the spirituall graces not onelie offered but giuen also vnto vs therin and this likewise to be wrought in vs though our sauiour be in heauen in respect of his bodie Acts. 3.21 Psalm 39.12 we heere as pilgrims strangers on the earth by the wonderfull vnsearchable working of his holie spirit in vs and by the meanes of a liuelie assured faith both which being knit togither doo easilie ioine togither thinges that be as farre asunder in respect of distance of place as one end of the earth is from the other and as farre asunder as heauen and earth themselues are or else how could we either beleeue the holie catholike church and feele the communion of saints seeing it commonlie falleth out that the members of that holie fellowshippe are sundered one of them from another in respect of great distance of place or be assured that Christes righteousnesse is become ours seeing he is in the heauen and wee on the earth if by faith we did not take holde of the same and applie it vnto our selues Besides if men should imbrace this sacramentarie opinion what were it but to euert as the trueth of Christes promises so the certeinetie and assurednesse of his word who in plaine termes calleth this holie sacrament his bodie Wherfore be it far from vs to approoue of anie such dotage as defaceth the trueth of the word derogateth from Christe and vtterlie destroieth our owne faith than which what can be more horrible to heare or fearefull to thinke 2 The second extremitie is that of consubstantiation some affirming that there is deliuered to the people they receiue togither with the substance of bread the verie substance of Christes verie naturall bodie so that there is as it were an intermingling or mixture of both the substances in the action of the supper But this opinion is iustlie to be disliked and reprooued not onelie because of the absurdities which it hath common with the heresie of transubstantiation whereof we will speake in the next place but also because it is quite and cleane contrarie to common sence reason confounding and iumbling togither two seuerall distinct substances and making the lesse to wit the substance of the bread to comprehend the greater that is Christes humane bodie yea euen his verie Godhead heauen and earth is not able to conteine Besides it dooth vtterlie take away an essentiall propertie of Christes bodie Isaiah 66.1 Acts. 7.49.17.21 for if Christ in respect of his humanitie be like vnto vs in all things sinne onelie excepted Hebr. 4.15 and we know by the light of reason vnderstanding that God hath bestowed vpon vs yea by verie experience that our bodies are circumscriptible and tied to a place it must needs follow that Christ in respect of his manhood or Christ as he is man is and must be tied to a place and not be in euery place as he must needs be if these mens assertions be true which is nothing els in deed but vtterlie to destroy Christs body which also I prooue against them thus Whosoeuer taketh away the essentiall propertie of anie thing taketh away also the verie thing it selfe This proposition is prooued by this marime in logike If the definition of a thing which cheeflie consisteth of the essentiall propertie of the thing be taken away then the thing it selfe also defined falleth away as for example If reasonable liuing creature which is the definition of a man be taken away what shall become of man or where shall he appeare which is the thing defined whereof also there is good reason because the essentiall propertie is it that constituteth or maketh the thing Hitherto the maior proposition as we say in schooles with the proofs thereof Now foloweth the minor or second proposition But these men take away the essentiall propertie of a thing to wit of a bodie which is to be circumscriptible or tied to a place which is in deed an essentiall propertie of the bodie of man and therefore of Christes bodie as hee is man whilest they will haue him as he is man in sundrie places at one time If anie man will denie this it may easilie be prooued both by their owne writinges in sundrie places and also by the definition of a bodie which is a quantitie that may be diuided according to the threefold measuring receiued amongest men that is length breadth and thickenesse and likewise by the description of a place which is defined to be a nighnesse or touching of the thing conteining and the thing conteined The conclusion therfore is that in taking away place from the bodie of Christ which they doo whilest they place it in euerie place whereas in the nature thereof it can be but in one place at one time they doo vtterlie destroie the bodie or humanitie of Christ or at the least confound it so with the Godhead as Eutyches did that they make a confusion whereas in all trueth and vprightnesse there shoulde remaine a distinction of the proprieties of either nature in his blessed person But of this inough in this place because it is somewhat philosophicall and because also in the next section we shall haue occasion to deale with the like 3 The third extremitie is that of transubstantiation mainteined altogither by the Romish catholiks as they will be called who hold that the bread and wine the substance thereof vanishing away and nothing being left but the accidents or qualities thereof as in the bread roundnesse whitenesse c and in the wine rednesse moisture c are changed and that by the power of certeine words spoken by the preest as they name him ouer the elements they are turned into the verie naturall bodie and bloud of our sauior Concerning this point and the branches therof I minde to speake both more particularlie and more fullie because it is one of the popish opinions that greatlie at this present troubleth the christian world and namelie our flourishing isle of England and also because in the daies of persecution heeretofore both within this land and elswhere it hath beene the common knife that the wicked haue vsed to cut the throtes of the godlie withall as it were the hatchet to chop off their heads It may be that in this my poore trauel some may be conuerted from falshood to truth and so be saued in the day of Christ or if that gratious effect followe not in the aduersaries yet I hope the friendes and louers of truth shall by this meanes be somwhat staied that they be not caried away with certaine inticing and inchaunting wordes in the mouths of some seducing spirites whom Antichrist Satans eldest sonne hath thrust into the worlde to peruert men from the truth and obedience of God 1 First for the name of Transubstantiation I feare not to affirme that it is verye newe and neuer heard of before the days of pope Innocent the third who was about the yeare of our Lorde 1205
