true and effectuall communion with Christ Iesus Againe S. Paul saith immediatly after 1. Cor. 10.17 we that are many are one bread and one bodie because we are all partakers of one Bread Againe as often as ye shall eate this Bread 1. Cor. 11.26 and drinke of this cuppe yée shew the Lords death till he come Againe whosoeuer shall eate this Bread and drinke the cuppe of the Lord vnworthely shal be guiltie of the body and blood of the Lord And again let a man therefore examine himself and so let him eate of this bread and drink of â—his cup. Here Saint Paul fiue times callâ—th it bread euen when it is receiued and eaten therfore I conclude that it is bread But here the Papists come in with a craftie cauillation and think they haue found a fine deuise to shift off these plain words of the Apostle they say that saint Paul calleth it bread because it was bread as Aarons rodde being turned into a serpent Exod. 7 1â— and being a serpent is called a rodde Aharons rodde deuoured their roddes I aunswere first that they compare things vtterly vnlike for in the Sacrament there must continue a similitude and agréement betwéene the signe and the thing signified as before out of S. Augustine I declared and therefore the substance of the signe must néeds remaine without which there can bée no such similitude But in this matter there is no such agréement betwéene the rodde and serpent but rather bee cleane contrary and therefore the reason of these two are not alike Secondly I say that because the conuersion of the rodde into a serpent was but temporall for a short time to continue Moses had good cause to call it a rodde because thereunto it was straight wayes to be restored and in the nature of a rod to continue Thirdly let the Papists shew that their bread is so turned into the bodie of Christ as that rodde was into a serpent and then they say something other wayes they proue nothing Lastly I may turne this Argument vpon their owne heads that as Moses called the serpent a rodde when it was not a rodde indéede but a serpent So Christ called the bread his body when it was not indéede naturally his bodie but in substance bread and by his ordinance a sacrament of his bodie And as the Papists will haue Saint Paul to call that bread which they say is not bread so why may not our sauiour Christ call that his bodie which not properly but sacramentally is his body Thus I trust this their cauillation is sufficiently confuted that you plainly perceiue that S. Paul calleth it bread because it is bread The which now Dialog 1 I will proue by the testimonies of the ancient fathers Theodoritus beside that plaine place before alledged where he saith that Christ hath honored the visible signes with the title or name of his bodie blood not chaunging the nature of them but Dialog 2 adding grace to nature hath a more plaine and pregnant place whose words be these Thou art catched in thine owne snares for the mysticall signes after sanctification or consecration leaue not their proper nature but they remaine in their former Substance and figure kind 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. and be visible and tangible as they were before here not only Theodoritus plain words do affirme the nature and substance of bread and wine to remaine after consecratioÌ„ but also the whole drift of the disputation betwéene the true Christian the Eutican heretike tendeth to the same end But if the doctrine of transubstantiation had beene then in the Church receiued it had most fitly serued for the heretiks purpose that as the bread after consecration is turned into Christs body so Christs bodie after the ascention is turned into the deitie and so the heretike reasoneth but the true Christian answereth that he is catched in his own snare for as bread and wine after consecration are not turned into Christs bodie and blood but remaine in substance as they were before so Christs bodie after his ascention is not turned into the deitie but replenished with glorie and immortality Gelasius a Bishop of Rome writing against the same heretike Eutiches that Theodoritus did and vsing the same reason setteth downe the same doctrine in these words Gelasius contra Eurichen Certe Sacramenta c. i. Surely the sacraments of the bodie and blood of Christ which we receiue are a diuine thing and therefore by them wée be made partakers of the diuine nature and yet it ceaseth not to be the substance or nature of bread and wine and indeed an image and similitude of the bodie and blood of Christ is celebrated in the Accion of the mysteries c. Chrisostome also writeth thus Chrisost ad Câ—esarium Monachum Sicut enim antequam sanctificetur panis c. For as before the bread is sanctified we call it bread but when the diuine grace hath sanctified it by the meanes of the priest it is in déed deliuered from the name of bread and is counted worthy of the