A boke made by Iohn Frith prisoner in the tower of London answeringe vnto M mores lettur which he wrote agenst the first litle treatyse that IohnÌ„ Frith made concerninge the sacramente of the body and bloude of christ vnto which boke are added in the ende the articles of his examinacion before the bishoppes of London winchestur and lincolne in Paules church at London for which Iohn Frith was condempned aÌ„d after bureÌ„t in smith felde with out newgate the fourth daye of Iuli Anno. 1533. ¶ Mortui resurgent ¶ The preface of this bokeâ— GRace and encreaâ—e of knowelege from God the fader thorow oure lord Iesus criste be with the christen reader and with all that love the lorde vnfaynedly Amen I chauÌ„ced bâ—ing in these parties to be in coÌ„panie with A christen broder wiche for hys commendable coÌ„uersation And sobre behavour myght better be a bishop theÌ„ many that weare myters yf the reule of s. Paule were regarded in ther election Thys broder after moche communication desyrid to knowe my mynde as touchynge the sacrrament of the body and blode of oure savioure Christ. Whiche thynge I opened vnto hym accordynge to the gist that god had gevyn me Firste I proved vnto hym that yt was non article of oure fayth necessarie to be beleved vnder payne of daÌ„nacioÌ„ TheÌ„ I declared that christ had a naturall bodie evyn as myne ys savyng synne and that yt cowde no more be in two places at once then myne can Thyrdly I shewyd hym that it was not necessarie that the wordes shulde so be vnderstonde as they sounde But that yt myght be a phrase of scripture as ther ar innumerable After that I shewyd hym certen suche phrases and maâ—er of speakyng And that yt was well vsed in oure englishe tong aÌ„d finally I recyted after what mauer they myght receyve yt accordynge to christes institutyon not fearyng the froward alteracyon that the prestes vse contrarie to the firste forme and institution When I had sufficiently published my mynde he desired me to entitie the sâ—me of my wordes aÌ„d write them for hym be cause they semed ouerâ—onge to be well râ—teigned in memorie And aâ—beit I was loth to take the mater in hande yet to fullfyll hys instant intercession I toke vppon me to touche this terrible tragedie and wrote a treatise whyche be side my paynfull impresonmeÌ„t ys lyke to purchase me moste cruell deth which I am redie and glade to receyve w t the sprite and inward man allthough the fleshe be frayle when so ever yt shall please god to lay yt vppon me Notwithsâ—ondinge to say the truthe I wrote yt not to the intent that yt shuld haue byn published For theÌ„ I wolde haue toucheâ— the mater more ernestly and haue writyn as well of the spirituall eatynge and drynkynge whiche ys of necessite as I dâ—de of the carnall whiche ys not so necessarie for the treatise that I made was â—ot expedient for all men albeit yt weare sufficieâ—t for them whom I toke in hande to ensâ—ructe For they knewe the spirituall and necessarie eatynge and drynâ—ynge of his bodie and bloode which ys not receyvyd with the teth and belye but with the â—ares and fayth and only neâ—ed instrucâ—yon in the ouâ—ward eatynge whiche thynge I therfore only declared But now yt ys commen a brode and in many mens mowthes in so moche that master more w c of late hathe busted hym sellfe to medle in all soche materes of what zele I wyll not defyne hath sore labored to coÌ„fute yt but some men thinke that he ys ashamed of his ê‘te and for that cause doth so diligently suppresse the worke w c he prynted For I my sellfe saw the worke in prent in my lorde of wynchesters howse vppon S. Stephyns day last paste But nether I nether all the fryndes I cowâ— make mighte attayne any copie but only one wrytyn copie which as yt semed was drawyn oute in great haste natwithstondinge I can not well Iudge what the cause shulde be that hys boke ys kept so secrette But this I am right sure of that he neuer touched the fouÌ„dacioÌ„ that my treatise was buylded vppon And therfore syth my foundacion stondith so sure and invincible