for Christ to worke But it is a great deale more semely for him to turne bread into his body then to turne him self into a vine Because it is to be thought he being the wisedom of God changeth allways for the best Which were not so if in stede of him self he should leaue vs a materiall vine and yet in turning bread into his body the change is made for the better by infinite degrees Therefore these words I am the true vine though al other thigs were equall could neuer proue that vnwise change so well as This is my body wil proue a most wise happy change of common bread into the bread of life Morcouer these words the vine albeit they were ment of a certeyne vine yet there is no necessitie that they should shew it present Sith those words may be verified of a vine which being a hundred mile thence were knowen to Christ alone as likewise wheÌ„ S. Paule sayd The rock was Christ the rock whereof he spake was not present 〈◊〉 him but in his mind he noted a certeyne rock which yet in truth it self was not very certeyne touching any one materiall rock because two diuerse rocks were stryken out of which water flowed at diuerse tymes But as I was about to say the true vine being only described by those termes might be vncerteine to the Apostles and to the hearers of Christ either because they neuer knew it or because they haue forgotten it So that these words I am the true vine will not as well proue a transubstantiation as the other words This is my body For both the bread which was changed was first present and the body wherevnto the change is made is presently shewed taken and eaten vnder the forme of the same bread It is doubtlesse a great help in prouing transubstantiation to know both the vttermost partes and to be able to bring that foorth into the which the other is changed For the nature of proof among men consisteth in making a thing plaine to reason by the meane of senses and among faithfull men it consisteth in making it plain to faith by the meane of the same senses If one should aske where the vine is whereof Christ sayd I am the true vine and ye could not bring it foorth and on the other syde if I could bring foorth the body of Christ into which yâ— bread were changed although you might as wel beleue the transubstantiation of Christ into the vine through the word of Christ as I do beleue the transubstantiation of bread into his body yet you could not so wel proue it because you could not shew it so well The vine is lesse then this vine and the proof that this maketh doth far excede the proof that the can make If an inquisition were made who had done a certeyne murder and you said the man hath done it but I could say this man hath done it I suppose all the Iudges in the world wold say that I proued the murder done better then you When it is sayd the man hath done such a murder albeit the Iudge beleue the saying yet his vnderstanding is not quieted but he asketh farther which man is that But when you come so nigh to the point as to say this man hath done it nothing caÌ„ be asked more plaine Which being so albeit I graunted a transubstantiation in eche saying yet M. Nowell had not sayd truly in affirming that these words I am the true vine do proue as well a transubstantiation as This is my body By how much this in making proof doth passe the by so much the later words wold better proue a transubstantiation then the first Besydes this when two transubstantiations are affirmed of the which one hath bene in some like sorte practised before but the other hath not bene likewise practised those words which affirme such a transubstantiation the like whereof hath bene before done do proue the sayd transubstantiation better then those that speake of a thing that neuer was done Bread was vsually turned into Christes body whiles he lined in earth for his body was nourished with bread the which bread was turned into his flesh Quamobrem rectè nunc etiam Dei verbo sanctificatum panem in Dei verbi corpus credimus im mutari Wherefore now also we beleue well sayeth Nyssenus brother to S. Basile the bread which is sanctified with yâ— word of God to be changed into the body of God the word This argument also Damascene Theophylact and Euthymius do make So that it is no newes for bread to become Chri stes body but for Christ to become a vine that as it is throughly impossible because Christ is God and vnable to be changed so albeit we did graunt it possible yet it were yâ— harder to proue it because it had not benâ—… done before Last of all there was neuer any auncient Father or Generall Councell nay there was neuer no learned man were he Catholike or otherwise there was neuer none of the lay people no woman no childe no naturall foole which tooke or thought any vine or rock in the whole world to be the naturall substance of Christ Notwithstanding that Christ had sayd I am the true vine and S. Paule that the rock was Christ. But if we come to these words This is my body and consider them so pronounced as they were we shal finde not only thousand millions of faithful people to haue beleued the bread ouer which those words are spoken to be changed into Christes body but also whole Generall Councels wherein many hundred of Bisshops and of great clerks haue bene gathered together to haue taught and decreed directly or by manifest sequele yâ— doctrine of transubstantiation as the Councels of Lateran of Basile of Constance of FloreÌ„ce of Trent Which all are knowen to haue agreed in this behalf Besides many auncient Fathers haue moste constantlie writen the same as S. Iustinus the Martyr Ireneus Tertullian S. Cyprian S. Ambrose S. Chrysostom with all the rest The prosecuting of which argumeÌ„t were at this present to far distant from my principall intent but in case I may vnderstand that these few reasons doe not satisfie M. Nowell or any other man to whome my labour may doe good I will proue moste fully the doctrine of transubstaÌ„tiation both out of the holy scriptures and out of the holy Fathers Now for M. Nowell not withstanding al these sâ—…ueÌ„ differences to affirme that no Papist shal euer be able to shew cause why I am the true vine doth not proue as well a transubstantiation as these words This is my body it was an ignorance in a preacher not pardonable For if I should only staye vppon the last argument wherein all Christendom is shewed to haue beleued transubstantiation through these words This is my body and that as well before in dede as by confession of our aduersaries euer sence the great Councell of
The supper of our Lord SET FOORTH ACCORding to the truth of the Gospell and Catholike faith By Nicolas Saunder Doctor of Diuinitie with a confutation of such false doctrine as the Apologie of the Churche of England M. Nowels chalenge or M. Iuels Replie haue vttered touching the reall presence of Christe in the Sacrament MANHV What is this The figure Exod. 16. This is the bread which our Lord hath geuen you to eate The prophecie Prouerb 9. Come eate my bread drink that wine which Ihaue mixed for you The promise Ioan. 6. The bread which I wil geue is my flesh for the life of the world The performance Matt. 26. Luc. 22. He gaue sayiÌ„g take eate this is my body which is geueÌ„ for you The doctrine of the Apostles 1. Cor. 10. The bread which we break is the coÌ„municatiÌ„g of our Lords body The belefe of the Church Hilar. lib. 8. de Trinit Both our Lord hath professed we beleue it to be flesh in dede The custome of Heretiks Tertul. de Resur car The contrarie part reiseth vp trouble by presence of figures LOVANII Anno domini 1566. CVm Regiae Maiestatis priuilegio sub 20. mâ—…sis Augusti anni 1565. permissum esset Nicolao Saundero Anglo sacrae Theologiae Doctori vt 〈◊〉 in scriptum The supper of our Lord set forth according to the truth of the Gospel c. imprimere posset posteaquà m prodiisset liber quidaÌ„ a duersus CatholicaÌ„ fideÌ„ quâ—…m D. Nicolaus defendisset anglicè conscriptus quem etiam confutandum sumpsit renouato Priuilegio concessum est eidem Nicolao vt ei vnâ cum confutatione contrariae doctrinae suum librum typis mandare ac impunè distrahere liceat Datum Bruxellis 22. Decembris Anno Christi 1565. S. de la Torre Approbatio sex priorum librorum AVthor ipse huius voluminis Nicolaus SauÌ„der sacrae Theologiae Professor eius est apud nos fidei vt sine aliquo metu tutò posset euulgari estque praeterà à multis Anglici idiomatis sacrae Theologiae peritissimis perlectum qui illud meritò plurimum coÌ„mendarunt Cunerus Petri Pastor Sancti Petri Louanâ—… 7. August Anno. 1565. TO THE BODY AND BLOOD OF ouâ—… Sauiour Iesus Christ vnder the foormes of bread and wyne all honour praisc and thanks be geuen for â—…uer IF he that mainteneth a right good cause yet partly for feare of the deceits and suttiltie of his aduersaries partly for mistrust of his own knowledge and memoric dare not appere in iudgement without his aduocate or proâ—…tour with 〈◊〉 seing yâ— sending foorth of a booke into yâ— light of yâ— world is yâ— dangering to haue it suÌ„moned to so manie courts as it shal be brought into howses yâ— appering before so manie iudges as be readers thereof what aduocat and proctour yea rather what Doctor and Patrone am I constrayned to seek who do not only set foorth mie book to be readen of whatsoeuer English man but also write of suche a matter as being of most weight is most diligently examined in these our dayes and wherein I am sure to find as wel the Lutherans as the Zuinglians though vtterly dissagreing betwene themselues yet against me not only agreing to be seuere iudges in the reading but also to be cruel aduersaries in their iudgement Which seing it is so let noman wonder that I not mistrusting anie whit the vniuersal cause of the Catholiks but misdoubting mine own wit and the shamelesse shifts of our aduersaries haue chosen to dedicate this work to yâ— mysteri of thy glorious body and blood Lord Iesu Christ to 〈◊〉 those that now take vpon them to misiudge yâ— manifest effectuall words of thy blessing and thanksgeuing pronounced by thâ—…o in thy last supper making a figuratiue speache of a proper and whereas thy true body and blood itself worthie of all honour is through thy godhead made really present teaching not withstanding for their parte the substance of bread and wine still to remain and therefore an idol to be falsely â—…et vp and worshipped by the Catholiks to th'inteâ—…t I saie those false teachers maie either through thy grace be conuerted from thâ—…r misbelefe whereof I most humbly beseche the or els if they wil stubbâ—…nly persist in their detestable opinion maie euen presently be confounded with the maiestie of thy name whose glorie they oppâ—…gne For what can be more dishonorable to thy goodnes then if it maie be truly reported that the wisedome of god did institute his chief Sacrament in such words the which either being true and not beleued should bâ—…rden our consciences with infidelitie or being earnestly beleued and yet not conceaâ—…ed in proper speache should bring vs into manifest daâ—…nger of idolatrie sith no faithfull man beleuing this to be thy body as thou hast said it is can abâ—…teine from the singular worshipping of that singular fotestole of God Now soeuer it be with other men I adore thee my God and lord really present vnder the formes of bread and wine after cousecration dewly made Beseeching thee of pardoÌ„ for my synnes by the same propitiatorie sacrifice of thy body and blood which being made once with bloodsheding vpon the crosse causeth the fruits therof to be daily applied in that cleane and vnbloody sacrifice of the masse To this great mysterie of thy real presence I dedicate these my paines as to the most vndoubted fountain cause and supporter of them In this faith I was baptized and made a member of thy mystical body in the hope to mainteine this 〈◊〉 miâ—… parents and frinds did set me to schole in the vehement loue and affection thereof I haue written this rude and simple work And to whom should I refer the praise and thanks for it but vnto the alone Or of whom shuld I craue the protection thereof but of thee seing thou only art a meet patrone for the defence of any booke which only art alwaies present wheresoeuer and whensoeuer it shal be examined To the honour therefore of thy body and blood I offer this poore mite of my simple vnderstanding thy mercifull gift whatsoeuer it be trusting thou wilt not suffer neither the truthe of thy gospel to be long vnrestored in the desolate I le of pitifull England nor me thy poore seruant through 〈◊〉 or naughty liuing to perish euerlastinglie AMEN The Contentes of the first Booke 1. The preface to the Reader 2. Notes concerning the translation of holy scripture in this argument 3. The state of the question 4. What the supper of our lords is according to the belefe of the Catholiks 5. What it is according to the doctrine of our aduersaries 6. A speciall errour of Caluin concerning the vvords of Christes supper is confuted The preface to the Christian Reader WHo so will auoyd the danger of pride of schisme and of hearesie he hath no greater helpe therevnto in this world then to mystrust his owne iudgement and to followe the authoritie of greater wisdome
written This is 〈◊〉 figure of my bodie Secundarily thei can bring no Church where the bodie of Christ was not confessed worshipped and 〈◊〉 Thirdly they haue no generall 〈◊〉 where it was euer said that the wordes of Christ are 〈◊〉 and worke not his bodie present Thereunto they will straight take exception affirming that all yâ— first six huÌ„dred yeres cooke the wordes of Christes supper to be figuratiue and nedes they must say so muche for 〈◊〉 they should saie nothyng at all But what 〈◊〉 we to that saying of theirs Uerily we 〈◊〉 that it is a mayn lye an impudent assertion a fond imagination as the which hath no ground at all in the first six hundred yeres Which thing although yt may be proued many wayes yet in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is most inuincibly declared by three 〈◊〉 The former is in so muche as diuers holy Fathers 〈◊〉 vs most instantly to beleue the wordes wherin Christ said This ys my body and This ys my bloode although they seme to be agaynst naturall reason and sense and yet no wise man wil requier vs to beleue figuratiue wordes The second is because the same Fathers teach expresly the adoration of that 〈◊〉 and blood of Christe which is in the holy mysteries which 〈◊〉 on the altar and table which is taken into the handes mouthes and bodies of Christian men The third reason is because the holie Fathers teach that we are made naturally and corporally one flesh with the flesh of Christ in the worthy recenuing of the blessed Sacrament of his supper All these thinges shal be declared God willing in their places We haue therefore iust cause not to graunt our aduersaries the first six hundred yeres And although we had not so iust cause to shewe the first six houdred to stand so playnlie for vs yet how ys yt possible that they or any man aliue can be sure of the opinion of that age The scriptures that should teache them what thei owght to â—…ue sounde an other waie â–ª The practise of the Churche which hath deriued to vs their custome and vse doth informe vs of a contrary meaning By what meanes then come oure aduersaries to assure them selues of the first six hundred yeres It is cleâ—…ely impossible that any man should haue any sufficient ground whereby to know that the first six hundred yeres were of the 〈◊〉 or Sacramentarie iudgement For the wrytinges of the Fathers whiche only they pretend cannot informe them of any suche their minde for so muche as none of them all writeth so fauorably for them that he hathe gone aboute once to proue that the bodie of Christ is not vnder that which the Priest blesseth or hath warned the people to beware of idolatrie or hath vsed suche words in that behalfe as the Sacramentaries of oure tyme do vse And yet suerlie a lyke fayth wolde hauâ—… browght foorthe a lyke doctrine Now where they call the Sacrament a figure and holie signe that doth not withstand the reall presence any whit but rather proueth it to him who considereth the signe we speake of not to be a signe made by men whose tokens do signifie thâ—… truth absent but institued by Christ who maketh reall truth in euerie Sacrament vnder a holy signe therof To be shorte there is nothinge to be sene or readen in the auncient Fathers concerninge the matter of the Sacrament but the same hath bene alwayes acknowleged of the Catholikes for good and sound doctrine euen continually all thies nine hundred yeres when if they had thought otherwise they might withowt reprouffe of any man before BereÌ„garius or after his tyme haue condemned what booke they lysted But no Papist were he neuer so muche addicted to the real presence of Christes body in the Sacrament did find fault with any Catholike Father of the first six hundred 〈◊〉 Undowtedlie because he neuer sawe worde in them against his owne opinion Or tell me doth S. Thomas doth Sâ—…otus doth Nicolaus de Lira doth Dionysius Larthusianus accuse anie Father of the first six hundred yeres as not thynkinge well of the Sacrament No suerlie And that is because they neueâ—… founde in them but the same docteine which them selues beleued and tawght And yet as sone as Berengarius began his newe doctrine euerie lerned man founde fault with yt Likewise with 〈◊〉 with â—…uinglins and with Iohn Caluin It is therfore euident seinge no Catholike nother hathe bene before Luters time nor is nowe offended with the olde Fathers doctrine concerninge the reall presence of Christes body and yet euerie of them is offended with the Sacramentaries doctrine that the Sacramentaries teache not as the olde Fathers did and agayne that the Sacramentaries cannot be suer that their doctrine is found in the olde Fathers For if yt were there to he found why should not Catholikes find yt there as well as they Or what one word can be brought sorthe of them so plainly denyinge the reall presence of Christes body vnder the forme of bread as we are able to bringe forth certayne hundred places wherin the said reall presence is earnestly affirmed Admitte the Fathers doctrine were vncertayne were dowtfull obscure yet cowld oure aduersaries neuer be sure therby that the fyrst six hundred yeres were with them Admitte some of them semed rather to fauoure theire side then owrs whiche is vtterly false yet the plaine word of God the plaine generall Councelles the faith of all nations by the space of nine hundred yeres owght to preuaile before the probable and apparant sayenges of a fewe men But nowe seinge the Fathers of the first six hundred yeres are so clerelie for vs that oure aduersaries are forced to excuse the expresse witnesses of S. 〈◊〉 S. Chrysostome S. 〈◊〉 alleged for the reall presence of Christes bodie as spoken by plaine hyperbole which in them that professe to teach the Catholike faith is no lesse to say then that these Fathers make rhetoricall lyes in wryting of the blessed â—…ucharist seing they are constrayned to deuie certaine workes of the verie most auncient as of Dionysius Areopagita of S. Ignatius of S. Polycarpus of Abdias of S. Clement of Anacletus of 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 yea of S. Ambrose and of suche like because their sayings are to 〈◊〉 agaynst them seing all that dispute now a dayes with the 〈◊〉 presse them with nothing more customably then with the autoritie of the auncient Fathers Now to saie they leaâ—…e to the first six hundred yeres when the holie scriptures and auncient Fathers generall Counceils and 〈◊〉 tradition maketh agaynst them he that listeth to consyder how 〈◊〉 how vilely how impudently it is pretended may in all other assertions mistrust them as men for great synnes geuen ouer vnto their owne lewd phantasie withowt they repent and call agayne to the holie Ghost for more grace and better vnderstanding M. Nowel in the preface prefixed before the reprouf of M. Dormans prouf semeth to haue
a stroÌ„g stout effectual figure ioyned with words of promise stirring vp the hart of him that heareth the promise and worthely râ—…aueth the pledge therof to mounte into heauen and there by faith to fede in spirite vpon Christes owne body and blood as he in earth corporally feedeth vpon bread and wine For Caluin teacheth bread and wine to be the figures and signes of Christes body and those wordes This is my body to be wordes of preaching or of promising Christes body to them that doe beleue O pitifull tossing and tearing of Gods holy mysteries Are those words which make and shew the body of Christ present words of promise But hereof I will speak more hereafter Now concerning that he willeth vs to goe into heauen by faith know ye not that because our nature was not able to 〈◊〉 â—…y to the seat of God in heauen therefore y◠〈◊〉 oâ—… God came 〈◊〉 from heauen to earth to leade and list vs vp to the â—…ition oâ—… his Father Know ye not that because our body more quickly â—…weth our soule dounward then our spirit is able to draw our body vpward therefore Christ 〈◊〉 not only yâ— soule but also the body of man geuing vs in his last supper that body of his to th'inthent our bodies taking hold in the Sacrament of the altar of his body might be caried into heauen to haue the sight of God And because faith without th'incarnation of Christ cannot lift vp our bodies therefore Christ fulfilled â—…aith with truth and hauing taken of the virgin oure nature gaue his body in dede to our bodies and soules yâ— we again might in body soule be lifted vp with it As a man that is cast into a depe pit calleth by the meane of his tonge for help but when a cord is let doune to him for the aide and 〈◊〉 of him it is not then sufficient to vse his tong still and to let his handes alone euen so our faith called for Christ to come from heauen to help vs to let doune the corde of his humanitie of his flesh and blood And shall we now when it is let doune to be fastened in our bodies and in the bottom of our hartes by eating it really shall wee now refuse it and saie wee will goe into heauen by faith ourselues and there take holde of Christ whereby wee maie be saued and deliuered out of the depe vale of misery As though the corde should haue neded to haue ben let doune if wee could haue fastened our bodies to any thing in heauen and yet our bodyes are they which weigh doune our soules châ—…ely But what meane I to reason in this place of that point whereof in all the booke folowing by Gods grace I will fully intreat For as it happeneth they are the scholars of Calnin with whom specially wee must haue to do at this time Of whose lerning and prâ—…ncie â–ª I most crueâ—…y craue this fauour that none of them all thinâ—… me to speak against their persons but only against their opinions and so to speak against them as I am instructed by the holy Scriptures not graunting that either they loue more intierly or study more carefully or reuerence more hartily the word of God then my Fathers brethren and I my selfe doe in the Catholike Church of Jesus Christ. Only about the meaning of it I rather would trust the common iudgeâ—…ent of auncient Doctours and practise of the whole Church theu mine owne priuate election and phantasie or the deuise of a newly planted congregation A Catholike man must kepe the most auncient path and most commonly troden high waie Priuie bypathes carie mâ—…n a side to the 〈◊〉 dennes of 〈◊〉 My purpose is to proue out of the word of God specially against zuinglius and Caluin that Christ geueth in his last supper the true substance of his flesh and blood not only to our soules by words of promise but also to our bodies vnder the formes of bread and wine And for as much as the present Church of England in the Apologie thereof hath set forth to the world an other doctrine contrarie to that wce reâ—…ued of our fore Fathers I will first disproue and confute the wordes and reasons oâ—… the Apologie and afterward will by the grace of God proue the Catholike faith out of the holy Scriptures and auncient Fathers But first of all I must declare what we Catholiks and what the Protestants and Sacramentaries beleue the supper of Christ to be That seing I make the Title of my booke Of the supper of our Lord it maie straight appere whose 〈◊〉 is more worthy to be instituted of Christ that which we through his word beleue or that which they assigne him against y◠〈◊〉 truthe of his own words ¶ what the supper of Christ is according to the belâ—…e of the Catholikes BEcause my purpose is to intreat of the blessed supper of our Lord I thought it best to declare before hand what we take that supper to be shewing withal how the Sacramentaries vnder the pretense of refoorming the abuses thereof haue taken away the whole supper of Christ and geuen vs a bare drinking of their own 〈◊〉 And whence maie that be more truly and soundly proued then chiâ—…fly out of the word of God next out of the monuments of the a aâ—…cient Fathers The word of God is a most faithfull witnesse oâ—… the institution of Christ the monuments and writings of auncient Fathers doe shew the right vnderstanding of the word of God which thing I speake not as though the Catholike Doctours of this later tyire had not the self same holy Ghost which the first had but seing our aduersaries refuse Albereus magnus Thomas of Aquine Bonauenture Alexander of â—…ales Dionyâ—…ns the Carthusian Nicolaus de Lyra Gabriel Biel and such other men of excelleÌ„t vertue wit and lerning who not withstanding by a rule that S. Auguâ—…stine geueth ought to be of credit in so much as all they liued before this question rose beâ—…wene the Sacramentaries and vs and therfore can not beare nor shew more affection to the one syde then to the other but seing our aduersaries refuse them for 〈◊〉 and yet follow men of later 〈◊〉 as Luther zuinglius 〈◊〉 we are content to put all the matter into the hands of the old Doctours And to beginne as we promised with the word of God thus writeth S. Paul in his first 〈◊〉 to the Corinthians Conuenientibus vobis in vnum iam non est dominicam coenam manducare vnusquisque enim suam coenam praesumit ad manducanduÌ„ when yow come together now there is no eating of our Lords supper For euery man taketh 〈◊〉 his owne supper to eate By the name of supper in the old tyme that one meale was meant wich ordinarily was made after noon and it serued for diner and supper The Corinthians coming together to yâ— holy communion taried not one for the other but
holy porche or entry as it were compassed round about with golden garments But what reherse I things to come Dum in hac vita sumus vt nobis terra caelum sit facit hoc mysterium Whiles we are in this life this mysterie causeth that the earth is heauen to vs. By the iudgement of Chrysostom the fame body of Christ which is our saluation and life is set besore vs vpon the verie table to th' intent whiles we liue the earth should be heauen to vs and when we departed heuce carying that body with vs we should be safe conueied vnto heauen it self When he saith the earth is heauen to vs through this mysterie he meaneth nolesse to be set vpon the table it self or altar then is at the right hand of God the Father And this is the supper of our Lord which the Catholiks beleue and not an emptie dish of faith which although it be much worth when truthe is absent yet as in heauen where clere vision is no faith abydeth euen so when earth is through this mysterie made heauen to vs we receaue and eate the body of Christ not only by faith from heauen but also in truthe from the verie altar and table For as there is a truthe lesse of our bodies then of our soules and as the soules of the faithfull neuer lacked God whom they might feede on by faith spirit so Christ therefore toke flesh that our bodies also might haue a banket made to them and so the whole man might be noâ—…rished to life euerlasting Oportuit enim certe sayth Cyrillus vt non solum anima per spiritum sanctum in beatam vitam alcenderet verum etiam vt rude atque terrestre hoc corpus cognato sibi gustu tactu cibo ad immortalitatem reduceretur For it behoued truly that not only yâ— soule should ascend by the holy Ghost into the blessed life but also that this rude and earthly body should be brought to immortality by tasting touching eating the meate which were of alliance or kynred with it that is to say of the same nature and substance whereof our bodies are Thus in the Câ—…tholik banket of Christes supper not only the soule but euen the body eateth tasteth and toucheth such meat as is of the same blood and kynred with it That is to say our flesh eateth Christes flesh our body his body It was flesh that made vs all borne in originall synne it is flesh that maketh vs all regeâ—…erate in Christ. Our soule was spâ—…tted by the entrance into that flesh which was spotted Thereiore our soule is made cleane by the wasshing of that our flesh which was borâ—… in syn The flesh sayth Tâ—…rtullian is washed that the soule maie be cleansed The flesh is oynted that the soule maie be consecrated The â—…esh is sigued that the soule maie be defenced The flesh is shadowed with imposition of hand that the soule also may be defenced The flesh is fed with the body and blood of Christ that the soule may also be made sat of God Non possunt ergo separari in mercede quas opera coniung it They cannot therefore be parted in reward whom work ioyâ—…eth Hitherto hath Tertullian commended to vs the great priuileges which God geueth to our flesh The greatest of all which is the eating and drinking of the body and blood of Christ. As therefore we Catholiks beleue most vndoutedly not only that our soules be 〈◊〉 and redemed of Christ but euen that our flesh is the creature of God made with his own hands redemed by Christ and shall 〈◊〉 again at the later daie really and liue for euer with the soule of the iuste man euen so we beleue and professe that not only our soules but euen yâ— same flesh receaueth â—…to it the benefits of Chriâ—…s paâ—…on the Sacraments which he left to vs eating draiâ—…ing really vnder the formes of bread and wine the true substance of Christes body and blood This is the last supper of Christ which we Catholiks beleue and prosesse ¶ whâ—…t the supper of Christ is according to the doctrine of the Protestants and Sacramentaries with a confutation thereof NOw let vs consyder on the other syde what kinde of banket our new brethern teache They saye Christ geueth to the body bread and wyne but to the soule he geâ—…eth hym selfe by faith spirit and vnderstanding This opinion shall by Gods grace be straight waies proued faulâ—…ye and erroneous In dede before that Christ was made man such a banket as they speake of had bene much worth and was kept of Melchisedech and Abraham of the children of Israell eating Manna of the priests eating the bread and cakes which was offered according to the lawe For then with an earthly banket of bread of flesh and of wyne the ioyning of a spirituall eating by fayth and vnderstanding was the highest banket that could be made For as the spirit and fayth was vertuously occupied in lifting vp it self to God So was the body occupied in making a figure and signe of the true banket of Christ which was to come But when Christ had taken flesh of the virgyn Marye tunc 〈◊〉 Christum facta est then the truth was made by Christ. Truth perfoormed outwardly in fulfilling the corporall figures doth adde much vnto fayth and spirit In the fayth of good men and in the spirit of God Christ was euer man but not euer man in truth of nature Whilâ—…s Christ was only a spirit and only God so long the feast or banket which was geuen for hym had no better thing in it then the fayth and spirit of the eaters and drinckers for that was the highest gyft thâ—…t God as yet had geuen to man But all those eatings and drinkings which were in nature and in the law of Moyses though they had corporall meate with faith and spirit are so farre behind the supper of Christ after his manhod really assâ—…pted as the fayth of Christes incarnation is behind the incarnation it felfâ—… Mark the point good reader and thou shalt not be deceaued by false doctrine As Christ by his incarnation did geue a reall truth to the fayth of the old fathers and not a new spirite so in his last supper he geueth the same spirituall gyft to vs that he gaue to Abel Noe Abraham Moyses Dauid Daniell and such others but he geueth vs an other kind of truth then euer he gaue them The truthe made by Christ is the true flesh and blood which he tooke of his mother and the geuing of that truth to be eaten is the geâ—…ing of that flesh and blood vnder the formes of bread and wyne Therefore they that now say Christ geueth bread and wyne with spirituall gyfts wherein our soule eateth and drinketh Christes flesh and blood they graunt a good thing one way but an other way they take away the greatest goodnes that euer was geuen to man Their
Christ are his members which are incorporated by grace ioyned to him being their head This incorporation is wrought by the grace of baptisme in one degrâ—… and finisâ—…ed by the Sacrament of the altar in a higher degree whereof we shall speake hereafter more at large The naturall body of Christis that which he tooke of the virgine and gaue to death for vs. Now Christ in his last supper gaue yâ— substaÌ„ce of his natural body to be â—…aten of his disciples to th' intent they should be made one mysticall body euen by eating his flesh blood Seing then the naturall body of Christ is geuen to thâ—…end we maie be nerer knitte in the mysticall body according as S. Paul sayeth The bread which we breake is the communicating of our Lords body because we being many are one bread one body all that partake of one bread Seing I say we communicate the natural body to be made a mystical body in a greater vnitie then we had in baptisme any man of discretion may perceaue that in som sense euill men receaue not the thing or the effect of the body of Christ vnderstanding by the effect of body the vnitie of the mysti call body the obteining whereof is the end of the eating Which vnitie S. Augustine somtime calleth Rem ipsam The thing it selfe that is to say the last effect and benefite which ariseth to vs by worthy eating of the Sacrament of the altar After which sort S. Augustin saieth euill men are not to be said to eate the body of Christ adding therevnto this reason QuoniaÌ„ nec in membris computandi sunt Christi Because they are not to be rekoned among the membres of Christ. So that euil men eate the substance of the naturall body but not the thing for which that substance was geuen which is the vnite of the body mysticall because they eate not worthely Whereas worthy eating only maketh them to obteyne the vnitie of the mysticall body which is to abide in Christ and to haue Christ abiding in them Therefore S. Augustine him selfe sayeth Non quocunque modo quisquà m manducauerit carnem Christi biberit sanguinem Christi manet in Christo in illo Christus sed certo quodam modo Not how so euer a man eateth the flesh of Christ and drinketh the blood of Christ he abideth in Christ and Christ in him but by a certain kind of way As though S. Augustine sayd Euery waye the flesh and blood of Christ is receaued in the supper of our Lord But not euery way it is so receaued that we maye dwell in Christ and Christ in vs. S. Bregorse saith by euell men Salutis fructuÌ„ non percipiunt in comestione salutaris hostiae They receaue not yâ— fruit of saluation in yâ— eating of yâ— healthful sacrifice They eate yâ— healthfull sacrifice which surely is nothing els but the naturall body of Christ but the fruit they receaue not as many men take an healthfull medicine but because their bodies be euil affected it proueth not healthfull to them S. Bede coÌ„pareth him to Iudas who with his sinfull members presumeth to violate Illud inestimabile inuiolabile Domini corpus That inestimable and inuiolable body of our Lord. And how could he violate it with his members if with no part of his body he touched it I omit Arnobius vpon that Psalm 74. S. Ambrose Theodorite Decumenius Haimo Theophilact Anselme vpon S. Paule who agree with the rest of the Fathers that there is in euery mysterie the substance of the SacrameÌ„t and the effect thereof As well the euill as the good receaue the substance which in our Lords supper is the body and blood of Christ. But only the good receaue th' effect Which is the grace of spirituall nourishment to life euerlasting and the vnion with Christ. Now as we haue shewed by the holy Scriptures euen so haue we proued out of the holy Fathers that euell men recâ—…aue the body and blood of Christ as really as the purple is one still whether it be spotted or cutt as really as one meate is eaten of some to their hurte of others to their helth as really as good and euill Iewes had all one measure of Manna but not all one swetenes in yeâ—…ast thereof as really as Iudas did kisse trayterously the same body of Christ which him self as all euill men trayterously receaued at Christes supper If nowe the Apologie hath neither Scriptures nor Fathers it maie leaue those boasting vpbraidinges as though the Catholikes fled the triaâ—… of bâ—…th Scriptures and Fathers It is Gods cause we haue committed it to Gods word The Fathers when they agree in anie one article are knowen to haue yâ— spirite of Christ and they beare witnesse that we haue rightly expouÌ„ded the holy scriptures He that listeth to see more of the same argument 〈◊〉 read that which I haue writen vpon that saying of S. Paule He that eateth this bread vnworthely shal be gilty of the body and blood of our Lord. ¶ What is the true deliuerance of Christes body and blood IN the supper there is truly deliuered the body and blood of the Lord the flesh of the soÌ„ne of God quickening our soules The food of immortalitie grace truth life In these words no euil doctrine is conteined but all sound and Catholike In so much a man wold woÌ„der to what purpose these things are now brought being extreme contrary to yâ— which the Caluinists defend saing they wold seme to speake as the holy scriptures and primitiue Churche hath spoken Seing therefore these words conteine true doctrine I wil reason briefly out of them against their opinion that wrote them You say The body and blood of the Lord is truly deliuered in the suâ—…per If it be so it is truly present And seing none other thing can be warrauted to haue bene deliuered in the supper besyde that which Christ gaue with his own hands which semed bread whereof he sayd This is my body and besyde that which semed wine where of he sayd This is my blood by the doctrine of the Apologie it will folow that Chrisâ—…es body was deliuered truly vnder that which semed bread and his blood was deliuered truly vnder that which semed wine Or tell me Can 〈◊〉 any man proue out of the word of God that any other thing was deliuered in the supper of Christ besyde two kinds the one being bread vntill Christ had sayd This is my body The other being the cup of wine vntill Christ had sayd This is my blood Is there mention made of any other thing truly exhibited offered or deliuered to the Apostles Or doth the supper of Christ consist of fower kinds of bread body of wine and blood In what gospell reade we of bread and wine deliuered Bread and wine were takeÌ„ but body and blood were only deliuered For Christ sayd Take this is my body Drinke this is my
