the flesh blood of Christ they haue inuented such kind of speaking as may both seme to agree with the Scriptures and yet withall mayntein their false doctrine The which thing that thou mayest the better vnderstand this is to be consydered The Catholike faith is that Christ in one person hath two natures The nature of God and the nature of man which two natures are ioyned and vnited together into one person after such sorte that what so euer is said of the one nature may be sayd of the other if we speake by that worde which signifieth the person For example we may say that man was in heauen before the ascension of Christ and that God died not because the nature of God could be borne of a woman or dye or the nature of man could be in heauen before the ascension of Christ but because that which was borne and dyed was also God and that which was in heauen was also man albeit his byrth and death was by the nature of man and his being in heauen by the nature of God The natures then tary distinct but yâ— pâ—…rson of God man is but one Now shall you see the meane whereby these new prechers go about to deceaue you They say Christ geueth him selfe in his SacrameÌ„ts The word Christ doth signifie his person wherein he is both God man Likewise the word him self is a word belonging to his person wherein both natures of God man are conteyned Now when they say Christ geueth him self they meane that he being God man geueth by some spiritual way the vertue of his flesh blood which they call him self for that he as God being euery where may dwell in vs more excellently by charitie as the Father and the holy Ghost doe But they meane not by geuing of him selfe the reall gifte of his person and of both natures which are ioyned therein after such sort that our whole nature might receaue his nature For then they should teache that which we doe But howsoeuer they bable of our soules they will graunt our bodies no touching nor tasting of him no not so much as vnder yâ—â—…oormes of bread and wine You haue heard what they say Now heare what Christ sayeth Christ speaketh of him self in diuerse places diuersely Due where he sayeth I will not leaue you Orphans I will come vnto you There he speaketh of his person and concerning the nature of Godhead as it appereth afterward where it is written If any man loue me he will kepe my word and my Father will loue him and we will come vnto him and make a mansion or dwelling with him or at his howse Here he speaketh first in such sort of his own coming that his Father as it appered afterward might come after the same sort Then was it the coming of God and not of man At his departure when he ascended from the world into heauen he sayd Behold I am with you all dayes euen vntill the consummation of the world These words may be meant as well by the nature of manhod which we haue with his Godhead in the Sacrament of the altar and so some holy Doctors haue taken them as also by the only nature of the Godhead which is euery where by maiestie and in good men by grace In an other place he sayd Poore men ye shall haue allwayes with you me ye shall not haue allwayes Where by the word me he meaneth not his Godhead which is allways euery where but the nature of his manhod and that not as it is in the Sacrament but as it was when he spake in a visible forme of a poore man who had not any howse of his own where he might reste his head Last of all let vs marke after what sorte he sayd that he wold be in his blessed supper Dyd he say I will geue my self to be eaten and to be drâ—…nken If he had sayd so yet seing he had mentioned eating and drinking which according to the letter rather belongeth to his manhod then to his Godhead we should rather haue thought that the words must haue bene taken properly then improperly To eate the substance of a man may be sayd properly for in deed it may be eaten with mouth and teeth but to eate the substance of God it is sayd vnproperly For it can not be eaten with teethe and mouth as also S. Cyrillus hath noted but only with vnderstanding and faith If then Christ had sayd before supper I will geue my self to be eaten and had sayd at his supper I do geue my self to be eaten These words with a circumstance of a supper had made so stroÌ„gly for the bodily geuing of him selfe that their part had bene more probable who had vnderstanded it of his manhod With whom if the tradition of the Apostles had stood there were no doubt but he should haue bene a wicked heretik who when Christ had sayd I geue my self to be eaten wold haue denyed that we had eaten the humane nature of Christ. But now attend what words Christ vsed He forcseing this hearesie made 〈◊〉 agaynst it and therefore he sayd not I will geue or do geue my self to be eaten as heretiks now delight to speake but I geue my flesh my body my blood These are not wordes of personage which may be applyed two wayes but they are the words of nature and only of mans nature For God by yâ— nature of his Godhead hath neither flesh ne blood ne soule ne body ne bone Christ as man hath all these things Now do the heretiks and false preachers of our age maruclously deceaue the people of God who alwayes say that they diminish not Christes benefite nor do not abuse the Lords supper 〈◊〉 say they we teache that Christ geueth his owne self and they repete agayne and agayn his owne self his owne self And thereby they meane no more then the comming of his grace and charitie into our soules by fayth spirit and vnderstanding Wholy robbing vs of that flesh which dyed for vs and of that blood whiche was shed for vs. For although God was able to haue saued man otherwyse yet he swetely disposed our saluacioÌ„ by sending his dere soÌ„ne to take of the virgyn our flesh and blood This flesh and this blood worketh our saluacion Which he yâ— taketh away from the Sacrament of the altar depriueth vs of the meane whereby to come to life euerlasting For as by this flesh and blood we are redemed So that redemption is applyed to all that be of lawful age by worthy eating and drinking thereof Now when these preachers cry vnto you of God of fayth of spirit of vnderstanding of vertue they seme perhaps to say goodly things but they craftily put you from that only meane of fleshe and blood whereby God hath ordeyned our saluacion Abraham was the sather of al beleuers because neuer any mans belefe was so
you to beleue Christ that sayd This is my body and this is my blood the remembrance of Christes death shall no lesse worke in your mind by reason of your faith theÌ„ if you sawe with your bodily eyes yâ— self same body of Christ which is vnder the forme of bread For faith is that to ChristiaÌ„s which eye sight is to infidels You must consyder that Christ geueth this Sacrament only to them that being already Christened professe to beleue him in all things He now telleth yâ— this is his body and this is his blood If you beleue him not you haue denyed your faith and are become an infidell But yet ye may repent recouer your old faith againe If then you beleue him now tell me what his bodily presence doth hurte the remembrance of his death or contrarywise what hinderance cometh to the memory of his death by the bodily presence Doth not one helpe the other and so helpe that no lyke helpe can be deuised by all the world Doth not his blessed body as it were crye vnto thy hart Behold here it is that suffred al the scorues scourges nayles thornes speare and death for thee And yet come our new preachers and crye O good people Christ called bread his body by a figuratiue speache and that appereth because he sayd doe this in my remembrance In my remembrance I say It is therefore no body but a remembrance of his body Is not this gaye diuinitie Is not this trew dealing 〈◊〉 Gods people Are not these preachers worthy of Bishopriks and the contrary teachers worthy of chaynes Haue they not found a fresh remembrance to put the fruyt of Christes death out of all remembrance Whiles the faithfull people beleued the body of Christ to be present they came with that preparation with that circumspection with that humble and contrite hart vnto this blessed Sacrament that in all their lyfe after they were the better They died vnto sinne and mortyfied them selues to comme worthely to this high banket and by those meanes they so wel remembred Christes death that they practised it in their owne flesh and printed it in their hartes And this was a great cause why Christ himself wold put the nature and substance of his body vnder the forme of bread to the intent he might so be remembred of vs that for feare of comming to this dreadfull Sacrament vnworthely we might conforme our selues to his death by contrition confession and satisfaction For besides the pauges of bodily death none other thing in the world maketh vs so fruitfully mindefull of Christes death as the Sacrament of the altar And this to be one peece of the remembrance which Christ wold haue to be made in our hartes S. Basile doth witnesse Oportet igitur accedentem ad corpus sanguinem Christi in commemorationem ipsius c. He that cometh to the body and blood of Christ must not onely be cleane from all filthy spot of flesh and sowle that he eate and drinke not to his damnation but also he must euidently shew the remembrance of him who died for vs and rose again in mortifying himself to synne and to the world and to himself so that he may liue to God in Christ Iesu our Lord. This great lerned and vertuouse man putteth our mortification for a peece of the remembrance which is made of Christes death and resurrection And in dede the reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament the belefe thereof in vs causeth vs to mortifie our selues lest we come vnworthely to such high mysteries But now Christ is so well remembred in bread and wyne that neither synnes be confessed neither amendment mynded neither faith exercised neither charitie vsed Is this the remembrance which Christ wold haue of his death Men of woorship and honor when they see death at hand prouide to haue a goodly tumbe built Whereby their memories may be preserued as long as it is possible And the Egyptians wisely considering how the life is very short and the tyme of being in the graue exâ—…eding long did bestowe much more cost vppon their tumbs then vppon their houses Thinking it best there to buyld most surely where they should dwell longest Christ for his part refused not an honorable burying and a gloriouse sepulcher Which to this day standeth at Dierusalem But yet sith he tooke his body for mens sake only he chose his longer memorie and perpetuall sepulcher to be rather in the body hart of man then in the bowels of the earth Rising therefore the third day from death he left no more his body in the earthly sepulcher But the night before he died he had instituted such a memorie of his death as became the sonne of God For such a one in dede no man were able to make His memorie is to haue bread turned into the substaÌ„ce of his body and wine turned into the substance of his blood and the same to be receaued of vs To th' intent we might be turned into Christ dwelling in him for euer Hereby his death is shewed vntill he come to iudgement at the end of the world As the noble Actes which other men haue done be writeÌ„ vpoÌ„ their sepulchers so in this memorie of Christ his acts are daily shewed and rehersed Then his incarnation is betokened most mystically when bread is made flesh as the worde was before made flesh and that incarnatioÌ„ is represented in outward shew also by singing of the Angels Hymne Glory be to God in the highest Then the going before of Ihoâ—… Baptist is expressed by reading of the Epistle Then Christes preaching is represented by singing of the Gospell Then the faith of his Apostles and Disciples is betokened in pronouncing the Crâ—…de or articles of the faith Then the supper of Christ is made with no lesse authoritie then himself instituted it Then his Crosse is shewed by making the signe thereof vppon the holy mysteries Then his death is inuisiblie wrought vnder the formes of bread wine by turning their substances into him self and shewing them as if the body were diuided from the blood Then the fruit thereof is sowen in the hartes of the faithfull people by geuing them the grace to feare him to loue him to come penitentlie vnto him and to be made one with him Then the resurrection is outwardlie shewed because the seuerall formes of bread and wine eche of them conteine whole Christ vnder them Then the body is adored which suffred for vs. Then Christ is glorified for the redemption of all mankinde Then thankes be geuen to God blessing to the people and prayer is made for all the world This is the memorie of Christ whereby his name is greate among the Gentils as Malachias did prophecie And this is the gloriouse sepulchre which Esay spake of this is the memory whereof Dauid saith Our Lord hath made a memory of his maruailons doings Now is it likely that al
this cost is bestowed vppon a peece of bread and wine Two kindes of sepulchers we reade to haue bene alwaies this day to be in vse the one is where the body lieth present and that is properly the place of buriall the other when the body is absent and only a token of it is erected and this later kinde is called Caenotaphium a voyd monument without hauing the body in it Iudge good Reader whether it be more semelie sith Christ wold this Sacrament to be made for his remembrance that it be a void monument without hauing the body in it or els a sepulcher truly conteining his body within it whose name it beareth specially seing himself sayd of this tumb and sepulcher This is my body and this is my blood The body is named of the Greekes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say of yâ— buriall or sepulcher as though the soule were buried therein as the carkase is put in the sepulcher And yet it is much more apt to call the body of Christ in the Sacrament of the altar the sepulcher of his passion because in it is buried yâ— who le vertue of that gloriouse sacrifice and thence it is applied and dispensed to the faithfull S. Chrysostom also called the body of Christ in the SacrameÌ„t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a carkase because it is present after the same rate as it was dead in the sepulcher not in dede without soule and life but yet without sensible mouinge as Epiphanius also hath noted The holy Martyrs whose death was of great price in yâ— sight of God haue leaft their bodies behinde them to our comfort neither haue they yet receaâ—…d the second robe of their flesh Deo pro nobis melius aliquid prouidente vt non sine nobis consummarentur God prouiding some â—…etter thinge for vs to the intent they should not be made throughly perfect without vs. euen as the Fathers of yâ— old Testament of whome S. Paule speaketh had not the reward of their faith vntill some of the new Testament were ioyned to them S. John the Eâ—…angelist although his carkase appered not yet he was not vnremembred because manna flowed out of his monument abundantly as Abdias hath witnessed And now shall Christ leaue a void memorie without his body or without Manna in it Are the reliques of the blessed Martyrs profitable vnto vs and is not the flesh of Christ who is Lord of all Martyrs more then necessary for vs It was mete that Christ should arise with body and soule because he is the first fruites of all them that arise from death But he now sitting at the right hand of his Father had before instituted a memorie wherein bread and wine should be conuerted into the substance of his body and blood that thereby we might both haue his body him selfe not lack it For so it becommed all iustice to be perfectly fulfilled in his person I trust by this tyme it appeareth that the remembrance of Christes death is maruelously set foorth by the reall presence of his body and blood Seing then the sayd remembrance is yâ— end why the Sacrament is made it is a better kind of reasoning to affirme that so profitable a meane as the body blood of Christ is for the remembrance of his death was not omitted by Christ then to teache that because it is a remembrance therefore it is not the body of Christ. Specially sith Christ sayd This is my body For when the thing which is intended is the more furthered by taking the words properly then figuratinely as wel the proper nature of the words as the scope of the whole