confesse they must needs be heere in their proper subiect and substances of bread and wyne but all this is founded vpon a false ground for albeit naturally an accident cannot be but in a subiect yet supernaturally and by the power of God susteyninge yt and supplyinge the place of a naturall subiect yt may be as we do confesse on the contrary side by Christian faith that the humayne nature of Christ in the mystery of the incarnation hath not her proper subsistence in yt selfe which yet is as naturall to a substance to subsist in yt selfe as yt is to an accident to be susteyned by another but is susteyned by the diuine person of Christ. 35. And the reason of this concerninge accidents is that albeit the intrinsecall nature of an accident is to be vnperfect and to depend of another and therby to haue an aptitude to be in another yet the act therof may be separated by Gods power from the said nature as a thinge posterior and followinge from the said nature as we haue she wed before in the naturall propriety of quantity to haue commensuration of place and this to be true that this actuall inherence of accidents may be seuered from the essentiall aptitude thervnto without destroing the nature of the said accident many philosophers both Christian and heathen do affirme whose sentences you may see gathered by diuers learned men as well of ancient as of our tymes Sundry Fathers also are of opinion that this case happened de facto in the creation of the world when the light being made vpon the first day as the booke of Genesis recounteth which being but a quality and accident remayned without a subiect vnto the fourth day when the sonne and moone weare created And of this opinion expressely was S. Basill in his explication of the works of God in those six dayes And the same holdeth S. Iohn Damascene Procopius in his commentary vpon the first Chapter of Genesis and Saint Iustine in the explication of our faith 36. This then being so that these accidents of bread wyne may remaine by the power of God in the Sacrament without their proper subiects yt followeth to consider what actions they can haue And first yt is to be noted that whatsoeuer actions or operations are proper to them as accidents when they were in their proper subiects of bread and wyne before consecration the same they may haue afterwards when they conteyne the body and bloud of Christ without inherence therein for that God supplyeth all by his power which their said subiects or substances did performe when they were present So as the effects for example that the accidents of wine bread did worke in our senses before by mouinge our sight by their colours to see our tast by their sauour and other like effects the same do they performe also afterwards So as for example sake by drinkinge much consecrated wyne though there be no substance of wyne therin but only the proper accidents of wyne as heat smell and other qualityes and proprietyes of wyne may a man be incensed or distempered as much as yf the substance of wyne were there in deed for these are the proper actions and operations of the said accidents themselues but where the concurrāce of substance is necessary to any action as in nutrition generation or corruption of one substance into another there doth God supply the matter that is necessary to that action when the body of Christ doth cease to be there which is when those accidents of bread and wyne are corrupted and not otherwise As for example in the resurrection of our bodyes where euery body is to receaue his owne proper flesh againe which yt had in this life yf some one body hauinge eaten another body or parcell therof in this world and conuerted the same into his proper substance in this case I say almighty God must needs supply otherwise by his omnipotent power that part and matter of substance that wanteth in one of these two bodyes for that els one of them should be vnperfect and want part of his substance in the resurrection And after the like manner we say that when a consecrated hoast is eaten and afterward is turned into the naturall norishment of the eater which norishment requireth a materiall substance God doth supply that substance in that instant when the formes of bread and wyne perishinge the body of Christ ceaseth to be there 37. And this appertayneth to the prouidence of almighty God for supplying the defects of particular naturall causes when any thinge fayleth that is necessary for their naturall operations The very same also is to be obserued in generation and corruption as for example when the accidents of the consecrated host perishinge and some other substance should happen to be engendred thereof as wormes or the like there the body of Christ ceaseth to be when the said accidents do perish and for the new generation insuinge thereof God supplyeth fitt matter as in the example before alleaged of the resurrection of our bodyes wherof the one had eaten part of the other By which obseruation yt wil be easy afterward to dissolue many cauillations proceedinge eyther of ignorance heresie or both and obiected by Sacramentaryes against this mystery The eight Obseruation About the wordes Sacrament signe figure type commemoration memory c. §. 8. 