of the Lordes bodye And by and by foloweth So many hostes muste bee offered in the altare as wyll suffice for the people And yf any remayn they must not be kept vntill the mornyng but be spent and consumed of the clearkes with feare and tremblynge And they that consume the residue of the Lordes bodye may not by and by take other common meates least they shoulde mixte that holy portion with the meate which is dygested by the bealy and auoyded by the foundament Therfore if the Lordes portion bee eaten in the mornynge the ministers that consume it must faste vnto sixe of the clocke and if thei do take it at thre or four of the clocke the minister must fast vntyl the euenyng Thus much writeth Clement of this matter If the Epistle which they alledge were Clementes as in dede it is not But they haue fayned many thynges in other mennes names thereby to stablyshe their fayned purposes But whose so euer the Epistle was if it be throughly consydered it maketh muche more agaynst the Papâ—stes than for their pourpose For by the same Epistle appereth euidently thre speciall thyngs against the errours of the Papistes The fyrst is that the breade in the sacramente is called the Lordes body and the peeces of the broken bread be called the peeces and fragmentes of the Lordes body whyche can not bee vnderstande but fyguratiuely The seconde is that the bread oughte not to be reserued and hanged vp as the Papistes euery where doo vse The third is that the priests ought not to receyue the sacrament alone as the Papistes commonly do makyng a sale therof vnto the people but they ought to coÌ„municate with the people And here it is diligently to bee noted that we ought not vnreuerently and vnaduisedly to approche vnto the meate of the Lordes table as we doo to other common meates and drynkes but with great feare and dreade least we shulde come to that holy table vnworthely wherein is not onely represented but also spirytually geuen vnto vs very CHRISTE hym selfe And therfore we ought to come to that boord of the Lorde with all reuerence faythe loue and charitee feare and dread accordyng to the same Here I passeouer Ignatius and Ireneus whiche make nothyng for the Papistes opinions but stand in the commendacion of the holy Communion and in exhortacion of all men to the often and godly receiuyng therrof And yet neither they nor no manne els can extolle and coÌ„mende the same sufficiently accordyng to the dignitee therof if it bee godly vsed as it ought to be Dionysius also whom they allege to praise extoll this sacrament as in dede it is most worthy beyng a sacrament of moste high dignitee and perfection representyng vnto vs our moste perfect spiritual coniunction vnto Christ oure continual norishyng feadyng comforte spiritual life in him yet he neuer sayd that the fleshe and bloud of Christ was in the bread and wyne really corporally sensibly and naturally as the Papistes wold beare vs in hand but he calleth euer the bread and wyne signes pledges and tokens declaryng vnto the faythfull receiuers of the same that they receiue Christ spiritually and that they spiritually eate his flesh drynke his bloud And although the bread and wyne bee the figures signes and tokens of Christes fleshe and bloud as sainct Dionyse calleth them bothe before the consecracion and after yet the Greke annotations vpon the same Dionyse do say that the very thynges them selfes be aboue in heauen And as the same Dionyse maketh nothing for the Papistes opinions in this point of Christes reall and corporall presence so in diuers other things he maketh quite and clean against them and that specially in thre pointes In transubstantiation in reseruacion of the sacrament and in the receauinge of the same by the priest alone Furthermore they do alleage Tertulian that hee constantly affirmeth that in the sacramente of the altare we do eate the body and drinke the blud of our sauiour Christ. To whoÌ„ we graunte that our flesh eateth and drinketh the bread and wyne whiche be called the bodye and bloude of Christ bicause as Tertulian saith they do represent his body and bloude although they bee not really the same in very deed And we graunt also that oure soules by faith do eate his verye body and drinke his bludde but that is spiritually suckinge out of the same euerlastinge lyfe But we deny that vnto this spirituall feedinge is required any reall and corporall presence And therefore this Tertulian speaketh nothinge against the truthe of our