I heard staying then present how that the Devil did believe the Sacrament of God was able to make of Stones Bread And we English people we do confess that Christ was the very Son of God and yet will not believe that of Bread he made his very Body Flesh and Blood wherefore we are worse than the Devil since that our Saviour by express words did more plainly affirm the same when at his last Supper he took Bread and said unto his Disciples Take ye eat this is my Body which shall be given for you And shortly after the said Mr. Doctor Ridley notwithstanding this most plain and open Speech at Paul's Cross did deny the same Whether Fecknam hath truly represented the words of Ridley is uncertain But from the last words of this passage it is manifest that some even in that time taking occasion from this Sermon had charged Bishop Ridley with asserting a Material Presence of Christ's Body in the Sacrament and that he constantly denied himself to have meant or intended any such presence In this therefore and such like expressions he intended only as himself assures us to oppose those who so lightly esteemed the Sacrament Ibid. vol. 3. p. 35. as to make of it but a figure For that but maketh it a bare sign without any more profit But to clear his intention in this matter from all remaining suspicion of any kind of Material Presence I will annex a larger explication of it in his own words in his last examination before the Queens Commissioners September 30. 1555. In like sort as touching the Sermon which I made at Pauls Cross you shall understand that there were at Pauls and divers other places fixed railing Bills against the Sacrament terming it Jack of the Box the Sacrament of the Halter Round Robbin with suchlike unseemly terms For which causes I to rebuke the unreverend behaviour of certain evil disposed persons Preached as reverendly of that Matter as I might declaring what estimation and reverence ought to be given to it what danger ensued the mis-handling thereof affirming in that Sacrament to be truly and verily the Body and Blood of Christ effectually by Grace and Spirit Which words the unlearned understanding not supposed that I had meant of the gross and carnal being which the Romish Decrees set forth That a Body having life and motion should be indeed under the shapes of Bread and Wine This Treatise was written by Bishop Ridley during his imprisonment a little before his death and several Copies of it dispersed abroad of which some being carried beyond Sea Dr. Grindall and other English Exiles conceived a great desire of causing it to be translated into Latin Ibid. p. 374. and Printing it The Bishop hearing of this desired that by all means they would lay aside their resolution till they should see how God would dispose of him Accordingly it was omitted till his death Immediately after his Martyrdom it was Translated into elegant Latin but in a Paraphrastical way and Printed at Geneva 1556. in 12s The English Copy was Printed at London 1586. 12s which we have now caused to be faithfully Reprinted adding to it out of Mr. Fox's Martyrology divers Speeches Disputations and Determinations upon the same subject which might farther illustrate and confirm his Opinion Lastly Because the late Bishop of Oxford in his last Treatise disputing of the ancient Opinion of the Reformed Church of England concerning the Eucharist and as his Cause required it maintaining the same assertion with our Adversaries That some material sort of Presence was then believed doth mightily urge the Authority of the Learned Dr. Poynet Bishop of Winchester at that time proposed in his Diallection and because that Book is not in English I have selected and annexed several passages out of it which may demonstrate what was indeed his notion of the Real Presence That he denied all manner of Material Presence and perfectly agreeth with Ridley in explaining the nature of it And consequently that he is fouly either Misrepresented or Mistaken by the Bishop of Oxford A BREEF DECLARATION OF THE Lordes Supper WRITTEN By the singuler Learned Man and moste constant Martyr of Christe NICHOLAS RIDLEY Bishop of LONDON Prisoner in Oxford a little before he suffered Death for the true testimonye of JESUS CHRISTE ROM VIII For thy sake are we killed all day long and are counted as sheep apoynted to be slain Neuerthelesse in all these thinges we ouercome through him that loue vs. Printed at LONDON 1586. And Reprinted for Ric. Chiswell 1688. TO THE READER VNderstand good Reader that this great Clark and blessed Martyr Bishop Nicholas Ridley sought not by settinge foorth any notable peece of learned woork the vaine glory of the World nor temporall freendship of men for his present aduancement much lesse he hunted heerby for Bishopricks and Benefices as al his aduersaries the enemies of Christs Trueth and Ordinance commonly doo but hauing consideration of the great charge of Soules committed vnto him and of the account thereof which the Iustice of God would require at his handes intending therwithal to be found blamles in the great daye of the Lord seeing he was put a parte to defende the Gospell He not only forsook Landes Goodes World Freends and himselfe with all and testified the Trueth specified in this Book by his learned mouth in the open presence of the World but also to leaue a sure Monument and Loue Token vnto his Flocke hee hath registred it by his owne Pen in this forme ensuinge and sealed it vp with his Blood. Forasmuch then as he hath proued himselfe no vain disputer no wethercocke nor hipocrite seeing hee hath willinglye giuen his life for the Trueth and in as much also as his loue and moste constant christen Conscience speaketh vnto thee gentle Reader I beseech thee for Christs sake and thine owne lend him thine indifferent hart and pacient hearing A BREEFE DECLARATION OF THE Lordes Supper MANY things confounde a weake memory A few places wel weighed and perceiued lighten the vnderstanding Trueth is there to be searched where it is certain to be had though God dooth speake the trueth by man yet in mans woord which God hath not reuealed to be his a man may doubt without mistrust in God. Christe is the trueth of God reuealed vnto man from Heauen by God him self and therefore in his woord the trueth is to be founde which is to be embraced of al that be his Christ biddeth vs aske and we shall haue search and we shall finde knocke and it shall be opened unto vs. Therefore our Heauenly The blessed Martirs praier Father the Author and fountain of al trueth the bottomles Sea of al vnderstanding send down we beseech thée thy holy spirit into our harts and lighten our vnderstanding with the beames of thy heauenly grace We ask thée this O mercifull Father not in respect of our deserts but for thy déere Sonne our Sauiour Iesus Christs sake Thou knowest
