is manyfest to euery man that wayeth substantially the circumstances of the place For whan Christ gaue bread to his disciples and sayd This is my body there is no man of any discrecion that vnderstandeth the Englishe tongue but he may well knowe by the order of the speeche that Christ spake those wordes of the bread callyng it his body as all the olde authors also do affirme although many of the Papistes deny the same Wherfore this sentence can not meane as the woordes seme and purport but there must nedes be some figure or mystery in this speeche more than appeareth in the plaine wordes For by this maner of speeche plainly vnderstande without any figure as the wordes lye can bee gathered none other sence but that bread is Christes body and that Christes body is bread whiche all christian eares do abhorre to heare Wherfore in these words must nedes be sought out an other sense and menyng then the wordes of them selues do beare And althoughe the true sense and vnderstandyng of these wordes be sufficiently declared before when I spake of Transubstantiation yet to make the mattier so playne that no scruple or doubt shal remaine here is occasion giuen more fully to intreate therof In whych processe shall be shewed that these sentences of Christ This is my body This is my bloud bee fyguratiue speches And although it be manyfest ynoughe by the playne wordes of the Gospel and proued before in the processe of transubstantiation that Christe spake of bread whan he sayde This is my body lykewise that it was very wine whiche he called his bloud yet least the Papistes shuld say that we sucke this out of our owne fingers the same shall be proued by testimonye of all the olde authors to be the trewe and olde faithe of the catholike churche Where as the schole authors and Papistes shall not bee able to shewe so muche as one worde of any auncient author to the contrary Fyrst Ireneus writyng agaynst the Ualentinians in his fourthe boke saithe that Christe confessed bread whiche is a creature to be his body and the cup to be his bloud And in the same boke he writeth thus also The bread wherein the thankes be geuen is the body of the Lorde And yet agayne in the same booke he saithe that Christe takyng bread of the same sorte that our bread is of confessed that it was his body And that that thing whiche was tempered in the chalice was his bloudde And in the fift boke he writeth further that of the chalice which is his bloude a man is norished and doeth growe by the bread which is his body These wordes of Ireneus be most plaine that Christe takynge very materiall breade a creature of God and of suche sort as other breade is whiche wedd vse called that his body when he sayde This is my bodye And the wyne also whiche doothe feede and noryshe vs he called his bloudde Tertulian likewise in his booke written agaynst the Iewes saith that Christe called bread his body And in his booke against Martion he oftentymes repeteth the selfe same wordes And S. Cyprian in the firste boke of his epistles saith the same thyng that Christ called such breade as is made of manny cornes ioyned togither his body and suche wyne he named his bloudde as is pressed out of many grapes and made into wyne And in his second boke he saith these wordes water is not the bloud of Christe but wyne And agayn in the same Epistle he sayeth that it was wyne whiche Christe called his bloude and that if wyne bee not in the chalice than we drynke not of the fruit of the vyne And in the same epistle he sayth that meale alone or water alone is not the body of Christe excepte they be both ioyned togither to make thereof bread Epiphanius also saith that Christ speakyng of a lofe whiche is round in fashion and can not see here nor feele sayde of it This is my body And Saynt Hierome writynge Ad Hedibiā saieth these wordes Let vs mark that the bread which the Lord brake and gaue to his disciples was the body of our Sauiour Christ as he sayd vnto them Take and eate this is my body And S. Augustine also saith that althoughe we may sette foorthe Christe by mouthe by wrytynge and by the sacramente of his bodye and bloud yet wee call neyther our tounge nor wordes nor ynke letters nor paper the body and bloudde of Christe but that wee calle the bodye and bloudde of Christe whiche is taken of the fruite of the yearth and consecrated by mysticall prayer And also he sayth Iesus called meate his body and drynke his bloudde More ouer Cyrill vpon Sayncte Iohn saith that Christe gaue to his disciples peces of bread saiyng Take eate this is my bodye Likewise Theodoretus saith Whan Christe gaue the holy mysteries he called bread his body and the cuppe myxt with wyne and water he called his bloude By all these forsaid authors and places with manny mo it is playnely proued that whan our Sauiour Christe gaue breadde vnto his Disciples sayinge Take and eate this is my body And lykewise when he gaue them the cuppe sayinge Diuide this amonge you and drynke you all of this for this is my bludde he called than the very materiall bread his bodye and the very wyne his bloudde That bread I say that is one of the creatures here in earth amonge vs and that groweth out of the earth and is made of many graynes of corne beaten into flower and mixed with water and so baken made into bread of such sort as other our bred is that hath neither sence nor reason finally that fedeth and nourisheth our bodies suche bread Christe called his bodye whan he sayd This is my body And such wine as is made of grapes pressed togyther and ther of is made drynke whiche norisheth the body suche wyne he called his bloud This is the true doctrine confirmed as well by holy scripture as by all auncient authors of Christes churche bothe Grekes and Latines that is to say that when our Sauiour Christe gaue bread and wyne to his disciples and spake these woordes This is my bodye This is my bloude it was very bread and wyne whiche he called his body and bloud Now let the Papistes shewe some authoritee for their opinion eyther of scripture or of some auncient author And let theim not constrayne all men to folowe their fonde deuises onely bycause they sai It is so without any other groūd or authoritee but their owne bare wordes For in suche wyse credite is to bee geuen to Goddes worde onely and not to the worde of any man As many of theym as I haue redde the byshop of Wynchester only excepted doo say that Christe called not the bread his body nor wyne his bloud whan he said This is my body This is my bloude and yet in
