he had with his Apostles the night before his death at which time as Mathew sayth When they were eating Iesus tooke bread and when he had geuen thankes he brake it and gaue it to his disciples and sayd Take eate this is my body And he tooke the cup and when hee had geuen thankes he gaue it to them saying Drinke ye all of this for this is my bloud of the new testament that is shed for many for the remission of sinnes But I say vnto you I will not drinke hence forth of this fruite of the vine vntill that day whē I shall drinke it new with you in my fathers kingdome This thing is rehearsed also of S. Marke in these wordes As they did eate Iesus tooke bread and when he had blessed he brake it and gaue it to them and sayd Take eate this is my body and taking the cup when he had geuen thankes he gaue it to them and they all dranke of it and he sayd to them This is my bloud of the new testament which is shed for many verely I say vnto you I will drinke no more of the fruit of the vine vntill that daye that I drinke it new in the kingdome of God The Euangelist S. Luke vttereth this matter on this wise When the houre was come he sate down and the twelue Apostles with hym And he said vnto them I haue greatly desired to eate this Pascha with you before I suffer For I say vnto you hēceforth I will not eat of it any more vntil it be fulfilled in the kingdome of God And he toke the cuppe and gaue thankes and sayd Take this and deuide it among you For I say vnto you I will not drinke of the fruit of the vine vntill the kingdome of God come And he toke bread and when hee had geuen thankes he brake it and gaue it vnto them saying This is my body which is geeuen for you This doe in remembrance of me Likewise also when he had supped he toke the cup saying This cup is the new testament in my bloud which is shedde for you Hitherto you haue herd all that the euangelistes declare that Christ spake or did at his last supper concerning thinstitutiō of the communion and sacramēt of his body and bloud Now you shall here what S. Paul sayth concerning the same in the tenth chapter of the first to the Corinthians where he writeth thus Is not the cuppe of blessing which we blesse a communion of the bloud of Christ Is not the bread which we breake a communion of the body of Christ We being many are one bread one body For we al are partakers of one bread and one cuppe And in the eleuenth he speaketh on this manner That which I deliuered vnto you I receaued of the Lord. For the Lord Iesus the same night in the which he was betrayed toke bread and when he had geuen thankes he brake it and sayd Take eate this is my body which is broaken for you doe this in remembrance of me Likewise also he tooke the cuppe when Supper was done saying This cup is the new testament in my bloud Doe this as often as ye drinke it in remembrance of me for as oft as you shal eate this bread and drinke this cup you shew forth the Lords death til he come Wherfore who soeuer shall eat of this bread or drinke of this cuppe vnworthely shal be gilty of the body bloud of the Lord. But let a man examine him selfe and so eat of the bread and drinke of the cuppe For he that eateth and drinketh vnworthely eateth and drinketh his own damnation because he maketh no difference of the Lordes body For this cause many are weake and sicke among you many doe sleepe By these wordes of Christ rehearsed of the Euangelistes and by the doctrine also of Saint Paule which he confesseth that he receaued of Christ two thinges specially are to be noted First that our Sauiour Christ called the materiall bread which he brake his body the wine which was the fruit of the vine his bloud And yet he spake not this to the intent that men should thinke that the material bread is his very body or that his very body is materiall bread Neither that wine made of grapes is his very bloud or that his very bloud is wine made of grapes But to signifie vnto vs as S. Paul sayth that the cuppe is a communion of Christes bloud that was shed for vs and the bread is a communion of his flesh that was crucified for vs. So that although in the truth of his humain nature Christ be in heauen and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father yet whosoeuer eateth of the bread in the Supper of the Lord according to Christes institution and ordinaunce is assured of Christes own promise and testament that he is a member of his body and receaueth the benefites of his passion which he suffered for vs vpon the crosse And likewise he that drinketh of that holy cuppe in the Supper of the Lord according to Christes institution is certified by Christes legacy and testament that he is made partaker of the bloud of Christ which was shed for vs. And this ment S. Paule when he sayth is not the cup of blessing which we blesse a communion of the bloud of Christ Is not the can bread which we breake a cōmunion of the body of Christ so that no man contēne or lightly esteeme this holy cōmuniō except he contēne also Christs body and bloud and passe not whether he haue any felowship with him or no. And of those men S. Paule saith that they eate and drink their own damnation because they esteme not the body of Christ. The second thing which may be learned of the forsaid wordes of Christe and S. Paule is this that although none eateth the body of Christ and drinketh hys bloud but they haue eternall life as apereth by the wordes before recited of S. Iohn yet both the good and the bad doe eate and drynke the bread and wine which be the Sacramentes of the same But beside the Sacramentes the good eate euerlasting life the euill euerlasting death Therfore S. Paule sayth Who soeuer shall eate of the bread or drinke of the cup of the Lord vnworthely he shal be gilty of the body and bloud of the Lord. Here S. paul saith not that he that eateth the bread or drinketh the cup of the Lord vn worthely eateth drinketh the body bloud of the Lord but is gilty of the body bloud of the Lord. But what he eateth drynketh S. Paul declareth saying he that eateth drinketh vnworthely eateth drinketh his own dānatiō thus is declared the sum of al that scripture speketh of the eating drinking both of the body bloud of Christ also of the sacramēt of the same And as these thinges be most certaynly true
because they be spoken by Christ hym selfe the auctor of all truth and by hys holy Apostle S. Paule as he receaued them of Christ so all doctrines contrary to the same be moste certaynly false and vntrue and of al Christen men to be eschued because they be contrary to Gods word And all doctrine concerning this matter that is more then this which is not grounded vpon Gods word is of no necessity neither ought the peoples heads to be busied or their consciences troubled with the same So that thinges spoken and done by Christ and written by the holy Euangelists and S Paule ought to suffice the fayth of Christian people as touching the doctrine of the Lordes Supper and holy communion or sacrament of his body and bloud Which thing being well considered and wayed shall be a iust occasion to pacifie and agree both parties as well them that hetherto haue contemned or lightly esteemed it as also them which haue hetherto for lacke of knowledge or otherwise vngodly abused it Christ ordeyned the Sacrament to moue and stirre all men to frendshippe loue and concord and to put away all hatred variance and discord and to testifie a brotherly and vnfained loue between all them that be the members of Christ But the deuil the enemy of Christ and of all his members hath so craftely iugled herein that of nothing riseth so much contention as of this holy Sacrament God graunt that al contention set aside both the parties may come to this holy communiō with such a liuely faith in Christ and such an vnfained loue to all Christes members that as they carnallye eate with their mouthes this Sacramentall bread and drink the wine so spiritually they may eate and drink the very flesh and bloud of Christ which is in heauen and sitteth on the right hand of his father And that finally by his meanes they may enioy with him the glory and kingdome of heauen Amen Winchester Now let vs consider the tertes of the Euangelistes and S. Paul which be brought in by the Author as followeth When they were eating Iesus tooke bread and when he had geuen thankes he brake it gaue it to his disciples and sayd Take eate this is my body And he tooke the cuppe and when he had geuen thanks he gaue it to them saying Drinke ye all of this for this is my bloud of the new testament that is shed for many for the remission of sinnes But I say vnto you I will not drinke henceforth of this fruite of the vine vntill that day when I shall drinke it new with you in my fathers kingdome As they did eate Iesus tooke bread and when he had blessed he brake it and gaue it to them and said Take eate this is my body And taking the cup when he had geuen thankes he gaue it to them and they all dranke of it and he said vnto them This is my bloud of the new testament which is shed for many Uerely I say vnto you I wil drink no more of the fruite of the vine vntill that day that I drinke it new in the kingedome of God When the houre was come he sate downe and the twelue Apostles with him and he sayd vnto them I haue greatly desired to eate this Pascha with you before I suffer for I say vnto you henceforth I wil not eate of it any more vntill it be fulfilled in the kingdome of God And he tooke the cup and gaue thankes and sayd Take this and deuide it among you for I say vnto you I wil not drinke of the fruit of the vine vntil the kingdome of God come And he tooke bread and when he had geuen thankes he brake it and gaue it vnto them saying This is my body whith is geuen for you this doe in remembrance of me Likewise also when he had supped he tooke the cup saying This cuppe is the new testament in my bloud which is shed for you Is not the cup of blessing which we blesse a communion of the bloud of Christ Is not the bread which we break a communion of the body of Christ We being many are one bread and one body for we are all partakers of one bread and of one cup. That which I deliuered vnto you I receaued of the Lord. For the Lord Iesus the same night in the which he was betrayed tooke bread and when he had geuen thanks he brake it and sayd Take eate this is my body which is broaken for you doe this in remembrance of me Likewise also he tooke the cup when supper was done saying This cup is the new testament in my bloud Doe this as often as ye drink it in remembrance of me for as often as you shall eate this bread and drinke of this cup ye shew forth the Lordes death till he come wherefore who soeuer shall eat of this bread or drinke of this cup vnworthely shall be gilty of the body and bloud of the Lord. But let a man examine himselfe and so eate of the bread and drink of the cup. For he that eateth and drinketh vnworthely eateth and drinketh his own damnation because he maketh no difference of the Lordes body For this cause many are weake and sicke among you and many doe sléepe After these tertes brought in the author doth in the 4. chap. begin to trauers Christes intent that he intended not by these wordes this is my body to make the bread his body but to signifie that such as receaue that worthely be members of Christes body The catholick church acknowledging Christ to be very God and very man hath from the beginning of these textes of scripture confessed truely Christes intent and effectuall miraculous worke to make the bread his body and the wine his bloud to be verely meate and verely drinke vsing therin his humanitie wherewith to féede vs as he vsed the same wherewith to redéeme vs and as he doth sanctifie vs by his holy spirite so to sanctifie vs by his holy diuine flesh and bloud and as life is renued in vs by the gift of Christes holy spirite so life to be increased in vs by the gift of his holy flesh So as he that beléeueth in Christ and receaueth the Sacrament of beliefe which is Baptisme receaueth really Christes spirite And likewise he that hauing Christes spirite receaueth also the Sacrament of Christes body and bloud Doth really receaue in the same and also effectually Christes very body and bloud And therfore Christ in the institution of this Sacrament sayd deliuering that he consecrated This is my body c. And likewise of the cuppe This is my bloud c. And although to mannes reason it séemeth straunge that Christ standing or sitting at the table should deliuer them his body to be eaten Yet when we remember Christ to be very God we must graunt him omnipotent and by reason therof represse in our thoughtes all imaginations how it might be and consider Christes
neighboures and cause him to put out of his hart all enuy hatred and malice and to graue in the same all amity frendshippe and concord he deceaueth him selfe if he thinke that he hath the spirite of Christ dwelling within him But all these foresayd godly admonitions exhortations and comforts doe the Papistes as much as lyeth in them take away from all christen people by their transubstantiation For if we receaue no bread nor wine in the holy Communion then all these lessons and comfortes be gone which we should learne and receaue by eating of the bread and drinking of the wine and that fantasticall imagination geueth an occasion vtterly to subuert our wholl faith in Christ. For seeing that this Sacrament was ordeyned in bread and wine which be foodes for the body to signifie and declare vnto vs our spirituall foode by Christ then if our corporal feeding vpon the bread and wine be but fantasticall so that there is no bread nor wine there in deede to feede vpon although they appeare there to be then it doth vs to vnderstand that our spirituall feeding in Christ is also fantastical and that in deede we feede not of him which sophistry is so deuilish and wicked and so much iniurious to Christ that it could not come from any other person but only from the Deuill himselfe and from his specyall minister Antichrist The eight thing that is to be noted is that this spiritual meat of Christs body and bloud is not receaued in the mouth and digested in the stomack as corporall meates and drinkes commonly be but it is receaued with a pure hart and a sincere fayth And the true eating and drinking of the said body and bloud of Christ is with a constant and liuely faith to beleeue that Christ gaue his body and shed his bloud vpon the crosse for vs and that he doth so ioyne and incorporate him selfe to vs that he is our head and we his members and flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones hauing him dwelling in vs we in him And herein standeth the wholl effecte and strength of this Sacrament And this faith God worketh inwardly in our hartes by his holy Spirit confirmeth the same outwardly to our eares by hearing of his worde and to our other sences by eating and drinking of the Sacramentall bread and wine in his holy Supper What thing then can be more comfortable to vs then to eate this meate drinke this drinke whereby Christ certifieth vs that we be spiritually truely fed and nourished by him and that we dwell in him and he in vs. Can this be shewed vnto vs more plainly then when he sayth him selfe He that eateth me shall liue by me Wherefore who so euer doth not contemne the euerlasting life how can he but highly esteeme this Sacrament how can he but imbrace it as a sure pledge of his saluation And when he seeth godly people deuoutly receaue the same how can he but be desirous oftentimes to receaue it with them Surely no man that well vnderstandeth and diligently wayeth these thinges can be without a great desire to come to this holy Supper All men desire to haue Gods fauour and when they know the contrary that they be in his indignation and cast out of his fauour what thing can comfort them how be their minds vexed what trouble is in their consciences all Gods creatures seeme to be against them and doe make them afrayd as thinges being ministers of Gods wrath and indignation towardes them and rest or comforte can they finde none neither within them nor without them And in this case they doe hate as well God as the Deuill God as an vnmercifull and extreeme Iudge and the Deuill as a most malicious and cruell tormentor And in this sorrowfull heauines holy Scripture teacheth them that our heauenly Father can by no meanes be pleased with thē again but by the Sacrifice and death of his only begotten Sonne whereby God hath made a perpetuall amity and peace with vs doth pardon the sinnes of them that beleue in him maketh them his children and geueth them to his first begotten Sonne Christ to be incorporate into him to be saued by him and to be made heires of heauen with him And in the receauing of the holy Supper of our Lord we be put in remembrance of this his death and of the wholl mistery of our redemption In the which Supper is made mention of his testament and of the aforesaid communion of vs with Christ and of the remission of our sinnes by his Sacrifice vpon the Crosse. Wherfore in this Sacrament if it be rightly receaued with a true faith we be assured that our sinnes be forgiuen and the league of peace and the Testament of God is confirmed betwene him and vs so that who so euer by a true fayth doth eate Christs flesh and drink his bloud hath euerlasting life by him Which thing whē we feele in our hartes at the receauing of the Lords supper what thing can be more ioyfull more pleasaunt or more comfortable vnto vs. All this to be true is most certayne by the wordes of Christ him selfe whē he did first institute his holy Supper the night before hys death as it appeareth as well by the wordes of the Euangelistes as of S. Paule Do this sayth Christ as often as you drinke it in remembraunce of me And S. Paule sayth As often as you eate this bread and drinke this cup you shall shew the Lordes death vntill he come And agayne Christ sayd This cup is a newe testament in myne own bloud which shall be shed for the remission of sinnes This doctrine here recyted may suffice for all that be humble and Godlye and seeke nothing that is superfluous but that is necessary and profitable And therfore vnto such persons may be made here an ende of this booke But vnto them that be contentious Papistes and Idolaters nothing is inough And yet because they shall not glory in their subtill inuentions and deceiuable doctrine as though no man were able to aunswere them I shall desire the readers of patience to suffer me a litle while to spende some time in vayne to confute their most vaine vanities And yet the time shal not be al together spent in vain for thereby shall more clearely appeare the light from the darcknes the truth from false sophisticall subtilties and the certaine worde of God from mens dreames and phantasticall inuentions ALthough I neede make no further aunswere but the rehearsall of my wordes yet thus much will I aunswere that where you say that I speake some wordes by the way not tollerable if there had bene any suche they should not haue fayled to be expressed and named to their reproche as other haue bene Wherfore the reader may take a day with you before he beleue you when you reproue me for vsing some intollerable wordes and in conclusion name not one of them And as
he is but beleeue them not And S. Peter saith in the Actes that heauen must receaue Christ vntill the time that all thinges shall be restored And S. Paule writing to the Colossians agreeth hereto saying Seeke for thinges that be a-aboue where Christ is sitting at the right hand of the Father And Saint Paul speaking of the very Sacrament saith As often as you shall eate this bread and drinke this cuppe shew forth the Lordes death vntill he come Till he come saith Saint Paule signifying that he is not there corporally present For what speech were this or who vseth of him that is already present to say vntill he come For vntill he come signifieth that he is not yet present This is the catholicke faith which we learne from our youth in our common Creede and which Christ taught the Apostles followed and the Martirs confirmed with their bloud And although Christ in his humain nature substantially really corporally naturally and sensibly be present with his Father in heaueÌ„ yet Sacramentally and Spiritually he is here present For in water bread and wine he is present as in signes and Sacramentes but he is in deede Spiritually in those faithfull christian people which according to Christes ordinaunce be baptized or receaue the holy communion or vnfainedlye beleeue in him Thus haue you heard the second principall article wherein the Papistes vary from the truth of Gods word and from the Catholick faith Now the third thing wherein they vary is this The Papistes say that euill and vngodly men receaue in this Sacrament tâ—â— very body and bloud of Christ and eate and drinke the self same thing that the good and godly men doe But the truth of Gods word is contrary that all those that be godly members of Christ as they corporally eate the bread and drinke the wine so spiritually they eate and drinke Christes very flesh and bloud And as for the wicked members of the Deuill they eate the Sacramental bread and drinke the SacrameÌ„tall wine but they doe not spiritually eate Christs flesh nor drinke his bloud but they eate and drinke their own damnation The fourth thing wherein the Popish priestes dissent froÌ„ the manifest word of God is this They say that they offer Christ euery day for remission of sinne and distribute by their Masses the merits of Christs passion But the Prophets Apostles and Euangelists doe say that Christ himselfe in his own person made a sacrifice for our sinnes vpon the Crosse by whose woundes all our diseases were healed and our sinnes pardoned and so did neuer no priest man nor creature but he nor he dyd the same neuer more then once And the benefit hereof is in no mannes power to gyue vnto any other but euery man must receaue it at Christes handes himselfe by his own fayth and beliefe as the Prophet saieth Here Smith findeth him selfe much greeued at two false reports wherwith he saith that I vntruely charge the Papists One when I write that some say that the very naturall body of Christ is in the Sacrament naturally and sensibly which thing Smith vtterly denieth any of them to say and that I falsely lay this vnto their charge And moreouer it is very false saith he that you lay vnto our charges that we say that Christes body is in the Sacrament as it was borne of the virgin and that it is broken and torne in peeces with our teeth This also Smith saith is a false report of me But whether I haue made any vntrue report or no let the bookes be iudges As touching the first the Bishop writeth thus in his booke of the Deuils sophistry the 14. leafe Good men were neuer offended with breaking of the hoost which they daily saw being also perswaded Christes body to be present in the Sacrament naturally and really And in the 18. leafe he saith these words Christ God and man is naturally present in the Sacrament And in ten or twelue places of this his last booke he saith that Christ is present in the SacrameÌ„t naturally corporally sensibly and carnally as shall appeare euidently in the reading therof So that I make no false reporte herein who report no otherwise then the â—apistes haue written and published openly in their bookes And it is not to be passed ouer but worthy to be noted how manifest falshoode is vsed in the printing of this Bishoppes booke in the 136. leafe For where the Bishoppe wrote as I haue two coppies to shew one of his own hand and another exhibited by him in open court before the Kinges Commissioners that Christes body in the Sacrament is truely present therfore really present corporally also and naturally The printed booke now set abroad hath changed this word naturally and in the stede therof hath put these wordes but yet supernaturally corrupting and manifestly falsefying the Bishops booke Who was the Author of this vntrue acte I cannot certainly define but if coniectures may haue place I think the Bishop himselfe would not commaund to altar the booke in the printing and then set it forth with this title that it was the same booke that was exhibited by his own hand for his defence to the kinges maiesties commissioners at Lamhith And I thinke the Printer being a French man would not haue enterprised so false a deed of his own head for that which he should haue no thanks at all but be accused of the Author as a falsifier of his booke Now for as much as it is not like that either the Bishop or the Printer would play any such pranks it must then be some other that was of counsell in the printing of the booke which being printed in Fraunce whether you be now fled from your own natiue countrey what person is more like to haue done such a noble acte then you who being so full of craft and vntruth in your own countrey shew your selfe to be no changeling where soeuer you become And the rather it seemeth to me to be you then any other person because that the booke is altred in this word naturally vpoÌ„ which word standeth the reproofe of your saying For he saith that Christ is in the Sacrament naturally and you deny that any man so saith but that Christ is there supernaturally Who is more like therefore to change in his booke naturally into supernaturall then you whom the matter toucheth and no maÌ„ els but whether my coniectures be good in this matter I will not determine but referre it to the iudgement of the indifferent Reader Now as concerning the second vntrue report which I should make of the Papistes I haue alleadged the wordes of Berengarius recantation appointed by Pope Nicholas the 2. and written De consecrat dist 2. which be these that not only the Sacraments of bread and wine but also the very flesh and bloud of our Lord Iesu Christ are sensibly handeled of the Priest in the Altar broaken and torne with the teeth of
so no certayntie of any true body to be in Christ This reason had been more fitte to be made by a man that had lost both his witte and reason For in this place Tertullian must needes be so vnderstand that by the body of Christ is vnderstand the figure of his body because Tertullian so expoundeth it him selfe And must it be always so bicause it is here so Must euer Christes body be taken for a figure bicause it is here taken for a figure as Tertullian sayth Haue you so forgotten your Logike that you will make a good argument à particulari ad vniuersale By your owne manner of argumentation bicause you make a naughty argumēt here in this place shall I conclude that you neuer make none good Surely this place of Tertullian as you haue handled it is neither secret nor manifest poynt eyther of learning witte or reason but a meere sophistication if it be no worse What other papistes haue aunswered to this place of Tertullian I am not ignoraunt nor I am sure you be not so ignoraunt but you know that neuer none aunswered as you do But your answer varieth as much from all other papists as yours theyrs also do varie from the truth Here the reader may note by the way how many fowle shiftes you make to auoyd the saying of Tertullian First you say that bread was a figure in the prophets mouth but not in Christes wordes Second that the thing which the prophet spake of was not that which Christ spake of Third that other haue aunswered this place of Tertullian before Forth that you call this matter but a wrangling argument Fift that if Tertulian call bread a figure yet he termeth it not onely figure These be your shiftes Now let the reader looke vpon Tertullians playn wordes whyche I haue rehearsed in my booke and then let him iudge whether you meane to declare Tertullians mynd truely or no. And it is not requiset for my purpose to proue that bread is onely a figure for I take vpon me there to proue no more but that the bread is a figure representing Christes body and the wine his bloud And if breade be a figure and not onely a figure than must you make bread both the figure and the truth of the figure Now heare what other authors I do here alleadge And saynt Ciprian the holy marter sayth of this matter that Christs bloud is shewed in the wine and the people in the water that is mixt with the wine so that the mixture of the water to the wine signifieth the spirituall commixtion and ioyning of vs vnto Christ. By which similitude Ciprian ment not that the bloud of Christ is wine or the people water but as the water doeth signifie and represent the people so doeth the wine signify and represent Christs bloud and the vniting of the water and wine together signifieth the vniting of Christian people vnto Christ himselfe And the same saynt Ciprian in an other place writing here of sayth that Christ in his last supper gaue to his apostles with his owne handes bread and wine which he called his flesh and bloud but in the crosse he gaue his very body to be wounded with the handes of the souldiours that the apostles might declare to the world how and in what manner bread and wine may be the flesh and bloud of Christ. And the manner he straight wayes declareth thus that those things which do signifye and those thinges which be signified by them may be both called by one name Here it is certain by saynt Ciprians mind wherfore and in what wise bread is called Christes flesh and wine his bloud that is to say because that euery thing that representeth and signifieth an other thing may be called by the name of thing which it signifieth And therfore Saynt Iohn Chrisostom sayth that Christ ordayned the table of his holy supper for this purpose that in that sacramēt he should dayly shew vnto vs bread and wine for a similitude of his body and bloud Saynt Hierom likewise sayth vpon the gospell of Mathew that Christ took bread which comforteth mans hart that he mght represent thereby his very body and bloud Also Saynt Ambrose if the booke be his that is intituled De his qui misterijs initianter sayth that before the consecration an other kind is named but after the consecration the body of Christ is signified Christ sayd his bloud beefore the consecration it is called an other thing but after the consecration is signified the bloud of Christ. And in his booke De sacramentis if that be also his he writeth thus Thou doost receiue the sacrament for a similitud of the flesh and bloud of Christ but thou doost obtayne the grace and vertue of his true nature And receiuing the bread in that foode thou art partaker of his godly substaunce And in the same booke he sayth As thou hast in baptisme reciued the similitude of death so likewise dost thou in the sacramēt drink the similitude of Christes precious bloud And agayne he sayeth in the sayd booke The priest sayth Make vnto vs this oblation to be acceptable which is the figure of the body and bloud of our Lord Iesu Christ. And vpon the epistle of Saynt Paule to the Corinthians he sayth that in eating and drinking the bread and wine we doe signifie the flesh and bloud which were offered for vs. And the olde tastament he sayeth was instituted in bloud because that bloud was a witnes of gods benefite in signification and figure wherof we take the mistical cup of his bloud to the tuitiō of our body soule Of these places of saynt Chrisostom saynt Hierom and saynt Ambrose it is cleare that in the sacramentall bread and wine is not rially and corporally the very naturall substance of the flesh and bloud of Christ but that the bread and wine be similitudes misteries and representations significations sacramentes figures and signes of his body and bloud and therfore be called and haue the name of his very body flesh and bloud Winchester Ciprian shal be touched after when we speake of him agayn Chrisostom shall open himselfe hereafter playnly Saynt Hierom speaketh here very pithely vsing the word represent which signifieth a true reall exhibision for saynt Hierom speaketh of the representation of the truth of Christes body which truth excludeth an onely figure For howsoeuer the visible matter of the sacrament be a figure the inuisible part is a truth which saynt Hierom sayth is here represented that is to say made present which onely signification doth not Saynt Ambrose shall after declare himselfe and it is not denied but the authors in speaking of the sacrament vsed these wordes signe figure similitude token but those speaches exclude not the veritie and truth of the body and bloud of Christ for no approued author hath this exclution to say an onely signe an only token an
