needes be a monstrous mishapen thing in ioyning the Christians of these later daies with the Apostles without any betwixt and fosâ—â—ating as it were the feete of the body hard to the eares without any other members betwixt the one and the other And thus hauing framed this mery conceit in your owne heade you call vpon your frendes to laugh at it with you and so you proceede in telling vs that whiles we take this course we fly without wings and climbe without a ladder and despise the counsell of Salomon which after your maner you interpret that we should reckon by succession the pastours that haue succeeded in continuance of one kinde of doctrine the which you say you haue shewed you haue done To what purpose now is all this seeing in trueth neither we doe thus cut of all Christians betwixt them and vs neither haue you shewed any such succession of pastours downe from them to you continuing in your doctrine Truely to no other purpose can they serue but to expresse your owne ridiculous vanity Howbeit because you called in the former Chapter for the names of those that haue caught vs to deny your real presence in the sacrament and vpon a conceit in your owne fansie that you haue posed vs you haue growen to bee thus full of these swelling wordes of vanity and because I feare neither you nor many of your disciples will vouchsafe to peruse those books that I sent you vnto for answere in that point yet haue hope that for your sake some of you may chauÌ„ce vouchsafe to reade this I will not sticke with you particulerly to satisfie your request a little further First therefore vnderstand that we haue learned to deny your kinde of reall presence of Christ himselfe the institutour of this Sacrament because he hath flatly and vehemently affirmed without exception Iohn 6.54 that whosoeuer eateth his flesh drinketh his bloud hath eternall life Whereas by the meanes of your doctrine it followeth because all that receiue this sacrament haue not faith but manie lacke it that it shall bee eaten of manie that shal be neuer the better by it but the worse We haue also further learned it of him in that in the same Chapter speaking of the eating of his body drinking of his bloud he drew his hearers from a grosse conceit of eating drinking him by their bodily mouthes by vsing of the word beleeueth in stead of eateth and drinketh ver 40.47 and cap. 7.38 by mentioning vnto them his ascention Iohn 6.62 lattly by saying vnto theÌ„ It is the Spirit that quickeneth the flesh profiteth nothing the words that I speake vnto you are spirit life ver 63. This finally we haue learned of him saying If any shall say vnto you Lo here is Christ there is Christ beleeue it not Math. 24.23 by his continuing at the table when he first instituted and ministred it vnto his Apostles without alteration either of his place or forme Mat. 26. Mar. 12. Luke 22.1 Cor. 11. The Apostles euaÌ„gelists haue also taught vs to deny it in that they teach vs that he visibly asceÌ„ded into heauen that he shall so also come againe wheÌ„ he coÌ„meth froÌ„ thence c. Act. 1.11 especially seeing his comming to iudgement is called his secoÌ„d comming Heb 9.28 and vntil the restitutioÌ„ of all things it is saied by Peter the heaueÌ„s must coÌ„taine him Act. 3.21 The EuaÌ„gelists in laying downe vnto vs the story of his natiuity life death so prouing vnto vs that he was is a true and perfect maÌ„ encourage vs also least we should with the Marcionites other heretiques denie the trueth of his maÌ„hood coÌ„tantly to â—â—â—y your reall preseÌ„ce for the maintenance whereof you are driueÌ„ to fansy a nuÌ„ber of things quite contrary to the nature trueth of his maÌ„hood And lastly in that reciting the words of the institution they tel vs that Christ commanded that to be done in remeÌ„brance of him Luke 22.19 1. Cor. 11.24 there Paul saith v. 26. As often as ye shall eate this bread drink this cup ye shew the lords death till he coÌ„e which words plainly argu that though the sacrameÌ„t be both rightly ministresâ— receiued yet it inferreth not any such real preseÌ„ce as you ther imagâ—â— Now betwixt them vs we finde infinite places in writers of all ages that teach vs still to denie your reall presence but amongst many marke these for example TertulliaÌ„ in his 4. booke against MarcioÌ„ interpreteth these words Hoc est corpus meum thus that is to say This is a figure of my body Augustine against AdamaÌ„tus the Manichee c. 