ExaÌ„ple wheÌ„ we vteu beholde a paynted table or walle we saye thys is Cicero thys is Salust thys Cesar Here we se both by Austeyne and Ekius iudgemeÌ„t the communyoÌ„ is named a sacryfyce of Christes body and bloud for that it is a resembleaunce ymage of the same sacryfyced By reason whereof nedes it must argue as the ymage of a thynge is not thee thynge selue as a paynted man is no maÌ„ in dede as Cesars ymage is not Cesar ne Salustis Salust selue So thee Masse or Communyon beynge but an ymage and memorye of the true sacryfyce of christes body and bloud is not thee verye true sacrifice of theÌ„ bothe And as the coÌ„munion is named the sacrifice of the foresayd body bloud in consyderatioÌ„ the sayd sacrifice is ther in both recorded resembled Ryght so the ministring ceâ—ebrating of the sayd coÌ„munion is vpoÌ„ lyke respect termed the sacrifyinge of christes bodye bloude Thus meaned our forefathers by the sacryfice sacrificing of the sayde body and bloud Now to the last matter incident to the masse sacrifice whych is the worshippe instans of whole christe bothe man and god in vnder the fourmes of bread and wyne A dede no lesse vnsytting repugnaunt too the EuaÌ„gelical truth theÌ„ the premisses be The pryue masse worshyppers holde opynyon that Christe ought of congrueÌ„ce to be honoured prayed after the consecration as beyng in the prestes haÌ„des for that he is theÌ„ there bothe god and maÌ„ so ther no lesse honourable prayable theÌ„ in heaueÌ„ But thys theyr argumentacion is nothiÌ„g dialectical or formal For that the presence of Christ in a place importeth not the honour prayeng of him in the sayd place Is not god the father essenciallye in eche creature Yet he is reuerenced sollicited but as resident in heaueÌ„ not in hys creatures Is not the holy ghost in eche faythefull person Howbeit no maÌ„ worshippeth him as present in the faithful but as in heaueÌ„ Christ is present in eche religiouse asseÌ„ble assembled faythfully in his name yâ— notwithstaÌ„diÌ„g nomaÌ„ doth honoure pray vnto hym as resyant in the religiouse assemble but in heauen alone Is he not as god eche wher consequeÌ„tly at the masse Howbeit no man adiudgeth hym there to be worshipped called vpon yf hys body were theÌ„ce vtterly abseÌ„ted The experieÌ„s wherof is playn in that part of the masse that forgoeth consecration Why theÌ„ shuld hys bodely presence enforce vs to honour sollicite him in the sayd masse For his body is not honourable ne prayable merely of it selue but in respect of hys godhedde personally alyed coupled therwyth Christ both god maÌ„ with his father the holy goost is present at that baptisme of faythfull infantes where they become enbodied incorporate therto it is to wete where they eate his body drinke his bloude as reallye as we do at his supper Howbeit no maÌ„ worshippeth eyther hys body as present at baptisme ther no lesse preseÌ„ted theÌ„ at his supper eyther els his godhed ether for his own or for the presens of his said body Why theÌ„ shuld ether his body be honoured as present in the masse after the consecration or els thee preseÌ„ce therof cause vs to honour his godhed in the same ther otherwyse vnhonourable As in the olde testament as we learne in the .vi. of Daniel the Godlye fathers in theyr exilemeÌ„t waÌ„dering in farreÌ„ coÌ„treis farre froÌ„ whom dyd in all theyr prayers made vnto god dyrecte bothe theyr hartes and theyr eyes toward HierusaleÌ„ wher so euer they cam dyd sollicite god as inhabitant in the same ryght so we being as pelgrimes iÌ„ this world exiled as were from heueÌ„ our HierusaleÌ„ and natyue countrie where god dwelleth must honour pray vnto hym alway as resyaÌ„t in that heaueÌ„ly HierusaleÌ„ not els wher It is wrytten in the canon of thee most worthy counsayl of Nyce in sort as foloweth Let vs not grossely beholde the breade and cuppe proposed set before our eyes but in faythe consydere thee lambe of of god in that hys sacred table with our myndes eleuate and vplifted Here we se the most worthy coÌ„sayl inhibiteth diswade the vs from gaysing tootinge vpoÌ„ the bread and wine aduertising vs in faith to respect christ in his supper hauing our myndes erected vp into heaueÌ„ In case the said coÌ„sayl had estemed it sitting leyful to worshyp the bread as the most parte of the lealtye I had almost sayde of the clergie to doth an ydolytre detestable or christ in the breade as in maner all christiandoÌ„ doth a lameÌ„table case it wold not