grace they went out Now Mark speaketh it thus And as they eat Jesus took bread blessed and brake it and gave it to them and said take eat this is my Body and he took the Cup gave thanks and gave it to them and they all drank of it and he said unto them this is my Blood of the New Testament which is shed for many Verily I say unto you I will drink no more of the fruit of the Vine untill that day I drink it new in the Kingdom of God Here Matthew and Mark do agree not only in the matter but also almost fully in the form of words saving that for this word in Matth. gave thanks Mark hath this word blessed which signifieth in this place all one and whereas Mat. saith Drink ye all of this Mark saith and they all drank of it and where Mat. saith of this fruit of the Vine Mark leaveth out the word this and saith of the fruit of the Vine Now let us see likewise what agreement in form of words is betwixt St. Luke and St. Paul Luke writeth thus He took Bread gave thanks brake it and gave it to them saying this is my Body this do in Remembrance of me likewise also when they had supp'd he took the Cup saying this Cup is the New-Testament in my Blood which is shed for you St. Paul setteth forth Christ's Supper thus The Lord Jesus in the same night in the which he was betrayed took bread and gave thanks and brake and said take eat this is my Body which is broken for you this do in remembrance of me After the same manner he took the Cup when Supper was done saying this Cup is the New-Testament in my Blood this do as often as you drink it in Remembrance of me for as often as you shall eat this Bread and drink this Cup you shall shew the Lords Death untill he come c. Here where Luke saith which is given Paul saith which is broken and as Luke addeth to the words of Paul spoken of the Cup which is-shed for you so likewise Paul addeth to the words of Luke this do as often as you shall drink it in the remembrance of me the rest that followeth in St. Paul both there and in the 10th Chap. pertaineth to the right use and doctrine of the Lord's Supper Thus the Evangelists St. Paul have rehearsed the words and Works of Christ whereby he did institute and ordain this holy Sacrament of his blessed Body and Blood to be a perpetual remembrance of himself untill his coming again Of himself I say that is of his Body given for us and of his Blood shed for the remission of sins But in this remembrance thus ordain'd as the Author thereof is Christ both God and Man so by the almighty power of God it far passeth all kinds of Remembrance that any other man is able to make either of himself or of any other thing For whosoever receiveth this holy Sacrament thus ordain'd in remembrance of Christ he receiveth therewith either Death or Life In this I trust we do all agree for St. Paul saith of the godly receivers 1 Cor. 10th The Cup of blessing which we bless is it not the partaking or Fellowship of Christ's Blood and also he saith the Bread which we break he meaneth at the Lord's Table is it not the partaking or fellowship of Christ's Body now the partaking of Christ's Body and Blood unto the faithfull and godly is the partaking and fellowship of Life and immortality And again of the bad and ungodly receivers St. Paul as plainly saith thus He that eateth of this Bread and drinketh of this Cup unworthily he is guilty of the Body and Blood of the Lord. O how necessary then is it if we love Life and would eschew Death to try and examin our selves before we eat of this Bread and drink of this Cup for else assuredly he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh his own damnation because he esteemed not the Lords Body that is he reverenceth not the Lords body with the honour which is due unto him And yet by that which was said that with the receit of the Holy Sacrament of the blessed Body and Blood of Christ is received of every one good or bad either Life or Death it is not meant that they which are dead before God hereby may receive Life or the living before God can hereby receive Death For as none is meet to receive natural food whereby the natural life is nourished except he be born and live before so no man can feed by the receit of this holy Sacrament of the food of eternal Life except he be regenerated and born of God before and on the other side no man here receiveth damnation which is not dead before Thus hitherto without all doubt God is my witness I say so far as I know there is no controversy among them that be learn'd in the Church of England concerning the matter of this Sacrament but all do agree whether they be new or old and to speak plain as some do odiously call each other whether they be Protestants Papists Pharisees or Gospellers And as all do agree hitherto in the aforesaid Doctrine so all do detest abhor and condemn the wicked Heresy of the Messalians which otherwise be called Trip. Hist. Lib. 7. cap. 11. Euchits which said that the holy Sacrament can neither do good nor harm All do also condemn the wicked Anabaptists which putteth no difference betwixt the Lords Table and the Lords meat and their own And forasmuch as Charity would if it be possible and so far as we may with the safeguard of good Conscience and