the crosse Shedde he there wyne of the grape for the remissioÌ„ of oure synnes Gaue he not his owne natural body shed his owne precious bloud then for vs Promysed he not afore to his apostles to gyue them bread that shold be his owne very natural body which he Ioan. 6. wold gyue by death for the lyfe of the world Who is then my lord so folysh to beleue this your doctrine But ye go forward sayng Althoughe none eateth the body and The bisshop fo 5. pa. 2. drinketh the bloud of christ but they haue eternal lyfe as appeareth by Ihons wordes afore rehersed yet the good c. My lord ye vnderstand not christes The confutation wordes writteÌ„ by S. Ihon for the right sense of them is that euery maÌ„ which eateth and drinketh christes body and bloud worthilie hath euer lastyng lyfe as saynt paul expoundeth that place 1. Cor. 11. wryting to the corinthians That this only was christes meanyng there yt shal be proued anon by gods grace Now ye recite S. pauls words which sayeth Who so euer shal eate of this 1. Cor. 11. bread and drinke of this cup vnworthilie he shal be gyltie of the body bloud of the lord and then ye saye thus Here S. paul sayeth not that he that The bysshop eateth the bread and drinketh the cup of the lord vnworthily eateth and drinketh the body and the bloud of the lord but is gyltie of the body bloud of the lord but what he eateth drinketh he declareth sayng He eateth and drinketh his oune damnation What yf S. paul say not my lord that The confuâ—â—tion the vnworthy receauer of the holy sacrament receaueth our lords body his bloud Is that enoughe to proue that he receaueth them not as ye defende Who that hath any learning in logicke wil so reason Doth not paul affirme that the vnworthy receauour of this blessed sacrament is gyltie of the body and bloud of christ May we iustely say that he which eateth only bakers bread drinketh wyne of the grape is gyltie of christes body and bloud May à man be gyltâ—e of the vnworthy eating of à thing which he eateth not at al Wyl any wyse man say that I am gyltie of eating á capoÌ„ wheÌ„ I eate but mylke Or may we say wel that he is gyltie of mysse intreating of à kynges oune person when he doth abuse only his image or picture Why theÌ„ haue ye my lord destroyed so many images of christ and his holy saintes images Were they not more lyuely and manifest pictures and representatioÌ„s of christes passion than bread and wyne are That they so were I wil shortly by gods grace proue to your reproche shame that haue so leudly destroyd them wythout al good ground and cause sufficient Moreouer ye are disceaued The bysshop when ye saye that S. paul declareth what the vnworthy receauer 1. Cor. 11. of the sacrament eateth and drinketh when he sayeth that he eateth drinketh his oune damnation For he declareth only by those wordes what ponyshement he shal haue that vnworthily receaueth christes body bloud Dyd ye not see that paul vsed there à figure and ment that he did eate and drinke that bread and bloud vnto his oune damnation that vnworthilie receaued them But of this sufficient ye say thus agayne But al these forsayed admonitions exhortations and confortes doth the The bysshop fo 12. ca. 15 papistes as much as lyeth in them take away from al christien people by their transubstantation The confutation How proue ye this my lord I besech yow Marry thus say ye For yf we receaue The bysshop no bread nor wyne in the communion then al the lessons and confortes be gone which we should learne and receaue by eating of bread The confutation drinking of wyne It is very false my lord that ye say here Why did ye not proue it to be true but because ye could not I am very certen Wherfore may we not learne al such lessons by that only that bread and wyne are taken of the priest to be consecrated and are so tourned yn to christes flesh and bloud that their formes and qualitees remayne stil For as the bread wyne which are consecrated be made of many graynes of corne and of dyuers grapes of the vyne lykewyse are Cyprianus al Christian people ioyned spiritually throughe fayth hope loue and grace Marke reader vnto Christ the head of the church which is his mystical body Seconly as the bread and wyne that we do eate drinke daily are so turned yn to oure fleash and bloud that they make but one whole body nor are distincted from the other our flesh and bloud euen so be al christen people spiritually ioyned both vnto christ and also one vnto an other throughe the worthy receauing of christes fleash and bloud yn the sacrament in to which bread and wyne of lyke nature and sorte were chanuged by the word and pouer of god that they do make altogether but one body of christ which is the church This thing is my lord sufficiently represented and signified by the bread and wyne layed vpon the aulter to be consecrated and by their shapes apparaunces qualitees remayninge there stil and their substaunces presence is not requyred therunto thoughe ye say that it is but prouing not your sayng But yf I should graunt as luther teacheth his scholers that the substance of bread and wyne remayneth in the sacrament what should that that ye here saye make for your opinion Doth not the lutherians hold and defende that the substaunce also of bread and wyne is yn the sacrameÌ„t with christes very natural body and bloud How can ye my lord then proue this argument vnto à lutherian The substance of bread wyne doth stil abyde yn the sacrament ergo theryn My lord laboureth al yn vayne is not christes body bloud but only bread and wyne as ye say See ye not then that al this your labour was cleane il speÌ„t lost for therby ye proued not your purpose Noue ye say that the doctrine of transubstantiatioÌ„ doth subuerte our fayth in christ and to proue that your sayng ye write after this maner For this sacrament is ordoÌ„ned in bread and wyne which The bysshop fo 1â— pa. 2. be foodes for the body to signifie and to declare vnto vs our spiritual foode by christ then yf our corporal feeding vpon the bread and wyne be but phantastical so that there be no bread nor wyne to feed vpon althoughe they appeare to be there than yt doth vs to vnderstand that our spiritual feadyng in christ is also phantastical and that The confutation in dede we feede not in christ As this your sayng my lord ys grounded vpon no reason nor authorite euen so it may be sufficient for me at this tyme to denye it and to
of them yn to mans flesh and bloud but not that bread and wyne that are consecrated but other of lyke nature Wherfore this authour ys against you my lord as IReneus is whom ye alleage sayinge The bread wherin wegeue than es The bysshop jo 22. pa. 2 vnto god althoughe yt be of the earth yet when the name of god is called vpon it it is not than common bread Lib. 43. but the bread of thankes geuinge hauiÌ„ge two thinges in yt one earthely and the other heauinlie Here ye alleage The confutation saint IReneus wrong as ye dyd Iustinus for he hath thus butr Houshal it appeare to them that that bread yn wich thankes are geuen is the lordes bodie and the chalice of is bloud yf they cal hym not his sonne wich made the world Then à good way afterward he writeth this As the bread which is of the earth feelynge or perceauinge the callinge vpon of god is not now common bread but à good grace or à thaÌ„kes geuinge consistinge in twoo thiÌ„ges an earthilie and an heauynlie euen so our bodies also receauing the good grace or sacrament are not now apte to be corrupted hauinge hope of resurrectioÌ„ what maketh this autour now for yow my lord telle me Calleth he not that bread which is in the sacrament christes bodie Sayeth he not also that it is not commen bread Doth not this doctour saye that it is à good grace that it preserueth our bodies from euer lastinge corruption Are these the effectes properties of bakers bread Who is so madde to beleue that Now ye The bysshop li. 2. pa. 2. fo 23. aske what Irenaeusâ—ment by the heaueÌ„ly thinge which is yn the sacrameÌ„t but the sanctification that cometh by the inuocation of the name of god what by the earthilie but the very bre of the earth To that I saye that this exposition is made of your oune head The confutation contrarily to his meanyng and mynde as his oune wordes afore mentioned declare Wherfore he meaneth by the heauenly thinge christes blessed bodie which was first fourmed and made in his mothers wombe aboue nature by the heauenly pouer and operation Marke reader of the holy goost and in to which by the heauenly wordes of christ by the inuocation of the holy goost by prayers and by goddes heauenly pouer and workinge the bread which came from the earth was turned in the tyme of the consecration And by the earthely thinge he ment that earthely bread was taken to be consecrated and that his properties qualitees quantite and shape doth stil remayne in the sacrament Wherfore this authorite seruith not my lord for your il purpose and as muche doth Origenes whom ye now alleage sayinge The matter of the bread auaileth nothinge but goeth doune in to the bealie The bysshop lib. 2. fo 23. pa. 2. and is auoyded douneward but the woord of god spoken vpon the breade is it that auaileth To this I might aunsweare In cap. 15 Matthaei Lâ—b 1. paschali The confutation that this writer was à great heretike as Theophilus and other declare and the chyefe scholemaistre of errours but I wil not so do for he erred not as muche as I haue red in this matter of the sacrament and is plainlie vpon my syde against my lordes doctrine in diuers places of which this is one vpon these wordes of Matthew Homi. 5. in Diuersos Domine non sum dignus c for these are his wordes When ye do receaue Origenes is against my lordes doctrine that holye meate and vncorrupted disshe whan thow doest vse the breade and cuppe of lyse thow eatest and drinkest the bodie of our lord than our lord entreth in to thy house What could he haue sayed more plainlie against this my lordes opinion Sayeth he not that we do eate oure lordes bodie and drinke his bloud and that thaÌ„ oure lord doth entre in to oure house which is oure bodie I myght bringe many other sentences of this writers to proue this purpose but I wil not because I wold be short Now to the examination of this place which ye my lord do here alleage very vnperfectlye to further your matter with for these In id Matthaei is Non quod intrat in os c. Fo. 23 pa. 2 are the authours wordes â–ª But some man chauncynge vpon this place wil saye that as that thyng which goeth in to the mouth defileth not man yea althoughe it were iudged polluted of the Iewes lyke wise that thinge which goeth in to the mouth maketh hym not holy that eateth it thoughe the more simple people do thinke that the bread doth sanctifie hym which bread is called our lordes bread If al that entereth in at the mouth goeth away doune yn to the * belli is cast out iÌ„to the draught that meate also which is halowed by goddes worde prayer touchinge that that it hath material goeth away in to the bealie is throwen furth in to the feage but concerninge the prayers which came to it it is made profitable after the portion of mans faith causynge à mans soul to se wel lokynge towardes that that is profitable for hym This origenes First The Confutation note reader how doubtfully he speaketh determynith not the matter SecoÌ„dly marke how il he applieth the se christes wordes That thinge which Matth. 15. entereth in at the mouth defileth not man Al that goeth in to the mouth goeth in to the stomake or bealie and is caste out in to the iakes For these wordes were spoken onlie of bodily fode and nothinge of any spiritual meate such as is this holie sacrament and therfore this authour erred herin and was not origen Thirdly he affirmeth that the bread is halowed not onlie by goddes word but also by prayer which my lord denieth Fourthlye he affirmeth that that thing which eÌ„tereth in to mans mouthe doth not sanctifie hym thoughe it be oure lordes bread that is consecrated by goddes word and praier â–ª which wordes declare open ly that origen neuer wrote them for they are cleane contrary to his wordes in an other booke which is vndoubtedly his where he writeth this Wherfore Lib. 8. contra celsum let celsus as à man that knoweth not god geue thankes to the deuelles but we obeynge the maker of thinges after that we haue geuen god thankes for his benefites bestowed vpon vs do eate the bread which was offered in sacrifice and is certenly by petition and prayer made à certen holier bodie which bodie maketh theÌ„ more holie that do vse that selfe same with à deuoter mynd Hou saye ye now my Marke lord Doth not origen affirme plainly here that the bread when it is consecrated by prayer is made à holier bodye and that it doth make the deuote and godly eater of it more holy than he was afore Can this then stande with that place which ye
and chaunged That this was saint Ambrose mynde there it appeareth plaīly by these his wordes that do folowe as à conclusion of his treaty Lib. 4. ca. 4 de sacramētis yn this matter Can not then the word of christ which hath made of nought that thinge that was not change the thinges that are in to that thinge which they were not What wold à man desire to be spoken more plainly then this is my lord for the confutation of your opinion and to proue that saint Ambrose is against it He sayeth also thus Thow doest perchaūcesaye My breade is commōly vsed but this is breade before the wordes of the sacrament after that the consecration is commen vnto it christes flesh is made of the breade Is not this manifestly written against your teachinge Marke my lord Now to the wordes which ye do alleage here foryow but not as they were writtē perfectely fullie for this is in that place of Ambrose If thē there be so great strengthe in oure lord Iesus worde that the thinges which were not should begynne to be how much more is that his word wourkinge that the thinges be which were and be chaunged yn to an other thinge Heauen was not the sea was not the earth was not but heare hym that sayeth He sayed and they were made he cōmaūded Psal 32. 148. they were created That I may then make aunsweare the bodie of christ was not afore the consecration but I tel the after the consecratiō that now christes bodie is there He sayed and it was made he bade it was created This Ambrose Now it is manifest that S Ambrose ment not that the substāce of bread doth remayne in the holy sacramēt but he ment by these wordes vt sint quae erant that the thinges be that were that goddes word doth preserue from perisshinge the thinges which were not before they were made vntil suche tyme that he chaungeth them in to other thinges so he doth also the bread wyne cōtinue kepe in their beinge vntil he turne their substance in to christes bodie bloud at the tyme of the cōsecration Wherfore this is enoughe to S Ambrose Now ye alleage S Austē which sayeth thus as peter Martyr and Aecolampadius allegeth hym in à certen sermon to infantes which is not amonge al his bookes that are in print nor worthy to be ascribed vnto hym That which The bysshop Fol. 2. pa. 2. yow see in the aulter is the bread and the cup which also your eies do shew yow But fayth sheweth further that bread is the bodie of christ the cup his bloud In primis S Austen here teacheh that aulters ought to be had for The confutation the sacramēt and ye my lord do cast them doune against which thinge I haue wrote à boke Secondly Austen sayeth not here that the bread and wyne remayne stil in the holy sacrament and that christes bodie is not Aulters there but onlye that we do see bread and the cuppe vpon the aulter which wordes may be verified of the bread not yet consecrated and that after the consecration our fayth teacheth vs that bread is christes bodie that is to saye that his bodie is the meate and fode of mans soul and that his bodie lyeth there couered vnder neath the forme of bread as oure fayeth sheweth to vs. Wherfore this authorite maketh not for your purpose as this doth not that now foloweth taken out of Saynt Austen but plainly against it Lib. sent prospe Th◠honour of the sacrament fo◠he sayeth thus We do honoure vnder the forme or kynde of bread and wyne which forme we see thinges inuisibles that is to say flesh and bloud And we do not take these twoo kyndes as we dyd before the consecracration for we confesse faythfullye that before the consecration there is bread and wyne which nature made but after the consecration christes fleash and bloud which the blessinge hath consecrated Is it possible for any man to speake more plainlye against your opinion my lord than Saint Austen doth in these wordes that are written yn that booke out of which ye alleage hym for yow Why winked ye at these wordes which immediatly go before the sentence that yow here recite to defende your opinion Pleye ye yet agayne the deuelles part which alleaged as ye do that part of the psalme which seamed to make for his purpose and yet it did not so in dede leauinge vnspoken that peace which was against hym Wherfore did ye not Matth. 4. reade these wordes of saint Austen which do folow there streight after the sentence that ye recyte It is christes fleash which we receaue Note this reader in the sacrament couered vnder neath the forme of breade and his bloud which we do drinke vnder the kinde and taste of wyne How maīfest are these wordes for the refutation of my lordes doctrine Maye he not then be now ashamed of his part and repent his errour but let vs examine saynt Austens wordes which he alledgeth here for his matter and they are euen these but moo than he rehearseth This is the thinghe that fo 28. pa. 2 we do goo about by al meanes to proue that the sacrifice of the church is made of twoo thinges and consisteth by two wayes the visible kinde of the elementes and the ynuisible flesh bloud of our lord iesu christ both the sacrament and also the thinge of the sacrament that is to saye the bodie of christe What man is now so blynd my lord but that he may easely see that Austē is vtterly against youre doctrine euē yn these wordes which ye alledge for your purpose For sayeth he not that the sacrifice of the church is made both of the visible kinde of bread wyne which is the sacramēt and also of the flesh bloud of christ The sacrifice of the masse which are therin inuisible only and are the thinges of the sacramēt Were ye not then my lord fowly disceaued Marke when ye folowinge peter Martir rehesed this place for your purpose and denyed also as hereafter it shal appeare to your great shame that the priest at Libro 5. masse maketh any sacrifice more then the laye people do ye erre my lord openly when ye gather of Austē that the nature of bread and wyne remayne stil in the sacrament when he sayeth that as yn christ there is the māhod and the godhead which are twoo natures euenso yn the sacramēt there are two thinges or natures that is to say bread and wyne as ye take it and the bodye and bloud of christ Ye erre I saye yn vnderstandinge of Twoo errours of the bisshops this place and that twyse ones when ye thinke that he ment that the substance of bread wyne did stil abyde yn the sacrament for he ment as his owne wordes afore written declare that the formes and kindes
of christes mystical body the church paul sayeth We be al one body that eate of one 1. cor 10. bread S. Cyprian whom ye alleage is fully against yow as it appeareth before in this booke althoughe he saye that christes bloud is shewed by the wyne meanynge that wyne must neaades be put yn to the chalice at masse to be consecrated and not water only as some priestes then vsed to do for Lib. 2. epi. 3 by the wyne put yn to the chalice christes bloud which ranne out of his side perced with à speare at the tyme of his Alexander primus epi. prima death is represented and shewed and therfore he sayeth euen yn that same epistle that oure sacrifice must aunsweare and be lyke to christes passion yn the tyme of the which both bloud and water ranne out of his side This is nothinge against the presence of christes bloud in the sacrament nor it proueth not that wyne remayneth stil after the consecration but only that wyne must be put yn to the chalice to be consecrated with water This only cyprian went about to proue at that tyme and there Wherfore this place of Cyprian maketh nothinge for your purpose as much doth that Which ye bringe for yo we out of the same doctour which sayeth that chryst gaue bread De vnctioÌ„e â—â—â—smatis The bysshop fo 63. wyne to his apostles because he gaue them his bodie and bloud vnder the formes of bread and wyne and not yn the formes of fleshe and bloud for after suche sorte and forme he gaue his body to be wounded with the handes of souldiours Also he calleth the formes of bread and wyne figures of christes bodie and bloud because they signified and represented them not absent but presently hidde vnder them ynuisiblye Agayne Cyprian sayeth yn that sermon Chryst gaue vnto priestes à cuppe of his bloud ful of abound ance of an infinite fulnes both to be reserued and also to be geueÌ„ which ye my lord wynke at Fynally he maketh there playne mention of the consecratynge of both oyle and creame vpon mandy thursday for the anoyntynge of kynges priestes when they Oyle and creame are made of children yn theyr coÌ„firmatioÌ„ and sayeth that thruoghe the benefite of that anoyntinge wisdome and vnderstandyng are geuen to vs of Esaiae 11. god lyke wyse the gyft of counsel of strength kunnyng pyte and fear are powred by goddes inspiration in to Marks reader vs. And also that we beinge anoynted with this oile do fyght with il spirites and can not be infected with vncleane sauours Why do ye not my lord obserue these lessons Wil ye take that only that à litle seameth to make for your purpose refuse al the rest which maketh playnly and fully against your domges and doctryne Why also do ye labour so much in allegynge the authours which sayed that bread and wyne remayned stil yn the sacrameÌ„t because there was bread wyne before the consecration and because they seame yet to be there stil when none of al those doctours saye as ye do that there is only bread and wyne and not christes bodye and bloud but the cleane contrarie to it S. Chrysostom who ye alleage vpon the psalme ment In Psal 22 that christ would shewe vnto vs bread and wyne that is to saye his bodie and bloud yn to which bread and wyne was turned and which appeared stil bread and wyne and that for à similitude of his bodie and bloud yn their owne propre formes offered vpon the crosse for by the celebration of the holy sacrament as Gelasius sayeth there is an image and à similitude made of christes bodie crucified of his bloud shead furth of that bodye for oure redemption S. Hieroms wordes do make Hierom iâ— Matth. 2â— nothinge for your doctryne when he sayeth that chryst toke bread that conforteth mans heart that he myght represent therby his very bodye and bloud For first he sayeth not as ye do that he gaue only bread nor yet bread vnto his apostles and that he gaue theÌ„ not his very bodie and bloud but that he toke bread to be coÌ„secrated turned it in to his bodie that by the distributinge and receauinge of it he might represent his body and bloud yn that they were putte to death and crucyfied for vs which thing he bade his apostles and by them al other priestes to do whem he sayed Do ye this Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11. for remembrance of me Agayne saynt Hierom vsed this word Representare to represent for to geue preseÌ„tly and out of hand as dyuers authours Râ—presentare Hieroni Mattheâ— 26 do vse it For Cicero sayed But also I wold gladly offre my body to suffre death si representari morte mea libertas ciuitatis potest id est dari nuÌ„c statiÌ„ Philippica 2 yf by my death the liberte of the citee might be euen nowe by and by geuen Also columella sayeth Itaque non aegre Libr 11. consequetur si semper se representauerit id est se presentem ostenderit inquit Budeus neque discesserit Cyprianus Representare quid sit Cypriano in orationeÌ„ dominicam sayeth We do desire the kyndom of god to be represented vnto us that is to say to be geuen vnto vs presently Agayne there he hath thus Christ also hymselfe brethren may be vnderstanded the kyndom of god whom we dailie desire to come whose commynge we desire sone to be represented to vs that is to say openly and presently to be shewed vnto vs. By these authorites it is manifest good reader that hierom is against my lord very much yn this place S. Ambrose maketh not for your purpose Lib. de iâ—â— qui mysteri is initiaÌ„tur cap. vlt. when he sayeth that christes body and bloud are signified after the coÌ„secratioÌ„ for as he sayeth not that they are onlie signified and not present there fo 63. as ye defende euen so he mente that by the outward formes of bread and wyne chrystes bodie and bloud were signified to bo hidde secretly vnder them and that the death of hym in his bodie and bloud offeringe vpon August ser 28 in LucaÌ„ the crosse was signified by the administration of the sacrament Also yt is true that he sayeth that we do receaue Lib 4. ca. 4. De sacrameÌ„tis the sacrament for à similitude of christes flesh and bloud but he doth Lib 4. ca. 4 De sacrameÌ„tis declare his meanynge with these wordes Wyne and water are put in to the chalice but bloud is made by the consecration of the heauenly word But thow doest perauenture say I see not the kinde or forme of bloud but à similitude is there for as thowe hast receaued in baptisme à similitude of death euen so thowe drinkest also à similitude of precious bloud that there should be noo abhorringe or à lothinge of bloud appeariÌ„ge
