Verily I saye vnto you I wil drinke no more of the frute of the vyne vntil that daye that I drinke that newe in the kingdome of God Here Matthewe and Marke do agree not only in y e mater but also almost fully in the forme of wordes In Matthewe gaue thākes Marke hathe one worde Blessed which signifieth in this place all one And where Matthewe sayeth Drynke ye all of this Marke sayeth they al dranke of it And wher Matthewe sayeth of this frute of y e vyne Marke leaueth out y e worde this and sayeth of y e frute of the vyne Now let vs see likewise what agrement in forme of wordes is betwene S. Luke and S. Paule Luke wryteth thus He toke bread gaue thākes brake it and gaue it to them sayēg This is my body which is geuē for you This doo in the remembraunce of me Likewise also whan they hade supped he toke the cupp sayeng This cuppe is the newe testament in my blood which is shedde for you Saint Paule setteth furthe y e Lordes supper thus The Lorde Iesus the same night in the which he was betrayed toke bread and gaue thankes brake and sayed Take eate this is my body which is broken for you This doo in remembraunce of me After the same maner he toke the cuppe whan supper was done sayeng This cuppe is the newe testament in my blood This doo as often as ye shall drinke it in the remēbraūce of me For as often as ye shall eate this bread drinke this cuppe ye shal shewe y e Lordes death vntil he come Here wher Luke sayeth which is geuen Paule sayeth which is broken And as Luke addeth to the wordes of Paule spoken of the cuppe which is shedde for you so likewise Paule addeth to the wordes therof This doo as often as you shall drinke it in the remembraunce of me The rest that foloweth in S. Paule bothe ther and in y e 10. chap. perteyneth vnto the right vse and doctrine of the Lordes supper Thus the Euangelistes S. Paule haue rehearced the wordes worke of Christ wherby he did institute ordayne this holy sacramēt of his body blood to be a perpetuall remēbraūce vnto his cōmyng again of him self I saye y t is of his body geuē for vs of his blood shedde for y e remission of synnes But this remēbraunce which is thus ordayned as y e autor therof is Christ bothe God and man so by the almightie power of God it farre passeth all kyndes of remembraunces that any other man is able to make eyther of hym selfe or of any other thing For who so euer receaueth this holy Sacramēt thus ordayned in remēbraūce of Christ he receaueth ther with either deathe or life In this I trust we doo all agree For S. Paule sayeth of y e godly receauours in y e 10. chap. of his furst epistle vnto the Corinthiās The cuppe of blessing which we blesse is it not the partaking or feloweship of Christes blood And also he sayeth The bread which we breake meaneth at the Lordes table is it not the partaking or feloweship of Christes bodye Now the partakīg of Christes body and of his blood vnto the faithfull and godly is the partaking or feloweship of life immortalitie And agayn of the badde and vngodly receauours S. Paule as playnly sayeth thus He that eateth of this bread eand drynketh of this cuppe vnworthily is giltie of the body and blood of y e Lorde O how necessary thā it is if we loue life wolde eschue deathe to trye and examine our selues before we eate of this bread and drynke of this cuppe for elles assuredly he that eateth and drynketh therof vnworthily eateth drynketh his owne damnacion bicause he estemeth not the Lordes body y t is he reuerenceth not the Lordes bodye w t y e honour that is due vnto him And that which was sayd that w t the recept of the holy Sacrament of the blessed body and blood of Christ is receaued of euery one good badde either life or deathe it is not mēt that they which are dead before God maie hereby receaue life or the lyuing before God can hereby receaue deathe For as non is mete to receaue natural fode wherby y e natural life is nourished except he be borne liue before so no man cā fede by the recept of this holy sacrament of the fode of eternal life except he be regenerated borne of God before And on the other syde no man here receaueth damnacion which is not dead before Thus hitherto without all doubt God is my witnesse I saye so farre as I doo knowe ther is no controuersie among them that be learned in the churche of Englande concerning the mater of this sacrament but all doo agree whether they be newe or olde and to speake playne and as som of them doo odiously call either other whether they be protestauntes papistes Pharisees or gospellers And as al doo agree hitherto in y e aforesayed doctrine so al do deteste abhorre cōdēne y e wicked heresie of y e Messalonianes which other wise be called Euticheres which said y t y e holy Sacramēt cā nother do good nor harme Al do al so cōdēne those wicked Anabaptistes which put no difference betwene the Lordes table and the lordes meate their owne And bicause charitie wolde that we should if it be possible and so farre as we maye with the sauegarde of good cōscience mayntenaunce of the truthe agree with all men therfore me thinkes it is not charitably done to burthen any man either newe or olde as they cal them further than such doo declare