catholicke doctrine but he speaketh many thinges most plainly for vs and against the Papistes and specially in thre pointes Firste in that he saithe that Christe called breade his body The second that Christ called it so bycause it representeth his bodye The thirde in that he saithe that by these wordes of Christe This is my bodye is mente This is a figure of my body Moreouer they allege for theym Origen because they would seeme to haue many aunciente authors fauourers of their erronious doctrine whiche Origen is moste clearely against them For although hee do saye as they allege that those things which before were signified by obscure figures be nowe truely in dede and in theyr very nature and kinde accomplished and fulfilled And for the declaration therof he bringeth forth thre examples One of the stone that floweth water an other of the sea and cloude and the thirde of Manna whiche in the olde testamente did signifie Christ to come who is now come in deed and is manifested and exhibited vnto vs as it were face to face and sensibly in his worde in the sacrament of regeneracion and in the sacramentes of breade and wine Yet Origene mente not that Christ is corporally either in his worde or in the water of baptime or in the breade and wine nor that we carnally and corporally be regenerated and borne againe or eate Christes flesh blood For our regeneracion in Christ is spiritual and our eating and drinking is a spirituall feeding which kinde of regeneration and feeding requireth no real and corporall presence of Christ but onlye his presence in spirite grace and effectuall operacion And that Origen thus mente that Christes fleshe is a spirituall meate and his bludde a spirituall drinke and that the eating and drynkinge of his fleshe and bloude maye not bee vnderstande literallye but spirytually it is manifested by Origenes owne woordes in his seuenth homylye vppon the booke called Leuiticus where hee sheweth that those wordes must bee vnderstande figuratiuely and who so euer vnderstandeth theim otherwise they bee deceaued and take harme by their owne grosse vnderstandinge And likewise ment Cypriane in those places whiche the aduersaries of the truthe alleadge of hym concernynge the true eatinge of Christes very fleshe and drinkinge of his bludde For Cyprian spake of no grosse and carnal eatinge with the mouth but of an inward
into the visible sacrament Whiche wordes of Cyprian do manyfestly shewe that the sacrament doth styll remayne with the diuinitee and that sacramentally the diuinitee is poured into the bread and wyne the same bread wyne styll remainyng like as thesame diuinitee by vnitee of person was in the humanitee of Christ the same humanitee stil remainyng with y ◠diuinite And yet the bread is chaunged not in shape nor substance but in nature as Cyprian truely sayth not meanyng that the naturall substance of bread is cleane gone but that by Gods word there is added therto another higher propertie nature and condition farre passyng the nature and condicion of common bread that is to saye that the bread doth shewe vnto vs as the same Cyprian sayth that wee bee partakers of the spirite of God and moste purely ioyned vnto Christ and spiritually feade with his fleshe and bloud so that nowe the sayd misticall bread is both a corporall foode for the body and a spiritual foode for the soule And likewise is the nature of the water chaūged in baptisme forasmuche as besyde his common nature whiche is to washe make cleane the body it declareth vnto vs that our soules he also washed made cleane by the holy ghost And thus is answered the chiefe authoritee of the doctours whiche the Papistes take for the principal defence of their error But for further declaracion of sainct Cyprians mynde herein reade the place of him before recited fol. 24. Another authoritee they haue of sainct Ihon Chrysostome whiche thei boast also to be inuincible Chrysostome say they writeth thus in a certaine homely De Eucharistia Doest thou see bread Doest thou see wyne Do they auoyde beneth as other meates do God forbyd thynke not so For as waxe if it be put into the fyre it is made lyke the fyer no substance remayneth nothyng is lefte so here also thynke thou that the mysteries be consumed by the substance of the body At these wordes of Chrysostome the Papistes do triumph as though they had won the fielde Lo say they doeth not Chrysostomus the great clarke say most plainly that we se neither bread nor wyne but