as bloud What can be more playnly spoken to declare that he ment that the very bloud of christ is made by the consecration of wyne ynto it and yet we receaue it not in forme of bloud but in a similitude shape of it the forme of wyne that is lyke to bloud in colour least we should abhorre to drinke it if it did appeare vnto oure eies very bloud Why redde ye not this my lord that ye had not erred in the alleaginge of this authorite of s. Ambrose yow folowed and trusted to much peter Martyrs allegation Peter Martyr falsely alledgeth thē doctour which reciteth almost al authours falsely and vntruely as I wil by goddes grace declare in my booke made against hym Saint Ambrose is against yow whom ye allege for yowe sayinge that the priest prayeth thus at masse lib. 4. cap. ◠de sacramētis Make vnto vs this oblation to be acceptable which is à figure of the bodie bloud of christ For he calleth here the masse à sacrifice and sayeth that the priest maketh therin sacrifice to god for hym self and other which ye denye vtterly Againe he saieth not that it is only à figure as ye defende it to be but that it is à figure of christes bodie bloud in that respecte that they were crucified for as much as christes death is in the sacrament represented and figured Ye do nowe corrupt falsely Ambrofius in 1. cor 11. alleage S. Ambrose and make of his true sainge à false sentence For this ye make hym say In eatinge and drinkynge the bread and wyne we do signifie the fleshe and bloud that were offered for vs where in dede these are his wordes vpon this texte of S. Paul ye shal shewe furth our lordes death vntil he come For because ye are sayeth he made free by oure lordes death we remembringe that thinge in eatinge and drinkinge fleash and bloud which were offered for vs do signifie c. Loo my lord S. Ambrose sayth we do eate and drinke fleash and bloud and ye make hym say that we do eate and drinke bread and wyne Are ye not ashamed so manifestly to lye vpon the authours Also saint Ambrose sayeth wel thoughe ye il vnderstand his wordes that we do receaue the mystical cup of bloud for tuition of our bodie and soul in à signification or à figure not of christes bodie as ye would make vs beleue but of that that the newe testament was confirmed by christes bloud and that bloud is à wytnes of christes benifite which came by his bloud sheadynge vnto vs. Therfore ye do il conclude of these authorites of the doctours that christes bodie and Fol. 64. bloud are not really in the holy sacrament but that bread and wyne are only signes figures similitudes and representations of them as ye do lyke wyse Augustinus Epist 23. il vnderstand saint Austen wrytinge to Bonifacius For he ment that christ was not dailye offered in the masse by death and sufferinge of his passion againe for so he was neuer but ones offered and yet he is daily offered in the sacrament for the people atmasse and his passion represented vnto vs theryn For we do vse to say that christ suffered his passion vpon this day good fryday and that day he arose agayne when the daies of his passion and resurrection are passed manye hundred yeres before and à memorie or à representation only of those two thinges is celebrated and made vpon such daies And so is the sacrament à signe and à similitude of christes body in sufferinge death and passion and is called in à maner his body as the outwarde formes and kindes of bread and wyne are sacramentes and signes of christes bodie and bloud beynge some tyme called christes bodie and bloud as they may ryght wel in à certen maner of speakinge as Saint Austen wytnesseth there because that some tyme thinges signified are called by the names of their signes and contrarily also This we see plainlye ynoughe that saint Austen is not vpon my lordes syde but against hym vtterly when he sayeth that christ is dailye offered in sacrifice at masse for the people which my lord denyeth vtterly and yet sayeth that saint Austen is of his The bysshop fo 62. pag 2. Contra adamantum cap. 12. mynde and beliefe therin To be short when Saint Austen or any other docter affirmeth that the sacrament is a figure or à signe they neuer saye that bakers bread or material bread and wyne of the grape are only in the sacrament as signes of christes body and The signe of christes body how hit is to be vnderstand bloud only absent but they meane as I sayed à fore that the outward formes and kyndes of bread and wyne are signes of them there presently couered vnder neath them And also that the sacrament is à signe of christes mystical bodie the church and of his passion à representation and figure As for Theodoretus whom he alleageth agayne is anusweared before sufficiently Your fyfte note my lord fo 66. pa. ◠which ye gather out of Theodoretus that nothinge ought to be affirmed for à certen trueth in religion which is not spoken of in holy scripture is à very damnable note and the mother of many abamynable heresies as I haue declared largely in my booke of traditions and also briefely before in this boke And to touche the same matter vnwrittē verytees à lytel agayne is the baptisme of children sette out in scripture Confessed not origen and saynt Austē the cleane contrarye Sayeth not Saint Austen that it is à tradition vnwritten Origenes lib. 6. in Romanos ca. 6 in scripture that baptisme ministred of an heretike or à schismatike is sufficient and good In the scripture is no mention made that the father of heauen is vngotten that there are three persons that christ is consuhstantialis patri that oure lady was à continual vyrgen that the souday ought to be kept holy and many such other certen truethes in christes religion are not written in scripture What then my lord Is he arrogant and presumptuous that affirmeth them for certen verites in religion Yow saye vntruely that papistes do make and vnmake articles of our faith at their pleasure for they neuer made article of the fayth nor vnmade but heretikes hath so done many tymes Vnto this lye ye adde twoo moo This lye is often repeted of hym one that we do saye that christes bodie is naturally and sensibly in the bread when we say bread is not there and that christes bodie is there vnnaturally against nature and vnsensiblye Fol. 71 The second lye is that priestes make of Christ à newe sacrifice for synne for it is no newe sacrifice but the selfe same yn the thinge offered Homi. 2. in 2 ad Timot. that as Saynt Chrysostom sayeth Christ ones offered hymselfe vpon the crosse and whyche he offered at his
christes spirite by grace adoptiō To proue this I wil alleage of many places of the scripture à fewe Hath not mani the goost Sap. 7 1 Cor. 12 Esaiae 11 Matth. 7 1 Cor. 13 Ioan. 11 and spirite of god by the gifte of wisdom prudence kunninge fayth to wourke myracles the power to do myracles to prophesie the grace of healinge the diseased the gyfte of toungues of interpretation the gyfte to gyue counsel as Ietro did vnto Moses the gyft of fear the gyft to preach to absolue the penitent in confession and the Ioan 20 gyftes of many other thinges and yet they are not goddes sonnes by grace Was not the spirit of god in balaam 1. Regū 18. Num. 22 Ioan. 11 Saul and cayphas when they prophesied and yet they were wicked men Was not then my lord disceaued openly shamefully when he thought that the spirite of god is ī none except they be his children by grace Did he not knowe that they only be his sonnes Rom. 5. 8 Zacha. 12 in whom his spirite is by grace and adoption that paul spake those wordes which he alleageth here for hym throughe ignorācye of that beyng only of the spirite of god in mā by grace But to touche the matter some what nearer I aske of hym whether the spirite of god be not in euery place in earth the water in heauen and hel and in euery part and creature of them If he saye yea ergo he is in euery synner wicked mā If he saye nay the scripture is against hym sayinge I fil heauen and earth sayeth our lord Heauē Hiere 23 Esaie 66 is my seate and the earth my fotestole And againe Whyther shal I goo from Psal 138 Christes spirite which is ioyned in one parson vnto his māhod is by his presence in synners thy spirite and flye from thy face If I go vp in to heauen thow art there yf I go doune vnto hel thow art present there Nowe it appeareth that god is euery where and in euery place Why thē is not the spirite of god which is very god in the wicked men by his presence and substance which is in euery place and placed in no place Wherfore christes blessed flesh bloud soul holy spirite and his deite ioyned vnto them in one parson certenlylmaye be and is often tymes in à man subiecte to synne and à lymne of the deuil and so god and the deuel do dwel both Actorū 17. at ones in à synner god by his power preseruinge hym feadynge him geuinge to hym vertue to lyue to be to moue and wourke and also he is in hym by his presence and substance and the deuel throughe synne and tentation Thus is al my lordes reasonīge proued voyed of none effect And so is not our third verite and catholike doctrine confuted which is that the il mē do eate drīke christes flesh bloud vnto their dānation althoughe he sayeth Ioan. 6 that it is cōfuted nor proued cōtrarye vnto christes wordes saynge whosoeeuer eateth my flesh drinketh my bloud hath euerlastinge life for those wordes were only spoken of the godly worthy eaters drinkers of thē as it is proued afore sufficiently both by the scripture also by the exposition of s. Austē Nowe my lord goeth about to aunswere vnto à place of paul which 1. Cor. 11 we do allege for vs. Let à man examyne hymselfe so eate of the bread drinke of the cup for he that eateth drinketh vnworthely eateth and drinketh his oune damnation not discerninge The bisshop fo 98. lib. 3. the lordes bodie Vnto this sentēce he sayeth that S Paul ment that for as much as the bread wine in the lordes soupper do represent vnto vs the body bloud of christ therfore althoughe he doth sitte at the fathers ryght hāde in heauē yet yf we come not vnto this mystical bread and wyne wyth fayth reuerence purite of cōsciēce fear as we wold do if we should come to see receaue christ hymselfe sensiblie present we do eate and drinke our damnation This is the effecte of his aunswere vnto that texte of paul which The confutation is directely agaīst his mynde for paul in the nexte sentence afore affirmeth that the vnworthy eater drinker of that our lordes blessed bread holy wine is gyltie of our lordes body bloud declaringe therby that he eateth drīketh not material bread wyne of the grape but christes very body bloud which he calleth bread wyne because breade wine were turned in to thē by the consecration and because they De coena domini be the foode of mans soul as Cyprian wytnesseth lyke as cōmon breade and wyne are of the body and also because they appeare as bread wyne stil reteyninge al other qualites accidētes of 1. Cor. 11 thē This was S Pauls mynde who can say truely that he is giltie of our lordes body bloud eateth drinketh his oune dānatiō that receaueth nothinge els but onli breade made of corne and Marke wyne of the grape May à man be giltie for eatinge of à thinge yet eate it not but only à figure of it Why then are Legeeyprianum ser ◠De lapsis not they worthy to be iudged giltie of destroyinge and breakinge of christes body and of his holie saintes that haue broken and destroyed their Images Images of christ and his saintes and pictures in Englande seinge they were more playne expresse and lyuely signes and figures of theym then are the bread and wyne of christes body and bloud Neade we so diligent and so great trial examining of ourselues as saint paul requireth here for the receauinge of bread and wyne Eateth he and drinketh his oune damnation that eateth and drinketh bread of weate and wyne of the vyne only The paschal lambe the bread of shewe Exodi 12 1. Regū 21 Deut. 8 Māna were figures of christes bodie and more excellent and playne than bread and wyne can be and yet the scripture wytnesseth not that the vnworthy eaters of any of theim were giltie of our lordes bodie or did eate their oune damnation not discerninge his body from other common meate Is it not then à sufficient profe that there is christes bodie itselfe in the sacramēt and not only bread à figure of it Moreouer yf bread and wyne were only in the sacrament howe could the receauer of it discerne our lordes bodie as paul biddeth hym do from other common meates to receaue it with greater cleanes of conscience and more deuotion than such common meates Agayne sayeth not saint paul Marke this that for the vnworthy receauinge of 1. Cor. 11 this holy sacrament many were sicke diseased weake and died Who may wel saye that god wold punysh men so greuously for the vnworthy eatinge and drinking of bare breade and wyne Doth
masse nor we come not in vayne thither praynge for theÌ„ vnto that laÌ„be lyinge there takinge away the sinnes of the world but there doth come ther of vnto theÌ„ some coÌ„fort Ambrose affirmeth the same wheÌ„ he sayeth A laÌ„be was offered afore and à calfe now Lib. 1. cap. 48. officioruÌ„ christ is offered but he is offered as à maÌ„ as it were receyuinge passioÌ„ he hymselfe doth offre hym selfe as à priest that he migt remite our sinnes Oratione de obitu fratris sui Satyri Agayne speakinge of his brother Satyrus departed heÌ„ce he sayeth I coÌ„meÌ„de vnto the ó god almyghtie the innoceÌ„t soul of my brother now dead I offre to the my sacrifice Take mercifully and gladly the present or gyft of à brother the sacrifice of à priest Againe he saieth vntoone faustine coÌ„fortiÌ„ge hym lameÌ„tiÌ„ge the death of his suster I iudge that she is not so much to be lameÌ„ted as to be prayed for nor so much to be wept for as her soul to be coÌ„meÌ„ded vnto oure lord with sacrifices He sayeth also thê° We haue seene the prince of priestes In psal 38. coÌ„minge vnto vs. We sawe hym hard hiÌ„ offeringe for vs his bloud Lette vs priestes folowe as we may offre sacrifice for the people althoughe we be weake by oure deseruinge yet we are honorable throughe the sacrifice for Lib. de heresibus haeres 53. albeit christ is not seene to be offered neuerthelesse he is offered vpon the earth when his bodie is offered Yea he is declared plainly to offre it in vs whose word maketh holie the sacrifice which is offered Saint AusteÌ„ reproued Lib. 3 Aerius for an heretike as also Epiphaphanius did because he sayed as my lord his secte doth that men should not praye for the dead nor offre sacrifice for theÌ„ S AusteÌ„ sayed thus in that In Enchir. cap. 110. ad DulcimuÌ„ 4 â—e 2 matter It is not to be denyed that the souls of meÌ„ depted are relieued throughe the godlynes of their frendes aliue when the sacrifice of oure mediatour Lege Aug. ser 11. de saÌ„ctis christ is offered for theÌ„ or els almes be geuen for theÌ„ in the churche But these thinges do profite theÌ„ which did deserue wheÌ„ they lyued that they might afterward ê“fite theÌ„ Anon after he saieth thus Therfore when sacrifices either of the aulter or els of any maner of al-masses are offered for al the dead wich were baptized they are thaÌ„kes geuiÌ„ge Note this for theÌ„ that be very good people for theÌ„ which are not very badde they are propitiations or purchasinges of mercy fauour of god But whoÌ„ they do ê“fite either they profite vnto this thiÌ„ge that there may be ful remissioÌ„ or els at the least that the peyne should be made more tollerable What can ye my Tolerabilior fiat iposa damnatio lord saye nowe to this For sayeth not here S AusteÌ„ plainly that the sacrifice of the masse is à sacrifice propitiatorie for the synnes of the deade Why denye ye it theÌ„ and yet say that your doctrine is apê“ued of the old doctours agreable vnto the faith of the primatiue church of christe I do remeÌ„bre wel At lambeth my lord that about three yeres sence wheÌ„ ye reasoned with me iÌ„ this matter of purgatorie I did alleage this place of s. AusteÌ„ ye sayed vnto me that Austen was disceaued here because he sayedvt tolerabilior fiat ipsa daÌ„natio that their daÌ„nation or peyne myght be made more easy to be borne but ye did not vnderstand s. Austen for he spake not those wordes of the daÌ„ned in hel as ye then sayed that he did but only of theÌ„ that depart not very il had deserued whiles they lyued here that such sacrifices myght profite theÌ„ after their death as he sayeth for as concerning the damned whoÌ„ he calleth very badde he affirmeth that such thinges helpe not theÌ„ Austen saieth also serm 32. deverb apost It is not to be doubted but the souls departed are helped by the holy churches prayers and the sacrifice of saluation and almes when they are geueÌ„ for them that god shold deale more mercyfully with them than their synnes had deserued He sayeth Epist 44. yet ones agayne thus We must beleue that sacrifices do helpe verily some what the souls departed out of this lyfe Heare now S Alexander that holy martyr which was within lxxxxx yeres after christes death and writeth thus Our lordes passioÌ„ must be recited in al solennites of masses that are offered vnto our lord that his passioÌ„ whose bodie bloud are made may be celebrated The masses sacrifice is propitiatorie For crymes synnes are put away throughe these sacrifices offered vnto our lord and therfore his passion must be also remeÌ„bred often recited Marke reader this body bloud offered vnto our lord With such sacrifices our lord wil be delited pacified wil for gyue great synnes for emonge sacrifices there can be nothinge greater than oure lordes bodie bloud There is no sacrifice better than this but this excelleth al other which must be offered vnto our lord with à pure conscieÌ„ce receaued with á cleane mynde and worshipped The honour of the holy sacrameÌ„t of the aulter of al meÌ„ And as this sacrifice is better then other euen so it ought to be rather much made of worshipped Here are iÌ„proued three of my my lordes errours The first against the makiÌ„ge Here are of christes bodie in the sacrameÌ„t the real preseÌ„ce of it therin The secoÌ„d Three errours confuted that the masse is not à sacrifice for synne that the priest maketh no more sacrifice at masse then à lay maÌ„ doth but only ministreth the sacrameÌ„t vnto the people The third against the worshippinge of the holy sacrament But Lib. 4. ca 14 noue heare s. damascene sayinge This is the pure and vnblouddie sacrifice which oure lord saieth by the prophete Malach. 1 is offered vnto hym froÌ„ the aeste vnto the west forsoth christes bodie bloud for the establyshemeÌ„t of our soul bodie Nowe to let passe many other writers sainges I wil speake of cypriaÌ„s miÌ„de Cyprianus â–ª De coena dmini of one or twoo moo theÌ„ so ende this chaptre boke CypriaÌ„ saith After our lord had sayed this is my body this is my bloud do ye this in my remeÌ„brance as ofteÌ„ as the thinge is done with these wordes this faith the bread Marke the cup made holy with à soleÌ„ne blessinge ê“fiteth vnto the life saluatioÌ„ of the whole maÌ„ beinge both à medicine à sacrifice also to heale sucknesses to purge synne The same holy Lib. 1. epi. 9 martyr witnesseth tgat the bisshops had made à decree before is time that he should not be praied for of te priest at the aulter nor any sacrifice made
concel of any one region or Lib. 2. ca. 1. contrae Donatistas de bap countrey Did not also the same thing moue hym to say that he did wel yn folowing the custome establyshed after ward by à general counsail yea althoughe the trueth lay yet vnknowē hidde S. Cyprian wyth almost lxxx Lib. 7. cap. 27. De bap contra Donatistas bysshops assembled yn à councel yn Africa erred and à general counsail afterward corrected their errour What follie then were it to beleue the Lib. 1. ca. 18 de bapt contra Donatistas determynation and doctrine of any one region before à general councel Wherfore let vs folow such councels as al holie men haue done afore our daies and not streight way denye thē yf they be against our opinions for so did euer al heretikes Arius sayed that Nicene concile erred Nestorius affirmed that the councel of Ephesus was disceaued Eutiches refused the counsail of Chalcedon and so did euer al other heretikes say that the councels erred which did condemne their opinions but let vs folow rather S. Athanasius Hilary Cyprian Austen Cyril and such blessed fathers and great learned men which both were at general councels and also did euer regarde much their sentences and determynations in matters of our fayth If we thus do we shal not be disceaued yn our beliefe but euer continue yn it that we may say whith S. Hierom I Ad oceanū pamma chium wil keepe that fayth in my age yn which I was borne à child also wyth saint Paul I haue foughten à good battel finyshed my course and kept my fayth There is à croune of ryghteousnes layed vp for me which our lord à iust iudge shal rendre vnto me at that 2. tim 4. day and to al that loue his commyng Vnto whom be al prayse world wythout ende Amen The confutation of certen sentences whych are in the preface of the Bysshoppes booke But the Romysh Antichrist to deface The bysshop this great benefite of christ hath taught that christes sacrifice made vpon the crosse is not à sufficient satisfaction and redemption for synne wythout an other sacrifice deuised by hym and made by à priest c. Who sayth my lord that christes The confutation sacrifice made vpon the crosse is not à sufficient satisfaction for the remissiō of the synnes of the whole world Why do ye blame vs in that whych we defend not Haue not I declared in my boke of the holy masse that christes sacrifice is sufficient of it selfe to saue al the whole world and that the sacrifice of the masse is the very selfe same sacrifice touchyng the thinges offered which are christes natural body and bloud and that it is distinct onely from it in the maner of offering and is à meane to apply yt vnto vs for the remission of our synnes It is also false that the bysshop of Rome deuised this sacrifice for christ hym selfe did institute it as I wil proue by gods grace in the confutation of the fyft boke Ye say my lord that the bysshop of Rome deuised the sacrifice of the masse and that à priest maketh no more Libr. 5. sacrifice for our synnes then the laye man doth and also that your doctrine is approued of the ancient docters which your saynges are very false for the holy martyr Anacletus that was whythin lx yeres after christes passion this wryteth of that sacrifice of Epist 1. omnibus ecclesiis scripta the masse They that do make sacrifice perfectely vnto god ought not to be vexed but to be borne wyth al conforted and worshipped of al men But when they do make sacrifice vnto our lord they ought not to do it alone wythout wytnes that they myght be proued to haue made sacrifice vnto god in places haloued Now wil ye say my lord that this blessed martyr deuised this sacrifice of his oune head against christes sacrifice He affirmeth that priestes do make sacrifice at masse ye deny vtterly that they make any sacrifice more then the laye man doth Whether of you twoo is more worthy to be beleued Heare what S. Clement pauls compaignion in preachyng of the gospel sayeth in this matter these are his wordes vnto S. Iames the apostle Let there be so many hoostes Epistola 2. offered vpon the aulter as may suffice the people What can ye now say my lord vnto this holy martyr Doth he not make playne mention here both of the sacrifice of the masse and also of an aulter for that sacrifice to be made vpon May ye not then my lord be ashamed of your wrytyng that this sacrifice of the masse was deuised by the bisshop of Rome against christes blouddy sacrifice and that priestes make no more sacrifice then the layte doth Why do ye cast doune the aulters which the apostles vsed to say masse and to offer sacrifice vpon Is this to reforme and restore as ye pretende christes religion vnto the state that it was in at the begynnyng of the chuch Do ye not rather destroy that which the primitiue church euer vsed But S. Clement sayeth agayne Epist 3. vnto S. Iames. We must knowe gods wyl whyles we do lyue here where the place is to offre sacrifice for we may The masse is à sacrifice not of late deuised not make sacrifice and say masses yn any other places then yn which our oune bysshop hath commaunded or yn that place that is or shal be consecrated by the bysshops debite of that cite For these thynges shal not be other wyse wel done both the old and also the neue testament bearyng ther vnto wytnes The apostles learned these thinges of our lord and taught thē vs. Who nowe may not see playnly my lord howe far your doctrine dissēteth from the apostles and the anciēt docters teaching and beliefe S. Clement sayeth that christe taught his apostles to offre sacrifice at masse and yn what place they shold do it that the apostles taught the same vnto him and his feloes ye my lord say that the bysshop of Rome deuysed that sacrifice and that priestes do make no sacrifice more then the laye people do and yet ye affirme in the title of your book that this your doctrine is approued by the cōsent of the most ancient doctours of the church O what meane ye my lord Thinke ye to blere mennes eyes after such sorte Thynke ye that we do not espie what ye goo Epistola ad burdegalēses cap. 3. about S. Martial peters scholer thus writeth of the masses sacrifice A sacrifice is offered vpon an aulter vnto god not to man nor angel Nor that is An aulter for masse to be sayed vpon not only done vpon an aulter haloued but à cleane sacrifice is offered vnto god yn euery place as he doth testifie whose body and bloud we offre to obteyne euerlasting life Do ye not yet my lord blusse May ye not wel repēt your labour
spent in settinge furth of this your booke seyng this disciple of S. peter so openly speaketh both of the presence of christes body bloud in the holy sacrament and also of the sacrifice of the masse Why also do ye destroy aulters which were vsed in the apostles tyme as it appeareth here for masses to be sayed vpon What I The masse is à sacrifice propitiaetori for synne pray you my lord is it to offre christes body and bloud at masse to purchase therby euerlasting life yf it be not the masse to be à sacrifice to pacifie gods wrath for synne and to obteyne his mercy Why then do ye denye this and say that such doctrine is blasphemous and iniurious vnto christ and his sacrifice Wold ye that we shold beleue your sayng before al these al other old godly fathers doctrine Heare yet ones agayne this holy martyr S. peters scholer which saieth thus That same thing that the Iewes did The masse is à sacrifice for synne kil throughe enuye we set furth vpon the aulter for our saluation knowyng that by this remedy alone the life that euer lasteth shal be geuen to vs and death dreauen away from vs for our lord hym selfe bade vs do this in remēbraunce Lucae 22 of hym Loo my lord this blessed martyr S. peters disciple affirmeth that priestes do offre for our saluation to get heauen and to auoyed hel the selfe same thinge vpon an aulter that the ieues did put vnto death Wyth what face do ye thē denye that christes bodye is yn the sacrament but bread only à signe of it and say also that the masse is no sacrifice at al for synne This father sayeth that christ commaunded sacrifice to be made of his body and bloud for our saluation and are ye not my lord ashamed then to say that the sacrifice of the masse was deuysed by the bysshop of Rome against christes sacrifice which he made vpon the crosse Who denyeth my lord but that christes sacrifice made vpon the crosse is sufficient for the remission of the synnes of the whole world But what therof Wil ye of that gather either that it did euen when it was made first vpon the crosse take away cleane in effect and actually al Note mens synnes or els that it neadeth none application to take effecte in vs for our saluation Why thē shold there be any hel or any man be damned For was not that his sacrifice à sufficient redemption 1. Ioan. 2 for the synnes of al the whole world Agayne yf the sacrifice of christ made vpon the crosse neade no application why shold we neade to beleue in hym to hope to feare god to do penaunce for our synnes to praye to fast to gyue almes to loue god to keepe his commaundementes or to do any good May we not then saye as 1. Cor. 15 many haue done and yet do let vs eate drinke and make good chere for christ hath done al enoughe for vs He wil not lose one of vs that he hath bought so dearly This many men do saye that are your scholers my lord they may gather no lesse out of many places of this your boke althoughe ye neuer ment any such thinge Wherfore seyyng christ did not actually nor in effecte take away by his death the synnes of men but onely as à meriter and deseruer of grace and remission of our synnes he hath prepared à remedie to heale cure them that receaue do and keepe al such thinges which he hath appoynted to be meanes to applye that his benefite vertu strēgth of his passion vnto them Why then may not the sacrifice of the masse be such à meane emoūg many other mo for that application of christes merite vnto vs wythout any derogation of the perfection sufficientcye of christes sacrifice made by his death Sayed Heb. 5. not S Paul that christ was made the cause of saluation not of al men absolutely but to them that obeyed hym Doth not he then plainly declare that this obedience of man is necessarie for the application of christes perfect sacrifice and yet that proueth no imperfectiō at al in that sacrifice Sayed not Coloss 1. also S paul that christ had pacyfied his fathers wrath recōciled vs vnto hym by his death and yet not wythstanding that that his sacrifice was ful perfect and sufficient he sayed that he did supplye those thinges whych lacked in christes passions when he suffered afflictions and persecution in his bodie for the people What mēt he my lord els but that the passions afflictions and peynes which he suffered for the settyng furth and defendyng of the gospel were meanes to applie christes perfect and sufficient sacrifice vnto the people for the remission of their synnes and their saluation Why then sayed ye that they which defende the sacrifice of the masse as an instrument and à meane to applye christes passion vnto vs for our saluation do it to supplye the imperfection of christes sacrifice and to do that for vs which christ either for lacke of charite did not for vs or els for lacke of pouer could not do Were ye not playnely disceaued my lord when ye wrote this against the sacrifice of the masse Recāte then for shame recāte this noughty doctrine teach it no more Now to the confutatiō of your first boke ⧠The Confutation of the first booke What so euer can not be grounded The bysshop fo 1. pa. 2 vpon the scripture touchyng oure fayth is mans deuyse chaungeable vncertayne What saye ye then my lord vnto The Confutation the baptisme of children For of it S. Austen thus writeth vpō the Genesis The custome of our mother the churche Lib. 1◠ca. 23. ad literam in baptizing of children is not be despised nor to be iudged superfluous in any wyse nother it ought to be beleued excepte it had bene à tradition of the apostles Agayne origen sayeth In ca. 6. ad Romanos after this maner The church hath receaued à tradition of the apostles to geue baptisme also to children See ye not noue howe that ye erre For Saynt Austen sayeth that the baptisme of children ought not to be beleued to be necessarie for their saluation yf it had not bene à tradition of the apostles ye saye what so euer is not grounded vpon the scripture touching our faith is mans deuise c. Thynke ye that the baptisme of children is grounded vpon scripture when S. Austen sayeth yt is only à tradition of the apostles Are ye better learned then he and origen that ye can fynde scripture for it where they could finde none Also by what scripture is the baptisme mynistred of an heretike or à schismatike approued to be good and auayleable Sayeth not also S. Austen that De vnico bapt contra Donatistas there is no scripture to proue it Called not also S. Hierom. Eluidium an heretike