matter compelleth vs to take them as they naturally and vsually sounde without any â—…arther circuition or seking of figures Si resâ—… icias sayth Origenes ad illam commemorationem de qua dicit Dominus Hoc facite in meaÌ„ commemoratio nem Inuenies quod ista est commemoratio sola quae propitium faciat hominibus Deum If thou looke to that remembrance whereof our Lord sayd Doe and make this thing for the remembrance of me Thou shalt find that this is the only remembrance which may make God mercifull to men Mark this propitiatorie kind of remembrance S. Augustine also declareth by conferring the Sacrament of the altar with the facrifices of the law how it is the remembrance of Christ saying In isto sacrificio gratiarum actio atque commemoratio est carnis Christi quam pro nobis obtulit In this sacrifice a thanksgeuing and a remembrance is of the flesh of Christ which he offered for vs and of the blood which the same God did shed for vs. Therefore in those olde sacrifices it was figuratiuely signi fied what should be geuen vs But in this sacrifice it is euidently shewed what hath now bene geuen vs. In those sacrifices it was before hand shewed that the sonne of God should be afterward kylled for wicked men But in this he is shewed to haue bene allready kylled for wicked men By this writer whether it were S. Augustine or as others think Fulgentius the whole nature of the remembrance which we kepe of Christes death is shewed wherein the death is in dede past and absent but the body of him that died is present But in the old sacrifices neither the death neither the body was preâ—…ent but only a shadow of both Therefore those sacrifices are a figuratiue signification as Fulgentius sayeth But the Sacrament of the altar is an euident shewing Marke the wordes of Fulgentius and you shall see two words of the old law answer vnto other two of the new law By the old sacrifices he sayeth siguratè significabatur it was figuratiuely signified By the new sacrifice euidenter ostenditur it is euideÌ„tly shewed Looke how much difference is betwene shewing signifiyng betwene euidence and figures so much is betwene the old sacrifices and the new Yet if vnder forme of bread the body were not and the blood vnder the forme of wine surely the olde did better shew Christes death then this for there was flesh to shew flesh and blood to shew blood The blood was both in dede and in shew also shed and in dede separated from the flesh and poured vpon the altar and the flesh in dede eaten by them that made the offering Therefore our sacrifice doth not passe that in shewing outwardly the maner of Christes death but in euideÌ„t shewing that which died In euident shewing I say vnder the forme of bread and wine which shewing is called euident not for the seing but for the certeyntie of the place and circiut within the which we know by Gods word yâ— flesh and blood of Christ to be vnder the same forme because Christ him self shewing to vs the foorm of bread sayd This is my body What nede I to bring the Fathers one by one sith the whole
The common Bible turneth In the remembrance of me A thing may be done best in the remembrance of a man when the man is first remembred and afterward the thing is done in the remembrance of him But Christ meaneth not so he meaneth to haue this thing to witt his body made to this effect that his death may be remembred and so his words do sound Doe and mâ—…e this thing for the remembrance of me to bring men into the remembrance of me For when my body is made by the Priest and listed vp to be adored and all the peple taught to bow doune to the body of Christ and to come with pure consciences to receaue it then Christ is remembred by reason of his body made and so the scripture is fulfilled which saith Doe and make this thing for the remembrance of me But the Sacramentaries wold haue nothing made in Christes supper But they wold haue bread eaten and wine druncken which is not able to make Christ to be remembred so effectually and with such contrition confession and satisfaction as he requireth to be remeÌ„bred withall For he seeketh not as the ZuingliaÌ„s imagine a remembrance in words alone but much more in dedes The remembrance of him is the following of his Crosse and death by penance by humility by confessing our synnes to his ministers and taking absolution of them and all this kind of remembrance ariseth by the making of Christes body whiles men are persuaded they may not come to so preciouse a thing without confoorming of them selues to the death of Christ. In translating S. Paule there are other faults not of so greate weight as these others but yet which should haue bene more diligently translated as where the Greek readeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 CoÌ„municatio sanguinis Christi coÌ„municatio corporis There the common Bible turneth The partaking of yâ— blood of Christ the partaking of yâ— body Whereas it shuld be translated the coÌ„municating of the blood of Christ and the communicating of the body Communicating is more then partaking albeit the old Latin text in the later place doth reade participatio partaking But that excuseth not the Sacramentaries who pretend to correct it allwaies by the Greek and now whereas the Greek readeth twise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Latin once communicatio the English agreing throughly with neither oâ—… both turneth twise partaking The communicating of Christes body and blood is when it self and all thing that is in it is made common Partaking is when part therof is taken But because after his resurrection Christ can be no more diuided the partaking of his blood is the communicating of it not by the force of the meane but by the dependence of the thing For as he that hath anie part of God must nedes haue all God because God is a nature whole euery where without any parts therof so he that hath any peece of Christes body and blood hath the whole body and blood because it is unmortal and can no more die Yet if it might be diuided it might also bye so that although partaking must in this argument 〈◊〉 stand for communicating yet the SacrameÌ„taries haue shewed their spite against S. Paule in translating it after the worst maner they could 〈◊〉 after S. Paul saâ—…th we being many are one bread because we all partake 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it should be Englished of the one bread For such strength hath y◠〈◊〉 article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 soâ—…time the common Bible turneth the Greek article into that But here it was not for the purpose of the Sacramentaries that it should be meaned so S. Paul meaneth one certain bread of liâ—…e wherof we partake to shew that he said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the one bread to witte of the bread which hath no fellowes of that bread who said I am the bread of life and the bread which I wil geue is me flesh If so manie faults be found without curiouse serching which I haue not vsed in so sinal rome iudge good Reader in what case their soules be who take the word of God at these mens handes iudge whose Gospell they haue deliuered to the simple people in English Uerily their own and not the Gospell of Jesus Christ. ¶ The state of the question betwen the Lutherans Zuinglians 〈◊〉 and Catholikes concerning the Sacrâ—…ment of the altar TO th'inthent thou maiest good Reader the better vnderstand to what point and mark the whole disputation shal be 〈◊〉 I will briefly declare how diuersly the doctrine of the blessed Sacrament of the altar hath beâ—… set forth in our dayes From the beginning of yâ— Christian Churche vntill yâ— yere of our Lord 1517. all yâ— on the earth professed openly Christes Catholike faith did beleue as well in the Breke as in the Latin Church the reall presence of Chrisâ—…es body blood vnder the formes of bread and wine after consecration dewly made This faith of theirs was preserued by the delyuery from hand to hand of that docâ—…rine euen sithens the beginning of Christes Church and was mainteined by the preaching and writing of the lerned Fathers and protested by the godly honour which all Christen people gaue to the said Sacrament at the time of masse or otherwise Well it might be that sâ—…me one in his harte thought amisse of that hely mystâ—… and that some 〈◊〉 in corners also conspired against the truthe thereof as 〈◊〉 and some other like as now â—…ull many maie be suspected to think that Christ is not the sauiour of mankind 〈◊〉 as â—…o Christian this daie teacheth openly and in expresse 〈◊〉 that 〈◊〉 is not y◠〈◊〉 of the world so did no man in open 〈◊〉 with the autoritie or toleration of any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 preache write or professe that the body of Christ was not present in the Sacrament of the altar if the Priest had once 〈◊〉 the solemne benediction which our lord Jesus commanded On the other syde if in the first six hundred yeres the Christians had beleued as the Lutherans or Zuinglians now doe he that had first begunne to haue taught yâ— real presence of Christes body and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine must haue ben at that tyme noted reputed for an 〈◊〉 he must haue ben conuinced by som generall or proninciall Councell kept either in the 〈◊〉 Church or in the west the Preachers and Doctours of that age should haue writen against him It is not possible that all the whole Church which to that day had beleued the mysteries that be consecrated vpon the altar to be â—…more but holy bread and wine to be only tokens of Christes body absent in substance to be neither a sacrifice 〈◊〉 nor the reall body and blood of Christ should 〈◊〉 through all nations change the Catholike and vniuersall belefe without any trouble or tumult at all without any contradiction or disputation yea without any man at all knowen or euer
not to geue vs a drinking in stede of a solemne feast In comparyson of this banket all fayth is impeâ—…t For we eate the ende of our belefe All vnderstanding fayleth in so much as more is in our mouth then we are able to comprehend in our wyt or mynde All spirituall gyfts are inâ—…erlour because the flesh is present which triumpheth ouer death and ascending into heauen sytteth at the right hand of God thence distributing gyfts vnto men We haue the cause of all 〈◊〉 present and letting it go shall we chiefly commend the feast for â—…ertayn spirituall effectes In respect of Christes reall substance thy supper O Caluyn is but a mere sauour of swete meates Geue me the flesh of Christ and take thou the sauour of it But alas the sauour hath alredy kâ—…lled thee â–ª so much the lesse I wonder if thou art wery of the flesh it selfe In setting forth our damnation in old Adam thou lackest neither diligence nor eloquence thou hast therin set foorth the lumpe of perdition the seuere doctrine of induration the impotent weakenes of the wounded man to helpe forward his owne destruction But when thou commest to Christ the new Adam he hath a sâ—…ly pore vnknowen and vnsene cumpanie fewe children a cold supper small offering of sufficient grace his baptisme is with thee lyke a marke set vpon shepe that sheweth somewhat and worketh nothing his Church hath no externaâ—… sacrifice no priesthod no one chief shepherd in earth no authoritie to make lawes no communion of Saâ—…ts by the way of praying to them or for yâ— soules departed no reall ioyning vâ—…iting with Christes flesh and blood in the holy mysteries What is this but to preferr euill before good the deuill before God shadowes before truth vice before vertue and the power of darknes before the kingdom of light It is no eating now as S. Paule sayeth of our Lords supper for euery heretyke taketh a supper of his owne before hand making Christes supper to geue place to hym And that I maye speake nothing of so great change of communions as hath bene in England Luther saith that Christes words be proper and that his supper is bread and flesh wyne and blood as though the immortall flesh of Christ must be eaten with materiall bread How do mortal things agree with immortal in one banket Carolstadius supposeth that Christes words be proper but that he touching hym selfe on the brest sayd Take bread and wine this is my body which I touche as though it were a supper mete for Christes making if he only shewed his body to his Apostles which euer was in their sight not suffering them to eate thereof Zuinglius said the bread and wine were only figures of Christes body and blood geueÌ„ to our bodies to represent to our harts tâ—…e death of Christ. And that the words of Christes supper were figuratine only by which reason the supper of the Paschall lambe was better then the supper of Christ because the dead flesh of an vnspotted lambe was more apt then bread and wine to shew the death of Christes innocent flesh wich is the lambe of God that taketh away the sinnes of the world Calâ—…in added to Zuinglius bare figures an efficacie of feeding by faith and taught the words of Christ not so much to be figuratiue as words of promise which being heard with faith cause that the minde by faith eateth of Christ sitting in heauen a mete supper for such a deuiser who setting the men that should be fed vppon earth kepeth the meate wherof they should be filled in heauen promising them who consist also of bodies mortal and corruptible that they shall fede vpon immortall meat in their soules such an eating were good for Angels I denie not but it is not the supper that Christ made to corporall men for his farewell when he said Take and eate this is my body and Drinke ye all of this for this is my blood Taking with our bodies is more then beleuing in our soules eating yâ— body of Christ is more then signifying the eating of his body The meate is the body of Christ the drinke is the blood of Christ. Beleue and thou hast it in harte before thou commest to the table But come to the blessed Sacrament of the altar and thou hast it in thy mouth and body Bothe is better then one Christ hath 〈◊〉 and fullfilled all maner of iustice he made both body and soule redemeth both fedeth both rayseth both crowneth both He doth not now diuide the hand from the harte the mouth from the minde the figure from the thing the token from the truth That he sayth he doth that thou beleuest in heauen thou receyuest at his table in earth yea earth is heauen to thee saith Chrysostom through this mysterie make his gift no lesse then he nameth it leste for vnthankfullnes thou be giltie of iudgement He that beleueth his plaine wordes is on the surer syde The Corinthians fault concerning the supper of our Lord was partely for that they came to it after they had eaten their own supper and vndoutebly so doe heretyks They first deuise with them seâ—…ues what supper they will allow to Christ and then they come to his supper entending to conforme it to their formeâ—… deuise Partely the 〈◊〉 were reproued of S. Paule for eating and drinking alone without making their meate common to the poore Euen so the heretiks eate and drinke alone teaching that euery man eateth Christ only by the measure of his own faith which hath diuerse degrees in euery man and therefore it maketh euery man eate Christ after his own faith only Whereas the supper of Christ is equall and common to all as S. Cyprian S. Hierome and Theodorite witnessed before wherein he geueth oâ—…e 〈◊〉 one blood one person to all that come without any respecte concerning the meate and substance of the supper although not without discerning the diuerse merites of the geastes It is the honour of him that maketh the feast to haue the meate most bouÌ„tifull and most reall howsoeuer the weak stomaks of euill men are able to beare it Wilt thou yet see more plainly how liberall Christ is in his supper All that he hath he geueth for he geueth his own selfe indifferently to euery man that sitteth at his table be the nian riche or poore good or bad The 〈◊〉 of this feast at his table is the maker of the feast him selfe Who sayeth so Uerily he that caÌ„not lye Who after that he said My flesh is meate in dede douted not to add moreouer He that eateth me shall liue for me doing 〈◊〉 to vnderstand that by eating his flesh we eate himself The same thing teacheth S. Hierom a man worthy to be credi ted as well for his own great learning as for that tyme wherein he liued and the faith wherof in his writing he witnesseth S.