that as waxe in the fyer they be consumed to nothyng so that no substance remayneth But if they had rehersed no more but the very next sentence that foloweth in Chrysostome which craftily and maliciously thei leaue out the meanyng of sainct Iohn Chrysostome would easily haue appeared and yet wyll make them blushe if they bee not vtterly past shame For after the foresayd woordes of Chrysostome immediatly folowe these wordes Wherfore sayth he whan ye comme to these mysteries do not thynke that you receiue by a man the body of God but that with tongues you receiue fyer by the Angels Seraphyn And straight after it foloweth thus Thynke that the bloud of saluacion floweth out of the pure and godly syde of Christ and so cōmyng to it receiue it with pure lippes Wherfore brother I pray you beseche you let vs not be from the churche nor let vs not be occupyed there with vaine cōmunication but let vs stand fearefull tremblyng castyng doune our eyes liftyng vp our myndes mournyng priuely with out speache and reioysyng in our heartes These wordes of Chrysostome do folowe immediatly after the other woordes whiche the Papistes before rehersed Therfore if the Papistes wil gather of the wordes by them recited that there is neither bread nor wyne in the sacrament I may aswell gather of the woordes that folowe that there is neither priest nor Christes body For as in the former sentence Chrysostome sayth that we may not thinke that we see bread wyne so in the second sentēce he sayth that we may not thynke that wee receyue the body of Christ of the priestes handes Wherfore if vpon the second sentence as the Papistes them selues wyll say it can not be truely gathered that in the holy Communion there is not the body of Christ ministered by the priest then must they confesse also that it can not bee well and truely gathered vpon the fyrst sentence that there is no bread nor wyne But there be al these thynges together in the holy Communion Christe himselfe spiritually eaten and drunken and norishyng the right beleuers the bread wyne as a sacrament declaryng the same and the priest as a minister therof Wherfore S. Ihon Chrysostome ment not absolutely to denye that there is bread wyne or to denye vtterly the priest and the body of Christ to be there but he vseth a speache whiche is no pure Negatiue but a Negatiue by comparison Whiche fashion of speeche is cōmonly vsed not onely in the scripture and among all good authors but also in all maner of languages For when two thynges bee compared together in the extollyng of the more excellēt or abasyng of the more vyle is many tymes vsed a Negatiue by comparishon whiche neuerthelesse is no pure Negatiue but onely in the respecte of the more excellent or the more base As by example When the people reiectyng the prophete Samuel desyred to haue a kyng almightie God sayd to Samuel They haue not reiected thee but me Not meanyng by this negatiue absolutely that they had not reiected Samuel in whose place they desired to haue a kyng but by that one negatiue by comparison he vnderstode two affirmatiues that is to saye that they had reiected Samuell and not hym alone but also y t they had chiefely reiected God And whan the prophet Dauid said in the person of Christe I am a worme and not a man by this negatiue he denyed not vtterlye that Christe was a man but the more vehementlye to expresse the great humyliation of Christe he said that he was not abased onely to the nature of man but was broughte so lowe that he might rather be called a worme than a man This maner of speeche was familiar and vsuall to S. Paule as whan he sayde It is not I that doe it but it is the synne that dwelleth in me And in an other place he saithe Christe sent me not to baptise but to preache the gospel And agayn he saith My speche and preachyng was not in wordes of mans persuasion but in manyfest declaration of the spirite and power And he saith also Neyther he that grafteth nor he that watereth is any thynge but God that gyueth the increase And he saieth moreouer It is not I that lyue but Christ lyueth within me And God forbydde that I shoulde reioyce in any thyng but in the Crosse of our Lord Iesu Christe And further We doo not wrastle againste fleshe and bloudde but agaynst the spirites of darkenesse In all these sentences and many other lyke although they bee negatiues neuerthelesse S. Paule mente not clerely to denye that he dyd that euyl wherof he spake or vtterly to say that he was not sent to baptise who in dede did baptise at