them selues to dissent from that we are persuaded to be truthe or pretende therto to be controuersies wher as non suche are in dede and so to multiplye the debate the which the more it dothe encreace the further it dothe departe from the vnitie that the true christian should desyre And agayn this is true that truthe nother nedeth nor wilbe maynteyned with lies It is also a true prouerbe that it is euen synne to lye vpō the deuil for though by thy lye thow doest synne neuer so muche to speake agaynst the deuil yet in y t thou lyest in dede thow workest the deuilles worke thow doest him seruice and takest the deuilles parte Now whether than they doo godly and charitably which either by their pen in writing or by their wordes in preaching doo beare the symple people in hāde that those which thus doo teache beleue doo goo about to make the holy Sacrament ordayned by Christ him self a thing no better than a piece of common bread or that doo saye that suche doo make the holy Sacrament of the blesed body and blood of Christ nothing elles but a bare signe or a figure to represent Christ non otherwise than the Iuye bushe dothe represent the wyne in a tauerne or as a vile persone gorgiouslye
apparailed ▪ maye represent a kyng or a prince in a playe Alas let men leaue lyeng and speake the truthe euery one not only to his neighbour but also of his neighbour for we are membres one of an other sayeth saint Paule The controuersie no doubt which at this daye troubleth the churche wherin any meane learned man either olde or newe dothe stande in is not whether the holy Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ is no better than a piece of cōmō bread or no or whether the Lordes table is no more to be regarded thā the table of any earthy man or no or whether it is but a bare signe or figure of Christ and nothing elles or no. For all doo graunt that S. Paules wordes doo require that the bread which we breake is the partaking of the body of Christ and also doo graunt hym that eateth of that bread or drinketh of y e cuppe vnworthily to be giltie of the Lordes death and to eate and drinke his owne damnacion bicause he estemeth not the Lordes body All doo graunt that these wordes of S. Paule whan he sayeth If we eate it auantageth vs nothing or if we eate not we want nothīg therby are not spoken of the Lordes table but of other common meates Thus thā hitherto yet we al agree But now let vs see wherin the dissensiō dothe stande The vnderstāding of it wherin it chiefli stādeth is a steppe to the true searching furthe of the truth For who can seke well a remedie if he knowe not before y e disease It is nother to be denyed nor dissembled that in the mater of this Sacramēt ther be diuerse poyntes wherin men counted to be learned can not agree As whether ther be any Transubstanciation of the bread or no any corporal carnall presence of Christes substaūce or no Whether adoracion due onlye vnto God is to be done vnto the Sacrament or no and whether Christes bodye be ther offred in dede vnto y e heauēly father by y e priest or no and whether y e euil man receaueth the naturall bodye of Christ or no. Yet neuerthelesse as in a man diseased in dyuerse partes commonlye the originall cause of suche diuerse diseases which is spredde abroade in the body doo come from one chefe membre as from the stomacke or from the head euen so all fyue aforesayed doo chiefly heng vpon this one question which is what is the mater of the Sacrament whether is it the naturall substaunce of bread or the natural substaunce of Christes owne body The truthe of this questiō truly tryed out and agreed vpon no doubt shal ceasse the cōtrouersie in al y e rest For if it be Christes owne natural body borne of the virgine than assuredly seing that all learned men in Englande so farre as I knowe bothe newe olde graūt there to be but one substaunce than I saye they must nedes graunt Transubstanciacion that is a chaūge of y e substaunce of bread into the substaunce of Christes bodye Thā also they must nedes graunt the carnall and corporal presence of Christes bodye Than must the Sacramēt be adored with y e honour due to Christ him selfe for the vnitie of the two natures in one persone Than yf y e priest do offre the Sacrament he dothe offre in dede Christ him selfe And finally the murtherour the aduouterour or wicked mā receauing the Sacramēt must nedes than receaue also the natural substaūce of Christes owne blessed bodye bothe fleshe and blood Nowe on y e other syde yf after the truthe shalbe truly tryed out it shalbe founde that the substaūce of bread is the naturall substaunce of the Sacrament although for the chaunge of the vse office and dignitie of y e bread the bread in dede sacramentally is chaunged into the bodye of Christ as the water in Baptisme is sacramētally chaūged into the fountayne of regeneration yet the natural substaunce therof remayneth all one as was before yf I say the true solucion of that former question whervpon al these controuersies do heng be that the naturall substaunce of bread is the material substaunce in the Sacrament of Christes blessed body than must it nedes folowe of the former proposicion