The common Bible turneth In the remembrance of me A thing may be done best in the remembrance of a man when the man is first remembred and afterward the thing is done in the remembrance of him But Christ meaneth not so he meaneth to haue this thing to witt his body made to this effect that his death may be remembred and so his words do sound Doe and mâ—…e this thing for the remembrance of me to bring men into the remembrance of me For when my body is made by the Priest and listed vp to be adored and all the peple taught to bow doune to the body of Christ and to come with pure consciences to receaue it then Christ is remembred by reason of his body made and so the scripture is fulfilled which saith Doe and make this thing for the remembrance of me But the Sacramentaries wold haue nothing made in Christes supper But they wold haue bread eaten and wine druncken which is not able to make Christ to be remembred so effectually and with such contrition confession and satisfaction as he requireth to be remeÌ„bred withall For he seeketh not as the ZuingliaÌ„s imagine a remembrance in words alone but much more in dedes The remembrance of him is the following of his Crosse and death by penance by humility by confessing our synnes to his ministers and taking absolution of them and all this kind of remembrance ariseth by the making of Christes body whiles men are persuaded they may not come to so preciouse a thing without confoorming of them selues to the death of Christ. In translating S. Paule there are other faults not of so greate weight as these others but yet which should haue bene more diligently translated as where the Greek readeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 CoÌ„municatio sanguinis Christi coÌ„municatio corporis There the common Bible turneth The partaking of yâ— blood of Christ the partaking of yâ— body Whereas it shuld be translated the coÌ„municating of the blood of Christ and the communicating of the body Communicating is more then partaking albeit the old Latin text in the later place doth reade participatio partaking But that excuseth not the Sacramentaries who pretend to correct it allwaies by the Greek and now whereas the Greek readeth twise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Latin once communicatio the English agreing throughly with neither oâ—… both turneth twise partaking The communicating of Christes body and blood is when it self and all thing that is in it is made common Partaking is when part therof is taken But because after his resurrection Christ can be no more diuided the partaking of his blood is the communicating of it not by the force of the meane but by the dependence of the thing For as he that hath anie part of God must nedes haue all God because God is a nature whole euery where without any parts therof so he that hath any peece of Christes body and blood hath the whole body and blood because it is unmortal and can no more die Yet if it might be diuided it might also bye so that although partaking must in this argument 〈◊〉 stand for communicating yet the SacrameÌ„taries haue shewed their spite against S. Paule in translating it after the worst maner they could 〈◊〉 after S. Paul saâ—…th we being many are one bread because we all partake 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it should be Englished of the one bread For such strength hath y◠〈◊〉 article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 soâ—…time the common Bible turneth the Greek article into that But here it was not for the purpose of the Sacramentaries that it should be meaned so S. Paul meaneth one certain bread of liâ—…e wherof we partake to shew that he said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the one bread to witte of the bread which hath no fellowes of that bread who said I am the bread of life and the bread which I wil geue is me flesh If so manie faults be found without curiouse serching which I haue not vsed in so sinal rome iudge good Reader in what case their soules be who take the word of God at these mens handes iudge whose Gospell they haue deliuered to the simple people in English Uerily their own and not the Gospell of Jesus Christ. ¶ The state of the question betwen the Lutherans Zuinglians 〈◊〉 and Catholikes concerning the Sacrâ—…ment of the altar TO th'inthent thou maiest good Reader the better vnderstand to what point and mark the whole disputation shal be 〈◊〉 I will briefly declare how diuersly the doctrine of the blessed Sacrament of the altar hath beâ—… set forth in our dayes From the beginning of yâ— Christian Churche vntill yâ— yere of our Lord 1517. all yâ— on the earth professed openly Christes Catholike faith did beleue as well in the Breke as in the Latin Church the reall presence of Chrisâ—…es body blood vnder the formes of bread and wine after consecration dewly made This faith of theirs was preserued by the delyuery from hand to hand of that docâ—…rine euen sithens the beginning of Christes Church and was mainteined by the preaching and writing of the lerned Fathers and protested by the godly honour which all Christen people gaue to the said Sacrament at the time of masse or otherwise Well it might be that sâ—…me one in his harte thought amisse of that hely mystâ—… and that some 〈◊〉 in corners also conspired against the truthe thereof as 〈◊〉 and some other like as now â—…ull many maie be suspected to think that Christ is not the sauiour of mankind 〈◊〉 as â—…o Christian this daie teacheth openly and in expresse 〈◊〉 that 〈◊〉 is not y◠〈◊〉 of the world so did no man in open 〈◊〉 with the autoritie or toleration of any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 preache write or professe that the body of Christ was not present in the Sacrament of the altar if the Priest had once 〈◊〉 the solemne benediction which our lord Jesus commanded On the other syde if in the first six hundred yeres the Christians had beleued as the Lutherans or Zuinglians now doe he that had first begunne to haue taught yâ— real presence of Christes body and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine must haue ben at that tyme noted reputed for an 〈◊〉 he must haue ben conuinced by som generall or proninciall Councell kept either in the 〈◊〉 Church or in the west the Preachers and Doctours of that age should haue writen against him It is not possible that all the whole Church which to that day had beleued the mysteries that be consecrated vpon the altar to be â—…more but holy bread and wine to be only tokens of Christes body absent in substance to be neither a sacrifice 〈◊〉 nor the reall body and blood of Christ should 〈◊〉 through all nations change the Catholike and vniuersall belefe without any trouble or tumult at all without any contradiction or disputation yea without any man at all knowen or euer
Hierome I saie expounding these wordes of 〈◊〉 the Prophet Declinaui ad eum vt vesceretur I bowed downe or turned in to him that he might eate writeth thus in Christes person Declinaui ad eos deserens regna coelorum vt cum eis vescerer assumpta forma hominis siue dedi eis esum corporis mei ipse cibus 〈◊〉 Forsaking the kingdome of heauen I bowed downe or turned in to them that the shape of maÌ„ being taken I might eate with them or else I gaue them the meate of my body I my selfe being both the meate and the banketer or feaster And yet he speketh in an other place more plainly Nec Moyses c. Neither Moyses hath geuen vs the true bread but our lord Iesus him self the feaster and the feast himself the eater and he that is eaten Behold Christes supper it may worthely be called his 〈◊〉 for neuer any man made any such before him he biddeth geasts and fedeth them with his owne flesh He is at the table as he was at the altar of his crosse For these two things are in most points agreable For this table is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and reall remembrance of that crosse As therefore vpon the crosse Christ was the preist who made the sacrifice Christ the hoste that was killed Christ the God to whom it was offred Christ the head of that body of his Church for whom it was offered Christ alone played all partes non fuit de gentibus vir cum illo and of all nations no man was with him so likewise in the last supper Christ 〈◊〉 the geastes telling them 〈◊〉 yere before of his ban 〈◊〉 at Capharnaum and the hower being come Christ geueth water not only to their hands but euen to their feete Christ is the panter Christ is the butler as S. Cyprian also hath writen Christ is the meate Christ is the drinke and what creature should haue parte with him in his supper Are bread and wine mete ban ketting dishes for his table They are in dede mete by their owtward shew to signifie the supper of Christ but not mete to be a substancial part therof He that is Lord of heauen and earth will he borow the substance of his creatures to make vp his feast As though he lacked bread of his owne or as though his flesh which is the true 〈◊〉 conteining al swetnesse in it lacked the swetnesse of wheaten bread or of materiall wine as though Christ had not better bread and meate of his 〈◊〉 and better drinke of his owne then the grape maketh and who shall haue them if he be without them A great shame it is that either any thing should chalenge part in Christes supper besydes Christe himselfe or that he should 〈◊〉 the table with bare odours of spirituall grace hauiug at commandement the substance of flesh and blood wherein the fullnes of Godhed dwelleth corporally Think of Christes supper according to the worship of him that made it leaue bread and wine for Lutrish tables beleue thou that Christ gaue no lesse to his geasts then he had to geue for verily all that he toke he toke it to geue for vs and to vs for vs vppon the crosse and to vs in his last supper Both which he expressed manifestly when he 〈◊〉 saing Take eate this is my body which is geuen for you that body was geuen bloodily for vs in the forme of man because he died for man the same is vnbloodily geuen to vs in the form of bread because man liueth by bread But earthly bread is to maintein life to earthly men HeaueÌ„ly men eate the bread which came doun from heauen which is the sonne of God assumpting the flesh of man For the bread which Christ promised to geue is his flesh for the life of the world His flesh is meate in dede and his blood is brink in dede Therefore who so teacheth the body blood of Christ to be now receaued by faith spirit only he denieth the supper of our Lord where the body was geuen by the hands of Christ receaued with the hands of the Apostles eaten with their corporal mouthes and the blood drunken out of the chalice of blessing the which Christ deliuered by their hands to their mouths and harts by that meanes feeding the whole man with his whole substance ¶ A speciall 〈◊〉 of Caluin is conâ—…ed who taught this is my body which is geuen for you to be words of promise in the way of preaching at Christes supper whereas they are words of perfoormance in the way of working THe special authoritie that Caluin hath gotten through his scholars in England moueth me specially to coufute I can not tell whether I shall name it his more false or more foolish opinion Who perceauing the Catholiks wholy to stick to the most proper and most effectual words of Christes supper and therevpon to build the belefe of the real presence of his body and blood thought best to inuegle the strength of those words as much as might 〈◊〉 to bring them from doing to saying from making to speaking from perfoorming to promising and therefore among manie other words of the same argument thus he writeth Atqui non panem alloquitur Christus vt corpus suum fiat sed discipulos iubet manducare atque illis corporis sanguinis sui communicationem pollicetur caet But Christ speaketh not to the bread that it might be made his body but he commandeth his disciples to eate and he promiseth them the communicating of his body and 〈◊〉 And afterward Let vs vnderstand those words to be a liuely preaching which may edifie the hearers etc. which in the fulfilling of that it promiseth may bring foorth his efficacie Hytherto Caluin whose worthy scholars haue consecrated that vnsensible deuise of his in the booke of their English homilies Where after an exhortation made that men should come them selues to communion it is sayd To this Christes commandement forceth vs saying do ye thus to this his promise enticeth vs this is my body which is geuen for you this is my blood which is shed for you This fault I find with my countriemen There can not be a foolish saying in al Germanie or â—…uicherland which they must not allow follow preache to their audience and set foorth in print And therefore if euery man might haue his will so many schismatical Churches as they had seâ—…e beyond the seas so many orders of communion they wold haue embraced Men that neuer brought foorth of them selues any thing worthy name and yet neuer saw in other places so apish a toye which they did not wonder at and gredeily practise Wherein they are both most like their master Caluin for so much as they specially follow his peuish inuentions and most vnlike him because he followed none other man in his doctrine but himself inuented a new religion of his own making What
good faith to haue a good charitie to examine him selfe goeth before the supper eating by faith and spirit is a thing required to come worthely to the supper But when we once come thither we all eate one thing one meate one foode one body whether we come worthely or vnworthely euen as all that are sprinkled with water in the name of the Trinitie are baptized in one and the same Sacrament of baptim whether they be good men as Cornelius was or â—…uill men as Simon Magus was For Simon Magus was baptized of Philip yâ— deacon But as it may appere by that is tolde in the scriptures and gathered by the Breke and Latine Fathers he came not worthely to that Sacrament but faynedly as one that hoped to make gain of his faith And yet he had that baptisme which as S. Paul sayeth is but one But he had not the vertue of that one baptisme which is the remission of synnes I trust by this tyme the defenders nede not boast of their doctrine neither vpbraid vs of ours because they teach that only good men haue yâ— body of Christ deliuered to them And we teach that euill men also eate really the true body of Christ. We haue I suppose declared the word of God to stand in our side and seing their doctrine must be tried by the word of God I tell them it is tried and sound to be false and forged except they can proue Iudas to haue bene an honest man For surely that he receaued the body of Christ it is the mind of S. Cyprian S. Hierom S. Chrysoâ—…om S. Augustin S. Leo S. Bede Theodoritus Sedulius 〈◊〉 Euthymius yea it is so farre the common opinion of all men that vpon that example this â–ª conclusion is grounded that we can not remoue 〈◊〉 euill man from the commu nion excepthy order of law we may coÌ„uince him Quia nec Christus Iudam a communione remouit Because Christ did not remoue Iudas from communion Howbeit we stand not in this doctrine vpon the person of Iudas only but also vpon the generall doctrine of S. Paule who teacheth euery euill man to be gilty of the body of Christ for eating that bread vnworthely ¶ The auncient Fathers teach that euill men receaue truly the body of Christ. YEa but say they we do affirme with the most auncient Fathers that the body of Christ is eaten of none other but of Godly and faithfull men Seing the holy scriptures are proued to stand on our side it were great marueile if the auncient Fathers did make for you They are not wonte to be contrarie to the word of God But what a miserie is this what a seducing of the people The word of God is pretended the auncient Fathers be named and not one syllable brought forth out of either both concerning this question But as before we brought holy scriptures so let vs now allege the auncient Fathers Origen sayeth Those who come to the Eucharist without examining cleansing them selues are lyke to men sicke of an ague who presuming to eate sanorum cibos the meates of whole men doe hurte them selues Whereby we may perceaue he iudgeth the meate of Christes supper which is proâ—…ded only for whole men yet to be truly but not profitabâ—…y eaten of them who are burdened with great synnes Basile asketh what a man shall say of him qui otiose et inutiliter edere audet corpus et bibere sanguinem Domini nostri Iesu Christi Who dareth in vayne and vnprofitably eate the body and drinke the blood of our Lord Iesus Christ If a man eate in vaine and to his disprofit yet he eateth in dede and as S. Basile sayeth he eateth the body of Christ. Chrysostom writeth thus If those which spotte the Kinges purple be no lesse punished then those that cutte it what wonder is it if those who take the body of Christ with an vncleane conscience haue the same punishment which they haue who pearced him with nailes Behold as it is one purple still whether it be spotted or cutt so is it the same body still whether it be pearced with nailes as the Iewes haudled it or taken with an vnclean conscience as euill Christians order it S. Cyprian in manner of purpose answereth those obiections which might moue any man to doubt how euill men may doo receaue so good a thing as Christes owne body is The Sacramentes sayeth he for their part can not be without their proper vertue Neither doth Gods maiestie by any meanes absent it self from the mysteries But albeit the Sacramentes permitte them selues to be taken or touched of vnworthy men yet those men can not be partakers of the spirit whose infidelitie or vnworthynes withstandeth such holines If by the mynd of S. Ciprian the Sacramentes can not lacke their owne proper vertue come good men or euill to them one substance is alwayes geuen but the euill can not receaue the spirit or grace thereof because they are vnworthie of such a benefite S. Hierome Opponis mihi Gomor Mannae vnam mensuram Et nos Christi corpus aequaliter accipimus Thou laiest vnto me the one measure of Manna called Gomor and we take the body of Christ equally One as well taketh it as an other but as it there foloweth Pro accipientiuÌ„ meritis diuersum fit quod vnum est According to the merites of them that receaue that which is one is made diuerse The Sacrament is one in it selfe yet to one it is made yâ— cause of goodnes when he taketh it worthely to an other the cause of euill when he taketh it vnworthely There also S. Hierome sayeth that Iudas dranke of the same cuppe whereof the other Apostles dranke but yet that he was not of the same merit S. Augustine sayeth Tolerat ipse Dominus Iudam DiaboluÌ„ furem venditorem suum sinit accipere inter innocentes Discipulos quod norunt fideles precium nostrum Our Lord him selfe beareth with Iudas he suâ—…th a deuill a theefe and the seller of him selfe to receaue among the innocent Disciples our price which the faithfull knowe If any thing besydes that body of Christ may be our price then S. Augustine might meane that euill men receaue an other thing But if our price be vndoubtedly that body of Christ which by death redemed vs Iudas receauing our price receaued the very true body and substance of Christ. In an other place he writeth Eundem cibuÌ„ sanctuÌ„ alios manducare digne alios indigne Some eate worthely some vnworthely the same holy meate Beholde the meate is the same Whether the euill receaue it or the good And because the Apologie though it name no Father at all yet it maie haue some pretense of certain wordes which are in S Augustine it is to be weighed diligeÌ„tly that Christ hath as well a mystical body as a true naturall body The mysticall body of
by man Truly in Baptim there is forgeuenesse of all synnes What skilleth it whether Priests challenge this right of forgeuing synnes to be geuen them by penance or by baptim The mysterie or Sacrament is one in both But thou wilt say that in Baptim the grace oâ—… yâ— mysteries worketh What in Penance doth not the name of God work Here is the same vertue and name of a mysterie or Sacra ment geuen to Penance which is geueÌ„ to Baptim Whereby S. Ambrose taught as wel that there was a SacrameÌ„t of Penance as the Apologie graunteth one of Baptim But to stand about the proof of all the seuen Sacraments it nedeth not sith in that most notable generall Councell gathered both of Grekes and Latines at Florence all the seuen Sacramentes were according to the word of God confessed proued declared and expounded as in the ende thereof it may appere But neither S. Ambrose nor S. Augustine had the charge committed to them to rekon vp how many Sacraments there are I brought these few places out of S. Augustine and S. Ambrose to shewe as it were to the eyes of all them that will not wilfully blind them selues how these defenders crie out vpon the word of God vntill they haue with swete words wonne â—…anour amoÌ„g the miserable nomber â—…f those vnstable meâ—… that allwayes harken for newes But when they haue them fast then is the word of God cleane forgotten and in siede of it Ambrose and Augustiâ—…e are captiously and falsely alleged For the truth is they that set nought by the word of God can not long esâ—…me Ambrose and Augustine who with all their hartes embraced the word of God and expounded the same according to the auncient tradition of holy Church To what end then doth this Apologie runne Truly to sette vp an Idoll of their owne making in place of the word of God To set vp I say a fantasticall religion of their owne deuising But if they should crie to the people Come come bowe down to the Idoll that we haue deuised for you the people would not come as being feared with yâ— infamouse name of an Idoll Therefore they say come to the word of God come to the holy Scriptures come to the true gospell of Iesus Christ. well Syr you say herein exceding well we are come Teach vs the word of God the Scriptures the gospell Say on a Gods name ¶ That the supper of our Lord is the chief Sacrament of all but not acknowledged of the Apologie according to the word of God WE saye that Eucharistia the supper of the Lord is a Sacrament that is to wit an euident token of the body and blood of Christ. It is most true that the supper of our Lord is a Sacrament yea it is the chief Sacrament of all Sacraments 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Est enim secunduÌ„ clarissimi praeceptoris nostri sententiam SacramentoruÌ„ Sacramentum The most holy Eucharist which Dyonisius named so a litle before according to the mind of our renowmed maister is the Sacrament of Sacramentes Although Dionysius had S. Paul to his master yet he meaneth at this tyme as vpon him Maximus hath noted by other places of his worke it may well appere to be true Hierotheus an holy Father and Disciple of Christ who in his talke whiche he was wonte to haue with Dyonisius did vse to call the holy Eâ—…charist of all the Sacramentes the chief Sacrament Surely iâ—… there had bene but two Sacramentes both Hierotheus Dyonisius had abused their words For where two things only are of one degree there one may be worthier then the other but neither of the twaiue may iustly be called the chief of the others If in all there be only two Sacramentes baptisme the Eucharist how is the Eucharist the Sacrament of Sacramentes sith when one is taken away there doth remaine but one moe to which relation may be made The opinion therefore of this Apologie standing the Eucharist may be yâ— more chief Sacrament of tâ—…e twaine but not the Sacrament of moe Sacramentes But what nede we stand herevpon seing Dionysius hath at large prosecuted moe Sacramentes then baptisme and the Eucharist as it is easye to see in his workes Seing then the supper of our Lord is a Sacrament and yet not found so to be named in holy Scripture the Apologie is constrained to beleue it selfe and to teach others somewhat which is not readen in holy Scripture Againe that euery Sacrament is a signe and token it is also true but not readen in holy Scripture Thirdly the Sacrament of the altar is an euident token of yâ— body and blood of Christ. But so much is not expressed in holy Scripture Last of all the supper of our Lord is the reall body blood of Christ him selfe And that truth is very plainly very ofte very earnestly sayd taught repeted in holy Scripture Foure thinges are now verified of the supper of our Lord. It is a Sacrament it is consequently a holy signe It is an euident token of the body and blood of Christ. It is the truth and substance of the body and blood of Christ. Of the foure truthes the last only is expressed in holy scriptures because it is the ground of all the other The three first are taught by the Church not coÌ„trary to the scripture but ouer and besides it Now mark well whether these defenders lead vs to the word of God or no. In describing the supper of our Lord they put the three first verities of which neuer a one is named in the scripture And the last veritie which is expresly named in all the foure Euangelistes and in S. Paul as before I haue declared that they vtterly 〈◊〉 aâ—…d leaue out As if they shuld saie we make much aâ—… to pretend yâ— holy scriptures but we will be sure to bring any thiâ—…g soner then the holy scriptures Marke this Apologie who shal he neuer lightly saw any book writen in so many matters of diuinitie wherein so litle scripture hath bene alleged It is full of gloses but the texte it hath very seldome And why They loue not in dede the scriptures they know not the scriptures according to the mind of the holy Ghost but only make a shew of them to entangle the sunple in their snares The supper of our Lord is a sacrament a holy signe an euident token of the body and blood of Christ. hitherto they teache without scriptures It is the body and blood it selfe of Iesus Christ. Hereof speake they at this time neuer a word because it is in the Gospell which they loue not If this last truth can not stand with the first what doubt is there but the worde of God must ouercome and the doctrine of men gâ—…ue place If therefore the supper of our Lord maâ—…e both be the signe of the body and the body it selfe it is well we are throughly
that it so feedeth vs as the water in baptism doth wash vs and that as water toucheth our body so it entreth into our body Which thing is so true that Christ hauing taken bread blessed stretching forth his hand said Take eate this is my body which is geuen for you Where not without a great mysterie Christe gaue his body vnder the forme of bread not only to feede vs presently through yâ— grace which procedeth froÌ„ his flesh by touching eating yâ— same but also to shew vs that this is the same bodie which before had incorporated vs into it self For as of manie graines of wheate one loaf of manie persons one Mysticall body of Christe was made so when Christ turneâ—…h the substance of bread into his own substaÌ„ce and so maketh him self present vnder yâ— form of bread he both feedeth many persons who partake of that one bread and by the form of bread sheweth how they being neuer so many are yet one in him because they are all incorporated into him Of this Sacrament S. Paule intreating sayd The bread which we breake is the communicating of Christes body because through it we both partake of the one bread which is Christ and are our selues shewed to be one bread and one body What are we in mystery but only members of Christ And for as much as Christ is him self present vnder the forme of this bread and is the very substaÌ„ce which is receaued there we are no lesse named one mystical bread of this one bread then we are named one mystical body of Christes true body out of which discourse it is vndoutedly proued that the bread which we breake is the body of Christ. How could we otherwise be called thereof one bread How could one bread and one body be put to signifie one thing but that in dede bread and body are here in substance the same selfe thing we are named the mysticall body in respect of yâ— vnion which we haue with the natural body of Christ and amoÌ„g our selues But we are also called one bread in S. Paule Therefore out of dout S. Paul meaneth that one bread which is Christ in respect whereof we are named to be yâ— mystical body of Christ. The Church taketh her names froÌ„ Christ that which Christ is in truth the Church is in mystery so that nothing can be verified of the Church which was not true before in Christ for the members folow the state of theyr head But the meÌ„bers are called one bread one body for mysteries sake therefore the head is in truth one bodie he is the one bread whereof we partake and we partake of that which is broken by meanâ—… of yâ— forme of bread therefore Christ is really present vnder that forme of bread whiche at his supper we breake and partake We are members of this bread before we take it in the Sacrament of the altar because this bread is that substance of Christe vnder the form of bread to whose mystical body we were ioyned in baptisâ—…e whereof S. Augustine writeth thus Nulli est aliquâ—…tenus ambigendâ—… cae No man ought by any meanes to doubt but that he is then made partaker of the body blood of our Lord when he is made a member of Christ in baptim neither is he alienated from the company of that bread and that cup although before he eate that bread and drinke that cup being placed in the vnity of Christes body he depart out of this world For he is not depriued of the partaking and benefite of that Sacrament for so much as him self hath found that thing which that Sacrament doth signify Whereas Christ sayd Except ye eate my flesh and drink my blood ye shal not haue life in you a man wold haue thought that euery person were bound to receaue actually the Sacrament of Christes body and blood but S. Augustine sheweth that thing not to be after that sorce necessarie to all men For he that is made a member of Christ in Baptism is therein made partaker of yâ— body blood of Christ. How so Because he receaueth that thing which the Sacrament of Christes body and blood signifieth What doth it signifie The mysticall body of Christ. By what meanes S. Augustine expounded yâ— meane a litle before saying Bread is not made of one grayne but of many likewise one liquour is made of many grapes Thus our Lord Iesus signified vs. he wold vs to apperteine to himself Mysterium panis vnitatis nostrae in sua mensa consecrauit he hath consecrated the mysterie of our peace and vnitie in his table Note that our mysterie was not made by the baker but consecrated by Christ the consecration was to turne the substance of the bread into his owne flesh keping still the olde forme of the same bread But if the body of Christ were not really vnder the forme of bread how could he that is baptized be partaker of the benefite of this Sacrament Was he made partaker of bread and wine No verily but of the mysticall body What hath the mystical body to doe in this Sacrament For â—…oth so much that here is both the thing which maketh vs all one which is Christ and he is so present that he sheweth him self to haue ioyned all vs to him as he hath ioyned the graines of wheat vnto his flesh For as the bread which we breake hath none other substance besyde the substance of Christ and yet it hath an outward appareuce of an other thing so the mysticall body of Christ hath none other substance through which it is one body besydes yâ— body of Christ although it haue an oâ—…tward appareÌ„ce of an other thing For be we neuer so many in number persons we are one body in Christ. How so euer we appere mortal men as we once were yet in truth we are ioyned to the body of Christ and are members of him our only head Take away that body of Christ from the forme of bread and here is no signe of vnitie in Christ. A signe of vnitie here is but not in Christ. Euery loaf 〈◊〉 vnitie but none other betokeneth our vnitie in Christ but that bread the substance whereof is Christ yâ— forme whereof is the forme of common bread If the naturall substance of Christ be absent from the bread which we consecrate and so be signified without the reall presence thereof if again the natural substance of bread remaine and signific the mysticall body of Christ who is absent him self in substance no signe is by that meane more effectually made then that Christ and his members are as far a sunder as heauen is distant from the earth and that as Christ is signified present being in dede not present so his members be signified to be ioyned to him and in truth be not ioyned to him These are the mystical signes which do folow necessarily vpon the
coming of his grace into our hartes His grace can not come except we first be made mete to receaue it but his body may come to our bodies so may condemne our soules before that we are made mete to receaue it His grace therefore must come first to vs by faith and charitie that we may thereby haue power to receaue worthely afterward his blessed body least if we receaue it vnworthely we take it to our damnation But so great preparation should not be requisite if our bodies receaued none other substance besyde bread and wine for they are of baser degree then eating by faith is But now we may somtime absteine from the Sacrament euen for honour and reuerence whiche we beare to it and yet we may not absteine from eating by faith or spirite Therefore it is a worthier kind of substance which is receaued in the SacrameÌ„t then the grace is which is the effect of spirituall eating And seing it should not be a worthier thing if it were the substance of bread and wine we may be assured the substance of the Sacrament to be that selfe body whereof the Centurion sayd Lord I am not worthy that thou shouldest enter vnder my roof It is the honour of that body whiche S. Paul and S. Augustine respect and not the honour of bread and wine in so much that the faithfull as well in the Greke as in the Latin Churche haue vsed alwaâ—…s the very same wordes in adoring the Sacracrament whiche the Centurion vsed to Christ. one praier to one Lord the same reuerence to the same God and man ¶ That the Fathers of the first six hundred yeres after Christ did adore the body and blood of Christe in the Sacrament of the altar DIonysius Areopagita scholer to S Paule made a praier to the Sacrament of the Altar in these wordes Sed ô tu diuinum sanctumque Sacramentum c. but o thou diuine and holy Sacrament open and display clerely to vs as it were the veyles and clokes wherewith thorough the signes of obscurities thou art couered and fill the eyes of our vnderstanding with suche clere light as may no more be dymmed Thus did that auncient Father pray not to bread and wine ye may be sure but to that blessed body of our Lord which is present in the mysteries Upon whiche place Pachymeres noteth that S. Dionisius speaketh vnto the Sacrament as being a thig which hath sense and life and that worthely For so the greate diuine Gregory saith But o passouer that great I say and holy passouer For that our passouer and this self holy Sacrament our Lord Iesus Christ him self is to whoÌ„ the holy man spâ—…aketh Lo this selfe holy Sacrament is Christ. And as nothing in the world is our great and holy passouer besyde Christ him selfe so this holy Sacrament hath none other substance at all besyde the substance of Iesus Christ who couereth him selfe as it were with the veyles of bread and wine As you haue heard the most direct wordes of S. Dionysius adoring this blessed mystery and of Pachymeres geuing the reason why he did speake vnto it as the which is Christe him selfe now you shal perceaue that all the other Fathers did beleue the same in so much as all men will graunt that they must needes adore that thing which they confessed to be either Christ or God or one in person with the sonne of God S. â—…yprian writing of the Sacrament of Christes supper saith In sacrificio quod Christus est non nisi Christus sequendus est In the sacrifice which is Christ only Christ must be followed It is knowâ—…ll well what sacrifice we offer how we take bread and wine coÌ„secrating them by the wordes of the last supper wherein it was said This is my body and this is my blood doe and make this thing for the remembrance of me This consecration of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ is our sacrifice and because Christ is not diuided nor dieth any more but where his body and blood is there him selfe is therefore S. Cyprian saieth Our sacâ—…ifice is Christ. Neither doth he speake of the death and passion where Christ was our sacrifice bloodily but he speaketh of the sâ—…pper of our Lord where we daily sacrifice Christ vnbloodily For he speaketh of yâ— matter of coÌ„secration which he saith must be wine mingled with water and not water alone because Christ made his owne blood of wine mingled with water Now saith S. Cyprian In the sacrifice which is Christ none must be followed but Christ. If our sacrifice be Christ because of bread and wine which we bring foorth the body and blood of Christ is made by his word is it possible that Christe should not be worshipped of S. â—…yprian with godly honour If Christ be so worshipped and our sacrifice be Christ our sacrifice must be worshipped with Godly honour our sacrifice I say because the thing that is made by coÌ„secration is none other besyde that body of Christe which is the price of the world and the only sacrifice for mankinde The same thing S. Ambrose saith euen as expressie of the Sacrament which S. Cyprian speaketh of the sacrifice In illo SacrameÌ„to Christus est quia corpus Christi in that Sacrament Christe is because it is the body of Christe To the same purpose apperteine the words of S. Ignatius calling this Sacrament the bread of God the heauenly bread the bread of life which thing saith he is the flesh of Christe the Sonne of God And of S. Ambrose calling it the nourishment of the diuine substance And of Eusebius Pamphili calling it Sacrificium Deo plenum And againe horroreÌ„ afferentia mensae Christi sacrificia a sacrifice full of God and the sacrifices of the table of Christe making men to tremble and quake And of Cyrillus saying those that receaue those mysteries to be made diuinae naturae participes Partakers of the diuine nature And again corporaliter in nobis Christum habitare participatione naturali that by these mysteries Christe dwelleth in vs corporally and by naturall partaking And of Isychius calling the same mysteries the bread of life panes mysticos viuificantes and mysticall loaues and those which quicken vs to life euerlasting And is it to be thought that Christ that the bread of God of life the diuine substance the sacrifice full of God which maketh men tremble quake that yâ— mysteries which cause Christe corporally to dwell in vs yâ— the nature of God whereof we are partakers by eating that the Sacrament of Christes supper being al this yet should not haue godly honour done to it Did al the Fathers who wrote thus of that mysterie honour and worship it according to their own doctrine and writings If all they and al the rest did professe that which was vpon yâ— table of Christ
holding and lifting vp the consecrated host said with a lowd voice Sancta sanctis the holy things for holy men The quere and people answered Vnus sanctus vnus dominus vnus Iesus Christus in gloria dei patris cum Spiritu sancto Amen one holy one Lord one Iesus Christ in the glory oâ—… God the Father with the holy Ghost Amen The Priest by lifting vp the holy consecrated hoste proâ—…oketh the people to adore and receaue the body of Christ vnder the forme of bread saying as it were These holy thinges are not for prophane synners or those who are not baptized but for holy Christians whereby the Priest meneth aswel to shew where the holy things be that he speaketh of as for whom they be Uerily they are those which he hath in his hands which he lifteth vp and sheweth to them Which I do so much the more earnestly presse vppon because now a dayes the Sacramentaries would make vs beleue that the holy thinges which must be adored to sanctisy vs and which must be adored be stil in heauen and not vpon the altar vnder the form of bread Why doth then the Priest hold vp the sanctified host cry holy things if those â–ª which he sheweth be not the holy things Why doth he adde holy tbings for holy men if those men that be holy shall not content them selues with those holy things but must looke for a new supper from heauen at the same tyme But the people of the primatiue Churche well knowing the things that were shewed to be the most holy of all holies because they are the body blood of Christ yet wil not acknowledge them selues to be holy and therefore do aunswere that there is one holy and he their Lord Iesus whiche words Cyrillus of Hierusalem expoundeth thus Sacerdos dicit Sancta sanctis Sancta scilicet ea quae in ara proposita sunt aduentu Spiritus sancti sanctificata Sancti vos cum sitis sancto spiritu donati atque ita sancta sanctis conueniunt Vos deinde respondetis vnus sanctus c. The Priest saith holy things for holy men Uerily the holy things are those whiche are set forth in the altar consecrated by the comming of the holy Ghost And seing ye are holy indewed with the holy Ghost by that meanes holy things are mete for holy men But afterward ye aunswere one holy one Lord Iesus Christ. In dede he alâ—…ne is holy as who is holy by nature For although ye are holy yet ye are not holy by nature but by partaking by exercise and by praier Behold the holy things â—…re not only in heauen but also vpon the altar S. Chrysostom saith Cûm dicit Sancta sanctis hoc dicit Si quis non est sanctus non accedat When he saith holy things for the holy he meaneth this thing If any man be not holy let him not come And in an other place Consydera quaeso Mensa regalis est apposita Angeli mensae ministrantes ipse rex adest cae Marke I pray you the kingly table is set before thee Aungels minister at the table the king him selfe is present and thou standest by idle thy garments are foule and thou carest not But if they are cleane then adore and receaue By conference of these places we vnderstand that the Priest by saying holy things for holy men warned that none should comme but those that were cleane from synne And yet those that were holy might not receaue before they had acknowleged and confessed by theyr fact and word the king to be present The confession by wordes was to answer the Priest one holy one Lord Iesus Christ. The confession in fact dede was to bow doune bodily and to adore the holy things which are the body and blood of Christ and Christ him self Adore saith Chrysostom and communicate worship and receaue The eleuation of the consecrated host was made for these two purposes that the king of glory should be worshipped vnder the form of bread receaued of holy men By worshipping we conâ—…esse him to be holy by nature in his Godhead and person by communicating we partake the fruits of his passion Of this lifting vp of the holy host Dionysius writeth Pontifex laudatis sacris dei operibus ea quae diuinissima suut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sacrificat vel consecrat laudata oculis subiicit per symbola quae ritè proponuntur The Bishop hauing praised the holy works of God doth offer vp in sacrifice or consecrate the most diuine things and after praise geuen to them he sheweth them to the eyes by meanes of the signes which are duely set forth The consecrating or offering vp in sacrifice of the most diuine things doth shew the real presence of the body and blood which only are the diuine things and only may be consecrated or finally offered in the state of the new testameÌ„t The praising of theÌ„ whiche is made of the Bishop doth witnesse that they are not creatures without life as they were before consecration but such as may receaue of a reasonable man praise and thanksgeuing offered vp to them The shewing of them declareth that other men are prouoked to the like praysing and honouring of them The shewing of theÌ„ by meanes of the signes declareth their presence not to be intellectuall only albeit the maner thereof be spirituall but their presence to be reall vnder the formes of breade and wine For those are the signes whereof Dionysius speaketh Neyther must one of these things be considered alone without the other as some men consider them who suppose they are lifted vp to be only as it were a watcheword of lifting vp our harts to heauen whereas they are first said to be consecrated and then to be lifted vp If the diuine things that were consecrated be lifted vp they be not now a signe only but they are made the diuine things theÌ„ selues and those diuine things are shewed to vs by the signes Lo there are diuine things shewed signes also but the diuine things being praised are shewed by the signes What is that to say but vnder the signes of bread and wine the body and blood of Christ are shewed to be praised and honoured of other men as the Priest him self hath already praised and honoured them The word signifying the praise of them is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 things praised with an hymne which worde hymne is most peculiar to the things of God for hymnes are specially dedicated to God in the praise of his workes S. Basil speaking of the same matter saith Inuocationis verba dum ostenditur panis Eucharistiae poculum benedictionis quis sanctorum scripto nobis reliquit which of the Saincts hath left in writing to vs the wordes of innocation whiles yâ— bread of thankes geuing and the cup of blessing is shâ—…wed The word which S. Basile vseth
is suche as betokeneth shewing and lifting vp 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth properly betoken suche a shewing as is made by listing vp It is much to be noted yâ— S. Basil asketh what Saint to wit what Apostle or Euangelist hath left in writing to vs the order of saying Masse and the praiers which therein we vse Non enim iis contenti sumus quorum caet For we are not content with those things whereof the Apostle or Gospel hath made mention but both before and after we say certeine other things as hauing great strength about the mysteries which are taken out of the doctrine which is deliuered without writing The Apostle and Gospel hath only told the substanciall points of the Masse but the rest hath bene left vnto vs as S. Basil saith by secret doctrine yet by the same auctority which gaue vs the substanciall points Well seing that S. Basill speaking of the whole Masse yet nameth it ostentionem Eucharistiae the eleuation and sheing of the 〈◊〉 he geueth vs to vnderstand the eleuation to be next vnto the consecration a most principall parte of the Masse in so much as the whole may be named by it While the bread of yâ— Eucharist was shewed these were and among the Breeks are the words of inuocation Vnus sanctus c. one holy one Lord in the glory of God the Father Amen These words if they did not belong to the holy things which are shewed why are they spoken at that tyme why are they called the wordes of inuocation the words that acknowlege so holy thinges to be shewed and holden vp that they are the only holy and one Lord Iesus who is in equall deitie and glorie with his Father Maximus in his notes vpon S. Dionysius after some other interpretations made vpon the shewing of the diuine mysteries resteth in this that Dionysius meaneth the lifting vp and eleuation of the one blessing which is yâ— of the diuine bread which the Priest lifteth vp saying Holy things for holy men And as it may appeare by Maximus in the primatiue Church the mysteries were twise shewed at the first tyme the diuine bread alone was listed vp and before the communion as wel that diuine bread as also therewithall the chalice Germanus writeth thus Elatio autem in altum diuini corporis repraesentatcrucis elationem mortem in ea ipsam resurrectionem The lifting vp a high of the diuine body doth represent the lifting vâ—… on the crosse and the death in it and the very resurrection After the lifting vp of Christes body and the adoration thereof the holy communion folowed of the which Eusebius Emissenus writeth in this maner Cum ad reuerendum altare salutari cibo potuque reficiendus accedis sacrum Dei tui corpus sanguinem fide respice honora mirare mente continge cordis manu suscipe maximè haustu interiore assume when thou comest to the reuerend altar to be refresshed with the healthfull meate and drink looke with faith vpon the holy body and blood of thy God honour it wonder at it touche it with thy minde receaue it with an inward swalowing The first thing to be noted in these words is that he which is desirous to receaue the blessed Sacrament of Christes body must know where to haue it The second how to take it and last of al how to vse it profitably Concerning the place Eusebius sayth when thou comest to the reuerend altar to be fed with yâ— healthful meate and drink Doing vs to vnderstand that the body blood of Christ which only is our healthful meate and drink standeth vpon the altar thence to be distributed to the faithfull people Concerning the maner of taking the sayd body Eusebius biddeth vs honour it and wonder at it Concerning the profitable vse thereof he biddeth vs take it with our hart and minde for if we toke it with our bodies alone we should rather take it to our damnation then to our profite The English homilies rehersing this place in the secoÌ„d tome haue translated altare the communion and salutari cibo potuque spirituall meates whereas altare is an altar and salutare is healthful But the brethern who 〈◊〉 ouerthrowen altars were loth by naming them to recite their own damnation Eusebius beginneth with the altar as the which is the grouÌ„d of all the rest Upon the altar the healthful meate is consecrated made ready for the faithfull people There it is looked on not by the bodily eye which seeth nothing besyde the outward formes but by faith which is taught the body and blood of Christ to be present vpon the altar vnder those formes There that meate is honoured thence that is taken which refresheth vs. To that meate the receauer sayd Lord I am not worthy that thou shouldest enter vnder my roof For he that seeth the diuine food lifted vp vnto him and afterward speaketh these words seing he taketh corporally that bread into his mouth and only in respect of that corporall receauing sayth I am not worthy that thou should est enter Doubtlesse he speaketh to the bread it self calleth it his Lord. For none other Lord entreth vnder the roof of his mouth besyde that bread It is lifted vp to receaue it he cometh to it he speaketh it entreth vnder his roof It is therefore a fond preteÌ„se to say those words were spoken to God in heauen not vnto yâ— holy Sacrament Cyrillus of Hâ—…erusalem describing yet more particularly the gesiures of them who receaue the holy coÌ„munion biddeth them to take the King and the body of Christ in the hollow of the right hand saing Amen And to sanctifie their eyes withall vsing all diligence that no crum thereof perish or fal away But what neded that precept if it were the substance of commoÌ„ bread Surely seing no such diligence was vsed in Baptisme we may well perceaue that as because that substance of water doth still remaine it skilleth not where it fall so for so much as no crum of bread must be lost it is not the substance of wheaten bread which is so carefully kept After the communion of the body Cyrillus biddeth the people come to the chalice of Christes blood bowing down saying in the maner of adoring and worshipping Amen Here the right hand receaueth the King surely not by faith which yâ— hand hath not therefore the King of glory was meant to be taken in the hand by meane of the forme of bread vnder which our King Iesus Christ is really present Here is bowing down and adoring at the very instant when the holy communion is receaued As therefore when we reade that the Disciples went back from the place of Christes ascension adorantes adoring we may wel conclude that they adored Christ him self and not only God yâ— Father in him or by him As againe when the Centurion sayd