12. writeth that christ doubted not to say This is my body wheÌ„ he gaue a signe of his body vpoÌ„ the 3. Ps he saieth that Christ admitted Iudas to a baÌ„quet where he coÌ„meÌ„ded a figure of his body to his disciples vpoÌ„ the 98. Ps he saith yee shal not eat this body that yee see neither shall yee drinke that bloud which they shall shed that crucify me I haue coÌ„mended vnto you a certaine sacrament it being spiritually vnderstoode will giue you life In his 3. booke therfore of Christian doctrine he writeth thus This saying of Christ Except yee eate the flesh of the son of maÌ„ c. seemeth to coÌ„mand an heinous thing a wicked therefore it is a figure coÌ„maÌ„ding vs to be partakers of Christs passioÌ„ keeping in our minds to our great profit coÌ„fort that his flesh was crucified wouÌ„ded for vs. c. 16. he saith It is a miserable slauery of the soule to take the signes for the things signified in the same booke c. 5. And therefore in his 23. epistle he telleth vs that the similitude betwixt the signe the thing signified is the cause why the one beareth the name of the other in sacrameÌ„ts in his 57. questioÌ„ vpoÌ„ Leuitic he giueth vs this rule The thing that signifieth is woÌ„t to bear the name of the thing which it signifieth as Paul said The rock was Christ not it signified Christ but eueÌ„ as it had bene indeed which neuertheles was not Christ by substaÌ„ce but by signification So that his vsual doctrine is to teach vs in this sacrament to seeke christ in heaueÌ„ by faith thereby to make him present which otherwise is absent as you may read in his 50. tract vpon Iohn els where very often And with Augustine the rest of the fathers consent in this matter therefore nothing is more coÌ„moÌ„ with them then to call the outward part in this sacrament a signe figure similitude resemblance or representatioÌ„ as it appeareth in these places Chrysostom in his 83. Homil vpon Mat. Hierom in his 2. booke against IouiniaÌ„ Ambr. in his 4. booke of the sacraments c. 5. Basil in his lyturgy Ephr in his 4. booke against the impugners of Christs manhood by humane reason And Origen vpoÌ„ Leuit hom 7. teacheth vs that the letter
of those words Except yee eat the flesh of the son of mā c. killeth therefore he teacheth vs there spiritually to vnderstand them Who vpon these wordes of Christ gathereth that no wicked man can eate the flesh of christ vpon Mat. c. 15. as for the other part he granteth the wicked may eat that when it hath beene eatē in the end it is auoided into the place of easement Hom 15. vpon Mat. Athanasius noteth the christ made mention of his ascension Iohn 6. to wtdraw thē from corporall fleshly vnderstāding of his words vpon these words whosoeuer speaketh a word against the son c. But Chrys goeth plainly to work saith in his 11. Hom vpon Mat. that the very body of christ himselfe is not in the holy vessels but the mistery sacrament thereof is therin conteined And therefore in his 46. Hom. vpon Iohn sheweth vs the christ saying the flesh profiteth nothing Iohn 6. therby warned vs to take heede of carnall and fleshly vnderstanding of his words which is to vnderstand them saieth he simply and in his 4. Homil vpon the 4. to the Corinth he telleth vs that the body of Christ is the carion where the Eagles will bee he nameth eagles saieth he to shew that who so will approch to his body must mount aloft haue no dealing with the earth nor be drawē downward but must euermore fly vp c. For this is a table of Eagles saieth he that fly on high not of Iaies that creepe beneath Christ tooke bread which cōforteth mās hart that he might represēt therby his body bloud saith Hier. vpō the 26. of Mat. As thou hast in baptism receued the similitude of death so likewise dost thou in this sacramēt drīk the similitude of christs bloud saieth Ambrose in his 4 booke 4 c. of the sacraments Ciprian de vnctione chrismatis writeth thus Christ in his last supper gaue vnto his Apostles bread wine which he called his body bloud but on the Crosse hee gaue his very body to be wounded with the hands of the souldiers that the Apostles might declare vnto the world how in what maner the bread may be the flesh bloud of Christ And the maner straight way he declareth thus that those things which do signifie those things which be signified by thē may be both called by one name Fulgētius in his booke to King Thrasimund hath these words This cup or chalice is the new Testamēt that is to