Hierome I saie expounding these wordes of 〈◊〉 the Prophet Declinaui ad eum vt vesceretur I bowed downe or turned in to him that he might eate writeth thus in Christes person Declinaui ad eos deserens regna coelorum vt cum eis vescerer assumpta forma hominis siue dedi eis esum corporis mei ipse cibus 〈◊〉 Forsaking the kingdome of heauen I bowed downe or turned in to them that the shape of maÌ„ being taken I might eate with them or else I gaue them the meate of my body I my selfe being both the meate and the banketer or feaster And yet he speketh in an other place more plainly Nec Moyses c. Neither Moyses hath geuen vs the true bread but our lord Iesus him self the feaster and the feast himself the eater and he that is eaten Behold Christes supper it may worthely be called his 〈◊〉 for neuer any man made any such before him he biddeth geasts and fedeth them with his owne flesh He is at the table as he was at the altar of his crosse For these two things are in most points agreable For this table is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and reall remembrance of that crosse As therefore vpon the crosse Christ was the preist who made the sacrifice Christ the hoste that was killed Christ the God to whom it was offred Christ the head of that body of his Church for whom it was offered Christ alone played all partes non fuit de gentibus vir cum illo and of all nations no man was with him so likewise in the last supper Christ 〈◊〉 the geastes telling them 〈◊〉 yere before of his ban 〈◊〉 at Capharnaum and the hower being come Christ geueth water not only to their hands but euen to their feete Christ is the panter Christ is the butler as S. Cyprian also hath writen Christ is the meate Christ is the drinke and what creature should haue parte with him in his supper Are bread and wine mete ban ketting dishes for his table They are in dede mete by their owtward shew to signifie the supper of Christ but not mete to be a substancial part therof He that is Lord of heauen and earth will he borow the substance of his creatures to make vp his feast As though he lacked bread of his owne or as though his flesh which is the true 〈◊〉 conteining al swetnesse in it lacked the swetnesse of wheaten bread or of materiall wine as though Christ had not better bread and meate of his 〈◊〉 and better drinke of his owne then the grape maketh and who shall haue them if he be without them A great shame it is that either any thing should chalenge part in Christes supper besydes Christe himselfe or that he should 〈◊〉 the table with bare odours of spirituall grace hauiug at commandement the substance of flesh and blood wherein the fullnes of Godhed dwelleth corporally Think of Christes supper according to the worship of him that made it leaue bread and wine for Lutrish tables beleue thou that Christ gaue no lesse to his geasts then he had to geue for verily all that he toke he toke it to geue for vs and to vs for vs vppon the crosse and to vs in his last supper Both which he expressed manifestly when he 〈◊〉 saing Take eate this is my body which is geuen for you that body was geuen bloodily for vs in the forme of man because he died for man the same is vnbloodily geuen to vs in the form of bread because man liueth by bread But earthly bread is to maintein life to earthly men HeaueÌ„ly men eate the bread which came doun from heauen which is the sonne of God assumpting the flesh of man For the bread which Christ promised to geue is his flesh for the life of the world His flesh is meate in dede and his blood is brink in dede Therefore who so teacheth the body blood of Christ to be now receaued by faith spirit only he denieth the supper of our Lord where the body was geuen by the hands of Christ receaued with the hands of the Apostles eaten with their corporal mouthes and the blood drunken out of the chalice of blessing the which Christ deliuered by their hands to their mouths and harts by that meanes feeding the whole man with his whole substance ¶ A speciall 〈◊〉 of Caluin is conâ—…ed who taught this is my body which is geuen for you to be words of promise in the way of preaching at Christes supper whereas they are words of perfoormance in the way of working THe special authoritie that Caluin hath gotten through his scholars in England moueth me specially to coufute I can not tell whether I shall name it his more false or more foolish opinion Who perceauing the Catholiks wholy to stick to the most proper and most effectual words of Christes supper and therevpon to build the belefe of the real presence of his body and blood thought best to inuegle the strength of those words as much as might 〈◊〉 to bring them from doing to saying from making to speaking from perfoorming to promising and therefore among manie other words of the same argument thus he writeth Atqui non panem alloquitur Christus vt corpus suum fiat sed discipulos iubet manducare atque illis corporis sanguinis sui communicationem pollicetur caet But Christ speaketh not to the bread that it might be made his body but he commandeth his disciples to eate and he promiseth them the communicating of his body and 〈◊〉 And afterward Let vs vnderstand those words to be a liuely preaching which may edifie the hearers etc. which in the fulfilling of that it promiseth may bring foorth his efficacie Hytherto Caluin whose worthy scholars haue consecrated that vnsensible deuise of his in the booke of their English homilies Where after an exhortation made that men should come them selues to communion it is sayd To this Christes commandement forceth vs saying do ye thus to this his promise enticeth vs this is my body which is geuen for you this is my blood which is shed for you This fault I find with my countriemen There can not be a foolish saying in al Germanie or â—…uicherland which they must not allow follow preache to their audience and set foorth in print And therefore if euery man might haue his will so many schismatical Churches as they had seâ—…e beyond the seas so many orders of communion they wold haue embraced Men that neuer brought foorth of them selues any thing worthy name and yet neuer saw in other places so apish a toye which they did not wonder at and gredeily practise Wherein they are both most like their master Caluin for so much as they specially follow his peuish inuentions and most vnlike him because he followed none other man in his doctrine but himself inuented a new religion of his own making What
shall differ any thing at all from the fathers gift must nedes be more then a spirituall eating of Christes flesh he shall perceane â—… this chapiter both a spirituall eating presently offred and a sacramentall eating promised hereafter â—… the naturall substaÌ„ce of flesh and blood which in this place thus breefly touched shall at large be handled in the treatise folowing At this tyme he that conferreth what was done and sayd both at the last supper of Christ and the yere before about the sea of Tyberias shall see concerning the doyngs bread taken in bothe places blessing and thanksgeuing in bothe eating in bothe And as concerning words let him deeply ponder and consider that as in S. Iohn he began his talke of coÌ„mon bread saying to the Iewes ye folow me because yehaue eaten of the loaues of bread but at the length he ended his talke with the eating of his fleshe and drynking his blood So in his last supper he tooke into his handes coÌ„mon bread but at the length he ended his banket in the eating his body and drinking his blood As in S. Iohn he speaketh distinctly of a meate which the soÌ„ne of man will geue So at his supper the soon of man did administer the whole gift of his heauenly meate in his owne person As in S. Iohn he saieth the bread which I will geue that is to say the meate of my last supper so in his last supper he takâ—…g bread after blessing breakyng dâ—…th geue a blessed food saying sumite take As in S. Iohn he sayd the bread whiche I will geue and not the bread whiche I will take so in his supper he tooke one kind of bread and gaue an other For as in S. Iohn he saieth the bread which I will geue is my flesh so at his last supper after he had taken coÌ„mon bread and blessed he sayed Take this is my body As in S. Ihon the bread to be geuen and the flesh of Christ is all oâ—…e so in his supper he geueth none other bread besides his owne body For the substance of the coÌ„mon bread was chaunged by blessing and speaking the wordes As his bread and flesh was sayd to be in S. Iohn for the lyfe of that world so in his supper he sayd This is my body which is geuen for you As in S. Iohn he saieth my flessh is meate in deed so in his supper he saieth take eate this is my body That whiche is eaten in deed is meate in deed As in S. Ihon there is mention oâ—… drinking the blood of Christ so in his supper he sayth drink ye al of this for this is my blood As in S. Ihon there is no mention of wine to be geuen or druÌ„ken so Christ in his supper neither spake of wine at the tyme of driÌ„king nor gaue any wine at all to be druÌ„ken because it was by his words changed into his blood As at Capharuaum certaine of his Disciples went away from him so at his last supper he did reiect and separate them from his table And as his twelue Apostles most faithfully taried with him at Capharnaum so they alone were in the night of his betraying admitted to his holy table As at Capharnaum when Christ had asked the twelue whether they also wold goe away S. Peter answered for them Lord to whom shall we goe meaning they were not offendedâ—… nor wold noÌ„t got from him euen so after his last supper S. Peter likewise all the rest sayd they wold not deâ—…ie him though all the world forsoke him or toke offence against him As at Capharnaum Christ sayd that one of the twelue was a deuill so at his last supper yâ— Bospel doth tell that Satan entred into Iudas one of the twelue If the tyme wordes dedes persons throughly agree it is vnsemely to make them diuerse kindes of eating and drinking whereof one man at one tyme of the yere speaketh and practiseth to the same Disciples so conformable a doctrine and doing ¶ It is proued out of the holy Fathers and generall Councels that Christ in S. Ihon spake of his last supper THat I may here omit S. Ignatius who defineth the bread of God of heauen and of life which is named in the sixth of S. Ihon to be the flesh of Christ and his cup or blood That I may let passe Clemens Alexandrinus who speaking of the nourishment which we that are baptized in Christ haue by him calleth it not only Christ the word milk bread and drink but also the flesh and blood and body of Christ and the mysterie of bread alleging diuerse places out of S. Ihon for that purpose Last of all that I may not stand vpon Origen who comparing the fulnes of Baptism to the red sea which was but a shadow and likewise the SacrameÌ„t of Christes supper to Mauna declareth out of S. Ihon that now the flesh of Christ is meate in deed by that meanes witnessing that he toke the words of the sixth of S. Ihon to belong to the mysterie oâ—… Christes last banket Surely S. Cyprian doth not only by occasion of other talk but euen of set purpose teache that who so euer for some great fault is any long tyme kept from the body of Christ in the Sacrament he is in danger of euerlasting life And yâ— because Christ sayd except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drink his blood ye shal not haue life in you And yet he should wholy faile of his proofe if that place which he bringeth out of S. Ihon did not proue the necessitie of communicating Sacramentally S. Athanasius setting foorth a brief and compendiouse rehersal of the whole diuine Scripture witnesseth that Christ at his coming to Capharnaum reasoneth with the multitude concerning the mysteries Which saying of his can not be iustified according to the historicall sense which he professeth in that worke if Christ in S. Ihon spake principally of that spirituall eating which is besyde his holy mysteries S. Hilarie disputing of the naturall veritie of Christ which is in vs by the SacrameÌ„t of receauing his flesh doth not only bring for that intent these words My flesh is meate in deed But also concludeth that as well by the profession of our Lord as by our own faith Christes flesh is truly in vs. And certainly he meaneth it so to be in vs as we receaue it in his last supper But if the place by him alleged proue not so muche his reason lacketh a sufficient ground for so much as he citeth none other authoritie for that argument of his against the Arrians but only the words which are in S. Ihon. By those words he affirmeth Christ to be in vs after such sort that he is in vs naturally and we naturally in him S. Basile intituling his booke of Baptism and wholy bent to declare the Sacraments of
what answere ought to be made therevnto Thus I haue proued by the proprietie of yâ— words in S. Ihon by the circumstance of the tyme and place by the coÌ„ference of holy Scriptures by the vniform consent of the auncient Fathers by the authoritie of generall Councels by the yerely practise of the west Church by the confutation of the reasons which are made to the contrarie that Christ in his disputation at Capharnaum spake in some part of yâ— sixth Chapiter by the way of promise of yâ— Sacrament of his last supper All which things if they proue not my intent I desier the learned Reader to shew me wherein they faile from the truth But vntill that be shewed I must say all the authoritie that is an yâ— earth semeth to concurre to that my position And therefore God willing I intend to build vpon this so sure a ground the rest of my disputation against the heretiks of our tyme who teach false doctrine in the matter of Christes supper affirming that Christ promiseth in S. Ihon to geue his flesh in spirit only and not vnder the forme of bread Against whom I wil from hence foorth dispute if yet I first shew somwhat more particularly that the euerlasting meate which Christ promiseth in S. Ihon doth appertein to that part of Christes talk whicâ—… is before proued to appertein to his last supper ¶ The meate tarying to euerlasting life which Christ promiseth to geue is meant of his reall flesh and blood to be geuen at his last supper CHrist going about to drawe the people from filling of their bellies to a more spiritual feeding said worke not the meate which perisheth but that which tarieth to life euerlasting which the sonne of man wil geue you This proposition is diligently to be consydered as being the chief keye of the whole dispâ—…ation folowing And therefore I wil declare how euery part of it doth agree with the processe of the talke which towardes the end of the chapter is made concerning Christes owne gift First where he saith the sonne of man will geue meate he afterwarde vttereth the kinde of meate or foode more plainly saying The Bread which I wil geue is my flesh And whereas he â—…ad them worke the sayd meate he afterward sheweth that by working he meaneth first beleuing in him with a true and working faith and afterward also eating and drinking worthely his owne flesh and blood And therfore sayth this is the worke of God that you beleue in him whom he hath sent and again Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood ye shal not haue life in you he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath life euerlasting And yet farther expounding his former wordes he sayth for my flesh 〈◊〉 meate in dede the word verè in dede declareth what kinde of worke belongeth to this meate not only a metaphoricall worke but a true worke of the body and soule of the soule in beleuing of the body in eating So that if we marke well the meate that must be wroâ—…ght the bread that he wil geue and his owâ—…e flesh which must be eaten is al one thing The working of this meate reqâ—…reth the helpe as well of the minde as of the body accordingly as Tertullian sayth Caro corpore sanguine Christi vescitur vt anima de Deo saginetur non possunt ergo separari in mercede quas opera coniungit The flesh eateth the body and blood of Christ to thintent the soule also mâ—…e be made fat of God They can not therefore be seperated in reward whom the worke ioyneth The body worketh with the soule in eating yâ— flesh of Christ the work ioyneth them because they both work and eate one thing and therefore they must be rewarded both together in the daye of Iugdement But if we did eate the body of Christ by faith only as the Sacramentaries teache our bodies should not worke the meate which perisheth not but only should eate bread and drinke wine which must nedes â—…erish But Christ goeth forward to shewe his owne flesh to be meat in dede to be that true meate which he sayd before should not perish but tary and abide still saying for he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood tarieth in me and I in him which thing cometh so tâ—… passe because Christes flesh being eaten is not digested into our earthly flesh and so consumed of vs as other meates are bâ—…t rather as being incomparably stronger then oâ—…r stomaks it consumeth all our carnall and fleshly humours If then it cause vs not to perish how much more is it selfe a meate not perishing but tarying for euer And to shew that the sayd worker of the meate and flesh which Christ will geue taâ—…ieth in Christ â—…ot only for a time but to life euerlasting as the not perishing meate was before sayd to doe againe it foloweth He that eateth this brâ—…ad shall liue for euer By which 〈◊〉 of Christes words it is euident when he sayeth worke not the meate whiche perisheth but which tarieth to life euerlasting which the sonne of man wil geue you that then he meaneth they shuld eate his flesh drinke his blood in such â—…orte as the sonne of man wil geue it I 〈◊〉 thee good Reader once againe to conferre these sayinges Is it not all one to say the sonne of man will geue and I wil geue Likewyse the sonne of man wil geue you meate and the bread which I will geue is my flesh only this difference there is that in the later wordes he nameth the kinde of meate which in the former he did not name The sonne of man will geue the meate which perisheth not and what is that 〈◊〉 say but that he will geue his flesh as meate which flesh he will geue for the life of the world And how can that fleshe be thought able to perish which maketh all other men that beleue in it to liue for euer The meate which the sonne of man wil geue must be wrought and the bread which Christ sayeth to be his flesh which he wil geue must also be eaten for except ye â—…ate the flesh of the sonne of 〈◊〉 and drinke his blood ye shal not haue life in you The meate of the sonne of man tarieth and he that eateth the flesh of Christ and drinketh his blood tarieth in Christ and Christ in him The meate of the sonne of man dureth to life euerlasting And he that eateth the flesh of Christ hath life euerlasting If these things answere throughly if Christ be the sonne of man if the bread he wil geue which is his flesh for the life of the world be the meat which perisheth not if the working of this meate be both beleuing and eating if the meat make the eater â—…arie for euer then â—…ith so many thinges agree let these wordes
be coÌ„fessed no lesse to perteine to the promise of Christes supper then those doe towardes th ende of the chapter when he sayth the bread which I wil geâ—…e is my flesh So doth Theophilact expoâ—…d this place Cibum manentem mysticam dicit sumptionem carnis domini quam nobis ipse dat filius hominis factus He calleth the meate which tarieth the mycall receauing of our Lords â—…esh which him selfe being made the Sonne of man geueth vs. What name I Theophilact All the Fathers yea all Christians agree that Christe in his supper is the meate whereof it is sayd it perisheth not Now Christ perisheth not whether he be geuen to vs by faith as his Father is sayd to geue him or in the Sacrament of his supper as yâ— Sonne of man is afterward sayd to be of the will to geue his flesh which is meate in dede As therefore we can not denie Christ when he is geuen by faith to be the not perishing meate so it were woâ—…derfull impiety to say the substance of Christes flesh geuen at his supper not to be the same not perishing meate or seing it is also a not perishing meate at his supper why should not these words be vnderstaÌ„ded of the same supper And seing Christ would it to be wrought not only as his Father geueth it presently but also as the Sonne of man wil geue it hereafter to wit vnder the form of bread at his last supper it must nedes be graâ—…ted yâ— Christ speaking of working the gift of the SoÌ„ne of man meant no lesse of working his own gift which he nameth afterward eating then the working of his Fathers gift which is straghtways called beleuing How beit concerning equalitie of substance in Godhead all is common betwixt them In fine the not perishing meate which the Sonne of man wil geue to yâ— Iewes is his flesh which he wil geue to be eateÌ„ Which flesh 〈◊〉 not perish as well because it is wholly 〈◊〉 in by the na ture substance of almightie God as also because it is not chaÌ„ged into our flesh when it is â—…aten as other meats are but spiritually changeth vs into it Now that fleshe not perishing but tarying in our soules bodies maketh them also kepe and preserue 〈◊〉 life whereby we come to the ioyâ—…s of heauen For that Christ meant of suche a not perishiÌ„g meat as might be receaued not only into our soules but into our bodies Also S. Cyrillus hath witnessed vpoÌ„ this place Operemur igitur vt saluator ait non eum â—…ibum caet Let vs work therefore â—…s our sauiour saith not that meat which â—…iding into the belly and geuing vs a short pleasure at the leugth goâ—…th forth in excrements and perisheth but let vs work the spiritâ—…all meat which strengtheneth the hartes leadeth to life â—…uerlasting the which meate he promiseth that he wil geue saying the Sonne of man will geue you this meate Thus he hath ioyned the things oâ—… man to the things of God and touched the whole mysterie of the incarnation For he sheweth sum what priuily the spirituall meate whereby we liue in Christe being sanctified both in soule and body But he wil say this thing more openly anon wherefore we also wil write there more at large an interpretation that shall agree to this place 〈◊〉 dured the words of S. Cyrillus who as he was a most excellent man of wit and lerning so hath he most exactly declared the meaning of these wordes which I now expound Christ meaÌ„t to persuade the Iewes his diuine nature and that he was himself according to his flesh the true maâ—…a which came down from heauen and that he would geue the self same flesh as truely to be â—…aten into the bodies of the faithfull for a spirituall nourishement of them as euer the Iewes dyd corporally feede vpon manna To persuade this he wrought a miracle in bread he traiâ—…ed them to talk of bread and of manna withal exhorting theÌ„ to sede vpon the â—…corruptible meate which he would geue This meate was his owne fleshe but he as yet would not vtter so muche vntill their myndes were somwhat prepared therunto by true faith For this cause S. Cyrillus wryteth that Christ as yet describeth the spirituall meate occultius somwhat secrâ—…tly Buâ—… that afterward hâ—… will shew it apertius more openly Agame S. Cyrillus saith Christ hath ioyned humana diuinis the things of man to the things of God The things of man are that flesh assumpted by Christ and the sanctifying of our bodies by receauing his fleshe into them through the gift of Christ whiche he gaue as man The thinges of God are the feeding of our soules by right belefe vpon God Thirdly by the iudgement of S. Cyrillus this place apperteineth to that which foloweth concerning the sanctification as wel of our bodies as of our soules but that whiche foloweth is most properly meant of the sanctification which our bodies receaue by the food of Christes supper of which supper S. Cyrillus exponndeth those words except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man c. What nede more words this place is like to the othâ—…r following in the end of the same chapiter The bread which I wil geue is my flesh whiche wordes al the auncient fathers without any contradiction teache to belong to the supper Therefore doubtlesse they are of the same mynd concerning this place also but because this place is not so plaine as the other no man nede to maruaile why they rather allege the other then this And yet euen to this place of S. Iohn the holy martyr Ignatius alluded when he sayd in that epistle which both Eusebius S. Hierom acknowledged to be his Non mihi placet cibus corruptionis nequè voluptates vitae huius panem Dei volo panem coelestem panem vitae quod est caro Christi filij Dei poculum volo sanguineÌ„ eius quod est charitas incorruptibilis perennis vita The perishing meaâ—…e and pleasures of this life plâ—…ase me not I long for Gods bread the heaneÌ„ly bread the bread of liâ—… whiche thing is the flesh of Christ the sonne of God and for the cup his blood which thing is â—…haritie not perishing and life euerlasting Thus as wel the coÌ„ference of holy scriptures as the witnesses of S. Ignatius of S. Cyrillus of Theophilact of S. Augustine and of Tertullian do shew this place to belong to the SacrameÌ„t of the Altar therefore therein we muste eate not bread and wine which perishe but only the permanent fleshe of Christ and so we must eate it by mouth as we beleue on it in hart For eating and beleuing is referred in this Chapiter to the selfe same fleshe of Christe therefore as really it must be eaten by mouth as it is beleued in hart to be most râ—…all in it selfe ¶ The equalitie of substance with his father which Christ allegeth
washing hath a farther and higher end then only to cleanse the body That speache therefore wherein Christ commaÌ„deth his flesh to be eateÌ„ is figuratiue not that we should denye the true eating of his flesh but because that eating is referred to a greater purpose then to the feeding of the body for Christes flesh is meate in dede that is to say is eaten in dede as I shal proue vpon that place but it is not eaten only that it should be corporalâ—…y receaued but to th end we should partake of the spirit and godhead which is in it and so by the merit of that flesh really present in vs obteyn life euerlasting with it now from what a worthy meaning wold these figuratiue Gospellers bring the words of our sauiour whose hard harts I beseche God to mollify that when they heare the truthe their stomake do not kendle to maynteine their old fashon beâ—…ore they haue well loked about them rather choosing to confesse a fault and to amend it then to make a new synne by myssexcusing the former fault ¶ Christes slesh being meate in dede must nedes be really receaued into our bodyes HE that wil know exactly why the flesh of Christ is called meate in dede must put before his eies three thinges The first is that the Iewes hearing Christ say he wold geue them his flesh asked how he could geue it to be eaten The second is that although Christ answered not directly to their captious how and vnsaythful question yet he sayd the eating of his flesh to be necessary for them as without the whiche they could not haue life and profitable as whereby they shold haue euerlasting life that not in their soules only but also in their bodies for so much as he wold reise them vp in the last day after whiche two things well pondered the third is to marke that Christ confirmeth all these former sayings of his by suche wordes as geue a reason of them for my flesh saith he is meate in dede and my blood is drinke in dede as if he had sayd wonder not yâ— my flesh geueth you life euerlasting reiseth vp your bodies for it is meate in dede that is to say it hath truly in dede those proprieties which any man wold wish for in true meate Two thinges may be considered in meate the one that it is trulie receaued into the body of that liuing creature for whose vse it is appointed the other that it is receaued as a medicine whiche may preserue vs against death for meate is neither properly attributed vnto the feeding of the sowle but only by a metaphor and an vnproper speache neither is it worthy to be called true meat if it gene not a true remedie against death there fore when Christ saith My flesh is meate in dede he meaneth thus my flesh bothe shal be receaued into the verie bodies of my people and shall geue life euerlasting as well to their bodiâ—…s as to their soules â–ª the whiche interpretation S. Chrysostom maketh writing thus Quid significat c. what meane these words my flesh is meate in deede and my blood is truly drinke either it meaneth that flesh to be the true meate whiche saueth the soule or els he speaketh it to confirm them in the former wordes Nâ—… obscurè locutum in parabolis arbitrarentur sed scirent omnino necessariuÌ„ esse vt corpus comederent that they should not thinke him to haue spokeÌ„ in parables darkely but that they should know it to be by all meanes necessary to eate his body thus far S. Chrysostom By whiche interpretation Christ geueth a reason both of his first wordes wherein he sayd the bread which I wil geue is my flesh and of the second when he sayd he that eateth my flesh hath life euerlasting for my flesh is meate in deede both in that respect that it shal be geuen to you as true meate is wont to be deliuered to them who truly take and truly eate it and also in that respect that it nourisheth truly as true and eâ—…erlasting meate ought to nourishe he that denieth any one sense of the twaine deuieth one veritie of the ghospell he that graunteth both senses must needes graunt that the true eating of the flesh standeth not for eating truly the signe of flesh because he spake not obscurely nor in parables as S. Chrysostom affirmeth and yet it is an obsâ—…nre saying to put flesh for materiall bread or eating for beleuing it is a parabolicall speache if when flesh blood eating and drinking is named yet we shal â—…derstand that bakers bread must be eaten and wyne drunken and Christ must be loued beleued vppon these parables neither Christ thought of nor the Fathers knew If Adam had not synned the opinion of ancient doctors is that notwithstanding his body consisted of contrarie elements by whose continual fight and battail it should naturally haue drawen to corruption and dissolution yet through the maruelouse grace of God saith S. Augustine his body shoâ—…lo haue bene far from disseases from old age from death from all corruption by tasting of the wood of life whiche was in yâ— middest of paradise Tanquam caetera essent alimento illud Sacramento vt sic fuisse accipiatur lignum vitae in paradyso corporali sicut in spiritali hoc est intelligibili paradyso sapientia Dei de qua scriptum est Lignum vitae est omnibus amplectentibus eam So that other meates in paradise were to nourish Adam corporally the word of life was also in stede of a mysterie or Sacrament to th' end the word of life should be vnderstanded to be after such sort in the corporal paradise as the wisedom of God is in the spiritual paradise which is atteined to by only vnderstanding the which wisedom of God as it is writen thereof is the wood of life to all that embrace it As now the wood of life which should haue preserued man froÌ„ incorruption was to be bodily tasted of and yet to worâ—…e a Sacramentall and spirituall effect in preseruing mans body aboue al course of a corrutible nature so is it meant that Christes flesh which is in dede the wood of life should be a SacrameÌ„t vnto vs by the corporall eating and spiritual working thereof for bothe these canses together it is called meate in dede Take a way yâ— corporall tasting of Christes body and charitie â—…aith hope or any like vertue is proportionably in his degree meat in dede or drinke in dede as the SacrameÌ„t of Christes supper is For all those vertues coming from God feed vs in dede to life euerlasting therefore haue that second proprietie of trut meat which is to nourish for euer But they haue not yâ— first proprietie which is to be receaued after an external maner into our bodies To this externall maner Christ had also respect when he â—…ayd My flesh is meat in dede or
meate vnto the body for how saith he can a ' thing whiche lacketh a body be made meat vnto the body as who should say there is no doubt but the flesh of Christ is made meate vnto one body because Christ sayd my flesh is meate in dede and meate is ordinarilie promised to nourish the body although it being the meate of God helpeth the soule also If the bread that came downe from heauen whiche is the flesh of Christ be true meate it is a bodily thing for els how could a thinge that hath no body be made meate for the body if that can not be so truly the flesh geuen at the supper of Christ whiche is meate in dede and drinke in dede can not be only receaued in spirit but it must be so reall that it may fede our bodies also to thinteÌ„t they may be reised in the later day therefore that whiche our body receaueth when Christ saith take and eate is the same flesh of Christ which is meate in dede and seing it is proued to be a body because it is made meate vnto the body it must be meate in dede vnto vs and must be really taken into our bodies by our mouthes or els Nyssenus â—…ayleth in his whole discourse for he proueth it a body because it is meate vnto the body then certainlie it is not meate only to the soule nor it is not only receaued by faith but trulie and in dede And seing al wise men reason vpon a sure ground we may not doubt but all the Catholike Church twelue hundred yeres past and so vpward toke it for an euident truthe that Christes body was meate vnto our bodies ¶ By the maner of our tarying in Christ it is proued that we receaue his reall flesh into our bodies WHereas hitherto the necessitie the profite and the truth of eating Chrisies flesh hath bene shewed and confirmed Now the proper effect of that banket is also declared because he that eateth Christes flesh and drinketh his blood tarieth in Christ and Christ in him In respect whereof the same thing was before named Cibus permanens the meate which tarieth Whereby we may perceaue that in the SacrameÌ„t of Christes supper we doe not beginue to liue as in baptism but we maintein kepe nourish increase the sede of life which we toke in our spirituall birth Neither only doe we preserue life during the tyme of our feeding but also when the banket is ended some effect remaineth in vs through the which we are sayd to tary in Christ and he in vs. Let vs then trye out what effect that is for by the maner kind of the effect we may gather somewhat of the cause What meaueth it that Christ tarieth in vs and we in him S. Chryâ—…ostom answereth In me manet dicit vt cum ipso se admisceri ostendat Christ sayth He tarieth in me to shew that him self is mingled with him S. Chrysostom meaneth that whiles we receaue worthely the substance of Christes flesh into our bodies we are so intierly ioyned to him that we may be sayd to be mingled with him And how that is done S. Cyrillus declareth by this similitude As if a man poure wax vppon melted wax he wholy must nedes mingle the one with the other so it must nedes be if any man receaue the flesh and blood of our Lord that he be so ioyned with him that Christ may be found in him and he in Christ. And again Sicut parum fermenti caet As a litle leauen tempereth the whole lump of dow so a litle benedictioÌ„ whereby he meaneth a peece of the consecrated host be it neuer so smal draweth the whole man vnto it and filleth him with his grace and by this meanes Christ tarieth in vs and we in him S. Cyrillus calleth the things which are consecrated at Christes supper Benedictio a blessing because they are consecrated by the words of blessing the which Christ left vnto vs. Now a litle of that blessed food being receaued worthely of vs is not so properly sayd to tary in vs as we to tary in it for that though it be small in forme yet in vertue it is great And therefore it draweth vs vnto it as leauen turneth the dow to his nature It can not be auoided by these interpretations but that the heauenly food which we receaue into our mouthes is the reall substance of Christes flesh For it is here called Benedictio the blessing that word is not meant of an inward vertue coming srom heauen but of that which semeth bread and is visibly receaued at our Lords table For euen in the same Chapiter S. Cyrillus exhorteth men ad recipiendam benedictionem to receaue the Sacrament of Christes supper The which SacrameÌ„t if it were wheaten bread how could it be true that a litle thereof should draw the whole man vnto it Doth wheaten bread make vs like it are we then made vnreasonable vnsensible and a corruptible creature as wheateÌ„ bread is Christ sayth his meat tarieth to life euerlasting so doth not wheateÌ„ bread Christ sayth by eating his flesh we tary in him But we tary in him whiles the gift which at his supper he deliuereth is mingled with vs and conuerteth vs vnto it as S. Chrysostom and S. â—…yrillus teache And yet we be not conuerted or drawen to the nature of materiall bread or wine therefore it appeareth the gift which Christ deliuered not to haue bene bread and wine but his own body and blood vnder those formes S. Hilarie bringeth the very same word of tarying to proue that as Christ is in his Father by the nature of Godhead we in him by his corporall birth so he is in vs by the mysterie of the Sacraments and tarieth in vs naturally The like witnesse Theophilact geueth saying Contemperatio fit noua super rationem ita vt sit Deus in nobis nos in ipso There is made by eating Christes flesh a new mingling together so that God is in vs and we in him Briefly thus Christ meaneth He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood receaueth me as meate into his body and soule But because I come not to nourish carnall life but spiritual in him he doth not digest and turn my body into his as it happeneth in other meates but he is turned to be like me For the real ioyning and knitting of my flesh to his maketh a maruelouse mixture as if melted wax were poured to other wax so that a great grace and vertue is left of me in him whereby he may tary still in me and increase the fountain of life which is in him This kind of our tarying in Christ and of his with vs could not be true if we â—…ed spiritually only vpoÌ„ Christ absent in body For how can the body which is only in heauen be so teÌ„pered tâ—… our bodies soules in earth as one melted wax being powred
arise the third day And straight he sang an hymne and with his Apostles went forth of the parler where they had supped Although the hymne or song of praise whereof S. Mathew speaketh doe not alone proue the real presence of Christâ—…s body and blood yet it helpeth thus far toward it as to shew and expresse a singular banket to haue bene made after which so rare and solemne a praise was geueÌ„ to God as again is no where els mentioned For albeit no man may doubt but Chist did always geue thanks vnto God after his meate receaued yet we neuer reade of an hymâ—…e sayd or song after any other Feast besyde this And yet I doubt nothing atall but that Christ gaue him self by faith and spirit euen at the supper tyme to some of his Disciples before this night and namely to the blessed Mary which at Bethaâ—…y oynted his feete at supper tyme. but that geuing of him self to Sainâ—…t Mâ—…ry or any other to be eaten of by faith was not this dreâ—…ful giâ—…t of Christs supper The hymne which was externally song or said was â—…ue to this externall worke of God wherein he witâ—… 〈◊〉 own hands gaue his own body and blood to his disciples To conclude at the length coÌ„cerning all these circumstances of this heauenly supper I besech the Reader to accompt weighe them all together and not only to consyder them a part albeit many of them alone are not able to be answered but a circumstance is not a perfit thing of it self but is a part of that whole thing about the which it hath his being and place If all these circumstances ioyned together doe proue the real presence of Christes body and blood vnder yâ— formes of that bread and wine which Christ toke and sayd thereof this is my body and this is my blood I haue my purpose and intent but he dealeth vnhonestly who diuiding them a part cauilleth at one or two and wil not looke to al at once If al these ioyned together proue not my purpose let him who thinketh so either shew me so many so strong for his contrary assertion or let him yeld to yâ— Catholiâ—… faith ¶ The real presence of Christes body and blood and the proper meaning of his words is proued by the conference of holy scriptures taken ouâ—… of the new Testament and speaking of our â—…ords supper EUery place in holy scripture hath not another place like or in apparance coÌ„trarie to it whereby the more light may be taken for the vnderstanding thereof but when there are any such places they helpe marueilously toward the vnderstanding of holy scripture Christ one yere before his last supper said at Capharnaâ—… The bread whiche I will geue is my flesh my flâ—…sh is meat in dede At his supper he toke bread and hauing blessed said Take eate this is my body and this cup is the new Testament in my blood S. 〈◊〉 speaking of the self same mysterie wryteth thus The chalice of blessing which we blesse is it not the communicating of Christes blood And the bread which we breake is it not the com municating of the body of our Lord Let vs now conferre euery word together That whiche was promised in S. Iohn by these wordes The bread whiche I will geue is discribed in the supper presently by these words Take eate this and this cup. not that I make this the accusatiue case to the verbe eate but only to shew that these three wordes agree with the first words in S. Ihon. And afterward in S. Paule it is called The bread which we breake so that these foure particles belong in effect to one thing The bread whiche I will geue The bread whiche we breake and take eate this or drinke ye this cup. By which conference we learne how the pronoune this may be particularly expounded in Christes supper for of his generall signification whiche is to shew vnder a visible form an inuisible substance I haue spoken before sufficiently This then is as much to say as this meat drink or food which is now broken and geueÌ„ and willed to be taken and eaten or drunken is my body or blood It hath bene euidently proued vppon the sixt of S. Ihon that yâ— bread which he promised was not meant of wheateÌ„ bread whereof Christ spake not in yâ— place but of the meate and foode of euerlasting life Therefore when Christ sayth this in his last supper he meaneth none otherwise then this eatable thing or this which is to be drunken this kind of meate or drinke and food which I nâ—…w geue is my body or bloâ—…d otherwise iâ—… it were not his flesh and blood but material bread and wine it were not the euerlasting meate which Christ at Caphaâ—…namn promised to geue and now at his supper doth geue So that whereas Christ both brake and gaue after blessing said take eate this therewith beginning to consecrate the Sacrament of his last supper we haue it expounded what this doth 〈◊〉 by three 〈◊〉 ways by the tyme to come when it is sayd the breaâ—… that I wil geue â—…hich out of question is vnderstanded the food 〈◊〉 Christ wil geue For Christ him self called it before the meate which tarieth to life euerlasting Agayne the pronoune this may be wel expounded by the dede exercysed about the Sacrament after cousâ—…ration when it is sayd of S. Paule The bread which we breake for the breaking is vsed after consecration in the signe and form of bread to shew the death of Christ wherein his flesh was in dede broken and to distribute the mâ—…rites thereof by the holy communion The third way is by conferring together the very words of the consecrating the two kinds For as he said of the bread this alone so he sayd of the wine this cup. geuing vs to vnderstand that as this cup must of necessity be resolued into yâ— thing within the cup so in the other kind we should resolue the pronoune this into that which is within this visible form Thereby declaring that this generally meaneth the substance vnder this and particularly meaneth the food vnder this All is in effecte to say The meate that I will geue the eatable thing that we breake at Masse that whereof Christ sayd take and eate that which is conteyned vnder the apparant formes that is it which in the supper is termed by the pronounâ—… â—…his The next word is the verbe is which can very hardly be expounded by any other word in any tonge because it being the verbe substaâ—… is in all tonges set alone to signifie yâ— being or substaÌ„ce that euery thing hath and no other one word is equal to it which may expound it Yet I may boldly say the holy Ghost hath done so much to expound this verbe as may suffise to any reasonable creature For Christ sayd before any signe of his body was 〈◊〉 The bread
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
participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 geuen froÌ„ the signification of his noune 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 body You supply in S. Luks Greeke words the verbe est is by common vse when you haue it present you cast it out again or expound it not according to yâ— common vse of speaking which forced you to supply it but according to an vnproper meaning very sildom vsed not vnderstanded of any meane lerned man You teache by necessarie ineuitable sequele of your doctrine a figure of Christes body that is to say material bread to be sacri ficed for vs. You teache the wine to be in the cup and yet Christ saith the cup to wit that which is in the cup to be shed for vs. You diuide the noune substautine from his genitine case sanguis from testamenti vitae from panis you cut of the article you mysseÌ„glish many things as I haue noted before These be faults into which a Grammarian should not fal yet you are so blind that you see them not For so I rather think of you theÌ„ that you of purpose chose to be Heretiks and to be damned persons What might a man doe to bring you home You wrote not passing twenty lines together of this blessed Sacrament in this place and yet sâ—… into what grosse 〈◊〉 you be fallen If your whole booke were so particularly skanned euery leafe is full of such like faults But because it wold passe all measure of writing if in a great volume euery line should be thus staid vpon therefore al things euery where be not nor can not be so particularly examined but surely all be as fond as vayne as false To returne to my chefe purpose Christ is yâ— bread of life according to his Godhead and manhod and is to be eaten of by faith as it is often times said in S. 〈◊〉 But he is also to be eaten iâ—… his humane fleshe and to be drunken in the substance of his naturall blood not onlie by faith but verè trulie â–ª that is to saie he is to be taken at the mouth and so cometh to oure hartes and mindes which is the waâ—… of eating him at his last supper The which way by that meane of eating fulfilleth the figure MaÌ„na In respect whereof Christ calleth him self not dead food as yâ— was but the liuing bread not without power to quicken as that was 〈◊〉 the bread of life which can geue life to him that worthily 〈◊〉 it Not a 〈◊〉 breade as Manna was but the true bread â–ª not geuen from the 〈◊〉 as Manna but from heauen and the bread sayth Christ which I wil geue is my flesh This bread of life M. Nowel is the euerlasting meat which the sonne of man promised to geue and at his supper he doth geue it euen as he is the sonne of man to wit by the instrument of his manhod verily by his own handes and by his corporall deliuery made to the twelue at his last supper The preface of the fift Booke ALmighty God knowing the reall presence of his Sonnes flesh vnder the forme of bread to be a thing so farre aboue the whole course of nature that no vnderstanding of man was able to atteine vnto it did at the least so fortifie the same by his holy wordes put in writing and by the continuall practise of the Church that who so listeth to beleue may haue more then sufficient grâ—…nd to bâ—…ld his faith vpon That I may now omitte other proâ—…es how plainly doth S. Paul speake in this matter whose words are the more earnestly to be weighed for so much as S. Augustine a man much â—…nuersant in the Epistles of this chosen 〈◊〉 affirmeth him to dispute according to the Apostolike maner more plainly Et magis proprie quam figurate 〈◊〉 qui and rather to speake properly then figuratiuely Which thing I wish the Reader to haue always in his minde depely consydering that if Chrâ—…s body 〈◊〉 not really present â—…o 〈◊〉 hath spoâ—… more â—…ely 〈◊〉 S. Paul be â–ª cause he alone hath writen more of the last 〈◊〉 it selfe then any other holy writer But 〈◊〉 he vseth for the most part to speake properly we must not in this myâ—…y alone take his words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Chapiters of the fyfth Booke 1. The reall presence of Christe is proued by the blessing of the cup of his blood 2. Item by the name of breaking and communicating 3. Item by the one bread which maketh vs all one body 4. Item by the conference of al those wordes together 5. It is shewed how vve are one body in Christ. 6. The reall presence is proued by the like example vvhiche S. Paule vsed concerning the Ievves and Gentils 7. Item by the kind of shewing Christes death 8. Item because euill men eate this bread vnvvorthelie 9. Item because euill men are gilty of Christes body and blood by eating and drinking it 10. Item because they discerne it not in their doings from other meates 11. Item because no figure can make a man gilty of Christes body vvithout speciall conempt except it be the truth and the figure together 12. Last of al the real presence is confirmed by the frequent repetition of the body and blood of Christ. ¶ The real presence of Christes body and blood is proued by the blessing and communicating of Christes blood where of S. Paule speaketh S. Paule writeth to the Corinthians of the Sacrament of the altar in this manner The cup of blessing which we blesse is it not the communicating of the blood of Christ as though he sayd there is no doubt but that the chalice which we blesse maketh vs partake the blood of Christ. This aduantage we haue by conference of those holy scriptures whiche speake of one matter that one place geueth light to the other S. Mathewe reherseth how Christ taking the chalice said This is my blood of the new testament S. Luke sheweth that he said This chalice is the new testament in my blood S. Paule addeth thereunto The chalice of blessing which we blesse is the communicating of Christes blood A blessing in holy scripture is either a praising of a thing or it is the geuing of a benefite thereunto It is certaine that the chalice as long as it hath nothing but wine in it can not deserue any praise because a thig without life is not apt to receaue praise It remaineth then to 〈◊〉 what benefite is bestowed vppon the liquour in the chalice The Sacramentaries wil say that it is made holy wine of coÌ„mon wine and sanctified bread of common bread which sanctisying is a blessed action and by that holy signification wherevnto it is apointed a certaine holines is geuen to it which may be called a blessing This were very wel said if it had bene only said generally of yâ— chalice that it is the chalice of blessing which we blesse but the blessing that S.