Epiphanius Who so beleueth not the saying to be true as him self spake it is fallen from grace and saluation Cyrillus Hierosolymitatus Seing Christ him self affirmeth so and sayth of the bread This is my body Who hereafter may be so bolde as to doubte S. Ambrosius Our Lord Iesus him self geueth witnes vnto vs that we take his body and blood Ought we any thing to doubte of his fidelitie and witnesbearing S. Chrysostome Because our Lord sayd This is my body let vs be intangled with no doubtfulnes but let vs beleue and see it with the eyes of vnderstanding Eusebins Emissenns Let all doubtfulnes of infidelitie depart for so much as the author of the gift him self also is witnes of the truth S. Cyrillus of Alexandria Doubt not whether it be true sith Christ sayth manifestly This is my body But rather take y◠word of our Sauiour in faith for seing he is y◠truth he lieth not And againe Let vs take great aduantage by the synnes of other men Geuing stedfast faith vnto the mysteries Let vs neuer in so high matters either thinke or speake that word Quomodo How S. Gregorius Nazianzenus Eate the body and drink the blood without confusion or doubte if at the least thou arte desirouse of life Neither do thou withdraw faith from the sayings which concerne the flesh The same thing S. Hilary Leo Isychius Theophylact Paschasius and diuerse others haue spoken requiring vs not to doubte of the truth of this mysterie and that specially because Christes words make full persuasion and take away al occasion of doubting But if they be figuratiue it is not so for then one may vnderstand this kinde of figure an other that kinde One may thinke it to be a Metaphore An other that it is Synechdoche The third that it is Metonymia The fourth that it is altogether an Allegorie or parable and without all ground of Historie Others doubt not to expound This is my body as if it were sayd in this with this or vnder this or about this my body is Yea from that day wherein the proper and natural sense of those words was denied I thinke neuer any words haue bene more vncertayne and more doubted of then This is my body Yet the Fathers were so farre from this vncertaintie that they counted him an infidell and ◅allen from grace and saluation who so did not beleue them euen as Christ spake them To wit euen so as they sound at the first sight If the truth of Christes body be the reall substance thereof they that intreating of the Eucharist affirme y◠truth of his flesh must nedes meane that his substance is really present in that Sacrament whereof they speake S. Hilarius speaking of the holy mysteries sayth There is left no place of doubting of the truth of flesh and blood Yet surely if the substance of flesh and blood were not present not only some place but the chief place of doubting were left S. Ambrosius It is the true flesh of Christ which we take Doubt ye nothing at all sayeth Leo concerning the truth of Christes body By like he spake to Catholikes for doubtlesse the Sacramentaries doubt so vehemently thereof that they beleue the truth of Christes body to be only at the right hand of his Father Isychius He receaueth by ignorance who knoweth not this to be the body and blood according to the truth Damascenus The bread and wine is not the figure of Christes body and blood God forbid But it is the self deified body of our Lorde The like assertion Theophylact Euthymius and diuerse other Fathers haue They that name the supper of Christ a figure a Sacrament or a remembrance do not therby exclude the true substāce of Christes flesh but they meane to shew that it is present vnder the signe of an other thing after a mysticall and secret maner S. Cyprian The diuine substance hath vnspeakably infused it self in the visible Sacrament S. Hilarius We take in dede the flesh of his body vnder a mysterie Lo the flesh the substance of God is present in truth but vnder a signe Ty◅illus Hierosolymitanus Vnder the figure of bread the body is geuen to thee Who now knowing the Sacrament to consist of two parts wil wonder that sometyme it is named of the one and sometyme of the other S. Augustine The body and blood of Christ shall then be life to euery man if that thing which is visibly receaued in the Sacrament be in the truth it self eaten spiritually B◅holde there is a thing in the Sacrament and so really it is there that it is visibly receaued Therefore it is not a spirituall thing only for no such matter is visibly receaued but it is there and thence it must be eaten spiritually and in y◠truth it self That is to say it must not only be taken into the mouth but into the hart also then it shal be life vnto the receauer This thing so receaued in the Sa cramēt must nedes be the body of Christ vnder y◠forme of bread for nothing els is to be eaten spiritually It were to rediouse to allege all that S. Augustine hath writen in this behalf but his other words being conferred with these wil make it plaine that whensoeuer he nameth it a figure he meaneth the truth hidden vnder a figure which is more shortly named a mysticall figure He that allegeth cause why the flesh and blood of Christ is not seen in the mysteries presupposeth albeit an vnuisible yet a most reall presence thereof S. Ambrose sayth it is not seen in his owne forme Vt nullus horror cruoris sit precium tamen operetur redemptionis To th' end there may be no lothsome abhorring of raw blood and yet that the price of our redemption may work So that by his iudgement the truth of blood is present to worke in vs the effect of Christes death and yet the foorm of blood is not seen because we should not abhorre to drink it Theophylact Although it seme bread to vs it is chaunged by vnspeakable operation Because we are weake and abhorre to eat rawe flesh specially the flesh of a man and therefore it semeth bread but in dede it is flesh If these words can be glosed with a figure then I know not what shall escape the hands of these figure makers They that acknowledge a change of the substāce of bread into Christes body must nedes meane a real presence of that body whereinto the change is made When Iustinus Martyr denyeth vs to take the things consecrated as common bread and drinke shewing also that we haue learned them to be not only sanctified in qualitie but to be the flesh and blood of Christ which is an other substance he doth vs to vnderstand that he meaneth them not to be after consecration the substance of common
as Christ said it sicut ipse dixit as him selfe said it without glosing without additioÌ„s without figures orparables euen as Christ spake it so it was beleued and beleued of euery man And who so did not beleue it was rekoned a damned person without grace without saluation without life euerlasting Thus haue we heard two notable witnesses of the faith of the whole Churche the one a Latine S. Hilarius the other a grecian Epiphanius But now I will bring foorth not as before the old Fathers bearing witnesse of the belefe of the people but I will bring foorth the whole people it selfe yea the people of the primatine Church You shall heare al the citizens of the house of God through out the world witnessing with one voice in one word their most constaÌ„t faith touching the Sacrament of the altar Amen is an hebrew word which partly wisheth and partly affirmeth signifying as it were at once be it so and it is so It signifieth be it so when it is ioyned with praiers and petitions It signifieth it is so when it foloweth any parte of Christes doctrine which is alredy pronounced or affirmed Thence we reade so oft in holy scripture Amen amen I say vnto you which is to say verely verely S. James the Apostle S. Iustin the martyr S. Clement S. Cyrill of Hicrusalem S. Basil S. Ambrose and S. Chrysostom doe witnesse that the people vsed at Masse tyme to answer Amen Which thing they did specially twise once at the consecration as well of the body as of the blood and againe at the tyme of communion At the consecration the Priest in the person of Christ pronounceth most determinatly ouer bread This is my body and ouer wine This is my bloood Therefore when the people answer to those blessed sayings Amen they affirme the same that is affirmed as though they said with one voice It is verely the body of Christ and it is verely the blood of Christ whereof you speak And least you should thinke this coÌ„ment to be of myne making S. Ambrose expounded yâ— same word before me saying Ipse clamat dominus Iesus hoc est corpus meuÌ„ our Lord Iesus him selfe crieth this is my body He calleeh the crying of our Lord when his minister crieth so in his name For of that crying he speaketh as it may appere by the word folowing Wel Our Lord Iesus him self crieth out this is my body before the blessing of yâ— heauenly words it is named another kind after consecration that body is signified him self calleth it his own blood before consecration it is called an other thing after consecration it is called blood and thou sayest Amen that is to say as S. Ambrose him selfe expoundeth it verum est it is true That the mouth speaketh let the inward mind confelse that the speache soundeth let the hart think Hitherto S. Ambrose who would not bid the people thinke that whiche the speache soundeth if the speache were figuratiue for a figuratiue speache soundeth otherwise then we ought to thinke thereof as when we say God is sory Christ is made synne the rok is Christ. As it was the custome of the primatiue Church for the people to say Amen straight vppon the consecration of the body and blood whereby they shewed them selues to beleue the wordes of Christ and the work of the Priest euen so was it also the custome that when the tyme of communion came as S. Clement and diâ—…erse others doe witnesse the Bishop should geue the oblation to the people saying â–ª Corpus Christi the body of Christ and he yâ— toke it should say Amen it is true And yâ— Deacon wheÌ„ he deliuered yâ— chalice did say sanguis Christi calix vitae â–ª yâ— blood of Christ yâ— chalice of life he that drank said Amen so it is or that is true To which custome being in vse at his tyme S. Ambrose alluding writeth thus Dicit tibi Sacerdos corpus Christi tu dicis amen hoc est verum quod confitetur lingua teneat affectus The Priest saith to thee the body of Christ and thou saiest Amen that is true that which thy tonge confesseth let thy hart kepe But what speake I of S. Ambrose Would the Apostles haue made all the people to cry amen to that which had not bene so as the word did sound Would they haue made the simple men to witâ—…esse their belefe to such words as neded a farther commeÌ„t or interpretation It is rather to be thought yea to be most assuredly beleued that they ordeined that custome to thend all men might know that the thing consecrated vppon the altar was in dede the body of Christ S. Augustine beareth witnesse to the same custome saying Habet magnam vocem Christi sanguis in terra cùm eo accepto ab omnibus gentibus respondetur Amen the blood of Christ hath a greate voice in earth when after it is taken all nations aunswere amen Haec est clara vox sanguinis quam sauguis ipse exprimit ex ore fidelium eodem sanguine redemptorum This is the cleere voice of the blood the which voice the blood it selfe forceth out of the mouth of the faithfull being redemed with the same blood Pope Leo the greate agreeth with S. Clement S. Ambrose and S. Augustine Sic sacrae mensae communicare debetis caeâ—… Ye ought so to communicate of the holy table that ye doubt nothing at all of the truth of the body and blood of Christe for yâ— thing is taken in the mouth which is beleued in faith And Amen is in vayne answered of them who dispute against that which is receaued This place declareth that some disputation was moued by some of the heresy of Manicheus who liued in Rome vnder Leo against the real presence of Christes body and blood vnder the forme of bread For seing the Maniches beleued not Christ to haue a true body at all they might well doubt of the truth of his body and blood in the Sacrament of the altar But that holy Bishop biddeth the people not doubt thereof shewing that we do not eate the body of Christ only by faith but also by mouth Now because Leo setteth the receauing of the truth of Christes body by mouth against the receauing thereof by faith only we may coniecture that heretikes euen in those days were of the mind that their ofspring is now of verily to draw as much truth from Christes works as may be and to set all things vpon faith spirit and vnderstanding But Leo proueth his doctrine by the generall custome of the whole Church â–ª wherein the people answering Amen did in open words witnesse them selues to beleue that it was true which the Priest sayd concerning the body of Christ. Now because some of them who vsed to say Amen disputed whether the substance and truth of Christes body were present in the mouthes of
and found a man in figure not in substance that is to say not in flesh Thus did the Marcionite reason out of the word of God it selfe to proue that Christ was not true man as M. Iuel now because the Fathers name the figure of the body would disproue the true body of Christ in the SacrameÌ„t But what answereth â—…rtullian Quasi non figura caet as though the figure and likenes and shape be not also ioyned to the substance So say we the figure whereof we dispute is ioyned to the substance of Christes body so that yâ— body signe of the breade make both but one perfite Sacrament or mysticall figure And that I will proue yet more plainly out of this very place of Tertullian who speaketh moste literally of bread as it was an old figure of Christes body whereof in Hieremie it was said let vs put the word of the â—…rosse into his bread to wit vpoÌ„ his body Christ theÌ„ fulfilling the old figures fecit panem corpus suum made the bread his body as Tertullian saith If he did so it could not tary bread any longer For as ayer being once made fier tarieth no more ayer so can not the bread whiche is made Christes body be any longer the substance of bread This grouÌ„d being put whiche is most true and it is expressed in Tertullian himselfe goe you forward and say this is the figure of my body as long as you wil yet the ground of that figure can not be the substance of bread sith it is made alredie the body of Christ and consequently the substance of Christe it selfe being made of the substance of bread and mystically conteined vnder the forme of bread is that figure of Christe him selfe walking visibly and suffering death where of Tertullian speaketh By this meane the worde is fastened into his bread as Hieremie said because his bread and his body is all one Iuel After consecration saith S. Ambrose the hody of Christ is signified San. S. Ambrose doth speake of that signification whiche is made whiles the Priest pronounceth Hoc est corpus meum this is my body Our Lord Iesus him selfe saith S. Ambrose crieth out this is my body Before the blessing of the heauenly wordes it is named an other kind after coÌ„secration the body is signified The which place wel vnderstaÌ„ded doth vtterly ouerthrow your figuratine opimon For S. Ambrose presseth vpon the signification óf these words this is my body and this is my blood The body saith he is signified the blood is named by mouth and this signification is made when Christ or his minister doth consecrate by these heauenly words Now immediatly before he said Quid dicimus de ipsa consecratione diuina vbi verba ipsa domini Saluatoris operantur What say we of the selfe consecration of God where the self words of yâ— Lord our Sauiour do work Now put together M. Iuel The words of our Sauiour do signify his body blood and yâ— selfe words doe worke verily them selues caÌ„ worke none other thing then they signifie therefore the wordes of our Sauiour which doe signifie Christes body and blood doe worke and make the same body and blood That is the signification whereof S. Ambrose speaketh The which his meaning when you dissemble you shew your selfe to be an enemie of the truthe Iu. I am oppressed with the multitude of witnesses San. As for these witnesses that say the Sacrament is a figure be no witnesses to your belefe because they proue your intent as well as if a man would proue by solenâ—…e witnesses that I had no soule because I hauc a body For whereas a Sacrament consisteth of two parts of an â—…uisible grace and of a visible signe whereas the inuisible grace of the Sacrament of Christes supper is the substance of his body made present to vnite vs to him and the visible signe thereof is the form of bread whosoeuer nameth that Sacrament a signe or a figure whether he meane both the grace and the signe or the signe alone certeinly he nâ—…er meaneth to deny the substaâ—…ciall presence of Christes body which is the chefe part of the same Sacrament Iu. It is a bondage and death of the soule saith S. Augustine to take the signe in steede of the things signified San. It is more a miserable bondage and death to exponud the things them selues for the signes as you doe S. Augustine meaneth of such a kind of signes when â—…ither the thing that appeareth to be signified is not at all true according to the letter as when God is said to be angrie or to repent or els wheÌ„ the thing signified is absent in substance as it was in the old sacrifices which yet the Iewes estemed as if they had bene the truth As therefore he that being athirst if he come to the yuie bush it selfe goe no further he should thereby neuer the more be filled with drincke so if a man come to an vnproper or to a bare signe he is miserably deceaued as those are who come to you for holy orders who were not your selues laufully ordeined Bishopes But as if a glasse of wine staÌ„d in the window to signifie what kind of wine is to be sold he that cometh to that signe may quenche his thirst because the substance whiche is signified to be sold is also there conteined so he that cometh to yâ— holy signes instituted by Christ he shal haue the truth of the signe really present and really geuen to him He that commeth to baptime is in dede borne by the vertue of that Sacrament and â—…e that commeth to our Lordes table shall â—…ate by his mouth therein the bread of life really present ¶ That the supper of Christe is a naked and bare figure according to the doctrine of the Sacramentaries HArding The Sacramentaries hold opinion that the body of Christ is in the Sacrament but in a figure signe or token only Iuel M. Harding vniustly reporteth of vs. San. I must say to you in this case M. Iuel as S. 〈◊〉 said to the Arrians who called Christ Dominum the Lord but yet denied him to be God Dominum licet nuncupes dominum tamen esse non dicis quia tibi ex communi genere potius familiari nomine quâm ex natura sit Dominus Albeit you name him Lorde yet you meane him not to be the Lorde Because he is a Lord to you rather by a commoÌ„ kind and a familiar name then by nature Euen so pretend what honorable opinion or doctrine you list of Christes supper as long as by nature and substance you thinke not that externall gift to be his body which him selfe called so you rather 〈◊〉 it by a better name then meane it to be any better thing then a bare signe and figure Ebion although he denied Christes Godhead yet as Epiphanius telleth he
Augustine when he sayeth He will not geue his body in that maner as you thinke As who should say he will geue it one way but not that way as you Capharnaites imagine He will not geue a shoulder to one and a leg to an other But the supper sheweth the maner of the geuing Where bread was taken and after blessing and the words pronounced Christes body was geuen to the mouthes of the Apostles Iuel This is the table for Egles and not for Iayes sayth Chrysostom San. I haue answered your iangling talk of Iayes in my iâ—… booke the. xxviâ—… Chapiter And haue turâ—…ed it vppon your own head Iuel S. 〈◊〉 let vs goe vp with the Lord into heauen into that greatparlar and receaue of him aboue the cup of the new â—…estament â–ª San. Certein men had imagined that Christ should reign corporally in earth a thousand yeres together drinke a new kind of wine who grounded their heresie vpon these words of Christ I say vnto you I will not drinke from hencefoorth of this frute of the vine vntill the day when I will drink it new with you in the Kingdome of my Father S. Hierom calling that 〈◊〉 Iudaicas fabulas Iewish tales therwith declareth what kind of wine we must drink in the Kingdome of God which is the Church saying Si ergo panis qui de coelo caet If then the bread which came down from heauen be the body of our Lord and the wine which he gaue to the Disciples be his blood of the new Testament which is shed for many for the remission of synnes let vs repell Iewish fables let vs ascend with our Lord vnto yâ— great parlar spread and made cleane and let vs take of him aboue the cup of the new Testament Hitherto S. Hierom. whose authâ—… ritie M. Iuel hath abused diuerse ways First you adde to S. Hierom these two words into heauen without cause For it folowed in S. Hierom whither we should ascend coenaculum magnum vnto the great parlar there to take of Christ the blooâ—… of the new Testament aboue that is to say not in the stalenes of the letter but in the newnes of the spirit as it foloweth afterward And yet againe more plainly in regno Ecclesiae in the Kingdome of the Church And last of all Impleamus opus eius Christus nobiscum bibet in regno Ecclesiae sanguinem suum Let vs fulfill his work and Christ will drinke with vs in the Kingdome of the Church his blood Thus it is plaiue that S. Hierome spake not of going into heauen by faith to drink the cup of the new Testament but oâ—… going vp into the great parlar which is the Church and Kingdome of God S. Hierom alluded to the Historie of Christes last supper which was kept in a parlar spread and strawed as it is thought in the mount Syon Let vs goe thither sayth S. Hierom there let vs receane the new wine whereof Christ spake S. Chrysostom also alluded to the same parlar saying yâ— Christ maketh this supper which now his Priests doe consecrate as well as he made that wherein he deliuered his owne banket Hoc est illud coenaculum caet This is that parlar wherein Christ was then with his Disciples Hence he went to yâ— mount of Oliues â–ª which sith it is so it was very euill done of M. Iuel to diuide the verb from his accusatiue case and to put an other â—…oun betwene against all reason grammar and honestie S. Hierom sayd ascendamus cum Domino coenaculum 〈◊〉 vs goe vp with our Lord to the parlar M. Iuel putteth the noun in coelum into heauen betwene As if when a man sayd let vs goe vp to the chamber he wold put an other word beâ—… and say let vs goe vp into the sliple into that chamber For after he had conueyed into S. Hierom his words into heâ—… uen he secondly turned coenaculum that parlar where is that in S. Hierom M. Iuel That was of your putting in to make vs beleue that heauen is the parlar whereof S. Hierom spake Thirdly M. Iuel left out these â–ª words which went immediatly before and shew in what respect S. Hierom spake of going vp Iudaicas fabulas repellamus Let vs put away Iewish fables and so let vs goc vp with our Lord to the great parlar by keping that which Christ instituted and by leauing other fables Fourthly whereas in the same very question it foloweth that not Moyses but our Lord Iesus gaue vs the true bread himself eating and being he that is eaten How can M. Iuel find in his hart to allege this place of S. Hierom against the reall presence For how is our bread more true then the bread of Moyses if at Christes supper we must goe vp into heauen to eate it Might not Moyses eating Manna doe the same How is Christ the maker of the feast and the meate it selfe if common bread be eaten and not his flesh Is common bread the maker of the feast If not the maker of the seast neither is it the meate for al is one saith S. Hierom. Iuel Cyrillus saith our Sacrament anoucheth not the eating of a man leauing the minds of the vnfaithfull in vngodly maner to grosse or flesh cogitations Sand. A man would scant beleue how wickedly this place is abused First these are not the words of S. Cyrill â–ª next he neuer meaÌ„t not so much as by dreame any such thing as M. Iuel doth father vppon him His own words are spoken vpon such occasion Nestorius the Heretike sayd that Christ had two persons and that his â—…hod was not â—…nited 〈◊〉 one person to the sonne of God Against whom S. Cyrill saith in that place proprium â—…orpus dicimus factum esse verbi non hominis alicuius seorsum separatim we say the body of Christ to be made proper of the word that is to say to be the words own body and not to be the body of any man apart or separated Nestorius replied out of Christes words He that eateth my flesh tarieth in me what eate we sayd the heretike the Godhead or the flesh meaning therby to conclude that seing the Godhead can not be eaten with our mouth yet the flesh was really eaten that there was one person of the Godhead an other of the flesh Cyrillus answereth Doest thou then affirm that there is an other sonne and Christ besyde the word coming from God the which hath appered to whoÌ„ alone the matter of Apostleship may be coÌ„mitted Now follow yâ— words corrupted by M. Iuel Num hominis comestionem nostrum hoc sacramentuÌ„ pronuncias doest thou pronounce this our Sacrament to be the eating of a man M. Iuel turneth these words as though S. Cyrillus had set foorth a doctrine of his own without any respect to the heresie of Nestorius but the
The supper of our Lord SET FOORTH ACCORding to the truth of the Gospell and Catholike faith By Nicolas Saunder Doctor of Diuinitie with a confutation of such false doctrine as the Apologie of the Churche of England M. Nowels chalenge or M. Iuels Replie haue vttered touching the reall presence of Christe in the Sacrament MANHV What is this The figure Exod. 16. This is the bread which our Lord hath geuen you to eate The prophecie Prouerb 9. Come eate my bread drink that wine which Ihaue mixed for you The promise Ioan. 6. The bread which I wil geue is my flesh for the life of the world The performance Matt. 26. Luc. 22. He gaue sayiÌ„g take eate this is my body which is geueÌ„ for you The doctrine of the Apostles 1. Cor. 10. The bread which we break is the coÌ„municatiÌ„g of our Lords body The belefe of the Church Hilar. lib. 8. de Trinit Both our Lord hath professed we beleue it to be flesh in dede The custome of Heretiks Tertul. de Resur car The contrarie part reiseth vp trouble by presence of figures LOVANII Anno domini 1566. CVm Regiae Maiestatis priuilegio sub 20. mâ—…sis Augusti anni 1565. permissum esset Nicolao Saundero Anglo sacrae Theologiae Doctori vt 〈◊〉 in scriptum The supper of our Lord set forth according to the truth of the Gospel c. imprimere posset posteaquà m prodiisset liber quidaÌ„ a duersus CatholicaÌ„ fideÌ„ quâ—…m D. Nicolaus defendisset anglicè conscriptus quem etiam confutandum sumpsit renouato Priuilegio concessum est eidem Nicolao vt ei vnâ cum confutatione contrariae doctrinae suum librum typis mandare ac impunè distrahere liceat Datum Bruxellis 22. Decembris Anno Christi 1565. S. de la Torre Approbatio sex priorum librorum AVthor ipse huius voluminis Nicolaus SauÌ„der sacrae Theologiae Professor eius est apud nos fidei vt sine aliquo metu tutò posset euulgari estque praeterà à multis Anglici idiomatis sacrae Theologiae peritissimis perlectum qui illud meritò plurimum coÌ„mendarunt Cunerus Petri Pastor Sancti Petri Louanâ—… 7. August Anno. 1565. TO THE BODY AND BLOOD OF ouâ—… Sauiour Iesus Christ vnder the foormes of bread and wyne all honour praisc and thanks be geuen for â—…uer IF he that mainteneth a right good cause yet partly for feare of the deceits and suttiltie of his aduersaries partly for mistrust of his own knowledge and memoric dare not appere in iudgement without his aduocate or proâ—…tour with 〈◊〉 seing yâ— sending foorth of a booke into yâ— light of yâ— world is yâ— dangering to haue it suÌ„moned to so manie courts as it shal be brought into howses yâ— appering before so manie iudges as be readers thereof what aduocat and proctour yea rather what Doctor and Patrone am I constrayned to seek who do not only set foorth mie book to be readen of whatsoeuer English man but also write of suche a matter as being of most weight is most diligently examined in these our dayes and wherein I am sure to find as wel the Lutherans as the Zuinglians though vtterly dissagreing betwene themselues yet against me not only agreing to be seuere iudges in the reading but also to be cruel aduersaries in their iudgement Which seing it is so let noman wonder that I not mistrusting anie whit the vniuersal cause of the Catholiks but misdoubting mine own wit and the shamelesse shifts of our aduersaries haue chosen to dedicate this work to yâ— mysteri of thy glorious body and blood Lord Iesu Christ to 〈◊〉 those that now take vpon them to misiudge yâ— manifest effectuall words of thy blessing and thanksgeuing pronounced by thâ—…o in thy last supper making a figuratiue speache of a proper and whereas thy true body and blood itself worthie of all honour is through thy godhead made really present teaching not withstanding for their parte the substance of bread and wine still to remain and therefore an idol to be falsely â—…et vp and worshipped by the Catholiks to th'inteâ—…t I saie those false teachers maie either through thy grace be conuerted from thâ—…r misbelefe whereof I most humbly beseche the or els if they wil stubbâ—…nly persist in their detestable opinion maie euen presently be confounded with the maiestie of thy name whose glorie they oppâ—…gne For what can be more dishonorable to thy goodnes then if it maie be truly reported that the wisedome of god did institute his chief Sacrament in such words the which either being true and not beleued should bâ—…rden our consciences with infidelitie or being earnestly beleued and yet not conceaâ—…ed in proper speache should bring vs into manifest daâ—…nger of idolatrie sith no faithfull man beleuing this to be thy body as thou hast said it is can abâ—…teine from the singular worshipping of that singular fotestole of God Now soeuer it be with other men I adore thee my God and lord really present vnder the formes of bread and wine after cousecration dewly made Beseeching thee of pardoÌ„ for my synnes by the same propitiatorie sacrifice of thy body and blood which being made once with bloodsheding vpon the crosse causeth the fruits therof to be daily applied in that cleane and vnbloody sacrifice of the masse To this great mysterie of thy real presence I dedicate these my paines as to the most vndoubted fountain cause and supporter of them In this faith I was baptized and made a member of thy mystical body in the hope to mainteine this 〈◊〉 miâ—… parents and frinds did set me to schole in the vehement loue and affection thereof I haue written this rude and simple work And to whom should I refer the praise and thanks for it but vnto the alone Or of whom shuld I craue the protection thereof but of thee seing thou only art a meet patrone for the defence of any booke which only art alwaies present wheresoeuer and whensoeuer it shal be examined To the honour therefore of thy body and blood I offer this poore mite of my simple vnderstanding thy mercifull gift whatsoeuer it be trusting thou wilt not suffer neither the truthe of thy gospel to be long vnrestored in the desolate I le of pitifull England nor me thy poore seruant through 〈◊〉 or naughty liuing to perish euerlastinglie AMEN The Contentes of the first Booke 1. The preface to the Reader 2. Notes concerning the translation of holy scripture in this argument 3. The state of the question 4. What the supper of our lords is according to the belefe of the Catholiks 5. What it is according to the doctrine of our aduersaries 6. A speciall errour of Caluin concerning the vvords of Christes supper is confuted The preface to the Christian Reader WHo so will auoyd the danger of pride of schisme and of hearesie he hath no greater helpe therevnto in this world then to mystrust his owne iudgement and to followe the authoritie of greater wisdome
wil stand sound when Caluin and all his scholars be out of memorie This practise did the Apostles leaue to their successours and scholars as Iustinus the Martyr Ireneus and Eusebiâ—…s witnesse Now consyder what an intolerable spirit of arrogancy was in Caluin who dareth oppose him self against the first hundred yeres after Christ. He dareth affirm that all the Priests and Bisshops of Rome before 〈◊〉 committed an abuse in sending the Eucharist to strangers That all Asia and Brece committed an abuse in sending the Eucharist by Deacons to men that were absent who heard not the words of promise If thou looke to be saued good Reader beware of that arrogant spirit Learning thou shalt not find in Caluin and much lesse honesty Only he hath a sort of smothe words which are poy soned with pride and ignorance If any of his scholars wil take vpon him to defend his errour I wil by Gods grace discouer more ignorance of that arrogant Master of theirs In the meane tyme I wil content my self with these reasons which I haue presently brought against him out of the word of God and out of the sayings and doings of the whole primatiue Churche ¶ The preface of the second Booke FOr so muche as contraric things one being set against the other are both made the more clere and plaine it semed best I should not only confirme the Catholike faith but also con fute the contrarie doctrine which is allowed for good and laudable in the Apologie of the Church of England to thâ—… intent the Reader might iudge whether the Catholikes or Protestauts doe more oftallege more syncerely interprete and more throughly beleue the word of God I feare me he shal find nothing beside the name of the gospell to be among the ProtestaÌ„ts But the true meaning and vse thereof only to remain in that Catholike Church of Christ. Let the thing it self speake I aske but an vpright and indifferent iudge Neither let any man be now shamed to heare that his new chosen opinion is a great deale worse then his old faith was For if he blushed not to forsake the faith of the Catholike Church vowed at the fonte of Baptism and to embrace a truthe lately espied as he thought in the gospell Muche lesse ought he to accompt it any reproche to reade further in the same gospell and there to lern his old profession made at the tyme of his Christendom to haue bene not only the receaued belefe of all Christians but also to haue bene grounded in the true word of God and practised of the Apostles and their Successours from the beginning The Chapiters of the second Booke 1. The Catholiks require their cause to be vprightly tried by the holy scriptures which they haue alwayes studied aud reuerenced 2. It is proued by the word of God that euill men receaue the body of Christ in his supper 3. The auncient Fathers teache that euill men receaue truly the body of Christ. 4. What is the true deliuerance of Christes body and blood 5. What it is which nourisheth vs in the supp of Christ. 6. The reall presence is proued by the vnion which is consessed to be made in the supper of Christ. 7. That the Apologie speaking of the Lords supper goeth cleane from the word of God 8. That S. Ambrose and S. Augustine taught more then two Sacraments 9. That the supper of our Lord is the chief Sacrament of all but not acknouledged of the Apologie according to the word of God 10. That the supper of our Lord is both the signe of Christes body and also his true body euen as it is a Sacrament 11. What signe must cheifly be respected in the SacrameÌ„t of Christes supper what a Sacrament is 12. Which argument is more agreable to the word of God It is a token of the body made by Christ and therefore not the body or els therefore the true body of Christ. 13. The words of Christes supper are not figuratiue nor his token a common kind of token 14. That the supper of our Lord is no Sacrament at all if these words of Christ This is my body and this is my blood be figuratiue 15. There all presence of Christes body is that which setteth his death and life before vs. 16. Our thanksgeuing and remembrance of Christes death is altogether by the reall presence of his body 17. The true resurrection of our bodyes cometh by eating that body of Christ which is bothe true and truly in vs. 18. Nothing is wrought in the supper of Christ according to the doctrine of the Sacramentaries 19. The reall presence of Christes flesh is proued by the expresse naming of flesh blood and body which are names of his humane nature 20. It is a cold supper which the Sacramentaries assigne to Christ in comparison of his true supper 21. By eating we touche the body of Christ as it maye be touched vnder the form of bread 22. The Sacramentaries haue neither vnderstanding nor faith nor spirit nor deuotion to receaue Christ withall 23. The reall presence of Christes body is proued by the confession of the Apologie 24. The contrariety of the apologie is shewed and that the lifting vp of our harts to heauen is no good cause why we should lift the body of Christ from the altar 25. What be grosse imaginations concerning the supper of Christ. 26. What the first Councell of Nice hath taught concerning Christes supper 27. That the Catholiks haue the table of Egles and the Sacramentaries the table of Iayes 28. The bread which is the meate of the mind and not of the belly can be no wheaten bread but only the bread of life which is the body of Christ. 29. Sacramentall eating differeth from eating by faith alone whereof only S. Augustine speaketh in the place alleged by the Apologie ¶ The Catholikes require their cause to be vprightlye tried by the holy Scriptures which they haue alwayes studied and reuerenced THe Apologie of the Church of England boasting it self partly of the word of God partly of the primatiue Church requireth that we call the new gospellers no more by the name of heretykes neither accompt our selues hereafter Catholikes except we coâ—…ince them out of the holy Scriptures as the old Catholike Fathers did vse to conuince the old stubburne heretikes If we be heretikes saith the Apologie they as they would gladly be called be Catholikes why do they not as they see the Fathers which were Catholike men haue done alwayes Why do they not conuince and maister vs by the diâ—…e Scriptures Why do they not call vs againe to be tried by them Why do they not lay before vs how we haue gone away from Christ From the Prophets From the Apostles and from the holy Fathers Why sticke they to do it Why are they afrayed of it It is Gods cause why doubt they to commit it to the triall of Gods word To this proude bragge of the Apologie thus I answere To
the holy scriptures and to the holy Fathers ye haue appealed By the holy Scriptures and Fathers your doctrine shal be tried â–ª The Catholikes neuer feared to be tried by the holy Scriptures but they alwayes feared to abuse them For we yâ— know in dede what holy Scripture is are so carefull how to behaue ourselues reuerently and semely about the same that we lightly vse not to allege any part thereof to proue any rare and harde matter vnlesse we shew some auncient Fathers or Councell to haue expounded that peece of Scripture before vs in suche sorte sense as we by the witnes thereof desyre to persuade and confirme But otherwise the Catholikes neuer refused the triall of the â—…oly Scriptures as yâ— which they alwayes both studied loued Do not the writings of S. Beruard in manner wholy consist of continuall testimonies taken out of holy Scripture Did not Petâ—…â—…ombardus lernedly comment the Psalmes the Episâ—…s of S. Paule and other parcels of Gods word â–ª Did not S. Thomas of Aquin write so vpoÌ„ Iob Esaias Ieremias S. Mathew S. Iohn S. Paule the Canonicall epistles and the Apocalips that he vseth to expound one hard place by an other as nighe as thâ—… thing will suffer Did not Nicolaus de Lyra Dionysius the Carthusian Paulus Burgensis Caietanus the Cardinall with diuerse other expound the whole Bible or make notes vpon it wold they haue don so except they had ben specially delighted with the word of God More ouer when heresies arose in our dayes Did not Contarenus Sadoletus Polus â—…osius 〈◊〉 Gropper Tapper Eckius Pighius Petrus and Dominicus of Soto Miranda Uillegagnon Ioannes a Louanio with diuerse other coâ—…ince those heresies by the holy Scriptures and Fathers And yet as though we brought nothing at all for defence of the Catholike faith out of the word of God or primitiue Churche so dothe the penner of this Apologie more to his discredite then to ours falsely and vnhonestly reporte But now to shew the better his falsehood and dishonestie I thought good for my part to set soorth such holy Scriptures and suche witnesses of the primitiue Churche as plainly confirme the Catholike belefe concerning the chefe matter which at this day is in controuerâ—…e betwixt vs and them The chefe question is about the blessed Sacrament of the altar Our belefe is that after consecration duely made the body blood of Christ is really present vnder the formes of bread and wine The Apologie teacheth other wise as now it shall appeare But whereas there are many questions in this behalfe as of the reall presence of transubstantiation of the sacrifice of the masse of communion vnder one kind of receauing alone of râ—…tion of the Sacrament and of suche other I will beginne 〈◊〉 with the matter of reall presence which iâ—… the grounde of all the rest not despayring to haue at other tymes more leasure to handle also the other questions So much therefore as in the Apologie belongeth to the reall presence of Christes body and blood in the Sacrament of the altar I will faithfully set foorth and trie the truth of that doctrine by Gods word and by the holy Fathers Neither let any man be offended yf I seme to kepe no good order in so much as I make no new methode of myne owne but follow the order of the Apologie which sodenly and abruptly thus intreth in to yâ— question ¶ It is proued by the word of God that euill men receaue the body of Christ in his supper WE do expresly pronounce that in the supper vnto suche as beleue there is truly geuen the body and blood of the Lord. This doctrine being called to yâ— word of God to yâ— iudgement of holy Fathers for his triall will appere false forged Because the holy scripture teacheth the body and blood of Christ to be truly delyuered not only to such as do beleue but euen to wicked men who in their workes haue deuied their faith howsoeuer they kepe it or geue it ouer in hart Iudas one whole yere before the last supper was called a deâ—…ll for so much as Christ knew that he wold betray and sell him vnto yâ— Iewes Which it is not to be thought that Iudas wold haue don if he had bene of the true belefe that Christ was the Sonne of God God him self And yet the body and blood of Christ was truly deliuered vnto him Who although he had beleued the diuine power of Christ yet he had not beleued as we now take beleuing for the fulfilling and perfoorming of all that which belongeth to the state and lawe of the new Testament According as it is written Vt omnis qui credit in eum non pereat sed habeat vitam aeternam That euery man which beleueth in him may not perish but haue euerlasting life Such a belefe workiâ—…g by charitie Iudas had not And yet he receaued the body and blood of Christ. For albeit some auncient Fathers thought that Iudas went out before the supper of Christ yet farre the greater part teache otherwise And it is much more agreable to the word of God How proue I that S. Mark writeth that Christ came with the twelue S. Mathew sayeth Christ sate down with the twelue and whiles they were eating he gaue his body and blood S. Luke agreeth vpon the very same number and vpon the same gift Among the twelue Iudas is rekoned in S. Mathew S. Mark S. Luke and S. Iohn And whiles they were at supper which they besyde the twelue Iesus tooke bread and blessed and gaue thanks and brake and gaue to them To which them I pray you but vnto the twelue that came with him and sate with him to yâ— twelue therefore he gaue and said Take eate this is my body And taking the chalice he gaue thanks and gaue them saying Drinke ye all of this for this is my blood of the new Testament Which is or shal be shed â—…or the remission of synnes Et biberunt ex illo omnes And all drank of it Which all if not the twelue Iudas therefore being one of the twelue had the body blood of Christ deliuered to him For Christ said Take eate and drinke ye all of this And as they dranke all so is there no doubt but they all did take and eate therefore Iudas tooke that which Christ deliuered But Christ witnessed himselfe to deliuer his owne body saying Take and eate this is my body And drink ye all of this for this is my blood Therefore the body and blood of Christ was deliuered vnto Iudas And sith Iudas did not beleue the body and blood of Christ was truely delyuered to some such as did not beleue We nowe call these defenders to be tried by the holy Scriptures We make it appere yâ— they haue seuered them selues from Christ from the Prophetes from the Apostles we stagger not we flee not it is Gods
cause we doubt not to commit it to Gods word And that no man maie suspect we take the words of the Apologie to short that we expound them to hardly that we seeke aduantage vpon small occasion I will bring foorth their owne words which they haue more fully writen in an other place of the same Apologie concerning this matter We do affirme with the most auncient Fathers that the body of Christ is eaten of none other but of godly and of faithfull men and such as are endued with the spirite of Christ. These felowes do teach that the very body of Christ maie in very dede and as they terme it really and substantially be eaten not only of wicked and vnfaithfull men but also it is horrible to speake it of mise and dogges Whether mise and dogges maie in some sense eate the body of Christ or no it is not worth while to discusse for so much as the Catholikes kepe the body of Christ so warely that neither mouse nor dogge maie come nigh to it But as yâ— Arrians threw downe the body and blood of Christ and trod thereon with their filthie feete and as the Donatists brake the chalices which as Optatus saith caried the blood of Christ so the Sacramentaries of England haue taken out of the holy pixes and troden vnder their prophane fecte the blessed body of Christ they haue sold broken and abused to filthy ministeries the chalices which haue holden Christes blood If the wicked men be able to pollute to tread on and to defile as much as lieth in them the body of Christ A thinke that to be worse then if mise and dogges did eate it Not that the immortall body of Christ can take any harme at all But yet a terrible damnation is reserued to them who being able to do it no hurte shewe not withstanding their vnsatiable malice against the highest mysterie of our redemption tredding vnder foote the sonne of God counting the blood of the new testament prophane and vnholy Leauing therefore this question we returne to the principall matter coÌ„fessing our selues to teache that the wâ—…ked men â—…ate in dede really the body of Christ in our Lords supper Thus we teach not only because the greater part of the Fathers haue deliuered so vnto vs but also because thus we learned of Christ. Who after bread taken hauing blessed gaue to Iudas one of the twelue bidding him take eate saying This is my body A worse man then Iudas I think is not lightly heard of Which amoÌ„g other things causeth vs to beleue that be the man neuer so euill yet if he take and eate after consecration and benediction he taketh and eateth really and in dede the body of Christ. Which vnworthy receauing of so precious a thing although it mislike Christ as all synne doth yet as he permitteth synne for the goodnes which he worketh by the occasion thereof so he thought it lesse euill that euil men should eate his body then that his Sacraments by any our infidelity should be made void or that the gift of his grace should be vncertaine For Christ in the institution of his SacrameÌ„ts dependeth not vpon our faith or vertue but vpon his owne mercy and truth Wherefore when so euer by a lawfull Priest intending to execute the ministerie commaunded by Christ it is dâ—…ely sayd ouer bread and wine This is my body and This is my blood Christ would it so to be as the wordes declare and who so euer receaueth that kind of food receaueth the body of Christ. whether well or â—…uill that dependeth vpon his worthy or vnworthy eating If any man eate vnworthely then will Christ complaine of him as he coÌ„plained of Iudas For straight after the deliuery of the blood he sayd as S. Luke doth witnesse and S. Augustine hath noted the same to pertaine to the Sacrament Veruntamen ecce manus tradentis me mecum est in mensa But yet see yâ— hand of him yâ— betrayeth me is with me on the table As if he had sayd You see what loue I shewe to you by geuing mine owne body to be eaten mine owne blood to be drunken in this my last supper this only greueth me that a very deuill doth eate drinke these preciouse giftes together with me and you Except our new brethren will say Iudas to haue bene a good faithfull man I see not but they must coÌ„fesse that euill men may haue the body and blood of Christ deliuered to them Which thing S. Paul most euidently confirmeth of all euill Christians saying Therefore who so euer shall eate this bread or drinke the chalice of our Lord vnworthely he shall be gilty of the body and blood of our Lord. Doth not he that speaketh of vn worthy eating coÌ„fesse a true eating True I say in nature of the thing eaten but vnworthy coÌ„cerning the effect of grace ensewing And yet doe not euill men who receaue the body of Christ vnworthely eate really the same body It is written in the booke of the Machabees that King Antiochus hauing slaine foure score thousand within three dayes entred also into the holy Temple Et scelestis manibus sumens sancta vasa contrectabat indigne contaminabat And taking in his wicked hands the holy vessels he handled or touched them vnworthely and defiled them I aske whether it doth not folow Antiochus touched vnworthely the holy vessels therefore he tou ched the holy vessels If that argument be good it is like to say an euil man doth eate the body of Christ vnworthely therefore he doth eate yâ— body of Christ. Or did not Adam and 〈◊〉 eate of the â—…uit of the tree because they did eate the same against the commaundement of God For these defenders seme to make an vnworthy eating no eating Whereas if it were no eating it were not an vnworthy eating Perhaps they wil say S. Paul writeth not that synners wicked men eate the body of Christ vnworthely but that they eate this bread vnworthely Uerily S. Paul speaketh not of bakers bread in yâ— place But hauing shewed that Christ taking bread after thanks geuen sayd This is my body straight he inferreth that as often as this bread is eaten the death of Christ is shewed therefore who so eateth this bread vnworthely he shal be gilty of the body of our Lord. This bread is one certayn kinde of meate or foode for so bread in the holy scripture doth signifie which food before was declared to be the body of Christ. And S. Paul doth so warely describe this kind of bread that he putteth both an article and a pronoune to it saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As if it were said in English who so eateth vnworthely this certayn kinde of bread For so the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 betokeneth â—… certayn bread spoken of before But then foloweth besides 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which most vehemently restraineth that certayn bread