controuersie euen that such is Christes bodie namelie that it hath alwaies beene must of necessitie for euer be a verie or true bodie and therefore also circumscriptible and tied to a place The third reason Yea this I say further that God cannot be created by God nor that a thing created can be turned into God for if there were manie gods he could not be God to whō another created wer equall neither could that created god so called abusiuelie be God because that to be God to haue a beginning of time or in time are merelie cōtradictorie things or speeches The conclusion of this point Christs flesh therfore could not become the Godhead therfore could it not be indued with the incommunicable proprieties of the Godhead that is to say with such proprieties belonging to the Godhead as cannot be cōmunicated to any other but the Godhead alone amongst which this to be infinit to be wholie at one time euerie where is not reckoned in the last place Is this I pray you to deny Gods almightie power or do we in this follow the vngodlines of the blasphemous felow Plinie Plinius and his errors for he denieth that God is able to bestow immortalitie vpon mortall people or to call backe again such as are dead which is not only falslie but wickedly spoken also The selfe same partie denieth that God is able to kill himselfe or to bring to passe Truth may be propounded by some though they perhaps doo not well vnderstand the cause thereof that he that hath liued and is now dead should not haue liued then when he liued or that twise ten should not be twentie And heer in howsoeuer he fel fouly in the former he hath not missed the truth but rightlie denied these things to be in God onelie heerein he did most beastlie slip The cause why God cannot do some things is not so much want of power in him as because he cannot or will not be found contrarie to his nature that not knowing or beleeuing the nature of God he would haue these things to be arguments and proofs of Gods imbecilitie and weaknesse wheras contrariwise we know and beleeue that he cannot therefore doo these things because he himselfe cannot perish nor lie nor be changed But loe we are now at the length come to them who seeme most equall and vpright aboue all other who also auoiding all other forgeries and deuises doo stay themselues onelie vpon these wordes of Christs This is my bodie Such answered as vrge the bare words This is my bodie and This cup is my bloud we must say they beleeue Christes wordes though he speake neuer so new and vnaccustomed matters yea though he speake things that our flesh and sences cannot beleeue We grant all this But what if they seeme not agreeable to the truth and the analogie or proportion of faith Verilie they are to be beleeued indeed seeing that the sonne of God is the truth it selfe yet these things or points must be so expounded Two rules meet to be obserued in expounding such places as seeme contrarie to truth that they may altogither agree with the 1 rest of the places of holie scripture and the cheefe 2 groūds or heads of christian religion for whatsoeuer doth dissent though it be neuer so little from these rules must of necessitie be false and vnsound Now we haue heeretofore at large declared and prooued that such and so corrupt is that interpretation which establisheth either transubstantiation or a reall consubstantiation of the signes and the things signified Two christian frutes arising by expounding the words of the supper sacramentallie But on the other side if we grant a sacramentall being of the thing signified which as it is true in other sacraments so also in this mystery then we shall preserue 1 the truth of Christes flesh and vphold 2 the analogie and proportion of faith Wherefore this interpretation is to be admitted receiued as true and well agreeing with right and sound doctrine An obiection answered But say they there is no place heere for a trope or figure yea the verie plaine word is simplie to be obserued But who I beseech you hath giuen you this rule speciallie sith this is most manifest yea and so vsuall also that when they speake of sacraments which also are themselues figures they speake figuratiuelie Neither thinke I that anie man can skarslie bring foorth or allege an example of a contrarie speech You must therefore allege a cause or render a reason why that which is of force in other sacraments shuld not likewise be of strēgth and power in this sacrament or speech touching the same But let vs some what more nighlie looke into the matter and well wey all and euerie of the words of institution First I demand what the thing is pointed at or painted out by this Pronoune demonstratiue Hoc that is The Pronounce Hoc that is This expounded This. The papists answer that it is an identicall proposition that is The popish opinion declared and confuted that one and the selfe same thing speaketh of it selfe and that therfore nothing is shewed forth but euen the verie bodie it selfe as if a man should say This thing is my bodie But we say that of necessitie that must be demonstrated shewed which he hauing taken broken did deliuer vnto his disciples to wit bread which thing also the apostle hath declared when hee said The bread which we breake 1. Corinth 10.16 Is it not the cōmunicating of the bodie of Christ And the word rup added in the other member or part of the institution of the supper doth plainlie prooue to all men that are not vtterlie contentious that this word this is as much as if Christ shuld say this bread And heere I confesse there is no trope at all the reason is because it was needfull for vs to haue the signe properlie fitlie declared that we might not be deceiued But our aduersaries among whom also a trope is almost as odious as an heresie being demanded Vbiquitaries or consubstantiators and thier opinions declared confuted What answer they Verilie that vnder this Pronoune Hoc that is This there is set out vnto vs both the bread and the bodie also that is to say both the signe the thing signified Their opinion is contrarie being in verie deed essentiallie vnited togither as they say To scripture But as erewhile I said 1 Paule vseth the onelie word bread and certeine it is that that was shewed whiche Christe took brake To the nature of Christs body Shall 2 we say that he took and brake his owne bodie Certeinelie if they will so affirme this reall coniunction of the signes the thing signified To their owne opinions shall 3 not depend vpon the words of institution seeing that euen before that Christ tooke it and brake
both a nature a person but the manhood is not of it selfe anie other thing than a nature which as they speake in the scholes is become a person There is but one sonne of God as there is but one Christ and is vpholden in the godhead taking it vnto it selfe so that now there are not two sonnes to wit one eternall and naturall or of the substance and being of the father and another created and adopted but that onelie eternall sonne of GOD sustaining and vpholding the nature vnited to himself so that also there are not two Christs but one onelie God and man together from the time that he knitte or vnited to himselfe the nature which he tooke Now we learne what we may call the person of Christ What the person of Christ is to wit the son of God manifested in the flesh Let vs come nowe to the word vnion for vniting is that whereby these two natures to wit the godhead or the person of the word and the humanitie or manhood are coupled together The Grecians call this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What vnion or vniting is that is the coupling or ioyning together of two thinges or more in such sort that of those many things commyng together some one certaine thing is compounded or made There are diuers sorts of vniting And there are diuers kinds of vnitings for sometimes nature is vnited with the forme or shape sometime an accident with the subiect sometime parts are vnited and knit vnto parts to establish or make a whole matter Vniting and vnion or vnitie differ much Wherefore vniting is one thing and vnitie or onenesse as a man might saye is an other thing For one or onenesse is not a number neither dooth it necessarily presuppose a number◠except in