from place to place he spake of him selfe that thing which was to be vnderstand of the arke And Christ him selfe often tymes spake in similitudes parables and figures as whan he sayd The field is the world the enemy is the diuell the seed is the word of God Iohn is Helias I am a vyne and you be the branches I am bread of lyfe My father is an husband man and he hath his fan in his hand and will make cleane his flower and gather the wheate into his barne but the chaffe he will cast into euerlasting fyre I haue a meat to eat which you know not Woorke not meat that perisheth but that indureth vnto euerlasting life I am a good shepherd The sonne of man will set the shepe at his right hād and the goates at his left hād I am a dore one of you is the deuyll Whosoeuer doeth my fathers will he is my brother sister and mother And when he sayd to his mother and to Iohn This is thy sonne this is thy mother These with an infinite number of lyke sentences Christ spake in Parables Metaphores tropes and figures But chiefly when he spake of the sacramētes he vsed figuratiue speaches As whan in Baptisme he sayd that we must be baptised with the holy ghost meaning of spirituall baptisme And like speach vsed S. Iohn the Baptiste saying of Christ that he should baptise with the holy ghost and fier And Christ sayd that we must be borne agayn or else we can not see the kingdom of God And sayd also Whosoeuer shall drincke of that water which I shall geue him he shall neuer be drye agayn But the water which I shall geue him shall be made with in him a well which shall spring into euerlasting life And S. Paule sayth that in baptisme we cloth vs with Christ and be buried with him This baptisme and washing by the fyre and the holy ghost this new birth this water that springeth in a man and floweth into euerlasting life and this clothing and buriall can not be vnderstand of any materiall baptisme materiall washing materiall birth clothing and buriall but by translation of thinges visible into thinges inuisible they must be vnderstand spiritually and figuratiuely After the same sort the mistery of our redemption and the passion of our sauiour Christ vpon the crosse as well in the new as in the ould testament is expressed and declared by many figures and figuratiue speaches As the pure Paschall lambe without spot signified Christ. The effusion of the lambes bloud signified the effusion of Christes bloud And the saluation of the Children of Israell from temporall death by the lambes bloud signified our saluation from eternall death by Christes bloud And as almightie God passing through Egypt killed all the Egiptians heires in euery house and left not one aliue and neuerthelesse he passed by the children of Israels houses where he sawe the Lambes bloud vpon the dores and hurted none of them but saued them all by the meanes of the Lambes bloud so likewise at the last iudgement of the whole world none shall be passed ouer and saued but that shall be found marked with the bloud of the most pure and immaculat lambe Iesus Christ. And for as much as the shedding of that lambes bloud was a token and figure of the shedding of Christes bloud than to come and for as much also as all the sacramentes and figures of the olde testament ceased and had an end in Christ least by our great vnkindnes we should peraduenture be forgetfull of the great benefite of Christ therfore at his last supper when he toke his leaue of his Apostles to depart out of the world he did make a new will and testament wherin he bequethed vnto vs cleane remission of all our sinnes and the euerlasting inheritaunce of heauen And the same he confirmed the next day with his owne bloud and death And least we should forget the same he ordayned not a yearly memory as the Pascall lambe was eaten but once euery year but a dayly remembrance he ordeined therof in bread and wine sanctified and dedicated to that purpose saying This is my body This cuppe is my bloud which is shed for the remission of sinnes Do this in remembrance of me Admonishing vs by these wordes spoken at the making of his last will and testament and at his departing out of the world bicause they should be the better remembred that whensoeuer we do eat the bread in his holy supper and drinke of that cuppe we should remember how much Christ hath done for vs and how he dyed for our sakes Therfore sayth S. Paule As often as ye shall eat this bread and drinke the cuppe you shall shewe forth the Lordes death vntill he come And forasmuch as this holy bread broken and the wine deuided do represent vnto vs the death of Christ now passed as the killing of the Pascall Lambe did represent the same yet to come therfore our sauiour Christ vsed the same manner of speach of bread and wine as God before vsed the Paschall Lambe For as in the old testament God sayd this is the Lordes passeby or passouer euen so sayth Christ in the new Testament This is my body This is my bloud But in the old mistery and sacrament the Lambe was not the Lordes very Passeouer or passing by but it was a figure which represented his passing by So likewise in the new Testament the bread and wine be not Christes very body and bloud but they be figures which by Christes institution be vnto the godly receauers therof Sacramentes tokens significations and representations of his very flesh and bloud instructing their fayth that as the bread and wine fede them corporally and continue this temporall lyfe so the very flesh and bloud of Christ feedeth them spiritually and giueth euerlasting lyfe And why should any man think it strange to admit a figure in these speches This is my body This is my bloud seing that the communication the same night by the Papistes owne confessions was so full of figuratiue speaches For the Apostles spake figuratiuely when they asked Christ where he would eat his passeouer or passeby And Christ him selfe vsed the same figure when he sayd I haue much desired to eate this passeouer with you Also to eat Christes body and to drink his bloud I am sure they will not say that it is taken properly to eate and drink as we doe eate other meates and drinkes And when Christ sayd This cup is a new testament in my bloud here in one sentence be two figures one in this word cup which is not taken for the cup it selfe but for the thing conteined in the cup an other is in this word testament for neither the cup nor the wine contayned in the cup is Christes testament but is a token signe and figure wherby is
if the very flesh of Christ were not in the sacrament truely present which is as much to say as in substaunce present if it were not in deede present that is to say really present if it were not corporally present that is to say the very body of Christ there present God and man If these truthes consenting in one were not there S. Augustine would neuer haue spoken of adoration there No more he doth sayth this author there but in heauen let S. Augustines wordes quoth I be iudge which be these No man eateth that flesh but he first worshippeth it It is found out how such a footestoole of the Lordes foot should be worshipped and not onely that we do not sinne in worshipping but we do sinne in not worshipping it These be S. Augustines wordes which I sayd before can not be drawen to an vnderstanding of the worshipping of Christes flesh in heauen where it remayneth continually glorified and is of all men christened continually worshipped For as S. Paule sayth Christ is so exalted that euery tongue should confesse that our sauiour Christ is in the glory of his father So as the worshipping of Christ there in the estate of his glory where he reigneth hath neither afore ne after but an euer continuall worshipping in glory Wherfore S. Augustine speaking of a before must be vnderstanded of the worshipping of Christes flesh present in the Sacrament as in the dispensation of his humility which Christ ceaseth not to do reigning in glory for although he hath finished his humble pafible conuersation yet he continueth his humble dispensation in the perfection of his misticall body and as he is our inuisible priest for euer and our aduocate with his father and so for vs to him a mediator to whom he is equall so doth he vouchsafe in his supper which he continueth to make an effectuall remembraunce of his offering for vs of the new Testament confirmed in his bloud and by his power maketh him selfe present in this visible Sacrament to be therein of vs truely eaten and his bloud truely drunken not onely in fayth but with the truth and ministery of our bodely mouth as God hath willed and commaunded vs to do which presence of Christ in this humility of dispensation to releaue vs and feed vs spiritually we must adore as S. Augustine sayth before we eate and we do not sinne in adoring but we sinne in not adoring remembring the diuine nature vnite vnto Christes flesh and therfore of flesh not seuered from the godhead Which admonishment of S. Augustine declareth he ment not of the worshipping of Christes flesh in heauen where can be no danger of such a thought where all tōgues confesse Christ to be in the glory of his father of which Christ as he is there in glory continually to be worshipped it were a colde saying of S. Augustine to say wee doe not sinne in worshipping Christ in heauen but sinne in not worshipping him as though any coulde haue doubted whether Christe shoulde bee worshipped in his humanitye in heauen being inseparably vnite to the diuinity And when I say in his humanity I speake not properly as that mistery requireth for as Christes person is but one of two perfite natures so the adoration is but one as Cirill declareth it and therfore abhorreth the addition of a sillable to speake of coadoration And will this author attribute to S. Augustine such a grossenes to haue written and giuen for a lesson that no man sinneth to worship Christes flesh in heauen reigning in glory wherfore taking this to be so farre from al probabilitie I sayd before these words of S. Augustine can not be drawen with any tenters to stretch so farre as to reach to heauen where euery christian man knoweth and professeth the worshipping of Christ in glory as they be taught also to worship him in his dispensation of his humility when he maketh present him selfe in this Sacrament whome we should not receaue into our mouth before we adore him And by S. Augustines rule we not onely not sinne in adoring but also sinne in not adoring him Caunterbury WHere you speake of the adoration of Christe in the Sacrament saying that if he were not there present substancially really and corporally S. Augustine would neuer haue spoken of adoration there in this word there you vse a great doublenes and fallax for it may be referred indiferently eyther to the adoration or to the presence If it be referred to the presence than it is neyther trew nor S. Augustine sayth no such thing that Christ is really substancially and corporally present there If it be referred to the worshipping than it is trew according to S. Augustines mynd that there in the receauing of the sacrament in spirite and truth we glorify and honor Christ sitting in heauen at his fathers right hand But to this adoration is required no reall substanciall and corporall presence as before I haue declared for so did Iacob worship Christ before he was borne and all faythfull christen people do worship him in all places where soeuer they be although he carnally and corporally be farre distant from them As they dayly honor the father and pray vnto him and yet say Qui es in coelis confessing him to be in heauen And therfore to auoyd all the ambiguitie and fallax of your speach I say that we being here do worship here Christ being not corporally here but with his father in heauen And although all christen men ought of duety continually to worship Christ being in heauen yet bicause we be negligent to doe our duties therin his word and sacramēts be ordeined to prouoke vs therunto So that although otherwise we forgat our dutyes yet when we come to any of his sacraments we should be put in remembrance thereof And therfore sayd Christ as S. Paule writeth As often as you shall eate this bread and drincke this cup shew forth the lordes death vntill he come And do this sayd Christ in remembraunce of me And the worshipping of Christ in his glory should be euer continuall without eyther before or after Neuertheles forasmuch as by reason of our infirmity ingratitude malice and wickednes we go farre from our offices and dueties herein the sacraments call vs home agayne to do that thing which before we did omit that at the least we may do at some tyme that which we should doe at all tymes And where you speake of the humiliatiō of Christ in the sacrament you speake without the booke For the scripture termeth not the matter in that sort but calleth his humiliation only his incarnation and conuersation with vs here in earth being obedient euen vnto death and for that humiliation he is now from that tyme forward exalted for euer in glory And you would plucke him downe from his glory to humiliation agayne And thus is Christ intreated when he commeth to the handling of ignoraunt lawyers blynd sophisters and
be Baptised for an other and if he be it auayleth nothyng so ought not one to receiue the holy Communion for an other For if a man be dry or hungry he is neuer a whit eased if an other man drinke or eate for him or if a man be all befiled it helpeth him nothing an other man to bewashed for him So auayleth it nothyng to a man if an other man be Baptised for him or be refreshed for him with the meate and drinke at the Lordes Table And therfore sayd S. Peter Let euery man be Baptised in the name of Iesu Christ. And our Sauiour Christ sayd to the multitude Take and care And further he sayd Drinke you all of this Whosoeuer therfore will be spiritually regenerated in Christ he must be Baptised him selfe And he that will liue him selfe by Christ must by him selfe eate Christes flesh and drinke his bloud And briefly to conclude He that thinketh to come to the kyngdome of Christ him selfe must also come to his Sacramentes him selfe and keepe his Commaundements him selfe and do all thynges that pertayne to a Christian man and to his vocation him selfe least if he referre these thynges to an other man to do them for him the other may with as good right clayme the kyngdome of heauen for him Therfore Christ made no such difference betwene the priest and the lay mā that the priest should make oblation and sacrifice of Christ for the lay man and eate the Lordes Supper from him all alone and distribute and apply it as him liketh Christ made no such difference but the difference that is betwene the priest and the lay man in this matter is onely in the ministration that the priest as a common minister of the Church doth minister and distribute the Lords Supper vnto other and other receaue it at his handes But the very Supper it selfe was by Christ instituted and geuen to the whole Church not to be offered and eaten of the priest for other men but by him to be deliuered to all that would duely aske it As in a princes house the officers and ministers prepare the Table and yet other aswel as they eate the meate and drinke the drinke so do the priests and ministers prepare the Lordes Supper read the Gospell and rehearse Christes wordes but all the people say therto Amen All remember Christes death all geue thankes to God all repent and offer them selues an oblation to Christ all take him for their Lord and Sauiour and spiritually feede vpon him and in token therof they eate the bread and drinke the wine in his mysticall Supper And this nothyng diminisheth the estimation and dignitie of priesthode and other ministers of the Church but aduaunceth and highly commendeth their ministration For if they are much to be loued honored and esteemed that be the kynges Chauncelours Iudges officers and ministers in temporall matters how much than are they to be estemed that be ministers of Christes wordes and Sacramentes and haue to them committed the keyes of heauen to let in and shut out by the ministration of his word and Gospell Now for asmuch as I trust that I haue playnly inough set forth the propitiatory sacrifice of our Sauiour Iesu Christ to the capacitie and comfort of all men that haue any vnderstandyng of Christ and haue declared also the haynous abhomination and Idolatry of the Popishe Masse wherein the priestes haue taken vpon them the office of Christ to make a propitiatory sacrifice for the sinnes of the people and I haue also told what maner of sacrifice Christen people ought to make it is now necessary to make aunswere to the subtle persuasions and Sophisticall cauillations of the Papistes whereby they haue deceaued many a simple man both learned and vnlearned The place of S. Paule vnto the Hebrues which they doe cite for their purpose maketh quite and cleane agaynst them For where S. Paule sayth that euery high priest is ordayned to offer giftes and sacrifices for sinnes he spake not that of the priestes of the new Testamēt but of the old which as he sayth offered Calues and Goates And yet they were not such priestes that by their offerynges and sacrifices they could take away the peoples sinnes but they were shadowes and figures of Christ our euerlastyng priest which onely by one oblation of him selfe taketh away the sinnes of the world Wherfore the Popish priestes that apply this text vnto thēselues do directly contrary to the meanyng of S. Paule to the great iniury and preiudice of Christ by whom onely S. Paule sayth that the sacrifice and oblation for the sinne of the whole world was accomplished and fulfilled And as litle serueth for the Papistes purpose the text of the Prophet Malachie that euery where should be offered vnto God a pure sacrifice and oblation For the Prophet in that place spake no word of the Masse nor of any oblation propitiatory to be made by the priestes but he spake of the oblation of all faythfull people in what place so euer they be which offer vnto God with pure hartes and myndes sacrifices of laude and prayse prophecying of the vocation of the Gentiles that God would extende his mercy vnto them and not be the God onely of the Iewes but of all nations from East to West that with pure fayth call vpon him and glorifie his name But the aduersaries of Christ gather together a great heape of Authours whiche as they say call the Masse or holy Communion a Sacrifice But all those Authours be aunswered vnto in this one sentence that they called it not a sacrifice for sinne bycause that it taketh away our sinne which is takē away onely by the death of Christ but bicause the holy Cōmunion was ordeined of Christ to put vs in remēbraūce of the sacrifice made by him vpō the crosse for that cause it beareth the name of that sacrifice as S. Augustin declareth plainly in his Epistle ad Bonifacium before rehearsed in this booke pag. 141. And in his booke De fide ad Petrum Diaconū And in his booke De Ciuitate Dei he sayth That which men call a sacrifice is a signe or representation of the true sacrifice And the Maister of the Sentence of whom all the Schoole Authours take their occasion to write iudged truely in this poynt saying That whiche is offered and consecrated of the priest Is called a sacrifice and oblation because it is a memory and representation of the true Sacrifice and holy oblation made in the aultar of the Crosse. And S. Iohn Chrisostome after he hath sayd that Christ is our Byshop which offered that Sacrifice that made vs cleane and that we offer the same now least any man might be deceiued by his maner of speakyng he openeth his meanyng more playnly saying That which we doe is done for a remembraunce of that whiche was done by Christ For Christ sayth Doe this in remembraunce of me Also
could deuise to deliuer some from Purgatory and some from hell if they were not there finally by God determined to abyde as they termed the matter to make rayne or faire wether to put away the plague and other sicknesses both from man and beast to halow and preserue them that went to Ierusalem to Rome to S. Iames in Compostella and other places in pilgrimage for a preseruatiue agaynst tempest and thunder agaynst perils and daungers of the Sea for a remedy agaynst moraine of cattell agaynst pensiuenesse of the hart agaynst all maner affliction and tribulations And finally they extoll their Masses far aboue Christes passion promising many thynges thereby which were neuer promised vs by Christes passion As that if a man heare Masse hee shall lacke no bodily sustenaunce that day nor nothyng necessary for him nor shal be letted in his iourney he shall not lose his sight that day nor dye no sodaine death he shall not waxe old in that time that he heareth Masse nor no wicked spirites shall haue power of him be he neuer so wicked a man so long as he looketh vpon the Sacrament All these foolish and deuilish superstitions the Papistes of their owne idle brayne haue deuised of late yeares which deuises were neuer knowen in the old Church And yet they cry out agaynst them that professe the Gospell and say that they dissent from the Church and would haue them to folow the example of their Church And so would they gladly do if the Papistes would folow the first Church of the Apostles which was most pure and incorrupt but the Papistes haue clearely varied frō the vsage and exāples of that Church and haue inuented new deuises of their own braynes and will in no wise cōsent to folow the primitiue Church and yet they would haue other to folow their Church vtterly variyng and dissentyng from the first most godly Church But thankes be to the eternall God the maner of the holy Communion which is now set forth within this Realme is agreable with the institution of Christ with Saint Paule and the old primitiue and Apostolicke Church with the right fayth of the Sacrifice of Christ vpon the Crosse for our redemption and with the true doctrine of our saluation iustification and remission of all our sinnes by that onely sacrifice Now resteth nothyng but that all faithfull subiectes will gladly receiue and embrace the same beyng sory for their former ignoraunce and euery man repentyng him selfe of his offences agaynst God and amendyng the same may yeld him selfe wholly to God to serue and obey him all the dayes of his lyfe and often to come to the holy Supper whiche our Lord and Sauiour Christ hath prepared And as he there corporally eateth the very bread and drinketh the very wine so spiritually he may feede of the very fleshe and bloud of Iesu Christ his Sauiour and redeemer remembryng his death thankyng him for his benefites and lookyng for none other sacrifice at no priestes handes for remission of his sinnes but onely trustyng to his sacrifice which beyng both the high priest and also the Lambe of God prepared from the begynnyng to take away the sinnes of the world offered vp him selfe once for euer in a sacrifice of sweete smell vnto his Father and by the same payd the raunsome for the sinnes of the whole worlde Who is before vs entred into heauen and sitteth at the right hand of his Father as a patron mediatour and intercessour for vs. And there hath prepared places for all them that be lyuely members of his body to reigne with him for euer in the glory of his father to whom with him and the holy Ghost be glory honour and prayse for euer and euer Amen Thus hauing rehearsed the whole wordes of my last booke I shall returne to your issue and make a ioynder or demurre with you therein And if you can not proue your propitiatory Sacrifice of the Priestes by Petrus Lombardus and Nicene Councell then must you confesse by your owne Issue that the Uerdite must iustly passe agaynst you and that you haue a fall in your own suite As for the sacrifice of laudes and thakesgeuyng I haue set it forth playnly in my booke but the sacrifice propitiatory deuised to be made by the priest in the Masse onely is a great abhominatiō before God how glorious soeuer it appeare befor◠men And it is set vp onely by Antichrist and therefore worthy to be abhorred of all that truely professe Christ. And first as concerning Nicene counsell because you begin with that first I will rehearse your wordes Winchester Fyrst to begin with the counsell of Nice the same hath opened the mistery of the sacrament of the body and bloud of Christ in this wise that christen men beleue the Lamb that taketh away the sinnes of the world to be situate vpon Gods woorde and to be sacrificed of the priestes not after the manner of other sacrifices This is the doctrine of the counsell of Nice and must then be called an holy doctrine and thereby a true doctrine consonant to the scriptures the foundation of all trueth If the author will deny this to haue bene the teaching of the counsell of Nice I shal alleadge therefore the allegation of the same by Decolampadius who being an aduersary to the truth was yet by Gods prouidence ordered to beare testimony to the truth in this poynt and by his meane is published to the world in greeke as followeth which neuerthelesse may otherwise appeare to be true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iterum etiam hic in diuina mensa ne humiliter intenti simus ad propositum pannem poculum sed mente exaltata fide intilligamus situm esse in sacra illa mensa illum Dei agnum qui tollit peccata mundi sacrificatum à sacerdotibus non victimarum more mos preciosum illius corpus sanguinem verè sumentes credere haec esse resurrectionis nostrae Symbola Ideo enim non multum accipimus sed parum vt cognoscamus quoniam non in satietatem sed sanctificationem These wordes may be englished thus Agayne in this godly table we should not in base and low consideration direct our vnderstanding to the bread and cup set forth but hauing our mind exalted we should vnderstand by fayth to be situate in that table the Lamb of God which taketh away the sinnes of the world sacrificed of the priestes not after the maner of other Sacrifices and we receiuing truely the precious body and bloud of the same Lamb to beleue these to be the tokens of our resurrection And for that we receiue not much but a litle because we should know that not for saturity and filling but for sanctification This holy counsel of Niece hath bene beleued vniuersally in declaration of the mistery of the Trinity and the Sacramentes also And to them that confesse that counsell to be holy as the author here doth and
condemnatiō only And the learned mē in Christes church say that the ignoraunce and want of obseruation of these thrée maner of eatinges causeth the errour in the vnderstanding of the scriptures and such fathers sayinges as haue written of the sacrament And when the Church speaketh of these thrée maner of eatinges what an impudency is it to say that the church teacheth good men only to eat the body of Christ and drink his bloud when they receaue the Sacrament being the truth otherwise yet a diuersity ther is of eatyng spiritually only eating spiritually and sacramētally because in that supper they receue his very flesh bloud in deed with the effects of al graces gifts to such as receue it spiritually worthely wher as out of the supper when we eat only spiritually by fayth God that worketh without his sacramentes as semeth to him doth releaue those that beleue and trust in him and suffereth them not to be destitute of that is necessary for them whereof we may not presume contemning the sacrament but ordenaryly seke God where he hath ordred himself to be sought and there to assure our selfe of his couenaunts and promyses which be most certaynly annexed to his sacramentes whereunto we ought to geue most certayne trust and confidence wherfore to teach the spirituall manducation to be equall with the spirituall manducation and sacramentall also that is to diminish the effect of the institutiō of the Sacrament which no Christen man ought to doe Caunterbury WHo is so ignoraunt that hath red any thing at all but he knoweth that distinction of thre eatinges But no man that is of learning and iudgement vnderstandeth the 3. diuerse eatings in such sort as you doe but after this manner That some eat only the sacrament of Christs body but not the very body it selfe some eat his body and not the Sacrament and some eat the Sacrament and body both togither The Sacramēt that is to say the bread is corporally eaten and chawed with the teth in the mouth The very body is eaten and chawed with faith in the spirite Ungodly men whē they receaue the Sacramēt they chaw in their mouthes like vnto Iudas the Sacramētal bread but they eat not the celestial bread which is Christ. Faithful Christian people such as be Christs true disciples continually frō tyme to tyme record in theyr myndes the beneficiall death of our Sauiour Christ chawing it by fayth in the cud of their spirit and digesting it in their harts feding and comforting themselues with that heauēly meat although they dayly receaue not the Sacrament thereof and so they eat Christs body spiritually although not the sacrament thereof But when such men for their more comfort and confirmation of eternall lyfe geuen vnto them by Christes death come vnto the Lords holy Table then as before ehey fed spiritually vpon Christ so now they feed corporally also vpon the sacramental bread By which sacramētal feeding in Christes promises their former spirituall feding is increased and they grow and wax continually more strōg in Christ vntill at the last they shall come to the full measure and perfection in Christ. This is the teaching of the true Catholick Church as it is taught by Gods word And therefore S. Paule speaking of them that vnworthely eat sayth that they eat the bread but not that they eat the body of Christ but their own damnation And where you set out with your accustomed rethorical colours a great impudencie in me that would report of the Papistes that good men eat the body of Christ and drink his bloud only when they receaue the Sacramēt seyng that I know that the Papistes make a distinction of 3. maner of eatinges of Christes body whereof one is without the sacrament I am not ignoraunt in deed that the Papists graunt a spiritual eating of Christs body without the sacrament but I mean of such an eating of his body as his presēce is in the Sacrament and as you say he is there eatē that is to say corporally Therefore to expresse my mind more plainely to you that list not vnderstand let this be the comparison They say that after such a sort as Christ is in the sacramēt and there eaten so good men eat his body and bloud only when they receaue the sacrament so doe they eat drink and feed vpon him continually so long as they be members of his body Now the Papists say that Christ is corporally present in the sacrament and is so eaten only when men receaue the sacrament But we say that the presence of Christ in his holy supper is a spirituall presence and as he is spiritually present so is he spiritually eaten of all faythfull christian men not only when they receaue the sacrament but continually so long as they be members spirituall of Christes misticall body And yet this is really also as you haue expounded the word that is to say in deed and effectually And as the holy ghost doth not only come to vs in Baptisme and Christ doth there eloth vs but they doe the same to vs continually so long as we dwell in Christ so likewise doth Christ feed vs so lōg as we dwell in him and he in vs and not only when we receaue the sacrament So that as touching Christ himself the presence is all one the clothing all one the feeding al one although the one for the more comfort and consolation haue the sacramēt added to it and the other be without the sacrament The rest that is here spoken is contentious wrangling to no purpose But now commeth in Smith with his 5. egs saying that I haue made hete 5. lyes in these comparisons The first lie is saith he that the Papists doe say that good men do eat and drink Christs body and bloud only when they receaue the sacrament which thing Smyth saith the Papists do not say but that they then onely do eat Christs body and drinke his bloud corporally which sufficeth for my purpose For I mean no other thing but that the Papistes teach such a corporall eating of Christes body as indureth not but vanisheth away and ceaseth at the furthest within few houres after the Sacramēt is receaued But for as much as Smith agreeth here with you the answere made before to you wil serue for him also And yet Smith here shall serue me in good stede against you who haue imputed vnto me so many impudent lyes made against the Papistes in the comparisons before rehearsed and Smith saith that this is the first lye which is in the 8. comparison And so shal Smith being mine aduersary and your frend be such a witnes for me as you cannot except against to prooue that those thinges which before you said were impudent lies be no lies at all For this is the first lye saith Smith and then my sayinges before must be all true and not impudent lies Now to the ninth
them by Manna was geuen the same thing that now is geuen to vs in the sacramentall bread And if I would graunt for your pleasure that in theyr sacrameÌ„ts Christ was promised and that in ours he is really geuen doth it not then followe aswell that Christ is geuen in the sacrament of Baptisme as that he is geuen in the Sacrament of his flesh and bloud And S. Augustin contra Faustum esteemeth them madde that think diuersity betweene the things signified in the old and new testament because the signes be diuers And expressing the matter playnely sayth that the flesh and bloud of our sacryfice before Christs comming was promised â— y sacryfices of similitudes in his passion was geuen indeed after his asâ—â—ntion is solemnly put in our memory by the Sacrament And the thing which you say S. Augustine noteth to be geuen in the sacraments of the new testament and to be promised in the sacramentes of the olde S. Augustine expresseth the thing which he ment that is to say saluation and eternall lyfe by Christ. And yet in thys mortall lyfe we haue not eternall lyfe in possession but in promise as the prophets had But S. Augustine sayth that we haue the promise because we haue Christ all ready come which by the Prophets was promised before that he should come therefore S. Iohn the Baptist was called more then a Prophet because he said Here is the lamb of God already preset which the Prophets taught vs to looke for vntill he came The effect therfore of S. Augustins words plainly to be expressed was this that the prophets in the old testament Promised a sauiour to come redeem the world which the sacraments of that tyme testified vntill hys comming but now he is already come and hath by his death performed that was promised which our sacramentes testifie vnto vs as S. Augustine declareth more playnely in his booke De fide ad Petrum the xix chapter So that S. Augustine speaketh of the geuing of Christ to death which the sacraments of the old testament testified to come and ours testify to be done and not of the geuing of him in the sacraments And forasmuch as S. Augustine spake generally of all the sacraments therefore if you will by his words proue that Christ is corporally in the sacrament of the holy communion you may aswell proue that he is corporally in baptisme For saint Augustine speaketh no more of the one then of the other But where saint Augustin speaketh generally of al the sacraments you restrayne the matter particularly to the sacrament of the Lords supper onely that the ignoraunt reader should thinke that saynt Augustine spake of the corporall presence of Christ in the sacramentes and that onely in the sacraments of bread and wine where as saynt Augustine himself speaketh onely of our saluation by Christ and of the sacraments in generall And neuerthelesse as the fathers had the same Christ and mediator that we haue as you here confesse so did they spiritually eat his fâ—esh and drinke his bloud as we doe and spiritually feed of him and by faith he was present with theÌ„ as he is with vs although carnally and corporally he was yet to come vnto theÌ„ and from vs is gon vp to his father into heauen This besides saynt Augustine is plainely set out by Bertrame aboue 6. hundreth yeares passed whose iudgement in this matter of the sacrament although you allow not because it vtterly coÌ„demneth your doctrine therein yet forasmuch as hytherto his teaching was neuer reproued by none but by you alone and that he is commeÌ„ded of other as an excellent learned man in holy scripture and a notable famous man aswell in liuing as learning and that among his excellent works this one is specially praised which he wrot of the matter of the SacrameÌ„t of the body and bloud of our Lord therfore I shall reherse his teaching in this point how the holy fathers and Prophets before the comming of Christ did eat Christes flesh and drink his bloud So that although Bertrams saying be not estemed with you yet the indifferent reader may see what was written in this matter before your doctrine was inuented And although his authority be not receiued of you yet his words may serue against Smyth who herein more learnedly and with more iudgement then you approueth this author This is Bertrams doctrine S. Paule saith that all the old fathers did eat the same spirituall meat and drinke the same spiritual drink But peraduenture thou wilt ask Which the same Euen the very same that christen people do daily eat and drinke in the church For we may not vnderstand diuers things when it is one and the self same Christ which in times past did feed with his flesh and made to drink of his bloud the people that were baptised in the cloude and sea in the wildernes and which doth now in the church feed christen people with the bread of his body and giueth theÌ„ to drink the floud of his bloud When he had not yet taken mans nature vpon him wheÌ„ he had not yet tasted death for the saluation of the world not redemed vs with his bloud neuertheles euen then our forefathers by spiritual meat and inuisible drink did eat his body in the wildernes and drink his bloud as the Apostle beareth witnesse saying The same spiritual meat the same spiritual drink For he that now in the church by his omnipotent power doth spiritually conuert bread wine into the flesh of his body and into the floud of his owne bloud he did theÌ„ inuisibly so worke that Manna which came from heauen was his body and the water his bloud Now by the thinges here by me alledged it euidently appereth that this is no nouelty of speech to say that the holy fathers and Prophets did eat Christes flesh and drink his bloud For both the scripture and old authors vse so to speake how much soeuer the spech mislike them that like no fashion but their own And what doth this further the pestilent heresy of Ione of Kent Is this a good argument The fathers did eat Christes flesh and drinke his bloud spiritually before he was borne ergo after he was not corporally borne of his mother Or because he was corporally borne is he not therefore dayly eaten spiritually of his faithfull people Because he dwelt in the world corporally from his incarnation vnto his ascention did he not therfore spiritually dwell in his holy members before that tyme and hath so done euer sithens and will do to the worldes end Or if he be eaten in a figure can you induce thereof that he was not borne without a figure Do not such kynde of argumentes fauour the errour of Ione of Kent Yea do they not manifestly approue her pestiferous heresy if they were to be alowed What man that meaneth the trueth would bring in such manner of resoning to deface the truth
