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
doth not lie that saith He is every day offer'd For if Sacraments had no similitudes or likeness of those Things whereof they be Sacraments they could in no wise be Sacraments and for their similitude and likeness commonly they have the names of the Things whereof they be Sacraments Wherefore as after a certain manner of speech the Sacrament of Christs Body is Christs Body the Sacrament of Christs Flood is Christs Blood so likewise the Sacrament of Faith is Faith c. After this manner of speech as St. Augustin teacheth in his Questions Super Leviticum contra Adamantium it is said That seven ears of Corn be seven years seven Kyne be seven years and the Rock was Christ Blood is the Soul The which last saying saith St. Augustin in his Book Contra Adamantium is understood to be spoken in a sign or figure for the Lord himself did not stick to say This is my Body when he gave the sign of his Body For we must not consider in Sacraments saith St. Augustin contra Maximinum Lib. 3. cap. 22. what they be but what they do signifie for they be signs of Things being one Thing in themselves and yet signifying another Thing for the Heavenly Bread saith he by some manner of speech is call'd Christs Body when indeed it is the Sacrament of his Body What can be more plain or more clearly spoken than are these places of St. Augustin if Men were not obstinately bent to maintain an untruth Yet one place more of St. Augustin will I alledge to this purpose That Christs Natural Body is in Heaven and not here Corporally in the Sacrament In his 50th Treatise upon John he speaks thus of Christ. By his Divine Majesty by his Providence by his unspeakable and invisible Grace That is fulfilled which he spake Behold I am with you unto the end of the World But as concerning the Flesh which he took in his Incaruation as concerning that which was born of the Virgin as concerning that which was apprehended by the Jews and Crucified upon the Tree and taken down from the Cross lapped in Linnen Cloths and buried and rose again and appeared after his Resurrection as concerning that Flesh he said Ye shall not ever have me with you Why so for as concerning his Flesh he was conversant with his Disciples forty days and they accompanying him seeing and not following him he went up into Heaven and is not here By the presence of his Divine Majesty he did not depart As concerning the presence of his Divine Majesty we have Christ ever with us but as concerning the presence of his Flesh he said truly to his Disciples Ye shall not ever have me with you For as concerning the presence of his Flesh the Church had him but a few days now it holdeth him by Faith tho it see him not Thus much St. Augustin speaketh repeating one thing so oft and all to declare and teach how we should understand the manner of Christs being here with us which is by his Grace by his Providence and by his Divine Nature And how he is absent by his Natural Body which was born of the Virgin Mary died and rose for us and is ascended into Heaven and there sitteth as is in the Article of our Faith on the right hand of God and thence and from none other place saith St. Augustin shall come on the latter day to judge the quick and the dead at the which day the Righteous shall then lift up their Heads and the light of Gods Truth shall so shine that all Falsehood and Errors shall be put to utter confusion Righteousness shall have then the upper hand and Truth that day shall bear away the Victory all the Enemies thereof quite overthrown to be troden under foot for evermore O Lord I beseech thee haste this day then shalt thou be glorified with the glory due unto thy holy Name and we shall sing unto thee in all joy and felicity laud and praise for evermore Here now would I make an end for methinks that St. Augustin is in this matter so full and plain and of that Authority that it should not need after this his Declaration to bring you any more Authors Yet because I promised to alledge three Writers of the Latin Church I will now alledge last of all Gelasius which was a Bishop of Rome but before the wicked Usurpation and Tyranny thereof spread and burst out abroad unto the World For this Man was before Bonifacius and Gregory the first in whose days both corruption of Doctrine and Tyrannical Usurpations did chiefly grow and had the over-hand Gelasius in an Epistle of the two Natures of Christ Gelasius Contra Eutychen writeth thus The Sacraments of the Body and Blood of Christ are Godly things whereby and by the same we are made partakers of the Divine Nature and yet nevertheless the substance or nature of Bread and Wine doth not depart or go away Note these words I beseech you and consider whether any thing can be more plainly spoken against the Error of Transubstantiation which is the ground and bitter root whereupon springeth all the horrible Errors before rehersed