twentie tymes to the intent it might at the least wise sinke at the lengthe into some of his disciples minde And how much lesse should I either thinke it long to dilate this argument either the Reader be wery thereof S. Paule sayth eadeÌ„ vobis scribere mihi quidem non pigruÌ„ vobis autem necessarium To write the same thinges vnto you it is not lothsom vnto me but truly necessarie vnto you Euen so Christe for our greate profite always repeted that he would geue meate whiche should not perish a bread which was his flesh And that we should eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drink his blood that who so did eate his flesh and drink his blood should haue life euerlasting for his flesh is meate in deede and his blood is drinke in deede who so doth eate his flesh and drinke his blood doth tarie in Christ and Christ in him and he that doth eate him should liue for him and that this is the bread which came doune from heauen an other manner of bread then MaÌ„na was He that doth eate this bread shal liue for euer Thus about tenne tymes we finde that in S. Ihon he said one thing though not in one words Sometyme calling it flesh sometyme blood sometyme him self sometyme this bread sometyme meat Put now here vnto that he toke bread and wine blessed gaue thankes brake and gaue and said take and eate this is my body and drinke ye al of this for this is my blood and make or doe this thing for the remembrance of me Remember farther that three Euangelists wrote the history of the supper in diuerse yeres all after one sort that S. Paule wrote the same adding more terrour to it by shewing that some died at Corinth for the vnworthy receauing the body and blood of Christ with all the rest which the Apostle sayth in that epistle and we shall find that the holy ghost hath confirmed and verified the knowen and litterall vnderstaÌ„ding of the words flesh blood body meat without any figuratiue speache or meaning Albeit God meant not his body and blood to be eaten and drunken after the common vsual manner of eating rosted flesh or drinking raw blood but that we should eate it drinke it vnder the forms of bread wine For which cause he also vsed yâ— name of a certaine kinde of bread A bread I say which came donne from heauen because it is vnited vnto yâ— sonne of God who was for euer equal with his Father in glory nature honour This repeting of one thing so many tymes is a great argumeÌ„t of speaking plainly without all figures or parables This argument to begin wth the weaker the greke author Euthymius maketh who vpon those wordes my flesh is truly meate saieth hoc dixit confirmans quòd non aenigmaticè neque parabolicâ—… loqueretur This he hath said coÌ„firming that he spake not 〈◊〉 either els in the manner of a parable Which obseruation Euthymius borowed of S. Chrysostom who saith that Christ affirmed his fleshe to be meate in dede to confirme his disciples least they should thinke him to haue spoken obscurely in parables But the ofte repeting is of it selfe the confirming and assuring vs that he spake not so Oecumenius also vse th the same reason in a like matter Per hoc quod frequenter ait corporis sanguinis domini manifestat quòd non sit nudus homo qui immolatur sed ipse dominus factor omnium vt videlicet per haec iplos exterreat in that he many tymes nameth the body and blood of our Lord he sheweth that he which is offered is not a bare man as the Nestorians did falsely teache but the Lord him self and maker of all things to th end he might verily put them in a terrour by these wordes if the ofte naming of Lord did shew it to be the body not of a bare man but also of God how much more doth it shew that it is not the bare substance of bread but the body it selfe of Christ who is our maker S. Basile noteth in the Apostle S. Paule coÌ„cerning this very matter VehemeÌ„tius simulque horribilius proponit ac declarat condemnationem per repetitionem The Apostle setteth forth and declareth more vehemeÌ„tly to the more terrour of the vnworthy receauers the condemnation by repeting it S. Augustine in his booke which he made concerning the working of muncks perceauing that some thought yâ— Apostle to speake figuratinely wheÌ„ he requireth that all men should labour and worke who would eate among other arguments wherewith he disproueth these figurantiue workers vseth this also Neque enim aut vno loco aut breuiter dictuÌ„ est vt possit cuiusuis astutissimi tergiuersatione in aliam traduci peruertique sententiam â—…t is not said in one place or in shorte wordes so that it may be 〈◊〉 and peruerted into an other meaning by yâ— ouerthwarting of neuer so suttle a sophist Thus reasoneth S. Augustine vpoÌ„ the ost repeting of worke of labour of miniâ—…ring with handes prouing thereby that the Apostle meant in dede bodily worke and not only working with mind or tonge But I am assured there is not more in the new testameÌ„t concerning the precept of working with handes then is of the body and blood of Christ of his flesh of the meat which perisheth not of such substanciall bread of taking eating drinking communicating partaking the body and blood of Christ of making the same of geuing breaking and distributing of not discerning it of being gilty for vnworthy eating of true meate true drink oâ—… reising vp him that eateth it of his abyding in Christ and liuing for Christ of the Church and Christ being twain in one flesh of being one bread one body all that partake of the one bread of liuing for euer if any man worthely eate this bread which is the flesh of Christ which he wil geue for yâ— life of that world it is not said in one place neither in short or few words therefore it ought not be drawen into an other meaning then the words do sound â—…y the ouerthwarting of neuer so suttle a sophist To conclude S. Cyrillus writeth in the same sense Non obdurescamus toties a Christo veritatem audientes non est enim ambigenduÌ„ quin summa supplicia subituri sunt qui saepius haec a Chisto iterata non capiunt Let vs not harden our selues hearing the truth so oft of Christ. for it is not to be doubted but they shall suffer most â—…reme paines who receaue not these thinges whiche are so many tymes repeted of Christ. The preface of the sixth booke BEcause the adoration of the body and blood of Christe in the Sacrament of the Altar is a matter whiche moste manifestly conuinceth the reall presence of Christ vnder the forme of bread I thought it best to handle it a part
miraculouse 26. Ye expound to be gilty of Christes body and blood for eating that is to say for not eating or resusing to eate For you teache euill men not to eate the body of Christ which is against S. Paule 27. Ye will not haue Christes supper to be an externall sacrifice but to be worse in that point then the Iewish or idolatours altars and tables who both did sacrifice and also S. Paule compareth Christes table with theirs 28. Ye so expound the shewing of Christes death by eating bread a figure of him that you rather shewe him not to be truely dead because your figure is yet emptie voide which can neuer proue Christes death truely past 29. Ye expound the not making a difference betwene Christes body eaten and other meates in suche sort that ye wil not haue the body present wherein the difference is to be made 30. Ye deny our vnion with Christes flesh by corporall participation which S. Paule teacheth by the example of Adam Eue being two in one flesh 31. Whereas S. Pauie saieth Christe to be so muche better then Angels by how much he had a more excelleÌ„t name theÌ„ they you regard not yâ— name body blood geuen to yâ— mysteries of Christ but affirme them to be still that they were before and therefore not to be that excellent substance which they are named to be 32. In all the scriptures so great and oft mention being made of Christes supper as there is yet no promise can be found made to him who eateth materiall bread and drinketh wine But all the promise is made for eatinge Christes fleshe and drinkinge worthely his blood Therefore you affirm bread to be eateÌ„ and wine to be drunken in Christes supper beside the word of God 33. Although Dauid prophecied of cating and adoring yet you wil graunt no such meat to be geueÌ„ to vs which may be external ly adored 34. Notwithstanding that the prophets teache that by Christes comming al externall idolatrie shal be taken away yet you feare not to say that Christes owne Sacrament bearing the name of his owne body and blood is it selfe an idol which was left with vs to kepe vs from all idolatrie 35. The sonne of man came as to saue so to fede the whole man why then denie you the food of life to our bodies affirming them to eat common bread and to drinke common wine whiles the soule is fed by faith with the body and bloode of Christ 36. If in the Sacrament of the altar we fede vpon Christ by faith alone why is that Sacrament called a supper more theÌ„ baptism where also we must fede on Christ by faith 37. Seing a figure may also be the truth it selfe whereof it is the figure as Christ is the figure of his Father and yet the same substance what reason haue you why you would rather detract this hoâ—…our from Christes Sacrament then geue the same vnto it 38. Christ being equal with his Father made promise to vs of his â—…ne fleshe whiche his Father had geâ—…en Why then denie you the gift of Christ to be as real to vs as his Father gaue him real fleshe 39. How teache you the words of Christ which are spirit life to be notwithstanding figuratiue and consequently deade and voide of al life or strength 40. Because yâ— word of God who was only able to be fed vpon by faith and so was the food of Angels or soules woulde be also the meate of man in respect of the body it toke flesh aâ—…d at his supper sayd to vs take eate this is my body And yet you make him still to be only the meate of the minde whereby we are excluded frome hauing God corporally in vs through the fleshe of Christe 41. To coÌ„clude whereas ye find flesh bodie blood ioyned with eating drinking taking partaking geuing breaking distributing coÌ„municating dâ—…udicating ye expound all those words figuratiuelie as though God by so manie waies repeating those words had not strengthned the coÌ„mon and proper significatioÌ„s of them Let this suffise for this time to shew that you obserue nor gender nor number nor nominatiue case nor verb nor antecedent nor relatiue nor the condition of the maker of the supper nor the nature of the sacrament nor the state and perfection of the Gospel nor the sayings of the prophetes nor the â—…ulfilling of the old law nor the oft repeting of the matters belonging to Christs supper but onlie to serue the eye and the senses deny al the marueilous workes of the new testament yâ— remeÌ„brance of al which this one mysterie is affirmed to be â—…rag no more M. Iuel of our figuratiue expositions sith you haue thus erred in graÌ„mar in Logick in Diuinitie in truth in faith in coÌ„mon sense Iu. If in these words except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of maÌ„ ye follow the letter it killeth San. To follow yâ— letter is to take words as thei sound to an inâ—…del as to haue flesh torn in to peeces and so eaten but he that taketh them as Christ in his supper by his fact did expound them doth folow yâ— spirit and not the letter ¶ A notable place of S. Augustine corrupted by M. Iuel IVel. S. Augustine sayth The Sacrament of Christes body after a certain phrase or manner or trope or â—…igure of speache is the body of Christ. Sander This place is wickedly abused because it is nakedly alleged and falsely englished whereas it dependeth wholy vpon the words going before which are these Nónne semel immolatus est Christus in se ipso tamen in Sacramento caet Was not Christ once offered vp in him selfe and yet in the Sacrament he is offered vp for the people not only at euerie feaste of Easter but euerie day Neither surely doth he lye who being demanded Eum responderit immolari Doth answere that he is offered vp For if the SacrameÌ„ts had not a certain likenes of those thinges whereof they are the Sacramentes they were not at all Sacramentes Out of this likenes they take also for the most parte the names of the things theÌ„ selues As therefore according to a certaine â—…anner the Sacrament of Christes body is the body of Christe the Sacrament of the blood of Christe is the blood of Christ so the Sacrament of faith is faith In these words of S. Augustine it is to be seen euidently that he putteth a difference betwene the thing and the Sacrament of that thing The thing therefore it selfe must be first knoweâ—… and then we shal see how the Sacrament thereof is both like vnâ—… it and taketh the name thereof The thing it selfe in ouâ—… question is Iesus Christ not only so but the true body of Iesus Christe neither only true in substance but euen
true in shape in form in quantitie and qualitie Christ was made man in dede borne in dede he grew and walked vpon the earth in dede according to the true and visible nature and forme of man He suffered death in the same forme and did shed his blood apart from his fleshe Now marke when it pleased him to depart out of this world he woulde haue all these thinges beleued of vs remembred of vs and folowed as our weakenes through his grace might suffer In cōsideration whereof he iustituted a Sacramēt of his own body and blood Of which body Of that which he had taken which was but one The first point of this Sacrament must be saith S. Augustine that it haue a certaine likenes or similitude with Christes own body and blood and consequently that likenes shall make it to haue the name it selfe What is the likenes in the sacrament of Christes supper betwene it and the naturall body of Christ Seeke as long as you are able M. Iuel prie and serche neuer so intierly you shall find the likenes to be in this point specially that the substance of Christes body blood not hauīg any outward image made of them are made presēt vnder the forme of an other thing are so made present that thereby all the highe mysteries of Christes visible body are mystically set before the faith of the true beleuer Christ being the sonne of God was made man by turninge some of the purest blood of the virgin Marie into his own flesh and blood and that was done without the sede of man by the vertue of the worde and power of the whole Trinitie through the ministery of the Archangel Gabriell euen so the purest creatures of bread and wine are made the body and blood of Christ and turned into the substance of them not by generation corruption but by the vertue of these wordes This is my body Which thing y◠who le Trinitie worketh by the ministerie of the Priest who is the Angel of Christ. Christ thus borne and hauing walked in his flesh came to die vpon the crosse where his blood was diuided from his flesh the soule from the body but the Godhead taried stil with both right so this sacrament hath the body consecrated vnder one kind the blood vnder an other kind and they are adored of the saithfull a part yet the person which is one whereunto they are vnited and the Godhead in that person causeth the two partes to make but one Sacrament and the whole to be vnder eche kind Thus the likenes whiche is not in form but in substance and in the consecration of true faith betwene Christ him self and this sacrament maketh this sacrament to be called his body blood although in al respectes it be not so Upon whiche ground S. Hierom saith Dupliciter sanguis Christi caro intelligitur c. The flesh and blood of Christ is vnderstanded two waies either that spiritual and diuine whereof him self said my flesh is truly meate and my blood is truly drinke and except ye eate my fleshe and drinke my blood ye shall not haue euerlasting life or els the fleshe which was cru cified and the blood which was shed with the speare of the soldiour Thus haue we one fleshe and blood in substance consydered vnderstanded two waies and that not falsely vnderstanded as the Sacramentaries imagine but truely and in dede For a false vnderstanding is hated of God This difference and this likenes is also noted in the present words of S. Augustin when he saith Christ was once offered in him self Note the worde in him selfe to wit in his visible shape form and truth as wel of substance as of quātity the same Christ is dayly offered in a sacramēt Are not these S. Augustines words ▪ Christ is offered in him self Christ is offered in a Sacrament is it not all one Christ or is Christe diuided No no al is one substāce but the m◅ner is not al one And farther note very dyligently good Reader that of the two immolations or offeringes the one is referred to the other The one is the signe token figure Sacrament of the other And therfore the one is but once done because it was y◠great immolation which absolutely fulfilled al the law prophets and it was made vppon the Crosse. The other being made in the Sacramēt sheweth kepeth preserueth and applieth daily the fruits of that one oblation but Christ is alwaies one in bothe Now this likenes of the Incarnation and passion of Christ made and represented to the faithfull by the Sacrament of the altar causeth it to be called the body blood of Christ. And therefore S. Augustine concludeth The Sacrament of Christes body according to a certain maner is the body of Christ. M. Iuel englisheth these wordes according to his maner falsely corruptly and ignorantly he turneth Secundum quendam modum after a certaine Phrase or maner or trope or figure of speache True it is that modus doth signifie a maner or meane Again it may be sometime y◠the maner is tropicall or figuratiue but now it is not so meant And that is proued two waies First because S. Augustine saith the Sacrament of the body of Christ according to a certein manner est is the body of Christ. he saith not only it is called the body after a certain manner but it is the body Therefore the manner that that he speaketh of is in the Sacrament in the thing it self in the substance thereof and not only in the phrase or trope or figure of speache as M. Iuel would haue it Againe the name whiche the Sacrament taketh is geuen as S. Augustine saith according to a likenes which is betwene the Sacrament and the thing it selfe That likenes then must be first in the Sacrament really and afterward in respect of priority of nature though not in respect of tyme the name is geuen Seing then the likenes of things goeth before the likenes of names When S. Augustine saith the Sacrament of Christes body is the body of Christ according to a certain manner that manner must respect the likenes of the thinges before it respecte the likenes of names Therefore M. Iuel hath erred altogether in translating modum a phrase or manner of speache But first he should haue sought wherein the things were like for in dede the likenes in dinerse things is diuerse In one thing it is in substance as God the Father and his sonne are like equall and one in substance Yet because there is some difference in that they are diuerse persons the sonne is the figure of his Fathers substance according to a certaine manner to wit as he is a diuerse person but not as a diuerse substance In other things the substāce may differ also as the rock and Christe and
spiritual flesh by mouth and not only by faith eating by faith is rather more due to the flesh of Christ as it hangeth crucified then to any other maner of the same slesh For we must swetely remember his death and be partakers of his passioÌ„ by faith but not by mouth On the other syde we must eate Christes diuine and spirituall flesh as it is vnderstanded in another way distinct in maner from his crosse and passion therefore that other eating is an eating by mouth and not only by faith Iuel ClemeÌ„s AlexaÌ„drinus saith there is a fleshly blood wherewith we are redemed and a spiritual wherewith we are anoynted and this is to drink the blood of Christ to be partaker of his immortality As Christes blood is not really present to anoint vs â—…o it is not really present to nourish vs. San. Clemens Alexandrinus diuiding Christes blood into carnall spirituall agreeth with S. Hierom in the former part of the diuision that is to say in carnall blood but in the later part he speaketh of an other thing For whereas S. Hierom toke spirituall flesh and blood for the substance of them as they are eaten and dronken in the Sacrament which thinge may appere for that he citeth these wdrds of Christ my flesh is verily meate and except you eate my flesh ye shall not haue life euerlaâ—…ing which words are meant of the SacrameÌ„tal eating Cleâ—…eÌ„s doth not respect so much the Sacrament of the altar it self as the effect and fruite of Christes carnall blood how soeuer it be partaken and that is euident by his owne words where he saith this is to drincke the blood of Iesus to be partaker of his immortality To partake the immortalitie of Christ is an effect which may rise of faith of Baptism of penance of the Sacrament of the altar and of all other meanes or instruments whereby the saluation of Christ may be deriued vnto vs. Clemeâ—…s therefore speaking of an effect which may â—…e wrought by one meritoriouse cause only that is to say by the death of Christ but vnderstanding the meanes to applie that cause vnto vs to be diuerse he spake not directly of these mâ—…anes but of that spirituall fruite which either one or moe of them doe bring foorth in vs. For the oynting whereof Clemens doth speake is to be referred to the spirituall grace which is gâ—…en to the soule and not to the substance of the Sacrament whereof we dispute It will not therefore folow that because the blood whereof Clemens doth speake sometime is not really present when through grace we are ointed with it that the blood also whereof S. Hierom speaketh should not be really present sith they two speak not of one kind of spirituall blood Iuel This nouris hing and this anoynting are both spirituall San. That is true but not both after one sort For S. Hieroâ—… speaketh of the spirituall blood in the substance thereof as it is verily drink in yâ— Sacrament Clemens as it is fruitfully partaken of vs and not as it is considered in his own substance S. Hierome speaketh of the Sacrament Clemens of the end and fruit of al our belefe That S. Hierome speaketh of the SacrameÌ„t it is proued because he citeth suche wordes out of S. Iohn as all yâ— Fathers and manifest reasons conference of the scriptures proue to appertein by the way of promise to the SacrameÌ„t of Christes supper Which thing I haue proued in twentie chapters together in my third booke to which reasons vntil M. Iuel hath answered he shal geue me leaue to put it for an vndoubted truth that Christ in the later part of the sixth chapter of S. Ihon speaketh most literally of the gift of his fleshe blood to be made at his last supper But Clemens doth speake of that spirituall drinking Christs blood whereof S. Augustin saith Hunc cibum potum societatem vult intelligi corporis membrorum suorum quod est sancta Ecclesia This meate and drinke Christ willeth to be vnderstanded the felowship of his body and members which body the holy Church is Now to be partaker of the vnity and spirit which is made in Christes myâ—…ical body that is to be partaker of the immortalitie and glorie of our Lorde For as S. Paule saith he is the Sauiour of his body Iu. S. Augustine saith Iudas betraied Christ carnal thou hastâ—… betraied Christe spirituall For in thy fury thou betraiedst the holy Gospel to be burnt with wicked fier These wordes of Clement and Augustine agreing so nere in 〈◊〉 â—…nd phrase with the words of Hierom may stand for sufficiente exposition to the same San. These wordes goe so nere yâ— one to the other thâ—…t in sense they differ exceding much For now S. Augustine taketh Christe spiritual an other way cleaue diuerse from Clement or S. HieroÌ„ and that may be easily seen if a man will reade the line which foloweth next in S. Augustine For he saieth Iudas betraied the lawmaker vâ—…to the perfidious Iewes thou hast betraied to meÌ„ as it were reliquias eius his reliques to wit the lawe of God to be destroied S. Augustin then taketh Christ spiritual for certaine reliques of Christ which although they be no partes of his corporal body yet they belong to him for yâ— of his great prouidence toward vs he lest theÌ„ to be deuoutly readen kept what meane you M. Iuel to miâ—…gle things impertineÌ„t together Think you wheresoeuer you find yâ— word spiritual yâ— by by it perteineth to your purpose or do you only inteÌ„d to abuse that not lerned reader The word spirituall being maned of spiritus a spirite mâ—…ste nedes be taken â—…s manie wayes as yâ— word spirit is taken which doth signifie God that is to say the whole Trinitie For God is a spirit 2. The holy Ghost of whom Christ was lead into the deserte 3. Christ him selfe as S. Cyrillus hath noted 4. Angels 5. 〈◊〉 6. Spiritual gifts 7. The soule 8. The imagination 9. The breath of mans â—…outh 1â—… Anger or punishmeÌ„t and many other things By which diuerse taking of this one worde aâ—… of diuerse others in the holy scripture such difficulty riseth to a man though not vnlerned that without the help of vniâ—…sal tradition he can not vnderstand them That whiche you bring out of Athanasâ—…s appertemeth to the Capharnaites to no man els Iu. Thus M. Harding reasoneth we eate not the flesh of Christ that was crucified ergo Christes flesh is really in the Sacrament Sander You leaue out the chefe part of the argument We eate Christes diuine and spirtual flesh and yet we eate it not so as it was crucified therefore S. â—…icrom spake of that eating whiche is not only made by faith for so the crucified fleshe may be eaten but of that which is made by mouth also Iu. We can notthen eate the flesh that was crueified
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
blood This can be but one thing Therefore Christ deliuering that whereof he sayd This and this deliuered at eche tyme but one thing in all but two things He deliuered his body blood as him self sayd and you coÌ„fesâ—…e he truly deliuered them wherevpon I conclude that he deliuered neither bread nor wine and consequently that the bread taken was changed in to the body of Christ and the wine was changed into his blood For seing Christ toke both bread and wine and deliuered truly his body and blood yet deliuered but one thing at eche tyme and that also keping the forme of bread and wine it must nedes be graunted that the substance of bread and wine which was truly taken and not truly deliuered because an other thing was truly deliuered was in the meane tyme truly changed into that body and blood which was truly deliuered O masters truth is strong and by the aduersaries own weapon getteth the victorie Again remember that the name of body and the name of blood are names belonging to the manhod of Christ to which manhod when you adioyne any act or work which may truly be verisied thereof it must be meant according to that truth which properly belongeth to the nature of the manhod When we say Christ was truly scurged nailed to the Crosse bound and buried it is not here to be vnderstanded that these things were don in figure in spirit in faith But that his body suffered according to the fâ—…esh all these things And he that saith the contrarie is an 〈◊〉 which heresie wold the manhod of Christ to be changed into his diuine nature If then the body and blood of Christ be truly dâ—…red you must not vuderstand a figure only to be dâ—…red neither a spiritual dâ—… only For if the body of Christ be deliuered truly and yet by spirit only then the truth of his body is by these men brought vnto the truth of a spirit and the flesh of Christ hath losi his true nature and propâ—… Mark wel the reason when the body of Christ is truly deliuered it is deliuered according to the truth of his own nature The nature of a body is to be dâ—…d after some bodily maner verily by hands or by some other corporail action And they to whom it is delâ—…red likewise receaue it by some part or sense of their body For so requireth the true nature of flesh and blood not immediatly to be geuen to the spirit and soule but to come to it by meane of the body Whereof it is inferred that the body and blood of Christ which are truly deliuered in the supper are bodily deliuered and bodily receaued But from the body of Christ who made the dâ—…ance vnto the bodies of the Apoâ—…es who receaued the things deliuered none other thing can â—…syde that which semed bread and wine therefore vnder that foormes the body and blood of Christ were truly contâ—…ined and by yâ— meanes truly deliuered and truly receaued Thirdly when you say the â—…sh of God quickeneth our soules you should haue sayd also that it quickeneth our bodies as in other places I haue proued out of the sixth of S. 〈◊〉 anâ—… out of S. Jreneus â—…tullian Cyrillus and other auncient Fathers ¶ what it is which nourisheth vs in the supper of Christ â–ª ANd that the same supper is the coâ—…ion of the body and blood of Christ by the partaking whereof we are qâ—…ned we are 〈◊〉 and sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That which 〈◊〉 and â—…th can not be 〈◊〉 from them whom it nourisheth and when it is cut of their reache they can not haue it before it be geuen If then we haue in 〈◊〉 yâ— body and blood of Christ we receaued it by his gift at his supper And surely it was the thing whereof he sayd Eate and whereof he sayd Drinke Other food was not deliuered in Christes supper beâ—… his body and blood Nor possiblie can we haue the food of his supper at any other mans table then at his Wel. If we be nourished by the meate which Christ gaue vs when he sayd Eate and yet we be nourished by his body and blood vndoubtedly he sayd Eate of that which he gaue with his hands and which the Apostles toke into their mouthes and that was bread to see vnto therefore vnder that â—…orme of bread we take the nourishment whereby we are sed to immortalitie Otherwise what warrant haue we to come by this food which is cleane out of our reache vntil God geue it saying Eate this is my body Drinke this is my blood By those words oâ—…â—…ate one liquour only is geuen which also â—…deth vs to immortalitie as yâ— Apologie coâ—…h But none other food that man may receaue bodily can feed vs to immortalitie besyde the reall substance of Christ. therefore that substance is receaued nourisheth vs when Christ sayd Eate this is my body Drinke this is my blood ¶ The vnion which is made by eating Christes reall flesh must nâ—…s be a naturall vnion â—…ore it be a mysticall ANd by the which we are coupled we are vnited and grafted into the body of Christ that we might â—…well in hinâ—… and he in vs. Christes â—…sh is deliuered to the end we should be nourished therewith And the end of nourishing is to make one thing of yâ— which is eaten and of him that eateth it The flesh deliuered to nourishe vs is not any mysticall flesh but only the natural flesh of Christ neither can it be any other food For none other thing that coâ—…th in at the mouth of man is able to seed him to immortalitie besyde the substance of Christes flesh and blood If then it be the naturall flesh which feedeth and the vnion doe come by seeding the vnion must of necesâ—…ty be made with the naturall flesh of Christ. And because that is such a flesh as being vnited to God hath power to geue life and â—…mortality out of the naturall vnion which is made with it by eating an other spiritual and mystical vnion floweth which maketh all the members of Christ to be one mysticall body So that we haue now fiâ—…e degrees First the slesh of Christ is deliuered to vs in his supper Next we eate the same flesh Thirdly we are fed by it if we eate it worthely Fourthly of yâ— feeding conuneth a reall and naturall vnion and ioyning with Christes flesh as S. Hilarie teacheth and other auncient Fathers Of that naturall vnion procedeth a spirituall vnion with the whole body of the Church Because being made one with Christes flesh we are vnited thereby to his spirit and Godhead liuing for him as he â—…th for his Father whereof I will speake more hereafter The Apologie acknowledgeth a ioyning with Christ by eating But it surely meaneth the last spirituall ioyning which ariseth of the other naturall vnion Whereas that spiritual ioyning doth â—…ude the other natural as euery effect presupposeth the necessarie
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
the flesh blood of Christ they haue inuented such kind of speaking as may both seme to agree with the Scriptures and yet withall mayntein their false doctrine The which thing that thou mayest the better vnderstand this is to be consydered The Catholike faith is that Christ in one person hath two natures The nature of God and the nature of man which two natures are ioyned and vnited together into one person after such sorte that what so euer is said of the one nature may be sayd of the other if we speake by that worde which signifieth the person For example we may say that man was in heauen before the ascension of Christ and that God died not because the nature of God could be borne of a woman or dye or the nature of man could be in heauen before the ascension of Christ but because that which was borne and dyed was also God and that which was in heauen was also man albeit his byrth and death was by the nature of man and his being in heauen by the nature of God The natures then tary distinct but yâ— pâ—…rson of God man is but one Now shall you see the meane whereby these new prechers go about to deceaue you They say Christ geueth him selfe in his SacrameÌ„ts The word Christ doth signifie his person wherein he is both God man Likewise the word him self is a word belonging to his person wherein both natures of God man are conteyned Now when they say Christ geueth him self they meane that he being God man geueth by some spiritual way the vertue of his flesh blood which they call him self for that he as God being euery where may dwell in vs more excellently by charitie as the Father and the holy Ghost doe But they meane not by geuing of him selfe the reall gifte of his person and of both natures which are ioyned therein after such sort that our whole nature might receaue his nature For then they should teache that which we doe But howsoeuer they bable of our soules they will graunt our bodies no touching nor tasting of him no not so much as vnder yâ—â—…oormes of bread and wine You haue heard what they say Now heare what Christ sayeth Christ speaketh of him self in diuerse places diuersely Due where he sayeth I will not leaue you Orphans I will come vnto you There he speaketh of his person and concerning the nature of Godhead as it appereth afterward where it is written If any man loue me he will kepe my word and my Father will loue him and we will come vnto him and make a mansion or dwelling with him or at his howse Here he speaketh first in such sort of his own coming that his Father as it appered afterward might come after the same sort Then was it the coming of God and not of man At his departure when he ascended from the world into heauen he sayd Behold I am with you all dayes euen vntill the consummation of the world These words may be meant as well by the nature of manhod which we haue with his Godhead in the Sacrament of the altar and so some holy Doctors haue taken them as also by the only nature of the Godhead which is euery where by maiestie and in good men by grace In an other place he sayd Poore men ye shall haue allwayes with you me ye shall not haue allwayes Where by the word me he meaneth not his Godhead which is allways euery where but the nature of his manhod and that not as it is in the Sacrament but as it was when he spake in a visible forme of a poore man who had not any howse of his own where he might reste his head Last of all let vs marke after what sorte he sayd that he wold be in his blessed supper Dyd he say I will geue my self to be eaten and to be drâ—…nken If he had sayd so yet seing he had mentioned eating and drinking which according to the letter rather belongeth to his manhod then to his Godhead we should rather haue thought that the words must haue bene taken properly then improperly To eate the substance of a man may be sayd properly for in deed it may be eaten with mouth and teeth but to eate the substance of God it is sayd vnproperly For it can not be eaten with teethe and mouth as also S. Cyrillus hath noted but only with vnderstanding and faith If then Christ had sayd before supper I will geue my self to be eaten and had sayd at his supper I do geue my self to be eaten These words with a circumstance of a supper had made so stroÌ„gly for the bodily geuing of him selfe that their part had bene more probable who had vnderstanded it of his manhod With whom if the tradition of the Apostles had stood there were no doubt but he should haue bene a wicked heretik who when Christ had sayd I geue my self to be eaten wold haue denyed that we had eaten the humane nature of Christ. But now attend what words Christ vsed He forcseing this hearesie made 〈◊〉 agaynst it and therefore he sayd not I will geue or do geue my self to be eaten as heretiks now delight to speake but I geue my flesh my body my blood These are not wordes of personage which may be applyed two wayes but they are the words of nature and only of mans nature For God by yâ— nature of his Godhead hath neither flesh ne blood ne soule ne body ne bone Christ as man hath all these things Now do the heretiks and false preachers of our age maruclously deceaue the people of God who alwayes say that they diminish not Christes benefite nor do not abuse the Lords supper 〈◊〉 say they we teache that Christ geueth his owne self and they repete agayne and agayn his owne self his owne self And thereby they meane no more then the comming of his grace and charitie into our soules by fayth spirit and vnderstanding Wholy robbing vs of that flesh which dyed for vs and of that blood whiche was shed for vs. For although God was able to haue saued man otherwyse yet he swetely disposed our saluacioÌ„ by sending his dere soÌ„ne to take of the virgyn our flesh and blood This flesh and this blood worketh our saluacion Which he yâ— taketh away from the Sacrament of the altar depriueth vs of the meane whereby to come to life euerlasting For as by this flesh and blood we are redemed So that redemption is applyed to all that be of lawful age by worthy eating and drinking thereof Now when these preachers cry vnto you of God of fayth of spirit of vnderstanding of vertue they seme perhaps to say goodly things but they craftily put you from that only meane of fleshe and blood whereby God hath ordeyned our saluacion Abraham was the sather of al beleuers because neuer any mans belefe was so
and teacheth to be a grosse imagination O grosse imagination of these pitifull preachers May there be a more grosse imagination then to imagine that Christ lyed Cyrillus biddeth vs put away grosse imaginations and Cyrillus saith of yâ— reall presence Ne dubites an hoc verum sit eo manifestè dicente hoc est corpus meum Sed potius suscipe verba Saluatoris in fide Cum enim sit veritas non mentitur Doubt thou not whether this be true sith him self plainly saith This is my body But rather imbrace the words of our Sauiour in faith For seing he is the truth he lieth not Who so consydereth well these words may vnderstand that Cyrillus thought nothing more grosse then to doubt whether that body of Christ be present or no. What grosse imaginations then did Cyrillus bid vs put away For sooth aboue all that we should not imagin Christ to lye Secondly that we should not imagin his words concerning this Sacrament to be dark or obscure seing Christ as he sayth spake manifestly Again that no man should thinke any other body to be geuen besydes the true body of Christ who in one person is God and man In the tyme of Cyrillus a great heretike named Nestorius scholar to one Diodorus falsely taught that Christ had two persons one of God an other of man Therefore they imagined the the body of Christ which all the world euen the heretikes them selues beleued to be present vpon the altar after consecration to be the body of man but not the proper body of God the word This was a very grosse imagination and therefore ought to be put away from the mind of faithfull men in receauing the mysteries Hereof Cyrillus literally said Num hominis comestionem nostrum hoc Sucramentum pronuncias irreligiosè ad crassas cogitationes vrges eorum mentem qui crediderunt Doest thou pronounce this our Sacrament to be the eating of a man And doest thou irreuerently inforce the mind of the faithfull to grosse cogitations Behold the grosse cogitation was to thinke that we doe eate that body of a maÌ„ whereas in dede through the vnitie of person it is yâ—â—…ody of God him self And therefore Cyrillus sayth afterwarâ—… Proprium est corpus eius verbi quod omnia viuificat It is the body proper to that word which quickeneth all thinges Of this â—…oule and grosse eâ—…oure two epistles are extant of Cyrillus as also in all his workes he full oft confuteth it One thing I wil further note this fine penner of the Apologie citeth not where Cyrillus speaketh of these grosse imaginations because the place is maruelous euident against him And what foul play is this to belie Cyrillus as though he had spoken of that imagination wherein we beleue that reall presence of Christes body vnder the form of bread whereas he spake of that wherein Nestorius vnderstanded that we did eate the flesh of Christ with out the diuine nature vnited vnto it in one person Cyrillus sayth because the word which is of God the Father is life by nature it hath declared his flesh to be the geuer of life hac ratione facta est nobis benedictio viuificatrix and by this meanes the blessing is made to vs geuer of life Cyrillus calleth yâ— Sacrement of the altar benedictio blessing because it is made by blessing Now in naming blessing he must nedes meane that which is blessed which is on the altar before vs and not any thing coâ—…ceaued in faith or spirit Therefore Cyrillus meaneth out of all coÌ„trouersie that thing which is made by blessing which we take in our hands which we put in our mouths to be able to geue life euerlasting which none other eatable thing can doe besydes the reall flesh of Christ. For the nature of Godhead as Cyrillus there confesseth is not eaten by itself or a part from the flesh If we put this together I require no more but that he be an honest man who shall construe the place of Cyrillus He shal be forced to confesse such an eating in the Sacrament of the altar as is not proper to the Godhead And yet eating by faith is proper to vs in respect of the Godhead therefore Cyrillus speaketh of eating that which quickeneth vs to life euerlasting with our body also and not with faith alone An other grosse imagination was to thinke that we eating the body of Christ should eat it dead or mortall and passible as we vse to eate other meates Whereas it is quicke yea of power to quicken vs as Cyrillus teacheth Quoniam Saluatoris caro verbo Dei quod naturaliter vita estconiuncta viuifica effecta est quando eam comedimus tunâ—… vitam habemus in nobis illi coniuncti quae vita effecta est Because the flesh of our Sauiour ioyned to the word of God which is life na turally is made able to geue life When we eate it then we haue life in vs being ioyned to that flesh which is made life The fifth grosse imagination is to thinke that we should so eate Christes flesh as if it were rawe and not by any meanes made meate for mannes cating Of this grosse imagination the Capharnaits were Ad immanes ferarum mores vocari se a Chri sto arbitrabantur incitarique vt vellent crudas hominis carnes manducare sanguinem bibere quae vel auditu horribilia sunt They thought them selues to be inuited of Christ to the cruel custom of wild beastes and to be prouoked to eate the raw flesh drinke the blood of man which thinges are horrible to heare It was yet no lesse a grosse imaginatioÌ„ to suppose they should cate the body of Christ peece meale one taking the shoulder an other the legg the third the brest and so foorth Against which imagination S. Augustine hath writen Their imagination also is very grosse who think that substance of bread to remaine after consecration as though they wold eate that immortall and gloriouse flesh of Christ with bakers bread Which is the cursed banket of the LutheraÌ„s whereas Christ said The bread which I will geue is my flesh geuing vs to vnderstand yâ— he wold not haue in his heauenly supper an earthly substance of materiall bread And yet it is a more grosse imagination to confesse that reallpresence of Christes body and to denye adoration to it sithens it is the body of God But how grosse is it to denye it to be a propitiatorie sacrifice sith it is his body who is the propitiation for the whole world I omit at this tyme his grosse imagination who teacheth the words which are spoken of a gift presently made and deliuered to be words of promise and of preaching * But the grossest imagination that euer was heard of is of them who affirm no body of Christ at all to be made really present vnder the form of bread