say doth signifie the new Testament Theodoret in his first Dialogue most plainely writeth that Christ honoured the signes and representatiōs which are seene with the name of his body and bloud not changing their natures but adding grace to nature and yet more plainely in the 2. Dialogue he writeth thus the mystical signes after sanctification go not from their nature for they tary in their former substance figure and forme Yea euen Gelasius a Pope about the yeare 500. against Eutiches is as plaine saying in the Eucharist the substāce and nature of bread and wine cease not For the image and similitude of the body and bloud is celebrated in those mysteries And Bertram in his treatise of this matter writen in the time of Carolus Caluus laboureth by many proofes testimonies to shew that bread and wine remaine still and that we are here to followe Christ in a figure and mistery And Bede vpon Luke 22. saith because bread doeth comfort mans heart and wine doeth make good bloud in his body therefore the bread is mystically compared to Christs body and the wine to Christs bloud The like saying hath Haymo in his 5. booke De sermonum proprietate Emissenus de consecrat Dist 2. cap. Quia corpus compareth the conuersion in the Sacrament to the conuersion in a man regenerated which we all know is in quality and not in substance There are two Epistles yet extant in the Saxon tongue made by one Alfricke in King Etheldreds time about the yeare of the Lord 996 being then as some write Bishop of Canterbury wherein he teacheth the bread and wine to be no otherwise the body and bloud of Christ then manna and the water of the rocke was Christ who also translated 80 sermons out of latin into the Saxon tongue whereof 24. were appointed to be read for homilies and in that which was to be read on Easter day there is much direct matter against Transubstantiation and your reall presence And since these times you know well inough wee haue had many from time to time yea mo thē you well like of that haue beene as flat and direct against your kinde of reall presence as we are now This Master Foxes booke of Actes and Monuments hath made euident to all the world And it is famously knowen that before your Lateran Councel vnder Innocent the 3. in the yeare 1215. it was not decreed to bee as you now hold It appeareth also by the last session of the councell of Florence which is not much aboue 140. yeares ago that the Greeke Church vntill then stoode against your doctrine of transubstantiation which is the ground of your reall presence And Tonstall though otherwise a great man on your side yet in his booke of this sacrament saieth perhaps it had beene better to leaue euery man that would be curious concerning this matter of the maner how Christ is present to his owne coniecture as by his confession before the councel of Lateran it was left at libertie And Iohn Duns a frend of yours vpon the 4. booke of the sentences saieth that the wordes might haue beene expounded more plainely then by Transubstantiation if it had pleased the Church Gabriel Biell another great doctour vpon the canon of the masse in his 40. reading plainely confesseth that it is not expressed in the canon of the Bible how the body of Christ is there whither by Trāsubstantiatiō or Consubstantiation Euen so your great Bishop Iohn Fisher writing against Luthers booke of the captiuity of Babylō is enforced to confesse that he findeth not in Mathew nor any where els in the scripture any thing to proue that there is thereby the reall presence of Christ in your masse nor that whensoeuer a Priest shall go about that matter hee maketh the bread wine the body and bloud of Christ and so concludeth that he thinketh that euery man vnderstandeth that the certaintie of that matter dependeth not so much of the Gospell as it doeth vpon the vse tradition and custome of the Church These testimonies forasmuch as directly they are against your literall exposition of Christs words your new deuise of transubstantiation the onely piller and buttresse of your real presence and against your grosse and carnal eating of him with the bodily mouthes of all receiuers good and bad they may not bee denied to bee forcible against your reall presence For the cause thereof denied and taken away the effect must cease and if the