things compounded but is the beginning of a number Therefore we hold that there is in christ a vnitie or onenesse indeede of the person and an vniting of the natures These words are diligently to be marked so much the more bicause the neglect thereof bringeth forth great confusions troubles in these disputations matters Certainely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is vniting and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is vnitie or onenesse are altogither diuers matters For in the mysterie of the Trinitie there is vnitie or onenesse of the essence and a Trinitie in the persons Againe on the other side there is in Christ an vniting of the natures and an vnitie or onenesse of the person Wherefore the Fathers saide well that in the diuinitie there is not an other thing and an other thing that is to say In the godhead there is but one simple being two thinges for in the diuinitie there is but one onely and most simple essence or being but an other and an other meaning persons For the Father is one an other is the Son and the Holie-ghost is an other The reason is because when we say another we mean the person when wee saye an other thing wee meane the nature Wherefore there is not an other thing in the diuinity for so there should be multiplication or multitude of Gods In Christ on the other side there is an other thing In Christ there is two natures but not two persons and an other thing because the godhead is an other thing than the manhood and not an other and an other bicause Christ is but one subsistence or being consisting not of two persons but of mans nature being taken which hath his subsisting and being in the diuine nature Let vs nowe come to a more full and large declaration of the word vnion or vniting This kinde and maner of vnion or vniting Errors cannot be wel confūted til the personall vnion bee well knowne is called personall vppon the true definition of which personall vnion dependeth the confutation of most great errors wherewith too manie at this present are sicke and infected as we shall wel perceiue when we shall come to the matter it selfe wherefore wee must describe the personall vnion out of the verie worde of God Isaiah 7.14 Matth. 1.23 First Isaiah saieth that this our sauiour is Immanuell that is God with vs. Iohn 1.14 Iohn expounding the fulfilling of this prophecie saith that the word became or was made flesh Nowe because a thing may be said to be made manie waies that manner of being made is declared by the Apostle in the epistle to the Hebrewes Hebr. 2 1◠when hee saith that the sonne tooke the seed of Abraham Therefore the word taking openeth and declareth this saieng of Iohn And the word was made flesh and both these laid togither doo also declare how Christ is God with vs and all these things laid or ioined togither doo shew and determine what the personall vnion is They which haue not interpreted that place of Iohn Three errors by misinterpreting the words of Iohn out of the place in the epistle to the Hebrues haue fallen into diuerse errors for some haue expounded it thus the word was made flesh because the word was in sted of the soule vnto the bodie taken that is to say that as the soule ioined with the bodie shapeth or fashioneth the man so the person of the sonne tooke vnto it that bodie that by that meanes he might become Christ So that they depriued Christ of a humane soule in the sted thereof did substitute the Godhead Apollinaris taught that the sonne of God tooke onelie the bodie of a man and not a reasonable soule Tripartit hist lib. 5. cap. 44. lib. 9. cap. 3. Basil epist 74. August lib. Hier lib. 9. He was about the yeere 380. But beside that this opinion of Apollinaris is by almost infinit plaine testimonies of scripture refuted this also necessarilie foloweth that except the word had taken the soule vnto it likewise our soules should of necessitie be lost bicause that onlie shal be saued which Christ restored in his own person neither could Christ properlie haue suffered that I may let slippe many other most absurd points seeing that the soule properlie is troubled and afflicted Others haue framed and deuised for true flesh a ghost or fantasie and to that purpose haue wrested and writhen the worde similitude or likenes Roman 8.3 in these wordes of Paule God sending his own son in the similitude of sinful flesh c whom the old fathers called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They had a double name Docitae or Docetae and sprung indeede as some suppose from Simon Magus who helde that Christ came not in the flesh but that hee was Christ They held as the Marcionites did that Christ suffered in a fantasie or ghost See homil 2. following If these mens opiniōs were true christ shold not be in verie deede Iesus or a Sauiour as indeed one that had not bin born or had suffered for vs. There are othersome who forsaking these errors do notwithstāding fall into others no lesse
in deed all the properties of the Godhead without exception powred into the same into the Godhead it selfe But now if there nothing happen to God or there be no accident in him as indeed there is not for whatsoeuer is in him is substance and not accidents as they speake in schooles How were the properties by which he is distinguished from things created indeed powred foorth into the flesh assumed and taken but that also mans nature should be changed into a certeine Godhead that is made or created He procureth an obiection But if these men will denie as sometimes I see them by the power of trueth it selfe constreined to denie that the monstrous presence euerie where for whose cause onelie whatsoeuer they faine they propound vnto vs that monster of vbiquitie to be esteemed and reuerenced dooth not cleaue vnto Christes flesh as to his proper subiect or that it is not accidents but onlie as accidents then I say who seeth not what monstrous things these are to ascribe vnto the flesh a reall presence euerie where in it selfe though not of it selfe the subiect whereof should yet notwithstanding not be the flesh it selfe but the Godhead which Godhead for all that should no otherwise be present to the flesh than to all other things whatsoeuer And whereof will these men be ashamed who are so farre off from being ashamed of these matters that yet they dare obiect this against vs that we exact points of diuinitie and religion to be handled according to the rules of philosophie The fift absurditie Certeinelie if so be it that the personall vnion must be defined and determined not by the vnion of the verie person of the word with flesh assumed or taken into one and the selfe same subsistence or being yet without anie reall vnion either of the natures themselues or of the essentiall properties wherwith they are indued but by the vniuersall effusion or powring foorth of powerfull graces from the nature assuming or taking into the nature assumed or taken which monstrous opinion fet from the filthie stincking puddles both of Nestorius Eutyches also and twise sod Brentius Suindelinus Illyrichus and these other goodlie fellowes doo propound and deliuer vnto the churches of Christ I say that whether they will yea or no this must needs follow vpon it that Christ is neither God nor man much lesse GOD and man togither Chimaera is a monster hauing three heads one like a lion another like a gote the third like a dragon but a certeine Chimaera or monster made of most grosse confusion and discord Yea and