Christ are his members which are incorporated by grace ioyned to him being their head This incorporation is wrought by the grace of baptisme in one degrâ—… and finisâ—…ed by the Sacrament of the altar in a higher degree whereof we shall speake hereafter more at large The naturall body of Christis that which he tooke of the virgine and gaue to death for vs. Now Christ in his last supper gaue yâ— substaÌ„ce of his natural body to be â—…aten of his disciples to th' intent they should be made one mysticall body euen by eating his flesh blood Seing then the naturall body of Christ is geuen to thâ—…end we maie be nerer knitte in the mysticall body according as S. Paul sayeth The bread which we breake is the communicating of our Lords body because we being many are one bread one body all that partake of one bread Seing I say we communicate the natural body to be made a mystical body in a greater vnitie then we had in baptisme any man of discretion may perceaue that in som sense euill men receaue not the thing or the effect of the body of Christ vnderstanding by the effect of body the vnitie of the mysti call body the obteining whereof is the end of the eating Which vnitie S. Augustine somtime calleth Rem ipsam The thing it selfe that is to say the last effect and benefite which ariseth to vs by worthy eating of the Sacrament of the altar After which sort S. Augustin saieth euill men are not to be said to eate the body of Christ adding therevnto this reason QuoniaÌ„ nec in membris computandi sunt Christi Because they are not to be rekoned among the membres of Christ. So that euil men eate the substance of the naturall body but not the thing for which that substance was geuen which is the vnite of the body mysticall because they eate not worthely Whereas worthy eating only maketh them to obteyne the vnitie of the mysticall body which is to abide in Christ and to haue Christ abiding in them Therefore S. Augustine him selfe sayeth Non quocunque modo quisquà m manducauerit carnem Christi biberit sanguinem Christi manet in Christo in illo Christus sed certo quodam modo Not how so euer a man eateth the flesh of Christ and drinketh the blood of Christ he abideth in Christ and Christ in him but by a certain kind of way As though S. Augustine sayd Euery waye the flesh and blood of Christ is receaued in the supper of our Lord But not euery way it is so receaued that we maye dwell in Christ and Christ in vs. S. Bregorse saith by euell men Salutis fructuÌ„ non percipiunt in comestione salutaris hostiae They receaue not yâ— fruit of saluation in yâ— eating of yâ— healthful sacrifice They eate yâ— healthfull sacrifice which surely is nothing els but the naturall body of Christ but the fruit they receaue not as many men take an healthfull medicine but because their bodies be euil affected it proueth not healthfull to them S. Bede coÌ„pareth him to Iudas who with his sinfull members presumeth to violate Illud inestimabile inuiolabile Domini corpus That inestimable and inuiolable body of our Lord. And how could he violate it with his members if with no part of his body he touched it I omit Arnobius vpon that Psalm 74. S. Ambrose Theodorite Decumenius Haimo Theophilact Anselme vpon S. Paule who agree with the rest of the Fathers that there is in euery mysterie the substance of the SacrameÌ„t and the effect thereof As well the euill as the good receaue the substance which in our Lords supper is the body and blood of Christ. But only the good receaue th' effect Which is the grace of spirituall nourishment to life euerlasting and the vnion with Christ. Now as we haue shewed by the holy Scriptures euen so haue we proued out of the holy Fathers that euell men recâ—…aue the body and blood of Christ as really as the purple is one still whether it be spotted or cutt as really as one meate is eaten of some to their hurte of others to their helth as really as good and euill Iewes had all one measure of Manna but not all one swetenes in yeâ—…ast thereof as really as Iudas did kisse trayterously the same body of Christ which him self as all euill men trayterously receaued at Christes supper If nowe the Apologie hath neither Scriptures nor Fathers it maie leaue those boasting vpbraidinges as though the Catholikes fled the triaâ—… of bâ—…th Scriptures and Fathers It is Gods cause we haue committed it to Gods word The Fathers when they agree in anie one article are knowen to haue yâ— spirite of Christ and they beare witnesse that we haue rightly expouÌ„ded the holy scriptures He that listeth to see more of the same argument 〈◊〉 read that which I haue writen vpon that saying of S. Paule He that eateth this bread vnworthely shal be gilty of the body and blood of our Lord. ¶ What is the true deliuerance of Christes body and blood IN the supper there is truly deliuered the body and blood of the Lord the flesh of the soÌ„ne of God quickening our soules The food of immortalitie grace truth life In these words no euil doctrine is conteined but all sound and Catholike In so much a man wold woÌ„der to what purpose these things are now brought being extreme contrary to yâ— which the Caluinists defend saing they wold seme to speake as the holy scriptures and primitiue Churche hath spoken Seing therefore these words conteine true doctrine I wil reason briefly out of them against their opinion that wrote them You say The body and blood of the Lord is truly deliuered in the suâ—…per If it be so it is truly present And seing none other thing can be warrauted to haue bene deliuered in the supper besyde that which Christ gaue with his own hands which semed bread whereof he sayd This is my body and besyde that which semed wine where of he sayd This is my blood by the doctrine of the Apologie it will folow that Chrisâ—…es body was deliuered truly vnder that which semed bread and his blood was deliuered truly vnder that which semed wine Or tell me Can 〈◊〉 any man proue out of the word of God that any other thing was deliuered in the supper of Christ besyde two kinds the one being bread vntill Christ had sayd This is my body The other being the cup of wine vntill Christ had sayd This is my blood Is there mention made of any other thing truly exhibited offered or deliuered to the Apostles Or doth the supper of Christ consist of fower kinds of bread body of wine and blood In what gospell reade we of bread and wine deliuered Bread and wine were takeÌ„ but body and blood were only deliuered For Christ sayd Take this is my body Drinke this is my
cause thereof We are coupled to Christ by eating that flesh of his which he deliuereth to vs. But Christ deliuereth it not only spiritually but also with his hands saying Take eate this is my body As therefore yâ— deliuery is real and not only spirituall so is the eating reall and the coupling reall I haue proued this thing in other places folowing Here it is 〈◊〉 to say this much against the bare words of the Apologie ¶ That the Apologie speaking of the Lords supper goeth cleane from the word of God VVE do acknowledge the Eucharist or the Lordes supper to be a Sacrament yâ— is to say an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the body and blood of Christ. Besides the former vaâ—…t of the word of God already brought foorth to the reproche of the Catholikes also the Apologie aâ—…tle before these words witnessed that yâ— auctours abâ—…tours thereof gaue thanks to God for the light of the Gospel raysed to them which they might allwayes haue before theyr eyes as a moste certayne rule to which all doctrine of yâ— Church ought to be called for his triall And within lesse than 〈◊〉 lines after the same Apologie cometh to denie our Lords supper calling it a Sacrament that is to say an 〈◊〉 token of the body and blood of Christ. What mâ—…ers Hauâ—… you in the holy Scriptures that the supper of our Lord is a Sacrament or a signe of yâ— body and blood of Christ From the beginning of 〈◊〉 to the later ende of tho â—…ocalips you finde â—…t our Lordes supper so called Christ in S. 〈◊〉 calleth it yâ— mâ—…e which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not but 〈◊〉 into lâ—…e 〈◊〉 He saieth yâ— bread which he will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he will 〈◊〉 â—…or yâ—â—…se of yâ— world He 〈◊〉 it the 〈◊〉 and the blood of the sonne of man meate in dede and drinke in dede his flesh and his blood the eating of him the bread which who so eateth shall liue for euer In S. Mathew and in S. Marke his body and his blood of the new testament In S. Luke his body whiche is geuen for vs and the chalice which is the newe testament in his blood which is shed for vs. In S. Paul the bread which we breake is the communicating of our Lords body the chalice of blessing which we blesse which is the coÌ„municating or partaking of Christes blood the one bread yâ— table of our Lord and the chalice of our Lord the body which is broken for vs the chalice which is the new Testament of his blood the eating of this bread and drinking of this chalice So many names are geuen in so many places of holy scripture to this blessed Sacrament and it being no where called a signe or token yet the Apologie which thanketh God for yâ— holy scriptures aâ—…d will trie all doctrine by them in the chief question of our age goeth quite from all holy scriptures and sayeth the Eucharist or the Lordes supper is an euident token of the body and blood of Christ. What is the matter that in wordes you make so much of holy scripture and in dede so litle What Apostle what Euangelist what Prophete or Patriarke taught our Lordes supper to be a signe or token S. Paul threateneth damnation to him who vnworthely eateth it and he calleth vnworthy eating not only the contempte thereof or lacke of faith but euen the omitting to proue or examine him selfe before he eate our Lords body And that because he maketh no difference betwixt it and common meates And come you with a new doctrine affirming that we receaue not our Lords body into our bodies but an euident signe and token thereof you 〈◊〉 no authoritie no rule no triall of matters belonging to faith but only the holy Scriptures and immediatly ye breake your owne rule in so much as the holy scriptures call the supper of our Lord his body and blood and you teach it to be an euident token of his body and blood If you kepe not your owne rule whom can you binde to kepe the â—…aine Ye will aske me perhaps whether the Lordes supper be not a Sacrament if a Sacrament then also a signe and token I aunswere ye that prescribe rules of beleuing to the world ye that wil haue all thinges iudged and proued by that touchestone of Gods worde ye that for pretense of folowing the gospell haue stirred vp so greate strife through all Christendome must not talke with vs with if with and with conditions and peraduentures But ye must bring forth the word of God for that ye say Although the supper of our Lord were neuer so much a Sacrament surely to you it were none because ye cannot proue out of the word of God where it is so named To vs it is both a Sacrament and a sacrifice A Sacrament because we are so taught by tradiction from the Apostles A sacrifice because Malachie the prophet in the person of God expressely saieth In omni loco sacrificatur offertur nomini meo oblatio munda â–ª quia magnum est nomen meum in geÌ„tibus In euery place a cleane oblation is sacrificed and offered to mie name because my name is greate amonge the gentils There is absolutely no pure and cleane oblation besides the sacrifice of Christes body and blood whiche was offered to death not in euery place but without the gate of Hierusalem alone and the same is at this daie vnbloodily offered in the masse in euerie place where so euer among the gentils the name of God is 〈◊〉 called vpon Thus both we and you maie proue the â—…upper of our Lord to be a sacrifice but that it is a 〈◊〉 â–ª we can proue because our forefathers delyuered such a doctrine to vs You can not proue the same seing you will not be bound to folow vnwritten traditions If you flee to the Church for naming it a SacrameÌ„t the church hathe seuen Sacramentes But ye in this present Apologie acknowledge only two properly to be rekoned vnder yâ— name for so many saie you do we find deliuered and sanctified by Christ and allowed of the olde fathers Ambrose and Augustine Concerning the deliuery of Sacraments by Christ ye might haue found in the word of God ConfirmatioÌ„ Actor 8. Penance IoaÌ„ 20. Extreme vnction Iacob 5. Priesthod Luk. 22. Matrimonie Eph. 5. And not only Baptim and the Eucharist But what kind of talk is this to say that S. Ambrose and S. Augustine allow that workes of Christ was not the deliuery and consecration of Christ of sufficâ—…ent autoritie except Ambrose and Augustine had approued it I thoâ—…ght Ambrose and Augustine should haue bene allowed by the scripture and not the scripture by them I stand with you vpon the autoritie of the word of God proue me thence that these two are Sacramentes alone yea proue that thei are so named at all what gospell calleth baptisme a Sacrament What holy write nameth
agreed for all scâ—…iptures call it the body and some doctours call it a signe But if these thinges can not both be true together awase with signes awaie with tokens let the worde of God be heard which saieth This is mâ—… body This is my blood Is it reason we obeie men or God If both stand in one degree men keping them selues vnder God let both be obeyed But if men draw from God he is more worth alone then all the men of the world What 〈◊〉 we now Will the sigâ—…e of the body and the body it selâ—…e stand together or no If not let the signe of the body which is not in scripture geue place let the body it selfe which is often times found there tarie still If the signe and the truth can not stand together the Sacramentaries must nedes be condemned who denie the truth which is in the scripture and preferre the signe before it which is not in the scripture If the signe truth doe both stand together yâ— Sacramentaries onlesse they repent be condemned because they denie the one part of yâ— twaine For they denie the true presence of Christs body and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine In what case stand these defenders which still be in state of damnation whatsoeuer be concluded true We verely teach and beleue the figure and the truth to stand together the supper of our Lord to be the signe of Christes body and to be his owne body The weaker part is the signe the greater is the truth But both doe not only stand together in one Sacrament but farther more the true nature of euerie Sacrament of Christ is to haue both that is â—…aie to haue oue certaine truth one certaine signe of the same truth The truth is hidden vnder the signe the signe is witnes of the truth Which thing once being declared you shall see the vaine doctrine of this Apologie with what kind of worthy Schoolâ—… the English Church is nowe gouerned to the greate 〈◊〉 and destruction of Christian soules Pardon me good reader if I stand somewhat long vpon the name of a Sacrament for in that word lieth hidden all the poyson of the Sacramentarie doctrine ¶ That the supper of our Lord is both the signe of Christes body and also his true body euen as it is a Sacrament GEue diligent care good Reader to the doctrine folowing Because as it is most true and profitable so is it somewhat hard I will shew that suche a signe as belongeth to Christes institution must nedes haue the same truth present whereof it is the Sacrament or holy signe The naturall sonne of God tooke naturall flesh of the virgin Marie to th' intent he being oâ—…e persone and there in hauing his humane nature common with men and his diuine common with God might by that meanes reconcile man to God againe His diuine personne staied in it the nature of man his manhod partly couered the diuine nature from the eyes of mortall men partly by maruelous signes and workes shewed the same to the faith of 〈◊〉 men Liâ—…ewise man consisteth of two parts of a soule inuisible and of a visible body The soule ruleth and gouerneth the body And the body sheweth to others by outward tokens what the soule thinketh and inwardly worketh Christ therefore intending to leaue certayn holy mysteries vnto his Church thereby to 〈◊〉 to her the fruite of his passion and death as well for regard of his owne selfe in whose personne two natures were vnited as for regard of vs who coÌ„siste of body and soule made the sayd holy Sacramentes to be of a dubble sort and nature so that the one part thereof might appere to the senses the other should lye priuie and only be seene by faith But as the outward workes and doctrine of Christ were vndoubted testimonies of the inward Godhed really present so the outward signe which is in the Sacraments is a most euident witnesse of the inward grace which they worke really present in them Aâ—…ter this sort Christ instituted the Sacrament of Baptisme that we might be newly borne and regenerated of water and of the holy Ghost as him selfe sayd to 〈◊〉 For the outward wasshing of the body in the naâ—…e of the Trinitie is an euident signe that the holy Ghost at the same instant by the meane of the word and water inwardly wassheth yâ— soule from synne Therefore S. Paul sayeth God hath saued vs by the wasshing of water and of the renewing of the holy Ghost The which holy scriptures S. Augustine embracing sayeth Aqua exhibens forinsecus Sacramentum gratiae spiritus operans intrinsecus beneficium gratiae regenerat hominem in vno Christo ex vno Adam generatum Water geuing outwardly the Sacrament or holy signe of grace and the holy Ghost working inwardly the benefite of grace begetteth man againe in one Christ which was begotten of one Adam Water is the outward signe Grace is yâ— inward benefite The outward water which wassheth the body is the signe of the inward grace which is wrought vpon the souâ—…e Here thou seest good Reader the signe of a thing and the thing it selfe to agree so well that the one is alwayes depending of the other Much lesse doth one of them hinder the other Except any man will say that Christ was not God in dede because his works were tokens signes of his Godhead which were a detestable saying Likewise the supper of Christ is both a signe of his body also his true body A signe outwardly the true body inwardly A signe by yâ— sound of words when it is first made a truth by the inward working of the holy Ghost by the meanes of the words of the censecration For as when the Priest spâ—…inkleth or dippeth the child in water saying 〈◊〉 wass he the in the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost At the same moment the holy Ghost wassheth the soule of the person baptized Right so when Christ or any lawfull Priest in his name taking bread blesâ—…ing duely sayeth This is my body making in those words an euident token of his body â—…eally present at the same instant the holy Ghost worketh inwardly the true substance of Jesus Christ really present vnder the forme of bread The outward pronouncing of the words ouer bread and wine is the Sacrament or holy signe that maketh and sheweth Christes body and the inward 〈◊〉 ning of the substance of bread into Christes reall body is the grace which is at the same tyme inuisâ—…bly wrought Thus in holy Scripture the signe of body and the true body stand so welâ—… together that both are true because one is true The which doctrine S. Chrisostom confessing writeth Sacerdotis oreverba proferuntur Et Dei virtute proposita consecrantur gratia Hoc est ait corpus meum hoc verbo proposita
the remembrance of Christes death As the birth of Christ was a true birth but most miraculous withall so is the Sacrament of the altar a true signe and therefore his true body and blood by the great miracle of turning the substance of bread wine in to them This is yâ— signe that Christ made in his last supper This is such a signe as is withall a secret miracle For it is a miracle not shewed to 〈◊〉 but only to the faithfull For as the birth of Christ is a 〈◊〉 to the faithfull only who beleue Christ being God and man truly to haue bene borne of a virgin withouâ—… sede of man by the almighty power of the holy â—…host Right so the suppâ—… of Christ is a sigâ—…e of his body 〈◊〉 blood to the faithfull only who beleue the 〈◊〉 of bread and wine to be â—…urned into his body and blood without 〈◊〉 or corruption by yâ— only 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉 oâ—… Chrisâ—… Who sayd after bread taken and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This is my body and this is my blood Doe and make this thing for the remembrance of me Behold the making of Christes body â—…nd blood â—…or yâ— remembrance of his death that is the signe we speake of This was the memorie or the remembrance whereof Dauid sayd Memoriam fecit mirabilium suorum misericors miserator Dominus eseanâ—… dedit timentibus se. Our mercifull graciouse Lord hath made a remembrance of his maruelous works he hath geuen meate to them that feare him And think we that a remembrance of maruelous things is made of God without a miracle S. Cyprian saith the bread to be made slesh Omnipotentia verbi By the allmighty power of the word S. Augustine calleth it Mirabile sacrificium A maruelous sacrifice S. Chrysostom crieth out o miracle o the goodnesse of God he that sitteth aboue with the Father in the self same moment of tyme is touched with the hands of all men If thou ask how it is made saith Damascene it is enough for the to heare that it is made by the holy Ghost euen as our Lord made for him self and in him self a body out of the virgin Mother of God And we know no more but that the word of God is true strenghtfull allmighty Eusebius calleth it Admirabilem exitum oraculi a maruelous euent of the oracle S. Bede nameth it a sanctification of the holy Ghost that can not be vttered by speache The like words haue S. Baâ—…ile S. Gregorins Nyssenus S. â—…ieront Nicephorus This much I thought good briefly to say concerning yâ— manner how the blessed Sacrament of the altar is a signe token figure mysterie remembrance Euery word whereof expounded according to the Gospell and to the state of the new Testament doth proue the reall presence of Christes body and blood vnder yâ— foormes of bread and wine It is a Sacrament which outwardly signiâ—… that which is inwardly wrought It is a figure coÌ„teyning the truth figured It is a signe mete for the institution of Christ whose signes are miraculous it is a secret token knowen only to them that beleue It is a remembrance of Christes death by the presence of the body which died What shall I say more It is the body and blood of Christ couered from our eyes reueled to our faith feeding presently our bodies and soules to life euerlasting ¶ That the supper of our Lord is no Sacrament at all if these words of Christ This is my body and This is my blood be figuratiue THere is a great difference betwen a figure of Rhetorike and a Sacramentall figure made by Christ. The Rhetoricall figures consist in words or sentences the mysticall figures of Christ consist in deeds secret workings Those sometymes sound one way and meane an other way These meane and sound always one thing but they shew it one way and doe it an other way Those chiefly serue the eares of mortall men These chiefly serue the harts of faithfull men Those were found by men these were instituted of God Christ sometime vsed figures of Rhetorike because in taking the nature of man he addicted him selfe to vse the kind of speakiÌ„g which men obserued But now Christians vse yâ— mystical signâ—…es of Christ because he that toke their nature left vnto them the vertue of his almightie Godhead Let noman therâ—…ore think when yâ— supper of our Lorde is called sometime a figure that a Rhetori cal figure is meant it is not so A mystical figure a secrete knowlege a priâ—…ie watch word is vnderstanded by the name of a figure as if Christ should say to his Apostles folowers Let this be a token betwen you and me betwene one of you toward yâ— other that when a faithfull man is washed with water and in the meane tyme it is said ouer him I Baptize the in the name of the Father and of the sonne and of the holy gost straight all synnes are forgeuen him And he is of my flock and receaued into my fold Lett it be again an other couenant or signe betwene vs. When my Apostles or those which are made Priests by them say ouer bread this is my body and ouer wine this is my blood hauing the intent to blesse and geue thanks and to make a remembrance of my death that my body and blood are really present vnder the formes of bread and wine accordingly as my words doe sound These are mystical signes priuie tokens and secret figures to be kept only among the faithfull and not to be published to infidels For as men by vse of speaking haue agreed to transferr certain words from their most proper signification to an other figuratiue custom euen so Christ hath transferred certain natural things to an other mystical vse which is now called in some Fathers by that name of holy signes or figures or tokens or which is most common of all by the name of sacraments or mysteries See good reader to what myserie we are growen He that commeth late from his grammar where he lerned certain figures of construction or he yâ— beginneth his Rhetorik where he more depely entreth into the treatise of tropes and shemes when he readeth in a two peÌ„ny booke the place alleged where it is said in Tertullian this is my body that is to saie the figure of my body he iudgeth owt of hand that Tertullian meaneth a figure of Rhetorik and Decolampadius Caluin or Peter Martir is a mete Scholemaster for him to expound what kind of Rhetorical figure it is verely saithei metonymia or synecdoche Again wheâ—… thei heare S. Augustine affirm that Christ gaue a'signe of his body thei think he meaneth such a signe as is set vp at an ale howse or wine tauern that Doctors meane a peculiar signe and token miraculously instituted by Christ which conteyneth geueth to the faithfull the truthe which it betokeneth This kind of signes and figures concerning the substance of
iudgement they are the chefe among all signes And as the same Doctour saith in an other place Signum nisi aliquid significet noÌ„ potest esse signum A signe except it signifie sumwhat can not be a signe Now that which doth not signifie a thing at all can not by signifiyng make and work that thing which it doth not signifie Take these fower words This is my body Neuer a one of them doth signifie washing Therefore if a maÌ„ washing an other with the mind to make him a member of Christes body should saie This is my body out of doute that man washed with those words should not be baptized What is the cause Washing was vsed the minister was present with intent to baptize some words also lacked not but yet because those words lacked which might signifie washing in the name of the Trinitie he was not baptized If then the words of Sacraments must signifie that which shal be made these words This is my body spoken by any Priest shall neuer make the signe of Christes body Because they doe not signifie any figure or signe thereof Ou the other syde If they be in dede figuratiue as the Zuinglians affirm them to be they shall not make the body of Christ because they say Christ meant not so but only meant a figure to be made in bread and wine Behold to what case we are now brought We haue striued so long about the words of Christ whether they be proper or figuratiue that now they are proued to make nothing at all if they be figuratiue For they make not the body of Christ because if they be figuratiue they meane not to make it They make no figure of the body because they name and signifie no figure And that which they do not signifie they by signifying can not make Foâ—… their whole institution vse nature and commoditie is to signifie to shew foorth to betoken make plain the mind of the speaker That which words doe not signifie they do not work That which they work not is neuer don by them But these words This is my body and this is my blood signifie no figure no signe no token for so muche as they signifie an other thing therefore they work no figure they make no signe they leaue no token And then haue we no Sacrament at all made because none is made without suche words as may signifie that which is made and wrought If any man saye Christ may meane a figure and signe and by his meaning these words This is my body may work a figure oâ—… his body I answer if Christ wil work by his meaning who can forbed him seing he is almighty And if he will work without any words who caÌ„ gainsaye him But then his words work not And why then are they deliuered to vs as the chief instrument to work withall Why sayd he Hoc facite Doe and make this thing why are they rehersed in euery Masse and communion Why doe the auncient Fathers teache the bread and wine to be consecrated by them Why may not Baptism be made by other words then by those which Christ instituted Surely to say that these words This is my body make a figure of his body because Christ wil haue it so is to say that Christ will not hane words necessarie to the making of his SacrameÌ„ts Or it is to saie that he will haue a thing wrought by words to work the which they be vumete instruments as if a man wold take a saw to plane timber withall a beetil to cutt down a tree Christ being the word of God hath geuen that honour to words of men but yet to such as are appointed by him self that they should principally among instrumentall causes work and make his Sacraments Next vnto words he chose maruelous conuenient things wherewith they should concur The things to be most agreable to th â–ª effect which they are sett to work all men agree It is conuenient for water to washe for bread and wine to concur to the Sacrament of the Altar as meetest to nourish for oile to serue in ointing at the vse of other Sacraments And now hath Christ erred in chosing his words hath he 〈◊〉 body to signifie the figure of his body To whom doth it signifie after that sort Surely not to all men as it is eâ—…ident not to all Christians as it maie appere in that we hearing it said that Christ had a mans body or walked in a mans body or that our bodies shall rise at the later daie in all these phrases we take not the name of body for a signe and figure of a body but we take it to meane the true substance of flesh and blood How then shall the word body be taken only in the supper of our Lord for the signe and figure of body Wher is that rulâ—… readen Wher is that secret reueled â–ª For dowtlesse if it were true it were of it self a mysterie and an vnwont acception appointed by Christ and it had neded to haue ben registred in the Scriptures or in the holy Fathers or at the least to haue ben deliuered to vs by tradition But who teacheth that body standeth to signifie the figure of body many Fathers saie the words of Christ are plain manifest true and effectuall but no man telleth vs of such a strange taking of the words body and blood noman witnesseth them to be taken for the figures of body and blood and no maruail For no man knew that iuterpretation They knew that the true body of Christ geuen after such a sort vnder the foormes of bread and wine was a figure of the self same body either walking visibly vpon the earth or suffering death vpon the crosse or sitting now at the right hand of his Father or intending to come to iudgement They could tell that a thing present in a secrete maner is a token a signe and a watch word to all the faithfull of an open maner either past or to come in the same thing By this meanes they confessed the Sacrament to be the figure of Christes body and blood but they knew no such figure as the SacrameÌ„taries haue deuised they neuer could tell of Synecdoche or of Meronymia they knew Sacramentall and not Rhetoricall figures Mysticall and not Poeticall holy and not prophane Let him therfore that will haue any thing at all made by Christes words acknowlege them to be proper to signifie sumwhat and to make that they signifie which is the true body and blood of Christ. ¶ The reall presence of Christes body is that which setteth his death and life before vs. WE doe acknowlege the Eucharist to be a Sacrament wherein is sette after a manner before our eyes the death of Christ and his resurrection and what soeuer he did here in his humane body The eating of common bread and drinking of common wine is but an homely maner of setting
fed at Christes supper with bread and wine that is not in the word of God where it is sayd Eate This is my body The Apologie semeth to say that our bodies be not noâ—…rished with the body and blood of Christ for it assigneth body and blood to our soules as our bodies are fed with bread and wine But Christ gaue his body to noâ—…rish our bodies also And therefore sayd Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood ye shall not haue life in you That is as Cyrillus expoundeth it In corpore vestro in your body And therefore on the other syde Christ sayd he that eateth my flesh drinketh my blood hath life euerlasting and I will reyse him again in the last day Ego sayeth Cyrillus Id est corpus meum quod comedetur I will reyse him that is to say my body which shal be eaten Reysing belongeth to the body which falleth into putrefaction by death As therefore the body is reysed by Christes body so the body liueth in the state of grace by Christes body and such life is by spiritual nutriment which is receaued of the flesh of Christ really present in vs. For which cause Tertullian confessed that not only our soule but also our body seedeth vpon the body and blood of Christ to th' intent our soule may be made fat of God Likewise Ireneus writeth that our flesh is nourishâ—…d of the body and blood of our Lord. We may now see what errour they fall into who assigne the body and blood of Christ to our soules and bread wine to our bodies whereas there is no substance left of bread or wine but euen our bodies feede vpon Christes body as Ireneus Cyrillus and Tertullian haue sayd ¶ Nothing is wrought in the supper of Christ according to the doctrine of the Sacramentaries AFter the Apologie had spoken of communion vnder both kinds and of transubstautiation of which points as yet I speake not it returneth again in a confuse manner to the matter of the reall presence and thus it sayeth And in speaking thus we meane not to abase the Lords supper or to teache that it is but a cold ceremonie only and nothing to be wrought therein as many falsely slaunder vs we teache If they that pluck down altars and other ornaments of Christes supper if they that call the blessed Sacrament of the altar by so vile names as you and your scholars haue done be not of your number if they be not your derelings if they lerned not that coÌ„tempt of holy things and the denyall of the vnbloody sacrifice of you if they first persuaded not the licenciouse youth and faithlesse companie of men and wâ—…men in EnglaÌ„d rather by blasphemous names geuen to the Eucharist then by any word of God which you stil pretend and neuer allege then let it be thought that you meane not to abase the Lords supper But if you did set all the players and minstrels in the realme a work with such scoffes as your brotherhead inuented against the blessed body and blood of Christ I feare me you be not slaundered when you are sayd to teach it to be but a cold ceremonie sith you doubt not to call euen in this Apologie yâ— honour done to it the worshipping of bread whereas it is in deed the worshipping of the true body and blood of Christ. Wel you teach not that nothing is wrought or made in the supper Then by like you teach that somewhat is wrought there I wold fain see what it is which you teach to be wrought in the sup per. For where you say that Christ geueth him self in his supper that we may eate him by faith You teach a work of Christ in geuing him self a work of ours in eating him but not any thing wrought or made in the supper it self For the supper is that meate which is prouided to be eaten at the table of Christ. There you confesse bread and wine to be taken But seing you teache the same things notwithstanding he speaketh otherwise of them yet to tarie bread and wine stil I can not perceaue what substanciall thing you teachâ—… to be wrought in the supper concerning the matter of the supper which is bread and wine Now concerning the body and blood of Christ which you graunt to be geuen by faith I trow you teache not any thing to be wrought a new and made therein sithens they be impassible and therefore can not haue any thing made in them what is it then which you teache to be made in the supper Either bread and wine is the supper or the body and blood of Christ or both together For nothing els is there mentioned Bread and wine you say remayne still as they were before concerning their substaÌ„ce Then I say nothing is wrought in them The body and blood of Christ can haue nothing wrought in their substance because that wherein somewhat shal be made must suffer of that which worketh it therefore glose the matter how ye will you teache not any substanciall thing to be wrought in the supper of Christ except you call the geastes them selues the supper And then I weâ—…e they must be eaten vp of some body in so much as euery supper is prouided to be eaten We teache the substance of bread and wine to be made the substance of Christes body and blood And that is yâ— true work made in the supper of Christ where the mutable creatures are turned into the immutable substance of Christ. which work sith you deny bable what you wil you teache nothing to be wrought in the supper of Christ. ¶ The reall presence of Christes flesh is proued by the expresse naming of flesh blood and body which are names of his humane nature FOr we affirme that Christ doth truly and presently geue his owne self in his Sacraments in Baptisme that we may put him on and in his supper that we may eate him by faith and spirite and may haue euerlasting life by his crâ—…sse and blood Heare ye not how they affirme that Christ presently geueth his own self wold not a maÌ„ thinke they meant honestly and truly But sith they can make the words of Christ figuratiue when they lyst wonder not if they require their own words to be taken figuratiuely They meane not that Christ doth geue him self presently to our bodies and soules as is requisite to the presence of the flesh and blood of man why then vse they such words Uerily because they see the Scriptures so playne the Fathers and Councells so manifest the â—…aith and practise of the Church so euident for yâ— reall presence of Christ that in no wyse they may confesse any other thing then they doe And yet on the other side being fully determined to sticke to their desperate opinion that we really neither eate nor drinke vnder forme of bread and wine
the flesh blood of Christ they haue inuented such kind of speaking as may both seme to agree with the Scriptures and yet withall mayntein their false doctrine The which thing that thou mayest the better vnderstand this is to be consydered The Catholike faith is that Christ in one person hath two natures The nature of God and the nature of man which two natures are ioyned and vnited together into one person after such sorte that what so euer is said of the one nature may be sayd of the other if we speake by that worde which signifieth the person For example we may say that man was in heauen before the ascension of Christ and that God died not because the nature of God could be borne of a woman or dye or the nature of man could be in heauen before the ascension of Christ but because that which was borne and dyed was also God and that which was in heauen was also man albeit his byrth and death was by the nature of man and his being in heauen by the nature of God The natures then tary distinct but yâ— pâ—…rson of God man is but one Now shall you see the meane whereby these new prechers go about to deceaue you They say Christ geueth him selfe in his SacrameÌ„ts The word Christ doth signifie his person wherein he is both God man Likewise the word him self is a word belonging to his person wherein both natures of God man are conteyned Now when they say Christ geueth him self they meane that he being God man geueth by some spiritual way the vertue of his flesh blood which they call him self for that he as God being euery where may dwell in vs more excellently by charitie as the Father and the holy Ghost doe But they meane not by geuing of him selfe the reall gifte of his person and of both natures which are ioyned therein after such sort that our whole nature might receaue his nature For then they should teache that which we doe But howsoeuer they bable of our soules they will graunt our bodies no touching nor tasting of him no not so much as vnder yâ—â—…oormes of bread and wine You haue heard what they say Now heare what Christ sayeth Christ speaketh of him self in diuerse places diuersely Due where he sayeth I will not leaue you Orphans I will come vnto you There he speaketh of his person and concerning the nature of Godhead as it appereth afterward where it is written If any man loue me he will kepe my word and my Father will loue him and we will come vnto him and make a mansion or dwelling with him or at his howse Here he speaketh first in such sort of his own coming that his Father as it appered afterward might come after the same sort Then was it the coming of God and not of man At his departure when he ascended from the world into heauen he sayd Behold I am with you all dayes euen vntill the consummation of the world These words may be meant as well by the nature of manhod which we haue with his Godhead in the Sacrament of the altar and so some holy Doctors haue taken them as also by the only nature of the Godhead which is euery where by maiestie and in good men by grace In an other place he sayd Poore men ye shall haue allwayes with you me ye shall not haue allwayes Where by the word me he meaneth not his Godhead which is allways euery where but the nature of his manhod and that not as it is in the Sacrament but as it was when he spake in a visible forme of a poore man who had not any howse of his own where he might reste his head Last of all let vs marke after what sorte he sayd that he wold be in his blessed supper Dyd he say I will geue my self to be eaten and to be drâ—…nken If he had sayd so yet seing he had mentioned eating and drinking which according to the letter rather belongeth to his manhod then to his Godhead we should rather haue thought that the words must haue bene taken properly then improperly To eate the substance of a man may be sayd properly for in deed it may be eaten with mouth and teeth but to eate the substance of God it is sayd vnproperly For it can not be eaten with teethe and mouth as also S. Cyrillus hath noted but only with vnderstanding and faith If then Christ had sayd before supper I will geue my self to be eaten and had sayd at his supper I do geue my self to be eaten These words with a circumstance of a supper had made so stroÌ„gly for the bodily geuing of him selfe that their part had bene more probable who had vnderstanded it of his manhod With whom if the tradition of the Apostles had stood there were no doubt but he should haue bene a wicked heretik who when Christ had sayd I geue my self to be eaten wold haue denyed that we had eaten the humane nature of Christ. But now attend what words Christ vsed He forcseing this hearesie made 〈◊〉 agaynst it and therefore he sayd not I will geue or do geue my self to be eaten as heretiks now delight to speake but I geue my flesh my body my blood These are not wordes of personage which may be applyed two wayes but they are the words of nature and only of mans nature For God by yâ— nature of his Godhead hath neither flesh ne blood ne soule ne body ne bone Christ as man hath all these things Now do the heretiks and false preachers of our age maruclously deceaue the people of God who alwayes say that they diminish not Christes benefite nor do not abuse the Lords supper 〈◊〉 say they we teache that Christ geueth his owne self and they repete agayne and agayn his owne self his owne self And thereby they meane no more then the comming of his grace and charitie into our soules by fayth spirit and vnderstanding Wholy robbing vs of that flesh which dyed for vs and of that blood whiche was shed for vs. For although God was able to haue saued man otherwyse yet he swetely disposed our saluacioÌ„ by sending his dere soÌ„ne to take of the virgyn our flesh and blood This flesh and this blood worketh our saluacion Which he yâ— taketh away from the Sacrament of the altar depriueth vs of the meane whereby to come to life euerlasting For as by this flesh and blood we are redemed So that redemption is applyed to all that be of lawful age by worthy eating and drinking thereof Now when these preachers cry vnto you of God of fayth of spirit of vnderstanding of vertue they seme perhaps to say goodly things but they craftily put you from that only meane of fleshe and blood whereby God hath ordeyned our saluacion Abraham was the sather of al beleuers because neuer any mans belefe was so