Christ. Likewise before the consecration it is called an other thing but after the consecration it is named the bludde of Christe And again he saith When I treated of the sacramentes I tolde you that that thinge whiche is offered before the woordes of Christ is called Bread but when the wordes of Christ be pronounced than it is not called bread but it is called by the name of Christes body By whiche woordes of S. Ambrose it appereth plainly that the bread is called by the name of Christes body after the consecration and although it be styll bread yet after consecration it is dignyfyed by the name of the thing whych it representeth as at lengthe is declared before in the proces of transubstantiation and speciallye in the woordes of Theodoretus And as the bread is a corporal meat and corporally eaten so saith S. Ambrose is the bodye of Christe a spirituall meate and spiritually eaten and that requireth no corporall presence Now let vs examine S. Iohn Chrysostome who in sounde of woordes maketh moste for the aduersaries of the truthe but they that bee familyar and acquainted with Chrysostomes maner of speaking how in all his writinges hee is full of allusions schemes tropes and figures shall soone perceyue that he healpeth nothyng their purposes as it shal wel appeare by the discussyng of those places whiche the Papistes do allege of him whiche bee specially two One is in sermone de Eucharistia in Encaenijs And the other is De perditione Iudae And as touchyng the first no maÌ„ can speake more plainly against them than sainct Iohn Chrysostome speaketh in that sermone Wherefore it is to be woÌ„dered why they should allege him for their partie vnlesse they be so blynde in their opinion that they can see nothyng nor decerne what maketh for them nor what against them For there he hath these woordes Whan you comme to these mysteries speakyng of the Lordes boorde and holy Communion do not thynke that you receyue by a man the body of God meanyng of Christe These bee S. Ihon Chrysostome his owne wordes in that place Than if we receiue not the body of Christe at the handes of a man Ergo the body of Christ is not really corporally and naturally in the sacrament and so geuen to vs by the priest And than it foloweth that all the Papistes bee lyars because they fayue and teache the contrary But this place of Chrysostome is touched before more at length in answeryng to the Papistes Transubstantiation Wherfore nowe shall be answered the other place whiche the allege of Chrysostome in these wordes Here he is present in the sacrament and dothe consecrate whiche garnished the table at the maundy or last supper For it is not man whiche maketh of the bread and wyne beyng set furth to be consecrated the body and bloud of Christe but it is Christe him selfe whiche for vs is crucifyed that maketh him selfe to bee there present The wordes are vttered and pronounced by the mouthe of the priest but the consecration is by the vertue myght and grace of God hym selfe And as this saying of God Increase be multiplied and fyl the yearth ones spoken by God toke alwayes effect towarde generation Euen so the saiyng of Christe This is my bodye â–ª beyng but ones spoken doth throughout all churches to this present and shall to his last commyng geue force and strength to this sacrifice Thus farre they reherse of Chrysostomes wordes Whiche woordes although they sound muche for their purpose yet if they be throughly considered and coÌ„ferred with other places of the same author it shall well appeare that he mente nothyng lesse than that Christes bodye should be corporally and naturally preseÌ„t in the bread and wyne but that in suche sorte he is in heauen only and in our myndes by fayth we ascend vp into heauen to eat him there although sacramentally as in a signe and figure he be in the bread and wyne and so is he also in the water of Baptisme in theim that rightly receiue the bread wyne he is in a much more perfectioÌ„ than corporally whiche should auayle them nothyng but in them he is spiritually with his diuine power geuing them eternall lyfe And as in the first creation of the world al lyuyng creatures had their first life by gods only word for god only spake his word and al thinges were created by and by accordingly and after their creation hee spake these woordes Increase and multiply â–ª and by the vertue of those wordes al thinges haue gendred and increaced euer sithens that tyme euen so after that Christe sayd Eate this is my body Drink this is my bloud Do this hereafter in remembrance of me by vertu of these words and not by vertu of any man the bread and wine be so consecrated that who so euer with a lyuely faithe dothe eate that bread and drink that wine doth spiritually eate drynke and feede vpon Christe syttynge in heauen with his father And this is the whole meanynge of S. Chrysostome And therefore dooeth hee so often saye that wee receaue Christe in baptisme and whanne he hathe spoken of the receauinge of hym in the holy Communion by and by he speaketh of the receauing of him in baptisme withoute declarynge any diuersytee of his presence in the one from his presence in the other He saieth also in many places that we ascende into heauen and do eate Christe sittinge there aboue AND where S. Chrysostome â—nd other Authors doo speake of the wonderfull operation of God in his sacramentes passynge all mannes wytte senses and reason he meaneth not of the workyng of God in the water bread and wyne but of the meruaylous workyng of God in the hartes of them that receaue the sacramentes secretely inwardly and spiritually transformyng them renuyng fedyng comfortyng and nourishyng them with his fleshe and bloud