agreed for all scâ—…iptures call it the body and some doctours call it a signe But if these thinges can not both be true together awase with signes awaie with tokens let the worde of God be heard which saieth This is mâ—… body This is my blood Is it reason we obeie men or God If both stand in one degree men keping them selues vnder God let both be obeyed But if men draw from God he is more worth alone then all the men of the world What 〈◊〉 we now Will the sigâ—…e of the body and the body it selâ—…e stand together or no If not let the signe of the body which is not in scripture geue place let the body it selfe which is often times found there tarie still If the signe and the truth can not stand together the Sacramentaries must nedes be condemned who denie the truth which is in the scripture and preferre the signe before it which is not in the scripture If the signe truth doe both stand together yâ— Sacramentaries onlesse they repent be condemned because they denie the one part of yâ— twaine For they denie the true presence of Christs body and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine In what case stand these defenders which still be in state of damnation whatsoeuer be concluded true We verely teach and beleue the figure and the truth to stand together the supper of our Lord to be the signe of Christes body and to be his owne body The weaker part is the signe the greater is the truth But both doe not only stand together in one Sacrament but farther more the true nature of euerie Sacrament of Christ is to haue both that is â—…aie to haue oue certaine truth one certaine signe of the same truth The truth is hidden vnder the signe the signe is witnes of the truth Which thing once being declared you shall see the vaine doctrine of this Apologie with what kind of worthy Schoolâ—… the English Church is nowe gouerned to the greate 〈◊〉 and destruction of Christian soules Pardon me good reader if I stand somewhat long vpon the name of a Sacrament for in that word lieth hidden all the poyson of the Sacramentarie doctrine ¶ That the supper of our Lord is both the signe of Christes body and also his true body euen as it is a Sacrament GEue diligent care good Reader to the doctrine folowing Because as it is most true and profitable so is it somewhat hard I will shew that suche a signe as belongeth to Christes institution must nedes haue the same truth present whereof it is the Sacrament or holy signe The naturall sonne of God tooke naturall flesh of the virgin Marie to th' intent he being oâ—…e persone and there in hauing his humane nature common with men and his diuine common with God might by that meanes reconcile man to God againe His diuine personne staied in it the nature of man his manhod partly couered the diuine nature from the eyes of mortall men partly by maruelous signes and workes shewed the same to the faith of 〈◊〉 men Liâ—…ewise man consisteth of two parts of a soule inuisible and of a visible body The soule ruleth and gouerneth the body And the body sheweth to others by outward tokens what the soule thinketh and inwardly worketh Christ therefore intending to leaue certayn holy mysteries vnto his Church thereby to 〈◊〉 to her the fruite of his passion and death as well for regard of his owne selfe in whose personne two natures were vnited as for regard of vs who coÌ„siste of body and soule made the sayd holy Sacramentes to be of a dubble sort and nature so that the one part thereof might appere to the senses the other should lye priuie and only be seene by faith But as the outward workes and doctrine of Christ were vndoubted testimonies of the inward Godhed really present so the outward signe which is in the Sacraments is a most euident witnesse of the inward grace which they worke really present in them Aâ—…ter this sort Christ instituted the Sacrament of Baptisme that we might be newly borne and regenerated of water and of the holy Ghost as him selfe sayd to 〈◊〉 For the outward wasshing of the body in the naâ—…e of the Trinitie is an euident signe that the holy Ghost at the same instant by the meane of the word and water inwardly wassheth yâ— soule from synne Therefore S. Paul sayeth God hath saued vs by the wasshing of water and of the renewing of the holy Ghost The which holy scriptures S. Augustine embracing sayeth Aqua exhibens forinsecus Sacramentum gratiae spiritus operans intrinsecus beneficium gratiae regenerat hominem in vno Christo ex vno Adam generatum Water geuing outwardly the Sacrament or holy signe of grace and the holy Ghost working inwardly the benefite of grace begetteth man againe in one Christ which was begotten of one Adam Water is the outward signe Grace is yâ— inward benefite The outward water which wassheth the body is the signe of the inward grace which is wrought vpon the souâ—…e Here thou seest good Reader the signe of a thing and the thing it selfe to agree so well that the one is alwayes depending of the other Much lesse doth one of them hinder the other Except any man will say that Christ was not God in dede because his works were tokens signes of his Godhead which were a detestable saying Likewise the supper of Christ is both a signe of his body also his true body A signe outwardly the true body inwardly A signe by yâ— sound of words when it is first made a truth by the inward working of the holy Ghost by the meanes of the words of the censecration For as when the Priest spâ—…inkleth or dippeth the child in water saying 〈◊〉 wass he the in the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost At the same moment the holy Ghost wassheth the soule of the person baptized Right so when Christ or any lawfull Priest in his name taking bread blesâ—…ing duely sayeth This is my body making in those words an euident token of his body â—…eally present at the same instant the holy Ghost worketh inwardly the true substance of Jesus Christ really present vnder the forme of bread The outward pronouncing of the words ouer bread and wine is the Sacrament or holy signe that maketh and sheweth Christes body and the inward 〈◊〉 ning of the substance of bread into Christes reall body is the grace which is at the same tyme inuisâ—…bly wrought Thus in holy Scripture the signe of body and the true body stand so welâ—… together that both are true because one is true The which doctrine S. Chrisostom confessing writeth Sacerdotis oreverba proferuntur Et Dei virtute proposita consecrantur gratia Hoc est ait corpus meum hoc verbo proposita
Christ â—…ayd to the Leprouse man Be thou made cleane which words gaue a signe and token of cleansing therefore in deed he was made cleane Christ gaue a signe and token that synnes were forgeuen to him that had the palsey by these words Remittuntur tibi peccata tua Thie synnes are forgeuen the therefore in deed they were forgeuen Likewise Christ bad him take vp his bed goe home for a token that the sonne of man had power in earth to forgeue synnes therefore Christ in deed had power in earth to forgeue synnes Because his token and signe is neuer false When Iohn Baptiste had sent two of his disciples to know whether he were the man that shuld come or an other were to be looked for Christ gaue a token to the eyes and eares of the messengers that the blind sawe yâ— lame walked yâ— leepers were cleansed Therefore in deed it was so And he bad them tell S. Ihon what they had heard and seen Christ sayd to the deafe and domme man Adaperire Be thou opened and as it foloweth in the Gospell straight ways his eares were opened and the bond of his tonge loosed Thus might I goe through euery example of the whole Gospell and allways when at the doing of any thing an outward signe of an inward grace is rehersed that which the signe soundeth the grace worketh Marke well good Reader that this rule be not wreasted to that mere doctrine of Christ which he spake doing or making nothing For then I confesse many parables many obscure sayings were vttered to prouoke his audience to be humble to think of their owne ignorance to depend wholy of Christ to aske him the vnderstanding of the darke sayings But now I speake not of sole doctrine I speake of a worke that Christ maketh and of words ioyâ—…d with his worke In this case I say what so euer signe is outwardly made the same is inwardly wrought Christ sayeth to his Disciples Take ye the holy Ghost and withal he 〈◊〉 vpon them Beholde the word and the doing The outward word is a holy signe or Sacrament so is the outward doing which is breathing The inward worke is the perfoorming of thâ—… 〈◊〉 signe which the worde and breath did betoken Seing then Christ at his last supper did somewhat seing he tooke bread seing he blessed seing he brake seing he gaue seing at the tyâ—… of this outward doing and working he sayd somewhat which saying was a signe a Sacrament a figure a token a pledge a 〈◊〉 of his body we are assured by the word of God which neuer shall perish that Christ gaue at the same tyme his true body vnder the forme of that bread which he tooke and which by blessing he turned into his body Hath not now the Apologie depely reasoned Hath it not put a goodly foundation of the Sacramentarie doctrine to saye the supper of our Lord is the euident token of the body and blood of Christ thereby meaning thâ—… his body is not in dede really present wherein although it speake otherwise then the holy scripture â—…oth in the same case â—…et mangre the will of the makers thereof it proueth the Catholike faith because the signe that euery Sa crament of Christ maketh euidently to our senses is inwardly wrought in that creature whereof the signifying words are spoken By this true declaration of the nature of a Sacrament it is proued that so many Fathers as call the supper of Christ a signe or figure geue witnesse that it is also the truth it self And if the Apologie will disproue the reall presence of Christ vnder yâ— foorm of bread it must shew that his supper is not so much as a signe of his body and blood But as long as they graunt vs the sigâ—…e the word of God will conuince the truthe to be present which is signified ¶ The words of Christes supper are not figuratiue nor his token a common kind of tokens WHen I graunt the supper of Christ to be a signe a token a figure yet I do not graunt the words wherewith it is made to be figuratiue If I geue you a ring and say were this token for the remembrance of me I both geue a token of me and name a signe or token and yet my words are not figuratiue It is therefore to be noted that how many Fathers so euer call the Sacrament a figure yet none of them all teacheth these words This is my body and this is my blood to be words figuratiue For when they call it a figure they meane not a figure of Rhetorike but a mysticall figure and calling it a signe they meane not a naturall signe or token but a mysticall signe that is to say a secret and miraculous kind of token such as the state of the new Testament requireth the nature whereof is to doe that which it sayeth â–ª because Christ the speaker 〈◊〉 all that by his diuine power and substance which his word spoken by the mouth of his manhod in holy Sacraments doth vtter and signifie Now he that wold the Sacrament of Christ so to be a signe that he should not make that thing to be his body in deed whereof in word he sayeth This is my body he most wickedly denieth the Godhead of Christ. Ebion was an heretike who denying the diuine nature of Christ sayd him to be NuduÌ„ hominem a bare man Epiphanius will proue against Ebion that he is God How so Because he was geuen to the world for a signe As the holy Ghost had prophecied before of him when he sayd to Achaz Pete tibi signum ask to the a signe And for as much as he wold not ask then sayd the Prophete Ipse Dominus dabit vobis signum our Lord him self will geue you a signe Behold a virgin shall conceaue Now sayth Epiphanius Non potest is qui per omnia homo genitus est signi gratia mundo dari He yâ— is alltogether begotten as a man can not be geuen to the world for a signe For that which is customably don what signe of the Godhead could be therein Epiphanius therefore doth signifie that sith Christes birth was geuen to the world for a signe it could not be such a byrth as other men haue but it must be miraculous and the miracle stode in this point because he was truly born of a true virgin Muche more we may say sith the blessed Sacrament of the altar hath bene left vnto vs as a signe of the body and blood of Christ It could not be so if it were bare bread and wine and not in deed his body and blood what signe what secret token what miracle were in the eating and drinking of bare bread and wine if none other thing were made thereof As the ordinarie birth of man is no mere signe for Christ who is true God so the ordinarie eating of bread drinking of wine is no mete signe for
fed at Christes supper with bread and wine that is not in the word of God where it is sayd Eate This is my body The Apologie semeth to say that our bodies be not noâ—…rished with the body and blood of Christ for it assigneth body and blood to our soules as our bodies are fed with bread and wine But Christ gaue his body to noâ—…rish our bodies also And therefore sayd Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood ye shall not haue life in you That is as Cyrillus expoundeth it In corpore vestro in your body And therefore on the other syde Christ sayd he that eateth my flesh drinketh my blood hath life euerlasting and I will reyse him again in the last day Ego sayeth Cyrillus Id est corpus meum quod comedetur I will reyse him that is to say my body which shal be eaten Reysing belongeth to the body which falleth into putrefaction by death As therefore the body is reysed by Christes body so the body liueth in the state of grace by Christes body and such life is by spiritual nutriment which is receaued of the flesh of Christ really present in vs. For which cause Tertullian confessed that not only our soule but also our body seedeth vpon the body and blood of Christ to th' intent our soule may be made fat of God Likewise Ireneus writeth that our flesh is nourishâ—…d of the body and blood of our Lord. We may now see what errour they fall into who assigne the body and blood of Christ to our soules and bread wine to our bodies whereas there is no substance left of bread or wine but euen our bodies feede vpon Christes body as Ireneus Cyrillus and Tertullian haue sayd ¶ Nothing is wrought in the supper of Christ according to the doctrine of the Sacramentaries AFter the Apologie had spoken of communion vnder both kinds and of transubstautiation of which points as yet I speake not it returneth again in a confuse manner to the matter of the reall presence and thus it sayeth And in speaking thus we meane not to abase the Lords supper or to teache that it is but a cold ceremonie only and nothing to be wrought therein as many falsely slaunder vs we teache If they that pluck down altars and other ornaments of Christes supper if they that call the blessed Sacrament of the altar by so vile names as you and your scholars haue done be not of your number if they be not your derelings if they lerned not that coÌ„tempt of holy things and the denyall of the vnbloody sacrifice of you if they first persuaded not the licenciouse youth and faithlesse companie of men and wâ—…men in EnglaÌ„d rather by blasphemous names geuen to the Eucharist then by any word of God which you stil pretend and neuer allege then let it be thought that you meane not to abase the Lords supper But if you did set all the players and minstrels in the realme a work with such scoffes as your brotherhead inuented against the blessed body and blood of Christ I feare me you be not slaundered when you are sayd to teach it to be but a cold ceremonie sith you doubt not to call euen in this Apologie yâ— honour done to it the worshipping of bread whereas it is in deed the worshipping of the true body and blood of Christ. Wel you teach not that nothing is wrought or made in the supper Then by like you teach that somewhat is wrought there I wold fain see what it is which you teach to be wrought in the sup per. For where you say that Christ geueth him self in his supper that we may eate him by faith You teach a work of Christ in geuing him self a work of ours in eating him but not any thing wrought or made in the supper it self For the supper is that meate which is prouided to be eaten at the table of Christ. There you confesse bread and wine to be taken But seing you teache the same things notwithstanding he speaketh otherwise of them yet to tarie bread and wine stil I can not perceaue what substanciall thing you teachâ—… to be wrought in the supper concerning the matter of the supper which is bread and wine Now concerning the body and blood of Christ which you graunt to be geuen by faith I trow you teache not any thing to be wrought a new and made therein sithens they be impassible and therefore can not haue any thing made in them what is it then which you teache to be made in the supper Either bread and wine is the supper or the body and blood of Christ or both together For nothing els is there mentioned Bread and wine you say remayne still as they were before concerning their substaÌ„ce Then I say nothing is wrought in them The body and blood of Christ can haue nothing wrought in their substance because that wherein somewhat shal be made must suffer of that which worketh it therefore glose the matter how ye will you teache not any substanciall thing to be wrought in the supper of Christ except you call the geastes them selues the supper And then I weâ—…e they must be eaten vp of some body in so much as euery supper is prouided to be eaten We teache the substance of bread and wine to be made the substance of Christes body and blood And that is yâ— true work made in the supper of Christ where the mutable creatures are turned into the immutable substance of Christ. which work sith you deny bable what you wil you teache nothing to be wrought in the supper of Christ. ¶ The reall presence of Christes flesh is proued by the expresse naming of flesh blood and body which are names of his humane nature FOr we affirme that Christ doth truly and presently geue his owne self in his Sacraments in Baptisme that we may put him on and in his supper that we may eate him by faith and spirite and may haue euerlasting life by his crâ—…sse and blood Heare ye not how they affirme that Christ presently geueth his own self wold not a maÌ„ thinke they meant honestly and truly But sith they can make the words of Christ figuratiue when they lyst wonder not if they require their own words to be taken figuratiuely They meane not that Christ doth geue him self presently to our bodies and soules as is requisite to the presence of the flesh and blood of man why then vse they such words Uerily because they see the Scriptures so playne the Fathers and Councells so manifest the â—…aith and practise of the Church so euident for yâ— reall presence of Christ that in no wyse they may confesse any other thing then they doe And yet on the other side being fully determined to sticke to their desperate opinion that we really neither eate nor drinke vnder forme of bread and wine
geuen before vnder Moyses For who can doubt but manna dyd in his owne substaÌ„ce farre passe bakers bread and wine of the grape Is this the end of this long disputation of so many differences put betwene Moyses God the Father and Christ betwene manna Christes incarnatioÌ„ his supper betwene eating by body alone by faith alone by bodie faith together Is this al to haue by yâ— gift of Christ only a token of him selfe in bread and wine how is then the bread which is eaten able to make vs liue for euer if the eating it by faith only at Christes supper make vs lyue for euer and yet we had it by faith before of the fathers geuing then Christe geneth him selfe by none other meane sauing bread and wine then his father had done and doth he in vain trow ye distinct his own gift from his fathers so many waies is it then all one to eate of Christ alone and to eate Christ and of Christ Uerily if concerning our taking of it the thing were throughly one sauing bread and wine he wold not make so many differences But if Christes gift concerning our partaking differ front his fathers gift in tyme in maner in degree why should it be so but that Christ geueth for a greater ioyning of vs to him â–ª yâ— same in truth of nature whiche his father in faith and spirite gaue before as the necessarie preparation to the sonnes gifte His father is only spirite and truth and therefore geueth Christe really to the worlde to be fed of spiritually by vs. But the sonne is fleshe for the worde is made flesh and so geueth really to vs the gifte of that flesh whiche he toke not for his own sake but for ours to th ende we might really eate the spirite of God which is in it Neither let it be strange to you yâ— Christ semeth to geue more to vs then his father for he geueth more both for vs vppon the Crosâ—… and to vs in his supper then his father doth outwardly geâ—… but yet all his gifts come srom his father because his father gaue his only begotten sonne to vs in the truth of our fleshe to th end he should geue the same flâ—…she in his owne person both for vs to vs that by such an excellenâ—… meane we might 〈◊〉 the nerer ioyned to God him self Although the conference of the words of the Ghospel do proue sufficiently that which I haue sayd yet I wil shew also that S. Chrisostom toke this chapiter in the same sense that I haue done First he noteth the diuersitie of persons in that Christ sayd se non patâ—…em dare him selfe to geue and not his Father Secondly the distinct places of the chapiter where Christ speaketh in the one of eating his Godhead by faith in the other of eating his body Primum de diuinitate c. de corpore circa fineÌ„ inquit Panis quem ego dabo c. Christ speaketh firâ—…t oâ—… his Godhead of his body he sayth toward the end the bread which I will geue is my flesh Thirdly S. Chrysostom noteth that the word panis bread signifieth either the doctrine of Christ and saluatioÌ„ and faith in him or els his body By which words who seeth not yâ— he distincteth eating by faith alone from eating yâ— body it self The body therefore is it self eaten otherwyse then by fa th Fourthly he sayth vpon these words my flesh is verily meat that Christ sayd so to th end they should not thinke him to speake in parables And yet by flesh to meaue the signe of his flesh or by eating to meane beâ—…uing is to speake in parables Last of all he sayth it is brought to passe by the meat which he hath geuen vs that we should not only by loue but also in dede it selfe be turned into yâ— flesh of his And again Christ mingleth him selâ—…e with vs not by faith only but he maketh vs his booy in it self But if we 〈◊〉 Christ by faith only loue surely we should be reformed to him by none other meane theÌ„ by faith loue But now we are turned from our corruptible nature and are made able to liue for euer not only by the gift of faith and charitie but euen by that we receaue Christes flesh in dede it selâ—…e in his owne substance truthe and nature All these things did S. Chrysostom gather out of Christes words I nede not to shew in many lines that Theophilact and Euthymius folow that same order in expounding S. Ihon which S. Chrysostom before had vsed For I think no man who knoweth their trade of wryting doubteth of it The former saith vpoÌ„ these words The bread whiche I wil geue is my flesh that Christ manifestly in that place speaketh of the Sacramentall communion of his body and that yâ— bread which is eaten of vs in yâ— mysteries is not only a certein resembling of our Lords flesh sed ipsa caro Domini but the flesh of our Lod it selfe Euthymius likewyse agreeth that Christ is bread two ways according to his diuine and humane nature Non autem dixit quem do sed quem dabo He sayd not which I doe geue but which I will geue For he minded to geue it in his last supper Now as Christ is bread two ways so is he eaten two ways As God he is eaten by faith alone as man geuing his flesh to vs at hiâ—… last supper he is eaten not only by faith but in very dede The later way of eating the Sacramentaries take away ¶ The like precept made to men oâ—…lawful age for caring Chrisâ—…es flesh as was made generally for 〈◊〉 sheweth his 〈◊〉 to be as really present iâ—… his 〈◊〉 as 〈◊〉 is in 〈◊〉 WHen Christ had promised to geue his flesh to be eaten and the Iewes had asked how he was able to doe it Christ answered Except yâ—… eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood ye shall not haue life in you he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath life euerlasting and I will reise him in the last day These words first were spoken to men of lawfull age as it appereth by the circumstance who are bound to receaue the blessed Sacrament of Christes supper if no lawfull impediment stop them to th end they may nourish and maitein the life which they toke in baptism and increase it to a higher degree of vnitie with Christ him selfe But baptism by our aduersaries confession may and ought to be geuen to infants and yet it could not doe them any good if it conteined not in it self the strength to regenerate them in Christ seing they are not able for their parts to beleue actually Mary if baptism really make them a new creature saue them as S. Paule speaketh the nourishment which we receaue in yâ— SacrameÌ„t of â—… altar being now of perfect vnderstaÌ„ding must nedes be also reall For as â—…regorius of
according to yâ— Hebrew worde Lehem which betokeneth all what soeuer is to be eaten of man but espe nally bread as being the chief fruite of the earth After which sorte when Christ saith in yâ— Ghospel man lyueth not by bread alone but by euery worde which procedeth from the mowth of God he meaneth by the name of bread al kinde of natural nourishment which man taketh by moâ—…th without all whiche he may liâ—…e either by naturall bread as Manna was or if it so please God to say the worde without any meat at all as Moyses and Elias fasted fortie days according to which generall taking of bread we aske in our Lordes praier our daily and supersubstantiall bread that is to saye all necessary sustenance for body and sowle It is further to be noted that in holy scriptures when one thinge is conuerted into an other the later thinge is many times called by the name of the first thing not because it is still the first but because it was made from the first As when it is sayd that the rod of Aron deuoured the rods of the Coniurers of Pha rao where that is called a rodde which was in dede a serpent and not then a rod but it is named a rod because from a rod it was turned into a 〈◊〉 Likewise Adam is called earth because he was made of earthe Thirdly a thing is callâ—…d in holy scripture not only as it is but also as it semeth outwardly to be so the Angel which the godly wâ—…men sawe at the sepulcher of Christ is called a yonge man because he appered so although in dede he were not so Which things being wel pondâ—…red it is casie to satisâ—…ie them that saye the holy communion is bread still because after consecration it is called bread To whome I answere first that it is called bread because it was bread and still semeth bread but that notwithstanding it is flesh and was made flesh from of the substaâ—…ce of bread being conuerted into flesh by the almightie wordes of Christ who taking bread sayd in the way of blessinge of thanks geuing this is my body Secondly I answere that in dede after consecration it is a kinde of bread and foode not that whiche it was before but ineâ—…ably bitter and of more price and more worthy of that name of true bread then it was before that is to say it is the true flesh of â—…hrist which nourysheth the bodies and soules of the faithfull men to liâ—…e euerlasting And to proue this answere true it may please the Reades to remember that Christ called himself the bread of life and named the gifte of his supper the meate which tarieth to life euerlasting the liuely bread which came downe from heauen After which meaning he saith and the bread which I wil gene is my â—…esh Behold the kind of bread Agayne S. Paule saith The bread which we breake is it not the communicating of our Lords body For we being many are one bread one body all we that partake of the one bread all partake of the one bread and it be the bread which we breake surely that which is brokeÌ„ can not be any material bread but is only the body of Christ the bread of life And least any man should thinke that in saying the name of bread in Christes supper standeth for meate for flesh I speake without sufficient authoritie besyde the authoritie of yâ— scriptures already alleged which can not be otherwise taken let him also weigh together with me how coÌ„formably the auncieÌ„t Fathers taught the same doctrine S. Ignatius sayth Panem Dei volo quod est caro Christi I desier the bread of God which thing is the flesh of Christ Which thing in the nenter gender is none other to say then which substance Iustinus the Martyr affirmeth first that the Deacons geue to euery man the bread wine and water which are coÌ„secrated with geuing of thankes Where he calleth them by the â—…ames which they had before consecration And sâ—…raight expounding yâ— names of bread wine and water which they haue by consecration he writeth thus Hic cibus apud nos Eucharistia nominatur This foode is called with vs the Eucharist Wherefore for all three names he putteth this one name of food wherein they all meete Neither so content he sayth yet againe For we take not these things as common bread and drink but we haue learned the meat which is consecrated by the words of prayer taken of him to be the flesh and blood of Christ. So that first he declareth him self by bread wine and water to meane the matter of the SacrameÌ„t Secondly he confesseth the consecration to make them a more heauenly food Thirdly he denieth them to be now common bread and drinke Fourthly he affirmeth it to be that kind of foode which is the flesh and blood of Christ. Of the same very Sacrament S. Hilarie sayth Nos vere verbum carnem cibo Dominico sumimus We take the word truly â—…esh in our Lords meate Where he calleth the thing which is geuen at Christes supper cibum Dominicum the meate which our Lord geueth meaning it not to be any more common bread but that kind of bread which is also called meate or food S. Cyprian sayth Christ offered bread and wine suum scilicet corpus sanguinem that is to say his own body and blood Mark the kind of bread S. Ireneus sayth It is not now to wit after coÌ„secration common bread but the Eucharist S. Ambrose asketh why after coÌ„secration we say in oâ—…r Lords prayer Geue vs this day our daily bread And him self aunswereth He calleth it bread in dede Sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hoc est supersubstantialem That is to say as S. Hierom expoundeth it qui super omnes substantias sit such a bread which is aboue all substances And yet farther S. Hierom sayth Panem illum petimus qui dicit Ego sum panis viuus we aske that bread which sayd I am the liâ—…ely bread But to return againe to S. Ambrose he concludeth Non iste panis est qui vadit in corpus sed ille panisvitae aeternae qui animae nostrae substantiam fulcit It is not that bread which goeth into the body but that bread of euerlasting life which holdeth vp the substance of our soule Gregorius of Nyâ—…a speaking of the Sacrament of the altar saith Panis est absque semine absque aratione absque alio humano opere nobis paratus It is bread prouided for vs without seed without plowing and without any other work of man S. Augustine saith wheÌ„ would flesh vnderstand this thing that he called bread flesh Isychiâ—…s nameth the bread whiche S. Paule saith is eaten vnworthely nutritorem substantiae nostrae intelligibilis the nourisher of our intelligible or spiriâ—…all substance Sedulius speaking of the bread whiche Christ gaue to