Christes Church sheweth that after our second birth nourishment is necessarie to vs straight way bringeth foorth Christes words in S. Ihon ioyning them with the words of his last supper which S. Basile sayeth to be writen in the end of the Gospels thereby geuing vs to vnderstand that as the performance was made in the end so the promise went before Is it not maruaile now that any thing should be pretended out of this blessed man for the contrarie opinion But how iustly it is pretended wee shall see afterward Gregorius of Nyssa brother to S. Basile teacheth the flesh of Christ to be a bodily thing because it is made meate for mans body That it is meate he proueth out of S. Ihon. For there only are found the chief words by him alleged which are Panis enim qui de coelo descendit qui verus cibus est non incorporea quaedam res est For the bread which came down from heauen which is the true meate is not a thing without a body Quo enim pacto sayth he res incorporea corpori cibus fiet For by what meanes will a thing which lacketh a body be made meate vnto the body Doubtlesse Christ is made meate vnto our bodies no where els but only in the SacrameÌ„t of his supper And therefore this great clerck thought him self to reason wel in bringing such words as are in S. Ihon for that effect which belongeth to the holy coÌ„munion Because he iudged both places of holy Scripture to be of one argument Cyrillus of Hierusalem intreating of the Sacrament of the altar so euidently citeth these words of S. Ihon Excepte ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man caet that noman may doubt of his meaning And because this part of my work wold be ouer long if I should staye so long vpon euery of the auncieÌ„t Fathers I besech the studiouse Reader to be content that hereafter I may in fewer words declare euery mans iudgemeÌ„t shewing him the place of the author where if it please him he may at more leisure examine all the circumstances S. Ambrose disputing of the truth of Christes flesh in the Eucharist although it selfe be not sene bringeth out of S. Ihon My flesh is meate in dede and except ye eate the flesh c. Eusebius Emissenus hauing spoken of the bread and wine of Melchisedech sheweth Christ to haue spoken of eating his own â—…esh of drinking his own blood in S. Ihon as of two kindes whereby he is receaued which is done no where but in Christes supper S. Chrysostom is so plaine herein that of those wordes the bread which I will geue is my flesh he maketh none other literal meaning but such as apperteineth to the Sacrament of Christes body And yet he expoundeth the former partes of the Chapiter indifferently of spirituall eating and drinking S. Augustine albeit he may seme vpon S. Ihon to presse most earnestly vpon the wâ—…itie which we haue with Christ by eating his â—…esh and drinking his blood and by tarying in him hauing him tarying in vs yet he meaneth not to exclude out of those wordes al Sacramentall receauing but only the vnworthy Sacramentall receauing For he sayth expresly he that tarieth not in Christ eaâ—…eth not spiritually his flesh â–ª albeiâ—… carnally and visibly he presse with his teath the SacrameÌ„t of 〈◊〉 body and blood of Christ. So that by S. Augustine there is a dubble spirituall eating of Christes flesh one without the Sacrament and an other with the Sacrament Christ so spake of both that he spake specially of the most perâ—…it which is obteined by worthy receauing of the Sacrament Out of this worthy receauing riseth that greate societie vnitie with Christ his mysticall body whereof S. Augustine so much speaketh This is the SacrameÌ„t of Godlines the signe of vnitie the bonde of chaâ—…itie Without eating of this one way or other no life euerlastiÌ„g is to be loked for by eating yâ— same wor thely in yâ— best kinde of way which is in the Sacrament of the altar the highest degree of vnitie with Christ our head is obâ—…eined As the best signe of vnitie is in the forin of this Sacrament so the best effect springeth oâ—…t of the worthy receauing of the substaÌ„ce which is vnder that form Therefore in other places S. AugustiÌ„e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 words out oâ—… S. Ihon This bread wâ—…cih I wâ—…ll geue is my flesh for the life of the world to shew the Priesthod of Melchisedech which Priesthod him selfe declareth to be in the Sacrament of the altar saying Melchicedech prolato Sacramento mensae dominicae nouit aeternum eius Sacerdotium figurare Melchisedech by bringing forth the Sacrament of our Lords table did know to shew the â—…igure of his euerlasting Priesthod Furthermore S. Augustine expounding these words of S. Ihon of the last supper in very many places of his works most expresly sayth that S. Ihon spake nothing of the body and blood of our Lord in the thirtenth Chapiter where he mentioned the last supper sed plane alibi multo vberius hinc Dominum locutuÌ„ esse testatur But verily in an other place S. Ihon witnesseth our Lord to haue spoken much more copiously thereof Except S. Augustine thought yâ— sixth Chapiter of S. Ihon to appertein literally to the Sacrament of the altar he wold neuer haue sayd that S. Ihon spake not of the supper in the due place because he spake of it in an other place more copiously But of S. Augustie I will speake again hereafter S. Hierome sayth the flesh and blood of Christ is vnderstanded two ways or in two maners Either that spirituall and diuine whereof he sayd My flesh is meate in dede and my blood is drinke in dede c â–ª or els yâ— flesh which was crucified for vs and yâ— blood which was shed with the speare of the Souldiour And that one substance is in eche maner of flesh and blood only the maner of geuing it being diuerse it appereth also by the senteÌ„ce folowing where he sayeth one flesh of the Saiâ—…res may see the saluatioÌ„ of God an other flesh can not possesse heauen Not that the substaÌ„ce of natural flesh but the worthines of the men is diuerse S. Cyrillus of Alexandria writing vpon S. Ihon of purpose and shewing the most literall sense thereof that he could deuise or learn interpreateth the whole sixth chapiter of S. Ihon of the SacrameÌ„t of the altar naming very many tymes the partaking of the holy mysteries and the mysticall blessing and the communicating of the holy chalice Also vpon those words I will reyse him vp again he maketh this exposition Ego id est corpus meuÌ„ quod comedetur resuscitabo eum I will reise him that is to say my body that shal be eaten shall reise him As if he sayd I will reise him because my body which shal be eaten of him shall reise him Sedulius proueth the
last supper he sayd This is my body which is or shal be geuen for you thereby geuing vs in his supper a far better meale then he gaue to Moyses or Elias euen so in this place when he promiseth to geue vs the bread which is his flesh for y◠world he meaneth not that we shall haue no more then Iacob had but that our meate is such as also is the propitiation for the synnes of the whole world By which words it is shewed y◠our meat is also an externall sacrifice and not that it is only a spirituall food receaued by faith and charitie Concerning that daily we may eate y◠bread which Christ promiseth it is not against the Sacrament of his supper which is left to be our daily and supersubstantial bread Either because we may come daily to it or els because being receaued at certaine tymes it always tarieth with vs by some spirituall effect which the Sacramentall receauing worketh in vs. And as the absolutiō which we receaue of the Priest at certain tymes causeth a continual Penance in vs through all our life so a Sacramental receauing of Christes body causeth a cōtinuall eating of him by spirit Now Christ so meant to haue his flesh eaten spiritually that the ordinarie cause of that feeding should consist in the Sacrament of his last supper for that Sacrament mainteineth our spiritual life as S. Paule teacheth The last reason of the contrarie part is thus foormed Christ in S. Iohn speaketh of that eating which maketh vs tary in him and him to tary in vs. But that is not alwayes the effecte of the Sacramentall eating for as S. Paul sayeth a man maye eate Christes body in the Sacrament of the altar vnworthely and to his damnation Therefore say they Christ speaketh not in S. Ihon of sacramentall eating but only of that eating by faith and charitie whereby we maye liue for euer For answere to this argument thus I saye Sacramentall eating must be considered two waies as all the other workes of God towardes men maye be considered one waye is to consider it in that nature vertue and effect which God for his part putteth in the Sacrament An other is in that abuse and imperfection which man wickedly committeth about the holy workes of God Who can doubt but that Christ came into the world to saue men vt saluetur mundus per ipsum that the world maye be sayd by him as for condemnation it was not brought in by Christ but by Adam and Eue our first parents and by our owne wilful synnes ad misdoinges And yet the holy scriptures witnes that Christ is the sauour of death to many and the stone whereat they stomble not through any fault of his but because they vse their freewil to the worse part with whom he hath to do Euen so cometh it to passe in the blessed Sacrament of the altar Christ geueth it only to this end that we by eating thereof maye tarie in him and he in vs. For as Isychius hath well noted Sanctificationis causa non autem contaminationis proposuit suum mysterium Christ hath set foorth his mysterie to sanctifie and not to spott vs. As he geueth faith to th' end it should worke by charitie and not to th' end it should lye dead and vnfruitfull And in dede so should all men tary for euer in Christ if they did eate this Sacrament as they ought to do If nowe they will profanely come vnto it without contrition and confession of their synnes and absolution of the priest that is not the sault of the Sacrament which is geuen to make vs dwel for euer in Christ but it is their fault who abuse the gift of God to their owne hurte and losse This thing wel weighed I answere that alwaies the effect of Sacramentall eating on Christes behalfe is the tarying of vs in Christ and of Christ in vs. And S. Paul saying that some receyue it vnworthely and to their damnation speaketh not of any effect rising of the Sacrament it self but only of a negligence and impietie which standeth on their part who come to the rea◅ flesh and blood of Christ in the Sacrament as if it were common bread and wine only halowed by the deuout praiers of man whereas in dede it is changed in substance by the mightie power of the word of God Let it therefore stand for a truth as it is a most vndoubted truth that Christ in the sixth chapiter of S. Ihon doth prophecie of his last supper promising to geue in it his own flesh to be eaten as the which is meate in dede and for his part he promiseth that it shall haue a perfit effect albeit we sometymes through ma lice withstand his goodnes This meaning is not only true in it self but it is confirmed also by S. Augustine who declaring that a thing good in it self may be vnpro◅itable to him y◠vseth it euill after he had shewed that to be so in light which hurteth sick eyes and delighteth the whole eyes and in the law in which although the Iewes were yet they abused the same at the length he cometh to our very purpose saying Quid de ipso corpore sanguine Domini vnico sacrificio pro salute nostra quamuis ipse Dominus dicat nisi manducaueritis caet What say we concerning the very body and blood of our Lord the only sacrifice for our saluation Not withstanding that our Lord him self sayth Except a man eate my flesh and drink my blood he shall not haue life in him self doth not yet the same Apostle teache euen this thing to be made hurtfull to them y◠vse it euill For he sayth Whosoeuer eat eth the bread and drinketh the chalice of our Lord vnworthely he shal be gilty of the body and blood of our Lord. What cā be plainer then these words of S. Augustine Who thought that argument which I haue answered to be nothing worth at all affirming the Apostle S. Paule and Christ in S. Ihon to speake of one and the same body or flesh of Christ as it is geuen in the Sacrament of his last supper And truly they doe no small iniury to S. Augustine who by any meanes wold father vpon him this opinion as though he taught Christ in S. Ihon to speake only of a spirituall eating by faith and charitie whereas he neuer gaue any sufficient token of that meaning but expresly teacheth the contrarie as all the other Fathers doe The reason which moued some men to think that S. Augustine meant so was for that he speaketh much of spiritual eating and of the vnitie of Christes Church But that eating is also made and best of all made in the mysteries of Christes supper when they are worthely receaued as Christ wold allways haue them to be receaued If any other argument remain by this which is already said it may be easily sene
for his gift proueth the reall presence of his body and blood in the SacrameÌ„t of the altar euen as God the Father gaue hun reall fleshe and blood at his incarnation CHrist for the meate whiche he promysed to gene in his last supper alleaged his diuinity as who shoulde plainly say wonder not that I promise you suche a thing of so greate difficulty and miracle for I am God His wordes are these worke saith he to the multitude of the Iewes not the meate which doth perish but that which tarieth to life euerlasting which the sonne of man wil geue you for him God hath signed that is God the father hath printed his diuine substance vppon him by eternal generation or hath oynted him with the oile of gladnes aboue al others because his humane nature is vnited to the godhed whereby he is able to do as much as his father It is not to be thought that Christ would haue alleged his equall auctoritie with his Father for a gift which were not of equall truth and of equall power with that which his Father is sayd to gene But his Father gaue him not only the vertue and 〈◊〉 of flesh but reall and natural flesh and blood at his incarnation thereâ—…ore God the Sâ—…nn 〈◊〉 to geue vs the same 〈◊〉 â—…ral fâ—…sh in his last supper For which cause he doth immediatly declare both God his Fathers gift and his own 〈◊〉 his Fathers gift he say 〈◊〉 My Father geueth you the true bread from heauen for it is the bread of God whiche cometh downe from heauen and geueth life to the worlde But what breade is this I saith Christ am the bread of life I am the liuely bread which came downe from heauen â—…ow we haue lerned that God the Father gaue Christ his Sonne from heauen when he sent him to take the flesh of man which flesh assumpted oâ—… the word is also by vnion to the word made the bread of life Christ therefore hauing shewed his Fathers gift and that him self is the bread of liâ—…e cometh to shew his own bread which he wil geue saying And the bread which I wil geue is my flesh for the life of the world The brief discourse of yâ— who le doctrine is this work the meate which tarieth for euer which the Sonne of man wil geue you for this Soâ—…ne of man is equall with God his Father whose naturall image he hath printed in him God the Father hath geuen his Sonne to the world and made him true man the true bread of life Therefore God yâ— Sonne being equall with his Father wil geue vs the same true flesh of the Sonne of man as meate yâ— shall tarie with vs to life euerlasting But his Father gaue him â—…o the world not only in faith spirite but in real and substancial flesh Therefore God the Sonne by the drift of all his talk doth signifie that he wil geue in his supper whereof he speaketh not in spi rite and faith only but in truth of nature and substance the 〈◊〉 same real and substanciall flesh First he sayth he wil geue that meate which shal tarye to life euerlasting Secondly that he is able to doe so as one signed of God his Father Thirdly he sheweth what bread and meate his Father hath geuen him that is to say the true flesh wherein â—…e spake to that preseÌ„t multitude of men Fourthly he sayth yâ— breade that he wil geue is his fleshe Last of all who so cateth it hath life euerlasting Doth not all this goe to proue that as he bad them work the meate which tarieth for euer and shewed him sefe concerning his 〈◊〉 to be made that meate sent from God his Father so he is able to geue them that meate which his Father gaue him and sayth he wil geue it them to the end they eating it may liue for euer he tarying in them and they in him And yet is not that his reall and substanciall flesh which he promiseth Or did he not perform in his supper that which he pro mised If he can not be false of his word we haue in our Lords supper where he perfomed this promise the reall and substancial body of Iesus Christ as truly as euer his Father gaue him reall and substancial flesh in this world And consequently we haue it not only by faith and spirite but in truth and substance This plainly is the discoâ—…rse of Christ him selfe who by his Godhead assureth vs of the gift of that incorruptible meat which is his flesh Whereupon S. Hilarie sayth that no man douteth of yâ— veritie of Christes flesh in vs except he deny Christ to be true God ¶ Seing Christ is the bread of life to vs by the gift of his flesh the eating of that flesh by our faith spirit only suffiseth not but it self also must be really eaten GOd sent his Sonne who is by nature the bread of life as hym self hath witnessed to take flesh for vs that in his flesh he might geue vs the same diâ—…ine nature which is the 〈◊〉 bread of life Therefore when Christ had sayd The Sonne of man will geue you the meate which tarieth to life euerlasting straightways he sheweth in one word three causes of yâ— his promise For God the Father sayeth he hath signed this SoÌ„ne of maÌ„ that is to say he hath geuen him hys owne substance concerning the diuine nature of Christ and concerning his humane nature he hath shewed his will by hym as by a seale of his owne hand Farthermore he hath assigned hym to bring vs this meate which tarieth to life euerlasting The verb Signauit he hath signed may signifye the printing of the same forme and ymage which the originall seale hath as S. Cyrillus hath noted in this place also it may stand to shew or confirme a thing by witnes of seale as Theophilact expoundeth it Orels to assigne or appoint a thing to some certain effect and purpose as S. Chrysostome and Eâ—…thymius take it God the Father signed Christ after the first sort by geuing him his own nature And after yâ— secoÌ„d sort by shewing him through miracles wrought in his flesh to be his own Sonne And last of all in appointing to haue his will done most perfitly and executed by him as Christ him self said It is my meate to doe the wil of him that sent me According to this last sense it was the wil of God that Christ should geue vs the euerlasting â—…eate which naturally is his Godhead and by the mysterie of the incarnation it is his flesh And to signifie so much Christ sayd I will geue you the euerlasting meate because my Father hath signed me to this purpose The whiche sense S. Chrysostome followeth in the first place of his interpretation writing thus Signauit hoc est misit qui hunc vobis
verily meat For he sayd not only my flesh is true meat but it is truly meat It hath not only yâ— true nature of meat but also yâ— true maner of it for as verus cibus is true meat so is verè cibus truly meat As true meat is sayd in respect of the essentiall proprietie and effect of meat which is to nourish so is the flesh of Christ truly meat in respect of the maner of it because it is receaued in at the mouth goeth into the body after such sort as other meates doc although it nourish spiritually I haue sayd often tymes that Christ in this chapiter speaketh both of spirituall eating alone and besydes that of Sacramental eating together with spirituall He speaketh of spirtuall alone about the middest of the chapiter â—…raight after those words work the euerlasting meat which the sonne of man will geue you Which words are the generall theme to the whole Sermon folowing But of Sacramental eating as being the sâ—…cond part of his Sermon Christ speaketh specially and expresly from these words forward and the bread which I will geue is my flesh Whiles Christ was yet about the first part of his Sermon which beloÌ„geth to spiritual eating alone he sayd Patermeus daâ—… vobis panem de coelo verum My Father geueth you the true bread from heauen Qui credit in me non sitiet vnquam He that beleueth in me shall not thirâ—…t at any tyme. As Christ is only beleued on and only receaued by faith so he is panis verus the true bread or meate But when he was come to the second part of his Sermon where he spake of Sacramentall eating as well as of spirituall there he sayd for Pater meus dat ego dabo For verus verè In stede of my Father he sayth I in stede of doth geue he sayth I will geue In stede of him self to be true food he sayth His flesh is truly food There is in the second parte none other substance then was in the first to th' end we should vnderstand that Christ geueth in his Sacrament the same reall flesh which his Father gaue him when he came down from heauen by taking flesh But there is an other tyme of Christes gift at his last supper and an other sorte or maner of his geuing For that which God the Father gaue vnto the soules of the faithfull God the Sonne geueth to their bodies also And by that meanes he is not only true meate but also truly meate And that without all dark speaches or parables S. Hilarie well vnderstanding the strength of the same word Verè truly or verily or in dede presseth the old Arrians and new Sacramentaries therewith in this maner De naturali in nobis Christi veritate quae dicimus nisi ab eo discimus stultè atque impiè dicimus ipse enim ait caro mea vere est esca caet Thus they are in English That we say concerning the naturall truth of Christ being in vs except we learue it of him we say it foolishly and vngodly For him self sayth My flesh is meate in dede and my blood is drink in dede he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood tarieth in me and I in him There is no place of doubting left concerning the truth of flesh and blood for now both by the profession of our Lord and by our own faith it is truly flesh and truly blood And these things taken and swallowed are the cause that we tary in Christ and Christ in vs. Is not this thing the truth It may well chaunce not to be true to them who denye Iesus Christ not to be true God S. Hilarie disputing in those words against the Arrians who wolde Christ to be one with his Father in will only doth proue that we also are one with Christ naturally by some â—…anes that is to say by naturall partaking of Christes flesh in his last supper And to proue that thinge albeit he might hauc brought many places out of the Ghospell or out of S. Paule yet 〈◊〉 to bring this place out of S. Ihon as the which he thought no lesse plaine then any other was And twise he repeteth that the flesh of Christ is truly meate Dâ—…ce as being spoken of God an other tyme as being also beleued of vs. and farther he affirmeth vppon this place that the flesh and blood of Christ being taken and swallowed bringe to passe that we are in Christ and Christ in vs. The taking of Christ by faith doth not proue S. Hilaries purpose for he must shew that we take Christ in body and nature euen as he defendeth Christ to be one nature and substance with his Father The being of Christes flesh in our bodies and the reall ioyning of the one to the other is that which S. Hilarie forceth vppon And therefore he sayth afterward that Christ naturaliter in nobis permanet tarieth naturally in vs. By that word naturally S. Hilarie expoundeth how he taketh the word Verè truly For he taketh it as if it were writen my flesh is to be naturally receaued of my Disciples as meate The which thing he had twise expressed before saying nos verè verbum carnem cibo Dominico sumimus We take yâ— word made flesh truly in our Lords meate And again Verè sub mysterio â—…arnem corporis sui sumimus We take the flesh of his body truly vnder a mysterie Lo by thies meanes the naturall veritie of Christ is in vs according as we learned of him saying My flesh is meate in dede All men knowe what we receaue into oure mouthes and bodies in Christes supper That very thing is affirmed of Christ to be his flesh And by that receauing of ours his flesh is truly meate S. Gregorie of Nyssa brother to S. Basile the greate warneth vs puro defaecatoque animo coelestem cibuÌ„ sumere To take the heauenly meat â–ª with a pure â–ª and cleane mind The which meat sayth he no sowing brought forth vnto vs by the arte of tilling the ground But it is bread prouided for vs without seed without sowing without any other worke of man It flowing from aboue is found in the earth for the bread which came downe from heauen which is the true meate which is obscurely meant by this historie of Manna is nor a thing without a body For by what meanes caÌ„ a thing without a body be made meate vnto the body The thing which is not without a body is by all meanes a body This blessed man alludeth euidently to the wordes of Christ in S. Iohn where he saith my flesh is meate in dede for the bread whiche came downe from heauen whiche is the trew meate is none other thing then the flesh of Christ. this kind of thing is not a spiritual thing that lacketh a body but it is a trew body how doth S. Gregorie proue it to be a trew body because it is made
arise the third day And straight he sang an hymne and with his Apostles went forth of the parler where they had supped Although the hymne or song of praise whereof S. Mathew speaketh doe not alone proue the real presence of Christâ—…s body and blood yet it helpeth thus far toward it as to shew and expresse a singular banket to haue bene made after which so rare and solemne a praise was geueÌ„ to God as again is no where els mentioned For albeit no man may doubt but Chist did always geue thanks vnto God after his meate receaued yet we neuer reade of an hymâ—…e sayd or song after any other Feast besyde this And yet I doubt nothing atall but that Christ gaue him self by faith and spirit euen at the supper tyme to some of his Disciples before this night and namely to the blessed Mary which at Bethaâ—…y oynted his feete at supper tyme. but that geuing of him self to Sainâ—…t Mâ—…ry or any other to be eaten of by faith was not this dreâ—…ful giâ—…t of Christs supper The hymne which was externally song or said was â—…ue to this externall worke of God wherein he witâ—… 〈◊〉 own hands gaue his own body and blood to his disciples To conclude at the length coÌ„cerning all these circumstances of this heauenly supper I besech the Reader to accompt weighe them all together and not only to consyder them a part albeit many of them alone are not able to be answered but a circumstance is not a perfit thing of it self but is a part of that whole thing about the which it hath his being and place If all these circumstances ioyned together doe proue the real presence of Christes body and blood vnder yâ— formes of that bread and wine which Christ toke and sayd thereof this is my body and this is my blood I haue my purpose and intent but he dealeth vnhonestly who diuiding them a part cauilleth at one or two and wil not looke to al at once If al these ioyned together proue not my purpose let him who thinketh so either shew me so many so strong for his contrary assertion or let him yeld to yâ— Catholiâ—… faith ¶ The real presence of Christes body and blood and the proper meaning of his words is proued by the conference of holy scriptures taken ouâ—… of the new Testament and speaking of our â—…ords supper EUery place in holy scripture hath not another place like or in apparance coÌ„trarie to it whereby the more light may be taken for the vnderstanding thereof but when there are any such places they helpe marueilously toward the vnderstanding of holy scripture Christ one yere before his last supper said at Capharnaâ—… The bread whiche I will geue is my flesh my flâ—…sh is meat in dede At his supper he toke bread and hauing blessed said Take eate this is my body and this cup is the new Testament in my blood S. 〈◊〉 speaking of the self same mysterie wryteth thus The chalice of blessing which we blesse is it not the communicating of Christes blood And the bread which we breake is it not the com municating of the body of our Lord Let vs now conferre euery word together That whiche was promised in S. Iohn by these wordes The bread whiche I will geue is discribed in the supper presently by these words Take eate this and this cup. not that I make this the accusatiue case to the verbe eate but only to shew that these three wordes agree with the first words in S. Ihon. And afterward in S. Paule it is called The bread which we breake so that these foure particles belong in effect to one thing The bread whiche I will geue The bread whiche we breake and take eate this or drinke ye this cup. By which conference we learne how the pronoune this may be particularly expounded in Christes supper for of his generall signification whiche is to shew vnder a visible form an inuisible substance I haue spoken before sufficiently This then is as much to say as this meat drink or food which is now broken and geueÌ„ and willed to be taken and eaten or drunken is my body or blood It hath bene euidently proued vppon the sixt of S. Ihon that yâ— bread which he promised was not meant of wheateÌ„ bread whereof Christ spake not in yâ— place but of the meate and foode of euerlasting life Therefore when Christ sayth this in his last supper he meaneth none otherwise then this eatable thing or this which is to be drunken this kind of meate or drinke and food which I nâ—…w geue is my body or bloâ—…d otherwise iâ—… it were not his flesh and blood but material bread and wine it were not the euerlasting meate which Christ at Caphaâ—…namn promised to geue and now at his supper doth geue So that whereas Christ both brake and gaue after blessing said take eate this therewith beginning to consecrate the Sacrament of his last supper we haue it expounded what this doth 〈◊〉 by three 〈◊〉 ways by the tyme to come when it is sayd the breaâ—… that I wil geue â—…hich out of question is vnderstanded the food 〈◊〉 Christ wil geue For Christ him self called it before the meate which tarieth to life euerlasting Agayne the pronoune this may be wel expounded by the dede exercysed about the Sacrament after cousâ—…ration when it is sayd of S. Paule The bread which we breake for the breaking is vsed after consecration in the signe and form of bread to shew the death of Christ wherein his flesh was in dede broken and to distribute the mâ—…rites thereof by the holy communion The third way is by conferring together the very words of the consecrating the two kinds For as he said of the bread this alone so he sayd of the wine this cup. geuing vs to vnderstand that as this cup must of necessity be resolued into yâ— thing within the cup so in the other kind we should resolue the pronoune this into that which is within this visible form Thereby declaring that this generally meaneth the substance vnder this and particularly meaneth the food vnder this All is in effecte to say The meate that I will geue the eatable thing that we breake at Masse that whereof Christ sayd take and eate that which is conteyned vnder the apparant formes that is it which in the supper is termed by the pronounâ—… â—…his The next word is the verbe is which can very hardly be expounded by any other word in any tonge because it being the verbe substaâ—… is in all tonges set alone to signifie yâ— being or substaÌ„ce that euery thing hath and no other one word is equal to it which may expound it Yet I may boldly say the holy Ghost hath done so much to expound this verbe as may suffise to any reasonable creature For Christ sayd before any signe of his body was 〈◊〉 The bread
which I wil geue is my flesh WheÌ„ Christ made that promise there was nothing in yâ— who le world whereof the verbe is might be verified in the present tense but only that substance of Christes flesh which he had in his natural body The outward gift of the supper was then to come yet Christ sayd of the substance of his gift The bread which I will geue is my flesh I say not only that it shal be my flesh but I say it is my flesh at this tyme because the substance that I will geue is now present with you although the manner of deliuerance be to come Let vs therefore so expound the verbè is in the supper that it may agree with the verbe is in S. Ihon where it cannot be taken for a bare significatiue being because then there was no signe of his body made Moreouer S. Paule writing after the supper was past doth interprete the verbe is as plainly as can be deuised to signifie a substancial and not an accidentall being for he sayth The bread which we breake is the communicating of Christes flesh it is yâ— communicating as though he sayd it is so truely Christes flesh that no differeÌ„ce is betwene it and the being or substance of Christes flesh All thing is common betwene it and Christes flesh no diuision no separation no distinction coÌ„meth betwene these two All this the word communicating doth signifie and more to For the bread which we breake is so farre Christes body that it maketh vs also the body of Christ. The bread which 〈◊〉 breake is so 〈◊〉 distant from being a bare signe that it hath Christes body made common to it by consecration and it maketh Christes body common to vs by communion so that for est is S. Paule putteth communicatio est it is the communicating or the hauing or making common Christes body and blood S. Chrysostom so vehemently presseth the word coÌ„municating vnion whereof the Apostle speaketh yâ— he sayth S. Paule would not leaue so muche as a little difference betwene the men which doe communicate and that which is communicated and yet if that which is communicated were materiall bread it would so much differ from Christ our head and the mysticall body which we are in Christ that it should be an other nature and substance cleane diuerse from it not only not communicating in one and the same meÌ„ber of a mystical body but neither in the whole kind of things which the Logicians call speciem or genus proximum Let vs adde hereunto that if we take est for significat in these words hic significat sanguinem meum the verb shal lacâ—… a noune substantiue to be his nominatiue case And that S. Luke by leauing est to be vnderstanded by common reason doth shew it signifieth properly as men commonly are wonte to vse that verbe Thus much being said for this and is the worde body remayneth to be declared by the conference of holy scripture In S. Matthew it is called supersubstantiall breade In S. Iohn it is called my flesh whiche I will geue for the lite of the world In S. Matthew and Marke my body in S. Luke my body whiche is geuen for you in S. Paule my body which is broken for you or shal be betraied for you the body of our Lord this bread the one bread Likewise concerning the blood it is called the blood of the sonne of man my blood the blood of the new Testament the new testament in my blood The chalice of blessing whiche we â–ª blesse the blood of Christ the blood of our Lord and the chalice of our Lord. Of the body it is said take eate of the blood take diuide among you and drinke ye all of this Of both together it is said to the Apostles make and do ye this thing Of euill men it is said that they eate this breade and drinke the chalice of our Lord vnworthely not iudging rightly our Lordes body And last of all he that eateth me shall liue for me If now we will expouÌ„d body for the signe of body it will folow that the signe of Christes body was gâ—…n for vs. And when it is sayd He that eateth me shall liue for me it must be expounded He that eateth the signe of me shal liue for the signe of me To conclude as this belongeth not to the substance either of bread or of wine wherewith it can not agree in 〈◊〉 as the verb est is can not stand for significat to signifie least it lack his nominatiue case as the cup shed for vs can not stande for wine shed in sacrifice or els for the signe of blood shed but only for the substance of blood shed on the crosse so corpus body can not stand for a figure or a signe of the body because hoc est corpuâ—… meum datum pro vobis accordingly as the Greeke hath can not be interpreted this is yâ— figure of my body which is geueÌ„ for you â–ª except with Ualentinus Marcion Manicheus it shal be sayd yâ— figure of Christes body was geuen to death for vs. Wherefore I may boldly coÌ„clude that stubburnly to defend that the words of Christes supper are Grammatically or Rhetorically figuratiue coÌ„cerning the substantial parts of the chefe propositions is extreme ignorance in the rules of Grammar and of Logicke palpable blindnes in the studie of diuinitie and a malice inexcusable at the day of iudgement if the party repent not Now on the other syde conferre Scriptures whether Ihon Baptist be Elias it is euident that it is not so There was betwene them in tyme aboue fiue hundred yeres Ihon Baptist was killed Elias liueth yet The Angel sayd by Ihon Baptist He shall goe before our Lord in the spirit and vertue of Elias He sayd not in truth and person And Ihon Baptist being asked whether he were Elias or no answered plainly Non sum I am not It is plaine enough that Ihon Baptist is not Elias in person but only in like office and function Thus you may see good Reader what oddes is betwene those places which our aduersaâ—…s wold haue like and wold make you beleue that these words This is my body be no more properly spoken then these He is Elias The like may be sayd of the rock which meaneth two diuerse natures â—…se geuing water as it is described in the bookes of Moyses and well knowen to be neither Christ by nature neither by coÌ„neâ—…on of any rok into Christ. For neither Christ euer sayd of the rock This is my body neither did he commaund vs to say so What shall I say of that vnsensible obiection that God dwelleth not in Temples made with mans hand For we now speaking of the body of Christ speake not of the dwelling which belongeth to God but of that which belongeth to his humane nature which it self also is not a Temple made with the hand of man or begotten by the
according to yâ— Hebrew worde Lehem which betokeneth all what soeuer is to be eaten of man but espe nally bread as being the chief fruite of the earth After which sorte when Christ saith in yâ— Ghospel man lyueth not by bread alone but by euery worde which procedeth from the mowth of God he meaneth by the name of bread al kinde of natural nourishment which man taketh by moâ—…th without all whiche he may liâ—…e either by naturall bread as Manna was or if it so please God to say the worde without any meat at all as Moyses and Elias fasted fortie days according to which generall taking of bread we aske in our Lordes praier our daily and supersubstantiall bread that is to saye all necessary sustenance for body and sowle It is further to be noted that in holy scriptures when one thinge is conuerted into an other the later thinge is many times called by the name of the first thing not because it is still the first but because it was made from the first As when it is sayd that the rod of Aron deuoured the rods of the Coniurers of Pha rao where that is called a rodde which was in dede a serpent and not then a rod but it is named a rod because from a rod it was turned into a 〈◊〉 Likewise Adam is called earth because he was made of earthe Thirdly a thing is callâ—…d in holy scripture not only as it is but also as it semeth outwardly to be so the Angel which the godly wâ—…men sawe at the sepulcher of Christ is called a yonge man because he appered so although in dede he were not so Which things being wel pondâ—…red it is casie to satisâ—…ie them that saye the holy communion is bread still because after consecration it is called bread To whome I answere first that it is called bread because it was bread and still semeth bread but that notwithstanding it is flesh and was made flesh from of the substaâ—…ce of bread being conuerted into flesh by the almightie wordes of Christ who taking bread sayd in the way of blessinge of thanks geuing this is my body Secondly I answere that in dede after consecration it is a kinde of bread and foode not that whiche it was before but ineâ—…ably bitter and of more price and more worthy of that name of true bread then it was before that is to say it is the true flesh of â—…hrist which nourysheth the bodies and soules of the faithfull men to liâ—…e euerlasting And to proue this answere true it may please the Reades to remember that Christ called himself the bread of life and named the gifte of his supper the meate which tarieth to life euerlasting the liuely bread which came downe from heauen After which meaning he saith and the bread which I wil gene is my â—…esh Behold the kind of bread Agayne S. Paule saith The bread which we breake is it not the communicating of our Lords body For we being many are one bread one body all we that partake of the one bread all partake of the one bread and it be the bread which we breake surely that which is brokeÌ„ can not be any material bread but is only the body of Christ the bread of life And least any man should thinke that in saying the name of bread in Christes supper standeth for meate for flesh I speake without sufficient authoritie besyde the authoritie of yâ— scriptures already alleged which can not be otherwise taken let him also weigh together with me how coÌ„formably the auncieÌ„t Fathers taught the same doctrine S. Ignatius sayth Panem Dei volo quod est caro Christi I desier the bread of God which thing is the flesh of Christ Which thing in the nenter gender is none other to say then which substance Iustinus the Martyr affirmeth first that the Deacons geue to euery man the bread wine and water which are coÌ„secrated with geuing of thankes Where he calleth them by the â—…ames which they had before consecration And sâ—…raight expounding yâ— names of bread wine and water which they haue by consecration he writeth thus Hic cibus apud nos Eucharistia nominatur This foode is called with vs the Eucharist Wherefore for all three names he putteth this one name of food wherein they all meete Neither so content he sayth yet againe For we take not these things as common bread and drink but we haue learned the meat which is consecrated by the words of prayer taken of him to be the flesh and blood of Christ. So that first he declareth him self by bread wine and water to meane the matter of the SacrameÌ„t Secondly he confesseth the consecration to make them a more heauenly food Thirdly he denieth them to be now common bread and drinke Fourthly he affirmeth it to be that kind of foode which is the flesh and blood of Christ. Of the same very Sacrament S. Hilarie sayth Nos vere verbum carnem cibo Dominico sumimus We take the word truly â—…esh in our Lords meate Where he calleth the thing which is geuen at Christes supper cibum Dominicum the meate which our Lord geueth meaning it not to be any more common bread but that kind of bread which is also called meate or food S. Cyprian sayth Christ offered bread and wine suum scilicet corpus sanguinem that is to say his own body and blood Mark the kind of bread S. Ireneus sayth It is not now to wit after coÌ„secration common bread but the Eucharist S. Ambrose asketh why after coÌ„secration we say in oâ—…r Lords prayer Geue vs this day our daily bread And him self aunswereth He calleth it bread in dede Sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hoc est supersubstantialem That is to say as S. Hierom expoundeth it qui super omnes substantias sit such a bread which is aboue all substances And yet farther S. Hierom sayth Panem illum petimus qui dicit Ego sum panis viuus we aske that bread which sayd I am the liâ—…ely bread But to return againe to S. Ambrose he concludeth Non iste panis est qui vadit in corpus sed ille panisvitae aeternae qui animae nostrae substantiam fulcit It is not that bread which goeth into the body but that bread of euerlasting life which holdeth vp the substance of our soule Gregorius of Nyâ—…a speaking of the Sacrament of the altar saith Panis est absque semine absque aratione absque alio humano opere nobis paratus It is bread prouided for vs without seed without plowing and without any other work of man S. Augustine saith wheÌ„ would flesh vnderstand this thing that he called bread flesh Isychiâ—…s nameth the bread whiche S. Paule saith is eaten vnworthely nutritorem substantiae nostrae intelligibilis the nourisher of our intelligible or spiriâ—…all substance Sedulius speaking of the bread whiche Christ gaue to
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in meam commemorationem in the accusatiue case the true English whereof must be for the remembrance of me Christ sayd make this thing for the remembrance of me that is make my body which is geuen for you to thend my geuiug of it for you vpon yâ— crosse may through that your fact and doing be remembred This is the true meaning of Christes words For so doth S. Paule expoimd them to the Corinthians where after he had declared the history of Christes supper of purpose teachig vs what is meant by the remembrance of him thus he writeth As ofte as ye shall eate this bread and drinke the chalice ye shall shew our Lordes death vntill he come Lo the shewing of our Lordes death is the kind of remembrance for which Christ willeth his body to be made eaten his blood to be made and â—…runken Wherefore saying make or doe this for the remembrance of me he sayth this much Take bread blesse saying this is my body breake geue eate and all to this ende that my death may be remembred vntill my second coming Here we learne that the remembrance whereof Christ speaketh is the shewing of his death and that not by word only but by dede and facte and by making and doing For the making of Christes body by chaunging the substance of the bread into the substance of his flesh is a marâ—…ilouse shewing of his death For as his death was the dissolution of the soule from the body so his soule which as S. Ambrose noteth is vnderstanded by the blood is shewed vnder the form of wine his body is shewed a part from it vnder an other form of bread I doe not say that either the body is without soule and blood or the blood without flesh and soule but I say the shewing of the body vnder form of bread and of the blood vnder yâ— forme of wine in â—…che of which whole Christ is conteyned is the shewing of his death and also of his resurrection For at the death in dede the soule and body were a sonder and at the resurrection they came againe together Euen as now in figure and shew they are a sonder not withstaÌ„ding that in truth they are together But if the bread and wine remayned in their old nature still taking only the name and signe of Christes body blood Then should nothing be made for the remembrance or to shew our Lords death whereas he sayd Make this thing for the remembrance of me That is sayeth S. Paule for the shewing of my death the which death is yet fâ—…rther shewed when the same body in a signe is broken and geuen to be eaten the blood drunken For then as Christes flesh was in dede broken vppon the Crosse so it is in shew signe broken first in the Priests hands vnder forme of bread and next in his or their mouths who communicate with him by eating and chewing of it And likewise yâ— blood is powred or shedde into his or their mouthes vnder the forme of wine as it was in dede shed vppon the Crosse and as in dede Christ there deliuered his ghost into his Fathers hands But if the breade and wine were not changed into the body blood of Christ then that body which at all were not so much as in signe and shew broken because it were not present and that blood whiche were not so muche as in apparence apart from the fleshe or shed into the mouthes of the receauers could not shew our Lords death at all whereas Christ would his own death to be shewed by the making of his own body and blood with the signes of breaking shedding parting and dissoluing Thou seeâ—… now good Reader how the kind of remembrance which Christ required to he had of him is not only nothing at all against the reall presence of his body and blood yea rather it is so singularly set forth thereby that without the presence of the body blooâ—… it shal be somewhat hard to deuise what memorie at all here can be of Christes death Most sure it is that though mans wit may deuyse much yet can it neuer inuent so perfect a meane to make the death of Christ be remembred as if his own self be present to warne vs thereof If it hath chaunted to any man whiles by manly fighting he hath delyuered his frind from perill of death to take some great wound in his owne face tell me on thy conscience is there any way more effectual for that wounded man to put his frind in remembraunce of that fighting then if him self come with the skar in his face to his frinâ—…s presence and sight Is it not more then if he sent an hundred letters an hundred tokens and messengers to warne his frinde thereof Euen so fareth it with Christ at this tyme who fighting for vs vppon the Crosse whiles he delyuered mankind from the bonde of death toke a wound which made him geue vp his ghost Can therefore a more vehement remembrance be stirred vp in our harts then if the same Christ offer him self present to vs with â—…he skar vpon his face Thou wilt I think graunt that nothing would moue vs or make vs more vehemently remembre the death which he tooke for vs. But thou wilt say that Christ now coÌ„meth not before vs that we see him not Well Sir First you graunt that the remembrance of Christes death is nothing at all hiudered by the presence of his body why then sayd you before if the Sacrament of the altar be a remembrance of Christ it is not Christ him self Why sayd you that the remembrance of a thing must uedes differ from the thing it self And now you see and confesse that Christ present with the resemblance of his woundes should make you best remember his death Beware hereafter of this kind of reasoning Christ made a resemblance of his death at his supper therefore it is not his own body That argument is not good yea rather this is good Christ made a perfecte remembrance of his death therefore his own body is geuen to put vs in mind that he died for vs. Now let vs returne to that you said Christ was not seene of vs. If he were seene your faith should be of small merite besyde that you could not receaue him into your body after that visible quantitie wherein he walked vppon the earth He therefore that died for you hath now geuen you the substance of his naturall flesh and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine Where he is as verily present as if you saw him or touched him For I trow you vnderstand that eye sight is not necessary to make a thing present Otherwise blinde men were in euill case and to them nothing should be present Which seing it is not so the body of Christ is not therefore the lesse present because you see it not But if it may please