expounding these wordeÌ„s thei vary amoÌ„g them selfes which is a tokeÌ„ that thei be vncertain of their owne doctrine For some of them saye that by this pronoune demonstratiue this Christ vnderstode not the bread nor wyne but his body and bloud And other som say that by the pronoune this he ment nether the bread nor wyne nor his body nor bloud but that he ment a particular thyng vncertayne whiche they cal Indiuiduum vagum or Indiuiduum in genere I trow some Mathematicall quiditee they can not tell what But let all these Papistes together shew any one authoritee either of scripture or of auncient author either Greke or Latin that saith as thei say that Christ called not breade and wyne his body and bloud but Indiuiduum vagum and for my part I shall geue theim place and confesse that they say trewe And if they can shewe nothynge for theym of antiquitee but onely their owne bare wordes than it is reason that thei geue place to the truthe confirmed by so many authoritees both of scripture and of auncient writers which is that Christ called very material bread his body and very wyne made of grapes his bloud Nowe this beyng fully proued it must nedes folow consequently that this maner of speking is a figuratiue speeche For in playne and proper speche it is not true to saie that breadde is Christes body or wyne his bloud For Christes body hath a soule life sence reason but bread hath neither soule nor life sense nor reason Likewise in playne speche it is not true that we eate Christes body and drynke his bloude For eatynge and drynkynge in their proper and vsuall signification is with the tong teeth and lyppes to swalow diuide and chawe in peeces whiche thyng to do to the fleshe and bloudde of Christ is horrible to be heard of any christian So that these speches To eate Christes body and drynk his bloud be speches not taken in the proper signification of euery worde but by translation of these wordes eatyng and drinkyng from the signification of a corporal thyng to signifie a spiritual thyng and by callyng a thyng that signifieth by the name of the thyng which is signified therby Which is no rare nor straÌ„ge thyng but an vsual maner and phrase in coÌ„mon speeche And yet least this fault shulde be imputed vnto vs that we doo fayne thynges of our owne heades without authoritee as the Papistes bee accustomed to do here shalbe cited sufficient authoritee as well of scripture as of olde auncient authors to approue the same Fyrst when our sauiour Christ in the sixte of Iohn sayd that he was the bread of life the wheÌ„che whosoeuer did eate should not dye but liue for euer that the bread whiche he would geue vs was his fleshe and therefore whosoeuer should eate his fleshe and drynke his bloud should haue euerlastyng lyfe and they that should not eate his fleshe and drynke his bloud should not haue euerlastyng life When Christ had spoken these woordes with many mo of the eatyng of his fleshe and drinkyng of his bloud both the Iewes mani also of his disciples wer offended with his wordes and sayd This is an hard saiyng For howe can he geue vs his fleshe to be eaten Christ perceiuing their murmuring heartes because they knewe none other eatyng of his fleshe but by chawyng and swalowyng to declare that they should not eate his body after that sorte nor that he ment of any suche carnall eatyng he sayd thus vnto theim What if you see the sonne of man ascende vp where he was before It is the spirite that geueth life the fleshe auayleth nothyng The wordes whiche I spake vnto you be spirit and life These wordes our sauior Christ spake to lift vp their myndes froÌ„ yearth to heauen froÌ„ carnal to spiritual eatyng that thei should not phaÌ„tasy that they should with their trethe eate him preseÌ„tly here in yearth for his flesh so eateÌ„ sayth he should nothyng profite them And yet â—o thei should not eate him for he would take his body away from them and ascend with it into heuen And there by fayth not with teeth they should spiritually eate him sittyng at the right hand of his father And therfore sayth he The wordes whiche I do speake be spirite and life that is to say are not to be vnderstand that we shall eate Christ with our teethe grossely and carnally but that we shall spiritually gostly with our fayth eate him beyng carnally absent from vs in heauen And in suche wyse as Abraham and other holy fathers did eate him many yeres before he was incarnated and borne