And yet it is not to be denied but that Christ is truely eaten as he was truly born but the one corporally and without figure and the other spiritually and with a figure Now followeth my 11 comparison They say that the body of Christ is euery day many tymes made as often as there be Masses sayd and that then and there he is made of bread and wine We say that Christes body was neuer but once made and then not of the nature substance of bread and wine but of the substance of his blessed mother Winchester The body of Christ is by Gods omnipotency who so worketh in his word made present vnto vs at such tyme as the church praye it may please him so to doe which prayer is ordred to be made in the booke of common prayer now set foorth Wherin we require of God the creatures of bread and wine to be sanctified and to be to vs the body and bloud of Christ which they can not be vnlesse God worketh it and make them so to be In which mistery it was neuer taught as this author willingly misreporteth that Christes most precious body is made of the matter of bread but in that order exhibited and made preset vnto vs by conuersion of the substaunce of bread into his precious body not a new body made of a new matter of bread and wine but a new presence of the body that is neuer old made present there where the substāce of bread and wine was before So as this comparison of difference is meere wrangling and so euident as it needeth no further aunswere but a note Lo how they be not ashamed to trifle in so great a matter and without cause by wrong termes to bring the truth in sclander if it were possible May not this be accompted as a part of Gods punishmēt for men of knowledge to write to the people such matter seriously as were not tolerable to be by a scoffer deuised in a play to supply when his fellow had forgotten his part Caunterbury Christ is present when so euer the church praieth vnto him and is gathered togither in his name And the bread and wine be made vnto vs the body and bloud of Christ as it is in the book of common praier but not by chaunging the substaunce of bread and wine into the substance of Christes naturall body and bloud but that in the godly vsing of thē they be vnto the receauers Christes body and bloud As of some the Scripture saith that their riches is their redemption and to some it is their damnatiō And as Gods word to some is life to some it is death and a snare as the prophet saith And Christ himself to some is a stone to stumble at to some is a raysing frō death not by conuersion of substances but by good or euill vse that thing which to the godly is saluation to the vngodly is damnation So is the water in baptism and the bread and wine in the Lords supper to the worthy receauers Christ himselfe and eternall life and to the vnworthy receauers euerlasting death and damnation not by conuersion of one substance into an other but by godly or vngodly vse thereof And therfore in the book of the holy communion we do not pray absolutely that the bread and wine may be made the body and bloud of Christ but that vnto vs in that holy mistery they may be so that is to say that we may so worthely receaue the same that we may be partakers of Christes body and bloud and that therwith in spirit and in truth we may be spiritually nourished And a like praier of old time were all the people wont to make at the communion of all such offerings as at that time all the people vsed to offer praying that their offerings might be vnto them the body and bloud of Christ. And where you say it was neuer taught as I say that Christs body is made of the matter of bread you knowingly and willingly misreport me For I say not of the matter of bread but of bread which when you deny that the Papists so say it semeth you be now ashamed of the doctrin which the Papistes haue taught thys 4. or 5. hundred yeres For is it not playnely written of all the Papists both lawyers and scholl authors that the body of Christ in the sacramēt is made of bread and his bloud of wine And they say not that his body is made present of bread wine but is made of bread and wine Be not their books in print ready to be shewed Do they not say that the substance of the bread neither remaineth still nor is turned into nothing but into the body of Christ And do not your selfe also say here in this place that the substance of bread is conuerted into Christes precious body And what is that els but the body of Christ to be made of bread and to be made of a new matter For if the bread doe not vanish away into nothing but be turned into Christes body then is Christs body made of it and then it must needes follow that Christes body is made of new and of an orher substance then it was made of in his mothers wombe For there it was made of her flesh and bloud and here it is made of bread and wine And the Papistes say not as you now would shift of the matter that Christes body is made present of bread but they say plainly without addition that it is made of bread Can you deny that this is the plain doctrine of the Papists Ex pane fit Corpus Christi of bread is made the body of Christ and that the substance of bread is turned into the substance therof◠And what reason sentence or english could be in this saying Christes body is made present of bread Marye to be present in bread might be some sentence but the speeche will you in no wise admitte And this your saying here if the reader mark it wel turneth ouer quite and cleane all the wholl Papisticall doctrine in this matter of the Sacrament as well touching transubstantiation as also the carnall presence For their doctrine with one whol consent and agreement is this That the substance of bread remaineth not but is turned into the substance of Christes body and so the body of Christ is made of it But this is false say you and not tollerable to be by a scoffer deuised in a place to supply when his fellow had forgotten his part And so the wholl doctrine of the papists which they haue taught these 4. or 5. hundreth yeares doe you condemne with condigne reproches as a teaching intollerable not to be deuised by a scoffer in a play Why doe you then take vpon you to defend the Papistical doctrine if it be so intollerable Why doe you not forsake those scoffers and players which haue iugled with the world so long and embrace the
following of the diuersitie of them that eate and not of that is eaten which is alway one According hereunto S. Augustine agaynst the donatists geueth for a rule the sacramentes to be one in all although they be not one that receaue vse them And therfore to knitte vp this matter for the purpose I intend and write it for we must consider the substance of the visible sacrament of Christes body and bloud to be alwayes as of it selfe it is by Christes ordinaunce in the vnderstanding wherof this author maketh variaunce and would haue it by Christes ordinaunce but a figure which he hath not proued but and he had proued it then is it in substaunce but a figure and but a figure to good men For it must be in substaunce one to good and bad and so neyther to good nor bad this sacrament is otherwise dispensed then it is truely taught to be by preaching Wherefore if it be more then a figure as it is in deed and if by Christes ordinance it hath present vnder the forme of those visible signes of bread and wine the very body and bloud of Christ as both bene truly taught hitherto then is the substance of the Sacrament one alwayes as the oyntment was whether doues eate of it or beteles And this Issue I ioyne with this author that he shall not be able by any learning to make any diuersitie in the substance of this sacrament what soeuer diuersite follow in the effect For the diuersitie of the effect is occasioned in them that receaue as before is proued And then to answere this author I say that onely good men eate and drinck the body and bloud of Christ spiritually as I haue declared but all good and euill receiue the visible Sacrament of that substaunce God hath ordeyned it which in it hath no variance but is all one to good and euill Caunterbury IN this booke because you agre with me almost in the whole I shall not need much to trauaile in the aunswer but leauing all your prety taūtes agaynst me and glorious bosting of your selfe which neyther beseemeth our persones nor hindreth the truth nor furthereth your part but by pompouse wordes to winne a vayne glory and fame of them that be vnlearned and haue more regarde to words then iudgement of the matter I shall onely touch here and there such thinges as we vary in or that be necessary for the defence of the truth First after the sūme of my fourth booke collected as pleaseth you at the first dash you beginne with an vntrue report ioyned to a subtell deceyte or falax saying that my chief purpose is to proue that euill men receaue not the body and bloud of Christ in the Sacrament And hereupon you conclude that my fourth booke is superfluouse But of a false antecedent all that be learned do know that nothing can be rightly concluded Now mine intent and purpose in my fourth boooke is not to proue that euill men receaue not the body and bloud of Christ in the sacrament although that be true but my chief purpose is to proue that euell men eate not Christes flesh nor drincke not his bloud neither in the sacrament nor out of the sacrament as on the other side good men eat and drincke them both in the sacrament and out of the Sacrament And in the word Sacrament which is of your addition is a subtill falax called double vnderstanding For when the Sacrament is called onely a figure as you reherse wherin the body and bloud of Christ be onely figuratiuely there the word Sacrament is taken for the outwarde signes of bread and wine And after when you reherse that the Sacrament is a visible preaching by the tokens and signes of bread and wine in beleuing and remembring Christes benefites there the word Sacrament is taken for the whole ceremony and ministration of the Sacrament And so when you goe about by equiuocation of the word to deceaue other men you fall into your owne snare and be deceaued your selfe in that you think you conuey the matter so craftely that no man can espy you But to vtter the matter playnly without fallax or cauilation I teach that no man can eat Christes flesh and drincke his bloud but spiritually which forasmuch as euill men do not although they eat the sacramentall bread vntill theyr bellyes be full and drincke the wine vntill they be dronken yet eat they neither Christes flesh nor drincke his bloud neither in the sacrament nor without the sacrament because they cannot be eaten and dronken but by spirite and fayth wherof vngodly men be destitute being nothing but world and flesh This therfore is the summe of my teaching in this fourth booke that in the true ministration of the Sacrament Christ is present spiritually and so spiritually eaten of them that be godly and spirituall And as for the vngodly and carnall they may eate the bread and drincke the wine but with Christ him selfe they haue no communion or company and therfore they neyther eate his flesh nor drincke his bloud which who soeuer eateth hath as Christ sayth him selfe life by him as Christ hath life by his father And to eate Christes body or drincke his bloud sayth S. Augustine is to haue life For whether Christ be in the Sacrament corporally as you say or spiritually in them that rightly beleue in him and duely receaue the Sacrament as I say yet certayne it is that there he is not eaten corporally but spiritually For corporal eating with the mouth is to chaw teare in peces with the teeth after which maner Christes body is of no man eaten although Nicholas the second made such an article of the fayth and compelled Berengatius so to professe And therfore although Christ were corporally in the Sacrament yet seeing that he cannot be corporally eaten this booke commeth in good place and is very necessary to know that Christes body can not be eaten but spiritually by beleuing and remembring Christes benefites and reuoluing them in our mynd beleeuing that as the bread and wine feed and nourish our bodyes so Christ feedeth and nourisheth our soules And ought this to come out of a christian mannes mouth That these be good wordes but such as the wordes of christes supper do not learne vs Do not the wordes of Christes supper learne vs to eate the breade and drinke the wine in the remembraunce of his death Is not the breakyng and eating of the bread after such sort as Christ ordayned a communication of Christes body vnto vs Is not the cuppe likewise a communication of his bloud vnto vs Should not then christian people according hereunto in fayth feed vpon Christ spiritually beleuing that as the bread wine feed and nourish theyr bodyes so both Christ their soules with his owne flesh and bloud And shall any Christian man now say that these be good wordes but such as the wordes in Christes supper do not
But all this is spoken quite besides the matter and serueth for nothing but to cast a myst before mens eyes as it semeth you seeke nothing els thorow your whole booke And this your doctrine hath a very euill smacke that spirite and life should fall vppon naughty men although for theyr malice it tary not For by this doctrine you ioyne togither in one man Christ and Beliall the spirite of God and the spirite of the diuell lyfe and death and all at one tyme which doctrine I will not name what it is for all faythfull men know the name right well and detest the same And what ignoraunce can be shewed more in him that accoumpteth himselfe learned then to gather of Christes wordes where her sayth his wordes be spirit and life that spirit and lyfe should be in euill men because they heare his wordes For the wordes which you recyte by and by of S. Augustin shew how vayne your argument is when he sayth The wordes be spirite and life but not to thee that doest carnally vnderstand them What estimation of learning or of truth would you haue men to conceaue of you that bring such vnlearned argumentes wherof the inuadilitie appeareth within six lynes after Which must nedes declare in you either much vntruth and vnsincere proceding or much ignoraunce or at the least all exceding forgetfulnes to say anythyng reproued agayn within six lynes after And if the promises of God as you say be not disapoynted by our infidelitie then if euyll men eate the very body of Christ and drink his bloud they must nedes dwell in Christ and haue Christ dwelling in them and by him haue euerlasting lyfe bycause of these promises of Christ Qui manducat meam carnem bibit meum sanguinem in memanet et ego in eo Et quimanducat meam carnem bibit meum sanguinem habet vitam aeternam He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath euerlasting lyfe And he that eateth my flesh and drincketh my bloud dwelleth in me and I in him And yet the third promise Qui manducat me ipse viues propter me He that eateth me he shall also lyue by me These be .iij. promises of God which if they can not be disapoynted by our infidilitie then if euyll men eat the very body of Christ and drinke his bloud as you say they doe in the sacrament then must it nedes follow that they shall haue euerlasting life and that they dwell in Christ and Christ in them bicause our infidilitie say you can not disappoynt Goddes promises And how agreeth this your saying with that doctrine which you were wont earnestly to teach both by mouth and penne that all the promises of God to vs be made vnder condition if our infidilitie can not disappoynt Gods promises For then the promises of God must nedes haue place whether we obserue the condition or not But here you haue fetched a great compasse circuit vtterly in vayne to reproue that thing which I neuer denied but euer affirmed which is That the substaunce of the visible sacrament of the body and bloud of Christ which I say is bread and wine in the sacrament as water is in baptisme is all one substance to good and to badde and to both a figure But that vnder the fourme of bread and wine is corporally present by Christes ordinaūce his very body and bloud eyther to good or to ill that you neyther haue nor can proue yet thereupō would you bring in your conclusion here wherin you commit that folly in reasoning which is caled Petitio principij What neede you to make herein any issue when we agree in the matter For in the substance I make no diuersitie but I say that the substance of Christes body and bloud is corporally present neyther in the good eater nor in the euill And as for the substance of bread and wine I say they be all one whether the good or euill eate and drincke them As the water of Baptisme is all one whether Symon Peter or Symon Magus be christned therin and it is one word that to the euill is a sauoure of death and to the good is a sauoure of lyfe And as it is one Sonne that shineth vppon the good and the badde that melteth butter and maketh the earth harde one flower wherof the bee sucketh hony and the spyder poyson and one oyntment as Decumenius sayth that kylleth the bettyll and strengthneth the doue Neuerthelesse as all that be washed in the water be not washed with the holy spirite so all that eate the sacramentall bread eate not the very body of Christ. And thus you see that your issue is to no purpose except you would fight with your owne shadowe Now forasmuch as after all this vayne and friuolous consuming of wordes you begin to make answere vnto my profes I shall here reherse my profes and argumentes to the intent that the reader seyng both my profes and your confutations before his eyes may the better consider and geue his iudgement therein My forth booke begynneth thus THe grosse errour of the Papistes is Of the carnall eating and drinking of Christes flesh and bloud with our mouthes For they say that whosoeuer eate and drincke the sacramentes of bread and wine do eat and drincke also with theyr mouthes Christes very flesh and bloud be they neuer so vngodly and wicked persons But Christ him selfe taught cleane contrary in the sixt of Iohn that we eate not him carnally with our mouthes but spiritually with our fayth saying Verily verily I say vnto you he that beleueth in me hath euerlasting lyfe I am the bread of life Your fathers did eat Manna in the wildernes and dyed This is the bread that cam from heauen that who so euer shall eate therof shall not dye I am the liuely bread that cam from heauen If any man eat of this bread he shall liue for euer And the bread which I will geue is my flesh which I will geue for the lyfe of the world This is the most true doctrine of our sauiour Christ that whosoeuer eateth him shall haue euerlasting lyfe And by and by it followeth in the same place of S. Iohn more clearly Verely verely I say vnto you except you eat the flesh of the sonne of man and drincke his bloud you shall not haue life in you He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath life euerlasting and I will rayse him agayne at the last day For my flesh is very meate and my bloud is very drincke He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud dwelleth in me and I in him As the liuing father hath sent me and I liue by the father euen so he that eateth me shall liue by me This is the bread which came downe from heauen not as your fathers did eate Manna and are dead He that eateth this
all his misticall conuersation here in his flesh and his doctrine consisting of his whole life pertayning both to his humanitie and diuinitie wherby the soule is nourished and brought to the contemplation of thinges eternall Thus teacheth Basilius how we eate Christes flesh and drincke his bloud which pertayneth only to the true and faythfull members of Christ. S. Hierom also sayth All that love pleasure more then God eate not the flesh of Iesu nor drincke his bloud Of the which himselfe sayth He that eateth my flesh and drincketh my bloud hath euerlasting lyfe And in an other place S. Hierom sayth that heritikes do not eate and drincke the body and bloud of the Lord. And more ouer he sayth that heretiks eat not the flesh of Iesu whose flesh is the meat of faythfull men Thus agreeth S. Hierom with the other before rehersed that heretikes and such as follow worldly pleasures eate not Christes flesh nor drincke his bloud bicause that Christ sayd He that eateth my flesh and drincketh my bloud hath euerlasting life And S. Ambrose sayth that Iesus is the bread which is the meat of sainctes and that he that taketh this bread dyeth not a sinners death For this bread is the remission of sinnes And in other booke to him intituled he writeth thus This bread of life which came downe from heauen doth minister euerlasting life and who soeuer eateth this bread shall not dye for euer and is the body of Christ. And yet in an other booke set forth in his name he sayth on this wise He that did eate Manne dyed but he that eateth this body shall haue remission of his sinnes and shall not dye for euer And agayne he sayth As often as thou drinckest thou hast remission of thy sinnes These sentences of S. Ambrose be so playne in this matter that there nedeth no more but onely the rehersall of them But S. Augustine in many places playnly discussing this matter sayth He that agreeth not with Christ doth neither eate his body nor drinke his bloud although to the condemnation of his presumption he receaue euery day the sacramēt of so hygh a matter And moreouer S. Augustine most playnly resolueth this matter in his booke De ciuitate Dei disputing agaynst two kindes of heretikes Wherof the one sayd that as many as were Christned and receaued the sacramēt of Christes body and bloud should be saued how so euer they liued or beleeued bycause that Christ sayd This is the bread that came from heauen that who so euer shall eate therof shall not dye I am the bread of lyfe which came from heauen who so euer shall eate of this bread shall liue for euer Therfore sayd these heretikes all such men must nedes be deliuered from eternall death and at length be brought to eternall life The other sayd that heretikes and scismatikes myght eate the sacrament of Christes body but not his very body bycause they be no members of his body And therfore they promised not euerlasting life to all that receaued Christes baptisme and the sacrament of his body but to all such as professed a true fayth although they liued neuer so vngodly For such sayd they do eate the body of Christ not onely in a sacrament but also in deede bycause they be members of Christes body But S. Augustine answering to both these heresies sayth That neither heretikes nor such as professe a true fayth in theyr mouthes and in theyr liuing shew the contrary haue eyther a true fayth which worketh by charitie and doth none euil or are to be counted among the members of Christ. For they can not be both members of Christ and members of the deuill Therfore sayth he it may not be sayd that any of them eate the body of Christ. For when Christ sayth he that eateth my flesh and drincketh my bloud dwelleth in me and I in him He sheweth what it is not sacramentally but indeed to eate his body and drincke his bloud which is when a man dwelleth so in Christ that Christ dwelleth in him For Christ spake those wordes as if he should say He that dwelleth not in me and in whom I dwell not let him not say or thincke that he eateth my body or drincketh my bloud These be the playne wordes of S. Augustine that such as liue vngodly although they may seme to eate Christes body bicause they eate the sacrament of his body yet in deed they neyther be members of his body nor do eate his body Also vpon the gospell of S. Iohn he sayth that he that doth not eate his flesh and drincke his bloud hath not in him euerlasting lyfe And he that eateth his flesh and drincketh his bloud hath euerlasting lyfe But it is not so in those meates which we take to sustayne our bodyes For although without them we cannot liue yet it is not necessary that who so euer receaueth them shall liue for they may dye by age sicknes or other chaunces But in this meat and drincke of the body and bloud of our Lord it is otherwise For both they that eate and drincke them not haue not euerlasting lyfe And contrariwyse who so euer eate and drincke them haue euerlasting life Note and ponder well these wordes of S. Augustine that the bread and wine and other meates drinckes which nourish the body a man may eate and neuerthelesse dye but the very body and bloud of Christ no man eateth but that hath euerlasting life So that wicked men can not eate nor drincke them for then they must nedes haue by them euerlasting life And in the same place S. Augustine sayth further The sacramēt of the vnitie of Christes body bloud is takē in the Lordes table of some men to lyfe of some mē to death but the thing it selfe wherof it is a sacramēt is takē of all men to lyfe of no man to death And more ouer he sayth This is to eate that meate and drincke that drincke to dwell in Christ and to haue Christ dwelling in him And for that cause he that dwelleth not in Christ in whome Christ dwelleth not without doubt he eateth not spiritually his flesh nor drincketh his bloud although carnally and visibly with his teeth he byte the Sacrament of his body and bloud Thus writeth S. Augustine in the xxvj homely of S. Iohn And in the next homely following he sayth thus This day our sermon is of the body of the Lord which he sayd he would geue to eat for eternall life And he declared the maner of his gift and distribution how he would geue his flesh to eate saying He that eateth my flesh and drincketh my bloud dwelleth in me and I in him This therfore is a token or knowledge that a man hath eaten and drunken that is to say if he dwell in Christ and haue Christ dwelling in him If he cleaue so to Christ that he is not seuered from him This therfore Christ
wound they should receiue if the Archbishop had stoode stedfast in his sentence and againe on the other side how great profite they should get if he as the principall standerd bearer should be ouerthrowen By reason wherof the wylie Papistes flocked about him with threatning flattering intreating and promising and all other meanes especially Henry Sydall and Frier Iohn a Spaniard De villa Garcina to the end to driue him to the vttermost of their possibilitie from his former sentence to recantation whose force his manly constancie did a great while resist but at last when they made no end of calling and crying vpon him the Archbishop being ouercome whether through their importunitie or by his owne imbecillitie or of what mynde I can not tell at length gaue his hand It might be supposed that it was done for the hope of life and better dayes to come But as we may since perceaue by a Letter of his sent to a Lawyer the most cause why he desired his tyme to be delayed was that he would make an end of Marcus Antonius which he had already begon but howsoeuer it was he recanted though playne agaynst his conscience Mary the Quéene hauing now gotten a time to reuenge her old grief receaued his recantation very gladly but of her purpose to put him to death she would nothing relent But taking secret Counsell how to dispatch Cranmer out of the way who as yet knew nothyng of her secret hate looked for nothyng lesse then death appointed Doct. Cole secretly gaue him in commaundement that agaynst the 21. of March he should prepare a funerall Sermon for Cranmers burning and so instructing him orderly and diligently of her will and pleasure in that behalfe sendeth him away Some after the Lord Williams of Tame and the Lord Shādoys Sir Thomas Bridges and Sir Iohn Browne were sent for with other worshipfull men and Iustices cōmaunded in the Quéenes name to be at Oxford at the same day with their seruauntes and retinue lest Cranmers death should rayse there any tumult Cole the Doctour hauing his lesson geuen him before and charged by her commaūdement returned to Oxford ready to play his part who as the day of execution drew neare euē the day before came into the prison to Crāmer to try whether he abode in the Catholicke fayth wherin before he had left him To whom whē Cranmer had aunswered that by Gods grace he would dayly be more cōfirmed in the Catholicke fayth Cole departing for that tyme the next day folowing repayred to the Archbishop agayne geuing no signification as yet of his death that was prepared And therefore in the mornyng which was the 21. day of March appointed for Cranmers execution the sayd Cole commyng to him asked if he had any money To whom when he aunswered that he had none he deliuered him 1◠Crownes to geue the poore to whō he would and so exhorting him so much as he could to constancie in fayth departed thence about his businesse as to his Sermon appertained By this partly and other like argumentes the Archbishop began more and more to surmise what they went about Thē because the day was not farre past and the Lordes and Knightes that were looked for were not yet come there came to him the Spanish Frier witnesse of his recantation bringyng a paper with Articles whiche Cranmer should openly professe in his recantation before the people earnestly desiring that hee would write the sayd instrument with the Articles with his owne hand signe it with his name which when he had done the sayd Frier desired that hee would write an other Copie therof which should remaine with him and that he did also But yet the Archbishop beyng not ignoraunt whereunto their secret deuises tended and thinking that the tyme was at hand in which he could no longer dissemble the profession of his fayth with Christes people he put secretly in his bosome his Prayer with his exhortation written in an other paper which he mynded to recite to the people before he should make the last profession of his sayth fearyng lest if they had heard the Confession of his fayth first they would not afterward haue suffered him to exhort the people Some after about ix of the clocke the Lord Williams Sir Thomas Bridges Syr Iohn Browne and the other Iustices with certaine other Noble men that were sent of the Quéenes Counsell came to Oxford with a great trayne of wayting men Also of the other multitude on euery side as is wont in such a matter was made a great concourse and greater expectation In this so great frequence and expectation Cranmer at length commeth from the prison Bocardo vnto S. Maries Churche because it was a foule and a raynie day the chief Church in the Uniuersitie in this order The Maior went before next him the Aldermen in their place and degree after them was Cranmer brought betwene two Friers which mombling to and fro certaine Psalmes in the stréetes aunswered one an other vntil they came to the Church doore and there they began the song of Simeon Nunc dimittis and entring into the Churche the Psalme saying Friers brought him to his standyng and there left him There was a stage set vp ouer agaynst the Pulpit of a meane height from the ground Cranmer had his standyng waytyng vntill Cole made him ready to his Sermon The lamentable case and sight of that man gaue a sorowfull spectacle to all Christē eyes that beheld him He that late was Archbishop Metropolitane and Primate of England and the kynges priuie Counsellour beyng now in a bare and ragged gowne and ill fauoredly clothed with an old square cap exposed to the contempt of all men did admonish mē not onely of his owne calamitie but also of their state and fortune For who would not pitie his case and bewayle his fortune and might not feare his own chaunce to sée such a Prelate so graue a Counsellour and of so long continued honour after so many dignities in his old yeares to be depriued of his estate adiudged to dye and in so paynfull a death to end his life and now presently from such fresh ornamentes to descēd to such vyle and ragged apparell In this habite when hee had stoode a good space vpon the stage turnyng to a piller neare adioyning thereunto he lifted vp his handes to heauen and prayed to God once or twise till at the length Doct. Cole commyng into the Pulpit and begynnyng his Sermon entred first into mention of Tobias and Zachary Whom after that he had praysed in the begynnyng of his Sermon for their perseueraunce in the true worshyppyng of God he then deuided his whole Sermon into thrée partes accordyng to the solemne custome of the Schooles entendyng to speake first of the mercy of God secondly of his Iustice to be shewed and last of all how the Princes secretes are not to be opened And procéedyng a litle