vnworthy eating and drinking of euill men WHen S. Paule had said As oft as ye shall eate this bread and drink the cup of our Lord ye shall shewe our Lordes death vntill he come he goeth forward saying Therefore who so eateth this bread drinketh the chalice of our Lord vnworthely he shal be gilty of our Lordes body and blood How doth this senteÌ„ce hang vpoÌ„ yâ— former how coÌ„meth it in with â—… Therefore but because in the former sentence S. Paul said by eating this bread we shew Christes death And for as much as we shew it in that self thing which dyed for vs therefore he that eateth vnworthely such a meate wherein by the substance which died he sheweth Christes death he is gilty of our Lordes body none otherwyse then if he had betraied it as Iudas did For the same body that Iudas did by a false kisse geue to death we eate vnder the forme of bread to shew the same death If then Iudas were gilty of Christes natural body for geuing it vnworthely to death we are gilty of the same naturall body when by eating it we shew vnworthely the same death But if we had not present the same real flesh which Iudas hetraied our vnworthy shewing could not be like his vnworthy doing al the strength of S. Paules reasoning is only grounded vpon the real presence of Christes body the vnworthy shewing whereof he now speaketh is the vnworthy â—…ating And for so much as eating is a corporall action which is done by the instruments of teeth and mouth S. Paule doth vs to vnderstand that euil men might touch and haue in their mouthes yâ— bread and drink of our Lord. But his bread and his drink is of him â—…elfe affirmed to be his body and blood therefore S. Paule confesseth that euill men may haue the body and blood of Christ in theyr mouthes But that they could not doe except the body and blood were vnder the formes of bread and wine therefore he teacheth the body and blood of Christ to be really present vnder the formes of bread and wine Saith not S. Paule whosoeuer eateth this bread and drinketh the cup of our Lord vnworthely Then this bread and the cup of our Lord may be eaten and drunken vnworthely But what Speaketh he of eating by faith or of drinking by spirit No verily for such eating and drinking can not be vnworthely made You wil say it is bread and wine whereof he speaketh If it were so why doth S. Paule name it this bread â–ª For 〈◊〉 the pronoune this doth shew a thing present to some sense or other and seing when S. Paule wrote these wordes he being absent in body from the Corinthians could not shew them any thing by any corporal actioÌ„ of his it remaineth that yâ— thing whereunto this doth point was named in the epistle of S. Paule which he worte to those faithfull men and also that it went not long before as the which otherwese might be of vncertaine vnderstaÌ„ding What is it then which went before Christ toke bread and after thanks geuen said Take eate this is my body whosoeuer eateth this bread vnworthely he is gilty of the body of our Lord. If this bread point vnto that whereof Christ said This is my body S. Paule meaneth to shew his faut whosoeuer eateth the body of our Lord vnworthely and thereby he grauÌ„teth euil men to eate Christes body which they can doe by no meanes except that be Christes body which they take into theyr â—…outhes The Sacramentaries will obiect againste me that Christ ment the signe of his body which truly can not be so For seing S. Paule named no signe as this can not point to that which was not named so it must point only to the thing named before But the thing before named was the body of Christ broken for vs therefore this bread meaneth that body of Christ and none other substance ¶ The reall presence is proued because vnworthy receauers are gilty of Christes body and blood WHo soeâ—…er eateth this bread or drinketh the cup of our Lord vnwortehly he shal be gily of yâ— body blood of our Lord. A man may be gilty either for doing an euil deede or for leauing a good deede cleane vndon or els for doing a good dede in an euil manner Here S. Paule maketh the vnworthy receauer gilty for eating this bread and drinking the cup of our Lord vnworthely which is to say for doing a good deede after an euil manner his dede is eating which thing he so reaâ—…ly doth that S. Paule affirmeth him to eate and drink damnation to himself But no man is gilty of doing more theÌ„ he actually doth therefore the vnworthy receauer who for eating and drinking is gilty of the body and blood of Christ doth eate and drink in deede the same body and blood of Christ whereof he is gilty The Sacramentaries imagine S. Paule to haue said He that eating by mouth materiall bread at Christes supper refuseth to eate by faith the body of Christ sitting in heauen is gilty of not eating Christes body Who euer heard of such a toy what iote of all the scriptures which appertein to Christes supper haue they left vnwrested vntorne or vndefiled what sentence clause or word haue they left in his naturall meaning If S. Paule and the foure Euangelists were not theÌ„ selues men of sufficient discretion who might consider how nedefull it were to vnderstand wel the mysteries of Christ yet surely in repeting one matter oft it would at the least chance vnto them that they should haue told vs some one syllable which might haue made for the Sacramentary doctâ—…ine if it had bene true But now whatsoeuer they speake doth destroie vtterly and ouerthrow theyr fond assertion And that I may for this tyme go no farther what caÌ„ be answered to this place of S. Paul he that eateth a very good thing vnworthely is pronounced gilty therefore his present fault consisteth in the euill manner of his eating For to eate vnworthely is to eate in deede but not to eate after a good manner No man by eating in an euill manner can be gilty of that which he doth not eate in that euill manner and yet the vnworthy receauer of this bread is pronounced gilty of Christes body and it is ment of his naturall body Therefore this bread which he doth eate vnworthely is the reall and naturall body of Christ. If a man had done neuer so heinouse a robbery yet thereby to condemne him of adulterie it were an euideÌ„t 〈◊〉 although the paine due to adultery be lesse then that which is due to robberie But now to condemne a man for eating the body of Christ who did eate only the figure of it that were much more vniust for that his paine increased aboue the measure of his fault Let it be neuer so great a fault to eate the holy bread vnworthely yet if that holy bread be
not in dede a man it shall neuer be the fault of eating mans flesh to eate that bread vnworthely S. Paule saith not only he is gilty who eateth this bread but he is gilty of the body of Christe Howe can that be except this bread which he eateth be the body of Christ â–ª If this bread be his body seing it stâ—…ll appereth bread we must confesse that the body of Christ is really present vnder the forme of bread And truly that is the cause why S. Paule nameth it this bread for yâ— word sheweth him to meane the bread coÌ„secrated at yâ— altar that bread which that Priest froÌ„ thence deliuereth yâ— bread which that people receaueth at the Priests haÌ„d Whosoeuer eateth this bread vnworthely he is gilty of Christes body because that substance of this bread is that substaÌ„ce of Christes natural body made geueÌ„ vnder that forme of bread If it were not so the eater of this bread could not by his eating be gilty of Christe s body Otherwise the talke of S. Paule would no more hang together then if it were said he that toucheth vnworthely the kings garment is gilty of murdering his person I am loth to heape vp in this place yâ— manifold witnesses of the auncient Fathers whose wordes I haue partly touched also before concerning that euill men eate Christes body Now it shall suffise to shew that they make the same sequele of S. Paules wordes whiche I do for they shew the vnworthy receauer to be gilty of Christes body because he inuadeth the body of Christ and not because he eateth wheaten bread Theodoritus expoundeth these words whereuppon we dispute after this sort Illud autem caeâ—… These words he shal be gilty of the body and blood of our Lord signifie this much That as Iudas betrayd him and the Iewes theÌ„ selfes insulted and rayled shamfully and sclanderously at him so these shame defile him who take his most holy body with vncleane hands put it into a polluted and vnchaste mouth Lo the taking touching and eating vnworthely Christes body maketh them gilty as Iudas and the Iewes were gilty of Christes death Yea Haymo saieth It were better for him who cometh with mortall sinnes to this Sacramente neuer to haue knowen the way of truth then to goe backward and to do worse then an infidell Primasius faith He despiseth Christ and his body as the Iewes dyd who cometâ—… to it without trying of his own conscience Sedulius besides that common similitude of Iudas and the Iewes vseth another saying If no man dare put it into a filthy cloth or vessel how much more ought he not to put it into an vncleane harte Note good Reader that the self same Sacrament is put in the cloth or vessel which is put in the harte It is not therefore as the Sacramentaries blaspheme breade and wine that is put into a cloth and vessell after consecration and body and blood that whiles the body eateth breade and wine is in hart receaued The same thing is in the harte which is put in the vessell wherein the Sacra ment is kept S. Hierome vsing the same similitude of a cloth or vncleane vessell declareth farther that as Ioseph did folde the body oâ—… our Lord in a cleane sheete so must we receaue him with a cleane coÌ„science Dâ—…u menius declareth the fault of the euill men to be in that they touche the body of Christ with vncleane mouth and impure hands saying that as Iudas betrayed Christ and the Iewes did violently runne vppon him euen so they do shame to him Quòd sanctissimum ipsius corpus manibus impuris suscipiunt veluti tunc eum Iudaei tenuerunt execrando admouent ori Who doe take with impure hands his most holy body none otherwise then the Iewes at that tyme helde him and doe put it to theyr cursed mouth Theophylact sayth of the blood of Christ Qui indignè hunc hauserit nulluÌ„ ex eo fructuÌ„ adeptus frustra ac temerè Christi sanguinem fudit He that drinketh the blood vnworthely he hath shed in vayne rashly the blood of Christ. taking thereof no fruit And again The cause why euil men take no fruit saith Theophylact is not through the nature of that mysteries as the which both haue life in them and geue life but it chauÌ„ceth through the vnworthines of them that come to them who take hurte by them nonc other wise theÌ„ as the sonne is wont to hurte them who haue sore eyes Theophylacte meaneth that as it is oue sonne which shineth to whole aud to sore eyes but yet the sore eyes through their owne defecte take hurt thereof and the whole eyes take good so the mysteries are one to the good and to the bad concerning their owne nature being as he saith always of that nature both to conteyne life and to gene life But the fault why life is not takeÌ„ cometh of the vnworthy receauer We haue now harde that euill men receaue the same true body of Christ which the good men do receaue but not to yâ— same profit because they haue not wel prepared them selues We must not then thinke that euer any auncient Father was of this mind to say that euill men haue in their mouthes only bread and wine and the good men eate only the true body of Christ. That heresiâ—… is as farre from the opinion of the Fathers as it is farre from the truth of the Scriptures S. Chrysostom saith he will suffer his own blood to be shed rather then he will graunt the moste holy blood of our Lord to an vnworthy man Doth not he meane that he hath our Lords blood in his own hand at the tyme of celebrating the mysteries and that he will not deliuer the same to a knowen euill man S. Cyrill noteth that it is not sayd in vaine of Iudas Exiuit continuò he went foorth by and by Timet diabolus benedictionis virtutem ne sintillam in animo eius accenderit The deuill feareth the vertue of the consecration or blessing lest perhaps it might haue kendled a spark of grace or of repentance in his minde S. Augustine hauing spoken of Iudas who gaue him self to the deuill Non malum accipiendo sed male accipiendo not by taking an euill thing but by taking it in an euill maner concludeth generally of all euill men Corpus enim sanguis domini erat etiam illis quibus dicebat Apostolus Qui manducat indignè iudicium sibi manducat bibit for it was the body and blood of our Lord euen to those to whom S. Paule sayd â–ª he that eateth vnworthely eateth and drinketh damnation to him self It were easy after this sorte to allege a very greate number of yâ— olde Fathers but our aduersaries well knowing that we our selues beleue that the euill men albeit they receaue the substance of Christes body yet they doe not receaue the grace and vnitie
twentie tymes to the intent it might at the least wise sinke at the lengthe into some of his disciples minde And how much lesse should I either thinke it long to dilate this argument either the Reader be wery thereof S. Paule sayth eadeÌ„ vobis scribere mihi quidem non pigruÌ„ vobis autem necessarium To write the same thinges vnto you it is not lothsom vnto me but truly necessarie vnto you Euen so Christe for our greate profite always repeted that he would geue meate whiche should not perish a bread which was his flesh And that we should eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drink his blood that who so did eate his flesh and drink his blood should haue life euerlasting for his flesh is meate in deede and his blood is drinke in deede who so doth eate his flesh and drinke his blood doth tarie in Christ and Christ in him and he that doth eate him should liue for him and that this is the bread which came doune from heauen an other manner of bread then MaÌ„na was He that doth eate this bread shal liue for euer Thus about tenne tymes we finde that in S. Ihon he said one thing though not in one words Sometyme calling it flesh sometyme blood sometyme him self sometyme this bread sometyme meat Put now here vnto that he toke bread and wine blessed gaue thankes brake and gaue and said take and eate this is my body and drinke ye al of this for this is my blood and make or doe this thing for the remembrance of me Remember farther that three Euangelists wrote the history of the supper in diuerse yeres all after one sort that S. Paule wrote the same adding more terrour to it by shewing that some died at Corinth for the vnworthy receauing the body and blood of Christ with all the rest which the Apostle sayth in that epistle and we shall find that the holy ghost hath confirmed and verified the knowen and litterall vnderstaÌ„ding of the words flesh blood body meat without any figuratiue speache or meaning Albeit God meant not his body and blood to be eaten and drunken after the common vsual manner of eating rosted flesh or drinking raw blood but that we should eate it drinke it vnder the forms of bread wine For which cause he also vsed yâ— name of a certaine kinde of bread A bread I say which came donne from heauen because it is vnited vnto yâ— sonne of God who was for euer equal with his Father in glory nature honour This repeting of one thing so many tymes is a great argumeÌ„t of speaking plainly without all figures or parables This argument to begin wth the weaker the greke author Euthymius maketh who vpon those wordes my flesh is truly meate saieth hoc dixit confirmans quòd non aenigmaticè neque parabolicâ—… loqueretur This he hath said coÌ„firming that he spake not 〈◊〉 either els in the manner of a parable Which obseruation Euthymius borowed of S. Chrysostom who saith that Christ affirmed his fleshe to be meate in dede to confirme his disciples least they should thinke him to haue spoken obscurely in parables But the ofte repeting is of it selfe the confirming and assuring vs that he spake not so Oecumenius also vse th the same reason in a like matter Per hoc quod frequenter ait corporis sanguinis domini manifestat quòd non sit nudus homo qui immolatur sed ipse dominus factor omnium vt videlicet per haec iplos exterreat in that he many tymes nameth the body and blood of our Lord he sheweth that he which is offered is not a bare man as the Nestorians did falsely teache but the Lord him self and maker of all things to th end he might verily put them in a terrour by these wordes if the ofte naming of Lord did shew it to be the body not of a bare man but also of God how much more doth it shew that it is not the bare substance of bread but the body it selfe of Christ who is our maker S. Basile noteth in the Apostle S. Paule coÌ„cerning this very matter VehemeÌ„tius simulque horribilius proponit ac declarat condemnationem per repetitionem The Apostle setteth forth and declareth more vehemeÌ„tly to the more terrour of the vnworthy receauers the condemnation by repeting it S. Augustine in his booke which he made concerning the working of muncks perceauing that some thought yâ— Apostle to speake figuratinely wheÌ„ he requireth that all men should labour and worke who would eate among other arguments wherewith he disproueth these figurantiue workers vseth this also Neque enim aut vno loco aut breuiter dictuÌ„ est vt possit cuiusuis astutissimi tergiuersatione in aliam traduci peruertique sententiam â—…t is not said in one place or in shorte wordes so that it may be 〈◊〉 and peruerted into an other meaning by yâ— ouerthwarting of neuer so suttle a sophist Thus reasoneth S. Augustine vpoÌ„ the ost repeting of worke of labour of miniâ—…ring with handes prouing thereby that the Apostle meant in dede bodily worke and not only working with mind or tonge But I am assured there is not more in the new testameÌ„t concerning the precept of working with handes then is of the body and blood of Christ of his flesh of the meat which perisheth not of such substanciall bread of taking eating drinking communicating partaking the body and blood of Christ of making the same of geuing breaking and distributing of not discerning it of being gilty for vnworthy eating of true meate true drink oâ—… reising vp him that eateth it of his abyding in Christ and liuing for Christ of the Church and Christ being twain in one flesh of being one bread one body all that partake of the one bread of liuing for euer if any man worthely eate this bread which is the flesh of Christ which he wil geue for yâ— life of that world it is not said in one place neither in short or few words therefore it ought not be drawen into an other meaning then the words do sound â—…y the ouerthwarting of neuer so suttle a sophist To conclude S. Cyrillus writeth in the same sense Non obdurescamus toties a Christo veritatem audientes non est enim ambigenduÌ„ quin summa supplicia subituri sunt qui saepius haec a Chisto iterata non capiunt Let vs not harden our selues hearing the truth so oft of Christ. for it is not to be doubted but they shall suffer most â—…reme paines who receaue not these thinges whiche are so many tymes repeted of Christ. The preface of the sixth booke BEcause the adoration of the body and blood of Christe in the Sacrament of the Altar is a matter whiche moste manifestly conuinceth the reall presence of Christ vnder the forme of bread I thought it best to handle it a part
by it selfe aâ—… also being one of those things which doth principally declare the saith of the whole Churche in this behalfe For no man would adore the body of Christ in the Priestes hands or vpon the altar if it were not really present there The Chapiters of the sixth Booke 1. The adoration of Christes body is proued out of the Prophet Dauid in the Psalm 21. 2. Item of the Psalme 98. 3. It is proued out of the Prophetes that it can be no idolatry to worship the body and blood of Christ in the Sacrament of the altar 4. The adoration of Christes body is proued out of the new Testament 5. That the Fathers of the first six hundred yeres after Christ dyd honour the body blood of Christ in the Sacrament of the altar 6. The adoration of the body blood of Christ is proued by the custome of the Priestes and people of the first six hundred yeres 7. The reall presence is proued by the doctrine consent of the auncient Fathers 8. Item by the faith of the people 9. That no man can be coÌ„demned for beleuing the reall presence of Christes body and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine ¶ The adoration of Christes body is proued out of the Prophete Dauid OF this adoration due to the body of Christ the holy ghost forewarned vs by the Prophete Dauid in that psalme which Christ him selfe hanging vpon the Crosse declared to be literally ment of him selfe and that as well concerning his death whch he suffered for vs as also concerning the memory of the same death which he instituted in the night wherein he was betraied Christ therefore hauing she wed in that psalme the cruelty of Iewes in killing him most humbly asketh of his Father through his manhod that his soule may be deliuered by resurrection from the mouth of yâ— lion promising or vowing therewithal that he will open the name of God vnto his brethren and praise him in the middest of the congregation And when I cried vnto him he heard me If God hath fauorably heard Christ as there can be no doubt but he hath Christ is bouÌ„d by his own promise to praise his Father in a greate Church therefore saith he will doe so adding thereunto I will render or performe my vowes in the sight of them that feare him By what meane wil he performe them It foloweth immediatly Edent pauperes caet The poore shal eate be silled and they that seeke him shal praise the Lord theyr hartes shall liue for euer all the endes of the earth shall remember and be turned to the Lord. All the families of the Gentils shall adore in his sight Because the kingdome is the Lords and him selfe shall beare rule among the nations All that be fat on the earth haue eaten and adored al they that goe doune into the earth shall fall doune before him 1. Christ then â—…or his resurrections sake 2. made a vow to praise God 3. in the great Church of all nations 4. the performance whereof should be stablished by the meanes of eating filling 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and worshiping â—…ose that after baptism by yâ— grace of God are preserued froÌ„ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the body of Christ in the SacrameÌ„t of yâ— altar 〈◊〉 be filled 〈◊〉 praise God for euer Eating is the acte of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 spirituall 〈◊〉 is the heauenly effect thereof the praising of God is the fruit of the 〈◊〉 For we 〈◊〉 to be 〈◊〉 are filled to the end we should praise God for euer 〈◊〉 that after 〈◊〉 fall into greate 〈◊〉 partly they so fal that they rise 〈◊〉 and then they remember in yâ— memory of Christes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his last supper is that Christe died for them and so the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 forceth presseth them by penance to returne Partly they so fall that they care not to returne to God but lye wallowing still in their synnes yet they departe not by 〈◊〉 or infidelity out of the Church but kepe stil the bare belefe of Gods truth without performing his â—…dementes Such men eate worship but because they wil not remeÌ„ber be 〈◊〉 to God but come to the table of Christ vnworthely they are not filled by their eating But there are two other kinds of men who sometime haue bene of Christes church but now are not of it of which two the one doth eat and not worship because it beleuâ—…th not the thing eaten to be the flesh of God such are the Zinglians the other doth neither worship nor eate which are the vnfaithfull Iewes who are not only departed from the Catholike Church but also froÌ„ yâ— coÌ„fession of Christ our true Messias of whom S. Pâ—…ule saith we haue an altar whereof they haue no power to eate who serue the tabernacle Christ being absent in the visible forme of his body sitting therein at the right hand of his father ruleth his Church reigâ—…eth in it not as the vnfaithfull Iewes thought he would haue done by exâ—…ising violent inâ—…isdiction and subduing the bodies of men by force but he reigneth in yâ— hartes through faith charitie which he geueth vs. This inuisible reigning among visible men requireth for conuenient maâ—…tenance thereof an inuisible kinde of presence concerning the person of the king bâ—…t yet visible concerning the forâ—…ies of bread and wine to theâ—…d his members may know where to worship him For as his Church is visible through the bodies of them whose soules do inuisibly serue him so his body is visible through the formes of bread wine vnder the which it lieth inuisibly distributing the frutes of his death and resurrection All this eating adoring filling raigning and praysing doth chieâ—…ly belong in this place to the Sacrament of Christes body and blood Through those mysteries Christe the bread of life is really eaten wee are filled with grace God is praised in good works reigneth in our hartes we bowe downe to his body and worship him for our maker our King and our Lord. And that this interpretation is not of mine owne making it shall nowe appere S. Hierome vpon those wordes vota mea reddam I wil render my vowes which I promised saith Vota Christi natiuitas vel passio vota Ecclesiae opera bona vel mysterium corporis sanguinis mei offeram cum his qui in eius timore haec celebrant The vowes of Christ are his birth or passion the vowes of the Church are good workes or els I will offer saith Christe the mystery of my body and blood with them who celebrate these thinges in his feare First S. Hierome taketh the vowes of Christ to haue bene the promises that he made to be borne or to die but afterward he geueth an other sense which is more agreable to the letter For Christe had spoken before of his passion
speaketh in an other place of the same matter Suprà dictum est edent pauperes saturabuÌ„tur hîc verò manducauerunt adorauerunt caet It was sayd before the poore shal eate and shal be filled But here it is sayd all the riche of the earth haue eaten haue adored For they also are brought to the table of Christ. And they take of his body and blood But they adore only and be not filled also because they folow not For although they eate Christ the poore man yet they disdaine to be poore And againe quia Deus excitauit eum a mortuis c. Because God hath raised him from the dead and hath geuen him a name the which is aboue euery name that in the name of Iesus euery knee should be bowed of heauenly earthly and of things vnder the earth They also moued with the fame of his highnes and with the glorie of his name which glorie is spred round about in the Church they come them selues to the table they eate and adore but yet they are not filled because they doe not hunger and thyrst righteousnes Hitherto S. Augustine who speaketh of eating the body of Christ from the table The riche men come to the table of Christ thence to eate his body There also they adore that which they take from the table and that which they eate And how is it possible but that this worshipping and adoring whereof S. Augustine speaketh must belong to the table of Christ that is to say to his body aud blood which is eaten from his table when the Priest geueth it to vs And yet it might not there be rightly adored if it were not reaâ—…ly present vppon the table And there it can not be present vnlesse it ve vnder the formes of bread and wine which only stand vppon the table Therefore this prophecie as wel proueth the adoration as the real presence of Christes body and blood Is it not a great blindnes in our new preachers that whereas the word of God sayeth euen the riche of the earth haue eaten and haue adored or shal eate and shall adore for so one tense doth stand for an other in the holy Scripture yet they wil haue ye eate and not adore to th' intent ye should be more vnkind thâ—…n those earthly riche men were ¶ The adoration of Christes body is proued again out of the Prophet Dauid THe Prophet Dauid speaking of the Kingdome of Christ which he exercised vpon the crosse by conquering the deuil and synne requireth vs to gene praise to him for it and not only to him but euen to his footestole writing thus Exaltate Dominum Deum nostrum adorate scabellum pedum eius quoniam sanctum est Exalte the Lord our God and worship his footestole because it is holy The Hebrew readeth because he is holy It is to be vnderstanded that Christ in one person hath two natures to wit the nature of God and yâ— nature of man Dauid willeth both to be adored and first he speaketh of the Godhead saying Exalte the Lord our God Next after of his humane nature in those words Adorate scabellum pedum eius worship his footestole for Godly honour is due to his flesh also because he is holy That is to say because his person is the second person in the Trinitie where vnto the manhod is vnited And through that vnion the nature of man is worthy of Godly honour The Iewes accompted the footestole of God to be the Arke and temple of Hierusalem toward which they bowed and adored God in their tyme of prayers But aswell the Arke as the Temple were the shadowes of Christes flesh and that not only as he was in the visible forme of man but euen as he is mystically vnder the forme of bread For the Arke did foreshadow the Sacrament of Christes body blood as Angelomus hath noted Sacerdos qui Arcam caet The Priest Oza who touched that Arke with vnaduised rashnes purged the fault of his bolde enterprise with death before his tyme wherein we must nedes consider how much he synneth who cometh gilty to the body of our Lord seing that deuout Priest is punished with death who with lesse reuerence then he ought hastely handled that Arke which was the figure of our Lords body Againe the Arke coÌ„teined Manna in it which was an expresse figure of the flesh of Christ in that respect as it is to be eaten of vs as both Christ him self hath declared in S. Ihon and S. Paul in the first Epistle to the Corinthians Likewise the Temple was a figure of Christes body according as him self sayd Dissolue ye this Temple of my body and and in three days I wil raise it vp againe The Arke therefore and the Temple being the footestole of God toward which yâ— Iewes prayed did signifie that the flesh of Christ should be adored not only in heauen whether Christ is entred as into the euerlasting 〈◊〉 and most holy of holies but also in the Sacrament of the altar which is the Arke Temple and â—…essell conteining the self same substance of Manna which sitteth at the right hand of God the Father The holy Prophet Dauid requiring vs to adore the footestole of God requireth vs to adore the flesh of Christ as well in the Arke of the new Testament which is the Sacrament of Christes body as in heauen it self because he that hath ascended into heauen and sitteth at the right hand of his Father sayd also in his last supper Take and eate this is my body Doe and make this thing for the remembrance of me Neither doe I make or first inuent such interpretation but the Fathers of the first six hundred yeres left it vnto me sauing that they expound yâ— footestole to be not only the Arke and Temple of â—…ierusalem but also the whole â—…arth in respect of the Godhead because Esate sayeth Heauen is my seate the â—…arth is the settle of my feete But herein wee may rest in S. Hieromes aucthoritie who vpon this place writeth thus Multae de scabello opiniones sunt caet There are many opinions concerning the â—…orestole what it should be But here the Prophete meaneth our Lords body wherein the maiestie of the diuine nature standeth as it were on a 〈◊〉 How so euer then wee interpret the fotestole concerning the literall and firsâ—… meaning yet the naturall flesh of Christe which he assumpted of the virgin is the spiritual truth wherevnto the Prophete directed his wordes That flesh where so euer it be is the fotestole of God and therefore it is euery where to be adored But as the Arcke deserued a speciall reuerence amonge the Iewes although it was the bare figure of Christes flesh in so much that Oza who touched it rashly died for it euen so the Sacrament of the altar which
wherein the honour may rest for the honour that wee geue to the body and blood of Christ which was taken of the virgine is according to the doctrine of S. Augustine geuen to his holy person who is the naturall Sonne of God and one substance with his Father true God and true man Thus wee saue the truth of the olde Propheâ—…ies the faith of our forefathers the proprietie of Christes wordes in his supper the honour of his Church the glory of his name who gaue no occasion of idolatry neither in worde nor in dede ¶ The adoration of Christes body in the Sacrament is proued out of the new Testament S. Paule speaking of Sacramtal eating saith he that eateth and drinketh vnworthely eateth and drinketh damnation to him self not discerning our Lords body that is to say not putting a difference betwene it and other meates For S. Hierome S. Augustiue Sedulius and Primasius expound those words in that meaning The difference which is to be made betwene the meate of Christes supper and other meates consisteth in two points in one that the receauer of Christes Sacrament must prepare him self before hand to be apt to receaue the grace of God in which point Baptisme penance holy orders and other Sacraments agree with the supper of Christe For we may not come being of lawfull age to any of those or such like holy mysteries without due disposing our selues to repentance for our synnes and to amendment of our life The second point of the difference betwene Christes supper other things is that in the Sacrament of his supper we must examine our selues euen for the respect of the substance of that meate which we receaue In baptisme we try our selues not for any honour which is due to the water but for the obteyning of the grace which is geuen in that Sacrament But in the supper a farther difference is to be made What is that The very substance which is taken is to be honoured and adored That is it which S. Chrysoâ—…ome sayth Non considerans vt oportet magnitudinem propositorum non reputans muneris magnitudinem He eateth vnworthely sayeth S. Chrysostome Who considereth not as it behoueth the greatnes of the things set foorth not weighing diligeÌ„tly the greatnes of the gift He speaketh not of the effect which cometh by the Sacrament but of the substance of the things set foorth What are they but such as appeare Bread and wine and yet in dede be Christ him self There fore it foloweth in S. Chrysostome If thou doest lern diligently qui sit propositus who is set before thee thou nedest to accompt nothing els Behold the person and substance set foorth is to be considered only Nullius alterius indigebis ratione Thou shalt nede make no accompt of any thing els For out of that substaÌ„ce which standeth before thee cometh the grace and all other effects of worthy eating as if he sayd prouyde to receaue worthely the person set foorth to thee vnder the formes of bread and thou mayest be secure So that the differeÌ„ce properly belonging to Christes supper is to make a difference of this substance from al other substances That is the difference whereof S. Ambrose saith He that will receaue worthely this meate must iudge that he is the Lorde whose blood he drinketh in a mystery What other meaning can these wordes haue but that he must iudge him selfe to drinke not wine but blood not the blood of an earthly man but his blood who is God also and that he drinketh his blood in a mysterie to wit not in his owne forme but vnder the forme of wine for he speaketh of Sacramentall drinking of that which is taken by mouth Therefore the very substance which he drinketh must be disseuered from all other creatures Nowe I say he that is willed so to iudge of the substance of this Sacrament as the substance of him who is God ought to be iudged of he is willed to adore the substance of this Sacrament sith his substance ought to be adored who is God For as S. Chrysostom saith the very table to wit the very meate staÌ„ding vpoÌ„ the table is the strength oâ—… our soulâ—… the synewes of the mind the bond of confidence our foundation hope health light lyfe Thus to iudge oâ—… this SacrameÌ„t by adoring it with true â—…oue in it to adore God that is to adore not only in spirite figures as yâ— Iewes dyd adore but also to 〈◊〉 in spirite and truth as Christ said we should do because our SacrameÌ„ts coÌ„teme yâ— truth which they signiâ—…ied â—…ot only signifying our Sauiour as yâ— old SacrameÌ„ts did but also geuing saluatioÌ„ as S. Augusti doth witnesse And for as muche as the Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ is the Sacrifice of the new â—…aw willed by him to be made for the remâ—…brance of his death we must both in our spirite and in the truth of naturall coniunction be vâ—…ted and made one with the substance thereof and also in the truth of Christes flesh externally consâ—…crated adore God offering him that reasonable and diuine sacrifice to the end we may render and paie the worship of thanksgeuing due for our redemption in none other substaÌ„ce then in the same which redemed vs. For as it is nostrum holocaustum our sacrifice wholy burnt by death of the Crosse so is it nostra hostia pacifica our sacrifice wherewith we both geue thanks for peace made betwene God and vs and also applie to our selues the fruites of that one burnt offerinâ—… truse made vpon the Crosse which was is the propitiation for our synnes and for the synnes of the whole world This kind of adoration proper to the new testament is due to God of our behalf by the Sacrament and sacrifice of Christes body and blood And herein stanâ—…eth all that which the Apostle speaketh of worthy or vnworthy receauing if the true substance of this SacrameÌ„t be vprightly estemed and both outwardly and inwardly honoured And so doth S. Augustine expound yâ— Apostles minde as now it shal appere Ianuarius had asked what S. Augustine thought concerning holy dayes fasting dayes or such like customes of the Church which are diuersly kept in diuerse countries Among other questions it was also moued what were to be more approued whethere to receaue daily the SacrameÌ„t of the altar or els to abstein sometymes To this question S. Augustine maketh answer that neither of them both depriueth the body and blood of our Lorde of honour if eche of them striue who may honour best the moste healthfull Sacrament For as well the Centurion as Zacheus did honour our Sauiour in maner by contrary meanes the one by receauing him with ioy into his house the other by saying â–ª Lord I am not worthy that thou shouldest enter vnder my roofe And as among the Iewes
of Christ who was coming to his house Lorde I am not worthy that thou should est enter vnder my roof we thereby know that he spake to Christ and called Christ his Lord and not only God in heauen so when we reade that the receauers of the holy communion did say at the tyme of receauing the Sacrament Lord I am not worthy that thou should est enter vnder my roof and that they did bow downe adore worship at the same tyme we must vndoubtedly conclude that both the Sacrament was spoken vnto and called Lord and also bowed to and adored Thus I haue proued the adoration of Christes body blood euen as it is a Sacrament out of the Prophetes out of S. Paul out of the anncient Fathers out of the publike seruire of the primitine Church and out of the custome of the faithfull people Al which proufes I haue applied to this end that the body blood of Christ should be knowen thereby to be really present in that self Sacrament which we take into our mouthes And for so much as that is so euery faithful man ought to beleue most constantly the sayd reall presence and to detest the contrary doctrine as a most perniciouse heresy ¶ The reall presence of Christes body and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine is proued by the testimonies of the auncient Fathers IF euery man is to be credited and ought to haue authoritie in his owne arte facultie if when we build we call a Carpenter to counsell and when we make gardens a gardener how much more must we esteme the holy Doctors of the Churche who are not only cunning by long labour bestowed â—…pon the science of diuinitie but also haue so vertuously vsed them selues that they haue bene abundantly instructed in all knowlege by marnailons inspirations of the holy Ghoste whose names are so greate that the very Heretiks can not deny them to be holy Sainctes in heauen and therefore they pretend to haue the first syx hundred yeres on their side It is then a good sure way to worke with the aduise of those auncient Fathers whose sayings because I haue particularly alleged and examined in euery article and chapiter of my former bookes as occasion suffered I thought good not to prosecâ—… them now again at large but rather to shew briefly by what generall chapiters a man may be vndoutedly assured of their belefe and doctrine First very many Fathers speaking of Christes words or dedes when aâ—…ter bread taken and thankes geuen he sayd this is my body allege the almighty power of God to defend the veritie of those dedes and wordes Therefore the same Fathers beleued those words this is my body to be true in so wonderfull a maner as they sound at the first sight And seing they meane according to their moste vsuall sound that this which is pointed vnto though it seme still bread is notwithstanding yâ— substance of Christes body we ought to think that those Fathers beleued the reall presence of Christes body Otherwise they wold neuer haue alleged his Godhead or almightie power and omnipotencie for the instituting of a figure and signe of his owne body sith for the institution of signes and figures such an authoritie might haue serued as God gaue to Moyses who yet was but the feruant of Iesus Christe and not almighty God S. Ireneus How can they be sure the bread whereon thankes are geuen to be the body of their Lord the chalice of his blood if they say not him to be the Sonne of the maker of the world S. Ireneus was so sure that Christ through his diuine power made the bread wherein thankes were geuen his owne body that if the Godhead were denied which should work that presence no man could be sure of the presence of Christes body and yet he might haue bene sure of a figuratiue presence though Moyses had bene the minister of the SacrameÌ„t and not Christe S. Cyprian That bread which our Lorde gaue to the Disciples by the omnipotencie of the word was made flesh What neded omnipotencie be alleged for a fact that were not supernaturall S. Hilary speaking of the Sacrament saith By the profession of our Lorde it is truely flesh and truely blood Is not this thinge the truth â–ª It may in dede chance not to be true to them who deny Icsus Christe to be true God As who should say if his Godhead may stand his flesh must nedes be truly present S. Basilius to shew yâ— these wordes This is my body make full persuation allegeth out of S. Iohn the glory or Godhead and also the incarnation of Christe because except he were both true God and true man this is my body should not make full persuasion sith if he were not man he should not haue a body whereof those words might be verified If he were not God we might dout how he were able to make his word true but seing he is God and man and sayd this is my body there is no dout of the presence of his body S. Ambrosius Our Lorde Iesus him self crieth This is my body he hath sayd and it is made S. Chrysostome O miracle He hath sitteth aboue caet And againe Let vs euery where geue credit vnto his wordes specially in the mysteries Eusebius Emissenus Let the very power of him that consecrateth strengthen thee S. Cyrillus of Alexandria Seing God worketh let vs not aske how Damascene We know no more but that the word of God is true strengthfull almighty but the maner is inscrutable No wise man requireth vs earnestly to beleue the words which himself doth think to be figuratiue and parabolicall but he rather should bid vs beware that we mistake them not as S. Chrysostome vpon those words God repented crieth out See a grosse word not that God repented God forbid but God speaketh to vs according to the custome of man Likewise S. Augustine saith in respect of those words Iohn Baptist is Elias Our Lord spake figuratiuely but S. Ihon saying I am not Elias answered properly If now these words This is my body were figuratiue we should haue ben'e warned by the watchmen of God to beware of them and not require d to beleue them as now we are required yea we are so required to beleue them that it is wonderfull to see and to consyd er how earnestly the Doctours speake in that behalf S Basilius The certeintie of our Lords words who sayd This is my body which is geu en for yow make this thing for the remembrance of me ingender full persuasion Surely figuratiue words can not make ful persuasion because theÌ„ selues are imperfite as lackin g their proper signification which is the chiefe vertue of words whereby they should fully informe vs. for no figuratiue speache is so plaine as a proper speache is
bread and wine but to be that substaÌ„ce which Christe toke of his mother when the worde was made flesh S. Cyprian sheweth the bread which our Lord gaue to the Disciples to be changed not in shape but in nature Therefore as the forme remayneth so the substance is changed S. Ambrose It is not that which nature formed but that which the blessing hath consecrated If nature formed the substance of common bread and the words of blessing pronounced This is my body It is not afterward any more the substance of bread but of Christes body Grace is affirmed with the deniall of nature This argument is in maner as large as that of the reall presence but who so listeth to see more therein let him reade Gregorius Nyssenus in Oratione Catechetica Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus in Catechesi mystagogica 4. Eusebius Emissenus in Oratione 5. in Pascha Isychius in ca. 6. Leuitici Theophylact Euthymius in Euangelia Damascene li. 4. cap. 14. All that affirme the external sacrifice of Christes body blood must nedes teache the real presence thereof sith that thing which is absent can not be externally sacrificed S. Dionysius Areopagita sayth The Bishop excuseth him self for that he offereth a sacrifice aboue his worthynesse or power crying out decently Thou o Lord sayedst Make this thing for the remembrance of me Heretikes admit no Eucharists or offerings saith S. Ignatius in Theodorete because they do not confesse the Eucharist to be the flesh of the Sauiour A man would haue thought this had bene made in our tyme against the Sacramentaries It agreeth to them so well or rather they agree with the old Heretikes so much Eusebius Pamphili We offer a sacrifice full of God and dreadsull and most holy We sacrifice after a new maner according to the new Testament a cleane sacrifice or hoste Concilium Nicaenum Let vs vnderstand by faith that Lamb of God who taketh away the synnes of the world being situated in that holy table to be offered vnbloodely of the Priests and that we take in dede his preciouse body and blood And againe Neither rule nor custome hath deliuered that they who haue no power to offer sacrifice should deliuer the body of Christ to them who offer Hereof S. Ireneus S. Cyprian S. Augustine and al the reste may be readen for it is a knowen matter handled of the Fathers moste frequently What shall I say that the Fathers teache that the Sacrament ought to be adored with Godly honour as I shewed before That they teache euill men to receaue and to touche the body blood of Christe thereby to be gylty of theÌ„ as Iudas was That they teache our bodies to be nourished with Christes flesh and blood which can not be nourished with a thing absent That they teache vs to be naturally vnited to Christe whiles he dwelleth corporally in vs That they affirme Christes body to be vpoÌ„ the altar vpon the holy table in the hands in the mouthes and the bloode to be in the Cup That they geue it such names as only may agree o the substance of Christe calling it saluation light life Lorde Christe an offering wholy burnt a Sacrament which quiâ—…keneth and maketh vs liue for euer That they teache euery man to receaue the same substance one measure equall portion which is true neither of spirituall nor of corporall gifts but only of yâ— flesh of Christe really present vnder the forme of bread That they vse in shewing how it is sanctified the verbs creating making working consecrating representing or making present and such like which are not verified of a matter onlie spiritual or absent in substance That they speake of it couertly saying Norunt fideles the saithfull know because if they should plainely declare the truth thereof the infidels wold mocke at it as now the heretikes doc For it is a mystery aboue all reason of man which scoffing were not to be feared if it were a mere figure for all kindes of religioÌ„ haue ceremonies and figures That they haue applied it to the helping of sowles departed as being the very self substance which ransacked hell That they haue taught it to be the truth which hath succeded in place of the old figures That they haue vsed by the knowen truth thereof to proue that Christe had true flesh and true blood in a visible manner two natures in one person against all the olde Heretiks That they haue so far preferred it before Baptisme and the other Socraments that no crumme might be suffered to fall downe or to be lost which was not so in the water of Baptisme for men were baptized in the running water of the flood That the Catechumeni who were admitted to the preaching of the Ghospel which is an excellent signe of Christes flesh and blood yet might not see the Eucharist because it was also the truth it sel. vnder a signe that no man might eate it except he were first baptized and kept the commandements and yet the Cathechumeni had a sanctified bread also geuen to them which was a signe of Christ as S. Augustine doth witnesse Let now the discrete Reader weigh vprightly this doctrine so grounded in holy scriptures and auncient Fathers and he shal perceaue that what soeuer our aduersaries bring for the other syde it may proue the Sacrament to be a figure which we denye not but it can not disproue the reall presence of Christes body and blood vnder that figure which is the thing that we stand in against them ¶ The reall presence of Christes body is proued by the faith of the whole Church of God in all tymes and ages S. Paule disputing against them who saied that our bodies should not arise againe hath these wordes Si Christus non resurrexit inanis est praedicatio nostra inanis est fides vestra If Christ be not risen our preaching is voyd and your faith is in vaine The like may be saied concerning the Sacrament of the altar in whiche if the true substance of Christes body be not conteined the Apostles preaching is in vaine and our faith is nothing worth But S. Paule acccompteth it a great absurditie that either of them both should be voyd or in vaine and yet prosecuting farther that argument he addeth that if Christ be not risen Qui domierunt in Christo perierunt those that haue slepte in Christ are perished Those I say that haue slept in Christ that haue beleued in him loued him suffred martyrdom for him those are perished Right so it is if Christes body be not vnder the form of bread all our forefathers that haue slept in Christ are perished All theyr faith watching praier almose dedes all