38. For so much as the Sacramentaryes of our tyme did forsee that they should be forced to oppose themselues for defending their hereticall noueltye sagainst the whole streame of scriptures expositors fathers councells reasons practise antiquity and vniforme consent of the vnhole Christian vvorld they thought best to diuise certayne tearmes and distinctions which should serue them for euasions or gappes to runne out at when-soeuer they should be pressed by our arguments and these their shifts do consist principally in the fraudulent vse of these tearmes of Sacrament signe figure type commemoration memory sacramentally spiritually and the like Wherfore we thinke yt needfull to explane and declare in this place the natures vses and abuses of these words 39. First then a Sacrament according to the common definition asscribed to S. Augustine is a visible signe of an inuisible grace as in baptisme the externall washinge by water is the signe of the internall washing of the soule by grace So heere also in this Sacrament of the Eucharist the externall visible signe are the consecrated formes of bread and wyne as they conteyne the body of Christ the internall or inuisible grace signified is the inward nourishinge and seedinge of our soule And this is the first and cheefe manner how this Sacrament is a signe that is to say a signe of grace and not of Christs body absent as Protestants are wont most fondly and fraudulently to inferre 40. Secondly these externall formes and accidents of bread and wyne are also a signe of Christs body conteyned vnder them And in this sense
vvas not much vnlike the former for substāce or rather lacke of substance yet the other three held in Oxford against Cranmer Ridley and Latymer by Catholike disputers are of a farre different kynd as hauinge both iudges notaryes and arbitrators to the likinge of both parts appointed And albeit in the manner of vrginge arguments there vvant not complaints of the Protestant party as after yovv shall heare for that diuers somtymes are said to haue spoken togeather one man to haue putt himselfe into the prosecution of another mans argument somevvhat disorderly as to them yt seemed yet touchinge the thinges themselues to vvitt the arguments proofes there laid forth prosecuted there vvere so many cleere substantiall vveighty as the reader vvill cōfesse there vvas no tyme lost in those 3. dayes disputation of the Cath party And so to the examination therof I remitt me 11. One thing of no small importance there is to be cōsidered in this preface about the nature of disputation to vvitt that as it is a fit meanes to styrre vp mans vnderstandinge to attēd the truth by layinge forth the difficultyes on both sides so is yt not alvvayes sufficient to resolue his iudgement for that yt moueth more doubts then he can aunsvvere or dissolue And this happeneth not only in vnlearned people vvhich by no meanes can descerne vvhich party hath the better vvhen both parts are learned alleage arguments for themselues in matters aboue their capacity but euen the most learned also yf they haue no other meanes of resolution then arguing to and fro by disputation are brought many-times to be more doubtfull therby then before this euen in matters both naturall and morall of this life The reason vvherof is that mans vnderstandinge being limited and the light of knovvledge imparted vnto him from God being but a little particle or sparkle of his infinite diuine knovvledge yt cometh to passe that the more this sparkle is exercised inkendled in searching out Gods vvorks and secrets in this life the more yt seeth her ovvne vveaknes and beginneth to doubt more to be more ambiguous in herselfe vvhether that vvhich shee apprehendeth be truly apprehended or no or vvhether by further search shee shall not find it othervvise and see herselfe deceaued in this apprehensiō as she hath found in many other apprehensions that vvent before vvhen she had lesse knovvledge 12. And vpon this ground no doubt came those philosophers called the Academicks to found their sect profession that they vvould belceue or affirme nothing but dispute of all things to and fro vvithout assent And heere hence came also the sayinge of that other philosopher Hoc Unum scio me nihil scire I knovv only this that I knovv nothinge And S. Austen himselfe before his conuersion being yet a Manichee vvearyed out vvith this search by vvay of arguments to and fro vvhich should be the true Religiō for this vvas one of their principall groūds as himselfe testified to beleeue nothinge but that vvhich vvas euidēt by reason fell at length to forsake the Manichees to ioyne himselfe to the Academiks but after long search finding no certainty also therin and hearing their sect euery day impugned by S. Ambrose Bishopp of Millayne vvhere then Augustine remayned he returned in the end by the motion of almightie God to consider vvhat more grounds the Catholike Religion had to stay a mans iudgement or cōscience then the vncertainty of disputations and findinge the same resolued himselfe to renoūce all sects and to be a Catholike as in his ovvne confessions at large he declareth 13. By this then vve do see that albeit disputation rightly vsed be a good meanes to discouer truth by mouinge doubts to and fro yet is yt not alvvayes sufficient to resolue and quiett a mans iudgement euen in naturall thinges and yf not in these hovv much lesse in supernaturall and diuine vvherin humaine disputation hath farre lesse force For that humaine sciences deducinge their disputation from principles that are euidently knovvne vnto vs by light of nature may farre better resolue a man by force of those disputations and enforce him to yeld his assent then in matters of diuinity vvhere the first grounds and principles are not knovvne to vs by light of nature as in humaine sciences but are receaued only by light of faith reueyled from God vvherfore these disputations may serue to examine and discusse matters for stirring vp our vnderstanding but the resolution determination must come frō a more certaine meanes vvhich is infallible and this vve see practised in the very first cōtrouersy that euer vvas handled in the priuitiue Church as is recorded by S. Luke in the Acts of the Apostles vvhere the question being vvhether Christiās conuerted of gentills should be bound to the obseruation of the mosayicall lavv or no there vvas saith the text first magna conquisitio a great search or disputation about the matter and then secondly the Apostles declared their sentences