of the deuine nature and yet neuerthelesse the substance or nature of the bread and wine dooth not departe nor goe away Note these woords I beséeche you and consider whether any thing can be more plainely spoken then these woordes be against the errour of Transubstantiatione which is the ground and bitter root wherupon springe all the horrible errours before rehearsed Wherfore seing that the falshood dooth appeare so manifestlye and by so many waies so plainly so cléerly and so fullye that no man needeth to be deceiued but he that will not sée or will not vnderstande let vs al that doo loue the trueth embrace it and forsake the falshood For he that loueth the trueth is of God and the lack of the loue therof is the cause why God suffereth men to fall into errours and to perish therin yea and as S. Paule saieth why he sendeth vnto them illusions that they beleue lyes vnto their own condemnation because saithe he they loued not the trueth This trueth no doubte is Gods woord For Christe him self saith vnto his father Thy woord is trueth The loue and Ioh. 17. light wherof almighty God our heauenly father giue vs and lighten it in our harts by his holy spirit through Iesus Christe out Lorde Amen Vincit Veritas Mr. FOX 2 d Volume of Acts and Monuments Edit London 1684. Lib. 9. pag. 106. The Disputation held at Cambridge before the Kings Commissioners June 20. 1549. wherein Bishop Ridley moderated GLin Well yet once again to you thus The very true Body P. 106. of Christ is to be honoured but the same very true Body is in the Sacrament Ergo the Body of Christ in the Sacrament is to be honoured Rochest Wellbeloved Friends and Brethren in our Saviour Christ you must understand that this Disputation with other that shall be after this are appointed to search for the plain truth of the Holy Scriptures in these matters of Religion which of a long Season have been hidden from us by the false Glosses of the Church of Rome and now in our days must be revealed to us Englishmen through the great Mercy of God principally and secondarily through the most gentle Clemency of our natural Sovereign Lord the Kings Majesty whom the living Lord long preserve to reign over us in Health Wealth and Godliness to the maintenance of Gods holy Word and to the extirpation of all blind Glosses of Men that go about to subvert the Truth Because therefore that I am one that doth love the Truth and have professed the same amongst you therefore I say because of conferring my mind with yours I will here gladly declare what I think in this point now in Controversy Not because this worshipful Doctor hath any need of my help in dissolving of Arguments proposed against him for as me seemeth he hath answered hitherto very well and Clerkly according to the Truth of Gods Word But now to the purpose I do grant unto you Mr. Opponent that the old Ancient Fathers do record and witness a certain Honour and Adoration to be due unto Christs Body but they speak not of it in the Sacrament but of it in Heaven at the right hand of the Father as holy Chrysostome saith Honour thou it and then eat it but that Honour may not be given to the outward sign but to the Body of Christ it self in Heaven For that Body is there only in a sign virtually by Grace in the exhibition of it in Spirit Effect and Faith to the worthy receiver of it For we receive virtually only Christs Body in the Sacrament Glin. How then if it please your good Lordship doth Baptism differ from this Sacrament For in that we receive Christ also by Grace and virtually Rochest Christ is present after another sort in Baptism than in this Sacrament for in that he purgeth and washeth the Infant from all kind of Sin but here he doth feed spiritually the receiver in Faith with all the merits of his blessed Death and Passion and yet he is in Heaven still really and substantially As for Example The Kings Majesty our Lord and Master is but in one place wheresoever that this Royal Person is abiding for the time and yet his mighty Power and Authority is every where in his Realms and Dominions So Christs real Person is only in Heaven substantially placed but his might is in all things created effectually For Christs Flesh may be understood for the Power or inward Might of his Flesh Glin. If it please your Fatherhood St. Ambrose and St. Augustine do say That before the Consecration it is but very Bread and after the Consecration it is called the very Body of Christ Madew Indeed it is the very Body of Christ Sacramentally after the Consecration whereas before it is nothing but common Bread and yet after that it is the Lords Bread and thus must St. Ambrose and St. Augustine be understood Glin. The Bread after Consecration doth feed the Soul Ergo The substance of common Bread doth not remain The Argument is good for St. Ambrose De Sacramentis saith thus After the Consecration there is not the thing that Nature did form but that which the blessing doth consecrate And if the Benediction of the Prophet Elias did turn the nature of Water how much more then doth the Benediction of Christ here both God and Man Madew That Book of St. Ambrose is suspected to be none of his Works Rochest So all the Fathers say Glin. I do marvel at that for St. Augustin in his Book of Retractations maketh plain that that was his own very Work. Rochest He speaketh indeed of such a Book so intituled to St. Ambrose but yet we do lack the same Book indeed Glin. Well let it then pass to other mens Judgments What then say you to holy St. Cyprian 1200 years past Who saith That the Bread which our Lord gave to his Disciples was not changed in form or quality but in very nature and by the Almighty word was made Flesh Madew I do answer thus That this word Flesh may be taken two ways either for the substance it self or else for a natural property of a fleshly thing So that Cyprian there did mean of a natural Property and not of fleshly Substance And contrariwise in the Rod of Aaron where both the Substance and also the Property was changed Glin. Holy St. Ambrose saith The Body there made by the mighty Power of Gods word is the Body of the Virgin Mary Rochest That is to say That by the Word of God the thing hath a Being that it had not before and we do consecrate the Body that we may receive the Grace and Power of the Body of Christ in Heaven by this Sacramental Body Glin. By your Patience my Lord if it be a Body of the Virgin as St. Ambrose saith which we do consecrate as Ministers by Gods holy Word then must it needs be more than a Sacramental or Spiritual Body yea a very Body of