them Therefore in this behalfe we are clere as who neuer departed from the Apostles nor froÌ„ their 〈◊〉 â–ª But your departing is knowen I 〈◊〉 that it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Berengarius about the yere of our Lord. 1000. I can tell when 〈◊〉 renewed the same heresy when Luther when Zwinglius began Who knoweth not where the Churches are whence they depâ—…rted To wit in Italy in France in Spaine in Germany so forth I can tell the CouÌ„cels wherin it hath bene condemned At 〈◊〉 at Uercels at Tours in the great Councel of Lateran at â—…iemia in Feance at Basill at Constance at Florence at Trent All things are knowen so manifestly concerning the begiuning and proceding of the Sacramentaries that they can not be denied To couclude our faith is 〈◊〉 by the testimonie of yâ— Church which in al ages hath beleued yâ— real presence of Christ in the Sacrament in so much that S. Hilary saith there is no place left of douting of the veritie of Christes fleshe blood why so nunâ—… enim ipsius Domini professione fide nostra verè 〈◊〉 est 〈◊〉 verè sanguis est â–ª for now both by the profession of our Lord him self by our faith it is fleshe in dede and blood in dede Lo By our Lordes profession and by our faith S. Hilary confesseth that all Christians beleued that the SacrameÌ„t of Cjroâ—…tes body and blood whereof he there spake was his fleshe in dede and his blood in dede for he had spoken before of the Sacrament which be called also a mystcrie and our Lords meate and the Sacrament of his flesh to be communicated to vs which Sacrament is Christes fleshe in dede and being receaued maketh the same fleshe naturally and corporally to dwell in vs. This was not only the minde of S. Hilary but he saith it was the profession of our Lord and the faith of the Churche whiche two groâ—…ids are so sure that no place of douting is left For the faith of the â—…hurch doth expound declare witnesse how Christ our Lord ment when he said my flesh is meate in dede This faith can not be vayne or voide for by it we ouercomme the world the deuyl and hel gates By it we know the difference betwene these words This is my body and these I am the dore the vine the way the rock is Christ Iohn Baptist is Elias and such like For no man taught in any age neither ChristiaÌ„ people did at tyme beleue that Christ was a material dore vine or way neither that any rock was turned into Christ neither that Ihon Baptist was Elias in person Faith always did vnderstand these propositioÌ„s and such like to be a phrase of speaking without any effect of working any farther thing But when a lawfull Priest saith vppon bread at the altar This is my body then no faithâ—…ul man euer douted but there was wrought the body and blood of Christ. and so our fathers and great grandfathers deliuered to vs that belefe Certainly a surer rule to vnderstand the word of God then faith is neuer was heard of for it is the life and graâ—… of the new testament which the holy Ghost hath geuen into the whole Church of God It is the gift of knowlege to euery good beleuer which directeth him to al truth S. Augustine shewing that the Manichees thought the visible sonne to be Christ although he might by many meanes haue impugned that errour yet he specially chose to say Catholicae Ecclesiae recta fides improbat tale commentum diabolicam doctrinam esse cognoscit credendo The right faith of the Catholike Church disproued that fable and knoweth it by beleuing to be a deâ—…ylish doctrine Euen so by beleuing the Sacrament of the altar to be Christes true flesh we know the doctrine of the Sacramentaries to be a fable aud an heresy Epiphanius writing of purpose against figuratiue and allegoricall interpretatious geueth likewise a most clere witnesse of the belefe of all the Church in his tyme and before him For disputing what it is for man to be made according to the image of God He shewith at the last whatsoeuer it be once it is true because God through grace hath geuen man that image Though we can not tell wherein it standeth And for example he bringeth how Christe tooke at his last supper bread and wine and when he had geuen thanks he sayd This is my body and this is my blood 〈◊〉 Epiphanius nameth not these things because the 〈◊〉 should not by his bookes vnderstaÌ„d our mysteries coÌ„sequeÌ„tly he sheweth that the thing coÌ„secrated is not like neither to the manhod of Christ nor to his Godhead For it is of a shape and to looke vnto a dead or vnsensible thing yet Christ by grace hath said This is my body and This is my blood Et nemo non fidem habet sermoni Qui â—…nim non credit esse ipsum verum sicut ipse dixit is excidit à gratia salute and euery man beleueth the saying For who so doth not beleue the saying as him selfe said it he is fallen from grace and saluation If the word saying be this is my body this is my blood If euery man beleue the saying if he that beleueth not the saying to be true and so to be true euen as Christ spake it as he sounded it as he vttered it if he that beleueth not these things be fallen from grace and saluation who wil now beleue that this is the signe of my body and not the truth thereof and then he must say likewise that in dede we are not made according to the image of God Euery man in the tyme of Epiphanius did beleue not only yâ— truth of Christes body blood in heauen nor only the dwelling thereof in vs by faith but euery man did beleâ—…e this selfe saying this speache and this proposition This is my body If this saying must be beleued it must be true if the speache it selfe be true the thing thereby signified is true But the wordes doe signifie the substance of Christes body for his body is a substance therefore it is true yâ— this is the substaÌ„ce of Christes body But if it be still bread it is not so for material bread is not the body of Christ therefore it is so the substance of his body that it is not bread or wine which is the signe of his body as the Sacramentaries teach In this saying This is my body no bread is named no signe no figure â—…ut only the selfe body of Christe which is one certaine substance Therefore all the Church in the tyme of Epiphanius and alwaies before did beleue the thing pointed vnto in those words to be the substaÌ„ce of Christes body For how so euer it semed vnsensible as also it is not sene how we are made according to yâ— image of God yet yâ— saying was beleued euen
Chapiters of the seuenth Booke 1. Maister Iuel hath not answered D. Hâ—…rding wel touching the vvords of Christes supper 2. That the supper of Christ is a naked bare figure accordig to the Doctrine of the SacrameÌ„taries 3. That Christes bodie is receaued by mouth not by faith only 4. M. Iuel hath not replied vvel touching the sixth Chapiter of S. Iohn But hath abused as vvell yâ— gospel as diuerse authorities of the fathers 5. Item he hath not replied vvell touching the Carpharnaites 6. Neither conferred the supper vvith the sixth of Iolm as it ought to be 7. Neither disputed wel touching the omnipotenâ—…ie of Christ in promising the gift of his flesh 8. Whether the 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 exponÌ„d more vnpropertie or inconuenientlie the vvords belonging to Christes supper 9. A notable place of S. Augustine corrupted by M. Iuel 10. Of the signification of aduerbs 11. Of the first author of the SacrameÌ„tarie heresie 12. Of Christes glorified bodie and the place of S. Hierom expounded 13. A place of S. Chrysostom examined 14. The difference betvvene baptisme and oure Lordes supper 15. The ansvvere to M. Iuel concerning the Nicene Councell S. Augstine caet 16. VVhether Christes bodie dvvelleth reallie in our bodies by his natiuitie 17. Item vvhether by faith 18. The contradictions of M. Iuel in this article 19. Whether by baptism Christe dvvelleth reallie in our bodies 20. Item VVhether by the Sacrament of the altar or no. 21. Christes bodie is proued really present by S. Chrysostoms vvordes 22. Item by the vvordes of S. Hilarie 23. Item of S. Gregorius Nyssenus 24. Item of S. Cyrill ¶ Master Iuel hath not answered D. Harding well touching the words of Christes supper IVel. fo 316. The people was not taught in the first 600. yeres to beleue that Christes body is really substantially corporally carnally or naturally in the Sacrament Harding Of the termes really substantially corporally coet found in the doctors Iuel His answere is that Christes body is corporally vnited to vs but whether it be corporally in the Sacrament he answereth not one word Harding The termes are fouÌ„d in the doctors treating of the true being of Christes body in the Sacrament Sander Ergo M. Iuel said not truly For as D. Harding now saith it so he proueth afterward Christes body to be really in the Sacrament Iuel In this matter he is able to allege nothing for direct prouf Harding Christen people hath euer bene taught that the body of Christ is present verely in the Sacrament vvhich doctrine is founded vpon Christes plaine vvords Sander Ergo M. Iuel â–ª he was able to allege some what Iuel It is marueil the people should be taught without a teacher or without â–ª words â–ª or those not writen Harding Christes vvordes are expressed by three Euangelists and S. Paule Take eate this is my body this is my blood coet San. Ergo M. Iuel hath 〈◊〉 plainly 〈◊〉 whereby direct prouf of Christes real presence is 〈◊〉 â–ª Harding Neither saieth our Lord only This is my body but to put the matter out of dout he addeth vvhich is geuen for you Iuel 317. Hereupâ—… M. Harding fouÌ„deth his carnal presence 318. in such grosse sort really and fleshly in the Sacrament c. San. It is no grosse sort of presence whiche is reall true and miraculouse as being of Christes own institution Marcion and Apelles herein your auncestors M. Iuel thought it a carnall a grosse a fleshly thing for Christ to lie nine moneths in his mothers belly to be nourished there with blood and humours to be borne naked to be wrapped in clouts For a remedie of which absurdities the one of them deuised that Christ was not really borne but that which Tertullian saith against Marcion shal be my answere to you First God saieth he hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound men that are wise in their own conceit 2. Whatsoeuer is vnworthy of God is expedient for maÌ„ 3. Be thou assured Christ had rather be borne then in any parte to make a lye Now if we applie all these sayinges to Christes presence in the Sacrament it shal be lesse carnall lesse grosse lesse fleshly to haue the substance of Christes corporall flesh in a spirituall manner really present vnder the forme of bread then either to be corporally in his mothers womb or to think that he made a lye when he said take eate this is my body Iuel Christ vseth not any of these words San. I will say with S. Augustine although the word be not found the thing is found Harding 130. Though this manner of speaking be not thus expressed in the scripture yet it is deduced out of the scripture Iuel Christ vseth no leading thereunto Sander The worde 〈◊〉 â—…id lead the Apostles to that which was in Christes hands or which lay before him the wordes is my body shewed the substance thereof as if I shewing to a man that kind of beast should say this is a lion the word this leadeth him to that beast which he feeth and whereunto I point is a lion sheweth the substance of the thing pointed vnto This oddes only there is that a man by pointing speaking can shew only that which was before but God who spake it was made by pointing and speaking doth make that to be the substance of his body whiche was not so before Nowe as when it is truly said this is a lion it wil follow thereof vnder this visible forme which I shew a lion is substantially conteined so seing Christe pointeth to the Sacrament saying This is my body it will follow thereof in this Sacrament my body is conteined substantially corporally c. Thus Chrisâ—…es wordes lead vs to his body substantially present in the Sacrament ergo M. Iuel must subscribe by his owne promise Iuel 317. D. Fisher saith this sense can not in any wise be gathered of the bare wordes of Christ. Sander Wel fisht I promise you if he fish wel that catcheth a lie 1. The blessed B. of Rochester had said that the vnderstaÌ„ding of the Gospell is more certeinly obteined by the interpretation of the Fathers and by the practise left by them then by the bare words of the Gospel For example hereof he saith no man shall prone by the bare wordes of the Gospel that any Priest in these daies doth coÌ„secrate the true body and blood of Christ. Marke good Reader whereof he speaketh For although saith he Christ him self did in dede make his body and blood of bread and wine yet except the like be promised and graunted to vs we can not be sure we do it but no suche thing is promised For in S. Mathew now followeth one of the places alleged by M. Iuell No word is put whereby it maie be proued that in our Masse the very presence of Christes body and blood
the booke of Canticles whiche you against his iudgement there set out in the vulgare tong to be readen of euery wanton boye or girle wold perhaps apply the names of loue there vsed carnally But that it should be any carnal thing to eate Christes flesh either by â—…aith or as we do it by moâ—…th that was neuer thought a wanton or fleshely thing as the practise of the Catholiks can witnesse who neuer came so wantonly to any caâ—…nal banket as they came deuoutly to receaue Christes body into their mouthes preparing them selues with contrition consession and satisfaction The spirituall dedes of them shewe that they vnderstode Chriâ—… stes supper moste spiritually Therefore D. Harding hath not erred in saying that Christes body is to be â—…ceaued into our bodies Iuel The bread is a figure San. Before consecration S. Ambrose confesseth it to be a figure but not after the words this is my body are said ouevit Vbi verba Christi accesserint corpus est Christi when the words of Christ are come thereunto it is the body of Christe Againe Damascene expreâ—…y saith Non est figura panis vinum corporiâ—… sanguinis Christi absit enim hoc The breade and wine is not a figure of the body and blood of Christ. God forbid that thing sed est ipsum corpus domini Deificatum but is the selfe Deified body of our Lord. Deified is to say made glorioâ—…se and immortall as God is by nature M. Iuel neuer brought nor can bring any Doctor who said that bread tarying in his olde substance is after consecration the body of Christe and yet he teacheth that doctrine as bold therein as blind bayerd Iuel The bread is subiecte to corruption Christes body is immortall therefore Rabanus Maurus saith The Sacrament is receaued with the mouth with the vertue of the SacrameÌ„t the inner man is repaired The Sacrament is turned into the nourishing of the body by the vertue of the Sacrament we get euerlasting life San. This place is alleged that noman is the nere where to find it For 〈◊〉 hath writen moe bookes then one or two Again he is no Doctor to be alleged of M. Iuell Who estemeth â—…one of them which haue writen these last nine hundred yeres and yet seing he bringeth them for him selfe wheusoeuer he is able to make any colour to peâ—…ade his owne doctrine thereby he doth vs to vnderstand that his resolution is that no writer of these last nine hundred yeres should be brought against him but yet that he may bring what him list against vs. Thinke you M. Iuel that this 〈◊〉 coÌ„dition shal be taken at your haÌ„ds are you not ashamed to cite them whom you haue 〈◊〉 if you did cite them to mock at them only or to shew their folly errours it were tolerable in a man of your profession But to allege them in earnest to build vpon their words and to proue your doctrine by some one of them and that where he disagreeth perhaps froÌ„ his sellowes yet not to admit them where they al agree together it is to speake all in briefe the very point of an heretike who seketh singularitie wheresoeuer he can find it and leaueth alwaies vniuersall and Catholike consent But these words we must take as you geue them vs. be it so Rabanus saith The SacrameÌ„t is taken with the mouth is not that against your doctrine M. Iuel who said the body of Christ is to be eaten by faith only none otherwise did you not speake of the body of Christ as it is eaten in the Sacrament But your own Doctor saith the SacrameÌ„t is taken with the mouth therefore the body of Christ is so taken and that is expresly proued by the words which follow in Rabanus With the vertue of the Sacrament the inner man is filled For so you should haue translated satiatur is filled and not is repaired as you haue done But howe is the inner man filled with the vertue of the Sacrament if wheaten bread be the Sacrament doth wheaten bread fill the soule of man Moreuer is the vertue of any thing absent from it is not that vertue in the Sacrament whereby the inner man is filled sith it is called of Rabanus the vertue of the Sacrament but the only 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 is the vertue which in this 〈◊〉 filleth 〈◊〉 soules Therefore the body of Christ is in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the body of Christ is 〈◊〉 with our mouthes Yea but say you the Sacrament is turned into the 〈◊〉 of the body I aunswere that the Sacrament is necessarily there meant to be the forme of breade or of wine whiche in dede nonrisheth our bodies by the power of God but vnder those formes the vertue lieth whereby as 〈◊〉 saith we get euerlasting life What haue you won now by your Doctor truely nothing els but your own confusion For he saith not that the bread remaineth still as you doe falsely teache Iu. The Sacrament saith S. Augustine is receaued frome the Lordstable Of some vnto life of som vnto destruction the thing it self whereof it is a Sacrament that is the body of Christ is receaued of euery man to life and of no man vnto destruction whosoâ—… be partaker of it San. Here is a heape of falshodes and lyes To disproue the which I must first open the Catholike faith which teacheth that the SacrameÌ„t of Christes supper is our Lords own body vnder the forme of bread The thing of the Sacrament is not the body 〈◊〉 Christ as your words put in among those of S. Augustins do falsely 〈◊〉 but the thinge here ment by S. Augustine is the 〈◊〉 of the Churche of God and the mysticall body of Christe which he knitteth together into one lump by vnspeakable meaues of 〈◊〉 loue 〈◊〉 flesh and blood And that is so plaine in S. Augustin that I can not sufficiently wonder at your enormous either blindues or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iuel Thus he writeth in yâ— selfe place where you cite him Hunc cibum caet Christ willeth this meate and 〈◊〉 to be vnderstanded the felowship of his body of his 〈◊〉 And again Huius rei Sacramentum id est 〈◊〉 corporis sanguinis Christi 〈◊〉 sacrameÌ„t of this thing that is to 〈◊〉 the Sacrament of the vnitie of the body and blood of Christ 〈◊〉 where euerie day somewhere certeine dayes comming betwene is prepared in our Lords table and is receaued 〈◊〉 our Lordes table to some men vnto life to other vnto destruction But the thing it selfe whereof also it is a holy signe or Sacrament is receaued of euerie man to life of no man to destruction who soeuer be partaker of it Hitherto S. Augustine M. Iuel saith the thing it self is yâ— body of Christ but if he had not falsely and miserably diuided S. Augustines words the very contrary would haue appeared to the eyes of the Reader
M. Iuel left out two genitiue cases vnitatis and huius rei which being repeated in S. Augustine maketh all the matter exceding clere S. Augustine affirmeth the felowship of the sainctes to be the body of Christ whereof S. Paule saith we being many are one bread one body The SacrameÌ„t saith he of this body which body is the cumpanie of the elect is receaued frome our Lordes table Huius rei Sacramentum The Sacrament of this thing Of whiche 〈◊〉 M. Iuel saieth of the body of Christ and meaneth the naturall body which sitteth in heauen for M. Iuel said before in the same verie paragraph Christes body is the thing it selfe Christes body is in heaueÌ„ gloriouse subiect to no corruptioÌ„ And he made the bread which is in earth a figure of that body But saith S. Augustin so No douttesse His words be Sacramentum huius rei 〈◊〉 est vnitatis corporis sanguinis Christi c. The SacrameÌ„t of this thing that is to say of the vnitie of Christes body and blood is prepared in our Lordes table and thence receaued The vnitie of Christes body is not his naturall body but his 〈◊〉 body the Churche whiche before S. Augustine called Societatem Sanctorum the feloship of the holy men Now the Sacrament of this feloship and of this vnion is receaued from our Lords table Therefore we see two things noted of S. Aâ—…gustine the one is the Sacrament it self The other is that thing whereof it is the Sacrament The Sacrament is such a substance which may be either life or destruction to vs because it is the naturall and true body of Christ which being vnited to God can make vs liâ—…e if it be worthely receaued and that by his own vertue which thing manna the Sacrament of the Iewes could not doe and the same being vnworthely receaued destroieth vs for that we touche and violate the reall substance of our maker But the thing whereof that Sacrament is the sigâ—…e is hurtful to no man Why so Because it is the â—…nioying or fruition of that feloship which being not entred into but by vertue and grace can not possibly make any man to be destroied For we can not abuse the vertues them selues All substances we may abuse and God we may offend â–ª but we can not take hurt by faith being faithfull chast humble charitable temperate modest by which vertues we are incorporated to the mystical body of Christ. This thing therefore which is the â—…ffect of the Sacrament being wrought in faithfull men is called in S. Augustine res ipsa the thing it selfe And was called before societas Sanctorum the feloship of the sainctes and straight after haec res this thing and again vnitas corporis sanguinis Christi the vnitie of Christes body and blood This thing is destruction to no man whosoeuer be partaker of it M. Iuel doth most ignorantly I can not tel with what greater malice leaue out huius rei and vnitatis and saith Sacramentum de mensa dominica sumitur The SacrameÌ„t is receaued from our Lords table But S. Augustine said the SacrameÌ„t of this thing that is to say of vnitie is receaued All those wordes huius rei id est vnitatis were left out of M. Iuel The which thing doth clene alter the whole sense of S. Augustine Againe whereas S. Augustine saide the Sacrament of this 〈◊〉 is prepared in our Lordes â—…able 〈◊〉 Iuel left it 〈◊〉 But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 much for me to shew to the reader that Christes Sacra ment is not only receaued from his table but also prepared in his table and first prepared before it be receaued Prepared by consecration receaued by coÌ„munion It is not common bread as â—… Iâ—…el wickedly preacheth For that was prepared before we came to our lordes table but Christes Sacrament is prepared in his table it is there first made thence it is receaued Wel if the Sacrament be one thing and the thing of the Sacrament wherof S. Augustine speaketh be the cumpanie of good men what will follow hereof Surely that the Sacrament is the substance of Christes bodie vnder the foorme of bread How so It is not possible that the body of Christ should be excluded 〈◊〉 the Sacrament of his holy table but al yâ— is there prepared or els receaued eyther it is the SacrameÌ„t it self or the thing of the Sacrament but Christs body is not now called of S. Augustin the thing of yâ— SacrameÌ„t as it hath ben proued therefore it is called the SacrameÌ„t it selfe But yâ— Sacrament is prepared in Christes table receaued thence therefore Chrâ—…stes body is prepared there receaued thence That which is receaued theÌ„ce appeareth bread that only is prepared by consecration and receaued by communion Therefore vnder that visible foorme the bodie is made present by consecration and receaued into our mouthes by communion Was there not cause trow you why M â–ª Iuel should leaue out the genitine case iâ—…yned with Sacramentum and take it absolutely for a sacrament that is to say for bread And so to make the thing of the Sacrament to be the body of Christ in heauen By such falshods mainteined must be mainteined otherwise it wold fal to the ground ¶ M. Iuel hath not disputed well touching the omnipotencie of Christ in promising the gift of his flesh HArding Christ by shevving his diuine povver vvhereby he vvill ascend into heauen confoundeth the vnbelefe of the Capharnaits touching the promised substance of his body Iuel Christ maketh mention of his ascension into heauen ergo sayeth M. Harding his body is really in the Sacrament San. You leaue out the omnipotencie of Christ where vppon D. Harding grounded his whole reason and so you play with him the pelting Sophist Iuel If he conclude not thus he concludeth nothing San. He concludeth that the Capharnaites be confounded for their vnbelefe as you also be For seing Christ sayed of his flesh I will geue And the whole stay why the Capharnaites beleued him not was because they knew not his Godhead which was able to doe it by so excellent a meanes as now we Catholikes know that he hath done it and ye will not know when both they and you here that Chrisâ—… is God and will asceÌ„d where he was before you are both confounded as who measure his workes by your own 〈◊〉 reason and not by his almighty word For his words are spirit and life and therefore do work really whatsoeuer they speake Iuel When ye see Christ ascend whole ye shal see that he geueth not his body in suche â—…ort as you imagine His grace is not wasted by morsels sayeth S. Augustine vsing Christes ascension to proue that there is no such grosse presence in the Sacrament San. True it is that Christ is not present to be wasted by eating but yet he is really eaten And that is clerely mea nt of S.
spiritual flesh by mouth and not only by faith eating by faith is rather more due to the flesh of Christ as it hangeth crucified then to any other maner of the same slesh For we must swetely remember his death and be partakers of his passioÌ„ by faith but not by mouth On the other syde we must eate Christes diuine and spirituall flesh as it is vnderstanded in another way distinct in maner from his crosse and passion therefore that other eating is an eating by mouth and not only by faith Iuel ClemeÌ„s AlexaÌ„drinus saith there is a fleshly blood wherewith we are redemed and a spiritual wherewith we are anoynted and this is to drink the blood of Christ to be partaker of his immortality As Christes blood is not really present to anoint vs â—…o it is not really present to nourish vs. San. Clemens Alexandrinus diuiding Christes blood into carnall spirituall agreeth with S. Hierom in the former part of the diuision that is to say in carnall blood but in the later part he speaketh of an other thing For whereas S. Hierom toke spirituall flesh and blood for the substance of them as they are eaten and dronken in the Sacrament which thinge may appere for that he citeth these wdrds of Christ my flesh is verily meate and except you eate my flesh ye shall not haue life euerlaâ—…ing which words are meant of the SacrameÌ„tal eating Cleâ—…eÌ„s doth not respect so much the Sacrament of the altar it self as the effect and fruite of Christes carnall blood how soeuer it be partaken and that is euident by his owne words where he saith this is to drincke the blood of Iesus to be partaker of his immortality To partake the immortalitie of Christ is an effect which may rise of faith of Baptism of penance of the Sacrament of the altar and of all other meanes or instruments whereby the saluation of Christ may be deriued vnto vs. Clemeâ—…s therefore speaking of an effect which may â—…e wrought by one meritoriouse cause only that is to say by the death of Christ but vnderstanding the meanes to applie that cause vnto vs to be diuerse he spake not directly of these mâ—…anes but of that spirituall fruite which either one or moe of them doe bring foorth in vs. For the oynting whereof Clemens doth speake is to be referred to the spirituall grace which is gâ—…en to the soule and not to the substance of the Sacrament whereof we dispute It will not therefore folow that because the blood whereof Clemens doth speake sometime is not really present when through grace we are ointed with it that the blood also whereof S. Hierom speaketh should not be really present sith they two speak not of one kind of spirituall blood Iuel This nouris hing and this anoynting are both spirituall San. That is true but not both after one sort For S. Hieroâ—… speaketh of the spirituall blood in the substance thereof as it is verily drink in yâ— Sacrament Clemens as it is fruitfully partaken of vs and not as it is considered in his own substance S. Hierome speaketh of the Sacrament Clemens of the end and fruit of al our belefe That S. Hierome speaketh of the SacrameÌ„t it is proued because he citeth suche wordes out of S. Iohn as all yâ— Fathers and manifest reasons conference of the scriptures proue to appertein by the way of promise to the SacrameÌ„t of Christes supper Which thing I haue proued in twentie chapters together in my third booke to which reasons vntil M. Iuel hath answered he shal geue me leaue to put it for an vndoubted truth that Christ in the later part of the sixth chapter of S. Ihon speaketh most literally of the gift of his fleshe blood to be made at his last supper But Clemens doth speake of that spirituall drinking Christs blood whereof S. Augustin saith Hunc cibum potum societatem vult intelligi corporis membrorum suorum quod est sancta Ecclesia This meate and drinke Christ willeth to be vnderstanded the felowship of his body and members which body the holy Church is Now to be partaker of the vnity and spirit which is made in Christes myâ—…ical body that is to be partaker of the immortalitie and glorie of our Lorde For as S. Paule saith he is the Sauiour of his body Iu. S. Augustine saith Iudas betraied Christ carnal thou hastâ—… betraied Christe spirituall For in thy fury thou betraiedst the holy Gospel to be burnt with wicked fier These wordes of Clement and Augustine agreing so nere in 〈◊〉 â—…nd phrase with the words of Hierom may stand for sufficiente exposition to the same San. These wordes goe so nere yâ— one to the other thâ—…t in sense they differ exceding much For now S. Augustine taketh Christe spiritual an other way cleaue diuerse from Clement or S. HieroÌ„ and that may be easily seen if a man will reade the line which foloweth next in S. Augustine For he saieth Iudas betraied the lawmaker vâ—…to the perfidious Iewes thou hast betraied to meÌ„ as it were reliquias eius his reliques to wit the lawe of God to be destroied S. Augustin then taketh Christ spiritual for certaine reliques of Christ which although they be no partes of his corporal body yet they belong to him for yâ— of his great prouidence toward vs he lest theÌ„ to be deuoutly readen kept what meane you M. Iuel to miâ—…gle things impertineÌ„t together Think you wheresoeuer you find yâ— word spiritual yâ— by by it perteineth to your purpose or do you only inteÌ„d to abuse that not lerned reader The word spirituall being maned of spiritus a spirite mâ—…ste nedes be taken â—…s manie wayes as yâ— word spirit is taken which doth signifie God that is to say the whole Trinitie For God is a spirit 2. The holy Ghost of whom Christ was lead into the deserte 3. Christ him selfe as S. Cyrillus hath noted 4. Angels 5. 〈◊〉 6. Spiritual gifts 7. The soule 8. The imagination 9. The breath of mans â—…outh 1â—… Anger or punishmeÌ„t and many other things By which diuerse taking of this one worde aâ—… of diuerse others in the holy scripture such difficulty riseth to a man though not vnlerned that without the help of vniâ—…sal tradition he can not vnderstand them That whiche you bring out of Athanasâ—…s appertemeth to the Capharnaites to no man els Iu. Thus M. Harding reasoneth we eate not the flesh of Christ that was crucified ergo Christes flesh is really in the Sacrament Sander You leaue out the chefe part of the argument We eate Christes diuine and spirtual flesh and yet we eate it not so as it was crucified therefore S. â—…icrom spake of that eating whiche is not only made by faith for so the crucified fleshe may be eaten but of that which is made by mouth also Iu. We can notthen eate the flesh that was crueified
Baptism only Christ ioyned vs to him selfe then as it were he should put vs foorth to nurse for neither faith nor baptism is Christ him selfe But when he fedeth vs with the reall substance of his own body and with it not only apprehended by faith but receaued by mouth then he fedeth vs by his own self and by him selfe vniteth vs to him selfe To conclude S. Chrysostome saith writing vppon S. Iohn Cum suum c. Christe intending to shew his loue towards 〈◊〉 hath mingled him selfe with vs by his body and hath brought him selfe into one with vs to thend the body should be vnited to the head Here are foure things to be noted First that Christe worketh the vnion Secondly that loue causeth him to worâ—… it Thirdly that the meane whereby he worketh it is affirmed to be his owne body Fourthly that so the body whiche is the Church is vnited to the head who is Christ. In whiche consideration Christ as sitting in the glorie of his father is the worker of the vnion His body as present in the Sacrament is the instrument whereby he worketh Christ as the Sauiour of his body whiche is the Church is the end whereunto the vnion doth bring vs. And herein appereth his loue that he him selfe in his owne substance is the beginning the middle the end of the vnioÌ„ The fondation the wall the top of the spiritual building The carpenter the instrument the dweller in the house of his ownâ—… handy working Now M. Iuel I will geue you certein phrases to pick out whereof you shal neuer be able to rid your handes 1. You proue right well that by faith we are dwelt in of Christ proue now that such dwelling is made by the thing it self and not by faith only â–ª for els Christes dwelling in vs by faith is not so reall a dwelling as that whereof S. Chrysostom speaketh which is not by faith only but by the thing it self to wit by the reall body of Christ. 2. You say in Baptism we are made Christes flesh and so we are made in dede his mystical flesh proue now that we are made also his flesh in baptism per corpus Christi by the body of Christ â–ª for els the vnion of the Sacrament wil be more real because the meane is more reall and more excellent 3. You proue that we are vnited to Christ by faith and Baptism proue now either that we are vnited vnto faith it self and vnto Baptism it self or els the vnion made in this Sacrament will farre passe the ioyning which is made in the other For here we are vnited to the same body wherewith we are fed which we see touche but there we be not vnited to the water wherewith we are washed 4. You say we are made Christ by Baptism but proue now that Christ is there deliuered in sensible things to your hand to your mouth to your tonge so that you may haue him within you as it is done in Christes supper These phrases you must proue to be verified by faith and Baptism if you will haue as reall a ioyning made by faith or by Baptism as is made by the Sacrament of the altar Iuel As the breaking of this bread is the partaking of the body of our Lord euen so the bread of idols is the partaking of diuels and if we eate one bread with idolatours we are made one body with them San. You falsifie the words of S. Paule who is not reported by Primasius to saie that the breaking of this bread is the partaking of the bodie of our Lord but the bread which we breake is the partaking of the bodie of our Lord. That which S. Paule spake of the substance of the bread which is the coÌ„municating of our Lords bodie that thing you assigne to the action of breaking And whereas Primasius saith the bread of Idols is also the partaking of diuels as the bread which we break is the partaking of our Lords bodie it sheweth yâ— he toke not yâ— name of bread materiallie for wheateÌ„ bread but for all kind of meare drinck which the Idolatours vsed And therefore he meant likewise yâ— the bread which we breake is no material bread but a kiÌ„d of meate which Christ hath prepared specially for vs. Againe as the Idolatours did offer their meate vnto diuels so much more the Christians did offer theirs vnto god And seiÌ„g the Idolators did in will and consent of mind partake with the diuels to whoÌ„ they offered the Christians did partake with God not only in will mind those I meane that were faithfull but also in body and mouth by receauing the natural flesh of Christ into theire bodies For Christ herein specially had honored his Church to theÌ„d the external sacrifice thereof should be no more any earthli creature but 〈◊〉 his own body blood the only propitiatorie sacrifice for al maÌ„kind ¶ It is proued that S. Hilarie taught the body of Christ to be really in the Sacrament HArding If the vvord be verily made flesh and vve receaue verily the vvord being flesh in our Lords meate hovv is he to be thought not to dvvell in vs naturally vvho both hath taken the nature of our flesh novv inseparable to himself in that he is born man and also hath mingled the nature of his ovvn flesh to the nature of euerlastingnesse vnder the Sacrament of his flesh to be receaued of vs in the communion Iuel M. Harding hath not hitherto found that Christes body is naturally or corporally in the Sacrament San. You found such a deuise M. Iuel to call for Fathers for their names and their words before their place was come that a maÌ„ wold haue thought when they were once come you wold haue examined their sayings most diligently But now your first shift is to heape them vp altogether And whereas in matters of lesse weight you did diâ—…ide D. Hardings words into a competent number of lines here you will not answer to the testimonies one by one least your nakednesse appeare but lay them all in one so to hyde your ignorance in answering Your second shift is to intreate of things out of order speaking now of one now of an other confusely But I wil bring your words to their due order as nigh as I can Your third shift is to let goe S. Cyrill and S. Hilarie and to râ—…ne to iâ—…pertinent sayings of S. Augustine of S. Bernard and of Cyrillus which are already answered The fourth shift is to say â—…alsely that M. Harding findeth not Christes body to be naturally or corporally in the Sacrament The which point God willing I wil now declare against your dissembling assertion 1. S. Hilarie disputeth against the Arrians which thing also M. Iuel in this article confesseth 2. The Arrians alleged against the Godhead of Christ diuerse arguments the which I must nedes repete
is not possible to vnderstand the mingling of two waxes to be other then reall and substanciall For wax hath neither faith nor spirit 3. D. Harding hath alleged fiue or six most plain sentences which may â—…e sene in his booke To none of all which M. Iuel hath iustly aâ—…swered or scant sayd any word reade also S. Cyrâ—…l in Ioan. li. 3. cap. 36. lib. 4. cap. 18. c. Now touching the corporall presence of Christ in the Sacrament it is to be vnderstanded that S. Cyrillus calleth the Sacrament of Christes body and blood mysticam benedictionem the mysticall blessing and therefore he exhorteth the faithfull peple to come to receaue it to be partakers thereof as the which putteth away both death and disseases Of this benediction and Sacrament thus he writeth 1. It differeth from Manna because the benediction is verily meate whereas Manna was a figuratiue bread But if the Sacrament conâ—…sted of materiall bread and were not Christs flesh it were no more the true bread then Manna was A litle blessing to wit a litle peece of the consecrated foode draweth the whole man to it Et sua gratia replet and filleth him with his owne grace Therefore the Sacrament hath grace of his own and is no common bread because then it shoâ—…ld not drawe vs vnto it but it should be turned into vs â–ª but nowe the benediction that is to say the Sacrament draweth vs to it therefore it self in his own substance is the flesh of Christ. He declareth the worde of God to be life according to nature yâ— it hath made his flesh able to geue life Et hac ratione facta est nobis benebictio viuificatrix And by this meane the Sacrament is made of power to geue vs life Marke the degrees the life it selfe is first in the sonne of God and afterward in the fleshe assumpted and so is the Sacrament able to geue life how hangeth this discurse but only because he presupposeth it for an vndouted truth that in the Sacrament the flesh of the sonne of God is really present After he had shewed that the Catechumeui can not partake of our mystical benediction he saith The ministers crie with a loud voice to those who come to the mystical blessing Sancta sanctis holy things for holy men Meaning the touching the sanctification of Christes body to agree only to those who are sanctified with yâ— holy Ghoste He calleth the mystical blessing the body of Christ and sheweth that those who come to it doe touch Christ whiche is of necessity vnderstanded by the meane of the foorme of bread vnder the which Christ is But if Christe were not really vnder that forme of bread why are the Catechumeni kept frome it For seing they confesse the faith with a loud voice as there S. Cyrillus doâ—…h witnesse and seing they may by their faith â—…eed vppon Christ in heauen shew me a reason M. Iuel if you be able why he that may eate Christe in faith may not eate the bread as you terme it which is the signe of him Specially sith S. Augustine confesseth that they also had a kind of halowed bread but not yâ— body of Christ geueÌ„ to them We geue this reason hereof because in the Sacrament of the body of Christe his own body is really present whiche is of suche honour that no meane sanctification should suâ—…ise for the admitting therunto And for as much as the Catechumeni who be not yet baptized haue not that grace of the holy Ghost which is geuen in baptism they are not sufficieÌ„tly prepared to receaue this marueilouse sacrifice and dreadfull myâ—…erie whiche you not withstandinge repute so vile that you crum your potage dishes with it sometymes caste that which is left in the cup of your own blessing vpon the ground as I my selfe sawe it done in king Edwardes tyme at a communion in Gloceter shere You make in words muche of it but your dedes do shew your blasphemouse hartes Harding The Catholike fathers sithence Berengarius haue vsed the termes really substancially c. to exclude Metaphores and figures and to confesse a most supernaturall vnion vvith Christ by meane of his natural flesh really though not locally present Iuel These Doctors liued within these three hundred yeres and are such as M. Harding thought not worth the naming San. He named none that were sithens the six hundred yeres after Christ because he saw your impudeÌ„t proclamation to haue bound him to yâ— tyme. But otherwise he neither lacked sufficient witnesses elder then Berengarius nor iudged them vnworthy the naming And because by these your insulting wordes you sâ—…e to loke for some witnesses aboue three hundred yeres olde I will geue you a taste euen of the best that were from the first six hundred vntil the last three hundred yeres after Christ. Within which time many notable fathers haue liued How thinke you by Damascene who saith the bread wine and water is superturally changed by the inuocation and the comming of the holy Ghoste into the body and blood of Christ. And that he proueth because our Lord said this is miâ—… not figure of body but body and not figure of blood but blood Saith not Theophilact that the bread is with secrete wordes by mysticall blessing and comming of the holy ghooste changed into our Lords fleshe saith he not it appereth bread but in dede is fleshe again why doth it not appere flesh because we should not abhor from the eating thereof For if it had appered flesh wâ—… had bene vnpleasantly affected towarde the communion Is there any dout but he who telleth that the bread is changed into flesh and sheweth why yet it doth appere bread and not flesh did verely beleue the real presence of Christes flesh vnder the form of bread or is he not more impudent then any haâ—…lot who wil staÌ„d in deâ—…nse that Damascene Theophilact beleued not tâ—…ansubstantiation as we do and yet these two are not only aboue three hundred but also aboue seuen hundred yeres old Saith not Haymo licet panis videatut in veritate corpus Christi est although it â—…me bread it is in truth the body of Christ Saith not â—…igius that after consecration it semeth bread and wine but in truth it is the body and blood of Christ Saith not Paschasius although the figure of bread and wine be hâ—…re yet after coÌ„secration they are to be beleued to be nothing at all but the flâ—…sh and blood of Christ What shall I speake of Lanfrancus Iuo 〈◊〉 Anselmus â–ª 〈◊〉 Algerus Euthymius who were al notable men for lerning and al aboue three hundred yeres old I come to S. Bernard whom you haue alleged manie tiâ—…s in this your work Thus he writeth Euen to this day the same flesh is exhibited to vs which the Apostles had sone in his manhod but yet
not to geue vs a drinking in stede of a solemne feast In comparyson of this banket all fayth is impeâ—…t For we eate the ende of our belefe All vnderstanding fayleth in so much as more is in our mouth then we are able to comprehend in our wyt or mynde All spirituall gyfts are inâ—…erlour because the flesh is present which triumpheth ouer death and ascending into heauen sytteth at the right hand of God thence distributing gyfts vnto men We haue the cause of all 〈◊〉 present and letting it go shall we chiefly commend the feast for â—…ertayn spirituall effectes In respect of Christes reall substance thy supper O Caluyn is but a mere sauour of swete meates Geue me the flesh of Christ and take thou the sauour of it But alas the sauour hath alredy kâ—…lled thee â–ª so much the lesse I wonder if thou art wery of the flesh it selfe In setting forth our damnation in old Adam thou lackest neither diligence nor eloquence thou hast therin set foorth the lumpe of perdition the seuere doctrine of induration the impotent weakenes of the wounded man to helpe forward his owne destruction But when thou commest to Christ the new Adam he hath a sâ—…ly pore vnknowen and vnsene cumpanie fewe children a cold supper small offering of sufficient grace his baptisme is with thee lyke a marke set vpon shepe that sheweth somewhat and worketh nothing his Church hath no externaâ—… sacrifice no priesthod no one chief shepherd in earth no authoritie to make lawes no communion of Saâ—…ts by the way of praying to them or for yâ— soules departed no reall ioyning vâ—…iting with Christes flesh and blood in the holy mysteries What is this but to preferr euill before good the deuill before God shadowes before truth vice before vertue and the power of darknes before the kingdom of light It is no eating now as S. Paule sayeth of our Lords supper for euery heretyke taketh a supper of his owne before hand making Christes supper to geue place to hym And that I maye speake nothing of so great change of communions as hath bene in England Luther saith that Christes words be proper and that his supper is bread and flesh wyne and blood as though the immortall flesh of Christ must be eaten with materiall bread How do mortal things agree with immortal in one banket Carolstadius supposeth that Christes words be proper but that he touching hym selfe on the brest sayd Take bread and wine this is my body which I touche as though it were a supper mete for Christes making if he only shewed his body to his Apostles which euer was in their sight not suffering them to eate thereof Zuinglius said the bread and wine were only figures of Christes body and blood geueÌ„ to our bodies to represent to our harts tâ—…e death of Christ. And that the words of Christes supper were figuratine only by which reason the supper of the Paschall lambe was better then the supper of Christ because the dead flesh of an vnspotted lambe was more apt then bread and wine to shew the death of Christes innocent flesh wich is the lambe of God that taketh away the sinnes of the world Calâ—…in added to Zuinglius bare figures an efficacie of feeding by faith and taught the words of Christ not so much to be figuratiue as words of promise which being heard with faith cause that the minde by faith eateth of Christ sitting in heauen a mete supper for such a deuiser who setting the men that should be fed vppon earth kepeth the meate wherof they should be filled in heauen promising them who consist also of bodies mortal and corruptible that they shall fede vpon immortall meat in their soules such an eating were good for Angels I denie not but it is not the supper that Christ made to corporall men for his farewell when he said Take and eate this is my body and Drinke ye all of this for this is my blood Taking with our bodies is more then beleuing in our soules eating yâ— body of Christ is more then signifying the eating of his body The meate is the body of Christ the drinke is the blood of Christ. Beleue and thou hast it in harte before thou commest to the table But come to the blessed Sacrament of the altar and thou hast it in thy mouth and body Bothe is better then one Christ hath 〈◊〉 and fullfilled all maner of iustice he made both body and soule redemeth both fedeth both rayseth both crowneth both He doth not now diuide the hand from the harte the mouth from the minde the figure from the thing the token from the truth That he sayth he doth that thou beleuest in heauen thou receyuest at his table in earth yea earth is heauen to thee saith Chrysostom through this mysterie make his gift no lesse then he nameth it leste for vnthankfullnes thou be giltie of iudgement He that beleueth his plaine wordes is on the surer syde The Corinthians fault concerning the supper of our Lord was partely for that they came to it after they had eaten their own supper and vndoutebly so doe heretyks They first deuise with them seâ—…ues what supper they will allow to Christ and then they come to his supper entending to conforme it to their formeâ—… deuise Partely the 〈◊〉 were reproued of S. Paule for eating and drinking alone without making their meate common to the poore Euen so the heretiks eate and drinke alone teaching that euery man eateth Christ only by the measure of his own faith which hath diuerse degrees in euery man and therefore it maketh euery man eate Christ after his own faith only Whereas the supper of Christ is equall and common to all as S. Cyprian S. Hierome and Theodorite witnessed before wherein he geueth oâ—…e 〈◊〉 one blood one person to all that come without any respecte concerning the meate and substance of the supper although not without discerning the diuerse merites of the geastes It is the honour of him that maketh the feast to haue the meate most bouÌ„tifull and most reall howsoeuer the weak stomaks of euill men are able to beare it Wilt thou yet see more plainly how liberall Christ is in his supper All that he hath he geueth for he geueth his own selfe indifferently to euery man that sitteth at his table be the nian riche or poore good or bad The 〈◊〉 of this feast at his table is the maker of the feast him selfe Who sayeth so Uerily he that caÌ„not lye Who after that he said My flesh is meate in dede douted not to add moreouer He that eateth me shall liue for me doing 〈◊〉 to vnderstand that by eating his flesh we eate himself The same thing teacheth S. Hierom a man worthy to be credi ted as well for his own great learning as for that tyme wherein he liued and the faith wherof in his writing he witnesseth S.