vs Secondly we must be like Egles in life and faith In life by forsaking earthly affectioÌ„s In faith by quicknesse of mind whiles we beleue that not withstanding bread and wine appeare to vs yet it is in deed an other 〈◊〉 The Egle hath many proprietes as to flee highe to looke â—…edfastly vpon the sun to see most clerely a farr of and to take his pray most swiftly To the flying high our good life must answer to yâ— quicknesse of sight our faith Not in suche sort to flee a highe as though the matter we seeke were not present but to â—…spie the body and blood of Christ vnder the formes of bread and wine For as S. Chrysostome saith This is the table of Egles He speaketh not now of heauen which is a boâ—…e the sun he speaketh of the table which standeth in the Church before vs wherupon the sonne of righteousnes is situated from which we take the foode of life the ioye of heauen yâ— earcase yâ— hath died for vs. The table is it whereof he speaketh What impudencie is this so to abuse the wordes of that blessed man as if he spake of going into heauen by faith whereas in dede he speaketh of them that liue like the saints of heauen and of theÌ„ that haue a quick sight to witt a faithfull vnderstanding yâ— they be able as it were to loke through the formes of bread and wine there to see vnder those formes the reall body and blood of Christ. For straight vpon the naming of a quick sight he inferreth yâ— this is the table of Egles not of Iaies As who shoâ—…ld say here is a meate that none can see but those who haue a most pure eye of faith Aquila sayth S. Augustine sublimiter volaÌ„s de tanto intervallo sub fluctibus natantem piscem dicitur ê‘â—…idere grauiter aquis illisa extertis pedibus atque vnguibus rapere The Egle flying a high is sayd most perfitly to see a great way of a fishe swiÌ„ming vnder the waues and vehemeÌ„tly beating her self against the water by stretching out her feet and clawes to snatch vp the fishe Behold an Egle seeth one thing vnder an other And so must we repute yâ— table of Christ to haue in it one thing vnder an other To haue vpon it the body of Christ vnder the form of bread And therefore noâ—…e but Egles can espie the said body As for the Sacramentaries Zuinglians they are like Iaies euer pratling of the body of Christ but neuer espying it or seing where it lieth they flee low as the Iaies doe as thinking that good works bring smal aide to â—…ife euerlasting They see weakely and coÌ„tent them selues with a base banket of bread and wine requiriÌ„g to theyr bodies none other food of life And whereas the sonne of reghteousnesse hath couered him self as it were with the cloudes of bread and wine to thintâ—…nt our eye might be able to beare more easily the brightâ—…esse of his shyning yet they are of so dull and of so dimme eye sight that thâ—…y say ther is nothing but 〈◊〉 vpon the table So that our table is the table of Eâ—…les where faithfull Egles may eâ—…pie the sonne of 〈◊〉 present vpon the altar and table and theyr table is the table of Iaies where nothing is 〈◊〉 besydes that which iufidell Iaies may find out by naturall eye sight bare naming without true being It foloweth in S. Chrysostm If noman wil rashly handle an other mans garment how dare we to our great shame and reproche receaue this pure and immaculate body â–ª which is Lord of al which is partaker of the diuine nature through which we haue our being and liuing by which yâ— gates of hel are broken downe and the gates of heauen set wide open Thus S. Chrysostome sheweth vs to receaue this body of Christ from yâ— holy table or altar as truly coÌ„cerning the substance thereof as we may truly touche an other mans garment Heauen is vsed both in holy Scriptures and in the Fathers for the heauenly life And so we must flee in to heauen not to receaue this body so it is not said but when we approche vnto this body The body is in earth with vs coÌ„cerning the nature and substaÌ„ce thereof vnder the formes of bread But as it is a body gloriâ—…ied and thereby made heauenly euen so we must clense and purge our selues from synne when we come to it and so be made heauenly or flee in to the state of them who liue in heauen And that state we professe who are called the kingdome of heaueÌ„ yâ— howse of God ¶ The bread that is the meate of the mind and not of the belly can be no wheaten bread but only the bread of lyfe which is the body of Christ. ANd Ciprian this bread sayith hee is meate of the mynd not meate of the belly The truth is so strong that yâ— more is brought agaynst it the better it is seene The sayng of S. Ciprian maketh so clearly for the contrarie of that wich the Apologi teacheth as it is possible to deuise If this bread be meate of the mind not meate of the belly out of questioÌ„ it is not material bread it is not the substaÌ„ce of coÌ„mon bread for though such materiall bread be neuer so much hallowed by prayer and thanksgeuing yet it still remayneth in substance bread of the belly But seing yâ— substance of yâ— common bread is changed into yâ— flesh of Christ as we catholikes beleue and teach now it can by no meanes be meate of the bellye for albeit wee receiue it really vnder the formes of bread into our bodyes and that also to feed them as wel as our sowles yet there ar two kinds of feedyng one wich is to liue in this world and in that case meate is for the belly and the belly for meate and God shall destroye both the one the other But an other feeding is to life euerlasting that is called by Christ cibus permanens meate which abideth which perisheth not Such a meate is the blessed body of Christ. It is a meat iÌ„ deed A meate wiche is truly eaten but is not digested into our corruptible flesh and voided as common meates are but a litle and a litle it feedeth and nourisheth vs to life euerlasting These defenders thought if it were â—…aten in deed that it could not be but meate of the belly As well they might blasphemously say that because Christ was man in deed he was born in synne And in that opinion they are like the Capharnaits who could imagine none other kinde of meate besides that which is diuided into peeces and consumed by eating The true Christians haue learned by the mercy of God with holy Cyrillus how the flesh of Christ because it is yâ— flesh of God may be eaten and yet quicken the eaters
chalice of blessing to be the communicatiâ—…g of Christes blood according as Christ said He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood c. Leo the great sayth we ought so to communicate with our Lords table that we doubt nothing of the veritie of his body and blood seing he sayd Except ye eat the flesh c. Theodoritus speaking of the holy mysteries ioyneth with the words of the supper these also The bread which I wil geue is my flesh which I will geue for the life of the world Isychius shewing that the penitent person may eate the bread whereof Christ sayd The bread which I will geue is my flesh ioyneth there with all the words of S. Paul Let a man proue him self and so eate Declaring both sayings to belong to one mysterie Theophilact vpon these words The bread which I will geue witnesseth that Christ manifestly telleth vs in this place of the mysticall communion of his body Damascenus declaring that Christ sayd This is my body and not the figure of my body bringeth for the same purpose Except ye eate the flesh c. Prosper Aquitanicus ioyneth these words Except ye eate the flesh c. with these except a man be born again of water to shew that the Sacraments of Christ doe geue vs grace and not oâ—…r own works which goe before baptism As therefore S. Cyprian and S. Augustin applie those two sayings to two seuerall Sacraments of baptism and of the Eucharist so must we think that Prosper doth who most diligently folowed S. Augustine Proco pius Gazeus writeth yâ— these words except ye eate my flesh c. Typum mysteriorum quae sub ipso latent continent conteine the foorm of the mysteries which lie priuie vnder it Eucherius teaching that Christ feedeth vs with the nourishmeÌ„ts of the healthiull mysterie saith that he distributeth to euery man a â—…ake of that bread which came down â—…rom heauen and geueth life to the world Cassiodorus saying that Christ did coâ—…secrate his body blood in geuing of bread and wine proueth it because him self sayd Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man c. Primatius shewing how the chalice of blessing is the communicating of the blood of Christ bringeth our Sauiour his words in S. Ihon saying he that eateth my flesh drinketh my blood tarieth in me and I in him S. Bede folowed in all points S. Augustin whose words he reciteth both vpon S. Ihon vpon S. Paule And therefore we nede not doubt but he is wholy of yâ— same mind Angelomus vpon the first booke of the kings reciteth S. Ihon in the same sense Haimo vpon S. Paule intreating of the Sacrament conferreth S. Paules words with the sixth of S. Ihon. S. Bâ—…rnard although he say the eating of the flesh of Christ to be the folowing of his painful conuersation in suffering voluntarie 〈◊〉 for his sake yet well knowing that Christ spake literally also of an other kinde of eating he saieth that Christ did speake of penance in a figure that is to saie couertly as rather including penance vnder the wordes which he named then expressely naming it Vnde hoe designat illibatum illud altaris sacramentum vbi dominicum corpus accipimus wherefore that pure Sacrament of the altar where we take our Lords body betokeneth so much Behold the true and literall meaning of Christes wordes is to haue his flesh eaten in the sacrament of the altar But that eating importeth a folowing of Christ in his painful conuersation For as that forme of bread saieth S. Bernard is seene to enter into vs so let vs knowe that Christ thorough that conuersation which he had in earth eutreth into vs to dwell by faith in our hartes Whereby we maie perceaue that S. Bernard vnderstandeth the sixth chapter of S. Iohn so literally of the sacrament of the altar that thereupon he buildeth a couert and a figuratiue preaching of penance Euthymius noteth that Christ did not say I do geue my flesh but I wil geue because he minded to geue it in his last supper Nicolaus Methonensis hauing first rehersed the wordes of the Gospell this is my body straight expoundeth all the chapter of S. Iohn thereof shewing the profit which we take by this Sacrament Samonas after the wordes of the supper declared as not betokening a figure or image affirmeth Christ to haue said in other places the same thing and straight reciteth the sixth chapiter of S. Iohn I omitt here Petrus Cluniacensis Guimundus Algerus Lanfrancus S. Thomas de Aquino Albertus Magnus Dionysius the Carthusian Nicolaus de Lyra a great number of late writers which all agreed vpon the same vnderstanding of the sixth of S. Iohu But what speake I of these Fathers one by one not only the Councel of Trident hath taken witnesse for the Sacrament of the altar out of S. Iohn but also the seuenth kept at Nice and the first kept at Ephesus doth allege against Nestorius the heretike for the presence of Christes person in the SacrameÌ„t the wordes of S. Iohn his gospell Yea the whole west church readeth the same gospell of S. Iohn when it celebrateth the feast of corpus Christi daie And surely wheÌ„ the Church kepeth any feast whereof there is mention in the gospell according to the letter it alwaies chooseth to reade that part where the feast is literally mentioned It wold therefore be very absurd sith S. Mathew S. Marke and S. Luke haue written so distinctly the historie of Christes supper to leaue them all and to reade the wordes of Christ in S. Iohn if the same wordes had any other sense more literall then that which belongeth to the supper of Christ. So that I trust there is no possible cause of doubting to a sober man but that the wordes of Christ in this chapiter maie literally and according to the first and chief meaning of them be brought to declare what we ought to thinke of his bodily presence in the Sacrament of his last supper But if any man be not fully satisfied therein let him reade the processe folowing and he shal haue lesse cause to doubt any more in this matter ¶ Answer is made to their obiections who teache out of the holy fathers that the sixth chapiter of S. Iohn ought to be expounded only of spiritual eating FOr their opinion who think the sixth chapiter of S. Iohn to speake only of the spiritual and not of the worthy sacramental eating of Christes body the authoritie of certaine fathers is alleged who are thought somtimes to expound the wordes of this chapiter partly of belefe in Christ partly of the vnitie which riseth by the sacramentes of baptisme and of penance But it maie seme a sufficient answere to that obiection if we saie first that so many fathers do not expound the wordes of Christ in the sixth chapter of S. Iohn of any other one
argument as doe conformably expound it of the supper of our lord And when we speake of the authoritie of the fathers their consent and agreement in one point is the chiefe waie to know according to the promise of Christ in what case they are specially to be followed Secondly those fathers which are named some where to haue expounded these wordes otherwise then of the supper of Christ haue them selues in other places expounded the same wordes of the verie supper As we maie perceaue by the places of S. Cyprian of S. Hierome of S. Augustine and of S. Bernard before alleged Whereby their authoritie is as great for that which I say as it is against it Thirdly no one of the auncient writers is brought forth who denieth these words in S. Iohn to appertaine to the supper And what skilleth it if many senses of one place be found out so long as they all stand together Is it not S. Augustines rule that all such senses may be well kept and all admitted Fourthly many of those places which are brought for the con trary opinion do manifestly and as it semeth to me inuincibly proue the wordes in S. Iohn to be literally meant of the supper of Christ. S. Cyprian who is first alleged for the other side putteth forth this truth that a man without baptisme can not come tâ—… the kingdome of heauen because except a man be borne againe of water and of the holy ghost he can not enter into the kingdome of God Likewise except ye eate the flessh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood ye shall not haue life in you Now they suppose that S. Ciprian bringeth these two sayinges for baptisme alone Wherefore say they it was not sayd of the supper except ye eate the flesh c. But herein they seme to be deceaued because the custome of the primitiue church i many places was to geue the sacrameÌ„t of yâ— altar together with the sacrament of baptisme not so much for necessitie as for sureties sake Hereof we haue mention i Dionysius Areopagita and in S. Am brose In so much that the very infantes were in the primitiue church in some countries made partakers of the sacrament of the altar Seing then the sacament of the altar was vsed to be geuen straight after yâ— sacrament of baptism therefore S. Cyprian ioyned together those two witnesses whiche did belong to those two Sacramentes that is vndoubtedly proued by his owne wordes for after he had cited those wordes in S. Iohn it followeth â—…mediatly Parum esse baptizari et eucharistiam accipere nisi quis factis et opere perficiat It is litle worth to be baptized and to receaue the eucharist except a man by deedes and workes make all perfit Behold as he alleged two sayings of Christ so he nameth the two sacrameÌ„ts whereof they were spoken Thus I think it most clere that S. Ciprian did not expound the eating of the flessh of Christ as spoken by baptism only And the lyke may be said of Innocentius Augustinus Eusebius Emissenus and of suche others whiche bring these woords of Christ except ye eate the fleshe of the sonne of man c. against the Pelagians to proue that infantes cannot haue lyfe in them selues vnles they be first baptized For seing they knew that no man could come to the eucharist except he were first baptized as also Iustinus Martyr hath witnessed seing yâ— Eucharist was namely called the bread of life whiche who so did eate he should liue for euer and who by any fault of his own did not eate it he should not haue life in himself moreouer seing the person baptized had not only Christ in him spiritually through baptism but had right vnto the very Sacrament of Christes supper and also being of lawfull discretion customably receaued it straight after baptism these things being so it is most true that who so is not at all baptized he is not only excluded from yâ— kingdom of heaueÌ„ as yâ— Pelagians graunted but likewise whiche thing they denyed from euerlasting life because he is by all meanes excluded from the food of life whiche except we eate by some meanes or other we cannot haue life in vs. we cannot eate it by any meanes at all that is to say not so muche as spiritually except we be first baptized either in deed or in perfit desire And being once baptized we doo eate it in some effect at the very font and really may and commonly must eate it afterward in the Sacrament to a farther effect So that the reasons of those Fathers do not import as though Christ meant in S. Ihon of spirituall eating only but that he meant of that kind of eating at the least and meant a farther kind of eating also in that case when farther occasion should be ministred For as when Christ saide except a man be born againe of water and of the holye Ghost he can not enter into the kingdom of heauen he so meant in those wordes to include his saluation that would be born vowed him self to be born again although by preuention of death he were not really so borne that yet not withstanding he meant muche more to haue most men really so born of water and of the holy ghost Right so when Christ sayd except ye eate the â—…lesh of the sonne af man drinke his blood ye shall not haue life in you he so meant to binde vs to eate his fleash that he should haue life which was at the least spiritually fead there with in baptisme and yet also that most men should be bound to feed really thereon and that he should haue most perfit life who was â—…d sacramentally with his fleshe and blood in the Sacrament of the Altar As therefore not withstandinge that the will of being baptised â—…seth to some others must be sacramentally baptised by that very precept of Christ in S. Ihon euen so though it be sufficient for â—…tes to eate Christ in baptisme spiritually yet other are bouÌ„d by yâ— same very precept to eate his flesh SacrameÌ„tally Now to aâ—…irme the one sense whiche was lesse meant denying therewithall the chief sense which was principally meant it is no smal iuiurie to Gods worde Certeinly S. Innocentins Gusebius S. Auguâ—… in saying that infants can not haue life except they â—…t the least wise eate Christ in baptisme did not meane to say that these wordes except ye eate the flesh cae were only spoken of baptisme or els more principally of baptisme then of Christes supper but rather they meant cleane contrarie as it may appere by S. Augustines owne wordes who disputing against the PelagiaÌ„s in this very question which we now speak of saith expresly Dominum audiamus non quidem hoode Sacramento lauacri dicentem sed de sacramento sanctae mensae suae quo nemo ritè nisi baptizatus accedit nisi manducaueritis carnem meam
whiche the same flesh hath being crucified For although it be one substāce yet it is cru◅fied as a sacrisice onely but it is eaten as a sacrament wherin the sacrifice is partaken Secondarily the Greeke text maketh mention of two gifts The one of that which Christ will make to vs which also is y◠same substance y◠he wil geue for vs. The bread sayth he which I wil geue is my flesh the which I wil geue for the life of the world It is not in vaine sayd twise I wil geue For he wil geue one and the same flesh both as a Sacramētal food as a bloody sacrific◅ the one gift he wil make in his supper the other vpon the Crosse Neither doth it skill that the latin copies report but once I wil geue for as they say that which is true so the same truth is made the plainer by the greke text God forbid we should so vnderstād the one as to make y◠other false or super◅ons seing both may stand right well together Thirdly it ought diligently to be marked y◠Christ sayd before worke the euerlasting meate which the Sonne of man wil geue you He there said he would geue meate vnto them but he determined not what kind of meate it was but now expounding the kind of meate be sayth and the bread or meate which I wil geue is my flesh As then the meate which y◠Sonne of man sayd he would geue was promised to be geuen to vs for he sayd dabit vobis he wil geue to you euen so the kind of meate to wit the ◅esh of Christ which he wil geue must be vnderstāded of that gift which he wil make nobis to vs and not only pro nobis for vs. But his death is geuen more properly for vs then to vs. His death I say was paied to God the Father to whom we were detters and it was paied for vs and in our behalf but his death was not properly geuen to vs. For then a sacrifice should be made of Christ to vs and consequently God the Father is robbed of his glory and that glory is geuen to men From which thought all good men doe abhorre All is one to say the sonne of man will geue and I will geue to say euerlasting meate and the bread which is Christes flesh But it was expresly sayd in the first proposition Dabit vobis he will geue it to you therefore in the second it is to be supplied the bread which I will geue to you is my flesh for the life of y◠world that is to say it is the same flesh which I will offer to my Father to the end the iust men of the world may liue for euer And so a reason is geuen by Christ why his flesh is that euerlasting meate vnto vs which he sayd before tarieth into life euerlasting For y◠which is offered meritoriously to God for the life of the whole world must nedes euen by that sacrifice haue strength in it selfe to quicken all that eate it worthely and to reconcile the partakers thereof to God Farthermore when Christ sayd The bread which I will geue is my flesh he sayd in effect The eatable thing which I wil geue is my flesh as if it were in other termes sayd I wil geue you my flesh to be eaten For bread vnto the Hebrewes doth shew all y◠which is apt to be eaten of man Christ ◅ad the Iewes work the euerlasting meate which he wold geue They straight sayd their Fathers had eaten Manna thinking that Christ was not able to geue them a better kind of bread Then Christ shewing that his Father had geuen them him self by his incarnation the true bread of God last of all cometh to shew what bread he him self wold geue them And the bread sayth he which I will geue that is to wit the Manna the foode the meate which I wil geue is my flesh so that by the promise of bread he sheweth him self to speake properly of a banket which is to come The Iewes who knew the Hebrew phrase albeit they did amisse in that they taried not to see how y◠promise should be perfoormed yet they vnderstode right well that Christ sayd I will geue you my flesh to eate And therefore they in other words reporting the same sense ask how this man is able to geue them his flesh to be eaten As who should say we vnderstand that he promiseth vs the eating of his flesh but we see not that he is able to perfoorm it in such sort as Manna was geuen to our fore◅athers Neither is any man able to deny but the Iewes toke the words of Christ after this sense ◅s knowing him to promise his flesh to be really eaten The which sense surely is against their opinion who suppose that Christ meant only of the gift of his flesh vpon the Crosse. Yea Christ alloweth the sense of the Iewes cōcerning the naturall sound of his words and as S. Basile hath noted with a vehement repetition signifieth he wil so truly geue his flesh to be eaten that except they do eate is they shall not haue life in them selues Neither is it to be doubted but if they had so obediently submitted them selues to Christ cōcerning the maner of perfoorming his gift as they vnderstode what he promised they had not offended at all For they lacked rather belefe then wit or vnderstanding What shall I say more The circumstance of the whole talk the Greektext the like words going before the propriety of the Hebrew tong the vnderstanding of the Iewes the othe and cōfirmation of Christ geue a witnesse aboue al exception that when he sayd The bread which I will geue is my flesh he meant I that am the true bread which by incarnation came down from heauē I that am presently sent and geuen to you to be beleued on of my Father I will hereafter geue mine own flesh euen the same flesh which is offered for the life of the world to be meate vnto you y◠wil tarie with me which haue the words of eternall life Which sense being thus proued their sense who wold haue the gift of Christes death only to be meant is not sufficient or full enough for the right interpretation of this place but it must be also meant of the last supper as all the Fathers both Greek and Latin haue bene shewed before to ha◅e taken it and as all these reasons doe euidently conuince Now whereas they who dissent from me in this matter say that Christ speaketh here of that gift which was common to the whole world euen to the Patriarchs and Prophets and therefore that it is a spirituall gift for els Dauid and Abraham could not haue partaken it I answere that Christ doth not promise in these words any one meate vnto the whole world but he promiseth his flesh to be eaten the which flesh is geuen for the whole world For as at his
last supper he sayd This is my body which is or shal be geuen for you thereby geuing vs in his supper a far better meale then he gaue to Moyses or Elias euen so in this place when he promiseth to geue vs the bread which is his flesh for y◠world he meaneth not that we shall haue no more then Iacob had but that our meate is such as also is the propitiation for the synnes of the whole world By which words it is shewed y◠our meat is also an externall sacrifice and not that it is only a spirituall food receaued by faith and charitie Concerning that daily we may eate y◠bread which Christ promiseth it is not against the Sacrament of his supper which is left to be our daily and supersubstantial bread Either because we may come daily to it or els because being receaued at certaine tymes it always tarieth with vs by some spirituall effect which the Sacramentall receauing worketh in vs. And as the absolutiō which we receaue of the Priest at certain tymes causeth a continual Penance in vs through all our life so a Sacramental receauing of Christes body causeth a cōtinuall eating of him by spirit Now Christ so meant to haue his flesh eaten spiritually that the ordinarie cause of that feeding should consist in the Sacrament of his last supper for that Sacrament mainteineth our spiritual life as S. Paule teacheth The last reason of the contrarie part is thus foormed Christ in S. Iohn speaketh of that eating which maketh vs tary in him and him to tary in vs. But that is not alwayes the effecte of the Sacramentall eating for as S. Paul sayeth a man maye eate Christes body in the Sacrament of the altar vnworthely and to his damnation Therefore say they Christ speaketh not in S. Ihon of sacramentall eating but only of that eating by faith and charitie whereby we maye liue for euer For answere to this argument thus I saye Sacramentall eating must be considered two waies as all the other workes of God towardes men maye be considered one waye is to consider it in that nature vertue and effect which God for his part putteth in the Sacrament An other is in that abuse and imperfection which man wickedly committeth about the holy workes of God Who can doubt but that Christ came into the world to saue men vt saluetur mundus per ipsum that the world maye be sayd by him as for condemnation it was not brought in by Christ but by Adam and Eue our first parents and by our owne wilful synnes ad misdoinges And yet the holy scriptures witnes that Christ is the sauour of death to many and the stone whereat they stomble not through any fault of his but because they vse their freewil to the worse part with whom he hath to do Euen so cometh it to passe in the blessed Sacrament of the altar Christ geueth it only to this end that we by eating thereof maye tarie in him and he in vs. For as Isychius hath well noted Sanctificationis causa non autem contaminationis proposuit suum mysterium Christ hath set foorth his mysterie to sanctifie and not to spott vs. As he geueth faith to th' end it should worke by charitie and not to th' end it should lye dead and vnfruitfull And in dede so should all men tary for euer in Christ if they did eate this Sacrament as they ought to do If nowe they will profanely come vnto it without contrition and confession of their synnes and absolution of the priest that is not the sault of the Sacrament which is geuen to make vs dwel for euer in Christ but it is their fault who abuse the gift of God to their owne hurte and losse This thing wel weighed I answere that alwaies the effect of Sacramentall eating on Christes behalfe is the tarying of vs in Christ and of Christ in vs. And S. Paul saying that some receyue it vnworthely and to their damnation speaketh not of any effect rising of the Sacrament it self but only of a negligence and impietie which standeth on their part who come to the rea◅ flesh and blood of Christ in the Sacrament as if it were common bread and wine only halowed by the deuout praiers of man whereas in dede it is changed in substance by the mightie power of the word of God Let it therefore stand for a truth as it is a most vndoubted truth that Christ in the sixth chapiter of S. Ihon doth prophecie of his last supper promising to geue in it his own flesh to be eaten as the which is meate in dede and for his part he promiseth that it shall haue a perfit effect albeit we sometymes through ma lice withstand his goodnes This meaning is not only true in it self but it is confirmed also by S. Augustine who declaring that a thing good in it self may be vnpro◅itable to him y◠vseth it euill after he had shewed that to be so in light which hurteth sick eyes and delighteth the whole eyes and in the law in which although the Iewes were yet they abused the same at the length he cometh to our very purpose saying Quid de ipso corpore sanguine Domini vnico sacrificio pro salute nostra quamuis ipse Dominus dicat nisi manducaueritis caet What say we concerning the very body and blood of our Lord the only sacrifice for our saluation Not withstanding that our Lord him self sayth Except a man eate my flesh and drink my blood he shall not haue life in him self doth not yet the same Apostle teache euen this thing to be made hurtfull to them y◠vse it euill For he sayth Whosoeuer eat eth the bread and drinketh the chalice of our Lord vnworthely he shal be gilty of the body and blood of our Lord. What cā be plainer then these words of S. Augustine Who thought that argument which I haue answered to be nothing worth at all affirming the Apostle S. Paule and Christ in S. Ihon to speake of one and the same body or flesh of Christ as it is geuen in the Sacrament of his last supper And truly they doe no small iniury to S. Augustine who by any meanes wold father vpon him this opinion as though he taught Christ in S. Ihon to speake only of a spirituall eating by faith and charitie whereas he neuer gaue any sufficient token of that meaning but expresly teacheth the contrarie as all the other Fathers doe The reason which moued some men to think that S. Augustine meant so was for that he speaketh much of spiritual eating and of the vnitie of Christes Church But that eating is also made and best of all made in the mysteries of Christes supper when they are worthely receaued as Christ wold allways haue them to be receaued If any other argument remain by this which is already said it may be easily sene
for his gift proueth the reall presence of his body and blood in the SacrameÌ„t of the altar euen as God the Father gaue hun reall fleshe and blood at his incarnation CHrist for the meate whiche he promysed to gene in his last supper alleaged his diuinity as who shoulde plainly say wonder not that I promise you suche a thing of so greate difficulty and miracle for I am God His wordes are these worke saith he to the multitude of the Iewes not the meate which doth perish but that which tarieth to life euerlasting which the sonne of man wil geue you for him God hath signed that is God the father hath printed his diuine substance vppon him by eternal generation or hath oynted him with the oile of gladnes aboue al others because his humane nature is vnited to the godhed whereby he is able to do as much as his father It is not to be thought that Christ would haue alleged his equall auctoritie with his Father for a gift which were not of equall truth and of equall power with that which his Father is sayd to gene But his Father gaue him not only the vertue and 〈◊〉 of flesh but reall and natural flesh and blood at his incarnation thereâ—…ore God the Sâ—…nn 〈◊〉 to geue vs the same 〈◊〉 â—…ral fâ—…sh in his last supper For which cause he doth immediatly declare both God his Fathers gift and his own 〈◊〉 his Fathers gift he say 〈◊〉 My Father geueth you the true bread from heauen for it is the bread of God whiche cometh downe from heauen and geueth life to the worlde But what breade is this I saith Christ am the bread of life I am the liuely bread which came downe from heauen â—…ow we haue lerned that God the Father gaue Christ his Sonne from heauen when he sent him to take the flesh of man which flesh assumpted oâ—… the word is also by vnion to the word made the bread of life Christ therefore hauing shewed his Fathers gift and that him self is the bread of liâ—…e cometh to shew his own bread which he wil geue saying And the bread which I wil geue is my flesh for the life of the world The brief discourse of yâ— who le doctrine is this work the meate which tarieth for euer which the Sonne of man wil geue you for this Soâ—…ne of man is equall with God his Father whose naturall image he hath printed in him God the Father hath geuen his Sonne to the world and made him true man the true bread of life Therefore God yâ— Sonne being equall with his Father wil geue vs the same true flesh of the Sonne of man as meate yâ— shall tarie with vs to life euerlasting But his Father gaue him â—…o the world not only in faith spirite but in real and substancial flesh Therefore God the Sonne by the drift of all his talk doth signifie that he wil geue in his supper whereof he speaketh not in spi rite and faith only but in truth of nature and substance the 〈◊〉 same real and substanciall flesh First he sayth he wil geue that meate which shal tarye to life euerlasting Secondly that he is able to doe so as one signed of God his Father Thirdly he sheweth what bread and meate his Father hath geuen him that is to say the true flesh wherein â—…e spake to that preseÌ„t multitude of men Fourthly he sayth yâ— breade that he wil geue is his fleshe Last of all who so cateth it hath life euerlasting Doth not all this goe to proue that as he bad them work the meate which tarieth for euer and shewed him sefe concerning his 〈◊〉 to be made that meate sent from God his Father so he is able to geue them that meate which his Father gaue him and sayth he wil geue it them to the end they eating it may liue for euer he tarying in them and they in him And yet is not that his reall and substanciall flesh which he promiseth Or did he not perform in his supper that which he pro mised If he can not be false of his word we haue in our Lords supper where he perfomed this promise the reall and substancial body of Iesus Christ as truly as euer his Father gaue him reall and substancial flesh in this world And consequently we haue it not only by faith and spirite but in truth and substance This plainly is the discoâ—…rse of Christ him selfe who by his Godhead assureth vs of the gift of that incorruptible meat which is his flesh Whereupon S. Hilarie sayth that no man douteth of yâ— veritie of Christes flesh in vs except he deny Christ to be true God ¶ Seing Christ is the bread of life to vs by the gift of his flesh the eating of that flesh by our faith spirit only suffiseth not but it self also must be really eaten GOd sent his Sonne who is by nature the bread of life as hym self hath witnessed to take flesh for vs that in his flesh he might geue vs the same diâ—…ine nature which is the 〈◊〉 bread of life Therefore when Christ had sayd The Sonne of man will geue you the meate which tarieth to life euerlasting straightways he sheweth in one word three causes of yâ— his promise For God the Father sayeth he hath signed this SoÌ„ne of maÌ„ that is to say he hath geuen him hys owne substance concerning the diuine nature of Christ and concerning his humane nature he hath shewed his will by hym as by a seale of his owne hand Farthermore he hath assigned hym to bring vs this meate which tarieth to life euerlasting The verb Signauit he hath signed may signifye the printing of the same forme and ymage which the originall seale hath as S. Cyrillus hath noted in this place also it may stand to shew or confirme a thing by witnes of seale as Theophilact expoundeth it Orels to assigne or appoint a thing to some certain effect and purpose as S. Chrysostome and Eâ—…thymius take it God the Father signed Christ after the first sort by geuing him his own nature And after yâ— secoÌ„d sort by shewing him through miracles wrought in his flesh to be his own Sonne And last of all in appointing to haue his will done most perfitly and executed by him as Christ him self said It is my meate to doe the wil of him that sent me According to this last sense it was the wil of God that Christ should geue vs the euerlasting â—…eate which naturally is his Godhead and by the mysterie of the incarnation it is his flesh And to signifie so much Christ sayd I will geue you the euerlasting meate because my Father hath signed me to this purpose The whiche sense S. Chrysostome followeth in the first place of his interpretation writing thus Signauit hoc est misit qui hunc vobis
cibum ferret God the Father hath signed that is to say hath sent the Sonne of man to bring you this meate And Eâ—…thymius agreeth with S. Chrysostome therein Christ therefore being sent of his Father to geue vs the euerlasting meate of life first fayeth I am the bread of life And then sheweth how he will geue the same bread saying And the bread which I will geue is my flesh S. Cyrillus vppon those words I am the bread of life writeth thus His verbis subostendit sanctissimi sui corporis vitam gratiam qua in nobis vnigeniti proprietas id est vita ingreditur permanet In these words he sheweth priuily the life and grace of his most holy body whereby the proprietie that is to say the life of the only begotten both entreth into vs and tarieth Likewise S. Hilarie hath these words Si verè verbuÌ„ caro factum est nos verè verbum carnem cibo Dominico sumimus quomodo non naturaliter manere in nobis existimandus est If the word be truly made flesh and in our Lords meate we truly re ceaue the word made flesh how can it be but he must be iudged to dwell naturally in vs Christ being for euer God in the fulnesse of tyme toke flesh and when the hower of death was at haÌ„d he gaue vs that flesh to be eaten by the which eating we reâ—…eaue the word it self that is to say the naturall Sonne of God into our bodies and so Christ dwelleth in vs not only by faith spirit or vnderstanding but naturally Wherefore S. Hilarie sayth we take and receaue the word truly Verè verbuÌ„ sumimus We receaue truly and in dede the word which was with God in the beginning and which was God But how can we receaue God truly or naturally God is a spirit and our nature consisting of a body can not fede truly and naturally vpon a spirit but only by faith and charitie How â—…hen receaue we God truly For south because 〈◊〉 toke flesh truly and we receaue truly the word made flesh Noman doubted but we can truly receaue flesh seing then the word is made flesh we thereby can receaue the word it self not only by vnderstanding but also whiles his own proprietie that is to say whiles the life Godhead which corporally dwelleth in Christes flesh entreth into vs with his flesh tariâ—…th in vs if we receaue worthely his most holy body Thus it appeareth that Christ in his flesh geueth vs the bread of life which he was sent to geue and he geueth it because that flesh is vnited to the word of God which is life by his own nature But if this flesh of his be geuen to vs by faith alone and vnderstanding or spirit alone and not in very dede We haue not yâ— bread of life in dede geuen to vs but only geuen to vs by faith spirite or vnderstanding And so it was geuen to vs before yâ— incarnatioÌ„ of Christ. For God was euer beleued on of the iust men â—…oth to be and to be the rewarder of them who seeke him as S. Paule sayth And faith by nature is due to God as Christ sayth 〈◊〉 beleue in God beleue also in me Therefore although Christ hath taken flesh yet if his flesh he geuen to vs only by â—…aith and spirit the bread of life and nature of God which dwelleth corporally in that flesh is not geuen vs after the coming of Christ by any other meanes then by faith And so by the incarnation of Christ we haue not the bread of life geueÌ„ to vs by any other way then we had it before Which is expresly against the word of God where the euerlasting meat and the bread of life is now first promised by the gift of Christ as who came into the world to bring vs this euerlasting meate And the bread which he will geue is his flesh Therefore to saue the truth of yâ— Gospell which neuer caÌ„ faile we must beleue that by the incarnation of Christ and by his gifâ—… at the last supper we haue his reall flesh and in it the bread of life geuen to vs more then by faith or vnderstanding or spirit that more is the gift of the true substance of flesh and of blood wherein the Godhead corporally dwelleth And by it the Godhead is receaued of vs not only by an effecte of grace by a certain verâ—…ue but in such truth of nature as it is corporally dwelling in the person of Christ who is one in substance with his Father For although God be euery where by nature and fill both heauen and earth yet as Iustinus Martyr witnesseth he is in the Sonne of man by so excellent a meane of vâ—…g man to God that he is no where els after that sort And by that singular meane he was promised vnto vs as who is only the euerlasting meate which alone satisfieth the hunger of man whose harte as S. Augustine confesseth is without rest vntil it rest in God because it was made to come to God And nothing is at quiet vntill it hâ—…ue obteyned the end wherevnto it was first made Seing then God is by nature yâ— only euerlasting meate which perisheth not and seing he must be geuen to vs in his own nature and we are not able to receaue him as he is a spirit he hath done for vs as good mothers and Nourses doe for their babes The mother eateth bread by her eating turneth it into milk and that milk she geueth to the infante and by that meanes the infante eateth bread made milk This similitude S. Augustine bringeth for the same purpose whereof I now speake In the beginning was the worde and the worde was with God and the word was God Ecce cibus sempiternus Behold sayeth S. Augustine the euerlasting meate Sed manducant Angeli But the Angels eate it Quis homo posset ad illum cibum What man were able to attayne to that meate Oportebat ergo vt illa mensa lactesceret ad paruulos perueniret It behoued therefore that foode should be turned into milk and so come to litle ones Vnde cibus in lac conuertitur nisi per carnem traijciatur By what meanes is meate turned into milk except it be conueyed through flesh Quomodo ergo de ipso pane pauit nos sapientia Dei How then hath the wisedome of God fed vs with yâ— bread it selfe Quia verbum caro factum est habitauit in nobis Because the worde is made flesh and hath dwelte in vs. And so S. Augustine coÌ„cludeth yâ— man hath eateÌ„ Angels food and that as he sheweth there in the new sacrifice of Christes supper For of that sacrifice Sacrament he intreateth Thus we see that God him self must be eaten of vs not only by faith for then he neded not to haue bene made man but he must be eaten also as infants eate milk by mouth