in order and finally the determination vvas in all their names representing the vvhole Church visum est spiritui sancto nobis yt seemed good to the holy-ghost and vs and so vvas the matter determined and the like forme hath byn obserued euer since that tyme in the Cath. Church determining all cōtrouersies that haue fallen out to vvit that first there should be great search discussion of the matter by lavvfull and free disputation to vvhich end the most learned men of all nations are sent cōmonly to generall Councells to performe this point And secondly all argumēts on both sides being heard examined the Bishops presēt do giue their voices and accordinge to the greater part vvith concourse generall approbation of the generall head do they determine visum est spiritui sancto nobis So as heere disputatiō serueth not to determine but to examine 14. And for that the sectaryes of our dayes haue not this sound meane to determyne matters but do depend only vpon probability and persuasibility of speach or vvryting one against the other by which as Tully saith nothinge is so incredible that may not be made probable therfore are their questions and controuersies endlesse and indeterminable and though they haue had aboue a hundred meetings conferences disputations Councells and synods from their first disputation held at Lypsia vpon the yeare 1519. vnto their synodde in Vilna vpon the yeare 1590. vvhereof yovv may see more largely in Stanislaus Rescius his obseruations yet could they neuer agree nor vvill hereafter lackinge the forsaid meanes of resolution and determination vpon their disputations 15. And yf this do fall out euen in the learnedst of our sectaryes that they cannot by disputations alone resolue soundly eyther themselues or others in matters of cōtrouersy for that still there remaine doubts and difficultyes vvhether matters vvere vvell prosecuted or no and nevv arguments do offer themselues dayly to and
contrary And wheras I do vse the words of externall true and proper sacrifise yow must remember therby the fraud of these new heretiks who as before about the reall presence did go about to delude all the sayings of holy Fathers and other testimonyes of Antiquity that spake of Christs reall being in the Sacrament by running to the words spiritually sacramentaly by faith and the like so heere fyndinge the whole torrent and streame of Christian antiquity to stand for this Christian sacrifice to mention reuerence auouch the same these fellowes for auoydinge their authorityes do runne from the proper externall sacrifice wherof we treate vnto the internall and inuisible sacrifice of the mynd wherof K. Dauid saith that a contrite spiritt is a sacrifice to God And when this cannot serue they run also to improper and metaphoricall externe sacrifices such as are mortification of the body Rom. 12. sacrifice of thankesgeuinge Psalm 49. Sacrifice of almes deedes Hebr. 13. and other such good works which by a certayne analogy or proportion with the nature of proper sacrifices are called also sacrifice in scriptures by the Fathers but improperly To these then do our Protestants runne when they are pressed with the authorityes of auncient Fathers that name the vse of Christian sacrifice in the Church and will needs make vs beleeue that the Fathers ment not properly of any true visible or externall sacrifice but eyther of inward or inuisible sacrifice of the hart mynd and good desire or els of outward metaphoricall sacrifice of pious and vertuous workes 35. But all these are fraudulent shifts to ouerthrow one truth by another For as we do not deny but that there is an inward and inuisible sacrifice of our mynd in dedicatinge of our selues to God and to the subiection of his Maiestie without which the externall sacrifice is little worth to him that offereth the same And as we graunt that all good works be sacrifices in a certayne sort by some similitude they haue with true proper sacrifices for that they are offered vp to God in his honour yet do we say that this is from our purpose in this place who talke of a true proper externall sacrifice offered vp to God after a peculiar sacred rite or ceremonyes by peculiar men deputed to this office in acknowledgement of Gods diuine power maiestie and dominion ouer vs protestation of our due subiection vnto him such as were the externall sacrifices in the law of nature offered vp by patriarks and heads of familyes and by Priests of Aarons order vnder the law of Moyses and by Christ and his Priests accordinge to the order of Melchisedech in the new law and for so much as both the internall metaphoricall sacrifices before mentioned of good affection desires and holy works are not peculiar to any law but were lawfull and needfull vnder all lawes and in all tymes and require no particular kind of men or ministers to offer them but may be offered vp by any man or woman whatsoeuer therfore do we exclude all these from the name of the sacrifice which heere is meant by our description and comprehendeth as yow see an externall visible oblation made by him or them who are peculiarly deputed by God to this office which are Priests So as when soeuer our aduersaryes do slipp from this proper signification of a sacrifice to the other eyther internall or metaphoricall which may be offeted by all sorts of people and therevpon do say that all men are Priests they runne as vow see quite from the purpose as they do also for examples sake when to auoyd the necessity of externall fastinge they runne to the internall fastinge of the mynd sayinge that true fastinge is to fast from sinne which as we deny not in that sense of spirituall fastinge so is it notwithstandinge a plaine shift and runninge from the purpose and cannot stand with many places of the scripture which must needs be vnderstood of the externall fast as when Christ is said by the Euangelists