haue forbiddeÌ„ vs to to ote vpoÌ„ the bred aduertised vs to vplift our hartes into heaueÌ„ Doth not the prest him selue at his masse saye a little before eleuation or sacringe We haue our hartes aboue to the lord How eyther ought or can christ be reuerenced oncalled as present in the sacringe yf we as the masser quere doo singe haue oughte to haue throughe the decre of the church our hartes eyes two for where oure hartes be there muste our eyes be fastened also aboue erected vp into heaueÌ„ to the lorde For yf he were to be considered honoured in the masse theÌ„ we shuld haue our hartes beneth not aboue downward not vpward to the lord theÌ„ we shuld at that instante worshyp hym in the prestes haÌ„des not in heaueÌ„ Christ prescribing vs an exacte trade perfyt forme to praye wythall enioyneth vs in the same to instant on call God the father in heueÌ„ wher he him selue is resydent on hys ryghthande as Paule sayth not els where notwithstaÌ„ding he be eche where Our father sayth christ whych is in heaueÌ„ he sayth not whych arte eche where In respect wherof bothe the father the sonne be to be worshipped praied to iÌ„ heaueÌ„ a â—one not els wher For to praye otherwise saieth CipriaÌ„ theÌ„ christe tought vs is not only an ignorauÌ„ce but a vice also mathe 15 syth he sayeth why do ye infriÌ„g break goddes iniunction purposely to establesh your tradicioÌ„ Chrisostome iÌ„ hys exposicioÌ„ vpoÌ„ the lordes prayer writeth as foloweth where as Christ saieth God is in heaueÌ„ he doth not by that his so saieÌ„g coÌ„clud hemeÌ„ hiÌ„ ther but with draweth hiÌ„ who makethe his praier to hym froÌ„ the earth fastneth him iÌ„ heaueÌ„ IteÌ„ in his homely vpon the sayde prayer he wryteth after thys forte Se where ye cal vpon the father verely in heauen vpon consideration whereof we crye at thee vicu of thee sacryfyce oure hartes aboue where oure confessyon is bounde lette oure hartes bee represeÌ„ted Hytherto Chrisostome who in these hys sayinges that Christ is not to be honoured prayed to in the earth so not in the massinge place apart therof but in heauen Further caÌ„ ther be made to god at any
tyme an effectual prayer with oute an vplyftinge of oure hartes vnto hym No verelye Why theÌ„ pray we to christ in the masse sacring Wher caÌ„ be none vpliftiÌ„ge but a downliftinge of our hartes In so moche as the places where christes supper and the masse bee celebrate as al other places vnder heaueÌ„ be beneth not aboue Austeyn in the behalfe of the premisses writeth super lectioneÌ„ euaÌ„gelii coÌ„fite or tibi pater etc in sorte thus Faythfull perfetly know where wheÌ„ it is sayd let vs reÌ„dre thaÌ„kes to the lord our god For nomaÌ„ reÌ„dereth thaÌ„kes to the lord who hath not his hart vpward to the lorde Note this he sayth not who hath his hart downward but vpward beneth but aboue dyrected but erecâ—ed in the earth but in heueÌ„ to the lorde Dyd not christ selue alwâ—ye pray to hys father his eyes erected vp into heauen as it appereth in Ihon. xvii Why theÌ„ do we not directe our prayers to the Trinite not as beynge here there or els wher but in heauen alone But here it is obiected the manye dyd worshyp instante Christ as beyng seably conuersant â—monge theÌ„ mathe 8 namely Thomas Peter the leâ—rouse personne therefore wee may in lyke maner honoure hym and on call hym in the masse or coÌ„munion To this I answere albeit christ was worshypful prayeable as beyng emonge vs whyle hâ— was sensiblye coÌ„uersaunt with vs By reson he as god meÌ„ was the seable emong vs vnasseÌ„ded to heaueÌ„ How beit for so moch as he is now become both vnuisible emong vs resydeÌ„t in heaueÌ„ on hys fathers ryghthaÌ„d he is both honourable prayable but iÌ„ heueÌ„ alone not in the erth consecrate bred wine For whi to worship hiÌ„ in vnder or before the sayd bread wyne is to worshyp the same bread wyne As to worship god in vnder or before an ymage is to reuerence thee ymage selue whych is an vnsufferable ydolatree also disalowed by the kynges maiesties proceding Ionn 4 Collos 3. Christ is truth spirite the body as Paule sayth In respect wherof he is not to be honoured moche lesse called vpon in or vnder shadowes carnal thiÌ„ges soch as the bread wyne pyxe other earthlye thynges be But in spirite veritie wythoute fygure shadowe or any other carnal thinge as he hym selue sayth in Ihon iiii The Catholyques theÌ„ selues graunte it ydolatre to worshippe â—hrist body vnder the bread yf ther were remayning the