and body And because that could not be vnlesse God were made man he vnited to his diuine person the nature of man thereby making the bread of life and the food of Angels apt to be eaten of men And at his supper he gaue that flesh wherein the Godhead corporally dwelt by which only meanes yâ— word of God is fulfilled where he sayeth Worke the euerlasting meate which the Sonne of man wil geue you For God the Father hath signed hym to this intent that he should bring and geue you this meate The way of bringing was for the word to become man The way of geuing was for the Sonne of man to geue the flesh of his which is vnited to the Godhead to be eaten It is geuen at Christes supper vnder the forme of bread No other meane of geuinge will serue for eating by faithe alone be it neuer so liuely a faith lacketh the Godhead in suche sorte and truth as it hath assumpted the fleshe of man to fede vs therewithall No spirit no vnderstanding no faith no grace no other gifte in heauen or in earth besyde the naturall substance of Christ can supplie the gifte of Gods nature dwelling corporally in Christ. What thing can be equall to the gift of yâ— euerlasting meate and to the gifte of yâ— bread of life There is but one meanes in all the world for vs to obtein yâ— substance which meanes is the fleshe of Christ where it only dwelleth for vs. and God assumpted that flesh to geue it vnto vs. And now what crueltie is it to spoile vs of that flesh thereby to spoyle vs of God of life and of the spirite That spirite is it which we muste eate The flesh profiteth nothing it is the spirit that quickneth it is the Godhead that feedeth God is a spirite And because man consisting of a body could not eate God therefore the spirit assumpted flesh and quickned that flesh singularliâ—… for our sakes That flesh is geuen vs and is profitable not in respect as it is flesh but because the spirite of the Godhead and the life it self dwelleth in it and that not by faith or vnderstanding alone but corporallie That Godhead the Sacraâ—…entaries depriue vs of that spirite they plucke from vs and it is no where els to be so eaten of man Heauen and earth Angels and archangels yea all that creatures can not geue vs God corporallie dwelling in them â–ª and so to be eaten in anie kynde of meate besydès the flesh of Christ. But in that flesh we eate the substance it self of God him self So teacheth blessed S. Ambrose saying Tu qui accepisti eius carnem diuinae eius substantiae in illo participaris alimento Thou that hast taken his flesh art made partaker of his diuine substance in that fode It is not possible to vnderstand this saying of anie spirituall vertue or of anie other thing then of the real flesh of Christ. Therein only is the substance of God made mete to be eaten of man No signe suffiseth to conuey to vs that heauenlie brâ—…ad It is an haynous impietie and an horrible blasphemie to say that a peece of bread can make vs partakers of the substance of God as it hath assumpted flesh in one persone Or to say that my faith is able to deriue the substance of God as meate into my sowle and body faith is a great gifte of God but yet a creature only wherein the fulnes of Godhead dwelleth not and therefore it is not able to aâ—…iue to the vnion of Gods nature and much lesse able to geue it me But Christ although he be true man yet is he God also in one persone equal with his Father and that fulnesse of Godhead dwelleth in his flesh that flesh he geueth in it the fulnes of the Godhead So may we eat the meat which perisheth not So we receaue the bread of life But other way in the whole world none can be deuised how we may eate God or carie hym in our bodies properly and corporally ¶ By the three diuerse geuings which are named in S. Ihon it is shewed that Christ geueth his reall flesh vnder the figure of an other thing IN that wonderfull disputation which our sauiour had at Capharnaum and which is described by S. Iohn dyuers persoues at three seuerall tymes are shewed to haue had somwhat to do about the geuing of bread or food God by the mynisterie of Moyses God the Father him self and Iesus Christ God and man God by Moyses is sayd to haue geuen in tyme past He hath geuen them bread from heauen to eate God the Father him self is sayd presently to geue my Father geueth you from heauen the true bread Iesus Christ sayth that hereafter he wil geue Work the euerlasting meate which the sonne of man wil geue you the bread whiche I wil geue is my flesh God by Moyses gaue bread which was figuratiue coming from the vppermost part of the ayer not able to geue life of it self and therefore not the true bread The bread of God the Father was from heauen it self able to geue life of it self and therefore the true bread Christes bread is such according to the forme thereof as both God by Moyses had figured which was maÌ„na and such in substance as God the Father gaue which is the flesh of his sonne incarnate and therfore it is called the bread which is the flesh of Christ. Christes bread concerning the substance thereof is the same flesh which geueth life euerlasting which is made the proper flesh of the worde and it is vnder the sorme of bread in token that he fulfilleth the figure of manna For Christ being true God with his Father and true man with Moyses doth both geue vs by his Godhead the same true fleâ—…h which his Father gaue to him and also he geueth it by his manhood vnder such a figure and forme of bread as in the ministerie of the law was vsed and eaten with the paschal lambe a litell before the making of his owâ—… supper He geueth not the substance of common bread as Moyses did for then the outward substance of his gyste had bene no better then God by Moyses gaue neither geueth he the shape of flesh as his Father gaue for then he had kept no agreement with the figuratiue law of Moyses but he geueth as true flesh as his Father gaue him because he is one with his Father and couereth yâ— same flesh with yâ— forme of bread because he is not only God with his Father but man also with Moyses and with all vs. By whiche manhood he is lesse then his Father and therefore as vnder the forme of man he couereth his true Godhead wherein he is equal with his Father so vnder yâ— forme of bread he couereth the gifte of his flesh wherein he geueth as much as his Father gaue him Only this difference there is that
we are saued by the washing of regeneration and of the renewing of the holy ghoste Likewyse that which Manna dyd then shadow hauing the swetenesse of all deyntie and pleasant tastes as now really geuen because yâ— flesh of Christ is meate in dede We differ not in substance of our manna from the Angels of heauen but only they are out of all feare we lyuc in good hope they see and eate we eate see not but beâ—…ue They are in theyr and oure countrey we are in the way to them Whyles we are goyng the truth of heauen is couered to vs but sith Christ came downe to be our guyde he hath left the kingdome of heauen in the blood of the newe testament among vs as really as him self â—… really for that purpose tooke fleshe and dyed in the same flesh to thintent he being exalted vpon the crosse should draw al things vnto him selfe ¶ The bread that Christ promiseth to geue which is his flesh must nedes be meant of the substance of his flesh HAuing already touched the three seuerall tymes of geuing â–ª which are spoken of in S. Ihon order wold yâ— I should shew the three seuerall kinds of working those three gifts But for as much as the last gift of the three is the gift of Christ whereof we doe principally intreat I thought good to say somewhat of it alone Christ hauing sayd before work the euerlasting meat which the Sonne of man will geue you cometh now to namè what kind of meat it is and the bread sayth he which I will geue is my flesh I haue proued already that these two sentences belong to one maner of gift which also is promised to be geuen to vs and not only to be geuen for vs as some doe aâ—… To be geuen to vs I say in the Sacrament of Christes supper and not only for vs vpon yâ— Crosse the which thing because I haue by diuerse reasoÌ„s proued in two places of this present booke it shal be now suâ—… to warn the reader that S. Cyprâ—… writing vpoÌ„ our Lords prayier hath alleged these words The bread which I will geue is my â—…esh as spoken of the Eucharist The like hath S. Chrysostom done in his comments vpon the same place affirming that Christ spake of the mysteries beside that which he speaketh hereof vpon the sixt of S. Ihon doth also allege it again for the Sacrament of Christes supper naming benedictionem mysticaâ—… the mysticall blessing S. Augustine often tymes allegeth this text for the gift made in Christes supper as I haue declared before also Theodoritus was of the same mind and as for Theophilact and Euthymius be so clere in this matter that they neuer doubted thereof Which sith it is so let it staÌ„d for a truth most vniuersally receaued yâ— Christ saying The bread which I wil geue is my flesh meant the bread which I wil geue you at my last supper is my flesh Moreouer the word bread must be noted which standeth not presently for wheaten breade but only for food and meat For as Christ sayd before work the meat which the sonne of man wil geue you so now he sayth and the bread which I wil geue is my flesh declaring yâ— bread in this place is all one with meat The which truthe is also expressed of S. Cyrillus where he sayth Saluator cuÌ„ ad Iudaeos multa de carne sua dissereret ac viuisicum verè panem â—…am appellaret panis enim inquit quem ego dabo caro mea est When our Sauiour disputed manie things among the Iewes of his flesh and caâ—…ed it the bread truly geuing life he sayd for the bread which I will geue is my flesh Thus it is clere that Christ in effect sayth I will geue you a kind of meat or food in my last supper yâ— which is my flesh euen the same flesh which I wil geue for the life of the world This promise Christ made at Caphâ—… to al the â—…tude but 〈◊〉 submitted theÌ„ selues to receaue that doctrine beside the twelue Apostles among whom Iudas being one had this promise made to him also For although Christ knew him to be a deuil and traitour as him self sayd euen at Caphâ—…um yet seing he taried with the twelue euen at the last supper and other men knewe not so muche of his maliciouse intent Christ dissembled it and as he promysed his fleshe to all so he gaue it to the twelue in the night wherein he was betrayd The whiche thing I speake to thend the reader might perceane what Christ promised presently Suche a gift it was the whiche was performed â—…o lesse to Iudas then to the other Apostles It was not therefore a spiritual gift only which was promised for such a one Iudas neither did nor could take but it was a reall â–ª and externall gift which was deliuered with the hands of Christ and receaued into the mouthes of the Apostles After which sort Iudas tooke it Which could not be so except the fleshe of Christ were vnder the forme of bread which Christ gaue Again Christ spake not now of geuing his flesh by faith only for that gift his Father presently gaue as he sayd Pater meus dat vobis panem de coelo verum my Father doth geue you the true bread from heauen That gift Christ him self was being geuen in flesh to th end we should beleue in him and 〈◊〉 vpon him by spirituall deuotion But Christes gift both hath an other person an other tyme. The person is Christ the tyme is to come Wherevpon S. Chrysostom here noteth Se non patrem dare dicit He saith him self to geue and not his Father It is therefore a reall gift to be made externally whereof Christ speaketh WherupoÌ„ it foloweth that Christes flesh was promised vnder the form of bread which suin his â—…pper was taken blessed and deliuered Under that form Christes flesh is promised not in faith only but in truth of nature and in the same substance which was geuen 〈◊〉 the life of the world The Sacramentaries must nowe say that flesh here standeth for the signe and figure of Christes flesh and so by that meanes they will say both Iudas had the figure of Christes flesh geuen â–ª and the other Apostles had the flesh it self by faith and spirit It hath bâ—…e â—…wed before that the bread whereof Christ now speaketh and which he affirmeth to be his flesh is Christ him self as he is true God and man Therefore to say the bread which Christ will geue is the signe of his flesh is to say that Christ him self through his own gift is the signe of his own flesh for of any other bread Christ spake not in this place then of such bread as him self is And of that he spake not in that only respecte as he is God but as he is man And so either the manâ—…hood of Christ is yâ— signe of his flesh
to that heauenly instrument of Christes flesh So that sometyme we say the Fathers gift is reall and externall but then we meane the visible flesh of Christ in his owne person Somtyme we say the Fathers gift is only spiritual and then we vnderstand the faith charitie and grace which the Father worketh in vs whom he bringeth to Christ by faith and spirit This distinction well remembred I trust to make the matter playne enough The state of our nature is suche that sith we consist of body and soule our soule being the chief part of vs and our body the inseriour parte God the Father in his gift intendeth to feed our soules which being fed our body shal be fed by reason it dependeth vppon the soule But Christ considering that our heauy bodies most commonly weigh down our soules to the pit of hell wold also inuent a way that our very bodies might not only not hindre but rather helpe our soules and not only through our soules but also through a meate that them selues should receaue be made lyght and meet to rise vpward and to obey the spirit gladly So that the meate which God the Father geueth to the soule Christ bringeth to the body And because the body hath no faith to apprehend the flesh of Christ withall neither vnderstanding nor spirite whereby to folowe the flesh of Christ into heauen it hath pleased his infinite mercy to leaue his flesh in so maruelouse a manner vnder the forme of bread that it might be geuen into our handes mouthes and breastes by which meanes we are able to receaue it corporally and naturally The Sonne therefore and the Father geue one thing on Christes behalfe but not one way on our behalfe For the Father geueth Christ vnto the world in dede but to vs in faith and spirit The sonne geueth him self to vs in faith and spirit with the Father and moreouer he is here sayd to geue him self in truth of body and blood to oursoules and bodies Because therefore the thing it self is one which the Father and the Soune geue one effect doth folowe in vs of both gifts For as it is sayd of the Fathers gifte He that beleueth in me hath euerlasting life So it is sayd of the Sounes gifte He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath euerlasting life But for so much as the Father and the Sonne geue not theire gifts after one sorte Therefore their two giftes are in this chapiter of S Ihon diuersly described First as I sayd before of the Fathers gift it is sayd He doth geue the true bread in the present tense Of that Sonne I wil geue in the future tense The Father geueth Christ in the forme of man and therefore it is sayd This is the will of my Father which sent me that euery one who seeth the Sonne and beleueth on him may haue euerlasting life and again ye haue sene me and haue not beleued Behold by the manner of the Fathers gift the faithful may see that Sonne of man vppon whom they beleue But of the Sonnes gifte it is only sayd The bread which I will geue is my flesh where it is not sayd that his flesh shal be seen but rather insinuated that it shal be vnder a couering of an other kinde of food which the naming of bread signifieth And in the supper where this prophecie was fulfilled it is most clere The Fathers gift is called Verus panis de coelo the true bread or meate from heauen The Sonnes gift is called not only true bread but also truly bread and meate in dede Caro mea verè est cibus my flesh is truly meate some true meate may chaunce not to be truly meate because it is not eaten but nothing is meat in dede and truly meate except it be in dede eaten There is difference betwene being the true vyne and a vyne truly Christ sayd him self was the true vyne but he sayd not that he was truly any certeyn vyne The Iewes and Disciples went not away from Christ for any thing that was spoken about the Fathers gyfte For albeit they beleued not Christ to be yâ— sonne of God yet they well perceaued that suche a gifte of eating by faith myght stand with the custome of Gods people but when the sonnes gifte came to be declared they could abyde no longer Seing then it is playne that they lacked faith but yet lacked not vnderstanding we may be sure they sawe more apparaÌ„t absurditie in the sonnes gifte as they toke it then in the Fathers because it semeth straunger for mans flesh to be eaten as the sonne semed to saye then God to be made man which is the Fathers gift who sent his sonne to take our flesh The gifte of the Father is called by suche names only as belong to the persone of Christ or to his dyuine nature to say the bread of life the liuely bread the true bread for God only is absolutely the true bread of life or by the pronownâ—… ego which is to say I. but yâ— gifte of Christ is called also by yâ— names of his humane nature to wit the flesh and blood oâ—… the sonne of man An other difference may be to coÌ„sider that Christ endeth his talke of eche gifte with repeating the old figure Manna betokening yâ— as wel by the giste of the Father as of the sonne the shadow of manna was fulfilled But as it shall hereafter appeare Manna was more perfectly fulfilled in outward doynges by the sonnes gift As therefore when he had longe reasoned of the belefe which they ought to haue in him whom God the Father had sent he last of al concludeth I am the bread of lyfe Your Fathers did eate manna in the desert and be dead yf any man eate of this bread he shall lyue for euer ryght so hauing at large reasoned of eating his owne flesh and of yâ— effect which ryseth thereof he at the last endeth This is the bread which came downe from heauen not as your Fathers haue eaten manna and be dead he that eateth this bread shall lyue for euer The like peroration vsed in both places with wordes somwhat vnlike doth declare that one substance is gyuen of the Father to be eateÌ„ of vs by faith and of the sonne to be really eaten so that the maner differeth because we eate only ex Christo that is to say of Christ by faith but we eate and receaue Christum Christ him self in the Sacrament of the altar For it pleased the whole Trinitie yâ— the fulnesse of our saluation should be in the manhood of Christ whose food it is to end his Fathers worke The Fathers gift is to beleue in Christ the soÌ„nes gifte is to eate and drink in very dede his flesh and blood In working the Fathers gifte a working faith is sufficient in working the sonnes gifte â—…aith is required with taking and eating that wherein we
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
Nyssa reasoneth our nature is not at any certain state but continueth in his substance by perpetuall motion drawing to it that which it lacketh and expelling superfluoâ—…se things As therefore our baptim is made by real washing with water real renewing of yâ— holy Ghost so nowe in the supper of Christ it behoueth we be really fed with the fruit of the 〈◊〉 of life which is â—…one other thing besyde the flesh of Christ. That flesh thâ—…n 〈◊〉 be really eaten of vs and not only eaten by spirit 〈◊〉 is conuenient for Angels but satisfieth not the necessitieâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nature but eaten by mouth and body For of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ at this tyme neither is it worth while to say that the body shall eate bread while the soul feedeth vpon the flesh of Christ. For the bread and wine haue no promise made in this place of them For albeit bread and wine be necessarie to the consecrating of the Sacrament yet the substance of theÌ„ is not necessarie at yâ— tyme of receauing the Sacrament it is only the flesh which died for vs that Christ promiseth to geue to be eaten it is the flesh of the sonne of man which if we eate not we shall not haue life in vs. It is Christes flesh which if we eate he will reise vs vp at the last day That flesh of his must be eaten his only blood must be drunken This threatning which is made if we receaue not worthely the flesh of Christ must be vnderstanded in his kind like the other threatning precept made before concerninge baptism where it was sayd except a man be borne again of water and of the holy ghost he can not enter into the kingdom of heauen bothe are Sacraments both necessarie to faithful men and both profitable to life euerlasting that whiche water doth in wasshing vs the fleshe of Christ must do in feeding vs. for this cause the ancient Fathers haue alwais both ioyned these two Sacraments together and haue alleged these two places for them the one out of the third the other out of the sixth of S. Iohn and they haue named the one baptism of wasshing and the other is called Christes body and blood of that substance whiche is geuen in it What should I name here S. Cyprian S. Basil S. Ambrose S. Augustine all the rest who reckon euery where the same truth of flesh to be in the 〈◊〉 which is concerning water in baptisme Therefore as the water which washeth vs is present really so must the fleshe of Christ which feedeth vs be made really present As baptisme can not be truely kept without naturall water so can not the supper of Christ be truely kept without his naturall flesh As if an euil maÌ„ come to baptism he is truly washed though not profitably to him self so if an euill man come to the supper of Christ he truly though not worthely receaueth his flesh As it is not enough for the Sracrament of baptism to haue water present in faith only and in spirite or vnderstanding so the presence of Christes flesh by faith spirite or vnderstanding only suffiseth not to make the Sacrament of his supper I pray you what vnderstanding had children wherewith they might receaue the body and blood of Christe and yet seing it is 〈◊〉 by the witnesse of S. Cyprian of S. â—…unocentius and of S. Augustin that children although without euident 〈◊〉 receaued the 〈◊〉 in many places of christendoÌ„ euen while the Churche was yet in his cheife floure it can not be denied but in that age all those Bishops Doctors and preachers which vsed to do so dyd well vnderstand that the receauing of the Eucharist consisted not in receauing Christ by actuall faith and meditation of his death and resurrection but in the vertue of those visible giftes which were sanctified by the Priestes vpon the holy altar of God and thence distributed to the faithfull people Tâ—…at custome of so auncient time vsed more for a securitie theÌ„ for necessitie yet was approued of God thus farre that we thereby might haue an 〈◊〉 witnesse of the learned farthers aucthority against them who doubt not to affirme all the writers and preachers of the first six hundred yeres after Christ to haue beleued of our Lords supper as the new preachers do now proâ—… in England But the new preachers make the substance of Christes supper to 〈◊〉 in faith in spirite and in vnderstanding And that not in 〈◊〉 saith whiche another man 〈◊〉 for me as it is dâ—…ne for 〈◊〉 antes at the 〈◊〉 bâ—…t teache tâ—…e â—…upper â—…o conâ—…ist in 〈◊〉 faith as euery man for him self bringeth and 〈◊〉 So that if a man thinke not of Christes death and lifting vp his hart doe not swetely feede vppon Christ sitting at the right hand of his Fa ther they say he doth not receaue our Lords body And they teach that he eateth nothing but breade and wine and toucheth nor the body and blood of Christ at all Of whoÌ„ I aske what S. 〈◊〉 what all the other Bishops of Aâ—…rica thought If they had thought so as these men doe they would not haue geueÌ„ the Eucharist to children and infants who could not â—…uminate Christes passion nor thinke vpon him sitting in heauen They doutlesse beleued farre otherwise of the Sacrament then so They beleued the body and blood of Christ to be really conteined vnder the formes of bread and wine and therefore that children might haue profite by receauing it into their verie bodies soules albeit they could not lift vp their mindes actually to heauen The matter in those daâ—…es dyd not stand vppon the faith of men but vpon the word of God who said this is my body This I say which I bid you take this whiche I geue this whiche I bid you eate What a toy is it nowe for our Sacramentaries to imagin an eating aboue the sky whereas the body is geuen to the Apostles hands mouthes by Christ himself and to the haÌ„ds or mouthes of other faithfull men by his ministers in earth ¶ That S. Augustine did not teach these words except ye eate the flesh c. to betoken the eating oâ—… Christ onâ—…y by faith and spirit nor yet the eating oâ—… materiall bread with 〈◊〉 remembrance of him but the eating of his flesh to theâ—…d we may be the better wyned to the spirit of God IF any speache sayth S. Augustin seme to command a dishonorable acte or vncharitable deed or to forbyd a profitable or benesiciall thing that speache conteineth some figure Fxcept ye eate sayth our Lord the slesh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood ye shall not haue life in you He semeth to command a dishonorable act or an euyll deed It is therefore a figure coÌ„manding that we should communicate with the passion of our Lord and yâ— we should swetely and profitably remember that his flesh was crucified and wounded for vs. This place of S. Augustine
may be alleged against me first by the Lutherans who wold proue thereby that Christ in S. Thou spake figuratiuely wheâ—… he named the eating of his flesh and the drinking of his blood For there wil they say he toke eating and drinking for perfect beleuing and remembring Christes death which is no sacramentall eating To whom I answere that S. Augustin by calling this speach a figure meaneth not to deny that it apperteineth to the last supper but only that it is a figure of speache in respect of the maner of eating his flesh and of drinking his blood because it semeth to commaund the visible and external eating of a mans flesh which is a heynouse thing but in dede Christ meant that they should caâ—…e his fleshe and drinke his blood swetely and profitably in a Sacrament in a mysterie in a remembraunce of his death who purchased our life which was done at Christes last supper when taking bread he said after blessing this is my body which is geueÌ„ for you take eate which body who so eateth worthely he must nedes communicate with the passion of Christ in so much as he eateth that body which suffered so bitter a passion for him Now by the fact of eating to communicate also with the spirite godhead of Christ that is the figure whereof S. Augustin speaketh but otherwise it is out all question that S. Augustine meant not by the swete remembraunce of Christes death to exclude the necessitie of receauing that Sacrament the which if we caâ—…e not when we shold cate it we shal not haue life and the whiche is commanded to be made for Christes remembrance Or is any man able to make a more swete remembrance of his own deuotion then Christ hath iustituted for vs at his last supper therefore S. Augustin â—…oth meane that whiles we eate the SacrameÌ„t we should communicate with Christes passion by doing yâ— in soule which our body doth Farthermore S. Augustin expoundeth these present wordes of Christes last supper in diuers other places of his workes in so much that he disputing against the Pelagians expresly affirmeth them to be sayd De sanctae mensae Sacramento of the Sacrament of the holy table and vppon the booke of Leuiticus he asketh why the Iewes were forbidden to drink blood sith Christ exhorteth all men that wil haue life to receaue the blood of his sacrifice in alimentum to nourish them which thing is knoweÌ„ to be done in the Sacrament of the altar and the exhortation therevnto is made in S. Iohn This much is sufficieÌ„t to answer the Lutherans concerning that they leane to S. Augustins authoritie in whom he that listeth to see more may reade the places noted in the margeâ—…t Secondarilie the Zwinglians graunting this place to be vnderstanded of Christes last supper and building vntruly therevppon the necessitie of both kindes make an argument that in his last supper we haue not the body of Christ present vnder the forme of bread after consecration but only that by eating materiall bread the figure thereof we must remember it absent and swetely repete in our minde what paines Christ suffered â—…or vs and with how great loue he redemed vs. and this their saying they wold father vppon this present place of S. Augustine because he calleth Christes speache figuratiue For the better vnderstanding of this present controuersie it is to be noted that S. Augustine writing rules or precepts of christian doctrine taketh and defineth a figuratiue speache after a certain peculiar maner which he him self describeth in this sort Quicquid in sermone diuino nequè ad morum honestatem neque ad fidei veritatom propriè referri potest figuratum esse cognoscas Whatsoeuer in the word of God can not be properly referred neither to the honestie of maners nor to the truthe of faith be thou sure it is figuratiue Whereby we may perceaue that he measureth a figuratiue speache by true faith and good maners to either of which all that cannot be properly attributed he doubteth not to call figura tiue in such sort as he now vseth that word for a thing that meaneth a farther truthe then the word naturally soundeth The figure that S. Augustine findeth in Christes words is because if we rest in their natural sense they can not be referred to the honesty of maners for it semeth a dishonorable dede and against charitie to eate a mans flesh for it is both against that charitie which a man oweth to him self and therefore is called flagitium dishonour and also against yâ— which we owe to our neighbour and therefore is named facinus an vncharitable or hurtsull act For as S. Augustine him self sheweth how he taketh a figuratiue speathe so doth he tell how he taketh flagitium and facinus It is surely a wilfull abusing of good lerning if a man knowing how a master and teacher taketh his termes will notwithstanding dispute with him vsing them in other seuse which thing sith it is not landable we knowing what S. Augustine calleth figuratiue and what he calleth dishonour and vncharitable must so talk of those things as he hath done Why then is it a figuratiue speache when Christ â—…ad the Iewes â—…ate his flesh S. Augustine him self geueth the cause saying Facinus vel flagitium videtur iubere he semeth to command a thing dis honorable and hurtfull dishonorable to yâ— cater hurtfull to him whose flesh is eaten for it is a thing muche against the honestie of nature to fede vpon our brothers flesh and it can not be naturally and properly done without the losse of his life whose flesh we eate for these two causes or els for any one of them we ought to think this precept to be a figure that is to say that it must be more profitablie vnderstanded then yâ— words doe properly sound what sound they properly See good reader whether I deale syncerely with thee or no. It is a weighty matter to haÌ„dle diuine mysteries and therefore I endeuour to vse therin such warinesse as becometh me I will bring none other mans words but S. Augustines own to shew what the precept of eating Christes flesh at Capharnaum did seme to sound properly S. Augustine speaketh in this wise of the Iewes CarneÌ„ sic intellexerunt quomodo in cadauere dilaniatur caet The Iewes vnderstode flesh after such sort as it is torne in peeces in a carcase or as it is sold in the shambles and not as it is quickened with the spirit And in an other place S. Augustine writeth also of the very same matter Durum illis visum est quod ait nisi quis manducauerit c. it semed a hard saying to the Iewes except a man eate my flesh he shal not haue life euerlasting They toke it foolishly thei thought of it carnally and supposed that our lord minded to cut of certain smal peeces of his body and to
because a certain vse or maner of a thing forbidden doth not infer that the substance of the thing it self is forbidden Yea contrariewise the forbidding of one maner semeth to licence the same thing in an other maner As if the law say let noman were a sword in the city it semeth to graunt that men may were a sword in the highe way And yet because S. Augustine sayth we ought to take Christes words figuratiuely in respect of such a foule maner of eating his flesh as the Iewes imagined the Sacramentarie will conclude that Christes flesh it self must not be eaten really and substancially at all See on the other syde why the Catholikes argument is good and laudable Euery maner and qualitie which is graunted coÌ„cerning the vse of any substance doth infer of necessitie the hauing of that substance But we may externally in a Sacrament by our fact and dede as wel as by faith eate Christes flesh Quomodo spiritu vegetatur after such maner as it is quickened with the spirit therefore we must haue it substancially and really present to the end we may so eate it in the sayd Sacrament The not eating it after a grosse maner doth not take away the eating of it in substance but the eating of it in a Sacrament whereof we now speake as it is dwâ—…t in of the 〈◊〉 which is a moâ—… pure maner of eating it doth include the eating of it in substaÌ„ce where dwelleth the Godhead but in the substance of Christes flesh Or how can I eate it as the spirit doth quicken it if I eat not the substance of it which only is quickened and vnited to the Godhead which thing sith it is so S. Augustine meaneth noâ—… by calling Christes words figuratiue to exclude the eating 〈◊〉 his flesh substancially but to exclude the eating of it by peece meale or els for the filling of the belly And therefore vppon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thus he writeth Quomodo illi intellexerunt carnem non sic ego do ad manducandum carnem meam After such maner as they vnderstode flesh I do not so geue my flesh to eate What is this to say but I gâ—…ue my flesh to be eaten after an other sort but not in an other substance then the Iewes thought of The Iewes erred in the maner of eating as thinking they should eate it in that visible quantitie wherein Christ spake and so they erred in the maner but not in the substance of Christes flesh But the Sacramentaries erre in the substance it 〈◊〉 The Iewes thought Christes slesh should haue bene eaten properly and naturally as other meates are eaten which are diuided and perished in the eating The Sacramentaries think that Christes flesh must not be eaten substancially or in truth of his own nature but 〈◊〉 and by faith alone The truth receaued in the whole Catholike Church is that Christes flesh is eaten both substancially and figuratiuâ—… in such sort that the 〈◊〉 eating is referred to an eating by faith we eate Christes flesh substancially because his true substance was both shadowed in the law of nature and of Moyses to be eaten and prophecied of before as meate and drink and promised by Christ vnder those names And deliuered by his own hands with these words This is my body and this is my blood take and eate and beleued in the whole church and adored vnder the formes of bread and wine through all Christendome we beleue that same substance of Christes flesh to be also eaten figuratiuely because it is not remoued thereby from his place in heauen but is made present by wordes which signifie worke the presence of his flesh and blood It is not sene in his own shape not felt nor tasted in his own proprieties not cut into peeces although diuerse take it together it is not perished by eating it â—…deth not the belly or yâ— sensible but the reasonable spiritual life it is not eaten only to be eateÌ„ but to make vs remeÌ„bre effectually and to conforme our selues to the death and life of him whose flesh it is And thereby to make vs to loue him to beleue him to be the bread of life to all the faithsull and no lesse to gather diuerse men into one mysticall body of his church then diuerse bodies of wheat and of grapes are made into one artificiall body of bread and wine the which mysticall body he will no lesse change from mortalitie then he hath changed the substance of bread and wine into the substance of his flesh and blood Seing the flesh of Christ may signifie so many things vnto vs through the maner of the presence it were more then madnesse to say it is not a figure or is not eaten figuratiuely But because it signifieth so many things therefore to deny it to be present is to take away no lesse the figures whiche come by the presence of it then the thing it felfe Christ is the figure of his fathers substance the image of God who can not be sene he is 〈◊〉 in shape as a man But what is he not therefore the same substance with his father 〈◊〉 God with him and true man in dede who reason thus but 〈◊〉 who but ArriaÌ„s but Marcionits but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did S. 〈◊〉 gustine euer meane suche a figure of Christes 〈◊〉 whiche was voide of the truth sigured taught he not that we must adore the body and blood of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we 〈◊〉 it â–ª but of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 may 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 of it 〈◊〉 doth not the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 or twain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that bread is there to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lose is both bread 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bread in 〈◊〉 and a 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 so is the 〈◊〉 of Chri. a 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vs. It is the flesh it self and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but it is 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 owne substance without any 〈◊〉 or lacke and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 of death whiche the same 〈◊〉 hauing 〈◊〉 once 〈◊〉 not now suffer but would by his own 〈◊〉 make it 〈◊〉 to vs in suche sort that we should 〈◊〉 the death of 〈◊〉 and partake the fruites of the death as oft as we came to receaue that 〈◊〉 worthely what nede more wordes To geue a brief resolution of S. 〈◊〉 mynd it is to be noted that both by his iudgemeÌ„t and by the 〈◊〉 of the Sa cramentaries these words except ye eate the flesh c. belong to the mysterie of Christes supper therefore if they be figuratiue they must shewe some figure in one parte or other of the supper The supper coÌ„sisteth of bread wine as of material parts â—…of it must be made and of pronouncing vpoÌ„ or ouer them as S. Iustinus the martyr speaketh the wordes instituted by Christ this is my body and this is my blood the which words wheÌ„ they come to
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
not fame vpoÌ„ him what should please them but should be controlled by his word For as vniuersal tradition suffiseth to Catholiks who beleue it so the heretik who estemeth no tradition must haue his ouerthrow by the holy Scriptures In them we read that who so beleueth and is baptized shal be saued Whereby is most clere that baptism hath his promse of saluation annexed to it But when we come to our Lords supper no promise at al is made to him that eateth material bread or driketh wine Therefore no man may be so bold to say that by eatig bakers bread we shal be saued Eating verily hath his promyse of saluatioÌ„ annexed thereunto but it is the flesh of Christ whiche must be eaten it is the blood of the sonne of man which must be drunken it is the food of life Christ him felf whiche must be Sacramentallie receaued In all S. Iohn there is promyse of life made to none other thing At the last supper it is said this is my body take eate and this is my blood drinke ye all of this Where no mention of eating bread or of drinkâ—…g wine is made much lesse anie promise of life is thereunto annexed S. Paul speaketh of none other breade then of that which is the communicating of his flesh and which being one is receaued and partaken of al faithful and yet neither in him nor in the actes of the Apostles nor in anieplace place els is any promise made by Christ that who so eateth material bread in his remembrance though he eate it neuer so deuoutly shall by that eating liue foreuer Nowe whereas Caluin pretendeth yâ— words of Christes supper to be words of promise it is already confuted and albeit they were words of promise yet they neither promise bread to be eateÌ„ nor life to them that deuoutly eate bread In coÌ„sideration whereof we may conclude that water is the instrument to giue life because baptism is expresly named andd hath the promyse of saluation in Gods word But seing bread hath not suche promise they speake beside all scriptures who think it sufficient for our bodies to eate bread and to drinke wine at Christes supper And lest any man should think that I may be deceaued in the word of God and that some promise there made to bread wine may escape me I answer that euen here Christ sheweth vs not only to liue for him but also to line for him by eating him so that we haue the word of God that Christ him self is our food not only by faith but by eating We haue then two aduaÌ„tages one that no promise of life is made to bread and wine The other that expresse promise of life is made to him who eateth Christ. whereupon thus I reason Either this promise of life which is made to him that eateth Christ suâ—…iseth in the kind of eating or no. If this suffise not the word of God is reproued which sayth He that eateth me shall liue for me And by eating Christ he vnderstandeth as I haue often tymes declared beleuing vpoÌ„ him doing his wil and besydes al that the receauing of him corporally in the Sacrament of his supper If now his promise of life be alone sufficient what place is left for the Sacramentaries to chalenge life to their bodies by the eating of wheaten bread and by drinking wine Their bodies verily can not liue without the food of life for as Christ said before except ye eate my flesh ye shall not haue life in you and I am sure he spake to men that had bodies But material bread is not Christes fleshe neither hath it any promise to geue life to our bodies therefore either our bodies die for euer or els they liue through yâ— that they receaue Christ into them corporally the which saying of myne is confirmed by this place of S. Cyrillus Non poterat aliter corruptibilis haec natura corporis ad incorruptibilitatem vitam traduci nisi naturalis vitae corpus ei coniungeretur This corruptible 〈◊〉 of the body could not otherwise be brought to incorruption and life 〈◊〉 the body of the naturall life were ioyned vnto it which if it be true 〈◊〉 not they who take the body of Christe who is the naturall life from 〈◊〉 corruptible bodies depriue vs of all hope of life in our bodies How theÌ„ do we lyue for Christ through him as he liued for his father Doth not he liue for his father as well in body as in soule because his manhood is vnited to the word which word is the sonne of yâ— father Therefore as we liue for him by eating him as he liueth for his father who sent him so must we be naturally ioyned to his flesh in the SacrameÌ„t of his supper by receauing yâ— same worthely into our bodies liue in body and soule for euer ¶ The eating of Christes flesh was so true that it was taught with the losse of many disciples IT is not to be thought that Christ who forbiddeth all occasioÌ„s of geuing offence to other men wold him self cast a stumbling block in his disciples way by pressing them to eate his fleshe and to drinke his blood if in dede they were not really to be eaten and drunken But if Christ spake that which was true in dede and spake it as it was true then was it their fault who had sene him the day before working so great a miracle not to beleue such a Prophet as their own experieÌ„ce and expresse words witnessed him to be If then they were bound to beleue him and yâ— they could do no otherwise then if they beleued that he would geue them his flesh to eate in dede their fault was in that they did not beleue that he was both able and in dede would by a conuâ—…nient meane geue them his true flesh in the way oâ—… meate and his true blood in the way of drinke If that were their fault then is it their â—…ault likewise who in our daies thinke teach that Christ hath not geuen vs in his last supper his 〈◊〉 flesh to be really eaten true blood to be really drunken 〈◊〉 the maner of eating flesh and drinking blood 〈◊〉 should in time conuenient haue learned that also Al men do know that when a thing is to be done the first question is to demand whether it may be done or no. wherein it is also conteined how easily a thing may be done The second is whether it be worthy yâ— taking in hand The third how it may be brought to passe As loÌ„g as the thig is thought either vnpossible or very hard or vnproâ—…itable so long it is in vaine to talke of the maner of the doing it Christ did talke with the Iewes of the two first points shewing that he was able to do it Quia hâ—…nc pater signauit Deus because God the father hath signed him whereby he declared
him self to be almyghty God He said also that it was profytable because he that dyd eate his flesh and drinke his blood should be raised againe to life euerlasting If they had beleued him in these pointes they might haue asked yea without asking they had knowen at or not long after his last supper the maner how it should haue bene coÌ„ueniently done as those Apostles did know who continued in their belefe And the way of knowledge was at his last supper where taking breade with speaking of these wordes this is my body he changed the substance of the breade into his body and wylled his disciples to take and eate his body This much those could not fre because thei would not beleue but to say that Christ hyndred their belefe by words more hard then neded that is more cruelly sayd thê it neded Oportebat c. they ought saith S. Cyril first of al to cast the rootes of faith in their mind and then to aske the thinges that were to be asked but the Iewes asked importunely before they beleued for this cause our Lord shewed them not how it might be brought to passe aâ—…terward S. Cyrill declareth how Christ in his last supper shewed yâ— maner also to theÌ„ who dyd beleue although they asked not for it ¶ The right vnderstanding of those words It is the spirite that quickeneth the flesh profiteth nothing I May be the shorter in this point because none of those who are meanely conuersant in the bookes of auncient writers though otherwyse they beleue not well haue applied these words against the reall presence of Christes body in his last supper for how can it be that Christes fleshe which is geuen for the life of the world should profite nothing Therefore S. Basil S. Chrysostom and S. Augustin do expound the name of flesh after one sort for the fleshly and carnall vnderstanding of the Iewes who thought they should haue eaten Christ as men eat mutton and beefe whereas Christ meant to geue his flesh in a secret maner as the faithful know which notwithstaÌ„ding the Luciferian spirit of Caluin reproueth this first vnderstanding in his comments vppon this place But it is sufficient to say that he difsented from those three notable pillers of Gods Church before named The second vnderstanding is on Christes behalf whose flesh should not profit any thing if the spirit that is to say the Godhead did not make it able to geue vs euerlasting life The which sense is chiefly followed by S. Augustin also and by S. Cyrillus Now seing the flesh of Christ is geuen so to vs vnder the foorm of bread that the Godhead is present with it we are sure to haue much profit by it What nede moe words If this saying appertem not to the last supper it maketh nothing against our belefe If it doe appertein to it the words are Propheticall because they speake before hand of a thing which most certeinly shall come to passe in the last supper and then the fulfilling of them will make them plaine For as Procopius saith A prophecie at the first sight is not clere but when it is come to the euent which was forespoken and is coÌ„ferred with the thing it self then draweth it to a perfit clerenes If now the sayd words were fulsilled at the supper and take a clere vnderstaÌ„ding thereof what meaning can they haue but that when Christ gaue his body he gaue it after a spiritual sort not after a fleshely maner He gaue not a shoulder to one Apostle and a legg to an other a brest to the third and a ribbe to the fourth but the whole body to euery 〈◊〉 not visible in the forme of flesh but inuisible in the forme of bread so making plaine why he had so often called him selfe bread and said that the bread which he would geue is his flesh He gaue not his body without his soule and Godhead neither his blood without his bones and flesh but the spirite quickened al things eche kinde had whole Christ. He lost not his visible body by geuing of it but by his words which are spirit and life turned bread and wine into his body and blood shewing yâ— as he was at the table in his whole body notwithstanding they did eate the same body so he might be in heauen although the sub stance of his true body and blood were geuen in his Sacrament in earth What shall I say more If the vnderstanding of these words depend vpon the last supper they must not geue vs a rule how to vnderstand the last supper but they must take their vnderstanding of it Who dare say that bread was crucified for vs because Ieremie sayd Mittamus lignum in panem eius let vs put wood into his bread Do we not rather say that because we are sure that the true flesh of Christ was crucified therefore in Ieremie bread is taken for flesh Who dare say that Christ had hornes in his hands because Habacuk said Cornua in manibus eius Do we not rather say that by hornes he meante the corners of the crosse because we are sure that Christ had vpon the crosse no materiall hornes in his hands If then these words the spirit quickeneth be referred to the supper and there we finde bread wine taken and after blessing body and blood geuen we may be well assured that one truth doth not take away the other Spirit doth not take away flesh but spirit must be taken for the Godhead which maketh the flesh both to be present and profitable to all such as receaue it worthely ¶ The words of Christ being spirit and life shew that his reall flesh is made present in his last supper aboue all course of nature and reason VErba quae ego locutus sum vobis spiritus vita sunt The words which I haue spoken or as the greke text readeth which I doe speake to you are spirit and life The Capharnaits hearing Christ say he wold geue his flesh to be eaten partly thought it not possible for him to geue partly not semely for them selues to take They imagined a diuisioÌ„ of yâ— flesh which should be deliuered and consequently the person whose flesh were cut in such peeces must die but how could a dead man geue his own flesh to be eaten Again though he could doe it what a cruel thing were it for them to eate mans flesh Christ knowing this theyr grosse concept sayth that the sonne of man wil ascend into heauen where he was before Thereby declaring first his almighty power and Godhead Next that the gift of his flesh doth not import the lacke of life either in yâ— geuer or in the thing geueÌ„ For theÌ„ in dede the gift should be litle worth because it is the spirit life which quickeneth dead flesh profiteth nothing to euerlasting life My words sayth Christ be spirit and life that is to say they