the death and resurrection and life of Christ before our eyes Here is the Sacramentaries argument I eate bread and drinke wine in token of Christes death resurrection therefore he is dead and risen I pray you Syr how doth this argument hold What affinitie hath bread and wine with the death and with the resurrection of Christ But if bread and wine be turned into the same body blood of Christ which died and rose againe which wrought all the miracles done in this world Then is the death and resurrection and conuersation of Christ in dede it selfe set before the eyes of our faith Because as Chrisostom teacheth Hoc idem corpus cruentatum caet This very same body bloudied perced with yâ— speare gaue as it were out of a spring fountaynes of blood healthfull to the whole world And the selfe body God aâ—…anced vnto the highest seate the which body also he gaue to vs both to th' intent we should haue it and to the intent we should eaâ—…e it But what speake I of S. Chrisostom This sayeth Christ is my body which is geuen for you And againe the bread which I will geue is my flesh which I will geue for the life of the world How ofte so euer sayeth S. Paul ye shall eate this bread and drinke the chalice of our Lord ye shall shew his death vntill he comme So that the hauing of the death and resurrection and all yâ— miracles of Christ before our eyes at Masse tyme riseth chiefly of yâ— thing which is the body of Christ. And secondarily of the things which are done about that his body The consecrating the offering the eating of the selfe same body which wrought these miracles which died and rose againe those facts I say in that thing shew his death and resurrection All other wayes of setting the death and resurrection and conuersation of Christ before our eyes without the reall presence of Christ is painting and shadowing in comparison of this liuely representation O how many sayeth S. Chrisostom say now adayes I wold see the soorm shape of Christ I would see his very garmentes and shoowes Ipsum igitur vides ipsum taÌ„gis ipsum comedis Lo thou seest him selfe thou touchest him selfe thou eatest him selfe Non quòd corpus illud sayeth Damascen è coelo descendat sed quia panis vinum in Christi corpus sanguinem transmutatur Not as though the body of Christ came downe from heauen but because the bread and wine is changed into the body and blood of Christ. See now good Reader whether the Apologie say more truly that the signe or token of Christes body and blood the body it selfe not being made present vnder the soâ—…nes of bread and wine as it teacheth doe more effectuously set before our eyes that death and resurrection and all the miracles of Christ or els whether the incarnation life death and resurrection of him be not better and more according to the word of God set soorth by the Catholikes who teach that the substance of bread and wine is changed into that body and blood of Christ to th' end the death and resurrection of the same body might be effectually remembred So teacheth S. Cyrillus in these words Prebet Christus nobis carnem suam tangendam c. Christ geueth vs his flesh to be tou ched that we might beleue assuredly that he hath in deed reised his temple For that the communion of mystical blessing is a certayn confession of the resurrection of Christ it is proued by his own words For he distributed the bread after it was broken saying This is my body which shal be geuen for you for the remission of synnes Make and doe this thing for the remembrance of me Therefore the participation of that mysterie is a certain true confession and remembrance that for our sakes and for vs our Lord both hath died and is reuiued and through that filleth vs with diuine blessing Let vs therefore flee infidelity after the touching of Christ and let vs be found strong and stedfast being far from all doubtfulnesse Thus far S. Cyrillus Who alludeth in that place to S. Thomas the Apostle And as S. Thomas touching the syde of Christ cried out My Lord and my God euen so S. Cyrillus teacheth that we touche the body of Christ when we come to the holy communion For as vnder the visible flesh of Christ his Godhead lay priuie but yet was truly present and had assumpted his flesh into one person euen so vnder the visible foorm of bread the flesh of Christ is really present in the holy mysteries and therefore we touch that flesh when we touche the foorm of bread as S. Thomas did touche the Godhead when he touched the flesh of Christ. For in eche place we touche not either the Godhead or the flesh visibly but by the meane of that thing wherein it is truly present That thing I say receaued of vs doth make his death and resurrection to be remembred Hath not he all that euer Christ did presently before his eyes who hath Christ him selfe present But take Christ awaye and afterward it is a foolish dreame to talke how his deeds be set before our eyes by bread and wine The apparence of bread is the token that Christes body is here to be eaten And the similitude of wine doth shew that his blood is here to be drunken But the true shewing of his death life and resurrection ariseth of that truth which is vnder those foormes When I eate the body that died I shew the death of it because no sacrificed flesh was euer eaten before the host was offered But we eate really the body of Christ therefore our fact crieth that Christ is dead We eate his body aliue hauing the blood and soule in it therefore our fact crieth he is risen again Thus the Ca tholiks reason Let him that hath coÌ„mon sense iudge who goeth nere the truth of the Gospell the Sacramentarie or the Catholike ¶ Our thanksgeuing and remembrance of Christes death is altogether by the reall presence of his body TO th' intent we should geue thanks for his death and our deliuerance and that by often resorting to the Sacramentes we should continually renew the remembrance thereof These men presuppose we haue a signe or token left vnto vs in bread and wine to geue thanks withall We haue in deed a token but this token though it were made of bread and wine is not bread and wine For Christ in his last supper tooke bread and when he had geuen thanks he sayd This is my body which is geuen for you doe and make this thing for the remembrance of me Behold the token wherein Christ both him selfe gaue thanks and would vs to geue thanks in the same The making of his body for vs is the thanksgeuing for his death and for our deliuerance Ipso genere sacrificij sayeth S.
Chrysostom ad iugem nos pro beneficijs suis inuitans gratiarum actionem Stirring vs to geue thanks perpetually for his benefites by the very kind of the sacrifice And shewing farther in an other place what kind of sacrifice it is God sayth Chrysostom did yerely by certain holydays set the remembrances of his benefites before the Iewes Tibi vero quotidiè ipse ne obliuiscaris proponitur But he is set before thee daily him selfe lest thou shouldest bee vnmindfull See now by what meanes the death of Christ is renewed Not by tokens wherein he is doubtfully called to minde him selfe being absent for that were a feble token but by these tokens wherein him selfe is made present lest we should forgett his death The body of Christ must be made to th' intent we maye remember his death If you take from vs the making of his body which causeth the vehement remembrance of the death it is afterward a vaine thing to talke of the remembraunce of his death by eating bread and drinking wine For the necessarie meane of necessarie remembrance of his death consisteth in the reall presence of him that died For who can forget his death whose body is daily made worshipped and eaten to the end the death may be remembred But I may right well eate bread and drinke wine not yet remembring thereby that Christ is dead for me ¶ The true resurrection of our bodies commeth by eating that body of Christ which is both true and is true in vs. TO th' intent we being fed with the body and blood of Christ may be brought into the hope of the resurrection and of euerlasting life and may most assuredly beleue that the body and blood of Christ doth in like manner feed our soules as bread and wine doth feed our bodies I omit to say any thing vpon that ouersight wherein the English translation of a body hath left out the word Vero the true body which the Latine edition hath But here the Apologie presupposeth that Christes supper consisteth as wel of bread wine as of body and blood The first two they will haue geuen to the bodies The later twaine to the soules The bread wine they will haue present on the table whence they be deliuered The body and blood they will haue to be receaued from heauen by faith and vnderstanding Against this dreame thus I reason out of the word of God Christ made his whole supper vpon a visible table accordingly as it was prophecied by king Dauid Parasti in conspectu meo mensam Thou hast prepared a table in my sight And by Salomon Sapientia proposuit mensam suaÌ„ insipientibus locuta est venite comedite panem meum bibite vinum quod miscui vobis Wisedome hath set foorth her table and hath spoken to simple men come ye eate my bread and drinke the wine which I haue mixed for you S. Paul sayth Non potestis mensae Domini participes esse mensae Daemoniorum Ye can not be partakers of our Lords table and of the table of deuils Put these three together and the sense will be the supper and table of our Lord was prepared and set foorth in the sight of the faithfull that they might thence cate and drinke such as the wisedome of God gaue them at his supper Therefore no meate no foode no banket is to be looked for at his supper but such as is prepared by Christ set foorth vpon his table Otherwise Christ had prepared no supper in the sight of that faithfull as Dauid foretold nor had not set foorth his table as Salomon prophecied nor we had not bene partakers of our Lords table as S. Paul writeth For bread and wine is not prepared of Christ But was before hand made ready by the baker and vintner or by the seruants yâ— brought them foorth The preparing which Christ made was by blessing and conseâ—…ng to make of earthly bread the bread of life euerlasting And hauing made it he deliuered the same to the Apostles and bad them both make and doe that thing If he deliuered not his owne body with his owne handes doubtles they did not eate his body For he sayd in respect only of that which he deliuered take and eate Wherevpon S. Chrysostom sayeth to him that cometh to our Lords table Cogita quid manu capias caet Bethink thy selfe what thou takest in thy hand and kepe it free from all couetousnes and violent robbery Consider againe that thou takest it not only in thy hande but also puttest it to the mouth and after thy hand and tonge the harte receaueth that dreadfull mysterie Thus much S. Chrysostom Let any reasonable man iudge whether he sayeth not that the hart receaueth the same which the hande doth and the hande the same which the hart doth For if the hart receaue it after that hand the hand receaued it before the hart It is not therefore as the Sacramentaries falsely teach bread only in hand and body only in harte But body as well in hand as in harte And none other true body in the harte then was first in the hand and mouth For this cause euer sith we receaued the faith we called this blessed supper The Sacrament of the altar As if we sayd the SacrameÌ„t which is made vpon the altar or vpon the table of Christ. for the table of Christ is an altar as in Malachie it may appere and in an other place by the fauour of God I will declare This name of the SacrameÌ„t of the altar was deliuered to vs with our Christianitie and it is found very ofte in the olde writers namely in S. Augustine By which we are enformed that the consecration and oblation thereof is made not in the hartes of men by words of promising and preaching but vpon the visible altar in the sight of Christian people by yâ— visible Priest who as a publike minister ordeined by God consecrateth the body of Christ by the same power which Christ gaue when he sayd Hoc facite doe and make this thing This is 〈◊〉 table prepared in the sight of Dauid set foorth by the wisedome of God whereof we are partakers when we receaue the blessed Sacrament of the altar At this altar S. Augustines mother desired a memorie of her to be made vnde sciret dispensari victimam sanctam qua deletum est chirographum quod erat contrarium nobis From which altar my mother knew sayeth S. Augustine the holy sacrifice to be distributed whereby the handwriting that was contrarie to vs is put out Behold the sacrificed body of Christ was dispeÌ„sed and geuen from the altar as both S. Augustine and his mother and all the faithfull then beleued Thus thou seest the dreame of the Apologie by the word of God to be blowen away like chaf dust dispersed with the wind The Apologie sayeth our bodies are
throughly tryed as hys He lacked not grace vertue and vnderstanding but he lacked the flesh and blood of Christ Which flesh when it came really into the world when it was crucified and gusshed out streames of blood then the soule of Christ deliuered the soule of Abraham and all the other Fathers out of prison Wel to end this matter Christ to shew that he wold be in his supper by yâ— nature of his manhed for that cause he named not his person but his flesh his body his blood And S. Paule named his bones as you shall see hereafter Wherefore yâ— talke of his presence by fayth is vnfaythfull yâ— talke of his presence by spirite as thereby excluding his body soule from our bodies and soules is spritish and diuelish A spirit hath no flesh and bones Christ is with vs in the substance of his owne flesh of his owne bones And yet that we might vnderstand that Christ naming flesh blood meaneth not that either his flesh is vnder yâ— forme of bread without blood or his blood vnder the forme of wine without flesh but that vnder eche kinde both flesh and blood and soule and Godhead is he saith he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood taryethin me I in hym That is to say when I promise flesh and blood I name them only to declare plainly that my being in the Sacrament is a being according to yâ— truthe of my humane nature and not as though I were not there in mine owne person for he that eateth my flesh and drynketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him But it I had sayd that I geue my self no more 〈◊〉 false preachers had expouÌ„ded my selfe by my Godhead and by fayth vppon me my simple faythfull people might haue bene deceaued I name flesh body and blood to shew according to what nature I am 〈◊〉 But I am not diuided as though my flesh were vnder one kynde and mie blood vnder the other And therefore I say last of all He that catcth me he also shall lyue for me so that I am altogether in mine owne person vnder eche kynde after coÌ„secration Marke this agayne and agayne and let not the doctrine of Christ him self preteÌ„ded in suttil words deceaue thee any longer Beleue thou the presence of body of blood of flesh and of bones as the word of God speaketh ¶ It is a cold supper which the Sacramentaries assigne to Christ in comparison of his true supper ANd we say not this is done sleightly and coldly but effectually and truly The eating of Christ by faith and spirit is no sleight or cold thing But to say that no more is done in his supper that is sleightly coldly sayd Partly because so much may be done without the supper namely when so euer a man with good faith and charitie doth meditate vpon his gloriouse victorie ouer death synne Partly because it is a cold thing to 〈◊〉 men who consist of bodies to a supper of Christes making and to geue their bodies none other meate then corruptible bread and wine as you teache whereas Christ did forbid vs to work the perishing meate at his banket How can yâ— be worthely called yâ— supper of Christ which a man may make at home without coming to the table of Christ As though it were not for his honour to haue a singular kind of supâ—… of his owne Euery man may eate bread and drinke wine at his owne howse with his wife and children and remember that Christ died for them neither wil Christ leaue his good deuotion vnrewarded wherein the supper that you assigne to Christ consisteth and is fulfilled And is not that which may be done at priuate mens tables coldly and sleightly done in comparison of that great sacrifice of the true Melchisedech who by his blessed word turneth the substance of the bread and wine into that body of his which died and into that blood which was shed for vs ¶ By eating we touche the body of Christ as it may be touched vnder the foorm of bread FOr although we do not touche the body of Christ with teeth and mouth yet we hold him fast and eate him by faith by vnderstanding and by the spirit These men haue lost their wits through malice As who can deuise an eating of meate in a supper which eating shal be without touching the meate that is eaten with teeth and mouth For in the supper of Christ it is a detestable heresie and an intolerable ignorance to say that Christ saying Take and eate did not meane taking by hands or mouthes and eating by teeth and mouth Taking and eating is not without touching Christ sayd Take and eate this is my body therefore he sayd in effect touche my body with your teeth and with your mouth Neither doth it skil that his body is immortal and impassible for though it be not perished by the eating yet the eating and tou ching is not therefore false but so much the truer by how much the meate receaued is the more profitable cueÌ„ to our bodies And as we are sayd truly to kisse the Kings knee when we kisse his hose vnder which the knee is conteined euen so in touching the accidents of bread and wine we touche the body and blood of Christ which is coÌ„teined vnder them For which cause S. Chrysostom sayd 〈◊〉 we doe not only see we doe not only touch but we eate and fasten our teeth in yâ— slesh of Christ thereby noting and teaching the vndoubted presence thereof vnder the foorm of bread Which foorm we see we touche we eate we chaw and by that meanes we doe these things to the body of Christ vnder that foorm not perishing the body one whit For the same cause S. Cyrillus speaking of the blessed Eucharist sayeth of Christ Praebet nobis carnem suam tangendaÌ„ vt firmiter credamus quia templum verè suum suscitauit He geueth vs his flesh to be touched that we might beleue assuredly that he hath truly reised his temple that is to say his own body Christ geueth vs his flesh to be touched and yet doe we not touche it But how do we touche it Uerily as S. Thomas touched the Godhead of Christ. For as in touching his flesh he confessed him to be God because the Godhead lay hid in that flesh right so when we touche with teeth mouth the forme of bread in the holy mysteries we confesse that we touche thereby the flesh which lieth hid vnder that forme and yet the Apologie denieth vs to touche the body of Christ with teeth and mouth And whereas it sayeth we hold him fast by faith that is true also but it is not the whole truthe for as S. Thomas the Apostle did beleue vpon the Godhead of Christ and withall touche the flesh wherein it dwelt corporally euen so we beleue the presence of his body and