thorough his most holy spirite the same fleshe and bloud styll remaynyng in heauen Thus is this place of Chrysostome sufficiently answered vnto And yf any man requyre any more than let hym looke what is recited of the same author before in the matter of transubstantiation Yet furthermore they bryng for theim Theophilus Alexandrinus who as they alledge saieth thus CHRISTE gyuynge thankes dydde breake which also we do addynge therto praier And he gaue vnto them sayeng Take this is my body this that I doo now gyue and that whiche ye nowe doo take For the breade is not a figure onely of Christes body but it is chaunged into the very body of Christe For Christ saith The bread whiche I wyll geue you is my fleshe Neuerthelesse the fleshe of Christ is not sene for our weakenesse but bread and wyne ar familiar vnto vs. And surely yf we shoulde visibly see fleshe and bloude we coulde not abyde it And therefore our Lord bearing with our weakenes doth reteyne and keepe the forme and apparaunce of bread and wyne
A DEFENCE OF THE TRVE AND CAtholike doctrine of the sacrament of the body and bloud of our sauiour CHRIST with a confutation of sundry errors concernyng thesame grounded and stablished vpon Goddes holy woorde approued by y e consent of the moste auncient doctors of the Churche Made by the moste Reuerende father in GOD THOMAS ARCHEBYSHOP of Canterbury Primate of all ENGLANDE and Metropolitane Yt ys the spirite that giueth lyfe the fleshe profiteth nothinge Ioannis 6. Thys booke ys deuyded into fiue partes The fyrst is of the true and Catholike doctrine and vse of the sacrament of the body and blud of our sauiour CHRIST The second is agaynst the erroure of Transubstantiation The thyrde teacheth the maner howe CHRIST is present in his holy supper The fowerth is of the eatynge and drinking of the body blud of our Sauioure CHRIST The fyft booke is of the oblation and sacrifice of our sauiour CHRIST A PREFACE TO THE READER OVR SAVIOVR CHRIST Iesus accordyng to the wil of his eternall father when the tyme therto was fully coÌ„plished takiÌ„g our nature vpon him cam into this world frome the high throne of his Father to declare vnto miserable sinners good newes to heale them that wer syck to make the blind to see the deaf to here the domb to speke to set prisoners at libertee to shew that the tyme of grace mercy was come to giue light to them that were in darknes and in the shadow of deth and to preach and geue pardon and ful remission of sinne to al his elected And to perfourme the same he made a sacrifice oblation of his owne body vpon the crosse whiche was a full redemption satisfaction propitiation for the sinnes of y â— wholle world And to coÌ„mend this his sacrifice vnto al his faithful people and to confirm their faith hope of eternall saluation in the same he hath ordeined a perpetual memory of his said sacrifice daily to be vsed in the Church to his perpetual laud praise to our singular comfort coÌ„solation That is to saie y â— celebration of his holy supper wherin he doth not cesse to geue him selfe with al his benefites to all those that duely receiue the same supper accordyng to his blessed ordinance But the Romish Antichrist to deface this great benefite of Christ hath taught that his sacrifice vpon y e crosse is not sufficient herevnto without another sacrifice deuised by him and made by the priest or els without IndulgeÌ„ces Beades Pardons Pylgramages suche other pelfray to supply Christes imperfection And that christian people can not apply to them selfes the benefites of Christes passion but that the same is in the distribution of the byshop of Rome or els that by Christe we haue no full remission but be deliuered onely from synne and yet remayneth temporall payne in Purgatorye due for the same to be remitted after this life by the Romishe Antichrist and his ministers who take vpon them to do for vs that thyng whiche Christ either would not or could not do O heynous blasphemy and moste detestable iniury against Christe O wicked abhominacion in the teÌ„ple of God O pryde intolerable of Antichrist and most manifest token of the soÌ„ne of pardicioÌ„ extollyng him selfe aboue God with Lucifer exaltyng his seate power aboue the throne of God For he that taketh vpoÌ„ him to supply that thyng whiche he pretendeth to bee vnperfite in Christ must nedes make him selfe aboue Christ and so very Antichrist For what is this els but to be against Christ to bryng him in coÌ„tempt as one y â— either for lacke of charitee would not or for lacke of power he could not with all his bloudsheadyng and death clearely deliuer his faythfull and geue them full remission of their synnes but that the ful perfectioÌ„ therof must be had at the haÌ„des of Antichrist of Rome his ministers What maÌ„ of knowlege zeale to Gods honor can with dry eyes se this iniury to Christ and loke vpoÌ„ the state of religion brought in by the Papistes perceiuyng the true sence of Gods worde subuerted by false gloses of mans deuisyng the true christian religion turned into certayne hypocritical superstitious sectes y â— people praiyng with their mouthes hearyng with theyr eares they wyst not what so ignorant in Gods worde that they could not discerne hypocricie superstition froÌ„ true syncere religion This was of late yeres the face of religion with in this realme of Englande yet remayneth in dyuers realmes But thankes be to almightie God to the kynges maiestie with his father a prynce of most famous memory y e superstitious sectes of Monkes Fryers that were in this Realme be cleane taken away the scripture is restored vnto the proper true vnderstandyng the people may dayly reade heare Gods heaueÌ„ly worde pray in theyr owne laÌ„guage whiche they vnderstaÌ„d so that their heartes mouthes may go together and be none of those people of whom Christ complayned saiyng These people honor me with theyr lyppes but theyr heartes be farre from me Thankes be to God many corrupt weedes bee plucked vppe whiche were wont to rotte the flocke of Christ and to let the growyng of the Lordes haruest But what auaileth it to take away beades pardoÌ„s