be words of him that is by nature euerlasting life who meaneth to geue his flesh aliue and that not only so aliue as our flesh liueth whiles the soule is in it but so liuing as that flesh liueth which is 〈◊〉 and ioyned in one person to the Godheâ—…d Think no more you grosse Capharnaits of dead flesh geueÌ„ by peece meale which is not auayable to brâ—…g you to heaueÌ„ but think of such a flesh as God hath assuÌ„pted to geue life by it to the world of such a flesh as will ascend by his own vertue into heauen of such a flesh as being conceaued not by the sede of man but by the holy ghost hath power to become spirituall without losse of his true nature and substance My words be spirit and life Spiritus est Deus God is a spirit In ipso vita erat life was in the word verbum caro factum est and yâ— word was made flesh Of that flesh Christ words must be vnderstanded That is the flesh which he will geue which we must eate that flesh liueth with God and in God and geueth them life who receaue it worthely This doutlesse is the literall meaning of Christes words and therefore S. Cyrillus douted not to write Spiritum hic c. Christ hath called here the very flesh â—…pirit not because it hath lost the nature of flesh and is changed into the spirit but because the flesh being very nigh ioyned with the spirit or Godhead hath receaued the whole power of quikning or of making thiÌ„gs to liue The words then which I haue spoken to you are spirit that is to say spirituall Et de spiritu vita id est de viuisica naturali vita sunt And they are of the spirit and life That is to say of the naturall life and of that which maketh other things to liue This phrase Verba mea de spiritu sunt my words are of the spirit doth meane that the words of Christ haue in them some of his spirit and of his diuine power Which meaning sith it is most true these words of Christ doe not shew that the naming of flesh and blood which went before was figuratiue and that now Christ declareth only a spirituall vnderstanding of them as the Sacramentaries teach but all is cleane coÌ„trary For Christ now geueth a reason why his former words be possible easy true and proper The reason is for that he is God that spake them and he spake them of that flesh which is vnited to the sonne of God Spiritus viuificans est caro Domini c. The flesh of our Lord sayth Damascen is a spirit which quickeneth because it was coÌ„ceiued of a quickenâ—…g spirit sor that which is borne of the spirit is spirit Which thing I say not taking away the nature of the body but intending to shew the Godhead thereof and the power which it hath to make things liue As therefore the flesh of Christ was not thereby no flesh because it was ioyned to his diuine substance but rather had by that vnion the power to make vs liue for euer euen so yâ— words which before did shew the flesh of Christ to be meate in dede and his blood to be drink in dede are not now declared to be figuratiue or vnproper words but rather they are declared to be most proper and true because they are witnessed to be spirit and life For as the Godhead is in his own nature most infinite almighty simple and vncompounded and the truth it self So those words which partake of the Godhead are declared to be of most strength to work that they sound to be most simple and to haue least figures parables in them as the which conteine the vertue to make that truth which they signifiâ—… So that the name of spirit doth not stand to depriâ—…e vs of Christes reall flesh but only to make it profitable to vs and to shew that Christ by his word is able to geue vs his flesh wherein the Godhead corporally dwelleth Corpus Dei sayeth S. Ambrose Corpus est spiritale corpus Christi corpus est diuini spiritus quia Spiritus est Christus The body of God is a spirituall body the body of Christ is the body of the diuine spirit because Christ is the spirit that is to say God Non ergo corporalis esca sed spiritalis est It is therefore no bodily but a spirituall food The food is spirituall as the body of Christ which he toke of the virgin is spiritual But the body is not spiritual as though it lacked the substance of true flesh but because it was wrought and made by the holy Ghost in the virgens womb Therefore the heauenly bread which we receaue from the altar is a spirituall food noâ—… that it lacketh the true substance of Christes flesh but because it is wrought and made present vnder the foorm of bread by the spirit of God and by the holy Ghost aboue all course of nature It is clere saith S. Ambrose that the virgen did beare Christ otherwise then the course of nature was and this body which we make is of the virgen What sekest thou here the course of nature in the body of Christ seing our Lord Iesus him self is brought foorth of the virgen besyde the course of nature As who should say the reall flesh of Christ is made present vnder the foorm of bread by the holy Ghost euen as Christ was incarnate in the virgens womb by the holy Ghost It is the Godhead the spirit the life that worketh all things in yâ— holy mysteries The flesh without yâ— Godhead profiteth nothing From yâ— Godhead the words came which Christ spake That Godhead is it which maketh Christes flesh profitable Per carnem spiritus sayth S. Augustine aliquid prosalute nostra egit caro vas fuit quod habebat attende non quod erat By the flesh the spirit or Godhead did somewhat for our saluation The flesh was the vessel or instrument mark what the flesh had or held and not what it was by his own nature And again The charitie of God is spread in our harts by the holy Ghost which is geuen to vs. Ergo it is the holy Ghost which quickeneth The words which I haue spoken to you are spirit and life What is it to say they are spirit and life They are to be vnderstanded spiritually If thou hast vnderstanded them spiritually they are spirit and life if thou hast vnderstanded them carnally they are spirit and life but not to thee Thus farre S. Augustine The word spirit may stand to signifie God Angels the soule of man the life the gift of God made to any reasonable creature the wind or breath or ayer or briefly any thing that moueth But among all significations the chief is to signifie God who is by nature the only spirit which quickeneth and moueth all other spirits
the bread of Christes supper to wit the subsâ—… of his own body is one to all But the eating by faith is not one to all It is the body which is one Therefore 〈◊〉 the Archebisshop of Constantinople writeth Post eleuationem statim partitio diuini corporis fit Verum enim vero tametsi in partes diuiditur indiuiduus insectus in singulis partibus sectorum totus agnoscitur inuenitur Aster the eleuation which among the Breakes was done immediatly before the communion by by a partition of the diuine body is made But truly although he be diuided into parts yet he is acknowledged and found vndiuided 〈◊〉 and whole in euery part of the things which are cut what is this to say but that the forme of bread is only broken and the substance of Christes body 〈◊〉 whole vnder euery peece of the sayd 〈◊〉 But what speake I of the Fathers S. Paule sayeth The bread which we breake is it not the communicating of our Lords body Because we being many are one bread one body For so much as we all partake of the one bread If the bread be broken how partake we all of one bread That which is broken is not according to the course of nature one in number And surely the Corinthians had more then one loaf which was broken among them And yet S. Paule hauing shewed that we breake a kind of bread sayeth Be we neuer so many we partake all of the one bread How is that but because the bread which we breake is no materiall bread but how many loaues so euer there were before after it is once sayd 〈◊〉 them This is my body euery one of them is turned into that one bread which is Iesus Christ. And that bread is distributed vnder the formes of commoÌ„ bread and so is the scripture instified which sayeth The bread which we breake is the communicating of Christes body And therefore that body being one bread it self maketh all vs one bread which partake of that one bread ¶ The xiij circumstance of geuing It is not to be thought that Christ deliuered first the fragmeÌ„ts of bread vnto his Apostles and then sayd the words of consecration for then he had not deliuered them a Sacrament but only had geuen them the matter and element whereof the Sacrament should be made but seing S. Paule saith yâ— bread which we breake is the communicating of Christes body we must rather iudge that he had consecrated his body before he brake as who intended by breaking to distribute the Sacrament which was already made And consequentlie as the Sacrament was made being yet in Christes own handes or lying vppon the table before him so it was deliuered with his own hands and by none other way that euer I can reade of vnto his Apostles but Christ had willed them before not to work the perishing but the euerlasting meate which the sonne of man should geue them which he shewed afterward to be his flesh and now fulfilling his promise he geueth the same euerlasting meate with his own hands which could not be so except the sayd euerlasting meate were vnder the form of bread or in the chalice which only the Apostles doe see in Christes hands therefore it is inuincibly proued by the word of God that Christes body which is the euerlasting meate was and is geuen to them that communicate vnder the formes of bread and wine What soeuer is sayd of spirituall meate comming down from heauen as to be a part of Christes supper it is vtterly voyd and without all ground of Christes institution wherein that Apostles are bound to rest vppon that onlye which Christ doth corporally geue and when he is readen to geue the which was done with his hands for vs at the same tyme to looke beyond him as if an other way more might be had then at his own hands it is a horrible blasphemie and a reprouing of his gift as insufficient He sayd I will geue you the euerlasting meate the Ghospell saith he gaue at his supper saying this is my body the Catholikes beleue that he theÌ„ gaue the same euerlasting meate which he had promised to wit his own flesh and blood the Sacramentaries say he gaue it not with his own hands I say there is none other way of geuing mentioned in the supper and yet there only was the flesh of Christ to be geuen as the Sacrament it self declareth being called the body and blood of Christ. I allege S. Mathew S. Mark S. Luke S. Paule where it is writen that Christ brake and gaue I think our 〈◊〉 will not deuie that gift of his to haue bene made with Christes corporal handes â–ª therein I beleue his promisse to haue bene fulfilled therein the spirituall and euerlasting meate to haue bene deliuered S. Iohn witnesseth that Christ said dabo I wil geue the which is not meant only of a geuing by faith for so Christ had alreadie geuen his flesh to diuerse men but it was meant of geuing by hands after which sort he had not yet geuen now the other fower 〈◊〉 before witnesse that our lord in his supper dedit gaue I say this later word fulfilled the former promise I aske our Sacramentaries what other Ghospell they can bring forth wherein Christ fulfilled at any tyme his promise of geuing the bread which was his flesh and the meate which tarieth to life euerlasting pardon me good reader if in so weightie a matter zeale force to 〈◊〉 out vpoÌ„ these false preachers of Gods word You cruell murderers of Christian soules where is that euerlasting meate geuen by your false glosing which Christ promised and called it his flesh is it not geuen at his own supper where then is it geuen at Christes table by which word shew you that gift if not by the word dedit he gaue if that word shew it that word signifieth a gift of that which was broken mystically deliuered with Christes hands appearing still bread therefore vnder the forme of that bread Christes flesh was geuen which is the meate that tariâ—…th to life euerlasting I speake so earnestly to th' end I might prouoke you to come to the trial of these effectual points in Gods word ¶ The xiiii Circumstance of saying WOrds be somtyme applied to the decking and garnishing of á matter the which without theÌ„ might doe right wel albeit it doth the better through their help But when the thing standeth so that either nothing at al can be vnderstanded without words or the cheife part of the businesse wil be hindered for lack of theÌ„ in that case they are by al meanes as most necessarie so most diligently to be obserued as for example we could know nothing that belongeth to 〈◊〉 matters if God reueled it not vnto vs by his only soÌ„ne by Angels Apostles prophets or other his seruants For this reason those words are moste carefully to be weighed which
true bread not because it was not a signe of true bread neither because who so deuoutly receaued it should not be deliuered froÌ„ euerlasting death of God but because it selfe had not in it any thing which being corâ—…ally taken â—…ight saue a man otherwise good from euerlasting dâ—…ath whereas the true bread which the Apostles toke into theyr hands through Christes gift was that very â—…esh which by the power of the Godhead whereunto it is annexed kepeth our soules that they dye not by synne and râ—…eth out bodies to liue for euer S. Augustine sayth Dominus sinit Iudam accipere inter innocentes disipulos quod fideles nouerunt preciuÌ„ nostrum Our Lord suffereth Iudas to take among the innocent disciples our price which the faithful know See what kind of taking S. Augustine speaketh of surely of that which was common to Iudas and which was made with hands See what Iudas toke precium nostrum our price Is bread and wine our price We are then derely bought in dede But if the reall substaÌ„ce of Christes body and blood be only our price when Christ sayth take he meaneth take yâ— real substance of my flesh into your haÌ„ds that thence it may come afterward vnder your harâ—…s ¶ The sixtenth circumstance of eating CHrist sayd eate ye once only and he sayd it of that one thing only which he deliuered to his Apostles corporally and they so toke it but Christ meant they should eate it as wel in soule as in body as wel by faith as by mouth For he had sayd before worke ye the euerlasting meat which the sonne of maÌ„ wil geue you and he declared the worke of God to be this that they should beleue in Christ who is the bread of life and who said his flesh to be meat in dede â–ª therefore when Christ sayd eate this is my body he meant eate bodily that I geue you and eate it also spiritually because it is a heaueÌ„ly kind of bread and a meate which neuer perisheth Neither doth the verbe eate by this meane stand vnproperly because â—…ating belongeth naturally both to the soule and to the body but yet concerning the cause of eating principally to the soule as the which alone geueth power to the body to eate and concerning the meane of eating principally to the body as the which only hath conuenient instruments to receaue corporall meat For neither a dead body can eate at al neither a soule which lacketh a body can eate properly Now when the soule and body may both not only eate but also be nourished by the eating that is the truest eating which can be deuised Christ then in saying eate meaneth eate ye as ye are men who consist of soules and of bodies eate in both and feede them both together For this is my body which hath in it the Godhead corporally dwelling Eating this you eate a food both spirituall and corporall This feedeth the whole man this is it which TertulliaÌ„ saith Caro c. The flesh is fed with the body and blood of Christ that the soule may also be made fat of God Note the perfit eating the flesh is fed and yâ— soule is made fat The Catholiks vpon this ground beleue the flesh which must be eaten spiritually to be vnder the form of bread which is eaten really and that Christ saying to a reasoable man eate this is my body saith by the reason of that kind of meat which he nameth eate in body and soule my body The SacrameÌ„taries teache a dubble substance to be eaten in a dubble maner of which yâ— one is present corporally yâ— other absent they teach bread wine to be eaten drunken corporally as things present but the flesh of Christ only to be eaten spiritually as a thing absent in his own substance they diuide the work of our bodies from the worke of our soules But the word eate ye can not be so meant sith it only pointeth to yâ— which the disciples had taken into theyr hands none other literal meaning can be of this word eate eating by faith hath no part in Christes supper neither is at al commanded if the thing eaten be not in the haÌ„ds of the Apostles ¶ The 〈◊〉 circumstance of these words this is my body I Wil speake of these wordes not al that may be sayd but rather no more then the nature of one circumstance among so many as Christ vsed in his supper will conueniently beare who taking bread after blessing and thaÌ„ks geuing sayd this is my body If yâ— meaning be this bread is yâ— signe of my body he gaue thaÌ„ks for the institution of a bare signe for so I must needs call it seing bread remaining still in his owne nature can neuer be any more then a bare signe so long as it is not the body it self which it doth signifie For euery figure image token whiche differeth in substance from his originall is always bare and naked in respect of that truth which it 〈◊〉 hath not the same in it selfe So was Christ a bare maÌ„to the Ebionits because they denied yâ— substaÌ„ce of God to be in him howsoeuer they extolled him otherwise 〈◊〉 Christ come theÌ„ to leaue naked bare signes to his Church and is he so glad of that promotion that he thanketh his father for it was this the ioy he had of eating the new passouer wherein he would geue vs only bread and wine mixed with water in â—…ede of bread wine herbs and flesh which were geuen vnder the law of Mâ—…yses is not his outward gift at the least desaced by this doctrine Uerily seing with thanks geuing Christ ioyned this is my body presenting in effectuall words that whiche his hart intended before to consecrate vnto God we must no more say that he instituted a bare figure of his body in these wordes then that he presented a bare signe in his hart when he gauc thanks For who can think that Christ who had said by God and by his Prophet Dâ—…uid Sacrifice and offring thou wouldest not but thou hast framed me a body meanig that none other sacrifice pleased God beside his vnspotted fleshe who can thinke that he now expresly naming that his body yet presenteth to his father bread wine only as figures signes of his body and blood and that he gaue thanks for them â–ª Melchisedech ended the mysterie of his bread and wine in the blessing of Abraham him self and doth Christ after bread wine taken end his blessing only in a figure of the sede of AbrahaÌ„ that whereof Moyses said this is the bread which our Lord hath geueÌ„ you to eate was in dede a more excelleÌ„t bread then he could name and â—…oth Christ name more then is really present Surely the signe of Christes supper is so bare if that which he pointeth vnto be not in dede his body yâ— in words he geueth greater 〈◊〉 to God his Father then in his dedes For
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
body Behold in promising his flesh and in affirming it to be meate in dede Christ spake not in parables much lesse could he do so in performing his promise and in saying Take eate this is my body Yet M. Nowell thinketh a parable as plaine as that speache which is no parable Forgetting yâ— Christ said him self to speake in parables to the multitude so that the hearers did not vnderstand him Yet M. Nowell wil haue I am the true vine whiche is a parable to be as plaine as this is my body S. Augustine saith Christe is called a vine by a Similitude or Metaphore but he neuer taught the like of this is my body For he saith Noster panis calix certa consecratione mystious fit nobis noÌ„ nascitur Our bread and chalice is not borne but is made mysticall to vs by a certain consecration That whiche is consecrated is in dede made somwhat which it was not before not only shewed to be a thing by a similitude A parable or similitude as I am the true vine is hath no consecration belonging to it but our bread hath a certeine consecration which worketh some mysterie and what consecration is that besyde the effectual operation of these words this is my body Christ was the true vine before he said I am the true vine but the thing pointed vnto at his supper was not his body before it was said This is my body Therefore these words which make a new thing when they are spoken are more pithy then those which only shew a thing already extant But are metaphors vsed to be really made after acerteine mauer of consecration Master Nowell They be named and writeÌ„ many tymes but they be neuer coâ—…secrated 〈◊〉 made really S. Cyrillus 〈◊〉 that he called himself a vine exempli ratione by the way of example But what said he likwise this is my body as it were for examples sake wheÌ„ we bring an example we bring it to proue some other thing which is more principal then the example was Christ inteÌ„ding to teach in what sort his disciples depended vpon him for their spiritnal life sheweth it by an example of the vine but in his supper his own body consecrated made and eaten was not an example brought to declare an other thing but it was the principall thing it self which was intended Therefore this is my body was more pithily said then I am the true vine For the principal is always more pithy then that which is alleged for to serue an othâ—…r purpose in so muche that S. Cyrill sayth Longè ab omni ratione remotum est ad naturae substantiaeque rationem illud traducere quod per similitudinem dictum est It is far distant from all reason to apply that which was spoken by a similitude to a comparison of nature and substance Which words S. Cyrill spake of the Arrians who denying these words to be ment of Christes humane nature by the similitude went about to proâ—…e that as the vine and the husbandman be not of one nature so God the father who is as it were the husbandman and Christ who is the vine were not of one nature And as the Arians did amisse to applie the words spoken by a similitude to the denying of Christes own diuine substaÌ„ce right so M. Nowell doth applie the same similitude euill to disproue by the example thereof the substanciall presence of Christes body in the Sacrament But as S. Cyrillus doth returne the argument of the Arians vppon their heads by shewing how Christ is the vine and we the braunches according to his humanitie so may we shew to M. Nowell that these words of Christ I am the true vine serue to shew the reall presence of Christes body in the Sacrament of the altar S. Augustine sayeth Christ was made man to th' end the nature of man might be the vine in him of which humane nature we men might be the braunches S. Cyrill affirmeth likewise Christ to be the vine euen according to the flesh and vs to be braunches both spiritually and corporally He proueth it for so much as the mysticall blessing maketh Christ to dwell corporally also in vs by the communicating of the flesh of Christ. What meaneth he by dwelling corporally Himself sheweth saying Non habitudine solum quae per charitatem intelligitur veruÌ„ etiá naturali participatione Not only by habit by power by effect or by the state and condition of charitie alone but also by naturall participation â—…o he placeth naturall participation as a farther degree beyond that dwelling of Christ in vs which is by faith or charitie M. Nowell will say peâ—…haps that the naturall participation of Christes flesh is to beleue that he is true man and true God and so to fede vpon him by faith at the tyme of eating bread and of drinking wine Such cursed interpretations now adaies they bring as though he that doth not beleue Christe to be in dede true man and true God can be ioyned to Christ at all â–ª by faith and charitie But S. Cyrill speaketh of that participation which is made not only by faith and charitie but also by naturall partaking his body and blood We must put a certeine iust man to beleue most pâ—…y who yet hath not receaued the mysticall blessing or communion of Christes flesh That iust man is ioyned to God by faith and charitie but not yet corporally He is a branche of the Godhead which is principally the true vine and a braunche of the manhod in that he beleueth in Christ who is true God and man but he is not yet corporally a braunche of the manhood which is also the true vine except he 〈◊〉 worthily the mysticall blessing which is the Sacrament of Christes supper the which maketh Christ to dwell in vs corporally also Note the word quoque also For Christ dwelt in his Apostles harts before the last supper by right faith and charitie and therefore he sayd they were all cleane sauing Iudas but this mysterie maketh him dwel in them corporllay also And S. Cyrill expoundeth farther how Christ by the Sacrament dwelleth in vs. For whereas Christ had sayd except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drink his blood ye shall not haue life in your selues He interpreteth life the flesh of life in your selues in your body That is to say except ye eate my flesh ye shall not haue the flesh of life in your body Vita autem iure ipsa vitae caro intelligi potest The life may well be vnderstanded the self flesh of life In vobis ipsis dicit id est in corpore vestro Christ sayth except ye eate yâ— flesh and drink yâ— blood of the sonne of man ye shall not haue life in your selues that is to say in your body Is not this plaine enough Then heare yet a plainer
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
that it so feedeth vs as the water in baptism doth wash vs and that as water toucheth our body so it entreth into our body Which thing is so true that Christ hauing taken bread blessed stretching forth his hand said Take eate this is my body which is geuen for you Where not without a great mysterie Christe gaue his body vnder the forme of bread not only to feede vs presently through yâ— grace which procedeth froÌ„ his flesh by touching eating yâ— same but also to shew vs that this is the same bodie which before had incorporated vs into it self For as of manie graines of wheate one loaf of manie persons one Mysticall body of Christe was made so when Christ turneâ—…h the substance of bread into his own substaÌ„ce and so maketh him self present vnder yâ— form of bread he both feedeth many persons who partake of that one bread and by the form of bread sheweth how they being neuer so many are yet one in him because they are all incorporated into him Of this Sacrament S. Paule intreating sayd The bread which we breake is the communicating of Christes body because through it we both partake of the one bread which is Christ and are our selues shewed to be one bread and one body What are we in mystery but only members of Christ And for as much as Christ is him self present vnder the forme of this bread and is the very substaÌ„ce which is receaued there we are no lesse named one mystical bread of this one bread then we are named one mystical body of Christes true body out of which discourse it is vndoutedly proued that the bread which we breake is the body of Christ. How could we otherwise be called thereof one bread How could one bread and one body be put to signifie one thing but that in dede bread and body are here in substance the same selfe thing we are named the mysticall body in respect of yâ— vnion which we haue with the natural body of Christ and amoÌ„g our selues But we are also called one bread in S. Paule Therefore out of dout S. Paul meaneth that one bread which is Christ in respect whereof we are named to be yâ— mystical body of Christ. The Church taketh her names froÌ„ Christ that which Christ is in truth the Church is in mystery so that nothing can be verified of the Church which was not true before in Christ for the members folow the state of theyr head But the meÌ„bers are called one bread one body for mysteries sake therefore the head is in truth one bodie he is the one bread whereof we partake and we partake of that which is broken by meanâ—… of yâ— forme of bread therefore Christ is really present vnder that forme of bread whiche at his supper we breake and partake We are members of this bread before we take it in the Sacrament of the altar because this bread is that substance of Christe vnder the form of bread to whose mystical body we were ioyned in baptisâ—…e whereof S. Augustine writeth thus Nulli est aliquâ—…tenus ambigendâ—… cae No man ought by any meanes to doubt but that he is then made partaker of the body blood of our Lord when he is made a member of Christ in baptim neither is he alienated from the company of that bread and that cup although before he eate that bread and drinke that cup being placed in the vnity of Christes body he depart out of this world For he is not depriued of the partaking and benefite of that Sacrament for so much as him self hath found that thing which that Sacrament doth signify Whereas Christ sayd Except ye eate my flesh and drink my blood ye shal not haue life in you a man wold haue thought that euery person were bound to receaue actually the Sacrament of Christes body and blood but S. Augustine sheweth that thing not to be after that sorce necessarie to all men For he that is made a member of Christ in Baptism is therein made partaker of yâ— body blood of Christ. How so Because he receaueth that thing which the Sacrament of Christes body and blood signifieth What doth it signifie The mysticall body of Christ. By what meanes S. Augustine expounded yâ— meane a litle before saying Bread is not made of one grayne but of many likewise one liquour is made of many grapes Thus our Lord Iesus signified vs. he wold vs to apperteine to himself Mysterium panis vnitatis nostrae in sua mensa consecrauit he hath consecrated the mysterie of our peace and vnitie in his table Note that our mysterie was not made by the baker but consecrated by Christ the consecration was to turne the substance of the bread into his owne flesh keping still the olde forme of the same bread But if the body of Christ were not really vnder the forme of bread how could he that is baptized be partaker of the benefite of this Sacrament Was he made partaker of bread and wine No verily but of the mysticall body What hath the mystical body to doe in this Sacrament For â—…oth so much that here is both the thing which maketh vs all one which is Christ and he is so present that he sheweth him self to haue ioyned all vs to him as he hath ioyned the graines of wheat vnto his flesh For as the bread which we breake hath none other substance besyde the substance of Christ and yet it hath an outward appareuce of an other thing so the mysticall body of Christ hath none other substance through which it is one body besydes yâ— body of Christ although it haue an oâ—…tward appareÌ„ce of an other thing For be we neuer so many in number persons we are one body in Christ. How so euer we appere mortal men as we once were yet in truth we are ioyned to the body of Christ and are members of him our only head Take away that body of Christ from the forme of bread and here is no signe of vnitie in Christ. A signe of vnitie here is but not in Christ. Euery loaf 〈◊〉 vnitie but none other betokeneth our vnitie in Christ but that bread the substance whereof is Christ yâ— forme whereof is the forme of common bread If the naturall substance of Christ be absent from the bread which we consecrate and so be signified without the reall presence thereof if again the natural substance of bread remaine and signific the mysticall body of Christ who is absent him self in substance no signe is by that meane more effectually made then that Christ and his members are as far a sunder as heauen is distant from the earth and that as Christ is signified present being in dede not present so his members be signified to be ioyned to him and in truth be not ioyned to him These are the mystical signes which do folow necessarily vpon the
is both the truth aâ—…d the figure of Christes visible body must by the force of this Propheâ—…y be adored among all faithfull Christians Therefore S. Ambrose disputing of this fotestole saith Per scabellum terra intelligitur per terram autem caro Christi quam hodieque in mysterijs adoramus By the fotestole the earth is fotestole by the earth the flesh of Christ which this day also wee adore in the mysteries When he saith wee adore the flesh of Christ euen at his day in the mysteries what other thing saith he then we adore the flesh of Christe at masse or in the supper of Christe or vpon the altar or vpon the holy table For all these names meanâ—… that the flesh of Christe is worshipped after consecration vnder the formes of bread and wine S. Augustine likewise coÌ„sidering that Dauid willeth vs to adore the footestole of our Lord and that 〈◊〉 saith in the person of God heaueÌ„ is to me a seate the earth is my footestole doubting how we that professe to adore one God may worship earth findeth at the last that Christ tooke earth of earth to wit flesh of the virgins flesh and because Christ walked in the very same flesh here and gaue vs the very same flesh to be eaten to saluation and no man eateth that fleshe except he first hath adored it is found how such a footestole of our Lords may be adored and how we may not only not synne by adoring but how we may synne by not adoring Behold the flesh which Christ tooke of yâ— virgin in the same he walked and the same he gaue to be eaten He toke true flesh and reall flesh he walked in the substance of natural flesh therefore he gaue vs the substance of the same flesh to be first adored and then to be eaten If you say he gaue it in a figure then he walked in flesh in a figure he tooke flesh in a figure For the same substance which he toke and walked in he gaue vs albeit he gaue it so as it might be most conueniently eaten vnder the form of breade whereunto all men are most vsed S. Augustine considering the foolish vnderstanding of the Capharnaits worthely saith as it were to them in Christes person ye shall not eate this body whiche you see nor drinke that blood which they shal shed who shal crucifie me SacramentuÌ„ aliquod coÌ„mendaui vobis I haue coÌ„mended a certaine Sacrament to you â–ª spiritualiter intellectuÌ„ viuificabit vos being spiritually vnderstaÌ„ded it wil make you liue Et si necesse est illud visibiliter celebrari oportettameÌ„ inuisibiliter intelligi Although it must nedes be celebrated visibly yet it must be vnderstanded inuisibly The last wordes of S. Augustine must agree with the first and then it shalâ—…e true both that we must eate the self same flesh which Christ toke of the virgin and yet not that body which the Capharnaits saw why Did not the 〈◊〉 see the body which Christ tooke of the virgin How then must we eate the flesh which he tooke and not that body which they saw If men will not affect blindnesse it is easy to vnderstand that all corporall natures consist of an inuisible substance and of a visible forme The forme of Christes body was that which the Capharnaites saw but the substance oâ—… Christes body is that which we must eate Christe tooke not that greatnes and quantitie of flesh of his mother wherein he walked for his greatnesse increased from the state of an infant to the state of a perâ—…ite man That increased quantitie the Capharnaites saw but the substance of his fleshe was neither increased nor diminished That same standing substance Christ tooke of his mother in that he walked and that he gaue vs to eate vnto saluation That substance we how vnto before we eate it But the forme shape of that substance we eate not for Christ hath geuen it vs vnder the forme of bread his blood vnder the form of wine Now this gift wherein yâ— truth of substaÌ„ce is really geuen without the visible form of flesh and blood is the gift of he Sacrament that is it which being spiritually vnderstand ed wil quicken vs to life enerlasting That was the vnderstanding which being denied to the proud stubborn Chapharnaits who would not beleue was reueled to the humble Apostles who taried with him vntill his last supper There they lerned how the same body was geuen them to be eaten which was taken of the virgin and which was betraied for vs And yet not that which the Capharnites saw the same in substance but not the same in apparence For Christ taking bread sayd This is my body which is geueÌ„ for you take eate There the Apostoles saw that which semed stil bread but vnder the form of the bread Christ gaue the selfe same flesh wherein he walked in this life and he so gaue it that it might be adored not only whiles it was eaten but before for no man eateth it nisi prius adorauerit except he adore it before That word before sheweth that it is the flesh of Christ before we eate it and consequently yâ— it is consecrated by the Priest speaking the words of Christ ouer the bread and wine S. Augustine was so fully persuaded that the flesh of Christe was to be adored vnder the forme of breade after consecration that he teacheth the Christian people to adore it not as common flesh but as the flesh of God for whose sake we adore it â–ª therefore he saith Cùm ad terram quamlibet c. When thou bowest thy self or fallest down before any earth looke not vpon it as earth but looke vpon that holy one whose fotestoole it is whiche thou adorest for thou adorest for his sake S. Augustin calleth the flesh of Christ earth because flesh was made of earth And Christ toke flesh of our Ladies flesh This flesh he calleth earth And for asmuch as he had said that no maÌ„ did eate that flesh except he had adored before he sheweth how we must adore verily not resting vpon the earth to wit vppon the flesh of Christ but looking to his person in whom that earth resteth as if he said the footestole is to be adored for his sake that sitteth on that stoole But now good Reader I besech thee as thou hast care of thy saluation and doest desire to be enformed of the truth concerning the adoration of this Sacrament to ponder well these words Ad terram quaÌ„libet cuÌ„ te inclinas atque prosternis when thou bowest or laiest thy selfe prostrate before any earth What meane these words Ad terram quaÌ„libet before any earth Hath Christ moe fleshes then one For by earth thou knowest he meaneth Christes fleshe What is it then to say before any earth Doubtlesse before any hoste consecrated Doubtlesse before any flesh
by diuerse places of your booke Another way the incarnation may be considered according to that nature which is generally common to all men As that thei consist of bodies of soules of reason and of certain accidents The question is whether Christ at his incarnation toke al man kind after such sorte that he is now the coÌ„mon substance of vs all or no. Here I know not what M. Iuel would answer if he were namely put in mind thereof But his wordes draw to the affirmatine sense altogether For he saith Christs body dwelleth in our bodies by his natiuitie whiche saying semeth to haue no real truthe in it except Christ be common man kind whiche is in 〈◊〉 man If he be that vniuersall substance then I see that as reason as life as sense as fleshe and blood are no lesse in one man then in an other so Christe who is supposed to be that generall reason life sense fleshe and blood is supposed likewise to be really in euery mans owne body But this kind of opinion is foolish and vain as it shall appere anon The third way of considering the incarnation is to say that Christ toke not yâ— common substance of al mankind but only the whole particular nature of man so that the 〈◊〉 of God hath assumpted so much into his own 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as any other 〈◊〉 euer had in his 〈◊〉 and corruptible 〈◊〉 to wit he hath assumpted the mind the 〈◊〉 the body and the 〈◊〉 shape of a true man According to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only is true S. Paul saith that he is not 〈◊〉 to call vs his brethern and that because the children whome God 〈◊〉 to him had 〈◊〉 and blood common among them ipse similiter participauit eisdem and he also likewise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he toke parte that is to say he toke to himselfe fleshe and blood for his own part as they had the same for their parts And therefore as they had a particular 〈◊〉 and generation so Christ was not gathered or taken generally out of the bodies soules of al men 〈◊〉 he was born of the virgin Marie alone the sonne of Dauid and of Abraham according to the fleshe whiche being so his body was no more really in our bodies by his natiuitie then one of our bodies is in the body of an other man For wheÌ„ we speake of our bodies we speake of that which is particularly proper to euery man in his own persoâ—… and not of that which is common to all mankind But yet certeyn general benefites are deriâ—…ed out of Christes 〈◊〉 euen to euery man Due is that our nature is in him marucilously honoured and auanced in so much that it is truly said man is God and God is man Moreouer S. Cyrillus affirmeth that euery particular man shal rise in his owne body at the later day because of the mysterie of Christes resurrectâ—…on who as man conteined all men in him self But seing they that haue done euill shall rise to be punisheâ—… and that more greuously then death it self is as there S. â—…llus witnesseth and yet sith no damnatioÌ„ is vnto them who are in Christ Iesus we may well say that Christ doth not only not dwell in euery mans body by his natiuitie but also that he dwelleth not in their bodies or soules who either did not partake of his flesh at al by faith or els did vnworthely partake thereof either by Baptism or by the Eucharist or any other way All this notwithstanding M. Iuel will proue that Christes body dwelleth euen really in our bodies by his natiuitie And when all is done it will proue either an heresie or noâ—…ing or a dwelling rather in the whole truth of mans nature assumpted then in any mans body after that sort of dwelling which is properly called reall or substanciall But let vs heare his proof Iuel S. Bernard sayth the body of Christ is of my body and is now become mine San. S. Bernard sayth Corpus Christi de meo est the body of Christ is of mine He saith not of my body as you traÌ„â—…ate it But of mine yâ— is to say of the same kind of stuffe whereof I am Of the same stock and 〈◊〉 of like flesh blood but not of my proper flesh of my proper blood not really dwelling in my bowels or in the partes of â—…y body Again when he sayth 〈◊〉 est and the body of Christ is mine he meaneth it is mino to take commoditie thereof mine to vse mine to 〈◊〉 mine to offer to enioy but not mine through this only condition because it is born but because I am ioyned to it by faith by Baptism by Penaunce and by râ—…auing it into my body at Christes holy table and by such like meanes Iuel A babe is born to vs. San. That is to say to th' end we should take 〈◊〉 by the birth of it But by the only birth it is not really in our bodies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not only to vs or for vs. Iuel A Sonne is geuen vnto vs. 〈◊〉 Unto 〈◊〉 who 〈◊〉 in him but not to them who receaued him not For he came into his own and his own receaued him not Iuel S. Basill We are partakers of the word by his incarnanation and 〈◊〉 called all his mysticall conuersation flesh and blood San. We partake him in his nature comming to ours and in ours communicated to him but not yet in our bodies coâ—…ing to his bodie except we also be ioyned to him by som other mean beside his natiuitie Iuel Nyssenus sayth His body is all mankind wherevnto he is mingled San. You haue abused this testimonie turning the due construction of the words â–ª and haue put that before the verb which should haue come after the verb. The true construction is The whole nature of man wherevnto he is mingled is the body of Christ. And he meaneth not the natural body of Christ which he toke of the virgen by his natiuitie whereof you intreate but he meaneth the mysticall body of Christ whereof he said before The subiection of the body of the Church is referred to him which doth inhabitie the body And immediatly before yâ— words 〈◊〉 out by you Our Lord is the life by whome it doth happen to all his body that it is brought to the Father Againe Si Pater diligit â—…lium caet If the Father do loue the Sonne and we all that through faith whereby we beleue in him are made his body be in the Sonne consequenâ—…e he that loueth his owne Sonne loueth also the bodie of his soâ—…e euen as he loueth his Sonne himselfe And we are that bodie Lo we are that bodie He spake not therefore of Christes naturall body Iuel Christ being in the womb of the blessed virgin beâ—… â—…esh of our slesh and bone of our bones San. Of the same kind of â—…sh and
parte Is that enough to buyld your consciences vpon agaynst the playne scripture vniuersall tradition consent of nations deâ—… of generall Councels and so vndouted witnesses as are in the aâ—…cient Fathers are you so slenderly buylt vpon Christ that euerie blast of 〈◊〉 â—…inglius or Caluins mouth is able to remoue you from the scriptures tradition Councels Fathers and 〈◊〉 belefe of all Christendome I speake not this God is my witnesse to vpbrayd you of your 〈◊〉 but to warne you of the miserable state that your 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seâ—…ses haue caried you to I now requier not anie other thing of you then that yow depelie ponder and all parâ—… set a side calling for the grace of God earnestly examine what was the sirst motion that made you doute of Christes 〈◊〉 and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine Was it not your senses Did not your sensuall man saie how can this white round cake be the body of Christ How can this bald shoren Priest make God How can Christe sitting at the ryght hand of his Father he also present in a thousand places at once Tell not me but tell your ghostly fathers whether theis reasons chefely moâ—…ed you not to discredit this high mysterie If those or suche like where the beginning of your departing from the Catholike â—…aith remember that God is almightie that Christ is God that he said This is my body doe and make this thing and all those thoughtes of infidelitie are straight driuen away But if now ye replie that there was in dede the beginning but afterward you found more strong argumentes I tell you the argumentes also be daily the stronger because your faith is daylie the weaker But for so muche as I am not with euerie of you face to face where I maye shew the weakenes of your argumentes I haue answered in this booke such as I found in the Apologie of the Churche of England beseching you most hartely to take my paynes in good worth If any where I seme to charge my aduersaries with malice or any like faulte take not that spoken to you but to hym that is giltie of it If my laboure lyke you in this argument it shal be redie to serue in anie other to my best habilitie Fare well and pray for me as I beseche God of his grace that I may pray especially for all them that reade my booke To th'entent it may offend none but the desperate helpe some that be not incurable comfort others that desier comfort of God to whom be all honour and glorie Amen ¶ Certeyne notes about the vse and translation of holy scripture to be remembred of hym that shall reade this booke IN alleging the holy scriptures although I haue had alwaies dew regard vnto the tonges wherein they were first writen yet I haue specially kept that texte which hath bene aboue these thousand yeres generally receaued throughowt all the weast Churche and therefore is expounded best and best knowen to the Latyns Concerninge the number of the Psalmes I haue followed the seuentie interpretours whom vniuersally the whole Churche hath followed from the Apostles tyme namely in the distinction of the Psalmes Concerning the englyshe bible I haue almost neuer vsed the wordes thereof partely because I am not bounde therevnto but specially because it almost neuer translateth any text well whereof any controuersie is in these our daies And to omit for this present other falsified places to the number of a great many hundreds these that followe are found not to be well translated in the onely matter of the Sacrament of Christes body and blood Christ saieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Operamini cibum permanentem The true Englishe were worke the meate which tarieth The translation appointed to be read in the Churches turneth Operamini labour for Whereby the sense of the place is corrupted We labour for that which we seeke and haue not we worke that stuffe which is present with vs and must nedes be present before we can worke it I suppose there is a difference whether a carpenter worke a piece of tymber or labour for a piece of tymber He that woorketh it hath it present he that laboureth for it seeketh it absent Christ bad the Iewes not labour for a meate which should be absent when they came to work but he bad them work the meate which taryeth to life euerlastinge which the sonne of man will geue them The sonne of man which is Christ will make the meate present and the Iewes are willed to worke the sayed meate being first made present and geuen to them It is not therfore the commaundement of Christ that they should labourfor it as if it were to be sought out by their diligeÌ„ce for they should labour in vain as neuer being able to find of them selues so preciouse a thing But Christ meaneth that they shuld work by faith and mouth by soule and body by soule in beleuing by body in eating that meate which the sonne of man doth promise to geue them That is the trew meaning of the word Operamini work ye as the wordes that follow to the end of the Chapiter do plainly declare But because the Sacramentaries do not beleue the meate that tarieth which is afterward shewed to be the flesh of Christ eaten in dede whereby he tarieth in vs and we in him for euer to be made really present so that we maye work it by faith and body therfore they haue changed working into labouring for as thowgh in the supper of Christ we laboured for his body and did dot rather work his body Againe Christ saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Qui manducat me ipse viuet propter me The trew English is He that eateth me he also shall liue for me The Englishe Bible teadeth He that eateth me shall liue by the meanes of me There is a similitude made in that place that as Christ being sent of the Father liueth for the Father so he that eateth Christ liueth for Christ. The Greek word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in both places It is construed with an accusatiue case in both places it is latined by propter in both places yet in the former place it is englished in the common Bible for the Father in the later not for me as it owght but by the meanes of me Whereas Christ wold proue that as him self doth liue for his Father with whom he is one nature and Godhead by eterna generation so we doe liue for him with whom we are one flesh and manhod by eating him worthely As therforâ—… the Godhead of the Father is really present in the whole substance thereof with Christ so is Châ—…ist really present with vs in his whole substance when we eate him in the Sacrament of which kind of eating he speaketh in that place by the waie of promise as I haue proued vpon S. Ihon. What honâ—…sty can be here pretended in one sentence to turne one
word diâ—…ersly euen when Christ â—…seth the self same word to shew therby the similitude of yâ— matter Is propter Patrem for the Father and yet is propter me not for me but by the meanes of me A man maie liue by his meanes that is absâ—…t whom also he neuer saw But he can not liue for him who is not with him yea so with him that his whole life is mainteined through him For here Christ meaneth by liuing for me such a kind of life as men haue by liuing for and because of the meate which they 〈◊〉 As therfore noman is able to liue through that meate which is absent and as when the meat causeth vs to liue it is truly and really in vs euen so when Christ saith He that eateth me shall liue for me he meaneth him self to be really eaten of him who liueth through that he eateth Christ. This helpe toward the Catholike faith the Sacramentaries thought to make nothing by saâ—…ifying the holy scripture Thirdly Christ saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Qui manducat hunc panem viuet in aeternum The true English were He that eateth this bread shall liue for euer The Bible doth English it He that eateth of this bread It is true to saie he that earcth of this bread shall liue for euer and it was saied before of Christ. But though it be true in his place yet it is not the true sense of this place For here Christ speaketh by the waie of promise of sacramental eating and he is so eaten in the Sacrament that we both eate him and of him We eate him because he is bodiâ—…y prâ—…sent vnder the foorm of bread We eate of him because we take vertue and increase of liâ—…e of him he yet tarieth whole Of him we maie eate also without the Sacrament by beleuing in him and keping his commaundâ—…ments But himself we properly eate only vnder the foorm of bread of which eating Christ now spake But because the Sacramentaries wold haue no difference betwen eating Christ eating of Christ as who beleue Christ really neuer to be eaten vnder the form of bread therfore they haue corrupâ—…ed the text putting of this bread where they shuld haue left out of and haue said He yâ— eateth this bread this bread I say which before Christ called his own â—…lesh and his own self He that eateth this bread shall liue for euer Other smal faults in translating S. John I will not now stand about Lett vs passe vnto the supper of Christ. S. â—…athew writeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 CuÌ„accepisset Iesus paneÌ„ et gratias egisset fregit et dedit discipulis et ait The true english is Iesus hauing taken bread geueÌ„ thanks or blessed braâ—…e gaue to the disciples and said The common Bible readeth Iesus tokâ—… bread and when â—…e had geuen thanks he brake it gaue it to the discâ—…ples The holy scripture saith not that Jeâ—…us brake it neither that he gaue it but that he brake and gaue For Iesus toke in dede wheaten bread but hauing 〈◊〉 aâ—…d gâ—…uen thanks and saied the words of consecration This is my body he made fâ—…om of the 〈◊〉 of bread the subsâ—…ance of his body because he said This is my body â—…nd he is not wont to saie 〈◊〉 Thiâ—… 〈◊〉 which when Jesâ—…s toke was bread is after the words pronoâ—…ced the body of Christ and consequently that which was taken is made his body whiâ—…s it is changed by the power of God in to his body and therfore the substance of bread is no more present For which cause the scripture saied not fregit eum dedit eum as the English Bible hath he brake it and gaue it but he brake and gaue withowt it for he brake the forme of bread which remained and he gaue his body which by his word he made The words of S. Mathew do not all stand in order as it shal be shewed hereafter in so much as Christ said the words of consecration as it is more like before he brake the Sacrament or gaue to his Disciples But the Sacramentaries who wold the word of Christ when he said This is my body to be voide to be figuratiue to be a word of promising and not of performing do saie falsely that it is not in dede the body of Christ but bread stil as it was before to maintein that heresie they corrupt the text sayng Jesus toke bread and brake it and gaue it Again in S. Mark say they he brake it and in S. Luke he brake it last of all in S. Paule he brake it 〈◊〉 tymes putting the particle it which is neither in the Breke nor in the Latin â—…ble S. Luke and S. Paule after the consecration of the body of Christ witnesse that Christ sayd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hoc facite The trewest Englishe were Make this thing â–ª The sullest do and make this thing The common Bible readeth in S. Luke This do 〈◊〉 S. Paule This do ye And that which is most abominable of all in the second tome of yowr hoâ—…lies in the homilie of the Sacrament of Christes body it is translated Do ye thus So that in two wordes thre faults be committed the one thaâ—… facere is here Englished to doe whereas it standeth not for that only but also to make which is yâ— cheefer meaning of yâ— twaine as I proue hereafter And therfore either both significatioÌ„s of doing and making or the more principal which is of making owght to â—…aue beÌ„ expressed Moreouer hoc this thing is turned this only without adding therunto the name of thing and that to thâ—…nd noman should think yâ— a substaÌ„tial thing were wiâ—… to be made but only that a qualitie were dâ—…d For they wold haue the words of Christ to meane Doe as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so do this Wheras he meaneth Make this thing whâ—… I haue mâ—… This thing I saye wherof you heard me saye This ys my body as though he 〈◊〉 make this my body But the Sacramentaries without all 〈◊〉 haue corrupted yâ— gespell because noman should think of 〈◊〉 any thing least by asking what thing it were he should 〈◊〉 that the body of Christ is commanded to be made In so much that in those homilies where they pretend to teache the word of â—…d they report the commandâ—… of Christ saying Do ye thus â—…a what 〈◊〉 do ye thus 〈◊〉 bread and 〈◊〉 it and 〈◊〉 it and make no more a doe but doe ye thus O trusty go 〈◊〉 O blasphemouse tongs Did Christ say 〈◊〉 ye thue He sayâ—… Doe and make this thing Hoc est corpus meum quod pro vobis datur hoc sacite This is my â—…ody which is geuen â—…or you doâ—… and make this thing â—…tt vs go forward It 〈◊〉 in S. Luke and in S. Paule 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In meam comme morationem The true English were for the remembrance of me or to th' end I may be remembred
God taking pitie that this litle world the worke of his great power was by the deuyll seduced came doune and toke flesh of the virgyn Mary being true God and true man in one person At that tyme were all things briefly brought again to God whence they first were created brought forth Christ aboue is all in one In his Godhed he is all that is aboue the heauens and that fylleth the world In his manhod which is the 〈◊〉 of God he is all that is in or vnder the heauens In this manhod are all creatures most perfectly compiled without all blemmysh of nature of mynd or of body So that seing this body of Christ wherein also the fullnes of Godhed dwelleth is geuen and eaten at a banket there is no doubt but the same is such a banket as can not be made with all the creatures of heauen and earth gathered together In this one dysh is a composition most delicate of angels heauens elements of herbes fysshes byrds beasts of reasonable men and of God hym selfe No kind of salit meate sauce sruyts confection no kynde of wyne aqua vite aqua composita liquors syrops can be found in nature made by arte deuysed by wyt but it is all set vppon this table and that in a small rome where it cloyeth not with the abundance ue annoyeth with the vncleane handling it sylleth without lothsomues it prouoketh the appetite without daunger of surfcating To be shorte were it not a banket prouided by the sonne of God no man wold think it possible to haue any such feast made in the desert of this wycked world Thus good reader doe the Latholyks teache of the supper of our Lord and beleue it agreable to his word and worthy his worship This banket fedeth the whole man there is a reasonable soule to fede our reason a naturall substance of flesh to fede and nourysh our flesh there is the spirite of God which quyckeneth both soule and flesh to lyfe euerlasting This is the true Manna which conteyneth the taste of all swetenes and hath in it selfe all maner of pleasant refection This is the fode of lyfe the which who so eateth worthely he shall lyue for euer This is the feast whereof SalomoÌ„ speaketh Hoc itaque visum est mihi bonuÌ„ vt comedat quis bibat fruatur laetitia ex labore suo This therefore semeth good to me that a man should eate and drinke and enioye myrth of his traualic Which words S. Augustine allegeth and expoundeth after this sorte Vbi ait Non est bonuÌ„ homini nisi quod manducabit bibet quid credibilius dicere intelligitur quà m quod ad participationem mensae huius pertinet quam Sacerdos ipse mediator testamentinoui perhibet secundum ordinem Melchisedech de corpore sanguine sue when Salomon sayeth There is no good thing to a man but that which he shall eate and drinke what is he more credibly thought to meane then the thing which belongeth to the partaking of this table yâ— which table yâ— Priest him selfe who is mediatour of the new testament doth furnish according to yâ— order of Melchisedech with his owne body and blood If then the Prophet haue affirmed the greatest good that man hath in this life to be eating and drinking and that eating and drinking belong to the supper of Christ we maye perceaue right well that the matter and substance of Christes supper consisteth not in bread and wine for then we might be better occupied then in eating and drinking it but in the reall flesh and blood of Jesus Christ wherein all goodnes spirituall and corporall is collected into one heape and geuen to vs vnder the forme of bread and wine For so God hath appoiÌ„ted Instaurare omnia in Christo quae in caelis quae in terra sunt in ipso Briefly to renew all things in Christ which are in heauen and which are in earth in him The Breek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 importeth such a brief gathering to one certain head and somme that not only heauen and earth but all things that are in them are brought into Christ and in him as it were begun again renewed The which cometh to passe by the taking of his flesh and geuing it to death vpon the crosse sor man in whom all things were both briefly collected and pitiously corrupted Now when Christ gaue to vs in his banket that flesh which he toke of his mother and that blood which he did shed on the crosse bidding vs make and eate that thing for the remembrance of him then was the head the floure the cheif composition of all meats drinks and iunkets in the world geuen vs in his last fupper S. Cyprian consydering the great deinties of this feast sayth Vident haec Sacramenta pauperes spiritu hoc vno contenti ferculo omnes mundi huius delicias aspernantur possidentes Chri stum aliquam huius mundi possidere supellectilem dedignantur The poore in spirit see these Sacraments and contenting them selues with this one dishe they despise all the delicates of this world and possessing Christ they disdaine to possesse any stuff of this world Contrariwise the wise men of this world abhorring as the same Cyprian saith the commandement of this religion euen to this day go backward he alludeth to the Capharnaits who through the doctrine this Sacrament forsoke Christ à secretis diuinis omnium intra se mysteriorum continentibus summam diffugiunt recedunt And they flee and depart from the diuine secrets which conteine within them the brief or somme of all mysteries A great deale more is found in S. Cyprian after the same sense in so much he calleth the supper of our Lord Omniâ—… consummationis sinem the end of all perfection All which praises only rise vpon this ground because these mysteries truly really contein within them the body and blood of Christ. when S. Cyprian sayth within them intra se he meaneth within the compasse or soormes of bread and wine For those only are the things that we can point vnto within or without Other meate or drink we see not S. Chrysostom hath so much in the praise of this feast that it wold make a great volume to bring all he saith therof I will con tent myself at this tyme with one place Quando corpus Christi tibi propositum fuerit dic tecum Propter hoc corpus so foorth When the body of Christ is set before thee saiâ—… with thyselfe For this bodies sake I am nomore earth and ashes For this I hope to receaue heauen and the good things which are in heauen immortall life the seat of Angels the cumpanie of Christ. The verie table is the strength of our soule the bond of trust the foundation our hope saluation life If we goe hence pure with this sacrifice with most great confidence we shall ascend to the
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
spirituall eating is not euill but it lacketh some truthe How so because the whole man is not fed For faith feedeth bue the soule and yet the name of feeding is proper to the body and thence is transferred to the soule that feeding therefore is not fully true which eateth not that in the mouth which it eateth in the harte whereas the true supper of Christ is meat in dede and drink in dede and must be the eating of that in our body which our mynde and soule doth eate So sayd Leo the great of Christes supper Hoc enim ore sumitur quod fide creditur For that is taken in the mouth which is beleued in fayth The reall flesh of Christ is beleued in faith therefore the same real flesh must be eaten with mouth And what other cause can be deuysed why allways from the beginning of the world to this day eating by mouth hath beâ—…e ioyned to the highest sacrifices and chefe kind of worshipping of God that euer was vsed what meaneth the â—…ating of the Paschall laâ—…be of Manâ—… of shew bread wheateâ—… meale and all such offerings as were in the law Could not God haue inueuted an other waye to haue occupied his people in seruing him but only by eating and drinking Surely the meaning of all those diners and suppers and feasts were to shew that in tyme to come the same Messias that they loked for 〈◊〉 in whom they beleued should so truly come for our sakes into the earth that he should come also into our bodies to dwell by his flesh caten in vs that we might dwell in him Neither let this seme a laughing matter to thee good Reader For sith Christ was born to vs and geuen to vs as Esaie saith he sought not his owne commoditie but ours and perceauing that in paradyse the whole nature of man was ouercome of the deuill specially by cating with mouth of the fruit which was forbiddeÌ„ him As against the deuill persuading Eua to disobaye God he sent the arâ—…hangell Babriell to persuade the blessed virgin Marie to consent to his will as against that appletree he planted the crosse of our redemption as for yâ— disobedience of Adam him selfe came to be obedient euen to death right so for the apple of the forbiddeÌ„ tree 〈◊〉 eaten he gaue him selfe the fruit and apple of the crosse which is the tree of grace lawfully and medefully to be eaten and his blood to be drunken Bibimus sayth S. Cyprian de sanguine Christi ipso iub eÌ„te vitae aeternae cum ipso per ipsum participes animalis vitae peccata quasi sanguinem impurum horrentes fatentes nos per peccati gustum â beatitudine priuatos damnatos nisi nos Christi clementia ad societatem vitae aeternae suo sanguine reduxisset We drink of the blood of Christ him self commanding being partakers of euerlasting life with him and by him abhorring the sinnes of bare natural life as vnpure blood and graunting ourselues to haue ben depriued from blisse and damned through the taste of sinne except the clemencie of Christ had brought vs again to the fellowship of euerlasting life by his blood S. Cyprian setteth the drinking of Christes blood against the taste of syn which man fell into by tasting vnlawfully the apple which was forbidden to be tasted of The like phrase also Prosper Aquitanicus hath vsed who firsâ—… declareth our fall by eating and drinking and afterward our arising again by eating the body and drinking the blood of Christ. Concerning our fall thus he writeth Liberum ergo arbitrium id est rei sibi placitae spontaneus appetitus vbi vsum bonorum quae acceperat fastidiuit vilescentibus sibi felicitatis suae praesidijs insanam cupiditatem ad experientiam praeuaricationis intendit bibit omnium vitiorum venenum totam naturam hominis intemperantiae suae ebrietate madefecit Free will therefore that is to saie yâ— voluÌ„tarie appetite of the thing which pleased it being ones 10thsome of the good things which it had takeÌ„ and without regard or care had to the aydes of his own blessednes hauing bent his impoteÌ„t gredines to the triall and experience of disobedience and preuarication drank in the poyson of all vices and drowned the whole nature of man with the drunkeÌ„nes of his intemperance Thus was poison drunk in Let vs now coÌ„sider whence helth maie be recouered Inde priusquam edendo carnem filij hominis bibendo sanguiuem eius lethalem digerat cruditatem labitur memoria errat iuditio nutat incessu neque vllo modo idoneus est ad illud bonum eligendum â–ª concupiscendum quo se sponte priuauit Thence it commeth that man faileth in memorie erreth in iudgement wauereth in his going neither is he by any meanes mete to choose and desier that good thing whereof he depriued himself of his own accorde before that by eating the flesh of the sonne of man by drinking his blood he digest the deadly surâ—…et which he toke As therefore the apple that Adam did really eate against the commandement of God doth make vs all yâ— were in his body at that tyme gilty of disobedience and the children of wrath so the reall eating of Christes flesh according to the worthy eating thereof which Christ commanded doth make vs all free from the pain of euerlasting death and the children of grace and glorie But as euery man did not eate the prohibited apple in his own person and by his own act but by the act of our father and mother and as being in them and of them so it is not nedefull that euery man in his own person eate the flesh of Christ which is geuen vs in the Sacrament to be eaten but it is absolutely nedefull that some or other eate it as really as euer the apple was eaten that all the rest who by baptisme enter into the same body maie be one perfitly with Christ whiles they are one mystically with them who really eate the substance of Christes flesh being the substance of our true sacrifice truly rosted vpon the crosse and truly rising from death to th' intent it might be truly eaten of vs without any corruption or perishing therof Thus we find that the supper of Christ can not in any wise consist of eating the flesh of Christ by faith and spirit alone But we that is to saie some of the mystical body that are of lawfull age must eate it to saluation as the apple was eaten to damnatioÌ„ And because before Christ was incarnat we had no apple to damnatioÌ„ he toke flesh and went of his own accord to death that thence we might plucke the apple of life and the fruit of the wood of life which preserueth vs to euerlasting ioyes For as Gregorius Bishop of Nyssa brother to S. Basil doth teache the medicine must be according to the poyson which we
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 remembrance of Christes death As the birth of Christ was a true birth but most miraculous withall so is the Sacrament of the altar a true signe and therefore his true body and blood by the great miracle of turning the substance of bread wine in to them This is yâ— signe that Christ made in his last supper This is such a signe as is withall a secret miracle For it is a miracle not shewed to 〈◊〉 but only to the faithfull For as the birth of Christ is a 〈◊〉 to the faithfull only who beleue Christ being God and man truly to haue bene borne of a virgin withouâ—… sede of man by the almighty power of the holy â—…host Right so the suppâ—… of Christ is a sigâ—…e of his body 〈◊〉 blood to the faithfull only who beleue the 〈◊〉 of bread and wine to be â—…urned into his body and blood without 〈◊〉 or corruption by yâ— only 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉 oâ—… Chrisâ—… Who sayd after bread taken and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This is my body and this is my blood Doe and make this thing for the remembrance of me Behold the making of Christes body â—…nd blood â—…or yâ— remembrance of his death that is the signe we speake of This was the memorie or the remembrance whereof Dauid sayd Memoriam fecit mirabilium suorum misericors miserator Dominus eseanâ—… dedit timentibus se. Our mercifull graciouse Lord hath made a remembrance of his maruelous works he hath geuen meate to them that feare him And think we that a remembrance of maruelous things is made of God without a miracle S. Cyprian saith the bread to be made slesh Omnipotentia verbi By the allmighty power of the word S. Augustine calleth it Mirabile sacrificium A maruelous sacrifice S. Chrysostom crieth out o miracle o the goodnesse of God he that sitteth aboue with the Father in the self same moment of tyme is touched with the hands of all men If thou ask how it is made saith Damascene it is enough for the to heare that it is made by the holy Ghost euen as our Lord made for him self and in him self a body out of the virgin Mother of God And we know no more but that the word of God is true strenghtfull allmighty Eusebius calleth it Admirabilem exitum oraculi a maruelous euent of the oracle S. Bede nameth it a sanctification of the holy Ghost that can not be vttered by speache The like words haue S. Baâ—…ile S. Gregorins Nyssenus S. â—…ieront Nicephorus This much I thought good briefly to say concerning yâ— manner how the blessed Sacrament of the altar is a signe token figure mysterie remembrance Euery word whereof expounded according to the Gospell and to the state of the new Testament doth proue the reall presence of Christes body and blood vnder yâ— foormes of bread and wine It is a Sacrament which outwardly signiâ—… that which is inwardly wrought It is a figure coÌ„teyning the truth figured It is a signe mete for the institution of Christ whose signes are miraculous it is a secret token knowen only to them that beleue It is a remembrance of Christes death by the presence of the body which died What shall I say more It is the body and blood of Christ couered from our eyes reueled to our faith feeding presently our bodies and soules to life euerlasting ¶ 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 THere is a great difference betwen a figure of Rhetorike and a Sacramentall figure made by Christ. The Rhetoricall figures consist in words or sentences the mysticall figures of Christ consist in deeds secret workings Those sometymes sound one way and meane an other way These meane and sound always one thing but they shew it one way and doe it an other way Those chiefly serue the eares of mortall men These chiefly serue the harts of faithfull men Those were found by men these were instituted of God Christ sometime vsed figures of Rhetorike because in taking the nature of man he addicted him selfe to vse the kind of speakiÌ„g which men obserued But now Christians vse yâ— mystical signâ—…es of Christ because he that toke their nature left vnto them the vertue of his almightie Godhead Let noman therâ—…ore think when yâ— supper of our Lorde is called sometime a figure that a Rhetori cal figure is meant it is not so A mystical figure a secrete knowlege a priâ—…ie watch word is vnderstanded by the name of a figure as if Christ should say to his Apostles folowers Let this be a token betwen you and me betwene one of you toward yâ— other that when a faithfull man is washed with water and in the meane tyme it is said ouer him I Baptize the in the name of the Father and of the sonne and of the holy gost straight all synnes are forgeuen him And he is of my flock and receaued into my fold Lett it be again an other couenant or signe betwene vs. When my Apostles or those which are made Priests by them say ouer bread this is my body and ouer wine this is my blood hauing the intent to blesse and geue thanks and to make a remembrance of my death that my body and blood are really present vnder the formes of bread and wine accordingly as my words doe sound These are mystical signes priuie tokens and secret figures to be kept only among the faithfull and not to be published to infidels For as men by vse of speaking haue agreed to transferr certain words from their most proper signification to an other figuratiue custom euen so Christ hath transferred certain natural things to an other mystical vse which is now called in some Fathers by that name of holy signes or figures or tokens or which is most common of all by the name of sacraments or mysteries See good reader to what myserie we are growen He that commeth late from his grammar where he lerned certain figures of construction or he yâ— beginneth his Rhetorik where he more depely entreth into the treatise of tropes and shemes when he readeth in a two peÌ„ny booke the place alleged where it is said in Tertullian this is my body that is to saie the figure of my body he iudgeth owt of hand that Tertullian meaneth a figure of Rhetorik and Decolampadius Caluin or Peter Martir is a mete Scholemaster for him to expound what kind of Rhetorical figure it is verely saithei metonymia or synecdoche Again wheâ—… thei heare S. Augustine affirm that Christ gaue a'signe of his body thei think he meaneth such a signe as is set vp at an ale howse or wine tauern that Doctors meane a peculiar signe and token miraculously instituted by Christ which conteyneth geueth to the faithfull the truthe which it betokeneth This kind of signes and figures concerning the substance of
iudgement they are the chefe among all signes And as the same Doctour saith in an other place Signum nisi aliquid significet noÌ„ potest esse signum A signe except it signifie sumwhat can not be a signe Now that which doth not signifie a thing at all can not by signifiyng make and work that thing which it doth not signifie Take these fower words This is my body Neuer a one of them doth signifie washing Therefore if a maÌ„ washing an other with the mind to make him a member of Christes body should saie This is my body out of doute that man washed with those words should not be baptized What is the cause Washing was vsed the minister was present with intent to baptize some words also lacked not but yet because those words lacked which might signifie washing in the name of the Trinitie he was not baptized If then the words of Sacraments must signifie that which shal be made these words This is my body spoken by any Priest shall neuer make the signe of Christes body Because they doe not signifie any figure or signe thereof Ou the other syde If they be in dede figuratiue as the Zuinglians affirm them to be they shall not make the body of Christ because they say Christ meant not so but only meant a figure to be made in bread and wine Behold to what case we are now brought We haue striued so long about the words of Christ whether they be proper or figuratiue that now they are proued to make nothing at all if they be figuratiue For they make not the body of Christ because if they be figuratiue they meane not to make it They make no figure of the body because they name and signifie no figure And that which they do not signifie they by signifying can not make Foâ—… their whole institution vse nature and commoditie is to signifie to shew foorth to betoken make plain the mind of the speaker That which words doe not signifie they do not work That which they work not is neuer don by them But these words This is my body and this is my blood signifie no figure no signe no token for so muche as they signifie an other thing therefore they work no figure they make no signe they leaue no token And then haue we no Sacrament at all made because none is made without suche words as may signifie that which is made and wrought If any man saye Christ may meane a figure and signe and by his meaning these words This is my body may work a figure oâ—… his body I answer if Christ wil work by his meaning who can forbed him seing he is almighty And if he will work without any words who caÌ„ gainsaye him But then his words work not And why then are they deliuered to vs as the chief instrument to work withall Why sayd he Hoc facite Doe and make this thing why are they rehersed in euery Masse and communion Why doe the auncient Fathers teache the bread and wine to be consecrated by them Why may not Baptism be made by other words then by those which Christ instituted Surely to say that these words This is my body make a figure of his body because Christ wil haue it so is to say that Christ will not hane words necessarie to the making of his SacrameÌ„ts Or it is to saie that he will haue a thing wrought by words to work the which they be vumete instruments as if a man wold take a saw to plane timber withall a beetil to cutt down a tree Christ being the word of God hath geuen that honour to words of men but yet to such as are appointed by him self that they should principally among instrumentall causes work and make his Sacraments Next vnto words he chose maruelous conuenient things wherewith they should concur The things to be most agreable to th â–ª effect which they are sett to work all men agree It is conuenient for water to washe for bread and wine to concur to the Sacrament of the Altar as meetest to nourish for oile to serue in ointing at the vse of other Sacraments And now hath Christ erred in chosing his words hath he 〈◊〉 body to signifie the figure of his body To whom doth it signifie after that sort Surely not to all men as it is eâ—…ident not to all Christians as it maie appere in that we hearing it said that Christ had a mans body or walked in a mans body or that our bodies shall rise at the later daie in all these phrases we take not the name of body for a signe and figure of a body but we take it to meane the true substance of flesh and blood How then shall the word body be taken only in the supper of our Lord for the signe and figure of body Wher is that rulâ—… readen Wher is that secret reueled â–ª For dowtlesse if it were true it were of it self a mysterie and an vnwont acception appointed by Christ and it had neded to haue ben registred in the Scriptures or in the holy Fathers or at the least to haue ben deliuered to vs by tradition But who teacheth that body standeth to signifie the figure of body many Fathers saie the words of Christ are plain manifest true and effectuall but no man telleth vs of such a strange taking of the words body and blood noman witnesseth them to be taken for the figures of body and blood and no maruail For no man knew that iuterpretation They knew that the true body of Christ geuen after such a sort vnder the foormes of bread and wine was a figure of the self same body either walking visibly vpon the earth or suffering death vpon the crosse or sitting now at the right hand of his Father or intending to come to iudgement They could tell that a thing present in a secrete maner is a token a signe and a watch word to all the faithfull of an open maner either past or to come in the same thing By this meanes they confessed the Sacrament to be the figure of Christes body and blood but they knew no such figure as the SacrameÌ„taries haue deuised they neuer could tell of Synecdoche or of Meronymia they knew Sacramentall and not Rhetoricall figures Mysticall and not Poeticall holy and not prophane Let him therfore that will haue any thing at all made by Christes words acknowlege them to be proper to signifie sumwhat and to make that they signifie which is the true body and blood of Christ. ¶ The reall presence of Christes body is that which setteth his death and life before vs. WE doe acknowlege the Eucharist to be a Sacrament wherein is sette after a manner before our eyes the death of Christ and his resurrection and what soeuer he did here in his humane body The eating of common bread and drinking of common wine is but an homely maner of setting
the death and resurrection and life of Christ before our eyes Here is the Sacramentaries argument I eate bread and drinke wine in token of Christes death resurrection therefore he is dead and risen I pray you Syr how doth this argument hold What affinitie hath bread and wine with the death and with the resurrection of Christ But if bread and wine be turned into the same body blood of Christ which died and rose againe which wrought all the miracles done in this world Then is the death and resurrection and conuersation of Christ in dede it selfe set before the eyes of our faith Because as Chrisostom teacheth Hoc idem corpus cruentatum caet This very same body bloudied perced with yâ— speare gaue as it were out of a spring fountaynes of blood healthfull to the whole world And the selfe body God aâ—…anced vnto the highest seate the which body also he gaue to vs both to th' intent we should haue it and to the intent we should eaâ—…e it But what speake I of S. Chrisostom This sayeth Christ is my body which is geuen for you And againe the bread which I will geue is my flesh which I will geue for the life of the world How ofte so euer sayeth S. Paul ye shall eate this bread and drinke the chalice of our Lord ye shall shew his death vntill he comme So that the hauing of the death and resurrection and all yâ— miracles of Christ before our eyes at Masse tyme riseth chiefly of yâ— thing which is the body of Christ. And secondarily of the things which are done about that his body The consecrating the offering the eating of the selfe same body which wrought these miracles which died and rose againe those facts I say in that thing shew his death and resurrection All other wayes of setting the death and resurrection and conuersation of Christ before our eyes without the reall presence of Christ is painting and shadowing in comparison of this liuely representation O how many sayeth S. Chrisostom say now adayes I wold see the soorm shape of Christ I would see his very garmentes and shoowes Ipsum igitur vides ipsum taÌ„gis ipsum comedis Lo thou seest him selfe thou touchest him selfe thou eatest him selfe Non quòd corpus illud sayeth Damascen è coelo descendat sed quia panis vinum in Christi corpus sanguinem transmutatur Not as though the body of Christ came downe from heauen but because the bread and wine is changed into the body and blood of Christ. See now good Reader whether the Apologie say more truly that the signe or token of Christes body and blood the body it selfe not being made present vnder the soâ—…nes of bread and wine as it teacheth doe more effectuously set before our eyes that death and resurrection and all the miracles of Christ or els whether the incarnation life death and resurrection of him be not better and more according to the word of God set soorth by the Catholikes who teach that the substance of bread and wine is changed into that body and blood of Christ to th' end the death and resurrection of the same body might be effectually remembred So teacheth S. Cyrillus in these words Prebet Christus nobis carnem suam tangendam c. Christ geueth vs his flesh to be tou ched that we might beleue assuredly that he hath in deed reised his temple For that the communion of mystical blessing is a certayn confession of the resurrection of Christ it is proued by his own words For he distributed the bread after it was broken saying This is my body which shal be geuen for you for the remission of synnes Make and doe this thing for the remembrance of me Therefore the participation of that mysterie is a certain true confession and remembrance that for our sakes and for vs our Lord both hath died and is reuiued and through that filleth vs with diuine blessing Let vs therefore flee infidelity after the touching of Christ and let vs be found strong and stedfast being far from all doubtfulnesse Thus far S. Cyrillus Who alludeth in that place to S. Thomas the Apostle And as S. Thomas touching the syde of Christ cried out My Lord and my God euen so S. Cyrillus teacheth that we touche the body of Christ when we come to the holy communion For as vnder the visible flesh of Christ his Godhead lay priuie but yet was truly present and had assumpted his flesh into one person euen so vnder the visible foorm of bread the flesh of Christ is really present in the holy mysteries and therefore we touch that flesh when we touche the foorm of bread as S. Thomas did touche the Godhead when he touched the flesh of Christ. For in eche place we touche not either the Godhead or the flesh visibly but by the meane of that thing wherein it is truly present That thing I say receaued of vs doth make his death and resurrection to be remembred Hath not he all that euer Christ did presently before his eyes who hath Christ him selfe present But take Christ awaye and afterward it is a foolish dreame to talke how his deeds be set before our eyes by bread and wine The apparence of bread is the token that Christes body is here to be eaten And the similitude of wine doth shew that his blood is here to be drunken But the true shewing of his death life and resurrection ariseth of that truth which is vnder those foormes When I eate the body that died I shew the death of it because no sacrificed flesh was euer eaten before the host was offered But we eate really the body of Christ therefore our fact crieth that Christ is dead We eate his body aliue hauing the blood and soule in it therefore our fact crieth he is risen again Thus the Ca tholiks reason Let him that hath coÌ„mon sense iudge who goeth nere the truth of the Gospell the Sacramentarie or the Catholike ¶ Our thanksgeuing and remembrance of Christes death is altogether by the reall presence of his body TO th' intent we should geue thanks for his death and our deliuerance and that by often resorting to the Sacramentes we should continually renew the remembrance thereof These men presuppose we haue a signe or token left vnto vs in bread and wine to geue thanks withall We haue in deed a token but this token though it were made of bread and wine is not bread and wine For Christ in his last supper tooke bread and when he had geuen thanks he sayd This is my body which is geuen for you doe and make this thing for the remembrance of me Behold the token wherein Christ both him selfe gaue thanks and would vs to geue thanks in the same The making of his body for vs is the thanksgeuing for his death and for our deliuerance Ipso genere sacrificij sayeth S.