substance And it is so truly made and the Lamb so truly prosenâ—… that he is offered not in hart alone but euen outwardly of the Priests not by shedding of blood as vpon the crosse but vnblodely as it becommeth the cleane oblation of the new Testament whereof Malachie did prophecie That sacrifice which Priests offer can not be but present for they offer with their hands moâ—…thes and other externall members of their body After that the sacrifice is made the faithfull people who stand by doe partake with the altar which could not be except a perma neâ—…t substance were made by consecration The Lamb is vpon the table He is offered there by yâ— Priests It foloweth in the Councell We take truly the precious body and blood We take it and truly take it That is to say in deed really and bodily For the truth of Christes body and blood is not an imaginarie or fained truth it is not a thing conceaued only as a man might conceaue in his mind men flying in the aier it is not only beleued or hoped but he in naturall existence and among external things hath as true a body and blood as any creature hath a substance of his owne The true taking of the which precious body and blood is the taking of it in suche a truth of subsâ—…ce as it self hath And because it is true in yâ— thing it selfe the taking of it is in the thing it self The taking of that which sâ—…andeth before vs on the table is by instrument of our bodyes therefore it is deliuered according to the same external truth by the corporall ministerie of yâ— Priests So that all is truly and externally done by the iudgement of this auncient councell Wel we truly taking them beleue them to be the tokens of our redemption or as some bookes read of our resurrection For as our redemption was by the â—…ame body and the same blood really wrought vpon the crosse so hauing them selues present vpon yâ— holy table and truly taking them we take the sure witnesses and euident tokens of our redemption But if the things which stand vpon the holy table were in substance bread and wine how could they be the tokens of our redemption Did bread and wine redeme vs Or did they rise from death for vs It is the body and blood of Christ which redemed vs and which arose from death and the self same body and blood are now made present to vs offered vnbloodely for vs to shew in fact and dede our redemption already wrought by them and to distribute the fruits of yâ— Crosse by none other thing so much as by the same body and blood that redemed vs. For least we should assigne any part of our saluation to any other creature besydes to the only body and blood of Christ he made the selfsame body both the price wherewith he redemed vs and the token and dispensour of the redemption It was proued before that if these things be the tokens of our redemption instituted by the expresse words of Christ then they are the things them selues which they betoken because they are mysticall tokens of the new Testament But they are here not as redeming vs new and therefore as tokens of yâ— old redemption that no man should thinke Christ to die again or should doubt as S. Chrysostom hath noted of his death already past or of any maner prices of our redemptioÌ„ to be payed then one or that it hath any other token left thereof in the holy mysteries besydes it selfe For it was so worthy a truth and raâ—…som payed for vs vpon the Crosse which was able to be painted worthely or set foorth to the remembrances of the faithfull by none other image then such wherein yâ— truth might be set foorth after an other sort more mystical concerning the manner But no lesse true then the thing which died was concerning the substance Who so is faithfull and humble is now able to vnderstaÌ„d how the shew of bread and wine standeth with the truth of body and blood present on the holy table How the vnbloody sacrifice is made of the Priests whiles by pronouncing the words of God they turne the substance of bread and wine in to the substance of Christes body and blood how we both truly take the precious body and blood of Christ coÌ„cerning the substance of them vnder the formes of bread and wine And yet beleue them to be tokens instituted of Christ of our redemptioÌ„ betokening the price paid by making present the body and blood which payed it Was not this a worthy place for the Apologie to allege But I warrant you it alleged the weakest part therof leauing out the situatioÌ„ of the Lamb of God on the holy table The vnbloody sacrifice made of Priests the true taking and receauing of the pre cious body and blood Only bread and wine which are named to shew the formes within the which the body and blood are them they name as a great matter to further this new broched heresie But he is a faithfull trier and examiner of auncient Fathers who faithfully citeth the whole place neither adding nor diminishing which honest dealing we may not looke for at these defenders hands ¶ That the Catholiks haue the table of Egles and the Sacramentaries haue the table of Iaies ANd as Chrisostome writeth wel we say that the body of Christ is the carcas and we must be the Egles that we may know that we ought to flye highe if we will come to the body of Christ. For this is the table of Egles not of Iayes It is a weake stake that these meÌ„ wold not take hold of being now plunging for life vnder the water S. Chrysostome so plainly expoundeth his owne meaning immediatly where he speaketh of the carcas and of the Egles that I can not sufficiently wonder at the impudeÌ„cie of him who allegeth this place For the alleger wold haue the wordes taken as though the body of Christ were not vpon the altar But we only shold by faith ascend into heauen whereas S. Chrysostome speaketh of going in to heauen by good life also and not by faith only His words are these The body of our Lord is through death become the carcase for vnlesse he had fallen we had not risen Christ vseth the name of Egles to declare that it behoueth him who shall approchevnto his body to seeke for high things and not to medle with the earth nor to be draweÌ„ down or crepe vnto earthly matters which are a low but to flee allways vp to higher matters And to behold the sonne of righteousnes and to haue the eye and the mind quick of sight for this is the table of Egles and not of Iaies Hetherto S. Chrysostome Who first sheweth why the body of Christ is called the carcase Not because it is without life but because it once hath died for
〈◊〉 of Godhed dwellech corporally in Christes flesh so his flesh râ—…ally eaten of vs with due faith charitie is a maruelouse instrument to geue vs the euerlasting meate and to ioyne vs most 〈◊〉 to the spirit of God Marke well that concerninge the eating God by saith and minde we approue it as a speciall good thinge but we say farther that God came in flesh to be eaten in flesh of them that consist of flesh And therefore hauing sayd my Father geueth you the true bread from heauen and I am the bread of life which hitherto is meant to be eaten by faith he also goeth forward promising an eating to come herafter that is to say in his last supper and thereof saith the bread which I will geue is my flesh and he that eateth me tarieth in me The same Christ commeth in his owne person to performe yâ— former promise not saying only beleue ye in God and in me as I teache you but saying and doing that is to wit taking blessing geuing and saying take eate this is my body which is geuen for you 〈◊〉 this only pointe were depelie pondered it semeth to me that the almightie speaker so sent so promising and so doing ought to be of suche aucthoritie that nothing should staye vs to beleue that externall thing to be his body whereof he sayd this is my body Let vs now adde hereunto the wisedome the prouidence the truthe and the goodues of yâ— speaker who wold not of purpose blind his owne spouse with siguratiue wordes both of promise and of performance and yet the one ioyned with the other and the person who both speaketh and doth well considered make to men of reason suche persuasion of a proper speache that no sufficient cause is lefte why to presume those wordes to be figuratiue Of this first circumstance Eusebius Emissenus writeth Ad cognoscendum percipiendum sacrificium veri corporis ipsa te roboret potentia consecrantis Let the very power of him that consecrateth it strengthen thee to know to perceaue the sacrifice of the true body Again recedat omne 〈◊〉 ambiguum qui auctor est muneris ipse etiam testis est veritatis Let al doutfulnes of insidelity depart he that is the authour of the gift is him self also the witnes of the truthe ¶ The second circumstance may be to consyder the tyme when the supper was made THe tyme of speaking was the nyght before Christ departed out of this world at what tyme men are wonte to speake most plainly And S. Paule himself noted that circumstance saying our lord in the night that he was betrayed toke bread c. For when the howre of death draweth nere men vse manifestly to shew their last wil without al figures tropes as nighe as the matter will suffer And how much more wold the wisedom of God vse wordes warily in this case specially seing S. Augustin witnesseth that he gaue this Sacrament after supper when his passion was at hand to thintent the highnes of the mysterie might the better sticke in the hartes and memorie of the disciples whereas otherwise the Churche is taught by the holy ghost to receaue this Sacrament fasting for the honour saith S. Augustine of so great a Sacrament Let vs now a litle weigh with our selues whether any good and discrete man knowing his parting hower out of this world to be at hand will speake of purpose such words of ordeining matters to be done after his death the which words he foreseeth wil cause his heyres either to synne greuously if they obserue theÌ„ plainly as they should or els to haue an inward dissensioÌ„ if some affirme them to be plaine others denying and 〈◊〉 them â—…o be figuratiue for if Christes words be in dedt figuratiue the Catholiks synne both in teaching the contrarie and in adoring Christes body and blood vnder the formes of bread and 〈◊〉 which thing they are constrained to doe by the force of the words and then they are giltie of 〈◊〉 who possiblie can find no cause why they should not beleue their master so speakig and doing as he spake and did and thus lieth the â—…ander vpon Christ himself but if the words be in dede plain then Christ is purged and the only sault is in them who will not beleue I think it far the better to beleue the wonderfull discretioÌ„ of Christ â—… so 〈◊〉 him to mistrust the infidelite of wicked men ¶ The third circumstance concerning the persons who were at the last supper THe hearers were his twelue Apostles who should instructe yâ— who le world of that which they lerned of Christ in this very busines whereof we talke and so they did neuer leauing in any peece of all their writinges or preachinges that Christ leste a figure of his body without the very truthe thereof conteined in the Sacrament of the altar To the same Apostles it was geuen to know and vnderstand the mysteries of the kingdom of heauen whereâ—…ore it is very iueredible that the greatest mysterie of the whole Church was either hidden from them by Christ or by them hidden from vs. Yet it can not be denied but it is in some part hidden if that words which report it be figuratiue and parabolicall for parables are spoken as Christ himself witnesseth out of Esaias the Prophet so that men hearing doe not vnderstaÌ„d in hart the things which are spoken Thyrdly the Apostles were those who taried with Christ at Capharnaum where he promised his flesh and blood therefore if Christ had then spoken figuratiuely to the people yet now at the least he should and wold haue declared the matter more plainly and so he did in dede not verilie adding any word which might shew his former talke to haue beue figuratiue conceruing the substance of flesh to be eaten the substance of wine to be drunken but only teaching the maner of geuing them his flesh and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine to be figuratiue and mystical because they are not geuen to fill the bellie but to fede the soule not so much for the fleshes sake which we 〈◊〉 as for yâ— spirit Godhead which replenisheth that flesh of Christ. ¶ The fourth circumstance concerning the ending of the old passouer and the making of a new THe occasion mouing Christ at his last supper rather then at any other tyme to say ouer bread This is my body and ouer wine This is my blood was the setting and placing of the new Paschal Lamb in stede of yâ— old For least his Churche should be without a mysticall sacrifice called according to the law of Moyses a passouer that is to say a sacrifice betokening our passing ouer the sea of synne and our 〈◊〉 to the Land of grace and life which we looke for as sone as the old Lamb was eateÌ„ and the tyme come that shadowes and figures should be fultilled by