pilgremages and such other like Popery so long as .ii. chief rootes remaine vnpulled vpâ— wherof so long as thei remain wil spryng again al former impedimeÌ„tes of the Lordes haruest corruption of his flock The rest is but branches and leaues the cuttyng away wherof is but like toppyng loppyng of a tree or cuttyng downe of weeds leauiÌ„g the body staÌ„dyng the rootes in the ground but the verye body of the tree or rather the rootes of the wedes is the popish doctrine of TransubstaÌ„tiation of the real presence of Christes fleshe and bloud in the sacrament of the aultar as they call it and of the sacrifice oblation of Christ made by the preest for the saluation of the quick and the dead Which rootes if thei be suffred to grow in the Lords vineyard thei wil ouerspreade all the ground agayn with the old errours superstitions These iniuries to Christ be so intollerable that no christâ—aÌ„ heart can wyllyngly beare them Wherfore seing that many haue set to their hands whetted their to les to pluck vp y e weedes to cut down y e tree of errour I not knowyng otherwise how to excuse my selfe at the last daie haue in this boke set to my hand and axe with the rest to cut downe this tree and to plucke vp the wedes and plantes by the rootes which our heuenly Father neuer plaÌ„ted but were grafted and sowen in his vineyard by his aduersary the diuell and Antechriste his minister The Lord graunt that this my trauail and labour in his vineyard be not in vaine but that it may prosper and bring forth good frutes to his honor and
hensforth of this fruite of the vine vntil that day when I shal drink it new w t you in my fathers kyngdom This thyng is rehersed also of saynt Marke in these woordes As they dyd eate Iesus toke bread and when he had blessed he brake it and gaue it to theim and sayd Take eate this is my body And takyng the cuppe when he had geuen thankes he gaue it to them and they all dranke of it And he sayd to them This is my bloud of the newe testament which is shed for many Uerily I saie vnto you I will drynke no more of the fruite of the vine vntyl that daie that I drinke it newe in the kyngdome of God The Euangelist S. Luke vttereth this matter on this wyse When the howre was come he sat down and the .xii. apostles with hym And he sayd vnto them I haue greatly desired to eate this pascha with you before I suffre For I saie vnto you Hensforth I wil not eat of it any more vntyll it be fulfylled in the kyngdome of god And he toke the cup and gaue thankes and sayd Take this and diuide it amōg you For I say vnto you I wil not drink of the frute of the vine vntill the kyngdom of God com And he toke bread and when he had geuen thankes he brake it and gaue it vnto them sayeng This is my body whiche is geuen for you This dooe in remembrance of me Likewise also whā he had supped he toke the cup saiyng This cuppe is the newe testament in my bloud whiche is shedde for you Hytherto you haue heard all that the Euangelistes declare that Christ spake or did at his last supper concernyng the institucion of the Cōmunion and sacrament of his body bloud Nowe you shall heare what sainct Paule sayth cōcernyng the same in the tenth chapiter of the first to the Corinthians where he writeth thus Is not the cup of blessynge whyche we blesse a comunion of the bloude of Christe Is not the bread whiche we breake a communyon of the bodye of Christ We beyng many ar one bread and one body For we all ar partakers of one bread and of one cuppe And in the eleuenth he speaketh on this maner That whiche I deliuered vnto you I receaued of the Lorde For the lord Iesus the same nyght in the which he was betraied toke breade and whan he had geuen thankes he brake it and sayde Take eate this is my bodye whiche is broken for you Doo this in remembrance of me Likewise also he toke the cup whan supper was doone saiyng This cuppe is the newe testament in my bloude Doo this as often as you drink it in remembrance of me For as often as you shal eat this bread and drinke this cuppe shew forthe the Lordes death tyll he come Wherfore who so euer shall eate of this breade or drynke of this cuppe vnworthily shall be gyltie of the body and bloude of the Lord. But let a man examine him self and so eate of the bread and drynke of the cuppe For he that eateth and drinketh vnworthily eateth and drynketh his owne damnation bycause he maketh no difference of the Lordes body For this cause manny are weake and sycke among you and many do sleape By these wordes of Christ rehersed of the Euangelistes and by the doctrine also of saynte Paule whiche he confesseth that he receaued of Christe two thynges specially are to be noted Fyrst that our sauiour Christ called the materiall bread whiche he brake his body and the wyne whyche was the fruite of the vyne his bloud And yet he spake not this to the intente that men shulde thynke that materiall bread is his very body or that his very body is materiall bread neither that wyne made of grapes is his very bloud or that his very bloud is wyne made of grapes but to signifie vnto vs as S. Paule saith that the cuppe is a communion of Christes bloud that was shedde for vs and the bread is a cōmunion of his fleshe that was crucified for vs. So that although in the truth of his humane nature Christe be in heauen and sitteth on the ryghte hande of God the father yet who so euer eateth of that bread in the supper of the Lorde accordynge to Christes institution and ordinaunce is assured by Christes owne promyse and testament that he is a membre of his body and receyueth the benefittes of his passion whych he suffered for vs vpon the Crosse. And lykewise he that drynketh of that holly cuppe in that supper of the Lorde accordynge to Christes institution is certified by Christes legacie and testament that he is mad partaker of the bloude of Christe whyche was shed for vs. And this ment saynte Paule when he saith Is not the cuppe of blessyng which we blesse a communion of the bloude of Christe Is not the breade whiche we breake a communion of the body of Christe So that no man can contemne or lyghtly esteme this holy