for els I thynke verely he wolde sore have labored to haue vndermined yt I wyl ther vppon buylde a lytle more and allso declare that his ordinance ys to slender to breake yt downe all though yt were sett vppon a wors foundacyon ¶ The fondacion of that lytle treatise was that yt ys non article of our fayth necessarye to be belevyd vnder payne of dampnacion that the sacrament shuld be the naturall bodie of christe which thynge ys proved on this maner FIrste we muste all aknowelege that yt ys non article af our fayth which can save vs nor which we are bounde to beleve vnder the payne of eternall damnacion For yf I shulde beleve that hys verey naturall bodye bothe fleshe and bloode were naturaly in the brede wyne that shulde not save me seinge many beleve that and receyve yt to ther dampnacyon for yt ys not hys prsense in the brede that â—an save me but hys presence in my herte thorough fayth in hys blode w c hathe washed oute my synnes and pacyfied the faders wrathe toward me And agayne yf I do not beleve his bodely presence in the brede wine that shall not dampne me but the absence out of my harte thorough vnbeleffe Now yf they wolde here obiecte that though yt be truth that the absence oute of the brede coulde not dampne vs yet are we bounde to belâ—ve yt be cause of goddes worde whiche who belevyth not as moche as in hym lyeth makythe god al lyer And therfore of anÌ„ obstinat mynde not to beleve hys worde may be an occasioÌ„ of daÌ„pnacioÌ„ To thys we may answer that we beleve goddes worde and knowelege that yt ys trewe but in this we dissent whether yt be trewe in the sense that we take yt in or in the sence that ye take yt in And we say agayne that thought ye haue as yt apereth vnto yow the evideÌ„t wordes of christe aÌ„d therfore coÌ„siste in the barke of the letter yet are we coÌ„pelled by conferringe of the scryptures to gether within the letter to serche oute the minde of our sauiour w c spake the wordes And we saye therdly that we do it not of an obstinate miÌ„de For he that defendeth a cause obstinatly whether yt be true or false ys euer to be repÌ„hended But we do yt to satiâ—fie our coÌ„sciences whiche are coÌ„pelled by other placys of scripture reasons and doctours so to Iudge of yt And evyn so ought yow to Iudge of youre partie and to defende youre sentense not of obstinatie but by the reason of scriptures which cause yow so to take yt aÌ„d so ought nether partie to dispyse other for eche sekyth the glorie of god and the trew vnderstondynge of the scripture This was the
fondacyon of my firste treatise that he hathe left vnshakyn which ys agreat argumeÌ„t that yt ys very true For els hys pregnant wit could not haue passed yt so clene over But wolde haue assayled yt with some sophisticall cavellacyon which by hys paynted poetre he might so haue collered that at the lâ—st he might make the ignoraÌ„t some appareÌ„ce of trouthe as he hathe done a gaynste the residewe of my firste treatice which neuertheles ys true aÌ„d shall so be proved And firste that yt ys none article of our faythe necessarie to be beleved vnder payne of daÌ„pnacyon may thus be furder confermed The same faithe shall save vs which saved the old faderes before Christ ys incarnacyon But thâ—y were not bounde vnder payne of dampnacyon to beleve this poyâ—t therfore yt shall follow that we are not bouÌ„de therto vnder the payne of daÌ„pnacyon The furste parte of myn argument ys proved by S. Austen ad DardamuÌ„ And I dare boldly â—ay almost in an C places For I thynke there be no proposicyoÌ„ w c he dothe more oftyn inculcate then thys that the same faythe saved vs w t saved our faders The seconde parte ys manyâ—est that yt nedeth no probaâ—yon For how coulde they beleve â—hat thynge w c was never sayde nor donÌ„ and w t out the worde they coulde haue no faythe vppoÌ„ the trewth of thes too ê‘tyes musâ—e the coÌ„clusioÌ„ nedes folowe Not wtstondinge they all did eat Christys bodye aÌ„d dronke hys bloode spuÌ„ally allthough they had hym not pÌ„sent to ther teth And by that spuÌ„all