to haue fasted 40. dayes togeather and S. Paul affirmeth that he and his fellow Apostles fasted frequently It cannot be vnderstood I say of fastinge only those tymes from sinne for that Christ fasted alwayes from sinne without exception and so do all good men both fast and facrisice also by offeringe vp good desires and pious actions to almighty God dayly and hourely without distinction of men or tymes 36. But this is not the proper visible externall sacrifice which heere we meane which was instituted by God as peculiar to Christian people vnder the law of the ghospell for an externall worshipp vnto him besides the internall and testification of their inward subiection loue and piety towards him which sacrifice comming in place of all others that went before both in the law of nature and of Moyses that prefigured and foresignified the same and being but one and singular insteed of them all and their great variety is to be esteemed so much more excellent then they all as the law of the ghospell is more excellent then those lawes and truth aboue shaddowes the sacred body of Christ God and man himselfe to be preferred before the bodyes of beasts byrds and other such creatures vvhich vvere but signes and figures of this 37. And in this sense do both scriptures fathers councells and all holy Christian antiquity speake and treat of this most diuine venerable and dreadfull sacrifice wherof as of the highest and most principall mystery and treasure left by our Sauiour in his Church there are so many testimonyes as before hath byn signifyed that yt shall not be possible for me in this place and with the breuity which is necessary to alleage the least part therof yet some few generall heads shall I touch which the learned reader may see more dilated by diuers Catholike wryters of our dayes and he that hath not commodity or tyme to do that may geue a ghesse by that which heere I shall sett downe 38. First then for that this holy sacrifice of the Christian Church was so principally intended by almighty God for the new law as hath byn said many things were sett downe by the holy Ghost in the old Testament both prefiguringe and prophecyinge the same as first the sacrifice of the King and Priest Melchisedech in bread and wyne Gen. 14. which all the auncient Fathers by generall consent do apply to the sacrifice vsed now in the Christian Church and yt were ouerlong to alleage their particular authorityes lett S. Augustine speake for all Primum apparuit saith he sacrificium Melchisedech quod à Christianis nunc offertur Deo toto orbe terrarum The first sacrifice appeared in Melchisedech which now is offered to God by Christians throughout all the world And in another place Vident nunc tale sacrificium offerri Deo toto orbe terrarum Christians do see the like sacrifice to that of
can make that the selfe-same flesh of Christ can occupy diuers places at once and that yt be conteyned in no certayne place and that yt lacketh both the outward shape of flesh and proper manner of being c. And for beleeuinge of this he counteth vs madd-men as yow haue heard and so must he account also of necessity all those holy Fathers before mentioned who beleeued the same mystery as we do notwithstandinge the outward appearances of impossibility for comprehendinge wherof they fledd from sense and reason to faith and beleefe 14. And yet further then this the reader must vnderstand that for so much as the said reason and faith are not contradictory the one to the other but more eminent the one aboue the other as before hath byn shewed Catholiks do take vpon them to proue that no one of these difficultyes obiected by faithlesse Protestants is impossible or implieth contradiction in reason it selfe as by the ensuing considerations shall more particularly be declared notinge only to the reader by the way that yf the particular intrinsecall natures and essences of euery thing were cleerly knowen vnto vs â—s they are for example vnto Angells and other Saints that be in glory we should easily see what doth imply contradiction to the said natures and what doth not but for that God for our humility and greater meritt would haue vs not alwayes to see this therfore are we forced to ghesse at the same by way of discourse and reason and by one example to another as yow shall see in the ensuinge obseruations Fourth Obseruation How a body may be vvithout an ordinary naturall place §. 4. 15. One of the greatest difficultyes therfore obiected by the aduersary is that a true and naturall organicall body such as Christs is confessed to be in the Sacrament cannot be without the ordinary dimensions of a peculiar place which we deny in such sense as heere we shall declare For better vnderstandinge wherof is to be noted that three wayes a thinge may be in a place first naturally and ordinarily by extension and commensuration vnto the said place soe as euery part and part cell of the thinge placed do aunswere to each part of the place yt selfe which manner of being in place philosophers do call circumscriptiuely for that all places of the body so placed are so limited and circumscribed by the part of the place as neyther that body can be iâ— any other place nor that place admitt another body without penetratinge the one of the other which by ordinary course of nature is held for impossible 16. Another manner of being in place is more spirituall and hard to conceaue to witt when a thing is so in a place as the parts therof are not extended to the parts of the place as in the former example but yet that the whole thing is so defined and limited within the compasse of that whole place assigned thervnto as naturally yt cannot be in any other whilest yt is there as for example the soule of a man in the body thervnto assigned is so conteyned therin as yt is not elswhere and yet is it not so extended by commensuration as in the