Wherefore seeing that the falsehood hereof doth appear so manifestly and by so many ways so plainly so clearly and so fully that no man needeth to be deceived but he that will not see or will not understand let us all that do love the Truth embrace it and forsake the Falsehood for he that loveth the Truth is of God and the lack of the Love thereof is the cause why God suâ—â—ered Men to fall into Errors and to perish therein Yea and the cause as St. Paul says why God sendeth unto them illusions that they believe Lies unto their own Condemnation because they loved not the Truth This Truth no doubt is Gods Word the Love and Light thereof Almighty God our Heavenly Father give us and lighten it in our Hearts by his holy Spirit through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen An Epistle of Mr. John Bradford Prisoner of the Lord to a faithful Christian in Coventry THe Peace which Christ left to his Church and to every true Member of the same the Holy Spirit the Guide of Gods Children be so ingraft in your Heart and the Heart of your good Wife and all my good Brothers and Sisters about you that unfainedly you may in respect thereof contemn all worldly peace which repugneth that peace I speak of and driveth it utterly out of the hearts of all them which would patch them both together For we cannot serve two Masters No Man can serve God and Mammon Christs peace cannot be kept with this Worlds peace God therefore of his mercy give unto you his peace which passeth all understanding and so keep your hearts and minds that they may be pure Habitacles and Mansions for the Holy Spirit yea for the Blessed Trinity who hath promised to come and dwell in all them that love Christ and keep his sayings
intolerable pride be claimed of any man other then of Christ himself how much and plainly it repugneth unto the manifest words the true sense and meaning of holy Scripture in many places and especially in the Epistle to the Hebrews the matter is too long and others have written in it at large that my mind is now not to entreat thereof any further Yet there remaineth one vain Quiddity of Dunse in this matter the which because some that write now do like it so well that they have stripped it out of Dunse's dusty and dark Terms and prickt and painted it in fresh colours of eloquent stile and therefore may deceive more except the error be warily eschewed Dunse saith in these words of Christ This is my Body that this Pronoun Demonstrative meaning the word this if you will know what it doth show or demonstrate whether the Bread that Christ took or no he answereth no but only one thing in substance it pointeth whereof the nature or name it doth not tell but leaveth that to be determined and told by That that followeth the word is that is by the Praedicatum as the Logicians doth speak and therefore he calleth this pronoun demonstrative Individuumvagum that is a wandring proper name whereby we may point out and shew any one thing in substance whatsoever it be That this Imagination is untruly apply'd unto those words of Christ this is my Body and the vanity thereof may appear plainly by the words of Luke and Paul said upon the Cup in Matthew and Mark. For as upon the Bread it is said of all this is my Body so of Matthew and Mark it is said of the Cup this is my Blood Then if in the words this is my Body the word This be as Dunse calls it a wandring name to appoint and shew forth any one thing where of the name or nature it doth not tell so must it be likewise in those words of Matthew and Mark upon the Lords Cup this is my Blood But in the words of Matthew and Mark it signifieth and pointeth out the same that it doth in the Lords words upon the Cup in Luke and Paul when it is said This Cup is the New Testament in my Blood Therefore in Matthew and Mark the pronoun Demonstrative This doth not wander to point one thing in substance not shewing what it is but telleth it plainly what it is no less in Matthew and Mark unto the Eye then is done in Luke and Paul by putting to this word Cup both unto the Eye and to the Ear. For taking the Cup and demonstrating or showing it unto his Disciples by this pronoun Demonstrative This and saying unto them Drink ye all of this it was then all one to say This is my Blood as to say This Cup is my Blood meaning by the Cup as the nature of the speech doth require the thing contained in the Cup. So likewise without all doubt when Christ had taken bread given thanks and broken it and giving it to his Disciples said Take Eat and so demonstrating and shewing that Bread which he had in his Hands to say then This is my Body and to have said This Bread is my Body is all one thing as it were all one if a man lacking a knife and going to his Oysters would say unto another whom he saw to have two Knives Sir I pray you lend me the one of your Knives were it not now all one to answer him Sir hold I will lend you this to