the more particular my reasoning is the more it ought to moue them earnestly to looke to the worde of God and not to contente them selues with the bare shewes thereof For my exposition beside the very order and conference of Christes supper hath for it as auncient a witnesse as Iustâ—…s Martyr is a man within the first two hundred not only within the 600. yeres whose works Robert SteueÌ„s printed in greke at Parise An. Dom. 1551. Thus he writeth The Apostles in their com meÌ„taries which are called gospels haue deliuered that Iesus gaue them thus in commaundement who when he had taken bread geuen thanks said do and make this thing for the remembrance of me 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est corpus meum That is to say my body Thus I reade the words thus they are vnderstanded make this thing That is to say make my body They that haue translated Iustinus haue turned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hoc est whiche words may be Englished as if the cause had bene This is But they also may signify hoc est that is to say For so the compound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken in greke in the way of interpretation or of exposition when the wordes that went before are expounded by the wordes that follow The same phrase is vsed in S. Matthew where after the Hebrew wordes were writen which Christ said vpon the Crosse Fli Eli Lamalabachtami it followeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. That is to say my God my God why hast thou forsaken me Therefore albeit the Latins can not distinct betwene hoc est whiche signifieth this is and hoc est whiche signifieth that is to say yet the grecians write the first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which thing Iustinus also hath obserned in the wordes belonging to the blood putting in euery letter The last they write leauing out yâ— last letter of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by an Apostrophe in pronountiation making one word of both And this sense is proued true by the processe of Iustinus who after that he had said we are taught the meat whiche is consecrated by the praier of the word whiche we toke of Christ to be his body and blood He would proue it to be still so because the Apostles dyd witnesse Iesum sic sibi mandasse Christ to haue geueÌ„ theÌ„ such a precept Hoc facite make this thing what thing my body Now if this thing were not meant to be yâ— body of Christ Iustinus had proued no commandement thereof and consequently no fleshe of Christ present whiche yet he affirmeth most plainly Therefore straight after he had rehearsed the commaundement Hoc facite make this thing he sheweth what thing it is â—…aiyng that is to say my body whereunto we must nedes vnderstand to make vp the full sense make my body or make this thing which is my body Therefore as well by the force of the letter of the Gospell as by the authoritie of S. Iustinus these words can be verified of no signe or figure nor by any other way theu by that we make the selfbody of Christ which always is this thing because it always tarieth one and the same in number person whereas the taking of bread and breaking or eating it is alwais such anotherthing but neuer this thing ¶ the xxi Circumstance of the words in meam commemorationem for the remembrance of me THe finall cause of instituting this new passouer was to make the remembrance of Christes death which so effectually and profitably for vs could be made in nothing els as in the same flesh that died for vs and being made therein it forceth vs by al meanes through the presence thereof to remeÌ„ber him whose flesh it is If now he that hath a busines to doe will those the beast meanes he can to bring it to passe if Christ came into the world to redeme vs by his death and if in beleuing and folowing that death our life consist seing no meane possibly can be deuised so effectuall to make vs remember and partake his death as if the thing which died be it self made present with vs and it self deliuered to vs a wise man may easibly iudge whether Christe hath not rather leaft his own body to vs for an vndoubted token of his death seing his words doe sound so theu that he hath leaft a peece of bread and a litle wine which neither be spoken of in the deliuery of the mysticall tokens nor be aptâ—… enough to worke the matter for which they are sayd to be least Therefore S. Chrysostom shewing the difference betwene other figuraâ—…iue remembrances and this truthe sayth Tibi quotidie ipse ne obliuiscaris proponitur Christ is euery day him self put before thee least thou shouldest forget him Note that Christ him self in this Sacrament is a remembrance of him selfe dying for vs euen as Manna was kept in the taberâ—…le of God to be a remembrance of it self Kepe it sayth God Vt nouerint filii Israël panem quo alui vos in solitudine That the children of Israel may know the bread wherewith I fed ye in yâ— desert So likewise the self body of Christ is kept as it were and preserued in the tabernacle of this blessed Sacrament that we may know by that knowlege which is meete for faithfull men that our Lord hath died for vs. ¶ The xxij circumstance of these words Drink ye all of this AFter the cup was taken and thanks geuen Christ gaue to his disciples and sayd bibite ex hoc omnes drink ye all of this In S. Luke it is sayd take and diuide among you By these words Christ meaneth literally that all the twelue should drink of that one cup and S. Marke witnesseth this precept to haue bene fâ—…illed saying Et biberunt ex illo omnes and all drank thereof This interpretation S. Dionysiâ—…s the Areopagite confirmeth saying that one chalice was diuided among them all And as S. Lyrillus witnesseth Circumtulit calicem dicens bibite ex hoc omnes He caried about the chalice saying drink ye all of this By carying about he meaneth all the twelue to haue receaued the drink out of that one cup in order Christ then would that his twelue Apostles should al drink of the same cup. The reason why he wold haue it so foloweth For sayth he this is my blood as if he sayd I haue conserated this cup only and none other therefore drink yâ—… all of this For if two or three of the twelue should haue drunk vp all that was in that cup either Christ must haue consecrated the cup again or the rest must haue receaued a drink not consecrated But it is not the wil of Christ that one Priest should coÌ„secrate in one Masse any more then once eche kind of the Sacrament because Christ died but once and then he onght to consecrate both kinds together because Christes blood and
Paule speaketh of is named specially also the communicating of Christes blood A generall blessing geueth a general benefite as when we say our Lord blesse you God send you good speede the right hand of God blesse this meate the holy Ghost sanctifie this wine and make it to be a remembrance of Christes bloodsheading These like wordes be blessings hallow or sanctifie the thing blessed as S. Paule saith the creatures to be sanctified by the word of God and praier But when a speciall blessing is geuen a speciall sanctifiyng must folow As when God blessed the 〈◊〉 Benedixitque eis dicens Crescite multiplicamini replete aquas maris and God blessed them saying Increase and multiplie and fyll the waters of the sea this special kinde of blessing worketh a speciall benefite vnto the creature which is blessed â–ª and it worketh euen that which the word signifieth â–ª who doubteth but by these words of Gods blessing increase and multiplie the fisshes toke the vertue of increasing and multiplying which before these words they had not for this kind of blessing gaue them this kind of benefite Seing then Christ blessed the chalice saying This is my blood of the new testament out of doubt he gaue it really this vertue to be the blood of the new testament Tell me no more that Christ willed it to signifie his blood for I tel you out of yâ— word of God what soeuer words haue bâ—… spoken belonging to any creature by the way of blessing they haue wrought that which they did signifie But Christ said in the way of blessing â–ª This chalice is the new testament in my blood Therefore he made by that blessing his blood within the chalice Bring me no more of those paltry examples I am a dore I am a vine the rock is Christ Iohn Baptist is Elias the holy Ghost is a doue a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of that sort I 〈◊〉 in one word to al that none of these were spoken by God in the way of blessing The 〈◊〉 saieth not that Christ blessed any certaine vine saying this is Christ or This is my body â–ª He sayd many thinges without blessing and he blâ—…ed sometymes without speaking But when blessing words are â—…oyned we are certified that those words are not figuratiue nor only tokens and bare sigâ—…s but working and making that which is said For if they promise a thing to come they worke by the way of causing the promyse in due tyme to be fulfilled as when a soâ—…e was promysed to Abraham by the Aungell of God If they be spoken as betokening a present verbe they presently worke the thing betokened Let no 〈◊〉 deceaue thee good Reader There is a dubble blessing spoken of in S. Paule there is the chalice of blessing and the chalice which we blesse The chalice of blessing as S. Chrysostom saieth is that which wheÌ„ we haue before vs we prayse God with admiration and horrour of the vnspeakeable gift but it is not the chalice of blessing vntill we haue blessed it The blessing whiche maketh it the chalice of blessing is that we speake of and that is the blessing whiche is made by the wordes of consecration as I haue said before Therefore S. Chrysostom wryteth thus vpon this place of S. Paule Cùm benedictionem dico Eucharistiam dico dicendo Eucharistiam omnem benignitatis Dei thesaurum aperio magna illa munera commemoro When I say blessing I say the Eucharist and in saying the Eucharist I open all the treasour of the goodnes of God and I make rehearsall of those great gifts But least any cauill should be made as though the wordes of 〈◊〉 were not the words of blessing heare what S. Ambrose aâ—…th of this Sacrament Quantis vtimur exemplis vt probemus non hoc esse quod natura formauit How many 〈◊〉 vse we to proue that it is not yâ— thing whiche nature made but that which blessing consecrated Lo that which conâ—…eth is blessing But what blessing After yâ— S. Ambrose had bronghâ—… many examples to shew what strength blessing had at the last he concludeth Quòd si tantùm valuit humana benedictio vt naturam conuerteret quid dicimus de ipsa consecratione diuina vbi verba ipsa Domini Saluatoris operantur If the blessing of man was of that power that it changed nature what say we of Gods own consecrating where the self words of our Lord Saniouâ—… do worke Marke good Read er blessing consecrating and the words of our Sauiour working is all one matter And yet againe to make it playner S. Ambrose saieth Nam Sacramentum istud quod ac cipis Christi sermone conficitur for this Sacrament which thou receauest is made with the wordes of Christ what the words be he telleth him self Vide omnia illa verba Euangelistae sunt vsque ad accipite siue corpus siue sanguinem inde verba sunt Christi Behold al those are the words of the Enâ—…ngelist vntill we come to this word take either body or blood from thense they are the wordes of Christ. Yf blessing be that which consecrateth both blessing consecration be made with the words oâ—… Christ his words he those which folow the word take yâ— words which folow be these This is my bodie and This is my blood who perceyueth not yâ— these only are the words of blessing Then we blesse the chalice when we consecrate when we say This is my blood of the new testament when we blesse saying the wordes of blessing in Christes mysteries then we make so much as our words do signifie For which cause S. 〈◊〉 concludeth that yâ— chaâ—…ce which we blesse is the coÌ„municating of the blood of Christ. In saying which we blesse he sheweth the cause why it is Christes blood In saying it is the communicating of Christes blood he sheweth both yâ— effect wrought by blessing which is yâ— presence of the blood of Christ and the cause finall why it is made verily to communicate vnto vs the merites of Christes death where the sayd blood was shed for the remission of synnes If the â—…halice after blessing had no blood in it how did it communicate to vs the blood of Christ S. Chrysostom geuing the literall sense of these woordes writeth thus EoruÌ„ auteÌ„ huiusmodi est sententia Quod est in calice id est quod a latere fluxit et illius sumus participes of these wordes this is yâ— meaning The same which is in the chalice is that which flowed from the side aâ—…d thereof we are pà rtakers He affirmeth S. Paul to say that both yâ— blood which flowed from Christes side is in the chalice also that we are thereof partakers But yâ— blood whereof we are partakers by the confession of yâ— Sacramentaries is yâ— naturall blood of Christ therefore the natural blood of Christ is coÌ„teined within yâ— chalice And consequeÌ„tlie
death of that holy thing which is eaten for a liuing and sensible creature is not vsed to be eaten without it be depriued first of his life Therefore Theophilact sayth Quinta vesperi fecit Dominus coenam caet Nemo enim quicquà m edit nisi prius mactatum fuerit The fift euening which was on Maundy Thursday night our Lord made a supper and â—…ayd to his Disciples Take and eate for this is my body And so because he was of power to lay down his soule it is euident that he then sacrificed him self from that tyme wherein he deliuered the Disciples his body For no man eateth any thing vnlesse it be first killed Thus we see that the reall presence of Christes flesh to th' end it may be eaten is the consequent whereby S. Paule proueth the shewing of Christes reall death Who perceaneth not that it is a good argument to say I eate in a Sacrament Christes reall flesh thereâ—…ore he is 〈◊〉 dead Doth it not follow well in the discourse of reason I drink the true blood of Christ therefore Christ hath truly shed his blood Or doth any faithfull man at the table of God eate the flâ—…sh and drink the blood of that thing which is not yet dead and offered in a sacrifice This argument of S. Paule they make vtterly voyde who say that we eate a figure and not the truth of Christes substance for then should Christ be shewed figuratiuely dead as he should be figuratiuely eaten Neither could it folow that because Christ is eaten by faith in a figure therefore he is already dead in truth it self but only that he is dead in a figure or in bare name without the truth of death as yet presently shewed When the Paschall Lamb was eaten the Lamb was truly dead but as the Lamb was the figure of Christ and not Christ did it thereof follow that it was only shewed in a figure that Christ sometyme should dye and not that in dede he was dead But now that he is dead in dede and so dead that his death is shewed true by the eating of his own body and by the drinking of his own blood vndoubtedly as truly as â—…uer that same Paschall Lamb was killed which was eaten so truly is the same body of Christ dead which is eaten and therevpon it wil folow that by eating the flesh of the man that dyed that maÌ„ is shewed to be dead in dedâ—… Wherefore S. Ambrose sayth vpon this place Quia enim mor te Domini liberati sumus huius rei memores in edendo potando carnem sanguinem quae pro nobis oblata sunt significamus Because we are made free through the death of our Lord being mindful thereof we in eating and in drinking flesh blood signifie those things which were offered for vs. Lo the very fact of eating flesh and of drinking blood shew the things that were offered to death for vs That is to say shew the flesh and blood of Christ as dead Damascene in that pleasant history of Iosaphat maketh the King Auenite to demaunde of certeyne Eremites why they caried about them that bones of dead men to whome they answered Ossa ista munda caet we cary about with vs ô King these cleane and holy bones representing the death of these maruelousemen whose they are and bringing our selues in minde of their exercise and of their conuersation beloued of God and flyring our selues to the like zeale And afterward the bones of dead men cause the remembrance of death to them that are a line Here we see many commodities which the blessed reliques of Sayntes do bring to good men Among other things they cause vs to remember the vertues of them whose bones we reâ—…erently kept And for as much as Christ did shew his charity chefely in dying for his enemies we haue no greater thing to remember by the presence of his body theÌ„ the same louing death of that body But if the bare presence of dead bones make vs remember that Saynts that be with God whose bones they were how muh more doth the eating of Christs body both make vs remember his death and shew it to our eyes being eaten after such sorte as this body is eaten This kinde of reasoning which S. Paule vseth is called of the logicians A consequentibus when by those things that are put for true and follow an other thing is proued to haue necessarily gone before As for example we may reason thus This woman is brought a bed therefore she hath companyed with a man in so much that reason declareth that no woman by the course of nature caÌ„ haue a childe except she lye before with a maÌ„ Now as if the bringing a bed be but in a shadow thereof no true cumpany with a man may directly be inferred euen so at this time if by eating yâ— body of Christe we shew Christs death and yet we do eate the body of Christe only in a shadow then may it not be inferred hereof that Christ is shewed to haue dyed truly in dede but only in a shadow Such as yâ— Consequent is where vpon we reason such antecedent may be inferred thereof If yâ— ConsequeÌ„t be reall true perfyt yâ— Antecedent is shewed to haue bene like If the Consequent be imperfyt figuratiue or sayned the Antecedent is not thereby shewed to be true If two persons are maryed together it may be well inferred that they consented together but if their maryage be â—…ained to say made vppon a sâ—…afold in the way of playing some Comedy or enterlude then is the coÌ„sent also sayned If the maryage were true the consent was true Christe made his last supper chefely to haue it a remembrance of his death and therefore he sayd Hoc facite in meam commemorationem doe and make this thing for the remembrance of me S. Paule hauing before declared how this thing may be made by the preistes of the new Testament for the remeÌ„brance of Christ in declaring that Christe toke bread brake and sayd this is my body he sheweth afterward how the sâ—…me body may be eaten by the common people for the remembrance of Christes death saying As often as ye shall eate this bread and drinke this chalice ye shall shew our Lords death vntill he come so that yâ— consecrating of Christes body by priests and the eating thereof by all Christian men is the shewing of Christes death Here I would know whether Christ instituted this Sacrament to shew his death as past in dede or els past in a bare shadow If to shew it in a bare shadow theÌ„ two absurd sequeles may seme to be employed One is yâ— it may shew Christes death as well to come as already past An other is that if it be past it is rather shewed to haue bene a figuratiue death theÌ„ a true death For as the eating of vnleauened bread vnder the law were