maintenance of the Truth to agree with all men therefore methinks that it is not charitably done to burden any man either new or old farther than such do declare themselves to dissent from that we are persuaded to be the Truth or pretend there to be controversies whereas none such are indeed and so to multiply the debate the which the more it doth increase the farther it doth depart from the unity that the true Christian should desire And again this is true that Truth neither needeth nor will be maintain'd with lies and it is sin to lie against the Devil for tho by the ly thou dost seem never so much to speak against the Devil yet in that thou lyest indeed thou workest the Devils work thou doest him service and takest the Devils part Now then whether they do godly and charitably which either by their pen in writing or by their words in preaching do bear the simple people in hand that those which thus do teach and believe do go about to make the holy Sacrament ordain'd by Christ himself a thing no better than a piece of common broken bread or that do say that such do make this Sacrament of the blessed Body and Blood of Christ but a bare sign or figure to represent Christ none otherwise than an
Ivy-Bush doth represent the Wine in a Tavern or as a vile person gorgeously apparrell'd may represent a King or a Prince in a Play Alass let us leave lying and speak the truth every man not only to his neighbour but also of his neighbour for we are members one of another saith St. Paul The controversy no doubt which at this day troubleth the Church wherein any mean learned man either old or new doth stand in is not whether the holy Sacrament of the blessed Body and Blood of Christ is no better than a piece of common bread or no or whether the Lords Table be no more to be regarded than the table of any earthly man or no or whether it be a bare sign or figure of Christ and nothing else or no for all do grant that St. Pauls words do require that the Bread which we brake is the partaking of the Body of Christ and also all do grant him that eateth of that Bread and drinketh of that Cup unworthily to be guilty of the Lords Death and to eat and drink his own damnation because he esteem'd not the Lords Body All do grant that these words of Paul when he saith if we eat it advantageth us nothing or if we eat not we want nothing thereby are not spoken of the Lord's Table but of other common meats Thus then hitherto yet we all agree but now let us see wherein the Dissention doth stand the understanding of it wherein it doth chiefly stand is a step to the true searching forth of the Truth for who can seek well a Remedy if he know not before the Disease It is neither to be denied nor dissembled that in the matter of this Sacrament there be divers points wherein men counted to be learned cannot agree as whether there be any Transubstantiation of the Bread or no any corporal and carnal presence of Christs Substance or no whether adoration due only unto God is to be done to the Sacrament or no and whether Christs body be there indeed offered unto the heavenly Father by the Priest or no or whether the evil man receiveth the natural Body of Christ or no yet nevertheless as in a man diseased in divers parts commonly the original cause of such divers diseases which are spread abroad in the body do come from some one chief member as from the stomach or from the head even so all those five aforesaid points do chiefly hang upon this one question which is What is the matter of the Sacrament whether is it the natural substance of Bread or the natural substance of Christs own Body The truth of this question truly tryed out and agreed upon no doubt shall cease the controversy in all the rest For if it be Christs own natural Body born of the Virgin then assuredly seeing that all learned men in England both new and old grant there to be but one substance then I say they must needs grant Transubstantiation that is a change of the substance of bread into the substance of Christs body Then also they must grant the carnal and corporal presence of Christs body Then must the Sacrament be adored with the Honor due unto Christ himself for the unity of the two natures in one person Then if the Priest do offer the Sacrament he doth offer indeed Christ himself And finally the murderer the adulterer and wicked man receiving the Sacrament must needs then receive also the natural substance of Christ's own blessed Body both Flesh and Blood Now on the other side if after the truth shall be truly tryed out it be found that the substance of the Bread is the material substance of the Sacrament altho for the change of the use office and dignity of the Bread the Bread indeed sacramentally is changed into the body of Christ as the water of Baptism is changed into the fountain of regeneration and yet the material substance thereof remaineth all one as was before If I say the true solution of that former question whereupon all these controversies do hang be that the natural substance of Bread is the material substance in the holy Sacrament of Christs body then must it follow of that former proposition confessed of all that be named to be learned so far as I do know