eat your meat but not to open Oysters withall and Hold I will lend you this Knife to eat your meat but not to open Oysters This Similitude serveth but for this purpose to declare the nature of speech withall whereas the thing that is demonstrated and shewed is evidently perceived and openly known unto the Eye But O Good Lord what wonderfull thing it is to see how some men do labour to teach what is demonstrated and shewed by the pronoun Demonstrative This in Christs words when he saith This is my Body This is my Blood And here the Transubstantiators do not agree among themselves no more than they do about the words which work the Transubstantiation some attributing the work unto the word Benedixit and the most part to Hoc est corpus meum Innocentius therefore Duns and that Sect which putteth the change in the word Benedixit say that this word This was then indeed Christs Body tho' the word did not import so much but only one thing in substance which after Duns now the Bread being gon must needs be the substance of Christs Body The other which do say that this change is made when the whole Sentence This is my Body is fully finished and not before cannot but say that Christs This did demonstrate and shew Bread indeed which so remain'd till the Sentence was fully pronounced But how can they make and verifie Christs words to be true demonstrating the substance of Bread and saying thereof This is my Body that is as they say the Natural substance of Christs Body except they will say that the Verb is fignifieth is made or is changed into and then in Christs words upon the Cup rehersed by Luke and Paul the Cup or the Wine in the Cup must be made or turned into the New Testament as was declared before There be some amongst the Transubstantiators which would be Mediators yea rather Newtrals or Ambidexters which can shift on both sides for where the one saith that this word This demonstrateth the substance of Bread the other saith No not so the Bread is gone and it demonstrateth a substance which is Christs Body Tush saith this third Man Ye understand nothing at all They agree well enough in the chief point which is the ground of all that is this Both do agree and bear witness that there is Transubstantiation They do agree indeed in that Conclusion but their proof and Doctrine thereof do even as well agree together as did the false Witnesses before Annas and Caiaphas against Christ or the wicked Judges to condemn Susanna for they did all agree to speak against Christ and the wicked Judges to condemn poor Susanna but in the Examination of their Witnesses they were found false and clean contrary one to the other Thus much have I spoken in searching out a solution to this principal Question which was What was the Material Substance of the Holy Sacrament in the Lords Supper Now lest I should seem to set by my own Conceit more than is meet I have thought good to establish this mine Answer and Opinion by the Authority and Doctrine of the old Ecclesiastical Doctors such I mean as were before the wicked Usurpations of the See of Rome grown so immeasurably great that not only with Tyrannical Power but also with Corrupt Doctrine it began to subvert Christs Gospel and to turn the state of the Church set by Christ and his Apostles clean upside down And I will reherse
translate the hallowed Chrysost. Vessels in the which is not contain'd the true Body of Christ but the Mystery of his Body to private uses how much more amiss is it to abuse and defile the Vessels of our Bodies These be the words of Chrysostom But I know that here many foul shifts are found to defeat this place The Author saith one is suspected I answer but in this place never fault was found with him unto these our days And whether this Author was John Chrysostom himself the Arch-Bishop of Constantinople or no that is not the matter for of all it is granted that he was a Writer of that Age and a Man of great Learning so that it is manifest that this which he writeth was the receiv'd Opinion of Learned men in his days If that solution will not serve saith another we may say that Chrysostom did not speak of the Vessels of the Lords Cup or such as were then us'd at the Lords Table but of the Vessel used in the Temple in the old Law But here Chrysostom speaketh of such Vessels wherein was that which is called the Body of Christ altho' it was not the true Body saith he of Christ but the Mystery of Christs Body And Erasmus declareth plainly that this saying of this Writer is none otherwise to be understood Yet can I saith the third Papist find out a fine and subtil solution for this place and say that Christs Body is not contained in those Vessels at the Lords Table as in a place but as in a Mystery Is not this a pretty shift and a mystical solution But by the same Solution then Christs Body is not in the Lords Table nor in the Priests Hand nor in his Pixe and so he is no-where for they