Christ indeed yea the same that is still in Heaven without all moving from place to place unspeakably and far passing our natural Reason which is in this Mystery so captivate that it cannot conceive how it is there without a lively Faith to Gods word But let this pass You do grant that this Bread doth quicken or give Life which if it do then it is not a natural Bread but a super-substantial Bread. Rochest So doth the effectual and lively Word of God which for that it nourisheth the Soul it doth give Life for the Divine Essence infuseth it self unspeakably into the faithful Receiver of the Sacrament Glin. How then say you to holy Damascene a Greek Author who as one Tritenius saith flourished one thousand years past he saith thus The Body that is of the holy Virgin Mary is joyned to the Divinity after the Consecration in verity and indeed not so as the Body once assumpted into Heaven and sitting on the Fathers right Hand doth remove from thence and cometh down at the Consecration time but that the same Bread and Wine are substantially transumpted into the very Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ If saith he thou dost not know the manner how it is brought to pass let it be enough to thee to believe that it is done by the Operation of the Holy Ghost and we do know no more but that the living Word of God is working and Almighty but the very manner how is inscrutable to us and no great marvel saith he for we cannot well express how the material Bread Wine or Water are transumpted naturally into the same Body and Blood of the Receiver and be become another Body than they were before So saith this great Ancient Clerk also this Shew-bread with Wine and Water are changed by the coming of the Holy Ghost into Christs Body and Blood and they be not two Bodies there but very one of Christ and the same Rochest First I deny Master Doctor that Damascene was one thousand years past Secondarily I say That he is not to be holden as an Ancient Father for that he maintaineth in his Works evil and damnable Doctrine as the worshipping of Images and such like Thirdly I say That indeed God by his holy Spirit is the worker of that which is done in the Sacrament Also I grant that there is a Mutation of the common Bread and Wine spiritually into the Lords Bread and Wine by the sanctifying of them in the Lords Word But I deny that there is any Mutation of the Substances for there is no other change there indeed than there is in us which when we do receive the Sacrament worthily then are we changed into Christs Body Bones and Blood not in nature but spiritually and by Grace much like as Isaiah saw the burning Coal even so we see not there the very simple Bread as it was before the Consecration for an Union cannot be but of two very things Wherefore if we be joyned to Christ receiving the Sacrament then there is no Adnihilation of Bread which is when it is reduced to nothing as it is in your feigned Transubstantiation Glin. So I perceive you would have me to grant that the Sacrament is but a Figure which Theophylactus doth deny Rochest You say Truth he denieth it indeed to be a Figure but he meaneth that it is not only a Figure Glin. Whereas St. Paul saith That we being many are one Bread he speaketh not nor meaneth one material Bread as you do here Ergo he speaketh of heavenly Bread. And holy Chrysostome upon Matthew saith That the Paschal Lamb was a Figure but the Mystery is the verity For the Disciples would not have been offended to have drunk a figure of Christ's Blood being well accustomed to figures For Christ did not institute a figure for a figure but the clear verity instead of the figure as St. John saith Grace and Verity was given by Christ Dost thou see Bread saith Chrysostome doth it avoid or pass as other meats do which we receive God forbid Ergo c. Madew That ancient Clerk Origen upon the 15th of St. Matth. saith thus As touching that which is material in the Sacrament it descendeth and issueth out as other nutriments do but as concerning that which is celestial it doth not so Glin. Chrysost Homily 83. upon Matthew saith That we cannot be deceived of Christ's Word but our natural Senses may be deceived in this point very soon and easily his said words cannot be false but our senses be many times beguiled of their judgments Because therefore that Christ said This is my body let us not at any hand doubt saith he but let us believe it and well perceive it with the eyes of our understanding And within a little after in that place he saith thus It was not enough that he was become man and afterwards was scourged for us but also he did reduce and bring us to be as one body with him not through Faith only but in very deed also he maketh us his Body And after that he saith that these works are not of mans power But the same things that he wrought in his last Supper he now worketh also by his Precept to his right Ministers and we do occupy the place of the same Ministers but he it is that doth sanctify and transumpt the creatures he performeth still the same Rochest Mr. Doctor you must understand that in that place St. Chrysostome sheweth us that Christ delivered to us no sensible thing at his last Supper Glin. Honourable Sir by your patience I grant that he gave to his Disciples no sensible thing in substance but a thing insensible his own precious Body and Blood under the only kinds of Creatures And truly as it seemeth Theophylactus best knew the meaning of Chrysostome because all Authors accept him as a faithful Interpreter of him And he hath these same plain words Transelemented and Transformed Also Theophylactus Alexandrinus super Marcum Cyrillus and St. Augustine saith That before the consecration it is bread but afterwards it is Christs very Body In like manner St. Augustine upon the 33d Psalm saith That in the last Supper Christ did bear himself in his own hands Now every man may bear the figure of his body in his own hands but St. Augustin saith it there for a Miracle Irenaeus in his fifth Book is of the same mind And St. Austin saith I do remember my words c. The Law and Figures were by Moses but the verity and Body came by Christ Rochest Well say what you list it is but a figurative speech like to this If you will receive and understand he is Elias for a property but indeed he was not Elias but John the Baptist And so in this place Christ calleth it his Body when it was very Bread. But better than the common Bread because it was sanctified by the Word of Christ Langdale I will prove it by another means Christ did