our redemption vpon the Crosse In taking therfore bread a part calling it his body brokeÌ„ afterwards wine and tearming it his bloud shed for many to the remission of their sins it was his purpose that by the vse of this sacrament vntill his coÌ„ming againe his Church should set forth his death and passion and so the separation of his body bloud the one froÌ„ the other you by this your deuise inuented for the maintenaÌ„ce of your Helena transubstaÌ„tiatioÌ„ make it to serue to a quite contrary end naÌ„ely to teach the coniunctioÌ„ stil of his body and bloud together and so to be a sacrament in effect to deny his death passion Of you therfore it may again most iustly be said that once Christ said of your right forefathers the Scribes and Pharisees in his time you are they y strein a gnat and swalow a camel and that for your owne traditions make no reckoning of the commandements of God Mat. 15. 29. Mar. 7. And certaine it is that whiles you and others of whoÌ„ you haue learned al these ceremonies of yours haue takeÌ„ vpon you thus to adde vnto Christs ordinance of baptisme such a nuÌ„ber of needles ceremonies especially vrging theÌ„ and vsing them as you doe al these welâ— therupoÌ„ directly follow you seeke to make the day light of the new Testament euen as darke as the night of the old by your new fouÌ„d figures and types you strongly lead meÌ„ to think that the simplicity of Christs institution of this sacrament was not decent and sufficiently ful of maiesty for the dignity of such a sacrament you by the multitude and pompe of your solemne ceremonies darken and obscure these things that are essential necessary thereunto indeed you take the effects inward graces apperteining to the right vse of baptism froÌ„ it coÌ„municate theÌ„ wtout other commaÌ„dement or promise from God to things but of meÌ„s inueÌ„tion lastly forcibly you thereby occasion meÌ„ to think that the integrity fulnes of this sacrament dependeth vpon these Howsoeuer therfore you would seeme from sundry places in Aug. here quoted by you to fetch credit for them yet these things being true which I haue saied as they are they well considered seeing in Augustines time it is certaine that neither there were so many nor those that were so superstitiouslie were then vrged or vsed we may be sure that hee would if he were now aliue to see and vnderstand all these thinges most vehemently write and speake against you therein For speaking but of the rites and ceremonies and the maner of vsing of them that were in his time hee greatly shewed his dislike then both of the multitude and maner of pressing them vpon men saying Hoc nimis doleo c. I cannot but extreamly sorrow for this that many things which most holesomly are commaunded in the diuine books are lesse cared for and all things are full of so many presumptions Epi. 119. And further he addeth in the same Epistle touching the same quamuis ista contra fidem non sint c. and though these things be not against faith yet wheras the mercy of god would haue religion free burdened with most few and most manifest sacraments to be obserued these with seruile burdens to presse it that more tollerable is the state of the Iewes who although they knowe not the time of their liberty yet they are subiect to the burdens of the law and not to humane presumptions and therefore his opinion in the ende is flat of all such that assoone as may bee without all doubt they be to be cut off in the same Epistle also Yea Pope Stephanus as he is cited of Gratian dist 63. Quia sancta speaking of humane orders aboue the election of Popes saieth plainely that if any of his predecessours did some things which then might be faultles and after they were turned into errour and superstition which is the cause of these your ceremonies which we mislike in you most flatly sine tarditate antiquâ cum magnâ authoritate destruantur a posteâ—s that is without any slacknes and with great authority let them of them that come after be destroied which assertion of his he doeth ground vpoÌ„ the example of good Ezechias in breaking the brasen serpeÌ„t which Moses had made c. And whereas you vnder your Tridentine curse would binde all churches to the strict obseruing of all these your solemne ceremonies you know or at least should that that is contrary to the ancient doctrine of Christian liberty in such things and to the practise and experience of the primitiue Church Annicet and Polycarp the East Church and the West you know a long time freely differed about the time of the obseruation of Easter and yet pacem