eatynge w c ys the fayth in hys body bloode wer saved as well as we ar For assone as our fore father AdaÌ„ hade traÌ„sgressed goddes precept aÌ„d was fallen vnder coÌ„dempnacyoÌ„ oure moste mercyfull father of hys gracyous favour gave hym the ê“misse of helthe and coÌ„fort wherby as many as beleved yt were saved from the thrauldoÌ„ of their traÌ„gressyon the worde aÌ„d promyse was this I shall put enmyte betwene the aÌ„d the woman betwene thy sede and her sede that sede shall trede the onÌ„ the hede and thow shall trede yt onÌ„ the hele In thys promisse they had knowelege that Christe shulde becom the sede or sone of a womaÌ„ aÌ„d that he shulde distroye the dâ—vyll w t all hys power aÌ„d dâ—lyver hys faytheful froÌ„ ther synnes And where he sayd that the devyll shulde treade yt on the he le they vnderstod ryght well that the devyll shulde fynde the meanes by his wyles wycked ministres to put Christe to dethe And they knewe that god was true and wolde fulfyll hys promisse vâ—to thâ—m and hartely longed after this sede and so dede bothe eate hys bodye and drynke hys bloode knoweleginge w t infinite thankes that christe shuld for ther synnys take the ê‘fiâ—e nature of manhode vppon hym and also suffer the dethe This promisse was gevyn to Adam and saved as many as did beleve and were thankefull to God for hys kydenes and after yt was establyshed vnto our father Abraham by the worde â—f God which sayd in thy sed shall all nacyons of the erthe be blyssed And with hym God made a couenant that he wolde be hys God aÌ„d do hym good And Abraham agayne promised to kâ—pe hys preceptes and walke in hys wayes Then God gave hym the sacrament of cyrcâ—â—sion aÌ„d cauled that hys covenant which thynge not w t stondynge was not the very covenant in dede although yt were so cauled But was only asigne tokyn sacrament or memoryall of the couenant that was betwene God and hym whiche myght expound our matter yf mâ—n hadyen to see After that God promised hym a sone when hys wyffe was past chylde bearynge and he allso very old Neuerthelesse he doubted not of goodâ—s worde But suerly beleved that he w c promised yt was able to performe yt And that was recounted vnto hym for ryghtwysnes Thys Abraham did bothe eate hys bodye and dryâ—ke hys blode thorough faythe belevinge verely that Christ shoulde take our nature aÌ„d sprynge oute of hys sede as touchynge hys fleshe and allso that he sâ—ulde suffer dethe to redeme vs. And as Christ testifyeth he hartely desyred to se the day of Chriâ—t And he sawe yt aÌ„d reioysed he sawe yt in faythe and had the day of christ that is to say all those thinges that shulde chaunce hym playnly revelated vnto hym albeit he were dede many hundred yeres before yt were actualy fulfyllyd reâ—elatâ—d vnto the worlde And by that fayth was he saved aÌ„d yet never did eate hys fleshe with hys teth nor never beleved that brede shulde be hys bodye and wyne hys blode And therfore sith he was also savyd with oute that faith and the same faythe shaâ—â— save vs which saved hym I thynke that we shall also be saved yf we eate hym spuÌ„ally as he ded although we never beleved that the brede ys hys bodye furthermore that mercyfull Moses which brought the childern of Israell oute of Egypte in to the wyldernes optayned of God by prayers both mana from hevyn to fede hys people also water oute of the stone to refresh comforte them Tâ—â—s mana and water wâ—re evyn the same thyng vnto them that the brede aÌ„d wyne ys to vs for as S. Austyn saythe Quicunque in manna Christum intellexeruÌ„t eundem quem nos cibuÌ„ spiritu alem manducaueruÌ„t Quicunque auteÌ„ de manna solaÌ„ saturitatem que siuerunt manducabant mortui sunt Sic etiaÌ„ eundem potum petra enim erat christus That ys to say as many as in that maÌ„na vnderstode Christ did eate that same spirituall meate that we do but as many as sought only to fyll ther bellyes of that maÌ„na the fathers of the vnfaythfull did eate are ded And lyke wise the same drynke for the stone was christ Here may yow gather of S. Austyn