name of the lords bodie although the nature of bread doe still continue in it and is called not two bodies but one bodie of the son c. Both the words of Gelasius Chrisostome and also the drift of their discourses tending to the same end that Theodoritus doth most plainly shew that after consecration the substance of bread remaineth euen as after Christs assention the substance of his true body continueth or else these reasons taken from the sacrament do not only not make for them but directly against them yea and plainly make for those heretikes whom they by these arguments séeke to confute Origen also saith Panis ille c. Orig. in Matâ—h cap. 15. That bread which is sanctified by the word of God and prayer according to the material substance which it hath goeth into the belly is cast out into the draught but by the prayer which is ioyned to it according to the proportion of faith is made profitable By which it appeareth that it is the substance of bread and not Christs bodie which were blasphemie to affirme that is so cast out Cyprian saith De vnctione Chrismatis Dedit dominus noster c. Our Lord at the table whereat he did participate his last feast with his disciples gaue with his own hands bread wine but vpon the crosse he gaue his bodie to be wounded by the hands of the souldiers August de consecr dist 2. qui mandu Augustine also saith Quod videtur panis est c. That which is séene is bread and the cuppe which our eies also do shew vnto vs c. He saith it is bread and not séemeth or appeareth to be bread August in psal 98. And in another place Spiritualiter intelligite quod loquutus sum Nen hoc corpus quod videtis manducaturi estis c. .i. Spiritually
you would daily more and more increase go forward in the loue of the preaching of Gods word and to imitate that noble example of that noble man of AEthiopia Act. 8.22 who both read that in his charet trauailing by the way the Prophet Isaias and also heard Philip expound the same Euen so that your Honors may daily more more grow in the true knowledge feare and obedience of God Wherein true Nobilitie doth chiefely consist not onely daily and reuerently reade the word of God your selues but also diligently heare faithfull Philips that is godly and learned ministers truely expound and preach the same Which is most needfull for you For as that noble maÌ„ profited by reading but was conuerted vnto Christ by Philips preaching Rom. 10.14 so it is chiefly the preaching of the Gospel which winneth vs vnto Christ planteth faith worketh repentance in vs and directeth stirreth vs vp to walke warely vprightly before the Lord our god For as spice when it is brused is of more force to season meat when it is chewed is more meete to norish vs Euen so the word of god when it is by exposition as it were brused chewed applyed vnto vs is of more power to season the corrupt humors that be in vs effectually to feed vs that we may liue in holines righteousnesse vnto God for want coÌ„tempt of the preaching of Christs gospel it is lameÌ„table to see how many fearfully fal away from the grace of god Therefore that your Honors may not only constantly coÌ„tinue but also daily increase in the true worship and feare of God loue earnestly the preaching of gods word let it be dearer vnto you than thousands of gold and syluer sweeter than hony the hony comb hunger after it as your daily food Matth. 13 45. esteeme it for that pretious pearle which ought to be more dear vnto you thaÌ„ al these earthly and transitorie things of the world for all flesh is grasse Isai 40. and al the glorie thereof is as the flower of the fielde which soone fadeth and falleth away but the word of our God abideth for euer and shall make vs stand florish for euer in gods kingdome if faithfully in our heartes we beleeue it and obediently in our liues and conuersation follow it Thus assuring my self that your Honors will take in good part this my bolde aduenture in presenting this small mite and poore gift vnto you I will forbeare from further troubling you beseeching God the father of mercie so to worke by his holy spirit in you that you may be filled with the knowledge of his wil in al wisedome Colos 1.9 and spirituall vnderstanding that yee may walke worthy of the Lord pleasing him in all things being fruitfull in all good workes and increasing in the knowledge of God c. Your Honors most humble in Christ Iesus to commaund Edward Bulkley At my house in VVoodhall the 18. of Februarie 1586. A Sermon preached by Edward Bulkley Doctor of Diuinitie at Bletsoe the 30. day of Ianuarie 1585. vpon the doctrine of the Sacrament of the body and blood of Iesus Christ Matth. 