trueth of Godes Woorde And yet I will do it vnder this protestation call me Protestant who lusteth I passe not therof My protestation shall be thus that my minde is and euer shal be God willinge to set foorth sincerelye the true sence and meaninge to the beste of my vnderstanding of Godes most holy woorde and not to decline from the same either for feare of worldly danger or els for hope of gaine I doo proteste also due obedience submission of my iudgemente in this my writing and in all other mine affairs vnto those of Christs Church which be truly learned in Gods holy Woord gathered in Christs Name and guided by his Spirit After this protestation I doo plainely affirme and say that the second Answere to the cheef question question and principall poynt I am perswaded to be the very true meaning and sence of Gods holy Woord that is that the naturall substance of bread and wine is the true materiall substance of the holy Sacrament of the blessed body and blood of our Sauiour Christe and the places of Scripture wherupon this my faith is grounded be these both concerning the Sacrament of the body and also the bloud Firste let vs repete the beginninge of the institution of the Lords Supper wherin all the three Euangelists and S. Paule almost in woords doo agree saying that Iesus took bread gaue thanks brake and gaue it to the Disciples sayinge Take eate this is my bodye Heer it appeareth plainly that Christe calleth very bread his body For that which he took was very bread In this all men doo agree And that which he took after he had giuen thankes he brake and that which he took and brake he gaue to his disciples and that which be took brake and gaue to his Disciples he saide him selfe of it This is my body So it appeareth plainelye that Christ called very bread his body But very bread canot be his bodye in very substance therof therfore it must needs haue an other meaninge Which meaninge appeareth plainelye what it is by the next sentence that followeth immediatly both in Luke and in Paule And that is this Doo this in remembrance of me Wher-vpon it seemeth vnto me to be euident that Christe did take bread and called it his bodye for that he would therby institute a perpetuall remembrance of his body speciallye of the singuler benefite of our redemtion which he would then procure and purchase vnto vs by his bodye vpon the Crosse But bread retaining still his owne very naturall substance may be thus by grace and in a sacramental signification his body wheras els the very bread which he took brake and gaue them could not be any wise his naturall bodye For that were confusion of substances and therfore the very woordes of Christe ioynes with the next sentence following both enforceth vs to confesse the verye bread to remaine still and also openeth vnto vs how that bread maye be and is thus by his deuine power his body which was giuen for vs. But heere I remember I haue red in some writers of the contrarye opinion which Christe did take be brake For say they after his taking he blessed it as Mark dooth speak And by his blessing be changed the natural substance of the bread into the natural substance of his body and so although he took the bread and blessed it yet because in blessing he changed the substance of it he brake not the breade which then was not there but only the forme therof Vnto this obiection I haue two plain answers both grounded vpon Gods woord The one I will heer rehearse the other answer I will differ vntil I speak of the Sacrament of the blood Mine answere heer is taken out of the plaine woords of S. Paule which dooth manifestly confound this fantastical inuention first inuented I â—een of Pope Innocentius and after confirmed by the subtile sophister Duns and lately renewed now in our daies with an eloquent stile and much finenesse of wit. But what can crafty inuention subtiltye in sophismes eloquence or finenesse of wit Mar. Antho. Constan Gardenar preuaile against the vnfallible Woorde of God What neede we to striue and contend what thinge we break for Paule saieth speaking vndoubtedly of the Lords Table The bread saieth he which we break is it not the partaking or felowship of the Lords body Wherupon it followeth that after the thanks giving it is bread which we break And how often in the Acts of the Apostles is the Lords Supper signified by breaking of bread They did perseuer saith S. Luke in the Apostles Doctrine Communion and Acts 2. 20. breaking of bread And they brake breade in euery house And again in an other place when they were come together to breake bread c. S. Paule which setteth foorth moste fully in his writinge both the doctrine and the right vse of the Lords Supper and the Sacramentall eating and drinkinge of Christs body and blood calleth it fiue times bread bread bread bread bread The sacramentall bread is the misticall body and so it is called The second reason in Scripture 1 Cor. 10. as it is called the naturall body of Christe But Christs misticall body is the congregation of Christians Now no man was euer so fond as to say that that sacramentall breade is transubstantiated and changed into the substance of the congregatione Wherfore no man shoulde likewise think or saye that the breade is transubstantiated and changed into the naturall substance of Christes humaine nature But my minde is not héere to write what may be gathered out of Scriptures for this purpose but onely to note heer breefly those which seem vnto me to be the most plaine places Therfore contented to haue spoken thus muche of the Sacramentall bread I will nowe speake a little of the Lords cup. And this shall be my third Argument grounded vpon Christes The third Argument owne woordes The natural substance of the sacramentall Wine remaineth still and is the material substance of the Sacrament of the blood of Christe Therfore it is likewise so in the sacramentall Bread. I know that he that is of a contrarye opinion will denye the former parte of mine Argument But I will prooue it thus by the plaine woords of Christe himselfe both in Mathewe and in Marke Christes woordes are these after the wordes saide vpon the cup I saye vnto you saith Christe I will not drinke hencefoorthe of this fruite of the vine tree vntill I shall drink that new in my fathers kingdome Heere note how Christe calleth plainly his cup the fruit of the vine tree But the fruit of the vine is very natural wine Wherfore the naturall substance of the wine doothe remaine still in the Sacrament of Christes Blood. And heer in speaking of the Lords Cup it commeth vnto my remembrance the vanitie of Innocentius his fantasticall inuention which by Paules woordes I did confute before and héer did promise somwhat more to