that the manna was vnto them As the brede ys to vs and lykewise that the water was to them as the wyne ys to vs whiche anoÌ„ shal apere more playnly S. Ausâ—yn sayth furder manducauit Moses manna maÌ„ducauit Aaron manducauit Phinâ—es manducauerunt ibi multi qui dâ—o placuerunt mortui non sunt Quâ—re quia visibâ—iem cibum spiâ—itualiter intellexeruÌ„t spiritualâ—ter esurâ—eruÌ„t spiritualiter gustaueruÌ„t vt spiritualiter satiarâ—ntâ—r Omnes eandem escam spiritualem manducauerunt omnes eundem potum spiritualem biberunt spiritualem vtique eandem nam corporalem alteram quia illi manna nos aliud spiritualem vero â—andem quam nos Ut omnes eundem potuÌ„ spiritualem biberunt aliud illi aliud nos sed speÌ„ visibili quod tameÌ„ hoc ideÌ„ significaret virtute spirituali Quomodo eundem potuÌ„ bibebant inquit apostolus de spirituali sequeÌ„ti petra petra autem erat Christus This ys to saye Moses allso dede â—ate maÌ„na and Aaron aÌ„d Phinees did eate of yt and many other dide there eate of yt w
the sacrament as well as the other Wherfore you muste nedes grauÌ„t that the sacrameÌ„t ys not the naturall bodye of christ but a figure tokeÌ„ or memoriall therof Nowe good christeÌ„ people count not this new lerninge w c is firmed by suche olde doctors faithfull fathers Nowe were this ynough for a Christen man that loued no coÌ„tencyon But because there are so many sophisters iÌ„ the world w c care not what they saye so they hold not ther peace I muste nedes sette som bulwarke by this holye doctoure to helpe to defende hym for els they will shortly ouer ruÌ„ne hym as they do me and make hym an hereâ—yck to Therfore I wyll allege hys master s. Ambrose Sainct Ambrose sayth NoÌ„ iste panis q uadit in corpus a nobis â—am anxie querituâ— sed panis uitae aeternaeq aiÌ„ae nrÌ„ae substaÌ„ciaÌ„ fulscit q auÌ„t discordat a christo noÌ„ manducat carneÌ„ eiê° nec bibit sanguineÌ„ eius si taÌ„tae rei sacrameÌ„tuÌ„ iudiciuÌ„ sue perditionis accipit That ys thys bred that goth in to the bodye ys not so gredelye sought of vs but the bread of euerlasting liffe w c vpholdeth the substaÌ„ce of our soule For he that discordeth from Christ doth not eate his fleshe nor drinke hys bloude allthough he receyue the sacrament of so great a thinge vnto hys dampnacyon and distructyon Forthermore the great clarke prosper coÌ„fyrmeth the same sayinge Qui discordat a Christo nec carneÌ„ Christi manducat nec sanguineÌ„ bibit etiaÌ„ si tantae rei sacramentuÌ„ ad iudiciuÌ„ suae praesumptioÌ„is quotidie indiffereÌ„ter accipiat That ys he that discordeth from Christ doth nether eate hys fleshe nor drinke hys bloude allthough he receyue indifferently euery day the sacrameÌ„t of so great a thinge vnto the coÌ„dempnation of his pÌ„sumption And thes are allso the very wordes of bede vppon the .xi. Chapiter of the fyrste pystyll to the Corinthians Nowe you may see that yt ys not Saynct Austens mynde onlye But allso the sayinge of many mo And therfore I truste you wyll be good vnto hym And yf ye condempne not thes holye fathers then am I wrongfullye punished But yf you condempne them then muste porefryth be content to beare the burthen w t them ¶ The mynde and exposicyon of the olde Doctours vppon the wordes of Christes maundey ANd where Master More sayth that yf Christe had not ment after the playne literall sense that both the hearers at that tyme and the expositors syns all Christen people beside this xv.c. yere wold not haue taken onlye the leterall sens being so straunge and meruâ—lous that yt might seame impossible and decline from the letter for allegories in all suche other thinges beinge as he saith and as in dede they be so manie ferre in noumbre moo As touchinge the hearers they were deceiued vnderstod hym not I meane as manye as toke his wordes fleslye as you do And they had ther answer of Christe when they murmured that hys wordes were sprite and lyffe that ys as S. Austen sayeth spiritually to be vnderstond and not fleslye as ys before declared And as for the exposâ—tours I thynke he hath not