former example that one part of the soule aunswereth one part of the body and another another part but the whole soule which is indiuisible and hath no parts at all is wholy in the whole body and wholy in euery part and parcell therof which is a miraculous strange being yf yt be well considered notwithstanding naturall as all philosophers do graunt for that the whole soule of man is as wholy for example in the singar and foote as in the breast and head and yet is but one soule in all and nether many soules nor one soule diuided into parts And after the same manner is an Angell also in a place definitiuely and not circumscriptiuely that is to say wholy in the whole place which he occupieth wholy in euery part therof without multiplication or diuision in himselfe or extension vnto the parts of the place wherin yt is But for that the example of the soule is more familiar and euident to our sense and reason it doth better expresse the matter And yt is to be noted that yt doth somewhat imitate the being of God himselfe wholy and without diuision in all parts of the world and in all creatures therof without limitation change or multiplication but only yt differeth in this that the soule or an Angell being both creatures cannot be euery where as the creatour naturally is and he cannot be otherwise but yet by his diuine power the said creatures may be in diuers places at once as after shal be shewed 17. These two wayes then of being in a place as I haue said are naturall the first circumscriptiuely the second definitiuely But besides these two there is a third supernaturall and possible to Gods diuine omnipotency and not repugnant to reason yt selfe as after shal be shewed which is that one and the selfe-same thing may by Gods diuine power be placed in two different places at once that is to say that the selfe-same soule as yt is naturally wholy and entyrely in the head for example and in the foote so yt repugneth not to the same nature or essence of the soule to be putt in two different bodyes at once The like of an Angell in diuers places and the same also may be held of a naturall body ys God will haue yt so as in the next obseruation shal be proued And this way or manner of being in place for that the Cath. Church doth hould yt to be in the body of our Sauiour in the Sacrament is called by diuines a sacramentall being in place nor for that the true body is not really there as some hearinge the word Sacramentally vsed sometymes by the Fathers and Doctors do fondly apprehend but for that it is there after this speciall manner as we haue declared that is to say so as yt is also in other places at the same tyme. 18. Now then these three wayes or manners of being in place declared yt remayneth that we shew how yt is possible to Gods power and not repugnant to naturall reason that a true body which of his owne nature is in place only after the first manner of circumscription and commensuration or extension may by Gods power be in place also after the second and third way that is difinitiuely and Sacramentally without the first way of commensuration and extension to a place And first heere we shall shew the said possibility in the second way and then of the third in the ensuinge obseruation 19. The only cheefe ground or reason obiected by the heretiks why it may seeme to repugne or imply contradiction that a true organicall body togeather with his quantity such as Christs is in the Sacrament should be definitiuely without extension in place is for that yt appeareth contrary to the nature of
quantity to be without such extension but this ground Cath. Philosophers and diuines do easily ouerthrow shewinge that three things do agree to quantity or magnitude wherof the first is to be extended in yt selfe and to haue distinct partes one from the other among themselues though not euer visible or perceptible by our sense and this first point is so essentiall to quantity and magnitude as yt cannot be imagined separable so as it remaine quantity And therfore this is graunted to be in the body of our Sauiour in the Sacrament though our sense doth not comprehend yt The second property of quantity or magnitude proceedinge from this first is not only to haue partes distinct in themselues but to haue them extended also in place accordinge to the commensuration therof as in the first way of being in place we haue declared 20. And for that this second condition or propriety is later then the former ensueth therof yt is not so intrinsecall to the nature essence of quantity but that by Gods diuine power yt may be separated without destroyinge the said nature which our diuines do shew by examples of other thinges where God hath separated such secondary proprietyes without dissoluinge the natures as heatinge for example from fyre in the fornace of Babylon which heatinge notwithstandinge is as naturall to fyre as yt is to quantity to occupy place Christ also in S. Mathewes ghospell hauinge said to his disciples that yt was easier for a Camell to passe through the eye of a needle then for a rich-man to enter into the Kingedome of heauen and the Apostles wondringe therat and sayinge vvho then can be saued our Sauiour answered that that vvhich vvas impossible to men vvas possible to God which yet could not be possible but by separatinge from the camell all his naturall extension and commensuration of place Wherfore all the auncient Fathers vpon this place attributing this to myracle do affirme that by Gods diuine power yt may be done to witt that a camell remayninge in the nature of a camell may passe through a needles eye quid prohibet saith S. Gregory Nazianzen quo minus hoc siat si voluntas it a tulerit What letteth but that this of the camell may be done yf Gods will be to haue yt so Some Protestant will stepp forth and say that yt cannot be done for that the Camell should not in that case haue