the faith of that eater neuer so great did not shew Christes death past but only to come so this eating of common bread in our Lords supper doth not by the eating inferre the death of Christe to be past but rather as being to come For euery shadow belongeth to a truth whereof it is the shadow and is 〈◊〉 vntil the truth it self come but when the truth is ones present the shadow is no more a bare shadow but a shadow fylled with the truth But by the Zwiâ—…glians opinion the Sacrament of Christes supper is common bread without any reall truth made or wrought abowt it therefore it is a figure a shadow and an imperfyt worke whereas if yâ— truth of it were come it should not be only a shadow but should haue a truth vnder the shadow Thus we may perceyue that the eating of common bread for a figure of Christes death with neuer so greate a faith doth not so much by the eating shew his death past as to come hereaâ—…ter Agayne were it graunted that by reason of the faith of the eater it shewed the death past yet because it sheweth it in a simple figure it may seme that it is past in a simple figure whereby this Sacrament aâ—…ter the interpretation of our new preachers is no sufficieÌ„t meane by the dede it selfe to shew that true death which Christe suffred for vs vppon the crosse and yet S. Paule saith that by eating this bread we shew the death of Christe that is to say we shew him to haue died by eating it I say For now we speake not of preaching the Ghospell not of remembring the articles of our crede nor of other vndoubted wytnesses whereby it is proued that Christe hath died for vs. We speake of S Paules argument who â—…aith by eating this bread we shew Christe to haue dyed for vs. which argument is none is vayne is rather agaynst the faith then with it if the bread that we eate be not the reall flesh of Christe But if we once confesse that we eate the subsâ—…aÌ„ce of Christes natural body drinke the substance of his naturall blood then doth it follow inuincibly that Christe is dead for vs. It followeth I say by the order of Gods words for no flesh is eaten whiles the beast liueth whose â—…lesh it is as it is written Carnem cum sanguine non comedetis ye shal not eate the flesh with the blood in it or any member cut from the liue beast whiles the blood yet remayueth in it Agayne the order of religion as wel vnder the Patriarkes as vnder the law of Moyses sheweth that no beast was eaten Sacramentally before it was kylled and offred From the sacrifice of Abâ—…lto to the comming of Christ certeinly Christ is really dead for vs and being his true fleshe that we eate we shew his true death â–ª and we shew it past and not to come Neither let any man say that Christ in his last supper gaue his fleshe before he died for he dyd not that before his death was at the very point to be fulfilled The Iewes began their feastes on the euening tyde couÌ„ting the day from Son set to the next Son set according as it is writen A vespera in vesperam celebrabitis Sabbata vestra from euening to euening ye shall kepe your holy days Christe therefore kept his supper the mauÌ„dy thursday at night after Son set when yâ— goodfryday whereon he dyed was now begon when he was already solde vnto the Iewes and all things prepared for his death so that he came to the geuing of his flesh as men do come in their death bed to dispose what shal be done after their death willing this mystery to be made for the remembrance of him And as it may appere in the actes of the Apostles after the 〈◊〉 of Christ and comming down of the holy Ghost the ChristeÌ„ mâ—…n begaÌ„first to kepe coÌ„tinue this at which time they shâ—…wed him both dead rysen sitting at his Fathers right haÌ„d in heauen And surely as well S. Iames in his liturgie as Damascen expounding these wordes of S. Paule whereof we speke â—…aieth Mortem filii hominis annunciatis resurrectionem eius conâ—…itemini â—…onec veniat ye shew the death of the son of man and coÌ„fâ—…sse his resurrection vntil he come Thus by eating this body we shew Christes true death by eating it being in it self aliue we shew also yâ— which folowed his death which was his resurrection and ascension Bâ—…t by a figuratiue eating we should not shew his true death and much lesse his true resurrectioÌ„ for as the death is shewed by eating the body which died so the resurrection of the said body is shewed by eating the body which died now is a liue the death is shewed whiles the body is vnder the forme of bread and the blood a part vnder the forme of wyne as though they were styll a sunder The resurrection is shewed whiles vnder eche forme whole Christ is conteyned Therefore we eate Christ more then in a figure and more then by faith and spirit we eate him in dede whereby it followeth that he is dead for vs in dede we eate him aliue without impairing or diminishing any part of him whereby it foloweth he is rysen from death and remaineth immortall Now let vs heare how S. Chrisostom alludeth to the same reason who speaking os Christes last supper writeth in this maner Quando id proposituÌ„ videris dic tecum Hoc corpus cae When thow seest that body set before thee say with thy self This body nailed and beaten was not ouercommed with death This body the â—…onne seing crucified turned away his beames Through it also the vele of the temple was torne and the rocks and the whole earth shaken The self same body made bloody wouÌ„ded with a speare gusshed out in founteines of blood water healthsome to the whole world Seest thou after what sorte Chrysostom talketh of the body of Christ in the Sacrament of the altar â–ª Seest thou by what means he there sheweth the death of Christ This body saith he was nailed wounded perced with a spere It is then the reall body that sheweth the reall death of Christe and that sheweth it not only when we remember that Christ dyed when we thinke of his resâ—…rrection and ascension but though no man think of his death yet the very eating of this very reall body sheweth his death to men to Aungels to God The dede I say and fact of eating sheweth him to be dead whose fleshe is eaten euen as the blood of Abel cried to God from the earth where it lay and as the body of Christ in heauen by his only presence maketh continual intercession to God the Father for vs alwaies putting God in minde of his death and of our saluation ¶ The real presence is proued by the illation which S. Paule maketh concerning the
vnworthy eating and drinking of euill men WHen S. Paule had said As oft as ye shall eate this bread and drink the cup of our Lord ye shall shewe our Lordes death vntill he come he goeth forward saying Therefore who so eateth this bread drinketh the chalice of our Lord vnworthely he shal be gilty of our Lordes body and blood How doth this senteÌ„ce hang vpoÌ„ yâ— former how coÌ„meth it in with â—… Therefore but because in the former sentence S. Paul said by eating this bread we shew Christes death And for as much as we shew it in that self thing which dyed for vs therefore he that eateth vnworthely such a meate wherein by the substance which died he sheweth Christes death he is gilty of our Lordes body none otherwyse then if he had betraied it as Iudas did For the same body that Iudas did by a false kisse geue to death we eate vnder the forme of bread to shew the same death If then Iudas were gilty of Christes natural body for geuing it vnworthely to death we are gilty of the same naturall body when by eating it we shew vnworthely the same death But if we had not present the same real flesh which Iudas hetraied our vnworthy shewing could not be like his vnworthy doing al the strength of S. Paules reasoning is only grounded vpon the real presence of Christes body the vnworthy shewing whereof he now speaketh is the vnworthy â—…ating And for so much as eating is a corporall action which is done by the instruments of teeth and mouth S. Paule doth vs to vnderstand that euil men might touch and haue in their mouthes yâ— bread and drink of our Lord. But his bread and his drink is of him â—…elfe affirmed to be his body and blood therefore S. Paule confesseth that euill men may haue the body and blood of Christ in theyr mouthes But that they could not doe except the body and blood were vnder the formes of bread and wine therefore he teacheth the body and blood of Christ to be really present vnder the formes of bread and wine Saith not S. Paule whosoeuer eateth this bread and drinketh the cup of our Lord vnworthely Then this bread and the cup of our Lord may be eaten and drunken vnworthely But what Speaketh he of eating by faith or of drinking by spirit No verily for such eating and drinking can not be vnworthely made You wil say it is bread and wine whereof he speaketh If it were so why doth S. Paule name it this bread â–ª For 〈◊〉 the pronoune this doth shew a thing present to some sense or other and seing when S. Paule wrote these wordes he being absent in body from the Corinthians could not shew them any thing by any corporal actioÌ„ of his it remaineth that yâ— thing whereunto this doth point was named in the epistle of S. Paule which he worte to those faithfull men and also that it went not long before as the which otherwese might be of vncertaine vnderstaÌ„ding What is it then which went before Christ toke bread and after thanks geuen said Take eate this is my body whosoeuer eateth this bread vnworthely he is gilty of the body of our Lord. If this bread point vnto that whereof Christ said This is my body S. Paule meaneth to shew his faut whosoeuer eateth the body of our Lord vnworthely and thereby he grauÌ„teth euil men to eate Christes body which they can doe by no meanes except that be Christes body which they take into theyr â—…outhes The Sacramentaries will obiect againste me that Christ ment the signe of his body which truly can not be so For seing S. Paule named no signe as this can not point to that which was not named so it must point only to the thing named before But the thing before named was the body of Christ broken for vs therefore this bread meaneth that body of Christ and none other substance ¶ The reall presence is proued because vnworthy receauers are gilty of Christes body and blood WHo soeâ—…er eateth this bread or drinketh the cup of our Lord vnwortehly he shal be gily of yâ— body blood of our Lord. A man may be gilty either for doing an euil deede or for leauing a good deede cleane vndon or els for doing a good dede in an euil manner Here S. Paule maketh the vnworthy receauer gilty for eating this bread and drinking the cup of our Lord vnworthely which is to say for doing a good deede after an euil manner his dede is eating which thing he so reaâ—…ly doth that S. Paule affirmeth him to eate and drink damnation to himself But no man is gilty of doing more theÌ„ he actually doth therefore the vnworthy receauer who for eating and drinking is gilty of the body and blood of Christ doth eate and drink in deede the same body and blood of Christ whereof he is gilty The Sacramentaries imagine S. Paule to haue said He that eating by mouth materiall bread at Christes supper refuseth to eate by faith the body of Christ sitting in heauen is gilty of not eating Christes body Who euer heard of such a toy what iote of all the scriptures which appertein to Christes supper haue they left vnwrested vntorne or vndefiled what sentence clause or word haue they left in his naturall meaning If S. Paule and the foure Euangelists were not theÌ„ selues men of sufficient discretion who might consider how nedefull it were to vnderstand wel the mysteries of Christ yet surely in repeting one matter oft it would at the least chance vnto them that they should haue told vs some one syllable which might haue made for the Sacramentary doctâ—…ine if it had bene true But now whatsoeuer they speake doth destroie vtterly and ouerthrow theyr fond assertion And that I may for this tyme go no farther what caÌ„ be answered to this place of S. Paul he that eateth a very good thing vnworthely is pronounced gilty therefore his present fault consisteth in the euill manner of his eating For to eate vnworthely is to eate in deede but not to eate after a good manner No man by eating in an euill manner can be gilty of that which he doth not eate in that euill manner and yet the vnworthy receauer of this bread is pronounced gilty of Christes body and it is ment of his naturall body Therefore this bread which he doth eate vnworthely is the reall and naturall body of Christ. If a man had done neuer so heinouse a robbery yet thereby to condemne him of adulterie it were an euideÌ„t 〈◊〉 although the paine due to adultery be lesse then that which is due to robberie But now to condemne a man for eating the body of Christ who did eate only the figure of it that were much more vniust for that his paine increased aboue the measure of his fault Let it be neuer so great a fault to eate the holy bread vnworthely yet if that holy bread be
not in dede a man it shall neuer be the fault of eating mans flesh to eate that bread vnworthely S. Paule saith not only he is gilty who eateth this bread but he is gilty of the body of Christe Howe can that be except this bread which he eateth be the body of Christ â–ª If this bread be his body seing it stâ—…ll appereth bread we must confesse that the body of Christ is really present vnder the forme of bread And truly that is the cause why S. Paule nameth it this bread for yâ— word sheweth him to meane the bread coÌ„secrated at yâ— altar that bread which that Priest froÌ„ thence deliuereth yâ— bread which that people receaueth at the Priests haÌ„d Whosoeuer eateth this bread vnworthely he is gilty of Christes body because that substance of this bread is that substaÌ„ce of Christes natural body made geueÌ„ vnder that forme of bread If it were not so the eater of this bread could not by his eating be gilty of Christe s body Otherwise the talke of S. Paule would no more hang together then if it were said he that toucheth vnworthely the kings garment is gilty of murdering his person I am loth to heape vp in this place yâ— manifold witnesses of the auncient Fathers whose wordes I haue partly touched also before concerning that euill men eate Christes body Now it shall suffise to shew that they make the same sequele of S. Paules wordes whiche I do for they shew the vnworthy receauer to be gilty of Christes body because he inuadeth the body of Christ and not because he eateth wheaten bread Theodoritus expoundeth these words whereuppon we dispute after this sort Illud autem caeâ—… These words he shal be gilty of the body and blood of our Lord signifie this much That as Iudas betrayd him and the Iewes theÌ„ selfes insulted and rayled shamfully and sclanderously at him so these shame defile him who take his most holy body with vncleane hands put it into a polluted and vnchaste mouth Lo the taking touching and eating vnworthely Christes body maketh them gilty as Iudas and the Iewes were gilty of Christes death Yea Haymo saieth It were better for him who cometh with mortall sinnes to this Sacramente neuer to haue knowen the way of truth then to goe backward and to do worse then an infidell Primasius faith He despiseth Christ and his body as the Iewes dyd who cometâ—… to it without trying of his own conscience Sedulius besides that common similitude of Iudas and the Iewes vseth another saying If no man dare put it into a filthy cloth or vessel how much more ought he not to put it into an vncleane harte Note good Reader that the self same Sacrament is put in the cloth or vessel which is put in the harte It is not therefore as the Sacramentaries blaspheme breade and wine that is put into a cloth and vessell after consecration and body and blood that whiles the body eateth breade and wine is in hart receaued The same thing is in the harte which is put in the vessell wherein the Sacra ment is kept S. Hierome vsing the same similitude of a cloth or vncleane vessell declareth farther that as Ioseph did folde the body oâ—… our Lord in a cleane sheete so must we receaue him with a cleane coÌ„science Dâ—…u menius declareth the fault of the euill men to be in that they touche the body of Christ with vncleane mouth and impure hands saying that as Iudas betrayed Christ and the Iewes did violently runne vppon him euen so they do shame to him Quòd sanctissimum ipsius corpus manibus impuris suscipiunt veluti tunc eum Iudaei tenuerunt execrando admouent ori Who doe take with impure hands his most holy body none otherwise then the Iewes at that tyme helde him and doe put it to theyr cursed mouth Theophylact sayth of the blood of Christ Qui indignè hunc hauserit nulluÌ„ ex eo fructuÌ„ adeptus frustra ac temerè Christi sanguinem fudit He that drinketh the blood vnworthely he hath shed in vayne rashly the blood of Christ. taking thereof no fruit And again The cause why euil men take no fruit saith Theophylact is not through the nature of that mysteries as the which both haue life in them and geue life but it chauÌ„ceth through the vnworthines of them that come to them who take hurte by them nonc other wise theÌ„ as the sonne is wont to hurte them who haue sore eyes Theophylacte meaneth that as it is oue sonne which shineth to whole aud to sore eyes but yet the sore eyes through their owne defecte take hurt thereof and the whole eyes take good so the mysteries are one to the good and to the bad concerning their owne nature being as he saith always of that nature both to conteyne life and to gene life But the fault why life is not takeÌ„ cometh of the vnworthy receauer We haue now harde that euill men receaue the same true body of Christ which the good men do receaue but not to yâ— same profit because they haue not wel prepared them selues We must not then thinke that euer any auncient Father was of this mind to say that euill men haue in their mouthes only bread and wine and the good men eate only the true body of Christ. That heresiâ—… is as farre from the opinion of the Fathers as it is farre from the truth of the Scriptures S. Chrysostom saith he will suffer his own blood to be shed rather then he will graunt the moste holy blood of our Lord to an vnworthy man Doth not he meane that he hath our Lords blood in his own hand at the tyme of celebrating the mysteries and that he will not deliuer the same to a knowen euill man S. Cyrill noteth that it is not sayd in vaine of Iudas Exiuit continuò he went foorth by and by Timet diabolus benedictionis virtutem ne sintillam in animo eius accenderit The deuill feareth the vertue of the consecration or blessing lest perhaps it might haue kendled a spark of grace or of repentance in his minde S. Augustine hauing spoken of Iudas who gaue him self to the deuill Non malum accipiendo sed male accipiendo not by taking an euill thing but by taking it in an euill maner concludeth generally of all euill men Corpus enim sanguis domini erat etiam illis quibus dicebat Apostolus Qui manducat indignè iudicium sibi manducat bibit for it was the body and blood of our Lord euen to those to whom S. Paule sayd â–ª he that eateth vnworthely eateth and drinketh damnation to him self It were easy after this sorte to allege a very greate number of yâ— olde Fathers but our aduersaries well knowing that we our selues beleue that the euill men albeit they receaue the substance of Christes body yet they doe not receaue the grace and vnitie