one of the olde fathers for hym but certen new fellowys as Dominic s. Thomas Oâ—â—am and suche other w c haue made the pope a God And as I haue shewed s. Austen maketh full for vs and so doo all the olde fathers as Oecolampadius hath well declared in hys â—oke qâ—id ueâ—eres senserint de sacramento eucharristiae And some of theyr sayinges I shall allege anon And wher you saye that all chrysten people haue so beleued this .1500 yeres that is very faulse For ther ys no doubte but that the people thought as holye Saint austen and other fayth full fathers taught them Which as I sayd make with vs. Not with stondynge in dede sith oure prelates haue byn made lordes haue sett vp their lawes and decres coÌ„trarye to the prerogatyue of all prynces and lyke moste sotâ—e traytours haue made all men beleue that they maye make lawes and bynde mens conscyences to obey them aÌ„d that theyr lawes are godds lawes blyndinge the peoples yen with too or .3 textes wrongfullye wrested to avaÌ„ce their pryde where they ought to obeye kynges prynces and be subiecte to ther lawes as christ and hys aposteles were euen vnto the deth Sith that tyme I saye they haue made meÌ„ beleue what they lyst and made articles of the fayth at their pleasure One article muste be that they be the churche can not erre And this ys the grouÌ„de of all their doctryne But the trueth of this article ys nowe suffecieÌ„tly knoweÌ„ For yf quene katerine be kynge heÌ„ries wyffe theÌ„ they do erre yf she be not theÌ„ thei haue erred to speake no more cruel lye It ys nowe be coÌ„e an article of our fayth that the pope of Rome muste be the hede of the churche the vicar of christe that bi goddes lawe yt ys an article of our fayth that what so euer he byndeth in yerth ys bouÌ„de in heuiÌ„ in so moche that yf he cuâ—â—e wrongfullye yet ye muste be feared infinite suche other w c are not iÌ„ our crede but blessed be god that hath geueÌ„ some light in to our priÌ„ces herte For he hath lateâ—â—e putforth a boke called the glasse of trouth w c ê“ueth many of thes articles verye folishe phaÌ„taâ—ies that euyn by theyr owin doctours aÌ„d so I truste you shaâ—be ê“ued iÌ„ this poiÌ„t of the sacrameÌ„t for though it be an article of our faith yt is noÌ„ article of our crede in the .xij. articles wherof are sufficient for our saluatioÌ„ And therfore we may thynke that you lye w t oute all Ieoperdye of dampnacyon Neuerthelesse seinge his mastership saith that all make for him aÌ„d I say clene coÌ„trarie that all the olde fathers make agaynste hym or at the lest wise not w t him It were necessarie that one of vs shulde proue his purpoâ—se But in dedâ— in this poynt he wold loke to haue the vâ—Ì„tayge of me For he thinketh that men will soner beleue hym w c ys a great man then me w c am but a poore man and that therfore I had more nede to proue my parte true then he to proue his Well I am content and therfore geue eare dere reader and Iudge betwene vs. First I will begin w t Tertulian because he is of moste antiquâ—teâ— Tertullian saith Ipse Christus nec paneÌ„ reproâ—auit qd ipsum corpus suuÌ„ representat That ys to saye Christ him sellfe dyd not reproue or discoÌ„mende bred w t doth repÌ„sent his very bodie For the vnderstonding of thys place you must knowe that there was an hereticke caulled marcion w c did reê“ue creatures said that all maner of creatures were euelâ— This thinge doth Tertullyan improue by the sacrament and sayeth Christ did not reproue or discomende bred