quantity and be organicall for so they say of our Sauiours body in the Sacrament but Nazianzen was of another opinion And so may yow read Origen S. Hierome S. Augustine S. Hilary S. Chrysostome and other Fathers in their commentaryes and expositions vpon this place of S. Mathewes ghospell 21. The third naturall condition or propriety of quantity proceedinge of this second is that for so much as by the forsaid second propriety the thinge placed doth fill vp the place which yt occupyeth euery part therof answeringe to euery part of the said place only and one place conteyne one body so as naturally yt is no lesse impossible for two bodyes to be in one place then for one body to be in many Yet notwithstanding supernaturally and by Gods omnipotent power both the one the other may be without implication or contradiction of the essence or nature of a true body The reason wherof is this for that this third propriety in quantity or magnitude flowinge of the second as hath byn said may much more easily be separated from the essence of the said quantity and body then the second and consequently the former being separable this is much more wherof our diuines do giue diuers most euident instances out of scripture yt selfe As for example out of S. Iohns Ghospell where twise yt is said that he came in to his disciples when the gates were shutt And in S. Mathew and S. Marke where yt is shewed how Christ after his resurrection came forth of the sepulcher the stone also being shutt and in his natiuity he came forth of his mothers wombe without violation of her virginity and in his assension he passed through all the heauens with his naturall body In all which myraculouse examples for so do the ancient Fathers hould and affirme them to be there must needs be penetration of bodyes or two bodyes in one place which is no lesse repugnant to the ordinary nature of quantity as hath byn said then for a body to be without certaine dimension of any place 22. Besides this our diuines do alleage the examples of the damned spirits miraculously tyed to certayne locall places in hell and that which is more maruelous that the damned soules being spiritts should suffer and be tormented by corporall fire wherof S. Augustine treateth at large lib. 21. de Ciuit. Dei cap. 1. 2. deinceps which is no lesse against the ordinary nature and propriety of spiritts to suffer corporally then yt is against the nature of a body to be after a certayne spirituall manner without his locall dimension by all which we may perceaue that although yt be aboue naturall reason that organicall bodyes should want these externall locall positions yet is yt not contrary or contradictory thervnto but subiect to Gods omnipotent power when and where yt pleaseth him to make yt so and consequently yt may be so also in the blessed Sacrament without destroyinge the nature of a true body as fondly Protestants do pretend 23. And heerby now falleth to the ground a whole mayne multitude of vayne arguments brought by Fox his Martyrs as after yow shall see against the reall presence all of them founded vpon this ground that a true organicall body cannot by Gods power be either without locall dimensions or in moe places then one at once The first of which two assertions hath now ben improued and the second shal be in the next ensuinge obseruation The fifth Obseruation How a body may be in diuers places at once §. 5. 24. As the weake faith and learninge of the Sacramentaryes of our tyme cannot reach to conccaue that a body can be without an externall place so much lesse can they comprehend that yt may be by Gods omnipotency placed in diuers places at once for that yt seemeth to their sense and humayne reason to be impossible but the ancient holy Fathers more wise and learned then our said Sectaryes tooke another course in this point which was to asscribe yt to miracle and to Gods infinite power which they could not by reason arriue vnto I might cyte diuers Fathers but one or two shall serue for all Omiracle saith S. Chrysostome o goodnes of God! that the same Christ who sitteth in heauen vvith his Father is conuersant at the selfe-same tyme in the hands of all that receaue him on earth And the same Father wrytinge of the same sacred body of our Sauiour as yt is a sacrifice saith Vnum est hoc sacrificium c. This sacrifice is
answered him well that S. Augustine spake expressely of the naturall being of bodyes accordinge to their ordinary externall dimensions and not how they might be by Gods supernaturall power and omnipotency 7. But aboue all others Philpott did keep reuell in the conuocation house about this argument against Maister Morgan Maister Harpesfield alleaginge diuers places of scripture for the same but little to the purpose God wooteth as that of S. Paul Christ is like vnto vs in all points except sinne And therfore said he as one of our bodyes cannot be at Paules and at VVestminster togeather so cannot Christ be in heauen and in the Sacrament But yt was told him that these words of S. Paul were true in S. Paules sense but yet that Christs body was vnlike also vnto vs besides sinne in diuers other points as for example in that he was begotten without the seed of man and that his body was inuisible when he would haue it soe and that he rose out of the sepulcher the same being shutt and diuers other like points which our ordinary naturall bodyes haue not though God of his omnipotency might giue the same to our bodyes also Then he alleaged the savinge of S. Peter in the Acts VVhome heauen must receaue vntill the consumation of the world Wherof he would inferre a necessity of Christs remayning in heauen vntill the day of iudgement Then Morgan laughed at this saith Fox Harpesfield stood vp and asked him how he vnderstood that place Oportet Episcopum esse vnius vxoris virum A Bishop must be the husband of one wife And whether this be