confessed of all that be named to be learned so farre as I do knowe in Englande which is that ther is but one material substaunce in the Sacrament of the bodye and one only lykewise in the Sacrament of the blood that ther is no suche thing in dede and in truthe as they call Transubstanciacion for the substaunce of bread remayneth stil in the Sacrament of the bodye than also the natural substaūce of Christes humane nature which he toke of the virgine Mary is in heauē where it reigneth nowe in glorie and not here inclosed vnder the forme of bread than that godly honour which is only due vnto God y e creatour may not be done vnto the creature without idolatrie and sacrilege is not to be done vnto the holy Sacrament Than also the wicked I meane the impenitēt murtherour aduouterour or suche like do not receaue the natural substaūce of y e blessed body blood of Christ. Finally thā dothe it folowe y e Christes blessed body blood which was once only offred shedde vpō the crosse being auaileable for the sinnes of al the hole worlde is offred vp nomore in'the natural substaūce therof nother by y e priest nor any other thing But here before we go any further to searche in this mater to wade as it were to search trye out as we may y e truthe hereof in the scripture it shall do wel by the way to knowe whether they that thus make answere solucion vnto the former principal questiō do take awaye symplie and absolutly the presence of Christes body blood from the Sacrament ordayned by Christ and duely ministred according to his holy ordinaunce and instituciō of the same Undoubtedly they doo denye that vtterlye either so to saye or so to meane Hereof yf any man do or will doubt the bookes which are writtē already in this mater of them that thus doo answere will make the mater playne Now than wil you say what kynd of presence do they graunt what do they denye Bryefly they denie the presence of Christes body in the naturall substaunce of his humane assumpt nature and graunt the presence of the same by grace that is they affirme and saye that the substaūce of the naturall body and blood of Christ is onlye remaynyng in heauē and so shalbe vnto the later daye whan he shall come agayne in glorie accompanied with the Aūgelles of heauen to iudge bothe the quicke and the deade And that the same natural substaūce of the very bodye blood of Christ bycause it is vnited vnto the diuine nature in Christ y e secōde person of the Trinitie Therfore it hathe not onlye lyfe in it selfe but is also hable to geue dothe geue lyfe vnto so
bothe in setting furthe the true doctrine of Christes religion also in the defence of the same against heretikes This autor as he hathe written most pleynteously in other maters of our faithe so likewise in this argument he hathe written at large in many of his workes so playnly against this errour of transustanciacion y t the papistes loue least to heare of hym of al other wrytours partly for his autoritie partly bicause he openeth the mater more fully than any other doth Therfore I will rehearse mo places of him thā hertofore I haue done of the other And furst what can be more playne than that which he wryteth vpon the 89. psalme speakīg of the sacrament of the Lordes body and blood and rehearsing as it were Christes wordes to his disciples after this maner It is not this body which ye doo see that ye shall eate nother shall ye drynke this blood which the souldyours y t crucifie me shall spill or sheade I doo commende vnto you a mysterie or a sacramēt which spiritually vnderstanded shall geue you life Now if Christ hade no moo natural and corporal bodies but that one which they thā presently bothe hearde sawe nor other natural blood but that which was in the same body and the which the souldiours did afterwarde cruelly shede vpon the crosse and nother this body nor this blood was by this declaracion of S. Augustine either to be eaten or dronken but the mysterie therof spiritually to be vnderstanded than I conclude if this sayeng and exposicion of S. Augustine be true that y e mysterie which the disciples should eate was not the natural body of Christ but a mysterie of the same spiritually to be vnderstāded For as S. Augustine sayeth in his 20. boke Contra Faustum ca. 21. Christes fleshe and blood was in the olde testament promysed by similitudes and signes of their sacrifices and was exhibited in dede and in truthe vpon y e crosse but the same is celebrated by a sacrament of remembraunce vpō y e aultare And in his boke De fide ad Petrum ca. 19. he sayeth that in these sacrifices meanyng of the olde lawe it is figuratiuely signified what was than to be geuen but in this sacrifice it is euidently signified what is allready geuen vnderstāding in the sacrifice vpon the aultare the remembraunce and thākes geuing for the fleshe which he offred for vs for the blood which he shedde for vs vpon the crosse as in the same place and euidently ther it maye appeare An other euident and cleare place wherin it appeareth that by the sacramentall bread which Christ called his body he ment a figure of his body As vpon the .3 Psalme wher S. Augustine speaketh this in playne termes Christ did