Chrysostom ad iugem nos pro beneficijs suis inuitans gratiarum actionem Stirring vs to geue thanks perpetually for his benefites by the very kind of the sacrifice And shewing farther in an other place what kind of sacrifice it is God sayth Chrysostom did yerely by certain holydays set the remembrances of his benefites before the Iewes Tibi vero quotidiè ipse ne obliuiscaris proponitur But he is set before thee daily him selfe lest thou shouldest bee vnmindfull See now by what meanes the death of Christ is renewed Not by tokens wherein he is doubtfully called to minde him selfe being absent for that were a feble token but by these tokens wherein him selfe is made present lest we should forgett his death The body of Christ must be made to th' intent we maye remember his death If you take from vs the making of his body which causeth the vehement remembrance of the death it is afterward a vaine thing to talke of the remembraunce of his death by eating bread and drinking wine For the necessarie meane of necessarie remembrance of his death consisteth in the reall presence of him that died For who can forget his death whose body is daily made worshipped and eaten to the end the death may be remembred But I may right well eate bread and drinke wine not yet remembring thereby that Christ is dead for me ¶ The true resurrection of our bodies commeth by eating that body of Christ which is both true and is true in vs. TO th' intent we being fed with the body and blood of Christ may be brought into the hope of the resurrection and of euerlasting life and may most assuredly beleue that the body and blood of Christ doth in like manner feed our soules as bread and wine doth feed our bodies I omit to say any thing vpon that ouersight wherein the English translation of a body hath left out the word Vero the true body which the Latine edition hath But here the Apologie presupposeth that Christes supper consisteth as wel of bread wine as of body and blood The first two they will haue geuen to the bodies The later twaine to the soules The bread wine they will haue present on the table whence they be deliuered The body and blood they will haue to be receaued from heauen by faith and vnderstanding Against this dreame thus I reason out of the word of God Christ made his whole supper vpon a visible table accordingly as it was prophecied by king Dauid Parasti in conspectu meo mensam Thou hast prepared a table in my sight And by Salomon Sapientia proposuit mensam suaÌ„ insipientibus locuta est venite comedite panem meum bibite vinum quod miscui vobis Wisedome hath set foorth her table and hath spoken to simple men come ye eate my bread and drinke the wine which I haue mixed for you S. Paul sayth Non potestis mensae Domini participes esse mensae Daemoniorum Ye can not be partakers of our Lords table and of the table of deuils Put these three together and the sense will be the supper and table of our Lord was prepared and set foorth in the sight of the faithfull that they might thence cate and drinke such as the wisedome of God gaue them at his supper Therefore no meate no foode no banket is to be looked for at his supper but such as is prepared by Christ set foorth vpon his table Otherwise Christ had prepared no supper in the sight of that faithfull as Dauid foretold nor had not set foorth his table as Salomon prophecied nor we had not bene partakers of our Lords table as S. Paul writeth For bread and wine is not prepared of Christ But was before hand made ready by the baker and vintner or by the seruants yâ— brought them foorth The preparing which Christ made was by blessing and conseâ—…ng to make of earthly bread the bread of life euerlasting And hauing made it he deliuered the same to the Apostles and bad them both make and doe that thing If he deliuered not his owne body with his owne handes doubtles they did not eate his body For he sayd in respect only of that which he deliuered take and eate Wherevpon S. Chrysostom sayeth to him that cometh to our Lords table Cogita quid manu capias caet Bethink thy selfe what thou takest in thy hand and kepe it free from all couetousnes and violent robbery Consider againe that thou takest it not only in thy hande but also puttest it to the mouth and after thy hand and tonge the harte receaueth that dreadfull mysterie Thus much S. Chrysostom Let any reasonable man iudge whether he sayeth not that the hart receaueth the same which the hande doth and the hande the same which the hart doth For if the hart receaue it after that hand the hand receaued it before the hart It is not therefore as the Sacramentaries falsely teach bread only in hand and body only in harte But body as well in hand as in harte And none other true body in the harte then was first in the hand and mouth For this cause euer sith we receaued the faith we called this blessed supper The Sacrament of the altar As if we sayd the SacrameÌ„t which is made vpon the altar or vpon the table of Christ. for the table of Christ is an altar as in Malachie it may appere and in an other place by the fauour of God I will declare This name of the SacrameÌ„t of the altar was deliuered to vs with our Christianitie and it is found very ofte in the olde writers namely in S. Augustine By which we are enformed that the consecration and oblation thereof is made not in the hartes of men by words of promising and preaching but vpon the visible altar in the sight of Christian people by yâ— visible Priest who as a publike minister ordeined by God consecrateth the body of Christ by the same power which Christ gaue when he sayd Hoc facite doe and make this thing This is 〈◊〉 table prepared in the sight of Dauid set foorth by the wisedome of God whereof we are partakers when we receaue the blessed Sacrament of the altar At this altar S. Augustines mother desired a memorie of her to be made vnde sciret dispensari victimam sanctam qua deletum est chirographum quod erat contrarium nobis From which altar my mother knew sayeth S. Augustine the holy sacrifice to be distributed whereby the handwriting that was contrarie to vs is put out Behold the sacrificed body of Christ was dispeÌ„sed and geuen from the altar as both S. Augustine and his mother and all the faithfull then beleued Thus thou seest the dreame of the Apologie by the word of God to be blowen away like chaf dust dispersed with the wind The Apologie sayeth our bodies are
of eatinge him by faith and therefore saith this is the worke of God that ye should beleue in him whom he hath sent He that beleueth in 〈◊〉 shall not hunger but there be some of you whiche beleue not so that the eating is the beleuing and the not beleuing is the not eating Christ in dede speaketh of belefe which is very necessarie and euen the foundation as S. Cyrillus noteth of his last supper but he speaketh also of a farther act whiche is to build vpon the foundation of faith the working of the euerlasting meat that he wil geue â–ª and to work not onely by faith but lykewise by eating and drinking and therefore as he chalengeth belefe to his godhead so doth he say that we muste eate his fleshe and drinke his blood according as he is the sonne of man Thus may we consyder in Christes wordes a dubble kind of eating the one is called maÌ„ducare ex hoc pane to eate of his bread the which bread Christ is the other is manducare hunc panem to eate this bread by faith we eate of Christ by his last supper we eate Christ. By eating of him we partake some effect of grace froÌ„ him By eating him we receaue his whole flesh blood soule and godhead into our bodies As therfore Christ willeth vs not ouly to eate of him but also to eate him self so besyds the eating which is by faith he geueth vs to vnderstand there is another eatinge proper to his last supper described in S. Ihon. The third argument of theirs is that Christ was the bread of life presently when he spake to the Iewes For he sayd I am the bread of life or the liuely bread which am come downe from heauen my father doth geuâ—… you yâ— truâ—… bread from heauen Therefore Christ was presently the bread of life yea rather he was so when he was incarnate firste of the virgin for euen then he came down from heaueÌ„ but how can this stand together if his words be applied to his last supper which was not yet instituted Christ through his Godhead was the bread of life to vs all for euer and straight vpon his incarnation he was the bread of life through his manhod and so continued stil at the tyme when he spake to the Iewes and after that visible and corporall sort he was to be eaten by faith not corporally But he saâ—…d also worke the meate which the Sonne of man wil geue you and the bread which I wil geue is my flesh This gift which Christ sayth he wil make differeth in tyme and maner from the gift which his Father doth presently make so that as he is the bread of life by faith so he wil be the bread of life by corporal participation which second gift is fulfilled in his last supper which he him self now promiseth For no reason can be shewed why Christ should say his gift was to come except it had bene some other gift theÌ„ to eate him by faith alone The which eating by faith sith it was lawful euen at the same instant wherein he spake he wold not say I wil goue of any spiritual eating therefore he spake of the Sacramental geuing which he intended to make at his last supper Against this last saying of mine Caietane or some other of his opinioÌ„ wil pretend that Christes gift whereof he speaketh in S. Ihon was in dede to come but yet not meant of his last supper because it was the gift of him self to death vpon the Crosse which he meant And therefore he sayd the bread which I wil geue is my 〈◊〉 for the life of the world signifying that the gift which he wil make shal be such as shal redeme the world Which gift was only performed vpon the Crosse was partaken always of the old Fathers and may be dayly howerly partaken of vs. Which points doe not agree with the gift of the holy Eucharist in Christes â—…upper This argument although it were wittily deuised yet it is insufficient and for many causes First becausâ—… Christ spake of a meate which he wold geue euen vnto our bodies and not only vnto our soules And that may â—…ppeare to be so as wel for that he ordeined the miracle of multiplying fiue loaues to be an introduction to this talke the which loaues were corporally eaten as also for that he shewed him self to be the true bread which would fulfill and excede â—…anna the figuratiue breade of the Iewes and therefore S. Cyrill saith that Christ saying my fleshe is meat in dede maketh a distinction betwene the mysticall benediction and manna â–ª for manna dyd not geue life euerlasting but by the blessing of the mysterie saith S. Cyrill we take the verie sonne of God Nowe seing manna was eaten of the Iewes both spiritually of the iust men and also corporâ—…llye of all the Israelites Christ who sayd his father to geue presently the true bread and promysed that him selfe would geue hereafter his flesh to be eaten which is â—…ate in dede dyd shewe the spirituall eating of manna to be presently fulfilled by his fathers gifte whereby he toke fleshe and that the corporall eating shuld likewise be hereafter fulfilled in his last supper Whiche being wel consydered it is plain that Christ when he speaketh of a gift which he will make doth speake of suche a kind of gifte as the miracle of fyue loaues as the figure of manna as the name of bread and nature of eating requireth But his death vpon the crosse is not the fulfilling of manna in that respect as manna was eaten either corporally or spiritually It is in dede the cause of all our feeding both in spirit and body the fontain of all our sacraments the welspring of al grace Bâ—…t we seek a similitude of things which are spoken together an agreement of one matter with an other Manna was a sacrameÌ„t onely and not properly a sacrifice and therefore it being eateÌ„ betokened the gift of Christ which he wold make in his supper wherein the true manna shulde be sacramentally eaten For which cause after Christ had said the bread which I will geue is my flesh he both commanded his flesh to be eaten shewed the profit of eating it and concluded in this wise not as your fathers haue eaten maÌ„na be dead he that eateth this bread shall line for euer If now we must eate that which he wil geue we must eate it after the rate as manna was eaten albeit yâ— thing eaten is far better surely the gift promised must be of a thing that shal be geuen to vs in a supper and not yâ— shal be made for vs vpoÌ„ the Crosse. for noman as it is alleged out of Origines eateth properly the flesh of Christ as it was crucified In so much that S. Hierom distincteth expresly the flesh of Christ whereof Christ speaketh in S. Ihon from the respect
In whom we liue are moued and haue our being Therefore the words which are called spirit and life are called in effect diuine and almighty Spirit sometyme standeth to signific the words of God as when S. Paule sayth the letter killeth the spirit quickeneth the letter in that place doth signiâ—…ie the law and the spirit doth signifie the words of our Lord as S. Basile doth expound it For Christ our Lord geueth grace to his words that they should not only signifie things as the words of the law did but also make and work the things which they signified The words that be spirit must be vnderstanded spiritually that is to say diuinely and as it becometh the words of him who is God him self whose words haue power in them selues to worke that which they betoken To vnderstand the words of Christ spiritually it behoueth we beleue them first as they sound to humble reasonable men for if we beleue not we shal not vnderstand but if we do beleue then we may be assured as S. Chrysoâ—…tom vppon this place hath writen that they conteine no naturall course but are free from al earthly necessity and from the lawes of this life Which being so when Christ taking bread and blessing saith this is my body we may not say with our selues how can this be so what other body can here be then a peece of bread which mine eye seeth and my tong tasteth If we speake after this sort we call the words of Christ from the spirit of God to the course of nature and of reason and we do not beleue them to be spirituall that is to say diuine and aboue the course of nature but we vnderstaÌ„d theÌ„ carnally loking for no miracle to be wrought by them and yet they are spirit and life able to quicken what soeuer they list they can make bread to be Christes body wine to be his blood they haue power to change natures and to worke inuisibly In a parable it is not nedefull that all things be in dede as the words doe sound but when Christes words are sayd to be spirit and life then it is declared to vs that they partake the nature of his Godhead that they worke a thing aboue our capacitie and make all that which they say Yea but say you shew me the body which they haue wrought I answer they are spirit and haue wrought a spiritual body not such as lacketh the truthe of flesh but such as through the vnion which it hath with the Godhead hath disposed the substance of flesh vnder the form of bread in such sorte as our soules are disposed within our bodies which are vndoubtedlie there but they can not be touched or felt by any sense euen so we beleue the real presence of Christes flesh vnder the form of bread and wine because the words of Christ are spirit life albeit no scuse or reason can attein to that highe mysterie Seing then these words of promise the bread which I wil geue is my flesh be spirit and life these words of performance which after bread taken say presently this is my body must nedes be much more spirit and life yâ— is to say of diuine power to worke that which they sound Let now al heretikes ceasse to mock vs of so many miracles as we teache to be in the sacrameÌ„t of the altar for so much as Christ hath witnessed it should be a miraculouse sacrameÌ„t and aboue al course of nature as being made by words which are spirit and life Let them likewise no more abuse the name of spirit to make men beleue that Christ spake not properly sith Christ calleth his words spirit because they be so proper that they come nere to yâ— nature of the Godhead as being his words who is naturally God then the words of men are able to doe and as the Godhead is most immurable and not at al subiect to any change euen so those words which partake most of the Godhead are most vnchangeable and least figuratiue for al figuratiue speaches are changed and abused hauing the name of tropes among the Grecians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ab eo quod vocabula mutantur a propria significatione in alienam figuratiue speaches are called in greake tropes that is to say chaÌ„ges because yâ— words are changed from their proper significatioÌ„ to an vnproper meaning but God is not changed nor those words be not changed froÌ„ their proper signification which God hath called spirit life but as they partake yâ— Godhead so doc they partake the proprietie of not being changed from their most accustomed meaning proper nature It is a world to see what difference there is betwene yâ— words of Christes Ghospell the interpretation of the false Ghospellers betwene the old Fathers and the new brethern betwene Catholikes Protestants Mark I pray thee good Reader the differences diligently Christ by his incarnation was made to vs the bread of life to the end we might eate his Godhead otherwise then the Fathers had done before the new brethern after the incarnation and supper of Christ wherein we should haue the Godhead geuen vs bid vs beleue vpon Christ in heauen and so to fede vpon him by faith alone as Noâ—… Abraham did Their councâ—…l is not 〈◊〉 in bidding vs sede by saith but where is yâ— Godhead 〈◊〉 by this meanes is that also receaued by faith why so it might haue bene receaued and so it was receaued before Christ was man Where is the food of Angels made the food of man where is the word of God so geuen to me after his incarnation as it could not be geuen before Where is any euerlasting meate for my body Where is the supper which may fede the whole man faith fedeth my vnderstaÌ„ding but my wil affectioÌ„ hath as much nede to be fed my flesh is rebelliouse to my spirit it hath nede to be fed my body was the meane to poyson my soule therefore my soule must haue a medicine which shal be receaued into my body and so be communicated vnto my soule S. Ireneus reproued those heretiks who because men were called in scripture spirituall denied the true resurrection of their flesh as though their spirit only should tary for euer and yet our new brethern where so euer mention is made of spirit or of a spirituall body and flesh so wrast it as though the reall substance of flesh in the Sacrament were by that word denied or diminisshed whereas it is rather increased for so much as that flesh which is spirituall is not thereby the lesse true flesh but it partaketh the more of the spirit And because a spirit once created is by the natural gift of God immortal a spiritual flesh is likewise like to the spirit in that case S. Augustine writeth that after resurrection the body shall no more haue nede of corporal
dyd rather geue his reall body vnder that blessed signe of bread then that he would say he gaue vs his body yet in dede gaue vs wheaten bread whiche were lesse then his body Howsoeuer shamefast men are wont to speake modestly to them whom they loue best surely they wil not blush to do most boâ—…tifully for them much lesse may we thinke that Christ louing vs so well spake more then he dyd performe ¶ The vij circumstance of washing the Apostles feete THe Paschal lambe being eaten Christ sate down at the table with his disciples He arose again laid his garments down girded himself with a towel poured water into the basin and began to washe his Apostles fete and to wipe them shewing thereby both his own humilitie also of what a great mystery they should be made partakers For the worthy coming whereunto not only their mind should be tried and purified but also their bodies yea euen the the vttermost parts of their affections should be purged and cleansed For which cause euer sins the Apostles 〈◊〉 as it may appere by the practise of the Churche and by S. â—…ionysius the Areopagite the Catholike Bishops and Priestes haue vsed before they come to coÌ„secrate yâ— dreadfull mysteries to wash the very toppes of their handes What to doe I pray you wâ—…ether because they should come to handle bread and wine then might Christe haue washed his disciples hands as he dyd their fete before they had eaten the Paschal lambe for it was not eaten without bread neither without a cup of wine also if we shal beleue S. Hierom S. Bede and Theophilact who thinke suche a cuppe of wine as the Iewes dranke of after the Paschall lambe to be mentioned in S. Luke And why is not the bread wine which was ioyned with the fleshe of the Paschall lambe it being set also to signifie the same Christ for which the bread and wine of the new testament is appointed as the Protestants teach why is not I say that bread wine as good as this whiche we haue one God made both and both be assigned to shâ—…ow one Christ both oblations both SacrameÌ„ts both be 〈◊〉 of the same men in the same night and place And yet so much 〈◊〉 is betwene the bread and wine of the old 〈◊〉 and that of the new that it was sufficient for the one to be eaten with 〈◊〉 not vncleane but the other 〈◊〉 haue 〈◊〉 the bodies purified for the more worthy receauig thereof 〈◊〉 not because it is bread and wine still but because it is made the 〈◊〉 of life the food of Aungels the body and blood of 〈◊〉 Hence cometh al this preparation hence cometh the difference betwene the old new 〈◊〉 For although they meete inone signification yet in substance the one was earthly the other in substance is heauenly the one published by Moyses the other of Christes own insâ—…utioÌ„ and for that cause yâ— one a bare shadow of the truth the other a truth of yâ— shadow and also couering the â—…me truth in a mysterie ¶ The 〈◊〉 Circumstance concerning the place of the last supper THe place where Christ kept his supper was chosâ—…n appointed not without a miracle by geuing his disciples a strange signe howe to go to an vnknowen house by folowing him that should cary a pot of water into it That house Nicephorus and Damascene write to haue bene about the mount Siou whiche standeth in holy scripture eueÌ„ by the inrerpretation of S. Paule to signify the City and Churche oâ—… God all which things doe portend that some great and vnaccustomed matter shal be done in suche a place so assigned In the house a faier parler was decked and adorned and therem a table at the which Christ sitting downe made thereupon his maundy Of which table for the meats sake whiche should be geuen at it the holy Ghost had before prophecied by king Dauid saying thou hast prepared a table in my sight And by Salomon wisedom hath set forth his table Likewise yâ— table whereuppon the twelue loaues of the shew bread stoode in the tabernacle of the law before the face of God shadowed this table of Christes supper whereat the twelue Apostles sate before the face of Christ our Lord he being the bread of life and geuing to euery of them a loaf vnder the forme whereof his owne substance was conteyned Christ then making his supper vppon this table and thence distributing his meate vnto the Apostles doth vs to vnderstand that whatsoeuer he feedeth vs withall either in spirit or in body at his supper is reallâ—… present vppon the very boord wherevppon he did eate For Christ at this tyme is not talking in parables not disputing in the synagoge not preaching in the teÌ„ple â–ª he is in a house in a parler at a boord shewing thereby where his banket is exhibibed where it is serued and whence it is receaued We are not now occupied in spirituall praicr alone but also in corporal eating and drinking If the euerlasting meate of Christes supper be only spiritual and only receaued in mind by faith let the howse be thought only to be spirituall the parler to be spiritual and the boord to be spiritual Let vs deny that any of these things were natural and real but if all the rest be confessed real seing al they are prouided for the meates sake which shal be eaten from the table what an impudent folly is it to say the body and blood of Christ whiche only is the euerlasting meate of this banket are taken neither in hand nor in mouth nor be not at all vppon the material boord whence Christ visibly deliuered them to his Apostles own handes bidding them take and eate ¶ The nyntenth circumstance of the taking bread and wine OUr sauiour sitting doun at the table toke bread and the cup of wine and he tooke it who neuer touched the thig which he did not sanctifie because vertue went forth of him euen by touching his garments Moreouer it is to be thought he toke such bread as the presâ—… feast of Caster which was beguÌ„ne might suffer Unleauened I meane and such as presently was vpon the table at the eating of yâ— Paschal Lamb. The which surely was already figuratiue bread it was already a token of Christ and already was partakeÌ„ of the disciples Shall we think then that Christ goeth about to do that which was already done No no this 〈◊〉 of his goeth to an other end as we shall perceaue anon Thirdly by taking bread and wine into his hands Christ meaneth vs to looke for the mystery that shal be made within the forms of those cratures which he toucheth He now pointeth not to his Apostles as though he would only consecrate somewhat in theyr breasts as Caluin dreameth he taketh bread and wine there we must seeke the first work of his supper Last of al by this kind of
of Iob. THe men of the tabernacle of Iob sayd Who might geue vs of his flesh to the intent we may be filled The tabernacle or houshold of Iob whome some of his seruants hated some loued was the figure of the Church wherein are good and bad The bad wish for one that might geue them Christes flesh to fill their hatred vpon it as the proude Pharises bought Christ of Iudas and now a daies the Iewes wil geue any mony for the blessed body of Christ in the forme of breade that therevpon they may shew their malice against Christ whom the Heretikes of our age folow in that point Therefore these souldiours of darknes when they can finde Christ visible or inuisible shewe all the spite they can against him But on thother side good men that be in the tabernacle of Iob with loue and reuerence wish for his flesh and desyre to be filled with it to their inestunable comfort Christ gaue his visible body to the handes of the Pharisees and Iewes Wherein hauing their desires satisfied they nailed it to the crosse And how much more is Christ to be thought to haue fulfilled really the desyre of good men who long for the inuisible substance of his owne body especially seing his owne desire was so vehement to eate this passouer of his owne body with his Apostles at which tyme he sayd to them Take and eate this is my body which is geuen for you If we had not as really yâ— flesh of Christ geueÌ„ to our handes and mouthes as the Pharisees had the same deliuered to their cruell handes it might seeme that the worse parte of the tabernacle of Iob had obtined more truth and more fulfilling of their desire then the better which is a thought vnworthy of Christen men The iust men of the tabernacle of Iob loued him so well that they desired to be filled with his flesh euen for the loue they bare to him which loue the greater it is the greater vnion it wisheth and 〈◊〉 Christ fulfilled to his people that which the sernantes of Iob figured in their vehenient affection which they had to be filled with their maisters flesh They of the tabernacle of Iob wished not only to see him or heare him speake nor they wished not at all to fâ—…ede vpon him in spirite and vnderstanding for they knew well he was not God but they would fill their flesh with his flesh and their soâ—…le with his soule and so make a perfite vnion for so much as them selues consisted as well of body as of soule This vnion Christ hath truly graunted vs making vs one with his very flesh saying his flesh to be meate in dede which who so eateth worthily 〈◊〉 in Christ and Christ in him for euer That is the vnion of reall flesh which was prophecied of in Iob and which is made betwâ—…e Christ and vs when we receiue worthelie his naturall fleshe vnder forme of bread into our naturall bodies and soules and are made one with it re ipsa in dede it self as meate is made one substance with him that eateth and digesteth it well ¶ The prophecies of Dauid and Salomon THou hast prepared a table sayeth Dauid to God in my sight against them who afflicte me And my chalice which maketh me drunke how excellent is it Wisedome hath offered his sacrifices set foorth his table and sayeth to the innocent and simple Come eate my bread and drink my wine which I haue mingled vnto you They falsyfie the holy Scriptures who teache the substance of common bread and wine to be by Christe prepared at his last supper But his preparing was to conuert the substance of them into his flesh and blood And those were the sacrifices which wisedome made That was his bread his wine which if it were only receaued by faith and spirite how sayeth the Prophet that the table was prepared in his sight No man is able to see that which is only spirituall But according to the word of God the Catholikes beleue that their meate is prepared set and layed vpon the table before they receaue it and it is set foorth in their sight in that visible forme of bread which is consecrated Againe the table is but one come good come bad They eate the same meate and surely none other at the supper of Christ besydes yâ— which is vpon his table Iudas did eate the same meate that Peter and Ihon did although diuers effectes came of it because them selues were not like affected But the Sacramentaries make Christ to haue two tables one where the good men receaue Christ him self with bread and wine as they â—…each an other where only common bread and wine is geuen to the wicked men And yet Dauid Salomon and S. Paule speake but of one table and it is prepared and set foorth not by faith and spirite but in our sight It is not only drunk of by mind and vnderstanding â–ª but the very chalice of it is of strength to make vs drunk because it conteyneth the blood of life and saluation ¶ An other Prophecie of Dauid ALl that be fatte vppon earth haue eaten and adored which thing the Prophete spake thereby to shew as it may appeare in the same place that all the nations of the world were by faith subdued to Christ. And he bringeth a most vndouâ—…ed token thereof in so much that they adore that which they eate which thing is peculiar to Christians because none other people doth â—…ate the reall flesh of God which only may and must be adored This propertie and token of the true faith they take away who say we eate in our Lords supper the substance of coÌ„mon bread forbidding vs to adore the blessed SacrameÌ„t of the altar the footestole wherein the 〈◊〉 of Godhead corporally dwelleth ¶ Many figures and prophecies ioyned together for breuities sake WHat shall Isay that Noë being made drunke with yâ— wine of his owne planting lieth naked is lawghed to scorne of his own childe to shew that Christ hauing drunke in his supper of the same blood which he planted for him selfe in the virgyns womb hangeth afterward naked vppon the crosse and is lawghed to scorne not only of the Iewes for his nakednesse but also of the SacrameÌ„taries for so grosse a dede as they repute it to be that he drank his own blood vnder the form of wine What shall I reherse that Abraham did set cakes made of â—…ine wheaten meale befoâ—… the Angels they allowed his dede not for the 〈◊〉 which they nâ—…ded not but for tâ—…e excellenty of the mysticall cake which was come in Christes supper That Isaac hauing stablished his sonne Iacob with corne and wine sayth to Esau demanding his blessing what more can I doe now to thee as who should say al goodnesse is already figured in that which I haue assigned to thy yonger brother which betokeneth yâ— faithfull people 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
his mysteries to naked names shall enioye his glorie no more really then they allow him a reall truth in his blessed Sacraments ¶ The reall presence is proued by the example which S. Paule vseth concerning the Iewes and Gentils SAint Paule intending to dissuade the Corinthians from eating and drinking with the Gentils at their false and vaine sacrifices vseth in that behalf this kind of argument Whosoeuer doth eate or drink that which is offered vp in sacrifice he is made one with the oblation it self and with it to whome the things eaten and drunken are offered This proposition he proueth by example of the ChristiaÌ„s who by partaking of the bread which we breake and of the chalice which we blesse which are the communicating of Christes body and blood are made one bread one body because they partake all of the one bread The like is sene also in the carnall Iewes among whom they that eate the oblations or things offered thereby were partakers of the altar to wit of the sacrifice and of the worshipping of God to whom it was offered Therefore if the Corinthians wold also partake of the meate offered to ydols it must follow that they should be partakers of the ydolatrie For although the dead ydoll be no true God nor any thing at all wherewith they may communicate yet a societie is ioyned thereby with the deuils who reigne in those ydols Therefore as ydolatry it self so the eating of the meates offered to ydols is to be auoided Out of this discourse it is proued that the Christians Iewes Gentils eche of them haue a God true or false eche of them offereth an externall sacrifice to him eche of them vse to partake of the things offered and eche of them communicated among them selues The meat offered and eaten of the Iewes was the flesh of such cleane beasts or such other oblations as were allowed by yâ— lawe of Moyses The meate offered and eaten of the Gentils was such as their superstition had receaued To one ydol a shepe was offered to another an oxe The meate offered and eaten of the Christians is described of S. Paule to be the bread which we breake which is the communicating of Christes body and the chalice of blessing which we blesse which is the communicating â—…f Christes blood The vnitie rising thereof is to be one bread one body because all partake of the one bread Uppon which ground it may be wel built that the meate partaken at Christes supper is the body and blood of Christ wherein we passe and ouercome the Iewes Gentils who had other earthly oblations but none of them had this foode which came down from heauen For as S. Paul sayeth We haue an altar whereof they haue no power to eate who serue the tabernacle But surely they might eate bread and wine who serued the tabernacle therefore the meate of Christes supper is not bread and wine but the bread of life and the blood of Christ. And whereas the Iewes had certeyn obseruancies of eating this and of leauing that meate or that the Leuits should eate this and the Priest that and the laye people an other meate S. Paule counselleth them to stablish their hart with grace and not so carefully to obserue the old law which commaunded so many differences of meate How beit if it be a good thing to haue some meates reserued for the Priests which the common people may not eate as the Iewes think then sayeth S. Paule we Christians also haue an altar to wit a thing offered vnto God and that so preciouse that the very Priests and Bisshops who serue in the tabernacle may not eate thereof That meate is as Theodorite sayth Hostia rationalis diuina A reasonable and diuine sacrifice as Sedulius writeth yâ— altar whence we partake the body and blood of Christ as Theophtlact witnesseth the vnbloody sacrifice of the body which quickeneth This then being the meate of our altar it foloweth that this meate is no lesse present vppon his holy table then that which the Iewes or ydolatours did eate was present at their sacrifices But that which they did partake was really present anâ—… receaued into their mouthes therefore likewise 〈◊〉 flesh is really present and is receaued into our mouthes The meate of the Iewes and of the Gentils was made one natural flesh with the partakers thereof therefore we likewise are made one naturall flesh with the meate of Christes tabâ—…e But herein is the oddes that their meat was turned into their flesh because it was weaker then their own nature but our flesh is turned without losse of his owne substance or proprietie into the nature of Christes flesh because it being the flesh which is dwelt in by the Godhead is stronger then our nature Again as the Iewes and Gentils by eating meates offered vp are made one body among them selues by coÌ„formitie of wil and mind alone because the meate was not able to tary in his own nature and to draw them vnto it so contrariwise we that eate Christes body are made really one flesh with Christ amoÌ„g our selues because as S. Cyrill declareth Christ suffereth him self to be no more diuided but kâ—…ping his owne flesh whole he gathereth all vs into it And seing we all that eate Christ are made naturally one with Christ we are also one among our selues For they who are one in any third are withall one among them selues Thus the meate of Christes table hath more truth in it then the meate of the Iewes or Gentils had according to the Catholike doctrine ¶ The reall presence is proued by the kind of shewing Christes death QVotiescunque manducabitis paneÌ„ hunc calicem hunc bibetis mortem Domini annunciabitis donec veniat How often so euer ye shall eate this bread and shall drinke this chalice ye shall shew the death of our Lord vntill he come Shewing may be either in word alone or in dede alone or in both together S. Paul speaketh in this place of that shewing which is by dede alone for eating and drinking is a kind of doing But not the eating of euery bread and the drinking of tuery chalice doth shew Christes death except it be this bread eaten that chalice drunken whereof S. Paule had sayd in Christes person a litle before This is my body which is broken for you and this cup is the new Testament in my blood The eating and drinking of â—… sacriâ—…iced body and blood doth euidently shew the death thereof as the which should not be eaten and drunken if it were not already consecrated by death vnto God For who doth eate the flâ—…sh of any creature whiles it yet liueth and hath blood in it Or how can blood be drunken in a cup if it be yet in the veines of the body The nature of the fact is such that it presupposeth the immolation and sacrifice and
not in dede a man it shall neuer be the fault of eating mans flesh to eate that bread vnworthely S. Paule saith not only he is gilty who eateth this bread but he is gilty of the body of Christe Howe can that be except this bread which he eateth be the body of Christ â–ª If this bread be his body seing it stâ—…ll appereth bread we must confesse that the body of Christ is really present vnder the forme of bread And truly that is the cause why S. Paule nameth it this bread for yâ— word sheweth him to meane the bread coÌ„secrated at yâ— altar that bread which that Priest froÌ„ thence deliuereth yâ— bread which that people receaueth at the Priests haÌ„d Whosoeuer eateth this bread vnworthely he is gilty of Christes body because that substance of this bread is that substaÌ„ce of Christes natural body made geueÌ„ vnder that forme of bread If it were not so the eater of this bread could not by his eating be gilty of Christe s body Otherwise the talke of S. Paule would no more hang together then if it were said he that toucheth vnworthely the kings garment is gilty of murdering his person I am loth to heape vp in this place yâ— manifold witnesses of the auncient Fathers whose wordes I haue partly touched also before concerning that euill men eate Christes body Now it shall suffise to shew that they make the same sequele of S. Paules wordes whiche I do for they shew the vnworthy receauer to be gilty of Christes body because he inuadeth the body of Christ and not because he eateth wheaten bread Theodoritus expoundeth these words whereuppon we dispute after this sort Illud autem caeâ—… These words he shal be gilty of the body and blood of our Lord signifie this much That as Iudas betrayd him and the Iewes theÌ„ selfes insulted and rayled shamfully and sclanderously at him so these shame defile him who take his most holy body with vncleane hands put it into a polluted and vnchaste mouth Lo the taking touching and eating vnworthely Christes body maketh them gilty as Iudas and the Iewes were gilty of Christes death Yea Haymo saieth It were better for him who cometh with mortall sinnes to this Sacramente neuer to haue knowen the way of truth then to goe backward and to do worse then an infidell Primasius faith He despiseth Christ and his body as the Iewes dyd who cometâ—… to it without trying of his own conscience Sedulius besides that common similitude of Iudas and the Iewes vseth another saying If no man dare put it into a filthy cloth or vessel how much more ought he not to put it into an vncleane harte Note good Reader that the self same Sacrament is put in the cloth or vessel which is put in the harte It is not therefore as the Sacramentaries blaspheme breade and wine that is put into a cloth and vessell after consecration and body and blood that whiles the body eateth breade and wine is in hart receaued The same thing is in the harte which is put in the vessell wherein the Sacra ment is kept S. Hierome vsing the same similitude of a cloth or vncleane vessell declareth farther that as Ioseph did folde the body oâ—… our Lord in a cleane sheete so must we receaue him with a cleane coÌ„science Dâ—…u menius declareth the fault of the euill men to be in that they touche the body of Christ with vncleane mouth and impure hands saying that as Iudas betrayed Christ and the Iewes did violently runne vppon him euen so they do shame to him Quòd sanctissimum ipsius corpus manibus impuris suscipiunt veluti tunc eum Iudaei tenuerunt execrando admouent ori Who doe take with impure hands his most holy body none otherwise then the Iewes at that tyme helde him and doe put it to theyr cursed mouth Theophylact sayth of the blood of Christ Qui indignè hunc hauserit nulluÌ„ ex eo fructuÌ„ adeptus frustra ac temerè Christi sanguinem fudit He that drinketh the blood vnworthely he hath shed in vayne rashly the blood of Christ. taking thereof no fruit And again The cause why euil men take no fruit saith Theophylact is not through the nature of that mysteries as the which both haue life in them and geue life but it chauÌ„ceth through the vnworthines of them that come to them who take hurte by them nonc other wise theÌ„ as the sonne is wont to hurte them who haue sore eyes Theophylacte meaneth that as it is oue sonne which shineth to whole aud to sore eyes but yet the sore eyes through their owne defecte take hurt thereof and the whole eyes take good so the mysteries are one to the good and to the bad concerning their owne nature being as he saith always of that nature both to conteyne life and to gene life But the fault why life is not takeÌ„ cometh of the vnworthy receauer We haue now harde that euill men receaue the same true body of Christ which the good men do receaue but not to yâ— same profit because they haue not wel prepared them selues We must not then thinke that euer any auncient Father was of this mind to say that euill men haue in their mouthes only bread and wine and the good men eate only the true body of Christ. That heresiâ—… is as farre from the opinion of the Fathers as it is farre from the truth of the Scriptures S. Chrysostom saith he will suffer his own blood to be shed rather then he will graunt the moste holy blood of our Lord to an vnworthy man Doth not he meane that he hath our Lords blood in his own hand at the tyme of celebrating the mysteries and that he will not deliuer the same to a knowen euill man S. Cyrill noteth that it is not sayd in vaine of Iudas Exiuit continuò he went foorth by and by Timet diabolus benedictionis virtutem ne sintillam in animo eius accenderit The deuill feareth the vertue of the consecration or blessing lest perhaps it might haue kendled a spark of grace or of repentance in his minde S. Augustine hauing spoken of Iudas who gaue him self to the deuill Non malum accipiendo sed male accipiendo not by taking an euill thing but by taking it in an euill maner concludeth generally of all euill men Corpus enim sanguis domini erat etiam illis quibus dicebat Apostolus Qui manducat indignè iudicium sibi manducat bibit for it was the body and blood of our Lord euen to those to whom S. Paule sayd â–ª he that eateth vnworthely eateth and drinketh damnation to him self It were easy after this sorte to allege a very greate number of yâ— olde Fathers but our aduersaries well knowing that we our selues beleue that the euill men albeit they receaue the substance of Christes body yet they doe not receaue the grace and vnitie
