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
will Isai 58.13 nor speaking a vaine word he must carefully serue God with a pure conscience earnestly loue his holy word and hunger after it as his daily foode He that hath ben an adulterer or fornicator must flée and forsake this filthy sinne 1. Thess 4.4 kéepe the vessell of his body and soule in holinesse and honour not in the lusts of concupiscence as do the Gentiles that know not God And if any come to this holy table like a filthy dogge before he haue bewailed vnfainedly this his wickednesse and if it be open before he haue publikely shewed true tokens of his true repentance and reconciled himself to the Church of God he treadeth vnder his filthy féete the blood of Iesus Christ the sonne of God and eateth and drinketh his owne damnation Those that haue beene dronkards ought to forsake this beastlinesse and liue soberly and temperately in Gods feare or else they in comming to this sacrament prouoke Gods anger and indignation against them and so receiue it to their destruction But it is lamentable to sée what infinite numbers of whoremongers adulterers incestious persons drunkards such other filthy swine without any signe of repentance or satisfaction to the Church of God by them offended doe come and be receiued to the communicating of this holy sacrament Lastly we ought to examine our selues whether we liue in Christian loue and charitie one with an other without which 1. Cor. 13.1 though we speake with the mouth of men and angels and could moue mountaines and did giue all our goods to the poore yea and our bodies to be burned we be nothing and without it we can do nothing that may be acceptable before God as our Sauiour Christ teacheth vs in these words If thou bring the gift or oblation to the alter Matth. 5.24 and there remember that thy brother hath ought against thée leaue there thine offring before the alter and goe thy way first be reconciled to thy brother and then come and offer thy gift Our Sauiour Christ here speaking of the alter and oblations that were in the old law doth teach vs that we can do nothing acceptable to God vnlesse wâ— be truely reconciled to our brethren and do sincerely loue them euen as we desire God in Iesus Christ to loue vs. Therefore if we liue not in true brotherly loue and charitie one with another we cannot come worthely to this holy supper of our Lord Iesus Christ for it is a sacrament of vnitie as Saint Paul saith we that are many 1. Cor. 10.17 are one bread one body because we al are pertakers of one bread For euen as we al eate of one bread and drinke of one cup so we declare and acknowledge thereby that we be all one in Christ Iesus all members of one mysticall body and all lynked together in brotherly loue one with another And as the bread is made of many graines knoden togither euen so we ought all to be knit together in a holy profession of one truth and in brotherly sincere loue one to another which must bring forth her fruits in humbling our selues one to another in the feare of God in helping comforting and reléeuing one another c. But lamentable it is to sée how cold Christian charitie is waxen and how rare it is among men Al men séeke themselues and their own priuat profit and not the good and benefite of their brethren we dispise and disdaine one another we séeke to exalt and aduance our selues one aboue an other by vsury bribery extorsion and oppression we pinch bite yea and deuour one an other If these be our fruits if thus we leade our liues and yet come to communicate on this holy sacrameÌ„t we prouoke gods fearefull vengeance against vs fearefully for to plague vs. So Paul sheweth that for the abusing of this sacrament at Corinth 1. Cor. 11.30 God had so striken them that many were dead and many weak and sicke among them And wheÌ„ I consider how horribly this holy Sacrament is abused among vs how this pearle is cast before swine and ministred to all without making any difference betwéene the cleane and vncleane how ignorantly vnreuerently and profanely it is receiued I cannot but stand in terrour and horrour of gods fearefull plagues to come vpon vs euen to the depriuing vs of the word of life the Gospel of our saluation and of this pretious pledge of our Redemption by Iesus Christ Let vs therefore deare brethren iudge our selues that we bee not iudged of the Lord our God but let vs humble our selues vnder his mighty hand let vs truely turne vnto him by vnfeined repentance and amendment of life Let vs with all reuerence come to this holy feast vnfeinedly confessing our sinnes with an inward féeling of them remorse of conscience for them truly trusting in gods mercy through Iesus Christ who came into this world to saue vs sinners 1. Tim. 1.15 2. Cor. 8.9 Philip. 