saieth Irenaeus in vniuersâ ecclesiâ c. that is both parts throughout the whole church kept and maintained christian peace Euseb lib. 3. cap. 23. and so likewise there hee shewes that there had beene a long time great difference about the fast before Easter both for the time of the coÌ„tinuance and otherwise yet that thereby rather in his opinion the vnity of faith was coÌ„mended then hindred And of Gregories answere to Leander touching the dipping of the baptized once or thrise the answere being as it was is reported by your owne Gratian de consecr dist 4. that howsoeuer the party was once or thrise dipped it was to be counted baptised you might learne that there is no such necessity as you imagine to haue generally throughout the whole church of Christ one precise forme of rites ceremonies to be kept that touch lesse the substaÌ„tial parts of the sacrament then this did That Gregory could say to fortifie that answere of his in vnâ fide nihil officit sanctae ecclesiae consuetudo diuersa that is the diuersity of custome or fashioÌ„ doeth not hurt the church continuing in one faith And our Cronicles doe plainely testify that neither Eleutherius bishop of Rome about the yeare 180. though king Lucius here sent vnto him for the Roman lawes to frame his people by would binde him thereunto nor yet the foresaied Gregory answering Augustine the Monks question would tie him then for the ordering of the church here to the Ceremonies and customes of Rome But the first sent Lucius for his direction to the lawes of God being without exception and not to the RomaÌ„ laws which might he confesseth be reproued and the other in his answere to Augustines third demaund how it came to passe that the faith being but one the ceremonies and customs were so diuers as that there was one maner of masse at Rome an other in FraÌ„ce wils him without respect of place out of many churches to chuse the best orders And who so will reade Socrates 5. booke and the 18.19.20.21 22. Chapters of the same he shall there finde not onely in a number of things diuerse fashions rites
for it as you would make men beleeue your prayers for the dead be For that had beene then furiously for a trifle to rage against the dead But alas master Albine both you and your fellowes are wonderfully deceaued in thinking that Cyprian meant here by oblation sacrifice and prayer as you doe For questionles by oblation and sacrifice he meant but the sacrifice of praise and thankesgiuing and therefore he saied not pro peccatis eius for his sins but pro dormitione eius for his sleeping and by praier not praier for to ease him of his sinnes but the publique and ordinary praier wherein then they vsed to make commemoration or remembrance of the godly brother departed the better to prouoke others thereby to imitate him which you might perceaue by his saying he deserueth not to be naÌ„ed in the praier of the Priest All which you might the better haue learned thus to vnderstande if you had remembred that the same Cyprian in his fourth booke of epistles epist 5. hauing spoken of certaine famous Martyrs Celerin Laurence and Ignatius addeth for these alwaies you remember wee offer sacrifices as oft as wee solemnize the passions and dayes of the Martyrs anniuersariâ commemoratione with a yearely commemoration For I am sure you holde that these were not in purgatory and that therefore these stoode in no neede to haue an oblation and sacrifice of the masse offered for them or praiers in your sence to be made for them Yea how can these otherwise be vnderstoode then of the oblation and sacrifice of thankesgiuing in the memorial or remembring the godly life and constant Christian death of such And so we neither dislike the practise of such thankful coÌ„memorations of the godly departed now nor deny that of ancient time for the comfort and instruction of them that were aliue that it hath beene vsed And of this offering of the oblation of praise and thankesgiuing for the faithfull departed very well may and must that be vnderstoode which vsually you alleadge so much out of the Lyturgies which you father vpoÌ„ Basil and Chrysostome For you know in offering it they teach you to offer it to God for those that are at rest in faith their elders their fathers patriarchs Prophets Apostles Euangelists Martyrs and for Mary the blessed Virgin her selfe For I hope you thinke not all these staÌ„d in neede to be offered praied for to be eased