As S. Paule sayth that they did eate the same spiritual meate that wee do and dranke the same spirituall drynke that is to saye Christe For they spiritually by their fayth were fed and norished with Christes body and bloud and had eternal life by him before he was borne as we haue nowe that come after his ascencion Thus haue you hearde the declaracion of Christe him selfe and of sainct Paule that the eatyng and drinkyng of Christes fleshe bloud is not taken in the common signification with mouthe and teethe to eate and chawe a thyng beyng present but by a liuely fayth in heart and mynde to chawe and degest a thyng beyng absent either ascended hence into heauen or els not yet borne vpon yearth And Origene declaryng the sayd eatyng of Christes flesh and drinkyng of his bloud not to be vnderstand as the wordes do sound but figuratiuely wryteth thus vpon these woordes of Christ Except you eate my fleshe and drinke my bludde you shall not haue lyfe in you Considre saith Origen that these thinges written in gods bokes are figures and therefore examine and vnderstande them as spirituall and not as carnall men For if you vnderstand them as carnall menne they hurte you and feede you not For euen in the gospels is there founde letter that kylleth And not only in the olde testamente but also in the newe is there found lettre that slayeth him that doth not spiritually vnderstande that whiche is spoken For if thou folowe the lettre or woordes of this that Christe saide Excepte you eate my fleshe and drinke my bludde this lettre kylleth Who canne more plainlye expresse in any wordes that the eatinge and drinkinge of Christes fleshe and blood are not to be taken in common significacion as the wordes pretend and sound than Origene doth in this place And S. Iohn Chrysostom affirmeth the same saying that if any man vnderstand the woordes of Christ carnally he shall surely profite nothyng therby For what meane these woordes The fleshe auaileth nothinge He ment not of his fleshe god forbid but he ment of them that fleshely and carnally vnderstode those thynges that Christe spake But what is carnall vnderstanding To vnderstand the woordes simply as they be spoken and nothinge els For we ought not so to vnderstande the
Adam is spirituall therefore our generation by hym muste be spirituall our feedyng muste bee lykewise spirituall And our spirituall generation by hym is playnly set forth in baptisme and our spirituall meate and foode is set foorth in the holy Cōmunion supper of the Lorde And because our sightes bee so feble that we cannot see the spiritual water wherwith we be washed in baptisme nor the spiritual meat wherwith we be fedde at the Lordes table therfore to healpe oure infirmities and to make vs the better to see the same with a pure fayth our sauiour Christ hath set furth the same as it were before our eyes by sensible signes and tokens whiche we be daily vsed and accustomed vnto And because the common custome of men is to washe in water therfore our spiritual regeneration in Christe or spirituall washyng in his blud is declared vnto vs in baptisme by water Lykewise oure spiritual norishement feadyng in Christ is sette before oure eyes by bread and wyne because they be meates and drynkes whiche chiefly and vsually we be fedde withal that as they feade the body so doth Christe with his fleshe and bloud spiritually feade the soule And therefore the bread and wyne bee called examples of Christes fleshe and bloud and also they be called his very fleshe and blode to signifie vnto vs that as they feade vs carnally so do they admonishe vs that Christe with his fleshe and bloud doth feade vs spiritually and moste truely vnto euerlastyng life And as almyghty God by his moste myghty worde and his hollye spirite and infinite power brought forth all creatures in the begynnyng and euer sithens hath preserued theym euen so by the same worde and power he woorketh in vs from time to tyme this meruailous spiritual generation wonderfull spirituall norishment feedyng which is wrought onely by God and is comprehended and receiued of vs by fayth And as bread and drynke by natural norishement be chaunged into a mannes body and yet the body is not chaunged but the same that it was before so although the bread and wyne be sacramentally chaunged into Christes body yet his body is the same and in the same place that it was before that is to say in heauen without any alteracion of the same And the bread and wyne bee