expresse And where ye saye that hâ— speaketh nothiâ—g of the sacrameÌ„t I wolde ye shulde sticke still to that saynge For this ys plaine that he speakyth of hys naturall bodye And therfore yf he speake not of the sacrament then haue you concluded that the sacrament ys not hys naturall bodye the contrarie wherof you wold haue meÌ„ beleue Thus haue I shewed euidence bothe where he shall finde the wordes of s. Austen and all so that I haue ryght allegeth them ¶ Nat wtstondyng syth he maketh so moche of â—ys payntâ—d sheth I shall a lâ—â—e hym more auetorite that christes naturall bodye ys in one place oâ—lye w c thynge proued doth vtterly conclude that the sacrament ys not his naturall bodye but onlye a memoryall representynge the same And â—urste let vs â—ee s. Austens mynde Saynte AusteÌ„ wryting vnto dardanus deth playnlye proue that the naturall bodye of Christe muste nedes be in one place onlie allso that his soule canÌ„ be but in one place at once The occasion of hys pistle ys this dardaâ—s did wryte vnto s. Austen for the exposition of thosse wordes that christe spake vnto the theiffe saynge this daye shalt thou be with me in paradise aÌ„d wiâ—t not how he shulde vnderstond yt whether christe meÌ„t that the theffe shulde be in paradise w t christâ—s soule or w t hys bodye â— or w t hys godhed Ther vppon s. AusteÌ„ wryteth that as touchinge christes bodye that daye yt was in the sepulchre And sayeth that yt was not paradise although it were in a gardeÌ„ that he was buried For christe he sayeth ment of a place of Ioye And that was not sayth s. AusteÌ„ in hys sepulchre And as For christes soule yt was that dye in hell And no man will saye â— that paradise was there Wherfore sayth s. Austen the text muste nedes be vnderstond that christ spake yt of hys godhed Now marke this argumeÌ„t of s. Austen and ye shall se my purpose playnlie proued For seinge he expoundeth thys text vppon christes godhed because hys maÌ„hod astouchinge the bodye was in the graue as touchyng hys soule was in hell you maye sone ê‘ceyue that Austâ— thought that whiles his bodie was in the graue yt was not in ê‘adise to aÌ„d because his soule was in hell yt coulde not be in paradise also And therfore he verefyeth the texte vppoÌ„ his diuinite For yf he had thought that christes bodie or soule might haue byn iÌ„ diuerse places at once he wolde noâ— haue said that the text muste nedes be vnderstoÌ„d of his diuite but yt might full well ye and moche better haue bin vnderstond of his manhode Marke well thys place w c doth determine the doubte of this matter Notwtstondinge the faythfull father leueth not the matter on this faâ—â—yon but allso taketh a waye soche fonde ymaginationis as wolde cause men to surmise that Christes bodie shulde be in mo places at once then one For he sayeth Cauendum est ne ita diuinitatem astruamus hominis ut ueritateÌ„ auferamus corporis Non est auÌ„t consequens ut quod in deo est ita sit ubique Nam de nobis ueracissime scriptura dicit quod in illo uiuimus mouemur sumus Nec tameÌ„ sicut ille ubiqueâ—umus sed aliter homo ille in Deo qmÌ„ aliter deê° in illo hoâ—e proprio quodaÌ„ singulari modo Vna enim persona deus homo est et VtruÌ„que est unus Christus resus vbique ê‘ id quod deus est in celo auÌ„t ê‘ id quod homo That ys to saye we muste beware that we do not so aâ—fyrme the diuinyte of the maÌ„ that we take awaye the truth of his bodie For yt followyth not that the thynge w c is in god shuld be iÌ„ euery place as god ys For the scripture doth trulye â—estefie on vs that we lyue moue be in hym And yet are we not in euerie place as he is How bey â—hat maÌ„ is other wise in god god otherwise in that maÌ„ by a certen peculier syngler waye For god aÌ„d maÌ„ is one person aÌ„d bothe of theÌ„ one christe Iesu w c ys in euery place in that he is god aÌ„d in heuyn in that he is maÌ„ Here AusteÌ„ doth saye that yf we shuld graâ—Ì„t christe to be in all places as touchyng his maÌ„hode we shuld take awaye the truth of his bodye For though his maÌ„hode be in god and god in hys manhode yet yt followeth not that yt sâ—ulde be in euerie place as god is And aâ—â—er he coÌ„cludeth that as touching his godhed he ys in euery place aÌ„d as thouchyng his manhode he is in hevin What nede he to make thes wordes antâ—thesies but because he thought verelye that though hys godhed were in euery place yet hys maÌ„hode was in heuyn onlye But yet thys holye doctoure goth furder so that they maye â—e ashamed of ther pertye and saâ—eth SecunduÌ„ homineÌ„ namque in terra erat non in coelo vbi nuÌ„c est quaÌ„do dicebat nemo ascendet