suffer P. 109. his most glorious passion for us really and substantially Ergo He is also in the Sacrament substantially The Argument is good because that it is the same here that was there crucified for us howbeit here invisibly indeed spiritually and sacramentally but there visibly and after a mortal and most bloody manner Rochest Mr. Langdale your Argument doth well conclude in case that his Body were here in the Sacrament after such a sort as it was when it was betrayed But that is not so for he was betrayed and crucified in his natural body substantially and really in very deed but in the Sacrament he is not so but spiritually and figuratively only Langd By your good Lordships favour that is not so for he is there not figuratively but verily and indeed by the power of his mighty Word yea even his very own natural body under the Sacrament duly performed by the lawful Minister Madew O say not so for you speak blasphemy Langd No no Mr. Doctor God forbid that either I or any man else should be noted of blasphemy saying nothing but the very plain truth as in my Conscience and Learning I do no less Rochest O Mr. Langdale I wis it becometh you not here to have such words Langd If it like your good Lordship I gave not the first occasion of them but only did refute that which I was unjustly burthened withall as reason doth require and it grieved me to hear it He saith if it please your Lordship that there is a mutation or change of the Bread after it is Consecrated which if it be so as I grant no less then I would require of him whether it be changed in the Substance or in the Accidents or else in both or in nothing No man can justly say that there is a change into nothing And all ancient Fathers do agree that the same accidents are there still after that were before nor doth any Doctor say That there is any mutation both of the Substance and Accidents also Ergo The Substance of Bread is changed into some other thing that is there really present under the forms of Bread and Wine which by Christs words must needs be his own Blessed Body Rochest Sir you are deceived greatly for there is no change either of the Substances or of the Accidents but in very deed there do come unto the Bread other Accidents insomuch that whereas the Bread and Wine were not sanctified before nor holy yet afterwards they be sanctified and so do receive then another sort or kind of vertue which they had not before Rochest Christ dwelleth in us by Faith and by Faith we receive Pag. 118. Christ both God and Man both in Spirit and flesh that is this Sacramental eating is the mean and way whereby we attain to the Spiritual eating and indeed for the strengthening of us to the eating of this Spiritual food was this Sacrament Ordained And these words This is my Body are meant thus By Grace it is my true Body but not my fleshly Body as some of you suppose Rochest I acknowledg not his real Substance to be there but Pag. 119. the property of his Substance The Determination of Dr. Nicholas Ridley Bishop of Rochester upon Pag. 120. the Conclusions above prefixed There hath been an ancient custom amongst you that after Disputations had in your common Schools there should be some determination made of the matters so disputed and debated especially touching Christian Religion Because therefore it hath seemed good unto these worshipful Assistants joyned with me in Commission from the Kings Majesty that I should perform the same at this time I will by your favourable patience declare both what I do think and believe my self and what also other ought to think of the same Which thing I would that afterward ye did with diligence weigh and ponder every man at home severally by himself The principal Grounds or rather Head-springs of this matter are specially five The first is the Authority Majesty and Verity of Holy Scripture The second is the most certain Testimonies of the Ancient Catholick Fathers who after my judgment do sufficiently declare this matter The third is the definition of a Sacrament The fourth is the abominable Heresie of Eutiches that may ensue of Transubstantiation The fifth is the most sure belief of the Article of our Faith He ascended into Heaven The First Ground This Transubstantiation is clean against the words of the Scripture and consent of the ancient Catholick Fathers The Scripture saith I will not drink hereafter of this fruit of the Vine c. Now the fruit of this Vine is Wine And it is manifest that Christ spake these words after the Supper was finished as it appeareth both in Matthew Mark and also in Luke if they be well understood There be not many places of Scripture that do confirm this thing neither is it greatly material for it is enough if there be any one plain testimony for the same Neither ought it to be measured by the number of Scriptures but by the Authority and by the verity of the same And the Majesty of this verity is as ample in one short sentence of the Scripture as in a thousand Moreover Christ took Bread he gave Bread. In the Acts Luke calleth it Bread. So Paul calleth it Bread after the Sanctification Both of them speak of breaking which belongeth to the Substance of Bread and in no wise to Christ's Body for the Scripture saith Ye shall not break a bone of him Christ saith Do ye this in my remembrance And again As often as ye shall drink of this Cup do it in rememberance of me And our Saviour Christ in the sixth of John speaking against the Capernaites saith Labour for the meat that perisheth not And when they asked What shall we do that we may work the works of God He answered them thus This is the work of God that ye believe in him whom he hath sent You see how he exhorteth them to faith For Faith is that work of God. Again This is that Bread which came down from Heaven But Christs Body came not down from Heaven Moreover He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him My flesh saith he is meat indeed and my blood is drink indeed When they heard this they were offended And whil'st they were offended he said unto them What if ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up where he was before Whereby he went about to draw them from the gross and carnal eating This Body saith he shall ascend up into Heaven meaning altogether as St. Augustine saith It is the Spirit that quickneth the Flesh profiteth nothing The words that I speak unto you are Spirit and Life and must be spiritually understood These be the Reasons which perswade me to incline to this Sentence and Judgment The Second Ground Now my Second Ground against this Transubstantiation are the Ancient Fathers