what meaneth this that they themselues are of necessitie constreined to except some things after that they haue affirmed that all things are powred foorth The sixt absurditie For these things verilie to be without beginning to be of himselfe c. Cannot be attributed to a creature but they may be personallie vnited and are in deed personallie vnited because that must be true which Christ himselfe saith Iohn 8.58 Before Abraham was I am And this is true because that he that after so manie ages passed from the beginning of the world was made or became the sonne of Mary Iohn 1.1 euen he I say is that word which was in the beginning not so much for his full effusion or powring foorth of powerfull graces as for the bodilie vnion or vniting of the Godhead it himselfe in the person of the word wherefore if we will beleeue these men this sonne of the virgine Marie shall not be eternall because there was not powred into the flesh assumed or taken that same being without beginning whereof he cannot be partaker euen as they themselues confesse who are otherwise large sheders abrode or rather euerters and ouerthrowers of all properties They being thus driuen from hense euen as it were out of some hold or fortresse of their owne at the last they retire hither or haue this starting hole Another obiection answered or rather error confuted to say forsooth that the personall vnion consisteth heerin that the word dooth nothing but with the manhoood and by the manhood as the soule dooth nothing but with the bodie or by the bodie Peripatelians were subtle philosophers of Aristotles sect opinion who had their names of disputing walking I will leaue this to the Peripatelians to be reasons of whether it be true that the soule ioined to the bodie doth nothing of it selfe for there are not diuers wanting that doo stiflie and stoutlie denie the same But I affirme that that definition of the personall vnion cannot stand I grant therefore that from the time the eternall word tooke flesh vnto him that it did not at anie time doo anie thing without the flesh the reason is because this vnion is perpetuall and yet for al that it dooth not heerevpon follow that whatsoeuer the worde did he did it by the flesh Though it be granted I say that the word did nothing being separated from the flesh because that that flesh which it once tooke it neuer laid downe yet it followeth not that whatsoeuer the word did it did it by the fleshe which thing may bee shewed by most assured and manifest examples The first example Christ raised vppe himselfe by his owne diuine power who also had said of himselfe Iohn 10.18 I haue power to lay downe my soule or life and to take it againe Did therefore the Godhead through the flesh accomplish and performe that worke I suppose no man will say so The second example Iohn 1.48 Matth. 9.4 When Christ beheld Nathaniell absent did he see him with his bodilie eies And when without the disclosing of anie other man he saw the thoughts of his aduersaries did he this by anie sharpnesse of mans minde or vnderstanding No verilie Wherefore he saw all these things as he was God and not with minde or bodie and yet he saw them not without man because he being God is man also The third example Matth. 8.13 Iohn 9.6.7 c. When he healed the Centurians seruant being absent did he that as when he healed that blind man being present putting his hand to him and making the claie No in deed For he wrought this latter by his hands mooued through the flesh that is to say vsing the instrument of flesh assumed or taken whereas he healed the other by the onelie power of his Godhead And yet he was not free from flesh I confesse it He healed him therefore with the flesh but not through flesh Wherefore in this fellow-working togither of the Godhead the nature assumed or taken the personall vnion is not deposed or ouerthrowne but established rather Beside though I should grant the antecedent or first proposition He granteth the aduersaries that which they speake and yet they gaine nothing by it to witte that the worde dooth nothing but with and by the manhood yet that would not follow therevpon that they imagine
we are woont euerie where to beat vpon this point that by the sacraments Christ is not signified vnto vs as when we beholde Cesars image picture we are woont to remember Cesar and nothing beside for in the signes hauing the word adioined vnto them we teach Christ and all his benefits to be so represented to vs and our mindes that he togither with all his graces is giuen to vs to be inioied of vs and in deed to be participated but yet after a spirituall maner and by faith Wherefore this action is not vaine neither are the signes and the very rites thereof naked emptie matters sith that which is signified is both most truelie offered vnto vs by God himselfe and most effectuallie receiued of such as beleeue This kind of signification Bernard well declareth by the similitude of a ring which the bridegrome deliuereth vnto the betrothed bride to the end that so she may not onelie thinke vpon the bridegrome deliuering it but that by this pledge of promise he might after a sort deliuer himselfe ouer vnto hir also And therfore Christ did not onelie say Matth. 26 2◠This is my bodie but also he added Take ye and eat ye Mainteiners of the truth charged to be defacers of the sacraments Ye see brethren what we thinke and hold touching these mysteries also what iniurie is offered vs when men say that we doo euacuat disanull the sacraments and transforme them into certeine vaine spectakles and shewes of Christ that is absent Other mens malice must not hinder vs from speaking truth Let vs notwithstanding as plainlie as possible we can declare what that is which is so in outward signes set before our minde to be looked into that yet notwithstanding it is a faithfull and beleeuing soule trulie exhibited and offered to be partaken by faith And what is that I say Truelie the bodie and bloud of the Lord. But who teacheth vs this or so instructeth vs Euen Gods owne sonne for he saith This that is to say Matth. 26.26.28 This bread is my bodie And this that is to say This wine conteined in this cup is my bloud By the way I will put you in minde of one thing Contention about wordes though it be not alwaies good yet when it may cleere the truth it may well be vsed least anie man might be offended because I say not This is my bloud in the masculine gender but This is my bloud in the neuter gender referring it either to the wine which is the neuter gender in Latine or to the cuppe conteining the wine which in Greeke is the neuter gender also for though I loue not to striue about words yet this point is well woorthie the marking Certeinlie he that saith Hic est sanguis meus in the masculine gender that is This is my bloud dooth point to or shew foorth nothing but his bloud But it is certeine that as before Christ did not propound his bodie vnto his disciples without bread so euen in this other part when Christ said so he would not set his bloud before his disciples without wine Therefore this Greeke Pronoune 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being of the neuter gender must needs be referred to the signe that is to say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the cup which is therefore expreslie put downe in Paule concerning which or of which the bloud it selfe may be spoken wherevpon this ariseth that the Greeke Pronoune 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this