about the Lambe The mysterie we speake of taketh not away any truth from the thing but sheweth the maner of the doing to be spirituall For the offering is made without slaughter the rosting without operation of sensible fier the eating without coÌ„suming of the meat the sprinkling without diuision or losse of the blood But as the incarnation being wrought without the seede of man did not cause the 〈◊〉 of Christ to be the lesse true euen so the inuisible changing of the substance of bread and wine into his body and blood the vnbloody offering the Sacramental eating and drinking doth rather shew to all faithfull people the worker of so high a mysterie to be true God then any whyâ—… hinder the reall presenâ—… of his flesh and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine ¶ The Prophecie and figure of Manna GOd sayd to Moyses Behold I wil raine bread to thee froÌ„ heauen Christ sayd worke the meate abyding to life euerlasting which the Sonne of man will geue you This is the bread which came downe from heauen And the bread which I will geue is my flesh for the life of the world The Israelits said Manhu What is this For they knew not what is was The Capharnaits striued saying How can this man geue vs his flesh to eate Moyses pointing to Manna sayth This is the bread which our Lord hath geuen you to eate Christ pointing to that true Manna coming down from heauen which him self made sayeth Take and eate this is my body which is geuen for you Moyses sayd this and Christ this Moyses sayd is Christ is Moyses the bread Christ my body Moyses which our Lord hath geuen Christ our Lord sayth which is geuen Moyses to you Christ for you Moyses to eate Christ sayd take and eate The bread which Moyses shewed was not the substance of wheaten bread but heauenly Neither the bread which Christ geueth is the substance of wheaten bread but the true bread which by the mysterie of the incarnation came from heauen The bread which Moyses shewed was made by Angels of such earthly stuffe and vapours as they found in the â—…ppermost part of the ayer And the bread of Christ was made by the Angell of great Councel of such earthly stuffe as he found vppon the table of the Paschall Lambe which was bread and wine willing also his Priestes who are his Angels in earth to doe and make the same The bread which Moyses shewed was truly eaten of the Israelites within the cumpasse of that white and cleare dew which they gathered And how much more is the body of Christ eaten of the Apostles and of other Christians within the cumpasse of yâ— forme of bread which they receaue from the altar of God The bread whereof Moyses him self bearing but a figure of the truth at this tyme spake was a signe not the truth The bread which Christ being the truth it self geueth is both a signe the truth The bread which Moyses shewed was perfect in his own nature before the Israelites did eate it Euen so the meate which Christ geueth is perfect in the Sacrament it self vnder the forme of bread before we do 〈◊〉 it whether more or lesse were gathered of Manna oue measure was always found in the ende to signifie that sith whole Christ is vnder euery part of yâ— forme of bread whether you take a greater peece of the forme or a lesse euer the same substance of Christes body is wholy receaued of euery Communicant Neither is it sufficient to fulfil this figure if we say that euery man hath the vertue and grace of Christes body geuen him by faith and spirit for the measure of that grace is as S. Paule teacheth diuers in diuers men according to the measure that Christ geueth it in Some haue greater giftes and some lesse and no one member is the whole body But Manna was in one measure to all men Euen so the substaÌ„ce of Christes body vnder the forme of bread is geuen to all that receaue the sayd forme in one measure and equally concerning the body it self For euery man receaueth the whole As wel the good men as the 〈◊〉 did eate Manna But the euill did eate with 〈◊〉 but to the good it gaue the taste of all swetenes Right so yâ— body and blood of Christ which is vnder the forme of bread and wine is as really taken of the euill as of the iust But they take it to their damnation these to their saluation He that marketh these comparisons shall easily perceaue that the holy Ghost both by the figure and by the truth condemneth their false doctrine who teache the reall body of Christ not to be geuen vnder the forme of bread and wine after consecration is once made ¶ The figure of the old Testament MOyses hauing offered oxen to God powred one halfe of the blood vpon the altar the other halfe he powred into basins And after he had readen the booke of 〈◊〉 betwene God and the Israelites and the people had promised to kepe the conditions thereof he sprinkled them with the blood saying This is the blood of the Testament which our Lord vpon all this talke hath made with you Christ intending to offer him self vnto his Father and certaine yeres before publishing to his people the conditions of his new Testament at the last in his supper he geueth his own blood the very same blood which con firmeth the new agreemeÌ„t made with vs And in stede of â—…ling vs with it he toke the chalice and gaue thanks and gaue to his Disciples saying Drink ye all of this for this is my blood of the new Testament Which shal be shed for many for the remission of synnes The figure and the truth answer maruelously as they may finde who will conferre the partes It is sufficient at this tyme to note that as the blood of the old Testament was in the 〈◊〉 or cup really whence it was sprinkled so the blood of Christ which is the blood of the new Testament is really in the chalice whence it is receaued As the noune blood in the old Testament which is but a figure of the new yet was not taken figuratiuely but properly for true naturall blood so much more the noune blood in Christes words which appertein to the new Testament it self may not be taken tropically but euen as the word most literally doth sound As the substance of blood which Moyses spake of was shewed vnder the accidents of the naturall blood of calues so the substance of the blood whereof Christ spake was shewed vnder the accidents of wine For as Iacob had Prophecied Christ wasshed his garments and cote in wine because he tooke the â—…orme of wine to couer his owne humane nature which was his garment in respect of his Godhead as S. Paule sayeth Habitu inueÌ„tus vt homo Found in his apparell as man ¶ The prophecit and figure
then the image and figure of it When we will shew how far a thing is from that which it is called doe we not say Hoc nomine tenus tale est noÌ„ re ipsa This is such a thing in name and not in dede So that the naming of a thing without being the true thing it self is the nakedest and barest thing that can be â–ª Our aduersaries wold the bread after consecration to be the body and blood of Christ in name only not in truthe which being so the chalice of blessing bread which is broken should rather be called partaking because a sinal part of yâ— truth is taken then communicating where all is made common But S. Paule sayd it is a communicating and S. Chrysostom sayeth he did it to shew that it was more than partaking therefore it is a false doctrine to say that yâ— true body and blood of Christ is not really vnder the forme of bread which is broken and within the chalice which we blesse Let vs conferre the scriptures and seke the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 communicare in other places of the new Testament we shall find that it standeth to geue and make common the thing it self rather then the shadow or name thereof S. Luke in the Actes of the Apostles sayeth Multitudinis cre dentium erat corvnum animavna nec quisquà m eorum quae possidebat aliquid suum esse dicebat sed erant illis omnia communia Of the multitude of beleuers there was one hart and one soule neither any man sayd any thing of that he possessed to be his own but all things were common to them In which place we haue it defined what communicating is truly it is such a geuing that all is made common and nothing chalenged as his own If then the chalice of blessing which we blesse be the communicating of Christes blood and the bread which we breake the communicating of his body all the blood and all the body is made common to them that receaâ—…e that chalice and that bread If all be common then we doe not receaue only a spirituall remembrance of Christes body or a figure and signe of his blood For in so doing we had not all but rather the smallest part In so doing Christ kept the best back and chalenged somewhat yea far the best part to his owne self and we should not haue it Likewise when S. Paul sayeth that the Gentils did communicate with the spirituall goods of the Iewes for his word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he meaneth not a ioyning in name in shewe in figure in signes but in the truth of faith and in the grace of God and in the redemption of Iesus Christ Last of al S. Paul shewing Christ to call the faithfull people of God his brethren and children reasoneth thus Quia ergo pueri communicaueruÌ„t earni sanguini ipse similiter participauit ijsdem Because therefore the children did communicate â—…lesh and blood him self likewise tooke parte with them In which place communicating is the naturall knitting and vniting which men haue to flesh and blood so that whether communicating be spoken by flesh and blood or by the goods of the world the communicating of them is the hauing of them common or making them common Euery where communicating importeth a great and liberall geuing or taking which can not be fulfilled with the only figure and bare name of body and blood but requireth the things them selues in truth of nature as holy Ireneus a disciple of the Apostles scholers writeth against those that taught that our flesh could not aryse againe to glory Vani sunt omnes c. They are all vayne that denyd the saluation of the flesh and despyse the regeneration of it saying that it is not able to receaue the state of incorruptibilitie So in dede to wyt according to those sayinges neither our Lorde hath redemed vs with his blood neither the chalice of thankes geuing is the coÌ„municating of his blood neither the bread which we breake is the communicating of his body For blood is not but from the vaynes and flesh and from the other substaÌ„ce which is belonging to man in the which substance yâ— worde of God truly made redemed vs with his blood S. Ireneus accomptâ—…th it a great absurditie that the bread which we breake should not be the communicating of Christ his true body the chalice of the Encharist the communicating of his blood Of what blood of the same which 〈◊〉 from vaynes from flesh and from the rest of our substance And S â–ª Ireneus bringeth this interpretation to proue that we that receyue the sayd body and blood receyue therein a gyft sufficient to raise our flesh at the later daye But surely fignes and figures of Christ wil not raise our flesh for so much as they are perceaued only by vnderstanding and be not of the same nature and kinde whereof our flesh is And S. Ireneus neuer dreamed of blood that should be receaued from heauen but only of that blood which is in the chalice and cup of Christes supper ¶ The presence of Christ in his supper is proued by the one bread which being receaued of vs maketh all vs one body VNuspanis vnum corpus multi sumus omnes qui de vno pane participamus we being many are one bread and one body all we that partake of the one bread He that listeth only to mark the order of S. Paules words may quickly perceaue what his meaning is concerning the true doctrine of the Sacrament of the altar First he described our Lordes supper by the name of the chalice of blessing which we blesse and of the bread which we breake Secondly he saith that eche of them is the communicating the one of Christ his body the other of his blood Last of all he feareth not to say that the partakers of that bread all are one bread and one body Who seeth not that he is come from blessing and breaking to communicating and from communicating to vniting making one so that vse we what wordes we please in vttering the matter call we it partaking eating drinking or communicating certainly it is so nigh a ioyning that a very vnion which is to say one thing is made of that which is receaued in this blessed Sacrament and of those that receaue the same one thing I say is made of both yea one of al not only he that receaueth this one bread is made one with the bread but he is one also with al them that any where within the Churche worthely receaue of the same bread for when two things meâ—…e in a thirde they mete also betwene them selues The reason of this great ioyning is the reall presence of Christes body and blood in the Sacrament for seing the bread receaued is Christ he is so strong a bread and foode that he can be ouercomed of
partake of the bread which is broken if the bread broken â—…e materiall we partake of the material bread and yet the bread whereof we partake is by S. Paule named one bread Therefore we partake of one materiall bread which can not be so For seing the bread is broken it is not still one These and many like absurdities can neuer be escaped except we say as the truth is that the bread broken is the flesh of Christ vnder the form of bread for our partaking is named of taking part of that which is brokeÌ„ but we al that are one patake only of Christ him selfe and be one in him alone and be not one in any materiall bread Therefore Christ is the bread broken by the reason of the form of bread vnder the which he is and the bread coÌ„municated and the bread which we are for that he is the cause of our mysticall coniunction For albeit the mysticall bread and body which we are be in seuerall persons and diâ—…tinct proprieties of men yet the substancial cause of that bread which we are is only found in the person and substaÌ„ce of Christ who is the beginner mainteyner and the end of that our mysticall body from Christ as from the cause of our vâ—…itie the same vnity procedeth to vs in an effect wrought by him But either to make vs one materiall bread or to make it being stil bread in substance to be notwithstanding the communicating of Christes body to vs or to be the bond which holdeth vs together by partaking thereof it is a doctrine which can not hang together And because the matter is of great importauce I will yet intreat farther of this our vnion ¶ Now we are one mysticall body in Christ. THe Church is one body more then one wâ—… First because it is called and holden together with one sâ—…ite of God Next because it is grounded in one faith 〈◊〉 â—…reaching of one true Gospel maiÌ„teined with one hope perfited â—…th one charitic watered with one baptisme of spiritual regeneâ—…ation redemed by one Mediatour ruled by one head 〈◊〉 to one husband ioyned in mariage to one fâ—…esh of Christ rewarded with one essentiall fruition of one euerlasting God The first foundation of this one cumpany which is the house the tabernacle yâ— teÌ„ple of God is the blessed Trinitie of whome by whome and in whome all things are In his diuine spirite we mete and be one not only with the Patriarches Prophets but also we therein be one with the Aungels Thrones and Seraphins in so muche that he vseth them for our ministery who neuer synned or swarued from the way of truth righteousnes Next after God all mankinde putteth his euerlasting confidence in the flesh of Iesus Christ who is the only Mediatour of all men that fell by synne either actuall or els originall there is no saluation in any other man Christ toke really our flesh to make it an iustrument whereby we might be brought again to God Therefore he both offered the same flesh vnto God euen to death and gaue the same flesh to be partaken of vs for the obteining of euerlasting life The partaking whereof is called in holy scripture by the name of eating drinking because although it be graunted to vs by diuers meanes yet the chiefe meane of all is when we eate his flesh and drinke his blood The first and most necessary meane of all is faith without which it selfe in men of lawfull age or without the Sacrament thereof in children none other 〈◊〉 can serue But faith alone though it worke by charitie doth not always â—…uffise because it is conueaient for a corporall substance such as the flesh of Christ is to be partaken by corporall meanes also For seing the corruption of our fleshe was the thing whiche did most incline vs to synne as the sonne of God toke our true flesh without synne to th end by it he might purge our synnes so he instituted diuerse Sacraments in certeine corporal things and in mystical words whereby the grace of his flesh might â—…e applied to our flesh and by that meane also to come to our soâ—…es Against the corrupâ—…ion of our birth he would vs to be washed in water which element his own fleshe had sanctified in the flud Iordan against the tentation of the deuill he coÌ„firmeth vs with the holy Ghost In stede of the custome of synning he geueth vs heauenly nourishement as well in body as in soule By these meanes I say we are one body in Christ of the which faith and charitic are meanes only spirituall the Sacraments are both spirituall meanes through the inward grace corporal through the visible formes of them The meanes only spirituall be neuer changed sith our faith is all one with that of the Patriarches but our Sacraments differ from theirs as whiche conteine the truth whereof the old Sacraments were only the shadow Hitherto it hath bene said that we can not be of the mysticall body of Christ vnlesse we partake his flesh either by faith or by the Sacraments For as S. Augustine writeth Albeit in some the grace of faith be so great that they are now assigned to the body of Christ and to the holy temple of God yet in some it is such as doth not suffise to obteine the kingdom of heauen as in the Cathecumenis as in Cornelius antequà m SacramentoruÌ„ participatione incorporaretur Ecclesiae before that he was incorporated to the Church â—…y paraking of the Sacraments The SacrameÌ„t wherein we are first incorporated to Christ is wel knowen to be Baptim which seing it consisteth of speaking holy words and of washing with the elemeÌ„t of water it is not to be denied but that God worketh our incorporation by corporall meanes also and not by faith a lone And as it is not enough for hauing the nature of a man to be conceaued only except he be also borne so if when he is borne he be not fed he can not long coÌ„tinew a man Therefore as the Sacrament of baptim beginneth the incorporation specially nowe when we al are baptized in our infancy euen so after the we are come to the yeres of discretion an other SacrameÌ„t is requisite to mainteyne vs in the body of Christ which is called the SacrameÌ„t of his body and blood whereof Christ said he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood tarieth in me and I in him Now sâ—…ing the sacrament which maketh vs tary in the body of Christ must â—…edes be a corporal thing as baptism was and yet it hath none other nature then that which Christ geueth it he nameth it his own body and blood we ought to confesse that the Sacrament which nourisheth the state of life euerlasting in vs is the body and blood of Christ corporally present that is to say
it yet the godhed remayned corporally dwelt in it and the soule returned to it agayne the third day Therefore when Christ saith This is my body which is geuen for you I am bound to beleue that his body is neither without soule nor godhead for ells it were not truly said it is geuen for vs yf it were not profitable to vs. Thus you se that I beleue al that words of Christ together and that you not doing so are without ye do repeut certeine to be condemned for not beleuing these words take eate This is my body You wyll say ye beleue these words yet not carnally but spiritually as it is mete for Christes wordes to be beleued O syr he that assigneth a meane howe he will beleue Christes wordes in that very faut sheweth hym selfe not to beleue them for belefe inuenteth nothing of his owne but followeth the autoritie of God that speaketh I beleue in deed that Christes words can not be carnal as you take carnal words for foule and grosse meaninges But I see it to be a very cleane and pure meaning that the moste pure substance of the flesh of Christ should he geuen vnder the form of bread to thend it may be eaten of vs and the chiefe and cleanest thing that we vse to eate is bread To geue therefore the chiefe and most healthfull flesh in the world to be eaten vnder the form of the purest eatable thing is a very pure and cleane work far from all carnality You will say it is more pure if it be rather beleued to be eaten only of yâ— harte of man by faith spirit then by mouth and body I answere that is no pure eating of a corporall thing which taketh away the truth of corporall eating Againe both ways of eating are better then one of them alone I beleue his real flesh to be eaten with hart and mouth to be eaten with body minde to be eaten in deede and in faith Here faileth your belefe because of two true thinges you beleue but one the other you discredit To be short let vs imagine him that beleueth the real presence of Christes body and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine to stand before the seate of Christes iudgement and that Christe asketh him why he did beleue and worship his body and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine May he not wel answere in this wise I beleued so and did so because your maiestie taking bread and hauing blessed douted not so say This is my body which words al my forefathers vnderstode to be spoken properly and to be true as they sounded therefore at the commandement of my prelats I adored your body vnder the form of bread If Christ reply that he had preachers who tought him otherwise and cryed to him to beware least he committed idolatrie first that obiectiâ—… might not be made to any man that died aboue fiftie yeres past because no preacher taught publikely any such doctrine Secondly if so much were said to one of our time he might answere that he had 〈◊〉 forefathers and moe preachers and those much more anncient and more honest men who required him to beleue Christes wordes and to worship the body of his maker Well now we are come to the point all the Catholikes haue preaâ—…hed with one accorde that it is the true body of Christ and the Gospell witnesseth that Christ 〈◊〉 This is my body Here is the word of God and the tradition and preaching of man ioyned together I aske whether it be possible for Christ who requireth nothing so earnestly of vs as briefâ—… to 〈◊〉 that simple man who being otherwise of good 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his word and his forefaâ—… and the preachers agreable with both or not Answere me for what fault shall this poore man be condemned First to beleue Christ it is no fault Secondly Christ faid this is my body Thirdly he being yet an infant was of his parentes taught that to be the body of Christ which was holden ouer the Priests head Fourthly as many and moe preache vnto him when he cometh to laufull age and say this is the body of Christ as there are that aâ—…terward preache the contrary Tell me then what was his fault for which he may be coÌ„demned If you say his eyes told him it was not yâ— body of Christ he will answere that for the reuerence he bare to the word of God he denied the fensible instruction of his eyes as geuing more credit to Christ then to him selfe Is that a fault If you reply that by that meaâ—…es he might haue worshipped the roâ—… in steâ—…de of Christ he wil answere he knoweth not what you meane he neuer had any rok shewed him by most graue authority which was said to be Christ. If any suche thing had bene taught him he for his parte was so obedient to beleue so willing to adore Christ that he would haue done any thing which had bene commanded to him vnder the name of Christ or of his religion Is this a fault why the poore man should be condemned No surely seing the Prophet Dauid saieth Vt iumentum factus sum apud te I am become as it were a beast before thee It is â—…andable saith Euthymius that in the sight of God we take our selues as beastes which being so I can deuise no fault in this poore and simple man who if he be deceaued he is deceaued by Christ by his forefathers by diuerse Catholike and vertuous Preachers by yâ— vertue of humility of obedience of pure loue towards God But on the other side if Christ call one of them before him who denieth his reall presence aske him why he did not beleue the Sacrament of the altar to be the body of Christe what will he answer for himselfe â–ª Will he say Syr I beleâ—…ed your body to sit at the right hand of God the Father and therefore that your body was not in the Priestes hand Why then thinkest thou that I am not able to make the same which is at the right hand of my father to be alsâ—… present vnder the form of bread Sir whether you be able or no I can not say but I haue hard many preachers tel that one body caÌ„ not be at one time in diuerse places O howe dreadfully would Christ answere in this case Did not those preachers whom thou preteÌ„dest to folow say alwaies they preached to thee the sincere word of God Did they not by that colour ouerthrow monasteries Churches altars images of Saintes and mine owne image and crosâ—…e Did they not denie the sacrifice of the Masse praing for the dead and such like auncient vsages only for pretence of the word of God And now see how inexcusable they thou art I said Take eate this is my body I said this to twelue men I gaue eche of them my body â—…ad
affirmed him to rule Angels and al that euer was made by God and his scholars called him a Prophet and the sonne of God whiche notwithstanding for so much as they beleued 〈◊〉 not to be God by nature the Catholiks neuer douted to say that they taught him to be nudum hominem a naked and bare man Right so whatsoeuer holynesse be annexed to bread and wine be it the signe of neuer so great a vertue and efficacie be it called neuer so much the body and blood of Christ yet if it remain stil in the former substance if the truth whiche it is appointed to signify be absent it is bare bread and bare wine a bare token of Christes body and blood Amend your belefe M. Iuell if you will haue vs to amend our termes Iuel We fede not the people with bare figures San. The question is not how ye fede the people by your doctrine but what signe you teache the Sacrament it self 〈◊〉 be whether it be suche a signe as hath present in a secrete manner the truth signified thereby or els whether it be the signe of a truth absent in substance For two kind of signes there are one which by the truth of his own substance considered and well vnderstaÌ„ded doth signifie an other manner of truth belonging to it selfe as when a loaf of bread beinge true bread in substance is set to signifie true bread also but yet in that respect as bread is there to be bought sold An other signe there is where the truthe signified is absent in substance As when an iuy bush doth signifie wine to be sold. This later kind of signes or figures is vtterly naked bare and without the truth which is signified The question is whether of these two kinds of signes is in the Sacrament of Christes supper The Catholikes say the best and richest kind of signes is there because there is Christes body realy present to signifie and as it were by seale to witnesse his owne death and passion You teache the substance of the Sacrament to be still bread and wine but our signe is more worthy of Christes Godhead and more properly a signe or a seale in truth of nature then yours For as S. Hilary and S. Cyrill teache Signaculorum ea natura est caet Such is the nature of signes or of seales that they set foorth the whole forme of the kind of thing printed in them and haue no lesse in them selues then those things haue whence they are sealed After this sorte God the Father signed Christ and Christe thereby was the forme the print the signe the figure the image of his Father But as S. Hilarie sheweth Imago authoris veritas He was the image of him whom he represented also the truthe I warrant you M. Iuel you fede the people with no doctrine of any such signe or seale present in Christes supper For you say afterward that the bread is an erathly thing therefore a figure I pray you can bread be other then a bare figure if it â—…il remain earthly and corruptible I say further to you M. Juel and yeâ—… beare no false witnesse at all that your 〈◊〉 be more bare then euerwere any euen in the old testameÌ„t For they at the least wise did in apparence of true fleshe and in true blood shedding foreshewe the fleshe and blood of Christ which should die for vs. Melchisedech likewise had beside his bread and wine the reall body of Abraham present whome he offered to God and in him Jesus Christ his sede But you hauing bare bread and bare wine without any reall flesh at all either present or offered must nedes haue a naked signe and a bare figure such as only Cain had and his brood Iu. We teache that in the ministration of the Sacraments Christ is set before vs euen as he was crucified vpon the crosse and that therein we may behold remission of synnes San. Admit ye â—…ache so then is your sermon better then your Sacrament For a man may looke long inowgh vppon the substaÌ„ce of bread wine before he can picke out of their earthly nature Christ crucified But if that blessed belefe were mainteined according to the truthe of the Gospell which after consecracion worshipped the reall body of Christ vnder the forme of bread theÌ„ the token which conteineth the true body that diâ—…d for vs in it is no bare token but the truth it selfe in substance and a token of the visible manner thereof Iu. We teache that Christes body is verily geuen to vs and that we verily eate it and liue by it and are flesh of his flesh San. How wel you teache it the thing it selfe will trie â–ª but all this proueth not that your Sacrament hath euer the more in it vnlesse you say that you receaue all this vnder yâ— formes of bread and wine A goodly matter your wordes in preaching to heare the which infidels may be admitted shal be better then the Sacraments instituted by Christ. How we are flesh of Christes flesh I haue shewed in the fifth booke the fifth chapiter Iu. Yet we â—…av not the substance of bread and wine is done â—…way or that Christes body is let downe from hâ—…uen or made really present San. That is the cause why your Sacraments are still bare naked For all the rest which you talke oâ—… is told to mens eares but nothing is wrought in the Sâ—…ents As for your nicke naming of things as of doing away bread in steede of changing of letting doune Christes body from heaâ—…en we must pardon you therein It is your grace to raile or rather the lacke of grace in you We teach bread to be changed into Christes body through his power Iu. He must mount on highe saith Chrysostome who so wil reache to that body San. You ouerreached your selfe when you turned accedere to reache â–ª it is to come vnto not to reache For S. Chrysostom spake of coÌ„ming to the holy visible table whiche stoode in the visible Church and meant that who so commeth to receaue thenâ—… the holy meate he must in good faith life climme vp to heauen and not that he should goe thither to receaue the mysteries Ipsa namque mensa For the very table that is to say the meate vpon the table is our saluation and life And againe This 〈◊〉 maketh that whiles we be in this life earth may vs heaueÌ„ to vs. Iu. Send vp thy faith saith Augustine and thou hast taken him San. The place is by you abused and drawen from a misbeleuing Iew to whome it was spoken to the Christian 〈◊〉 See good Reader my second booke xxix chapiter Iu. In deede the bread thaâ—… we receaue with our bodily mouthes is an earthly thing therefore a figure as the water in 〈◊〉 San. The water in baptisme is no figure
the booke of Canticles whiche you against his iudgement there set out in the vulgare tong to be readen of euery wanton boye or girle wold perhaps apply the names of loue there vsed carnally But that it should be any carnal thing to eate Christes flesh either by â—…aith or as we do it by moâ—…th that was neuer thought a wanton or fleshely thing as the practise of the Catholiks can witnesse who neuer came so wantonly to any caâ—…nal banket as they came deuoutly to receaue Christes body into their mouthes preparing them selues with contrition consession and satisfaction The spirituall dedes of them shewe that they vnderstode Chriâ—… stes supper moste spiritually Therefore D. Harding hath not erred in saying that Christes body is to be â—…ceaued into our bodies Iuel The bread is a figure San. Before consecration S. Ambrose confesseth it to be a figure but not after the words this is my body are said ouevit Vbi verba Christi accesserint corpus est Christi when the words of Christ are come thereunto it is the body of Christe Againe Damascene expreâ—…y saith Non est figura panis vinum corporiâ—… sanguinis Christi absit enim hoc The breade and wine is not a figure of the body and blood of Christ. God forbid that thing sed est ipsum corpus domini Deificatum but is the selfe Deified body of our Lord. Deified is to say made glorioâ—…se and immortall as God is by nature M. Iuel neuer brought nor can bring any Doctor who said that bread tarying in his olde substance is after consecration the body of Christe and yet he teacheth that doctrine as bold therein as blind bayerd Iuel The bread is subiecte to corruption Christes body is immortall therefore Rabanus Maurus saith The Sacrament is receaued with the mouth with the vertue of the SacrameÌ„t the inner man is repaired The Sacrament is turned into the nourishing of the body by the vertue of the Sacrament we get euerlasting life San. This place is alleged that noman is the nere where to find it For 〈◊〉 hath writen moe bookes then one or two Again he is no Doctor to be alleged of M. Iuell Who estemeth â—…one of them which haue writen these last nine hundred yeres and yet seing he bringeth them for him selfe wheusoeuer he is able to make any colour to peâ—…ade his owne doctrine thereby he doth vs to vnderstand that his resolution is that no writer of these last nine hundred yeres should be brought against him but yet that he may bring what him list against vs. Thinke you M. Iuel that this 〈◊〉 coÌ„dition shal be taken at your haÌ„ds are you not ashamed to cite them whom you haue 〈◊〉 if you did cite them to mock at them only or to shew their folly errours it were tolerable in a man of your profession But to allege them in earnest to build vpon their words and to proue your doctrine by some one of them and that where he disagreeth perhaps froÌ„ his sellowes yet not to admit them where they al agree together it is to speake all in briefe the very point of an heretike who seketh singularitie wheresoeuer he can find it and leaueth alwaies vniuersall and Catholike consent But these words we must take as you geue them vs. be it so Rabanus saith The SacrameÌ„t is taken with the mouth is not that against your doctrine M. Iuel who said the body of Christ is to be eaten by faith only none otherwise did you not speake of the body of Christ as it is eaten in the Sacrament But your own Doctor saith the SacrameÌ„t is taken with the mouth therefore the body of Christ is so taken and that is expresly proued by the words which follow in Rabanus With the vertue of the Sacrament the inner man is filled For so you should haue translated satiatur is filled and not is repaired as you haue done But howe is the inner man filled with the vertue of the Sacrament if wheaten bread be the Sacrament doth wheaten bread fill the soule of man Moreuer is the vertue of any thing absent from it is not that vertue in the Sacrament whereby the inner man is filled sith it is called of Rabanus the vertue of the Sacrament but the only 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 is the vertue which in this 〈◊〉 filleth 〈◊〉 soules Therefore the body of Christ is in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the body of Christ is 〈◊〉 with our mouthes Yea but say you the Sacrament is turned into the 〈◊〉 of the body I aunswere that the Sacrament is necessarily there meant to be the forme of breade or of wine whiche in dede nonrisheth our bodies by the power of God but vnder those formes the vertue lieth whereby as 〈◊〉 saith we get euerlasting life What haue you won now by your Doctor truely nothing els but your own confusion For he saith not that the bread remaineth still as you doe falsely teache Iu. The Sacrament saith S. Augustine is receaued frome the Lordstable Of some vnto life of som vnto destruction the thing it self whereof it is a Sacrament that is the body of Christ is receaued of euery man to life and of no man vnto destruction whosoâ—… be partaker of it San. Here is a heape of falshodes and lyes To disproue the which I must first open the Catholike faith which teacheth that the SacrameÌ„t of Christes supper is our Lords own body vnder the forme of bread The thing of the Sacrament is not the body 〈◊〉 Christ as your words put in among those of S. Augustins do falsely 〈◊〉 but the thinge here ment by S. Augustine is the 〈◊〉 of the Churche of God and the mysticall body of Christe which he knitteth together into one lump by vnspeakable meaues of 〈◊〉 loue 〈◊〉 flesh and blood And that is so plaine in S. Augustin that I can not sufficiently wonder at your enormous either blindues or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iuel Thus he writeth in yâ— selfe place where you cite him Hunc cibum caet Christ willeth this meate and 〈◊〉 to be vnderstanded the felowship of his body of his 〈◊〉 And again Huius rei Sacramentum id est 〈◊〉 corporis sanguinis Christi 〈◊〉 sacrameÌ„t of this thing that is to 〈◊〉 the Sacrament of the vnitie of the body and blood of Christ 〈◊〉 where euerie day somewhere certeine dayes comming betwene is prepared in our Lords table and is receaued 〈◊〉 our Lordes table to some men vnto life to other vnto destruction But the thing it selfe whereof also it is a holy signe or Sacrament is receaued of euerie man to life of no man to destruction who soeuer be partaker of it Hitherto S. Augustine M. Iuel saith the thing it self is yâ— body of Christ but if he had not falsely and miserably diuided S. Augustines words the very contrary would haue appeared to the eyes of the Reader