prophane and ungodly persons for it casteth that which is holy unto Dogs and pearls unto Swine Fifthly It forceth men to maintain many Monstrous Miracles without necessity and Authority of God's Word Sixthly It giveth occasion to the Hereticks which erred concerning the two Natures in Christ to defend their Heresies thereby Seventhly It falsifieth the sayings of the Godly Fathers it falsifieth also the Catholick Faith of the Church which the Apostles taught the Martyrs confirmed and the Faithful as one of the Fathers saith do retain and keep until this day Wherefore the 2 d part of mine Argument is true The Probation of the Antecedent or former part of this Argument by the Parts thereof 1. This carnal Presence is contrary to the Word of God as appeareth Joh. 16. I tell you the truth It is profitable to you that I go away for if I go not away the Comforter shall not come unto you Act. 3. Whom the Heavens must receive until the time of restoring of all things which God hath spoken Mat. 9. The Children of the Bridegroom cannot mourn so long as the Bridegroom is with them But now is the time of mourning Joh. 16. But I will see you again and your hearts shall rejoice Joh. 14. I will come again and take you to my self Mat. 24. If they shall say unto you Behold here is Christ or there is Christ believe them not c. 2. It varieth from the Articles of the Faith He ascended into Heaven and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father from whence and not from any other place saith St. Augustine he shall come to judg both the quick and the dead 3. It destroyeth and taketh away the Institution of the Lord's Supper which was commanded only to be used and continued until the Lord himself should come If therefore he be really present in the body of his flesh then must the Supper cease For a remembrance is not of a thing present but of a thing past and absent And there is a difference between Remembrance and Presence and as one of the Fathers saith A Figure is in vain where the thing figured is present It maketh precious things common to prophane and ungodly Persons and constraineth men to confess many absurdities For it affirmeth that Whoremongers and Murtherers yea and as some of them hold opinion that Mice Rats and Dogs also may receive the very real and corporal Body of the Lord wherein the fulness of the Spirit of Light and Grace dwelleth contrary to the manifest words of Christ in six Places and Sentences of the 6th Chapter of St. John. 4. It confirmeth also and maintaineth that beastly kind of Cruelty of the Anthropophagi that is the Devourers of Man's Flesh for it is a more cruel thing to devour a quick Man that to slay him Pie. He requireth time to speak Blasphemies Leave your Blasphemies Rid. I had little thought to have had such reproachful words at your hands West All is quiet Go to your Arguments Mr. Doctor Rid. I have not many things more to say West You utter Blasphemies with a most impudent face leave off I say and get you to the Argument Rid. 5. It forceth men to maintain many monstrous Miracles without any necessity and authority of God's Word For at the coming of this presence of the Body and Flesh of Christ they thrust away the Substance of Bread and affirm that the Accidents remain without any Subject and instead thereof they place Christ's Body without his qualities and the true manner of a Body And if the Sacrament be reserved so long until it mould and Worms breed some say that the Substance of Bread miraculously returneth again and some deny it Other some affirm that the real Body of Christ goeth down into the Stomach of the Receivers and doth there abide so long only as they shall continue to be good but another sort hold that the Body of Christ is carried into Heaven so soon as the forms of Bread be bruised with the Teeth O Works of Miracles Truly and most truly I see that fulfilled in these Men whereof St. Paul prophesied 2 Thess 2. Because they have not received the love of the truth that they might be saved God shall send them strong Delusions that they should believe a Lye and be all damned which have not believed the Truth This gross Presence hath brought forth that fond phantasie of Concomitance whereby is broken at this day and abrogated the Commandment of the Lord for distributing of the Lord's Cup to the Laity 6. It giveth occasion to Hereticks to maintain and defend their Errors as to Marcion who said that Christ had but a Phantastical Body and to Eutiches who wickedly confounded the two Natures in Christ 7. Finally It falsifieth the Sayings of the Godly Fathers and the Catholick Faith of the Church which Vigilius a Martyr and grave Writer saith was taught of the Apostles confirmed with the Blood of Martyrs and was continually maintained by the Faithful until his time By the Sayings of the Fathers I mean of Justin Irenaeus Tertullian Origen Eusebius Emisenus Athanasius Cyril Epiphanius Hierome Chrysostome Augustine Vigilius Fulgentius Bertram and others most ancient Fathers All those places as I am sure I have read making for my purpose so am I well assured that I could shew the same if I might have the use of mine own Books which I will take to me to do even upon the peril of my life and loss of all that I may lose in this World. But now my Brethren think not because I disallow that Presence which the first Proposition maintaineth as a Presence which I take to be forged Phantastical and besides the Authority of God's Word perniciously brought into the Church by the Romanists that I therefore go about to take away the true Presence of Christ's Body in his Supper rightly and duly administred which is grounded upon the Word of God and made more plain by the Commentaries of the Faithful Fathers They that think so of me the Lord knoweth how far they are deceived and to make the same evident unto you I will in few words declare what true Presence of Christ's Body in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper I hold and affirm with the Word of God and the Ancient Fathers I say and confess with the Evangelist Luke and Apostle Paul that the Bread on the which thanks are given is the Body of Christ in the remembrance of him and his Death to be set forth perpetually of the Faithful until his coming I say and confess the Bread which we break to be the Communion and partaking of Christ's Body with the Ancient and the Faithful Fathers I say and believe that there is not only a signification of Christ's Body set forth by the Sacrament but also that therewith is given to the Godly and Faithful the Grace of Christ's Body that is the food of Life and Immortality And this I hold with Cyprian I say also with St.