cannot declare anie other matter or thing than this that is to say this thing or matter which I hold in my hāds to wit the wine that is cōtained in this cup which indeed cānot be expressed by this word Hic a Pronoune of the masculine gender as the meanest Grammarians may well and easilie perceiue Christes verie bodie bloud is the matter o◠thing signified in the Lords supper But to returne to the matter By these thinges you may perceiue what we vnderstand by the name or word of the thing it selfe or by the terme trueth sacramentallie sigifined namelie the bodie bloud of the Lord Iesus Wherefore first of all we dissent from the anabaptists In the matter of the supper we agree not either with the Anabaptists or sacramentaries who in sted of the matter of the sacrament signified doo put downe I knowe not what shadow or figuratiue thing as though it were some warlike cognizance pledge or watch-word by which christians might be discerned from such as be no christians Next we dissent from them likewise Or with such as vnderstand it onelie concerning Christes merits sundered from Christ himselfe who for the matter of the Sacrament established Christes force and power as also his merites but yet seuered from Christ himselfe For Christ said not this is the merit of my bodie Luke 22.19.20 which is deliuered for you but This is my bodie and this is my bloud neither is it without cause definitiuelie before hand added which is deliuered for you and which is shed for you So that it could not more plainelie haue beene said that verie Christ himselfe whose bodie was giuen for vs and whose bloud was shed for vs is truelie and verilie giuen vs in the supper to be the food of eternal life to vs. And therfore the matter of that sacrament is in deed that verie bodie which he offered vp for vs on the crosse and that bloud which he shed for the forgiuenesse of our sinnes so far off are we from deeming or thinking of some figuratiue or typicall bodie or some allegoricall bloud as certeine most fond men who doo not indeed well vnderstand their owne wordes minde and opinion are not ashamed to speake and write of vs that we so holde Now I come to the third point of this discourse for first I haue spoken of the signes and secondlie of the things signified Two sorts of people that in the sacrament of the supper haue erred in and about the right coniunction of the signes and the thing signified Now we are to see in the third place what is the knitting or ioining togither of the signes and the thinges signified wherein for the most part consisteth the whole determination of all this controuersie touching the sacraments The papists haue altered the ioining togither of the signes and the thing signified into a transmutation or change one of them into another than which what can be more absurd For certeinlie if the bread and the wine be in deede changed into the bodie and bloud of Christ as they affirme then we cannot chuse but affirme also that this is not to ioine the signes with the thinges signified but to change the signes into the thinges themselues or else the signes vanishing away or perishing to put the thinges themselues in their roome But let these men go as who in deed deserue not anie confutation their assertions be so absurd and blockish There are others at this present no
lesse hard sharpe against vs than the verie papistes themselues who will haue the thing signified that is to say the verie bodie of Christ so to be ioined with or vnder or in the bread that in that verie place where that bread is there must also be the bodie of Christ which in like sort is to be vnderstood also touching the wine and the bloud of Christ If a man then should demand where is the verie bodie bloud of Christ in the action of the supper A grosse absurditie or two following consubstantiation if wee will answere according to their opinion we must say that it is truelie and in deed in our hands and in our mouth and therfore certeinelie vnlesse it presentlie vanish away within this bodie of ours with in or vnder the verie signes of the bread the wine being eaten and drunken Now we will shew and that by reasons not fet from humane philosophie as our aduersaries vntrulie say we vse such but from the verie word of God it selfe Two things to be handled viz. the confutation of the aduersaries the maintenance of the truth that this consubstantiation as we may trulie call it is no lesse absurd and erronious than transubstantiation as also that that communion or partaking which out of the pure word of God we propound and teach in our churches is a most secret and diuine matter Wherefore our iudgement is quite cleane contrarie to either of those opinions before rehearsed To begin we hold that such things as are spoken of the sacraments must be vnderstood sacramentallie For what I pray you is or can be more vpright than to haue all thinges spoken rightlie vnderstood and perceiued as the nature of that matter will beare whereof there is question A similitude or two explaning the point he hath in hand Certeinelie such thinges as the lawiers speake touching the law must be vnderstood euen as they are vsed in that verie science of the law and we must needs giue the selfe same iudgement of all things and arts whatsoeuer Such thinges therefore as are taught and deliuered touching the sacraments must be sacramentallie vnderstood What manner of coniunction then is the coniunction or knitting togither of the signe and the thing sacramentallie signified Verilie it is sacramentall The signes therfore and the things are ioined togither by that relation or respect which is betweene the signes and the thinges signified which yet once againe I doo most plainelie declare after this maner When we heare some man speaking vnto vs in the toong we vnderstand the words that come to our eares and strike them doo verie liuelie represent that vnto our mindes for the expressing and signification whereof they were vsed Another similitude For example as soone as we heare the word Rome presentlie wee thinke vpon that citie If a man name Cesar or the emperour Cesar or the emperour presenlie commeth to our memorie The reason whereof verilie is that that is well deliuered and taught in schooles to wit such thinges as are in the voice or words are signes of the affections that are in the soule or minde There is the selfe same consideration to be had of the sacraments for the sacraments are nothing else but visible words that is representing through our eies vnto our mindes things signified as words heard doo by our eares conuey vnderstanding to our minds likewise Therfore these visible sacraments of bread wine bring to passe that when I see and receiue that bread and that wine ioined with the word of God I doo withall conceiue in my mind and vnderstand that bodie that was giuen for me and that bloud that was shed for me as though I were led or carried euen vnto the thing it selfe being present And because I am commanded not onelie to looke vpon these signes with mine eies but also to take them Math. 26.26.27 eat them drinke them therefore dooth the faithfull minde euen lay hold of and applie vnto himselfe those things so signefied as they are deliuered and offered Touching which point we will largelie discourse in the fourth place to wit when we shall come to handle this question how both the signes and the thinges signified are receiued of vs whereas now we onelie dispute or speake touching the