will not say that he is either here or there as in a place This answer pleaseth so well the maker that he himself after that he hath plaid with it a little while and shewed the fineness of his wit and eloquence therein he is contented to give it over and say That it is not to be thought that Chrysostom would speak after this fineness or subtilty and so returneth again to the second answer for his Sheet-Anchor which is already sufficiently answer'd Another short place of Chrysostom I will reherse which if any Indifferency may be heard in plain terms setteth forth the truth of this matter Writing Ad Caesarem Monachum Before the Bread saith he be hallowed we call it Bread but the Grace of God sanctifying it by the means of the Priest it is delivered now from the name of Bread and esteemed worthy to be call'd Christs Body altho the nature of Bread abide in it still What can be said or taught more plain against this Error of Transubstantiation than to declare that the Bread abideth so still and yet to this so plain a place some are not ashamed thus shamefully to delude it saying We grant the nature of Bread remaineth still thus far that it may be seen felt and tasted and yet the Corporal substance of the Bread therefore is gone lest two Bodies be confused together and Christ should be thought impanate What contrariety and falshood is in this answer the simple man may easily perceive Is not this a plain Contrariety to grant that the nature of Bread remaineth so still that it may be felt seen and tasted and yet to say the Corporal substance is gone to avoid absurdity of Christs Impanation Or what manifest falsehood is this to say or mean that if the Bread should remain still then must follow the Inconvenience of Impanation as though the very Bread could not be a Sacrament of Christs Body as the Water is of Baptism except Christ should unite the nature of Bread to his nature in unity of Person and make of the Bread God Now let us hear Theodoretus the last of the three Greek Authors He writeth in his Dialogue contra Eutychen thus He that called the Natural Body Theodoretus Corn and Bread and also named himself a Vine-tree even he the same hath honour'd the Symboles that is the Sacramental Figure with the name of his Body and Blood not changing indeed the Nature it self but adding Grace unto the Nature What can be more plainly said than is this that altho the Sacraments bear the name of the Body and Blood of Christ yet is not their nature chang'd but abideth still And where is then the Papists Transubstantiation The same Writer in the second Dialogue of the same Work writeth yet more plainly against this Error of Transubstantiation if any thing can be said to be more plain For he maketh the Heretick to speak thus against him that defendeth the true Doctrine whom he calleth Orthodoxus As the Sacraments of the Body and Blood of our Lord are one thing before the Invocation and after the Invocation they be changed and made another so likewise the Lords Body saith the Heretick is after the Assumption or Ascension into Heaven turned into the substance of God The Heretick meaning thereby that Christ after his Ascension remaineth no more a Man To this Orthodoxus answereth thus and saith to the Heretick Thou art taken saith he in thine own snare for those Mystical Symbols or Sacraments after the Sanctification do not go out of their own nature but they tarry and abide still in their substance figure and shape yea and are sensibly seen and groped to be the same they were before At these words the Papists do startle and to say the truth these words be so plain so full and so clear that they cannot tell what to say but yet will they not cease to cast their colour over them that the Truth which is so plainly told should not have place This Author wrote say they before the Determination of the Church as who would say Whatsoever that wicked man Innocentius the Pope of Rome determined in his Congregations with his Monks and Fryers that must be for so Dunse saith holden for an Article and for the substance of our Faith Some do charge this Author that he was suspected to be a Nestorian which thing in Calcedon Council was tryed and proved to be false But the foolest shift of all and yet the best that they can find in this matter is That Theodoretus understandeth by the word Substance Accidents and not Substance Indeed this gloss is like the gloss of a Lawyer upon a Decree the Text whereof begins thus Statuimus that is We Decree The gloss of the Lawyer there after many other shifts vel dic Statuimus i. e. Abrogamus that is We do Decree that is We do abrogate or disanul Is not this a goodly and a worthy gloss Hitherto you have heard three Writers of the Greek Church not all what they do say for that were a Labour too great for to gather and too tedious for the Reader but one or two places of every one the which how plain how clear and how full they be