because he defended that christes dear mother was not á continual vergeÌ„ Is that verite set furth in scripture No ye are shamefully disceaued yn this poynt but of this matter I haue spoken more at large in my boke of traditions vnto which ye haue yet made no answeare althoughe ye raile dailie A booke of traditions against vnwritteÌ„ verites It foloueth yn your booke And al doctrine concernyng this matter The bisshop fo 5 pa. 2. of the sacrameÌ„t that is more theÌ„ this which is not grounded vpon gods word is of no necessite c. Then let The confutation your communion be celebrated at nyght my lord when christ did institute it Then let al men breake their fast before they receaue the holy sacrameÌ„t as one Bernard of christes church Bernard Ianuario epist 119. Tertulianus libr. 2. ad vxorem in oxford did For Austen sayeth our lord commaunded not by what ordre this sacrameÌ„t should be receaued but lefte that thing vnto his apostles by whon he wold set the churches in an 1. Cor. 11. ordre and therfore S. paul sayeth wheÌ„ he had spokeÌ„ of the sacrament I wil dispose the rest when I shal come vnto yow Moreouer saint Austen sayeth It pleased the holy goost that our lordes bodie should first entre in to mans Epist 119. mouth afore other meates for the honoure of so great à sacrament Loo S. Austen sayth it seamed good vnto the holy goost that for the honoure of so The honoure of the sacrament great à sacrament we shold receaue our lordes body fastyng And ye saye my lord that we receaue but bread wyne and that the sacrament ought not to be honoured and that al doctrine concerninge this matter which is not grounded vpoÌ„ gods word is of no necessite that the peoples consciences ought not to be troubled ther with What meane yow Do ye despise al godly ordre and the fathers doctrine and yet saye that your boke is approued of the old doctours Thinke ye that meÌ„ are so mad to beleue yow befor S. Austen Origen sayeth that euery Homi. 5. in Numeros man must of necessite obserue the ordre and maner of the receauing and the ministring of this sacrameÌ„t which the church obserueth Also S. CypriaÌ„ De ablutione pedum writeth after this sort That thing is as firme or as ratified that the apostles haue taught by the inspiration of the holy goost as that which christ hymself taught and commaunded to be done for his remembraunce Also saiÌ„t Luc. 22. Austen sayeth that this sacrifice is not wel done except the signe of the crosse Tract 189. in IoanneÌ„ Lib. 3. contra pelagiâ— Epist 1. ad omnes ecclesias Lib. 1. epi. 3 be made vpon the hoost S. Hierom affirmeth that christ taught his apostles to say dailie the pater noster in the sacrifice of his bodie S. Alexander which was withyn lxx yeres after christes passion S. Cyprian many other holy men and great clearkes say that christ mengled water with the wyne in the chalice when he made sacrifice at his mandy and bade priestes to dothe same and therfore they must do it of necessite Is this thinge expressed my lord in scripture It is not Wyth what face then do ye say that there is nothing of any necessite but that only which is grounded vpon scripture Is this your doctrine to be approued as ye say that it is by the consent of the ancient docters of the church S. ClemeÌ„t pauls disciple S. Anacletus S. Martial peter scholers and many other old doctours do testifie that the sacrament ought to be celebrated only in halowed places and vpon aulters and ye my lord regard nothyng of this and yet ye wold make men beleue that your doctrine is alowed set fourth by the ancient writers of the churche Thynke ye after such sorte to blynd men Do ye not gyue an occasion vnto men by this your doctrine to celebrate the communion as ye cal yt in the buttery kechen backhouse or els where they lyst SaiÌ„t Basil Lib. de spis cap. 27. sayeth that the wordes of inuocation which are sayed when the bread of thankes geuing the cup of blessyng The sacrament was sheued to the people in baesils tyme lege TheophiluÌ„ lib. 1. pasch is shewed came by tradition and that the priestes sayed that tyme at masse certeÌ„ wordes that haue great strength vnto the mysteries besides the wordes of the gospel and the apostle and are not ye then my lord ashamed to say that nothing is of any necessite yn this matter that is not grounded vpon the scripture Wold ye haue men rather to beleue yow then this saint S. Epist praefixa Libr. paschalibus Hierom commended Theophilus bisshop of Alexandria for teaching men to worship the holy chalices and other thinges pertaynyng vnto the ministration of the blessed sacrament of the aulter and that with the same maieste honoure that his body and bloud are to be worshipped because that they are there present Shold we then folowe my lord your doctrine which saye that nothyng is of any necessite but that only which is grounded vpon gods word and it is idolatry to whorship the holy sacrament of the aulter In how many places of his bookes Tract â—3 in Ioan. lib. 8. capi 27. de ciuitate dei Lib. 22. cap. 10. Deuerbis apost sermone 17. saieth S. Austen that the holy martyrs and other saintes names are rehearsed at masse for to pray for us Why then denie ye this S. Austen Cyprian Chrysostom Cyril and many other of the best wryters and most godly docters of christes church do make mention Chrysost lib. 3. de sacerdotio ca. 4. lib. 6. cap. 4. of many thinges vsed then at masse which are not written yn scripture do saye that the sacrifice of the aulter is made by prayer and inuocation of August epistol 57. Ser igi lib. 3. cap. 4. de trinitate the holy goost and gods name Wherfore your doctrine is false my lord vtterly improued of the ancient doctours of the church thoughe ye say that they do approue it I passe ouer many thinges that are of necessite to be obserued at masse be not expressed yn the scripture least I shold be to long and tedious ye saye moreouer thus First here is to be noted that christ The bysshop fo 4 pa. 2. called the material bread his bodye the wyne which was the fruite of the vyne his bloud Why did ye not proue The confutation this my lord Wold ye that men shold take yow for à prophete or for one that could not erre yn his sainges How called christ the material bread and wyne of the grape his body and bloud when he added immediatly these wordes which shal be geuen for yow shed for yow For gaue he material Marke bread for our redemption vpon
say that our spiritual feeding in christ also the corporal eating and drinking of his body and bloud in the sacrament are sufficiently signified vnto vs by that that the bread and wyne which be consecrated in to christes fleash and bloud are of that same kind and nature of which the bread and wyne be that we do feed dailie vpon and by that that their formes and properties do remayne stil in the sacrament This was the meanyng of al the ancient doctours which intreated any thyng of this matter and ye shal neuer be able to proue the contrary wyth the helpe of al them that made this your booke but. I do traueile yn vayne to spend so many wordes in à thing of it selfe manfestly false and therfore I wil passe it ouer and go forward It foloueth yn your booke This spiritual The bysshop fo 1â— pa 2. cap 16. meate of christes body and bloud is not receaued in the mouth c. Why proued ye not this your sainge The confutation Is your bare word à sufficient profe my lord of this pestilent doctrine and à reprouffe of the catholike fayth of christ The body and bloud of Christ are I confesse à spiritual foode of oure souls and yet they are not only receaued of vs spiritually but also corporally with our mouthes when we do worthily receaue the sacrament of the aulter For Tertulianus sayeth Lib. de resurrect â—anis The fleash of man eateth christes body and bloud that his soul may be also fed of god How doth my lord mans flesh eate christes body and drinke Lib. 4. c. â—4 his bloud yf he eate it not as ye say with his mouth Cyril also writeth of the same after this maniere We denye not that we be ioyned spiritually vnto christ throughe à right Lib 10. ca. 11. in Ioan. fayth and pure charite but that we haue no ioynyng together with hym bodylie we vtterly denye and do iudge that against the scripture And least any man should say that he spake not this of the sacrament and of our corporal ioynyng vnto Christ by the bodily receauing of hym in the sacrament he addeth mention of the 1. Cor. 10. sacrament saying Althoughe we be many yet we be one in hym for we are al partakers of one bread Thinketh he that we knowe not the vertu of the sacrament which when we do receaue doth it not make Christ to dwel in vs yea corporally throughe Marke the partakyng of his fleash What may à man desire to be spoken more plainlie to proue my lord that christes fleash is receaued of vs bodily yn the sacrament and not onely as ye teach falsely by fayth spiritually May Christ dwel I besech yow in vs corporally by the receauing of the sacrament of the aulter and yet we not receaue his body with our mouthes I let passe dyuers such authorites both of S Cyril Chrysostom and also of many other but yet I wil not passe by Lib. sentenâ—ia◠〈◊〉 prosperi this saying of S Austen Whiles the hoost ys broaken whiles the bloud is poured out of the chalice in to the mouthes of the faythful what thing is els signified but the death of our lordes body vpon the crosse and the sheddyng of his bloud out of his side Saint Austen sayeth that we receaue bodily christes bloud wyth our mouthes my lord denyeth it whether ought we to beleue of these twoo Ye saye agayne in your boke thus And so The bysshop fo 1â— ca. 17. there remayneth whytnesse but nothing is whyt there remayne colours but nothing is coloured there remayneth roundnes but nothing is round and there is bignes but nothing is byg there is swetnes but nothing is swete c. What of this my lord Wil ye denye The confutation these thinges to be true because your natural wyt and reason can not perceaue how these accidentes and qualites may be in the sacrament wythout any substaunce to susteyne theÌ„ and in which they may be Who wil measure an article of our fayth by 1. Cor. 2. Theophilactus in IoanneÌ„ ca. 3. his natural wyt Sayeth not S paul my lord that à man which foloweth natural argumentes and reason perceaueth not the thinges that pertayne vnto the spirite of god Why remembre ye not that gods word is his dede Psal â—3 Psal 14. Sayeth not scripture that god doth al that he wil and that nothyng is vnto Luc. 1. Sap. 7. 11. hym impossible Can he them not make whitnes roundnes swetnes bygnes sauour and other the qualitees of bread and wyne to be in the sacrament wythout their substance to beare theÌ„ Is this à greater thing thaÌ„ to create make al thing of nothing S Ambrose sayeth why seakest thow à natural ordre in christes body that is in the sacrament Libr. de his qui mysterus initiantur cap. 9. seying that his body was borne of the virgen without yea against the ordre of nature What meane ye then my lord to wounder so much at these thinges The hethen men that lacketh fayth may wel merueile at them and thinke that it is madnes to beleue any such thing as they do iudge of al the articles of our fayth Sayeth not the prophete excepte ye beleue ye shal not vnderstand Why Esaiae 7. then do ye not my lord first beleue and afterward studye humbly to vnderstand this deape mysterie of our fayth Did not christ saye that that Matth. 19. thing which seamed impossible to man was possible vnto god Is not our fayth the fundation of al the thinges that belong vnto our saluation 1. Cor. 3. Wherfore then bylde ye that vpon reason without fayth which ought onely Hebr. 11. to be buylded vpon fayth without reasoning Cotta sayed unto Lucilius as lactantius sayth If thou doest aske De origene erroris Lib. 2. cap. 7. à reason thou doest not beleue why doest thou theÌ„ require à reason which may cause the not to beleue But yf thou doest requyre à reason and thinkest that à reasoÌ„ must neades be asked theÌ„ thou doest not beleue Lo my lord à paynim setteth yow to schole Are ye not then á shamed of your reasonyng in this matter in which fayth onely ought to rule Wel I trust ye wil be anoÌ„ yf ye be not past al shame Ye write thus agayne But this is not the doctrine The bysshop fo 15. of christ but the subtil inuentioÌ„ of Antichrist first decreed by InnoceÌ„t the third c. Innocent the third my The confutation lord was à great learned maÌ„ as his bookes declare and as platina wytnesseth and also à godly which caused à general councel at Rome to be had celebrated of M. ccc xv fathers some out A councel of M. ccc xv fathers of euery region of al christen dome they after long prayng to god for grace much deliberation and reasonyng vpon this matter made
this acte and decree for the declaration of our beliefe in the sacrament There is one vnyuersal church of the faythful out of the which no man vtterly can be saued In which church christ hymselfe is à priest and á sacrifice whose body and bloud is verily conteyned in the sacrament of the aulter vnder the formes of bread and wyne the substance of the bread and wyne beyng tourned in to christes body and bloud by gods pouer hytherto this the greatest couÌ„sel that euer was kept emoÌ„gest christian people Nou I appeale to thy coÌ„scieÌ„ce reader and aske of the whether we ought not rather to beleue this great nombre of learned and godly men that were assembled together in this counsail than either my lord of Canterbury or els any one particulier councel of any reaulme christened For who can iustely thinke that al those men gathered together in Christes name for the settyng furth of the trueth of oure fayth vnto gods honour and the wealth of our souls did erre so shamefully as my lord sayeth they did For did not Christ promyse Matth. 18. to be in the middes of two or three assembled in his name Was he not theÌ„ wyth these M. cccxv fathers that were in this councel that they erred not in their sentence Why were ye not theÌ„ ashamed my lord to say that Innocentius the third fyrst decreed this our doctrine which al these fathers did set furth above ccc yers passed yet not first as ye say but onely established yt being loÌ„g afore taught euen by Christ and his apostles albeit not so plainly as they declared it Haymo à godly bisshop which was Haymo homiliade passione Christ secundum Matthaeum aboue cccc yeres before this Innocen tius did thus write of this matter The bread is chaunged in to our lordes fleash and the wyne in to his bloud not by à figure nor by à shadowe but by In. 1. Cor. 11 the veryte See ye not noue my lord how plainly ye erre saying that Innocentius first decreed this doctrine of Transubstantiation Anselme that was bysshop of Canterbury cxx yeres before Innocentius was borne wrote thus of the sacrament It appeareth bread to the outward senses of man but do ye knowe yt wyth the senses of the mynde for this is Christes body no other but that selfe same in substance that was crucified for vs What can be more plainly spoken than this is my lord against your wrytiÌ„g here but let this passe as sufficienthy disscussed refuted it foloweth in your Booke The papistes say that the very The bysshop natural body and bloud of Christ which suffered for vs vpon the crosse and sittehy at the rygth hand of the father in heauen is also really et c. in the sacrament Here ye cal papistes The confutation my lord not lúther only and al his scholers which are against your doctrine but also al christen nations and al the ancyent doctours of christes church which do beleue and defend the real presence of christes blessed body in the sacrameÌ„t Agayne ye falsely report of them that they say that christes body is naturally and sensibly Iâ— 16. in the sacrament for they affirme manifestly that it is there aboue nature and vnsensiblye It is also very false that ye lay vnto our charges that we say that christes body is in the sacrament as yt was borne of the virgen and that it is broaken and toren in peaces with our teth for we say that he was borne naturally of the vyrgen and visibly in his oune forme of fleash and bone and that he is vnnaturally inuisibly and vnder the forme of bread and wyne in the sacrament and that he is therin receaued wholly without breaking of his body or teryng of it with our teth and that the formes only of bread are broaken and toren with our teth This ment berengarius Fo. 16. whon ye do alledge by such wordes of his recantation And yn those his wordes he folowed S Chrysostom Hom. â—5â— â—â— 83. in Matthaeum homi 45. in Ioannem certen other of the old writers which for the more manifest setting furth of the real presence of christes body in the sacrament do say often tymes that it is therin touched broaken and seane wheÌ„ only the formes and kyndes of bread are touched broaken and seane And why may we not as wel say that we do touch breake and see christes body in the sacrament when we see touche and breake only the outword formes of the bread Gen. 18. 19. 32. Iosue 5. Mar. vlt. Act. 1. 1. Ioan. 1. as the scripture sayeth that loth Abrahan Iacob Iosua mary Madgalen the Apostles sawe and touched angels and god when they sawe only touched te forme and shape of man Moreouer I do aske of yow my lord why may not we say that christes body is is broaken when the formes of bread are broaken only yn the sacrament and his body taketh no hurt at al as S. Thomas did putte his hand in to christes side after his resurrection without al harme of his body which was then iÌ„mortal and not apte to suffre any hurt at al Is not this as impossible to maÌ„nes natural reason wyt as the other and as the qualitees of bread wyne to remayne stil in the sacrameÌ„t wythout any substance to susteyne them Wherfore theÌ„ do ye not beleue the one as wel as the other Ye say that Fo. 16. christe is gone vp from vs yn to heauen bodily and shal not come hither agayne vntil domes daye and therof ye gather that he is not bodily really in the sacrament but how false that saying is it doth partly appeare already and more playnly shal by these wordes which do folowe here First Christ is both at ones in heauen also in the sacraement of the aulter the catholike fayth is that Christ departed vysibly and in is oune forme out of this world in to heauen at the tyme of his ascension and after that maner sitteth at the right hand of the father in heauen and shal do vntil domes daye and yet he is bodily also in the sacrament both at ones by the almightie pouer of god aboue nature and the vnderstandyng of al mans wyt and reason S. Austen expoundeth Ad Dardadum epist â—7 ActoruÌ„ â— this matter after the lyke sense saynge He wil come agayne as the angels wytnessed after that same sort as he was seane goyng vp yn to heauen that is to say as S. Austen taketh it in the same forme and substance of flesh What can be more playnly spoken to declare that Christ is gone from vs visibly in the forme of fleash and that after such sorthe is not with vs now but shal be at domes daye This proueth not that he is not wyth vs now ynuisibly in the forme of bread and wyne and therfore this your argument my lord is soyled sufficiently
diseases were healed and our synnes pardoned and so dyd neuer no priest nor creature but he nor he did the same neuer but ones What The confutation ignorance is this my lord that ye are yn Who denyeth that Christ hath redeamed vs perfectly and sufficiently by his one sacrifice ones for al offered vpon the crosse at the least coÌ„cernyng his office duyte parte and merite but yet not in effecte and actually as it is declared before but he only then deserued grace remission of synne and euer lasting lyfe for al them that wold beleue in hym hope in gods mercy fear god do penaunce for their synnes praye gyue almes to the poore fast receaue the sacrameÌ„tes loue god and their neyghbours keape gods Hebr. 5. facto est causa salutis c. commaundementes Why then may we not wel say that à priest as à ministre of god sayeth masse and offereth christes body and bloudde for to applye his sacrifice made vpon the crosse vnto vs for the actuall remission of our synnes althoughe they do not take away our synnes nor pardonne them nor heale our diseases but god onely doth yt for christes perfect sacrifices sake For sayeth not the scripture Matth. 6. Marci 11. 1. Timo. 4. Matth. â— Iacoâ—i 5. that we do forgeue one an other our offences that the preacher of gods word doth saue the people and hymselfe therby that we must praye for the remission of our synnes of others also that they may be saued that Ecclesiast 1. Ioan. 20. Daniel 4. fear expelleth synne that priestes do remitte synne that synne is taken a way by almes fastinge baptisme Danielis 4. Luc. 11. Matth. 17. Esaie 43 and yet god only for christes merites sake remitteth our synnes Ye saye that euery man must apply christes sacrifice and merite vnto hymselfe and Abacuc 2. by his oune fayth receaue the frute of it at christes handes not at the priestes What then my lord Is this à good argument I besech yow euery man must receaue the benefite of christes death by his oune faith at christes handes ergo the priest sayeth not masse for the obteyning the remissioÌ„ of synnes Do not they for whom the priest offereth christ at masse receaue that christes benefite for the remission of their synnes and saluation throughe their faith and repentaunce of god only for christes sake Doth not this your argument my lord proue as much against oure praying one for an other Iacobi 5 Matth. 28. preaching of the gospel ministring of the sacramentes for the remission of our synnes and against many such other thinges requyred of god in the scripture for remission of our synnes Marke reader and saluation as it doth against the sacrifice of the masse For must they not receaue of christ by their oune fayth remission of their synnes for whom ye daily praye to whom ye do ministre the sacramentes and preache gods word Why then did yow thus trifie myspend your tyme in such vayne thinges to seduce the people Ceasse for shame ceasse I saye thus to reason vnreasonably and vnlearnedly against the trueth which euer obteyneth the 3 Esd 3. psal 11â— victorie and endureth Thus ye ende your first boke and so I do myn The confutation of the seconde The bysshop booke which is of Transubstantiation After ye had my lord made to the Lib. 2. ca. 2. fo 18. pa. 1. reader à great promes in the begynning of this your booke ye saye that christ gaue at his last soupper bread vnto his disciples and for the profe therof ye say thus Whan christ sayed This the bread say thei remayned O vayne tryfler And whan he sayed is yet the bread remayned stil And whaÌ„ he sayed bo yet the bread was there stil But when he finished the whole sentence This is my body thaÌ„ they say the bread was gone and there remayneth no substaÌ„ce but christes body as thoughe the bread could not remayne when it is made á sacrameÌ„t This is in dede my The confutation lord the very true sense of those christes wordes althoughe ye mocke much therat as it doth right wel become your estate and degree and your reason maketh no lesse against your oune My lords reason is as muâ—h against his oune doctrine as it is against oures opinion than it doth against oures For the bread and wyne are not made holy signes as ye say that they are only of christes body and bloud vntil the wordes of consecration be fully pronounced and therfore we may vse this your oune reason after lyke sorte against your doctrine as ye do vse it against oures Agayne when the priest baptizeth à child saying I do christen Matth. 28. the in the name of the father the sonne and the holy goost the child is not baptized nor his sinnes forgeueÌ„ hym when the priest sayeth I christen the and so of the rest of those wordes but only whan the whole sentence is pronounced â—uc 22. Moreouer christ gaue vnto his apostles authorite to coÌ„secrate the bread and wyne to offre his body and bloud in sacrifice and to ministre theÌ„ vnto other when he saied do this in remembraunce of me and yet when he sayed Do they had not that authorite nor when he sayed This but when al these wordes were spoken or els he speakinge them gaue that authorite Wherfore ye haue gotten nothing by this your reasoning my lord but only declared therby your ignoraunce as ye do when you folowing your great Matth. 26. Hoc est c god peter martyr denye that these wordes This is my body are the wordes of consecration For S. Ireneus Lib. 4. c. 32. De coena d. Tertulian Saint CypriaÌ„ Chrysostom Hierom Ambrose basile libro de institutione monachorum cap. 70. Damascene Contione 2. in psal 33. lib. 4. cap. 14. S. Austen and many other of the oldest writers affirme plainly that those are the wordes of consecratioÌ„ but I wil rehearse nowe onely the wordes of certen of them for diuers causes S. Ambrose thus writeth Afore it be consecrated it is bread Lib 4. ca. â— de sacramentis but after christes wordes are come vnto it is christes body Heare hym saying Take and eate This is my body S. Damascene also saieth The bread Lib. 4. c. 14. and wyne are not à figure of the body and bloud of christ god forbidde that but our lordes body it selfe ioyned vnto the godhead our lord hymselfe sayng This is my bodye not à figure of my bodye but my bodye Is Marke reader not this plainly spoken of that holy saint to declare both that those are the wordes of consecration and also that christes very natural body and bloud are in the sacrament and not only à figure of them Where it not theÌ„ great folly to beleue your doctrine my lord before his which was à notable clearke Hom.