communion excepte he contemne also Christes body and bloud and passe not whether he haue any felowshyp wyth hym or no. And of those men saynte Paule saieth that they eate and drynke their owne damnation bycause they esteme not the body of Christe The seconde thyng whiche may bee lerned of the forsayd wordes of Christe and saynt Paule is this that although none eateth the body of Christ and drynketh his bloud but they haue eternall lyfe as apereth by the wordes before recited of S. Iohn yet both the good and the bad do eate and drynk the bread and wyne whiche be the Sacramentes of the same But beside the Scaramentes the good eateth euerlastyng lyfe the euyll euerlastyng death Therefore S. Paule saith Whosoeuer shall eate of this breade and drynketh of the cuppe of the Lorde vnworthyly he shall be giltie of the body and bloudde of the Lorde Here sainte Paule saith not that he that eateth the bread and drinketh the cup of the Lorde vnworthyly eateth and drynketh the body and bloud of the Lorde but is giltie of the body and bloud of the Lord. But what he eateth and drinketh S. Paule declareth saiynge He that eateth and drynketh vnwoorthyly eateth and drynketh his owne damnation Thus is declared the summe of all that scripture speaketh of the eatyng and drynkynge bothe of the body and bloud of Christ and also of the sacrament of the same AND as these thynges be most certainly true because they be spoken by Christe hym selfe the author of all truth and by his holy apostle S. Paule as he receaued them of Christ so all doctrines contrary to the same be moste certainly false and vntrue and of all christian men to bee eschued bycause they be contrary to gods word And al doctrine concernyng this matter that is more than this whiche is not grounded vpon Goddes word is of no necessitee neither ought the peoples heades to be busied or theyr consciences
troubled with the same So that thynges spoken and done by Christe and written by the holy Euangelistes and S. Paule ought to suffise the faith of christen people as touching the doctrine of the Lordes supper and holy communion or sacrament of his body and bloud Whiche thynge beeyng well consydered and waied shalbe a iust occasion to pacifie and agree bothe parties as well them that hytherto haue contemned or lyghtly estemed it as also theym whiche haue hitherto for lacke of knowledge or otherwyse vngodly abused it CHRISTE ordeyned the sacrament to moue and styrre all men to frendeshyp loue and concorde and to put away all hatred variance and discord and to testifie a brotherly and vnfained loue betwene all theim that bee the membres of Christ but the diuell the ennemy of Christ and of al his membres hath so craftily iuggled herein that of nothyng ryseth so muche contention as of this holy sacrament God graunt that al contention set aside both the parties may come to this holy communion with suche a liuely faith in Christe and such an vnfained loue to all Christes membres that as they carnally eate with their mouth this sacramentall bread and drink the wine so spiritually they maye eate and drynke the very fleshe and bloud of Christe whiche is in heauen and sitteth on the right hande of his father And that finally by his meanes they may enioy with him the glory and kyngdome of heauen Amen Altho in this treatie of the sacramente of the body and bloude of our sauiour Christ I haue already sufficiently declared the institution and meanynge of the same accordynge to the very wordes of the gospell and of saint Paule yet it shall not bee in vayne somewhat more at large to declare the same accordyng to the mynde as well of holy scripture as of olde auncient authors and that so sincerely and plainly without doubtes ambiguitees or vayn questions that the very symple and vnlerned people may easily vnderstande the same and be edified therby And this by Goddes grace is myne only intent and desyre that the â—locke of Christ dispersed in this realme among whom I am appointed a speciall pastour may no longer lacke the commoditee and fruite which springeth of this heauenly knowledge For the more clerely it is vnderstande the more swetenes fruit comfort and edification it bryngeth to the godly receauers thereof And to the clere vnderstandynge of this sacramente dyuers thynges muste bee consydered FYRST that as all men of them selues bee synners and thorough synne bee in Goddes wrathe banyshed far away froÌ„ hym condemned to hell and euerlastyng damnation and none is clearely innocent but Christe alone so euery soule inspired by God is desyrous to be deliuered from synne and hell and to obteyn at Goddes handes mercy fauour righteousnes and euerlastyng saluation And this earnest and greate desyre is called in scripture The hunger and thirst of the soule with whyche kynde of hunger Dauid was taken whan he sayde As an harte longeth for sprynges of water so doth my soule long for the O God My soule hath thyrsted after God who is the well of lyfe My soule thyrsteth for the my fleshe wysheth for thee And this hunger the sely poore synfull soule is dryuen vnto by meanes of the lawe whiche sheweth vnto her the horriblenes of synne the terrour of Goddes indignation and the horrour of death and euerlastyng damnation And whan she seeth nothyng but damnation for her offences by iustice and accusation of the lawe and this damnation is euer before her eies than in this great distresse the soule beyng pressed with heuynesse sorowe seketh for some comfort and desireth some remedy for her miserable and sorowful estate And this feelynge of her damnable condicion and gredy desyre of refreshyng is the spirituall hunger of the soule And who soeuer hath this godly hunger is blessed of God and shal haue meate and drynke ynough as Christ hym self said Blessed be they that hunger and thirst for rightousnes for they shalbe fylled ful And on thother side they that see not their owne synfull and damnable estate but thynke theim selues holy ynoughe and in good case and condicion ynough as they haue no spirituall hunger so shall they not bee fed of God with any spirituall foode For as almighty God