26.26 As they did eate Iesus tooke breade and when he had blessed he brake it and gaue it to his disciples and said take ye eate ye This is my body Also he tooke the cuppe and when he had giuen thanks he gaue to them saying drinke ye all of this for this is my blood of the new Testament which is shed for many for the forgiuenes of sinnes I say vnto you that 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 And when they had song a psalme they went out into the mount of Oliues WHen the time did nowe drawe neare Ephes 5.2 that our Sauiour Christ was to offer that sweete smelling sacrifice and oblation of himselfe vpon the Altar of the crosse for our redemption reconciliation it seemed good to his heauenly wisedome to ordaine this Sacrament to be a perpetuall memoriall remembrance and pledge vnto vs of his death and passion vntill his comming againe 1. Cor. 11.25.26 And because the law did require the Paschal lambe at that time to be eaten he comming not to breake but to fulfill the lawe that he might discharge all our breaking of the law Matth. 5.17 did first with his disciples according to the law eat the passouer and so did put an end vnto the same and then did institute this his supper to succeed in his Church for euer in the place thereof That as he had ordayned baptisme to succéed in the roome of Circumcision so he would haue this Sacrament to succeed in the place of the Pascall Lambe and as they had béene Sacraments and seales of the olde Testament before his comming in the flesh so these might be after his comming sacraments and seales of the new Testament and couenant whereof we reade Hieremie 31.31 and Hebrewes 8.8 Therefore the Euangelist in the first words of my text saith As they did eat Meaning that when they had eaten the Paschall Lambe then they did receiue and eate this his holie supper Whereupon I may gather this that it is not so vnlawfull as some thinke after the tasting and eating of some thing to eate this blessed Sacrament The which I speake not for that I would haue men eate and drinke and fill their bellies before they come to this holy supper which with al reuerence and sobrietie ought in Gods feare to be receiued but to take away the superstition of some who think that if they being in neuer such infirmitie and weaknes do tast neuer so little they be thereby vnméete and vnworthy to receiue this holy mysterie and thereupon abstaine from it But if we did iudge rightly we should think that not the receiuing into vs of a little of Gods creatures soberly with thankesgiuing that vpon infirmitie doth make vs vnméete communicants but those things that come out of vs euen out of our hearts as euill thoughts murders Matâ—h 15.15 adulteries formeations theftes false testimonies slaunders are the things that defile vs and make vs more loathsome vnto Gods maiestie than any leprosie vnto men These thinges make vs vnméete gestes for such a celestiall banket and vnworthy receiuers of this blessed Sacrament of Christs body and blood Well saith Chrisostome Non enim comedisse confusionem nobis affert In Genes hom 10. sed mali quippiam egisse i. Not to eate but to commit any wickednesse bringeth shame vnto vs. Therefore I exhort you to abstaine from these and all other such filthie sinnes and to come with cleare consciences and good hearts to this holy table And as touching meats I wish men to refraine from them when they come to communicate on this sacrament vnlesse it be for some great infirmitie necessitie c. Now
Fathers did teach touching the two natures of the deitie and humanity in our Sauiour Christ that they are neither to be distracted a sunder and seperated as did Nestorius nor the properties of them to be confounded as did Eutiches but the said properties are to be distinguished Euen so are we to deale in this matter of the sacrament concerning the signe and thing signified that neither they are to be distracted a sunder deuided nor to be confounded â—ogether but to be distinguished The sign which is the bread and wine are things visible and corruptible which wil in short time putrifie Iesus Christ the thing signified is to our outward eyes inuisible and is incorruptible The bread and wine are vpon earth Iesus Christ is in heauen at the right hand of God The bread wine are receiued with our mouthes broken with our téeth and féede our bodies Iesus Christ is fide digerendus saith Tertullian Tertull. de resurrect carnis receiued and eaten by faith féedeth our soules to liue to God eternally The bread and wine are receiued of all both faithfull and vnfaithfull godly and wicked Iesus Christ is onely receiued of them who be faithful Ephes 3. in whose hearts he dwelleth by faith They that do eate the bread and wine do die not onely this outward death but also many die eternally Iohn 9.51 but he that eateth this bread that came downe from heauen which is Iesus Christ himselfe shal liue for euer Thus a difference is to be put betwéene the externall sacrament and Iesus Christ of whom it is a SacrameÌ„t And yet we must not distract seperate altogether Iesus Christ from the sacrament but beléeue that he is