as much against your oune doctrine as it is against oures For althoughe the texte seameth to say that Christ gaue vnto his disciples the sacrament before the wordes of consecration were spoken of hym yet he did not so but he did first consecrate the bread sayng This is my body My lordes reason is against his oune doctrine and then he sayed take and eate for els he had geuen vnto them no sacrament but only common bread vnconsecrated which is very false as much against your opinion as against our doctrine For ye do say that christ gaue to his apostles holy consecrated bread à signe and à sacrament of his body Ye are also disceaued wheÌ„ Luc. 22. fo 19 Matth. 26. ye say that christ gaue vnto his disciples the cup of wine before he did coÌ„secrated it for then he had geuen to theÌ„ wyne vnconsecrated which had bene neither signe nor sacrament of christes precious bloud more thaÌ„ al other common wyne was and now is and the apostles also had then receaued drounken but common wyne for the texte of Marke which ye folowe here in your boke sayeth They drouÌ„ke of it al and after it reciteth the wordes of the consecration sayng This is Marci 14. my bloud c. Is not this then against your doctrine my lord as much as it is against oures Why then do ye not thus construe christes wordes in Marke My lord made an argumeÌ„t plaily against his oune doctrine This is my bloud of the newe testament c. Take it ye and drinke and they drounke of it al Shal ye not els be enforced to say that christ did nether consecrate the wyne at al nor geue to his apostles any sacrameÌ„t or holy signe for he dyd not consecrate the wyne after they had drounken it Recante therfore this your errour for shame recante yea for our lordes honoures sake the sauing of your oune soul and the souls of many other whoÌ„ ye haue seduced with this your wicked doctrine Ye also write thus Nowe I aske The bysshop of the papistes what thing it was that christ commaunded his disciples to drinke whan he sayed Drinke ye al of this I anusweare my lord that it was his oune precious bloud which he shed for many as he sayeth there hymselfe and that he spoke those woâ—des after he had consecrated the wyne as I haue already declared althoughe the letter hath not that ordre For els ye must neades graunt that Christ gaue vnto his apostles but common vnconsecrated wyne and that he did neuer consecrate it nor make it à holy signe of his bloud which howe false it is and houe playne against your oune doctrine who seeth not May not à man nowe my lord wel perceaue how ye erre for lacke of knowlage thoughe ye take vpon yow to correct al other and to reforme christes religion Of lyke ignoraunce proceded this reason that now foloueth in your booke Before christ deliuered the cup of wyne The bysshop lib. 2. fo 19. pag. 2. to his disciples he sayed vnto them Deuide this among yow Here ye do deskant my lord vpon this word Deuide The confutation and aske of the papistes what thing it was that christ bade his apostles deuide among them I thinke say ye that they wil not say that it was his bloud because those wordes were spoken before the consecration and also the bloud of christ is not deuided This ye reason without both reason The Confutation and also good learning For if Christ had spoken those wordes of the wyne which appertayned vnto the holy sacrament as in dede he did not but on ly of the wyne that he dranke at his soupper eating the paschal lambe afore the institution of the sacrament Marci 14. Luc. 22. yet they should make nothing more against our beliefe than against your vnbeliefe For if he had commaunded his apostles to haue drounken the wyne Marke not yet consecrated as ye say falsely that he did than it had bene no sacrament nor holy signe of christes bloud as ye teache that it is But I saye to the good reader that he must neades be very folish that wil geue any credence vnto my lordes doctrine seyng he doth so falsely alleage and wreast gods word to maintene his errour But I wil passe this ouer as confuted sufficiently Ye say agayne When the coÌ„munion was ended christ sayed vnto his apostles Verily I say vnto yow Luc. 22. The bysshop lib. 2. fo 19. pa. 2. that I wil drinke no more hence furth of this frute of the vyne vntil the day that I shal drinke yt newe wyth yow in my fathers kyndome These wordes proue not my lord that christes apostles The confutation dranke wyne in the receauing of the sacrament as ye saye but only that they dranke wyne with christ at soupper when they did eate the paschal lambe before the institution of the sacrament as it appeareth by SaiÌ„t Lukes euangile in which these wordes Lucae 22. are written to declare both Saint Mattheus and Saint Markes wordes Agayne yf those wordes had bene spoken of the coÌ„secrated wyne yet they shold not proue your purpose my lord that wyne of the grape remayneth stil yn the holy sacrameÌ„t but only that christ called his very oune bloud wyne because that wyne was turned in to it by the consecration and because it seamed to be wyne and had the qualitees and properties of wyne least we shold abhorre to drinke it yf it did appeare bloud as S. Damascene Theophilacte Damascene Lib. 4. c. 14. Theophi in Marci 14. Euthyimus and many other learned men do wytnesse and that man myght merite beleuing against his senses iudgementes which hath no merite as Saynt Gregorie sayeth when he Homi. 28. in Euangelia hath à prouffe of the thinge It is no strange thyng for christes bloud to be called wyne for the storie of the Genesis Gene. 49. sayeth of christ in the person of Iuda he shal wash his stole in wyne and his garment in the bloud of the grape Did not the holy goost calle wyne here christes bloud Saint Cyprian proueth â—i 2. Epi. 3 by that text and by an other of Esaiae the prophete that wyne must neades be putte in to the chalice to be consecrated and made christes bloud and therfore christ ment that he wold not drinke his oune bloud iÌ„ to which the wyne was then chaunged by his wordes and pouer after that tyme vntil he dranke yt with his apostles in the Lege Hier. ad hedihiaÌ„ quaest 2. church after his resurrection And after this sorte Saint Eucherius that was bysshop of lions in France aboue Libro quaestionum noui veteris testameÌ„ti M. c. yeres passed expoundeth that texte sayng What shal we folow here The kyndome of god as learned men do vnderstaÌ„d it is the church in which christ daily drinketh his bloud by
his holy people as the head in the membres Loo this holy doctour my lord vnderstode by the fruete of the vyne of which S. Luke maketh mention not wyne of the vyne as ye do but christes very bloud and sayeth that he dranke it when his membres the godly people drāke it in the church as the head drinketh in his membres Nowe I aske of yow my lord where drinketh christ his bloud daily in the churche when his membres the god men drinke it except it be ī the holy sacramēt Is not this argument then anusweared sufficiētly It is very false also that The bysshop Li. 2. fo 20 ye say that christ vsed al such termes and circumstances which shold make vs beleue that bread and wyne remayned stil in the sacrament For the terme of his body and saynge that he gaue euen that same his bodye that should be crucified for vs his bloud that he wold shed for vs and that he vsed the neutre gendre when he sayed This is c which can not be referred vnto the bread that is both in latine and also in the Greake the masculine gendre ought to make vs beleue that he spake then of his oune very natural body and bloud I let passe here your malitious rayling vpon the catholike priestes which declareth plainly by what spirite ye are led ye write also this Saint Pol called bread bread and wyne wyne and neuer altered The bysshop lib. 2. fo 20 pagina 2. christes wordes heryn The bread which we breake sayeth he is it not the communion of christes body It is The confutation not true that Saint Pol called bread bread and wyne wyne for he called christes blessed body precious bloud bread wyne because bread wyne were turned in to them at the tyme of the consecration and because there remayned stil the qualitees and properties of bread and wyne and thirdly be cause that christes body and bloud do feede the soul as material bread and wyne doth the body When ye say that S. Pol must neades be vnderstanded when he sayeth the bread that we breake c. of material bread because christes body is not broken I say that ye erre in so saying for the formes quantites of bread are broken christes body lying vnder them takyng no har me at al as Saint Thomas did putte his hand yn to christes side without al hurt vnto it beyng then immortal Ioan. 20 vnapte to suffre harme Saint Pol I graunt maketh ofte mention of bread and wyne but what therof Is that sufficient to proue that he spake of material 1. Cor. 10. 11 bread and of wyne of the vyne Maketh he not also often mention of christes body and bloud Why then Marke reader may not we say that he spake of thē and ment by the bread and wyne christes body and bloud in to which the bread was chaunged and the wyne also and whose properties and qualitees remayned stil in the sacrament Ye say that pol neuer spake of transubstantiation yf ye meane expressely and by that name I graūt it but that proueth nothing for your purpose for he spake of the thing signified ment by that word that is to say he taught vs that christes body and bloud are in the sacrament and not bakers bread as it is proued afore Agayne Saint Pol neuer sayed that material bread remayneth stil in the sacrament as ye teach my lord therfore pol by your oune reason maketh no more for yow thē he doth for me Also the scripture speaketh not namely expressely of this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 homousios nor that the father is ingenitus nor that there are three persons in the trinite Wil ye mi Marke lord therfore conclude that scripture setteth not furth the selfe same thing by other termes and wordes No god forbid Is it not then sufficient for our doctrine that the scripture teacheth vs the same thing that this word transubstantiation signifieth althoughe it maketh no mention of that word Now ye speake much against altering of christes wordes But who doth my lord so much alter them as ye do For christ sayed This is my body that shal be geuen for yow and ye say that it was not his body in dede but bread of corne à signe or à figure of it only can there be my lord any greater altering of à thinge then to denie it and Mrrke to say it is not it but only à figure of it Christ sayed it was he selfe same body that he gaue for vs to death we say euen the same where ye say it was not it but bread Haue ye not then blamed vs in that thing in which ye your selfe is most to be blamed Wel let The bysshop fo 21. The confutation this passe Now ye fal to reasoning and say thus Now let vs consider how the same is also against reasō and natural operation c. What then Are not lyke wyse al the articles of our fayth against both reason and natural operation For what can be more against reason and natural operation than à virgen to conceaue and beare à child without decay of her virginite than mās Matth. 1. Lucae 1. 1. Cor. 15. flesh to rise agayne than al thinges to be made of nothing than death to be ouercome by death than that there be three persons and but one god c. Why thē denye ye not as wel al these articles of our faith as the real presence of christes body in the sacrament Haue ye forgetten S pols sayng A mā which foloweth natural reason and argumentes made by his oune wyt perceaueth 1. Cor. 1. Theophilactus in 10. 3 not thinges belonging to god and those that are aboue reason Dyd not Nichodemus think it was impossible that à mā should be borne agayne because he lacked faith and folowed natural reason only Exhorteth not vs Coloss 2. S Pol to take heede that no man disceaue vs by vaine reasoning and philosophie Did not the heithen and paynyms iudge it folly to beleue in christes 1. Cor. 1. death because they thought it against reason that à man shold be saued by à mans death How much reasoned Saint pol against the natural philosophers to proue the resurrectiō 1. Cor. 15 of the flesh Which they wold not beleue because it was against reason and natural knowlege Do ye not geue mē à great occasiō my lord by your reasoning in this your booke to denye al the articles of our fayth seyng they are against natural reason operation I pray god that ye bringe not the people vnto such madnes Athanasius Libro 4. ad Theophilum contra potentinum sayed vnto one pontentine Thow alone doest dissent in this matter from the catholikes against the scriptures and the whole world whiles thow folouest the philosophers doctrine May we not my lord say the same of yow
disceaue vs and so it appeareth that this your reason my lord is of none effecte nor force at al. We opeÌ„ no gate as ye say falsely that we do vnto valentinianus heresy nor to any such other For althoughe we do say that our senses are not to be trusted yn this matter of the holy sacrament yet we denye not but that some credence may be geuen wel vnto them in natural thinges hauyng their natural condition and state And as concernyng the heresy of them that sayed christ was not à very man or that he had not very flesh and bones the contrary was not proued sufficiently by their senses which sawe hym but by many textes both of the old and also the newe testament Moreouer the scriptures are manyfest enoughe in many places against Basilides and such other that sayed christ was not crucified for vs but Simon Cyrenaeus by which scriptures that article and the beliefe of it is approued and not by oure senses RomanoruÌ„ 10. for S Paul sayeth that fayth commeth of the hearyng of gods word and not of hearyng seyng feeling or of any of the other our senses for they may often tymes disceaue vs as Saint Homi. 93. in Matthaeum Ioan. 14. Chrysostom wytnesseth where gods word which is the trueth itself can neuer disceaue vs. Wherfore the senses are not to be trusted heryn and so is al that reasoniÌ„ge which ye make my lord here wythe so many wordes not worth à bleue point Ye say also thus And yf there be no trust to be geuen The bysshop fo 22 pa. 2. to oure senses in this matter of the sacrament why than do the papistes so stoutly affirme that the accidentes remayne after the consecration which can not be iudged but by the senses Syr we do affirme that there is no The confutation trust to be geuen to our senses in matters of our faith especially where they do iudge agenst goddes word as they do in this matter For the scripture sayth that christ promysed to geue his apostles bread which should be his owne very flesh that he wold geue for the lyfe of the world and that he gaue Ioan. 8. Matth. 28. 1. Cor. 11. to them his bodie which was crucified for them the senses did iudge that it was but bread of corne Agayne our senses do iudge only the accidentes properly as al learned men do wel know whiche every maÌ„ may affirme to be yn the sacrament but notthinke ther of that their substances do remayne althoughe the scripture expresselye sayeth not that there remayneth no bread but that it is christes bodie which he gaue for vs to death and so it can not be breade forthat was not geueÌ„ for vs vpon the crosse The sacrament is not an elusion of our senses as ye say althoughe in yt appeare bread Gen. 18 19. Mar vt Ioan. 20 Actorum 1. and yt is not there as god and the angelles seamed men to loth AbrahaÌ„ and other and were not very men in dede and yet they were no elusions of their senses werfore an aÌ„uwseare is now made to al this your reasoninge my lord vpon the iudgement of our senses and natural reason Now ye labour The bysshop lib. 2. fo 23. pag. 1. to proue that oure belefe in this matter is against the fayth of the old autours of christes church ye alleageiustine the Holie martyr affirminge The confutation Anno d. â—0 103 90. that he is the oldest author that is knowen this daie to writte any treatie vpoÌ„ the sacrameÌ„tes which is very false for Anacletus the martyr Clement dionise saynt Martial certen other moo wrate of that matter before hym à great while as it appareth plainlie by their lyues writinges and bookes The confutation I muche merueile my lord that ye are not à shamed falsely to alleage iustine Iustinus wordes for the furtheraÌ„ce of your wicked doctrine which neuer wrote as ye say butthus onlie ThaÌ„ afterward bread the chalice of wyne and water myxed together is broughe vnto the bisshop or priest This nourysshemeÌ„t is called of vs Eucharistia And we take not these thinges as euery meate and euery drinke but as throughe goddes word Christ oure sauiour was incarnate and toke fleashe and bloud for oure saluation euen so we haue learned by these wordes This is my bodie This is my bloud that this meate by the which oure flesh bloud are throughe alteration nouryshed when it is blessed by the prayers of the word goddes sonne he meaneth is the flesh and bloud of iesu hymselfe incarnate These are his wordes which are as plaiÌ„lie agaiÌ„st your doctrine as caÌ„ be in four pointes The Iustinus whoÌ„ my lord alleageth for hym is first is that he speaketh of meÌ„glinge of wyne water together in the chalice of which the scripture maketh no meÌ„tioÌ„ agaiÌ„st hym in four pointes therfore ye saye that it is not to be passed vpon Secondlye he is contrarie to your teachinge whan he affirmeth verites not Wrytten in scripture that christ prayed when he did consecrate and that by his prayers the bread and wyne were blessed which is not mentioned yn the scripture and for that cause ye despise it and say it is à thinge of no necessite at al. Thirdly he sayeth that these are the wordes of consecration This is my bodye This is mybloud which ye denie Four thely he sayeth that the bread wine by which our flesh bloud are nouryshed are after they be blessed throughe christes prayers the flesh and bloud Marke â–ª this reader of christ How blynd were ye theÌ„ my lord when ye alleaged this authour for oure purpose which is so euideÌ„tly against your doctrine But what yf Iustinus had thought as ye saye that he did yet did not so indede that bread wyne remayned stil yn the sacrameÌ„t Could that haue proued your doctrine that there is nothinge els in the sacrament but bread an wyne only No man is so blynd but he maye se that it doth not proue your purpose thoughe it seame to make with luther Also many of the Greakes affirmed that the holie goost proceded not froÌ„ the father and he sonne both they agreed not theryn with the latine church vntil the conseil holden at florentia wich was with yn these cxx yeres and yet that their opinion proued not that the latine church erred yn their belefe why then should either Iustinus saying Theodoretus or any other of the Greates which wrote that bread and wyne remayned stil yn the sacrament make against our faith touchyngetraÌ„substaÌ„tiatioÌ„ which Greakes generallie did not receaue manyyeres after the latine church had manifestly taught yt But Iustinus saye ye affirmeth that the bread and wyne are turned in to our flesh and bloud to nouryshe our bodies It is true but not as ye do take his sainge for he meÌ„t that coÌ„mon bread and wyne are turned by the alteration
alleage for your purpose where he doth denie this vtterly Legat haec caecus Petrus Martyr and sayeth that it doth nothinge sanctifie the receauer Affirmeth not origen also here that bread is made à holier bodie than it was before What bodie is that yf it be not christes bodie it selfe But heare my lord what foloweth in that place that ye alleage here This is therewritten As appertayneth to the eatinge nether of that that we do not eate of that breade halowed by goddes word and prayer we are defrauded of any good thinge nother we haue by eatinge of it any more goodnes in vs. Doth this saynge agree with that that is rehearsed afore out of his other book which affirmeth that the sacrameÌ„t maketh vs more holy Is not this last sentence that the sacrament maketh not men holy nor they take any hurt which receaue it not against many places of S IhaÌ„s gospel the vj. chap. and al old doctours myndes which saye as christ doth Io. 6. that by this Ioan 6. Cyrillus Cyprianus sacrament christ dwelleth in vs and we in hym and that we shal not haue euer lasting lyfe without we eate christes fleash and drinke his bloud Why then may not I truely conclude and say that ye my lord were shamefullie disceaued when ye alleaged this authorite and so was peter Martyr your great god in abusinge the same as I wil shortly by goddes helpe declare to al men in my booke against him which is now redie for the presse Now Cyprianus Lib. 2. epi. 3 The bisshop Fo. 24. to S Cyprian whom ye bringe thus wrintinge For as much as christe sayed I am à true vyne therfore the bloud is not water but wyne nor it can not be thought that his bloud wherby we are redeamed and haue lyfe is yn the cup when wyne is not in the cuppe wherbye the bloud of The confutation christ is shewed O'lord what meaneth this man Why remembreth he not that S Cyprian there went about to proue that wyne ought to be putte in to the chalice at masse and not onlie water as then some priestes did vse to do against christes doynge commaundement Luc. 22. and not to proue that wyne remayned stil therin after the coÌ„secration Sayeth not S Cyprian here as plainly that christes very bloud wherby we were redeamed is in the chalice as he doth that wyne is therin and more plainlye also How then for shame could yow my lord alleage the one for your purpose and denye the other Is this the rightwaye to set furth the trueth to the people What is this but to seduce them vtterly But let vs se what S Cyprian hath in that same epistle agaiÌ„st your doctrine He writeth after this maner As meÌ„ caÌ„ not drinke wine except the grapes be pressed afore Lib. 2. epi. 3 so we caÌ„ not drinke christes bloud excepte christ had bene before pressed vpon the crosse and had drounken first of the chalice of which he began to drinke vnto theÌ„ that beleued Agayne Cyrillus Cyprianus he sayeth yn that same epistle If à maÌ„ do put in to the chalice onlie water christes bloud begyinnythe to be in the chalice without vs. Finallie he writeth thus If yn the sacrifice which is christ only christ must be folowed we Christ is offered at masse yn sacrifice and not bread ought to obey do that which christ did and commaunded to be done of vs. How can we shead our bloud for christ which are ashamed to drinke christes bloud Who now is so blynd my lord I besech you that he seeth not how much S. Cyprian is against your vngodly doctrine which ye wold yet father vpon hym God geue al meÌ„ grace to be ware of such teachers which wold beare men yn hande that their doctrine is old and grounded vpon the belefe and writiÌ„ges of godlye ancient doctours when they are agaiÌ„st yt plainly â–ª but I aske of yow my lord how ye can proue by S. CypriaÌ„ or any other doctour which ye do alleage here for your purpose that there is none other substance in the blessed sacrament of the aulter then bare bakers bread and wyne of the vyne Are ye so ignorant in logicke which doth teach men to reason wel and to make good argumentes as to make this argument for your matter S. Cyprian affirmeth that wyne is in the chalice ergo there is not christes bloud A boye which only hath learned the sophistrye wil not dispute so fondly I am sure but wel such is your authorite Note power yn that reaulme that no man may speake agaiÌ„st your doctrine be it neuer so folysh wicked Christ his apostles did not sette fourth the gospel by any such meanes as ye vse Now ye alleage S. CypriaÌ„ agayne whose wordes are euidentlye against your purpose for he sayeth Christ offered sacrifice at his last soupper and that christes bloud is offered yn sacrifice at masse which both two ye denye vtterlye and yet are not ashamed to say that this your doctrine is approued So hath the title of his â—oke by the most ancient doctours of christes church of which S. Cyprian is one of the chyefest Ye bringe now for yow Eusebius Emissenus which is moost of al men against your cause Thus he writeth When the creatures The bissop lib. 2. fo 24 pa. 2. bread and wyne are to be blesshed with goddes wordes they are sette vpon the holy aultour before they be consecrated with the inuocation of the most highe name there is the substance of bread and wyne but after christes wordes be spoken there is christes bodie and bloud But what merueile is it yf god can by his word turne those thinges that are created which could make them with his word And that it ought not to seame to vs à newe and an impossible thinge that earthly mortal thinges are chaunged in to christes substance aske thyselfe et c. Agayne he writeth yn this wyse The heauenly autorite In homi pasehali de cons dist 2. Quia corpus c. confirmeth this matter My fleash is verilie meate and my bloud is verilie driÌ„ke lette then al doubte of vnfayth fullnes depart awaye for he that is the maker of the gyfte is also the wytnes Ioan. 8. of the trouth For the inuisible priest christ turneth by the word with à TransubstaÌ„tiation secrete power the visible creatures in to the substance of his bodie and bloud thus sayinge Take ye and eate This is my bodie And the sanctifieng repeted he saied thus Take and drinke This is my bloud Seest thow not now clerely good reader that this auncient father and great clearke is plainly against my lordes doctrine He wold not alleage these wordes because he saw that they were agaiÌ„st hym vtterlye Euen so the deuel alleaged Matth. 4. the scriptures against christ Aulters for the sacrament This doctour alloweth aulters for the
consecration of the blessed sacrament and my lord casteth them al downe This father sayeth that the substaÌ„ce Marke reader of bread and wyne is by inuocation of goddes name christes wordes and goddes power turned yn to christes bodie and bloud and yn to the substance of them and my lord denyeth both that inuocation is necessarie therto and that the substance of bread and wyne is chaunged and turned yn to christes bodie and bloud yet sayeth that this doctour is vpon his side Al the wordes which he reciteth here for hym do proue nothinge his intent but only that it ought not be iudged of vs à thinge impossible to fo 25. god to turne the substance of bread and wyne in to christes fleshe and bloud This ment onlye that authour by those similitudes that my lord rehearseth out of hym and not that there is none other chaunge of bread and wyne yn the sacrament then is in mans soul when he is baptized his synnes are forgeuen hym which chaunge is onlie spiritualle and not bodily ffor that were not the substance of bread wyne to be turned and chaunged yn to the substance of christes fleashe and bloud which this aulthour affirmeth plainlie to be done yn the sacrament Wherefore this writer writeth contrarilie to my lordes purpose and euen so doth Hilary bysshoppe of Rome whom ye alleage sayinge Hilarius Romanus de cons dist 2. cap. corpus after this maner There is a figure sayeth he for bread and wyne be outwardly seene and there is also à trueth Here my lord agayne alleageth fo 25. pa. 2. falsely this authours wordes leaving The confutation out the first part of the sentence which maketh against him plainly for this he writeth The bodie of christ which is taken from the aulter is à figure when bread and wyne outwardly appeare but it is the trueth whiles the bodie and bloud of christ is inwardly beleued in the trueth What may be more plainly sayed against my lordes opinion than this is Saith he not that we do receaue christes bodie at the aulter and that we do beleue that christes bodie bloud are of à trueth ynwardly yn the sacrament What is that my lord els but that christes bodie bloud are beleued of good christen people to lye hyd ynwardly vnder neath the formes of bread and wyne which are outwardly seene of vs and are also à figure What haue ye my lord now gotten by this allegation of hilarie Do ye so il vnderstand that ye reade which fault ye were wont to ascribe vnto me Re cante recante for shame and go not furth this blyndly in your errour to your oune confusion many others also Suffer learned men to saye their myndes for discharge of their consciences towardes god and settinge furth Recante my lord of the trueth Keape men no longer yn pryson leaue your affection and Marke partialite least ye repent it at the the length when it shal be to late to repent Epiphanius whom ye recite for The bysshop you is nothinge for your purpose for when he sayeth the bread is meate fo 25. pa. 2. he meaneth that christ the heauenly bread and his blessed bodye vnder Homi. 83. in Matth. the forme of bread yn the sacramente is the fode of the soul of maÌ„ S. ChrysostoÌ„ sayeth truely that christ vsed wyne when he gaue the mysteries not that he gaue to his apostles theÌ„ very material wyne but that he myxed wyne and water together at the tyme of consecration and them turned them in to his bloud as I haue declared afore and wil more at large hereafter in this booke by goddes helpe The epistle that ye alleage of chrisostom vnto Cesarium the Monke is â—o 26. fayned and forged yn his name for it is against many of his other sainges as it shal be opened hereafter althoughe his sainge yf it were his that the nature of bread doth stil remayne proueth not that very bread only doth remayne in the sacrament For why may not I here saye as ye do to cypriaÌ„ and Ambrose that this word Natura nature signifieth not here in Chrysostom the substance of breade but the properties and qualitees of it onlye Agayne what maketh this saynge for your purpose which do teach that onlye bread remayneth in this sacrameÌ„t Is this à good argument absolutely There is bread ergo there is onely bread Luther erreth not so much iÌ„ this matter as my lord doth Saieth not luther that there is both bread and christes bodye also Finallie sayeth Chrysostom as ye do that there is not christes very bodie bloud No no nor yet any other catholique writer that euer was Wherfore this authorite maketh not for the furtherance of your doctrine After this ye recite Ambrose for yow when he writeth in this maner If the word of god be of De ijs qui mysterijs initiantur capit vl that force that it can make thinges of noughte and those thiÌ„ges to be which neuer were before much more it can Lib. 4 ca. 4 de sacrameÌ„tis The confutation make thinges that were before stil to be and also to be chaunged in to other thinges This authorite my lord seameth a lytle at the first sight to make for the lutherans doctrine but nothinge at al for yours which saye that christes bodie is not reallie in this sacrament but only bare bread which Ambrose neuer taught but the cleane contrarie as it may appeare plainlie by theses his wordes Let vs proue Libr. de ijs qui myst initiantur cap. 9. that it is not that thinge which nature made but that which the blessiÌ„g hath consecrated and that the strength of the blessinge is greater than is the force of nature for by the blessinge yea nature is chaunged Loo here S Ambrose denyeth plainly that the thinge which is in the sacrament is that same that nature made and sayeth also that nature is therin chauÌ„ged throughe the consecration which he calleth à blessinge Who then can wel and truely say that he ment by his wordes which ye my lord do alleage that the nature of breade remayned stil after the consecration For then it were not chaunged as he affirmeth here that it is and then also it were stil that same thinge that nature made which he denieth vtterly wherfore that was not his mynde but that the substance of the bread is chaunged in to oure lordes fleasn as his examples which he bringeth immediatly to proue his purpose do manifestly declare For he bringeth there for an example the turninge of Moses rod yn to à serpent and of the serpent agayne in to à rod of the ryuers of Egypt turned yn to bloud and how they were turned agayne yn to their oune natures Which examples do declare that Ambrose ment of the chaunge of the substaunce of bread in the sacrament because the substance yn al those examples was turned