spiritually forsoth not carnally For there is no cause why we should say either yâ— apparitioÌ„ which was made to the fathers of yâ— old testament either that presence of his flesh which was exhibited to the Apostles to be dâ—…nied in these oure daies For to them who faithfullie consider the matter â–ª it shal be clere that neither of both lacketh For the true substance of the flesh it selfe is present now also to vs no dout verilie but that it is so in the sacrameÌ„t Here is M. Iuel the true substance of Christes own flesh affirmed to be no lesse present in a spiritual maner but not in a carnal manner of being as it was present to the Apostles who saw Christ in flesh I omit Nicholaus Methonensis and 〈◊〉 and Photâ—…s Grecians Albertus Magnus Alexander de Haâ—…s Iâ—…nocentius the third with diuerse moe aboue three huÌ„dred yeres old Iu. Their doctrine is without coÌ„fort thei hold that the bodie of Christe remaineth no longer in our bodies but only vntill the formes of the bread and wine begin to alter San. That doctrine M. Iuel is not without coÌ„fort in so much as the Sacrament serueth as a meane to bring to vs the body of Christ which when it hath deliuered vnto our bodies a coniunction is made by touching and eating Christ out of whiche coniunction made by flesh â–ª riseth a marueilouse commoditie to our spirite and soule So that albeit when the formes of breade and of 〈◊〉 be altered the body of Christe can not be affirmed to be corporally in our bodies any loÌ„ger yet a grace vertue strength is left stil with vs of inestimable operatioÌ„ toward life euerlastiÌ„g If this do seme absurd to M. Iuell how thinketh he of al those whome Christ healed by touching them with his fleshe was it not a corporall and real touching because Christ ceased to touche any more when the helth was once procured was not all Christes comming and walking in fleshe true real and corporall because when the tyme of his humble dispensation â—…as 〈◊〉 he departed bodily out of our sight and taried with vs in his godhead and power Moreouer I haue said often times our coÌ„â—…ton with Christ in this Sacrament is like the carnal copulation betwen the wife and husbaÌ„d where twain are in one flesh A great mysterie saith S. Paule in Christ his Church As therefore the man and wife being corporally ioyned tarie not alwayes together but after a tyme departe a sunder and yet for all that of their coniunction iâ—…ue commeth and they kepe yet alwaies the bonde of wedlock and of loue in eche of them so after that Christe hath vnited him to vs vnder the foorme of bread he departeth in bodily presence when those foormes cease to be vnder whiche it pleased him to comme to vs but the vertue of that coniunction tarieth still Iuel Some others say that as sone as our teeth touch the bread straight wayes Christes body is taken vp into heauen The words be these Certum est quod quà m cito species dentibus teruntur tam cito in coelum rapitur corpus Christi San. Haue you not yet done with gloses M. Iuel I marueil not For the greatest flour of your gardeÌ„ lieth in gloses and phrases But yet if the gloses â—…e of them selues not at al tymes moste wary because they were made in greaâ—… security of yâ— faith the authors of theÌ„ neuer thinking yâ— such a desperat generatioÌ„ of â—…leuers should haue sprong vp surely you ought not to make theÌ„ more odiouse then they deserue by false and corrupt translation You haue englished nowe teruntur touched and species bread for you say as sone as our teeth touch the bread the body is takeÌ„ into heauen But species doe signifie the formes of bread wine teruntur doth signifie are wasted or consumed The which word in Berengarius coÌ„fession you could turne by the word grynded thus at one tyme terere is to grynd with you at an other tyme it is to touch Why M. gloser of gloses is terere latine to touch to grind But you haue a new kind of malice in your hart which can make new latine new english new Gospell new faith and a new Church at your pleasure Iu. Here a man may say vnto M. Harding as he did before to the Arrian heretike San. You can not so speake to D. Harding as he spake to the Arrian heretike to whome he spake not by his owne authoritie but by the authoritie of S. Cyrillus who disputing against an Arrian heretike saied vnto him as D. Harding may right well say vnto you An fortassis putas caet What troweth this Arrian heretike parhaps that we knowe not the vertue of the mysticall blessing Whiche when it is become to be in vs doth it not cause Christ to dwel in vs corporally also by receauing of Christes body in the communion Thus farre S. Cyril whose words touched M. Iuel a thowsand yeres before he was borne because his heresie is one in this behalf with the Arrian heresie who taught vs not be corporally ioyned by naturall participation to Christe as braunches are ioyned to the vine but â—…aughte euen as M. Iuel doth that we depend of Christ by faith and none otherwise And troweth M. Iuel now that he may talke to D. Harding by his own contemptible authoritie as D. Harding talked to him out of S. Cyrillus Bring if you can M. Iuel a saying of aboue a thowsand yeres old where D. Hardinges doctrine may be accused of heresie Iuel Commeth Christ to vs from heauen and by and by forsaketh vs San. As Christe at his incarnation came not frome heauen by forsaking his glorie but by assupting flesh of the virgin so nowe at the time of the consecration his body commeth not doune froÌ„ heaueÌ„ but the bread is changed into his body and by that meane his body is present with vs. and as after his resurrection he ascended into heauen so after the communion the formes of bread and wine being consumed Christe caeaseth to be corporally with vs to th end we should again desier his presence and well know these two chefe pointes of our belefe the one that the end of the ioyning consisteth in spirit rather thâ—…n in flesh the other that the flesh of Christ really eaten is the meane whereby we haue accesse to the spirit of God with trust and confidence Iuel Or that we eate Christe and yet receaue him not or hauâ—… him not or that he entreth not caet San. We eate him and receaue him and haue him he entreth into vs. Who teacheth the contrarie but that your owne shadow troubleth you Iuel He saith this presence is knowen to God only then it foloweth M. Harding knoweth it not San. He sayd not this presence but the maner of the presence is knowen to God only and so is it in dede But why
Gal. 5. Ephe 5. The Apo logiâ—… brin gâ—…th vâ—… from yâ— holy Scripture to the Fathers The eigth chapiter Aug. dâ—… bono coÌ„ iugal ca. 24. Mariage among ChristiaÌ„s is a Sacrament Priesthâ—… is a Sacrament The substance of yâ— Sacrament tarieth in an eâ—…ill priest remoued from his office Augu. eoÌ„ tra Don. li. 5. c. 20 Ambros. lib. 1. de Paenit cap. 7. SeueÌ„ Sa cramâ—…ts were proâ—… 〈◊〉 yâ— Greeks Latins in yâ— CouÌ„cell of Fâ—…oreÌ„ce Heretikes eâ—…eme nei ther scriptures nor Fatheâ—…s The Apo logie pretendeth scriptures til it may set vp an idol of his own The nynthe chapiter The Apo logie The aunswere The supper of our Lord is a sacrament Dion de Ec. Hier. cap. 3. Maxim in schol Graecis â—…sius acknowledgeth moe SacrameÌ„ts then twaine Ca. 4. 5. 6. de Ecclesiast Hierarâ—…hia The Apo logie is coÌ„ strained to beleue many veri ties vnwriten Ioan. 6. Matt. 26. Mark 14 Luk. 22. 1. Cor. 10. 11. The apologie skippeth the writen veâ—… The Apo logie is full oâ—… gloses but not of scriptures Math. 26 Heretikes loue not the gospel Matt. 26. Actor 5. Euery way the SacrameÌ„ 〈◊〉 be 〈◊〉 The figâ—…re and yâ— truth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The. x. Chapiter Ioan. 1. Christ hath two natures in one persoÌ„ Galat. 3. 1. Tim. 2. 1. IoaÌ„ 5. 10. Man consisteth of two parts The Sacraments consist of 〈◊〉 parts Ioan. 3. Mat. 28. Tit. 3. In ep 23. ad Bonifacium The signe and thing signified stand toge ther. Mat. 28. Mat. 26 â–ª Marc 14. Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11 Homil. de Iudae proditio ne Christ câ—… not instiâ—… a false signe The. xi chapiter Diuerse signâ—…s are in yâ— Euâ—… †1. †2. †3. †4. †1. The Words of â—…tion arâ—… yâ— first signe †2. Christes toke hath in it the truth 〈◊〉 Ioan. 11. 1. IoaÌ„ 5. What a Saâ—…rament is De coÌ„secratione 〈◊〉 2. cap â–ª Saâ—… Luc. 22. If the bo dy be not made the wordes make a fal se token Psal. 58. Facere is to doe and make When the order of Priesthoâ—… was geuè to the Apostles Lucae 22. Matt. 16. A figuratiue speach doth not signifie till it be vnderstaÌ„ded August de doctr Christ. li. 2. ca. 1. This is my body either doth signi fie nothing or it signifieth the body of Christ. Simple men can not vnder stand how the sigâ—…e may â—…e called â—…y yâ— name oâ—… the thinâ—… The Apo stles were simple men Actor 4. If Christes words haue not their first meaning they must sound to diuerâ—…e meÌ„ diuersly The Apo logie is coÌ„ futed by his own sayingâ—… Ioan. 20. words must be taken as they commonly sound The Apo logie falsifieth the words of Christ. The chief words of a SacrameÌ„t must not be vnproper An obscure saying is no sensible signe It is against the nature of an holy signe or sacrament not to signific plain â—…y Antichrist could not take away the whole faith if some part 〈◊〉 not called in â—…oubt beâ—…ore The. xij Chapiter The â—…rgu ment of he â—…es The supper of our Lord is his body â–ª because it is a signe thereof instituted by him self Ioan. 1. August Psal. 73. 1. Tim. 3. 1. Pet. 2. The true conception 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is 〈◊〉 with the signe thereof Lucae 1. Matth. 8. Cleansing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in deed 〈◊〉 the word is 〈◊〉 Matth. 9. 〈◊〉 be forgeueÌ„ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sâ—…d 〈◊〉 Christ. Math. 11. Those mi racies were don in deed which were beâ—… Marci 7. The eares were opened 〈◊〉 deed when it was sayd be yâ— opened Math. 13. Parables wâ—… vsed in teachig but not in doing Ioan. 20. Christ rather did theÌ„ taught in his supper 1. Pet. 1. The. xiii Chapiter The wordes of the Sacrament be not figuratiue The Fathers calling yâ— supper of Christ a figure meane not a figure of Rhetoâ—… Epiphanius li. 1. To. 2. Her 30. Esaiae 7. The signes of Christ are miraculouse The Sacraments of Christ are secret tokens The 〈◊〉 of Christes Chur che be geâ—… to the 〈◊〉 therâ—…ore are â—…ble Luc. 22. Psal. 110. Ciprian de coena Domini August in manuali cap. 11. Chrysos de sacerdot lib. 3. Damasc. de orthod fid li. 4. c. 14. Euseb. li. 5. demoÌ„ cap. 3. Beda in hom vidit Iesus c. Basilius in Litur Gregor Nyssen in orat de paschate Hieron in Leui. Nicepho rus lib. 1. cap. 28. The. xiiij Chapiter The â—…rence betwen â—…res of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The figures of Christ are mysticall Matt. 28. Matt. 26. â—…oyes iudge the figures of God to be figures of grammer Heretikes name what figure of grammer it is 〈◊〉 things Mysticall words Ephes. 5. Math. 28. Ioan. 15. In Ioan. tract 80. Elementum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 August in â—…oan tract 80. â—…n things in a Sacrament August coÌ„t Donat li. 5. cap. 19. 20. August coÌ„t Ep. Parmen li. 2. c. 12. Chrysost in Epist. ad Roma Hom. 16 August in Ioan. tracta 5. Ambros. de Sacra li. 4. c. 4. 5. Chryso hom de prodiâ—…i Iudae August de dâ—…ct Christi li. 2 ca. 3. August de Magistro The wordes of Christes supper doe not sig nifie a figure of his body If Christes wordes be siguratiue they make nothing at all Words doe all 〈◊〉 they doe by signifying Lucae 22. Math. 28 The word of God hath geuen hoâ—…ur to words Body doth sigâ—…i sie yâ— substance but not the sigure of a body How Christes body is a figure The. xv Chapiter The Apo logie The aunswere It is the body of Christ which setteth his death before vs not bread and wine Lucae 22. 1. Cor. 11 Ioan. 6. 1. Cor. 11 Hom. 83. in Maâ—…h Damascenus de orthod side li. 4. cap. 14. Cyrillus in Ioan. lib. 12. cap. 28. Ioan. 20. 1. Cor. 11 The. xvi Chapiter The Apo logie The aunswere Lucae 22. Chrysost in Hom. 26 in Math. Chrysostom Hom. 51. in Math. Lucae 22. The. xvii Chapiter The Apo logie The aunswere Psal. 22. Prou. 9. 1. Cor. 10 Psal. 22. Prou. 9. 1. Cor. 10 Bread wine was not yâ— table that Christ pre pared Lucae 22. Hom. 82 in Math. The hand toÌ„ ge receaue â—…he same body yâ— the hart doth Why the supper of Christ is called the SacrameÌ„t of the altar Malach. 1 De ciuit Dei li. 10 cap. 6. Lucae 22. Psal. 22. Prou. 9. 1. Cor. 10 August li. 9. confes ca. 13. Math. 26 Ioan. 6. Cyrillus li. 10. c. 13 in Ioan. Tertul. in lib. de resurrec carnis Ireneus aduersus haereses li. 4. c. 34. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Apo logie The aunswere By what meanes yâ— Lords sup per is aba sed now in EnglaÌ„â—… The Apo logie nameth yâ— ho nouring of Christes body the worshipping of bread No substanciall thing is wrought in Christes supper by the Sacramentaries doctrine What the Catholikes beleue to be wrought The. xix Chapiter The Apo logie The 〈◊〉 The Apo logie â—…peaketh 〈◊〉 meanerâ—… euill
heard of that should first commend vnto them this new opinion of nine hundred yeres old Is it credible that so many thousand millions of Christen men as were in the Church at the end of the first six hundred yeres beleuing the one yere those halowed things vpon the altar to be still bread and wine should the next yere after alltogether in all countrâ—…es and languages fall 〈◊〉 prostrate or 〈◊〉 or at the least bow to the very same things as to the true body of their maker and sauiour which before they had ben taught to haue ben vnreasonable and vnsensible creaturesâ—… And did they al this thing without any guide or preacher who might will them so to doe Or did all the Preachers in 〈◊〉 at onâ—… moment change their mind 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so Or did som few go through the sower parts of the world and without resistance of any man preache that new 〈◊〉 Were all the pennes of all the writers of histories so tyed that 〈◊〉 of them all was able once to write any one mans name who after the six hundred yeres 〈◊〉 taught first second or third or at any tyme that change of belefe through out Christendom Was that heretiâ—…ke alone so almighty that noman durst write his name neither whiles he liued nor when he was departed out of this life If the man were vnknowen at the least why hath the sect no speciall name Was there not one lerned man in the whole Church of God either willing or able to resist that fury of new doctrin in the matter of Christes supper If none were lerned enough to conquer it by preaching or disputing or writing at the least wise wold none do bis best to sett 〈◊〉 a bare historie of that tragedie Or who euer hath writen that the whole Church chaÌ„ged her saith in this matter So many Councells haue ben kept in all ages and countries so many heâ—… names and opinioÌ„s who were but in priuie corners haue ben of late 〈◊〉 left writen to vs as Bogomili VValdenses Petrobusiani Pseudoapostoli Begardi Beguinae with such like and could this main heresie of Christes reall preseuce ouerrunne the whole Church so far that fifty yeres past and vpwards no small chapell can be named in the wide world where Christes supper was made without adoration of his body and blood as present vnder formes of bread and wine and yet 〈◊〉 noman vpon the earth be found in the space of eight hundred and fiftie yeres to leaue in monumeÌ„ts of histories when that heresy began or by whom it was promulgated or what name was geuen to it Did Satan in those eight hundred yeres so strongly oppresse Christ that his gospell was cleane darkned and his kingdom lost Did hel gates auaile against the whole Churche Did the rock it self 〈◊〉 Did yâ— holy Ghost 〈◊〉 to teache yâ— people of God all 〈◊〉 I think it wil be sayed that the Bishops of Rome did preache commend set foorth and mainteine that 〈◊〉 But they must shew which Bishop first began and who writeth it of him and by what meanes he was so 〈◊〉 obeyed that no resistance in the world is read to haue ben any where made against him And yet surely he neuer lacked eâ—…emies in the cast Church The truth is that all the Bishops of Rome yea all the Catholike Bishops of the whole world lerned of Christ this to be his reall body and this to be his blood And this faith dured from the last supper of Christ in all faithfull men without any denying or direct 〈◊〉 therof vntill Berengarius began to teache otherwise It was in dede 〈◊〉 indirectly by Marcion Valentinus Manichaeus and all those that thought Christ to haue had no true body of his own Again by Arrius and Nestorius who taught the body of Christ to be the body of a man Arrius because Christ was not equal in substance with his father but a creature only Nestorius because he had two persons one of God an other man therfore seing this was his humane body Nestorius wold it not to be the body of yâ— sonne of God But directly yâ— reall presence of Christ in this blessed Sacrament was not impugned vntill Berengarius about fiue hundred yeres past began to sow in the field of the Churche the corrupt sede of false doctrine concerning that question But his owne 〈◊〉 and the three Councels gathered straight against him at Uercelles Tours and Rome do rather shew what and how constant the Catholike 〈◊〉 was of old time in that behalfe then any thing help and 〈◊〉 the opinion of those men who now adayes endeuour to establish a new inuention of their owne The Church therefore as I said beleuing most 〈◊〉 that Christ gaue his owne reall flesh and blood in the mysteries of his last supper taught consequently the meane of making present that blessed body to be not the comming downe of Christ from heauen but the changing of the substance of bread and wine into the substance of his 〈◊〉 and blood by the almighty power of 〈◊〉 word spoken by a Priest with such minde and 〈◊〉 as that solemne 〈◊〉 required This â—…hange wherein the whâ—…le subsâ—…ance of brâ—…ad and wine should by the 〈◊〉 of Christ be so mightely conuerted into that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which 〈◊〉 for vs and into that holy bloud which was shed for vs on the â—…rosse must of 〈◊〉 be a dreadfull and propitiatorie sacrifice as well by reason of the body of Christ sacrifiâ—…ed once to death which is now made 〈◊〉 as for the cause and finall end why it is made present For Christ sayd at his 〈◊〉 This is my Lody which is geuen for you doe and make this thing for the remembraunce of me If it be at the tyme of consecration geuen for vs 〈◊〉 by the commaâ—…dement of Christ who can deny but it is a sacrifice and that we take greate profit and aduantage by that gift Upon this ground the Christen people were taught to esteme this holy sacriâ—…ice abouâ—… all other externall â—…inds of worshipping God in this life Thence came so goodly biâ—…ding of so many Churches so riche decking of altars so great foundations of â—…hanteries in 〈◊〉 so much estimation of Masse that some came to the holy order of Priesthod not for 〈◊〉 but for welth And some other went into monasteries rather for case then for 〈◊〉 to serue God All which became thâ—…ough ouer much ease lacke of the feare of God negligent in their office dissolute in their behauiour ignorant in good lerning and which in that vocation is most filthy of all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 couâ—…touse And the moe that in such sorte vnworthâ—…ly presumed to those holy prosessions the greater anger of God theâ—… synfull doing prouoked against them selues The people on th' other side seing the vnhonest liâ—…e of certaine religiouse persons and Priestes and how vnreâ—…erently they handled the diuine seruice sell in hatred
wil stand sound when Caluin and all his scholars be out of memorie This practise did the Apostles leaue to their successours and scholars as Iustinus the Martyr Ireneus and Eusebiâ—…s witnesse Now consyder what an intolerable spirit of arrogancy was in Caluin who dareth oppose him self against the first hundred yeres after Christ. He dareth affirm that all the Priests and Bisshops of Rome before 〈◊〉 committed an abuse in sending the Eucharist to strangers That all Asia and Brece committed an abuse in sending the Eucharist by Deacons to men that were absent who heard not the words of promise If thou looke to be saued good Reader beware of that arrogant spirit Learning thou shalt not find in Caluin and much lesse honesty Only he hath a sort of smothe words which are poy soned with pride and ignorance If any of his scholars wil take vpon him to defend his errour I wil by Gods grace discouer more ignorance of that arrogant Master of theirs In the meane tyme I wil content my self with these reasons which I haue presently brought against him out of the word of God and out of the sayings and doings of the whole primatiue Churche ¶ The preface of the second Booke FOr so muche as contraric things one being set against the other are both made the more clere and plaine it semed best I should not only confirme the Catholike faith but also con fute the contrarie doctrine which is allowed for good and laudable in the Apologie of the Church of England to thâ—… intent the Reader might iudge whether the Catholikes or Protestauts doe more oftallege more syncerely interprete and more throughly beleue the word of God I feare me he shal find nothing beside the name of the gospell to be among the ProtestaÌ„ts But the true meaning and vse thereof only to remain in that Catholike Church of Christ. Let the thing it self speake I aske but an vpright and indifferent iudge Neither let any man be now shamed to heare that his new chosen opinion is a great deale worse then his old faith was For if he blushed not to forsake the faith of the Catholike Church vowed at the fonte of Baptism and to embrace a truthe lately espied as he thought in the gospell Muche lesse ought he to accompt it any reproche to reade further in the same gospell and there to lern his old profession made at the tyme of his Christendom to haue bene not only the receaued belefe of all Christians but also to haue bene grounded in the true word of God and practised of the Apostles and their Successours from the beginning The Chapiters of the second Booke 1. The Catholiks require their cause to be vprightly tried by the holy scriptures which they haue alwayes studied aud reuerenced 2. It is proued by the word of God that euill men receaue the body of Christ in his supper 3. The auncient Fathers teache that euill men receaue truly the body of Christ. 4. What is the true deliuerance of Christes body and blood 5. What it is which nourisheth vs in the supp of Christ. 6. The reall presence is proued by the vnion which is consessed to be made in the supper of Christ. 7. That the Apologie speaking of the Lords supper goeth cleane from the word of God 8. That S. Ambrose and S. Augustine taught more then two Sacraments 9. That the supper of our Lord is the chief Sacrament of all but not acknouledged of the Apologie according to the word of God 10. That the supper of our Lord is both the signe of Christes body and also his true body euen as it is a Sacrament 11. What signe must cheifly be respected in the SacrameÌ„t of Christes supper what a Sacrament is 12. Which argument is more agreable to the word of God It is a token of the body made by Christ and therefore not the body or els therefore the true body of Christ. 13. The words of Christes supper are not figuratiue nor his token a common kind of token 14. That the supper of our Lord is no Sacrament at all if these words of Christ This is my body and this is my blood be figuratiue 15. There all presence of Christes body is that which setteth his death and life before vs. 16. Our thanksgeuing and remembrance of Christes death is altogether by the reall presence of his body 17. The true resurrection of our bodyes cometh by eating that body of Christ which is bothe true and truly in vs. 18. Nothing is wrought in the supper of Christ according to the doctrine of the Sacramentaries 19. The reall presence of Christes flesh is proued by the expresse naming of flesh blood and body which are names of his humane nature 20. It is a cold supper which the Sacramentaries assigne to Christ in comparison of his true supper 21. By eating we touche the body of Christ as it maye be touched vnder the form of bread 22. The Sacramentaries haue neither vnderstanding nor faith nor spirit nor deuotion to receaue Christ withall 23. The reall presence of Christes body is proued by the confession of the Apologie 24. The contrariety of the apologie is shewed and that the lifting vp of our harts to heauen is no good cause why we should lift the body of Christ from the altar 25. What be grosse imaginations concerning the supper of Christ. 26. What the first Councell of Nice hath taught concerning Christes supper 27. That the Catholiks haue the table of Egles and the Sacramentaries the table of Iayes 28. The bread which is the meate of the mind and not of the belly can be no wheaten bread but only the bread of life which is the body of Christ. 29. Sacramentall eating differeth from eating by faith alone whereof only S. Augustine speaketh in the place alleged by the Apologie ¶ The Catholikes require their cause to be vprightlye tried by the holy Scriptures which they haue alwayes studied and reuerenced THe Apologie of the Church of England boasting it self partly of the word of God partly of the primatiue Church requireth that we call the new gospellers no more by the name of heretykes neither accompt our selues hereafter Catholikes except we coâ—…ince them out of the holy Scriptures as the old Catholike Fathers did vse to conuince the old stubburne heretikes If we be heretikes saith the Apologie they as they would gladly be called be Catholikes why do they not as they see the Fathers which were Catholike men haue done alwayes Why do they not conuince and maister vs by the diâ—…e Scriptures Why do they not call vs againe to be tried by them Why do they not lay before vs how we haue gone away from Christ From the Prophets From the Apostles and from the holy Fathers Why sticke they to do it Why are they afrayed of it It is Gods cause why doubt they to commit it to the triall of Gods word To this proude bragge of the Apologie thus I answere To
the holy scriptures and to the holy Fathers ye haue appealed By the holy Scriptures and Fathers your doctrine shal be tried â–ª The Catholikes neuer feared to be tried by the holy Scriptures but they alwayes feared to abuse them For we yâ— know in dede what holy Scripture is are so carefull how to behaue ourselues reuerently and semely about the same that we lightly vse not to allege any part thereof to proue any rare and harde matter vnlesse we shew some auncient Fathers or Councell to haue expounded that peece of Scripture before vs in suche sorte sense as we by the witnes thereof desyre to persuade and confirme But otherwise the Catholikes neuer refused the triall of the â—…oly Scriptures as yâ— which they alwayes both studied loued Do not the writings of S. Beruard in manner wholy consist of continuall testimonies taken out of holy Scripture Did not Petâ—…â—…ombardus lernedly comment the Psalmes the Episâ—…s of S. Paule and other parcels of Gods word â–ª Did not S. Thomas of Aquin write so vpoÌ„ Iob Esaias Ieremias S. Mathew S. Iohn S. Paule the Canonicall epistles and the Apocalips that he vseth to expound one hard place by an other as nighe as thâ—… thing will suffer Did not Nicolaus de Lyra Dionysius the Carthusian Paulus Burgensis Caietanus the Cardinall with diuerse other expound the whole Bible or make notes vpon it wold they haue don so except they had ben specially delighted with the word of God More ouer when heresies arose in our dayes Did not Contarenus Sadoletus Polus â—…osius 〈◊〉 Gropper Tapper Eckius Pighius Petrus and Dominicus of Soto Miranda Uillegagnon Ioannes a Louanio with diuerse other coâ—…ince those heresies by the holy Scriptures and Fathers And yet as though we brought nothing at all for defence of the Catholike faith out of the word of God or primitiue Churche so dothe the penner of this Apologie more to his discredite then to ours falsely and vnhonestly reporte But now to shew the better his falsehood and dishonestie I thought good for my part to set soorth such holy Scriptures and suche witnesses of the primitiue Churche as plainly confirme the Catholike belefe concerning the chefe matter which at this day is in controuerâ—…e betwixt vs and them The chefe question is about the blessed Sacrament of the altar Our belefe is that after consecration duely made the body blood of Christ is really present vnder the formes of bread and wine The Apologie teacheth other wise as now it shall appeare But whereas there are many questions in this behalfe as of the reall presence of transubstantiation of the sacrifice of the masse of communion vnder one kind of receauing alone of râ—…tion of the Sacrament and of suche other I will beginne 〈◊〉 with the matter of reall presence which iâ—… the grounde of all the rest not despayring to haue at other tymes more leasure to handle also the other questions So much therefore as in the Apologie belongeth to the reall presence of Christes body and blood in the Sacrament of the altar I will faithfully set foorth and trie the truth of that doctrine by Gods word and by the holy Fathers Neither let any man be offended yf I seme to kepe no good order in so much as I make no new methode of myne owne but follow the order of the Apologie which sodenly and abruptly thus intreth in to yâ— question ¶ It is proued by the word of God that euill men receaue the body of Christ in his supper WE do expresly pronounce that in the supper vnto suche as beleue there is truly geuen the body and blood of the Lord. This doctrine being called to yâ— word of God to yâ— iudgement of holy Fathers for his triall will appere false forged Because the holy scripture teacheth the body and blood of Christ to be truly delyuered not only to such as do beleue but euen to wicked men who in their workes haue deuied their faith howsoeuer they kepe it or geue it ouer in hart Iudas one whole yere before the last supper was called a deâ—…ll for so much as Christ knew that he wold betray and sell him vnto yâ— Iewes Which it is not to be thought that Iudas wold haue don if he had bene of the true belefe that Christ was the Sonne of God God him self And yet the body and blood of Christ was truly deliuered vnto him Who although he had beleued the diuine power of Christ yet he had not beleued as we now take beleuing for the fulfilling and perfoorming of all that which belongeth to the state and lawe of the new Testament According as it is written Vt omnis qui credit in eum non pereat sed habeat vitam aeternam That euery man which beleueth in him may not perish but haue euerlasting life Such a belefe workiâ—…g by charitie Iudas had not And yet he receaued the body and blood of Christ. For albeit some auncient Fathers thought that Iudas went out before the supper of Christ yet farre the greater part teache otherwise And it is much more agreable to the word of God How proue I that S. Mark writeth that Christ came with the twelue S. Mathew sayeth Christ sate down with the twelue and whiles they were eating he gaue his body and blood S. Luke agreeth vpon the very same number and vpon the same gift Among the twelue Iudas is rekoned in S. Mathew S. Mark S. Luke and S. Iohn And whiles they were at supper which they besyde the twelue Iesus tooke bread and blessed and gaue thanks and brake and gaue to them To which them I pray you but vnto the twelue that came with him and sate with him to yâ— twelue therefore he gaue and said Take eate this is my body And taking the chalice he gaue thanks and gaue them saying Drinke ye all of this for this is my blood of the new Testament Which is or shal be shed â—…or the remission of synnes Et biberunt ex illo omnes And all drank of it Which all if not the twelue Iudas therefore being one of the twelue had the body blood of Christ deliuered to him For Christ said Take eate and drinke ye all of this And as they dranke all so is there no doubt but they all did take and eate therefore Iudas tooke that which Christ deliuered But Christ witnessed himselfe to deliuer his owne body saying Take and eate this is my body And drink ye all of this for this is my blood Therefore the body and blood of Christ was deliuered vnto Iudas And sith Iudas did not beleue the body and blood of Christ was truely delyuered to some such as did not beleue We nowe call these defenders to be tried by the holy Scriptures We make it appere yâ— they haue seuered them selues from Christ from the Prophetes from the Apostles we stagger not we flee not it is Gods