in England which is That there is but one material substance in the Sacrament of the Body and one only likewise in the Sacrament of the Blood that there is no such thing indeed and in truth as they call Transubstantiation For the Substance of Bread remaineth still in the Sacrament of the Body then also the natural substance of Christs human nature which he took of the Virgin Mary is in Heaven where it reigneth now in glory and not here inclosed under the form of Bread then that godly Honour which is only due unto God the Creator and may not be done unto the creature without Idolatry and Sacriledge is not to be done unto the holy Sacrament Then also the wicked I mean the impenitent murtherer adulterer or such like do not receive the natural Substance of the blessed body and blood of Christ. Finally then doth follow that Christs blessed Body which was once only offer'd and shed upon the Cross being available for the sins of all the World is offer'd up no more in the natural substance there of neither by the Priest nor any otherthing But here before we go any farther to search in this matter and to wade to search and try out as we may the truth thereof in the Scripture it shall do well by the way Whether they that thus make answer and solution unto the former principal Question do take away simply and absolutely the presence of Christs Body and Blood from the Sacrament ordained by Christ and duely ministred according to his holy Ordinance and Institution of the same Undoubtedly they do deny That utterly either so to say or to mean the same and hereof if any man do or will doubt the Books which are written already in this matter of them that thus do answer will make the matter plain Now then will ye say what kind of presence will they grant and what do they deny Briefly they deny the presence of Christs Body in the natural substance of his human and assumpt nature and grant the presence of the same by Grace that is They affirm and say that the substance of the natural body and blood of Christ is only remaining in Heaven and so shall be until the latter day when he shall come again in glory accompanied with the angels of Heaven to judge both the quick and the dead And the same natural substance of the very Body and Blood of Christ because it is united to the divine nature in Christ the second person in the Trinity therefore it hath not only Life in it self but is also able and doth give life unto so many as be or shall be partakers thereof that is to all that do believe in his name which
against the Error of Trausubstantiation I refer here unto the Judgment of the indifferent Reader And now I will also reherse the saying of other three old Ancient Writers of the Latin Church and so make an end And first I will begin with Tertullian whom Cyprian the holy Martyr so highly esteem'd that whensoever he would have his Book he was wont to say Give us now the Master's This old Writer in his fourth Book against Marcion the Heretick saith Jesus made the Bread which he took and distributed Tertull. to his Disciples his Body saying This is my Body that is to say saith Tertullian a Figure of my Body In this place it is plain that after Tertullian his Exposition that Christ meant not by calling of Bread his Body and the Wine his Blood that either the Bread was his Natural Body or the Wine his Natural Blood but he call'd them his Body and Blood because he would institute them to be unto us Sacraments that is holy Tokens and Signs of his Body and Blood that by them remembring and firmly believing the benefits procured to us by his Body which was torn and Crucified for us and of his Blood which was shed for us upon the Cross And so with thanks receiving these holy Sacraments according to Christs Institution might by the same be spiritually nourished and fed to the increase of all Godliness in us here in our Pilgrimage and Journey wherein we walk unto Everlasting Life This was undoubtedly Christ our Saviours mind and this is Tertullian's Exposition The wrangling that the Papists do make to delude this saying of Tertullian's it is too far out of all frame Tertullian writeth here say they as none hath done either before him or after him This saying is too-too manifestly false for Origen Hilary Ambrose Basil Gregory Nazianzen St. Augustine and other old Authors likewise do call the Sacrament a Figure of Christs Body And where they say that Tertullian wrote this when he was in a heat of Disputation with an Heretick coveting by all means to overcome his Adversaries as who would say he would not take heed what he did say and specially what he would write in so high a matter so that he might have the upper hand of his Adversary Is this credible to be true in any Godly Wise Man How much less then is it worthy to be thought and credited in a Man of so great a Wit Learning and Excellency as Tertullian is worthily esteem'd ever to have been Likewise this Author in his first Book against the same Heretick Marcion writeth thus God did not reject Bread which is his Creature for by it he hath made a Representation of his Body Now I pray you what is this to say that Christ hath made a Representation of his Body by Bread but that Christ hath instituted and ordained Bread to be a Sacrament for to represent unto us his Body Now whether the representation of one thing by another requireth the corporal presence of the thing which is represented or no every man that hath understanding is able in this point the matter is so clear of it self to be a sufficient Judge The second Doctor and Writer of the Latin Church August is St. Augustine of whose Learning and Estimation I need not to speak for all the Church of Christ both hath and ever have had him for a Man of much singular Learning Wit and Diligence both in setting forth the true Doctrine of Christs Religion and also in the Defence of the same against Hereticks This Author as he hath written more plenteouslly in other matters of our Faith so likewise in this Argument he hath written at large in many of his Works so plainly against the Error of Transubstantiation that the Papists love least to hear of him of all other Writers partly for his Authority and partly because he openeth the matter more fully than any other doth therefore I will reherse more places of him than heretofore I have done of the other And first What can be more plain than that which he writeth upon the Ninety eighth Psalm speaking of the Sacraments of the Lords Body and Blood and rehersing Tom. 8. Col. Nov. B. as it were Christs words to his Disciples after this manner It is not this Body which ye do see that ye shall eat nor ye shall not drink this Blood which the Soldiers which Crucify me shall spil or shed I do commend unto you a Mystery or a Sacrament which spiritually understood shall give you Life Now if Christ had no more Natural or Corporal Bodies but that one which they there then presently both heard and saw and none other Natural Blood but that which was in the same Body and the which the Soldiers afterward did cruelly shed upon the Cross and neither this Body neither this Blood was by this Declaration of St. Augustin either to be eaten or drunken but the Mystery thereof spiritually to be understood Then I conclude that the Mystery which the Disciples should eat was not the Natural Body of Christ but a Mystery of the same spiritually to be understood For as St. Augustin saith in his Twentieth Book Contra Faustum Christs Flesh and Blood was Cap. 21. in the Old Testament promised by Similitudes and Figures of their Sacrifices and was exhibited indeed and in truth upon the Cross but the same is celebrated by a Sacrament of Remembrance upon the Altar And in his Book De Fide ad Petrum Cap. 19. he saith That in those Sacrifices meaning of the old Law it is figuratively signified what then was to be given but in this Sacrifice it is evidently signified what is already given Understanding in the Sacrifice upon the Altar the Remembrance and Thanksgiving for the Flesh which he offered for us and for the Blood which he shed for us upon the Cross. Another evident and clear place wherein it appeareth that by the Sacramental Bread which Christ call'd his Body he meant a figure of his Body is upon the Third Psalm where St. Augustin speaketh thus Christ did admit Judas unto the Feast in the which he commended unto his Disciples the Figure of his Body St. Augustin also in the 23 Epist. ad Bonifacium teacheth how Sacraments bear the name of Things whereof they be Sacraments both in Baptism and in the Lords Table even as we call every Good-Friday the Day of Christs Passion every Easter-Day the Day of Christs Resurrection where in very deed there was but one day wherein he suffered and one day wherein he rose And why do we then call them so which are not so indeed but because they are in like time and course of the year as those days were wherein those things were done Was Christ saith St. Augustin offer'd any more but once and he offered himself and yet in a Sacrament or Representation not only every solemn Feast of Easter but also every day to the People he is offered so that he
are not born of blood as John saith or of the will of flesh or of the will of man but are born of God tho the self same substance abide still in Heaven and they for the time of their Pilgrimage dwell here upon Earth By Grace I said that is by the gift of this life mentioned in John and the properties for the same meet for a Pilgrimage here upon Earth the same body of Christ is here present with us As for example we say the Sun which in substance never removeth his place out of the Heavens is yet present here by his Beams Light and natural Influence where it shineth upon the Earth for Gods word and his Sacraments be as it were the Beams of Christ who is Sol Justitiae Thus thou hast heard wherein doth stand the principal state and chief point of all the Controversies which do properly pertain unto the nature of this Sacrament As for the use thereof I grant there be many other things whereof here I have spoken of nothing at all And now least thou justly mayest complain and say that I have in opening this matter done nothing else but digged a Pit and have not shut it up again or broken a Gap and have not made it up or opened the Book and have not closed it again or else to call me what they list as neutrall Dissembler c. Therefore here now I will by Gods