sacramentall coniunction of the signes themselues Two errours mainteined by the aduersaries with the thing signified Such as are not content with this sacramentall coniunction fall into a double errour not onelie that they doo in a a great and grosse errour verilie establish a real vnion of the signes with the things signified of which we haue spoken before but also they further adde this that euen in that verie place wheresoeuer the signes are offered to such as come to communicate there is present the flesh and the bloud of Christ that is to say they would haue vs confesse that euen his verie humanitie or manhood is in deed present there and is to be receiued or taken by bodily instruments As for vs we affirme that Christ in respect of his manhood The substance of that we are to know or beleeue touching the coniunction of the signes with the things signified in the Lords supper euen as when he was vpon the earth was no where else but in that verie place where he was conuersant so now he is not anie where else but aboue all heauens into which he ascended and that therefore he is not now togither with the signes offered to the bodie but togither with the signes truelie deliuered and giuen to the beleeuing soule euen as by the word we heare it and by the signe we see it Now it remaineth that we doo by some reasons fet from the word of GOD well wey and consider whether they or we swarue from the truth The first reason Rom. 1.3 Rom. 9.5 Galath 4.4 Philip. 2.7 Hebr. 2.16 Iohn 16.7.28 Matth. 28.20 Acts. 1.9 The holie scripture witnesseth that the sonne of God did personallie take vnto himselfe a true and verie bodie The selfe same scripture dooth attribute vnto the flesh of our sauiour Christ assumed and that both before and after the glorification thereof such things as doo plainelie prooue the truth of a naturall bodie as that he came that he went away that he was sometimes present and sometimes absent These things then doo of necessitie follow the trueth of Christes bodie which if a man take from it he must also needs take away the truth of the manhood of Christ and so come at the length to the heresie of the Marcionits or Dokits Marcionits or Dokits they were called Marcionits of one Marcion whose principall error was this that Christ did not appeare indeed and suffer indeed c. vpon the crosse but in phantasie or ghostlike apparition Concerning Dokitiae see homil 1. before going Tertullian wrote most learnedlie against this Marcion But these things are manifestlie taken away by their opinion who say that
question in controuersie whether this doctrine concerning the reall presence of Christes very fleshe in many or all places at once can stand wyth the truth of Christs flesh whether wee consider it after or before the glorification thereof Now we stoutly and safely deny that Christs fleshe at any tyme can be in many or in all places at once and wee saye that it can not by anye necessary or fitte consequence bee gathered either from this hys walkyng vppon the waters or in that hee entered into the place where hys disciples were the dores being shut or in that hee arose againe the stone of the Sepulchre or Toombe Iohn 20.19 Math. 28.2 Certain reasons alledged for proofe of his assertion not beeing remooued or rolled awaye by mannes handes And of thys wee haue sundrye reasons for firste these myracles seeme rather to bee doone in the waters themselues made harde and firme not onelie vnder Christs feete but vnder Peters also than in Christs owne bodie the like whereof also is to bee saide touching the wall and sepulchre Matth. 14.29 the heape or weight whereof did sodainely yeeld vnto the body of the creator Moreouer though we shold grant that they were to be seene in the very body of Christ yet doth not the withholding of a bodily weight or the withdrawing of it for a time or else this thinnesse as a man woulde say of a bodilie heape either abolish a bodie it selfe sith it dooth at any hand take away the quantitie of a body or implie contradiction as they are woont to say in the schooles But we affirme that a true and very bodie can neither want quantity or circumscriptiblenesse but it shal cease to be a bodie neither can it be at once in one place as circumscribed and in an other place as not circumscribed but that we must of necessitie conclude both that it is a bodie and that it is not a bodie which are assertions meerelie contrarie The summe of all these thinges is this or tendeth to this ende namelie that this opinion of the reall consubstantiation of Christes flesh with bread and wine is most false and vntrue as by meanes whereof the trueth of Christes fleshe is vtterlie abolished Now againe The second reason against consubstantiation See the first before pag. 65. euen by this most weightie argument following may this forgerie and deuise be confuted namelie because it plainlie and wholie standeth vp against the analogie and proportion of faith so little need or iust cause haue the defendors thereof to call vs backe to the power and force of faith Acts. 1.11 Marke 16.19 The scripture witnesseth in manie places that Christes flesh ascended vp aboue the heauens and that there also at this day it remaineth we may not therefore seeke for it in earth otherwise it should not be an ascending but a vanishing away for the time Certeinlie A generall rule no man can trulie be said to come or go vp thither where he now was or to go away descend or be absent from the place where he remaineth Looke therefore in how manie places these things are spoken of Christ according to his flesh and that without anie figuratiue kinde of speech by so manie most strong and inuincible testimonies there is confirmed vnto vs the true taking away of the bodie of Christ from vs and also that reall dotage of the presence of Christes flesh vpon the earth that is to say thys opinion which the Dokits Marcionits mainteine sufficientlie confuted Of these see before pag. 70. As for that that they vrge against vs An obiection answered saieng How absurd is that that Christes flesh is now in heauen and no where else It is easilie answered that we speake no otherwise than Peter Acts. 3.21 Acts. 1.11 yea than the angels themselues haue spoken And though they say further that by this meanes we shut vp Christ as it were in a prison where as yet notwithstanding the right hand of God that is to say his heauenlie power and authoritie whereat he sitteth is euerie where What for all this Answer vs this and tell vs whether that being on the earth absent from heauen for he had not ascended thither where he was then present or whether that being in the virgins wombe or wrapped vp in swadling clothes lieng in the crib he was shut vp in prison Yea sith euerie bodie is conteined in his owne place yea things without bodies are yet notwithstanding included in the proprietie of their nature for onelie the Godhead is infinit what can follow else of this their most absurd argument and reason Absurditie in reason by the aduersaries argument than that all things are full of prisons and prisoners And though we should say that vnder the termes of sitting at the right hand Philip. 