substance of the sayd bread why than worshyp we the fore sayde bodye vnder the bread sythe as I haue heretofore argued the bread substance is not altered Wel thoughe it were yet why shuld it not be ydolatre to honour christes body vnder the accidental and outwarde fourmes of bread For in thys maner as well the accideÌ„tes of bread be worshipped as in thother thee substaunce therof Now doth he show as the father and the holy ghost do his glory maiestie but in heaueÌ„ alone notwithstaÌ„ding he be eche where In respecte wherof he is to bee adored sollicited in heaueÌ„ alone and not els where For honoure prayer importe the presence of his glorye and maiestye where they be exhibited to him And as a king renouÌ„ceth to be honoured as a king where he dyffynneleth hys person age and maiestye royall Ryghte so Christe dyssymuling hys Maiesty renoume godly personage here emong vs refuseth to be reuerenced called vpon as hee is amongest vs. He is as meate receaued eaten as drinke taken and dronken at hys supper and thee masse also yf he be ther receaued at al By reason wherof he is to be honoured and oncalled nether in the one ne in the other bycause meat and drinke be nether honoured ne instanted Thys it appeareth euydeÌ„t that the worshyp praying to christ at the masse hys supper or els where heaueÌ„ exempted is dissonante to the sacred scripture worthy counsayll auncieÌ„t doctours good reason the nature câ—nditioÌ„ of true prayer and so discommendable But here wolsome saye God is too be honoured and prayed to in all places and so consequentlye in the priestes handes at the eleuation or els where To this I answere notwithstanding we ought to honour and sollicite god eche where howbeit our prayers worshippes made vnto him here or ther must tende be directed to him as inhabitant resiant in heaueÌ„ not as here ther or els wher in the earth Why then wolsome say doth Austeyne that worthy clerke wryte to the contrarye He sayth nomaÌ„ eateth christes flesshe onles he fyrst worshyppeth it and synneth it he worship it not Wel though Austeyne saythe Christes must be worshipped yet he gayn sayth not me because he sayth not nomaÌ„ eateth christes fleshe wtout he worship it as in his supper or the masse in or vnder the bread but in symple without any soch lyke glose worshippeth it Yea though he were to be vnderstand to talke of soch worship whych implieth the honour and instaunce of the sayd flesshe By reason he maketh noo clere meÌ„tion wher the same shuld be worshypped he is to be taken to entreate of the worshipping of the before meÌ„cioned fleshe in soch place wherein it is not doubted but certenly knoweÌ„ it is worshipped that is of heaueÌ„ and not of any earthly place But Augustyn meaneth by the worshippiÌ„g of christes fleshe no soch worshippe as honouring prayinge crowchinge or knelinge therunto but only the worthy reuerent and holsome receypte eating of the sayd fleshe For the honour due and requisite to the said fleshe or sacrameÌ„t therof is to receyue theÌ„ as christe instituted theÌ„ to bee receaued that is to wete wyth pure fyeth clensed conscieÌ„ce wyth vnfayned repentaunce charitie thankesgeuing with ful desyre and purpose to be fedde wyth christes fleshe to be therbye mortefyed too syn sanctified to be enbodyed to christ not to crouch before the bred to his fleshe or to worshyp inuocate sollicite him as presente in or vnder the bred The ryght vsage of gods word his sacrameÌ„tes is recoÌ„pted theyr due honour as theyr abusion dishonoure The worde Baptisme absolution throughe meane of true obedient fayth clensed conscieÌ„ce be condignely accordingly receyued wtout ether crouching or kneling eyther worshippinge or prayinge to God as present in the same So thee lordes supper is worthely ryghtely celebrate receyued wyth oute thee foresayd crouche worshyp instaÌ„ce Thus haue I at full spokeÌ„ of the fyrst part of the masse Now to the secoÌ„d whych coÌ„sisteth in the receypt of the lordes supper which wether it bee in very dede as it is named it happely may be wel doubted vpon Yea as me seameth it is not in dede For syth at the preuy masse ther is none to suppli the roumth office of christ in ministring the supper it caÌ„not be the lordes but the priestes supper For wtout christe