feedeth them that be hungry so doth he sende awaie empty all that be not hungry But this hunger and thyrst is not easily perceyued of the carnall man For when he hereth the holy ghoste speake of meate and drynk his mynde is by and by in the kytchen and buttery and he thynketh vpon his dyshes and pottes his mouthe and his bealy But the scripture in sundry places vseth speciall wordes wherby to drawe our grosse myndes from the phantasyeng of our teeth and belly and from this carnall and fleshely imagination For the Apostles and disciples of Christe when they were yet carnall knew not what was ment by this kynde of hunger and meate and therfore when they desired hym to eate to withdrawe their myndes from carnall meate he said vnto theim I haue other meate to eate whiche you knowe not And why knewe they it not Forsothe because their myndes were grosse as yet and had not receyued the fulnesse of the spirite And therfore our sauiour Christ myndyng to drawe them from this grossenes tolde theim of an other kynd of meate then they phantasied as it were rebukyng them for that they perceiued not that there was any other kynde of eating and drinkyng besides that eatyng and drinkyng whiche is with the mouth and the throte Likewyse whan he sayd to the woman of Samaria Who so euer shall drynke of that water that I shall geue hym shall neuer be thirsty agayn They that heard hym speake those wordes might well perceyue that he went about to make them wel acquaynted with an other kynd of drinkynge than is the drynkynge with the mouth and throte For there is no suche kynd of drynke that with ones drynkyng can quenche the thirst of a mans body for euer Wherfore in saiyng He shall neuer be thirsty agayn he dyd drawe theyr myndes from drynkynge with the mouth vnto an other kind of drinkyng wherof they knew not and vnto an other kynd of thirsting wherwith as yet thei wer not acquainted Also when our sauiour Christe saide He that commeth to me shal nat hunger and He that be leueth on me shall neuer bee thyrstye he gaue them a plaine watche worde that there was an other kynd of meat and drinke then that wherwith he fedde them at the other syde of the water and an other kynde of hungryng and thyrstynge then was the hungrynge and thirstyng of the body By these wordes therfore he droue the people to vnderstand an other kynde of eatyng and drinkyng of hungring and thyrstyng then that whiche belongeth onely for the preseruation of temporal lyfe Nowe then as the thyng that comforteth
as a necessary article of our fayth But it is not the doctrine of Christe but the subtill Inuension of Antechrist fyrst decreed by Innocent the thyrd and after more at large set furth by schole authors whose studye was euer to defende and set abrode to the worlde all suche matters as y e byshop of Rome had once decreed And the deuil by his minister Antichrist had so daseled the eyes of a great multitude of christen people in these latter dayes that they sought not for their fayth at the cleare light of Gods worde but at the Romishe Antichrist beleuyng whatsoeuer he prescribed vnto thē yea though it were against all reason all senses and Gods most holy worde also For els he could not haue been very Antichrist in dede except he had been so repugnaunt vnto Christe whose doctrine is cleane contrary to this doctrine of Antichrist For Christ teacheth that we receiue very bread and wyne in the most blessed supper of the Lord as sacramentes to admonishe vs that as we be fedde with bread wyne bodely so wee be fedde with the body and bloud of our sauiour Christ spiritually As in our baptisme we receiue very water to signifye vnto vs that as water is an element to washe the body outwardly so be our soules washed by the holy ghost inwardly The seconde principall thyng wherein the Papistes varry from the truth of Gods worde is this They say that the very natural fleshe and bloud of Christe whiche suffered for vs vpon the crosse and sitteth at the right hand of the father in heauen is also really substancially corporally and naturally in or vnder the accidentes of the sacramental bread and wyne which they cal the fourmes of bread and wyne And yet here they varry not a lytle among them selues For some say that the very natural body of Christ is there but not naturally nor sensibly And other saye that it is there naturally and sensibly and of the same bygnes fashion that it is in heauen and as the same was borne of the blessed virgyn Mary and that it is there broken and torne in peeces with our teethe And this appeareth partly by the schole authors and partly by the confession of Beringarius whiche Nicholaus the second constrayned him to make whiche was this That of the sacramentes of the Lordes table the sayd Beringarius should promise to holde that fayth whiche the sayd Pope Nicholas and his counsail held whiche was that not onely the sacramentes of bread and wyne but also the very fleshe and bloud of oure Lorde Iesu Christ are sensibly handeled of the priest in the altare broken and torne with the teethe of the faythfull people But the true catholike fayth grounded vpon Gods moste infallible woorde teacheth vs that our sauiour Christ as concernyng his mannes nature and bodely presence is gone vp vnto heauen sitteth at the right hand of his father and there shall he tarry vntyl the worldes ende at what tyme he shal come agayn to iudge both the quicke and the dead as he sayth him selfe in many scriptures I forsake the worlde sayth he and go to my Father And in another place he sayth You shal haue euer poore men among you but me you shall not euer haue And again he sayth Many hereafter shall come and laye Loke here is Christe or looke there he is but beloue them not And sainct Peter sayth in the Actes that heauen must receiue Christe vntyll the tyme that all thynges shall be restored And saint Paule writyng to the Colossians agreeth hereto saiyng Seke for thinges that be aboue where Christ is sittyng at the right hand of the father And sainct Paule speakyng of the very sacrament sayth As often as you shall eate this bread and drynke this cuppe