of them fo 2â— pa. 2. only remayne Secondlye ye erre shamefully when ye affirme that saint Austen maketh here with you for he sayeth that christes bodie and bloud are yn this sacrifice and that it is made of them beynge present as both the godhead and manhod are really present in christ of which he is made Where was your sight my lord whan ye sawe not this that is so playne Ye do now alledge Chrysostom out of an epistle forged yn his name and it yet proueth not your purpose For he meÌ„t not that the substance of breade remayned in the sacrament but the nature Ad Caesarium monachum of yt meanynge therbie the natural properties and qualites of bread or els he should haue bene directly against hymselfe in an other place which is Fo. 23. certainly his where he sayeth thus These works which he then doth wourke Homi. â—3 in Matth. in that soupper are not of mans power he hymselfe worketh now also he maketh the thinges perfect We priestes are the ministers but it is christ hymselfe that halloueth the bread and wyne and doth turne or change them Loo he sayeth that christ hymselfe chaungeth the breade and wyne how than do they remayne stil as ye saye that they do yn their substaÌ„ce Agayne Chrysostom sayeth The Homi. 24. in 1. cor 10. thinge that is in the chalice is that which ranne out of christes side and we are partakers of it Dyd wyne runne out of christes side vpon the crosse not bloud In an other place he vtterly denyeth that we do see bread and wyne yn the sacrament but I aske of Homi. 60. ad populuÌ„ my lord why he tryumpheth so much wheÌ„ some authours seame to saye that as twoo natures and substances remayne stil yn the sacrament which are christes bodie and bloud and bread wyne yf he saye wel eueÌ„ so two natures are whol yn christ not turned nor coÌ„sumed ffor this saiynge of them is fullye against his doctrine because it proueth that christes bodie bloud are realllye yn the sacrameÌ„t as the nature of man and of god both are really in christ our sauiour not by à signe only Wherfore may it not be wel sayed here that my lord is slayne with Episcopus iste suoiugulatur aiunt gladio Gelasius the pope his owne swerd as they saye common lye Gelasius the pope whom ye now alleage for yow is against you saynge Certeinly the sacrameÌ„tes of christes bodie and bloud which we receue are à dyuyne thinge wherfore we be also made by them partakers of the dyvyne nature yet not withstandynge that the substance or nature of breade and wyne ceaseth not to be And vndoubteldy an image à similitude of christes bodie and bloude are celebrated in the action of the mysteryes Wherefore it is shewed vnto vs euideÌ„tly enoughe that we muste iudge that Ex antidoto contra omnes hereses yn christ oure lord hymselfe that we do professe celebrate be in his image that like as they passe ouer yn to this dyuine substance when the holie goost makinge perfect permanente tamen in sua proprietate naturae yet the thinge abydinge stil yn the propertie of is nature euenso that principal mysterie whose workinge and vertu they do verilie represent vnto vs of the which it is euident that the priÌ„cipal mysterie is one christ properlie remayninge for as much as they do shewe plainly that one and à perfect christ abydeth stil hitherto that writer Note here first good reader that he sayeth that we be made partakers of the nature of god by the sacrament which his sayinge can not be vnderstanded of the receauinge of pure breade and wyne but it muste neades be taken of the very bodie bloud of christe ioyned to the godhead yn one personne which when we do receaue in the sacrament we are made partakers of that same dyuyne nature by hauinge it yn vs bodily Secondly this doctour sayeth not that Damascenus lib 4. cap. 14. onlye bread and wyne remayne yn the holy sacrament and that there is not the bodye and bloud of christ which you my lord do defende and therfore he maketh not for your purpose Thirdly this senteÌ„ce is so imperfect and so for from true latine as it appeareth by the latine wordes that no man can make of it any perfect seÌ„se or construe it and therfore it is not lyke that Gelasius which was very wel learned wrote it Fourthlye he was pope and setteth fourth the popes primacie largely in many places as it appeareth both in his boke of decrees also yn the decrees gathered by GratiaÌ„ Why theÌ„ do ye my lord alledge hym yn the matter of the sacrament whoÌ„ ye folow not yn the other Agayne he calleth the sacrament in an other place the holy bodie of christ and maketh plaine mention of the shewynge of it to the people which ye reproue Also he affirmeth that virgens Lib. suoruÌ„ decretorum cap. 8. and wydowes which haue made à vowe of virginite and chastyte may not marrye and calleth al such mariages whoredome and incest biddeth that they should be broken agayne as Cap. 20. ca. â—1 it doth appeare yn his decrees Why do ye not folow hym yn these thinges Now ye do alleage Theodoretus for yow which sayeth that christ called the breade ad wyne his bodie and bloudde and yet he chauÌ„ged not their natures To this authour I saye first Theodoretu lib. DialogoruÌ„ that he was an heretike and defended one Nestorius heresie which sayed that christ was not god and man both as it appeareth yn Cyrillus workes yn other dyuers bookes and therfore he ought not to be beleued in this matter of our fayth Secondly I saye that Lege anathematismos Cyrilli his adnexa he was à Greake writer and the Greakes did not generally receaue this doctrine of transubstaÌ„tiation before the procedynge of the holie goost from the father and the sonne althoughe many of the best learned meÌ„ of them beleued and taught both these thinges Now why should his errour in this our matter of transubstantiation make any more against oure belefe therin theÌ„ his or any other Greake doctours errour in the procediÌ„ge of the holy goost from the father the soÌ„ne shold hurt our faith therin Thirdly he teacheth not as ye do that christes bodie is not in the holy sacrament but only bread and wyne signes and figures of them wherfore he is not vpon your side as ye saye that he his And that doth appeare wel by these his wordes written vpon this sainge of S Paul He that eateth and drinketh vnworthilie shal be gyltie of our lordes bodie and bloud This is paules meanynge sayeth he Theodoritus in Gagnei scholijs that as the Iewes and Iudas did Christ wronge spake against hym spiteful checkinge wordes euen so they do iniurie to his name which do touch his
most holy bodie with their vncleane Theodoretê° is agaiÌ„st the bysshoppe thoughe he alleaged hym for his purpose handes and do putte it vnto their cursed mouth What might he haue saied more euidently for me against yow my lord Moreouer theodoretus in his third dialogue alleageth Saint Ignatius saynge in his epistle to Smyrnenses Marke wel this reader They do not receaue or admitte the sacrament and oblations because they confesse not the sacrament to be our sauiours flesh whiche suffered for oure synnes and which the father reysed vp againe from death to lyfe Doth not this authorite of S Ignatius which was saint Ihon the euangelistes scholer waye more vpon oure side than al my lordes doctours that he alleageth for hym And also doth it not appeare that Theodoritus was against my lordes doctrine which alledgeth that authorite of Ignatius that affirmeth so plainlye that the same fleash of christ is in the sacrameÌ„t that he offered vpoÌ„ the crosse for vs and that the sacrameÌ„t is à sacrifice which my lord denyeth The sacrifice of the masse The same writer also in his first dialogue which ye alledge my lord sayeth that these wordes This is my bodie This is my bloud are the words of coÌ„secration that these wordes of christ Ioan. 6. written in Ihon. The bread which I wil geue is my fleash c. were spoken of christes flesh in the sacrameÌ„t which both ye denye He maketh also mention Theodoretus is in many pointes against my lord of the puttinge of water in to the chalice and sayeth that the consecration is made with inuocation which ye saye are of no necessite because scripture speaketh not of them Agayne in his second dialogue he sayeth after The honoure of the sacrameÌ„te set out by Theodoretus my lordes oune doctour this maner But the thinges which be made are vnderstand and beleued and honoured as beinge those thinges which they are beleued Here he speaketh of the honouringe of the sacrament which thinge as ye denye my lord so these wordes can not be wel sayed of bread and wyne for to honoure them is ydolatrie as ye denye not your selfe This worsshippinge or adoration of which he speaketh here can not be referred to christ in heauen as ye are wount to auoid lyke sainges of the old authours but very fondly for he sayeth that the thinges which by the consecration are made be worshipped of vs. Finallie he saith thus We do cal also this bodie the bodie of god teachynge that it is our lordes bodie and geueth lyfe which is not true of à common bodie of euery man indiffereÌ„tly but of the bodie of oure lord Iesus Christ both god man It is then now euident how wel your sight my lord seruyd yow when ye did recyte this authour for your purpose which so plainly is against it Farder ye goo Fol. 29. about to soile our argumentes and reasons which we do make to proue transubstantiation and first ye improue as Folio 31. ye thinke at the lest our vnderstandyng of those christes woordes this is my bodie by whiche we beleue that the breade is turned in to chrâ—stes very bodie This is your sayinge against that oure godly and true belefe But what christian eares can patiently The bysshop fo 31. pa. 1. heare this doctrine that Christe is euery daie made à newe and made of an other substaunce than he was made of in his mothers wombe Here my The confutation lord ye make a great wounderinge at the catholike faith and doctrine of christ because ye vnderstande it not as your wordes declare manifestlye For christ is not made à newe dailie nor we do not teache any such thinge but only that the bread nou is dayly Marke reader turned in to that his bodie which was made ones for al in his mothers wombe so that that one bodie and one Christ whiche was neuer made but ones onlye nor can not be made agayne is therby reallie present in the holye sacrament and in heauen also both at ones This oure doctrine and beleue is sette furth in the scriptures as it Christes body is daily made at masse is alreadye declared and also in al catholique doctours bookes out of the which I wil by goddes helpe rehearse à certeÌ„ sentences for the profe and defense Lib. 4. contra Marciouem of this oure fayth Tertulian sayeth Christe made the breade his bodie sayinge this is my bodye The holy martyr Alexander which was aboue Epist 1. ad omnes ecclesias M. cccc xxix yeres passed confirmeth the same sayinge thus Oure lordes passion must be myxed in the oblations of the sacramentes which are offered to our lord at masse that his The masse is no newe thing passion whose bodie and bloude is made may be celebrated Cyprian sayeth Oure lord maketh euen continuallie De coena domini vntil this daie this his most true and holie bodie and maketh it holy blesseth it diuideth it to them which deuoutly Ad athanasium alios episcopos Aegypti c. receaue it Felix à holy martyr which was M. cc. lxx yeres sence writeth iÌ„ this maner intreatiÌ„ge of the persecution of priestes The mirth of the whole conseil is turned in to mourninge because it was not seamelie that they which do make christes bodie dailie with their oune mouthe should suffre so great persecution S Damasus sayeth vnto steaphon that was in s Hieroms tyme. The priestes do make christes bodie with their mouthe s. Ambrose De ijs qui mysterijs oÌ„ cap. 9. sayeth This bodie that we do make is of the virgeÌ„ Againe It was not christes bodie before the coÌ„secration but I tel the that after the consecration it is now christes bodie He hath sayed it Lib. 4. cap. 4. de sacramentis is made c. Thow hast then learned that christes bodie is made of breade that wine and water are putte in to the chalice but bloud is made throughe Lib. 4. cap. 5. de sacramentis the coÌ„secratioÌ„ of goddes woordes Before christes wordes the chalice is ful of water wyne after that christes wordes haue wroughte there is made the bloude which redeamed the people Hom. 45. in Ioannem ChrysostoÌ„ is of that same miÌ„de which saieth It is not maÌ„ but christ that was crucified for vs which maketh his bodie bloud of the thiÌ„ges that are sette furthvpoÌ„ our lordes table to be coÌ„secrated Homi. 2. in 2. timo 1. The same doctour thê° sayeth Priestes what so euer they be do offre dailie that same oblatioÌ„ that christ offered hymselfe gaue to his apostles addinge at the leÌ„gth these wordes And therfore both this is christes bodie that also is his bodie he that thinketh that this bodie hath any thiÌ„ge lesse theÌ„ that knoweth not that it is christe which is now also preseÌ„t workethe And to let passe many of his
senteÌ„ces I wil recite Homi 17. in epist ad Hebraeos but this onli now We do not offre nou an other laÌ„be two morowe an other but euer the same thiÌ„ge it selfe Therfore this sacrifice is one or els by this reasoÌ„ that he is offered iÌ„ many places there are many christes NothiÌ„ge lesse but there is one christ euery where both Hieroni. ad heliodoruÌ„ beinge here ful there ful one bodie HieroÌ„ hath á lyke seÌ„teÌ„ce wheÌ„ he saieth thus God forbid that I should speake any il of theÌ„ which succediÌ„ge the apostles degree do make christes bodie with à holie mouth throughe whoÌ„ we be christians Also he sayeth ad Euagrium Lege eum in epistolaÌ„ ad Titum What eylde the minystre of tables widowes à deacoÌ„ he meaneth proudly to extolle hymselfe aboue theÌ„ at whose prayers christes bodie and bloud is made Finallie damascene Damas lib. 4. cap. 14. sayeth can not christe which was borne of à virgen make the breade his owne bodie and the wyne his bloud Againe he writeth after this sorte doest Christs body is made at masse thow aske how bread is made christes bodie and wyne and water his bloud I saye to the that the holie goost worketh the thinges aboue maÌ„s speach and vnderstandinge but the bread and wyne are turned Agayne he sayeth God hath ioyned is godhead vnto bread wyne and water and made them his bodie and bloud not that his bodie cometh downe from heauen but because the bread and wyne are chaunged in to the bodie and Inuocation helpeth to the consecratioÌ„ bloud of god The bread wyne water by the inuocation and commynge of the holy goost are aboue nature chaunged in to christes bodie bloud they are not twoo bodies but one and the selfe same bodie I passe by good reader many such sainges both of these same writers and of other also Now lerte my lord rayle vpon these doctours and great clearkes whose bookes he is not worthy to beare after them yf they where now alyue Now he maketh certen sophistical and captious argumentes that are bilded vpo à false fundation which is as it appeareth afore that we do beleue The bisshop fo 31. pa. 2. A false an enuyous imagination of the bysshop against priestes and saye christes bodie is made so of bread à newe as it was ones made yn the wombe of his deare mother oure ladie of whose most cleane and pure bloud it was made by the operation of the holie goost This is à very pyuysh and an enuious imagination of this man which neuer learned christened man did teache but we say onlye that the bread and wyne are by goddes holy word and almightie pouer turned in to he same christes one bodie and bloudde which he toke of our lady was ones crucified to death and that there are not two bodies as he fayneth that we do teach nor twoo christes Homi. 2. in 2 timo 1 homi 17. in Hebr. but one and the same that is yn the sacrament and yn heauen also as S. Chrisostom wytnesseth opeÌ„ly Wherfore al this his sophistical reasonynge is not worth à good ryshe for he disputeth thus Yf christes bodie that The bysshop fo 3â— pa. 2 â—n autem vt video pro christo aduersus christum pugnas Nazian in apolgetico was crucyfied was not made of breade but the bodie that was eateÌ„ at the soupper was made of breade as the papystes say than christes bodie that was eaten was not the same that was crucyfied This reason is as I haue sayed afore grounded al together vpon à false principle which is that the catholike teachers do say that christes bodie which was eaten at his maÌ„dy was made of breade as of a matter or à substaÌ„ce of newe and not that the breade was and is onlie turned yn to that selfe same bodie of christ that was borne of the vyrgen that suffered vpoÌ„ the crosse which was neuer but ones onely made and yet S. Cyprian sayeth The bread which our lord gaue vnto his disciples not chauÌ„ged in forme Cyprianus de coenad but in nature by the almyhtie power of the worde is made flesh Which is as moch to saye as that the breade is chaunged in to christes very flesh which he toke of is mother and not that his bodie or els he hymselfe now Marke is made à newe of the breade as this bysshop falselye affirmeth that we do beleue and teach and therfore his reasons made here are of no strength at al thoughe he iudged then neuer so stronge and insoluble Agayne it is an impudent lye when he sayeth that priestes do affirme that they make God is not made yn the sacrament god of the breade for god ys not made at al nor yet christes bodie à newe but they say truely with al catholike doctours that they are mynisters of god and that when they do pronounce these wordes of christ This is my bodie yn the masse then christ hymselfe and the holy goost do turne the breade in to christes bodie that his mother coÌ„ceaued and bare with the which the fo 32. godhead that neuer was made is ioyned vnseparably This is the catholike Note reader fayth which we do beleue and defende and not that thinge which this bysshop falsely sayeth that we defende therfore he is sufficientlye aunsweared in this his raylinge vnreasonable reasoÌ„ynge And so is not oure strongest argument yet answeared vnto as the bysshop sayeth it is nor our chiefe fuÌ„datioÌ„ wherpoÌ„we do buyldeour doctryne subuerted nor neuer shal be by any Matth. 7. 18 heretique for it is buylded vpon à sure rocke gods word and the church of christ which erreth not Ye say also after this maner in your booke my lord The soupper of our lord can be no perfect The bisshop fo 53. pa. 1. sacrament of spiritual foode excepte there be as wel bread and wyne as the bodie and bloud of oure sauiour spirituallie feedinge vs which by the sayed bread and wyne is signified Why The confutation do ye then my lord denye that christes bodye and bloud be in this sacrament Agayne is it enoughe to proue that bread and wyne muste neades be there because ye do so say No your bare word is not of any such force I passe by the argument of impanation fo 33. pa. 1. for I do not muche esteame it althoughe your improbation of it my lord be very weake buylded vpon twoo similitudes which doe not serue for that purpose For who that is learned wil say that christ should be none other wise ioyned vnto the bread in the sacrament yf it were there than the holy gost is vnto the water in baptisme or than the holy goost was vnto Ioan. 3. Matth. 3. the dooue For was it euer sayed in scripture of the holy goost This water is the holy goost or
do leaue out those wordes which would open al the whole matter are these in s. CypriaÌ„s sermon As in the person of christ the humanite was seene and the diuinite was hid euen so did the diuinite ineffablye put it selfe in to the visible sacrament These woordes sayeth my lord do He mysconstrueth saiÌ„t Cyprians wordes shew manifestly that the diuinite is poured in to the bread and wyne the same bread wyne stil remayninge lyke as the same diuinite by vnite of person was in the humanite of christ the same humanite stil remaynynge with the diuinite Which thing S. Cyprian neuer ment by that comparysoÌ„ but only that as the manhod of Christ was seene and his godhead not seene in hym but hid secretely from mans sight couered vnder neâ—th the manhode eueÌ„ so did the godhead powre it selfe in to the visible sacrament vnspeakeably The true seÌ„se of S. Cyprians wordes when that it turned the bread and wyne in to christes fleash and bloud ioynynge itselfe vnto them in vnite of person which how they were done no man can tel or expresse with his tongue This was Saint Cyprians mynde in that place Now he goeth about to aunswere to cyprians wordes which are that the bread is chaunged in nature not in outward forme sayeth thus in effecte bryefely It is not chaunged in substaunce but The bysshop in nature that is to saye it hath other properties and an other condition thaÌ„ folio 35 pagina 1 it had afore it was consecrated which farre passeth the nature condition of common breade It sheweth to vs that we be partakers of the spirite of god most purely ioyned vnto christ spirituallie fead with his fleash and bloud This is your oune dreame my lord The confutation which is directelie agaiÌ„st the doctours meaninge For he ment that the bread which christ gaue vnto his disciples at his mandie was chaunged in substance in to christes very natural fleash as these his last wordes of that same sentence is by the almightie power of his worde made flesh do shewe plainlie Why winked ye my lord at these wordes Marke this reader Do not they declare that cyprian ment that the bread was so chaunged in nature that it was made christes very flesh by goddes almyghtie power What madnes is it theÌ„ to wreast those words to anyother seÌ„se thaÌ„ vnto that Againe s. CypriaÌ„ sayeth à lytle before after he had recited these wordes This is my bodie The differeÌ„ce of corporal spiritual meat is also made manifest that it was an other thinge that was set vpoÌ„ the table confumed an other that was geueÌ„ distributed of the maistre how caÌ„ mylord this be true if bread remayned stil in the sacrament For is it theÌ„ coÌ„sumed an other thinge geueÌ„ thaÌ„ was set vpoÌ„ the table if bread remayne stil S. Cyprian sayeth also thus This coÌ„moÌ„ bread chauÌ„ged in to flesh bloud procureth lyfe encrease to the bodies Seest thou not then good reader that my lord wreasted cyprian to his purpose where he saieth that we do wreast hym vnto ours Now he aunswereth to Chrysostom which wrote so plainly against hiÌ„ iÌ„ this matter that he can not be wel wreasted ChrysostoÌ„ fo 35. pa 2. from oure belefe for he sayeth thus Doest thou see bread Doest thou see wyne Do they auoide beneeth as other meates do God forbid thiÌ„ke not so For as waxe yf it be put ones in to the fyre yt is made lyke the fyre no substance remayneth nothynge is lefte so here also thinke thou that the mysteries be consumed by the substaÌ„ce of the bodie Hitherto Chrisostom Who would desire more playne wordes Homilia de eucharistia than these are of this holy father and great clearke For doeth he notdenyee vtterly that we see bread or wyne yn the sacrament Sayeth he not playnly that they goo not awey beneth yn to the draught as other coÌ„moÌ„ meates do Affirmeth he not also that the bread and wyne are so consumed that no substance remayneth as waxe is consumed by fier What follye is it Marke then to folow AEcolampadius Peter martyrs this bissoppes such others wreasting of this playne wordes But let vs nowe see how learnedly my lord auoideth this authorite â–ª this he sayeth The bisshop fo 36. pa. 1. Saint Chrisostoms wordes which do folowe there immediatly do declare his mynde for he writeth thus Wherfore fo 36. et 83 wheÌ„ ye come to those mysteries do not thinke that ye receaue by à maÌ„ the bodye of god but that with tongues you receaue fyer by the angels Seraphim of these wordes ye my lord do gather that yow may as wel say that Chrisostom ment that there is neither priest nor christes bodie as we may gather that there is neither bread nor wyne in the sacrament of those wordes which are afore recited and be gynne thus Doest thow see bread But ye are shamefullye disceaued theryn The bysshop for he sayeth not doest thow se the priest Doest thowe see Christes bodie God forbyde thinke not so for they are consumed as he doth of the bread and wyne why then do ye my lord so trifle and cauil yn this so manifest à matter Are ye not ashamed yet of your part Wherfore when chrisostom sayeth do ye not thinke that ye receaue by à man the body of god he meÌ„t that we ough to thinke that we receaue goddes boddie not of hym principally but of hym only as à minister and of christ hymselfe chyefely as he sayeth yn an other place by these wordes Homi. 51 in Matth. 14. Whan thow doest see the priest geue to the christes bodye thinke not that the priestes hand but christes Ioan. 1. hand is reached vnto the as he doth 1. cor 3. principallie baptize This sayed he to stere meÌ„ for to receaue christes bodye with greater reuerence and more purenes of conscience as he did saye Doest thowe see bread et c. to make men beleue that althoughe theyr eies should iudge bread and wyne to be in the sacrament yet they shold not thinke that there were very bread and wyne in dede for the sense are disceaued easely in this mysterie and therfore we must beleue these christes wordes this is my bodie althoughe al our senses reason and vnderstaÌ„dynge be vtterly Homi. 93 in Matth. 28. against it as he sayeth in an other place Wherfore my lord was disceaued yn this point playnlie and so he was yn the wronge alleagynge of these wordes out of chrysostoms booke Thinke De eucharistia in Enceniis ye that the bloud of saluation floweth out of the pure and godly side of christ and so commynge to yt receaue it with pure lippes Chrysostom hath not so but quasi è diuino impolluto latere effluere that is to saye as it were to flowe out of the godly pure side not to flowe