2.9 there is meant the verie selfe same thing which the apostle simplie and without trope saith that Christ to wit as he is man hath receiued that is to say a name aboue all names yet it should be no lesse fond and absurd thervpon to gather and conclude the presence of Christes flesh in euerie place A similitude that if we would affirme that the bodie of some king is as large and wide as the bounds of his kingdome are brode But say they Another obiection answered Christ being present gouerneth all things We answer that is true as he is God and yet the person of Christ is not for al that rent in sunder or diuided For euen Christ man being euerie where the Lord is present also euerie where much more in the supper In what respect Christ is present euerie where howbeit not as in respect of the manhood it selfe but as in regard of another that is to say as he is one person not in himselfe as in regard of his manhood but in the verie nature of the Godhead it selfe of which the humanitie was so assumed that it is one subsistence or being togither with it as a little while ago we declared Therefore the man Christ is in deed present to wit as he the selfe same is Christ God and yet the manhood of Christ is not now in anie other place than in heauen The third obiection answered Ephes 4.10 But it is yet further obiected that Christ went vp into heauen to fulfill all things I grant it wherevpon also I gather that hee fulfilled not all things till he ascended and that therefore the definition of the personall vnion taken from habituall grace as they call it of which we haue said some what before is false and fond Yea I gather this further that if he did truelie and in deed ascend that that his flesh was not in heauen before he ascended thither that it ceaseth to be on the earth after that he ascended from thense into heauen But say they he ascended to fulfill or fill all things The same obiection vrged yet answered therfore he filleth
aunsweared as which indeede if it bee well weighed is not onelie vntrue as in respect of it selfe because though glorification implie a most excellent and heauenlie estate dooth not yet for all that destroye the essentiall properties of bodies glorified but most absurde and false also as in regard of vs. For if the glorification of Christs bodie haue remooued or taken awaye that essentiall propertie to witte that it shoulde truelie and indeede bee tied vnto a place then the like shall bee perfourmed and the same effect followe in all the glorified bodies of the faithfull after the resurrection because our Sauiour hath not onelie glorified his owne bodie for himselfe hee rising therein a mightie conquerour ouer death and hell and nowe triumphantlie ruling and raigning in the heauens in all maiestie but for our sakes also hath atchieued that greate honour wee hauing from him this assured promise in his worde Philip. 3.21 that God shal chaunge our base and vile bodies that they may bee fashioned like vnto his glorious bodie according vnto the mightie working whereby hee is able to subdue all things vnto himselfe But to saye that our bodies glorified after the rising againe of the same in the generall day of iudgement shall be euery where a rashe and vncertaine yea a beastlie and blasphemous assertion because it ascribeth that vnto vs which is proper and peculiar onelie to GOD for vnto hym alone it perteineth to fill heauen earth and all places alwayes and at one tyme as infinite places of Scripture doo plainelie prooue therefore this opinion also concerning Christes glorified bodie beeing euerie where or in infinite places at one time must of necessitie be suche likewise 4 Fourthlie it dooth directlye destroy and as it were at one blowe blotte out and deface all those Articles of our moste pretious Faith and Christian religion whych doo concerne Christes assured ascension into Heauen hys maiesticall sitting at the right hande of the Father and his glorious comming agayne from thence together wyth that infinite number of moste playne places of GODS holie woorde that out of the writinges of the Prophetes and Apostles may bee drawen for the proofe of those moste comfortable and necessarie pointes To deale wyth euerye one of these by themselues shortely and in fewe woordes I woulde faine knowe if our Sauiour Christ be here vpon earth in respect of his bodilye power and presence howe hee can iustlie as in regarde of the same hys bodye bee sayde to haue ascended into Heauen Or let them tel vs if hee remaine wyth vs in hys flesh how hee can bee truelye saide in hys manhoode to sitte at the right hande of hys Father in Heauen Or howe it can bee in religion or reason affirmed that our Sauiour shall come from Heauen with great power and glorie to iudge the quick and the dead seeing he is here on earth already The Scripture telleth vs for his ascension Actes 1.9 that in the sight and beholding of the blessed Apostles yea whiles they looked stedfastly towards heauen he was taken vp Let them shew so much for his bodilie abode vpon earth and proue it by such substantiall witnesse and wee are readie to yeelde Besides we knowe by the worde and therefore beleeue it that as he was seene go into heauen Actes 1.10 so shall he come againe but hee was seene to ascend thither bodilie and therefore so shall hee returne from thence againe I suppose they will not saye that our Sauiour had two bodies one that hee tooke wyth him an other that hee left heere for that were to make him altogether monstrous and men scrupulous none knowing in whether of them hee perfourmed the work of their redemption And to saye that that one blessed bodie of his was diuided is as absurde and erronious because it can not be so but that the whole bodie it selfe must be impaired and mangled at the least if not destroyed and so the woorke of saluation ouerthrowne To stand vpon anie naked interpretation touching the right hand of God will not serue their turne for there being nothing meant thereby in this article of our beleefe but the great glorie that is in heauen prepared for the saints and that most excellent blessednesse that belongeth to them whereof our sauior Christ was in a most full measure made by his ascention into heauen as in respect of his humanity absolute partaker what could they gaine Doo they imagine that it would heervpon insue that Christ should be euerie where and by consequent on earth but they are deceiued for why doo they not as well consider the word sitting which implieth locall residence in a place or doo they not know and beleeue that heauen it selfe is not euerie where but locall rather or will they not see that without warrant of the word yea contrarie to the same which in sundrie places opposeth heauen and earth one of them against another or sence of humane iudgement they iumble and confound them togither Reason will lead vs to this that none can be said to goe vp into the place where he is or to come downe from it when he remaineth there And though wee minde not to subiect our sauior speciallie as in respect of his eternall Godhead to humane sence yet by the same we may and ought to be ledde not to destroy the essentiall properties of his manhood Now then whether shall wee beleeue this trueth of the Lord or mens fantasies that go about to peruert our persuasions and deceiue our vnderstandings Let men of the worlde deeme what they lust this is the truth that God hath sanctified vnto vs in his word and I doo stedfastlie beleeue it in my heart and will throgh Gods goodnesse and strength alwaies confesse the same with my mouth that from the very time of Christes ascension into Heauen Acts. 3 2â— The Heauens must conteine his naturall bodie vntill the time that all things be restored that is euen to the worlds end 5 Fiftlie I say that this opinion dooth vniustlie depriue vs of all such spirituall graces and comforts for our consciences as God the father in his sonne Christ by sending the Holie ghost the third person in the deitie hath not onelie promised but in good time wil performe and bestow vpon the whole church generallie and euerie sound particular member of the same yea if we wey it well we shall finde that it is the ruine and bane of the church it selfe both in the whole bodie of it and in the seuerall parts Our sauior himselfe in most plaine and expresse terms faith Iohn 16.7 I tel you the truth it is expedient for you that I go away for if I go not away the comforter will not come vnto you but if I depart I will send him vnto you Hee that knoweth anie thing of truth is well acquainted with this that generallie all the word but most especiallie the comfortable promises conteined in the same be as it were the life