backe the people that were ready to depart to Prayers Brethren sayd hee lest any man should doubt of this mans earnest conuersion and repentaunce you shall heare him speake before you and therfore I pray you Maister Cranmer that you will now performe that you promised not long agoe namely that you would openly expresse the true and vndoubted profession of your fayth that you may take away all suspition from men and that all men may vnderstand that you are a Catholicke in déede I will do it sayd the Archbyshop and with a good will who by and by rising vp and putting of his cap began to speake thus vnto the people I desire you well beloued brethren in the Lord that you will pray to God for me to forgeue me my sinnes which aboue all men both in number and greatnes I haue committed but among all the rest there is one offence whiche of all at this tyme doth vexe and trouble me wherof in processe of my talke you shall heare more in his proper place and then puttyng his hand into his bosome he drew forth his Prayer whiche he recited to the people in this sense ¶ The Prayer of Doct. Cranmer Archb. of Cant. at his death GOod Christen people my dearely beloued brethren and sisters in Christ I beséech you most hartely to pray for me to almightie God that he will forgeue me all my sinnes and offēces which be many without number and great aboue measure But yet one thyng gréeueth my conscience more then all the rest wherof God willyng I entend to speake more hereafter But how great and how many soeuer my sinnes be I beséech you to pray God of his mercy to pardon and forgeue them all And here knéelyng downe he sayd O Father of heauen O Sonne of God redeemer of the world O holy Ghost three persons and one God haue mercy vpon me most wretched caitiffe and miserable sinner I haue offended both against heauen and earth more then my toung can expresse Whether then may I goe or whether should I flye To heauen I may be ashamed to lift vp myne eyes and in earth I finde no place of refuge or succour To thee therfore O Lord do Irunne to thee do I humble my selfe saying O Lord my God my sinnes be great but yet haue mercy vpon me for thy great mercy The great mistery that God became mā was not wrought for litle or few offēces Thou diddest nor geue thy sonne O heauenly Father vnto death for small sinnes onely but for all the greatest sinnes of the world so that the sinner returne to thee with his whole hart as I do here at this present Wherfore haue mercy on me O God whose property is alwayes to haue mercy haue mercy vpon me O Lord for thy great mercy I craue nothyng O Lord for myne owne merites but for thy names sake that it may be halowed thereby and for thy deare sonne Iesus Christ sake And now therfore our Father of heauen halowed by thy name c. And then he rising sayd Euery man good people desireth at that tyme of their death to geue some good exhortation that other may remember the same before their death and be the better thereby so I beseech God graunt me grace that I may speake some thyng at this my departyng whereby God may bee glorified and you edified First it is an heauie case to see that so many folke be so much doted vpon the loue of this false world and so carefull for it that of the loue of God or the world to come they seeme to care very litle or nothyng Therefore this shal be my first exhortation that you set not your myndes ouer much vpon this glosing world but vpon God and vpon the world to come and to learne to know what this lesson meaneth whiche S. Iohn teacheth That the loue of this world is hatred agaynst God The second exhortation is that next vnder God you obey your Kyng and Queene willingly and gladly without murmuryng or grudgyng not for feare of them onely but much more for the feare of God knowyng that they be Gods Ministers appointed by God to rule and gouerne you and therefore who soeuer resisteth them resisteth the ordinaunce of GOD. The third exhortation is that you loue altogether lyke brethren and sisters For alas pitie it is to see what cōtention and hatred one Christen man beareth to an other not takyng ech other as brother and sister but rather as straungers and mortall enemyes But I pray you learne and beare well away this one lesson to doe good vnto all men asmuch as in you lyeth to hurt no man no more then you would hurt your owne naturall louyng brother or sister For this you may be sure of that who soeuer hateth any person and goeth about maliciously to hinder or hurt him surely and without all doubt God is not with that mā although he thinke him selfe neuer so much in Gods fauour The fourth exhortation shal be to them that haue great substaunce and riches of this world that they will well consider and wey three sayinges of the Scripture One is of our Sauiour Christ him selfe who sayth It is hard for a rich man to enter into the kingdome of heauen A sore saying and yet spoken of him that knoweth the truth The second is of S. Iohn whose saying is this He that hath the substaunce of this world and seeth his brother in necessitie and shutteth vp his mercy from him how can he say that he loueth God The thyrd is of S. Iames who speaketh to the couetous rich mā after this maner Weepe you and howle for the miserie that shall come vppon you your riches doe rotte your clothes be moth eaten your gold and siluer doth canker and rust and their rust shall beare witnesse agaynst you and consume you like fire you gather a horde or treasure of Gods indignation agaynst the last day Let them that be rich ponder well these three sentences for if euer they had occasion to shew their charitie they haue it now at this present the poore people beyng so many and victuals so deare The description of Doct. Cranmer how he was plucked downe from the stage by Friers and Papistes for the true Confession of his Fayth First I beleue in God the Father almightie maker of heauen and earth c. And I beleue euery Article of the Catholicke fayth euery word and sentence taught by our Sauiour Iesus Christ his Apostles and Prophetes in the new and old Testament And now I come to the great thyng that so much troubleth my conscience more thē any thyng that euer I did or sayd in my whole life and that is the settyng abroad of a writyng contrary to the truth which now here I renounce and refuse as thynges written with my hand contrary to the truth which I thought in my hart written for feare of
death and to saue my life if it might be and that is all such Billes and papers which I haue written or signed with my hand since my degradation wherein I haue written many thynges vntrue And for as much as my hand offended written contrary to my hart my hand shall first bee punished therefore for may I come to the fire it shal be first burned And as for the Pope I refuse him as Christes enemy and Antichrist with all his false doctrine And as for the Sacrament I beleue as I haue taught in my booke agaynst the Byshop of Winchester the whiche my booke teacheth so true a doctrine of the Sacrament that it shal stand at the last day before the Iudgement of God where the Papisticall doctrine contrary thereto shal be ashamed to shew her face Here the standers by were all astonyed maruailed were amased did looke one vpon an other whose expectation he had so notably deceiued Some began to admonish him of his recantation and to accuse him of falshode Briefly it was a world to sée the Doctours beguiled of so great an hope I thinke there was neuer crueltie more notably or better in tyme deluded and deceiued For it is not to bee doubted but they looked for a glorious victorie and a perpetuall triumph by this mans retractation Who as soone as they heard these thynges began to let downe their eares to rage fret and fume and so much the more because they could not reuenge their grief for they could now no longer threaten or hurt him For the most miserable man in the world can dye but once where as of necessitie he must néedes dye that day though the Papistes had bene neuer so well pleased now beyng neuer so much offended with him yet could he not be twise killed of them And so whē they could do nothing els vnto him yet lest they should say nothyng they ceassed not to obiect vnto him his falsehode and dissimulation Unto which accusation he aunswered Ah my Maisters quoth he do not you take it so Alwayes since I liued hetherto I haue bene a hater of falsehode and a louer of simplicitie and neuer before this tyme haue I dissembled and in saying this all the teares that remained in his body appeared in his eyes And when hee began to speake more of the Sacrament and of the Papacie some of them began to cry out yalpe and baule and and specially Cole cried out vpon him stop the heretickes mouth and take him away And then Cranmer beyng pulled downe from the stage was led to the fire accompanied with those Friers vexyng troublyng and threatnyng him most cruellie What madnes say they hath brought thée agayne into this errour by which thou wilt draw innumerable soules with thée into hell To whom he aunswered nothyng but directed all his talke to the people sauyng that to one troublyng him in the way he spake and exhorted him to get him home to his study and apply his booke diligently saying if he did diligently call vpon God by reading more he should get knowledge But the other Spanish barker ragyng and fomyng was almost out of his wittes alwayes hauyng this in his mouth Non fecisti diddest thou it not But when he came to the place where the holy Byshops and Martyrs of God Hugh Latymer Ridley were burnt before him for the confessiō of the truth knéeling down he prayed to God and not long tarying in Prayers puttyng of his garmentes to his shirt hee prepared him selfe to death His shirt was made long downe to his féete His féete were bare Likewise his head when both his cappes were of was so bare that not one heare could bee sene vpon it His beard was long and thicke coueryng his face with marueilous grauitie Such a countenaunce of grauitie moued the hartes both of his frendes and of his enemies Then the Spanish Friers Iohn and Richard of whom mention was made before began to exhort him and play their partes with him a fresh but with vayne and lost labour Cranmer with stedfast purpose abidyng in the profession of his doctrine gaue his hand to certaine old men and other that stoode by biddyng them farewell And when he had thought to haue done so likewise to Ely the sayd Ely drew backe his hand and refused saying it was not lawfull to salute heretickes and specially such a one as falsely returned vnto the opinions that he had foresworne And if hee had knowen before that he would haue done so he would neuer haue vsed his companie so familiarly and chid those Sergeauntes and Citizens which had not refused to geue him their handes This Ely was a Priest lately made and Student in Diuinitie beyng then one of the Fellowes of Brasennose Then was an yron chayne tyed about Cranmer whom when they perceiued to be more stedfast then that he could be moued from his sentence they commaunded the fire to be set vnto him And when the wood was kindled and the fire began to burne neare him stretchyng out his arme he put his right hand into the flame whiche he held so stedfast and immouable sauyng that once with the same hand he wiped his face that all men might sée his hand burned before his body was touched His body did so abide the burnyng of the flame with such constancie and stedfastnesse that standyng alwayes in one place without mouyng of his body hee séemed to moue no more then the stake to whiche he was bound his eyes were lifted vp into heauen and often tymes he repeated his vnworthy right hand so long as his voyce would suffer him and vsing often the wordes of Stephen Lord Iesus receiue my spirite in the greatnesse of the flame he gaue vp the Ghost This fortitude of mynde whiche perchaunce is rare and not vsed among the Spaniardes when Frier Iohn saw thinkyng it came not of fortitude but of desperation although such maner examples whiche are of the like constancie haue bene common here in England ran to the Lord Williams of Lame crying that the Archbyshop was vexed in mynde and dyed in great desperation But he whiche was not ignoraunt of the Archbyshops constancie beyng vnknowen to the Spaniardes smiled onely and as it were by silence rebuked the Friers tollie And this was the end of this learned Archbyshop whom lest by euill subscribyng he should haue perished by well recantyng God preserued and lest he should haue liued longer with shame and reproofe it pleased God rather to take him away to the glory of his name and profite of his Churche So good was the Lord both to his Church in fortifying the same with the testimonie bloud of such a Martyr and so good also to the man with this Crosse of tribulation to purge his offences in his world not onely of his recantatiō but also of his standyng agaynst Iohn Lambert and M. Allen or if there were any other
foūd this matter so fully prooued that he neither is nor neuer shal be able to answere thereto For I haue alleadged the scripture I haue alleadged the consent of the old writers holy fathers and martirs to prooue that Christ called bread his body and wine his bloud For the Euangelistes speaking of the Lords supper say that he took bread blessed it brake it gaue it to his disciples saying This is my body and of the wine he sayd Take this deuide it among you drinke it this is my bloud I haue alleadged Irene saying that Christ confessed bread to be his body and the cup to be his bloud I haue cyted Tertulliā who sayth in many places that Christ called bread his body I haue brought in for the same purpose Cyprian who sayth that Christ called such bread as is made of many cornes ioyned together his body and such wine he named his bloud as is pressed out of many grapes I haue written the wordes of Epiphanius which be these that Christ speakinge of a loafe which is round in fashion and can neither see heare nor feele said of it This is my body And S. Hierom writing ad Hedibiam sayth that Christ called the bread which he brake his body And S. Augustine sayth that Iesus called meate his body and drinke his bloud And Cyrill sayth more plainly that Christ called the peeces of bread his body And last of all I brought forth Theodorete whose saying is this that when Christe gaue the holy mysteries he called bread his body and the cuppe mixt with wine and water he called his bloud All these Authors I alleadged to prooue that Christ called bread his body and wine his bloud Which because they speak the thinge so plainly as nothing can be more and Smith seeth that he can deuise nothinge to answere these Authors like a wily fox he stealeth away by them softly as he had a flea in his eare saying nothing to all these authors but that they proue not my purpose If this be a sufficient answere let the Reader be iudge for in such sort I could make a short answere to Smithes whol booke in this one sentence that nothing that he sayth proueth his purpose And as for proofes of his saying Smith hath vtterly none but onely this fond reason That if Christ had called bread his body then should bread haue been crucified for vs because Christ added these words this is my body which shal be geuē to death for you If such wise reason shall take place a man may not take a loafe in his hand made of wheate that came out of Danske and say this is wheate that grew in Danske but it must follow that the loafe grew in Danske And if the wife shall say this is butter of my own cow Smith shall proue by this speach that her mayd milked butter But to this fantasticall or rather frantike reason I haue spoaken more in mine aunswere to Smithes preface How be it you haue taken a wiser way then this graunting that Christ called bread his body and wine his bloud but adding thereto that Christs calling was making Yet here may they that be wise learn by the way how euil fauoredly you and Smith agree among your selues And forasmuch as Smith hath not made answere vnto the Authors by me alleadged in this parte I may iustly require that for lacke of answere in time and place where he ought to haue answered he may be condemned as one that standeth mute And being condemned in this his chiefe demur he hath after nothing to answere at al. For this foundation being ouerthrown all the rest falleth down withall Wherefore now will I returne to aunswere you in this matter which is the last of the euident and manyfest vntruthes wherof you appeach me I perceaue here how vntoward you be to learn the truth being brought vp all your life in Papisticall errors If you could forget your law which hath been your chief profession and study from your youth and specially the Canon law which purposely corrupteth the truth of Gods word you should be much more apte to vnderstand and receaue the secretes of holy scripture But before those scales fall from your sawlish eyes you neither can nor will perceaue the true doctrine of this holy sacrament of Christes body bloud But yet I shall doe as much as lyeth in me to teach and instruct you as occasion shall serue so that the fault shall be either in your euill bringing vp altogether in popery or in your dulnes or frowardnes if you attaine not true vnderstanding of this matter Where you speake of the miraculous workinge of Christ to make bread his body you must first learne that the bread is not made really Christes body nor the wine his bloud but sacramētally And the miraculous working is not in the bread but in them that duely eate the bread and drink that drink For the marueylous worke of God is in the feeding and it is Christen people that be fed and not the bread And so the true confession and beleefe of the vniuersall Church from the beginning is not such as you many times affirme but neuer can proue for the Catholicke church acknowledgeth no such diuision betweene Christes holy flesh and his spirite that life is renued in vs by his holy spirite and increased by his holy flesh but the true fayth confesseth that both be done by his holy spirite and flesh iointly together as well the renouation as the increace of our life Wherfore you diminish here the effect of baptisme wherin is not geuen only Christes spirite but wholl Christ. And herein I will ioyne an issue with you And you shall finde that although you thinke I lacke law where with to follow my plea yet I doubt not but I shall haue helpe of Gods word inough to make al men perceiue that you be but a simple diuine so that for lacke of your proofes I doubt not but the sentence shall be geuen vpon my side by all learned and indifferent iudges that vnderstand the matter which is in controuersy betweene vs. And where you say that we must represse our thoughtes and imaginations and by reason of Christes omnipotency iudge his intent by his wil it is a most certayne truth that Gods absolute and determinate wil is the chiefe gouernour of all thinges and the rule wherby all things must be ordered and therto obey But where I pray you haue you any such will of Christ that he is really carnally corporally naturally vnder the formes of bread and wine There is no such will of Christ set forth in the scripture as you pretend by a false vnderstanding of these wordes this is my body Why take you then so boldly vpon you to say that this is Christs will and intent when you haue no warrant in scripture to beare you It is not a sufficient
knew they it not Forsooth because their mindes were grosse as yet and had not receaued the fulnes of the Spirite And therfore our Sauyour Christ minding to draw them from this grossenes tolde them of an other kinde of meate then they fantasied as it were rebuking them for that they perceiued not that there was any other kinde of eating and drinking besides that eating and drinking which is with the mouth and throate Likewise when he said to the woman of Samaria Who soeuer shall drink of that water that I shal geue him shal neuer be thirsty again They that heard him speak those words might well perceiue that he went about to make them well acquainted with an other kinde of drinking then is the drinking with the mouth and throate For there is no such kinde of drinke that with once drinking can quench the thirst of a mans body for euer Wherefore in saying he shall neuer be thirsty agayn he did draw their mindes from drinking with the mouth vnto another kinde of drinking wherof they knew not and vnto another kinde of thirsting wherewith as yet they were not acquainted And also when our Sauyour Christ said he that commeth to me shall not hunger and he that beleeueth on me shall neuer be thirsty he gaue them a plain watcheworde that there was another kinde of meate and drinke then that wherwith he fed them at the other syde of the water and an other kynde of hungryng and thirstyng then was the hungryng and thyrstyng of the bodye By these wordes therfore he droue the people to vnderstand an other kynde of eatyng and drynking of hungring and thirsting then that whiche belongeth onely for the preseruation of temporall life Now then as the thing that comforteth the body is called meate and drink of a lyke sorte the scripture calleth the same thinge that comforteth the soule meate and drinke Wherfore as here before in the first note is declared the hunger drought of the soule so is it nowe secondly to be noted what is the meate drinke and foode of the soule The meate drinke foode and refreshing of the soule is our Sauiour Christ as he sayd himselfe Come vnto me all you that trauaile and be laden and I will refresh you And If any man be dry sayth he let him come to me and drinke He that beleueth in me floudes of water of life shall flowe out of hys bellye And I am the bread of life saith Christe he that commeth to me shall not be hungry and he that beleeueth in me shall neuer be dry For as meate and drinke do comfort the hungry body so doth the death of Christes body and the shedding of his bloud comforte the soule when she is after her sorte hungry What thinge is it that comforteth and nourisheth the body Forsooth meate and drinke By what names then shall we call the body and bloud of our sauiour Christ which do comfort and nourish the hungry soule but by the names of meate and drynke And this symilitude caused our Sauiour to say my flesh is very meate and my bloud is very drinke For there is no kinde of meate that is comfortable to the soule but only the death of Christes blessed body Nor no kinde of drinke that can quench her thirst but only the bloudsheading of our Sauyour Christ which was shed for her offences For as there is a carnall generation and a carnall feeding and nourishment so is there also a spirituall generation and a spirituall feeding And as euery man by carnall generation of father and mother is carnally begotten and borne vnto this mortall life so is euery good christian spiritually borne by Christ vnto eternall life And as euery man is carnally fedde and nourished in his body by meat and drinke euen so is euery good christian man spiritually fed and nourished in his soule by the flesh and bloud of our Sauyour Christ. And this Christ hymselfe teacheth vs in thys syxt of Iohn saying Verely verely I say vnto you excepte ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drynke hys bloud you haue no life in you Who so eateth my flesh and drynketh my bloude hath eternall life and I will rayse him vp at the last daye For my flesh is very meate and my bloud is very drynke He that eateth my fleshe and drynketh my bloude dwelleth in me and I in hym As the liuing father hath sent me and I liue by the father euen so he that eateth me shall lyue by me And this S. Paul confessed him selfe saying That I haue life I haue it by faith in the Sonne of God And now it is not I that liue but Christ liueth in me The thyrd thyng to be noted is this that although our Sauiour Christ resembleth hys fleshe and bloud to meate and drynke yet he farre passeth and excelleth all corporall meates and drynkes For although eorporall meates and drynkes do nourish and continue our life here in this world yet they begin not our life For the beginning of our lyfe we haue of our fathers and mothers and the meate after we be begotten doth feede and nourish vs and so preserueth vs for a tyme. But our sauiour Christ is both the first beginner of our spirituall lyfe who first begetteth vs vnto God his father and also afterward he is our lyuely foode and nourishment Moreouer meate and drynke doe feede and nourishe onely our bodyes but CHRISTE is the true and perfect nourishment both of body and soule And besides that bodely foode preserueth the lyfe but for a tyme but Christ is such a spirituall and perfect foode that he preserueth both body and soule for euer as he sayde vnto Martha I am a resurrection and lyfe He that beleueth in me although he dye yet shall he lyue And hee that lyueth and beleeueth in me shal not dye for euer Fourthly it is to be noted that the true knowledge of these things is the true knowledge of Christ and to teache these thinges is to teache Christ. and the beleuing and feelyng of these thinges is the beleuyng and feelyng of Christ in our hartes And the more clearely we see vnderstand and beleue these thinges the more clearely we see and vnderstand Christ and haue more fully our fayth and comfort in hym And although our carnal generation and our carnal nourishment be known to all men by dayly experyence and by our common senses yet this our spirituall generation and our spirituall nutrition be so obscure and hyd vnto vs that we cannot attayne to the true and perfect knowledge and feelyng of them but onely by fayth which must be grounded vpon Goddes most holy worde and sacramentes And for this consideration our Sauiour Christ hath not only set forth these thyngs most playnly in his holy word that we may heare them with our eares but he hath also ordayned one visible sacrament of spirituall regeneration in water and an
say Christ is receaued in the mouth and entreth in with the bread and wine and for an aduersatiue therto I say that we which follow the Scriptures and aūcient writers say that he is receaued in the harte and entreth in by faith euery indifferent Reader vnderstandeth this aduersatiue vpon our side that we say Christ is not receaued in the mouth but in the hart specially seeing that in my fourth booke the second and third chapters I make purposely a processe therof to proue that Christ is not eaten with mouthes and teeth And yet to eschew all such occasions of sleight as you impute vnto me in this comparison to make the comparison more full and plain let this be the comparison They say that Christ is receiued with the mouth and entreth in with the bread and wine we say that he is not receaued with the mouth but with harte and entreth in by faith And now I trust there is no sleight in this comparison nor both the partes may not be vnderstand on both sides as you say they might before And as for S. Augustine serueth nothing for your purpose to proue that Christes body is eaten with the mouth For he speaketh not one word in the place by you alleadged neither of our mouthes nor of Christes body But it seemeth you haue so feruent desire to be doing in this matter that you be like to certain men which haue such a fond delight in shooting that so they be doyng they passe not how farre they shoote from the marke For in this place of S. Augustine against the Donatists he shooteth not at this butte whether Christes very naturall body be receaued with our mouthes but whether the Sacramentes in generall be receaued both of good and euill And there he declareth that it is all one water whether Symon Peter or Symon Magus be christned in it All one Table of the Lord and one cup whether Peter suppe thereat or Iudas All one oyle whether Dauid or Saule were annointed therewith Wherfore he concludeth thus Memento ergo Sacramentis Dei nihil obesse mores malorum hominum quo illa vel omnino non sint vel minus sancta sint sed ipsis malis hominibus vt haec habeant ad testimonium damnationis non ad adiutorium sanitatis Remēber therfore saith S. Augustine that the manners of euill men hinder not the Sacramentes of God that either they vtterly be not or be lesse holy but they hinder the euill men them selues so that they haue the Sacramentes to witnesse of their damnatiō not to helpe of their saluation And all the processe spoaken there by S. Augustine is spoaken chiefly of Baptisme against the Donatistes which sayd that the Baptisme was naught if either the minister or the receauer were naught Against whom S. Augustine concludeth that the Sacramentes of themselues be holy and be all one whether the minister or receauer be good or bad But this place of S. Augustine prooueth as wel your purpose that Christes body is receaued by the mouth as it prooueth that Poules steeple is higher then the crosse in Cheape For he speaketh not one worde of any of them al. And therefore in this place where you pretēd to shoote at the butte you shoote quite at rouers and cleane from the marke And yet if Iudas receaued Christ with the bread as you say and the deuil entred with the bread as S. Iohn saith then was the deuil and Christ in Iudas both at once And thē how they agreed I meruaile For S. Paul saith that Christ and Beliall cannot agree O what a wit had he neede to haue that will wittingly maintayn an open error directly against God his word and all holy auncient writers Now followeth the fourth comparison in my booke They say that Christ is really in the Sacramentall bread being reserued a wholl yeare or so long as the forme of bread remayneth But after the receauing thereof he flyeth vp say they from the Receauer vnto heauen as soone as the bread is chawed in the mouth or chaunged in the stomacke But we say that Christ remayneth in the man that worthely receaueth it so long as the man remayneth a member of Christ. Winchester This comparison is like the other before whereof the first parte is garnished and embossed with vntruth and the second parte is that the Church hath euer taught most truely and that all must beleeue and therefore that peece hath no vntruth in the matter but in the manner onely bring spoaken as though it differed from the continuall open teaching of the Church which is not so Wherefore in the manner of it in vtterance signifieth an vntruth which in the matter it selfe is neuerthelesse most true For vndoubtedly Christ remayneth in the man that worthely receaueth the Sacrament so long as the man remayneth a member of Christ. In this first parte there is a fault in the matter of the spéech for explication whereof I will examine it particularly This Author saith they say that Christ is really in the Sacramental bread being reserued an wholl yeare c. The Church geuing faith to Christes word when he said This is my body c. teacheth the body of Christ to be present in the Sacrament vnder the forme of bread vnto which wordes when doe put the word really it serueth onely to expresse that truth in open wordes which was before to be vnderstanded in sence For in Christ who was the body of all the shadowes and figures of the law and who did exhibite and gaue in his Sacramentes of the new law the thinges promysed in his Sacramentes of the olde law We must vnderstand his wordes in the institution of his Sacramentes without figure in the substance of the celestiall thing of them and therefore when be ordered his most precious body and bloud to be eaten and druken of vs vnder the formes of bread and wine we professe and beléeue that truely he gaue vs his most precious body in the Sacrament for a celestiall foode to comforte and strengthen vs in this miserable life And for certainty of the truth of his worke therein we professe he geueth vs his body really that is to say in déed his body the thing it selfe which is the heauenly parte of the Sacrament called Eucharistia hauing the visible forme of bread and wine and contayning inuisibly the very body and bloud of our Sauyour Christ which was not wonte to be reserued otherwise but to be ready for such as in daunger of death call for it and the same so long as it may be vsed is still the same Sacrament which onely tyme altereth not Whereof Cirill wrote to this sence many hundred yeares past and Hesychius also and what ought to be done when by negligence of the mynister it were reserued ouerlong Mary where it liketh the Author of these differences to say the church teacheth Christ to flée vp from the
wherupoÌ„ we might coÌ„clude that Christ did in this mortal life but in one particular momeÌ„t of time offer him self to the father to what purpose you bring forth this momeÌ„t of time I caÌ„not tell for I made no meÌ„tâ—on therof but of the day of his death the scripture saith plainly that as it is ordained for euerye man to dye but once so Christe was offered but once And saith further that sinne is not forgeueÌ„ but by effusioÌ„ of bloud therefore if Christ had ben offered many times he should haue dyed many times And of any other offering of Christes body for sin the scripture speaketh not For although S. Paul to the PhillippiaÌ„s speaketh of the humiliatioÌ„ of Christ by his incarnatioÌ„ so to worldly miseries afflictioÌ„s eueÌ„ vnto death vpoÌ„ the crosse yet he calleth not euery humiliatioÌ„ of Christ a sacrifice oblatioÌ„ for remissioÌ„ of sin but onely his oblatioÌ„ vpoÌ„ good Fryday which as it was our perfect redeÌ„ptioÌ„ so was it our perfect recoÌ„ciliatioÌ„ propitiatioÌ„ satisfactioÌ„ for sinne And to what purpose you make here a long processe of our sacrifices of obedience vnto Gods coÌ„mauÌ„demeÌ„ts I caÌ„not deuise For I declare in my last booke that all our whole obedience vnto Gods will a commauÌ„demeÌ„ts is a sacrifice acceptable to God but not a sacrifice propitiatory for the sacrifice Christ onely made and by that his sacrifice all our Sacrifices be acceptable to God without that none is acceptable to him And by those sacrifices al christeÌ„ people offer theÌ„selues to God but they offer not Christ again for sin for that did neuer creature but Christ him self alone nor he neuer but vpoÌ„ good Fryday For although he did institute the night before a remeÌ„brance of his death vnder the SacrameÌ„ts of bread wine yet he made not at that time the sacrifice of our redeÌ„ptioÌ„ satisfaction for our sinnes but the next day following And the declaration of Christ at his last supper that he would suffer death was not the cause wherfore Ciprian sayd that Christ offered himselfe in his supper For I reade not in any place of Ciprian to my remeÌ„brance any such wordes that Christ offered himselfe in his supper but he saith that Christ offered the fame thing whiche Melchisedech offered And if Ciprian say in any place that Christ offered himself in his supper yet he sayd not that Christ did so for this cause that in his supper he declared his death And therfore here you make a deceitful fallax in sophistry pretending to shew that thing to be a cause which is not the true cause in deede For the cause why Ciprian and other olde authors say that Christ made an oblation and offering of him selfe in his last supper was not that he declared there that he would suffer death for that he had declared many times before but the cause was that there he ordained a perpetuall memory of his death which he would all faithfull christeÌ„ people to obserue froÌ„ time to time remembring his death with thankes for his benefites vntill his comming again And therfore the memoriall of the true sacrifice made vpon the crosse as S. Augustine saith is called by the name of a sacrifice as a thing that signifyeth an other thing is called by the name of the thing which it signifyeth although in very deede it be not the same And the long discourse that you make of Christes true presence and of the true eating of him and of his true assisting vs in our doing of his commaundement all these be true For Christes flesh bloud be in the sacrament truely present but spiritually and sacramentally not carnally and corporally And as he is truely present so is he truely eaten and dronken and assisteth vs. And he is the same to vs that he was to them that saw him with their bodely eyes But where you say that he is as familiare with vs as he was with theÌ„ here I may say the French terme which they vse for reuerence sake Saue vostre grace And he offered not him selfe then for them vpon the crosse and now offereth himself for vs daily in the Masse but vpon the crosse he offered him selfe both for vs and for them For that his one sacrifice of his body than onely offered is now vnto vs by fayth as auailable as it was then for them For with one sacrifice as S. Paul saith he hath made perfect for euer them that be sanctifyed And where you speake of the participation of Christes flesh and bloud if you meane of the sacramentall participatioÌ„ onely that therby we be ascertayned of the regeneration of our bodies that they shall liue and haue the fruition of God with our soules for euer you be in an horrible errour And if you meane a spirituall participation of Christes body and bloud then all this your processe is in vaine and serueth nothing for your purpose to proue that Christes flesh and bloud be corporally in the sacrament vnder the formes of bread and wine and participated of them that be euill as you teach which be no whit therby the more certain of their saluation but of their damnation as S. Paul saith And although the holy supper of the Lord be not a vain or phantasticall supper wherein thinges should be promised which be not performed to them that worthely come thereunto but Christes flesh and bloud be there truely eaten and dronken in deede yet that misticall supper can not be without misteries and figures And although wee feede in deede of Christes body and drinke in deed his bloud yet not corporally quantitatiuely and palpably as we shal be regenerated at the resurrection and as he was betrayed walked here in earth and was very man And therfore although the thinges by you rehearsed be all truely done yet all be not done after one sort and fashion but some corporally and visibly some spiritually and inuisibly And therfore to al your comparisons or similitudes here by you rehearsed if there be geuen to euery one his true vnderstanding they may be so graunted all to be true But if you will linke all these together in one sort and fashioÌ„ and make a chaine thereof you shall farre passe the bondes of wanton reason making a chaine of golde and copper together confounding and mixing together corporall and spiritual heauenly and earthly thinges and bring all to very madnes and impiety or plaine and manifest heresy And because one single error pleaseth you not shortly after you linke a number of errors almost together in one senteÌ„ce as it were to make an whole chaine of errors saying not onely that Christes body is verely present in the celebratioÌ„ of the holy supper meaning of corporal presence but that it is also our very sacrifice and sacrifice propitiatory for all the sinnes of the world and that it is the onely sacrifice of the church and that it is the pure aud cleane