shewe furth the Lordes death vntyll he come Tyll he come sayth S. Paule signifiyng that he is not there corporally present For what speeche were this or who vseth of him that is already present to say Untyl he come For Untyl I come signifyeth that he is not yet present This is the catholike fayth whiche we learne from our youth in our common Crede and whiche Christ taught the Apostles folowed and the martyres confirmed with theyr bloud And although Christ in his humayne nature substantially really corporally naturally and sensibly be present with his father in heauē yet sacramentally and spiritually he is here present in water bread and wyne as in signes and sacramentes but he is in deede spiritually in the faythfull christian people whiche accordyng to Christes ordinaunce be baptised or receyue the holye communion or vnfainedly beleue in him Thus haue you hard the seconde pryncipal article wherin the Papistes vary from the truthe of Goddes worde and from the catholike faith Nowe the thyrde thynge wherin they varye is this The Papistes saye that euell and vngodlye men receaue in this sacramente the very bodye and bloud of Christe and eate and drynke the selfe same thinge that the good and godly men doo But the truthe of Gods woorde is contrary that al those that be godly mēbres of Christe as they corporally eate the bread and drinke the wyne so spiritually they eate and drinke Christes very fleshe and bloude And as for the wycked membres of the dyuell they eate the sacramental bread and drinke the sacramental wyne but they doo not spiritually eate Christs fleshe nor drinke his blode but they eate and drinke theyr owne damnation The fourthe thynge wherein the Popyshe preestes dissente frome the manifest woorde of God is this They saie that they offre Christe euery day for remission of sinne and distribute by their Masses the merites of Christes passion But the prophetes apostels and euangelistes doo saye that Christe him selfe in his owne person made a sacrifice for our sinnes vppon the Crosse by whose woundes all our diseases were healed and our sinnes pardoned and so dyd neuer no preest man nor creature but he nor he dyd the same neuer more than ones And the benefite hereof is in no mannes power to gyue vnto any other but euery man muste receaue it at Christes handes him selfe by his owne faith and beliefe as the prophete saieth HERE ENDETH THE fyrste booke THE SECONDE BOOKE IS AGAINST THE ERROVR OF Transubstantiation THVS HAVE you hearde declared fower thynges wherein chiefly the papisticall doctrine varieth from the true worde of God and frome the olde catholyke Christen faith in this matter of the lordes supper Nowe lest any man shuld thynke that I faine any thinge of myne owne heade without any other ground or authoritee you shall heare by Goddes grace as well the erroures of the Papistes confuted as the catholike truthe defended both by goddes most certaine woorde and also by the moste olde approued authors and martyrs of Christes churche And fyrst that breade and wine remain after the woordes of consecration and bee eaten and drunken in the
bread bread and wyne wyne and neuer alteryng Christes woordes herein The bread whiche wee breake sayth he is it not the communion of Christes body Nowe I aske agayn of the Papists whether he spake this of the bread consecrated or not cōsecrated Thei can not say that he spake it of the bread vnconsecrated for that is not the communion of Christes body by their owne doctrine And if S. Paule spake it of bread consecrated than they must needes confesse that after consecracion suche bread remayneth as is broken bread whiche can bee none other than very true material bread And straight wayes after sainct Paule sayth in the same place that wee be partakers of one bread and one cuppe And in the next chapiter speakyng more fully of the same matter four tymes he nameth the bread and the cuppe neuer makyng mention of any transubstantiation or remainyng of accidētes without any substaunce whiche thynges he would haue made some mencion of if it had been a necessary article of our fayth to beleue that there remayneth no bread nor wyne Thus it is euident and plaine by the wordes of scripture that after cōsecracion remayneth bread and wyne and that the Papisticall doctrine of transubstantiation is directly contrary to Gods worde Let vs nowe consider also howe the same is against natural reason and natural operacion which although thei preuaile not against Gods woorde yet whan they bee ioyned with Gods worde they be of great moment to confirme any truthe Naturall reason abhorreth vacuum that is to saie that there shoulde be any empty place wherin no substance shoulde be But yf ther remain no bread nor wine the place where they wer before and where theyr accidentes be is fylled with no substance but remaineth vacuum cleane contrary to the order of nature We se also that the wyne though it be consecrated yet wyll it tourne to vyneger and the breadde wyll mowle whyche than be nothynge elles but sowre wyne and mowled bread which could not waxe sowre nor mowly if there were no breade nor wyne there at all And if the sacramentes were nowe brent as in the olde church they bourned all that remained vneaten lette the Papistes telle what is brente They must needes saie that it is eyther bread or the body of Christe But breade saye they is none there Than muste they needes bourne the body of Christ and be called Christbourners as heretofore they haue burned many of his membres except they wil say that accidentes bourne alone without any substaunce contrary to all the course of nature The sacramentall breade and wyne also wyll nourishe whiche nourishement naturally commeth of the substance of the meates and drynkes and not of the accidentes The wyne also wyll poyson as dyuers byshops of Rome haue had experiences bothe in poysonyng of other and beyng poysoned them selues whiche poysonyng they can not ascribe to the moste holsome bloud of our sauior Christ but onely to the poysoned wyne And most of all it is against the nature of accidentes to be in nothing For the