Augustine that we eat Life and we drink Life with Emisene that we feel the Lord to be present in Grace with Athanasius that we receive Celestial Food that cometh from above the propriety of natural Communion with Hilary the nature of Flesh and Benediction which giveth life in Bread and Wine with Cyril and with the same Cyril the virtue of the very Flesh of Christ Life and Grace of his Body the property of the only begotten that is to say Life as he himself in plain words expounded it I confess also with Basil that we receive the mystical Advent and coming of Christ Grace and Virtue of his very Nature the Sacrament of his very Flesh with Ambrose the Body by Grace with Epiphanius Spiritual Flesh but not that which was crucified with Hierom Grace flowing into a Sacrifice and the Grace of the Spirit with Chrysostom Grace and invisible Verity Grace and Society of the Members of Christ's Body with Augustine Finally with Bertram who was the last of all these I confess that Christ's Body is in the Sacrament in this respect namely as he writeth Because there is in it the Spirit of Christ that is the power of the Word of God which not only feedeth the Soul but also cleanseth it But of these I suppose it may appear unto all men how far we are from that Opinion whereof some go about falsly to slander us to the world saying we teach that the Godly and Faithful should receive nothing else at the Lord's Table but a Figure of the Body of Christ The Second Proposition After the Consecration there remaineth no Substance of Bread and Wine neither any other Substance than the Substance of God and Man. The Answer The second Conclusion is manifestly false directly against the Word of God the Nature of the Sacrament and the most evident Testimonies of the godly Fathers and it is the rotten Foundation of the other two Conclusions propounded by you both of the first and also of the third I will not therefore now tarry upon any further Explication of this Answer being contented with that which is already added afore to the Answer of the first Proposition The First Argument for the Confirmation of this Answer It is very plain by the Word of God that Christ did give Bread unto his Disciples and called it his Body But the Substance of Bread is another manner of Substance than is the Substance of Christ's Body God and Man. Therefore the Conclusion is false The second part of mine Argument is plain and the first is proved thus The Second Argument That which Christ did take on the which he gave Thanks Da and the which he brake he gave to his Disciples and called it his Body But he took Bread gave Thanks on Bread and brake Bread. ti Ergo The first part is true And it is confirmed with the Authorities of the Fathers Irenaeus si Tertullian Origen Cyprian Epiphanius Hierom Augustine Theodoret Cyril Rabanus and Bede whose places I will take upon me to shew most manifest in this behalf if I may be suffered to have my Books as my request is Bread is the Body of Christ Ergo. It is Bread. The Third Argument As the Bread of the Lord's Table is Christ's natural Body so Ba it is his mystical Body But it is not Christ's mystical Body by Transubstantiation Ergo It is not his natural Body by Transubstantiation ro eo The second part of my Argument is plain and the first is proved thus As Christ who is the Verity spake of the Bread This is my Body which shall be betrayed for you speaking there of his natural Body even so St. Paul moved with the same Spirit of Truth said We though we be many yet are we all one Bread and one Body which be partakers of one Bread. The Fourth Argument We may no more believe Bread to be Transubstantiate into the Body of Christ than the Wine into his Blood. But the Wine is not Transubstantiate into his Blood Ergo Neither is that Bread therefore Transubstantiate into his Body The first part of this Argument is manifest and the second part is proved out of the Authority of God's Word in Matthew and Mark I will not drink of the fruit of the Vine c. Now the fruit of the Vine was Wine which Christ drank and gave to his Disciples to drink With this Sentence agreeth plainly the place of Chrysostome on the 20th Chapter of Matthew as Cyprian doth also affirming That there is no Blood if Wine be not in the Cup. The Fifth Argument The words of Christ spoken upon the Cup and upon the Ba Bread have like effect and working But the words spoken upon the Cup have not virtue to Transubstantiate ro Ergo It followeth that the words spoken upon the Bread have eo no such virtue The second part of the Argument is proved because they would then Transubstantiate the Cup or that which is in the Cup into the New Testament But neither of these things can be done and very absurd it is to confess the same The Sixth Argument The Circumstances of the Scripture the Analogy and proportion of Da the Sacraments and the Testimony of the faithful Fathers ought to rule us in taking the meaning of the Holy Scripture touching the Sacrament But the Words of the Lord's Supper the Circumstances of the ti Scripture the Analogy of the Sacraments and the Sayings of the Fathers do most effectually and plainly prove a figurative speech in the words of the Lord's Supper Ergo A figurative sense and meaning is specially to be received in si these words This is my Body The Circumstances of the Scripture Do this in remembrance of me As oft as ye shall eat of this Bread and drink of this Cup ye shall shew forth the Lord's death Let a man prove himself and so eat of this bread and drink of this cup. They came together to break Bread and they continued in breaking of Bread. The Bread which we break c. For we being many are all one Bread and one Body c. The Analogy of the Sacraments is necessary for if the Sacraments had not some similitude or likeness of the things whereof they be Sacraments they could in no wise be Sacraments And this similitude in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper is taken three manner of ways 1. The first consisteth in nourishing as you shall read in Rabanus Cyprian Austin Irenaeus and most plainly in Isidore out of Bertram 2. The second in the uniting and joyning of many into one as Cyprian teacheth 3. The third is a similitude of unlike things Where like as the Bread is turned into one Body so we by the right use of this Sacrament are turned through Faith into the Body of Christ The sayings of the Fathers declare it to be a figurative speech as it appeareth in Origen Tertullian Chrysostom in opere imperfecto