good faith to haue a good charitie to examine him selfe goeth before the supper eating by faith and spirit is a thing required to come worthely to the supper But when we once come thither we all eate one thing one meate one foode one body whether we come worthely or vnworthely euen as all that are sprinkled with water in the name of the Trinitie are baptized in one and the same Sacrament of baptim whether they be good men as Cornelius was or â—…uill men as Simon Magus was For Simon Magus was baptized of Philip yâ— deacon But as it may appere by that is tolde in the scriptures and gathered by the Breke and Latine Fathers he came not worthely to that Sacrament but faynedly as one that hoped to make gain of his faith And yet he had that baptisme which as S. Paul sayeth is but one But he had not the vertue of that one baptisme which is the remission of synnes I trust by this tyme the defenders nede not boast of their doctrine neither vpbraid vs of ours because they teach that only good men haue yâ— body of Christ deliuered to them And we teach that euill men also eate really the true body of Christ. We haue I suppose declared the word of God to stand in our side and seing their doctrine must be tried by the word of God I tell them it is tried and sound to be false and forged except they can proue Iudas to haue bene an honest man For surely that he receaued the body of Christ it is the mind of S. Cyprian S. Hierom S. Chrysoâ—…om S. Augustin S. Leo S. Bede Theodoritus Sedulius 〈◊〉 Euthymius yea it is so farre the common opinion of all men that vpon that example this â–ª conclusion is grounded that we can not remoue 〈◊〉 euill man from the commu nion excepthy order of law we may coÌ„uince him Quia nec Christus Iudam a communione remouit Because Christ did not remoue Iudas from communion Howbeit we stand not in this doctrine vpon the person of Iudas only but also vpon the generall doctrine of S. Paule who teacheth euery euill man to be gilty of the body of Christ for eating that bread vnworthely ¶ The auncient Fathers teach that euill men receaue truly the body of Christ. YEa but say they we do affirme with the most auncient Fathers that the body of Christ is eaten of none other but of Godly and faithfull men Seing the holy scriptures are proued to stand on our side it were great marueile if the auncient Fathers did make for you They are not wonte to be contrarie to the word of God But what a miserie is this what a seducing of the people The word of God is pretended the auncient Fathers be named and not one syllable brought forth out of either both concerning this question But as before we brought holy scriptures so let vs now allege the auncient Fathers Origen sayeth Those who come to the Eucharist without examining cleansing them selues are lyke to men sicke of an ague who presuming to eate sanorum cibos the meates of whole men doe hurte them selues Whereby we may perceaue he iudgeth the meate of Christes supper which is proâ—…ded only for whole men yet to be truly but not profitabâ—…y eaten of them who are burdened with great synnes Basile asketh what a man shall say of him qui otiose et inutiliter edere audet corpus et bibere sanguinem Domini nostri Iesu Christi Who dareth in vayne and vnprofitably eate the body and drinke the blood of our Lord Iesus Christ If a man eate in vaine and to his disprofit yet he eateth in dede and as S. Basile sayeth he eateth the body of Christ. Chrysostom writeth thus If those which spotte the Kinges purple be no lesse punished then those that cutte it what wonder is it if those who take the body of Christ with an vncleane conscience haue the same punishment which they haue who pearced him with nailes Behold as it is one purple still whether it be spotted or cutt so is it the same body still whether it be pearced with nailes as the Iewes haudled it or taken with an vnclean conscience as euill Christians order it S. Cyprian in manner of purpose answereth those obiections which might moue any man to doubt how euill men may doo receaue so good a thing as Christes owne body is The Sacramentes sayeth he for their part can not be without their proper vertue Neither doth Gods maiestie by any meanes absent it self from the mysteries But albeit the Sacramentes permitte them selues to be taken or touched of vnworthy men yet those men can not be partakers of the spirit whose infidelitie or vnworthynes withstandeth such holines If by the mynd of S. Ciprian the Sacramentes can not lacke their owne proper vertue come good men or euill to them one substance is alwayes geuen but the euill can not receaue the spirit or grace thereof because they are vnworthie of such a benefite S. Hierome Opponis mihi Gomor Mannae vnam mensuram Et nos Christi corpus aequaliter accipimus Thou laiest vnto me the one measure of Manna called Gomor and we take the body of Christ equally One as well taketh it as an other but as it there foloweth Pro accipientiuÌ„ meritis diuersum fit quod vnum est According to the merites of them that receaue that which is one is made diuerse The Sacrament is one in it selfe yet to one it is made yâ— cause of goodnes when he taketh it worthely to an other the cause of euill when he taketh it vnworthely There also S. Hierome sayeth that Iudas dranke of the same cuppe whereof the other Apostles dranke but yet that he was not of the same merit S. Augustine sayeth Tolerat ipse Dominus Iudam DiaboluÌ„ furem venditorem suum sinit accipere inter innocentes Discipulos quod norunt fideles precium nostrum Our Lord him selfe beareth with Iudas he suâ—…th a deuill a theefe and the seller of him selfe to receaue among the innocent Disciples our price which the faithfull knowe If any thing besydes that body of Christ may be our price then S. Augustine might meane that euill men receaue an other thing But if our price be vndoubtedly that body of Christ which by death redemed vs Iudas receauing our price receaued the very true body and substance of Christ. In an other place he writeth Eundem cibuÌ„ sanctuÌ„ alios manducare digne alios indigne Some eate worthely some vnworthely the same holy meate Beholde the meate is the same Whether the euill receaue it or the good And because the Apologie though it name no Father at all yet it maie haue some pretense of certain wordes which are in S Augustine it is to be weighed diligeÌ„tly that Christ hath as well a mystical body as a true naturall body The mysticall body of
cause thereof We are coupled to Christ by eating that flesh of his which he deliuereth to vs. But Christ deliuereth it not only spiritually but also with his hands saying Take eate this is my body As therefore yâ— deliuery is real and not only spirituall so is the eating reall and the coupling reall I haue proued this thing in other places folowing Here it is 〈◊〉 to say this much against the bare words of the Apologie ¶ That the Apologie speaking of the Lords supper goeth cleane from the word of God VVE do acknowledge the Eucharist or the Lordes supper to be a Sacrament yâ— is to say an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the body and blood of Christ. Besides the former vaâ—…t of the word of God already brought foorth to the reproche of the Catholikes also the Apologie aâ—…tle before these words witnessed that yâ— auctours abâ—…tours thereof gaue thanks to God for the light of the Gospel raysed to them which they might allwayes haue before theyr eyes as a moste certayne rule to which all doctrine of yâ— Church ought to be called for his triall And within lesse than 〈◊〉 lines after the same Apologie cometh to denie our Lords supper calling it a Sacrament that is to say an 〈◊〉 token of the body and blood of Christ. What mâ—…ers Hauâ—… you in the holy Scriptures that the supper of our Lord is a Sacrament or a signe of yâ— body and blood of Christ From the beginning of 〈◊〉 to the later ende of tho â—…ocalips you finde â—…t our Lordes supper so called Christ in S. 〈◊〉 calleth it yâ— mâ—…e which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not but 〈◊〉 into lâ—…e 〈◊〉 He saieth yâ— bread which he will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he will 〈◊〉 â—…or yâ—â—…se of yâ— world He 〈◊〉 it the 〈◊〉 and the blood of the sonne of man meate in dede and drinke in dede his flesh and his blood the eating of him the bread which who so eateth shall liue for euer In S. Mathew and in S. Marke his body and his blood of the new testament In S. Luke his body whiche is geuen for vs and the chalice which is the newe testament in his blood which is shed for vs. In S. Paul the bread which we breake is the communicating of our Lords body the chalice of blessing which we blesse which is the coÌ„municating or partaking of Christes blood the one bread yâ— table of our Lord and the chalice of our Lord the body which is broken for vs the chalice which is the new Testament of his blood the eating of this bread and drinking of this chalice So many names are geuen in so many places of holy scripture to this blessed Sacrament and it being no where called a signe or token yet the Apologie which thanketh God for yâ— holy scriptures aâ—…d will trie all doctrine by them in the chief question of our age goeth quite from all holy scriptures and sayeth the Eucharist or the Lordes supper is an euident token of the body and blood of Christ. What is the matter that in wordes you make so much of holy scripture and in dede so litle What Apostle what Euangelist what Prophete or Patriarke taught our Lordes supper to be a signe or token S. Paul threateneth damnation to him who vnworthely eateth it and he calleth vnworthy eating not only the contempte thereof or lacke of faith but euen the omitting to proue or examine him selfe before he eate our Lords body And that because he maketh no difference betwixt it and common meates And come you with a new doctrine affirming that we receaue not our Lords body into our bodies but an euident signe and token thereof you 〈◊〉 no authoritie no rule no triall of matters belonging to faith but only the holy Scriptures and immediatly ye breake your owne rule in so much as the holy scriptures call the supper of our Lord his body and blood and you teach it to be an euident token of his body and blood If you kepe not your owne rule whom can you binde to kepe the â—…aine Ye will aske me perhaps whether the Lordes supper be not a Sacrament if a Sacrament then also a signe and token I aunswere ye that prescribe rules of beleuing to the world ye that wil haue all thinges iudged and proued by that touchestone of Gods worde ye that for pretense of folowing the gospell haue stirred vp so greate strife through all Christendome must not talke with vs with if with and with conditions and peraduentures But ye must bring forth the word of God for that ye say Although the supper of our Lord were neuer so much a Sacrament surely to you it were none because ye cannot proue out of the word of God where it is so named To vs it is both a Sacrament and a sacrifice A Sacrament because we are so taught by tradiction from the Apostles A sacrifice because Malachie the prophet in the person of God expressely saieth In omni loco sacrificatur offertur nomini meo oblatio munda â–ª quia magnum est nomen meum in geÌ„tibus In euery place a cleane oblation is sacrificed and offered to mie name because my name is greate amonge the gentils There is absolutely no pure and cleane oblation besides the sacrifice of Christes body and blood whiche was offered to death not in euery place but without the gate of Hierusalem alone and the same is at this daie vnbloodily offered in the masse in euerie place where so euer among the gentils the name of God is 〈◊〉 called vpon Thus both we and you maie proue the â—…upper of our Lord to be a sacrifice but that it is a 〈◊〉 â–ª we can proue because our forefathers delyuered such a doctrine to vs You can not proue the same seing you will not be bound to folow vnwritten traditions If you flee to the Church for naming it a SacrameÌ„t the church hathe seuen Sacramentes But ye in this present Apologie acknowledge only two properly to be rekoned vnder yâ— name for so many saie you do we find deliuered and sanctified by Christ and allowed of the olde fathers Ambrose and Augustine Concerning the deliuery of Sacraments by Christ ye might haue found in the word of God ConfirmatioÌ„ Actor 8. Penance IoaÌ„ 20. Extreme vnction Iacob 5. Priesthod Luk. 22. Matrimonie Eph. 5. And not only Baptim and the Eucharist But what kind of talk is this to say that S. Ambrose and S. Augustine allow that workes of Christ was not the deliuery and consecration of Christ of sufficâ—…ent autoritie except Ambrose and Augustine had approued it I thoâ—…ght Ambrose and Augustine should haue bene allowed by the scripture and not the scripture by them I stand with you vpon the autoritie of the word of God proue me thence that these two are Sacramentes alone yea proue that thei are so named at all what gospell calleth baptisme a Sacrament What holy write nameth
by man Truly in Baptim there is forgeuenesse of all synnes What skilleth it whether Priests challenge this right of forgeuing synnes to be geuen them by penance or by baptim The mysterie or Sacrament is one in both But thou wilt say that in Baptim the grace oâ—… yâ— mysteries worketh What in Penance doth not the name of God work Here is the same vertue and name of a mysterie or Sacra ment geuen to Penance which is geueÌ„ to Baptim Whereby S. Ambrose taught as wel that there was a SacrameÌ„t of Penance as the Apologie graunteth one of Baptim But to stand about the proof of all the seuen Sacraments it nedeth not sith in that most notable generall Councell gathered both of Grekes and Latines at Florence all the seuen Sacramentes were according to the word of God confessed proued declared and expounded as in the ende thereof it may appere But neither S. Ambrose nor S. Augustine had the charge committed to them to rekon vp how many Sacraments there are I brought these few places out of S. Augustine and S. Ambrose to shewe as it were to the eyes of all them that will not wilfully blind them selues how these defenders crie out vpon the word of God vntill they haue with swete words wonne â—…anour amoÌ„g the miserable nomber â—…f those vnstable meâ—… that allwayes harken for newes But when they haue them fast then is the word of God cleane forgotten and in siede of it Ambrose and Augustiâ—…e are captiously and falsely alleged For the truth is they that set nought by the word of God can not long esâ—…me Ambrose and Augustine who with all their hartes embraced the word of God and expounded the same according to the auncient tradition of holy Church To what end then doth this Apologie runne Truly to sette vp an Idoll of their owne making in place of the word of God To set vp I say a fantasticall religion of their owne deuising But if they should crie to the people Come come bowe down to the Idoll that we haue deuised for you the people would not come as being feared with yâ— infamouse name of an Idoll Therefore they say come to the word of God come to the holy Scriptures come to the true gospell of Iesus Christ. well Syr you say herein exceding well we are come Teach vs the word of God the Scriptures the gospell Say on a Gods name ¶ That the supper of our Lord is the chief Sacrament of all but not acknowledged of the Apologie according to the word of God WE saye that Eucharistia the supper of the Lord is a Sacrament that is to wit an euident token of the body and blood of Christ. It is most true that the supper of our Lord is a Sacrament yea it is the chief Sacrament of all Sacraments 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Est enim secunduÌ„ clarissimi praeceptoris nostri sententiam SacramentoruÌ„ Sacramentum The most holy Eucharist which Dyonisius named so a litle before according to the mind of our renowmed maister is the Sacrament of Sacramentes Although Dionysius had S. Paul to his master yet he meaneth at this tyme as vpon him Maximus hath noted by other places of his worke it may well appere to be true Hierotheus an holy Father and Disciple of Christ who in his talke whiche he was wonte to haue with Dyonisius did vse to call the holy Eâ—…charist of all the Sacramentes the chief Sacrament Surely iâ—… there had bene but two Sacramentes both Hierotheus Dyonisius had abused their words For where two things only are of one degree there one may be worthier then the other but neither of the twaiue may iustly be called the chief of the others If in all there be only two Sacramentes baptisme the Eucharist how is the Eucharist the Sacrament of Sacramentes sith when one is taken away there doth remaine but one moe to which relation may be made The opinion therefore of this Apologie standing the Eucharist may be yâ— more chief Sacrament of tâ—…e twaine but not the Sacrament of moe Sacramentes But what nede we stand herevpon seing Dionysius hath at large prosecuted moe Sacramentes then baptisme and the Eucharist as it is easye to see in his workes Seing then the supper of our Lord is a Sacrament and yet not found so to be named in holy Scripture the Apologie is constrained to beleue it selfe and to teach others somewhat which is not readen in holy Scripture Againe that euery Sacrament is a signe and token it is also true but not readen in holy Scripture Thirdly the Sacrament of the altar is an euident token of yâ— body and blood of Christ. But so much is not expressed in holy Scripture Last of all the supper of our Lord is the reall body blood of Christ him selfe And that truth is very plainly very ofte very earnestly sayd taught repeted in holy Scripture Foure thinges are now verified of the supper of our Lord. It is a Sacrament it is consequently a holy signe It is an euident token of the body and blood of Christ. It is the truth and substance of the body and blood of Christ. Of the foure truthes the last only is expressed in holy scriptures because it is the ground of all the other The three first are taught by the Church not coÌ„trary to the scripture but ouer and besides it Now mark well whether these defenders lead vs to the word of God or no. In describing the supper of our Lord they put the three first verities of which neuer a one is named in the scripture And the last veritie which is expresly named in all the foure Euangelistes and in S. Paul as before I haue declared that they vtterly 〈◊〉 aâ—…d leaue out As if they shuld saie we make much aâ—… to pretend yâ— holy scriptures but we will be sure to bring any thiâ—…g soner then the holy scriptures Marke this Apologie who shal he neuer lightly saw any book writen in so many matters of diuinitie wherein so litle scripture hath bene alleged It is full of gloses but the texte it hath very seldome And why They loue not in dede the scriptures they know not the scriptures according to the mind of the holy Ghost but only make a shew of them to entangle the sunple in their snares The supper of our Lord is a sacrament a holy signe an euident token of the body and blood of Christ. hitherto they teache without scriptures It is the body and blood it selfe of Iesus Christ. Hereof speake they at this time neuer a word because it is in the Gospell which they loue not If this last truth can not stand with the first what doubt is there but the worde of God must ouercome and the doctrine of men gâ—…ue place If therefore the supper of our Lord maâ—…e both be the signe of the body and the body it selfe it is well we are throughly
of God to make you beleue neither doe they differ onely because in the supper a bodily signe of that thing is eaten where vpon we feed by faith but because that thing is receaued into our bodies where vppon we feed by faith In so much that of purpose Christ impugneth destroyeth the SacrameÌ„tary doctrine by these his wordes in this Chapiter wherein as I haue heretofore noâ—…ed diuerse kindes and tymes of geâ—…ng because God by Moyses gaue naked figures in the tyme past the father him self geueth presently the true naturall flesh of his naturall sonne to our eyes and hartes and Christ will geue hereafter the same true fleshe vnder the forme of breade to our mouthes and mindes so now must I note diuerse workings of the sayd gifts One worke aunswered to Gods gift by Moyses another to the fathers gist and the third to Christes gift By Moyses his minister God gaue Manna This bread was only corporall and the people wrought the substaÌ„ce thereof only with their teeth bellies other thing was there not in it whiche myght be wrought for although it were ordeined to be a figure oâ—… a greater thing to come in Christ yet that was no parte of the Manna it self but consisted and had his whole ground in the appointemeÌ„t of God and in the vnderstanding of yâ— people of God to whom if they were well instructed and so toke it MaÌ„na was a figure and whether they toke it so or no it was ordeined to be a figure but not to them profitable who toke it onely for bodily food Again those which vnderstode wel what Manna signified had not any good by the meat it self but looked for it of the truth which Manna shadowed for whiche cause Christ saith your fathers haue eaten Manna in the desert and are dead as who should say Manna by his owne vertue could saue none of them all but that true breade Iesus Christ only saueth whiche Manna dyd signifie The second gift is the present gift of the Father whereof Christ sayeth My 〈◊〉 doth geue you the true bread froÌ„ heauen This gift of the father muste be wrought not by teeth and bellies as Manna was but by fayth and spirite And therefore S. Augusâ—…ine saith vpon this place Vt quid paras dentem ventrem Cre de máducasti What doest thou prouide tooth and belly beleue and thou 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The third gift is that where Christ promiseth to geue his flesh and the working of it is to eate worthely the same fleshe vnder the forme of bread God the father is sayd to gene the true bread whiche is Christ him selfe in such sorte as he is God and man in one person and the same one God doth worke faith in all that heare his voyce by the which faith they may worke vpon Christ and eate of him by spirit Of this worke it is sayde This is the worke of God that ye beleue vpon him whom he hath sent of this kind of working it is sayd He that commeth to me shall not hunger and he that beleueth in me shall not thirst for euer To be short of this worke doth Christ speake specially and in maner wholy from that place where he sayd that the Father geueth the true bread for twenty sentences together vntyll he conclude that kind of working by these words If any man eate of this bread he shall lyue for euer â–ª Take the payne to reade ouer once or twise the Chapitre of S. Jhon from that place where it is sayd operamini worke not that meat which perisheth and so forth to the end and conferte therewith that which I now write and you shal see as clevely as can be that Christ distincteth as thre giftes so thre workings of theÌ„ As God by Moyses gaue the delicate bread called Manna so they wrought vppon it by eating the same bread with their teth As God the father geueth yâ— true bread Iesus Christ so the faithfull must worke it by beleuing and their reward shal be life euerlasting But as thou doest tender thy soule health so goe forward with me to the third giâ—…t and the third working or eating which in dede yf it be done profitably conteineth both a bodily and a spi rituall working a bodily with manna a spirituall with the gifte of God the father a bodily to 〈◊〉 the manhod of Christ a spirituall to eate it fruitfully the eating is spirituall because it requireth faith in Christ and loue towards God and our neighbours the same eating is bodily becauâ—…e it in dede eateth vnder that forms of bread and wine that fleshe of Christ whiche it beleueth in saith and harte First Christ sheweth his gift saying And the bread which I wil geue is my flesh for the life of the world That this gifte doth differ from the gifte of Moyses who gaue bare breade it is easily sene For the sonnes gift tarieth for euer but MaÌ„na perished and they that dyd eate it concerning any vertue that Manna had in his own substaÌ„ce to saue them from death The working of this gift is also named eating and drinking but yet after another sort then the eating of Manna was vnder Moyses for here the truth is eaten that was figured in Manna But how it differeth from the fathers gifte and the worke whiche belongeth to the fathers gifte there standeth a great part of this question Here I must warne the Reader that he coÌ„found not him self for in ofte repeating what the Father and what the sonne why the Father and why the sonne geueth this or that it is to be seared least the mynd gorâ—…et the chief distinction and so take one part in stead of the other The Father and the sonne yea the holy ghost also be all one God and giue al one thing But the holy scripture for the instruction of vs and by reason of Christes flesh assumpted doth attribute sometyme one thing to the Father an other to yâ— sonne an other to the holy ghoste meaninge most commonly by the name of the Father God and the whole Trinitie according to the whiche appropriation of workes and giftes we now intend to speake The Father is sayd to geue many waies in this chapiter he geueth faith into our hartes he geueth Christ to the world in flesh he geueth Christ to vs and geueth vs to Christ. Therefore the gift of the Father may be respected speciallie two wayes either in Christ him self or in vs toward Christ. The Fathers gift in Christ him â—…elf is reall and externall because he sendeth and geueth his only begotten Sonne in the true flesh of man to be seen heard and felt The Fathers gift in respect of yâ— we receaue of him is reall but internal spiritual and without working outwardly that same sensible gift which is wrought inwardly For after the Father had once geuen flesh to his Sonne all sensible and externall working was worthely committed
geue it them This is a hard talk sayd they they were hard and not the talk for if they were not hard but gentle they wold say to them selues He speaketh not this thing rashly but because there lieth priuie some Sacrament â—…eing gen tle not hard they wold â—…arie with him and should learn of him that thing which after their departure those lerned who taried for when yâ— twelue had taried with him the other being departed they as who were sorie of yâ— others departing warned Christ that they were offended with his word so were departed but Christ instructed them and sayd It is the spirit which quickeneth the flesh profiteth not the words which I haue spoken to you are spirit and life vnderstand that which I haue spoken spiritually Ye shall not eate this body which ye see ne shall not drink that blood which they shal shed who wil 〈◊〉 me I haue commended to you a certain Sacrament which being spiritually vnderstanded shal make you liue and although that Sacrament mustenedes be visibly celebrated yet it must be inuisibly vnderstanded thus much S. Augustine First I note in these words against the Lutherans that S. Augustine vnderstandeth the precept of eating Christes flesh of the Sacrament of his last supper for there only a Sacrament of his death is visibly folemnized and inuisibly vnderstanded Secondly I note against the Zuinglaâ—…s that the figuratiue speache which S. Augustine acknowlegeth in Christes words is to be measured and meant according to the natural and customable speaking and vnderstanding of carnall men who yet be not fully faithfull for they thought they should haue eaten Christes flesh torne into peeces to fâ—…l their bellies there withal for in dede the eating of flesh naturally imploieth cutting or tearing before it come to our month and afterward chawing with the teeth and so the filling of the bellye but in respect of all suche meanings the words of Christ be figuratiue For seing it is against the honestie of maners to order mans flesh after such a cruel fashion the Iewes should haue deuised how to make an honest meaning of his words whom they confessed to be a great Prophete or at the least they should haue asked of Christ the true meaning of his own words For seing Christ had multiplied siue loaues miraculously to feed them and did so many other miracles and so much good in al the countrie that all men who were voide of malice confessed him to be of God reason geueth they should harken obediently to his words as the which they might perceaue to be spoken by no meane or common man and that therefore they should not measure them by their own phantasie experience Now then to say that except ye eate my flesh is a siguratiue speache is no more to say but you must not take the eating of Christes flesh so as at the first sight it cometh to your mind neither concerning the vsuall maner nor concerning the customable end of yâ— eating for that is vnhonest Tarie therefore vntill you find a better sense Whiche sense is found when it is knowen that Christ vnder the forme of bread geueth the substance of his flesh whole sound and quick with the Godhead corporally dwelling in it to the end we should liue spiritually for euer by worthy receauing it into our bodies and soules Thirdly I note much the kind of speaking which S. Augustine vseth For he calleth that thing a Sacrament vpon yâ— words of the Psalm now alleged which in his bookes of Christian doctrine he called a figure Shewing him self to take the name of a figure for all that when a farther and higher thing is to be vnderstanded then was outwardly expressed in which case the thing expressed is a Sacrament to wit a figure or a holy signe of that higher truth which is to be vnderstanded but he meant not by the name of a figure either to exclude the truth of eating Christes flesh or the truthe of drinking his blood but only the grosse maner of eating and drinking it to a carnal end which the Iewes thought vpon for as the killing and eating of the Paschall lamb was not only natural but also gaue yâ— faithful to vnderstand that Christ â—…ould be both killed on the crosse and eaten in a Sacrament and as the figure which was in that Lamb did not diminish the real killing and eating thereof but only did refer it to a higher truthe so the figure which is in eating Christes flesh doth not diminish the true eating thereof but only declareth that eating to be a figure because it is referred again to a higher truthe both in Christ whose flesh that once died is now eaten and in vs who eate it not so much for to eate it corporally as to fede spiritually of God him self who maketh that flesh profitable and that S. Augustine thought so it is euident by his own words vpon S. Iohn ye know not what is that maner of eating this flesh but except ye eate it c. Lo the maner of eating was secret but the thing that should be eaten was naturall flesh Again Carnem sic intellexerunt quomodo in cadauere dilaniatur aut in macello venditur non quomodo spiritu vegetatur They so vnderstode flesh as it is torne in a carcase or solde in the shambles And not as it is quickened with the spirit or Godhead Here it is reported wherein the Iewes did erre They toke the word flesh amisse not concerning the substance of it which must be really eaten but concerning the maner of eating it Is not modus Latin for the maner Is not quomodo as much to say as by what maner The Iewes vnderstode yâ— name of flesh Quomodo dilaniatur non quomodo vegetatur After such maner as it is torn into pecces and not after such maner as it is quickened with the spirit of God Do not these words import that the Iewes erred in the manner of eating Christes flesh Doth not he that findeth fault only with the maner of eating flesh sufficiently allow the eating of the flesh it self if it be done after a good maner Yea farther doth not he that sheweth the maner how it may be well eaten approue that kind of eating it As we must not â—…ate Christes flesh after such a grosse maner as is vsed in eating such flesh which is commonly cut into peeces Right so we must eate Christes flesh after such maner as it is quickened with the Godhead So doe S. Angustines words import I beseche thee good Reader see the oddes betwene the argument of a Catholike and of a SacrameÌ„tarie He reasoneth thus we must not eate Christes flesh carnally and butcharly therefore we must not eate really yâ— substance thereof We reason thus We must eate Christes flesh as it is quickened with the Godhead therefore we must eate really the substance thereof The argument of the Sacramentarie is naught
in him self according to the spirit or Godhead sith he liueth through the Father S. Hilarie sheweth first in these words y◠there is a similitude of liuing betwene vs and Christ and betwene God the Father and Christ. we liue for Christ by eating his flesh as he liueth for his Father who sent him but we saith S. Hilarie liue for Christ by eating his flesh in such sort that we haue the nature of his flesh in vs. Therefore Christ liuing for his Father hath his Fathers nature in him self Thus haue the Arrians gained nothing by saying that the Father was one with Christ as Christ is one with vs. For Christ is found to be one with vs naturally and thereunto it suffiseth not that Christ toke our naturall flesh in his mothers womb for Christ spake not of that vnitie otherwise the gentils Iewes heretiks and heinouse synners should be naturally one with Christ which thing is not so for to be one with Christ it behoueth that as he toke our nature into his own person we take his nature into our bodies soules Two reasonable parties which haue both free will consist of bodies be not properly made one in nature if they bothe do not as well consent thereunto in mind as also approche in bodies Lett vs put an example betwene Dina and Sichem for although Sichem had by force oppressed Dina corporally yet she not consenting in hart thereunto was not throughly and in her whole nature made one with him for that the cheif part of her dissented Again lett vs put the ca◅e that two other persons be together in hart wisshing to be man and wise but yet that they can not come together because bothe or one of them is inclosed in prison these also are not one naturally as long as their bodies be asonder euen so albeit Christ haue the same nature which all men haue excepting synne yet he is not naturallie that is to say in the whole truth of nature one with vs thereby except we both in hart and body approche vnto him If we come to him in body alone we come vnworthely if in hart alone it is a spiritual coniunction which will serue if either necessitie or infamie kepe vs from natural coniunction but if we come to lawful age haue opportunitie we must approche both in body and soule to the Sacrament of Christes supper to be made one with him naturally that is to say to take his body really into ours to th' end the spirit and Godhead which dwelleth corporally in that body of his may fede our spirit and soule which beleueth in him to life euerlasting Of this kind of liuing Christ spake when he sayd he that eateth me lineth for me as I liue for my Father And it is to be consydered that Christe brought the similitude of his own liuing for his father to shew thereby how we doe line for him when we eate him But S. Hilarie was so sure of this later part of the similitude to wit that we liue for Christ by naturall coniunction of his body and spirite to our bodies and soules when we eate him that thereby he proued Christ to be one with his father in nature and substance And now come our new Sacramentaries teaching the argument of S. Hilarie to be nothing worth because they presuppose Christes fleshe not to be eaten of vs and consequently not to be in vs in his own nature and substance whereby they also affirm that the father is not proued to be in Christe naturally by these wordes of our sauiour as the liuing father sent me and I liue for the father also he that eateth me shall liue him selfe for me For if here the comparison be only in this point that as Christ referreth his life to another beginning which is his father so we liue by Christ who is the cause of all the grace we haue if I say nothing els be respected in both partes but that a thing whiche is lesse receaueth a benefite by the greater these words rather seme to proue against the Godhead of Christ then for it Yea the māhood is not by thē shewed to be really vnited to the worde And so that which the Catholike fathers bring for the truth which is beleued in Christ the Sacramentaries make altogether voyd Let vs adde to the former consyderations that we eating Christ liue for Christ. we then so liue for him as we eate him For seing the eating is the cause of the life such is the life as the eating is But the Sacramentaries auouche that we eate bodily nothing els at Christes supper beside bread and wine therefore by theyr iudgement we shall liue bodily none other way then to that end whereunto bread wine cā fede vs. They can not feed vs to life euerlasting therefore it foloweth of the Sacramentarie docrine that our bodies haue no meate whereby they may liue for euer What say ye masters Haue we not bodies as wel as soules ▪ Doe not our bodies eate in theyr kind as wel as our soules Do not our bodies line by theyr proper meat as our soules doe liue by the meat which is conuenient for them If Christ be meat vnto vs is he not meat to vs as well in respect of our bodies as of our soules Doth he not heale the whole man regenerate the whole feed the whole and saue the whole ▪ Then by like he feedeth our bodies to life euerlasting What food it that Where is it geuen how cometh it vnto vs The Catholiks answere It is the flesh of Christ which is geuen to vs vnder the form of bread But ye Zuinglians who deny that real presence of Christ shew what meat our bodies receaue which is able to make them liue for euer Either say they shal not liue or shew the meane of life You say our bodies eate sanctified bread at Christes supper Be it so But is that sanctified bread stil bread or is it made the flesh of Christ which is the bread of life If it be made Christes fleshe ye agree with me our bodies haue the true food of life But if it tarie bread stil it can not geue our flesh life euerlasting Ye will say Christ is able to vse wheaten bread tarying bread for his instrument or tokē to geue vs by that maane euerlastiug life As common water tarying water is in baptism y◠instrumēt meane as wel to our bodies as to our soules of life euerlastig In which reason ye vaunt your selues ouer much and think ye haue found a goodly defence But beware least ye triūph before the victorie As hitherto I haue resorted to the word of God to confute your vain doctrine so now I wil repair to the same vndouted fountain of true wisdome It is most certain that God were able to saue vs by what mea nes he would But his will is now committed to writing that heretiks might