2.7 who became poore to inrich vs tooke vpon him the shape of a seruant to purchase eternal fréedome and libertie to vs submitted himself to shame Gal. 3.13.15 to procure euerlasting glorie to vs tooke vpon him the curse to obtaine the blessing of God for vs finally suffered death to giue eternall life vnto vs. Thus when we come to receiue this sacrament let vs thus declare the death of our Lord Iesus Christ acknowledge with heart and mouth that the life wée now liue in the flesh Gal. 2.20 we liue by the faith of the sonne of God who hath loued vs and giuen himselfe for vs. This is our worthy receiuing of this holy mysterie euen effectually from our hearts to confesse our owne vnworthinesse and earnestly to hunger for the righteousnesse of Iesus Christ which onely is able to discharge our vnrighteousnesse If therefore we do vnfainedly confesse our vnworthinesse and wickednesse and not with a perfect faith which no where is to be found and which if we had wée should haue no such néede of this sacrament which is ordeyned to strengthen our faith and to be as it were a prop to vphold it but with an vnfaigned faith as the Apostle termeth it come vnto Christ Iesus 1. Tim. 1.5 lay our sins vpon him beléeue that he hath made peace by the blood of his crosse Coloss 1.20 that by his stripes we be healed if we do truly amend our sinfull liues 1. Pet. 2.24 2. Pet. 1.4 féeling the corruption that is in the world through lust and purelie serue God with good consciences And finally do reconcile our selues one to an other and liue in brotherly loue and Christian charitie one with an other in comming to this sacrament we shall not onely licke the rocke but also sucke the hony and Oile out of the same as S. Cyprian saith Serm. de Caenâ— Domini we shall not onely eate Panem domini the bread of the Lord as Iudas did August in Iâ—hn tract 59. but also Panem Dominum that bread which is the Lord as the other disciples of our sauiour Christ did we shall not onely receiue these visible elements of bread and wine but also we shal eat Christs flesh and drinke his blood Iohn 6.56 he shall dwell in vs and we in him and shall hereby more and more grow vp in him and be more and more assured of our saluation in him These things the father of all mercie worke in vs and continually increase in vs to his owne glorie and our eternall comfort and saluation through Iesus Christ our onely sauiour redéemer to whom with the Father the holy Ghost be all praise laud and glorie now and for euer Amen HOSEA 14.10 Who is wise and he shall vnderstand these things and prudent and he shall know them for the wayes of the Lord are vpright and the iust shal walke in them but the wicked shall fall therein LONDON Printed by Iohn VVolfe for George Byshop 1586.
with them and be effectual instruments to conuey neuer so great a thing to vs yea euen to bring vs pardon for our life being condemned to die euen so the promises of God and the sacraments annexed as seales thereunto be meanes to conueigh Iesus Christ vnto vs and with him forgiuenes of all our sinnes and a free pardon from eternal death which we haue deserued And therefore although bread and wine doe there remaine as the substance of water doth in Baptisme the other sacrament and seal of Gods promise continue yet it is very reuerently to be receiued as a SacrameÌ„t of Iesus Christ and a pledge of our saluation in him Now lastly that this doctrine of theirs draweth with it diuerse absurdities hath partly alredie appeared As for to say that they breake not the substance of breade but either onely accidences or Christs bodie is an absurditie to say that the accidences do hang in the aire without any subiect is an absurditie or to say that they bee in Christes bodie is an other absurdetie To say that there is a conuersion and chaunge of the substance and none of the external qualities and properties is an absurdity and contrarie to all other myracles in the Scriptures as before is declared But of other absurdities which followe this absurd doctrine of transubstantiation I will hereafter by Gods grace intreate Now I come to the second error of the Papists concerning the presence of the verie reall and naturall bodie of Iesus Christ vnder those accideÌ„ces and formes of bread and wine which I affirme to be contrarie to the Articles of our faith to the holy scriptures to the sayings of the ancient fathers and that it bringeth with it sundrie absurdities First we beleeue and confesse in the Articles of our faith that Christ is ascended into heaueÌ„ sitteth at the right hand of God from thence shall come againe to iudge the quicke and the dead Matth. 26.11 So in the scriptures our Sauiour Christ saith the poore ye shal haue alwaies with you but me ye shall not haue alwaies Againe I came out from the father and came into the world Ioh. 16.28 Againe I leaue the world and go to the father Also he saith Ioh. 17.11 and now I am no more in the world but these are in the world Peter also saith Actes 3.21 that the heauen must containe him vntill that all things be restored But here the Papists haue an other shift the Christ is not here now vpon earth in that visible maner that he was then This is as much as if a maÌ„ should say I wil leaue this house I wil abide no more in this house and yet he hideth himselfe vnder some hangings that he is not seene doth that man say truely or is he not therefore in the house yea but they replie say that our Sauiour himselfe said Matth. 