truely offered to all and effectually receiued of those that be gods children and haue a true faith which is the very mouth of the soule whereby they eate his flesh drinke his blood as Christ saith Iohn â— 35 I am the bread of life he that commeth to me shall neuer hunger and he that beléeueth in me shall neuer thirst Now I will onely shew briefly the vncertainty of this doctrin of Transubstantiation Lib. 4. dist 11. cap. Si autem and so I will end this discourse Peter Lombard the master of the sentences writeth thus Si autem quaeritur qualis sit illa conuersio an formalis an substantialis vel alterius generis definire noÌ„ sufficio formalem tamen non esse cognosco quia species quae ante fuerant remanent i. If it be asked what kinde of conuersion that is whether formal or substantiall or of any other kind I am not able to define But yet I know that it is not a formal conuersion because that the formes and shewes which were before do still remaine Afterward he addeth some think that it is a substantiall conuersion saying that one substance is so coÌ„uerted into an other substance that the one is essentially made the other to the which sense the fore alledged authorities do séeme to consent But some do not graunt that the substance of bread is at any time made the flesh of Christ Others be graunt that that which was bread or wine after consecration is the body and blood of Christ Some doe say thus that that conuersion is so to be vnderstoode that vnder those accidences vnder which before was the substance of bread and wine after consecration is the substance of the body blood but others haue thought that the substance of bread and wine doe there remaine and that there also is the body and blood of Christ Hitherto the master of all the Popish schoolemen whose booke of Sentences was of such credite and autority with them that it was more read expounded then the holy bible Whereby wée may plainely sée how vncertaine this their doctrine is and what diuers opinions haue bene of it So Gabriel Byell Gab. Biell in exposit Canonis Missae lect 40. an other great scholeman writeth thus Quomodo ibi sit Christi corpus an per conuersionem alicuius in ipsum an sine conuersione incipiat enim corpus Christi cum pane manentibus substantia accidentibus panis non inuenitur expressum in canone Bibliae Vnde de hoc antiquitus fuerunt diuersae opiniones .i. How the body of Christ is there whether by conuersion of some thing into it or without conuersion there beginne to the body of Christ with the bread the substance and accidences of the breade remaining still it is not found expressed in the canon of the bible Whereupon in old time there were diuers opinions hereof And afterward he rehearseth foure Besides this what if Iohn Fisher bishop of Rochester a great patrone of the Pope and his doctrine doe flatly confesse that this presence of Christs body and blood in the sacrament cannot be proued by the scriptures Ioh. Roffens Episc in defentio Regiae assertionis cont captiuit Babilonicam M. Lutheri N. 8. O. Whose words be these Hactenus Mattheus c. Hitherto Matthew who onely maketh mention of the new Testament neither is there any word here set downe whereby it may be prooued that in our masse there is made a true presence of Christs bodie and blood for although Christ made of the breade his flesh and of the wine his blood it doth not therefore follow that we by vertue of any word here set downe can doe the like when we attempt the same Again he saith Non potest per vllam scripturam probari c. It cannot be proued by any scripture that either a layman or priest as often as he attempteth the same can in like manner make of bread and wine the bodie and blood of Christ as Christ himselfe made séeing this is not conteined in the scriptures And again he concludeth this matter thus Ibid. Ex iis opinor c. By these things I suppose euery man perceiueth that the certenty of this matter depeÌ„deth not so much of the gospel as of the vse and custome which so many ages hath bene commended vnto vs from the verie first fathers Héere by the iudgement of Bishop Fisher this doctrine of Transubstantiation and reall presence dependeth not so much vpon the Gospel as vpon custome that it cannot be proued by the Scriptures whereby we may sée how vncertaine it is So that we may say with Tertullian Nihil de eo constat Lib. de carne Christi quia Scriptura non exhibet .i. We know nothing thereof because the Scripture doth not shew it And againe Lib. de monogamia Negat scriptura quod non notat .i. The scripture doth deny that which it doth not expresse wherefore let vs forsake this doubtful doctrine yea this erronious absurd and false doctrin and let vs imbrace the truth before declared let vs not séeke Christ here vpon earth but let vs lift vp our hearts into heauen there by faith eate Christs blessed body that was offred and drinke his