of the argument or the desyre to haue the thing wel remembred or my forgetfulnes may cause me to fall in to that default The Chapiters of the fourth Booke 1. That no reasoÌ„ ought to be heard why the words of Christes supper should now be expouÌ„ded vnproperly or figuratiuely that the Sacramentaries can neuer be sure thereof 2. That as al other so the words of Christes supper ought to be taken properly vntill the coÌ„trarie doth euidently appere 3. The proper fignification of these words this is my body and this is my blood is that the substance of Christes body blood is conteined vnder the visible formes of bread wine 4. That the pronoune this in Christes vvords caÌ„ point neither to bread nor to vvine 5. That the pronoune this can not pointe to any certein acte vvhiche is a doing about the bread and vvine 6. That the sayd pronoune pointeth finally to the body and blood of Christ and in the meane tyme it signifieth particularly one certaine kind of food 7. The naming of the chalice proueth not the rest of the vvords to be figuratiue but helpeth much the reall presence 8. That the vvordes of Christes supper be proper though many other vnlike to them be figuratiue 9. The reall presence is declared by xxvij circunstances vvhich belong to Christes supper 10. The same is proued by conference of holy scriptures in the nevv Testament 11. Why the Sacrament is called bread after consecration 12. The real presence is proued by câ—…nference of holy scriptures of the old Testament 13. Item by the vvords hoc facite vvhich do signifie make this thing 14. Item by the vvords for the remembrance of me 15. The grosse error impudent chalenge of M. Novvell is corrected and fully satisfied concerning the coÌ„ference betwene these vvords this is my body and I am the true vine ¶ That no reason ought to be heard why the words of Christes supper should now be expoundâ—…d vnproperly or figuratuely and that the Sacramentaries can neuer be sure thereof CHrist in his last supper was bâ—…th like a testatour who disposeth before his death what shal be comâ—… of his goods afterward and like a maker of lawes who prescribeth an order to be kept in his commoÌ„ weale The legacie bequeath ed or rather the gift made by his life tyme in consyderation of death cerâ—…einly approching was the deliuery of those inestimable tâ—…wels which he called his own body and blood willing his heyrs and fruids to take to care hâ—…s bodâ—… which should be geuen for theÌ„ and to drink his blood of the new Testament which should be shed for the remission of synnâ—…s The law which he made was that the Apostles and their successones in the like degree of Priesthood should make that Sacrament which he had then instituted for the remembrance of his death vntill he came again to iudge the world His Testament and the gift made therein was confirmed by that famouse death which he siffered the next day vpon the Crosse. His law was receaued and practised from the coming doune of the holy Ghost euen to this day through al the catholike Church A few yeres after Christes death his TestameÌ„t and law which he made by mouth was by witnesses of sufficient credit put in writing published and acknowleged of al faithful men If therefore any question arise coÌ„cerning such words as were either in yâ— last wil or in the law or the narration of them who wrote the Gospell We ought to weigh whether that question be moued of a thing not already determined or els vpoÌ„ that which many yeres before was accustomed and receaued For as reason would a new doubt to be newly dissolued so no reason no law no conscience can suffer that a matter once fully decided and perfitly ended should be again called into iudgement The question is whether the words of Christ be figuratiue or proper I say that question was decided aboue fiftene hundred yeres past For when that wil law of Christ was first published al men toke those words This is my body and this is my blood to be proper And so we receaued of our forefathers from hand to hand in so much that the Church neuer heard before these daies any other doctrine preached by publike auctoritie it neuer saw other practise then to adore with Godly honoure those things ouer which the Priest as Christes mynister had sayd the words before rehearsed The vniuersal preaching and vsage of Christes Church is a sufficient witnesse that it hath always taken those words to be proper not figuratiue Whiche thing sith it is so minimè sunt mutanda sayth the lawier quae interpretationem certam semper habuerunt Those things are least of all to be changed whiche haue always had a knowen vnderstanding And yet if we should come to geue accompt of these vniuersall customs how reasonably might it be applied to our purpose which yâ— same lawier saith Si de interpretatione legis quaeratur inprimis inspiciendum est quo iure ciuitas retro in huiusmodi casibus vsa fuisset Optima enim est leguÌ„ interpres 〈◊〉 If a question be moued coÌ„cerning the interpretation of a law it is principally to be attended what order and law the common weale hath vsed before in those cases for custome is the best interpreter of lawes We are sure that before the birth of â—…uther yea also of Berengarius al the Church vsed to worship the body blood of Christ vnder the forms ofbread and wine and yet it could not haue done so if it had taken the word body for material bread only signifying the body that name of blood for wine which was appointed only to signifie Christes blood For the Church of God wold neuer haue worshipped with Godly honour bakers bread wine of the grape though they were tokens of neuer so goodly things But if the Sacramentaries answer that once the Church did other wise and that the auncient fathers neither adored the body blood of Christ vnder that formes of bread and wine nor preached the words of Christes supper to be proper besyde that such answer of theyrs is stark false as by that plain words of S. Ambrose of S. 〈◊〉 of S. Augustine and of Theodoretus it shal hereafter euideÌ„rly appere yet surely though so much could not be presently declared yet it were a great folly vpon the allegation of a thing so far beyond memorie of maÌ„ as the primitiue Church is to leaue the manifest vse and custom of the present Church the which Christ no lesse redemed no lesse gouerneth and loueth theÌ„ he did the faithfull of the first six hundred yeres Furthermore if all that is presently beleued shal be vndone as oft as it is pretendâ—…d that the primatiue Church thought otherwise what quietnes can there be in the Church after this order what end shall we haue of controuersies When shall
taking bread wine he putteth vs in mind of that great Priest Melchisedech who brought forth bread and wine and blessed Abraham As therefore Melchisedech toke bread and wine to offer them first vnto God next to communicate AbrahaÌ„ with them so doth our true king of rightuousues intend to offer to God and his Father the present bread and wine which he taketh And because the thing sacrificed is to be changed one way or other euen in substance from the former nature which it had as being sometymes killed sometymes burnt and sometymes eaten when Christ as the high Priest of God for so it appeareth in the end toke bread wine he toke them to offer coÌ„sequently to thange them in the most perfit maner that euer could be deuised as who is the most perfit Priest And into what substance shall he chaÌ„ge them but into the sede of Abraham his own body who came to fulfil the law and gather all things into him selfe and so to bring them again vnto his Father For which cause S CypriaÌ„ sheweth that as Melchisedech first brought foorth bread wine that so the blessing might duely be celebrated about Abraham so Christ fulfilling the truth of the prefigured image offered bread wine suum scilicet corpus sanguinem that is to say offered his own body blood This great mystery could not be throughly haÌ„dled in a whole booke much lesse I am able to coÌ„clude it within the cumpasse of a circumstance it is now sâ—…icient to touch the chefe points of so long a matter ¶ The tenth circumstance of blessing OUr chefe Bisshop did not only take bread and wine but he blessed also Benedictio blessing is as it were a blessed saying and because God sayth and it is done in him blessing is doing and in Christ who is both God man blessing is most properly of all a doing by the meane of saying or signifiyng for not alwayes when he blesseth he nedeth to speake but if he blesse as man he maketh at the least some outward token of the good dede which he is about either by lifting vp his eyes or hands to heauen or by making the signe of the crosse or by speaking certeine words Howsoeuer it be it caÌ„ not be well imagined that blessing should be in God or in Christe without a doing otherwise it should not differ from a simple saying yea it should be the saying of mâ—…n rather then of God But now it is called the blessing as if we should say a beneficiall saying which in God always importeth a doing In this place it sheweth also what intent and purpose Christ had For whereas Christ might haue spoken in the way of exhorting or of prophecying or of threatening or of comforting when it is writeÌ„ he blessed and sayd we may learne that he speake in the way of doing of working of bestowing some real benefit and of geuing vertue and strength vnto his word for that effecte which being so we can not now with any pretense of honestie imagine that those words are in the substantial parts of them 〈◊〉 at the prononcing whereof the Gospell hath rehearsed the word and vertue of blessing For as a figuratiue saying is an imperfect speache and therefore lesse then a common kind of speaking so is blessing farre more theÌ„ any speaking and therefore a true doing What repugnance then were it to say that Christ blessed at such tyme as he not only did no great miracle but also did lesse then the ordinary nature of speaking requireth For ordinarily men vse proper words Well that blessing in this place is to be referred to the words This is my body and this is my blood it is the doctrin of the most auncient fathers For S. Ambrose calleth this mystery benedictionem verborum coelestium the blessing of the heaueÌ„ly words and S. Cyrillus commonly nameth the blessed Eucharist benedictionem Christi or mysticam benedictionem the blessing of Christ or the mysticall blessing The like doth S. Chrysostome writing vpon S. Paule Now for so much as blessing standeth here beâ—…wene taking of bread and saying this is my body the which bread and body caÌ„ not be truely verified of the same thing at once the blessing so declareth the working and making present of Christes body that it doth intimate withal the bread to be changed into his body For as all blessing doth geue some benefit so when a creature taketh a benefit it is châ—…ged into a better state For which cause both S. Gregorie of Nyssa and S. Ambrose atâ—…ribute the chaunging of the nature of bread and wine into Christes body and blood to the vertue of his blessing It would paâ—…e yâ— describing of a circumstaÌ„ce and become a whole booke if I should prosecute any of these matters so largely as the thing would beare which at this tyme I may not doe ¶ The eleuenth circumstance of gening thankes GOd blesseth his creatures in bestowiing some benesite vpon them and the creatures blesse God by praising and rendring 〈◊〉 vnto 〈◊〉 Blessing thereâ—…ore in a diuerse sâ—…se is coÌ„mon to God and man but thanksgeuing is the proper duety whiche man oweth to God As Christ by blessing at his supper shewed his intent of changing bread and wine to a better nature then they before had so by geuing thanks he declarerh his change to appertein to the honoure of God and that after such speciall sort in this Sacrament that the whole mysterie taking thereof his name is called as Iustinus the martyr doth witnesse Eucharistia that is to say the geuing of thanks Whereas thanks be geuen by words alone or dedes alone or in both together it can not be denied but those are best thanks wherein most excellent dedes are ioyned with most true and reall words And who can dout but it is a more worthy dede to make present the body of Christ vnder the form of bread yâ— God may thence be glorified thanked then to make bread stil taryiÌ„g bread to be an effectuall signe of Chistes body Who can dout but the words of thanking are more true which say this is my body and meane the same then those which name yâ— body of Christ meane the figure of his body The Chatholiks beleue that Christ gaue thanks to his Father with moste true words and with most perfit dedes in so much that we deny any perfiter worke to be any where done vpon any creature in the whole world then that was wherein Christ wrought his body present vnder the form of bread to thend it should be a sacrifice of thanksgeuing to God And consequently we confesse with S. Ireneus eum panem in quo gratiae actae sunt corpus esse domini that bread wherein thanks were geuen to be the body of our Lord. And therefore he addeth iam non communis panis est sed Eucharistia it is not now common
very same that is put to death for you but concerning the true vine he saith As the braunche can not beare fruit vnlesse it be in the vine so can not we beare fruit except we tary in him The particles as and so be words of similitude and not of substance Behold how he is a vine by a similitude and by a metaphor by an exaÌ„ple by hauing a like propriety towards vs as the vine hath towards his owne braunches These be other manner of circumstances for the pithy and plaine setting forth of his reall body vnder the form of bread theÌ„ you can bring any to make so much as an apparence that Christ should be a vine And is yet the one with you so plaine so pithy as the other To what case would you bring the words this is my body if your power were to your will S. Iustinus the Martyr calleth them words of praier because they were spoken with thankesgeuing S. Chrysostom words which consecrate the things set forth because they make a Sacrament of yâ— bread and wine S. Ambrose calleth them words of blessing and a speache which worketh because they are spoken with the intent of working that they souÌ„d S. Augustine nameth them a mystical praier of consecrating of vowing or offering because they consecrate vow and offer vnto God the substance of bread and wine to theâ—…d it being accepted of him may be made the body of Christ our only sacrifice wherein the oblations of the new law must end You making these words no more pithy theÌ„ I am the true vine would haue them worke no more then metaphorical words do work which is to say that they teach only a comfortable doctrine but worke no essentiall thing in the substance of bread whiche is set forth to be consecrated Christ after his body was consecrated sayd to his Apostles Make this thing for the remembrance of me but after the wordes of the true vine were spoken he bad no thing to be doâ—… or made for any purpose or effect The making of Christes body was eâ—…r accompted a greate sacrifice as the greeke Liturgies and latine â—…bookes delare but there neuer was hard of auy vine that was in that opinion among the faithfull The words which consecrate Christes blood shew likewise what is to be thought of this is my body but the true vine is not so conâ—…d by any other like consecration annexed The blood is pointed vnto within a cup or chalice declaring the body also to haue bene pointed vnto vnder the form of bread but the vine was not so limited within a certaine place where it might appere to any sense of the Apostles It is called the blood of the new tostament or the new testament in Christes blood the like addition is not made to yâ— true vine The very cup of Christes supper is said to be shed for vs because the blood is conteined in it which was only shed for vs yâ— like is not said of any thing wherein yâ— vine might be conteined The wordes of Christes supper be so playne and so pithy that if we take them not as they sound the pronoâ—…nes hoc and hic shall lacke theyr noune substantiue The verbe est is being once taken for significat shall haue no substantiue at all to be his nominatiue case The noune corpus body being expounded for the figure of Christes body shall not agree with his participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 datum geuen or els the relatiue quod which shall not agree with his antecedent corpus body except we defend a figure of Christ to haue bene crucified for vs. None of all these things compell vs to take these wordes I am the true vine in suche sorte There is no pronoune no Relatiue or Participle which may so restrain the nature of the wordes but that we may take Christes kind of being the true vine for hauing the qualitie of a true vine and not being any vine in a seuerall substance Three Euangelists haue writen This is my body one after an other confirming the propriety of the words but only S. Ihon wrote that Christe said I am the true vine Nowe that is not so plainly said whereof four men write conformably as that which one writeth alone For if an other had writen the parable of the vine perhaps he would haue added other words to haue made it plainer although it be plaine enough already For the honour of these wordes This is my body Churches and Altars haue bene builded where that blessed body might be coÌ„secrated vnder the forme of bread For any vine I neuer thinke the like to haue bene done You your selues allow at the least a square table where this is my body may be solemnly pronounced but not so for these words I am the true vine The body whereof Christ spake hath bene taught to be adored vnder the forme of bread by S. Ambrose S. Chrysostom S. Augustine all the Fathers You are the first M. Nowell who would either a vine to be adored equally with Christes body or els his body to be no more adored in the Sacrament of the altar then a parabolicall vine For to that end your words runne that as wel Christ should be a vine as that whereof he spake in his supper should be his body to say that his body is only present in a parable at Christes supper S. Chrysostom calleth these words I am the true vine a parable and theresore saith Quid vult haec parabola significare what will this parable meane And againe Vide quà m diligenter hanc parabolom exequitur See how diligently he prosecuteth this parable But thought he trow you that This is my body was likewise a parable No no it neuer was his minde For writing vpoÌ„ these words Take eate this is my body and hauing asked why the disciples were not troubled hearing that thing he aunswereth Quia multa iam magna de hoc anteà disseruit because Christ hath disputed of this thing many and great things before Where no dout at al can be but that S. Chrysostom meaneth the the disputation kept at Capharnaum where Christ promised the bread whiche is his flesh affirming his fleshe to be not only true meate but to be meat truely therein shewing that it is meat not only concerning the truth of nourishing but also concerning the mancâ—… of caâ—…ing it vpon whiche place S. Chrysostome writeth that Christe called his fleshe truely meate either because it is the true meate which saueth the soule or to confirme them in his former sayings ne obscurè locutum in parabolis arbitrarentur sed scâ—…rent omnino necessarium esse vt corpus comederent least they should thinke him to haue spoken darkly in parables but should know it to be by all meanâ—…s necessary thaâ—… they should eate his
similitude which fully doth open his minde S. Cyrillus expresly affirmeth Christ to be in vs and vs to be in him by the communicating of his body and blood euen after that sort as if a man taking wax which is melted by the fier do so mingle it with other melted wax that one maner of thing semeth to be made of both How think you M. Nowell Is one wax mingled with an other by faith and spirit alone or is it mingled by signes and tokens 〈◊〉 the one part without the reall presence of both waxes What wicked men are ye who will make vs beleue yâ— S. Cyrill did not meane the reall substance of Christes fleshe to be reallie and corporallie in vs by communicating his bodie blood If you beleue him not why do ye not deny his aucthoritie If ye beleue his doctrine why teache you not the same These be the points M. Nowell which you must aâ—…swer vnto For euery word that foloweth is in S. Cyrill euen in that place where he disputeth of the true vine though not in such order as I now put them Which thing I doe to make his whole mind appeare at once Thus he sayth * 1. The mysticall blessing or the communicating of Christes body and blood â–ª * 2. maketh * 3. Christ or the life or the flesh of life * 4. to be or to be made or to be ioyned or to dwell * 5. in vs or with vs and vs to haue it in our selues or in our bodies * 6. according to the flesh or corporally * 7. and not only by habit or power or by â—…aith or charitie or spiritually * 8. but also by naturall partaking * 9. euen so as one melted wax is mingled to an other melted wax and in maner made one therewith * 10. By this meanes we are both corporally and spiritually braunches of Christes flesh which is also the true vine See now M. Nowell how yâ— parable of the true vine rightly expounded maketh altogether for our purpose As Christ is the true vine according to his flesh so are we the braunches according to his flesh He is the vine by hauing his flesh really present and vnited to himself therefore we be the braunches by hauing the same flesh really present in vs and by being really vnited vnto it as the braunche is vnited to his roote As Christ is the true vine two ways by his Godhead and by his manhod so a maÌ„ may two ways liue by Christ by partaking of his Godhead and manhod by habit only if he haue a good faith and by partaking his manhod corporally also if he receaue worthily the Sacrament of the altar But that Sacrament could no more make vs be braunches according to the flesh of Christ then our faith and charitie doth make vs to be braunches thereof except it had his flesh really present For otherwise our faith it self is a better meane to graâ—… vs into Christ then bread and wine is because it is a ioyning of vs to God in a higher degree But the mystical blessing in S. Cyril is made the meane to ioyne vs to God in a higher degree then faith or charitie Therefore S. Cyrill and all the Fathers before him whose minde he professeth himself to folow beleued the reall presence of Christes flesh in the Sacrament of the altar And that by the way of turning the bread into his flesh For the flesh of Christ could not be really present to dwell corporally with vs and in our bodies except it were corporally receaued of vs. And other way how to receaue it corporally I see not except the bread be changed into it Thus you see what aduantage I am the true vine doth bring to the Catholike faith but no hinderance in the world can be thence deduced against the reall presence of Christes body and blood in the Sacrament of the altar M. Nowell ¶ Nay if Christ had sayd likewise this is my true very body as he sayd I am a true or very vine what a rule had we then had I Marueile if M. Nowell think more strength to be in these words my true or very body theÌ„ in these My body which is geuen for you as though yâ— true very body were not geuen for vs. But if the true body were geuen for vs Christ saying This is my body which is geuen for you sayd also This is my true and very body And therein M. Nowell shal haue a rule to know that Christ spake not metaphorically for the relatiue quod which can not agree with any other word then with the noune substantiue corpus body which noune corpus body if it stand vnproperlie the relatiue must nedes repete it so as it standeth and then if this be the sigure of Christes body which is geuen at his supper the figure of his body is geuen for vs vpon the crosse I confesse M. Nowell I could be content to goe to schole to â—…rne of so auncieÌ„t a scholemaster as you are how a word which is but once named as yâ— noune corpus body in Christes supper may be antecedent to the relatiue quod which as the Latins reade or noune substantiue to the participle datum geuen as the Greeks reade and yet be otherwise ment in his relatiue and participle then it was being the antecedent or the noune substantiue Christ sayd This is my body geuen for you wil you diuide the participle geuen from his noune substantiue body If you will not as the body geuen for vs was the substance of Christes body so this is the self same substaÌ„ce of Christes body which the Apostles are commanded to take to eate and to make In that you turne the words vitis vera not only a true but also a verie vine you are much deceaued The word vera is not now to be pressed as if it were set to signifie a naturall vine where vnto your words run but to signifie a perfect vine in respect of an imperfit for so we say he is a true man meaning a truth in his words and dedes but not in nature for a lier and falsifier is also a true man in nature Euen so Christ meaneth himself to be a moste true and perfect vine concerning the swete frute which a vine ought to bring foorth and to communicate vnto his branches For the Iewes being a vine well planted by God became through synne a â—…oure vine and brought foorth none other but wilde grapes but Christ is a true a perfit a moste excellent vine which bringeth foorth swete grapes in his faithfull members of yâ— Church Thus doth S. Augustine expound yâ— word vera true saying that when Christ calleth him self a true vine he maketh a difference betwene him self and that vine to which it is sayd How art thou turned into the bitternes of a strange vine Euthymius declareth the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie either an excellent an incorruptible a spirituall
by it selfe aâ—… also being one of those things which doth principally declare the saith of the whole Churche in this behalfe For no man would adore the body of Christ in the Priestes hands or vpon the altar if it were not really present there The Chapiters of the sixth Booke 1. The adoration of Christes body is proued out of the Prophet Dauid in the Psalm 21. 2. Item of the Psalme 98. 3. It is proued out of the Prophetes that it can be no idolatry to worship the body and blood of Christ in the Sacrament of the altar 4. The adoration of Christes body is proued out of the new Testament 5. That the Fathers of the first six hundred yeres after Christ dyd honour the body blood of Christ in the Sacrament of the altar 6. The adoration of the body blood of Christ is proued by the custome of the Priestes and people of the first six hundred yeres 7. The reall presence is proued by the doctrine consent of the auncient Fathers 8. Item by the faith of the people 9. That no man can be coÌ„demned for beleuing the reall presence of Christes body and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine ¶ The adoration of Christes body is proued out of the Prophete Dauid OF this adoration due to the body of Christ the holy ghost forewarned vs by the Prophete Dauid in that psalme which Christ him selfe hanging vpon the Crosse declared to be literally ment of him selfe and that as well concerning his death whch he suffered for vs as also concerning the memory of the same death which he instituted in the night wherein he was betraied Christ therefore hauing she wed in that psalme the cruelty of Iewes in killing him most humbly asketh of his Father through his manhod that his soule may be deliuered by resurrection from the mouth of yâ— lion promising or vowing therewithal that he will open the name of God vnto his brethren and praise him in the middest of the congregation And when I cried vnto him he heard me If God hath fauorably heard Christ as there can be no doubt but he hath Christ is bouÌ„d by his own promise to praise his Father in a greate Church therefore saith he will doe so adding thereunto I will render or performe my vowes in the sight of them that feare him By what meane wil he performe them It foloweth immediatly Edent pauperes caet The poore shal eate be silled and they that seeke him shal praise the Lord theyr hartes shall liue for euer all the endes of the earth shall remember and be turned to the Lord. All the families of the Gentils shall adore in his sight Because the kingdome is the Lords and him selfe shall beare rule among the nations All that be fat on the earth haue eaten and adored al they that goe doune into the earth shall fall doune before him 1. Christ then â—…or his resurrections sake 2. made a vow to praise God 3. in the great Church of all nations 4. the performance whereof should be stablished by the meanes of eating filling 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and worshiping â—…ose that after baptism by yâ— grace of God are preserued froÌ„ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the body of Christ in the SacrameÌ„t of yâ— altar 〈◊〉 be filled 〈◊〉 praise God for euer Eating is the acte of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 spirituall 〈◊〉 is the heauenly effect thereof the praising of God is the fruit of the 〈◊〉 For we 〈◊〉 to be 〈◊〉 are filled to the end we should praise God for euer 〈◊〉 that after 〈◊〉 fall into greate 〈◊〉 partly they so fal that they rise 〈◊〉 and then they remember in yâ— memory of Christes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his last supper is that Christe died for them and so the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 forceth presseth them by penance to returne Partly they so fall that they care not to returne to God but lye wallowing still in their synnes yet they departe not by 〈◊〉 or infidelity out of the Church but kepe stil the bare belefe of Gods truth without performing his â—…dementes Such men eate worship but because they wil not remeÌ„ber be 〈◊〉 to God but come to the table of Christ vnworthely they are not filled by their eating But there are two other kinds of men who sometime haue bene of Christes church but now are not of it of which two the one doth eat and not worship because it beleuâ—…th not the thing eaten to be the flesh of God such are the Zinglians the other doth neither worship nor eate which are the vnfaithfull Iewes who are not only departed from the Catholike Church but also froÌ„ yâ— coÌ„fession of Christ our true Messias of whom S. Pâ—…ule saith we haue an altar whereof they haue no power to eate who serue the tabernacle Christ being absent in the visible forme of his body sitting therein at the right hand of his father ruleth his Church reigâ—…eth in it not as the vnfaithfull Iewes thought he would haue done by exâ—…ising violent inâ—…isdiction and subduing the bodies of men by force but he reigneth in yâ— hartes through faith charitie which he geueth vs. This inuisible reigning among visible men requireth for conuenient maâ—…tenance thereof an inuisible kinde of presence concerning the person of the king bâ—…t yet visible concerning the forâ—…ies of bread and wine to theâ—…d his members may know where to worship him For as his Church is visible through the bodies of them whose soules do inuisibly serue him so his body is visible through the formes of bread wine vnder the which it lieth inuisibly distributing the frutes of his death and resurrection All this eating adoring filling raigning and praysing doth chieâ—…ly belong in this place to the Sacrament of Christes body and blood Through those mysteries Christe the bread of life is really eaten wee are filled with grace God is praised in good works reigneth in our hartes we bowe downe to his body and worship him for our maker our King and our Lord. And that this interpretation is not of mine owne making it shall nowe appere S. Hierome vpon those wordes vota mea reddam I wil render my vowes which I promised saith Vota Christi natiuitas vel passio vota Ecclesiae opera bona vel mysterium corporis sanguinis mei offeram cum his qui in eius timore haec celebrant The vowes of Christ are his birth or passion the vowes of the Church are good workes or els I will offer saith Christe the mystery of my body and blood with them who celebrate these thinges in his feare First S. Hierome taketh the vowes of Christ to haue bene the promises that he made to be borne or to die but afterward he geueth an other sense which is more agreable to the letter For Christe had spoken before of his passion
and had made petition for his resurrection and saith he wil now performe the vowes which he made for the obteining of his resurrection Those vowes were to haue Gods name tolde and his 〈◊〉 published To that ende serueth the mystery and sacrifice of his body blood for God is thanked in the Eucharist and praised in the cup of blessing as in yâ— publike sacrifice instituted by Christ to remaine in his Church vntill his second comming Therefore when he saith I will performe my vowes he meaneth I wil offer the sacrifice of my body and blood as S. Hierome expoundeth it And therein S. Augustine fully agreeth with him saying Quae sunt vota sua Sacrificium quod obtulit deo Nostis quale sacrificium Norunt fideles vota quae reddit coram timentibus eum And afore Sacramenta corporis sanguinis mei reddam coram timentibus eum What are his vowes The sacrifice which he hath offered to God Knowe ye what maner of sacrifice The faithfull knowe the vowes which he rendereth before them that feare him I will render the Sacramentes of my body blood before them that feare him Cassiodorus consentâ—…th saying Vota mauult intelligi SacrameÌ„ta corporis sanguinis sui caet He rather would the voweâ—… be vnderstanded the Sacramentes of his body and blood the which are rendred those being present which are subiecte to him in holy feare To be shorte see what foloweth the poore shal eate and be filled These are the vowes whereof he spake before S. Bede also writeth Vota quae feci cum meipsum in ara crucis obtuli illa reddam in Ecclesia magna id est iterum per quotidiana sacrificia meorum in sacramentis offeram vota dico eadem verè in coÌ„spectu timentium eum id ist quantuÌ„ ad intellectum bonorum etsi non sint eadem in conspectu malorum qui nihil in Sacramentis nisi quod exterius apparet intelligunt The vowes which I made when I offered my selfe on the altar of the crosse those I will render in the greate Church That is to say I will offer them againe in the Sacramentes by the daily sacrifices of my ministres I meane the same vowes in dede in the sight of them that feare him to witte concerning the vnderstanding of the good men albeit they be not the same in yâ— sight of euil men who vnderstand nothing in the Sacramentes but that which appereth outwardly Here S. Bede expoundeth the rendering of the vowes of Christe to be the offering of the very same body blood which was offered vpon the crosse And that the good see by faith and vnderstand by beleuing more then the eye seeth But the euil men will vnderstand no more then they see iudging that which semeth bread and wine to be still in dede bread and wine But the truth is the same substance of Christes flesh and blood is offered in the Sacramentes which was offered on the crosse Concerning my purpose S. Hierome S. Augustine Cassiodorus Bedafull well agree this place to apperteine literally to the Sacrament of the altar Yea Arnobius who was elder then all they saith that Christ being vpon the Crosse praieth for them that crucifie him that his praise may bee in the greate Church and that he may render his vowes before them which feare him Dum edunt corpus eius pauperes Spiritu whiles the poore in spirit shal eate his body Neither doe the Latines only expound this place aâ—…ter that sorte but also the Grecians Euthymâ—…s hauing expounded the vowes to be the promises of praising Gods name and the eating of the poore men to be their feeding vppon the doctrine of the Apostles addeth also the other interpretation saying Vel aliter comedent fideles Saluatoris corpus cum quo sanguinem eius bibent c. Or els according to an other meauing the faithfull shall eate the body of our Sauiour wherewith they shall drink also his blood And shall be silled verily filled with the holy Ghost and shall extoll God with hymnes and praises in that table So that the former versicle may conteyne not only a prophecie of the Gospell but also the mysticall Sacrament of that table In which interpretation the Fathers agree so throughly that they conferre those words of the pâ—…alme their hartes shall liue for euer with those of Christ I am the bread of life and if any man eate of this bread he shall liue for euer Now if this psalme do literally speake of the offering and eating of the body and blood of Christ in the Sacrament of his supper as ye see plainly it doth it can not be auoided but the same place shal proue that the body blood of Christ must be adored in the Sacrament For yâ— same that is eaten is here prophecied also as a thing to be adored It is sayd manducauerunt adorauerunt they haue eaten haue adored Both be referred to one thing But they haue eaten is referred to the Sacrament of the altar therefore they haue adored is referred to the same Sacrament Apostoli vel caeteri sancti sayeth S. Hiâ—…rome manducauerunt corpus Christi The Apostles and other saiutes haue eaten the body of Christ wherevppon it foloweth that they haue adored it also S. Augustine expresseth it more plainly Manducauerunt corpus caet Euen the riche of the earth haue eaten the body of the lowlines of their Lord. They are not filled so that they wil folow as the poore men were but yet they haue adored Behold three verbs which all belong to the very body of Christ eating adoring filling The poore in spirite haue eaten and adored because al nations haue adored before him and they are filled The riche haue eaten and are not â—…illed but yet they haue adored What haue they both eaten The body of Christ Wherewith are the poore filled With the body of Christ. What haue that riche adored The body of Christ but yet they are not filled therewith because they will not folow the humilitie of Christ. And seing this eating pâ—…rteyneth to the Sacrament of Christes supper as it was before prourd the adoring also apperteyneth to the same Sacrament That is eaten which appeareth to be bread therefore that self substaÌ„ce is adored which appearing bread is in dede the truth of Christes own body S. Bede expoundeth the adoring thus Adorabunt quia cum quadam exteriori veneratione accedent They shal adore because they shall come with a certeyne outward worshipping Behold the worshipping of the riche is outward and not from the hart whereas it ought to haue beue both outward and inward both in spirit and in truth But through their hypocrisie it consisteth only in bowing their bodies because other men do so and not in true and perfite charitie of God Moreouer S. Augustin