coming of his grace into our hartes His grace can not come except we first be made mete to receaue it but his body may come to our bodies so may condemne our soules before that we are made mete to receaue it His grace therefore must come first to vs by faith and charitie that we may thereby haue power to receaue worthely afterward his blessed body least if we receaue it vnworthely we take it to our damnation But so great preparation should not be requisite if our bodies receaued none other substance besyde bread and wine for they are of baser degree then eating by faith is But now we may somtime absteine from the Sacrament euen for honour and reuerence whiche we beare to it and yet we may not absteine from eating by faith or spirite Therefore it is a worthier kind of substance which is receaued in the SacrameÌ„t then the grace is which is the effect of spirituall eating And seing it should not be a worthier thing if it were the substance of bread and wine we may be assured the substance of the Sacrament to be that selfe body whereof the Centurion sayd Lord I am not worthy that thou shouldest enter vnder my roof It is the honour of that body whiche S. Paul and S. Augustine respect and not the honour of bread and wine in so much that the faithfull as well in the Greke as in the Latin Churche haue vsed alwaâ—…s the very same wordes in adoring the Sacracrament whiche the Centurion vsed to Christ. one praier to one Lord the same reuerence to the same God and man ¶ That the Fathers of the first six hundred yeres after Christ did adore the body and blood of Christe in the Sacrament of the altar DIonysius Areopagita scholer to S Paule made a praier to the Sacrament of the Altar in these wordes Sed ô tu diuinum sanctumque Sacramentum c. but o thou diuine and holy Sacrament open and display clerely to vs as it were the veyles and clokes wherewith thorough the signes of obscurities thou art couered and fill the eyes of our vnderstanding with suche clere light as may no more be dymmed Thus did that auncient Father pray not to bread and wine ye may be sure but to that blessed body of our Lord which is present in the mysteries Upon whiche place Pachymeres noteth that S. Dionisius speaketh vnto the Sacrament as being a thig which hath sense and life and that worthely For so the greate diuine Gregory saith But o passouer that great I say and holy passouer For that our passouer and this self holy Sacrament our Lord Iesus Christ him self is to whoÌ„ the holy man spâ—…aketh Lo this selfe holy Sacrament is Christ. And as nothing in the world is our great and holy passouer besyde Christ him selfe so this holy Sacrament hath none other substance at all besyde the substance of Iesus Christ who couereth him selfe as it were with the veyles of bread and wine As you haue heard the most direct wordes of S. Dionysius adoring this blessed mystery and of Pachymeres geuing the reason why he did speake vnto it as the which is Christe him selfe now you shal perceaue that all the other Fathers did beleue the same in so much as all men will graunt that they must needes adore that thing which they confessed to be either Christ or God or one in person with the sonne of God S. â—…yprian writing of the Sacrament of Christes supper saith In sacrificio quod Christus est non nisi Christus sequendus est In the sacrifice which is Christ only Christ must be followed It is knowâ—…ll well what sacrifice we offer how we take bread and wine coÌ„secrating them by the wordes of the last supper wherein it was said This is my body and this is my blood doe and make this thing for the remembrance of me This consecration of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ is our sacrifice and because Christ is not diuided nor dieth any more but where his body and blood is there him selfe is therefore S. Cyprian saieth Our sacâ—…ifice is Christ. Neither doth he speake of the death and passion where Christ was our sacrifice bloodily but he speaketh of the sâ—…pper of our Lord where we daily sacrifice Christ vnbloodily For he speaketh of yâ— matter of coÌ„secration which he saith must be wine mingled with water and not water alone because Christ made his owne blood of wine mingled with water Now saith S. Cyprian In the sacrifice which is Christ none must be followed but Christ. If our sacrifice be Christ because of bread and wine which we bring foorth the body and blood of Christ is made by his word is it possible that Christe should not be worshipped of S. â—…yprian with godly honour If Christ be so worshipped and our sacrifice be Christ our sacrifice must be worshipped with Godly honour our sacrifice I say because the thing that is made by coÌ„secration is none other besyde that body of Christe which is the price of the world and the only sacrifice for mankinde The same thing S. Ambrose saith euen as expressie of the Sacrament which S. Cyprian speaketh of the sacrifice In illo SacrameÌ„to Christus est quia corpus Christi in that Sacrament Christe is because it is the body of Christe To the same purpose apperteine the words of S. Ignatius calling this Sacrament the bread of God the heauenly bread the bread of life which thing saith he is the flesh of Christe the Sonne of God And of S. Ambrose calling it the nourishment of the diuine substance And of Eusebius Pamphili calling it Sacrificium Deo plenum And againe horroreÌ„ afferentia mensae Christi sacrificia a sacrifice full of God and the sacrifices of the table of Christe making men to tremble and quake And of Cyrillus saying those that receaue those mysteries to be made diuinae naturae participes Partakers of the diuine nature And again corporaliter in nobis Christum habitare participatione naturali that by these mysteries Christe dwelleth in vs corporally and by naturall partaking And of Isychius calling the same mysteries the bread of life panes mysticos viuificantes and mysticall loaues and those which quicken vs to life euerlasting And is it to be thought that Christ that the bread of God of life the diuine substance the sacrifice full of God which maketh men tremble quake that yâ— mysteries which cause Christe corporally to dwell in vs yâ— the nature of God whereof we are partakers by eating that the Sacrament of Christes supper being al this yet should not haue godly honour done to it Did al the Fathers who wrote thus of that mysterie honour and worship it according to their own doctrine and writings If all they and al the rest did professe that which was vpon yâ— table of Christ
them make that thing as it is written in the Gospel I shewed at 〈◊〉 that I was signed of my Father and equall with him in power they them selues beleue that I made al creatures places times of nothing and now is it doubted how I am able to make my body present vnder the â—…orm of bread in diuerse places Yea to maintaine the better that argument against my allmighty power they say I entred not into my disciples the dores being shut But eyther preuented the shutting of them contrary to the wordes of my Gospell or came in by the window as theues do or by some hole as crepers doe yea any thing is soner beleued then my diuine strength and working Thou hypocrite seing the word of God hath it written foure tymes in the new testament This is my body how comest thou to talke with me of my 〈◊〉 in heauen as though one of my workes were contrary to the other If in dede thou haddest bene humbly perswaded that I were God thou wouldest not measure my allmightie power by thy simple wit Thou art twise condemned first for deniall of a truth and againe for denying it against my expresse word which thou pretendest to esâ—…e and yet pronouÌ„cest it false If the pore mâ—…n say he knew not so much nor saw not the falsehod of that argumeÌ„t and beginne to accuse the salse preachers who deceiuâ—…d him Christ maie well say that he was not deceaued for before those false preachers began their false doctrine he had said This is my body and this is my blood and all the world beleued and taught the râ—…all presence of Christes body blood fiften hundred yeres together What cause nowe haddest thou to beleue a new Gospell and new preachers thereof Forsoth Sir they said the Bishop of Rome had deceaued vs and we heare say he is a very euil maÌ„ therefore we thought he had deceaued vs. If in this case Christ tell him that the Bishop of Rome were yâ— successour of S. Peter and so his vicar hauing promise by him not to erre in faith and yet that he alone taught not that doctrine but that all the Bishops doctors pâ—…ers of the whole Church taught the same from the beginning and that Christ him selfe had sayâ—… the same that all the 〈◊〉 and the Apostle S. Paule had written the same that al faithful 〈◊〉 beleued the same what excuse can he haue who 〈◊〉 Christ the Apostles the Bisshops the Fathers the preachers and the whole Church to followe an vpâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who began his doctriue so amhitiously and proudly who â—…ed so euil died so terribly that his very â—…ominable dealing with great Princes his shamfull 〈◊〉 and horrible death might make any good man wearie to think vpon him much lesse should so many haue folowed him To 〈◊〉 shor â—…wer the pore maÌ„ for him selfe â–ª what he may yet he can not denie but that both Christ said this is my body the Church taught the same and yet he beleued not this to be the body of Christe and therefore is one of them who beleue not without faith which is but one there is no saluatioÌ„ no pleasing of God no part in the kingdoÌ„ of heauen Which thing if they that be aliue will consider they maie returne againe to the Catholike Churche and so be made liuely members of that body whereof Christe is the Sauiour Herevnto is added the seuenth booke conteining a con â–ª â—…utation of the fifth article of M. Iuels Reply against D. Harding concerning the reall presence of Christes body in the supper of our Lorde The preface of the seuenth booke Iâ—…d thought to haue ended my treatise of our Lords supper with such matter as had bâ—…ne set foorth in my former six boks But when I had seen M. Iuels â—…eply against D. Harding and had 〈◊〉 not only contrarie doctrine to that which the Catholike Chruch beleueth vttered therin but also the same vttered with such enormouse misconstruing of the worde of God and with suche abusing of auncieÌ„t writers that it semed expedient to detect the falshod thereof I toke vpoÌ„ me to answere specially to that article whiche did unpugne the reall presence of Christes body â–ª whereof I had intreated And because I could neither well confute M. Iuels â—…ply without some respect had to D. Hardings answere nor conueniently put both D. Hardings and M. Iuels whole wordes in â—…ny booke which alredie was greate enough I was constrained to take such order that neither al their wordes might be at large laied foorth nor the pith of them in any part dissembled Wherein I haue so behaued my selfe that M. Iuel shall haue no 〈◊〉 cause to coÌ„plaine of me For I haue to my knowledge omitted no scripture no authoritie no argument of any force whereunto I haue not aunswered As for yâ— bookes of D. Harding of M. Iuel they being extaÌ„t in most mens handes nede not to be printed again by me How fully M. Iuel is answered the discrete Reader shall iudge when he commeth to the matter This much I will say it was more pain to staie my penne in suche abundance of stuffe as the goodâ—…es of the cause and euill dealing of M. Iuel gaue me then to 〈◊〉 at any tyme what might be 〈◊〉 answered One thing I beâ—…che the Reader to note most diligeÌ„tly that in all this treatise M. Iuel vseth none other meane so coâ—…on to proue his intent as to set one truth against an other As though Christes body could not both be in heauen visibly and in the Sacrament miraculously or as though because the Saâ—…rament is a figure it could not also contein the truth which it sigureth Or because Christ is eaten by faith his body might not be eaten also realy in the Sacrament But this thing is common to M. Iuel with other of his faction Marie to leaue on t the true nominatiue caâ—…e and to put in a false to leaue out the 〈◊〉 word which is the keie of all disputation to conueye wordes of his own which the authour neuer thought of to mispoint mis-english the testimonies of the fathers to 〈◊〉 their meaning that I can not tel whether any man hath vsed so much in so litle a treatise as in this one article of the reall â—…sence â—…e is â—…ound to haue done Neither is it vnknoweÌ„ to yâ— lerned who hath seen his booke yâ— hâ—… hath vsed the like falshod in yâ— other articles also 〈◊〉 by Gods grace the world shal see or it be long In the meane tyme iudg the rest by this which I shall set before thiâ—…e eyes And praie vn â–ª to God yâ— either M. Iuel may see his vnhonest dealing 〈◊〉 him selfe or els that his folly maie be 〈◊〉 to al men to thintent none may perish beside those who will not â—…denour by all meanes to lerne 〈◊〉 folow and to embrace the true doctrine of Christes Gospel and of the 〈◊〉 â–ª tholike Church The