in coeluÌ„ nisi qui desceÌ„dit de coelo fiilius hoiÌ„es q est in coelo That is to saye as touchyng hys manhod he was in the yerth not in heuyn where he now ys when he sayd no maÌ„ ascendeth into heuyn but he that descended from heuyn the sone of man w c is in heuin Now I truste ye will be coÌ„tent and lett the truth spred For I am sure yt ys not possible for you to auoyde yt for he sayeth that as touching his maÌ„hod he was in the erth aÌ„d not in heuin when he spake those wordes so proueth that he was not in 〈◊〉 places at once then onlie one place For els yf s. Austen had thought that he coulde haue byn in mo places at onece theÌ„ one w t his bodye then myght he not haue sayd that he was in yerth and not in heuyn For then a man might sone haue deluded hym haue saidâ— Austen you can not tell for he maie be in euery place But they that so thinke aâ—ter AusteÌ„s mynde do take awaye the truthe of his naturall bodye and make yt a very phantasticall bodye froÌ„ the w c heresie god deliuer his faythfull Besides this S. Austen doth saye Christum DominuÌ„ nostrum unigenituÌ„ DEI filium equaleÌ„ patri eundemque hoiÌ„s filium quo maior est pater ubique totum presentem esse non dubiteâ— tanquam Deum in eodem templo DEI esse uerum DEVM in aliena parte coeli propter corporis moduÌ„ That is to saye doubt not but that christe our lorde the onlie begottoÌ„ soune of god equall to the father and the same beinge the sonne of man wherein the father ys greater is hole pÌ„sent in all places as touchyng hys godhed and dwellythe in the same temple of GOD as GOD and in some place of heueÌ„ for the coÌ„dicion of his very bodie Here is yt euideÌ„t bi s. austeÌ„s
wordâ—s that as touchyng his godhed he is iÌ„ all places And as touching his manhod he is onlye in heuinâ—ye and not that onlye but that he being in heuin as touching the measure â— nature condicyon and qualite of his naturall bodie is only in one certayne place in heuin and not in many places at once Thus moche is proued oute of Saincte Austen This truth is not onlye proued by s. AusteÌ„s auctorite but allso by the noble clarke Fulgentius w c wryteth on this maner Vnus idemque homo localis ex homine qui esi Deus immensus expaâ—â—e unus idemque secunduÌ„ humanam substantiaÌ„ absens coelo cuÌ„ esset in terra derelinquens terraÌ„ cuÌ„ ascendisset in coeluÌ„ Secuâ—dâ—m diuinaÌ„ uero immen samque substantâ—aÌ„ nec coâ—luÌ„ dimittens cuÌ„ de coelo descendit nec tâ—rraÌ„ desâ—â—ens â—um ad coâ—lum ascendit Quod ipsius DnÌ„i certissimo sâ—â—mone potest cogno sciâ— qui ut loâ—alem osâ—enderet suaÌ„ humanitateÌ„ dicit discipulis suis Ascendo ad patrem meuÌ„ patrem uestruÌ„ Deum meuÌ„ DeuÌ„ uesâ—ruÌ„ â—e Lazaro quâ—que cuÌ„ dixisset Lazarus mortuus est adiunâ—it dicens eâ— gaudeo propter uos ut credatis quoniaÌ„ non eraÌ„ ibi â—mmensitaâ—em uero suâ— diuinitatâ—â— oftendens discipulis dicit Ecâ—â—â—go uoâ—isâ—uÌ„ sâ—m usque ad coÌ„summationem saecuâ—â— Quomodo auteÌ„ asâ—endit in coeluÌ„ nisi quia localis uerus est homo aut quomodo adest fidelibus suis nisi quia idem inmensus uerus Dâ—us est That is to saye The same one man is locale that is to say conteined in one place as thouching his manhod w c is also God vnmesurable from the father the same one man as touching the substance of his manhod was absenâ— from heuin when he was in erth and forsakinge the yerth when he ascendid in to heuin but as touching his godlie and vnmeasurable substaÌ„ce he nether for soke heuin when he descended froÌ„ heuen nor forsoke the erth when he asceÌ„ded vnto heuen Which maye be knowen by the moste sure worde of the lorde w c to schew his humanite to be localle that is to saye contayned in one place onlye did saye vnto his disciplis I ascende vnto my father and your father my God your God of Lazarus also when he sayd Lazarus is ded he sayd futher I am glade for your sake that you may beleue for that I was not there And againe schewing the vnmeasurablenes of his godhed he sayd vnto his disciples beholde I am w t you vnto the worldes ende how did