chalice of blessing to be the communicatiâ—…g of Christes blood according as Christ said He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood c. Leo the great sayth we ought so to communicate with our Lords table that we doubt nothing of the veritie of his body and blood seing he sayd Except ye eat the flesh c. Theodoritus speaking of the holy mysteries ioyneth with the words of the supper these also The bread which I wil geue is my flesh which I will geue for the life of the world Isychius shewing that the penitent person may eate the bread whereof Christ sayd The bread which I will geue is my flesh ioyneth there with all the words of S. Paul Let a man proue him self and so eate Declaring both sayings to belong to one mysterie Theophilact vpon these words The bread which I will geue witnesseth that Christ manifestly telleth vs in this place of the mysticall communion of his body Damascenus declaring that Christ sayd This is my body and not the figure of my body bringeth for the same purpose Except ye eate the flesh c. Prosper Aquitanicus ioyneth these words Except ye eate the flesh c. with these except a man be born again of water to shew that the Sacraments of Christ doe geue vs grace and not oâ—…r own works which goe before baptism As therefore S. Cyprian and S. Augustin applie those two sayings to two seuerall Sacraments of baptism and of the Eucharist so must we think that Prosper doth who most diligently folowed S. Augustine Proco pius Gazeus writeth yâ— these words except ye eate my flesh c. Typum mysteriorum quae sub ipso latent continent conteine the foorm of the mysteries which lie priuie vnder it Eucherius teaching that Christ feedeth vs with the nourishmeÌ„ts of the healthiull mysterie saith that he distributeth to euery man a â—…ake of that bread which came down â—…rom heauen and geueth life to the world Cassiodorus saying that Christ did coâ—…secrate his body blood in geuing of bread and wine proueth it because him self sayd Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man c. Primatius shewing how the chalice of blessing is the communicating of the blood of Christ bringeth our Sauiour his words in S. Ihon saying he that eateth my flesh drinketh my blood tarieth in me and I in him S. Bede folowed in all points S. Augustin whose words he reciteth both vpon S. Ihon vpon S. Paule And therefore we nede not doubt but he is wholy of yâ— same mind Angelomus vpon the first booke of the kings reciteth S. Ihon in the same sense Haimo vpon S. Paule intreating of the Sacrament conferreth S. Paules words with the sixth of S. Ihon. S. Bâ—…rnard although he say the eating of the flesh of Christ to be the folowing of his painful conuersation in suffering voluntarie 〈◊〉 for his sake yet well knowing that Christ spake literally also of an other kinde of eating he saieth that Christ did speake of penance in a figure that is to saie couertly as rather including penance vnder the wordes which he named then expressely naming it Vnde hoe designat illibatum illud altaris sacramentum vbi dominicum corpus accipimus wherefore that pure Sacrament of the altar where we take our Lords body betokeneth so much Behold the true and literall meaning of Christes wordes is to haue his flesh eaten in the sacrament of the altar But that eating importeth a folowing of Christ in his painful conuersation For as that forme of bread saieth S. Bernard is seene to enter into vs so let vs knowe that Christ thorough that conuersation which he had in earth eutreth into vs to dwell by faith in our hartes Whereby we maie perceaue that S. Bernard vnderstandeth the sixth chapter of S. Iohn so literally of the sacrament of the altar that thereupon he buildeth a couert and a figuratiue preaching of penance Euthymius noteth that Christ did not say I do geue my flesh but I wil geue because he minded to geue it in his last supper Nicolaus Methonensis hauing first rehersed the wordes of the Gospell this is my body straight expoundeth all the chapter of S. Iohn thereof shewing the profit which we take by this Sacrament Samonas after the wordes of the supper declared as not betokening a figure or image affirmeth Christ to haue said in other places the same thing and straight reciteth the sixth chapiter of S. Iohn I omitt here Petrus Cluniacensis Guimundus Algerus Lanfrancus S. Thomas de Aquino Albertus Magnus Dionysius the Carthusian Nicolaus de Lyra a great number of late writers which all agreed vpon the same vnderstanding of the sixth of S. Iohu But what speake I of these Fathers one by one not only the Councel of Trident hath taken witnesse for the Sacrament of the altar out of S. Iohn but also the seuenth kept at Nice and the first kept at Ephesus doth allege against Nestorius the heretike for the presence of Christes person in the SacrameÌ„t the wordes of S. Iohn his gospell Yea the whole west church readeth the same gospell of S. Iohn when it celebrateth the feast of corpus Christi daie And surely wheÌ„ the Church kepeth any feast whereof there is mention in the gospell according to the letter it alwaies chooseth to reade that part where the feast is literally mentioned It wold therefore be very absurd sith S. Mathew S. Marke and S. Luke haue written so distinctly the historie of Christes supper to leaue them all and to reade the wordes of Christ in S. Iohn if the same wordes had any other sense more literall then that which belongeth to the supper of Christ. So that I trust there is no possible cause of doubting to a sober man but that the wordes of Christ in this chapiter maie literally and according to the first and chief meaning of them be brought to declare what we ought to thinke of his bodily presence in the Sacrament of his last supper But if any man be not fully satisfied therein let him reade the processe folowing and he shal haue lesse cause to doubt any more in this matter ¶ Answer is made to their obiections who teache out of the holy fathers that the sixth chapiter of S. Iohn ought to be expounded only of spiritual eating FOr their opinion who think the sixth chapiter of S. Iohn to speake only of the spiritual and not of the worthy sacramental eating of Christes body the authoritie of certaine fathers is alleged who are thought somtimes to expound the wordes of this chapiter partly of belefe in Christ partly of the vnitie which riseth by the sacramentes of baptisme and of penance But it maie seme a sufficient answere to that obiection if we saie first that so many fathers do not expound the wordes of Christ in the sixth chapter of S. Iohn of any other one
beleue The Fathers gifte is to worke Christ in vs as Christ is God and man but more as he is God then as he is man for oure â—…aith and belefe is due to the Godhead first of all aâ—…d vnto the manhood because it is ioyned vnto the Godhead and therefore Christ sayd ye beleue in God beleue also in me But drinking and eating is first apperteyning to the manhood and afterward reacheth vnto the Godhead because yâ— Godhead is in that meaâ—…e and drinke which we take therefore Christ sayd he that 〈◊〉 my flesh dwelleth in me and I in him The Fathers gift is belonging first to our spirite and then to oure flesh because it is the flesh of such a spirit which beleueth in God and loueth him the sonnes gifte is first in our body and flesh concernyng the Sacramentall receauing of him and then in our spirite because it is a spirite belonging to such a flesh which receaueth the flesh of God thorough Christ. In the Fathers gift we are not sayd to receaue yâ— true bread it self which the Father gaue into the world but to receaue as it were an effect wrought by yâ— streÌ„gth thereof for after Christ had at large described his Fathers gifte he said this is the bread comming downe from heauen to the entent that if any man shal eate ex ipso of it he may not dye he saith not ipsum if any man eate it but of it Again Ego sum panis qui de coelo desceÌ„di si quis manducauerit ex hoc páne viuet in aeternum I am the bread which came downe from heauen if any man eate of this bread he shall liue for euer to eat of this bread is to receaue some grace and effect comming from it And this much coÌ„cerning yâ— Fathers gift But concerning the sonnes gifte Christ saith except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of maÌ„ He saith not of the flesh but yâ— wholè flesh it self Again My flesh is truely meaâ—… he that eateth my flesh tarieth in me and afterward he that eateth meâ—… he saith not now of me but me Last of all qui maÌ„ducat hunc panem viuet in aeternum he that eateth this bread shal liue for euer he saith not now he that eateth of this bread as he sayd before speaking of spirituall eating but he that eateth this bread And yet to make the matter more playne such an eating is assigned to the gifte of Christ which is made in his supper as before was named of MaÌ„na for it was sayd thereof Our Fathers did eate Manna they sayd not of Manna but Manna in his owne substance which words are three tymes conformably rehearsed and euery where they did eate Manna not only of Man na as though they had only taken a certeyn vertue out of it but they did eate Manna as we eate common bread Seing then we may eate of a thing or els the thing it self the eating of it is a spiritual eating by faith and vnderstanding But the eating it is a reall eating in the nature and substance of the thing it self When I say that by the Fathers gifte we eate of Christ and by the Sonnes gifte we eate Christ I meane not to deny but that also by the Sonnes gifte we eate of Christ. For as he that hath syxe hath fower so he that eateth worthely Christes flesh eateth both Christ and of Christ but not only of Christ for he eateth Christ in his humane nature wherein the diuine nature dwelleth and is geuen thereby to be eaten of He eateth of Christ I say concerning that effect grace which by Sacramentall eating the Godhead worketh in his body and soule For the Godhead it self is the bread whereof we must partake But the meane to partake it most abundantly is to receaue worthely yâ— manhood wherein the Godhead corporally dwelleth Therefore Christ geuing all the spirituall gifts that his Father doth as meane to make vs partakers of yâ— Godhead geueth also besydes all them the truth of his flesh and blood in the Sacrament of the altar as yâ— meane far yâ— highest to ioyne vs most nigh to yâ— spirit of God And although his Father geue vs by his appointment the same flesh and blood which Christ doth geue yet Christ calleth it for a great reason his own gift because the substance of it procedeth from his own person where vnto he assumpted flesh and blood For in this Chapiter as in many other places by the Fathers gift the gift of God and of the whole Trinitie is meant And by yâ— Sonnes gift that chiefly is meant which peculiarly procedeth by meane of yâ— incarnatioÌ„ strength of Christes flesh ioyned always with yâ— dyuine nature the which flesh we receaue in the Sacrament of Christes own institution wherein he sayd in his own person Take and eate this is my body drink ye all of this for this is my blood Who seeth not nowe the difference betwene the gift that God geueth vs by charitie which he spreadeth in our hartes and the gifâ—… wherein he gaue his owne Sonne wheÌ„ he toke flesh and became man with vs and the gift which the Sonne being made man geueth in his supper No gifte of God could saue vs the prophecies standing as they did but only the geuing of his soÌ„ne into the world when he tooke reall flesh for vs. And yet was not that enough except the Sonne again had geuen him self to death for vs. Then the flesh of Christ is the meane for vs to be saued that is a ladder let down from heauen whereon we may steppe and so clyme vp God him self we could not eate thereby to be chauÌ„ged into him and made membres of him But God became man that we eating maÌ„ might receaue God as he dwelt in that flesh which we reâ—…aued The conclusion is that if the Fathers gifte which is the inâ—…arnation of Christ and his manhood be to be taken in spirite and faith concerning the feeding of our soules as you haue seen it plainly proued the sonnes gifte which is an other different maner of geuing and hath an other kynde of working appoin ted to it must be receaued not in faith spirit and vertue only but also in the substance of flesh and blood Our new preachers expound the whole matter as though Christ gaue his flesh in his last supper noâ—…e otherwise excepting materiall bread and wine then his Father geueth it vnto vs by faith And therefore they teache that we receaue in the supper of our Lord with common bread and wine Christ him self by faith and spirit But by that meanes Christ geueth a great deale lesse then his father gaue For bread and wine is lesse then the gift of faith when Christ geueth faith he doth it as God therein being one with his father Is then his owne gift only bread and wine Came he into the world to geue a lesse tokeÌ„ then God had
Nyssa reasoneth our nature is not at any certain state but continueth in his substance by perpetuall motion drawing to it that which it lacketh and expelling superfluoâ—…se things As therefore our baptim is made by real washing with water real renewing of yâ— holy Ghost so nowe in the supper of Christ it behoueth we be really fed with the fruit of the 〈◊〉 of life which is â—…one other thing besyde the flesh of Christ. That flesh thâ—…n 〈◊〉 be really eaten of vs and not only eaten by spirit 〈◊〉 is conuenient for Angels but satisfieth not the necessitieâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nature but eaten by mouth and body For of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ at this tyme neither is it worth while to say that the body shall eate bread while the soul feedeth vpon the flesh of Christ. For the bread and wine haue no promise made in this place of them For albeit bread and wine be necessarie to the consecrating of the Sacrament yet the substance of theÌ„ is not necessarie at yâ— tyme of receauing the Sacrament it is only the flesh which died for vs that Christ promiseth to geue to be eaten it is the flesh of the sonne of man which if we eate not we shall not haue life in vs. It is Christes flesh which if we eate he will reise vs vp at the last day That flesh of his must be eaten his only blood must be drunken This threatning which is made if we receaue not worthely the flesh of Christ must be vnderstanded in his kind like the other threatning precept made before concerninge baptism where it was sayd except a man be borne again of water and of the holy ghost he can not enter into the kingdom of heauen bothe are Sacraments both necessarie to faithful men and both profitable to life euerlasting that whiche water doth in wasshing vs the fleshe of Christ must do in feeding vs. for this cause the ancient Fathers haue alwais both ioyned these two Sacraments together and haue alleged these two places for them the one out of the third the other out of the sixth of S. Iohn and they haue named the one baptism of wasshing and the other is called Christes body and blood of that substance whiche is geuen in it What should I name here S. Cyprian S. Basil S. Ambrose S. Augustine all the rest who reckon euery where the same truth of flesh to be in the 〈◊〉 which is concerning water in baptisme Therefore as the water which washeth vs is present really so must the fleshe of Christ which feedeth vs be made really present As baptisme can not be truely kept without naturall water so can not the supper of Christ be truely kept without his naturall flesh As if an euil maÌ„ come to baptism he is truly washed though not profitably to him self so if an euill man come to the supper of Christ he truly though not worthely receaueth his flesh As it is not enough for the Sracrament of baptism to haue water present in faith only and in spirite or vnderstanding so the presence of Christes flesh by faith spirite or vnderstanding only suffiseth not to make the Sacrament of his supper I pray you what vnderstanding had children wherewith they might receaue the body and blood of Christe and yet seing it is 〈◊〉 by the witnesse of S. Cyprian of S. â—…unocentius and of S. Augustin that children although without euident 〈◊〉 receaued the 〈◊〉 in many places of christendoÌ„ euen while the Churche was yet in his cheife floure it can not be denied but in that age all those Bishops Doctors and preachers which vsed to do so dyd well vnderstand that the receauing of the Eucharist consisted not in receauing Christ by actuall faith and meditation of his death and resurrection but in the vertue of those visible giftes which were sanctified by the Priestes vpon the holy altar of God and thence distributed to the faithfull people Tâ—…at custome of so auncient time vsed more for a securitie theÌ„ for necessitie yet was approued of God thus farre that we thereby might haue an 〈◊〉 witnesse of the learned farthers aucthority against them who doubt not to affirme all the writers and preachers of the first six hundred yeres after Christ to haue beleued of our Lords supper as the new preachers do now proâ—… in England But the new preachers make the substance of Christes supper to 〈◊〉 in faith in spirite and in vnderstanding And that not in 〈◊〉 saith whiche another man 〈◊〉 for me as it is dâ—…ne for 〈◊〉 antes at the 〈◊〉 bâ—…t teache tâ—…e â—…upper â—…o conâ—…ist in 〈◊〉 faith as euery man for him self bringeth and 〈◊〉 So that if a man thinke not of Christes death and lifting vp his hart doe not swetely feede vppon Christ sitting at the right hand of his Fa ther they say he doth not receaue our Lords body And they teach that he eateth nothing but breade and wine and toucheth nor the body and blood of Christ at all Of whoÌ„ I aske what S. 〈◊〉 what all the other Bishops of Aâ—…rica thought If they had thought so as these men doe they would not haue geueÌ„ the Eucharist to children and infants who could not â—…uminate Christes passion nor thinke vpon him sitting in heauen They doutlesse beleued farre otherwise of the Sacrament then so They beleued the body and blood of Christ to be really conteined vnder the formes of bread and wine and therefore that children might haue profite by receauing it into their verie bodies soules albeit they could not lift vp their mindes actually to heauen The matter in those daâ—…es dyd not stand vppon the faith of men but vpon the word of God who said this is my body This I say which I bid you take this whiche I geue this whiche I bid you eate What a toy is it nowe for our Sacramentaries to imagin an eating aboue the sky whereas the body is geuen to the Apostles hands mouthes by Christ himself and to the haÌ„ds or mouthes of other faithfull men by his ministers in earth ¶ That S. Augustine did not teach these words except ye eate the flesh c. to betoken the eating oâ—… Christ onâ—…y by faith and spirit nor yet the eating oâ—… materiall bread with 〈◊〉 remembrance of him but the eating of his flesh to theâ—…d we may be the better wyned to the spirit of God IF any speache sayth S. Augustin seme to command a dishonorable acte or vncharitable deed or to forbyd a profitable or benesiciall thing that speache conteineth some figure Fxcept ye eate sayth our Lord the slesh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood ye shall not haue life in you He semeth to command a dishonorable act or an euyll deed It is therefore a figure coÌ„manding that we should communicate with the passion of our Lord and yâ— we should swetely and profitably remember that his flesh was crucified and wounded for vs. This place of S. Augustine
the elements of bread and wine the SacrameÌ„t is made what is that Sacramente we say it is the making present in a miraculouse sorte the true body and blood of Christ. Our aduersaries say it is the appointing of bread and wine to be a figure of Christes body and blood through the remembrance of his death For our belefe I bring S. Augustines authoritie who saith except ye eate my flesh are words figuratiue and out of it thus I reason The â—…ating of Christes fleshe and the 〈◊〉 of his blood being reall 〈◊〉 which must be performed in Christes supper yet being called 〈◊〉 good 〈◊〉 siguratiue 〈◊〉 must nedes 〈◊〉 the sigures of somwhat the 〈◊〉 dedes words being referred to the supper os Christ 〈◊〉 nedes betoken somewhat as they are there 〈◊〉 But the eating of flesh in Christes supper can betoken nothing at all 〈◊〉 his flesh be there eaten the eating whereof may be the 〈◊〉 of this betokening Therefore these wordes import of 〈◊〉 that in Christes supper the 〈◊〉 of Christ is really eaten and his blood is really drunken It is not sayd of Christ except ye eate bread drinke wine Of those elemeÌ„ts he in the promyse of his supper made at Capharâ—… speakethnot one syllable for which cause we must not aske at this time what they figure signisy in Christes supper because nowe there is no mentioÌ„ of theÌ„ except any man be so frontike as to say that yâ— flesh of Christ is here made yâ— figure of bakers bread his blood yâ— figure of wine whereupon it would folow that y◠〈◊〉 blood as being 〈◊〉 of these dead 〈◊〉 were worse and baser then the elements theÌ„ selues for euery figure is some way or other behind the truth which it figureth If then we must leaue of the consyderation of bread and wine if likewise no respect must now be had of the words of consecration which are not yet spoken os what other thing can these 〈◊〉 ratiue words except ye eate my flesh signifie in Christes supper but this except ye eate my flesh in that mysticall and wonderfull maner which I will geue it in and to that 〈◊〉 end for the which I being true God wil geue it you that is to say except ye do both take it in the Sacrament and spiritually remember my death 〈◊〉 me thanks for it and conforming your selues to it ye shall not haue 〈◊〉 in you By whiche interpretation Christes 〈◊〉 are figuratiue in so much as they meane neither that maner of â—…ating pâ—…ces of fleshe whiche the Iewes vnderstode noâ—… that end of eating it which they thought vpon mynding altoge ther as S. Cyrillus and S. Chrysostom note the feding of their bellies But if Christes flesh be not present at all whereof is it a figure when it is eaten can that which is not signifie or figure anie thing caÌ„ the flesh which is only figured at the tyme of our eating bread as the Sacramentaries teache be made a signe and figure by eating it if the eating of Christes fleshe be not the figure the wordes Except ye eate my flesh be not figuratiue For if eating â—…e throughly taken for beleuing and for no eating at all theÌ„ these wordes do not apperteine to the SacrameÌ„tall eating of Christes supper But seing the Sacramentaries teache them to speake of the supper as in truth they doe the eating must so be figuratiue one way that yet it be true another way For if there be no true eating there lacketh a grouÌ„d which may be the figure of another eating that is to say of spirituall communicating with Christes passion If some reall eating must be had to warn vs of that spirituall eating surely that real eating can not in S. Iohn be meante of bread and wine sith Christ neuer named them therefore it is imployed that Christ meaneth except ye eate my flesh so as it is a figure both of my death and may be a cause of your spiritual life ye shal not liue euerlastiÌ„gly Thus doubtelesse did Christ meane thus dyd S. Augustine expound his wordes The Sacramentaries doc erre in making Christes words to be figuratiâ—… only passiuely whereas they are also figuratiue actiuely That is to say the Sacramentaries so take this matter as if it were only said the fleshe and blood of Christ be figured signiâ—…ed in his supper as to be spiriâ—…ually fed on But it is not so said only but also the actuall eating of Christes flesh is taught to be a figure it selfe of another spirituall eating Therefore we eate really flesh one way to signifie another way the â—…ating and beleuing in flesh spiritually And that is proued out S. Ambrose most maniâ—…estly where he saith In edendo potando 〈◊〉 sanguinem for there is the point albeit the Sacramentaries go about to corrupt his wordes by euil distincting of them quae pro nobis oblata sunt significamus In eating and drinking the 〈◊〉 and blood we signifie those things whiche were offered â—…or vs. Behold the â—…ating 〈◊〉 doth signiâ—…ie and make a figure of the self same flesh as it was offered for vs. And so doth both Christ S. Augustine â—…ane at this tyme. our Lord coÌ„maunding vs to eatâ—… his flesh doth command vs to coÌ„municate with his passion saith S. Augustine and profitably to remember his death that is to wit he commaâ—…deth both to eate the body which died to eate it worthely to eate it in hart as wel as in mouth to eate it in remembraunce of his loue toward vs as wel as in the SacrameÌ„t to eate it as the Godhead doth quicken it and as it figureth the entring and tarying in his mysticall body the Church This eating of Christes â—…eshe is swete is profitable is not hard not carnall not without a figure or mysterie For to eate without any mystical meaning is only to fill the belly whereof Christ spake not he commanded a figuratiue eating of his fleshe the which figuratiue â—…ating should not take away the real eating of his flesh for that eating whiche is not reall can not be actiuely figuratiue sith euerie figure is made vpon a true ground of one thing done really of another thing meant mystically But the figuratiâ—…e eating importeth a farther thing then to rest in the eating it selfe It is therefore insensibly said of the SacrameÌ„taries that those wordes which naming a certain actuall and real dede as the eating of mans flesh is be â—…iguratiue because the flesh is not really â—…ten But they be in dede figuratiue because the fleshe of that 〈◊〉 is 〈◊〉 also and vnderstanded to be more then â—…ally eaten for it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 spiritâ—…lly eaten also The Sacrameâ—…taries comâ—…ted an otâ—…er foule error in these wordes 〈◊〉 whiles they wil draw this place of S. Iohn to their purpose they are constrained to expound the wordes of Christ iâ—… this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ye eate tâ—…e 〈◊〉 of the sonne of man that is to say
meate vnto the body for how saith he can a ' thing whiche lacketh a body be made meat vnto the body as who should say there is no doubt but the flesh of Christ is made meate vnto one body because Christ sayd my flesh is meate in dede and meate is ordinarilie promised to nourish the body although it being the meate of God helpeth the soule also If the bread that came downe from heauen whiche is the flesh of Christ be true meate it is a bodily thing for els how could a thinge that hath no body be made meate for the body if that can not be so truly the flesh geuen at the supper of Christ whiche is meate in dede and drinke in dede can not be only receaued in spirit but it must be so reall that it may fede our bodies also to thinteÌ„t they may be reised in the later day therefore that whiche our body receaueth when Christ saith take and eate is the same flesh of Christ which is meate in dede and seing it is proued to be a body because it is made meate vnto the body it must be meate in dede vnto vs and must be really taken into our bodies by our mouthes or els Nyssenus â—…ayleth in his whole discourse for he proueth it a body because it is meate vnto the body then certainlie it is not meate only to the soule nor it is not only receaued by faith but trulie and in dede And seing al wise men reason vpon a sure ground we may not doubt but all the Catholike Church twelue hundred yeres past and so vpward toke it for an euident truthe that Christes body was meate vnto our bodies ¶ By the maner of our tarying in Christ it is proued that we receaue his reall flesh into our bodies WHereas hitherto the necessitie the profite and the truth of eating Chrisies flesh hath bene shewed and confirmed Now the proper effect of that banket is also declared because he that eateth Christes flesh and drinketh his blood tarieth in Christ and Christ in him In respect whereof the same thing was before named Cibus permanens the meate which tarieth Whereby we may perceaue that in the SacrameÌ„t of Christes supper we doe not beginue to liue as in baptism but we maintein kepe nourish increase the sede of life which we toke in our spirituall birth Neither only doe we preserue life during the tyme of our feeding but also when the banket is ended some effect remaineth in vs through the which we are sayd to tary in Christ and he in vs. Let vs then trye out what effect that is for by the maner kind of the effect we may gather somewhat of the cause What meaueth it that Christ tarieth in vs and we in him S. Chryâ—…ostom answereth In me manet dicit vt cum ipso se admisceri ostendat Christ sayth He tarieth in me to shew that him self is mingled with him S. Chrysostom meaneth that whiles we receaue worthely the substance of Christes flesh into our bodies we are so intierly ioyned to him that we may be sayd to be mingled with him And how that is done S. Cyrillus declareth by this similitude As if a man poure wax vppon melted wax he wholy must nedes mingle the one with the other so it must nedes be if any man receaue the flesh and blood of our Lord that he be so ioyned with him that Christ may be found in him and he in Christ. And again Sicut parum fermenti caet As a litle leauen tempereth the whole lump of dow so a litle benedictioÌ„ whereby he meaneth a peece of the consecrated host be it neuer so smal draweth the whole man vnto it and filleth him with his grace and by this meanes Christ tarieth in vs and we in him S. Cyrillus calleth the things which are consecrated at Christes supper Benedictio a blessing because they are consecrated by the words of blessing the which Christ left vnto vs. Now a litle of that blessed food being receaued worthely of vs is not so properly sayd to tary in vs as we to tary in it for that though it be small in forme yet in vertue it is great And therefore it draweth vs vnto it as leauen turneth the dow to his nature It can not be auoided by these interpretations but that the heauenly food which we receaue into our mouthes is the reall substance of Christes flesh For it is here called Benedictio the blessing that word is not meant of an inward vertue coming srom heauen but of that which semeth bread and is visibly receaued at our Lords table For euen in the same Chapiter S. Cyrillus exhorteth men ad recipiendam benedictionem to receaue the Sacrament of Christes supper The which SacrameÌ„t if it were wheaten bread how could it be true that a litle thereof should draw the whole man vnto it Doth wheaten bread make vs like it are we then made vnreasonable vnsensible and a corruptible creature as wheateÌ„ bread is Christ sayth his meat tarieth to life euerlasting so doth not wheateÌ„ bread Christ sayth by eating his flesh we tary in him But we tary in him whiles the gift which at his supper he deliuereth is mingled with vs and conuerteth vs vnto it as S. Chrysostom and S. â—…yrillus teache And yet we be not conuerted or drawen to the nature of materiall bread or wine therefore it appeareth the gift which Christ deliuered not to haue bene bread and wine but his own body and blood vnder those formes S. Hilarie bringeth the very same word of tarying to proue that as Christ is in his Father by the nature of Godhead we in him by his corporall birth so he is in vs by the mysterie of the Sacraments and tarieth in vs naturally The like witnesse Theophilact geueth saying Contemperatio fit noua super rationem ita vt sit Deus in nobis nos in ipso There is made by eating Christes flesh a new mingling together so that God is in vs and we in him Briefly thus Christ meaneth He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood receaueth me as meate into his body and soule But because I come not to nourish carnall life but spiritual in him he doth not digest and turn my body into his as it happeneth in other meates but he is turned to be like me For the real ioyning and knitting of my flesh to his maketh a maruelouse mixture as if melted wax were poured to other wax so that a great grace and vertue is left of me in him whereby he may tary still in me and increase the fountain of life which is in him This kind of our tarying in Christ and of his with vs could not be true if we â—…ed spiritually only vpoÌ„ Christ absent in body For how can the body which is only in heauen be so teÌ„pered tâ—… our bodies soules in earth as one melted wax being powred
be words of him that is by nature euerlasting life who meaneth to geue his flesh aliue and that not only so aliue as our flesh liueth whiles the soule is in it but so liuing as that flesh liueth which is 〈◊〉 and ioyned in one person to the Godheâ—…d Think no more you grosse Capharnaits of dead flesh geueÌ„ by peece meale which is not auayable to brâ—…g you to heaueÌ„ but think of such a flesh as God hath assuÌ„pted to geue life by it to the world of such a flesh as will ascend by his own vertue into heauen of such a flesh as being conceaued not by the sede of man but by the holy ghost hath power to become spirituall without losse of his true nature and substance My words be spirit and life Spiritus est Deus God is a spirit In ipso vita erat life was in the word verbum caro factum est and yâ— word was made flesh Of that flesh Christ words must be vnderstanded That is the flesh which he will geue which we must eate that flesh liueth with God and in God and geueth them life who receaue it worthely This doutlesse is the literall meaning of Christes words and therefore S. Cyrillus douted not to write Spiritum hic c. Christ hath called here the very flesh â—…pirit not because it hath lost the nature of flesh and is changed into the spirit but because the flesh being very nigh ioyned with the spirit or Godhead hath receaued the whole power of quikning or of making thiÌ„gs to liue The words then which I haue spoken to you are spirit that is to say spirituall Et de spiritu vita id est de viuisica naturali vita sunt And they are of the spirit and life That is to say of the naturall life and of that which maketh other things to liue This phrase Verba mea de spiritu sunt my words are of the spirit doth meane that the words of Christ haue in them some of his spirit and of his diuine power Which meaning sith it is most true these words of Christ doe not shew that the naming of flesh and blood which went before was figuratiue and that now Christ declareth only a spirituall vnderstanding of them as the Sacramentaries teach but all is cleane coÌ„trary For Christ now geueth a reason why his former words be possible easy true and proper The reason is for that he is God that spake them and he spake them of that flesh which is vnited to the sonne of God Spiritus viuificans est caro Domini c. The flesh of our Lord sayth Damascen is a spirit which quickeneth because it was coÌ„ceiued of a quickenâ—…g spirit sor that which is borne of the spirit is spirit Which thing I say not taking away the nature of the body but intending to shew the Godhead thereof and the power which it hath to make things liue As therefore the flesh of Christ was not thereby no flesh because it was ioyned to his diuine substance but rather had by that vnion the power to make vs liue for euer euen so yâ— words which before did shew the flesh of Christ to be meate in dede and his blood to be drink in dede are not now declared to be figuratiue or vnproper words but rather they are declared to be most proper and true because they are witnessed to be spirit and life For as the Godhead is in his own nature most infinite almighty simple and vncompounded and the truth it self So those words which partake of the Godhead are declared to be of most strength to work that they sound to be most simple and to haue least figures parables in them as the which conteine the vertue to make that truth which they signifiâ—… So that the name of spirit doth not stand to depriâ—…e vs of Christes reall flesh but only to make it profitable to vs and to shew that Christ by his word is able to geue vs his flesh wherein the Godhead corporally dwelleth Corpus Dei sayeth S. Ambrose Corpus est spiritale corpus Christi corpus est diuini spiritus quia Spiritus est Christus The body of God is a spirituall body the body of Christ is the body of the diuine spirit because Christ is the spirit that is to say God Non ergo corporalis esca sed spiritalis est It is therefore no bodily but a spirituall food The food is spirituall as the body of Christ which he toke of the virgin is spiritual But the body is not spiritual as though it lacked the substance of true flesh but because it was wrought and made by the holy Ghost in the virgens womb Therefore the heauenly bread which we receaue from the altar is a spirituall food noâ—… that it lacketh the true substance of Christes flesh but because it is wrought and made present vnder the foorm of bread by the spirit of God and by the holy Ghost aboue all course of nature It is clere saith S. Ambrose that the virgen did beare Christ otherwise then the course of nature was and this body which we make is of the virgen What sekest thou here the course of nature in the body of Christ seing our Lord Iesus him self is brought foorth of the virgen besyde the course of nature As who should say the reall flesh of Christ is made present vnder the foorm of bread by the holy Ghost euen as Christ was incarnate in the virgens womb by the holy Ghost It is the Godhead the spirit the life that worketh all things in yâ— holy mysteries The flesh without yâ— Godhead profiteth nothing From yâ— Godhead the words came which Christ spake That Godhead is it which maketh Christes flesh profitable Per carnem spiritus sayth S. Augustine aliquid prosalute nostra egit caro vas fuit quod habebat attende non quod erat By the flesh the spirit or Godhead did somewhat for our saluation The flesh was the vessel or instrument mark what the flesh had or held and not what it was by his own nature And again The charitie of God is spread in our harts by the holy Ghost which is geuen to vs. Ergo it is the holy Ghost which quickeneth The words which I haue spoken to you are spirit and life What is it to say they are spirit and life They are to be vnderstanded spiritually If thou hast vnderstanded them spiritually they are spirit and life if thou hast vnderstanded them carnally they are spirit and life but not to thee Thus farre S. Augustine The word spirit may stand to signifie God Angels the soule of man the life the gift of God made to any reasonable creature the wind or breath or ayer or briefly any thing that moueth But among all significations the chief is to signifie God who is by nature the only spirit which quickeneth and moueth all other spirits