eares be vij yeares The scripture sayth not signifieth vij yeares And vij kine be seuen yeares and many other like And so sayd saynt Paule that the stone was Christ and not that it signified Christ but euen as it had ben hee indede which neuerthelesse was not Christ by substaunce but by signification Euen so sayth saynt Augustine bicause the bloud signifieth and representeth the soule therfore in a sacrament or signification it is called the soule And contra Adamantium he writeth much like saying In such wise is bloud the soule as the stone was Christ and yet the Apostle sayth not that the stone signified Christ but sayth it was Christ. And this sentence Bloud is the soule may be vnderstand to be spoken in a signe or figure for Christ did not stick to say this is my body when he gaue the signe of his body Here S Augustine rehearsing diuers sentences which were spoken figuratiuely that is to say when one thing was called by the name of an other and yet was not the other in substance but in signification As the bloud is the soule vij kyne be vij yeares vij eares be vij yeares the stone was Christ. Among such maner of speaches he reherseth those wordes which Christ spake at his last supper this is my body Which declareth playnly Saynt Augustines mind that Christ spake those wordes figuratiuely not meaning that the bread was his body by substance but by signification And therfore S. Augustine sayth contra Maximinum that in the sacramentes we must not consider what they be but what they signifie for they be signes of thinges being one thing and signifiyng another Which he doeth shew specially of this sacrament saying the heauenly bread which is Christes flesh by some maner of speach is called Christes body when in very deede it is the sacrament of his body And that offering of the flesh which is done by the priestes handes is called Christes passion death and crucifiyng not in very dede but in a misticall signification Winchester As for saynt Agustine ad Bonifacium the author shall perceiue his fault at Martyne Bucers hand who in his epistle dedicatory of his enarations of the gospels reherseth his mind of Saynt Augustine in this wise Est scribit diuus Augustinus secundum quendam modum sacramentum corporis Christi Corpus Christi sacramentum sanguinis Christi sanguis Christi At secundum quem modum Vt significet tantum corpus sanguinem Domini absenta Absit Honorari enim percipi in simbolis visibilibus corpus sanguinem Domini idem passim scribit These wordes of Bucer may be thus englished Saynt Augustine writeth the sacrament of the body of Christ is after a certayn maner the body of christ the sacramēt of the bloud of christ the bloud of christ but after what maner that it should signifie onely the body and bloud absent Absit In no wise for the same Saynt Augustine writeth in many places the body and bloud of Christ to be honored and to be receiued in those visible tokens Thus sayth Bucer who vnderstandeth not saynt Augustine to say the sacrament of Christes body to be Christes body after a certayn maner of speach as this author doth nor S. Augustine hath no such wordes but onely secundum quendam modum after a certayne maner wherunto to put of speach is an addition more then truth required of necessitie In these wordes of Bucer may apeare his whole indgement concerning S. Augustine who affirmeth the very true presence of the thing signified in the sacrament which truth established in the matter the calling it a signe or a token a figure a similitude or a shewing maketh no matter when we vnderstand the thing really present that is signified Which and it were not in dede in the Sacrament why should it after Bucers true vnderstanding of S. Augustine be honored there Arguing vpon mens speaches may be without end the authors vpon diuers repsectes speake of one thing diuersly Therfore we should resort to the pith and knot of the matter and see what they say in expounding the speciall place without contention and not what they vtter in the heat of their disputation ne to search their dark and ambiguous places wherwith to confound that they speake openly and playnly Canterbury WHat nede you to bring Martine Bucer to make me answer if you could answer your selfe but bicause you be ashamed of the matter you would thrust Martine Bucer in your place to receaue rebuke for you But in this place he easeth you nothing at all for he sayth no more but that the body and bloud of Christ be exhibited vnto the worthy receiuers of the sacrament which is true but yet spiritually not corporally And I neuer sayd that Christ is vtterly absent but I euer affirmed that he is truly and spiritually present and truly and spiritually exhibited vnto the godly receiuours but corporally is he neither in the receiuors nor in or vnder the fourmes of bread or wine as you do teach clearly with out the consent of master Bucer who writeth no such thing And where I alleadge of Saynt Augustine that the sacrament of Christes body is called Christes body after a certayn maner of speach and you deny that saynt Augustine ment of a certayne maner of speach but sayth onely after a certayne maner Read the place of saynt Augustin who will and he shall find that he speaketh of the maner of speach and that of such a maner of speach as calleth one thing by the name of an other where it is not the very thing in dede For of the maner of speach is all the processe there as apeareth by these his wordes a day or two before good Friday we vse in common speach to say to morowe or this day two dayes Christ suffered c. Likewise vppon Easter day we say this day Christ rose And why do no men reproue vs as lyars whan we speake in this sort And we call those dayes so by a similitude c. And so it is called that day which is not that day in dede And sacramentes commonly haue the name of the thinges wherof they be sacramentes Therfore as after a certayne manner the sacrament of Christes body is Christes body so likewise the sacramēt of fayth is fayth And likewise sayth Saynt Paule that in baptisme we be buried he sayth not that we signifie buriall but he sayth playnly that we be buried So that the sacrament of so great a thing is called by the name of the thing All these be S. Augustines wordes shewing how in the common vse of speach one thing may haue the name of another Wherfore when Doctor Gardiner sayth that S. Augustine spake not of that maner of speach thou mayst beleue him hereafter as thou shalt see cause but if thou trust his wordes to much thou shalt soone be deceiued As for the reall presence of Christ
in the sacrament I graunt that he is really present after such sort as you expound really in this place that is to say indede and yet but spiritually For you say your selfe that he is but after a spirituall maner there and so is he spiritually honored as S Augustine sayth But as concerning heat of disputation marke well the wordes of S. Augustine good reader cited in my booke and thou shalt see clerely that all this multiplication of wordes is rather a iugling then a direct answer For saynt Augustine writeth not in heate of disputation but temperatly and grauely to a learned Bishop his deare frend who demanded a question of him And if Saynt Augustine had aunswered in heate of disputation or for any other respect otherwise then the truth he had not done the part of a friend nor of a learned and godly Bishop And who so euer iudgeth so of Saynt Augustine hath small estimation of him and sheweth him selfe to haue litle knowledge of Saynt Augustine But in this your answer to saynt Augustine you vtter where you learned a good part of your diuinitie that is of Albertus Pighius who is the father of this shift and with this fleight eludeth Saynt Augustin when he could no otherwise answer As you do now shake of the same Saynt Augustine resembling as it were in that poynt the liuely countenauÌ„ce of your father Pighius Next in my booke foloweth Theodoret And to this purpose it is both pleasaunt comfortable and profitable to read Theodoretus in his Dialogs where he disputeth and sheweth at length how the names of things be chaunged in scripture and yet thinges remayne still And for example he proueth that the flesh of Christ is in the scripture sometime called a vayle or coueryng sometime a cloth sometyme a vestment and sometyme a stole the bloud of the grape is called Christes bloud and the names of bread and wine and of his flesh and bloud Christ doth so chaunge that sometyme he calleth his body corne or bread and sometime contrary he calleth bread his body And likewise his bloud sometime he calleth wine and sometime contrary he calleth wine his bloud For the more playne vnderstanding wherof it shall not be amisse to recite his owne sayings in his foresayd dialogs touching this matter of the holy sacrament of Christes flesh and bloud The speakers in these dialogs be Orthodoxus the right beleuer and Eranistes his companyon but not vnderstanding the right fayth Orthodoxus saith to his companion Doost thou not know that god caleth bread his flesh Eran. I know that Orth. And in an other place he calleth his body corne Eran. I know that also for I haue heard him say The houre is come that the sonne of man shal be glorified c. Except the grayne of come that falleth in the ground dye it remayneth sole but if it dye then it bringeth forth much fruite Orth. When he gaue the mysteries of sacraments he called bread his body and that which was mixt in the cup he called bloud Eran. So he called them Orth. But that also which was his naturall body may well be called his body and his very bloud also may be called his bloud Eran. It is playne Orth. But our sauiour without doubt chaunged the names and gaue to the body the name of the signe or token and to the token he gaue the name of the body And so wheÌ„ he called himself a vyne he called bloud that which was the token of bloud Eran. Surely thou hast spokeÌ„ the truth But I would know the cause wherfore the names were changed Orth. The cause is manifest to them that be expert in true religion For he would that they which be partakers of the godly sacraments should not set their mindes vpon the nature of the things which they see but by the changing of the names should beleue the things which be wrought in them by grace For he that called that which is his naturall body corne and bred and also called himselfe a vyne he did honor the visible tokeÌ„s and signes with the names of his body and bloud not changing the nature but adding grace to nature Eran. Sacraments be spoken of sacramentally and also by them be manifestly declared things which all men know not Ortho. Seyng then that it is certayne that the Patriarch called the lords body a vestiment and apparell and that now we be entred to speak of godly sacraments tell me truely of what thing thinkest thou this holy meat to be a tokeÌ„ and figure of Christes diuinity or of his body and bloud Eran. It is cleare that it is the figure of those thinges whereof it beareth the name Orth. Meanest thou of his body and bloud Eran. Euen so I meane Orth. Thou hast spoken as one that loueth the truth for the Lord when he tooke the token or signe he sayd not This is my diuinity but This is my body this is my bloud And in an other place The bread which I wil giue is my flesh whiche I will geue for the life of the world Eran. These things be true for they be Gods words All these writeth Theodoretus in hi first Dialogue ' And in the second he writeth the same in effect yet in some thing more playnly agaynst such heretiques as affirmed that after Christes resurrection ascention his humanity was changed from the very nature of man turned into his diuinity Agaynst whom thus he writeth Orth. Corruption healeth sicknes and death be accedents for they goe come Era. It is meet they be so called Orth. Mens bodies after their resurrection be delyuered from corruption death mortalitie and yet they lose not theyr proper nature Eran. Truth it is ' Orth. The body of Christ therfore did rise quite cleane from all corruption death and is impassible immortall glorified with the glory of God is honored of the powers of heauen and it is a body hath the same bignes that it had before Era. Thy saying seeme true according to reason but after he was ascended vp into heauen I thinke thou wilt not say that his body was not tourned into the nature of his godhead Orth. I would not so say for the persuation of mans reason nor I am not so arrogant and presumptious to affirme any thing which scripture passeth ouer in silence But I haue heard S. Paule cry that God hath ordayned a day when he will iudge all the world in iustice by that man which he appoynted before performing his promise to all men and raysing him from death I haue learned also of the holy angels that he will come aâ—ter that fashion as his disciples saw him goe to heauen But they saw a nature of a certayn bignesse not a nature which had no bignes I heard furthermore the lord say You shall see the sonne of man come in the cloudes of heauen And
I know that euery thing that men see hath a certayne bignes For that nature that hath no bignes can not be seene Moreouer to sit in the throne of glory and to sette the Lambes vpon his right hand and the goates vpon his left hand signifieth a thing that hath quantitie and bygnes Hitherto haue I rehersed Theodoretus wordes and shortly after Eranistes sayth Eran. We must tourne euery stone as the prouerb sayth to seeke out the truth but specially when godly matters be propounded Orth. Tell me than the sacramentall signes which be offered to God by his priestes wherof be they signes sayst thou Eran. Of the Lordes body and bloud Orth. Of a very body or not of a very body Eran. Of a very body Orth. Very well for an image must be made after a true paterne for Paynters follow nature and paynt the images of such thinges as we see with our eyes Eran. Truth it is Orth. If therfore the godly sacramentes represent a true body than is the Lordes body yet still a body not conuerted into the nature of his Godhead but replenished with Goddes glory Eran. It cometh in good tyme that thou makest mention of Gods sacramentes for by the same I shall proue that Christes body is tourned into an other nature Answer therfore vnto my questions Orth. I shall answer Eran. What callest thou that which is offered before the inuocation of the priest Orth. We must not speake playnly for it is like that some be present which haue not professed Christ. Eran. Answer couertly Orth. It is a nourishment made of sedes that be like Eran. Than how call we the other signe Orth. It is also a common name that signifieth a kind of drinke Eran. But how doest thou call them after the sanctification Orth. The body of Christ and the bloud of Christ. Eran. And doest thou beleue that thou art made partaker of Christes body and bloud Orth. I beleue so Eran. Therfore as the tokens of Gods body and bloud be other thinges before the priestes inuocation but after the inuocation they be chaunged and be other things so also the body of Christ after his assumption is chaunged into his deuine substaunce Ortho. Thou art taken with thine owne nette For the sacramentall signes go not from their owne nature after the sanctification but continue in their former substance forme and figure and may be seene and touched as well as before yet in our mindes we do consider what they be made and do repute and esteme them and haue them in reuerence according to the same thinges that they be taken for Therfore cōpare their images to the paterne and thou shalt see them like For figure must be like to the thing it selfe For Christes body hath his former fashion figure and bignesse and to speake at one word the same substance of his body but after his resurrection it was made immortall and of such power that no corruption nor death could come vnto it and it was exalted vnto that dignity that it was sette at the right hand of the father and honoured of all creatures as the body of him that is the Lord of nature Eran. But the sacramentall token chaungeth his former name for it is no more called as it was before but is called Christes body Therfore must his body after his ascention be called God and not a body Orth. Thou semest to me ignorant for it is not called his body onely but also the bread of lyfe as the Lord called it So the body of Christ we call a godly body a body that giueth life Gods body the Lordes body our masters body name ning that it is not a common body as other mennes bodies be but that it is the body of our Lord Iesu Christ both God and man This haue I rehersed of the great clerke and holy byshop Theodoretus whom some of the Papists perceiuing to make so playnly agaynst them haue defamed saying that he was infected with the errour of Nestorius Here the Papistes shewe their old accustomed nature and condition which is euen in a manifest matter rather to lie without shame than to giue place vnto the truth and confesse their owne errour And although his aduersaries falsely bruted such a fame agaynst him whan he was yet a liue neuerthelesse he was purged therof by the whole Councell of Calcedon about a leuen hundred yeares agoe And furthermore in his booke which he wrote agaynst heresies he specially condemneth Nestorius by name And also all his iij. bookes of his dialogues before rehersed he wrot chiefly agaynst Nestorius and was neuer here in noted of error this thousand yeare but hath euer bene reputed and taken for an holy Byshop a great learned man and a graue author vntill now at this present tyme whan the Papistes haue nothing to answer vnto him they begin in excusing of them selues to defame him Thus much haue I spoken for Theodoretus which I pray thee be not weary to read good reader but often and with delectation deliberation and good aduertisement to read For it conteineth playnly and breefly the true instruction of a Christian man concerning the matter which in this booke we treate vpon First that our sauiour Christ in his last supper whan he gaue bread and wine to his apostles saying This is my body This is my bloud it was bread which he called his body and wine mixed in the cup which he called his bloud so that he changed the names of the bread and wine which were the misteries sacramentes fignes figures and tokens of Christes flesh and bloud and called them by the names of the thinges which they did represent and signifie that is to say the bread he called by the name of his very flesh and the wine by the name of his bloud Second that although the names of bread and wine were changed after sanctification yet neuertheles the thinges them selues remayned the selfe same that they were before the sanctification that is to say the same bread and wine in nature substance form and fashion The thyrd seing that the substance of the bread and wine be not changed why be then their names changed and the bread called Christes flesh and the wine his bloud Theodoretus sheweth that the cause therof was this that we should not haue so much respect to the bread and wyne which we see with our eyes and tast with our mouthes as we should haue to Christ him selfe in whome we beleue with our hartes and fele and tast him by our faith and with whose flesh and bloud by his grace we beleue that we be spiritually fedde and norished These thinges we ought to remember the reuolue in our myndes and to lift vp our hartes from the bread and wine vnto Christ that sitteth aboue And bicause we should so do therfore after the consecration they be no more called bread and wine but the body and bloud of Christ. The forth It is in these sacramentes of bread and wine
doubt not but the priest would haue absteined from ministration vnto more opportunitie and more accesse of Christian people as he would haue done likewise in saying of mattens and preaching Wherfore in your case I might well answer you as S. Hierom answered the argument made in the name of the heretike Iouinian which myght be brought agaynst the commendation of virginitie What if all men would liue virgines and no man marry How should then the world be mayntayned What if heauen fall sayd S. Hierom What if no man will come to the church is your argument for all that came in those dayes receaued the communion What if heauen fall say I For I haue not so euill opinion of the holy church in those dayes to think that any such thing could chaunce among them that no one would come when all ought to haue come Now when you come to your issue you make your case to straight for me to ioyne an issue with you bynding me to the bare and onely wordes of Clement and refusing vtterly his mynd But take the wordes and the mynd together and I dare aduenture an Issue to passe by any indiferent readers that I haue proued all my three notes And where you say that vpon occasion of this epistle I speake more reuerently of the sacrament then I do in other places if you were not giuen all together to calumniate and depraue my words you should perceaue in all my booke thorough euen from the beginning to the end therof a constant and perpetuall reuerence giuen vnto the sacramentes of Christ such as of dutie all Christian men ought to giue Neuerthelesse you interpret this word Wherin farre from my meaning For I meane not that Christ is spiritually eyther in the table or in the bread and wine that be sette vpon the table but I meane that he is present in the ministration and receauing of that holy supper according to his owne institution and ordinaunce Like as in baptisme Christ and the holy ghost be not in the water or fonte but be giuen in the ministration or to them thāt be duly baptised in the water And although the sacramental tokens be onely significations and figures yet doth almighty God effectually work in them that duely receaue his sacramentes those deuine and celestiall operations which he hath promised and by the sacramentes be signified For else they were vayne and vnfrutfull Sacramentes as well to the godly as to the vngodly And therfore I neuer sayd of the whole supper that it is but a significatiō or a bare memory of Christes death but I teach that it is a spirituall refreshing wherein our soules be fedde and nourished with Christes very flesh and bloud to eternall life And therfore bring you forth some place in my booke where I say that the Lordes suppper is but a bare signification without any effect or operation of God in the same or else eate your wordes agayne and knowledge that you vntruly report me But heare what followeth further in my book Here I passe ouer Ignatius and Ireneus which make nothing for the papists opinions but stand in the commendation of the holy Communion and in exhortation of all men to the often and godly receauing therof And yet neither they nor no man else can extoll and commend the same sufficiently according to the dignitie therof if it be godly vsed as it ought to be Winchester This author sayth he passeth ouer Ignatius and Ireneus and why Bicause they make nothing he sayth for the Papistes purpose With the word papist the author playth at his pleasure But it shal be euident that Irene doth playnly confound this authors purpose in the deniall of the true presence of Christes very flesh in the sacramēt who although he vse not the wordes reall and substanciall yet he doth effectually comprehend in his speach of the sacrameut the vertue aud strength of those wordes And for the truth of the sacrament is Ireneus specially alleaged in so much as Melanghton when he writeth to Decolampadius that he will alleage none but such as speake playnly he alleageth Ireneus for one as apeareth by his sayd Epistle to Decolampadius And Decolampadius himselfe is not troubled so much with answering any other to shape any manner of euasion as to answer Ireneus in whome he notably stumbleth And Peter Martyr in his work graunteth Irene to be specially alledged to whome when he goeth about to answer a man may euidently see how he masketh him selfe And this author bringeth in Clementes epistle of which no great count is made although it be not contemned and passeth ouer Ireneus that speaketh euidently in the matter and was as old as Clement or not much yonger And bicause Ignatius was of that age and is alleadged by Theodorete to haue written in his epistle ad Smirnenses whereof may apeare his fayth of the mistery of the sacrament it shall serue to good purpose to write in the wordes of the same Ignatius here vpon the credite of the sayd Theodoret whome this author so much commendeth the wordes of Ignatius be these Eucharistias oblationes non admittunt quod non confiteantur Eucharistiam esse carnem seruatoris nostri Iesu Christi quae pro peccatis nostris passa est quam pater sua benignitate suscitauit Which wordes be thus much in english they do not admitte Eucharistias and oblations bycause they do not confesse Eucharistiam to be the flesh of our sauiour Iesu Christ which flesh suffered for our sinnes which flesh the father by his benignitie hath stirred vp These be Ignatius wordes which I haue not throughly englished bicause the word Eucharistia can not be well englished being a word of mistery and signifieng as Ireneus openeth both the partes of the sacrament heauenly and earthly visible and inuisible But in that Ignatius openeth his fayth thus he taketh Eucharistia to be the flesh of our sauiour Christ that suffered for vs he declareth the sence of Christes wordes This is my body not to be figuratiue onely but to expresse the truth of the very flesh there giuen and therfore Ignatius sayth Eucharistia is the flesh of our sauior Christ the same that suffered and the same that rose agayne Which wordes of Ignatius so pithely open the matter as they declare therwith the fayth also of Theodoret that doth alleage him so as if the author would make so absolute a worke as to peruse all the fathers sayinges he should not thus leape ouer Ignatius nor Irene neither as I haue before declared But this is a color of rethorik called Reiection of that is hard to answer and is here a prety shift or slaight wherby thou reader mayst consider how this matter is handled Caunterbury IT shall not nede to make any further answer to you here as cōcerning Ireneus but onely to note one thing that if any place of Ireneus had serued for your purpose you would
more then the assertion of this Author specially when thou hast red how he hath handled Hilray Cyrill Theophilact and Damascene as I shall hereafter touch Caunterbury WHether I make an exposition of Cyprian by myne own deuise I leaue to the iudgement of the indifferent reader And if I so doe why do not you proue the same substancially agaynst me For your own bare words without any proofe I trust the indifferent reader will not allow hauing such experience of you as he hath And if Cyprian of all other had writ most plainly agaynst me as you say without profe who thinketh that you would haue omitted here Cyprians wordes and haue fled to Melancthon and Epinus for succor And why do you alleage their authority for you which in no wise you admit when they be brought agaynst you But it semeth that you be faint harted in this mater and beginne to shrinke and like one that refuseth the combat and findeth the shift to put an other in his place euen so it semeth you would draw backe your selfe from the daunger and set me to fight with other men that in the meane tyme you might be an idle looker on And if you as graund capitayne take them but as meane souldiours to fyght in your quarell you shall haue little ayd at their hands for their writings declare opēly that they be agaynst you more then me although in this place you bring them for your part and report them to say more and otherwise then they say indeed And as for Cyprian and S. Augustine here by you alleaged they serue nothing for your purpose nor speake nothing against me by Epinus own iudgement For Epinus sayth that Eucharistia is called a sacrifice because it is a remembrance of the true sacrifice which was offred vpon the cros and that in it is dispensed the very body and bloud yea the very death of Christ as he alleadgeth of S. Augustine in that place the holy sacrifice wherby he blotted out and canceled the obligation of death which was against vs nayling it vpon the crosse and in his owne person wanne the victory and tryumphed agaynst the princes powers of darknesse This passion death and victory of Christ is dispēsed and distributed in the Lords holy supper and dayly among Christs holy people And yet all this requireth no corporal presence of Christ in the sacrament nor the words of Cypriā ad Quirinum neither For if they did then was Christes flesh corporally present in the sacrifice of the old testament 1500. yeares before he was borne for of those sacrifices speaketh that text alleaged by Cyprian ad Quirinum whereof Epinus and you gather these wordes that the body of our Lord is our sacrifice in flesh And how so euer you wrast Melancthon or Epinus they condemne clearely your doctrine that Christes body is corporally contayned vnder the formes or accidents of bread and wine Next in my book of Hilarius But Hylarius thinke they is playnest for them in this matter whose words they translate thus If the word were made very flesh and we verely receaue the word beyng flesh in our lords meat how shal not Christ be thought to dwel naturally in vs Who beyng borne man hath taken vnto him the nature of our flesh that can not be seuered hath put together the nature of his flesh to the nature of his eternity vnder the sacrament of the communion of his flesh vnto vs. For so we be all one because the father is in Christ and Christ in vs. Wherfore whosoeuer will deny the father to be naturally in Christ he must deny fyrst eyther himselfe to be naturally in Christ or Christ to be naturally in him For the beyng of the father in Christ and the being of Christ in vs maketh vs to be one in them And therfore if Christ haue taken verily the flesh of our body and the man that was verily born of the virgin Mary is Christ and also we receaue vnder thè true mistery the flesh of his body by meanes wherof we shal be one for the father is in Christ and Christ in vs how shall that be called the vnity of will when the naturall property brought to passe by the Sacrament is the sacrament of vnity Thus doth the Papists the aduersaries of Gods word of his truth alleage the authority of Hilarius eyther peruersely and purposely as it semeth vntruely reciting hym and wrasting his words to their purpose or els not truely vnderstanding him For although he sayth that Christ is naturally in vs yet he sayth also that we be naturally in him And neuerthelesse in so saying he ment not of the natural and corporall presence of the substaunce of Christes body and of ours for as our bodyes be not after that sort within his body so is not his body after that sort within our bodies but he ment that Christ in his incarnation receyued of vs a mortal nature and vnited the same vnto his diuinity and so be we naturally in him And the sacraments of Baptisme of his holy supper if we rightly vse the same do most assuredly certify vs that we be partakers of his godly nature hauing geuen vnto vs by him immortality and life euerlasting and so is Christ naturally in vs. And so be we one with Christ and Christ with vs not onely in will and mind but also in very naturall properties And so concludeth Hylarius agaynst Arrius that Christ is one with his father not in purpose and will onely but also in very nature And as the vnion betwene Christ and vs in baptisme is spirituall and requireth no real and corporall presence so likewise our vnion with Christ in his holy supper is spirituall and therfore requireth no reall and coporall presence And therfore Hilarius speaking therof both the sacraments maketh no difference betwene our vnion with Christ in baptisme and our vnion with him in his holy supper And sayth further that as Christ is in vs so be we in him which the Papistes cannot vnderstand corporally and really except they will say that all our bodyes be corporally within Christes body Thus is Hylarius answered vnto both playnly and shortly Winchester This answere to Hylary in the lxxviii leafe requyreth a playne precise issue worthy to be tried apparant at hand The allegation of Hylary toucheth specially me who do say and mayntayne that I cited Hylary truely as the copy did serue and translate him truely in English after the same words in latin This is one issue which I qualyfy with the copy because I haue Hilary now better correct which better correctiō setteth forth more liuely the truth then the other did and therfore that I did translate was not so much to the aduantage of that I aledged Hylary for as is that in the book that I haue now better correct Hilaries words in the booke newly corrected be these Si enim verè verbum caro factum est nos