AbrahaÌ„ his posteritie Christes breathe was called the holy ghost not that it was the very holy ghost or turned in to him but in respect of the sayd ghost therwyth both resembled exhibited semblably albeit the coÌ„secrate bread is named Christes body yet is it not the layde body ne chauÌ„ged into the same mathe 26 luke 22 but so called in consyderacioÌ„ therwyth the sayd body is both sygnifyed presented exhibited The cup is termed christes bloud the newe testameÌ„t Yet that his so callyng theÌ„ notwithstaÌ„ding no maÌ„ wyll depose therupoÌ„ the cup eyther to be christes bloud or his testameÌ„t Termed notwithstanding thou sayd bloud testament for that it is thou sacrameÌ„tal mean wherwyth they be applied conferred vnto vs Vpon semblable consyderacioÌ„ is the bread named christes bodye Wher as it is thought credited the bread substaÌ„ce only not hys accideÌ„tes also to be tornekynded into Christes bodye By reasoÌ„ he vseth in this his saying this is my body the article thys in the newtre not in the masculine gendre Yf this were formally argued is our bonden duety so to do Yet it is replyed sayed Paule calleth the consecrate bread wyne this bred this wyne Why shuld he so terme theÌ„ In case the one were not turned into christes bodye the other into hys bloud Verely the consideration therof is to haue vs put a difference therby betwyxte the consecrate vnconsecrate coÌ„mon breade wyne acknowledging the former bread wyne to be sacramentes exhibitiues of christes body bloud and these I meane the commoÌ„ bread wyne to be nothing lesse theÌ„ lyke coÌ„dicioned The last argumeÌ„t that is alledged for tornekynd is thys If christes bodye be in thee bred as vndoubtedly it is theÌ„ it is enbreaded his bloude enwyued whych was alway taken for a great heresy In respect wherof transubstantiacion nedes muste be grauÌ„ted as ryght true and beleueable To thys I answere in sorte thus Notwythstandinge christes body be presented in thee bred as questionles it is not placely as ther placed spaced mesured but ghostly as ther vnplaced vnspaced not measured Howebeit it is not enbreaded nomore then the deytie is recompted enfleshed for that it is substancially in vs Nomore then the sayd god hede is demed eÌ„breaded for thou it is entierly in eche bred No morotheÌ„ the holy ghoste is accompted enbreathed for that he was presented in christes breathe Nomore then the sayd holy ghost is adiudged enbodied or enharted for that he is wholly in vs in oure hartes Christes body is adiudged of no man to be accideÌ„ted notwythstanding it is presented in the accidentes of the bread Why then shuld it be adiuged eÌ„breaded for hys preseÌ„ce in the breade The one is as reasonable ' as gatherable as thother is Some are fule deceyued in the meanynge of these wordes thimpanacion of Christes bodye whyche is not in simple any preseÌ„ce indefereÌ„tly of the sayd body in the bred Nomore theÌ„ the incarnatioÌ„ or enfleshing of christes godhead is indiffereÌ„tly any presence therof in maÌ„s fleshe nature But only soch a presence of christes body in the bread wherwyth they both shuld be vnseuerably personed haue al theyr coÌ„dicions properties coÌ„moÌ„ mutuall betwixt theÌ„ Soch a presence is the personal presence of christes Godheade in hys manhode Soch is the presence of the soule in the body In respect wherof as christes body is not enpersoned iÌ„ vs notwithstaÌ„ding it be enbodied to vs Semblable though the sayd body be presented in thou bred howbeit it is not become one person therw t whych is properly termed the impaning or enbreding therof If the bred wyne be not exchaunged in the coÌ„munioÌ„ Some wil demauÌ„d of me why the auÌ„cieÌ„t doctors make so oft report vpoÌ„ thalteracion of the breade wyne To whoÌ„ this myne answere The coÌ„sideration why the forefathers so oft report an exchauÌ„ge to be wrought in the sacrameÌ„t of christes body bloud is For that they beleued the chosen bread wyne to be turned froÌ„ a prophane to a godly vse to become nomore coÌ„moÌ„ but special bread wyne to be made nowe exhibityues sacrameÌ„tes of christes body bloud where as before theyr hallowing they were nothyng so And not that they beleued the sayd bread wyne to be torne kiÌ„ded into the lordes body bloud Thys is the exchaunge wherof the doctours make report and none other doo they acknowledge here besyde Thus I haue argued effectually both consecration traÌ„substantiacion construed after the catholique doctryne to be directly repugnauÌ„t agaynst gods wrytten truth Now wyll I trye whether the masse sacrifyce in semblable sort empugneth the said truth And for so moch as this masse sacryfyce is takeÌ„ here both for a satisfactioÌ„ of syn thankesgeuinge I wyl discusse fyrst whether it be a clensing satisfactory sacrifice This done theÌ„ whether it be an acceptable seruiceable thankesgeuing to god or no. Concernyng the clensynge sacryfyce falsely geuen to the masse 〈…〉 Paule wryteth in sort as followeth With one offering hath christ made ê‘fyghte for euer theÌ„ that are sanctifyed There is not one word in this paules saying diligently depely consydered the enforceth not moch against the before specified sacrifice In respect wherof I wyll report orderly wayghe eche word of the sayd saying seuerally by it selfe Paul sayth not wyth a manyfold or renewed but with one offering hath christ made perfecte for euer the sanctefied In consyderacion whereof they bee foule deceaued who auouche Christes sacrifyce ought to be reuiued multiplied to the ful pardoÌ„ contentacioÌ„ of our synne otherwyse vnpardonable And therfore repete the sayd sacryfyce day by day to the same effect For why that that is oft offered cannot iustly be recoÌ„pted to be offered but ones By reason a repeted renewed sacrifice is not merely syngle one but manifolde diuerse If christ had oft died notwithstaÌ„ding he were the selue same Christ that doeth so oft dye Howbeit the his often dyeng shuld not be adiuged one single but sondry deaths Though it be that selfe same body the dieth by the second deth which died through the former deth Yet is the twyse dyeng of the body recoÌ„pted not one but two dethes as wytnesseth IohaÌ„ in hys Apo. Euen so 2â— yf christ were oft sacrificed thoughe he were the same none other christ that is so offered Yet were that oft sacrificying of hym no syngle one but a many folde multiplied sacrifyce In consideracion wherof sythe by the one otferinge of christe oure synnes be thoughly pourged as paule recordeth Sythe an often offer is not an ones but a manifold sacrifyce though it be ot the selue same matter Christes bodi nether may ne ought to be agayne sacrificed either bloudely or vnbloudely to the doynge away of our defaultes Now to the entretable text of paul By one offering hath christe
bloud Fayn wold our catholiques haue theyr masse sacryfyce to be authorysed founded vpon gods wrytten worde but it wolde not be I beseche the what enforceth the alledged text of Paul to the maynteyning of prestes sacrifice Verely nothing at al. For why it talketh only of the Aaroni cal ordre of priesthode as it doth well appere by this the after sayinge of Paul let no man take vnto hym honoure he meaneth the foresayde priestehode wythoute he bee called of God there too as Aaron was and compareth thee offyce of thee sayde priestehode wyth Chrystes as it is ryghte euydente by thys thee nexte after speache whych begynneth in sort thus Euen so lykewyse Chryste etc. And he speaking but of the leuiticall priesthode oughte in nowyse too be vnderstande of oure masse presthode according to the generall rule Eche man sayinge must be takeÌ„ after the entended entreated matter Well though the foresayd allegatioÌ„ of Paul were to be construed of oure Christian priesthode of our christian pâ—iestes Howbeit it oughte so too be takeÌ„ that it implieth nomore one christiaÌ„ theÌ„ another nomore the spiritual theÌ„ the leameÌ„ notwithstanding some be ecclesiastical ministers whyche other be not according to this saying of peter ye be a kingly presthod But beyt ther be certayn allotted chosen to a special sort of presthode i. Pet. ii whyche the remnaunte of Christians be not allotted to Iet shuld the heretofore alledged scripture argue nothiÌ„g for theÌ„ By reasoÌ„ it entreateth of soch prestes who ar wonted to offre not one gyft but many diuers not one sacrifice but sondre and theÌ„ to the ful contentation of syn oure made priestes offre but one gyfte yf they offer that but one sacryfyce and not dyuers and that not to the satisfaction and purging of synne but for a thankesgeuing as our Catholiques theÌ„ selue now at the last acknowledge Yet thee sayde Catholiques replye for ther said sacrifice in sort thus Christ sayd to his apostels as Luke .xxii. maketh hereof report Thys do for my remeÌ„braunce which thys his saying autoryseth theÌ„ to sacrifyce christis body and bloud as he him selue had theÌ„ done at his supper This theyr replicationis nothing effectual or true Was not S. Paul an apostle not of that basest but hyghest sort howbeit he dyd not vnderstaÌ„d the sayd sayinge of christ after that