28. Behold I am with you to the end of the world I answere that our sauiour Christ by his diuine nature and godhead is with vs to preserue direct and comfort vs but in respect of his bodie and humane nature which he took of the blessed virgin he is not nowe vppon earth And therefore our Sauiour himself warneth vs to beware and take héed of such false Prophets as say heere is Christ or there is Christ Matth. 24.23 he is in the desert or in secreat places 26. and biddeth vs beleeue them not for saith he as the lightning commeth out of the East and appeareth in the West â—7 so shall also the comming of the sonne of man be As though he should say my comming shal not be secreat and inuisible vnder the formes of bread and wine but euen as the lightning is visible and terrible to the world so shall my comming bée which then shal be when I shall come in maiestie power and glory to iudge the quicke and the dead vpon which words S. Hierome writeth thus Hierom. in Matth. 24. Stultum est itaque eum in paruo loco vel abscondito quaerâ—re qui totius muÌ„di lumen sit .i. It is therefore a foolish thing to séek him in a small secreat place such as is a pix who is the light of the whole world Christ therefore in respect of his humanitie and bodie is not to be sought or found vpon earth But they replie that in as much as our sauiour Christ is not onely man but also god being Immanuel god with vs and that these two natures being vnited in one person make one Christ therefore wheresoeuer is the one nature that is the deitie there is the other viz. the humanitie I answere that this followeth not for although I confesse that to be most true of the vniting of the two natures in one person yet we must not with the heritike Eutiches confound those two natures but acknowledge the seueral properties apperteining to them to remaine distinct and that they are to be distinguished of vs. Iohn 14.28 In this sense Christ said The father is greater then I the which is to be vnderstood in respect of his humanitie for in respect of his deitie he saith the father and I are one and as S. Paul saith Philip. 2.6 he thought it no robbery to be equal with God Mark 13.32 So in respect of his humanitie he confesseth himself to be ignorant of the day of iudgement but in respect of his godhead he knoweth all things In respect of his manhood hée was subiect to infirmities as hunger Matth. 4. â— Iohn 4. â—6 wearinesse yea and vnto death but in respect of his deitie he was subiect to none of these but was impassible immortall So in respect of his manhood he was contained in place and when hée was risen the Angel said he is risen and is not here but in respect of his godhead he is in all places 1. King 8. â—7 the heauens of heaueÌ„s do not contein him So I conclude that in respect of his humaine nature bodie as when he was in earth he was not in heauen so now being in heauen he is not vpon earth and therefore in respect of his humain nature he said me ye shal not haue alwayes I leaue the world I am no more in the world and in respect of his deitie he said behold I am with you to the end of the world And yet I confesse that we may truely say that whole Iesus Christ God and man is with vs to the end of the world In vnitate personae non proprietate naturae as S. Augustin saith i. in vnitie of person not in propriety of nature for if we consider perticulerly his humaine nature that is not with vs. This doctrine the ancient Fathers most plainely set forth as Augustine August Epist 57 ad Dardanum Vna enim persona deus homo c. i. for he being God and man is one person and booth is one Christ Iesus who is euery where in
for that our sauiour Christ did eate the sacrament doth appeare by these his words after supper Verely I say vnto you Matth. â—6 I will not henceforth drinke anie more of the fruit of the vine c. And as our Sauiour vouchsafed to be baptized that he might sanctifie Baptisme vnto vs euen so he did receiue this sacrament also to sanctifie it vnto vs and thereby to assure vs the more of our communion fellowship with him Chrisost in Mat. Homil. 83. de Consecr dist 2. cap. nec Moses Et glos in cap. in Christo This both Chrisostom doth flatly affirm and the papists themselues do not deny but plainly confesse in these rude rimes without reason Rex sedet in Coena turba cinctus dnodena Se tenet in manibus se cibat ipse cibo i. The king sitting at his supper with his xii Apostles helde himselfe in his hands and fedde himselfe with the meat of himselfe Now whether this be not an absurditie that our sauiour Christ sitting with his disciples did with his natural body eate his naturall body I will commit it to the conscience and iudgement of the godly to consider And whether it must not hereof follow that he had too bodies one an Actiue that did eate and another a passiue that was eaten An other absurditie hereof ensueth that whereas the papists teach the Christs body is in the sacrament being impassible mortall and glorified contradictories must néeds be affirmed at one instaÌ„t vpon Christs bodie