creatures of bread and wine be much bound vnto you and can no lesse do then take you for their sauior For if you can make them holy and godly then shall you glorifie them and so bryng them to eternall blisse And then may you aswell saue the true laboring bullocks and innocēt shepe and lambes and so vnderstand the prophet Homines iumenta saluabis domine But to admonish the reader say you how the bread and wine haue no holynes this fortune of spech not vnderstand of the people engendreth some scruple that nedeth not By which your saying I cannot tel what the people may vnderstand but that you haue a great scruple that you haue lost your holy bread And yet S. Paule speaketh not of your holy bread as you imagine being vtterly ignoraunt as appeareth in the scripture but he speaketh generally of all manner of meates which christian people receaue with thankes giuing vnto God whether it be bread wine or water fish flesh white meat herbes or what manner of meat and drinck so euer it be And the sanctified bread which S. Augustine writeth to be geuen to them that be catechised was not holy in it selfe but was called holy for the vse and signification And I expresse S. Cyprians minde truely and not a whit discrepant from my doctrine here when I say that the diuinitye may be sayd to bee powred or put sacramentally into the bread as the spirite of God is sayd to be in the water of baptisme when it is truely ministred or in his word when it is syncerely preached with the holy spirite working mightely in the hartes of the hearers And yet the water in it selfe is but a visible element nor the preachers word of it self is but a sound in the ayre which as soone as it is hard vanisheth away and hath in it selfe no holines at all although for the vse ministery therof it may be called holy And so likewise may be sayd of the sacramentes which as S. Augustine sayth be as it were Gods visible word And whereas you reherse out of my wordes in an other place that as hoat and burning yron is yron still yet hath the force of fyre so the bread and wine be tourned into the vertue of Christes flesh and bloud you neyther report my words truly nor vnderstād thē truely For I declare in my booke vertue to be in them that godly receaue bread and wine and not in the bread and wine And I take vertue there to signifie might and strength or force as I name it which in the greeke is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after which sence we say that there is vertue in herbs in words and in stones and not to signify vertue in holynes which in greek is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wher of a person is called vertuous whose fayth and conuersation is godly But you sophistically and fraudulently do of purpose abuse the word vertue to an other significatiō then I mēt to approue by my words your own vayne error that bread should be vertuous holy making in your argument a fallax or craft called equiuocation For where my meaning is that the death of Christ and the effusion of his bloud haue effect and strength in them that truely receaue the sacrament of his flesh and bloud you turne the matter quite as though I should say that the bread were godly and vertuous which is very frantick and vngodly opiniō and nothing pertaining to mine application of the similitude of yron But this is the mother of many errors both in interpretation of scriptures and also in vnderstandyng of old auncient writers when the mind and intent of him that maketh a similitude is not considered But the similitude is applied vnto other matters then the meaning was Which fault may be iustly noted in you here when you reason by the similitude of hoat burning yron that bread may conceiue such vertue as it may be called vertuous and holy For my onely purpose was by that similitude to teach that yron remayning in his proper nature substance by conceauing of fire may work an other thing thē is the nature of yrō And so likewise bread remaynyng in is proper nature and substaunce in the ministration of the sacrament hath an other vse then to feed the body For it is a memoriall of Christes death that by exercise of our fayth our soules may receaue the more heauenly food But this is a strange maner of spech which neither scripture nor approued author euer vsed before you to cal the sacrametal bread vertuous as you doe But into such absurdities men do cōmonly fall when they will of purpose impugne the euident truth But was there euer any man so ouersene say you as this author is Who seeth not S. Ambrose in these three latter speeches to speak as plainly as in the first Was there euer any man so destitute of reason say I but that he vnderstandeth this that when bread is balled bread it is called by the proper name as it is in deed and when bread is called the body of Christ it taketh the name of a thing which it is not in deed but is so called by a figuratiue spech And calling say you in the words of Christ signifieth making which if it signifieth when bread is called bread then were calling of bread a making of bread And thus is aunswered your demaund why this word call in the one signifieth the trueth and in the other not because that the one is a playne speche and the other a figuratiue For els by our reasoning out of reason when the cup which Christ vsed in his last supper was called a cup and when it was called Christes bloud all was one calling and was of like trueth without figure so that the cup was Christes bloud in deed And likewise the stone that flowed out water was called a stone and when it was called Christ the arke also when it was called the arke when it was called god all these must be one spech and of like trueth if it be true which you here say But as the arke was an arke the stone a stone bread very bread and the cup a cup playnely without figuratiue spech so whē they be called God Christ the body and bloud of Christ this can not be alike calling but must needes be vnderstād by a figuratiue spech For as Christ in the scripture is called a lambe for his innocency meeknes a Lyon for his might and power a doore and way wherby we enter into his fathers house wheat corne for the property of dying before they ryse vp bring increase so is he called bread and bread is called his body wine his bloud for the propertie of feedyng nourishing So that these al like speches where as one substaūce is called by the name of an other substaunce diuers and distinct in
taught and admonished by these misticall or figuratiue wordes that we should be in his body vnder him our head among his members eating his flesh nor forsaking his vnitie And in his booke De doctrina Christiana S. Augustine sayth as before is at length declared that to eate Christes flesh and to drincke his bloud is a figuratiue speach signifying the participation of his passion and the delectable remembraunce to our benefite and profite that his flesh was crucified and wounded for vs. And in an other sermon also De verbis Apostoli he expoundeth what is the eating of Christes body and the drincking of his bloud saying The eating is to be refreshed and the drincking what is but to liue Eate life drincke life And that shall be when that which is taken visibly in the sacrament is in very deed eaten spiritually and dronken spiritually By all these sentences of S. Augustine it is euident and manifest that all men good and euill may with theyr mouthes visibly and sensibly eate the sacrament of Christes body and bloud but the very body bloud them selues be not eaten but spiritually that of the spiritual members of Christ which dwell in Christ haue Christ dwelling in them by whome they be refreshed and haue euerlasting lyfe And therfore sayth S. Augustine that when the other Apostles did eate bread that was the Lord yet Iudas did eate but the bread of the Lord and not the bread that was the Lord. So that the other Apostles with the sacramentall bread did eate also Christ him selfe whome Iudas did not eate And a great number of places moe hath S. Augustine for this purpose which for eschewing of tediousnes I let pas for this tyme and will speake some thing of S. Cirill ¶ Cyrill vpon S. Iohn in his Gospell sayth that those which eate Manna dyed bycause they receaued therby no strength to liue euer for it gaue no lyfe but onely put away bodily hunger but they that receaue the bread of life shall be made immortall and shall eschewe all the euils that pertayne to death liuing with Christ for euer And in an other place he sayth◠For as much as the flesh of Christ doth naturally geue life therfore it maketh them to liue that be partakers of it For it putteth death away from them vtterly driueth destructiō out of them And he concludeth the matter shortly in an other place in fewe wordes saying that when we eate the flesh of our sauiour than haue we life in vs. For if thinges that were corrupt were restored by onely touching of his clothes how can it be that we shall not liue that eate his flesh And further he sayth that as two waxes that be molten together do run euery part into other so he that receaueth Christes flesh and bloud must nedes be ioyned so with him that Christ must be in him and he in Christ. Here S. Cyrill declareth the dignitie of Christes flesh being inseparably annexed vnto his diuinitie saying that it is of such force and power that it geueth euerlasting life And what soeuer occasion of death it findeth or let of eternall life it putteth out and driueth cleane away all the same from them that eate that meate and receaue that medicine Other medicins or playsters sometyme heale and sometyme heale not but this medicine is of that effect and strength that it eateth away all rotten and dead flesh and perfectly healeth all woundes and sores that it is layd vnto This is the dignitie and excellēcy of Christes flesh and bloud ioyned to his diuinite of the which dignite Christes aduersaries the Papistes depriue and robbe him when they affirme that such men do eate his flesh and receaue this playster as remayne still sicke and sore and be not holpen therby Thus hast thou heard gentle reader the groundes and profes which moued me to write the mater of this iiii booke that good men onely eate Christes flesh and drincke his bloud Now shalt thou here the late byshopes confutation of the same Winchester And as for the Scriptures and doctours which this author alleadgeth to proue that only good men receaue the body and bloud of Christ I graunt it without contention speaking of spirituall manducation and with liuely fayth without the Sacrament But in the visible sacrament euell men receaue the same that good men do for the substance of the sacrament is by godes ordinauce all one And if this author would vse for a profe that in the sacrament Christes very body is not present bicause euill men receaue it that shal be no argument for the good seed when it was sowen did fall in the euill ground and although Christ dwelleth not in the euill man yet he may be receaued of the euill man to his condemnation bycause he receaueth him not to glorifie him as God as S. Paule sayth Non dijudicans corpus domini not esteming our Lordes body And to all that euer this author bringeth to proue that euell men eate not the body of Christ may be sayd shortly that spiritually they eat it not besides the sacrament and in the sacrament they eate it not effectually to life but condemnation And that is and may be called a not eating As they be sayd not to heare the word of God that here it not profitably And bycause the body of Christ of it selfe is ordeyned to be eaten for life those that vnworthely eate to condemnation although they eate in dede may be sayd not to eate because they eate vnworthely as a thing not well done may be in speach called not done in respect of the good effect wherfore it was chiefly ordered to be done And by this rule thou reader mayst discusse all that this author bringeth forth for this purpose eyther out of Scriptures or doctors For euill men eate not the body of Christ to haue any fruite by it as euil men be sayd not to heare gods word to haue any frute by it and yet as they heare the worde of spirite life and neuerthelesse perish so euill men eate in the visible sacrament the body of Christ and yet perish And as I sayd this aunswereth the Scripture with the particuler sayinges of Ciprian Athanase Basyl Hierome and Ambrose As for S. Augustine which this author alleageth De ciuitate dei the same S. Augustine doth playnly say there in this place alledged how the good and euill receaue the same sacrament and addeth but not with like profite which wordes this author suppresseth and therfore dealeth not sincerely As for S. Augustine shall be hereafter more playnly declared Finally he that receaueth worthely the body bloud of Christ hath euerlasting life dwelleth in Christ and Christ in him he that receaueth vnworthely which can be onely in the sacrament receaueth not lyfe but condemnation Caunterbury IF you graunt without contention that which I do proue then you must graunt absolutely and franckly without any addition that onely good
our Lordes body to proue the presence of Christes body there who compareth such an offender to the Iewes that did shed Christes bloud maliciously as those do prophane it vnprofitably in which sense the Grke commentaries do also expound it And where this author bringeth in the wordes of S. Paule as it were to poynt out the matter Let a man examine him selfe and so eate of the bread and drincke of the cup for he that eateth vnworthely c. these wordes of examining and so eatyng declare the thing to be ordered to be eaten and all the care to be vsed on our side to eate worthely or els S. Paule had not sayd and so eat And when S. Paule sayth Eate iudgement and this Author well remember him selfe he must call Iudgement the effect of that is eaten and not the thing eaten for iudgment is neyther spirituall meat nor corporall but the effect of the eating of Christ in euyll men who is saluation to good and iudgement to euell And therfore as good men eating Christ haue saluation so euill men eating Christ haue condemnation and so for the diuersite of the eaters of Christes body followeth as they be worthy and vnworthy the effect of condemnation or lyfe Christes sacrament and his worke also in the substance of that sacrament bring alwayes one And what so euer this author talketh otherwise in this matter is mere trifles Caunterbury AS touching myne aunswere here to the wordes of S. Paule you would fayne haue them hid with darkenesse of speach that no man should see what I meane For as Christ sayd Qui male agit odit lucem and therfore that which I haue spoken in playne speach you darken so with your obscure termes that my meaning can not be vnderstand For I speake in such playne termes as all men vnderstand that when S. Paule sayd he that eateth and drinketh vnworthely eateth drinketh his owne damnation in that place he spake of the eating of the bread and drincking of the cup and not of the corporall eating and drincking of Christes flesh and bloud These my playne wordes you do wrape vp in these darke termes that I would distinct the vnworthy eating in the substaunce of the Sacrament receaued Which your wordes vary so farre from myne that no man can vnderstand by them my meaning except you put a large comment therto For I distinct the vnworthy eating none otherwise then that I say that when S. Paule speaketh of vnworthy eating he maketh mencion of the vnworthy eating of the bread and not of the body of Christ. And where you aske me this question why it should be a fault in the vnworthy not to esteme the Lordes body when it is not there at all There is in my booke a full and playne answere vnto your question alredy made as there is also to your whole booke So that in making of my booke I did foresee all things that you could obiect agaynst it In so much that here is not one thing in all your book but I can shew you a sufficient answer therto in one place or other of my former booke And in this your question here moued I referre the reader to the wordes of my booke in the same place And where you say that if the bread be but a figure it is lyke Manna as concerning the materiall bread truely it is like Manna but as concerning Christ him selfe he sayd of him selfe Not as your fathers did eate Manna and are dead He that eateth this bread shall liue for euer And as concerning Erasmus and the greke commentaries neyther of them sayth vppon the place of S. Paule as you alleage them to say And what soeuer it pleaseth you to gather of these wordes examining and so eating yet S. Paules wordes be very playne that he spake not of the eating of the very body of Christ but of the eating of the materiall bread in the sacrament which is all one whether the good or euyll eate of it And all the care is on our syde to take heede that we eate not that bread vnworthely For as the eating of the bread vnworthely not of Christ him selfe who can not be eaten vnworthely hath the effect of iudgemēt and damnacion so eating of the same bread worthely hath the effect of Christes death and saluation And as he that eateth the bread worthely may be well sayd to eate Christ and life So he that eateth it vnworthely may be sayd to eate the diuell and death as Iudas did into whom with the bread entred Satan For vnto such it may be called mensa daemoni orum non mensa Domini not Gods bourd but the diuels And so in the eaters of the bread worthely or vnworthely followeth the effect of euerlasting lyfe or euerlasting death But in the eating of Christ himselfe is no diuersite but whosoeuer eateth him hath euerlasting lyfe For asmuch as the eating of him can be to none dampnation but saluation because he is lyfe it selfe And what so euer you bable to the contrary is but meare fables deuised without goddes word or any sufficient ground Now foloweth myne aunswer vnto such authors as the Papistes wrast to theyr purpose But here may not be passed ouer the answer vnto certayne places of auncient authors which at the first shew seeme to make for the Papistes purpose that euill men do eate and drincke the very flesh and bloud of Christ. But if those places be truely and throughely wayed it shall appeare that not one of them maketh for theyr errour that euill men do eat Christes very body The first place is of S. Augustine Contra Cresconium Grammaticum where he sayth that although Christ him selfe say He that eateth not my flesh and drinketh not my bloud shall not haue life in him yet doth not his Apostels teach that the same is pernicious to them which vse it not well for he sayth Whosoeuer eateth the bread and drincketh the cup of the Lord vnworthely shal be gilty of the body and bloud of the Lord. In which wordes S. Augustine semeth to conclude that aswel the euill as the good doe eate the body and bloud of Christ although the euill haue no benefite but hurt therby But consider the place of S. Augustine diligently and then it shall euidently appeare that he ment not of the eating of Christes body but of the Sacrament therof For the intēt of S. Augustine there is to proue that good thinges auayle not to such persons as do euill vse them and that many thinges which of them selues be good and be good to some yet to other some they be not good As that light is good for whole eyes and hurteth sore eyes that meate which is good for some is euill for other some One medecine healeth some and maketh other sicke One harnes doth arme one and combreth another one coate is meete for one and to straight for an other And after other examples
all is one thing and one reason For in vs they be done by little and little but God worketh the same sodenly in one moment And yet if you had well considered the matter you should not haue found the sacraments of God likesoppes wherin licour is poured but you should haue found pouring an apt word to expresse the abundance of gods working by his grace in the ministration of his holy sacraments For when there cometh a small rayne then we say it droppeth or there is a few droppes but when there cometh a great multitude of rayne togither for the great abundance of it we vse in common speach to say it poureth downe So that this word pouring is a very apt word to expresse the multitude of Gods mercies and the plentifulnes of his grace poured into them whome he loued declared and exhibited by his wordes and sacraments And howsoeuer you be disposed by iesting and scoffing to mocke out all thinges as your disposition hath bene euer giuen to reprehend thinges that were well yet the indifferent reader may iudge by this one place among many other that you seeke rather an occasion to brable without cause and with idle wordes to draw your booke out at length then to seeke or teach any truth And if I should play and scoffe in such a matter as you doe I might dally with the word of Infusion as you do with the word powring For as you reiect my word of powring bicause some fond reader might fantasy that bread in the sacrament to be like a soppe wherin licour were powred by like reason may I reiect your English Latin of infuding bicause such a reader might fantasy therby the bread to be like water wherin the diuinity is stieped or infuded As infused rubarbe is called when it is stieped certayne houres in stilled water or wine without seething and so be roses and violets likewise infused when they be stieped in warme water to make inlep therof But as poticaries phisitions surgions and Alcumists vse wordes of Greeke Arabike and other strange langwages purposely therby to hide their sciences from the knowledge of others so farre as they can so do you in many partes of your booke deuise many strange termes and strange phrases of speach to obscure and darken therby the matter of the sacrament and to make the same meete for the capacities of very few which Christ ordayned to be vnderstanded and exercised of all men At the last as you say you come to your purpose not to open the truth but to hide it as much as you may and to gather of Ciprians wordes your owne faining and not his meaning who ment nothing lesse then eyther of any Transubstantiation or of the corporall presence of Christ in the bread and wine And to set out Ciprians mynde in few wordes he speaketh of the eating and not of the keeping of the bread which when it is vsed in the Lordes holy supper it is not onely a corporall meate to norish the body but an heauenly meate to nourish the soules of the worthy receauors the diuine maiesty inuisibly being present and by a spirituall transition and change vniting vs vnto Christ feeding vs spiritually with his flesh and bloud vnto eternall life as the bread being conuerted into the nature of our bodies fedeth the same in this mortall life And that this is the mynd of S. Ciprian is euident aswell by the wordes that go before as by the wordes following the sentence by you alleadged For a little before Ciprian writeth thus There is geuen to vs the foode of immortall life differing from common meates which reteineth the forme of corporall substance and yet proueth Gods power to be present by inuisible effect And agayne after he sayth This common bread after it is changed into flesh and bloud procureth life and increase to our bodyes And therfore the weakenes of our fayth being holped by the customable effect of thinges is taught by a sensible argument that in the invisible sacraments is the effect of euerlasting life and that we be made one by a Transition or change not so much corporall as spirituall For he is made both bread flesh and bloud meate substance and life to his church which he calleth his body making it to be partaker of him Note well these wordes good reader and thou shalt well perceaue that Ciprian speaketh not of the bread kept and reserued but as it is a spirituall nourishment receaued in the Lordes supper and as it is frutefully broken and eaten in the remembrance of Christes death and to them that so eate it Ciprian calleth it the foode of immortall life And therfore when he sayth that in the inuisible sacrament is the effect of euerlasting life he vnderstandeth of them that worthely receaue the sacrament for to the bread and wine pertayneth not eternall life Neuertheles the visible sacrament teacheth vs that by a spirituall change we be vnited to Christes flesh and bloud who is the meate and sustenance of his church and that we be made partakers of the life euerlasting by the power of God who by his effectuall working is present with vs and worketh with his Sacraments And here is agayn to be noted that Ciprian in this place speaketh of no reall presence of Christes humanitie but of an effectuall presence of his diuine maiestie and yet the breade sayth he is a foode and nourishment of the body And thus Ciprian proueth nothing agaynst my sayinges neither of the reall presence of Christes flesh and bloud nor of Transubstantiation of bread and wine And where you be offended with this word spirituall it is not my deuise but vsed of S. Ciprian him selfe not past .vi. or vii lines before the wordes by you cited where he declareth the spirituall mutation or transition in the Sacraments And of the change in the sacrament of baptisme as well as in the sacrament of the body and bloud of Christ speaketh not onely this author but also Nazianzen Emissene Chrisostome Ambrose with all the famous auncient ecclesiasticall authors And this water doth well to delay your hotte wine wherof you haue drunken so much out of the cuppe of the great whore of Babilon that the true wine representing to vs our whole redemption by the true bloud of Christ you haue clearly transubstantiate and taken away Now followeth my answere vnto Chrisostome An other authority they haue of S. Ihon Chrisostome which they boast also to be inuincible Chrisostome say they writeth thus in a certayne homily De Eucharistia Doest thou see bread Doest thou see wine Do they auoyde beneth as other meates do God forbid thinke not so For as waxe if it be put into the fire it is made like the fire no substāce remayneth nothing is lefte here so also thinke thou that the misteries be consumed by the substance of the body At these wordes of Chrisostome the Papists do triumph as though they had won the field Loe
fayth to snare them rather thē to saue them But what skilleth that to the Papistes how many men perish which seeke nothing elles but the aduaūcement of their Pope whom they say no man can finde fault withall For though he neither care for his own soules health nor of his christen brother but draw innumerable people captiue with him into hell yet say the Papistes no man may reprehēd him nor aske the question why he so doth And where you speake of the sobernesse and deuotion of the schoole authors whom before you noted for boasters what sobernesse and deuotion was in them being all in manner monkes and fryers they that be exercised in them do know wherof you be none For the deuotion that they had was to their God that created them which was their Pope by contention sophistication and all subtle meanes they could deuise by their witte or learning to confirme and establish whatsoeuer oracle came out of theyr Gods mouth They set vp their Antichrist directly agaynst Christ and yet vnder pretence of Christ made him his vicar generall giuing him power in heauen earth and in hell And is not then the doctrine of Transubstantiation and of the reall and sensuall presence of Christ in the sacrament to be beleued trow you seing that it came out of such a gods mouth was set abroad by so many of his Aungels And is not this a simple and playne doctrine I pray you that visible formes and substances be transubstantiated and yet accidents remayn A playne doctrine be you assured which you confesse your selfe that the simple and playne people vnderstand not nor your selfe with the helpe of all the Papistes is not able to defend it where the true doctrine of the first catholick christian fayth is most playne cleare and comfortable without any difficulty scruple or doubt that is to say that our Sauiour Christ although he be sitting in heauē in equality with his father is our life strēgth◠food and sustenaunce who by his death deliuered vs from death and daily nourisheth and increaseth vs to eternall life And in tokē hereof he hath prepared bread to be eaten and wine to be drunken of vs in his holy supper to put vs in remembrance of his sayd death and of the celestiall feeding nourishing increasing and of all the benefites which wee haue thereby which benefites through fayth and the holy ghost are exhibited and geuen vnto all that worthely receiue the sayd holy supper This the husbandman at his plough the weauer at his loume and the wife at her rocke can remember and geue thankes vnto God for the same This is the very doctrine of the Gospel with the consent wholly of al the old ecclesiastial doctors howsoeuer the Papistes for their pastime put vysers vpon the sayd doctors and disguise them in other coates making a play and mocking of them Now followeth the second absurdity Secondly these Transubstantiatours do say contrary to all learning that the accidentes of bread and wine doe hang alone in the ayre without any substance wherin they may be stayed And what can be sayd more foolishly Winchester The Mayster of the sentences shewing diuers mens sayings in discussion as they can of this mistery telleth what some say that had rather say somewhat then nothing which this author rehearseth as a determination of the church that indéede maketh no doctrine of that poynt so but acknowledgeth the mistery to exéede our capacity And as for the accidentes to be stayd that is to say to remayne without their naturall substaūce is without difficulty beleued of men that haue fayth considering the almighty power of Christ whose diuine body is there present And shall that be accounted for an inconuenience in the mistery that any one man saith whose saying is not as a full determination approued If that man should encounter with this author if he were aliue so to do I think he would say it were more tolerable in him of a zeale to agrée with the true doctrine to vtter his conceit fondly then of a malice to dissent from the true doctrine this author so fondly to improue his saying But if he should appose this author in learning and aske him how he will vnderstand Fiat lux in creation of the world where the light staied that was then create But I will proceed to peruse the other differences Caunterbury THe doctrine that euen now was so simple and playne is now agayne waxed so full of ambiguities and doubtes that learned men in discussing therof as they can be fayne to say rather some thing than nothing and yet were they better to say nothing at all then to say that is not true or nothing to purpose And if the master of the sentences saying in this poynt vary from the cōmon doctrine of the other Papists why is not this his errour reiected among other wherin he is not commonly helde And why do your selfe after approue the same saying of the Master as a thing beleeued without difficultie that the accidents be stayed without their naturall substāce And then I would know of you wherin they be stayed seeing they be not stayed in the ayre as in their substance nor in the bread and wine nor in the body of Christ For eyther you must appoynt some other stay for them or els graunt as I say that they hange alone in the ayre without any substance wherin they may be stayed And eyther I vnderstand you not in this place you speake so diffusely or els that thing which the Master spake and your self haue here affirmed you cal it a tollerable conceit fondly vttered And where as to answere the matter of the staying of the accidents you aske wherin the light was stayed as the creation of the world this is a very easy opposall and soone answered vnto For first God created heauen and earth and after made light which was stayed in them as it is now although not deuided from the darkenes in such sort as it was after Now followeth the third absurdity Thirdly that the substance of Christes body is there really corporally and naturally present without any accidents of the same And so the Papistes make accidents to be without substances and substances to be without accidents Winchester How Christes body is in circumstance present no man can define but that it is truly present and therfore really present corporally also and naturally with relation to the truth of the body present and not to the maner of presence which is spirituall exceeding our capacitye and therefore therein without drawing away accidentes or adding wee beleeue simplye the trueth howesoeuer it liketh this author without the booke to terme it at his pleasure and to speake of substaunce without accidentes and accidents without substance which perplexity in wordes can not iest out the truth of the catholike beleefe And this is on the authors part nothing but iesting with a wrong surmise and supposall as