sort For he spoke the very selue same to thou vnprested CorinthiaÌ„s i. Cori. xi and the not of his owne hede but by the motion of the lord I haue sayth he receyued of the lord Which I haue delyuered you wherby it doth wel appeare that it is not onelye Paules but the lordes also consequently al his apostles mynde that thys hys sayinge do thys in my remeÌ„braunce is spoken aswel to the vnprested as to the prested christians By reason whereof yf th one be through the sayd speche autorysed to sacryfyce christ is body the other is in lyke maner If the one be not the other sorte can not be In respect wherof our Catholiques acknowledging the vnprested not to be autorised throughe the sayd speach auctorysed to sacrifice christes bodi thother is in lyke maÌ„er If th one be not thother sorte cane not bee In recspecte whereof oure Catholyques acknowledgynge thee vnpreysted not to bee auctorysed thoroughe the aboue alledged scrypture to offre Christes bodye and bloud muste no remedye graunte thee preystede not to be lycenced by the sayd scripture to sacrifice the same Thys partecle thys in thys chrystes sayenge thys dooe in my remembraunce as it is a ê“nouÌ„e relatyue so demonstratyue therfor reporteth declareth respecteth hys antecedent whyche was not to sacryfyce hys body wherof he forspoke neuer word ne did anye thing coÌ„cerniÌ„g the same but onely the thaÌ„kful receipt eating of his body drynkyng of hys bloude ther purposeli meÌ„cioned Which ymplie no maner sacrificing of the same at al This is grauÌ„ted of all meÌ„ aswell of the catholiques as the protestantes as a trueth most vndoubted that the laye vnpriested maÌ„ receaueth the coÌ„munyon vnworthely what tyme soeuer he take it not recording therwyth the precyous death of the lorde But howe could the sayd maÌ„ receaue that sayde coÌ„munion vnworthely for his receypte therof wythout myndefulnes of christes passion death yf for to so take it were not a punishable defaulte For why the vnworthenes herein issueth from synne alone But how were it synne yf it were not directly repugnaunte agaynst Goddes oppen commauÌ„demente For there is noo synne whych is not a breach therof But what commaundemente is there for the laye men to remeÌ„bre christes deathe at theyr receypte of the of his supper yf thys do in my remeÌ„braunce be not it yf it touche theÌ„ not Certaynly none By reason wherof nedes must we recognise acknowledge eyther that the vnprested ê‘sons receyue not vnworthely the sayd sacramente when they take it in forgetfulnes and syleÌ„ce of christes passion whiche is nothing grauÌ„table eyther els that this saying of christ this do in my remeÌ„braunce coÌ„cerneth chargeth the sayd persons aswel as the prestes whych is ryght certeyn In coÌ„sideratioÌ„ wherof this do in my remeÌ„brauÌ„ce purporteth not to sacrifice christ in hys remeÌ„braunce but to recorde declare opeÌ„ly hys death as Paul sayth who exponeth the sayd saying 〈◊〉 11. in thys wyse As oft as ye eate thys bread drinke thys cup ye shall show the death of the lorde tyl he come Yet are not oure Catholiques contented but further they procede in theyr replial We haue an aulter wherof they may not eate whych serue thee tabernacle Here saye they Paule meanethe thus They who kepe the ceremonyes of Moyses lawe haue none authoritie to eat of christes bread hys very body coÌ„secrated offered in sacryfyce on the aulter whiche we christeÌ„ men haue set vp in our teÌ„ples If Paul had not meaned this he wold haue made noo meÌ„tion of an aulter whych is made for sacrifice to be offered therupon to God See good reder how foule deceyued be the herfore named persoÌ„s Is it not ryght euydeÌ„t that Paul speaketh of an eateable aultar We haue an aultare saythe he wherof they maye not eate He◠〈◊〉 not of thee masse stone aulter whych is not eatable If yâ— sayd aultare were to be takeÌ„ for a stone aultar Then were they who trusted in the ceremoniall lawe in better case then we Christians be For that they moughte not wee must eat the sayd aulter TheÌ„ shuld Christes body bloud th one haue bene eateÌ„ thother dronking in Paules tyme at the aultare not at the table 1. Cor 10 TheÌ„ wold Paul haue termed the eatynge place of thee lordes supper not the lords table but the lordes aultar Then wold not the Apostles haue gone from house to house to mynister the coÌ„munyon Art â— for that there was none aultare Then do oure mynystres trespace who exhibite mynystre the sayd communion