he ascend in to heuen but because he is locall a verye man Or howe is he present vnto hys faythfull but because he is vnmeasurable verye God Here maye you conclude by the auctorite of this doctoure also that Christes bodie is onlye in one place to onece For he sayeth that christ as touchinge his maÌ„hed is locall that is to saye conteyned in one place onlye And that he proueth by the scripture euen of Christes awyn wordes Now yf this be true as mi coÌ„science doth testifie how so euer other men shall Iudge Then muste yt nedes followe that his naturall bodye can not be in the sacrameÌ„t And the auctorite I am sure no man can auoide yt ys so playne Now as for his naturall reasons be not worthie the reasoning For furste that the bodie of christ vnglorified coulde no more be in two places at once then his owyn can because he is a naturall bodye as he is I will not examine no coÌ„parison betweyn there to bodyes but yf christe wolde tell me that he wolde eche of both there bodyes to be in â—yftâ—ne places at once I wolde beleue hym and wolde neuer aske hym whether he wolde fyrst gloryfye them or not But I am sure gloryfyed or vnglorified yf he sayd yt he ys able to do ytâ— For the matter ys not ympossible to God Truthe yt is that yf christe so sayde and in so saâ—ing so ment thâ—re is no doubte but he were able so to doo but that he in dede so grossâ—lie meÌ„t ye shall neuer proue And in dede yf he had so ment that his owyn bodye naturall shuld haue coÌ„tinued in the sacrameÌ„t w t is the meate of the soâ—â—e thorough â—ayth and not of the bodye by â—atinge yt and maye as will be eatyn thorough â—ayth although yt Remayne in heuyn as yf yt were here present to oure mouthes yf I saie he had so ment then wolde he neuer haue geuen vs suche scriptures as he did For I saye that this grosse imaginacyon may not stonde w t the processe of the scripture w c ys receyued as yt shall appere by certayne tâ—xtes Furste where our sauioure sayth the fleshe profiteth nothiÌ„g The waight of those wordes doth coÌ„pell vs to vnderstoÌ„d oure matter spuÌ„alye for by this short sentense we are no lesse plucked bake froÌ„ the carnall eatinge â— then was Nichodemê° that he shuld not once dreame of the carnall regeneracyon when christe sayd vnto hym that what so euer was of the fleshe was fleshe For this ys a playne conclusion that when Christe sayd the fleshe profytyth nothynge he ment yt euyn of hys owyn fleshe that yt coulde not profyte as they vnderstod hym to be eaten with the â—eth Albeyt yt doth moche profyte to be slayne for our redeÌ„ption eaten thorough fayth Which thiÌ„ge we may doo although his naturall fleshe be not iÌ„ the sacrameÌ„t â—or I mayâ— as well beleue in him though he be in heuen as yf he were in yerth and in the sacrament aÌ„d bâ—forâ— myn eyes And that Christe spake these wordes of hys owyne bodye yt ys playne by S. Ausâ—ens wordes wrytinge vppon the same place And therfore he sayeth that they muste be vnderstoÌ„d spuÌ„allye and addeth yf thou vnderstond them spirituallye they are sprite and lyffe And though thou vnderstond thâ—m carnallye yet neuerthelesse they are spryt and lyff But vnâ—o the they are not sprite and lyff which vnderstondest not spirituallye those thynges that I haue spoken Allso Athanasius sayth SpuÌ„s est q uiuificat caronoÌ„â—dest quicq uerba q ego locutus sum spuÌ„s sunt uita Nam hoc loco utruÌ„que de seipso dicit carneÌ„ spirituÌ„ spirituÌ„ ab eo quod est secunduÌ„ carneÌ„ distinxit ut noÌ„ soluÌ„ uisibile sed etiaÌ„ inuisibile quod in ipso erat credeÌ„tes disâ—aÌ„r qd et ea q dicit noÌ„ sunt carnalia sed spuÌ„alia Quod emÌ„ comedentibus suffecisset corpus ut totius muÌ„di alimonia fiat Sed ea ê“pter meminit asceÌ„sus filij hoiÌ„s in coeluÌ„ ut illos a corporali cogitatione auelleret post hac discaÌ„t carneÌ„ dictaÌ„ cibum coelestem superne uenientem spiritualem alimoniaÌ„ quaÌ„ ipse det naÌ„ quae locutus â—um inquit uobis spiritus sunt uita That is to saye yt is the sprite that quiâ—kenâ—th the fleshe profieteth nothinge the wordes