wherein the honour may rest for the honour that wee geue to the body and blood of Christ which was taken of the virgine is according to the doctrine of S. Augustine geuen to his holy person who is the naturall Sonne of God and one substance with his Father true God and true man Thus wee saue the truth of the olde Propheâ—…ies the faith of our forefathers the proprietie of Christes wordes in his supper the honour of his Church the glory of his name who gaue no occasion of idolatry neither in worde nor in dede ¶ The adoration of Christes body in the Sacrament is proued out of the new Testament S. Paule speaking of Sacramtal eating saith he that eateth and drinketh vnworthely eateth and drinketh damnation to him self not discerning our Lords body that is to say not putting a difference betwene it and other meates For S. Hierome S. Augustiue Sedulius and Primasius expound those words in that meaning The difference which is to be made betwene the meate of Christes supper and other meates consisteth in two points in one that the receauer of Christes Sacrament must prepare him self before hand to be apt to receaue the grace of God in which point Baptisme penance holy orders and other Sacraments agree with the supper of Christe For we may not come being of lawfull age to any of those or such like holy mysteries without due disposing our selues to repentance for our synnes and to amendment of our life The second point of the difference betwene Christes supper other things is that in the Sacrament of his supper we must examine our selues euen for the respect of the substance of that meate which we receaue In baptisme we try our selues not for any honour which is due to the water but for the obteyning of the grace which is geuen in that Sacrament But in the supper a farther difference is to be made What is that The very substance which is taken is to be honoured and adored That is it which S. Chrysoâ—…ome sayth Non considerans vt oportet magnitudinem propositorum non reputans muneris magnitudinem He eateth vnworthely sayeth S. Chrysostome Who considereth not as it behoueth the greatnes of the things set foorth not weighing diligeÌ„tly the greatnes of the gift He speaketh not of the effect which cometh by the Sacrament but of the substance of the things set foorth What are they but such as appeare Bread and wine and yet in dede be Christ him self There fore it foloweth in S. Chrysostome If thou doest lern diligently qui sit propositus who is set before thee thou nedest to accompt nothing els Behold the person and substance set foorth is to be considered only Nullius alterius indigebis ratione Thou shalt nede make no accompt of any thing els For out of that substaÌ„ce which standeth before thee cometh the grace and all other effects of worthy eating as if he sayd prouyde to receaue worthely the person set foorth to thee vnder the formes of bread and thou mayest be secure So that the differeÌ„ce properly belonging to Christes supper is to make a difference of this substance from al other substances That is the difference whereof S. Ambrose saith He that will receaue worthely this meate must iudge that he is the Lorde whose blood he drinketh in a mystery What other meaning can these wordes haue but that he must iudge him selfe to drinke not wine but blood not the blood of an earthly man but his blood who is God also and that he drinketh his blood in a mysterie to wit not in his owne forme but vnder the forme of wine for he speaketh of Sacramentall drinking of that which is taken by mouth Therefore the very substance which he drinketh must be disseuered from all other creatures Nowe I say he that is willed so to iudge of the substance of this Sacrament as the substance of him who is God ought to be iudged of he is willed to adore the substance of this Sacrament sith his substance ought to be adored who is God For as S. Chrysostom saith the very table to wit the very meate staÌ„ding vpoÌ„ the table is the strength oâ—… our soulâ—… the synewes of the mind the bond of confidence our foundation hope health light lyfe Thus to iudge oâ—… this SacrameÌ„t by adoring it with true â—…oue in it to adore God that is to adore not only in spirite figures as yâ— Iewes dyd adore but also to 〈◊〉 in spirite and truth as Christ said we should do because our SacrameÌ„ts coÌ„teme yâ— truth which they signiâ—…ied â—…ot only signifying our Sauiour as yâ— old SacrameÌ„ts did but also geuing saluatioÌ„ as S. Augusti doth witnesse And for as muche as the Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ is the Sacrifice of the new â—…aw willed by him to be made for the remâ—…brance of his death we must both in our spirite and in the truth of naturall coniunction be vâ—…ted and made one with the substance thereof and also in the truth of Christes flesh externally consâ—…crated adore God offering him that reasonable and diuine sacrifice to the end we may render and paie the worship of thanksgeuing due for our redemption in none other substaÌ„ce then in the same which redemed vs. For as it is nostrum holocaustum our sacrifice wholy burnt by death of the Crosse so is it nostra hostia pacifica our sacrifice wherewith we both geue thanks for peace made betwene God and vs and also applie to our selues the fruites of that one burnt offerinâ—… truse made vpon the Crosse which was is the propitiation for our synnes and for the synnes of the whole world This kind of adoration proper to the new testament is due to God of our behalf by the Sacrament and sacrifice of Christes body and blood And herein stanâ—…eth all that which the Apostle speaketh of worthy or vnworthy receauing if the true substance of this SacrameÌ„t be vprightly estemed and both outwardly and inwardly honoured And so doth S. Augustine expound yâ— Apostles minde as now it shal appere Ianuarius had asked what S. Augustine thought concerning holy dayes fasting dayes or such like customes of the Church which are diuersly kept in diuerse countries Among other questions it was also moued what were to be more approued whethere to receaue daily the SacrameÌ„t of the altar or els to abstein sometymes To this question S. Augustine maketh answer that neither of them both depriueth the body and blood of our Lorde of honour if eche of them striue who may honour best the moste healthfull Sacrament For as well the Centurion as Zacheus did honour our Sauiour in maner by contrary meanes the one by receauing him with ioy into his house the other by saying â–ª Lord I am not worthy that thou shouldest enter vnder my roofe And as among the Iewes
of Christ who was coming to his house Lorde I am not worthy that thou should est enter vnder my roof we thereby know that he spake to Christ and called Christ his Lord and not only God in heauen so when we reade that the receauers of the holy communion did say at the tyme of receauing the Sacrament Lord I am not worthy that thou should est enter vnder my roof and that they did bow downe adore worship at the same tyme we must vndoubtedly conclude that both the Sacrament was spoken vnto and called Lord and also bowed to and adored Thus I haue proued the adoration of Christes body blood euen as it is a Sacrament out of the Prophetes out of S. Paul out of the anncient Fathers out of the publike seruire of the primitine Church and out of the custome of the faithfull people Al which proufes I haue applied to this end that the body blood of Christ should be knowen thereby to be really present in that self Sacrament which we take into our mouthes And for so much as that is so euery faithful man ought to beleue most constantly the sayd reall presence and to detest the contrary doctrine as a most perniciouse heresy ¶ The reall presence of Christes body and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine is proued by the testimonies of the auncient Fathers IF euery man is to be credited and ought to haue authoritie in his owne arte facultie if when we build we call a Carpenter to counsell and when we make gardens a gardener how much more must we esteme the holy Doctors of the Churche who are not only cunning by long labour bestowed â—…pon the science of diuinitie but also haue so vertuously vsed them selues that they haue bene abundantly instructed in all knowlege by marnailons inspirations of the holy Ghoste whose names are so greate that the very Heretiks can not deny them to be holy Sainctes in heauen and therefore they pretend to haue the first syx hundred yeres on their side It is then a good sure way to worke with the aduise of those auncient Fathers whose sayings because I haue particularly alleged and examined in euery article and chapiter of my former bookes as occasion suffered I thought good not to prosecâ—… them now again at large but rather to shew briefly by what generall chapiters a man may be vndoutedly assured of their belefe and doctrine First very many Fathers speaking of Christes words or dedes when aâ—…ter bread taken and thankes geuen he sayd this is my body allege the almighty power of God to defend the veritie of those dedes and wordes Therefore the same Fathers beleued those words this is my body to be true in so wonderfull a maner as they sound at the first sight And seing they meane according to their moste vsuall sound that this which is pointed vnto though it seme still bread is notwithstanding yâ— substance of Christes body we ought to think that those Fathers beleued the reall presence of Christes body Otherwise they wold neuer haue alleged his Godhead or almightie power and omnipotencie for the instituting of a figure and signe of his owne body sith for the institution of signes and figures such an authoritie might haue serued as God gaue to Moyses who yet was but the feruant of Iesus Christe and not almighty God S. Ireneus How can they be sure the bread whereon thankes are geuen to be the body of their Lord the chalice of his blood if they say not him to be the Sonne of the maker of the world S. Ireneus was so sure that Christ through his diuine power made the bread wherein thankes were geuen his owne body that if the Godhead were denied which should work that presence no man could be sure of the presence of Christes body and yet he might haue bene sure of a figuratiue presence though Moyses had bene the minister of the SacrameÌ„t and not Christe S. Cyprian That bread which our Lorde gaue to the Disciples by the omnipotencie of the word was made flesh What neded omnipotencie be alleged for a fact that were not supernaturall S. Hilary speaking of the Sacrament saith By the profession of our Lorde it is truely flesh and truely blood Is not this thinge the truth â–ª It may in dede chance not to be true to them who deny Icsus Christe to be true God As who should say if his Godhead may stand his flesh must nedes be truly present S. Basilius to shew yâ— these wordes This is my body make full persuation allegeth out of S. Iohn the glory or Godhead and also the incarnation of Christe because except he were both true God and true man this is my body should not make full persuasion sith if he were not man he should not haue a body whereof those words might be verified If he were not God we might dout how he were able to make his word true but seing he is God and man and sayd this is my body there is no dout of the presence of his body S. Ambrosius Our Lorde Iesus him self crieth This is my body he hath sayd and it is made S. Chrysostome O miracle He hath sitteth aboue caet And againe Let vs euery where geue credit vnto his wordes specially in the mysteries Eusebius Emissenus Let the very power of him that consecrateth strengthen thee S. Cyrillus of Alexandria Seing God worketh let vs not aske how Damascene We know no more but that the word of God is true strengthfull almighty but the maner is inscrutable No wise man requireth vs earnestly to beleue the words which himself doth think to be figuratiue and parabolicall but he rather should bid vs beware that we mistake them not as S. Chrysostome vpon those words God repented crieth out See a grosse word not that God repented God forbid but God speaketh to vs according to the custome of man Likewise S. Augustine saith in respect of those words Iohn Baptist is Elias Our Lord spake figuratiuely but S. Ihon saying I am not Elias answered properly If now these words This is my body were figuratiue we should haue ben'e warned by the watchmen of God to beware of them and not require d to beleue them as now we are required yea we are so required to beleue them that it is wonderfull to see and to consyd er how earnestly the Doctours speake in that behalf S Basilius The certeintie of our Lords words who sayd This is my body which is geu en for yow make this thing for the remembrance of me ingender full persuasion Surely figuratiue words can not make ful persuasion because theÌ„ selues are imperfite as lackin g their proper signification which is the chiefe vertue of words whereby they should fully informe vs. for no figuratiue speache is so plaine as a proper speache is
theyr charitie and theyr coÌ„slict against the deuill the world and the flesh is lost They were more miserable then any men For they liued more hardly in this life then any of our age doth and yet all is loste They were idolatours they worshipped a false God they are condeâ—…ned for euer This could not S. Paule abyde this he accoÌ„pted for wonderfull absurd that a man who is called to the faith and baptized in Christe who doth his best to serue God with all his hart and thought that he should be condemned for beleuing that which al men preached all taught all professed For surely the real presence of Christes body and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine was beleued through out al the Church in so much that Caluin Decolampadius Zuinglius Luther Wyelefe yea Berengarius did once euery of them with al theyr scholars beleue the said reall presence For they were baptized and christened al to be made members of that member of faithfull men all which did beleue that Christ in the Sacrament of his last supper had lefte to them vnder the formes of bread and wine his owne body and blood Whiles theÌ„ they were made by baptisme of that Catholike company them selues also had the same Catholike belefe and no marnayle sith all they being baptized when they were infantes and therefore hauing no actuall fayth of theyr owne must nedes haue only that faith which the Church had whereof by baptisme they were made members but the whole Church East and West belened the reall presence of Christes body so that when Beringarius began to say otherwise he was reproued of al the Preachers of yâ— age he was condemned by three Councels of Bishops kept at Rome and Uercels in Italy and at Tours in France He was impugned by Algerus LaufraÌ„cus Guiâ—…undus and afterward by Rupertus Petrus Cluniacensis and other excellent Clerks of that tyme. The faithful Princes and people abhorred him and to be short no man beleued his doctrine except that he changed his old faith to take a new of Berengarius For if any other man in the whole Church before Berengarius had openly taught or beleued that Christ was â—…ly by a figure in the Sacrament then could not he only haue bene made râ—…cant nor had not bene accompted the father and first open preacher of that faith Againe if the Princes and people had bene of his belefe they had surely done as the princes and people of our tyme who beleue the doctrine of Berengarius dayly do They had throwen doune altars ouerthrowen Churches denyed all outward Priesthod changed Bishops into superintendents Priests into ministers altars into tables yâ— chaste clergy into the vnlauâ—…ul mariage of â—…otaries they had not preserued the Sacrament of the altar for soden necessities they had not adored the flesh of God and man vnder the form of bread and wine they had not bene content with one kind at the holy coÌ„munion one 〈◊〉 should not haue said Masse without an other to receaue the communion with him the sacrifice of the Masse had not bene applied to the liue and dead monasteries chantries chappels had not bene so fast erected and to speake breifly al that now is mislyked had bene then misliked if the princes and people of that age had thought as Princes and people such as nowe folow 〈◊〉 his doctrine doe thinke For it can not be otherwise but that the same fayth will bring forth the same workes as one manner of tree bringeth forth alwaise the same manner of fruit But if it be euid ent to all men that fyue hundred yers past and vpward euen to yâ— daies of Constantine the great vnder whom Christ was openly worshipped Churches monasteries altars chappâ—…lles were built if Priests were estemed the body of Christ reserued and adored it Masses were in vse and in price euery where and said for the liuing and the dead out of all controuersie neither Bishops who kepte Councels against Berengarius neither preachers and doctours who taught and wrote against him neither princes and people who did and folowed the contrary effect to his doctrine none â–ª I say of al the Christian men aâ—…â—…ublikely professed Bâ—…rengarius opion which was to deny the reall â—…ce of Christes body and blood in the Sacrament of the altar So that only those whome Berengarius seduced began then first to thinke as he did wherâ—…by two things are manifest the one that Beringariâ—…s went from the doctrine of all the Church and from that fayth wherein he was baptized An other that for so doing he was a seducer and false teacher to whome none of the Apostles successours who for that tyme ruled the Church gaue any commission to preache such doctrine And yet how could he preache if he were not sent or how could he be sent sith no man would authorise him to preache that doctrine yâ— conâ—…rary wherof him selfe beleued Therefore of such false preachers as Berengarius was God said by the Prophete Ieremie I sent them not and they ranne For if God seâ—…t him he can shew his commission he can name yâ— meane wherby he was sent he caÌ„ bring forth what successour of the Apostles willed him to preache that doctrine But if he can not doe so he cometh of him self he preacheth without authority and consequently he is a thefe a robber a murdrer and so are all those that folow him â—…owbeit for so much as he recanted it may be well thought that by penance he was reconciled to God again And so may his folowers be reconciled if according to the example of theyr master they will repent It was then the vniâ—…ersall faith of the Church before the tiâ—…e of Berengariâ—…s that Christes body and blood waspresent really vnder the formes of bread and wine which being so if that faith came not to them from the Apostles who taught it them â–ª If faith â—…ome of hearing the word of God preached the whole Church could not beleue that which was not preached If it were so preached either that preaching came by lawfull coâ—…ission and then it was of God and the doctrine good or els it came of priuate 〈◊〉 and it must be shewed who were those vsâ—…pers that preached otherwise tâ—…â—…ey had receaued Or how is it possible tâ—…t it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a priuate vsurping which was generally receaued euery where Or if those that preached the reall presence were men that went by schisme or hereseie out of yâ— Church let yâ— Church and faithfull cumpanie be named whence they went Let vs goe from step to step First six hundred yeres past al the knoweÌ„ faithful on the â—…arth beleued the reall presence as it appered euidently when Berengarius afterward began to teache otherwise For then all preachers prelates and people resisted him both in word and dede as I shewed before Wel then those docâ—…ours and preachers of six hundred yeres old how
Chapiters of the seuenth Booke 1. Maister Iuel hath not answered D. Hâ—…rding wel touching the vvords of Christes supper 2. That the supper of Christ is a naked bare figure accordig to the Doctrine of the SacrameÌ„taries 3. That Christes bodie is receaued by mouth not by faith only 4. M. Iuel hath not replied vvel touching the sixth Chapiter of S. Iohn But hath abused as vvell yâ— gospel as diuerse authorities of the fathers 5. Item he hath not replied vvell touching the Carpharnaites 6. Neither conferred the supper vvith the sixth of Iolm as it ought to be 7. Neither disputed wel touching the omnipotenâ—…ie of Christ in promising the gift of his flesh 8. Whether the 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 exponÌ„d more vnpropertie or inconuenientlie the vvords belonging to Christes supper 9. A notable place of S. Augustine corrupted by M. Iuel 10. Of the signification of aduerbs 11. Of the first author of the SacrameÌ„tarie heresie 12. Of Christes glorified bodie and the place of S. Hierom expounded 13. A place of S. Chrysostom examined 14. The difference betvvene baptisme and oure Lordes supper 15. The ansvvere to M. Iuel concerning the Nicene Councell S. Augstine caet 16. VVhether Christes bodie dvvelleth reallie in our bodies by his natiuitie 17. Item vvhether by faith 18. The contradictions of M. Iuel in this article 19. Whether by baptism Christe dvvelleth reallie in our bodies 20. Item VVhether by the Sacrament of the altar or no. 21. Christes bodie is proued really present by S. Chrysostoms vvordes 22. Item by the vvordes of S. Hilarie 23. Item of S. Gregorius Nyssenus 24. Item of S. Cyrill ¶ Master Iuel hath not answered D. Harding well touching the words of Christes supper IVel. fo 316. The people was not taught in the first 600. yeres to beleue that Christes body is really substantially corporally carnally or naturally in the Sacrament Harding Of the termes really substantially corporally coet found in the doctors Iuel His answere is that Christes body is corporally vnited to vs but whether it be corporally in the Sacrament he answereth not one word Harding The termes are fouÌ„d in the doctors treating of the true being of Christes body in the Sacrament Sander Ergo M. Iuel said not truly For as D. Harding now saith it so he proueth afterward Christes body to be really in the Sacrament Iuel In this matter he is able to allege nothing for direct prouf Harding Christen people hath euer bene taught that the body of Christ is present verely in the Sacrament vvhich doctrine is founded vpon Christes plaine vvords Sander Ergo M. Iuel â–ª he was able to allege some what Iuel It is marueil the people should be taught without a teacher or without â–ª words â–ª or those not writen Harding Christes vvordes are expressed by three Euangelists and S. Paule Take eate this is my body this is my blood coet San. Ergo M. Iuel hath 〈◊〉 plainly 〈◊〉 whereby direct prouf of Christes real presence is 〈◊〉 â–ª Harding Neither saieth our Lord only This is my body but to put the matter out of dout he addeth vvhich is geuen for you Iuel 317. Hereupâ—… M. Harding fouÌ„deth his carnal presence 318. in such grosse sort really and fleshly in the Sacrament c. San. It is no grosse sort of presence whiche is reall true and miraculouse as being of Christes own institution Marcion and Apelles herein your auncestors M. Iuel thought it a carnall a grosse a fleshly thing for Christ to lie nine moneths in his mothers belly to be nourished there with blood and humours to be borne naked to be wrapped in clouts For a remedie of which absurdities the one of them deuised that Christ was not really borne but that which Tertullian saith against Marcion shal be my answere to you First God saieth he hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound men that are wise in their own conceit 2. Whatsoeuer is vnworthy of God is expedient for maÌ„ 3. Be thou assured Christ had rather be borne then in any parte to make a lye Now if we applie all these sayinges to Christes presence in the Sacrament it shal be lesse carnall lesse grosse lesse fleshly to haue the substance of Christes corporall flesh in a spirituall manner really present vnder the forme of bread then either to be corporally in his mothers womb or to think that he made a lye when he said take eate this is my body Iuel Christ vseth not any of these words San. I will say with S. Augustine although the word be not found the thing is found Harding 130. Though this manner of speaking be not thus expressed in the scripture yet it is deduced out of the scripture Iuel Christ vseth no leading thereunto Sander The worde 〈◊〉 â—…id lead the Apostles to that which was in Christes hands or which lay before him the wordes is my body shewed the substance thereof as if I shewing to a man that kind of beast should say this is a lion the word this leadeth him to that beast which he feeth and whereunto I point is a lion sheweth the substance of the thing pointed vnto This oddes only there is that a man by pointing speaking can shew only that which was before but God who spake it was made by pointing and speaking doth make that to be the substance of his body whiche was not so before Nowe as when it is truly said this is a lion it wil follow thereof vnder this visible forme which I shew a lion is substantially conteined so seing Christe pointeth to the Sacrament saying This is my body it will follow thereof in this Sacrament my body is conteined substantially corporally c. Thus Chrisâ—…es wordes lead vs to his body substantially present in the Sacrament ergo M. Iuel must subscribe by his owne promise Iuel 317. D. Fisher saith this sense can not in any wise be gathered of the bare wordes of Christ. Sander Wel fisht I promise you if he fish wel that catcheth a lie 1. The blessed B. of Rochester had said that the vnderstaÌ„ding of the Gospell is more certeinly obteined by the interpretation of the Fathers and by the practise left by them then by the bare words of the Gospel For example hereof he saith no man shall prone by the bare wordes of the Gospel that any Priest in these daies doth coÌ„secrate the true body and blood of Christ. Marke good Reader whereof he speaketh For although saith he Christ him self did in dede make his body and blood of bread and wine yet except the like be promised and graunted to vs we can not be sure we do it but no suche thing is promised For in S. Mathew now followeth one of the places alleged by M. Iuell No word is put whereby it maie be proued that in our Masse the very presence of Christes body and blood
therefore yâ— substance of Christs flesh is promised to be eaten verily and not only by faith but also in a sacrament That kind of promise was only performed in the laste supper when he sayd Take eate this is my body which is geuen for you There was euery word literally performed For the particular declaration whereof I beseche the reader to consider that which I haue writen vpon S. Ihon in the 3. booke the 2. Chap. Iuel S. Augustine saith Thei eate Christes body not only in the Sacrament but also in verie dede Behold not only in the Sacraâ—…ente San. To 〈◊〉 out a peece of the sentence of S. Augustine and such a peece as vtterly changeth the â—…eaning of his words is it not the signe of one that hath cast of all feare either of god or of man S. Augustine saith thus some men promise pardon to Catholiks though they liue noughtily because they haue eateÌ„ yâ— body of Christ not only in yâ— SacrameÌ„t but in very dâ—…de But how yâ— body of Christ is 〈◊〉 in very dede that M. Iuâ—…l would not write and yet it is a peece of the very same clause The rest of the wordes are in ipso eius corpore constituti de quo Apostolus dicit Vnus panis vnum corpus multi sumus Being stablished in the selfe body of his of the which S. Paule said we being many are one bread one body which yet is againe expounded afterward 〈◊〉 iâ—… coâ—…pore Christi id est Ecclesia Catholica sumpseruÌ„t baptismum Christi manducaueruÌ„t corpus Christi Euil Catholiks 〈◊〉 not coudemned as some men said because they haue receaued the baptisme of Christ and haue eaten Christes body in the body of Christ that is to say in the Catholike Church This false opinion proponed in the xx chapter is impugned by S. Augustine in the xxv of the same booke Where he sheweth that none other are to be accompted the members of Christ beside those that tarie euen to ytâ—…d in the vnitie and charitie of his mystical body the Church But M. Iuel playeth the Sophist by taking the word body otherwise then S. Augustine meant it for as the cumpanie of Merchants in London make a certaine feloship among theÌ„ selues therefore may right wel be called a collegiate body euen so the cumpanie of faithull men who beleue and liue well make a certain body of Christ which is called his flocke his elect his fold most often of al his mysticall body â–ª Now M. Iuâ—… taketh yâ— word body which signifieth both Christes naturall mystical body as if it signified only his naturall body He wil proue the body of Christ to be eaten without the Sacrament and therein he taketh it for the natural body whiche 〈◊〉 at the right hand of God He proueth it by S. Augustine who speaketh of the mystical body which is the cumpanie of the elect and the holy Church of God Is not this man worthy to be a preacher â–ª Iu. S. Augustine contrarie to M. Hardings doctrine so farre forceth this difference that he maketh the eating of Christes body in the Sacrament to be one thing and the very true eating thereof in dede to be an other thing San. Why then doe you mingle the one with the other Why 〈◊〉 you against D. Harding who speaketh of the Sacrament â—…ly that place which spâ—…th oâ—… an another thing that is to say of the mysticall body You 〈◊〉 him vniustly and condemne your self most â—…ly He denieth not the mystical body and therfore is not contrarie to S. Augustine but he sheweth that Christ promised a real eating beside al other kinds of eating The promise of that reall eating you would exclude by shewing yâ— Christ may be eaten by other waâ—…s then by the Saâ—…ment â–ª as if wheÌ„ you had dâ—…d a â—…an to haue in his house yâ— armour which he is bound by lawe to haue ready you would afterward acquit your selfe if you proued that he had horsâ—…s in his stable and oxen in his pasture As though the hauing of the oâ—… proued the lacking of the other For how many waies oâ—…â—…ating Christ soâ—…r there are yet the â—…ating of his real flesh which was promised at Capharnaum is thereby rather coâ—…ed then â—…isproued Iu â–ª S. Augustine saith â–ª the Fathers of the old law receaued the 〈◊〉 same body that is now receaued oâ—… the faithfull Sander You leaue out some words of S. Augustine you adde other of your owne S. Augustine saith the old Fathers diâ—… eate the same spiritual meate which we eate you leaue out the worâ—… spirituall wherein he chefely 〈◊〉 His 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vppon S. Paules words is that the olâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 eate the 〈◊〉 spirituall meate the same saith he I can not find how I may vnderstand but the meate which we also eate Some man then will say was this which I now take manna is there nothing then at this time come if it was before is then the slaunder of the crosse made voyde How els did the Fathers eate the same meate but that the Apostle added spiritalem the same spiritual meate Againe Eundem ergo potum quem nos sed spiritalem id est qui fide capiebatur non qui corpore hauriebatur The old Fathers drunk the same drinck which we doe but the same spirituall drinck that is to say which was taken by faith not which was drunck by body Is it plaine enough M. â—…uel that S. Augustine speaketh not generallie of the same meat but of the same spiritual meate why leaft yoâ—… that word out why sayd you in stede thereof that the old Fathers did eate the self same body that is now receaued of the faithfull What delight haue you to misreport the auncient Fathers where is it writen the self same body saieth not S. Augustine eundem potum quem nos sed spiritalem they dranke the same drinck which we doe but spirituall did he not expound the word spirituall saying the which was taken by faith and not drunk by body Note well those wordes M. Iuel noÌ„ qui corpore hauriebatur they drank not that which we doe concerning the drink which is taken into the body that is to say they tooke not the blood of Christ into their bodies as we now do they toke a signe of Christes blood as we doe and among other figures they had also bread wine At the time of which figuratiue bankets the iust men did fede in spirit vpon Christ but we fede vpon him also in body we eate the same in spirit and also in body which they did eate in spirit only We meete with them in the meate as it is spiritual but we differ in the same and farre passe them as it is corporal Therfore S. Augustine saith vpon S. Ihon Spiritalem vtique eandem 〈◊〉 corporalem â—…lteram quia illi manna nos aliud â–ª they did