admytte Iudas vnto the feast in the which he commēded vnto his disciples the figure of his bodye This was Christes last supper before his passion wherin he did ordayne the sacrament of his body as all learned men doo agree S. Augustine also in his 23. epistle to Bonifacius teacheth how sacramentes doo beare the names of y e thinges wherof they be sacramentes bothe in Baptisme and in the Lordes table euen as we call euery good frydaye the daye of Christes passiō and euery Easter daye the daye of Christes resurrection whan in very dede ther was but one daye wherin he suffred and but one daye wherin he rose And why doo we than call them so which are not so in dede but bicause they are in like tyme and course of the yeare as those dayes were wherin those thinges wer done Was Christ sayeth S. Augustī offred any more but once And he offred him self And yet in a sacrament or represētaciō not only euery solēne feast of Easter but also euery day to y e people he is offred so y t he dothe not lye y t sayeth He is euery daye offred For if Sacramētes hade not sō similitudes or likenesse of those thinges wherof they be Sacramētes they could in no wise be sacramētes for their similitudes and likenesse commonly they haue the names of the thinges wherof they be sacramētes Therfore as after a certayn maner of speche y e sacramēt of Christes body is Christes body the sacrament of Christes blood is Christes blood so likewise the Sacrament of faithe is faithe After this maner of speche as S. Augustine teacheth in his questiones Super Leuiticum Cōtra Adamantinū it is sayed in scripture that .vii eares of corne be seuen yeares seuen kyen be vii yeares y e rocke was Christ blood is y e soule the which last sayeng sayeth S. Augustine in his boke Contra Adimantinum is vnderstanded to be spoken in a signe or figure For the Lord himself did not sticke to saye This is my body whan he gaue the signe of his body For we must not considre in sacramētes sayeth S. Augustine in an other place What they be but what they doo signifie for they be signes of thinges being one thing in them selues and yet signifieng an other thing For the heauenly bread sayeth he speaking of the sacramental bread by some maner of speache is called Christes body whan in very dede it is the Sacrament of his body c. What can be more playne or more clearly spoken than are these places of S. Augustine before rehearsed if men were not obstinately bent to mayntene an vntruthe to receaue nothing what so euer dothe set it furthe Yet one place more of S. Augustine will I allege which is very cleare to this purpose that Christes natural body is in heauen and not here corporally in the Sacrament and so let him departe In his .50 treatise which he wryteth vpon Iohn̄ he teacheth playnly and clearly how Christ being bothe God and man is bothe here after a certayn maner and yet in heauen and not here in his natural body and substaunce which he toke of the blessed virgin Mary speaking thus of Christ and sayeng By his diuine Maiestie by his prouidence and by his vnspeakeable inuisible grace y t is fulfilled which he spake Beholde I am with you vnto the ende of the worlde But as concernyng his fleshe which he toke in his incarnacion as touching that which was borne of the virgine as concernyng that which was apprehended by the Iewes crucified vpon a tree and taken downe from the crosse lapped in lynen clothes and buryed and rose agayn and appeared after his resurrection as concernyng that fleshe he sayed ye shall not euer haue me with you Why so For as cōcernyng his fleshe he was conuersaūt with his disciples .xl. Dayes and they accompanyeng seing and not folowīg hym he wēt vp in to heauen is not here By y e presēce of his diuine maiestie he did not departe as concernyng y e presēce of his diuine maiestie w c haue Christ euer w t vs but as concernyng y e presence of his fleshe he sayed truly to his disciples Ye
many as be or shalbe partakers therof that is y t to all y t do beleue on his name which are not borne of blood as S. Io. sayeth or of y e wil of y e fleshe or of y e wil of maÌ„ but are borne of God though the selfe same substaunce abyde styll in heauen and they for the tyme of their pilgrimage dwel here vpon earthe By grace I saye that is by the gyfte of thys lyfe mencioned in Iohn and the propreties of the same mete for our pilgrimage here vpon earth the same bodye of Christ is here preseÌ„t with vs. Euen as for example we saye y e same Sunne which in substauÌ„ce neuer remoueth his place out of the heauens is yet present here by his beames light and naturall influence where it shyneth vpon the earthe For Goddes worde and his Sacramentes be as it were the beames of Christ which is Sol iusticiae the SuÌ„ne of ryghteousnes Thus haste thou hearde of what sorte or secte so euer thou be wherin dothe stande the principall state and chiefe point of all the controuersies which do ê“prely perteyne vnto the nature of this SacrameÌ„t As for the vse therof I graunt ther be many other thinges wherof here I haue spoken nothyng at all And now least thou iustly mightest complayne and say that I haue in opening of this mater done nothyng elles but digged