about the Lambe The mysterie we speake of taketh not away any truth from the thing but sheweth the maner of the doing to be spirituall For the offering is made without slaughter the rosting without operation of sensible fier the eating without coÌ„suming of the meat the sprinkling without diuision or losse of the blood But as the incarnation being wrought without the seede of man did not cause the 〈◊〉 of Christ to be the lesse true euen so the inuisible changing of the substance of bread and wine into his body and blood the vnbloody offering the Sacramental eating and drinking doth rather shew to all faithfull people the worker of so high a mysterie to be true God then any whyâ—… hinder the reall presenâ—… of his flesh and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine ¶ The Prophecie and figure of Manna GOd sayd to Moyses Behold I wil raine bread to thee froÌ„ heauen Christ sayd worke the meate abyding to life euerlasting which the Sonne of man will geue you This is the bread which came downe from heauen And the bread which I will geue is my flesh for the life of the world The Israelits said Manhu What is this For they knew not what is was The Capharnaits striued saying How can this man geue vs his flesh to eate Moyses pointing to Manna sayth This is the bread which our Lord hath geuen you to eate Christ pointing to that true Manna coming down from heauen which him self made sayeth Take and eate this is my body which is geuen for you Moyses sayd this and Christ this Moyses sayd is Christ is Moyses the bread Christ my body Moyses which our Lord hath geuen Christ our Lord sayth which is geuen Moyses to you Christ for you Moyses to eate Christ sayd take and eate The bread which Moyses shewed was not the substance of wheaten bread but heauenly Neither the bread which Christ geueth is the substance of wheaten bread but the true bread which by the mysterie of the incarnation came from heauen The bread which Moyses shewed was made by Angels of such earthly stuffe and vapours as they found in the â—…ppermost part of the ayer And the bread of Christ was made by the Angell of great Councel of such earthly stuffe as he found vppon the table of the Paschall Lambe which was bread and wine willing also his Priestes who are his Angels in earth to doe and make the same The bread which Moyses shewed was truly eaten of the Israelites within the cumpasse of that white and cleare dew which they gathered And how much more is the body of Christ eaten of the Apostles and of other Christians within the cumpasse of yâ— forme of bread which they receaue from the altar of God The bread whereof Moyses him self bearing but a figure of the truth at this tyme spake was a signe not the truth The bread which Christ being the truth it self geueth is both a signe the truth The bread which Moyses shewed was perfect in his own nature before the Israelites did eate it Euen so the meate which Christ geueth is perfect in the Sacrament it self vnder the forme of bread before we do 〈◊〉 it whether more or lesse were gathered of Manna oue measure was always found in the ende to signifie that sith whole Christ is vnder euery part of yâ— forme of bread whether you take a greater peece of the forme or a lesse euer the same substance of Christes body is wholy receaued of euery Communicant Neither is it sufficient to fulfil this figure if we say that euery man hath the vertue and grace of Christes body geuen him by faith and spirit for the measure of that grace is as S. Paule teacheth diuers in diuers men according to the measure that Christ geueth it in Some haue greater giftes and some lesse and no one member is the whole body But Manna was in one measure to all men Euen so the substaÌ„ce of Christes body vnder the forme of bread is geuen to all that receaue the sayd forme in one measure and equally concerning the body it self For euery man receaueth the whole As wel the good men as the 〈◊〉 did eate Manna But the euill did eate with 〈◊〉 but to the good it gaue the taste of all swetenes Right so yâ— body and blood of Christ which is vnder the forme of bread and wine is as really taken of the euill as of the iust But they take it to their damnation these to their saluation He that marketh these comparisons shall easily perceaue that the holy Ghost both by the figure and by the truth condemneth their false doctrine who teache the reall body of Christ not to be geuen vnder the forme of bread and wine after consecration is once made ¶ The figure of the old Testament MOyses hauing offered oxen to God powred one halfe of the blood vpon the altar the other halfe he powred into basins And after he had readen the booke of 〈◊〉 betwene God and the Israelites and the people had promised to kepe the conditions thereof he sprinkled them with the blood saying This is the blood of the Testament which our Lord vpon all this talke hath made with you Christ intending to offer him self vnto his Father and certaine yeres before publishing to his people the conditions of his new Testament at the last in his supper he geueth his own blood the very same blood which con firmeth the new agreemeÌ„t made with vs And in stede of â—…ling vs with it he toke the chalice and gaue thanks and gaue to his Disciples saying Drink ye all of this for this is my blood of the new Testament Which shal be shed for many for the remission of synnes The figure and the truth answer maruelously as they may finde who will conferre the partes It is sufficient at this tyme to note that as the blood of the old Testament was in the 〈◊〉 or cup really whence it was sprinkled so the blood of Christ which is the blood of the new Testament is really in the chalice whence it is receaued As the noune blood in the old Testament which is but a figure of the new yet was not taken figuratiuely but properly for true naturall blood so much more the noune blood in Christes words which appertein to the new Testament it self may not be taken tropically but euen as the word most literally doth sound As the substance of blood which Moyses spake of was shewed vnder the accidents of the naturall blood of calues so the substance of the blood whereof Christ spake was shewed vnder the accidents of wine For as Iacob had Prophecied Christ wasshed his garments and cote in wine because he tooke the â—…orme of wine to couer his owne humane nature which was his garment in respect of his Godhead as S. Paule sayeth Habitu inueÌ„tus vt homo Found in his apparell as man ¶ The prophecit and figure
Paule speaketh of is named specially also the communicating of Christes blood A generall blessing geueth a general benefite as when we say our Lord blesse you God send you good speede the right hand of God blesse this meate the holy Ghost sanctifie this wine and make it to be a remembrance of Christes bloodsheading These like wordes be blessings hallow or sanctifie the thing blessed as S. Paule saith the creatures to be sanctified by the word of God and praier But when a speciall blessing is geuen a speciall sanctifiyng must folow As when God blessed the 〈◊〉 Benedixitque eis dicens Crescite multiplicamini replete aquas maris and God blessed them saying Increase and multiplie and fyll the waters of the sea this special kinde of blessing worketh a speciall benefite vnto the creature which is blessed â–ª and it worketh euen that which the word signifieth â–ª who doubteth but by these words of Gods blessing increase and multiplie the fisshes toke the vertue of increasing and multiplying which before these words they had not for this kind of blessing gaue them this kind of benefite Seing then Christ blessed the chalice saying This is my blood of the new testament out of doubt he gaue it really this vertue to be the blood of the new testament Tell me no more that Christ willed it to signifie his blood for I tel you out of yâ— word of God what soeuer words haue bâ—… spoken belonging to any creature by the way of blessing they haue wrought that which they did signifie But Christ said in the way of blessing â–ª This chalice is the new testament in my blood Therefore he made by that blessing his blood within the chalice Bring me no more of those paltry examples I am a dore I am a vine the rock is Christ Iohn Baptist is Elias the holy Ghost is a doue a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of that sort I 〈◊〉 in one word to al that none of these were spoken by God in the way of blessing The 〈◊〉 saieth not that Christ blessed any certaine vine saying this is Christ or This is my body â–ª He sayd many thinges without blessing and he blâ—…ed sometymes without speaking But when blessing words are â—…oyned we are certified that those words are not figuratiue nor only tokens and bare sigâ—…s but working and making that which is said For if they promise a thing to come they worke by the way of causing the promyse in due tyme to be fulfilled as when a soâ—…e was promysed to Abraham by the Aungell of God If they be spoken as betokening a present verbe they presently worke the thing betokened Let no 〈◊〉 deceaue thee good Reader There is a dubble blessing spoken of in S. Paule there is the chalice of blessing and the chalice which we blesse The chalice of blessing as S. Chrysostom saieth is that which wheÌ„ we haue before vs we prayse God with admiration and horrour of the vnspeakeable gift but it is not the chalice of blessing vntill we haue blessed it The blessing whiche maketh it the chalice of blessing is that we speake of and that is the blessing whiche is made by the wordes of consecration as I haue said before Therefore S. Chrysostom wryteth thus vpon this place of S. Paule Cùm benedictionem dico Eucharistiam dico dicendo Eucharistiam omnem benignitatis Dei thesaurum aperio magna illa munera commemoro When I say blessing I say the Eucharist and in saying the Eucharist I open all the treasour of the goodnes of God and I make rehearsall of those great gifts But least any cauill should be made as though the wordes of 〈◊〉 were not the words of blessing heare what S. Ambrose aâ—…th of this Sacrament Quantis vtimur exemplis vt probemus non hoc esse quod natura formauit How many 〈◊〉 vse we to proue that it is not yâ— thing whiche nature made but that which blessing consecrated Lo that which conâ—…eth is blessing But what blessing After yâ— S. Ambrose had bronghâ—… many examples to shew what strength blessing had at the last he concludeth Quòd si tantùm valuit humana benedictio vt naturam conuerteret quid dicimus de ipsa consecratione diuina vbi verba ipsa Domini Saluatoris operantur If the blessing of man was of that power that it changed nature what say we of Gods own consecrating where the self words of our Lord Saniouâ—… do worke Marke good Read er blessing consecrating and the words of our Sauiour working is all one matter And yet againe to make it playner S. Ambrose saieth Nam Sacramentum istud quod ac cipis Christi sermone conficitur for this Sacrament which thou receauest is made with the wordes of Christ what the words be he telleth him self Vide omnia illa verba Euangelistae sunt vsque ad accipite siue corpus siue sanguinem inde verba sunt Christi Behold al those are the words of the Enâ—…ngelist vntill we come to this word take either body or blood from thense they are the wordes of Christ. Yf blessing be that which consecrateth both blessing consecration be made with the words oâ—… Christ his words he those which folow the word take yâ— words which folow be these This is my bodie and This is my blood who perceyueth not yâ— these only are the words of blessing Then we blesse the chalice when we consecrate when we say This is my blood of the new testament when we blesse saying the wordes of blessing in Christes mysteries then we make so much as our words do signifie For which cause S. 〈◊〉 concludeth that yâ— chaâ—…ce which we blesse is the coÌ„municating of the blood of Christ. In saying which we blesse he sheweth the cause why it is Christes blood In saying it is the communicating of Christes blood he sheweth both yâ— effect wrought by blessing which is yâ— presence of the blood of Christ and the cause finall why it is made verily to communicate vnto vs the merites of Christes death where the sayd blood was shed for the remission of synnes If the â—…halice after blessing had no blood in it how did it communicate to vs the blood of Christ S. Chrysostom geuing the literall sense of these woordes writeth thus EoruÌ„ auteÌ„ huiusmodi est sententia Quod est in calice id est quod a latere fluxit et illius sumus participes of these wordes this is yâ— meaning The same which is in the chalice is that which flowed from the side aâ—…d thereof we are pà rtakers He affirmeth S. Paul to say that both yâ— blood which flowed from Christes side is in the chalice also that we are thereof partakers But yâ— blood whereof we are partakers by the confession of yâ— Sacramentaries is yâ— naturall blood of Christ therefore the natural blood of Christ is coÌ„teined within yâ— chalice And consequeÌ„tlie
shewed a litle before that they were after consecration the body and blood of Christ. Therefore the mysticall signes are vnderstanded to be the body and blood not because they be not so but because they are so for that they were made his body blood and so they are beleued to be and are adored or â—…neled bowed vnto But how percase as bearing the image and signes of the body and blood of Christ No Syr. but as being in dede the body and blood of Christ. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as being those things which they are vnderstaÌ„ded and beleued to be They are adored because they are the body and blood of Christ. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as being and the word as meaneth in that place a truth of being as if it were verè existeÌ„tia quae creduntur being in dede things whiche they are beleued to be So speaketh S. Ihon saying of Christ vidimus gloriam eius gloriaÌ„ quasi vnigeniti à patre we saw his glory a glory as of the only begotten of the Father to wit we saw the glory of him being in dede the only begotten of his Father Uppon which place Theophylact saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. This particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in English as is not a word that betokeneth a similitude or likenesse but that coÌ„firmeth and betokeneth an vndouted determination as when we see a king comming forth with great glory we say that he came forth as a king that is to say he came forth as being in dede a king So that by the iudgement of Theophylact that particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Thedorite vseth doth betoken an vndoubted being and determinate truth of that thing whereof we speak The holy mysteries are adored as being those things in dede which they are beleued to be This place is such as can not be reasonably answered vnto For the reason of adoring or geuing godly honour to the Sacrament of the altar is because it is in dede the body of Christ as it is beleued to be But it is beleued to be the body of Christe after consecration therefore it is adored as being yâ— true body of Christ. For Theodorete before hauing confessed the mysteries to be called after consecration the body and blood of Christ when it was demanded farther doest thou beleue that thou receauest the body and blood of Christ he answered to that question 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ita credo I doe beleue so Now therefore he affirmeth those mystical signes to be in deede after consecration the body and bâ—…ood of Christ which they are beleued to be and so beleued that they are receaued of vs. Euery word must be weighed because we haue to do with Heretikes who must find shifts or els theyr deceite will appere to al the world First therefore let it be marked that after consecration the mysteries are called the body and blood Secondly that the mysteries are vnderstanded to be the body and blood of Christ. Thirdly that they are made so Fourthly they are beleued to be so Fiâ—…tly they are adored for that they are in dede those things which they are beleued to be And last of all they are receaued The first saying the second and the last the Sacramentaries can beare â—…ithall to wit that they are called the body and blood and are vnderstanded to be the body and blood and that the body and blood are receaned For they would haue them called so and not be so thereby making the namer of them a myssecaller as one that calleth them by a wrong name SecoÌ„dly they would haue them vnderstanded to be the body and blood and yet not to be so thereby shewing that they delight in false vnderstandings for no good men would haue a thing vnderstanded to be that which in deede it is not Againe they would the body blood to be receaued How trow you In the faith of the man but not in the truth of the body thereby declaring that they diuide faith from truth as men that haue a presuasion of things that in dede be not so But to calling vnderstanding and receauing Theodoret ioyneth also beleuing adoring and being And the beleâ—…e which he speaketh of is not referred to heaueÌ„ but vnto the holy mysteries They are beleued they are adored as being those things which they are beleued to be The thing that is called or named Christes body blood is in dede that thing whiche it is called Christ can missename nothing at al. For if he should call that which were before aier water or earth by the names of fier stones or bread aier earth and water would soner cease to be fyre bread stones would come in theyr place theÌ„ God should cal any creature by a wroÌ„g name He called bread his body therefore bread is vnderstaÌ„ded to be made the body of Christ. You say the vnderstaÌ„ding of man taketh his beginning of senses which tel me it is bread I say in matters belonging to faith my vnderstanding is informed by Gods word which telleth me it is the body of Christ and Theodorete saith it is beleued so to be and it is worshipped for that it is so And he geueth the same very word of worshipping to the holy mysteries the which in the same sentence he geueth to the immortall body of Christ sitting at the right hande of his Father And no wonder For seing it is one body whether it be worshipped in heauen or vpon the altar one worship is always due to it Thus we haue witnessed by Theodoretus that the holy mysteries of Christ are worshipped and adored not as the signes of his body aad blood but as being in dede his body and blood Therefore worship is not geuen to them as to images whiche represent a thing absent but as to mysticall signes which really conteine the truth represented by them ¶ The adoration of the body and blood of Christ is proued by the custom of the Priests and people of the first six hundred yeres FRom the Apostles tyme to this day the very same holy mysteries which were consecrated by the Priest vppon the altar were adored of the saithful people which thing is euidently proued out of the Massebooke of the primitiue Church For the Liturgies or Massesbookes of S. Iames the Apostle of S Clement Bishop of Rome of S. Basill Bishop of Cesarea of S. Chrysostom Bishop of Constantinople and the exposition which both S. Dionysius Bishop of Athens of Paris Cyrillus Bishop of Hierusalem Germanus Bishop of Constantinoplâ—… Maximus the munk and diuers others haue made vpon the holy mysteries do al with one accord teache and confirme that first the Deacon said Let vs be attent with the feare of God and with reuerence And straight therevppon euen before the tyme of receauing the body and blood of Christ the Bishop or Priest who said Masse
the receauers or no that Shepherd of Christes flok sayth that if it were not his true body and receaued in the mouth it were in vaine to say Amen It is true For seing the Priest bringing meate vnto their mouthes did say The body of Christ if notwithstanding it were only to be receaued in hart not in mouth also it were in vaine to say Amen or to answere it is so it is true and yet to think in hart otherwise To end this matter at the length The whole Church before Berengarius beleued the reall presence and they toke that their belefe of their auncestours from hand to hand euen vntill we come to the Apostles and by them to Christ. In the primatiue Church the Priest cried out at the altar This is my body and this is my blood All the people answered it is so It is true S. Ambrose biddeth them think as they speake yea euen as the word soundeth S. Leo sayth they say in vaine it is true if they dispute against the truth thereof And he teacheth the truth to be that the same thing is receaued in the mouth which is beleued in faith S. Hilary sayeth No place of doubting is left sith both by our Lords profession and by our faith it is verily flesh and verily blood Epiphanius witnesseth that euery man beleueth our Lords saying wherein he sayd This is my body And who so doth not beleue it eueÌ„ as him self spake it he is fallen from gracâ—… and saluation Seing all these things doe euidently proue the faith of the whole Church to haue bene that Christes body and blood was really present in the Sacrament of the altar and really receaued into the mouthes of the faithfull people it remaineth that thosâ—… who haue bene deceaued in this behalf do returne agaiâ—…e to their former belefe and that as wel in al other points as iâ—… this they do for euer beleue the Catholike Church the piller of truth Knowing for surety that it can not be a Catholiâ—…e doctrine which is begun in our age or any tyme after thâ—… preaching of the Apostles and that specially when it is conâ—…rary to the faith always preached and beleued ¶ That no man possibly can be condemned for beleuing the body of Christ to be really present in the Sacrament of the altar WHen Christe had almost ended his talke at Capharnaum and shewed his wordes to be spirit and life perceauing all the fault why the Iewes thought his sayinges so absurde to be for so much as they estemed him no more then a naturall man weighing his doctrine by theyr senses earthely reason he for declaration of theyr incurable dyssease for the detection of the cause thereof sayd Sed sunt quidam ex vobis qui non credunt But there are some of you who beleue not For Iesus knewe from the beginning who they where which beleued not Here we may see the chefe fault in all matter and question of the supper of Christ to consist in not beleuing He that beleueth is safe but wo to him that beleueth not S. Peter beleueth and confesseth Christ to haue the wordes of euerlasting life Iudas beleueth not and therefore he is called a deuil The chefe point of ChristiaÌ„ belefe is to acknowlege Christ to be God to be almighty to be able to make and to doe what soeuer pleaseth him This point he lacketh who so denieth Christ to be able to make the substance of his owne body present in diuerse places at once vnder diuerse formes of bread and wine If â—…herefore any man wil not beleue this he may be assured his portioâ—… is rekned with Iudas who as Leo hath witnessed beleued not thâ—… almighty power and Godhead of Christ. But if all men agree 〈◊〉 this point it is very well then let vs passe to the nexte Christ said â–ª The bread which I will geue is my flesh the which I will geue for tâ—…e life of the world Now are we come from the power of Chist to the will of Christ. We all were agreed that he was able to make the substance of his body present vnder diuerse formes of bread and wine Nowe these wordes affirme that he will geue a kind of bread the substance whereoâ—… is his own flesh euen that flesh the which he will geue for the life of the world And if we goe to his last supper we see bread taken and after blessing and thankes geuen he said This is my body which is geuen for you And he gaue his twelue disciples twelue fragmeÌ„tes or peeces bidding euery one of them take and eate in which deede he sheweth him self to make the substance of his body present vnder the formes of bread in diuerse places at one tyme allthough not after the manner of locall situation because his body hath not in the Sacrament actually that naturall dimention and occupying of place which it hath otherwise But as he hath ordeined it to be so is it vnder twelue diuerse formes of bread Here I am sure many will stand with me and say they beleue not so to whom I answere yâ— by so saying they haue condemned them selues to be of those of whom Christ said there are some of yow who beleue not For yf Christ said by yâ— which was bread before his blessing which still seemed bread yf Christ said thereof this is my bodie gaue it vnder twelue peeces or formes seing they confesse him to be able to make his body present vnder diuerse formes and to haue promised to geue his flesh and to haue said this is my body and to haue geuen it to twelue how can they deny that his body was present at that supper vnder twelue diuerse formes of bread being whole and all vnder eche forme The confessing of that which Christ said is a thing that apperteineth vnto faith because the speaker is God to whom all faith beloÌ„geth To beleue this that God saith must nedes be a vertue and to discredite it is a great vice You will perhap allege that fleshe profiteth nothing the wordes of Christ are spirit and life â–ª that is true therefore I beleue that when he said take eate this is my body he gaue his body not without life spirit but yet as really as euer by saying Let the light be made he made yâ— light for his wordes be not dead flesh which profiteth nothing but quicken and geue lyfe how and when so euer it pleaseth hym muche better then the spirit and soule of man is able to quicken make liuely the body wherein it is These two sayinges this is my body and my wordes are spirit and life stande so well together that I beleue the one for the others sake Christes words neuer lacke spirit and life and power to quicken other thinges euen as his flesh neuer lacked al kynd of spirit in it selfe for when the soule was out of
so that the substance of flesh and blood shal be excluded by all meanes And as for the qualitie of Christes fleshe he wil haue it corporally in our bodies without any substance thereof wherein that qualitie may rest which his opinion is against all the course of nature Agayn when S. Hilarie saith that Christ tarieth naturally in vs what qualitie wil M. Iuel assigne to that aduerb shal he tary in vs in the maner of a natural tarying and yet shal not his true nature be in vs let vs go a litle farther S. Hilary saith Christus natualiter secundum spiritum in se patrem habet Christ hath the father in him according to yâ— spirit naturally How wil M. Iuel expound the worde naturally whether that Câ—…riste hath a qualitie of his fathers nature in him not the whole true substaÌ„ce Last of al S. Hilarie expoundeth his owne wordes euen as D. Harding hath done For as he saith in one place Ipso in nobis naturalitr permanente he tarying in vs naturally so he saieth in an other place a litle before Est ergo in nobis ipse per carnem Therefore he is in vs him selfe by flesh Aâ—…d again Naturaliter secundum carnem per eum viuimus id est naturam carnis suae adepti We liue by him according to the flesh naturally that is to say hauing obteined the nature of his flesh Consider good Reader that naturaliter viuere to liue naturally is by S. Hilarie thus resolued to liue by hauing the nature And to liâ—…e naturally according to the flesh is to liue by hauing yâ— nature of Christes flesh Who is now the more ignorant in grammar D. Harding or M. Iuel And yet M. Iuel in that childish eloquence of his triumpheth vpon D. Harding saith childern are taught these things Iu. God regardeth not the doing of any thing but the manner of doing But M. Harding will ouerloke the grammar rules San. That rule is to be vnderstande in matters belonging to manners But now we dispute of substances and not of doings We say Christes body is in our bodies naturally this truth is to be discussed and not any morall action of ours Iuel Our childern must lerne a new grammar for thâ—…se mens pleasure otherwise these mens dâ—…initie can not stand San. Priestes childern may 〈◊〉 a new grammar but as the old faith so the old grammar wil â—…erue other mens childen It is verily a verie new graÌ„â—…r to say that aduerbes taken of nounes neuer signifie the substance Good Scholmasters wil not admâ—…e such rules Iu. Haue these old Fathers nor names nor wordes San. As though you knowe that they folowe hereafter when you are come to them you wil be quickly werie of them ¶ Of the first Author of the Sacramentarie heâ—…sie HArding Berengarius first began openly to shevv the Sacramentarie heresie touching the veritie of Christes body in the Sacrament Iu. Before M. Harding said the Messalians were the first fathers of this heresie and so his tales hang not together Harding The Messalians opinion VVas the Sacrament of the altar did nor good nor euil And therein they VVere the first parents of the Sacramentarie heresie San. That which the Messalians did begin priuily by generall disgracing the Sacrament Berengarius began openly by denying this speciall vertue thereof which is the real presence and so there is no contradiction at all and you are founde but a cauiller Iu. Ioannes Scotus and Bertram mainteinâ—…d the same doctrin before Berengarius Sander If these men did barke in priuie corners at anie ceremonie which thing yet is not euident to vs but if it were so yet thâ—…y mainteined it not For then they had bene condemned of heresy But if that also were true you haue gained litle more theÌ„ two huÌ„dred yeres and those but by surmise without knowledge thereof left in any good historie And what is that to 〈◊〉 hundred yeres of continuall practise and open doctrine suche as we Catholiks haue had Iuel For farther declaration hereof it shal be necessary to open Berengarius iudgement San. Nay Sir it is enough to vs that you are at a stay can bring your faith no higher then to Ihon Scote and Bertram If your faith began priuily almost eight hundred yeres after Christ shall we here the declaration thereof if that may be permitted the heresy of the Arrians may be heard againe who was before Bertram Iuel Thus Berengarius wrote San. I care not what he wrote sith he recaÌ„ted yâ— same The 〈◊〉 wil standeth in his force and no wise man knowing that he repeuted his follie will afterward allege his authoritie for that which he recalled Iuel But his iudgement is confirmed by the Fathers San. It is not possible that the Fathers should confirme his iudgement who impugned their vniuersall tradition in so muche that he him selfe 〈◊〉 his own iudgement For seing he recanted his whole opinioÌ„ he recanted also that verie errour which he had coÌ„ceiued as by pretense of yâ— fathers words What a madâ—…es is it for you to allege any of both in his name for he in his recanting hath answered his own authorities alleged before out of the Fathers Iuel Let vs see the confutation hereof San. Seing Berengarius is the coÌ„futour his own true word is enough to vndoe as muche as his word had falsely stablished before Iuel Berengarius was forced to recant in this wise San. Force is not done to the free 〈◊〉 of man Iuel I beleue that the bodie of our Lorde Iesus Christ sensibly and in very dede is touched with the hand of the Priest brokeÌ„ and rent and ground with the teeth of the faithfull San. You haue englished the wordes very spitefully you haue added rent of your owne head and atteri doth signifie to be broken in peeces or to be wasted which may be done without grinding You are so accustomed to falsify things yâ— no mans wordes may escape your poison Iuel The very glose saith vnlesse you warily vnderstand these words of Berengarius you will fal into a greater heresy then euer he heald any San. The glosse warneth vs that all the touching breaking and wasting or coÌ„suming is to be referred to the formes of bread and wine the which thing if you had not left out you had alleged some one glosse without falsifying the same Iu. These Fathers redresse the lesse errour by the greater San. The cause whie Berengarius recanted by those wordes rather theÌ„ by anie other were two the one for yâ— he had taught in the tyme of his errour the body of Christ not to be before our eyes Against whiche words he now saith it is sensiblie handled The secoÌ„d was for that the body being vnder the form of bread and touched by the Priestes hands and broken by reason of the same form is thereby shewed most really present to witnesse the whiche reall presence S. Chrysostame had
that we are ioyned to Christ by faith and by Baptism Yeas Syr and by will also But note the point we stand vpon we are not ioyned naturally to Christ nor he is not ioyned by nature vnto vs by our faith or Baptism It is yâ— term naturally which M. Iuel denied at S. Poules crosse and that teâ—…n D. Harding hath found to appertein to the Sacrament as it shal be be made most manifest That term M. Iuel wold wrest to faith and Baptism And for that termes sake he is almost become a wicked Arrian or a naturall The second argument of the Arrians is He that planteth he that watereth are one Ergo sayd they the vnitie of will is in both them and they meant of will only and not any other vnitie S. Hilarie answereth that they are one because to them being born again in one Baptism one ministerie or dispensation of the one Baptism which doth regeneraâ—…e is graunted So that they are onâ—… because they haue one ministerie and not only because they 〈◊〉 of one minde At the last S. Hilarie geueth a generall rule qui per eandem rem vnum sunt naturâ etiam vnum sunt non tantum voluntate Those who are oâ—…e by the same thing they are one by nature and not only by will The third argument of the Arrians is Exemplum vnitatis istius sayth S. Hilarie caet The Arrians haue brought foorth an example of this vnitie out of our Lords words also to th' end all may be one As thou O Father in me and I in thee that they also may be in vs. To this argument S. Hilarie answereth declaring now first that which M. Iuel spake of before out of place Now first beginneth S. Hilarie to shew how Christ dwelleth naturally in vs and we in him And consequently how we also dwell in his Father by the meane of him To this matter should M. Iuel haue applied his solutioÌ„ For vppon the discourse made by reason of this argument D. â—…ding did ground his proof of Christes reall presence in the Sacrament What saith M. Iuel to this matter Iuel Thus it appeareth by S. Hilarie we may haue Christ naturally within vs by three other sundry meanes and therefore not only as M. Harding holdeth by receauing of the SacrameÌ„t San. Thus it appeareth say you but I haue shewed that no such thing appereth For S. Hilarie neuer sayd hitherto that we were naturally in Christ. Iuel Like as Christ is naturally corporally and carnally in vs by faith by regeneration and by Baptism euen so and none otherwise he is in vs by the Sacrament of his body San. First you begin with a thing not confessed nor agreâ—…d vpon and thereof you conclude a manifest falshod Christ is in vs by faith and Baptism but not corporally in our bodies But by the Sacrament of his body he is both in vs and in our bodies in the true and corporal substance of his own flesh blood Secondly you distinguish regeneration from Baptism as though Baptism were not the Sacrament which doth regenerate vs euen by S. Hilaries own doctrine alleged before Thirdly if Christ be none otherwise in vs by the Sacrament of his body then by faith or Baptism why do you make it a seuerall way from the other named before Why is that counted by your self a fourth meane of Christes being in vs which disferâ—…th not at all from the other three At the length it is tyâ—…e that I proue out of S. Hilarie which thing you M. Iuel dissemble and denie Chrisles body to be really present in the Sacrament It is to be remembred that whereas the Arrians had sayd aâ—… vuitie of will to be only betwen God the Father and the sonne as we likewise are one with Christ by will only for so thei sayd S. Hilariâ—… doth not in that case rest vpoÌ„ this answer that Christ by his birth is one with vs in truthe of flesh blood and therefore not in will and assent only as the Arriaâ—…s pretended and as M â–ª Iuel did before goe about to proâ—… S. Hilarie I say rested not therein because the vnitie of nature which was made with mankind by Christes Incarnation â—…ight be thought to pertein no more to the good then to the euill whereas Christ prayed for the vnitie of good men aloâ—…e that they might be one as God the Father is in Christ and Christ in him Therefore S. Hilary seking an other meane of our natural vnitie with Christ thereby proueth seing the faithfull men are one with Christ not only by faith or Baptism but by naturall coniunction and by corporall partaking of his own substance that much more Christ is one with his Father in nature and not in will alone S. Hilarie then must prone that we are one with Christ naturally which thing he doth after this â—…ort The word is verily made flesh and we take verily the word being flesh in our Lords meate therefore Christ is to be iudged to tary is in vs naturally Thus doth S. Hilari reason as I haue now shewed his coÌ„clusion is yâ— Christ tarieth in vs naturally yâ— meane to proue it is dubble one because Christ hath true flesh and blood whereby it is shewed to be possible that he may dwell naturally in vs the other is to shew that Christ gaue vnto vs aâ—…d that we take verily the same word being flesh in our Lords meate whereby the flesh that was able to be geuen to vs because it was really assumpted of Christ cometh in dede reallie vnto vs by his gift â–ª our Lords meate whereof S. Hilarie speaketh is the Sacrament of Christes supper wherein only he â—…ed vs corporallie with the word being flesh therefore S. Hilarie doth vs to vnderstand that in the Sacrament we take the word made flesh and so verily take it as the word was verily made flesh â–ª Iuel That we verily and vndoutedly receaue Christes body in the Sacrament it is neither denied nor in question SaÌ„ You sayd before pag. 323. that Christ in his supper added an outward Sacrament to the spirituall eating named in S. Ihon which Sacrament you sayd was commonly called a figure and again you sayd the bread is a figure Last of all you said out of Rabanus that the Sacrament is receaued with the mouth but now you say it is not denied yâ— we verily receaue Christes bodie in the Sacrament whereof I say it must nedes folow that Christes body is receaued with the mouth For it is receaued in the Sacrament as here you confesse and the Sacrament is receaued with the mouth as you taught before therefore by your doctrine Christes body is receaued by mouth which is against your third conclusion pag. 319. Who can tell where to find you But to return to my purpose the aduerb verily doth signifie in this place naturallie
really substanciallie For as the word is made fleshâ—… really so we take really the word being flesh in our Lords meat The worde was not made fleshe onlie by our faith but in truthe of his substance therefore we take the worde being fleshe not by our faith onlie but in truthe of his substance If M. Iuell will haue vs receaue Christes bodie verily and yet by faith only it must be made flesh verily and yet by faith onlie Ivel It is the bread of the hart â–ª hunger thou within thirst thou within San. If Christ being in his diuine nature toke real flesh and yet maie be hungred within is much yâ— better to vs bread of yâ— hart by natural slesh right so it is extreme madnes to make vs beleue that Christes bodie geneÌ„ vnder the form of bread is therefore the lesse hungred within or the lesse the bread and foode of the hart Iuel The thing that is receaued in spirit is receaued in dede San. If it be to be receaued corporally as well as in spirit as Baptisme and the Eucharist then it is false and foolish to say that it is receaued in dede when the outward dede lacketh This man wil cloth the naked and fede the pore in spirit and yet he saith it is done in dede albeit thei die for cold Spiritual receauing is true and good when it shuldreth not out reall receauing as spiritual resurrectioÌ„ is good true but yet it is not al yâ— truth of resurrection S. Bernard is alredie answered and S. Cyril Iuel It is a holy mystery and a heauenly action forcing our mindes vp into heauen and there teaching vs to eate the body of Christ not outwardly by the seruice of our bodies San. Is not verè sumimus we verily take spoken of taking by the seruice of our bodies can it be otherwise meant Again it foloweth in the same sentence that Christ hath mingled the nature of his flesh to the nature of euerlastingnesse vnder a Sacrament of his flesh to be coÌ„municated vnto vs. Mark these words M. Iuel which you passed ouer as if you had ben vtterly blind The nature of Christes flesh is I trow real it is communicated to vs vnder a Sacrament know you not that sub is vnder is not the Sacrament receaued by the seruice of our bodies did not your self graâ—…nt the Sacrament to be taken by mouth If then the nature of Christes flesh be vnder a Sacrament when the SacrameÌ„t is receaued by the seruice of our bodies the nature of Christes flesh is receaued by our bodies not by faith alone Iu. The truth hereof standeth not in anie reall presence but as Hilarius saith in a mysterie which is in a Sacrament San Whereas S. Hilarius saied We receaue verily the flesh of his body vnder a mysterie you report him to saie in a mysterie Is that no false dealing Well he saith we receaue Christes flesh vnder a mysterie and by your owne confession a mysterie is a Sacrament therefore we receaue the flesh of Christes body vnder the Sacrament And the Sacrament deliuered in the laste supper is by your confession also outward and commonly called a figure therefore we verilie receaue the flesh of Christes bodie vnder an outward figure and the outward figure is knowen by our eye to be the figure of bread therefore vnder the figure of bread we receaue the flesh of Christes bodie albeit by the figure you meane the substance of bread Iuel Our regeneration in Baptisme in a certaine bodily sorte teacheth vs the purgatioÌ„ of the mind as Dionysius saith so it is in the Sacrament of Christes body San. Can you haue the mind better tanght by an outward action then if you eate the same flesh in body which we doe eate in faith Is it possible to haue a greater coÌ„formitie a more vehemeÌ„t figuring and liuely expressing of al truth And albeit I haue shewed differences before betwen Baptisme and the Eucharist yet omitting yâ— I wil now say 〈◊〉 S. Augustin then yâ— bodie blood of Christ shal be lise to euerie man if yâ— thing which is visiblie taken in the Sacrament be eaten in the truthe spirituallie and be drunken spiritually M. Iuel would haue one thing ouâ—…wardly taken and an other thing eaten inwardly But S. Augustine saith that must be eaten in the truthe it selfe spiritually which is visibly taken in the Sacrament Iuel Although Christ be not bodily â—…resent yet that doth not hinder the substance of the mysterie San. The substance of the mysterie muste nedes be hindered when it is absent For it can be no mysterie without the substance thereof The substance of the mysterie is the naturall substance of Christ vnder the Sacrament therefore S. â—…ilarie saith The naturall propriety by the Sacrament is the Sacrament of the perfite vnitie Of this place I haue often times spoken and I would gladly heare M. Iuels minde in it For then should I be sure to know how I might dispute against him I can not coÌ„strue it otherwise then thus Naturalis proprietas the natural propriety which is to saie the natural substance he meaneth the substance of Christe For S. Hilarie vseth the ward proprietas verie muche and ost for the substance or personall being of God or of Christ. Wel then Christes naturall substance Per Sacramentum by or through the SacrameÌ„t est is Sacramentum the SacrameÌ„t perfectae vnitatis of perfite vnitie The substance of Christe is a Sacrament by or through the Sacrament these words can haue none other literall meaning but this the substance of Christe through the form of bread wherein vnitie is figured and vnder which it is by that meane I saie it is the Sacrament of perfite vnitie how can els the natural substance of Christe be a Sacrament Of it self alone it can be no holy signe but by the forme of bread it may be a Sacrament and yet M. Iuell can not find the real presence of Christ in the Sacrament in al S. Hilarie Moreouer S. Hilarie making a preface that we muste not speake otherwise in Gods matters then we haue lerned of him who said my flesh is verily meate yâ— there is no place of douting of yâ— truth of flesh blood concludeth thus For now both by the profession of our Lord him selfe and by our faith it is flesh in deede and blood in deede Answer I pray you M. Iuel What is fleshe in deede what is the nominatine case to est is I knowe none other besyde the worde Sacramentum the Sacrament or some like word which doth import the SacrameÌ„t as to saie that which the faithfull receaue at Christes supper For of that thinge S. Hilarie now speakethe That then is verily flesh and that is meant by S. Hilarie of an outward thig for he saith immediatly Haec accepta these things taken and drunke do bring