saflie say and affirme that the virgin Marie was the mother of our Sauiour Christ as hee is God and man in one person the reason is because that euen from the verie moment of his blessed conception in the wombe of the virgine the Godhead and the manhood Romans 9.5 were inseperablie ioyned and knit togeather in that one person Iesus Christ who is God ouer all to be blessed for euer and euer But if herevpon a man would inferre therefore she is or may bee called the mother of God besides that hee shoulde speake against the groundes and principles of sounde faith which teacheth vs that as christ in respect of his manhood was without father so in respect of his godhead he was without mother he shold speak very proudly of flesh bloud and very basely of God as though that the creature were in time before the creator or God could not bee without the helpe of pore and weake women 4 To deale with the reseruation circumgestation or carieng it about and with many other odde toies of their own inuention and largely lay out the inconueniences therof would require some proper and fit discourse for that purpose but I wil reserue it til another time making hast now to handle that which shal be as the last so in my iudgement not the least profitable part of this treatie and that is how a man should drawe neere vnto such reuerent misteries to gods glory and his owne good and howe hee may best come to reape and receiue fruite and comforte by the same speciallie sith it pleaseth God to offer to him such excellent graces therby wherein I mind not to deal largely because as you see thorowe all this discourse I professe breuitie and shortnes and to deale fully perfectlie I can not both by reason of the excellencie of the thinges to bee handled and also by meane of the maime that wee find in our knowledg in this life in which we know in part 1. Corinth 13.9 and prophecie in part as the Apostle sayth And yet not to saye somewhat sith the Lord hath made me to feele somewhat were not onelie to deface the graces that God in the riches of his mercie hath bestowed vpon me poore and miserable wretch that I am but to defraude my good brethren and the people of God of some eyther profitable instruction or sweete comfort that the Lord hath beene pleased to acquaint mee withall wherein setting Gods glorie chieflie before mine eies and the good of his children I will trusting in the multitude of his mercies assaye to vtter that little that I my selfe in some measure feele in this matter The thinges that euerie man is principallie to deale in concerning this poynt may in my minde bee well reduced into three short heads or titles Frst because no manne is to doo a thyng without deepe consideration before hande of the matter hee taketh in hande wee are to see what hee is to perfourme before the communicatyng or receauing of this Sacrament and this I will call in one terme preparation Secondlie because in the action and execution of euery good and lawfull thing a man is to haue his mind wholy bent and set vpon the same we are to weigh what he is to do or thinke vpon in the time and at the verie instant of receiuing and this I will name meditation Thirdly because there is no good thing so wel done but the pleasure or profit in time afterward may therby redound to the doer yea because ther is nothing so wel done by men but that by reason of the imperfection of mans nature som thing must stil be added we are to looke what he is to do after the time of receiuing and this I will call action or practise Preparation which is the first respecteth either God or man Now that which concerneth God is comprehended vnder sound knowledge true faith vnfeigned repentance as that which concerneth man is comprised vnder sincere loue And I call them sound true vnfeigned and sincere yet not perfect because perfection properlie signifieng that vnto which nothing can be added can not be found in man during this natural life of his And this I speake partlie to stoppe the mouthes of such as dream of a perfection in this life to grosse an error to bee largelye confuted because Gods word is most plaine in that behalfe the manifold imperfections of those that would seeme most perfect do plentifullie improue the same and partly as in a comfortable sort to teach vs that our imperfections should not hinder vs from drawing nigh thereto so that we do not foster and feed our selues in them seeing that otherwise the sacrament should stand vs in no steed if we were not vnperfect because it is a holie helpe and singular succour ordeined by God him selfe against our naturall infirmitie and weakenes 1 By knowledge I vnderstand not anie humaine sciences or worldly faculties or a meane insight into the groundes of christian religion but an assured vnderstanding as of the most materiall pointes of our faith for example of the vnitie of the godhead of the Trinitie in the persons of the names nature person and offices of our sauiour c. so specially of this point of the Lordes supper it selfe for bee it farre from vs to knowe others and to bee ignorant in that whereof wee are to bee partakers we keeping our selues farre off and free from all erronious opinions either of Transubstantiation consubstantiation or any such like either besides or against the will of God reuealed in his word which as it must onely be the direction of all our actions so must it alwaies bee the rule of our religion alone And this sound knowledge of the groundes and principles of christian religion and that in such sort as god hath reuealed thē vnto vs in his word must of necesity go before al other things both because it is as a man would say the foundation to the house the roote to the tree and also because if wee know not the good will and pleasure of our GOD we can neuer either beleeue or doo the same for euen as in worldlie matters if men bee set about the thinges they haue no skill in they knowe not where to begin or howe to proceede or when to make an ende so in spirituall thinges they are much more blinde and backwarde for in outwarde thinges of this life men may somewhat bee holpen by the light of reason and the liuelines of their owne witte but in the matters of God the more they rely or leane vpon that the further off they are from atteining the trueth because the Apostle telleth vs that the naturall man perceiueth not the things of the spirit of God 1. Corinth 2.14 for they are foolishnes vnto him neither can he know them because they are spiritually discerned Roman 8.7 And in another place the wisdome of the flesh is enmitie against God for it is not