of such necessity as he may not be without a wife one at least With which demaund Philpott was so entangled as he could not well go forward as there yow may see and refused to aunswere Maister Morgan as the prolocutor would haue had him 8. Well then this is the first and principall ground and bulwarke of all Sacramentary vnbeleefe in this article that Christs body cannot be by Gods omnipotent power in two places at once to witt both in heauen and in the Sacrament which we haue shewed before in our fourth fifth and sixt obseruations to be a fond and temerarious position whervnto we referre the reader to see the grounds more at large and heere only we shall say a word or two to the former eight arguments as they lye in order Yet first it shal be good for the reader to remember that which we haue noted before in the story of Melancthon who saith I had rather offer my selfe to death then to affirme as the Zuinglians do that Christes body cannot be but in one place at once But yet Peter Martyr Philpott Cranmer and their fellowes would dye and some of them also did dye for the contrary so as Saints of one Calendar do heere dye for contrary opinions one to the other But let vs answere the arguments 8. To the first we say concerning the minor proposition that a true naturall body naturally and by ordinary course of nature cannot be at one tyme but in one place and that meaneth S. Augustine ad Dardanum but supernaturally and by Gods ommpotent power that exceedeth nature yt repugneth not to be in diuers places at once yf God will haue yt so as in our fifth obseruation is proued To the second argument we say that euery true naturall body requireth one certaine place by ordinary course of nature and not otherwise To the third that soules and spiritts by their naturall course haue but one totall place wherin they may be said to be as one soule in one body and one Angell in the place that it pleaseth to occupye or to haue operation therin albeit yf we respect partiall places of the same body as head foote fingar and the like the selfe-same soule is wholy in diuers places at once which is no lesse wonderfull and incredible to our sense then for a bodily substance to be in two distinct places at once And the like is in the Angell who may occupy for example a whole house or towne for his totall place and yet be in euery particular and partiall place therof wholy and entyrely which is graunted both by all philosophers and diuynes though vulgar sense cannot apprehend yt 9. To the fourth may be answered the very same as to the former that the being of Angells in place definitiuely is like in all respects to that of the soule Read our fourth obseruation in the precedent Chapter To the fifth argument the aunswere is easy for we deny that whatsoeuer is in diuers places at once is God for that by his omnipotent power a creature may be yt is Gods priuiledge that he is euery where wholy and entyrely ex vi naturae diuinae by force of his diuine nature that is to say he is so euery-where as he cannot be but euery where which is not true eyther in a spiritt or in Christs body or in any other creature whatsoeuer for that all creatures as they haue limited natures so are they limited also in place and restrayned from vbiquity or being euery where which is proper and peculiar to almighty God alone so to speake of the body of Christ in particular yt is not euery-where and we detest both the Eutichian vbiquitaryes that held Christs body to be euery-where as confounded with his diuinity and no lesse the Lutheran vbiquitaryes of our dayes that hold Christs body to be euery where by reason of the coniunction with Christs diuinity the Catholike faith affirming only that Christs body though naturally it be but in one place yet by Gods omnipotency it may be in more 10. To the sixt argument we deny the Minor to witt that we destroy Christs humanity by grauntinge that yt may be in diuers places at once for that yt repugneth not to a humayne creature to be in more places then one by Gods omnipotency this we haue shewed more largely in our fifth obseruation To the seauenth we deny also the Minor that Christs body in the Sacrament is to be circumscribed or circumscriptiuely there as yt is in heauen The differences betweene three manners of being to witt circumscriptiuely definitiuely and sacramentally yow may see more at large declared in our fourth and fifth obseruations To the eight and last we say that the maior is to be vnderstood naturally and not supernaturally by diuine power to the Minor we aunswere that Christs body hath not externall dimensions in the Sacrament though yt haue in heauen and in the Sacrament yt hath only internall and inuisible quantity without extension to place wherof yow may read more in the fourth and fifth obseruations And this shal be sufficient for this first ground of philosophicall arguments Now will we passe to the second The second head or ground of Sacramentary argumentes drawen from contrary qualityes or quantityes c. §. 2. 11. This second ground is not