bone but not thereby really dwelling in our bodies which belong to our persons Iuel In that sense S. Ihon saith the word was made flesh and dwelt in vs. San. In what sense Whether that Christes bodie by his natiuitie dwelleth substantially in our bodies for so you said but S. Ihon said not so God gaue men power to be made the sonnes of God to such as beleue in his name to such as are borne of God and when S. Iohn had said we had power to be the sonnes of God if we were borne of God he consirmeth that power geuen to vs saying And yâ— word is made flesh hath dwelt 〈◊〉 vs. Therfore saith S. ChrysostoÌ„ he hath dwelt in vs that it might be lauful to come to him selfe to speake to be câ—…uersant boldly with him He was not in our bodies really straight vppon the incarnation but when he dwelt 〈◊〉 our nature wheÌ„ he was a trúe man as we are then might we come to him Priusipsu verbum voluit nasci ex homine vt tu securius nascereris ex deo The word wold first be born of a woman to thâ—…d 〈◊〉 mightest be born of God without feare Iuel Therefore Christ calleth himself the vine and vs the braunches San. It is vntruly sayd 〈◊〉 Iuel For albeit Christ by his humane birth be as it were the 〈◊〉 of the vine for his owne part yet he is not to vs the vine nor we be not the braunches 〈◊〉 we are graffed into Christ which is don by saith and Baptism S. Augustine saith he is made maÌ„ that the nature of man should be a vine in him whereof we that are men might be also the braunches If his only birth had made vs braunches what neded a new birth in Baptism When S. â—…yrill wold shew that Christ according to his humane nature was the vine which thing the Arrians denied he went not for the matter to Christes birth only for then Iudas and â—…ain had bene braunches but he went to the Sacrament of Christes supper to proue that we depend of Christes flesh as braunches doe of the vine Iuel S. Paul calleth Christ the head and vs the body San. S. Paule speaketh of Christes mysticall body and you should proue that his natural body is really in our bodies Now if to make his body to dwell really in our bodies more then his birth be necessary it is not true that M. Iuel with such vain brags hath hitherto sayd that his body by â—…is natiuity dwelleth really or substancially or naturally in our bodies But only that he dwelleth in vs to wit in our nature being made Emanuell nobiscum Deus God with men But thereby Christ dwelleth but in one body really to wit in that which he made to himself out of the virgins most pure blood Wherefore S. Cyrillus saith Habitauit in nobis Dei verbum in templo vno quod propter nos de nobis sibi condidit vt omnes in seipso habeÌ„s in vno corpore patri reconciliaret The word of God hath dwelt in vs or among vs in one teÌ„ple yâ— which he made to himself for our sakes and out of vs that hauing al in himself he might reconcile them to the Fathâ—… in one body One thing M. Iuel I must put you in mind of You 〈◊〉 that Christes body may not be in many places at once which doutlesse you meane of his naturall body and his body is by no meanes more natural then by the natiuity thereof But you say now that Christes body by his natiuity dwelleth really substan cially and fleshly in our bodies and certeinly our bodies dwell in many places therefore you are against your own doctrine as who confesse Christes body by his natiuity to dwell naturally in all our bodies which are not only in many places of yâ— earth but a great number also are vnder the earth in al which Christes body according to your doctrine must dwell corporally and therefore it must be in many places together ¶ Whether Christes body dwell in our bodies by faith really or no. IVel. Towching faith S. Paul saith Christ by faith dwelleth in our harts San. The word hart in holy scripture doth not alwayes signifie that fleshly part of a mans body commonly so called but S. Paule meaneth that Christ dwelleth in our minds and wills by faith and charitie which is made very plaine by the words going before secundum interiorem hominem according to the inner man Therefore no dwelling of Christes body really or substancially in our bodies is proued by this place of S. Paule except we shall say that Christ hath no real and substanciall body of his own For if is be a reall substance what meaneth M. Iuel to affirm it dwelleth really and substancially where the real substance thereof it not if it be a reall dwelling of Christes body in our bodies in that we beleue in Christ and yet Christ haue but one reall and substanciall body by M. Iuels phrase of speache that body may be sayd to haue dwelt really in yâ— virgins â—…omb in that she only beleued in Christ. and by such worthy interpretation the truthe of the incarnation is vtterly taken away Iuel S. Peter saith Hereby we are made partakers of the diuine nature San. Those wordes generally pertein to all the giftes of God and specially to yâ— incarnation of Christ whereby we communicate most perfitly if yet we be faithsull with the nature of God For when we beleue in Christe who is man with vs and God with his Father then wee communicating with his manhood coÌ„municate also with the Godhead whiche dwelleth corporally in Christ. But that coÌ„municating may be made either by faith or baptism and other Sacraments And as the Godhead dwelâ—…eth incomparably more excellently in Christes own body â—…then it doth in any other thing which dependeth thereof so the vnion with his nature is made far better by the meane of the Eucharist with faith and Baptism ioyned together then by one or two of them alone And that this place of S. Peter doth pertein to the communicating of Christes flesh in the Sacrament also Cyrillus of â—…ierusalem doth witnesse writing thus Under the forme of bread the body is geuen and vnder the forme of wine the blood is geuen c. And so we shal be made partakers of the diuine nature as S. Peter sayth Now M. Iuel hath most improperly placed this Testimonie in the second kind of Christes dwelling in vs sith it apperteyneth to all foure ways generally but most especially to that coÌ„munion or ioyning which is made by the holy Eucharist Iuel So sayth Ignatius By his passion and resurrection that is by our faith in the same we are made the members of his body San. S. Ignatius in two places oâ—… that Epistle speaketh of such a matter as M. Iuel wold
haue but because his words did not serue the turn it pleased this corruptour of all good authors to geue him new words The first place in S. Ignatius is vt credentes in mortem eius per BaptismuÌ„ participes resurrectionis eius efficiamini To th' intent ye beleuing in his death through Baptism should be made partakers of his resurrection Here is not that for which M. Iuel seeketh because Baptism is also named whereof as yet it is not his course to speake Again here is no reall or substanciall dwelling spoken of The other place is Vos verâ—… inuitat Christus ad suam incorruptibilitatem per passionem suam ac resurrectionem qui estis membra eius Christ inuiteth you who are his members to his immortalitie by his passion and resurrection But this place wâ—… not serue M. Iuels purpose For it is not sayd we are made the members of his body which is the thing that M. Iuel must proue That word body was not in S. Ignatius but is cast in by M. Iuel 2. Moreouer though it had bene expressed it had bene meant of Christes mysticall body â—…oncerning faith and not of his naturall body whereof we now dispute 3. S. Ignatius speaketh not of our incorporating to be now first made by faith in Christes passion but he saith Christ inuiteth vs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being his members he speaketh not of that we are made his members that word made M. Iuel made of his own head 4. S. Ignatius spake of this point how those that are already the members of Christ which thing they were not by faith alone but by Baptism and the Eucharist how those I say were inuited not now to be made members but to be made immortal with Christ their head Thus M. Iuel doth order the holy Fathers words ¶ The contradiction of M. Iuel concerning Christ really dwelling in vs by faiâ—… not really dwelling in vs by faith c. WHat shal we say of M. Iuel who in one and the selfe same diuision affirmeth two propositioÌ„s cleane contrarie For as here he saith Christes body dwelleth in our bodies by euerie of the four meanes of which one is a dwelling by faith so afterward expounding out of S. Augustine the very same wordes of S. Paule whiche he now bringeth for the dwelling of 〈◊〉 body in our bodâ—…es really Thus he â—…aith Christe is in thee not really or bodily but because his â—…aith is within thee And those wordes not really or bodily are not the wordes of S. 〈◊〉 but the wordes of M. Iuell Who within the câ—…mpasse of two leaues affirmeth more coÌ„tradictions neuer able to be recâ—…ciled The one place saith Christes body is in our bodies by faith The other saith Christ is not really in vs but by faith If there be any ods betwene Christ and his body it maketh altogether against M. Iuel For whereas Christe maie be said to be where his body is not and maie be said to be in vs when his body is not in our bodies M. Iuel 〈◊〉 in the one place not only the body of Christe to be really in vs but also he denieth that Christ is really iâ—… vs. and in the other he affirmeth not only Christe to be really in vs by faith but also his body to be really not only in vs but euen in our bodies by faith You pretend some contradiction M. Iuell here and there betwen D. Hardings own words but I 〈◊〉 you no such is to be fouÌ„d as this is You note in this article that D. Harding is contrarie to him self because he saiâ—…th in one place Berâ—…ngarius first begaÌ„ openly to sowe the Sacramentarie heresie in an other he said the Messalians were the first parents of this heresy But what a poore contradiction is that sith one may be the first parent of an heresie in geuing secret occasion thereof the other may beginne it first in professing it opeÌ„ly and publikely as D. Hardings own wordes expressly say But if D. Hardinges contradiction were like yours it should saie Berengarius began this heresie first openly and Berengarius began it not firste openly The same termes being kepte the one shoulde haue affirmed the same thinge whiche the other had denied No no it is for M. Iuel to haue suche contradictions and for no man els But what credit shall any man geue to your wordes sith yoâ—… doe not only saie these two contradictiones but you teache them both You hold that Christe is in vs by faith and therefore that his body is really in our bodies You set it foorth as a doctrine of yours you make a preface to it solemly say for answere hereunto it shal be necessarie first to vnderstand howe manie waies Christes bodie dwelleth in our bodies and thereby afterward to view M. Hardinges reason Four speciall meanes there be whereby Christe dwelleth in vs and we in him His natiuitie whereby he embraced vs. Our faith whereby we embrace him The Sacrament of baptism and the Sacrament of his body By euerie of these meanes Christes bodie dwelleth in our bodies and that not by waie of imagination or by figure or phantasie but really naturally substantially fleshly and in deede Are not these your own words M. Iuel Are they not spoken of you not only in the wai of answering wherein somtime a maÌ„ vseth some shift but are they not your own words setting foorth a doctrine whiche you would haue beleued and embraced Well Why then saie you afterward the contrarie and that not only once but in diuerse places For againe in an other place before you said Christe dwelleth in our hartes by faith must he nedes meane that Christ is really and fleshly placed within our harts Meane you not there to saie that though Christe dwell in vs by faith yet he is not really placed in vs What meaneth this contrarie doctrine Surely thus it meaneth yâ— you knowe not what you saie you vnderstand not whereof you dispute You prouide only to contrarie D. Harding and through him the Catholike Church and that by al meanes possible to be deuised by phrases of speache by the authorities of schole meÌ„ by falsifying yâ— auncieÌ„t Fathers And now through vehement bending your self against our reall receauing of Christes bodie into our bodies which the Catholikes beleue you haue inuented three other your selfe in the meane time assuredly beleuing that there is neuer a corporall coniunction at all with Christes naturall bodie Of other petie contradictions I speake in other places ¶ Whether Christ dwelleth really in our bodies by baptisme or no IVel. To increase this vnion God hath specially appointed his holy Sacraments San. Not only to increase it but also to make it For partly now all men be baptized being yet infantes when they doe not actually beleue partly though they did beleue their saith maie be to weake to worke the incorporation as S. Augustine saeith
that we are ioyned to Christ by faith and by Baptism Yeas Syr and by will also But note the point we stand vpon we are not ioyned naturally to Christ nor he is not ioyned by nature vnto vs by our faith or Baptism It is yâ— term naturally which M. Iuel denied at S. Poules crosse and that teâ—…n D. Harding hath found to appertein to the Sacrament as it shal be be made most manifest That term M. Iuel wold wrest to faith and Baptism And for that termes sake he is almost become a wicked Arrian or a naturall The second argument of the Arrians is He that planteth he that watereth are one Ergo sayd they the vnitie of will is in both them and they meant of will only and not any other vnitie S. Hilarie answereth that they are one because to them being born again in one Baptism one ministerie or dispensation of the one Baptism which doth regeneraâ—…e is graunted So that they are onâ—… because they haue one ministerie and not only because they 〈◊〉 of one minde At the last S. Hilarie geueth a generall rule qui per eandem rem vnum sunt naturâ etiam vnum sunt non tantum voluntate Those who are oâ—…e by the same thing they are one by nature and not only by will The third argument of the Arrians is Exemplum vnitatis istius sayth S. Hilarie caet The Arrians haue brought foorth an example of this vnitie out of our Lords words also to th' end all may be one As thou O Father in me and I in thee that they also may be in vs. To this argument S. Hilarie answereth declaring now first that which M. Iuel spake of before out of place Now first beginneth S. Hilarie to shew how Christ dwelleth naturally in vs and we in him And consequently how we also dwell in his Father by the meane of him To this matter should M. Iuel haue applied his solutioÌ„ For vppon the discourse made by reason of this argument D. â—…ding did ground his proof of Christes reall presence in the Sacrament What saith M. Iuel to this matter Iuel Thus it appeareth by S. Hilarie we may haue Christ naturally within vs by three other sundry meanes and therefore not only as M. Harding holdeth by receauing of the SacrameÌ„t San. Thus it appeareth say you but I haue shewed that no such thing appereth For S. Hilarie neuer sayd hitherto that we were naturally in Christ. Iuel Like as Christ is naturally corporally and carnally in vs by faith by regeneration and by Baptism euen so and none otherwise he is in vs by the Sacrament of his body San. First you begin with a thing not confessed nor agreâ—…d vpon and thereof you conclude a manifest falshod Christ is in vs by faith and Baptism but not corporally in our bodies But by the Sacrament of his body he is both in vs and in our bodies in the true and corporal substance of his own flesh blood Secondly you distinguish regeneration from Baptism as though Baptism were not the Sacrament which doth regenerate vs euen by S. Hilaries own doctrine alleged before Thirdly if Christ be none otherwise in vs by the Sacrament of his body then by faith or Baptism why do you make it a seuerall way from the other named before Why is that counted by your self a fourth meane of Christes being in vs which disferâ—…th not at all from the other three At the length it is tyâ—…e that I proue out of S. Hilarie which thing you M. Iuel dissemble and denie Chrisles body to be really present in the Sacrament It is to be remembred that whereas the Arrians had sayd aâ—… vuitie of will to be only betwen God the Father and the sonne as we likewise are one with Christ by will only for so thei sayd S. Hilariâ—… doth not in that case rest vpoÌ„ this answer that Christ by his birth is one with vs in truthe of flesh blood and therefore not in will and assent only as the Arriaâ—…s pretended and as M â–ª Iuel did before goe about to proâ—… S. Hilarie I say rested not therein because the vnitie of nature which was made with mankind by Christes Incarnation â—…ight be thought to pertein no more to the good then to the euill whereas Christ prayed for the vnitie of good men aloâ—…e that they might be one as God the Father is in Christ and Christ in him Therefore S. Hilary seking an other meane of our natural vnitie with Christ thereby proueth seing the faithfull men are one with Christ not only by faith or Baptism but by naturall coniunction and by corporall partaking of his own substance that much more Christ is one with his Father in nature and not in will alone S. Hilarie then must prone that we are one with Christ naturally which thing he doth after this â—…ort The word is verily made flesh and we take verily the word being flesh in our Lords meate therefore Christ is to be iudged to tary is in vs naturally Thus doth S. Hilari reason as I haue now shewed his coÌ„clusion is yâ— Christ tarieth in vs naturally yâ— meane to proue it is dubble one because Christ hath true flesh and blood whereby it is shewed to be possible that he may dwell naturally in vs the other is to shew that Christ gaue vnto vs aâ—…d that we take verily the same word being flesh in our Lords meate whereby the flesh that was able to be geuen to vs because it was really assumpted of Christ cometh in dede reallie vnto vs by his gift â–ª our Lords meate whereof S. Hilarie speaketh is the Sacrament of Christes supper wherein only he â—…ed vs corporallie with the word being flesh therefore S. Hilarie doth vs to vnderstand that in the Sacrament we take the word made flesh and so verily take it as the word was verily made flesh â–ª Iuel That we verily and vndoutedly receaue Christes body in the Sacrament it is neither denied nor in question SaÌ„ You sayd before pag. 323. that Christ in his supper added an outward Sacrament to the spirituall eating named in S. Ihon which Sacrament you sayd was commonly called a figure and again you sayd the bread is a figure Last of all you said out of Rabanus that the Sacrament is receaued with the mouth but now you say it is not denied yâ— we verily receaue Christes bodie in the Sacrament whereof I say it must nedes folow that Christes body is receaued with the mouth For it is receaued in the Sacrament as here you confesse and the Sacrament is receaued with the mouth as you taught before therefore by your doctrine Christes body is receaued by mouth which is against your third conclusion pag. 319. Who can tell where to find you But to return to my purpose the aduerb verily doth signifie in this place naturallie
Custom The vse of Gods church The adoration of Christes body A new heresie in PoolelaÌ„d Circumâ—… of them selâ—…s Tertull. de prae scriptioÌ„ aduersus haeretic One chaÌ„ge only could be in religioÌ„ Iacob 1. Heb. 11. A teacher of new doctrine is not to be heard Berenga rius preached a new doctrine The Sacramentaries can haue no ground of their doctrine 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The honour of God The profite of the faithfull Lucae 6. Lucae 8. Two cau ses of spea king figuratiâ—…ly Aug. de doctrina Christ. l. 3. cap 10. The proper sense of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is nother agaâ—… the 〈◊〉 nor good maners We can neuer be sure that Christ spake figu ratiuely The ii Chapiter Wordes are to be taken as they do properly signifie Tertull. de carne Christi Things must be beleued aâ—… they are named Li. 67. de leg 3. The names vsed at Christes supper are to be kept This is body my EpiphaÌ„ lib. 2. to 1. haer 61. TraditioÌ„ is to be re spected in exposiding holy scriptures The iiâ—… Chapiter Ioan. 13. This can be said but of one substance Christes words directed to the bread The streÌ„gth of the pronoun this The prâ—…per sense of Christes wordes TransubstantiatioÌ„ 1. Co. 11. Luc. 22. hoc this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the noune body Christes naming to making Rom. 4. The 〈◊〉 Chapiter The optmoÌ„ of the protestants The substance of bread is not pomted vnto 1. Co. 11. Mat. 21. Luc. 22. Ioan. 6. This and bread be not of one gender CypriaÌ„ de coena Domini not farre from the beginning This in English is of all genders The v. Chapiter This doth not stand to signifie many things All the doings be not pointed vnto 1. Co. 10. 1. in Apo. 2. 2. in Or. cathech 3. li. 4. de Sacram. 4. depro dit lud 5. contr Faust. li. 20. ca. 13. epi. 59. Breaking is not poin ted vnto Of S. Iames. Of S. 〈◊〉 Of S. Chrysost. Of S. Chrysost. Eating or drinkig is not alone pointed vnto 1. Cor. 10 The body or blood is only pointed vnto The brea king The taking The eating Luc. 22. The geuing The vi Chapiter Theop. â—… Math. 26 In Marc. 14. This doth mean particular ly this eatable thiâ—… The vii Chapiter 1. Cor. 11 The obiecion The aunswere 1. The Cha lice 2. The chalice expouÌ„ ded in holy scripture 3. The chalice by vse of speakig signifieth the drinke in it 4. This cha lice where in liquor is knoweÌ„ to be can not make the speach obscure 5. Matt. 16. The word ioâ—…ned with the name of 〈◊〉 maketh aâ—… plaâ—… 6. Luc. 22. 7. 26. 14. 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 is â—…amed The 〈◊〉 Chapiter Ioan. 15. 1. Cor. 10 Uniuersal consent is a way to knowe figuratiue speaches 〈◊〉 dore The dore Chiâ—…ore Ezec. c. 5 The circuÌ„ stance of yâ— speache is to be considered Aug. lib. quaest 83 q. 69. The intâ—…t of the author in this chapi ter Ioan. 1. 14. God Ioan. 6. Sent 〈◊〉 flesh To men that were flesh Rom. 12. Col. 2. Promiseth flesh Geueth flesh He is to be beleued Euseb. homil 5. in pasch Men speake most ware ly toward their death 1. Co. 11. Aug. ep 118. ad Ia nuar. Christ 〈◊〉 not bethought lesse discrete in his words then other men wold 〈◊〉 The Apostles haue 〈◊〉 Christes words to vs without any mentioÌ„ of a figure Math. 13. Parableâ—… hide the truth in part Math. 13. Ioan. 6. Leo in serm de pass do Exo. 12. 1. Cor. 5. Ioan. 1. Ireneus lib. 4. ca. 32. Leo de pass do serm 7. Heb. 7. Ioan. 1. Lucae 22. Chryso in Math. ho. 83. Christ did not eaâ—… his own flesh by faith but in dede Hom. 83. Psal. 77. The old Lamb was not desired for his own sake Psal. 49. Malac. 1. Tertul. l. 4. aduer Marcio Chryso in Ps. 37. Chryso in Math. hom 82. 83. Ioan. 13. In fine di lexit eos Chrys. hom 61. ad Anti. Chrys. 1. Cor. homi 24. great loue cauleth yâ— greatest gifâ—…s Ioan. 13. Dionys. de Eccl. Hierar cap. 3. Hieron in Math. 26. Luc. 22. Why the bread of Christ is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yâ— of 〈◊〉 Luc 22. Niceph. li. 1. 〈◊〉 Eccles. cap 28. Damasc. de orth fi lib. 4. cap 14. Gal. 4. Hebr. 11. Psal. 22. Prou. 9. Leuit. 24 Christos supper is vpon the table it self If yâ— table be râ—…ll muche more the meate Luc. 6. The bread â—… Christ toke was already ha lowed The 〈◊〉 of Christes supper is made in bread and wine Gen. 14. Leuit. 1. 2. c. Al things that be sacrificed be changed Matth. 5. Cypr. ad Caecil li. 2. epi. 3. Blessing Psal. 148 Ioan. 6. Marc. 6. Luc. 24. The blessing of god is a doing The word blessing sheweth yâ— intent of Christ. Amb. de ijs qui init mys cap. 9. Cyril li. 4. in IoaÌ„ c. 16. 17. 19. lib. 11. ca. 22. Chrys. in 1. Cor. hom 24. Nysse in orat cathechet Amb. de ijs qui init ca. 9. Blessing Thanks 〈◊〉 Iustin. in Apol. 2. Euchar. The best kind of thanks True words be most thaÌ„k full â—…ren lib. 4. ca. 34 Theod. Dial. 3. The order of doing and speaking 1. Cor. 10 Christes supper diuided into 〈◊〉 and wordâ—… Manna Exod. 16 Hieron aduersus Iouinia lib. 2. Ephes. 4. Rom. 12. 1. Cor. 12 1. Cor. 11 Hieron aduersus Iouinia lib. 2. Homil. 〈◊〉 in Pasch. Ignatius ad Phila delphien 〈◊〉 In Theo 〈◊〉 Eccles. 1. Cor 10 The one bread to Christ who 〈◊〉 breaking 〈◊〉 whole 1. Cor. 10 Christ gaue with his hands Ioan. 6. The meat of Christes supper came from his hands 26. 14. 22 1. Cor. 11 Christes gift in S. 〈◊〉 is meant of an externall gift The Sacramentaries can not 〈◊〉 when Christ ful filled his promise 1. The profite of words 2. The necessitie of words 3. The wordes of God 4. Mysteries 5. The mysterie of Christes supper 6. The Sacramentaries trust not Christes words 26. 14. 1. Co. 11. 22. 7. Dedes be doubtfull Chryso in Math. Hom. 83. 8. The 〈◊〉 of the supper were para bles 9. The words of the supper expound yâ— parable of the dedes 10 Mere 〈◊〉 words ex pound nothing 11. The words of yâ— supper geue 〈◊〉 to y◠〈◊〉 Ioan 3. Matt. 28. In yâ— secoÌ„d booke ca. 〈◊〉 12. It is no singâ—… 〈◊〉 che is not knowen The 〈◊〉 The aunswerâ—… Ioan. 6. In Epi. 162. 〈◊〉 belongeth to the body â—… soule Tertul. de resur carnis â—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epipha haer 30. Hebr. 10 Christ pre sented no external sacrifice besyde his own flesh Gen. 14. Exod. 16 Malac. 1. Working words caÌ„ not be figuratiue Chrys. homi de prodit Iudae Ioan. 6. Howe the SacrameÌ„ taries 〈◊〉 Chri stes wordes Chryso in Ioan. Hom. 35. How S. 〈◊〉 placed 〈◊〉 â–ª words There is but one noun substantiâ—… in Christes 〈◊〉 By the Sacraâ—… doctrâ—…e a â—…gure was cruâ—… for vs. The obâ—…ction The aunswer One word can not haue at once a pro
vntruth The 90. vâ—…truth The 91. vntruth Matt 19. 15. The 〈◊〉 Chapiter The 7. 〈◊〉 The 〈◊〉 vntruth The 93. vntruth Heb. 〈◊〉 The 94. vntruthe Cypria de coena Dom. de cons. dist 2. c. Hoc est quod dicimus Theod. in dialo Math. 26 Lib. 8. de Trin. In vita Moysis Ad Euo Anath 11 § 5. The 95. vntruthe The 96. vntruthe The 97. vntruthe De â–ª consecrat dist 2. c. de Sac. Quae 〈◊〉 rabiliter fit In Ioan. Hom. 47 De doct Christ l. 3. cap. 16. The 98. 〈◊〉 The diâ—… flesh is cateÌ„ by mouth In paeda 〈◊〉 2. ca. 2. The 99. vntruthe Ioan. 9. Vnctio 1. Ioan. 2. Ioan. 6. Tract 〈◊〉 in Ioan. Ephes 5. Cont. liâ—… Petil li. â—… â–ª cap. 8. The 100. 〈◊〉 Christes reliques are yâ— holy Bibâ—… Ioan. 4. Matt. 4. Rom. 8. Heb. 1. Psal. 47 â—… Cor. 14 Ioan. 19. â—… Cor. 14 Gen. 6. The 101. â—…truth The 102. â—…truth The 8. diâ—…ision The 103. â—…ntruth The xiiâ—… Châ—…piter The 1â—…4 â–ª 〈◊〉 The 10â—… â–ª vntruth The 10â—… â–ª â—…ntruth 〈◊〉 3. Oâ—…li Chri stâ—…s real fleshe proueth his death to be past The 107. vntruth The 108. â—…ntruth The xiiâ—… Chapiter The 109. vntruth De sanâ—… baptis In Matt. hom 51. De sacr li. 1. ca. 5. Serm. 3. super missusest â–ª 〈◊〉 28. Matt. 26. The diâ—…e rences betwene baptisme the Eâ—…charist Heb. 1. 2. In Apol. 2. 3. In Epist. ad Euag. 4. In epi. ad 〈◊〉 5. â—…oncil Lateran 6. Lib. 6. Cate. my stag 4. in martyro logio Tarsi 7. Chrys. in 1. Cor. hom 24. 8. De eccl Hierar cap. 3. Li. 4. de similitudine platatâ—… arbo ris c. 9. Union 10. 1. 2. 3. 4. The xv Chapiter Diuision 〈◊〉 § 5. The 110. 〈◊〉 Gaspar Cassalius Lusitan decalice Garet in centen 4 The 111. vntruthe Ephes. 3. Apoc. 5. Ad Marcâ—…llam Act. 1. De recta fide The 〈◊〉 vntruthe Op. de coena Do mini loan 14. Rom. 4. 9. The 113. 〈◊〉 De Dei naâ—…ura Hom. 4. De myst cap. 3. The 114. 〈◊〉 CoÌ„t Ma xim li. 3. cap. 22. In Math. Hom. 83 Luc. 22. The 115. vntruthe Easter kept in S. 〈◊〉 age with 〈◊〉 De cons. dist 2. c. quia cor pus The 116. vntruthe The mystery Transubstaâ—…ation Ioan. 2. In serm ad infan 1. Cor. 10 apud Be dam. The 117. vntruthe The 118. vntruthe M. Iuel â—…eth to a terme â—…or lack of a good answer The 119. vntruthe The 〈◊〉 rence betwene Christ being a true â—…ine and truly 〈◊〉 The 12â—… vntruth in Ioan. tract 26. Ioan. 6. Aug. coÌ„t aduersariuÌ„ legis prophetaruÌ„ Epi. 118. The 9. diuision The 121. vntruth Galat. 2. De praescript aduersus Haeret. The 122. 〈◊〉 The 123. â—…ntruth De praescript The 124. vntruth 1. Tim. 〈◊〉 The 125. vntruth De praescript â—…he 126. â—…utruth Iere. 6. The 127. vntruth De praescript The 128. vntruth in iij. tomo conciliorum Anno D. 1538. The 129. vntruth The 130. vntruth L. 2. 〈◊〉 hist. ca. 1. Act. ca. 1. Act. 15. Matt. 28. Ioan. 20. The 131. vntruth Ioan. 〈◊〉 Psal. 〈◊〉 Act. 〈◊〉 Dé praescript Rom. 10 Ior. 23 Heb. 5. Ioan. 10. 〈◊〉 178. The. 13â—… vntruth In CaÌ„tica Can. 4 The xvâ—… Chapiter The 133. vntruth The 134. vntruth The 135. vntruth The 136. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. 〈◊〉 2. Damasc. de orth fi li. 3. c. 6. 11. Heb. 2. 〈◊〉 4. 〈◊〉 h. 1. In Ioan. li 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 12. Rom. 8. The 113. vniruthe Serm. 〈◊〉 de Epip Ioan. 1. Ad Caesa rienses The 138. vntruthe M. Iuel hath erred in constru ction In dictuÌ„ Apostol tunc filius sub ijcietur He speaketh still of the mystical body Note The 〈◊〉 vntruthe The 140. 〈◊〉 Ioan. 1. Hom. 11. in â—…oan Aug. tractat 2. in Ioan. The 141. vntruthe Ioan. 15. In Ioan. tract 80. Lib. 10. cap. 13. The 〈◊〉 vntruthe Ephes. 4. Math. 1. Prou. 9. In Ioan. li. 1. ca 〈◊〉 One temple naturall One body Ephes. 2. M. Iuels contrary doctrine The xvij Chapiter Ephes. 3. Ephes. 3. M Iuels phrase defendeth Ioan of kents heresie Petr. 1. Catech. mystic 4 2. Pet. 1. Ad Tral The 143. vntruthe Ad Tâ—…allianos 〈◊〉 â—…ying 〈◊〉 â—…ying The 〈◊〉 Chapiter Contradi ction in M. Iuel 341. lin 4 〈◊〉 10. 341. lin 26. 344. lin 24. 25. 317. 81. M. Iuels â—…oroes 336. lin 10. The 〈◊〉 Chapiter August Epi. 2â—… Aug. ad Simplic quaest 2. Ephes. 5. Ioan. 3. Ioan. 20. Luc. 13. Impertinent Impertinent Impertinent False 〈◊〉 Incorporation False traÌ„slation The 144 vntruth False traÌ„slation â—…sticall â—…eshe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ephes. 5. In eccl Ilâ—…er c. â—… Par. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The xx Chapiter The 145 vntruth M. Iuell breaketh promise M. Iuel 〈◊〉 aâ—…ainst him self The. 146 vntruth Chry. ad Ro. Ho. 16. 〈◊〉 place falsified Tâ—…e 147. vntruth 〈◊〉 word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 4. sent dist 1. quaest 3. The xxi Chapiter the 148. vntruth For it could â—…ot 〈◊〉 said so The 149. vntruth The 150. vntruth The 151. vntruth The 152. 〈◊〉 What corâ—… S. 〈◊〉 vsed Hom. 46 In Ioan. Hom. 45 In the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hom. 60 61. Vt ita dicam â–ª is noâ—… in the greke The 153. vntruth Oyle ChaÌ„gingâ—… 〈◊〉 wordes of the Fathers The 154 vntruthe wordâ—…s left out in yâ— middest of the sentence The applying of Alexander his words Against 〈◊〉 â–ª The 155. vntruthe Contrariety 1. Cor. 12 In Ioan. li. 1. ca. 16 Ephe. 5. Math. 19 De coena Domini Damasc. de Orth. 〈◊〉 li. 2. c. 3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dâ—… paâ—… â–ª In Ioâ—… tracta 〈◊〉 One is not there The 1â—… vntruthe In Ioaâ—… tracta â–ª 〈◊〉 Mat â–ª 28. 〈◊〉 2. 3. 4. 5. Reipsa 〈◊〉 self Ioan. 3. Note not only the vnion but yâ— meane thâ—…of The constructioÌ„ of the place Thethinâ—… it selfe Being touchâ—… 〈◊〉 In Matt. Hom. 83 The change The sacrifice Hand Mouth Tonge Note the meane of the vnton Hom. 60 ad pop 〈◊〉 Hom 60 ad pop Antioch 60. Hom Hom. 45 Per corpus suuÌ„ 1. Cor. 10 Ephes. 5 1. 2. 3. 4. The 157. vntruthe Primas in 1. Co. 10. 1. Cor. 1â—… Falsâ—…â—…ying Breaâ—… The xxij Hilar. de Trini l. 8 The 158. vntruthe M Iuels disseÌ„bling 1. 2 â–ª 3. 4. 1. 2. 3. Lib. 8. de Trinit 4. Act. 4. 5. Ephes. 4 â–ª Pag. 346 8. 9. 10. 11. The 159. â—…ntruthe Actor 4. 12. The 160 vntruthe 13. The 161. vntruthe Christ had not faith but more then faith 1. Cor. 13 14. The 162. vntrutâ—… 15. The 163. vntruth Falsifying 16. 17. 18. 19. The 164 vntruthe 20. 21. Lib. 8. de Trinit 22. The 166. vntruthe Note well Naturally 23. 24. 25. 26. Ioan. 17. 27. The. 167 vntruth the 168. vntruthe The 169. 〈◊〉 Nâ—… 24. in tâ—…is 〈◊〉 28. The vnitâ—… of Chri â—…tes birth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ioan. 17. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of S. Hâ—…ary 29. The conclusion the prouâ—… Cibusdo minicus 〈◊〉 Pag. 343. Tâ—…e
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
it withal seing the doctrine taught by M. Iuell and his fellowes against the real presence is by the word of God found to be vaine false wicked and is directly coÌ„futed in the first second and seuenth bookes last of aâ—…l seing as in this one article M. Iuels 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are in parte discouered so 〈◊〉 many other they shal be shortly God willing layed 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 of all 〈◊〉 it remaineth that the whole Catholike faith so 〈◊〉 defended and iustified be most eruestly bâ—…leued and according to the commaundement of Christ most strongly confessed to th' end he that coÌ„fesseth now this truth of Christ before men may be acknowleged of Christ before his Father at the day of iudgement where God send vs a comfortable sentence that we may liue with him in glorie for euer Amen Approbatio septimi Libri QVoniam Librum istum legerunt approbant 〈◊〉 Theologiae idiomatis Anglici eruditissimi quibus ego summam hac in re fidem deberi iudico tutò vtiliter emitti potest Cunerus Petri Pastor Sancti Petri Louanij 20. Decemb. Anno. 1565. A briefe table of the vvhole vvorke 1. First because the whole booke doth concerne specially the real presence of Christes body in the SacrameÌ„t if the Reader wil see any thing perteining thereunto he shall finde it in the chapiters which are prefixed before euerie booke 2. Secondly of adoration it is intreated in yâ— six first chapiters of the sixth booke And that the SacrameÌ„t of the altar can be no idol 292. 3. Of transubstantiation as occasion serued he shall find fol. 234. c. item 314. B. 315. 4. Of the sacrifice of yâ— masse fol. 32. 33. 34. 197. 217. 216. 217. 223. vsque ad 233. 5. Of reseruation 35. b. 36. 37. 6 Howe the Sacrament of the altar is a figure 59. 60. vsque ad 72. 137. b. vsque ad 146. 280. 7. That euill men eate Christes body in the Sacrament 43. vsque ad 50. 276. 8. Of the mysticall body of Christ whiche is the Church fol. 260. vsque ad 269. 9. Of the figures and prophecies of the old Testament 214. b. vsque ad 223. 10. The faith of the whole Church concerning the Sacrament of the altar 316. b. vsque ad 324. Faults Fo. Pa. Li. Corrections 〈◊〉 5 1. 7. liue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 7 2 17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 meanâ—… 11 1 4 name is more like 17 2 29 is it more like aboue 19 1 24 alone doctrinethis 20 2 11 doctrine of this a truth lesse 21 1 21 a truth no lesse â—…che 28 1 24 such redy by dede 29 2 12 ready either by dede diuine ibidem  31 liuing saying 50 2 13 sauing that filleth 73 2 20 that he filleth denieth parâ—… 82 1 8 denieth any parcel made meate 86 2 9 made meete now came 87 1 9 now come vs neâ—… 89 2 15 vs a new maner prices eodeÌ„ that the sonne   18 other prices  107 1 28 yâ— which the sonne of his bread 108 1 20 of this breade be said 112 1 5 be saued the â—…ycal â—…15 1 2 mystical weth howhe 118 2 2 sheweth that he geue the flesh 120 1 16 geue that fleshe of grace 123 2 18 of glorie signa quo 124 1 31 signa quae mysteries 126 1 6 mysteries Cyrillus besyde that besyde     wil geue it 127 2 29 I wil geue but one 128 2 11 spake but once but teache 136 2 31 but thei teach out al quest 137 2 31 out of al question old fashon 143 2 5 old falshod word of life 147 2 17 wood of life â—…tem lin 18.     not to be 148 2 3 Christ to be where yet 167 2 â—… wel yet of God ibidem  15 and if it be the honour of God hoc that 172 2 24 hoc this seme to staÌ„d 177 1 15 seme to sound this Hieru ibid. 2 15 this is HierusaleÌ„ they should 179 2 7 as they sound and really 180 2 11 and real Chrystom 182 1 â—… Chrysostom meaneth vs 184 1 5 moueth vs. 〈◊〉 ibideÌ„  â—…2 to change Faults Fo. Pa. Li. Corrections and gather ibideÌ„  25 and to gather God man ibideÌ„ 2 7 both God man miraculoush 186 2 19 miraculously vnder your 191 2 7 vnto your miserable 194 1 4 miserable racking taking     corpus 185 1 3 corporis the cause 198 2 4 the sense faithful wheÌ„ 202 1 31 faithful when cup is the 203 1 6 this cup the same meÌ„ber 209 2 6 same number it is not 211 1 7 is it not by naturall 212 2 3 supernatural corde vos 227 1 24 certè vos of me and ibidem  30 of me to th end in yâ— dede ye may be mindfull of me and I say vnder 233 2 16 I say the body that died vnder dâ—…edes that â—…34 2 13 dedes in that am a vine 252 2 28 am the true vine any mystical 266 1 12 only mystical corpore vni ibid.  25 capite vniretut â–ª but in the 268 1 23 but by the. carnis Chri sti ibid.  31 carnis Christi c. his Church 269 1 24 All the foloweth froÌ„ these words and his church to the end of the v. Chap. should come in at the end of thâ—… vi chap.  did it 272 1 8 so did it was dead ibidem  9 was dead els past in 273 1 19 els in 〈◊〉 274 1 4 Christ. Certenly by act 180 1 31 by art not once to 299 1 3 not omitte to CorinthiaÌ„s was not 300 1 4 CorinthiaÌ„s was â–ª not corpus 302 1 10 corpus est Chri sti Christi     did al the ibid 2 1 did not al the. in dede 306 1 18 in dede the things things     that meÌ„ber 317 1 12 that number or beleue 320 1 â—…9 or 〈◊〉 no. no â–ª     â—…aults Fo. Pa. Li. Corrections of a shape ibid. 2 8 of a rounde shape specially 322 2 31 specially twise awise     very faut 325 2 15 very fact no leading 333 2 1 no word leading is a figure 332 2 15 is the signe thee they 331 2 2 thee that they also also     sixteÌ„th cha 334 2 9 tenth chap. yas ibidem  10 say yet we 335 1 12 yet now we the word ibid. 2 13 the wood But it is 346 2 2 But is it or flesh 356 â–ª 1 26 or fleshly to what 359 1 31 to be what Faults Fo. Pa. Li. Corrections the coÌ„secra 364 2 21 the consideratioâ—… tion     the vine 365 2 14 the true vine speake vnto 381 2 2 spake vnto yâ— Iewes the. the     and drink 382 1 30 and to drinke be coÌ„mon 385 2 26 be the common 〈◊〉 is be 388 2 15 iâ—… it be therof it not â–ª ibid.  17 thereof is