he not offered in verity For the Apostle saith Not that he might offer up himself oftentimes for then must he have suffered oftentimes since the beginning of the World. Now where Christ is not offered there is no Propitiatory Sacrifice Ergo In the Mass there is no Propitiatory Sacrifice For Christ appeared once in the latter end of the World to put sin to flight by the offering up of himself And as it is appointed to all men that they shall once dye and then cometh the Judgment even so Christ was once offered to take away the Sins of many And unto them that look for him shall he appear again without sin unto salvation Another Argument Where there is any Sacrifice that can make the comers thereunto Da perfect there ought men to cease from offering any more Expiatory and Propitiatory Sacrifices But in the New Testament there is one only Sacrifice now already ri long since offered which is able to make the comers thereunto perfect for ever Ergo In the New Testament they ought to cease from offering i. any more Propitiatory Sacrifice Sentences of the Scripture tending to the same end and purpose out of which also may be gathered other manifest Arguments for more confirmation thereof By the which will saith the Apostle we are sanctified by the offering Heb. 10. up of the Body of Jesus Christ once for all And in the same place But this man after that he had offered one Sacrifice for sin sitteth for ever at the Right hand of God c. For with one Offering hath he made perfect for ever them that are sanctified and by himself hath he purged our Sins I beseech you to mark these words by himself the which well weighed will without doubt cease all controversie The Apostle plainly denieth any other Sacrifice to remain for him that treadeth under his feet the Blood of the Testament by the which he was made holy Christ will not be crucified again he will not his death to be had in derision He hath reconciled us in the Body of his Flesh Mark I beseech you he Col. 1. saith not in the Mystery of his Body but in the Body of his Flesh If any man sin we have an Advocate with the Father Jesus Christ the 1 John 2. Righteous and he is the Propitiation for our Sins not for ours only but for the Sins of the whole World. I know that all these places of the Scripture are avoided by two manner of subtil shifts The one is by the distinction of the bloody and unbloody Sacrifice as tho our unbloody Sacrifice of the Church were any other than the Sacrifice of Praise and Thanksgiving than a commemoration a shewing forth and a Sacramental Representation of that one only bloody Sacrifice offered up once for all The other is by depraving and wresting the Sayings of the Ancient Fathers unto such a strange kind of sense as the Fathers themselves indeed never meant For what the meaning of the Fathers was is evident by that which St. Augustine writeth in his Epistle to Boniface and in the 83d Chapter of his Ninth Book against Faustus the Manichee besides many other Places likewise by Eusebius Emissenus Cyprian Chrysostom Fulgentius Bertram and others who do wholly concord and agree together in this unity in the Lord that the Redemption once made in Verity for the Salvation of Man continueth in full effect for ever and worketh without ceasing unto the end of the World That the Sacrifice once offered cannot be consumed That the Lord's Death and Passion is as effectual the vertue of that Blood once shed as fresh at this day for the washing away of sins as it was even the same day that it flowed out of the blessed Side of our Saviour And finally that the whole substance of our Sacrifice which is frequented of the Church in the Lord's Supper consisteth in Prayers Praise and giving of Thanks and in remembring and in shewing forth of that Sacrifice once offered upon the Altar of the Cross that the same might continually be had in reverence by Mystery which once only and no more was offered for the Price of our Redemption These are the things right worshipful Mr. Prolocutor and ye the rest of the Commissioners which I could presently prepare to the answering of your three foresaid Prophesies being destitute of all help in this shortness of time sudden warning and want of Books Wherefore I appeal to my first Protestation most humbly desiring the help of the same as much as may be to be granted unto me And because ye have lately given most unjust and cruel Sentence against me I do here appeal so far forth as I may to a more indifferent and just censure and judgment of some other Superior Competent and Lawful Judge and that according to the approved state of the Church of England Howbeit I confess I am ignorant what that is at this present through the trouble and alteration of the state of the Realm But if this Appeal may not be granted to me upon Earth then do I fly even as to my only Refuge and alone Haven of Health to the Sentence of the Eternal Judge that is of the Almighty God to whose most merciful Justice towards us and most just Mercifulness I do wholly commit my self and all my Cause nothing at all despairing of the Defence of my Advocate and alone Saviour Jesus Christ to whom with the Everlasting Father and the Holy Spirit the Sanctifier of us all be now and for ever all Honour and Glory Amen Ridley Of Christ's Real Presence there may be a double understanding P. 56. If you take the Real Presence of Christ according to the Real and Corporal Substance which he took of the Virgin that Presence being in Heaven cannot be on the Earth also But if you mean a Real Presence secundum rem aliquam quae ad Corpus Christi pertinet i. e. according to something that appertaineth to Christ's Body certes the Ascension and abiding in Heaven are no let at all to that Presence Wherefore Christ's Body after that sort is here present to us in the Lord's Supper by Grace I say as Epiphanius speaketh it I grant the Bread to be converted and turned into the Flesh of P. 60. Christ but not by Transubstantiation but by a Sacramental Conversion or turning It is Transformed saith Theophylact in the same place by a Mystical Benediction and by the accession or coming of the Holy Ghost unto the Flesh of Christ He saith not by expulsion or driving away the Substance of Bread and by substituting or putting in its place the Corporal Substance of Christ's Flesh And where he saith It is not a Figure of the Body we should understand that saying as he himself doth elsewhere add one that is it is no naked or bare Figure only For Christ is present in his Mysteries neither at any time as Cyprian saith doth the Divine Majesty