mortal only and crucified vppon the crosse but for that it was spiritual and diuine â—…hat is to say the flesh of the Sonne of God San. Your glose M. Iuel is stark naught For whereas S. Hierom rekoneth vp two wayes of vnderstanding one and the same flesh you make such an interpretation which doth coÌ„found those 〈◊〉 vnderstandings For if Christes flesh be called of S. Hieroâ—… diâ—…ine and spirituall because it is the flesh of the Sonne of God theâ—… his flesh was diuine and spirituall vppon the crosse also For euen there it was the flesh of the Sonne of God But he calleth it spirituall one way and crucified an other way therefore his meaning is that it is spirituall and diuine flesh not only for respect of the vnion but vnder the forme of bread where it is present to be eaten in a diuine maner and as if it were a spirit vtterly inuisible and able to be perceaued by no 〈◊〉 aâ—…d yet for all tâ—…at true and reall flesh euen the same substance which was crucified Any other sense you can not applie to the distinction of S. Hierom and whatsoeuer els you bring out of S. Augustine or Angelomus it is not to the purpoâ—… Iuel S. Hieroms meaning is that the same flesh being thus diuine and spirituall must also spiritually be receaued and not fleshly as M. Harding imagineth San. As though D. Harding brought not the distinction of S. Hierom to proue that his assertion is not carnal and fleshly but spirituall and diuine And yet you still call it as you list and huddle vp places of the Manichees and Messalians nothing to the purpose Iuel S. Hierom him self sayth Of this oblation which is marueilously made in the remembrance of Christ it is lawfull to eate but of that oblation which Christ offered vppon the altar of the crosse according to it self it is lawfull â—…or noman to eate That is to say in grosse and fleshly maner San. Who could speake more against your self then you doe now The fleshly maner of eating is to eate flesh visible palpable and corruptible and in that maner as it was vpon yâ— crosse This place brought by you although it be thought to be the saying of Origenes and not of S. Hierom yet confirmeth excedingly the former distinction For the same substance is eaten which was crucified euen as the Hoste or thing offered is one in both oblations but the maner is diuerse Both these places are in dede very like Both name the crosse both name eating Both make a difference betwene the thing crucified and eaten but yet not in substance but in the maner of the presence thereof Iuel By these words S. Hierom â—…weth a great difference betwene the sacrifice that is made in the remembrance of Christ and the very sacrifice in dede that Christ made vppon the crosse San. The difference is so great that the thing offered is all one in substance but vppon the crosse it is offered as an oblation wholy burnt and therefore not eaten In the supper it is offered as an oblation to kepe the redemption of the crosse in continuall remembrance and to thank God for the redemption purchased and to make vs partake the fruits of Christes death by eating worthely the body which died But if the thing or substance offered be not one the same what oblatioÌ„ is that M. Iuell which is marueilously made in the supper What is that wherein we remember and shew Christes death Is bread and wine yâ— marueilouse oblation 〈◊〉 they made 〈◊〉 in the remembrance of Christ What marueilouse making can you find in them Except which is the very truth they be made the body blood of Christ That is in dede a marueilouse making a marueilouse sacrifice a marueilouse shewing of Christes death You had lost your wits when you brought foorth this place which maketh so fore all against you Iuel If a man take it fleshly saith S. Chrysostom he gaineth nothing San. It foloweth in S. Chrysostom immediatly what say we then is not flesh flesh yes doutlesse And again these words the flesh profiteth nothing were not spoken of the flesh it self but of fleshly vnderstanding Whereby it is clere that he vnderstandeth fleshly who deuiseth a grosse fleshly maner of eating Christes flesh but not he who saith the flesh it self must be eaten in his true substance if the maner be diuine and spiritual as in our Sacrament it is Iuel It is a figure or foorm of speache saith S. Augustine â—…illing vs to be partakers of Christes passion San. You are taken M. Iuel If you had not brought this place I wold haue brought it for if Christ in S. Ihon willeth 〈◊〉 to be partakers of Christes passion seing that partaking muâ—… be at the lest by faith for it may also be in a more 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both by faith and Sacrament but seing we must partake of the passion at the least by faith and you say we eate Christes body none otherwise in the supper but only by faith how then can you auoide the place brought by yourâ—…lf ouâ—… of S. Hierom where it was sayd it is not lawful to eate of that oblation according to it self which Christ offered vpon yâ— altar of the crosse Is it not lawful to eate of Christ by faith euen as he hung crucified â–ª will you not then beleue vpon him as he hangeth in that base humble condition I know you will but your eating is beleuing therefore you eate that oblation according to it selfe euen according as it is there spread coÌ„tumeliously handled But S â–ª Hierom saith noman may eate it so therefore he meaneth eating by mouth and not by faith goe on with me M. Iuel but of that oblation which is made maruelously in the remembrance of Christ it is lawfull to eate â–ª and how to eate but by mouth for as lawfull eating standeth against vnlawfull eating so in the one place it is vnlawfull to eate by moâ—…th in the other it is lawful to eate by mouth Therefore S. Hierom speaketh not only of eating Christes diuine and spiritual flesh by faith but euen by mouth also in the Sacrament Iuel S. Hierom calleth the eating of the diuine and spirituall flesh of Christ the remembring that he died for vs. Sand. If that be so then the oblation it self is eaten of which Christ offered vpon the crosse that secundum se that is to say according to it self How is it possible swetely to remember that Christ died for vs and not to eate by faith his very death and the sensible maner thereof but his â—…esh offered ou the crosse though it may be eateÌ„ by faith yet according to it self it may not be eaten in that corruptible foorm and shape And contrarie wise the diuine spirituall flesh is so 〈◊〉 appointed to be 〈◊〉 that the 〈◊〉 Christ sayd my flesh is verily meate therefore S. Hierom speaketh of eating the diuine
marke yâ— point consider the whole discourse of S. Chrysoâ—… who writeth thus Because Christ hath said this is 〈◊〉 bodie let vs be â—…gled with no dout Thou saieth Chrysostome desirest to see his garments but he deliuereth him selfe to thee Vt tangas in te habeas so that thou maiest touch him and haue him in thee Beware therefore lest after so great benefites thou begiltie of his bodie and blood by receauing with an vncleane soule For it suâ—…ed him not to be made man to be scourged crucified but he mingleth him selfe with vs or bringeth vs into one lump with him and â—…hat not by faith alone but he maketh vs his own bodie by the thing it selfe This is the true discourse of S. Chrysostom in that place as it may appere to any maÌ„ who shall reade it We are theÌ„ made one with Christ to worke the whiche thing it is common to faith and to baptisme or to the Sacrament of â—…ance But S. Chrysostome saith farther that the meane of this making vs one is in that Christe deliâ—…eth him selfe to vs. Ipse se ipsum tibi tradidit he deliuereth his owne selfe to thee And by that meanes he is mingled with thee not by faith alone but by the thing it selfe By which thing By him selfe or by his own body so that the excellency of Christes loue consisteth as much in the 〈◊〉 of the vnioâ—… â–ª â—…s in the vnion it selfe God might haue saued vs without sending his sonne to take flesh but when he sent his only begotten and made him in his own humane nature which he assumpted the meane to saue vs then his loue appered most singularly Euen so at this tyme the meane of the vnion is that whereof S. Carysostome speaketh For whereas there is a meane by faith to vnite vs to God he saith Christ was not content to be made man neither to die for vs by whiche points the faith of the old Fathers was fulfilled and therefore it might haue suffised for Christ to haue rested in his naâ—…tie and in his death letting our faith through his grace to make vp the knot of vnion without going any farther but that meane suffised not He hath brought vs into one lump with him not by faith alone to wit not by the meane of faith alone after his natiuitie Crosse he was not conteÌ„t with the meane of his birth death faith but he mingleth him selfe with vs by the thing it selfe Faith is one word yâ— thing is an other Fide is the same case yâ— re ipsa is one verb doth serue both As therefore it must of necessitie beenglished efficit he maketh nos vs suum corpus his own bodie non solum not only fide by saith so must it be englished sed but re ipsa by the thing it selfe The vnion therefore is made by faith and by the thing it selfe I come nere you M. Iuel I saie the thing it selfe is neither water nor bread and wine nor â—…th nor anie other creature but only the real substance of Christes bodie blood The which â—…bstance is yâ— meane whereby we are vnited yet yâ— same snbstaÌ„ce is not the meane exept 〈◊〉 be deliuered in the Sacrament of the altar for of that Sacrament and of the worthie coÌ„municating and of the 〈◊〉 thereof S. Chrysostom now speaketh it is called not only the bodie of Christ but Christ him selfe and therefore Christe is said not only to be seen but to be touched eaten and to be within vs. That bodie and blood of Chriâ—… being consecrated 〈◊〉 the holy table and so seen vnder the forme of bread being deliuered by the priests hand to vs and so touched eaten and being within vs that is the thing it selfe whereby we are nowe made the mystical body of Christ. That hody and blood was made present by changing the bread and wine into theÌ„ And therefore S. Chrysostom saith in yâ— same homilie Qui haec sanctificat transmutat ipse est It is Christe him selfe who maketh holie and changeth these things That bodie and blood is offered and partaken and therefore it foloweth immediatly after the wordes whereof we now chefely dispute that he ought to be cleaner then anie thing Qui hoc sacrificio participaturus est who wil partake this sacrifice That hand which breaketh in peeces this fleshe the mouthe which is filled with spirituall fier the tong whiche is made red with this wonderful blood ought to excede the sonne beames â–ª What can be deuised of man more plaine then to name changing sacrifice hand mouth tong seing touching eating hauing within vs Al these words are affirmed of these marueilouse gifts of Christes supper It is not therefore bread and wine which is res ipsa the thing it selfe but it is the body of Christ and that body being made in the SacrameÌ„t of Christes supper is the meane to make vs one mystical body therefore that bodie is really present in the Sacrament of the supper How could it otherwise be seen touched taken into the hand into the mouth be receaued with the tong and be in vs and whiche is the chefe of al howe could it be the meane to make vs one bodie For as when by faith or Baptism we are incorporated faith is present really with vs and Baptism is really present so when we are vnited by the bodie of Christ it must nedes be really present And how present If thou wert without a body saith S. Chrysostome God had geuen thee his giftes naked and without bodies But because the soule is knit vnto the bo dy In sensibilibus intelligibilia tibi praebet In things yâ— are sâ—…sible he geueth thee things which are intelligible or such as may be atteined only by vnderstanding The bodie of Christe therefore as it is the thing it selfe which vniteth vs in his Sacrament so is it geuen vs in sensibilibus in things which maie be seen felt and touched And to speake all in one the real bodie is geuen really to vs vnder the formes of bread and wine Moreouer when we are vnited by faith Baptism we are not vnited vnto faith or vnto Baptisme but by them vnto the flesh of Christe But of this Sacrament it is said not only that we are vnited by it but also vnto it in so much that S. Chrysostom saith That thing at the sight whereof the Angels quake neither dare boldely behold it for the brightnes whiche shineth out of it therewith we are fed thereunto we are vnited Lo we are vnited to the thing wherewith we are fed â–ª and straight S. Chrysostom sheweth that whereas no shepherd fedeth his shepe with his own blood yea whereas some mothers geue out their childern to be nourished Christ doth not so but he fedeth vs with his owne blood and by all meanes he ioyneth vs to him selfe If by faith
he applieth the answere made by S. Hilarie concerning the vnion betwene our selues by faith as though he had sayd it of Christes vnion with vs. a matter of great weight is so shamefully belied He writeth things expressly contrary as that by faith Christes body dwelleth in our bodies really and corporally and that Christ dwelleth in vs not really or bodily but because his faith is in vs. Againe what contradiction is it to say all accidentall coniunction is remoued and yet not to graâ—…nt a reall and substantiall coniunction to say the Sacrament is taken with our mouthes and that we vndontedly receaue Christes body in the Sacrament and yet that Christes body is not receaued into our mouthes really but by faith only That our coniunction with Christ is called corporall because it is spirituall He vseth a point of so great and shamefull dishonesty as one boy in scholes wold not vse in reasoning against an other Making D. Harding to reason so as he neuer thought os as to say 1. The Capharnaites mistoke Christes words 2. Christ speaketh of his ascension 3. We eate not the flesh that was crucified Uppon euery of which propositions and many suche like he maketh D. Harding conclude ergo Christes body is really in the Sacramâ—…nt Either falsifying the whole argument or leauing out a principall part or putting that in one part which should haue stode in an other And when he hath done his feat then to amend the matter he is wont to come in with a But M. Harding will say cet A man of good conscience and of learning wil rather make his aduersaries reasons stronger and then answere them when they are at the worst then to dissemble the strength of them and only to blere mens eyes with defacing his Aduersaries strong argument by falsifying his proof D. Harding requireth only that men of vnderstanding wil vouthsafe to reade his words againe after M. Iuel hath made his argument and then to consider his vnhonest report a witnesse of his euill conscience He falsifieth the doctours by making them to say more then they do say He putteth into S. Hierom these three words into heauen that whiche doe vtterly change the sense He reporteth that S. Augustine teache th the olde Fathers to haue eaten the selfe same body that is receaued now of the faithful all the which wordes are forged In the words of Cyrillus he did put in these three wordes non aliud quà m He maketh S. Hilarie to say that we are one with Christ by faith naturally He leaueth out certein words of the doctours whiche were of importance touching the principall question The nominatiue case in the B. of Rochesters words conueying in also a false nominatiue case in steede of the true In S. Augustines wordes in one place he left out the genitiue case vnitatis and huius rei and in the same place the verbe praeparatur in mensa Domini In the third place the noune adiâ—…ctiue spiritualem wherein the whole weight of the cause rested in the fourth the ablatiue case in ipso eius corpore constituti In Anacletus he left out Chrismati putting in oleo for it In Alexander he omitted MissaruÌ„ solennia In englishing yâ— wordes of BonaueÌ„ture he left out the adueâ—… essentially In S. HieroÌ„ he left out repellamus Iudaicas fabulas which wold haue shewed whereof he spake In alleging â—…usebins Emissenus he left out three linesin yâ— miâ—…dest ioyning yâ— foormer part with the later He affirmeth Gregorie Nyssen not to speake one worde of the Sacrament and therein formeth D. Hardings argument Christ is borne of the virgin ergo his body is really in the Sacrment whereas Gregorie Nyssen said cleane contrarie Christ is made meate to to the body ergo he was borne of the virgin and thereof D. Harding concluded ergo he was as really made meate to our bodies in the Sacrament as euer he was really borne sithe his being real meate proueth his birth He saith one Iohn Scote and Bertram wrote openly against the real presence with good contentation of the world a more impudent lye was neuer vttered by man He disgraceth S. Hilarie and priuily fathereth vppon him a great blasphemy as though he taught that we are one with God the Father and the sonne in nature of the Godhead whereas his mind was nothing so as I haue declared before He calleth the Fathers wordes spoken in the matter which is in question betwen D. Harding him hot violent rigorouse excessiue therein plainly yelding him selfe giltie that he ought to subsribe as who would not find fault with those three most lerned and auncient Fathers words Hilarie Chrysostome Cyrill vnlesse he clerely saw them to speake vtterly against his doctrin I beseche God to geue him grace to amend these enormouse faults It is better M. Iuel once to subscribe hartely then to be damned for euer Now to leaue M. Iuel and to speake these few words to thee good Christian Reader I chose to speake so copiously of this argumeÌ„t partly because it is the safer way to offend in that side partly because this one questioÌ„ is the ground of a great number â—…oe whiche depend of it For if the body and blood of Christ be really present vnder the formes of bread and wine which thing nowe is most fully proâ—…d there is no doubt of transubstantiation as the which is the most conueâ—…ient way to make the body present Againe wheresoeuer that body is it can not be but a propitiatory sacrifice sith it is the substance once bloodily sacrificed wherein the merite of that sacrifice still remaineth Thirdly seing that body being risen from death dieth no more the whole must nedes be vnder eche soorme and therefore albeit the consecration muste be necessarily made in two kindes to represent the death of Christ where his blood was apart from his flesh yet no lesse merite vertue grace cometh to him who receaueth worthely one kind alone then if he receaued both together Fourthly there can be no dout but the body of the sonne of God both ought to be adored being present for vs may be preserued for our necessity So that all these truthes and many moe depend of this one wherein the reall body of Christ is proued to be present in the Sacrament And seing it is proued present by the word of God as it hath bene declared in the third fourth and fifth bookes seing it hath bene taught to be adored as it is declared in my sixth booke seing it is 〈◊〉 to be taken into our 〈◊〉 mouthes and bodies and to nourish our very flesh to resurrection to be made meate to our bodies which haue neither faith nor spirit but only flesh and bones to receaue