neither reason learnyng nor fayth beareth that Christes body beyng onely in bread should gyue life vnto a man So that if it were an Article of our faith to beleue that Christ is present in the formes of bread and wine it were an vnprofitable Article seyng that his being in the bread should profit no man Irenee therefore meaneth not of the beyng of Christ in the bread and wyne but of the eatyng of him And yet he meaneth not of corporall eating for so Christ sayth him selfe that his flesh auayleth nothing but spirituall eatyng by fayth Nor he speaketh not of spirituall eatyng in receauyng of the Sacrament onely for then our lyfe should not be eternall nor endure no longer then we be eating of the sacrament for our spirituall life cōtinueth no lōger thē our spirituall feedyng And then could none haue lyfe but that receaue the Sacramēt and all should haue perished that dyed before Christes Supper and institutiō of the Sacrament or that dye vnder age before they receiue the Sacrament But the true meaning of Irenee Hilary Cyprian Cyrill and other that treated of this matter was this that as Christ was truely made man and crucified for vs and shed his bloud vpon the Crosse for our redemption now reigneth for euer in heauen so as many as haue a true fayth and belefe in him chawyng their cuddes and perfectly remembryng the same death and passion which is the spirituall eatyng of his flesh and drinkyng of his bloud they shall reigne in euerlastyng lyfe with him For they spiritually and truely by faith eate his flesh and drinke his bloud whether they were before the institution of the Sacrament or after And the beyng or not beyng of Christes body and bloud really and corporally in the Sacrament vnder the formes of bread and wine neither maketh nor marreth nor is to no purpose in this matter But for confirmation of this our fayth in Christes death and passion for a perpetuall memory of the same hath Christ ordeined this holy Sacrament not to be kept but to be ministred among vs to our singular comfort that as outwardly and corporally we eate the very bread and drinke the very wine and call them the body and bloud of Christ so inwardly and spiritually we eate drinke the very body and bloud of Christ. And yet carnally and corporally he is in heauen and shall be vntill the last Iudgement when he shall come to Iudge both the quicke and the dead And in the Sacrament that is to say in the due ministration of the Sacrament Christ is not onely figuratiuely but effectually vnto euerlastyng lyfe And this teachyng impugneth the heresies of the Ualentinians Arrians and other heretickes and so doth not your fayned doctrine of Transubstantiation of the reall presence of Christes flesh and bloud in the Sacrament vnder the formes of bread and wine and that vngodly and wicked men eate and drinke the same which shall be cast away from the eternall lyfe and perish for euer And for further aunswere to Hilary I referre the Reader to myne other aunswere made to him before And for S. Chrisostome Gelasius and Theodorete if there be no bread and wine in the Sacrament their Argumentes serue for the heretickes purpose and cleane directly agaynst them selues For their entent agaynst the heretickes is to proue that to the full perfection of Christ is required a perfect soule and a perfect body and to be perfect God and perfect man As to the full perfection of the Sacrament is required pure and perfect bread and wine and the perfect body and bloud of Christ. So that now turnyng the Argument if there be no perfect bread and wine as the Papistes falsely surmise then may the heretickes cōclude agaynst the Catholicke fayth and conuince Chrisostome Gelasius Theodorete with their own weapon that is to say with their own similitude that as in the Sacramēt lacketh the earthly part so doth in Christ lacke his humanitie And as to all our senses seemeth to be bread and wine and yet is none in deede so shall they argue by this similitude that in Christ seemed to all our senses flesh and bloud and yet was there none in very deede And thus by your deuilish Trāsubstantiation of bread and wine do you trāsubstantiate also the body and bloud of Christ not conuincyng but confirmyng most haynous heresies And this is the conclusion of your vngodly fayned doctrine of transubstantiation And where you would gather the same cōclusion if Christes flesh and bloud be not really present it seemeth that you vnderstand not the purpose and intent of these Authors For they bring not this similitude of the Sacrament for the reall presence but for the reall beyng That as the Sacrament consisteth in two partes one earthly an other heauenly the earthly part beyng the bread and wine and the heauenly the body and bloud of Christ and these partes be all truely and really in deede without colour or simulation that is to say very true bread and wine in deede the very true body and bloud of Christ in deede euē likewise in Christ be two natures his humanitie and earthly substaunce and his diuinitie and heauēly substaunce and both these be true natures and substaunces without colour or dissemblyng And thus is this similitude of the Sacrament brought in for the truth of the natures not for the presence of the natures For Christ was perfect God and perfect man whē his soule went downe to hell and his body lay in the graue bycause the body and soule were both still vnited vnto his diuinitie and yet it was not required that his soule should be present with the body in the sepulture no more is it now required that his body should be really present in the Sacrament but as the soule was then in hell so is his body now in heauen And as it is not required that where so euer Christes diuinitie is there should be really and corporally his manhode so it is not required that where the bread and wyne be there should be corporally his flesh and bloud But as you frame the Argument agaynst the heretickes it serueth so litle agaynst them that they may with the same frame and engine ouerthrow the whole Catholicke Church For thus you frame the Argument As the presence of Christes body in this mystery doth not alter the proprietie of the visible natures no more doth the Godhead in the person of Christ extinguish his humanitie Marke well now good Reader what foloweth hereof As the presence of Christes body in this mysterie doth not alter say you the proprietie of the visible natures no more doth the Godhead in the person of Christ extinguish his humanitie But the presence of Christes body in this mystery doth so alter the visible natures as the Papistes say that the substaunces of bread and wyne be extinguished and there remayneth no substaūce but of the body of Christ Ergo likewise in the
for all our sinnes and is the raunsom for our redemption from euerlastyng damnation And although in the olde testament there were certayne sacrifices called by that name yet in very deed there is but one such sacrifice whereby our sins be pardoned and Gods mercy and fauour obtained which is the death of the sonne of God our Lord Iesu Christ nor neuer was any other sacrifice propitiatory at any time nor neuer shal be This is the honor and glory of this our high priest wherein he admitteth neither partener nor successor For by his owne oblation he satisfied his father for all mens sinnes and reconciled mankinde vnto his grace and fauour And whosoeuer depryue him of his honour and go about to take it to themselues they be very Antichristes and most arrogant blasphemers against God and agaynst his sonne Iesus Christ whom he hath sent And other kind of sacrifice there is which doth not reconcile vs to God but is made of them that be reconciled by Christ to testify our dueties vnto God and to shew ourselues thankfull vnto him And therfore they be called sacrifices of laud prayse and thanksgeuing The first kind of sacrifice Christ offered to God for vs the second kinde we our selues offer to God by Christ. And by the first kinde of sacrifice Christ offered also vs vnto hys Father and by the Second we offer ourselues and all that we haue vnto hym and hys Father And this sacrifice generally is our whole obedience vnto God in keeping his lawes and commaundementes Of which maner of sacrifice speaketh the prophet Dauid saying A sacrifice to God is a contrite hart And S. Peter sayth of all christen people that they be an holy priesthood to offer spirituall sacrifices acceptable to God by Iesu Christ. And S Paule sayth That alway we offer vnto God a sacrifice of laud and prayse by Iesus Christ. But now to speake somewhat more largely of the priesthood and sacrifice of Christ he was such an hie bishop that he once offering himselfe was sufficient by once effusion of his bloud to abolish sinne vnto the worldes end He was so perfect a priest that by one oblation he purged an infinite heape of sinnes leauing an easy and a ready remedy for all sinners that his one sacrifice should suffice for many yeares vnto all men that would not shewe themselues vnworthy And he tooke vnto himselfe not onely their sinnes that many yeares before were dead and put their trust in him but also the sins of those that vntill his comming agayne should truely beleue in his gospell So that now we may looke for none other priest nor sacrifice to take away our sinnes but onely him and his sacrifice And as he dying once was offered for all so as much as pertayned to him he tooke all mens sinnes vnto himself So that now there remaineth no moe sacrifices for sinne but extreme iudgement at the last day when he shall appeare to vs agayne not as a man to be punished agayne and to be made a sacrifice for our sinnes as he was before but he shal come in his glory without sinne to the great ioy and comfort of them which be purified and made cleane by his death and continue in godly and innocent liuing and to the greate terrour and dreade of them that be wicked and vngodly Thus the scripture teacheth that if Christ had made any oblation for sinne more then once he should haue dyed more then once forasmuch as there is none oblation and sacrifice for sinne but onely his death And now there is no more oblation for sinne seyng that by him our sinnes be remitted and our cōsciences quieted And although in the old Testament there were certayne sacrifices called Sacrifices for sinne yet they were no such sacrifices that could take away our sinnes in the sight of God but they were ceremonies ordayned to this intent that they should be as it were shadowes and figures to signify before hand the excellent sacrifice of Christ that was to come which should be the very true and perfect sacrifice for the sinnes of the whole world And for this signification they had the name of a sacrifice propitiatory and were called sacrifices for sinnes not because they indeed toke away our sinnes but because they were images shadowes and figures wherby godly men were admonished of the true sacrifice of Christ then to come whiche should truely abolish sinne and euerlasting death And that those sacrifices which were made by the priestes in the olde lawe could not be able to purchase our pardon and deserue the remission of our sinnes S. Paule doth clearely affirme in his sayd Epistle to the Hebrues where he sayth It is impossible that our sinnes should be taken away by the bloud of oxen and goates Wherefore all godly men although they did vse those sacrifices ordayned of God yet they did not take them as thinges of that value and estimation that thereby they should be able to obtayne remission of their sins before God But they tooke them partly for figures and tokens ordained of God by the which he declared that he would send that seed which he promised to be the very true sacrifice for sinne and that he would receiue thē that trusted in that promise and remit their sinnes for the sacrifice after to come And partly they vsed them as certayne ceremonies whereby such persons as had offended agaynst the law of Moyses and were cast out of the congregation were receiued agayne among the people and declared to be absolued As for like purposes we vse in the church of Christ sacramentes by him instituted And this outward casting out from the people of God and receiuing in agayne was according to the law and knowledge of man but the true recōciliation and forgeuenes of sin before God neither the fathers of the old law had nor we yet haue but onely by the sacrifice of Christ made in the mounte of Caluary And the sacrifices of the old law were prognosticatiōs and figures of the same then to come as our sacramentes be figures and demonstrations of the same now passed Now by these foresayd things may euery man easily perceiue that the offering of the priest in the Masse or the appoynting of his ministratiō at his pleasure to them that be quicke or dead can not merite and deserue neither to him selfe not to thē for whō he singeth or sayth the remissiō of their sinnes but that such Popish doctrine is cōtrary to the doctrine of the Gospell and iniurious to the sacrifice of Christ. For if onely the death of Christ be the oblation sacrifice and price wherfore our sinnes be pardoned thē the act or ministratiō of the priest cā not haue the same office Wherfore it is an abhominable blasphemy to geue that office or dignitie to a priest which pertaineth onely to Christ or to affirme that the Church hath neede of any such sacrifice as
his death indeed So in the Lords supper according to his commaundement we remember his death preaching and commending the same vntill his return agayne at the last day And although it be one Christ that died for vs and whose death we remember yet it is not one sacrifice that he made of himselfe vpon the crosse and that we make of him vpon the alter or table For his sacrifice was the redemption of the world ours is not so his was death ours is but a remēbraunce thereof Hys was the taking away the shines of the world ours is a praising and thanking for the same and therefore his was satisfactory ours is gratulatory It is but one christ that was offred thē that is offred now yet the offeringes be diuers his was the thing and ours is the figure His was the originall and ours is as it were a patterne Therefore concludeth Lombardus that Christ was otherwise offered then and otherwise now And seing then that the offeringes and sacrifices be diuers if the first was propitiatory and satisfactory ours cannot be so except we shall make many sacrifices propitiatory And then as S. Paule reasoneth either the first must be insufficient or the other in vayne And as Christ onely made thys propitiatory sacrifice so he made but one and but once For the making of any other or of the same agayne should haue beene as S. Paule reasoneth a reprouing of the first as vnperfect and insufficient And therefore at his last supper although Christ made vnto his father sacrifices of lauds and thankesgeuing as these wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do declare yet he made there no sacrifice propitiatory for then either the sacrifice vpon the crosse had bene voyd or the sacrifice at the supper vnperfect and vnsufficient And although he had at his supper made sacrifices propitiatory yet the priests do not so who do not the same that Christ did at his supper For he ministred not the sacrament in remembrannce of his death which was not then brought to passe but he ordained it to be ministred of vs in remembraunce thereof And therfore our offering after Lombardus iudgement is but remembraunce of that true offering wherein Christ offered himselfe vpon the crosse And so did Christ institute it to be And Lombardus sayth not that Christ is dayly offered for proportion of our sinnes but because we dayly sinne wee dayly bee put in the remembraunce of Christes death which is the perfect proportion for sinne And the priest as Lombardus sayth maketh a memoriall of that oblation of Christ and as Hesechius sayth he doth in the name of the people so that the sacrifice is no more the priestes then the peoples For the priestes speak the wordes and the people should aunswere amen as Iustinus sayth The priest should declare the death and passion of Christ and all the people should looke vpon the crosse in the mount of Caluary see Christ there hanging and the bloud flowing out of his side into theyr wounds to heale all their sores and the priest and people altogether should laud and thanke instantly the Chyrurgion and Phiscycion of their soules And this is the priestes and peoples sacrifice not to be propitiators for sinne but as Emissene sayth to worship continually in mistery that was but once offered for the price of sinne and this shortly is the mind of Lombardus that the thing which is done at gods boord is a sacrifice so is that also which was made vpon the crosse but not after one manner of vnderstanding For this was the thing in deed and that is the anniuersary or commemoration of the thing And now haue I made it euident that Petrus Lombardus defaceth in no poynt my saying of the sacrifice but confirmeth fully my doctrine aswell of the sacrifice propitiatory made by Christ himselfe onely as of the sacrifice cōmemoratiue and gratulatory made by the preists and people So that in your issue taken vpon Lombard the verdit cannot but passe wyth me by the testimony of Lombard himselfe And yet I do not fully allow Lombardes iudgement in all matters who with Gratian his brother as it is sayd were ij chiefe champiōs of the Romish sea to spread abroad their errours and vsurped authority but I speake of Lombard onely to declare that yet in his tyme they had not cited so farre to make of theyr was a sacrifice propitiatory But in the end of this processe Lōbard speaketh with out the booke when he concludeth this matter thus that the virtue of this sacrament is the remission of veniall sin and perfection of vertue which if Lombard vnderstand of the sacrifice of Christ it is to little to make hys sacrifice the remission but of veniall sin And if he vnderstand it of the sacrifice of the priest it is to much to make the priests sacrifice either the perfection of vertue or the remission of veniall sinne which be the effects onely of the sacrifice of Christ. Now let vs consider the rest of your confutation Winchester The catholicke doctrine teacheth not the daily sacrifice of Christes most precious body and bloud to be an iteration of the once perfited sacrifice on the crosse but a sacrifice that representeth that sacrifice and sheweth it also before the faythfull eyes and refresheth the effectuall memory of it so as in the dayly sacrifice without shedding of bloud we may sée with the eye of fayth the very body and bloud of Christ by Gods mighty power without diuision distinctly exhibits the same body and bloud that suffered and was shed for vs which is a timely memoriall to stir vp our fayth and to consider therin briefly the great charity of God towardes vs declared in Christ. The catholick doctrine teacheth the dayly sacrifice to be in the same in essence that was offered on the crosse once assured therof by Christs wordes when he sayd This is my body that shal be betrayed for you The offering on the crosse was and is propitiatory and satisfactory for our redemption and remission of sin whereby to destroy the tyranny of sinne the effect whereof is geuen and dispensed in the sacrament of baptisme once likewise ministred and neuer to be iterate no more then Christ can be crucified agayne and yet by vertue of the same offering such as fall be releued in the sacrament of penaunce Caunterbury After you wilfull wrangling without any cause at the last of your own swing you come to the truth purely and sincerely professing and setting forth the same except in few wordes here and there cast in as it were cockle among cleane corne The offering on the crosse say you was and is propitiatory and satisfactory for our redemption and remission of sin the effect whereof is geuen and dispensed in the sacrament of baptisme once likewise ministred and neuer to be iterate but the catholick doctrine teacheth not that the dayly sacrifice is an
moreouer that Christ him selfe commeth downe vpon the child apparelleth him with his own selfe And as at the Lordes holy Table the Priest distributeth wine bread to feede the body so we must thinke that inwardly by fayth we see Christ feedyng both body and soule to eternall lyfe What comfort can be deuised any more in this world for a Christē man And on the other side what discomfort is in your papisticall doctrine what doubtes what perplexities what absurdities what iniquities what auayleth it vs that there is no bread nor wyne or that Christ is really vnder the formes and figures of bread and wyne and not in vs or if he be in vs yet he is but in the lippes or the stomacke and tarieth not with vs. Or what benefite is it to a wicked man to eate Christ and to receaue death by him that is lyfe From this your obscure perplex vncertaine vncomfortable deuilish and Papisticall doctrine Christ defend all his and graunt that we may come often and worthely to Christes holy Table to comfort our feeble and weake fayth by remembraunce of his death who onely is the satisfaction and propitiation of our sinnes and our meate drinke and foode of euerlastyng lyfe Amen Here endeth the Aunswere of the most Reuerend Father in God Thomas Archbyshop of Canterbury c. vnto the crafty and Sophisticall cauillation of Doct. Steuen Gardiner deuised by him to obscure the true sincere and godly doctrine of the most holy Sacrament of the body and bloud of our Sauiour CHRIST THE Aunswere of Thomas Archebishop of Caunterbury c. agaynst the false calumniations of doctour Richard Smith who hath taken vpon him to confute the defence of the true catholik doctrine of the body and bloud of our Sauiour Christ. I Haue now obtayned gentle reader that thing which I haue much desired which was that if all men would not imbrace the truth lately set forth by me concerning the Sacrament of the body and bloud of our Sauiour Christ at the least some man would vouchsafe to take penne in hand and write against my booke bicause that therby the truth might both better be serched out and also more certaynly knowen to the world And herein I hartely thanke the late Bishop of Winchester and doctor Smith who partely haue satisfied my long desire sauing that I would haue wished aduersaries more substantially learned in holy scriptures more exercised in the olde auncient ecclesiasticall authors and hauing a more godly zeale to the triall out of the truth than are these two both being crafty sophisters the one by art and the other by nature both also being drowned in the dregges of papistry brought vp and confirmed in the same the one by Duns and Dorbell and such like Sophisters the other by the Popish Canon law wherof by his degree taken in the uniuersity he is a professor And as concerning the late bishop of Winchester I will declare his craftye Sophistications in myne aunswere vnto his booke But doctour Smith as it appeareth by the title of his preface hath craftely deuised an easy way to obtayne his purpose that the people being barred from the serching of the truth might be stil kept in blindnes and errour as wel in this as in al other matters wherin they haue bene in times past deceaued He seeth full well that the more diligently matters be serched out and discussed the more clearly the craft and falsehode of the subtill Papistes will appeare And therfore in the preface to the reader he exhorteth all men to leaue disputing and resoning of the fame by learning and to giue firme credite vnto the church as the title of the sayd preface declareth manifestly As who should say the truth of any matter that is in question might be tryed out without debating and reasoning by the word of God wherby as by the true touchstone all mens doctrines are to be tryed and examined But the truth is not ashamed to come to the light and to be tryed to the vttermost For as pure golde the more it is tryed the more pure it apeareth so is all manner of truth Where as on the other side all maskers counterfayters and false deceiuors abhorre the light and refuse the triall If all men without right or reason would geue credite vnto this Papist and his Romish church agaynst the most certayne word of God and the olde holye and Catholicke Churche of Christ the matter should be soone at an end and out of all controuersie But for as muche as the pure word of God and the first church of Christ from the beginning taught the true catholike fayth and Smith with his church of Rome do now teach the cleane contrary the chaffe can not be tryed out from the pure corne that is to say the vntruth discerned from the very truth without threshing windowing and fanning serching debating and reasoning As for me I ground my beleefe vpon gods word wherin can be no errour hauing also the consent of the primatiue church requiring no man to beleue me further then I hane gods word for me But these Papistes speake at their pleasure what they lift and would be beleeued without godes word bicause they beare men in hand that they be the church The church of Christ is not founded vpon it selfe but vppon Christ and his word but the Papistes build their church vpon them selues deuising new articles of the fayth from tyme to tyme without any scripture and founding the same vpon the Pope and his cleargy monkes and fryers and by that meanes they be both the makers and Iudges of their fayth themselues Wherfore this Papist like a politike man doth right wisely prouide for himselfe and his church in the first entry of his booke that all men should leaue searching for the truth and sticke hard and fast to the church meaning himselfe and the church of Rome For from the true catholike church the Romish church which he accomteth catholike hath varied and dissented many yeares passed as the blindest that this day do liue may well see and perceaue if they will not purposely winke and shut vp their eyes This I haue written to answere the title of his preface NOw in the beginning of the very preface it selfe when this great doctor should recite the wordes of Ephesine counsell he translateth them so vnlearnedly that if a young boy that had gone to the grammer schole but thre yeres had done no better he should scant haue escaped some scholemasters handes with sixierkes And beside that he doth it so craftily to serue his purpose that he cannot be excused of wilfull deprauation of the wordes calling celebration an offering and referring the participle made to Christ which should be referred to the word partakers and leauing out those wordes that should declare that the sayd counsell spake of no propiciatory sacrifice in the Masse but of a sacrifice of laud and thankes which christen people geue vnto God
at the holy communion by remembrance of the death resurrection and ascention of his sonne Iesu Christ and by confessing and setting forth of the same Heare by the vngodly handeling of this godly councell at his first beginning it may appeare to euery man how sincerely this Papist entendeth to proceede in the rest of this matter And with like sinceritie he vntruly belieth the sayd counsell saying that it doth playnly set forth the holy sacrifice of the Masse wich doth not so much as once name the Masse but speaketh of the sacrifice of the church which the sayd councell declareth to be the profession of christen people in setting forth the benefite of Christ who onely made the true sacrifice pro piciatory for remission of sinne And whosoeuer else taketh vpon him to make any such sacrifice maketh himselfe Antichrist And than he belyeth me in two thinges as he vseth commonly throughout his whole booke The one is that I deny the sacrifice of the Masse which in my booke haue most playnly set out the sacrifice of christen people in the holy communion or masse if D. Smith will needes so terme it and yet I haue denyed that it is a sacrifice propitiatory for sinne or that the priest alone maketh any sacrifice there For it is the sacrifice of all christen people to remember Christes death to laude and thanke him for it and to publish it and shew it abroad vnto other to his honor and glory The controuersy is not whether in the holy communion be made a sacrifice or not for herein both D. Smith and I agree with the foresayd councell at Ephesus but whether it be a propitiatory sacrifice or not and whether onely the priest make the sayd sacrifice these be the poyntes wherin we vary And I say so far as the councell sayth that there is a sacrifice but that the same is propitiatory for remission of sinne or that the priest alone doth offer it neyther I nor the counsell do so say but D. Smith hath added that of his owne vayne head The other thing wherin D. Smith belyeth me is this He sayth that I deny that we receaue in the sacrament that flesh which is adioyned to Gods owne sonne I meruaile not a little what eyes Doctor Smith had when he red ouer my booke It is like that he hath some priuy spectacles within his head wherwith when soeuer he loketh he seeth but what he list For in my booke I haue written in moe then an hundred places that we receaue the selfe same body of Christ that was borne of the virgine Mary that was crucified and buried that rose agayne ascended into heauen and sitteth at the right hand of God the father almighty And the contention is onely in the manner and forme how we receaue it For I say as all the olde holy Fathers and Martirs vsed to say that we receaue Christ spiritually by fayth with our myndes eating his flesh and drincking his bloud so that we receaue Christes owne very naturall body but not naturally nor corporally But this lying papist sayth that we eate his naturall body corporally with our mouthes which neyther the counsell Ephesine nor any other auncient councell or doctor euer sayd or thought And the controuersy in the councell Ephesine was not of the vniting of Christes flesh to the formes of bread and wine in the sacrament but of the vniting of his flesh to his diuinity at his incarnation in vnity of person Which thing Nestorius the heretike denyed confessing that Christ was a godly man as other were but not that he was very God in nature which heresy that holy counsell confuting affirmeth that the flesh of Christ was so ioyned in person to the dyuine nature that it was made the proper flesh of the sonne of God and flesh that gaue life but that the sayd flesh was present in the sacramēt corporally and eaten with our mouthes no mention is made therof in that councell And here I require D. Smith as proctor for the Papists eyther to bring forth some auncient councell or doctor that sayth as he sayth that Christs own naturall body is eaten corporally with our mouthes vnderstanding the very body in deed and not the signes of the body as Chrisostome doth or els let him confesse that my saying is true and recant his false doctrine the third tyme as he hath done twise already THan forth goeth this Papist with his preface and sayth that these wordes This is my body that shall be giuen to death for you no man can truely vnderstand of bread And his profe therof is this bicause that bread was not crucified for vs. First here he maketh a lye of Christ. For Christ said not as this papist alleadgeth This is my body which shal be giuen to death for you but onely he sayth This is my body which is giuen for you which wordes some vnderstand not of the giuing of the body of Christ to death but of the breaking and giuing of bread to his apostles as S. Paule sayd The bread which we breake c. But let it be that he spake of the geuing of his body to death and said of the bread This is my body which shal be geuen to death for you by what reason can you gather hereof that the bread was crucified for vs If I looke vpon the image of kinge Dauid and say This is he that killed Goliath doth this speach mean that the image of King Dauid killed Goliath Or if I hold in my hand my booke of S. Iohns gospell and say This is the gospell that S. Iohn wrote at Pathmos which fashion of speach is commonly vsed doth it folow hereof that my booke was written at Pathmos Or that S. Iohn wrote my booke which was but newly printed at Paris by Robert Stephanus Or if I say of my booke of S. Paules epistles This is Paule that was the great persecuter of Christ Doth this manner of speach signify that my booke doth persecute Christ Or if I shew a booke of the new testament saying This is the new testament which brought life vnto the world by what forme of argument can you induce hereof that my booke that I bought but yesterday brought life vnto the world No man that vseth thus to speake doth meane of the bookes but of the very thinges themselues that in the bookes be taught and contayned And after the same wise if Christ called bread his body saying This is my body which shall be giuen to death for you yet he ment not that the bread should be giuen to death for vs but his body which by the bread was signified If this excellent clarke and doctor vnderstand not these maner of speaches that be so playne then hath he doth lost his sences and forgotten his gramer which teacheth to referre the relatiue to the next antecedent But of these figuratiue speaches I haue spokē at large in my third booke First in the
viii chap. prouing by authority of the oldest authors in Christs church that he called bread his body and wine his bloud And agayne in the ix x. xi and xii chapters I haue so fully intreated of such figuratiue speaches that it should be but a superfluous labour here to speake of any more but I referre the reader to those places And if M. doctor require a further answere herein let him looke vpon the late bishop of Winchesters booke called the detection of the diuels sophistry where he writeth plainly that when Christ spake these wordes This is my body he made demonstration of the bread THan further in this prologue this Papist is not ashamed to say that I set the cart before the horses putting reason first and fayth after which lye is so manifest that it needeth no further proofe but onely to looke vpon my booke wherein it shall euidently appeare that in all my fiue bookes I ground my foūdation vpon gods word And least the Papistes should say that I make the expositions of the scripture my selfe as they commonly vse to do I haue fortified my foundation by the authority of all the best learned and most holy authors and martyrs that were in the beginning of the church and many yeares after vntill the Antichrist of Rome rose vp and corrupted altogither And as for naturall reason I make no mention therof in all my v. bookes but in one place onely which is in my second booke speaking of Transubstantiation And in that place I set not reason before fayth but as an handmayden haue appoynted her to do seruice vnto fayth and to wayte vpon her And in that place she hath done such seruice that D. Smith durst not once looke her in the face nor find any fault with her seruice but hath flylye and craftely stolen away by her as though he saw her not But in his owne booke he hath so impudently set the cart before the horses in Christes owne wordes putting the wordes behind that goe before the wordes before that goe behind that except a shameles Papist no man durst be so bolde to attempt any such thing of his owne head For where the Euangelist and S. Paule rehearse Christes wordes thus Take eate this is my body he in the confutation of my second booke turneth the order vpside downe and sayth This is my body take eate After this in his Preface hee rehearseth a great number of the wonderfull workes of God as that God made all the world of nought that he made Adam of the earth and Eue of his side the bush to flame with fire and burne not and many other like which be most manifestly expressed in holy scripture And vpon these he concludeth most vainly and vntruly that thing which in the scripture is neyther expressed nor vnderstanded that Christ is corporally in heauen and in earth and in euery place where the sacrament is And yet D. Smith sayth that Gods word doth teach this as playnly as the other vsing herein such a kind of sophisticall argumēt as all Logitiās do reprehend which is called petitio principij whē a mā taketh that thing for a supposition and an approued truth which is in controuersy And so doth he in this place when he sayth Doth not Gods word teach it thee as playnly as the other Here by this interrogatory he required that thing to be graunted him as a truth which he ought to proue and whereupon dependeth the whole matter that is in questiō that is to say whether it be as playnly set out in the scripture that Christes body is corporally in euery place where the sacrament is as that God created all thinges of nothing Adam of the earth and Eue of Adams side c. This is it that I deny and that he should proue But he taketh it for a supposition saying by interrogation doth not the word of God teach this as playnly as the other Which I affirme to be vtterly false as I haue shewed in my third boobe the xi and twelfe chap. where I haue most manifestly proued as well by Gods word as by aūcient authors that these wordes of Christ This is my body and This is my bloud be no playne speaches but figuratiue THen forth goeth this papist vnto the vi chap. of S. Thou saying Christ promised his disciples to geue them such bread as should be his owne very naturall flesh which he would geue to death for the life of the world Can this his promise sayth M. Smith be verified of common bread Was that giuen vpon the crosse for the life of the world Wherto I answer by his owne reason Can this his promise be verified of sacramentall bread was that geuen vpon the crosse for the life of the world I meruayle here not a little of M. Smithes eyther dulnes or maliciousnes that cannot or will not see that Christ in this chap. of S. Ihon spake not of Sacramentall bread but of heauenly bread nor of his flesh onely but also of his bloud and of his godhead calling them heauenly bread that giueth euerlasting life So that he spake of him selfe wholy saying I am the bread of life He that cōmeth to me shall not hunger and he that beleueth in me shall not thirst for euer And neyther spake he of common bread nor yet of sacramentall bread For neyther of them was giuen vpon the crosse for the life of the world And there can be nothing more manifest then that in this vi chap. of Ihon Christ spake not of the sacrament of his flesh but of his very flesh And that aswell for that the sacrament was not then instituted as also that Christ sayd not in the future tense the bread which I will giue shal be my flesh but in the present tense the bread which I will geue is my flesh which sacramentall bread was neyther then his flesh nor was then instituted for a Sacrament nor was after giuen to death for the life of the world But as Christ when he sayd vnto the woman of Samaria The water which I will geue shall spring into euerlasting life he ment neyther of materiall water nor of the accidents of water but of the holy ghost which is the heauenly fountayne that springeth vnto eternall life so likewise when he sayd The bread which I will geue is my flesh which I will geue for the life of the world he ment neyther of the materiall bread neither of the accidents of bread but of his owne flesh Which although of it selfe it auayleth nothing yet being in vnity of persō ioyned vnto his diuinity it is the same heauenly bread that he gaue to death vpon the crosse for the life of the world But here M. Smith asketh a question of the tyme saying thus When gaue Christ that bread which was his very flesh that he gaue for vs to death if he did it not at his last supper when he sayd This is my