not so chaunged into the fleshe and bloud of Christ that they bee made one nature but they remayne styll distinct in nature so that the bread in it selfe is not his fleshe the wyne his bloud but vnto them that worthely eate and drinke the bread and wyne to them the bread and wyne be his flesh and bloud that is to say by thynges naturall and whiche they be accustomed vnto they bee exalted vnto thynges aboue nature For y ◠sacramental bread and wyne be not base and naked figures but so pithy and effectuous that whosoeuer worthely eateth them eateth spiritually Christes fleshe and bloud and hath by them euerlastyng life Wherfore whosoeuer cōmeth to the Lordes table must come with all humilitee feare reuerence and puritie of life as to receiue not onely bread and wyne but also our sauior Christ both God and man with al his benefites to the relief and sustētacion both of their bodies and soules This is briefly the summe and true meanyng of Damascene concernyng this matter Wherfore they that gather of hym either the natural presence of Christes body in the sacramētes of bread and wyne or the adoration of the outward and visible sacrament or that after the cōsecracion there remayneth no bread nor wyne nor other substaunce but onely the substaunce of the body and bloude of Christe eyther they vnderstand not Damascen or els of wilful frowardnes they wyll not vnderstande hym whyche rather seemeth to bee true by suche collections as they haue vniustly gathered noted out of him For although he say that Christe is the spirituall meate yet as in baptisme the holy ghost is not in the water but in hym that is vnfaynedly baptised so Damascene ment not y t Christ is in the bread but in hym y t worthily eateth the bred And though he say that the bread is Christes body and the wyne his bloud yet he mente not that the bread considered in it selfe or the wyne in it selfe beyng not receyued is his fleshe and bloud but to suche as by vnfayned faith woorthely receyue the breade and wyne to suche the breade and wyne are called by Damascene the body and bloude of Christe bycause that suche persons through the workyng of the holy gost be so knytte and vnited spirituallye to Christes fleshe and bloude and to his diuinitee also that they bee fedde with them vnto euerlastyng life Furthermore Damascene sayeth not that the sacrament should be worshipped and adored as the Papistes terme it whiche is playne ydolatrye but we must worship Christ God and man And yet we may not worship him in bread and wyne but sittyng in heauen with his father and beyng spiritually within our selues Nor he sayeth not that there remayneth no bread nor wyne nor none other substaunce but onely the substaunce of the body and bloud of Christe but he sayeth playnely that as a burnyng coale is not wodde onely but fyre wodde ioyned together so the bread of the Cōmunion is not bread onely but bread ioyned to the diuinitee But those that say that there is none other substance but the substāce of the body and bloud of Christe doo not onely denye that there is bread and wyne but by force they must denye also that there is either Christes diuinitee or his soule For if the fleshe and bloud the soule and diuinitee of Christe bee foure substances and in the sacrament be but two of them that is to say his fleshe and bloud than where be his soule and diuinitee And thus these men diuide Iesus separatyng his diuinitee from his humanitee Of whom sainct Ihon sayeth Whosoeuer diuideth Iesus is not of God but he is Antichrist And moreouer these men do so separate Christes body from his membres in the sacrament that they leaue hym no mans body at all For as Damascene saith that the distinction of membres pertayne so muche to the nature of a mannes body that where there is no suche distinction there is no perfecte mans body But by these Papistes doctrine there is no suche distinction of membres in the sacramente for eyther there is no head fete handes armes legges mouthe eyes and nose at all or elles all is heade all feete all handes all armes all legges all mouthe all eyes and all nose And so they make of Christes body no mannes bodye at all Thus beynge confuted the Papistes errours as well concernyng Transubstantiation as the reall corporall and natural presence of Christ in the sacrament whiche were two principall pointes purposed in the begynnyng of this woorke Nowe it is tyme som thyng to speke of the third errour of the Papistes whyche is concernynge the