conuersion And then he explaneth himselfe thus that as in bread one loafe is made of many graynes so signifieth this Sacrament that we are all one mysticall body in Christ. And againe As bread nourisheth our body so doth the body of Christ nourish our soule And thirdly As bread is turned into our substance so are vve turned into Christs substance All vvhich three effects cannot be signified saith he by this Sacrament yf there be Transubstantiation and no nature of bread left and therfore there can be no Transubstantiation 7. This is Maister Ridleyes deepe diuinity about the nature of this Sacrament but yf yow reade that which we haue noted before in our eyght obseruation concerninge the true definition and nature of a Sacrament in deed yow will see that this was great simplicity in him though accordinge to his hereticall groūd that the Sacramēts doe not giue grace to leaue out the principall effect signified in the Sacrament which is grace for that a Sacrament is defined A visible signe of inuisible grace receaued therby This Sacrament also is a signe of Christs body there present vnder the formes of bread and wyne yet deny we not but that these other three effects also of vnity nutrition and conuersion may be signified therby as in like manner the death and passion of our Sauiour wherof this Sacrament is a memoriall and commemoration neyther doth the Transubstantiation of the bread into the body of Christ lett or take away these significations for so much as to make this Sacrament there is taken bread and wyne which naturally doth signifie these effects of vnion nutrition and conuersion which Ridley heere mentioneth though yt be not necessary that the substance of the said bread and wyne should still remayne but only there formes and accidents which do signifie and are signes to our senses as much as yf the substances themselues of bread and wyne were present As for example the brasen serpent did as much represent and was a signe of Christ in respect of the analogie betwene Christ and a true serpent as yf he had had the substance of à true serpent whereof he had but only the forme and shape and so are the outward formes of bread and wyne after the words of consecration sufficient to represent vnto vs the Analogy that is betweene feedinge the body and feedinge the soule vnity of graines and vnity of Christs mysticall body which is his Church 8. And thus much of Ridleyes third ground which impugneth Transubstantiation which ground as yow see is so weake and feeble as he that shall build theron is like to come to a miserable ruyne of his owne saluation But much more ridiculous is his fourth ground vttered in these words The fourth ground saith he is the abhominable heresie of Eutiches that may ensue of Transubstantiation Thus he saith in his position but lett vs heare him afterward in his probation which is not much larger then his proposition for thus he wryteth They vvhich say that Christ is carnally present in the Eucharist do take from him the verity of mans nature Eutiches graunted the diuyne nature in Christ but his humayne nature he denyed And is not this a goodly proofe of so great a charge Nay is not this a goodly ground and head-springe of proofes Consider I pray yow how these matters do hange togeather Eutiches heresy was as yow may see in the letters of Saint Leo the first and in the Councell of Calcedon that Christs flesh being ioyned to his diuinity was turned into the same and so not two distinct natures remayned but one only made of them both And how doth this heresie I pray yow follow of our doctrine of Transuostantiation Eutiches said that the diuine and humayne natures in Christ were confounded togeather and of two made but one we say that they remayne distinct and do condemne Eutiches for his opinion and by our Church he was first accursed and anathematized for the same Eutiches said Christs humayne nature was turned into his diuine we say only that bread and wyne is turned into Christs flesh and bloud what likenesse hath this with Eutiches heresie But saith Ridley vve do take from Christ the verity of mans nature This is a fiction and foolish calumniation as before yow haue heard and consequently deserueth no further refutation 9. The fifth ground is saith he the most sure beleefe of the article of our faith He ascended into heauen This ground yf yow remember hath byn ouerthrowne before and abandoned by Ridley himselfe in his Oxford-disputation where he graunted that he did not so straitly tye Christ vp in heauen to vse his owne words but that he may come downe on earth at his pleasure And againe in another place of the said disputation VVhat letteth but that Christ yf yt please him and vvhen yt pleaseth him may be in heauen and in earth c. And yet further to Doctor Smith that asked him this question Doth he so sitt at the right hand of his Father that he doth neuer foresake the same Ridley aunswered Nay I do not bynd Christ in heauen so straitly By which aunsweres yow see that this whole principall ground and head-springe of Ridleyes arguments against Transubstantiation is quite ouerthrowne For yf Christ in flesh after his ascension may be also on earth when he will as Ridley heere graunteth then is it not against the article of our Creed He ascended into heauen to beleeue that not withstandinge his ascension he may be also on earth in the Sacrament And albeit Ridley do cyte heere certayne places of S. Augustine that do seeme to say that Christ after his ascension is no more conuersant amonge vs vpon earth yet that is not to be vnderstood of his being in the Sacrament which is a spirituall manner of being but of his corporall manner of conuersation as he liued visibly among his disciples before his ascension And this is sufficient for discussion of this fifth ground wherof the cheefe particulars haue byn handled in diuers places before 10. Now then will we returne to his second ground againe of the most certayne testimonyes of the auncient Catholike Fathers And first he alleagath Saint Dionysius Areopagita for that in some places of his works he callerh yt bread And the like of Saint Ignatius to the Philadelphians which we deny not for S. Paul also calleth yt so as before we haue shewed but yet such bread as in the same place he declareth to be the true body of Christ sayinge that he vvhich receaueth yt vnworthily shal be guilty of the body and bloud of Christ addinge for his reason non dijudicans corpus Domini for not discerninge the body of our Lord there present And so S. Ignatius in the very selfe-same place saith that yt is the flesh and bloud of Christ as yow may read in that Epistle 11. After these he citeth Irenaeus whose words are Eucharistia ex