subiectes but they must seeke it at a straungers hands in a straunge land the like whereof I thinke was neuer seene I would haue wished to haue had some meaner aduersaryes I thinke that death shall not greeue me much more then to haue my most dread and most gratious soueraygne Lord and Lady to whom vnder God I do owe all obedience to be mine accusers in iudgement within their owne realme before any straunger and outward power But forasmuch as in the time of the Prince of most famous memory King Henry the 8. your graces father I was sworne neuer to consent that the byshop of Rome should haue or exercise any authoritie or iurisdiction in this realme of England therefore least I should allow his authority contrary to mine oth I refused to make aunswere to the Byshop of Gloucester sitting here in iudgemēt by the Popes authority least I should runne into periury An other cause why I refused the popes authority is this that his authority as he claimeth it repugneth to the crowne imperiall of this realme and to the lawes of the same which euery true subiect is bound to defend Fyrst for that the Pope sayth that all manner of power aswell temporall as spirituall is geuen first to him of God and that the temporall power he geueth vnto Emperours and Kinges to vse it vnder him but so as it be alwayes at his cōmaundement becke But contrary to this clayme the Emperial crowne and iurisdiction temporall of this Realme is taken immediately from God to be vsed vnder him onely and is subiect vnto none but to God alone Moreouer the imperiall lawes and customes of this realme the king in his Coronation and all Iustices when they receiue their offices be sworne and all the whole realme is bound to defend and maintayne But contrary hereunto the pope by his authority maketh voyd and commaundeth to blot out of our bookes all lawes and customes being repugnant to his lawes and declareth accursed all rulers and gouernours all the makers writers executors of such lawes or customes as it appeareth by many of the Popes lawes whereof one or two I shall rehearse In the decrees distin x. is written thus Constitutione contra canones decreta praesulum Romanorum vel bonos mores nullius sunt momenti That is the constitutions or statutes enacted agaynst the Canons and decrees of the Bishops of Rome or their good customes are of none effect Also Extra de sententia excommunicationis merit Excōmunicamus omnes hareticos vtriusque sexus quocumque nomine censeantur fautores receptatores defensores eorum nec non qui de catero sernari fecerint statuta edita consuetudines contra ecclesia libertatem nisiea de capitularibus suis intra duos menses post huiusmodi publicationem sentencia fecerint amoueri Item excōmunicamus statutarios scriptores statutorum ipsorum nec non potestates consules rectores consiliarios locorum vbi de catero huiusmodi statuta consuetudines edita fuerint velseruatae nec non illos qui secundum ea praesumpserint iudicarem vel in publicam formam scribere iudicata That is to say we excōmunicate all heretickes of both sexes what name so euer they be called by and their fauourers and receptours and defenders and also them that shall hereafter cause to be obserued statutes and customes made agaynst the liberty of the Church except they cause the same to be put out of their bookes or recordes within two monethes after the publication of this sentence Also we excommunicate the statute makers and writers of those statutes and also the potestates consuls gouernors and counsellors of places where such statutes and customes shall be made or kept and also those that shall presume to geue iudgement according to them or put into publike forme of writing the maners so iudged Now by these lawes if the Byshop of Romes authority which be claymeth by God bee lawfull of your graces lawes and customes of your Realme being contrary to the Popes lawes be naught and aswell your maiesty as your iudges iustices and all other executors of the same stand accursed among heretickes which God forbid And yet this curse can neuer be auoyded if the Pope haue such power as he claymeth vntil such times as the lawes and customes of this Realme beyng contrary to his lawes bee taken away and blotted out of the law bookes And although there bee many lawes of this Realme contrary to the lawes of Rome yet I named but a few as to conuict a Clarke before any temporall Iudge of this Realme for debt felony murther or for any other crime which Clarkes by the Popes lawes be so exempt from the Kynges lawes that they can be no where sued but before their Ordinary Also the pope by his lawes may geue all byshoprickes and benefices sprituall which by the lawes of this Realme can be geuen but onely by the Kinges and other patrones of the same except they fall into the lapse By the Popes lawes ius patronatus shal be sued onely before the ecclesiasticall iudge but by the lawes of this realme it shall be sued before the temporall iudge and to be short the lawes of this realme do agree with the Popes lawes like fire and water And yet the Kinges of this Realme haue prouided for their lawes by the premunire so that if any man haue let the excution of the lawes of this Realme by any authority from the sea of Rome he falleth into the premunire But to meete with this the popes haue prouided for their lawes by cursing For whosoeuer letteth the Popes lawes to haue full course within this realme by the Popes power standeth accursed So that the popes power treadeth all the lawes and customes of this Realme vnder his feete cursing all that execute them vntill such time as they geue place vnto his lawes But it may be said that notwithstanding all the popes decrees yet we do execute still the lawes and customes of this Realme Nay not all quietly without interruption of the Pope And where we do execute them yet we do it vniustly if the popes power be of force and for the same we stand excommunicate and shall doe vntill we leaue the execution of our owne lawes and customes Thus we be wel recōciled to Rome allowing such authority wherby the Realme standeth accursed before God if the Pope haue any such authority These thinges as I suppose were not fully opened in the parliament house when the popes authority was receiued agayne within this Realme for if they had I do not beleue that either the King or Queenes maiesty or the nobles of this Realme or the commons of the same would euer haue consented to receiue agayne such a forrayne authority so iniurious hurtfull and preiudiciall aswel to the crowne as to the lawes and customes and state of this realme as whereby they must needes acknowledge themselues to
tooke his leaue of the kynges highnesse for that night On the morow about ix of the clocke before noone the Counsaile sent a Gentleman busher for the Archbishop who when he came to the Counsaile chamber doore could not be let in but of purpose as it séemed was compelled there to waite among the pages lackeys and seruyngmen all alone Doct. Buttes the kynges Phisition resortyng that way and espying how my Lord of Canterbury was handled went to the kynges highnes and sayd My Lord of Canterbury if it please your Grace is well promoted for now he is become a lackey or a seruyngman for yonder he standeth this halfe houre without the Counsaile chamber doore amongest them It is not so quoth the kyng I trow nor the Counsaile hath not so litle discretion as to vse the Metropolitane of the Realme in that sorte specially beyng one of their owne number but let them alone sayd the kyng and we shall here more soone Anone the Archbishop was called into the Counsaile Chamber to whom was alledged as before is rehearsed The Archbyshop aunswered in like sort as the kyng had aduised him and in the ende when he perceiued that no maner of perswasion or intreatie could serue he deliuered to them the kyngs ryng reuokyng his cause into the kynges handes The whole Counsaile beyng thereat somewhat amased the Earle of Bedford with a loude voyce confirmyng his wordes with a solemne oth sayd When you first began this matter my Lordes I told you what would come of it Do you thinke that the kyng will suffer this mans finger to ake much more I warrant you will he defend his life agaynst brablyng varlets You do but comber your selues to heare tales and fables agaynst him And so incontinently vpon the recept of the kynges token they all rose and caryed to the kyng his ryng surrenderyng that matter as the order and vse was into his owne handes When they were all come to the kynges presence his highnesse with a seuere countenaunce sayd vnto theÌ„ Ah my Lordes I thought I had had wiser men of my Counsaile then now I finde you What discretion was this in you thus to make the Primate of the Realme one of you in office to waite at the Counsaile Chamber doore amongest seruyngmen You might haue considered that he was a Counseller as well as you and you had no such CoÌ„mission of me so to handle him I was coÌ„tent that you should try him as a Counseller not as a meane subiect But now I well perceiue that things be done agaynst him malitiously if some of you might haue had your myndes you would haue tried him to the vttermost But I doe you all to witte protest that if a Prince may be beholdyng vnto his subiect and so solemly laying his haÌ„d vpon his brest sayd by the fayth I owe to God I take this man here my Lord of Caunterbury to bee of all other a most faythfull subiect vnto vs and one to whom we are much beholdyng giuyng him great commendations otherwise And with that one or two of the chiefest of the Counsaile makyng their excuse declared that in requestyng his induraunce it was rather ment for his triall and his purgation agaynst the common fame and sclaunder of the world then for any malice conceiued agaynst him Well well my Lordes quoth the king take him and well vse him as he is worthy to be and make no more ado And with that euery man caught him by the hand and made fayre wether of altogethers whiche might easely be done with that man And it was much to bee marueiled that they would goe so farre with him thus to séeke his vndoyng this well vnderstandyng before that the kyng most entirely loued him and alwayes would stand in his defence who soeuer spake agaynst him as many other tymes the kynges patience was by sinister informations agaynst him tryed In so much that the Lord Cromwell was euermore wont to say vnto him My Lord of Canterbury you are most happy of all men for you may do and speake what you lifte and say what all men can agaynst you the kyng will neuer beleue one word to your detriment or hinderaunce After the death of kyng Henry immediatly succéeded his sonne kyng Edward vnder whose gouernement and protection the state of this Archbyshop beyng his Godfather was nothyng appaired but rather more aduaunced Duryng all this meane tyme of kyng Henry aforesayd vntill the entryng of kyng Edward it séemeth that Cranmer was scarsely yet throughly perswaded in the right knowledge of the Sacrament or at least was not yet fully rypened in the same wherein shortly after he beyng more groundly confirmed by conference with Byshop Ridley in processe of tyme did so profite in more ryper knowledge that at last he tooke vpon him the defence of that whole doctrine that is to refute and throw downe first the corporall presence secondly the phantasticall transubstantiation thirdly the Idolatrous adoration fourthly the false errour of the Papistes that wicked men do eate the naturall body of Christ and lastly the blasphemous sacrifice of the Masse Whereupon in conclusion he wrote fiue bookes for the publicke instructioÌ„ of the Church of England which instruction yet to this day standeth and is receaued in this Church of England Agaynst these fiue bookes of the Archbyshop Stephen Gardiner the Archenemy to Christ and his Gospell beyng then in the Tower slubbereth vp a certaine aunswere such as it was which he in open Court exhibited vp at Lambeth beyng there examined by the Archbyshop aforesayd and other the kynges Commissioners in kyng Edwardes dayes whiche booke was intitled An Explication and assertion of the true Catholicke fayth touchyng the blessed Sacrament of the aultar with a confutation of a booke written agaynst the same Agaynst this Explication or rather a caâ—illyng Sophistication of Stephens Gardiner Doctour of Law the sayd Archbyshop of Canterbury learnedly and copiously replying agayne maketh aunswere as by the discourse therof renewed in Print is euident to be sene to all such as with indifferent eye will Read and peruse the same Besides these bookes aboue recited of this Archbishop diuers other things there were also of his doing as the booke of Reformation with the booke of Homelies whereof part was by him contriued part by his procurement approued and published Wherunto also may be adioyned an other writing or confutation of his agaynst 88. Articles by the CoÌ„uocation deuised and propounded but yet not ratified nor receaued in the reigne and time of king Henry And thus much hetherto concernyng the deynges and trauailes of this Archbyshop of Caunterbury duryng the lines both of kyng Henry and of kyng Edward his sonne Which two kynges so long as they continued this Archbyshop lacked no stay of maintenaunce agaynst all his maligners After the death of king Edward Quéene Mary comming now to the Crowne and being established in
the possession of the Realme not long after came to London and after she had caused first the two Dukes of Northumberland and Suffolke and their two children the Lady Iane and the Lord Guilford both in age tender and innocent of that crime to be executed She put the rest of the Nobilitie to their lines and forgaue them the Archbishop of Canterbury onely except Who though he desired pardon by meane of frendes could obtaine none in so much that the Quéene would not once â—ouchsafe to sée hym For as yet the old grudges agaynst the Archbyshop for the diuorcement of her mother remained hid in the bottome of her hart Besides this diuorce she remembred the state of Religion chaunged all which was reputed to the Archbishop as the chief cause therof While these thinges were in doing a rumor was in all mens mouthes that the Archbishop to curry fauour with the Quéene had promised to say a Dirige Masse after the old custome for the funerall of king Edward her brother Neither wanted there some which reported that he had already said Masse at Caunterbury whiche Masse in déede was sayd by Doct. Thornton This rumor Cranmer thinkyng spéedely to stay gaue forth a writing in his purgation the tenour whereof being set out at large in the booke of Actes and Monumentes I néede not here againe to recite This Bill being thus written and lying openly a window in his chamber coÌ„meth in by chaunce Maister Scory Bishop then of Rochester who after he had read and perused the same required of the Archbishop to haue a Copie of the Bill The Archbishop when he had graunted and permitted the same to Maister Scory by the occasion therof M. Scory lending it to some frend of his there were diuers Copies takeÌ„ out therof the thing published abroad among the common people in so much that euery Scriueners shop almost was occupied in writing and copying out the same and so at length some of those Copies comming to the Bishops handes so brought to the Counsell they sending it to the Commissioners the matter was knowen so he commauÌ„ded to appeare Whereupon Doct. Cranmer at his day prefixed appeared before the sayd Commissioners bringing a true Inuentorie as he was commauÌ„ded of all his goodes That done a Bishop of the Quéenes priuie Counsell being one of the sayd Commissioners after the Inuentorie was receaued bringing in mention of the Bill My Lord said he there is a Bill put forth in your name wherein you séeme to be agréeued with setting vp the Masse againe we doubt not but you are sorie that it is gone abroad To whom the Archbishop aunswering againe saying as I doe not deny my selfe to be the very Authour of that Bill or Letter so must I confesse here vnto you concerning the same Bill that I am sorie that the sayd Bill went from me in such sort as it did For when I had written it M. Scory got the Copie of me and is now come abroad and as I vnderstand the Citie is full of it For whiche I am sorie that it so passed my handes for I had intended otherwise to haue made it in a more large and ample maner mynded to haue set it on Paules Church doore and on the doores of all the Churches in London with mine owne feele ioyned thereto At whiche wordes when they saw the constantnesse of the man they dismissed him affirming they had no more at that present to say vnto him but that shortly hee should heare further The said Bishop declared afterward to one of Doct. Cranmers frendes that notwithstaÌ„ding his attainder of treason the Quéenes determination at that time was that Cranmer should onely haue bene depriued of his Archbishopricke and haue had a sufficient liuing assigned him vpon his exhibiting of a true Inuentorie with commaundement to kéepe his house without medlyng in matters of Religion But how that was true I haue not to say This is certaine that not long after this he was sent vnto the Tower and soone after condemned of treason Notwithstanding the Quéene wheÌ„ she could not honestly denie him his pardon seing all the rest were discharged and specially seing he last of all other subscribed to king Edwardes request that against his owne will released to him his action of treason and accused him onely of heresie which liked the Archbishop right well and came to passe as he wished because the cause was not now his owne but Christes not the Quéenes but the Churches Thus stoode the cause of Cranmer till at length it was determined by the Quéene and the Counsel that he should be remoned from the Tower where he was prisoner to Oxford there to dispute with the Doctours and Diuines And priuely word was sent before to them of Oxford to prepare them selues and make them ready to dispute And although the Quéene and the Bishops had coÌ„cluded before what should become of him yet it pleased them that the matter should be debated with Argumentes that vnder some honest shew of disputation the murther of the man might be couered Neither could their hastie spéede of reuengement abide any long delay and therfore in all hast he was caried to Oxford What this disputation was and how it was handled what were the questions and reasons on both sides and also touching his condemnation by the Uniuersitie the Prolocutor because sufficiently it hath bene declared in the storie at large we mynde now therefore to procéede to his finall iudgement and order of condemnation whiche was the xii day of September an 1556. and seuen dayes before the condemnation of Bishop Ridley and Maister Latimer After the disputations done and finished in Oxford betwene the Doctours of both Uniuersities and the thrée worthy Bishops Doct. Cranmer Ridley and Larymer senteÌ„ce condemnatory immediatly vpoÌ„ the same was ministred against them by Doct. Weston and other of the Uniuersitie whereby they were iudged to be heretickes and so committed to the Maior and Sheriffes of Oxford by whom hee was caried to Bocardo their coÌ„mon Gaile in Oxford In this meane tyme while the Archbishop was thus remainyng in duraunce whoÌ„ they had kept now in prisoÌ„ almost the space of thrée yeares the Doctours and Diuines of Oxford busied them selues all that euer they could about Maister Cranmer to haue him recant assaying by all craftie practises and allurementes they might deuise how to bring their purpose to passe And to the intent they might winne him easely they had him to the Deanes house of Christes Church in the sayd Uniuersitie where he lacked no delicate fare played at the bowles had his pleasure for walking and all other thinges that might bring him from Christ. Ouer and besides all this secretly and sleightly they suborned certaine men whiche when they could not expugne him by argumentes and disputation should by entreatie and fayre promises or any other meanes allure him to recantation perceiuyng otherwise what a great
corporal manducation of his most holy flesh and drincking of his most precious bloud which he gaue in his supper vnder the formes of bread and wine Caunterbury THis is the third euident and manifest vntruth whereof you note me And because you say that in citing of S. Augustin in this place I handle not the matter so sincerely as it requireth let here be an issue between you and me which of vs both doth hādle this matter more sincerely and I will bring such manifest euidence for me that you shall not be able to open your mouth against it For I alledge S. Augustine iustly as he speaketh adding nothing of my selfe The wordes in my booke be these Of these wordes of Christ it is plain and manifest that the eating of Christs body and drincking of his bloud is not like to the eating and drinking of other meates and drinkes For although without meat and drinke man cannot liue yet it followeth not that he that eateth and drinketh shall liue for euer But as touching this meate and drinke of the body and bloud of Christ it is true both he that eateth and drinketh them hath euerlasting life And also he that eateth and drinketh them not hath not euerlasting life For to eate that meate and drinke that drink is to dwell in Christ and to haue Christ dwelling in him and therfore no man can say or think that he eateth the body of Christ or drinketh his bloud except he dwelleth in Christ and haue Christ dwelling in him Thus haue you heard of the eating and drinking of the very fleshe and bloud of our Sauiour Christ. Thus alleadge I S. Augustin truely without adding any thing of mine own head or taking any thing away And what sleight I vsed is easy to iudge for I cite directly the places that euery man may see whether I say true or noe And if it be not true quarrell not with me but with S. Augustine whose wordes I onely rehearse And that which S. Augustine sayeth spake before him S. Ciprian and Christ himselfe also plainlye inough vpon whose wordes I thought I might be as bold to build a true doctrine for the setting forth of Gods glory as you may be to peruert both the words of Ciprian and of Christ him selfe to stablish a false doctrine to the high dishonor of God and the corruption of his most true word For you adde this word worthely wherby you gather such an vnworthy meaning of S. Augustines wordes as you list your self And the same you doe to the very words of Christ him selfe who speaketh absolutely and plainly without adding of any such word as you put thereto What sophistry this is you know well inough Now if this be permitted vnto you to adde what you list and to expound how you list then you may say what you list without controlment of any man which it seemeth you looke for And not of like sort but of like euilnes doe you handle in reprehending of my seconde vntruth as you call it an other place of S. Augustine in his booke de doctrina Christiana where he sayth that the eating and drinkinge of Christes flesh and bloud is a figuratiue speach which place you expound so farre from S. Augustines meaning that who soeuer looketh vpon his wordes may by and by discern that you do not or wil not vnderstand him But it is most like the words of him being so plain and easy that purposely you will not vnderstand him nor nothing els that is against your will rather then you will goe from any part of your will and receaued opinion For it is plain and cleare that S. Augustine in that place speaketh not one worde of the separation of the two natures in Christ and although Christs flesh be neuer so surely and inseparably vnited vnto his Godhead without which vnion it could profite nothing yet being so ioyned it is a very mans flesh the eating wherof after the proper speech of eating is horrible and abominable Wherfore the eating of Christes flesh must needes be otherwise vnderstanded then after the proper and common eatinge of other meates with the mouth which eating after such sort could auayle nothing And therefore S. Augustine in that place declareth the eating of Christes fleshe to be onely a figuratiue speach And he openeth the figure so as the eatinge must be ment with the minde not with the mouth that is to say by chawing and digesting in our mindes to our great consolation and profite that Christ dyed for vs. Thus doth S. Augustine open the figure and meaning of Christ when he spake of the eating of his flesh and drinking of his bloud And his flesh being thus eaten it must also be ioyned vnto his diuinitie or els it could not geue euerlasting life as Cyrill and the councell Ephesin truly decreed But S. Augustine declared the figuratiue speech of Christ to be in the eating not in the vnion And where as to shift of the playn words of Christ spoken in the sixt of Iohn he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud dwelleth in me and I in him you say that dwelling in Christ is not the manducation You say herein directly against S. Cyprian who saith quod mansio nostra in ipso sit manducatio that our dwelling in him is the eating And also against S. Augustine whose wordes be these Hoc est ergo manducare escam illam illum bibere potum in Christo manere illum manentem in se habere This is to eat that meat and drinke that drinke to dwell in Christ to haue Christ dwelling in him And although the eating and drinking of Christ be here defined by the effect for the very eating is the beleeuing yet where so euer the eating is the effect must be also if the definition of S. Augustine be truely geuen And therfore although good bad eate carnally with their teeth bread being the Sacrament of Christes body yet no man eateth his very flesh which is spiritually eaten but he that dwelleth in Christ and Christ in him And where in the end you referre the Reader to the declaration of Christes wordes it is an euill sequele you declare Christes wordes thus Ergo they be so ment For by like reason might Nestorius haue preuayled against Cyrill Arrius agaynst Alexander and the Pope against Christ. For they al proue their errors by the doctrine of Christ after their own declarations as you doe here in your corporall manducation But of the manducation of Christs flesh I haue spoken more fully in my fourth booke the second third and fourth chapters Now before I answere to the fourth vntruth which I am appeached of I will reherse what I haue said in the matter and what fault you haue found my booke hath thus Now as touching the Sacramentes of the same our Sauiour Christ did institute them in bread wine at his last Supper which
sacrificium oblationem quia memoria est representatio veri sacrificy sanctae immolationis factae in ara crucis semel Christus mortuus in cruce est ibique immolatus est in semetipso quotidie auteÌ„ immolatur in sacrameÌ„to quia in sacramento recordatio fit illius quod factum est semel vnde Augustin Certum habemus quia Christus resurgens ex mortus iam non moritur c. tamen ne obliniscamur quod semel factum est in memoria nostra omn 〈◊〉 fit sclicet quaÌ„do pascha celebratur Nunquid totiens Christus occiditur sed tantuÌ„ aniu◠〈◊〉 â—ecordatio representat quod olim factuÌ„ est sic nos facit moueri taÌ„quaÌ„ videamus Domin◠〈◊〉 â—uce IteÌ„ semel immolatus est Christus in semetipso tameÌ„ quotidie immolatur in sacramâ—â—â—â— Quod sic intilligenduÌ„ est quia in manifestatione corporis distinctione membroruÌ„ semel tanti in cruce pependit offereÌ„s se Deo patri hostiaÌ„ redeÌ„ptionis efficacem eoruÌ„ scilicet quos praedestinauit Item Ambrosius In Christo semel oblata est hostia ad saluteÌ„ potes quid ergo nos Nonne per singulos dies offerimus Fae si quotidie offeramus ad recordationem eius mortis fit vna est hostia non multae quomodo vna noÌ„ multae quia semel immolatus est Christus Hoc auteÌ„ sacrificium exemplum est illius idipsum semper idipsum offertur proinde hoc idem est sacrificium alioquin dicetur quoniam in multis locis offertur multi sunt Christi non sed vnus vbique est Christus hic plenus existens illic plenus sicut quod vbique offertur vnum est corpus ita vnum sacrificium Christus hostiam obtulit ipsam offerimus nuÌ„c sed quod nos agimus recordatio est sacrificij Nec causa suae infirmitatis reperitur quia per ficit hominem sed nostrae quia quotidie peccamus Ex his colligitur esse sacrificium dici quod agitur in altari Christum semel oblatuÌ„ quotidie offerri sed aliter tunc aliter muncâ—et etiam quae sit virtus huius sacramenti ostenditur remissio scilicet peccatorum venalium perfectio virtutis The English hereof is this After this it is asked whether that the Priest doth may be sayd properly a sacrifice or immolation and whether Christ be dayly immolate or onely once Whereunto it may be shortlye aunswered that which is offered and consecrate of the priest is called a sacrifice and oblation because it is a memory and representation of the true sacrifice and holye immolation done in the aultar of the crosse And Christ was once dead on the crosse and there was offered in himselfe but he is dayly immolate in the sacrament because in the sacrament there is made a memory of that is once done Whereupon S. Augustine We are assured that christ rising from death dieth not now c. Yet least we should forget that is once done in our memory euery yere is done videl as often as the pascha is celebrate is Christ as often killed onely a yerely remembraunce representeth that was once done and so causeth vs to be moued as though we saw our Lord on the crosse Also Christ was once offered in himselfe and is offered dayly in the sacrament which is thus to be vnderstaÌ„ded that in open shewyng of his body and distinction of his meÌ„bers he did hang onely once vpon the crosse offering himselfe to God the father an host of redemption effectuall for them whome he hath predestinate Also S. Ambrose In Christ the host was once offred being of power to helth what do we then doe we not offer euery day and if we offer euery day it is done to the remembraunce of the death of him and the host is one not many How one and not many because Christ is once offered this sacrifice is the example of that the same and alwayes the same is offered therfore this is the same sacrifice Or els it may be sayd because offering is in many places there be many Christes which is not so but one Christ is ech where and here ful and there full so as that which is offered euery where is one body and so also one sacrifice Christ hath offered the host we do offer the same also now But what we do is a remembraunce of the sacrifice Nor there is no cause found of the owne inualidity because it perfiteth the man but of vs because we dayly sinne Hereof it is gathered that to be a sacrifice and to be so called that is done in the alter and Christ to be once offered and dayly offered but otherwise then and otherwise now and also it is shewed what is the vertue of this Sacrament that is to say remission of veniall sinne and perfection of vertue Thus writeth Petrus Lombardus whose iudgement because this author alloweth he must graunt that the visible church hath Priestes in ministery that offer dayly Christes most precious body and bloud in mistery and then must it be graunted that Christ so offered himselfe in his supper For otherwise then he did cannot now be done And by the iudgement of Petrus Lombardus the same most precious body and bloud is offered dayly that once suffered and was once shed And also by the same Petrus iudgement which he confirmeth with the saying of other this dayly offering by the priest is daylye offered for sin not for any imperfection in the first offering but because wee daylye fall And by Petrus iudgement appeareth also how the priest hath a speciall functioÌ„ to make this offering by whose mouth god is prayed vnto as Hesychius sayth to make this sacrifice which Emissene noteth to be wrought by the great power of the inuisible priest By Petrus Lombardus also if his iudgement be true as it is in deed and the author coÌ„fesseth it so to be that is done in the aultar is not onely called a sacrifice but also is so the same that is offered once and dayly to be the same but otherwise then and otherwise now But to the purpose if the author will stand to the iudgement of Petrus Lombardus all his fift booke of this treaty is clerely defaced And if he will now call backe that agayne he might more compendeously do the same in the whole treatise being so far ouerseene as he is therein Caunterbury HOw is it possible to set out more playnely the diuersity of the true sacrifice of Christ made vpon the aulter of the crosse which was the propitiation of sinne from the sacrifice made in the sacrament then Lombardus hath done in this place For the one he calleth the true sacrifice the other he calleth but a memoriall or representation thereof likening the sacrifice made in the lordes supper to a yeares mind or anniuersary wherat is made a memoriall of the death of a person and yet it is not