in purgatory And yet your praying for the dead your purgatory are right Hypocrates twins they must laugh and weepe togither they must stand and fal beginne and ende both at once I am sure you haue heard of Augustines saying Qui orat pro martyre iniuriam facit martyri he that prayeth for a martyr iniureth a martyr And therefore long after the councell of Bracchar in Spaine mentioneth onely a coÌ„memoration of the dead that die in the Lorde with Psalmes of thankesgiuing which it forbiddeth to be vsed for those that kill themselues or for their faults are put to death can 34. Indeede in that councell which was in the yeare of the Lorde 630. in the time of Honorius the first for I speake of the first held there I finde mentioÌ„ in the 39. Canon which is the last thereof not onely of a commemoration of the dead but of some offering when that was or when the feasts of martyrs in their memories were kept of mony or some other thing for the reliefe of the needy where order is taken for the receauing of it and bestowing of it which either were the free will offerings of the liuing to testifie their thankfulnesse to God for the good departure of the dead or bequests and legacies of the dead to the reliefe of the poore other holy vses against the staying detaining whereof the fourth Councell of Carthage and the second of Vase sharplie decreed And it appeareth in Iustinus martyrs second apologie that euen so long ago after the communion there was an oblation of almes giuen for such vses but he in neither of his apologies though therein hee shewe what the forme and maner of the Christians seruing of GOD then was of purpose once remembreth so much as any commemoration then made of the dead in their assemblies Of such offerings and oblations at the commemorations of the dead I noted before what the authour of the tractes vpon Iob commonly fathered vpon Origen hath saied Other oblation sacrifice or offering then these two of thanksegiuing and almes I cannot finde in any ancient and sound writer allowed The more are you to blame Master Albine that thorow the ambiguity of the wordes not vnderstoode of your simple Reader will make him beleeue that yet because Cyprian hath these words that therefore thereby he alloweth of your kinde of offerings oblations and sacrifice of the â—asse for the sinnes of the dead If there had beene aâ—â—â—â—ch vse of the Sacrament of the body and bloud of Christ why haue none of the Apostles or Euangelists made any mention of it Or neither Christ nor they hauing spoken one word of anie such vse of it what reason is there that if there aftercoÌ„mers should without all warraÌ„t from any of them that we should be leeue them therein Surely whosoeuer he be that should especially also seeing we cannot finde how many kinde of sacrifices soeuer God for diuerse occasions in the old testament appointed that euer he appointed any or made any mention of any for the dead we would learne of Chrysostome euen therefore to say vnto him you see into what great absurdities men fall when they will not follow the Canon of the Scripture Homil 58. in Genesin and with Augustine though he were an Angel because of a matter of so great importance he speaketh without warraÌ„t either out of the old testameÌ„t or new he would boldly hold him accursed Contra literas petiliani lib. 3. cap. 6. But to auoide this I know because in a cause so gainefull for you you will not seeme to bee altogither destitute of Scripture the bookes of the Machabees euen to help you at a pinch in this case in spite of all good antiquity and trueth shall be Canonicall Scripture and Iudas Machabeus fact 2. Mach. 12. must be vrged not onely as a lawfull fact but as a president to warrant your offering and sacrificing to relieue soules in purgatorie And yet in very deede when you haue alleadged this fact of his neuer so much you shall finde your dealing herein as voide of credit out of the Scriptures of God as before For first certaine it is that these bookes are none of the Canon of the old testament as you know well enough Origen apud Eusebium lib. 6. c. 24. Athanasius in Synopsi Cyril Hierosolymitanus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nazianzene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hierom. in prologo Galeato Gregorius magnus libro 19. Cap. 17. vpon Iob the councell of Laodicea and diuerse others haue determined whose iudgements are inuincibly confirmed by the