a pitte and haue not shut it vp again or broken a gap haue not made it vp agayne or opened y e boke haue not closed it agayne or elles to cal me what thou lustest as neutrall dissembler or what so euer elles thy lust learnyng shall serue to thee to name me worse Therfore here now I wil by Goddes grace not only shortly but so clearely â–ª playnly as I caÌ„ make y e to know whether or y e aforesaid two answeres to y e former principal state chief poiÌ„t dothe lyke me best yea and also I will holde al those accursed which in this mater y t now so troubleth y e churche of Christ haue of God receaued the keye of knowlage yet goo about to shutte vp y e doores so y t they theÌ„ selues wil not entre in nor suffre other that wolde And as for myne owne parte I coÌ„sydre bothe of late what charge cure of soule hathe ben coÌ„mitted vnto me wherof God knoweth howe sone I shalbe called to geue accoÌ„pte also now in this worlde what perile dauÌ„ger of y e lawes coÌ„cernyng my life I am now in at this pÌ„seÌ„t tyme. What folye where it thaÌ„ for me now to disseÌ„ble w t God of whoÌ„ assuredly I loke hope by Christ to haue euerlastiÌ„g life Seing y t suche charge dauÌ„ger bothe before God maÌ„ doo compasse me in rouÌ„de about on euery syde therfore God willing I will frankely frely vttre my mynde though my body be captyue yet my toÌ„gue my pen as long as I maye shall frely set furthe that which vndoubtedly I am persuaded to be y e truthe of Goddes worde And yet I wil do it vnder this protestacion call me protestauÌ„t who iusteth I passe not therof My protestacion shalbe thus that my mynde is euer shalbe God willing to set furthe syncerely the true sense and meanyng to the best of my vnderstanding of Goddes most holy worde not to decline from the same either for feare of worldly daunger or elles for hope of gayne I doo proteste also due obedience submission of my iudgement in this my wryting and in all other myne affaires vnto those of Christes church which be truly learned in Goddes holy worde gathered in Christes name and guided by his spirite After this protestacion I doo playnly affirme and saye y t the seconde answer made vnto the chief question and principal poynt I am persuaded to be the very true meanyng and sense of Goddes holy worde that is that the naturall substaunce of bread and wyne is the true material substaunce of the holy sacrament of the blessed body blood of our saueour Christ and the places of scripture whervpon this my faithe is grouÌ„ded be these bothe coÌ„cerning y e sacrameÌ„t of y e body also of y e blood Furst let vs repete the begynnyng of the institucioÌ„ of the Lordes supper wherin al y e three euaÌ„gelistes and S. Paule almost in wordes doo agree sayeng that Iesus toke bread gaue thaÌ„kes brake and gaue it to the disciples sayeng Take eate this is my body Here it appeareth playnly that Christ calleth very bread his body For that which he toke was very bread In this all meÌ„ doo agree And that which he toke after he hade geuen thankes he brake and that which he toke and brake he gaue to his disciples that which he toke brake and gaue to his disciples he sayed hym self of it This is my bodye So it appeareth playnlie that Christ called very bread his body But very breade caÌ„not be his body in very substauÌ„ce therof therfore it must nedes haue an other meaniÌ„g Which meanyng appeareth playnly what it is by the next sentence that foloweth imediatlye bothe in Luke in Paule And y t is this Doo this in remeÌ„brauÌ„ce of me Whervpon it semeth vnto me to euident that Christ did take bread called it his bodye for that he wolde therby institute a perpetual remeÌ„braunce of his body specially of y e singular benefite of our redempcion which he wolde than procure and purchace vnto vs by his body vpon the crosse But bread reteynyng still his owne very natural substaunce maye be thus by grace and in a sacrameÌ„tal significacioÌ„ his body wheras elles the very bread which he toke brake and gaue them could not be in any wise his natural body For that were confusion of substaunces and therfore the very wordes of Christ ioyned with the next sentence folowing bothe enforceth vs to confesse the very bread to remayne still and also openeth vnto vs how that bread may be and is thus by his diuine power his body which was geueÌ„ for vs. But here I remembre I haue red in some writours of the contrarie opinion which doo denye that y t which Christ did take he brake For saye they after his taking he blessed it as Marke doth speake And by his blessing he chaunged the natural substaunce of the breade in to the natural substaunce of his bodye and so although he toke the bread and blessed it yet bicause in blessing he chaunged the substaunce of it he brake not the bread which than was not ther but only the forme therof Unto this obiection I haue two playne answers bothe grounded vpoÌ„ Goddes worde The one I will here rehearse the other answer I will differre vntil I speake of the SacrameÌ„t of the blood Myne answer here is takeÌ„ out of y e plaine wordes of S. Paul which dothe manifestlye confounde this fantastical inuencion furst inueÌ„ted I wene of Pope Innocentius after confirmed