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
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
holding and lifting vp the consecrated host said with a lowd voice Sancta sanctis the holy things for holy men The quere and people answered Vnus sanctus vnus dominus vnus Iesus Christus in gloria dei patris cum Spiritu sancto Amen one holy one Lord one Iesus Christ in the glory oâ—… God the Father with the holy Ghost Amen The Priest by lifting vp the holy consecrated hoste proâ—…oketh the people to adore and receaue the body of Christ vnder the forme of bread saying as it were These holy thinges are not for prophane synners or those who are not baptized but for holy Christians whereby the Priest meneth aswel to shew where the holy things be that he speaketh of as for whom they be Uerily they are those which he hath in his hands which he lifteth vp and sheweth to them Which I do so much the more earnestly presse vppon because now a dayes the Sacramentaries would make vs beleue that the holy thinges which must be adored to sanctisy vs and which must be adored be stil in heauen and not vpon the altar vnder the form of bread Why doth then the Priest hold vp the sanctified host cry holy things if those â–ª which he sheweth be not the holy things Why doth he adde holy tbings for holy men if those men that be holy shall not content them selues with those holy things but must looke for a new supper from heauen at the same tyme But the people of the primatiue Churche well knowing the things that were shewed to be the most holy of all holies because they are the body blood of Christ yet wil not acknowledge them selues to be holy and therefore do aunswere that there is one holy and he their Lord Iesus whiche words Cyrillus of Hierusalem expoundeth thus Sacerdos dicit Sancta sanctis Sancta scilicet ea quae in ara proposita sunt aduentu Spiritus sancti sanctificata Sancti vos cum sitis sancto spiritu donati atque ita sancta sanctis conueniunt Vos deinde respondetis vnus sanctus c. The Priest saith holy things for holy men Uerily the holy things are those whiche are set forth in the altar consecrated by the comming of the holy Ghost And seing ye are holy indewed with the holy Ghost by that meanes holy things are mete for holy men But afterward ye aunswere one holy one Lord Iesus Christ. In dede he alâ—…ne is holy as who is holy by nature For although ye are holy yet ye are not holy by nature but by partaking by exercise and by praier Behold the holy things â—…re not only in heauen but also vpon the altar S. Chrysostom saith Cûm dicit Sancta sanctis hoc dicit Si quis non est sanctus non accedat When he saith holy things for the holy he meaneth this thing If any man be not holy let him not come And in an other place Consydera quaeso Mensa regalis est apposita Angeli mensae ministrantes ipse rex adest cae Marke I pray you the kingly table is set before thee Aungels minister at the table the king him selfe is present and thou standest by idle thy garments are foule and thou carest not But if they are cleane then adore and receaue By conference of these places we vnderstand that the Priest by saying holy things for holy men warned that none should comme but those that were cleane from synne And yet those that were holy might not receaue before they had acknowleged and confessed by theyr fact and word the king to be present The confession by wordes was to answer the Priest one holy one Lord Iesus Christ. The confession in fact dede was to bow doune bodily and to adore the holy things which are the body and blood of Christ and Christ him self Adore saith Chrysostom and communicate worship and receaue The eleuation of the consecrated host was made for these two purposes that the king of glory should be worshipped vnder the form of bread receaued of holy men By worshipping we conâ—…esse him to be holy by nature in his Godhead and person by communicating we partake the fruits of his passion Of this lifting vp of the holy host Dionysius writeth Pontifex laudatis sacris dei operibus ea quae diuinissima suut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sacrificat vel consecrat laudata oculis subiicit per symbola quae ritè proponuntur The Bishop hauing praised the holy works of God doth offer vp in sacrifice or consecrate the most diuine things and after praise geuen to them he sheweth them to the eyes by meanes of the signes which are duely set forth The consecrating or offering vp in sacrifice of the most diuine things doth shew the real presence of the body and blood which only are the diuine things and only may be consecrated or finally offered in the state of the new testameÌ„t The praising of theÌ„ whiche is made of the Bishop doth witnesse that they are not creatures without life as they were before consecration but such as may receaue of a reasonable man praise and thanksgeuing offered vp to them The shewing of them declareth that other men are prouoked to the like praysing and honouring of them The shewing of theÌ„ by meanes of the signes declareth their presence not to be intellectuall only albeit the maner thereof be spirituall but their presence to be reall vnder the formes of breade and wine For those are the signes whereof Dionysius speaketh Neyther must one of these things be considered alone without the other as some men consider them who suppose they are lifted vp to be only as it were a watcheword of lifting vp our harts to heauen whereas they are first said to be consecrated and then to be lifted vp If the diuine things that were consecrated be lifted vp they be not now a signe only but they are made the diuine things theÌ„ selues and those diuine things are shewed to vs by the signes Lo there are diuine things shewed signes also but the diuine things being praised are shewed by the signes What is that to say but vnder the signes of bread and wine the body and blood of Christ are shewed to be praised and honoured of other men as the Priest him self hath already praised and honoured them The word signifying the praise of them is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 things praised with an hymne which worde hymne is most peculiar to the things of God for hymnes are specially dedicated to God in the praise of his workes S. Basil speaking of the same matter saith Inuocationis verba dum ostenditur panis Eucharistiae poculum benedictionis quis sanctorum scripto nobis reliquit which of the Saincts hath left in writing to vs the wordes of innocation whiles yâ— bread of thankes geuing and the cup of blessing is shâ—…wed The word which S. Basile vseth
Epiphanius Who so beleueth not the saying to be true as him self spake it is fallen from grace and saluation Cyrillus Hierosolymitatus Seing Christ him self affirmeth so and sayth of the bread This is my body Who hereafter may be so bolde as to doubte S. Ambrosius Our Lord Iesus him self geueth witnes vnto vs that we take his body and blood Ought we any thing to doubte of his fidelitie and witnesbearing S. Chrysostome Because our Lord sayd This is my body let vs be intangled with no doubtfulnes but let vs beleue and see it with the eyes of vnderstanding Eusebins Emissenns Let all doubtfulnes of infidelitie depart for so much as the author of the gift him self also is witnes of the truth S. Cyrillus of Alexandria Doubt not whether it be true sith Christ sayth manifestly This is my body But rather take y◠word of our Sauiour in faith for seing he is y◠truth he lieth not And againe Let vs take great aduantage by the synnes of other men Geuing stedfast faith vnto the mysteries Let vs neuer in so high matters either thinke or speake that word Quomodo How S. Gregorius Nazianzenus Eate the body and drink the blood without confusion or doubte if at the least thou arte desirouse of life Neither do thou withdraw faith from the sayings which concerne the flesh The same thing S. Hilary Leo Isychius Theophylact Paschasius and diuerse others haue spoken requiring vs not to doubte of the truth of this mysterie and that specially because Christes words make full persuasion and take away al occasion of doubting But if they be figuratiue it is not so for then one may vnderstand this kinde of figure an other that kinde One may thinke it to be a Metaphore An other that it is Synechdoche The third that it is Metonymia The fourth that it is altogether an Allegorie or parable and without all ground of Historie Others doubt not to expound This is my body as if it were sayd in this with this or vnder this or about this my body is Yea from that day wherein the proper and natural sense of those words was denied I thinke neuer any words haue bene more vncertayne and more doubted of then This is my body Yet the Fathers were so farre from this vncertaintie that they counted him an infidell and ◅allen from grace and saluation who so did not beleue them euen as Christ spake them To wit euen so as they sound at the first sight If the truth of Christes body be the reall substance thereof they that intreating of the Eucharist affirme y◠truth of his flesh must nedes meane that his substance is really present in that Sacrament whereof they speake S. Hilarius speaking of the holy mysteries sayth There is left no place of doubting of the truth of flesh and blood Yet surely if the substance of flesh and blood were not present not only some place but the chief place of doubting were left S. Ambrosius It is the true flesh of Christ which we take Doubt ye nothing at all sayeth Leo concerning the truth of Christes body By like he spake to Catholikes for doubtlesse the Sacramentaries doubt so vehemently thereof that they beleue the truth of Christes body to be only at the right hand of his Father Isychius He receaueth by ignorance who knoweth not this to be the body and blood according to the truth Damascenus The bread and wine is not the figure of Christes body and blood God forbid But it is the self deified body of our Lorde The like assertion Theophylact Euthymius and diuerse other Fathers haue They that name the supper of Christ a figure a Sacrament or a remembrance do not therby exclude the true substāce of Christes flesh but they meane to shew that it is present vnder the signe of an other thing after a mysticall and secret maner S. Cyprian The diuine substance hath vnspeakably infused it self in the visible Sacrament S. Hilarius We take in dede the flesh of his body vnder a mysterie Lo the flesh the substance of God is present in truth but vnder a signe Ty◅illus Hierosolymitanus Vnder the figure of bread the body is geuen to thee Who now knowing the Sacrament to consist of two parts wil wonder that sometyme it is named of the one and sometyme of the other S. Augustine The body and blood of Christ shall then be life to euery man if that thing which is visibly receaued in the Sacrament be in the truth it self eaten spiritually B◅holde there is a thing in the Sacrament and so really it is there that it is visibly receaued Therefore it is not a spirituall thing only for no such matter is visibly receaued but it is there and thence it must be eaten spiritually and in y◠truth it self That is to say it must not only be taken into the mouth but into the hart also then it shal be life vnto the receauer This thing so receaued in the Sa cramēt must nedes be the body of Christ vnder y◠forme of bread for nothing els is to be eaten spiritually It were to rediouse to allege all that S. Augustine hath writen in this behalf but his other words being conferred with these wil make it plaine that whensoeuer he nameth it a figure he meaneth the truth hidden vnder a figure which is more shortly named a mysticall figure He that allegeth cause why the flesh and blood of Christ is not seen in the mysteries presupposeth albeit an vnuisible yet a most reall presence thereof S. Ambrose sayth it is not seen in his owne forme Vt nullus horror cruoris sit precium tamen operetur redemptionis To th' end there may be no lothsome abhorring of raw blood and yet that the price of our redemption may work So that by his iudgement the truth of blood is present to worke in vs the effect of Christes death and yet the foorm of blood is not seen because we should not abhorre to drink it Theophylact Although it seme bread to vs it is chaunged by vnspeakable operation Because we are weake and abhorre to eat rawe flesh specially the flesh of a man and therefore it semeth bread but in dede it is flesh If these words can be glosed with a figure then I know not what shall escape the hands of these figure makers They that acknowledge a change of the substāce of bread into Christes body must nedes meane a real presence of that body whereinto the change is made When Iustinus Martyr denyeth vs to take the things consecrated as common bread and drinke shewing also that we haue learned them to be not only sanctified in qualitie but to be the flesh and blood of Christ which is an other substance he doth vs to vnderstand that he meaneth them not to be after consecration the substance of common
bread and wine but to be that substaÌ„ce which Christe toke of his mother when the worde was made flesh S. Cyprian sheweth the bread which our Lord gaue to the Disciples to be changed not in shape but in nature Therefore as the forme remayneth so the substance is changed S. Ambrose It is not that which nature formed but that which the blessing hath consecrated If nature formed the substance of common bread and the words of blessing pronounced This is my body It is not afterward any more the substance of bread but of Christes body Grace is affirmed with the deniall of nature This argument is in maner as large as that of the reall presence but who so listeth to see more therein let him reade Gregorius Nyssenus in Oratione Catechetica Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus in Catechesi mystagogica 4. Eusebius Emissenus in Oratione 5. in Pascha Isychius in ca. 6. Leuitici Theophylact Euthymius in Euangelia Damascene li. 4. cap. 14. All that affirme the external sacrifice of Christes body blood must nedes teache the real presence thereof sith that thing which is absent can not be externally sacrificed S. Dionysius Areopagita sayth The Bishop excuseth him self for that he offereth a sacrifice aboue his worthynesse or power crying out decently Thou o Lord sayedst Make this thing for the remembrance of me Heretikes admit no Eucharists or offerings saith S. Ignatius in Theodorete because they do not confesse the Eucharist to be the flesh of the Sauiour A man would haue thought this had bene made in our tyme against the Sacramentaries It agreeth to them so well or rather they agree with the old Heretikes so much Eusebius Pamphili We offer a sacrifice full of God and dreadsull and most holy We sacrifice after a new maner according to the new Testament a cleane sacrifice or hoste Concilium Nicaenum Let vs vnderstand by faith that Lamb of God who taketh away the synnes of the world being situated in that holy table to be offered vnbloodely of the Priests and that we take in dede his preciouse body and blood And againe Neither rule nor custome hath deliuered that they who haue no power to offer sacrifice should deliuer the body of Christ to them who offer Hereof S. Ireneus S. Cyprian S. Augustine and al the reste may be readen for it is a knowen matter handled of the Fathers moste frequently What shall I say that the Fathers teache that the Sacrament ought to be adored with Godly honour as I shewed before That they teache euill men to receaue and to touche the body blood of Christe thereby to be gylty of theÌ„ as Iudas was That they teache our bodies to be nourished with Christes flesh and blood which can not be nourished with a thing absent That they teache vs to be naturally vnited to Christe whiles he dwelleth corporally in vs That they affirme Christes body to be vpoÌ„ the altar vpon the holy table in the hands in the mouthes and the bloode to be in the Cup That they geue it such names as only may agree o the substance of Christe calling it saluation light life Lorde Christe an offering wholy burnt a Sacrament which quiâ—…keneth and maketh vs liue for euer That they teache euery man to receaue the same substance one measure equall portion which is true neither of spirituall nor of corporall gifts but only of yâ— flesh of Christe really present vnder the forme of bread That they vse in shewing how it is sanctified the verbs creating making working consecrating representing or making present and such like which are not verified of a matter onlie spiritual or absent in substance That they speake of it couertly saying Norunt fideles the saithfull know because if they should plainely declare the truth thereof the infidels wold mocke at it as now the heretikes doc For it is a mystery aboue all reason of man which scoffing were not to be feared if it were a mere figure for all kindes of religioÌ„ haue ceremonies and figures That they haue applied it to the helping of sowles departed as being the very self substance which ransacked hell That they haue taught it to be the truth which hath succeded in place of the old figures That they haue vsed by the knowen truth thereof to proue that Christe had true flesh and true blood in a visible manner two natures in one person against all the olde Heretiks That they haue so far preferred it before Baptisme and the other Socraments that no crumme might be suffered to fall downe or to be lost which was not so in the water of Baptisme for men were baptized in the running water of the flood That the Catechumeni who were admitted to the preaching of the Ghospel which is an excellent signe of Christes flesh and blood yet might not see the Eucharist because it was also the truth it sel. vnder a signe that no man might eate it except he were first baptized and kept the commandements and yet the Cathechumeni had a sanctified bread also geuen to them which was a signe of Christ as S. Augustine doth witnesse Let now the discrete Reader weigh vprightly this doctrine so grounded in holy scriptures and auncient Fathers and he shal perceaue that what soeuer our aduersaries bring for the other syde it may proue the Sacrament to be a figure which we denye not but it can not disproue the reall presence of Christes body and blood vnder that figure which is the thing that we stand in against them ¶ The reall presence of Christes body is proued by the faith of the whole Church of God in all tymes and ages S. Paule disputing against them who saied that our bodies should not arise againe hath these wordes Si Christus non resurrexit inanis est praedicatio nostra inanis est fides vestra If Christ be not risen our preaching is voyd and your faith is in vaine The like may be saied concerning the Sacrament of the altar in whiche if the true substance of Christes body be not conteined the Apostles preaching is in vaine and our faith is nothing worth But S. Paule acccompteth it a great absurditie that either of them both should be voyd or in vaine and yet prosecuting farther that argument he addeth that if Christ be not risen Qui domierunt in Christo perierunt those that haue slepte in Christ are perished Those I say that haue slept in Christ that haue beleued in him loued him suffred martyrdom for him those are perished Right so it is if Christes body be not vnder the form of bread all our forefathers that haue slept in Christ are perished All theyr faith watching praier almose dedes all
them Therefore in this behalfe we are clere as who neuer departed from the Apostles nor froÌ„ their 〈◊〉 â–ª But your departing is knowen I 〈◊〉 that it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Berengarius about the yere of our Lord. 1000. I can tell when 〈◊〉 renewed the same heresy when Luther when Zwinglius began Who knoweth not where the Churches are whence they depâ—…rted To wit in Italy in France in Spaine in Germany so forth I can tell the CouÌ„cels wherin it hath bene condemned At 〈◊〉 at Uercels at Tours in the great Councel of Lateran at â—…iemia in Feance at Basill at Constance at Florence at Trent All things are knowen so manifestly concerning the begiuning and proceding of the Sacramentaries that they can not be denied To couclude our faith is 〈◊〉 by the testimonie of yâ— Church which in al ages hath beleued yâ— real presence of Christ in the Sacrament in so much that S. Hilary saith there is no place left of douting of the veritie of Christes fleshe blood why so nunâ—… enim ipsius Domini professione fide nostra verè 〈◊〉 est 〈◊〉 verè sanguis est â–ª for now both by the profession of our Lord him self by our faith it is fleshe in dede and blood in dede Lo By our Lordes profession and by our faith S. Hilary confesseth that all Christians beleued that the SacrameÌ„t of Cjroâ—…tes body and blood whereof he there spake was his fleshe in dede and his blood in dede for he had spoken before of the Sacrament which be called also a mystcrie and our Lords meate and the Sacrament of his flesh to be communicated to vs which Sacrament is Christes fleshe in dede and being receaued maketh the same fleshe naturally and corporally to dwell in vs. This was not only the minde of S. Hilary but he saith it was the profession of our Lord and the faith of the Churche whiche two groâ—…ids are so sure that no place of douting is left For the faith of the â—…hurch doth expound declare witnesse how Christ our Lord ment when he said my flesh is meate in dede This faith can not be vayne or voide for by it we ouercomme the world the deuyl and hel gates By it we know the difference betwene these words This is my body and these I am the dore the vine the way the rock is Christ Iohn Baptist is Elias and such like For no man taught in any age neither ChristiaÌ„ people did at tyme beleue that Christ was a material dore vine or way neither that any rock was turned into Christ neither that Ihon Baptist was Elias in person Faith always did vnderstand these propositioÌ„s and such like to be a phrase of speaking without any effect of working any farther thing But when a lawfull Priest saith vppon bread at the altar This is my body then no faithâ—…ul man euer douted but there was wrought the body and blood of Christ. and so our fathers and great grandfathers deliuered to vs that belefe Certainly a surer rule to vnderstand the word of God then faith is neuer was heard of for it is the life and graâ—… of the new testament which the holy Ghost hath geuen into the whole Church of God It is the gift of knowlege to euery good beleuer which directeth him to al truth S. Augustine shewing that the Manichees thought the visible sonne to be Christ although he might by many meanes haue impugned that errour yet he specially chose to say Catholicae Ecclesiae recta fides improbat tale commentum diabolicam doctrinam esse cognoscit credendo The right faith of the Catholike Church disproued that fable and knoweth it by beleuing to be a deâ—…ylish doctrine Euen so by beleuing the Sacrament of the altar to be Christes true flesh we know the doctrine of the Sacramentaries to be a fable aud an heresy Epiphanius writing of purpose against figuratiue and allegoricall interpretatious geueth likewise a most clere witnesse of the belefe of all the Church in his tyme and before him For disputing what it is for man to be made according to the image of God He shewith at the last whatsoeuer it be once it is true because God through grace hath geuen man that image Though we can not tell wherein it standeth And for example he bringeth how Christe tooke at his last supper bread and wine and when he had geuen thanks he sayd This is my body and this is my blood 〈◊〉 Epiphanius nameth not these things because the 〈◊〉 should not by his bookes vnderstaÌ„d our mysteries coÌ„sequeÌ„tly he sheweth that the thing coÌ„secrated is not like neither to the manhod of Christ nor to his Godhead For it is of a shape and to looke vnto a dead or vnsensible thing yet Christ by grace hath said This is my body and This is my blood Et nemo non fidem habet sermoni Qui â—…nim non credit esse ipsum verum sicut ipse dixit is excidit à gratia salute and euery man beleueth the saying For who so doth not beleue the saying as him selfe said it he is fallen from grace and saluation If the word saying be this is my body this is my blood If euery man beleue the saying if he that beleueth not the saying to be true and so to be true euen as Christ spake it as he sounded it as he vttered it if he that beleueth not these things be fallen from grace and saluation who wil now beleue that this is the signe of my body and not the truth thereof and then he must say likewise that in dede we are not made according to the image of God Euery man in the tyme of Epiphanius did beleue not only yâ— truth of Christes body blood in heauen nor only the dwelling thereof in vs by faith but euery man did beleâ—…e this selfe saying this speache and this proposition This is my body If this saying must be beleued it must be true if the speache it selfe be true the thing thereby signified is true But the wordes doe signifie the substance of Christes body for his body is a substance therefore it is true yâ— this is the substaÌ„ce of Christes body But if it be still bread it is not so for material bread is not the body of Christ therefore it is so the substance of his body that it is not bread or wine which is the signe of his body as the Sacramentaries teach In this saying This is my body no bread is named no signe no figure â—…ut only the selfe body of Christe which is one certaine substance Therefore all the Church in the tyme of Epiphanius and alwaies before did beleue the thing pointed vnto in those words to be the substaÌ„ce of Christes body For how so euer it semed vnsensible as also it is not sene how we are made according to yâ— image of God yet yâ— saying was beleued euen
as Christ said it sicut ipse dixit as him selfe said it without glosing without additioÌ„s without figures orparables euen as Christ spake it so it was beleued and beleued of euery man And who so did not beleue it was rekoned a damned person without grace without saluation without life euerlasting Thus haue we heard two notable witnesses of the faith of the whole Churche the one a Latine S. Hilarius the other a grecian Epiphanius But now I will bring foorth not as before the old Fathers bearing witnesse of the belefe of the people but I will bring foorth the whole people it selfe yea the people of the primatine Church You shall heare al the citizens of the house of God through out the world witnessing with one voice in one word their most constaÌ„t faith touching the Sacrament of the altar Amen is an hebrew word which partly wisheth and partly affirmeth signifying as it were at once be it so and it is so It signifieth be it so when it is ioyned with praiers and petitions It signifieth it is so when it foloweth any parte of Christes doctrine which is alredy pronounced or affirmed Thence we reade so oft in holy scripture Amen amen I say vnto you which is to say verely verely S. James the Apostle S. Iustin the martyr S. Clement S. Cyrill of Hicrusalem S. Basil S. Ambrose and S. Chrysostom doe witnesse that the people vsed at Masse tyme to answer Amen Which thing they did specially twise once at the consecration as well of the body as of the blood and againe at the tyme of communion At the consecration the Priest in the person of Christ pronounceth most determinatly ouer bread This is my body and ouer wine This is my bloood Therefore when the people answer to those blessed sayings Amen they affirme the same that is affirmed as though they said with one voice It is verely the body of Christ and it is verely the blood of Christ whereof you speak And least you should thinke this coÌ„ment to be of myne making S. Ambrose expounded yâ— same word before me saying Ipse clamat dominus Iesus hoc est corpus meuÌ„ our Lord Iesus him selfe crieth this is my body He calleeh the crying of our Lord when his minister crieth so in his name For of that crying he speaketh as it may appere by the word folowing Wel Our Lord Iesus him self crieth out this is my body before the blessing of yâ— heauenly words it is named another kind after consecration that body is signified him self calleth it his own blood before consecration it is called an other thing after consecration it is called blood and thou sayest Amen that is to say as S. Ambrose him selfe expoundeth it verum est it is true That the mouth speaketh let the inward mind confelse that the speache soundeth let the hart think Hitherto S. Ambrose who would not bid the people thinke that whiche the speache soundeth if the speache were figuratiue for a figuratiue speache soundeth otherwise then we ought to thinke thereof as when we say God is sory Christ is made synne the rok is Christ. As it was the custome of the primatiue Church for the people to say Amen straight vppon the consecration of the body and blood whereby they shewed them selues to beleue the wordes of Christ and the work of the Priest euen so was it also the custome that when the tyme of communion came as S. Clement and diâ—…erse others doe witnesse the Bishop should geue the oblation to the people saying â–ª Corpus Christi the body of Christ and he yâ— toke it should say Amen it is true And yâ— Deacon wheÌ„ he deliuered yâ— chalice did say sanguis Christi calix vitae â–ª yâ— blood of Christ yâ— chalice of life he that drank said Amen so it is or that is true To which custome being in vse at his tyme S. Ambrose alluding writeth thus Dicit tibi Sacerdos corpus Christi tu dicis amen hoc est verum quod confitetur lingua teneat affectus The Priest saith to thee the body of Christ and thou saiest Amen that is true that which thy tonge confesseth let thy hart kepe But what speake I of S. Ambrose Would the Apostles haue made all the people to cry amen to that which had not bene so as the word did sound Would they haue made the simple men to witâ—…esse their belefe to such words as neded a farther commeÌ„t or interpretation It is rather to be thought yea to be most assuredly beleued that they ordeined that custome to thend all men might know that the thing consecrated vppon the altar was in dede the body of Christ S. Augustine beareth witnesse to the same custome saying Habet magnam vocem Christi sanguis in terra cùm eo accepto ab omnibus gentibus respondetur Amen the blood of Christ hath a greate voice in earth when after it is taken all nations aunswere amen Haec est clara vox sanguinis quam sauguis ipse exprimit ex ore fidelium eodem sanguine redemptorum This is the cleere voice of the blood the which voice the blood it selfe forceth out of the mouth of the faithfull being redemed with the same blood Pope Leo the greate agreeth with S. Clement S. Ambrose and S. Augustine Sic sacrae mensae communicare debetis caeâ—… Ye ought so to communicate of the holy table that ye doubt nothing at all of the truth of the body and blood of Christe for yâ— thing is taken in the mouth which is beleued in faith And Amen is in vayne answered of them who dispute against that which is receaued This place declareth that some disputation was moued by some of the heresy of Manicheus who liued in Rome vnder Leo against the real presence of Christes body and blood vnder the forme of bread For seing the Maniches beleued not Christ to haue a true body at all they might well doubt of the truth of his body and blood in the Sacrament of the altar But that holy Bishop biddeth the people not doubt thereof shewing that we do not eate the body of Christ only by faith but also by mouth Now because Leo setteth the receauing of the truth of Christes body by mouth against the receauing thereof by faith only we may coniecture that heretikes euen in those days were of the mind that their ofspring is now of verily to draw as much truth from Christes works as may be and to set all things vpon faith spirit and vnderstanding But Leo proueth his doctrine by the generall custome of the whole Church â–ª wherein the people answering Amen did in open words witnesse them selues to beleue that it was true which the Priest sayd concerning the body of Christ. Now because some of them who vsed to say Amen disputed whether the substance and truth of Christes body were present in the mouthes of
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
Albeit he be spirituallie the true vine and the true Manna For seing he was not these things really thei can not be said of him really But he is man in dede and therefore offered in dede killed in dede buried in dede and eateÌ„ in dede For now as we beleue the real death of him so must we beleue the real â—…ting of him because the truth belonging to eche of them is to be taken according to the true nature of man whiche he toke And as it was mete for him to be killed in the shape of man so he would be eaten in the shape of bread Iu. S. Augustine vtterly remoueth the natural office of the body What preparest thou thy teeth Beleue and thou hast eaten Beleuing in him is the eating of the bread of life San. You are one of yâ— most impudent men that euer any creature had to doe withall S. Augustine spake these wordes to the faithlesse Iewes with whome Christe talked at Capharnaum who gaped for bodily meate and belly chere Now when Christ had said worke the meate which tarieth to life euerlasting S. Augustine saieth to the Iew who soughte to haue his bellie filled what preparest thou thy teeth M. Iuel knoweth that when Catholikes come to the SacrameÌ„t of the altar they whet not theyr teeth as if they came to a carnall banket but they beleue eate first by beleuing to th end they maie afterward eate by mouthe worthely And therefore S. Augustine confesseth vs to receaue Christ by mouth also but by a faithfull mouth not by a glotoâ—…ouse mouth His words are Hominem Christum Iesum caet fideli corde atque ore suscipimus We doe receaue with a faithful hart and mouth the man Iesus Christ geuing his fleshe vnto vs to be eaten and his blood to be drunk although it may seme more horriâ—…le to eate maÌ„s flesh theÌ„ to kil it drink mans blood then to shed it When S. Augustine saith we receaue Christ with a faithfull mouth he sheweth that â—…his meaning is not to remoue vtterly the naturall office of the body as M. Iuell most impudently saith but he meaneth we should not come to the Sacrament for to satisfie our bodily hunger but with a faithfull harte and mouth Where if he spake not of reall drinking by mouth he would neuer haue said it is more horrible to drink mans blood then to shed it but now although it be so horrible to drink mans blood in that corruptible sort which mortal blood hath yet Christes blood is geuen to vs in a miraculonse manner without corruption or lothsomnes and is receaued euen in the mouthes of the faithful But I can not so leaue you M. Iuel Did S. Augustine vtterly remoue the office of the mouth Said he not that for the honour of so great a Sacrament it pleased the holy Ghoste Vt prius in os christiani corpus dominicum intraret quà m caeteri cibi that our Lords body should enter into the mouth of a christian man before other meates and yet is the office of the body remoued and that vttterly remoued Where is M. Iuell your mind your wit your sense Where is your care of God regarde to your good name or the feare to abuse the holy mysteries Harding Buceâ—… taught the body of Christe to be truly and substantially present exhibited and taken Iu. Hitherto M. Harding hath alleged nor auncient doctour nor old CouÌ„cel San. As though we had not disputed this long time of yâ— Nicene Councâ—…l where 318. auncient Fathers were gathered together Iu. What reasons lead him to yeld to the other side for quietnessake I remit vnto God San. In a matter of suche weight he ought not to haue yelded for quictnes sake sith S. Paule resisted S. Peter for a matter of much lesse importance as wherein they rather disagreed in facte then in doctrine as Tertullian witnesseth Iu. If M. Harding had found any other doctor he would not haue made his entry with Bucer San. Beside the Nicene councel which you haue heard already ye shal heare other doctours anon Iu. The councel of the eight Cardinals at Rome might rather haue bene scoft at then this brotherly conference San. The Cardinals sought not a new faith as Bucer and Luther did but the purging of old faultes they came not together to set forth a new doctrine but to amend the life of euil men Tertullian saieth well hllic scripturaruÌ„ expositionuÌ„ adulteratio deputanda est vbi diuersitas inuenitur doctrinae There the couÌ„terfeting both of the scriptures of yâ— expositioÌ„s is to be assigned where yâ— diuersity of doctrine is fouÌ„d such diuersity is betwen the Lutherans and Zuinglians but not betwen the Catholiks Iuel If we compare voices thei of wittemberge were moe in number Sander Nay sir all the Catholike nations of Christendome communicated with the Cardinals but your doctrine was then scant sixtene yeres old and had neuer a citie town or village in the world that wholy communicated with it at that daye The number must not be tried by the men gathered in a house together but by the men agreing in the church together For yâ— who le Church is one house oâ—… god Iuel If we compare knowledge thei were better lerned San. Of new sprong teachers 〈◊〉 said Omnes tument â—…mnes scientiam pollicentur Al of them do swel with pride and euerie one doth promise knowledge But on the other side Nemo sapiens nisi fidelis No man is wise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 faithfull The Cardinals therefore being faithfull were also â—…etter lerned then your men of witteÌ„berge Again Tertullian sheweth that certein men are wont to saie whie did this woman or that man being moste faithfull most wise most practised in the Church goe into thaâ—… side that is to saie hold this or that new opinion But he answereth they are neither to be counted wise nor faithfull nor men of practise whom heresies can change Therefore those that camâ—… together at witteÌ„berge seing thei chaÌ„ged their old faith soughâ—… out a new thei could not be lerned as thei ought to haue bene But otherwise also thinck you M. Iuel that ani wise man wil grant you that Luther and Bucer with their companions were better lerned them Contarenus Sadoletus Polus and Theatinus with their fellowes Is it enough for you to haue said it in bare words without any proufe at all Iuel If we compare purposes thei sought peace in truth and the glorie of god Sander Cal you that peace when thei diuided Germanie from the rest of ChristendoÌ„ You are of those who wold cure the sores of the people by vâ—…ine words saying to them peace peace when as in dede there was no peace Iuel If we compare issue god hath blessed their doings and geuen force vnto his word Sander Touching your case Tertullian saith Deverbi administratione
Patrone of his own sonne Shal not M. Iuel be swetely rewarded for this geare if he die in this excessiue opinioÌ„ Heare I pray you what S. Hilary saith of his own doctrine in this very booke Cura est nobis vt primum It is our care first to teache those things which are holy and perfite and sound and that our talke not wandering by certain by turnings windings and sodenly appering out of not haunted and creping holes shuld rather shew then seeke the truth Thus did he professe to teache perfite and sound things and vndouted truthes which M. Iuell calleth excessiue beause they excede the cumpasse of his heresy contein yâ— Catholike truth And wheÌ„ S. Hilarie cometh to yâ— very matter whereof we speake at this tyme he doth not only say it is sound perfice holy and true doctrine but he saith he lerned it of Christ him self Euen concerning this very point that the naturall verity of Christe is in vs for that he sayd My fleshe is verily meate But all the Fathers all the scriptures which resist M. Iuels phansie are hot violent excesâ—…iue as S. Augustine moste truly faith If the opinion of any errour hath first possessed the minde whatsoeuer the scripture affirmeth otherwise figuratum homines arbitrantur men thinke it figuratiue ¶ That the place of 〈◊〉 â—…erteineth to the Sacrament of Christes supper HArding Gregorie Nyssene speaking of the bread vvhich came dovvne from heauen saith by vvhat meane shall a bodiles thing be made meate to a body Iuel Gregorie Nyssene is newly set abroade with sundry corruptions San. If this vaine fable may be admitted euery man shal be corrupted when it pleaseth you If he be corrupted he is corrupted by your faction for his works haue ben no where so fully printed as at Bale called in Latine Basilea which is a citie of your profession 3. Moreouer you very oft bring his authority and how are you sure that he was not corrupted at all in those places which you allege 4. Yea farther you allege for your purpose this very treatise and this very side of the leaf whence D. Harding toke this authority and that as well before the words brought by D. Harding as after Iuel He speaketh not one word neither of Christes naturall dwelling in vs. 2. Nor of the Sacrament San. Out vppon this impudency M. Iuel you haue taken vpon you the forhead of a harlot are without all feare shame or hoâ—…estie Doth not Gregorie Nyssene speake in that place one word of the Sacrament he speaking of Moyses life by occasion thereof cometh to shew the wandering of the children of Israel in the desert where he saith â—…fter that thei had drunck of yâ— stone all nourishment which thei had brought out of Aegipt failed theÌ„ and a simple meate to looke vnto but diâ—…erse iâ—… tast was rained down to them which thing did signifie saith he that we must cleanse our minds by saith by Baptism by traâ—…aile by all vertue by doctrine of the Ghospell so that al Aegiptiaâ—…al kind of liâ—…ing to wit all the multitude of sinnes failing vs we must receaue â—…oelestem cibum quem nulla nobis satio agriculturae artibus produxit the heauenly meate which no sowing hath by the art of plowing brought foorth vnto vs. but it is bread prepared for vs without sede without plowing without any other work of man that bread flowing from aboue is found in the earth Hitherto he hath said that we haue a true manna which we must receaue and how I praie you but as the children of Israel did receaue their manna and then we must receaue it by mouth as thei did receaue their maÌ„na by mouth But what is our manna Forsoth a meate which came down from heauen as the old manna did a meate not gotten out of the ground but rainig froÌ„ heaueÌ„ What raining is that The Incarnation of Iesus Christ who taking flesh of the virgin without the meane of the sede of man came down from heauen and was in the earth man amoÌ„g men No saith the heritike UaleÌ„tinus for exaÌ„ple or Manicheus Christ toke no true flesh of yâ— virgin Yes saith Gregorius NisseÌ„ Panis enim et caet for the bread which came down from heauen which is the true meate which is obscurely signified by this historie of Manna is not a thing bodilesse Thus much he said against the heretikes who denied the truth of Christes body well goe foorth syr I praie you For the heretikes will not admit your bare word proue that which you say Quo enim pacto res incorporea corpori cibus fiet For by what meane shal a thing which lacketh a body be made meate vnto the body Here Gregorie Nyssen presuppoâ—…eth that Christ incarnated is made meate vnto our bodies because he is our true Manna But saith he yâ— could not be so if Christ had no true flesh for a thing without a body can not be made meate vnto the bodie but Christ is so reallie made meate vnto oâ—…r bodies that thereby Nyssâ—…s proueth he had a true and reall body so that al the principal mater in that place is of this Sacrament and of Christes naturall dwelling in our bodies Therein Manna is fulfilled Which Manna rained from heauen into the earth as Christ came from his Fathers bosome into the Uirgins womb The same Manna was afterward eaten by the Iewes corporally as Christ after his incarnation was corporally eaten at his supper of the Apostles Before yâ— Iewes did eate Manna they were prepared with passing ouer the red sea with labour and with water of the rocke And before we come to Christes supper we are prepared by Baptism and good life and preaching S. Gregorie Nyssene doth make eating by faith a preparatioÌ„ to eate the last supper worthely Oportet fide Baptismate caet We must cleanse our soules by faith and Baptism demum and so at the length with a purified mind receaue the heaueÌ„ly meate It is not eating by faith M. Iuel that he speaketh of Faith goeth before it and the receauing of this heauenly meate is a farther kind of eating This meat being yâ— bread brought foorth of the virgin without tylling is made meat vnto the body Doe you heare M. Iuel It is made meate vnto the body Not only to the vnderstanding but to the body It is so really made meat vnto the body that of necessitie thence it is deduced that it self is a bodily and corporal thing Which argument were none if it were not corporally receaued into our bodies For by faith God the Father and the Sonne and the holy Ghost dwell in vs and make their mansion in our harts as it were in houses and our bodies are the temple of the holy Ghost But such dwelling as it proueth not God the Father or the holy Ghost to haue bodies so doth it