last soupper and commaūded al priestes to offer lyke wyse as it shal be declared here after by goddes grace Nowe ye reherse many figuratiue speaches vsed in the scripture to proue that christ spake lyke these wordes This is my bodie by à Fo. 72. 73 figure which al proueth it not except ye wil saye that Christ spake nothinge wythout à figure which I am sure ye wil not say Moreouer ye gather Fo. 76. three thinges out of s. Clemētes epistle against the catholikes belefe The first Epist 2 is that bread is called our lordes bodie which is very false for there is no mention at al of any bread but of our lordes bodie and he sayeth that that holy portion of his bodye should not be myxed wyth the meate that is dygested by the bealy or stomake and auoyed out at the foundament declaringe plainly therby that it is not material bread for then it should be also digested yn the stomacke and cast out at the foundament as other meates be Wherfore my lord was heryn ouerseene The second thinge that ye note of S. Clementes wordes is that the bread as ye calle it falsely ought not to be reserued when he hath the clene contrary sayinge yn the same wordes that ye alleage here for this he writeth yn effect The priestes deacons and ministers ought with feare and tremblinge keepe the leauinges of the broken peaces of our lordes bodie that no corruption be founde in the holy place least by negligence great ynyurie be done to the portion ef the lordes bodie My lord wynked at these wordes toke those only that seamed to make with hym and yet did not for S. Clement willed only that none of the hoostes or portions of them whyche were cōsecrated for the laye people should be reserued but spent and receaued of the clearkes Nother the third note that ye gather of S. Clemētes wordes is true which is that priestes ought not to receaue the sacrament alone but the people must neades communicate with them For he sayeth only that the layte did then receaue the sacrament with the priestes as they euer myght do yf they would themselfes but that their fact maketh no necessarie lawe for vs as dyuers men lyued in common and had nothinge propre yn the apostles tyme and yet that maketh no lawe to enforce vs so to lyue Moreouer ye affirme that christes sacrifice made vpon the crosse was that oblation of which Cyprian speaketh vnto cecilius saynge that it was figured before it was done The bysshop fo 78 by the bread and wyne which Melchizedech gaue vnto Abraham in which sayng ye make twoo faultes the one is that Melchizedech gaue bread wyne Lib. 2. epi. 3 vnto Abrahā did not offer thē to god that the other the sacrifice of christ done at his last soupper and the sacrifice Gen. 14. of the masse was not signified and figured by Melchisedecs dede than ▪ which twoo errours saint Cyprian confuteth sufficiently sayinge thus yn that same epistle after he had alleaged the wordes of the Genesis wrytten of Melchizedech for euer Which ordre sayeth he certenly is this commynge of that sacrifice that Melchizedech was the priest of the highe god and that he offered bread and wyne For Lib. 2 epi. 3. Psal 109. who is rather à priest of the highe god than oure lord iesus christ which offered à sacrifice vnto god the father and he offered the selfe same sacrifice that Melchisedech had offered that is bread and wyne forsoth his bodie and bloud Here we may playnly see that ye my lord erred both yn saynge that Melchisedech gaue bread wyne vnto Abraham for Cyprian sayeth as the texte of the Genesis also hath that he offered them in sacrifice to god and also in saying that Melchisedechs doinge then figured not christes sacrifice made at his mandy but only that Gene. 14. which was done ones vpon the crosse for it signified and figured his sacrifice made at his mandye as saynt Cyprian affirmeth by and by in that same epistle thus writinge There went before by Melchizedech an ymage of à sacrifice ordeyned in bread and wyne Which thinge our lord perfectly doinge fulfillynge hath offered bread and à chalice mixed with wyne and he that is the fulnes hath fulfilled the trueth of the image fygured afore Hitherto Cyprian Where he sayeth also that christ commaunded priestes to offre sacrifice at masse in à remembrance of his death sayīge do ye this in my remembraunce If à man wil The sacrifice the holy masse but only loke vpon and consider what Cyprian went about to proue and perswade in that epistle he shal fynde anon that my lord erred manifestly when he sayed that Melchisedechs oblation Lucae 22. ◠Cor. 2. figured only christes sacrifice made vpon the crosse for Cyprians purpose and intent there was to proue by many figures of the old testament that wyne ought to be put yn to the Marke chalice at masse to be offered in sacrifice god as Melchisedech had done afore in à figure and as chtist fulfillinge accomplysshyng perfitely that figure had done also at his mandye Wherfore ye ought my lord to recante this playne errour and to vse that lawe vpon youre selfe iustely which ye haue vsed against many other mē vniustly Christ offered sacrifice at his last souppe◠Ye peruerte also these wordes of Chrysostom When yow come to these mysteries do not thinke that ye receyue De eucharistia io enceniis by a man the bodye of god Vpō these wordes my lord maketh this argument Than yf we receaue not the body of christ at the handes of man ergo the bodie of christ is not reallye corporalli and naturallie in the sacrament and so geuen to vs by the priest What blyndnes is this Chrysostom The bysshop fo 93. byddeth men not thinke that they receaue christes body of a man the prieest meanynge that they receyued yt not of hym prīcipally but so of christ The confutation hymself and that he sayed to stere thē vnto greater deuotion in receauing of christes blessed bodie and my lord gathereth therof a pure negation that we receaue not christes bodie at the handes of ma. Is this a worthy persō to be beleued in his doctrine that thus reasoneth without reason Fourthermore my lord doth make aunswere vnto Theophilus bysshop of Alexandria which writeth thus vpon Markes gospel Theophilus christ geuinge thankes did breake the bread which also we do addynge therunto prayer And gaue vnto thē sayinge Take this is my bodie This that I do nowe geue and that which ye do nowe take For the bread is not onely à figure of christes bodie but it is chaunged in to the very bodie of christe For christ sayeth The bread which I wil gyue yowe is my flesh Neuerthelesse Ioan. 8. the flesh of christ is not seene for oure weakenes but bread and wyne are
familiar vnto us And surelie yf we should vysibly see flesh bloud we could not abide it And therfore our lord bearynge wyth our weekenes doth reteyne and keepe the forme and apparaunce of bread and wyne but he turneth the bread and wyne yn to the The bysshop fo 95. pa. 2 very flesh and bloud of christ These are the very wordes of Theophilus In catenaaurea in Marcum althoughe my lord saye that they are not his wordes but one Theophilactus maketh therof no profe at al. Saint Thomas à great clearke and á holy father and dyuers other blessed men many yeares afore my lord was borne sayed that he wrote those wordes my lord of canterburye sayth nay wether partie wil à wise man beleue I aske of my lord why may not these wordes be Theophilus bysshop of Alexandria as the first authour of them and yet the same to be after written our of hym by Theophilactus as wel as Theophilactus folowed saynt Chrysostom and vsed many sentences of his in his commentaries Which sentences no man can denye but they are chrysostoms For Chrysostom and Theophilactus hath this sentence vpon paul The thiÌ„ge which is in the chalice is that that hath flowed out of the side and we Homi. 24 in 1. Cor. 10. are partakers of yt May à man gather nowe of that that Theophilactus writeth those wordes folowyng ChrysostoÌ„ that the same sentence was not wrytten by Chrysostom Why then sayeth my lord that Theophilus wrote not the sentence aboue recited vpon S Marke but it was only writteÌ„ after his tyme of Theophilactus Myght not Theophilus first write it and Teophilactus borowe it of hym as Theophilactus did many sayinges of Chrysostom But to-go nearer the matter it apearethe plainlye by many thinges that those wordes were not written by Theophilactus vpon Marke for first Theophilactus hath not these wordes And he gaue it vnto then sayinge nor these wordes This that I do nowe geue nor this word onlye for this he Theophila writeth there as the Greake letter hath When he had blessed it that is to say geuinge thankes he breake the bread which thinge we do also addinge prayer This is my body this I say that ye do receyue For the bread is not a figure Note this lege Grace and a certen exemplar of our lordes bodye but it is chaunded in to the Ioan. 6. selfe same bodie of christ For oure lord sayeth the bread which I wil gyue is my flesh He sayed not it is à figure of my flesh but it is my flesh And thow sayest howe is not flesh seene O man this is done for oure weakenes For bycause bread and wyne are of those thinges wyth which we haue bene accustomed we do not abhorre them but we seynge bloud and flesh sette furth would not abide it but abhorre it clene Wherfore the mercyful god bearinge wyth our infirmite doth reteyne stil the forme of bread and wyne but he turneth them iÌ„ to the vertu of flesh bloud Hitherto Theophilactus by whose wordes we see both that he wrote not the other sentence which is before rehersed of my lord because these his wordes varye much from those other of theophilê° also that theophilactus is vtterly against my lordes doctrine in this matter Wherfore we father The byshop fol. 95. not wronge that sainge vpon theophilus as my lord sayeth that we do Agayne my lord sayeth vntruely that we do falsifie this authours wordes and meaninge For as Teophilus hath the same wordes afore in his name recited even so Theophilactus hath I denie not these wordes God condesceÌ„dinge vnto oure iÌ„firmite reserueth the kinde of bread wyne but he turneth them in to * the vertu of flesh bloud Which wordes my lord thinketh doth declare playnly that he ment that bread wyne remayne stil in their substance are turned only in to the vertue of christes flesh bloud for as much as that they wich do worthilye receaue theÌ„ receaue therby the vertu of christes body bloud spiritualy Which exposition is vtterly against his meanynge for he sayeth evideÌ„tly that the bread ys not á figure of our lordes body but that it is turned in to the very natural bodie of christe For sayth he not that there is flesh and bloud in the sacrameÌ„t but they appeare Marke not there to oure eyes and sight but the formes only of theÌ„ least we should abhorre the receauiÌ„ge of theÌ„ Whould he haue so saied yf he had beleued that only bread wyne were present in the Theophilactus sacrament Agayne he doth vpon Matthe we declare his mynde more plaiÌ„lye Matth. 2â— sayingt thus Christ sayiÌ„ge This is my bodie sheweth that the bread which is halowed vpon the aulter is oure lordes Aulters bodie it selfe not á figure aunsweriÌ„ge to it For he sayed not this is á figure but this is my bodie For it is transformed by an operation vnspeakable yea althoug it seame bread bycause we be weake do abhorre to eate rawe flesh chyefely the flesh of à man for that cause it appeareth to be bread but it is flesh in dede Agayne vpon Ihons gospel In cap. 6. Ioannis he is as playne as may be agaiÌ„st my lordes doctrine when he sayeth thus But marke that the bread which is eaten of vs in the sacrament is not only à figure of oure lordes flesh but our lordes flesh itselfe For christ sayed not Ioan. 6. the bread which I wil gyue is à figure of my flesh but my flesh For that bread is transformed wyth secret wordes in to oure lordes fleshe throughe the mystical blessinge and commynge of the holy goost vnto it Nowe what can my lord say to this Hath he here any startinge hole or euasion but he must neades graunt his errour and recante it S Hierom writeth thus There is as Hierom in â—iti cap. 1. great difference betwene the loaues of shewe bread and the bodie of christ as is betwene à shadowe of à bodie and the bodie itselfe and as there is betwene an ymage and the thinge itselfe betwene an example of thinges to come and the thinges that be prefigurated by them Vnto this authorite my lord maketh this sclender anusweare He ment that the shewe bread of the The bysshop fo 86. pa. 2. lawe was but à darke shadowe of christ to come but the sacrament of christes bodye is á clere testimonye that christ is already come and that he hath performed that which was promysed doth presently conforte and feed vs spirituallie wyth his precious bodie bloud Is not this à shameful wreastinge of this sentence S Hierom allegeth 1. ReguÌ„ â—â— there that Abymelech wold not gyue to dauid and his compaynye the shewe bread to eate when they were almost famyshed throughe want of meate vntil he had perceaued that they had forborne the coÌ„payniÌ„ge with their wyfes twoo
daies space before and by that facte he exhorteth men to come with á pure coÌ„science vnto the receauinge of the holy sacrament because there is as muche difference betwene Marke christes bodie therin receaued and those shewe loaues as is betwene the shadowe of á bodie the bodie betwene an ymage the trueth pictured by it as there is betwene the exaÌ„ples of thiÌ„ges to come the thinges them selfes that were figured by those exaÌ„ples declariÌ„ge manifestly that that christes bodie which is receaued eateÌ„ in the sacrameÌ„t is in coÌ„paryson to the sheue loaues which were á shadow the very bodie shadowed by theÌ„ the trueth expressed by that image the very thinge itselfe figured by that exaÌ„ple Howe can this be true yf there be but material bakers bread eateÌ„ in the sacrameÌ„t as à bare signe à figure of christes bodie Note abseÌ„t thence Is á figure the bodye shadowed the trueth set fourth by an image the very thiÌ„ge itselfe figured by an exaÌ„ple What maÌ„ is so blind thê° to say Agayne S. Hierom euen there vpon that same epistle sayeth that the Hierony in cap â–ª 1. ad Titum priestes do offre daily for their synnes the peoples also pure sacrifices and that the priest maketh christes bodie at masse This can not be vnderstaÌ„d of pure material bread and therfore my lord must loke better vpon his bookes theÌ„ he shal see the trueth in this matter ceasse thus falsely to glose the doctours sainges Nowe he laboureth to soile S Damascenes wordes which are these that folowe but my lord did not rehearse them because they should haue marred al his matter Doest thowe Damascen lib. 4. ca. 14 nowe aske of me howe bread is made christes bodye and wyne and water his bloudde I anusweare vnto the that the holy goost worketh these thinges aboue mans speache and vnderstandinge but the bread and wyne are turned The bodye is ioyned vnto the deite which bodye is of the vyrgen not that the body taken of the vyrgen commeth downe from heauen but that the bread itselfe and wyne are chaunged in to the bodie Christes body is in the sacrament and in heauen both at ones and bloud of god The bread wyne and water throughe inuocation and the comminge of the holy goost vnto them are aboue nature chaunged in to christes bodie and bloud and they are not two bodies but one the same bodye The bread and wyne be Marke reader and beleue not á figure of christes bodye bloud For god forbid that but it is his body itselfe ioyned vnto the godhead oure lord hymselfe sayinge This is my bodie not à figure of the bodie but the bodie not à figure of the bloud but the Matth. 26. bloud This S Damascene wrote Nowe my lord might haue bene ashamed to goo about to wreaste wryth these so manifeste wordes of this holy great clearke to any other seÌ„se if he had had any shame at al but let vs examyne his aunsweare vnto hym In primis he sayeth He was à yonge newe authour in respecte of those whiche we haue brought yn for oure partie Syr ye haue yet brought yn none for The bysshop â—o 37. pa. 1. youre partie that sayeth that christes The confutation bodie is not really in the sacrament or that there remayneth stil onely bakers bread as à figure of christes bodye as ye do teach but this godly father sayeth that christes bodye is present theriÌ„ and that the bread is turned in to it that it is not nou à figure Ye can neuer bringe any catholike writer of any age that writteth so plainly for yow as this doth for vs. Agayne for his age S. Damascenes age he was after many learned mennes myndes aboue M. c yeares past but at the least I am certeÌ„ that he was almost eight hundred yeres sence which is nyghe ccc yeares before the father of your doctrine berengarius was borne Berengarius was the father of this bysshops doctrine Wherfore this is an answeare sufficieÌ„t vnto the obiection of Damascenes age Moreouer ye say my lord that he varieth from al the old authours when he denieth that the bread is à figure of christes bodie for they called it à figure Ye say not truely for he agreeth wel with them therin for they cal not the material bread à figure of christes bodie only absent in heauen as ye do which How the sacrament is a figure Aug. serm 28. in Luâ—aÌ„ Damascene also denyeth but many of them saye the sacrament is à figure because the outwarde formes of bread and wyne are figures of christes bodie and bloud hyd vnder them and because the oblation ministratioÌ„ and receauinge of them is à figure of christes passion and bloudy sacrifice and thirdly because the sacrament is à figure of christes mystical bodie the churche which Damascene denyeth not and therfore he agreeth right wel with the fathers in that point and so this startinge hole is stopped that ye can not crepe out at hym my lord S. Damascene sayeth also in dede as ye saye here my lord that the thinge There is no material bread yn the sacrament which is yn the sacrament coÌ„sumeth not nor auoydeth not downeward froÌ„ man in which saynge as he declareth playnly that he ment not as ye saye he did that material bread remayneth stil in the sacrament for then yt must neades consume and auoyed douneward as al other bread doth euen so he sayeth not therin against either origeÌ„ or els Austen for nother of them sayeth that the consecrated bread consumeth and auoydeth dounewarde but saynt Austen hath the contrarie sayin Ser 23. de verbis domini secuâ—dum LucaÌ„ ge It is called bread of the priest in the masse after the coÌ„secratioÌ„ when he recyteth the paternoster in which he prayeth to god to gyue vs our daily bread but not that bread which goeth yn to the bodie but that which beareth vp the substance of our soul soo he denieth here manifestly that there is any such bread after the consecration in the holy sacrament as goeth in to the Saint AusteÌ„ sayeth there is no material bread in the sacrament sustynaunce and nouryshement of mans bodie Wherfore he sayeth not as my lord sayeth that there ys material bread in the sacrament which consumeth in eatinge of it and goeth douneward fro man Nowe my lord runnyth to an other euasion and sayeth that this holy Damascene was one of the byshop of romes chyefe proctours The bysshop fo â—7 pa. 2 against the emperours to set abroad al idolatrie by his owne hand writinge therfore yf he lost his hand as they say he did he lost yt by goddes most righteous iudâ—ement c What meaneth my lord here this falsely to diffame that holy saint and noble clearke Images by whom god wrought many greate and notable myracles
as it appeareth plainlye in his life and against whom no mā that was à good christen man did euer write for any errour In dede he wrote against leo the emperour for his destroynge of images and that he did ful clearkely and godly as I haue declared and proued in my boke of images It is true that he lost his hand for the defence of images but not as the bysshop sayth by the iust iudgement of god but by the cruel and malitious forgynge of his letters by that emperour against hym to the prince of the cite Damascus by which letters that noughtie cursed emperour certified that prince that saint Damascene wold haue betrayed that cyte to hym and therfore that prince commaunded his hand to be stroken of but it was anon after restored vnto hym agayne and mad hole when he prayed before an image of oure lady as it appeareth both in his lyfe written by à patriarche of Graecia long sence and also Marke in the seuenth general councel for therī was that miracle reharsed before mo them ccc bysshoppes aboue seuen hundred yeres passed and therfore my lord erred when he wrote that this my racle was fayned Yet my lord seaketh moo awayes to auoyd this authorite of S. Damascene but al in vayne for thus he writeth after much bablyng The bread and wyne remayne stil are chaunged onelie sacramentally The bisshop fo 99. lib. 3. are made figures not naked for that Damascene denyeth but so pythy and effectuous that who so euer worthilie eateth them eateth spirituallie christes flesh and bloud and hath by that euer lastynge lyfe Is not this a manifest ▪ The confutation auillynge to auoyed the trueth S Damascene sayeth that christ made the bread his bodie and the wyne and water his bloud that the holy goost Marke this turneth the bread in to christes bodie and the wyne water in to his bloud that the bread and wyne are chaunged aboue nature in to christes bodie and bloud and that they are not twoo bodies but one and the same body that stil abideth in heauen and finallye that bread and wyne are not figures of christes bodie and bloud but his owne bodie vnto which the godhead is ioyned and yet this mā was not ashamed to saye that he mente that bread and wyne remayne stil in the sacrament and that they are not turned by their substance in to christes bodie bloud which be not in the sacrament but only bread and wyne as he sayeth What is this yf it be not à wounderful blyndnes and à malitious subuertinge of this doctours godly and true doctrine least he should seame to be agaīst their erronious and wicked doctrine as he is playnly He bringeth many other fonde euasiōs which be so manifestly against this doctours playne wordes that it were but à lost labour to confute them because euery man may sone see that they are not to the purpose yf he do but ones compare them wyth saint Damascens wordes And as touchynge the worshippinge of the holy sacrament we do worship therin christ very god and man present really and not the outwarde and visible formes kindes of bread and wyne which thīg S. Damascen ment Trueth it is that Damascene sayeth not expressely that there remayneth no bread nor wyne but yet the very selfe same thinge he affirmeth when he sayeth that they are turned and chaunged in to christes bodie and bloud which he toke of his blessed mother and vnto which the The bysshop fo 99. pa. 2 god head is ioyned in one parsone and christes soul is also coupled there with them and therfore my lord sayed vntruely that yf we denye bread and wyne to be there stil we must also by force Note this denye that there is either christes diuynitee or his soul For may not these twoo be ioyned vnto christes bodie and bloud in the sacrament as they be in heauen yf neither bread nor wyne be therin Wil he haue christes soul godhead to be in the bread and wyne or els they cā not be in the sacramēt What ignorance is this Why sayeth he that we deuyde christ Do they deuide hym that saye he his both god and mā and that his very bodie bloud soul and godhead are really in the blessed sacrament of the aulter altogether ioynctly Further more it is very false that he leyeth vnto our charges that we separate christes body from his membres in the sacrament for we do saye that it is there with al his membres perfectely and wholly but howe Fo. 90. Lib. de duabus in christo voluntatibus we define not nor can do Damascene sayeth wel that the distinction of mēbres doth pertayne so vnto the nature of mans bodie that where there is no such distinction there is no perfecte mās bodie but that is very true of euery natural bodie of man beynge in his natural estate and condition and in his oune forme and shape after which sorte christe is not in this sacrament and therfore Damascene is not against our doctrine and beliefe in this matter but altogither wyth it Thus is now made à ful confutation of al my lordes obiections against Transubstantiation and the real presence of christes very natural bodie and bloud in the blessed sacrament of the aulter Nowe I make an ende of this thirde boke and begynne the fourth yn whiche I wil confute lyke wyse his obiections made against our doctrine which is that synners do eate christes very natural bodye and drinke his bloud althoughe to their damnation as sainct Paul wytnesseth playnly 1. Cor. 11. Thus endeth the confutation of my lords third booke and foloweth the cōfutation of his fourth boke First he The bysshop fo 90. pag. 2. bringeth furth of Sainct Ihons gospel these wordes to proue that synners eate not christes very body wyth their mouthes nor drinke his bloud in the sacrament but only bread and wyne I am the lyuely breade that came doune Ioan. 6. from heauen If any man eate of this bread he shal lyue for euer c. The confutation Do ye not my lord remembre that dyuers tymes before in youre booke ye sayed that christes wordes written in Ihon the syxt chapiter did nothinge pertayne to the sacrament but only vnto à spiritual eatynge of christes bodie by fayth Why then bringe Marke ye nowe furth his wordes to proue that il and vngodly men eate not christes body in receauynge the sacrament But yet it is very true that Ioan. ◠Christ spake those wordes of the sacramēt and of the eatinge of his oune bodie in the same wyth oure mouthes meanynge that whosoeuer eateth his bodye and drinketh his bloud worthily wyth à perfect fayth and a cleane conscience and not only wyth his mouth bodilye shal lyue for euer ther by and haue euerlastynge lyfe and therfore Sainct paule declaringe this doctrine of christ written by Ihon
exhorteth euery man to trie and examyne 1 Cor. 1â— â–ª hymselfe and his conscience wel before he receaue this holy sacrament that he receaue it not to his damnation Why loked ye not my lord vpon that texte of paul that ye myght haue learned of hym the maner of eatinge christes bodie which is requyred necessarilie that we should lyue for euer throughe receauinge of it in the sacrament Are ye so ignorant in the scriptures that ye knowe not that there are very many such speaches and sentences in them which are not generally and absolutely true but wyth certeÌ„ Marc. 16. additions and conditions For christ sayed whosoeuer shal beleue and be baptized shal be saued and yet many Matth. 7. thousandes do beleue and are baptized also that shal be damned of the nombre of which they are that shal saye at domes day lord lord haue we not cast out deuelles in thy name prophised also and wrought many myracles in thy name To whom christ shal say I knowe ye not gette ye hence from me ye wourkers of iniquitee Wherfore this sentence whosoeuer Mar. vlt. shal beleue and be christened shal be saued hath this condition ioyned vnto yt yf he continue in his fayth and Matth. 2â— in the grace of god and purenes of soul receaued in baptisme as christ sayeth hymselfe by these wordes whosoeuer shal perseuere vntil the ende shal be saued Forthermore sayeth not christ euery man that asketh receaueth Matth. 7 Lucae â–ª 11. What then my lord May we therof gather I praye yow that the mother of the sonnes of Zebudaei did not aske Matth. 2â— of christ that one of her sonnes myght sitte vpon his right hand and the other at his lyfte in his kyndome because she obteyned not that her petition We may so say by your maner of reasonynge here Asked not also Sainct Paul of god à petition that the prickynge of the fleash myght be taken from hym and yet he obteyned 1. Cor. 12. Iacobâ— â— not his desire Must not then this sentence of Christ euery man that asketh receaueth be vnderstand with this condition yf he aske godly and necessarie thinges for his saluation accordyng to 1. Ioan. 5 goddes wil and commaundement as sainct Ihon sayeth To be short and Matth. 1â— to passe ouer many such speaches sayed not christ who so euer beleueth in Ioan. 3. 5 the sonne of god hath euerlastinge lyfe Wil ye therof my lord proue agaiÌ„st scripture that al they beleueth not in Ioan 12 christ that haue not euerlastinge lyfe seinge Ihon sayeth that many of the princes of the Synagoge beleued yn christ and yet confessed hym not for fear of the pharisees least they should be cast out of the Synagoge for they loued more the glorie of man than the glory of god Must we not then vnderstand christes wordes when he sayeth who so euer beleueth in the sonne of god or in me hath euerlastinge life of a certen maner of beleuinge which is wyth à lyuely wourkinge fayth that auaileth Ioan. 12 sayeth paul in christ Iesu Maye we not theÌ„ nowe see plainly hou Gala. 5 that christ ment not that euery maÌ„ generally which should eate that bread which came doune from heaueÌ„ should haue euerlastinge lyfe but onely they that should eate it godly worthily as paul teacheth vs to do Wherfore these 1. Cor. 11 textes of Ihon which ye my lord briÌ„ge moreouer for your purpose that Fo. 91 he which eateth christes flesh and drinketh his bloud hath euerlastinge lyfe Ioan. 6 dwelleth in christe christ iÌ„ hym c. do nothiÌ„ge vtterly serue thervnto â–ª for they must be al vnderstaÌ„d of theÌ„ only that eateth drinketh christes body bloud godly as S. AusteÌ„ expoundeth it saying When christ sayeth he that eateth Ser. â—1 de verbis domini secunduÌ„ Matthaeum my flesh and drinketh my bloud dwelleth in me I â—n him may we vnderstaÌ„d it of theÌ„ of whoÌ„ paul saieth that they eate and drinke their oune iudgemeÌ„t 1. Cor. 11 wheÌ„ they eate that bodie driÌ„ke that bloud TheÌ„ after aÌ„ exaÌ„ple brought of Iudas of other certeÌ„ il men he asketh whether they did eate christes bodie drinke his bloud therby did abide in christ christ in theÌ„ or not He doth anuswe are to that questioÌ„ so plainly that he vtterly taketh awaye al doubt iÌ„ that matter destroyeth your false glosynge cleane my lord sayinge thus But truely there is à certeÌ„ maner of eatinge that flesh drinkinge that bloud after the which he that eateth driÌ„keth dwelleth in christe christ in him Wherfore a maÌ„ shal not eate christes flesh driÌ„ke his bloud after euery Marke this reader sorte of eatinge drinking of theÌ„ abyde in christ christ iÌ„ hym but after à certeÌ„ maner which maner he himselfe sawe wheÌ„ he saied these wordes Loo my lord how manifestly hath S AusteÌ„ opened al this matter declared that ye vnderstod not wel christes wordes which ye do alleage here It is theÌ„ euideÌ„tly proued that christes wordes in IhoÌ„ make nothinge vtterly agaiÌ„st oure doctrine wich is that the vngodly meÌ„ womeÌ„ do eate driÌ„ke christes flesh bloud iÌ„ receauiÌ„ge of the holi sacrameÌ„t althoughe they haue not euerlastiÌ„g lyf as the godly only haue but euerlastiÌ„ge damnatioÌ„ Nowe ye saye that christ is The bysshop fo 91. pa. 2. fo 92. not eaten swalowed and dygested with oure teth tungues throtes and bealyes which sayinge is only true in that that ye saye he is not dygested with oure bealyes for al the rest of that sentence is very false and neither Cyprian nor S. Austen proueth the contrarie for S. CypriaÌ„ ment that we whette not oure teeth to bytte christes body Cyprianus de coena domini in the sacrament as we do bodily meates S. Austen whon ye do alleage my lord maketh not for your purpose for when he sayeth Prepare not thy Ser. 3â— de verbis d. iawes but thy hert he ment as S. Cyprian did afore hym that men should not thinke that christes flesh ought to be eaten as coÌ„mon meates beuffe laÌ„b veale mouton and such other meates sold in the shambles commonly as he sayeth hymselfe in an other place In psal 98. ser 2. de verbis apostoli which is nothinge against oure beliefe and doctrine For we saye that we eate christes body as à spiritual foode and meate of oure souls without breakynge rentinge tearinge chawynge digestinge such other ynyuryes doyng Tract 2â— in IoaÌ„nem vnto yt Agayne wheÌ„ S. AusteÌ„ sayeth Why doest thow prepare thy bealy teth beleue thowe hast eaten he speaketh only against the vnfaythful iewes which thought that he spake of à Ioa. 6. bodily meate when he sayed vnto theÌ„ wourke ye not the meate that perysseth but that abydeth stil vnto euerlaÌ„stinge life where he spake