for his body wherein he sate at the table with his disciples was visible but the body in the sacrament inuisible that bodie was passible this impassible that subiect to death which shortly after died vpon the crosse this not subiect to death Now it can no more be that Christs body at one instant should be visible and inuisible passible and impassible subiect to death and not subiect to death then it can be a bodie and no body And therefore this is a foule absurditie Moreouer for Christs body to be at one instant in heauen and earth and infinite places of the earth is as I haue shewed and proued before an absurdity And that Christs bodie should bée in the Sacrament without any accidences of a body as form figure leÌ„gth breadth thicknesse is as I touched before an absurditie This doctrine bringeth an other absurdity which they maintain that wicked men do eat the very body of Christ Whereas Christ himselfe saith Iohn â— 54 whosoeuer eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood 56. hath eternall life and I will raise him vp at the last day And againe he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood 57. dwelleth in me and I in him hée that eateth me shal liue by me But the wicked haue not eternall life neither do they liue by Christ being deade in their sinnes Therefore the wicked do not eat Christs flesh nor drink his blood Augustine saith August in Ioh. tract 26. Huius rei sacramentum id est vnitatis c. The sacrament of this thing that is of the vnitie of Christs bodie and blood is prepared in the Lords table and receiued of the Lords table in some places euery day in some at certaine times of some men to life of some to destruction But the thing it selfe wherof it is a sacrament is destruction to none but life to euery one that is partaker of it Again the same Augustine saith August lib. 21. de imitat Dei cap. 25. Non dicendum eum manducare corpus Christi qui in corpore non est Christi i. we must not say that he doth eate the body of Christ who is not in the body of Christ And againe in the same place Idem ibid. Nec isti ergo dicendi sunt manducare corpus Christi quoniam nec in membris computandi sunt Christi c. Therefore they are not to be said to eat the bodie of Christ because they are not to be counted among the members of Christ for not to speake of other things they cannot at one time be the members of Christ and the members of a harlot Origene saith Est verus cibus i. Orig. in Matth. 15. that is the true meate which no wicked man can eate for if a wicked man could eat the body of Christ it would not be writen He that eateth this bread shall liue for euer These places I do alledge to confute not onely this absurd assertion but also that grosse doctrine of transubstantiation for if the bread be so transubstantiated into Christs body then the wicked do eate Christs body if the wicked do not eat Christs body as by the proofes before alledged doth plainely appeare then is there no such transubstantiation nor carnall presence as they vainely imagine and falsely affirme for to be But heere also they want not a shift which is that the wicked doe eate Christs flesh and drink his blood but not worthily But I would haue them to proue that a man may eate Christs bodie vnworthely In déede I confesse that the wicked may vnworthely eat of this bread drink of this cuppe of the Lords 1. Cor. 11.27 and be guilty of the bodie and blood of Christ as S. Paul saith because that through infidelitie they do reiect Iesus Christ offred therby But that the wicked and reprobate be either worthely or vnworthely partakers of Iesus Christ that I do deny Yet to proue this shamelesse assertion see how they be not ashamed wilfully to corrupt the holy Scriptures Titul 21. Arti. 1. de sumpt Euch. Bunderius a lying and false Frier is not abashed thus to alledge S. Paules place which euen now I brought forth Multi enim indigne accipiunt de quibus ait Apostolus Qui manducat carnem bibit calicem domini indigne iuditium sibi manducat bibit i. For many do vnworthely receiue of whom the Apostle speaketh He that eateth the flesh and drinketh the cuppe of the Lord vnworthely eateth drinketh his owne damnation Heere this deceitfull Frier for panem the bread putteth carnem the flesh that whereas the Apostle saith he that eateth this bread and drinketh this cup c. He maketh him to say he that eateth the flesh and drinketh the cuppe of the Lord vnworthely wherein you sée how he altereth S. Pauls words and corrupteth the place But no maruell for such shamelesse assertions and corrupt doctrin cannot be defended without shame lesse corrupting of the holy Scriptures But they will say the sense and meaning is all one for he that eateth that bread eateth Christs body But that is the question and therefore they vse a deceitfull Argument called petitio principii taking that for graunted which is in question and is denied for the bread is one thing Christs bodie an other And although we are not to seperate Christ from the sacrament yet we ought not to confound them but to distinguish betwéene them for euen as the godly