Grace not only shortly but also so clearly and plainly as I can make thee now to know whether of the aforesaid two Answers to the former principall state and chief point doth like me best Yea and also I will hold all those accursed which in this matter which now so troubles the Church of Christ have of God receiv'd the Key of Knowledg and yet go about to shut up the Doors that they themselves will not enter in nor suffer others that would And as for my own part I consider both of late what cure and charge of Souls hath bin committed unto me whereof God knoweth how soon I shall be called to give an Account and also now in this world what peril and danger of the Laws concerning my Life I am now in at this present time what folly were it to dissemble with God of whom assuredly I look and hope by Christ to have everlasting life Seing that such charge and danger both before God and man do compass me in round about on every side therefore God willing I will frankly and freely utter my mind and tho my body be Captive yet my Tongue and my Pen as long as I may shall freely set forth that which undoubtedly I am perswaded to be the Truth of Gods word And yet will I do it under this Protestation call me a Protestant who list I do not pass thereof my Protestation shall be this that my mind is and ever shall be God willing to set forth sincerely the true sense and meaning to the best of my understanding of God's most holy word and not to decline from the same either by fear of worldly danger or else for hope of gain I do protest also due obedience and submission of my judgment in this my writing and in all other mine affairs unto those of Christs Church which be truly learned in Gods holy word and guided by his Spirit After this Protestation I do plainly affirm and say that the second answer made unto the chief Question and principal point I am perswaded to be the very true meaning and sense of Gods holy word That is that the natural Substance of Bread and Wine is the true material substance of the holy Sacrament of the blessed Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ and the places of Scripture whereupon this my Faith is grounded be these both concerning the Sacrament of the Body and also of the Blood First let us repeat the beginning of the Institution of the Lords Supper wherein all the three Evangelists and St. Paul do agree saying That Jesus took Bread gave thanks brake and gave it to the Disciples saying Take Eat this is my Body Here it appeareth plainly that Christ called very Bread his Body For that which he took was very Bread In this all men do agree and that which he took after he had given thanks he brake and that which he took and brake he gave it to his Disciples and that which he took brake and gave to his Disciples he said himself of it This is my Body So it appeareth plainly that Christ called very Bread his Body But very Bread cannot be his very Body in very Substance thereof therefore it must needs have another meaning which meaning appeareth plainly what it is by the next sentence that followeth immediately both in Luke and in Paul and that is this Do this in remembrance of me whereupon it seemeth unto me to be evident that Christ did take Bread and called it his Body for that he would institute thereby a perpetual Remembrance of his Body specially of that singular benefit of our Redemption which he would then procure purchase unto us by his Body upon the Cross. But Bread retaining still its own very natural substance may be thus by grace and in a sacramental signification His Body whereas else the very Bread which he took brake and gave them could not be in any wise his natural body for that were confusion of substances and therefore the very words of Christ joyned to the next sentence following both enforceth us to confess the very bread to remain still and also openeth unto us how that Bread may be and is thus by his divine power his body which was given for us But here I remember that I have read in some writers of the contrary opinion which do deny that That which Christ did take he brake For say they after this taking he blessed it as Mark doth speak and by his Blessing he changed the natural substance of the Bread into the natural substance of his Body And so altho he took the bread and blessed it yet because in blessing it he changed the substance of it he broke not the bread which then was not there but only the form thereof Unto this Objection I have two plain answers both grounded upon Gods word The one I will reherse here the other answer I will defer untill I speak of the Sacrament of the Blood Mine answer here is taken out of the plain words of St. Paul which doth manifestly confound this fantastical invention first invented I ween of Pope Innocentius and after confirmed by the subtil sophist Dunse and lately renewed now in our Days with an eloquent stile and much fineness of wit But what can crafty Inventions subtilty in Sophisms Eloquence or fineness of Wit prevail against the infallible word of God What need we to contend and strive what thing we break for Paul saith speaking undoubtedly of the Lords Table The Bread saith he which we break is it not the partaking