it not them nowe appeare playnly that Saint paul ment that christes bodie is really in this sacrament and that my lordes exposition of saint pauls wordes is vayne false Farder he maketh an aunsweare vnto Saint Austen which doth plainly affirme Contrae cres conium lib. 1. cap. 25. that euel man do eate christes body and drinke his bloud vnworthyly in the sacrament and are therby giltie of christes bodie and bloud althoughe Christ sayeth he that eateth not my fleash and drinketh not my bloud Ioan. 6 shal not haue life in hym and sayeth that Austen mente not of the eatynge of christes very fleshe and of his bloud but of the sacrament or of the bread and wyne which are signes and figures only of them This is à wounderful fond and à blynd wreastinge of Saint Austens wordes For he sayeth manyfestly that synners do eate christes fleash and drinke his bloud in the receauinge of the sacrament and my lord sayeth that he ment that only of the bread and wyne I denye not that Austens intent was there to proue that good thinges auayle not them that do euel vsed them But what therof Is that ynoughe to proue that he meÌ„t that il men receaue not christes very bodie flesh bloud in the sacrament What learned man wold make any such argument as this is A good thiÌ„ge auayleth not the il receauour of it ergo the il receauer receaueth it not S. Austen ment that good thinges il Aduersus CresconiuÌ„ lib. 1. ca. 25 vsed profite not the il vser and for an example he bringeth fourth christes flesh and bloud the receauinge of which auayleth not but hurteth them that do il and vnworthilie take them althoughe christ sayed that he which eateth and drinketh not his flesh and Ioan. 6. bloud shal not haue lyfe in hym What may à man desyre to be spokeÌ„ more plainly Also S. Austen opeÌ„ly affirmeth that the wicked man Iudas receaued the bodie and bloud of christ De baptismo contra Dontistas lib. 5. ca. â— and ye saye my lord that he receaued them not but only bread and wyne as à figure of theÌ„ What anusweare is this Is it not à manifest subuertinge of the trueth Who wil beleue such teachers yf he regarde any thinge the health of his soul It is very true that sacramentes be signes as ye alleage Aduersus MaximinuÌ„ lib 3. ca. 22. August ser 28. de verbis secunduÌ„ Lucan out of S. Austen of other thinges so is the sacrament of the aulter à figne of christes death and passion of the mystical body of christ the church and of christes natural body really the rin present Was not the paschal laÌ„be the eatinge and oblation of hym á figure of christ of his body his sacrifice and passion and yet he was veryly offered in sacrifice and eaten Was not also christes death and resurrection Rom. 6. à figure of oure dyinge vnto synne and rysinge vp from synne vnto á newe life and yet they were also very Rom. 4. thinges and done yn dede doth not paul cal christ à figure of god the Heb. 1. fathers substaunce and yet he is one thinge with hym and of the very same substance that he is of Why then may we not wel and truely saye that the sacrament of the aulter is both à signe and the thinge it selfe signified in à maner as S. Austen sayeth Epistola 23. that it is The sacrament properlye consisteth in the outward and visible formes of bread and wyne and in the oblation and receauinge of christes body and bloud and the thynge of the sacrament is christes body and bloud therin conteyned and encrease of goddes grace with other benefites of god which only the good men receaue What yf figures and pictures be often tymes called by the names of the thinges themselfes figured pictured Can ye proue therby that the sacrament is so called of the old doctours à signe of christes body bloud that yt is only à signe of them The bysshop fo 99. pa. 2 and that it conteyneth not the same in yt reallye No not so for the doctours affirme that it is both á signe of those thinges and hath in it presently them also Nowe ye do wreast S. Chrysostoms wordes cleane out of tune For he sayeth that we see christ with oure eies in the sacrament touch hym feele hym fyxe oure teth in his flesh tast hym and so fourth but not dygest hym as ye saye falsely because that we do al those thinges vnto the outward kindes and formes of bread and wyne which do hyde and couer hym there secretly Which sainge of hym is much lyke vnto the phrase or maner of speakinge which scripture vseth when it wytnesseth that loth Note Abraham Iacob Iosuae Mary MagdaleÌ„ and the apostles sawe touched hand led and hard angelles and god hym selfe because they sawe touched and handled the shape or forme of man Gene. 18. 19 32. Iosuae 5. Mar. vlt. Act. 1. and hard his voice vnder which forme and shape those angelles and god did then appeare and spake vnto theÌ„ And S. Chrysostom vsed that maner in speakinge to perswade vs the soner both to beleue christes body and bloud to be really present in the holy sacrament and also to receaue them wyth greater reuerence and deuotioÌ„ Ye nowe excuse your selfe my lord for settinge out of the presence of christes bodye and bloud in the sacrameÌ„t and say that when ye wrote in à catechisme by you translated out of latine in to Englishe that we do receaue This bysshop recaÌ„ted his first doctryne of the sacrament christes bodye and bloud bodily wyth our mouthes ye ment by à figure that is to say that we do eate and drink bread and wyne figures and signes of them This excuse is not true for ye wrote so manifestly then of the really presence of christes bodie and bloud both in the sacrament and also in heaueÌ„ at ones that nothinge myght be written more plainly and that neither ye could yourselfe nor none other of your brethren other wyse take it and therfore ye perceauinge that that doctrine did myslike and offend the rest of your brethren yn christ did shortly recante yt as it appeareth by the settinge furth agayne of that The bysshop fo 10 â–ª pa. 2 The Worshippinge of â—he sacrameÌ„ booke called à catechisme Moreouer ye write of the adoration and worshippinge of the holy sacrament or of christ hymselfe very vngodly speakinge against al learned catholike doctours and teachers and affirminge that they haue brought the people in to horrible idolatrie to worship visible thinges made with their handes as their god and maker Is this my lord your charite so openly to report falsely of men The old doctours did euer The confutation teach the people as we do now also teach them that they ought not to worship the outward formes and
apparaunces of bread and wyne but only christe god and man vnder neath theÌ„ present as their only maker and god and are ye not my lord then ashamed thus vntruely to say of them and of vs The runnyng of the people out of their seates froÌ„ altar to aultar from sakering to sakering the lyfting vp of the sacrameÌ„t ouer the priestes heades do not proue as ye say falsely they doth that the people worshipped that thinge which they sawe with theyr bodily eyes but only christ god and maÌ„ whom they beleved to be vnder that forme of bread and this may we do right wel For did not Abraham see three lyke men appearinge vnto hym ranne furth to mete them and fel downe vpon the earth and worshypped one of them which was god appearinge lyke á man did not also loth see two angelles lyke two men and rose vp went to mete them fallynge doune greuelinge vnto the grouÌ„de whorshipped them What did they worshippe then els but god and his angelles which they sawe not beynge ynvisible but only the shape and forme of maÌ„ Why then may we not go to see christ yn the sacrament saye we sawe hym and whorshippe theriÌ„ hym Both god and man althoughe we see hym not there as Iacob did not see god and yet he sayed that he sawe hym because he sawe the forme of man in which he Gene. 32. appeared to hym Came not the kinges of colen to see christ and did worshippe Matth. 2. hym vpon their kneenes and worshipped not the thinge that they sawe but his godhead Sayed not saiÌ„t 1. Ioan. 1. Ihon that he and his foloes the apostles sawe hard and felt with their handes that thiÌ„ge that was euen froÌ„ the be gynnynge the sonne of god wheÌ„ they sawe hard and felt only christes man hode Tel me then why we may not say that we haue seene christ oure maker in the holy hoost and sacrament when whe sawe but the outward sensible forme of bread vnder the which he lyeth hid We do go from place to place I graunt to see the sacrameÌ„t but not to worshippe the thinge apeariÌ„ge Marke outwardly to our bodily eyes but that only that we see there by fayth as loth Abraham and the three kinges went not furth to honoure and worship that thinge which they sawe bodily but that that they beleued and sawe then with their in warde eies Did not the kinge dauid offre sacrifices caused 2. Regum 6 instrumentes of musyke to make swete melody daunsed and played afore the arke of god But he did those thinges not to worship the arke but god and therfore he sayed that he daunsed lept and played before our lord And to touche the matter yet some what nerer heare what s. Austen sayeth He Lib. 3. cap 9 De doctrina christiana that worshippeth a profitable signe instituted of god the strength and signification of which he vnderstandeth doth not worship the thinge that is see ne and passeth away but rather that thinge vnto which al such thiÌ„ges must be referred Hitherto Austen Nowe we see plainly that after S Austens mynde we myght honoure the sacrament if it were but à signe only ordayned of god so that we did referre that worshippinge vnto christ represented signified by it how much more then is it leful yea godly to go to see and worship the sacrament or the hoost chalice lifted vp ouer the priestes heade at masse referringe that honoure vnto god seynge that the sacrameÌ„t is not only à signe instituted of god but it doth also coÌ„teyne in it christ very god man Lib. de cathechy Zaudis rudibus cap. 2â— Sayeth not s. Austen agayne sacrameÌ„tes are visible signes of godly thinges but the inuisible thinges theÌ„ selues are honoured in theÌ„ He answeareth now vnto this place of AusteÌ„ part of which he doth only alleage least it shold hurt In psal 98. his matter Christ tokeflesh of the flesh of Marye and because he walked here in the same flesh gaue vnto vs the selfe same flesh to be eaten for oure saluatioÌ„ no maÌ„ eateth that flesh except he worship it before it is found out how such à forestole of our lordes feete may be worshipped and that we should not only not synne in worshippinge of it The honoure of the holy sacramâ—â— but synne in not worshippinge of it These wordes of s. AusteÌ„ declare plainly both that christ gaue vnto vs to be eaten in the holy sacrament that same flesh that he toke of his mother also that euery man synneth that worshippeth it not before he eate it in the sacrament my lord sayeth that he He folowed peter Martyr theryn giueth vs to eate only bread wine that austeÌ„ meÌ„te that we must worship christ sittinge in heaueÌ„ at the right haÌ„d of his father and not in the sacrameÌ„t when he spake only of the eatinge and worshippiÌ„ge of christes flesh in the sacrameÌ„t as his oune wordes shewe that In psal â—8 folowe anon after when he sayeth I haue coÌ„mitted vnto yowe à certeÌ„ sacramente it shal gyue life vnto yow if it be spiritually vnderstaÌ„ded Althoughe it be necessarie that it be visiblye celebrated yet it must be inuisiblye vnder stand Loo we see here that s. AusteÌ„ spake of the sacrameÌ„t of eatinge of christes flesh worshippinge of it therin afore we do eate it Therefore my lord mystoke hym was therin vtterly disceaued He vntruely sayeth that we wold perswade the people by s. AusteÌ„s wordes to worship the sacramental bread wyne or the visible thinge in the sacrament for we do saye and teach the people that there is nother bread nor wyne in the sacrament and that no visible thinge of the sacrameÌ„t must be worshipped of itselfe as S. Austen teacheth vs but only god Nowe he goeth In psal 98. Deutero 6 about to proue that Saint Austen meÌ„t not that christes flesh is corporally present and eaten corporallie in the sacrament Fo. 102 pa 2 by these his wordes written there also But the flesh profiteth nothinge the wordes which I haue spoken vnto yowe are spirite and lyfe In psal 98. That which I haue spoken vnderstaÌ„d yow spirituallye Yow shal not eate this bodie which yow see and drinke that bloud which they shal shed that wil crucifie me I haue commended vnto yow a sacrament vnderstande it spiritually and it shal gyue yow lyfe c. Here is not one word my lord that proueth your purpose for his wordes à littel afore recited there do declare what he meaneth For these are his wordes expounding this texte of Ihon. Except a man eate the fleash of the sonne Ioan. 6. of man c. They toke that folyshely they thought of it carnallye and iudged that oure lord wold cut of from his body certen peaces and gyue them vnto them to eate and they sayed this is à hard sayinge He instructed them
Psal 109 priest Saye we not wyth the holy goost speakinge in Dauid and sainct Paul Heb. 7 that he is à priest for euer We affirme and teach that he hymselfe offereth his body and bloud daily at masse by the ministerie of the priest as he Ioan. 1. 10. 1. Cor. 3. doth contynually baptize and preache vnto the people by his ministres the priestes My lord ye vnderstande not Sainct paul for he only ment that no other priesthode should euer succede christes priesthode as his priesthod did Aarons but that it shold 1. Cor. 11. endure vntil the worldes ende Wherfore seyinge we say that christ euer continueth à priest stil and that we priestes are but his mynisters executinge his office by his owne commission sainge Do ye this in remembraunce Luc. 22. of me my lord reproued vs wythout à iuste cause What neadeth any moo The bysshop fo 128. lib. 5 sacrifices yf christes sacrifice be perfect and sufficient Syr the sacrifice The confutation of the holy masse is not an other sacrifice then christes but the very selfe same sacrifice concerninge the thinges offered which are his body and bloud Agayne this sacrifice of the masse is not made for any vnperfectenes or vnsufficiencye of christes death and sacrifice as ye wold make men beleue that we do teach but only to applye it vnto vs for our imperfectenes throughe our synne Maye I not proue by à lyke reason grounded vpon the perfectenes and sufficiencye of christes sacrifice that we shal al be saued and that none of al should be damned and that we neade not to beleue hope fear god repent our lyfes synfully spēt fast praye geue almes receaue the sacramentes nor to keepe goddes commaundementes at al For maye I not thus argue Christes sacrifice is sufficient to saue me what neade I then to do any thinge of my partie for to adde any thing vnto that which is of itselfe perfecte and sufficient Thinke ye not my lord that manye of your scholers hath gathered such argumentes and wil gather here after of your doctrine therby cast al vertu aside leade their lyfes in à leude liberte and Marke say Christ hath perfectely and sufficiently satisfied for me I neade to do nothinge at al for he wil not lose that he hath so dearly bought Paul sayed I denye not that yf Aarons sacrifices Heb. 8 had bene sufficient to haue put away synne christes sacrifice should not haue bene requyred But what therof Wil ye proue by that that for as much as christes sacrifice is sufficiēt we neade not the sacrifice of the masse Is it not declared sufficiently in my booke of the sacrifice of the masse and also here afore that it is not for any vnperfectnes or insufficiency of christes sacrifice that the masse is à sacrifice As it was that christes sacrifice succeded Aarons The bisshop fo 109. li. 5 commaunded of christ as it shal be proued anon but only to applye that sacrifice vnto vs But nowe ye obiecte against oure aunswere to your argumentes which is that we do make no newe sacrifice nor none other than christ made hymselfe at his mandy and vpon the crosse Than The bysshop saye yowe it must neades folowe that ye slaye or kil Christ euery daye for as much as christes oblation was made by his death and effusion of his bloud No sir not so for it is the same The confutation sacrifice touchynge the thinges offered that is to say christes body and bloud but the maner of offerynge is not one one is bloudy the other vnblouddye the one by death and the other by the representation and commemoration of that death Dyd not the fathers of the old lawe offre christ in figures and shadowes which admonyshed Apoc. 13. them of his death and yet they slayed hym not in dede althoughe Ihō sayeth that he was slayne euen from the begynnynge of the world Why then may we not offre his bodye and bloud in the sacramente in which he Epist 23. is daily offered as Sainct Austen sayeth for the people without killing of hym Why shold we not my lord I be seche yow beleue the holy church which doth thus expounde this matter as wel as we do and neades must in many other thinges that appartayne vnto our fayth Wold ye that we shold beleue yow before al the ancient doctours of christes church both Graekes and latynes of al ages For they are altogether vtterly against your doctrine Why do ye not make aunsweare vnto my bokes of the sacrifice of the blessed masse and of the sacrament of the aulter But now heare S. Chrysostom Homi. 17. in Heb. 9. whiche teacheth vs how this may wel be done sayinge Do we not offre sacrifices daily We do offre but doinge it in remembraunce of christes death And this hoost is one not manye Howe is it one not many And that oblation was ones offered in to heauen but this sacrifice is an example of that we do euer offre the selfe same thinge Whe offre not to daye one lambe christ and twoo morowe an other but euer the selfe same thynge Wherfore this sacrifice is one or els by that reason that it is offered in many places are they many christes Nothinge lesse but there is one christ euery were beynge both here ful and there ful one body For as that which is offered in euery place is one bodie and not many bodies euen so it is also one sacrifice but he is oure bysshop which offered à sacrifice makinge vs cleane we do offre the same and that which then was offered can not nowe be consumed Hytherto chrysostom out of whose wordes many notable lessons may be gathered for the confutation of al your raylinge reasonynge my lord false chargynge of al catholike teachers wyth many thinges which they neuer dreamed vpon The first lesson is that notwythstandynge that saint paule affirmeth that christ was neuer but ones offered vpon the crosse that he made al thē perfect wyth that his one sacrifice which are made holy yet priestes do offre hī dayly at masse The seconde is that this oure oblatiō of christ is not à kilynge of hym but à remembrynge of his death The third lesson is that we offre dailie and euer one and the selfe same hoost or sacrifice which can not be verified of bread and wyne for they are not one and the same in many places but it is only true of christes body and bloud that are one and the same in al places where they be offered in sacrifice The fourth lesson is that the thynge offered is the lambe christe that is offered in sacrifice dailie in many places and yet he is but one christ which is here vpon this aulter and there vpon that ful one body and not many bodies one sacrifice The fifte lesson is that priestes do dailie offre in sacrifice that same hoost or sacrifice
which christe hymselfe offered ones by his death to clense vs from synne The syxt and last lesson is that the hoost or sacrifice which priestes do offre dailie can not be cōsumed and therfore it is not bread and wyne for they are sone consumed but christes body bloud which are not consumed in eatinge and drinkīge of them but they stil euer remayne whol and safe Nowe à mā may see euidently that my lordes doctrine is against saint Chrysostoms beliefe and teachinge and that he rayleth vpon hym and his doctrine in this his last booke For first my lord sayeth that priestes haue inuented of them selfes à newe sacrifice vnto the great blasphemie yniurye of christ But ancient docters saye that christ hymselfe offered the same sacrifice that priestes offre at masse both at his last soupper and vpon the crosse also and commaunded priestes to offre yt in remembraunce of his death as these autoritees do shewe manyfestly S. Ireneus aboue M. ccc lxxiiij wrote thus Christ toke bread and gaue thankes sayinge lib. 4. ca. 32. Christ did institute the sacrifice of the masse This is my body And toke the chalice of wyne and confessed it to be his bloud and he taught à newe sacrifice of the newe testament which the church receauinge of the apostles offereth vnto god in al the whole world This holy martyr which was verye nyght christes tyme sayeth that christ taughte his apostles at his mandy by say in he these wordes This is my bodie This is my bloud à newe sacrifice of the newe testamēt that the apostles taught it vnto the church which offereth the same yn the whole world and my lord sayeth that christ offered not his body and bloud in sacrifice at his last soupper nor taught his apostles to offre them in sacrifice nor finally that priestes offre any sactifice more then the laite doth but they haue iuuented à newe sacrifice distincted frō christes iuiurious and blasphemous vnto it What is this yf it be not playne blyndnes and ignoraunce Is this my lord your doctryne to be approued of the auncyent docters sainges S. Cyprian agreeth wyth this saynge Luc. 22. Epist lib. 2. epist 3. If our lord iusus christ and god hymselfe be the highe priest of god the father and he hymselfe did first offre à sacrifice vnto god the father and hath commaunded that same to be done in remembraunce of hym that priest is verily christes vicar which doth folowe that thynge that christ hath done And then he offereth in the church á true and à ful sacrifice vnto god yf he begynne to offre as he may perceaue that christ offered And in the begynnynge of that epistle he sayeth that christ is the authour and teacher of this sacrifice of the masse and bade priestes Homi. 24. in 1. Cor. 10. offre it vnto god as he hymselfe had done afore at his mandy Chrysostom Homi. 2. in 2. time 1. sayeth also thus But christ hath prepared à muche more wounderful and à magnificent sacrifice both whē he chaunged the sacrifice it selfe and also when he did commaunde hym selfe to be offered in the steade of brute beastes which were offered in the Homi. 2. in 2 Tim. 1. old lawe Agayne he writeth thus that holy oblation whether peter offer it or Note this wel paule or els à priest what soeuer his deseruinge be is the same sacrifice which christ hymselfe gaue vnto his disciples and which also priestes do nowe make This the priestes sacrifice hath in it nothinge lesse than that of christes makinge Why so because men do not make holy this the priestes sacrifice but christ that had made that his owne sacrifice holy afore For as the wordes which christ spake are the same that the priestes do nowe also pronounce euen so is the sacrifice also the same Then he concludeth sayinge Wherfore this sacrifice is christes body and that also He that thinketh that this bodye hath any thynge lesse than that knweth not that it is christ which is nowe also present and worketh Eusebius which was about M cc yeres passed Eusebius lib 1. ca. 10. Demonst euangelicae holdeth also against my lordes doctryne saiynge Wherfore after al thiges christ wrought à certen merueylous host and an excellent sacrifice he offered it vnto his father for al our saluation and did ordayne that we should offre à remembraunce of that same thinge to god hymselfe for à sacrifice Ambrose sayeth I o lord remēbringe thy passion do come vnto thy Primae precatione praeparāte ad missam aulter althoughe I be à synner that I may offre to the that sacrifice which thow diddest ordeyne and commaunde to be offered for our saluation in remembraunce De eccles hierarch of the. S. Dionyse paules disciple writeth thus Wherfore he both reuerently and also accordynge to the office of à bysshop after holy prayses of goddes workes excuseth hymselfe that he offereth à sacrifice of saluatiō which is excellēter than he is hymselfe criynge out vnto hym Thow diddest bydde o lord Do ye this for à remembraunce of me Ignatius Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11. Epist 8. S. Ihons scholer sayeth It is not leful to offre nother make sacrifice nor to celebrate masses without the byshops autorite or consent Fynallie for I passe ouer many other doctours autorites li. 10. ed. 20 de ciuitate dei Austen hath thus speakinge of christes blouddy sacrifice made vpon the crosse A sacrament of the which thinge he wold that the dailie sacrifice of the church should be seiynge he is the head of his bodie the church and she also is the body of that head as wel she by hym as he by her vsed to be offered in sacrifice Nowe can my lord iustely saye that priestes haue inuented Christ is offered in sacrifice of them selfes à newe sacrifice against christes sacrifice and that his doctrine is approued of al the auncient The masse is á sacrifice propitiatorye for synne doctours Moreouer let vs see whether this sacrifice of the masse which we haue now proued to be īstituted of christ be à sacrifice for remission of synne or not Of which matter thus writeth Hom. 69. ad pop Antiochenum in cap. 1. ad phil Chrysostom These thinges were not vnaduysedly rasshely or without cause ynacted or decreed of the apostles that the dead should be remembred in the dreadful misteries For thei do knowe that much good profite cōmeth vnto thē therof For whem the people Hebr. 5. shal stād holdyngvp their handes with the priestes the dreadful sacrifice is set furth how shal we not obteine gods fauour prainge for thē Agayne he sayeth We must traueile as much as may Homi. 41. in 1. Cor. 15 be that the dead may be helped not with weapinge but with prayer supplicatiōs almesses sacrifices This thinge was not inuēted without à cause nor we do not in vaine remēbre the dead ī the
are there wythout theyr substance agaiÌ„st nature what haue ye to say vnto me For why may not they as wel feade maÌ„ agaiÌ„st their natures by gods almyghtie pouer as god fed Moses and 3. Reg. 13. 17. Helias long against nature the one without meate the other with very littell Fynally may not poyson be as wel in the accidentes and qualitees of the bread and wyne â–ª against nature as god fed the children of Israel wyth Manna and with quayles water out of the rocke against nature Ye are noue Exo. 16. Pâ—al 7. Exod. 7. Exod. 16. my lord anusweared in al these obiections and natural reasons It foloweth in your booke And most of al it is against the nature of accidentes to be yn nothinge c. What than my The bysshop lib. â— fo 21. pag. 2 The confutation lord I pray yow Was it not as much against nature that the angeles did eate and drinke and lyke wise christ after his resurrection and nothyng of that meate and drinke was tourned Exodi 3. Exod. 17. Numerorum 20. yn to their noryshement Did not the busse of thornes flame wyth fyre and not burne against nature Was it not against nature that water ranne out of Exod. 17. the hard rocke that quayles came downe from the firmament that the sea made away for the Iewes to passe throvghe Iosuae 3. Psal 113. it that the ryver of iordane ranne backe against his course that the bytternes of the water of Marath was turned yn to swetenes when Moses cast à peace of woode yn to it that yroÌ„ did swime aboue vpon the water that Exod. 15. fyre came doune from the firmament by Helyas word that the sonne the 4. ReguÌ„ 6. moone stod stil that christ walked 4. Regum 1 Iosuae 10. Danielis 3. Danielis 6. Lucae 1. and also peter vpon the see that Daniels three feloes burned not in the great fyre that the lyons hurt not daniel that christ was borne of his mother Matth. 28. with out breaking of her closures that he rose throughe the stone lying Ioan. 20. vpon his tombe that he entred in to the house the doores beyng yet stil closed Are not these thinges and many such other as much impossible and against nature as the accidentes and qualitees of bread and wyne to remayne in the sacrament without their substance to susteyne them Doth not heuy Marke Plinius hist naturalis lib. 36. cap. 16. libr. 36. cap. 14â— yron ascende vp ward against nature when it is set vnder à stone called Magnes and wyl hang in the aer without any staye yf one magnes be set vnder it when it is goyng vpward towardes an other beyng aboue For as much as the one stone draweth it vpward towardes hym so much doth the other drawe it doune wardes toward hym Also no strength can breake an adamant stone as plinye sayeth but In prooemio lib. 20. hist natura the bloud of à goate onlie Are not the se thinges which be done naturally as much against nature by mans reason and iudgement as the accidentes and qualites of bread wyne to be in the sacrameÌ„t without their substaunce by gods pouer Why then do ye my lord make so great à matter that the accidentes and qualites of bread and wyne should remayne stil in the sacrameÌ„t wythout their substance in which they myght be Wyl ye ascribe lesse vnto gods pouer than to nature It is no great merueile that ye iudge it follye to affirme as we do in dede agaiÌ„st nature and reason that one body is in dyuers places at ones and twoo bodies in one propre place both together for the heithen people as I haue declared afore esteamed christes faith and religion nothyng els but mere folly and 1. Cor. 1. The bysshop fo 21. 22. madnes which thing S Pol testifieth manifestly Our doctrine is I confesse against al our outward senses but proueth that my lord that it is false Are not lyke wyse al the articles of our fayth against our outward senses althoughe not after lyke sorte as this is May ye therfore denye them Were it not much better to leaue this vayne reasoning and to folowe Saint Chrysostoms godly consail which is this Let vs beleue god in euery thing and Homi 83 in Matthaeum Good counsail not say against hym yea althoughe the thing that he sayeth doth appeare an inconuenience both vnto our senses thought and vnderstandyng and doth also excede our sense capacyte Marke and reason Let vs I besech yow beleue his wordes in al thinges but chyefely in the sacramentes not loking only vpon those thinges which lye before vs but considering also his woordes For by his wordes we caÌ„not be disceaued but our senses are moost easy to be disceaued His wordes can not be Matth. 26 false oursenses are very often tymes disceaued Wherfore seing christ hath sayed This is my body let vs nothing doubte therof but beleue and perceaue it wyth the eies of our vnderstandyng Hyther to this holy doctour Now were it not much more wysdome and á greater saftye for our souls health for to ceasse reasonyng in this matter to mystrust the iudgement of our senses and to sticke wholly vnto gods word as Saint Chrysostom wylleth vs to do than to foloue your natural reasonyng here my lord and measuryng of this highe mystery by our senses Moreouer ye write after this maner Our fayth teacheth The bysshop Lib. 2. fo 22 pag. 1. The confutation vs to beleue thinges that we see not but it doth not bid vs that we shal not beleue that we see daily wyth our eies c. What do ye my lord see in the sacrameÌ„t but the colour of bread and wyne For ye see not their substance Wherfore ye may beleue that colour to be there but not the substance of the bread and wyne S Thomas did at christes commaundement put his had in to christes syde and felt his woundes Ioan. 20. I graunt for the confirmation of his fayth What then my lord Can ye of that proue that as he trusted then to his senses for to beleue christes resurrection euen so we may beleue our senses iudgement touching this sacrament No ye are disceaued For althought our senses may helpe some what to the profe of natural thinges beyng in their natural formes such as christes body was then yet in thinges that are aboue nature and out of their natural beyng state and shap as christes Narkc Chrysosto Damasce body is in the holy sacrament they are not to be trusted For in such thinges they iudge vtterly against our fayth Agayne was not the sight and feelyng of loth Abraham Iacob and certen other which sawe god and Gene. 18. 19 32. angels in mennes formes and apparances disceaued wheÌ„ they thought they were very meÌ„ in dede as they seamed to be vnto them Wherfore our senses may
this dooue is the holye goost as christ sayed This is my bodie Wherfore ye were heryn disceaued manifestly as ye were also sayng that christ spake not theses wordes the Ioan. 6. bread that I wil geue is my fleash which I wil geue for the lyfe of the woorld of the sacramental bread of the sacramental eatinge but of spiritual bread and of a spiritual eatiÌ„ge only Which is very false and against both the text it self and also the exposition of al old godly doctours as it shal anon by goddes grace be proued sufficiently when I haue improued your reasons which ye make for your The bysshop fo 34. pa. 1. Ioan. 6. opinion They are rhese That was spoken twoo or three yeares before the sacrament was firste ordeyned I am the bread of lyfe which came doune from heauen he that eateth this breade shal lyue for euer et c. O what blyndnes is this What man that hath The confutation any knowledge in the scriptures wil make this argument which is made here of my lord These wordes of IhoÌ„ The bread which I wil geue is my flesh et c were spoken sayeth he before the sacrament was first ordeyned ergo they were not spoken of the sacrament May not à man proue by à like reason that al the prophesies which were made of christss incarnation passion resurrection and ascension and of baptisme the institution preachinge of the gospel with many other thiÌ„ges were not spoken therof because they were spokeÌ„ manye yeres before christ came and afore the thâ—nges were instituted and done how weake then is the first his profe Nowe when he sayeth that these wordes I am the bread of Ioan. 8. life which came doune from heauen can not be vnderstand of the sacrameÌ„tal bread for it came not doune from heauen yf I should graunt hym that Cyrillus Chrysostom Theophil to be very true and say that they were spoken onelie of christes godhead that should not yet proue that these wordes Ioan. 6. The breade which I wil geue is my flesh that I wil geue for the life of the world were not spoken of christes very natural flesh to be eaten in the sacrament as it is euident enoughe of it selfe Againe I may say that christes fleash which he spake of then and there in Ihon came doune from heauen both because it was and is ioyned with the godhead that came froÌ„ heaueÌ„ for christ vsed à lyke maner of speakinge Ioan. 3. when he sayed And no maÌ„ ascendeth vp in to heauen but he that came doune from heauen the sonne of man which is in heauen For here he sayed both that the sonne of man came doune from heauen because christes man hode was ioyned in one person with his godhead that came from heauen and also that his manhod was than in heauen before his ascension in to heauen because the godhead with which it was knytte in one person was theÌ„ in heauen Secondly I say that christes bodie which he then called bread in Ihon came doune from heauen for as much as it was made by the heauenly Matth. 1. pouer of god and the holye gost by whom christes blessed mother conceaued 1. Cor. 15 hym And this maner of speakinge is not strange in the holy scripture which calleth christ the seconde man 1. Cor. 10 from heauen celestial the Manna spiritual meate the water which ranne out of the stone spiritual drinke because they were prepared for the Iewes aboue nature by goddes power which is à spirite and by the mynistery of angelles that are also spirites and therfore Ioan. 4. Psal 103. that manna is called angelles foode psal 77. Wherfore this reason is clerely soiled When he sayeth that these Ihons wordes he that eateth of this Ioan. 4. fo 34. breade shal lyue for euer can not be vnderstand of the sacrament because pag. 2. it geueth not life to al that eate it I saye that these wordes are to be vnderstand of the sacrament and that christ ment that al which do worthily eate of it as s. paule teacheth vs to do shal lyue for euer Moreouer ye say my lord 1. Cor. 11. Fo. 34. that these wordes of Ihon the breade pa. 2. that I wil geue is my flesh which I wil geue for the life of the world can not Ioan. 6. be vnderstaÌ„d of the sacrament because that of such bread christ could not than presently haue sayed this is my flesh because at that tyme bread was not made his fleash I saye that they may right wel be vnderstand of it and that christ there vsed the present tyme Matth. 3 for the future and did put is for shal be as he did when he sayed after the Greake letter the tree which beareth not frute is cutte doune is cast in to the fire where the translatour sayed in latine it shal be cutte doune shal be cast in to the fire A lyke phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luc. 12. 1. Cor. 11. vsed he when he sayed This is my bodie that is geuen and broken for yow meaning that it should be geuen and broken for them Euen so he sayed this is my bloud that is shead furth for yow as the Greake hath which the old translatour turned nearer the sense sainge which shal be shead for yow But why loked not my lord vpon the Greake texte of IhoÌ„ which hath twise Ioan 6. this werbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doso dabo I wil geue Matth. 26. which declared plainly that christ ment there then that he wold geue his flesh twise ones to the apostles vnder the forme of breade in the sacrament Ioan. 6. to be eateÌ„ of theÌ„ as the foode of their souls for that cause he called it breade which promes he performed at his last soupper wheÌ„ he toke bread blessed it brake it sainge Take eate this is my bodie that shal be geuen for yow Againe he gaue that same his Note wel reader fleashe in the forme of flesh for the lyfe of the world vpon the crosse and so doth this promes plainlye agree with his dede vpoÌ„ the maÌ„dy the next daie folowinge which we cal good frydaie Wherefore this my lordes reasoÌ„ is fullye anusweared soluted with à label which he his foloes shal neuer be able The bysshop to anusweare vnto whiles they lyue I am very sure Now mi lord goeth about to make an anusweare vnto the An anuswere vnto the holy doctours sainges doctours which the catholike meÌ„ alleage for theÌ„ first he laboureth to anusweare vnto S Cyprian which writeth thus This bread which oure lord gaue vnto his disciples not chaunged in outward forme but in nature is by omnipotencie De coena domini of the worde made flesh Here my lord raileth vpoÌ„ al catholike writers The bysshop teachers callinge theÌ„ papistes sayinge that they
out Are the se twoo both one my lord to flowe out and as it were to flowe out God sayd behold Adam is made as it were Gen. 3. Matth. â—6 one of vs. Is that as much as yf he had sayed he is made one of vs Also christ sayed vnto the iewes ye are come furth vnto me as it were to à these Wil ye my lord turne those wordes thus in to Englysh ye are come furth Many such translatioÌ„â— would sonedryne christ as à these out of England to me à these Why then did ye so translate chrysostoms wordes to disceaue the reader But let this passe I wil not ones touch your negatiues by comparison as ye terme them because they make nothinge for your purpose The bisshop â–ª as it appeareth now by the declaration of chrysostoms wordes which he spake absolutely and without al comparyson Nowe ye alledge these chrysostoms wordes for yow What doest fo 37. fo 3â— thowe o man Didest not thowe promyse to the priest which sayed lyftvp your myndes and hartes and thowe Homi. de Eucharistia in enceniis didest answeare we lyfte theÌ„ vp vnto the lord etc. Who is so blynd but yf he do yea ones reade chrysostoms wordes which ye do my lord here reherse for you he may sone see that he meÌ„t that men yn the tyme off the masse shold be godly occupied and not consume that tyme in wordly busynes nother in triflynge as he sayeth there and talkynge but to remeÌ„bre christes death and passion and that christ the lambe of god is then offered for them that the bloud wich was drawen out of christes syde for their purgynge from synne is in the cuppe and by these and such other meanes to endeuoure them selfes to purchase them goddes mercy This ment S. Chrysostom and ye my lord wold make vs beleue that he went about to withdrawe The bysshop fo 40. lib. 3 mennes myndes from the coÌ„sideratiom of sensible thinges bread and wyne which are yn the holy sacrameÌ„t as ye saye But howe chaunced it that ye alleaged these wordes lyftevp your myndes etc. to proue that ChrysostoÌ„ment that bread and wyne remayned stil in the sacrament Haue ye so ofteÌ„tymes sayed masse hard it and also the communion that ye haue forgotten that these wordes Sursum cordaet c were euer and yet are songe and sayed both of the Greakes in their masse and also of the latins before the coÌ„secr atioÌ„ of bread and wyne to prouoke and moue men vnto deuotion and especially at the tyme of the sacrynge of it This is S. basils mynde Chrysostoms S. Ciprians and certen others Basilius Chrysost iÌ„ missa coruÌ„ cypr. in orad Wherfore those wordes of the masse make not for yow which wold proue that material bread remayneth in the sacrament after the consecration Moreouer The bysshop fo 41. pa. 2 ye saye that S Ambrose whoÌ„ we do alleege affirmiÌ„g that the nature itselfe of bread is chaunged by the coÌ„secration ment not that the substaÌ„ce of it ys chaunged but only that the nature of yt ys altered yn to à hygher estate Lib. de iis qui myst intiaÌ„tur ca. 9 and condition so that after the consecration it is not common bread but à holy fode of maÌ„s soul wherby we receaue spiritual fedyng and supernatural nouryshement from christes body aboue yn heauen Which your answeare is vaynly forged of peter martyr whom ye do folow and it is playnly A vayne enasion of S Ambroses Wordes against the doctours mynde as these his wordes which are written there and are à part of the same sentence declare sufficiently There is not that thing which nature made but that which the consecration hath formed the benediction ys of more strength thaÌ„ nature For by the blessyng the nature of bread wyne is so chaunged throughe the consecration at masse that the thyng which nature made is not afterward remaynyng yn the sacrament but only that which is made by the consecration How then ment he that material bread remayned stil in the sacrament as ye fayne For did not nature make material bakers bread Were ye not then my lord playnly disceaued when yow wrote thus vnlearnedly to auoyde the trueth which Ambrose did so manyfestly set furth The bysshop fo 43. pa. 2. Now ye aske of vs what thiÌ„g it is that is eaten broaken chawed wyth the mouth teth c. in the sacrameÌ„t seyng The bisshop fo 43. pa. â— that therin is no substance of bread as we do say and christes body is not broaken for it is immortal impassible The confutation Vnto the which I anusweare that the formes quaÌ„titees and qualitees of the bread are broaken chaued c. Which thing is done aboue nature and mans natural reason May not this be as wel Ioan. 20. Matth. 13 Luc. 16. Matth. 25. done by gods pouer as that saint Thomas did put his hand in to christes syde wythout al harme to it as the fyre of hel to burne and torment the damned spirites and mennes souls without Gene. 1. consumyng of them And as water to be aboue the firmament For are not al these thinges as much against nature and aboue mans capacyte as the accidentes of the bread to be alone without their substance and to be broaken chawed The bisshop fo 43. pa. 2. c Ought ye not my lord to haue bene ashamed to say in your boke that we do teach that christes body is naturally in the sacrament without his accideÌ„tes qualites seyng we say that it is there against nature with al his qualytes Fol. 44 and accidentes Moreouer ye say vntruely my lord that we do defende that à substance is made of accidentes whan the bread moulyth or engendreth wormes for we say that christes body departeth out of the sacrament or the oost reserued wheÌ„ it begynneth to moule or putrifie and shold engendrewormes and that then an other substaÌ„ce succedeth it of which such thinges are made Thê° endeth the seconde booke The coÌ„futatioÌ„ of the third The confutatioÌ„ of the third booke booke In this boke good reader I wil be short for in it the bisshop vainly alleageth many authorites to proue that christ bodily departed out of this fib 3. fo 46 world at the time of his ascension and sitteth now vpoÌ„ the fathers right hand in heauen of the which no good christian man doubteth yet he is also bodily and really in the sacrament of the aulter both at ones This is no new doctrine althoughe my lord sayeth that it is but the old catholike doctrine taught of christ his apostles and al the ancyent fathers at the begynnyng of the church and euer shal be vntil the 1. Cor. 11 3. Esdrae 3 worlds ende for the trueth of gods word euer endureth and hath the vyctorie My lord maketh à great matter The bisshop â—ol 46 pag. 2. lib. â— at
of beleuīge in hym and of the spiritual eatinge of hym troughe à lyuely fayth vnto the which men should not neade to prepare either bealy or teth but what is this against oure teachinge Doth it folowe that we eate not christ bodyly with oure mouth and teth because that we neade not to prepare our bealy and teth to eate christ only spiritually throughe fayth which the fathers did before the institution of the sacramēt and nowe also many do when they receaue not the sacrament Is there but only one maner to eate christ Is he not eaten both when the sacrament is receaued and when it is not receaued Why red ye not Austens wordes in his booke vpon Ihon that ye myght haue sene and perceaued the true sense of Tract 25. them For he thus writeth vpon this texte This is the worke of god that ye beleue in hym This is thē to eate that Ioan. 8. meate which perysheth not but abydeth stil vnto euerlasting life to beleue in hym Why preparest thou teth and bealy beleue thowe hast eaten We see nowe that S. Austen then expounded that texte which was spoken of christe before he did intreat any thinge of the sacrament and ment only of à spiritual eatinge of hymselfe by fayth vnto which eatynge men ought not as S. Austen sayed to prepare either bealye or els teeth as to the eatīg of common meate of the bodie they are wount to do and as the iewes il vnderstod christ speakinge then of meate that should bringe vnto them lyfe euer enduringe Wherfore ye are anuswered my lord in this obiection sufficiently Origen whom ye allege next ment as christ did in Ihon whose wordes he reciteth and are expounded of Ioan. 8. S. Austen afore that is to say that euil men receaue not nor eate not christes flesh worthyly and profitably to haue therby euerlasting lyfe but only bodily and vnworthily to their damnatiō lyke wyse S. Cyprian spake of à spiritual eating of christes flesh and denyed Sers de lapsis de coena domini not the corporal eatinge of it with our mouthes and sayed as christ did that none do eate of that lābe oure sauiour christ spiritually and worthily as S. fo 92 pa. 2. Paul biddeth men do but only true 1. Cor. 11. Israelites that is to say good christian men Also Athanasius ment not as ye Athanasius lib. de pecca to in spi sanctum saye he did that christ made therfore mention of his ascension in to heauē when he spake vnto the iewes of eatīg his flesh and of his bloud to plucke their myndes vtterly from thinkinge vpon any eatinge of his bodie and drīkinge of his bloud with their mouthes but only from beleuinge as they did then that he moued them to eate his flesh deade ▪ cutte out in peaces ▪ and to deuoure it cleane vp as other commō meates are eaten for then he could not ascende vp from them in to heauen alyue and whole as he sayed vnto them that he would do This ment Athanasius Ioan. 6. and christ makinge there mention of his ascension for so doth Cyril Cyprian Chrisostom saint Austen and many other the eldest and best doctours expounde that place of Ihon. For S. Austen thus writeth expoundyng that same saying of Ihon. Did ye thinke that I wold make peaces of this body which ye do see and The confutation cut the partes of my body and geue them vnto yow What then yf ye shal the sonne of man ascende thither where he was afore Certenly he that Ioan. 6. could ascēde vp whole could not be consumed He hath then both geuen Augusti in pal 8 in Ioannem vnto vs a holsome refection of his body and bloud also soyled à great question touchyng his wholnes Hytherto S. Austen Wherfore this authorite is not against oure beliefe which is that we do eate christes fleash bodily with oure mouthes without al hurt Basilius Epist 141. and harme to it and without deuouringe vp of yt S Basil spake there only of à spiritual eatinge of christes fleash by fayth and godly lyuinge and nothinge of the sacrament nor of eatinge of christes flesh therin and therfore his sainge is not to the purpose Hierō Hierom in Esaie ca. 88 in Hiere 22. vpon Esaye and Hieremie affirmeth only that synners and heretikes eate not the bodie of christ worthily for to obteyne the frute effecte and profite In Osean cap. 8. therof which is spiritual nourishemēt encrease of grace to dwel in christ christ in them and to come vnto euerlastinge lyfe but he denyed not Ambros de benedict patriar ca. 9. lib. de sacramentis 4. cap. 4. lib. 5. cap 3. August de ciuitate dei lib. 21 cap. 2◠in Ioann trac 28. 27. de verbis a post ser 2. Tract 59. ī Ioan. The bysshop fo 18. that they eate it vngodly and vnworthyly to their dānatiō The same mēt Ambrose and S. Austen also spake in those places which ye alleage of à fruteful and a profitable eatinge of christes flesh of drinkinge of his bloud to the obteyning of euerlastinge life Ye vnderstand not S. Austen writing thus Albert the other apostles did eate bread that was the lord yet Iudas did eate but the bread of the lord not the bread that was the lord For he ment only that the other apostles did eate christes body both bodyly with their mouthes and also spiritually with à perfect fayth and à pure conscience but Iudas did eate it only bodyly with his mouth S. Cyril ment euen the very same thinge that only good men do eate christes flesh vnto their profite and saluation but yet he sayeth not nor none other doctour as ye do that il men do not bodyly receaue it with their mouthes in the holy sacrament and therfore none of The bysshop fo 97 lib. 4. thē proueth your doctrine to be true Nowe ye aske of vs whether an vnrepentaunt synner haue christes bodie within hym or no whan he receaueth A reason taken out of Peter martyr booke the sacrament To that I saye that he so hath and also to the seconde question I answeare that il men beinge impenitent when they do receaue the sacrament haue christes spirite wythin them and yet they are not his sonnes althoughe paul do saye that he is goddes sonne as ye saye and gather of hym and hath christ in hym and lyueth Rom. 8. because he is iustified S. pauls wordes are these And yf his spirite that raysed vp iesus from death dwel in yowe he that raysed christ from death shal gyue life to your mortal bodies for his spirits sake which dwelleth in yow My lord vnderstandeth not howe that man receaueth the spirite of god by certen of his giftes in his very nature substance presence and power and yet he is neuerthelesse à synner hauīg not in hym
sayinge The spirite gyueth lyfe but the fleash profiteth nothinge c. Doest thow not see here reader that Saint Austen ment not to denye the corporal and real beynge and eatinge of christes bodie in the sacrament For he ment that fleash that is to say such à fleshely and folyshe vnderstaÌ„dynge of christes wordes werby they thought that christ wold that they shold eate his flesh cut out in peaces â—er 2. de verbis apost as common meates are eaten and not alyue and whole without al hurt done to it profiteth nothinge but the spirite that is to say à spiritual vnderstandinge of his wordes that they should eate his flesh alyue ioyned vnto his spirite and godhead whole and not harmed in any thiÌ„ge geueth lyfe And so he wold that they shold not thinke that they should eate that his bodie which they sawe after any such maner and as they sawe it in that same forme of fleash visibly but inuisiblye as he sayeth there nor drinke the bloud which the iewes should shed furth in that forme of bloud in which it should be shed out and visiblie This ment he as his oune wordes afore recited declare plainly and therfore those wordes which my lord alleageth for hym maketh nothinge for hym at al. The ende of the fourth booke The fyfth boke of the sacrifice of the holy masse Althoughe ye my lord do saye without any good grounde that it is à great blasphem ye against christ to saye that in the masse is made à sacrifice propitiatorie for synne yet al the eldest and best learned doctours that euer were are vtterly against your errour therin as I haue declared touching The bysshop fol. 104. many of theÌ„ in my booke of the sacrifice of the holy masse and as I wil anon by goddes grace proue by some of their saiÌ„ges briefely We make no sacrifice The confutation Luc. 22. at masse but only as ministers of christ which bade vs so to do offereth hymselfe daily for vs therin and therfore ye are disceaued at the begynninge of this your boke when ye say that priestes do make their masse à sacrifice propitiatorie for the synnes of the quycke and deade as neuer no creature made but christ alone and that ones onely for al vpon the crosse And to proue this ye alleage S. Paul which spake there to the hebrews of christes Hebr. 9. 10. blouddy sacrifice made by his death only which he offered neuer but ones as he sayeth or els he must neades haue dyed more theÌ„ ones for as much as that kynde of sacrifice is necessarilie ioyned wyth his passion but this maketh nothynge vtterly against the sacrifice of the masse in which christ hymselfe turneth the substaunce of bread and wyne in to his owne very natural fleash and bloud and offereth How and in What seÌ„ce the masse is à sacrifice them in à remembraunce of his death for the application of his passion and the merite of it for remission of the synnes both of the quycke and the deade as al holy doctours bothe Graekes and latines do wytnesse Fo. 105. plainly of whose sentences I wil alledge some anon But here I aske of yowe my lord why may not Christ euery daie be offered in sacrifice wythout dyinge agayne for vs as wel as he was slayne as Ihon sayeth euen from Apocal. 13. the begynnynge of the world and yet he suffred death not many thousand yeres after Were not the sacrifices of Abel Isaac of the paschal lambe and many other sacrifices of the old lawe certen figures of christes sacrifice theÌ„ Exodi 12. 1 Lâ—â—â—ti 24. Gene. 4. to come vpon the crosse and were offered to put meÌ„ in mynde of it What theÌ„ should lette my lord that the masse myght not be a sacrifice for a remeÌ„brance of christes passion and death now passed as wel as they were of it to come that this sacrifice shold not as wel be an application of christes merites vnto vs for remission of oure synnes as they were I am very sure Lib. 17 ca 20 De ciuitate Dei that ye are not able wyth the helpe of althem that made this youre booke to auoyde this Austen writeth after this sorte therin Salomon sayeth A maÌ„ hath nothinge that god is to hym Ecclesiastes 8. but that thinge whych he shal eate drinke What thinge more credible may here be vnderstanded to saye than that which doth pertayne to the partakinge of this table Which that priest the mediatour of the newe testament gyueth of his bodie and bloud after Marke this reader the ordre of Melchisedech For that sacrifice hath succeded al the sacrifices of the old testament which were offered in à shadowe of it to come Wherfore we do acknowledge that voice of the same mediatour written in the Psal 39. psalme by the prophete Thowe woldest not haue sayed christ the sonne to his father à sacrifice an oblatioÌ„ but thowe madest me à perfecte body for because in the stead of al those old sacrifices and oblations christes bodie is offered in sacrifice and mynystred Three errours confuted here vnto the partakers Here are three of your errours my lord confuted The first that Melchisedech offered not sacrifice in bread and wyne for à figure of christes sacrifice made at his last soupper The secoÌ„de that christes bodi and bloud are not in the holi sacrameÌ„t but only bread and wyne The thirde that christes bodie is not offered in sacrifice at masse We do confesse that christes sacrifice made vpon the crosse was ful perfecte sufficient and did doth stil put away the synnes of al them that beleue perfectly in hym trust in goddes mercy repent their illyues and receaue the holy saeramentes by which as meanes that christes sacrifice is and neades must be applied vnto them and therfore it cometh not of any imperfection of christes sacrifice ones made for euer vpon the crosse that his blessed bodie is offered daily in sacrifice for oure synnes but only to applie that perfecte sacrifice vnto vs for to take away actually oure imperfectenes of synne This a unsweare is sufficient for the soilynge of al that is brought out of S. paules epistle vnto the hebrews Nowe ye make à distinction of sacrifices saynge that there is one kinde of sacrifices à propitiatorie or à mercyful sacrifice that is to saye such as pacyfieth goddes wrath and indignatioÌ„ obteyneth mercye for oure synnes and forgeuenes of them which is onely christes death sacrifice made ones for al vpon the crosse Which no good christian man The confutation denyeth But what then Canye therby proue my lord that christe offereth not hymselfe yet daily at masse by the priest as his ministre for an applyiÌ„ge of that his propitiatorie and most mercyful sacrifice made neuer but ones Maye not the sacrifice of the masse made in à remembrance of christes death and blouddy sacrifice be as wel