definition of accidentes is to be in some substance so that if they be they must nedes be in some thyng And yf they be in nothynge than they bee not And a thousand thynges mo of lyke foolishnesse doo the Papistes affirme by their Transubstantiation contrary to all nature and reason As that two bodies bee in one place and one body in many places at one tyme and that substances be gendred of accidentes onely and accidentes conuerted into substances and a body to be in a place and occupie no roume and generation to be without corruption and corruption without generation with many suche lyke thynges agaynst all order and principles of nature and reason The Papistical doctrine is also against al our outward senses called our fiue wittes For our eies say they se there bread and wine our noses smell bread wine our mouthes taste and oure handes feele bread and wine And although the articles of our faith be aboue all our outward senses so y ◠we beleue thynges which we can neither see fele here smell nor taste yet they bee not contrary to our senses at the lest so contrary that in suche thynges whiche we from tyme to tyme do see smell fele here and tast we shall not trust our senses but beleue cleane contrary Christ neuer made no suche article of our faith Our faithe teacheth vs to beleeue thynges that we see not but it doth not byd vs that wee shall not beleue that we see dayly with our eies and heare with our eares and grope with our handes For although our senses can not reache so farre as our faithe doothe yet so farre as the compas of our senses doeth vsually reache our faith is not contrary to the same but rather our senses doo confirme our faith Or els what auailed it to S. Thomas for the confirmation of Christes resurrectiō that he did put his hand in to Christs side felte his woundes if he might not trust his senses nor giue no credit therto And what a wyde doore is here opened to Ualentinianus Marcion and other heretikes whiche sayde that Christe was not crucified but that Symon Cyreneus was crucifyed for him although to the syghte of the people it seemed that Christe was crucified Or to suche heretikes as sayde that Christ was no man although to mens sightes he appered in the forme of man and semed to be hūgry dry weery to wepe slepe eate drynke yea and to dye lyke as other men doo For if we ones admyt this doctrine that no credite is to be geuen to our senses we open a large field geue a great occasiō vnto an innumerable rablement of most heinous heresies And if there be no trust to be geuen to our senses in this matter of the sacramente why than do the Papistes so stoutely affirme that the accidentes remayn after the consecration whiche can not be iudged but by the senses For the scripture speaketh no woorde of the accidentes of breade and wyne but of the breade and wyne them selues And it is againste the nature and diffinition of accidentes to bee alone withoute any substance Wherefore if we may not truste our senses in this matter of the sacrament thā if the substance of the bread and wyne be gone why may we not then say that the accidentes begon also And if we must nedes beleue our senses as cōcernyng the accidents of bread wine why may we not do the lyke of the substance that rather than of the accidentes Forasmuche as after the cōsecration the scripture saith in no place that there is no substance of bread nor of wyne but calleth them still by suche names as signifie the substances and not the accidentes And fynally if our senses be dayly deceiued in this matter thā is the sensible sacrament nothyng els but an elusion of our senses And so we make muche for their purpose that
disease the puttyng away of thyn infection the wipyng away of thy fylthynesse be not seene with thyne eyes but are beleued in thy mynde so lykewyse when thou doest go vp to the reuerende altare to feede vpon spirituall meate in thy faith loke vpon the bodye and bloude of hym that is thy God honour hym touche hym with thy mynd take hym in the hande of thy hart and chiefely drynk hym with the draught of thy inward mā Hytherto haue I rehersed the saiynges of Eusebius whiche bee so playne that no man can wyshe more playnely to bee declared that this mutation of the bread and wyne into the body and bloud of Christe is a spirituall mutation and that outwardly nothyng is changed But as outwardly we eate the bread and drynke the wyne with our mouthes so inwardly by faithe wee spiritually eate the very fleshe and drynke the very bloud of Christe Hilarius also in fewe wordes saieth the same There is a figure saieth he for bread and wyne be outwardly seene And there is also a truth of that fygure for the body and bloude of Christe be of a truthe inwardly beleued And this Hilarius was within lesse than 350. yeares after Christe And Epiphanius shortly after the same tyme saieth that the bread is meate but the vertu that is in it is it that geueth lyfe But if there were no bread at all howe coulde it be meate About the same tyme or shortly after aboute the yeere our Lorde 400. Saynte Iohn Chrysostome wryteth thus agaynst theim that vsed onely water in the sacrament Christe sayth he myndyng to plucke vp that heresye by the rootes vsed wyne as well before his resurrection when he gaue the mysteries as after at his table without mysteries For he saith of the fruit of the vyne whyche surely bryngeth foorth no water but wyne These wordes of Chrysostome declare plainly that Christe in his holy table bothe dranke wyne and gaue wyne to drynke whych had not bene true if no wyne had remayned after the Consecration as the Papistes fayne And yet more playnely Saynct Chrysostome declareth this matter in an other place sayeng The breade beefore it bee sanctified is called breade but whan it is sanctified by the meanes of the prieste it is delyuered frome the name of breadde and is exalted to the name of the Lordes body although the nature of bread doeth styll remayne The nature of bread saith he doeth styll remayn to the vtter and manyfest confutation of the Papistes whiche saye that the accidentes of breadde dooe remayne but not the nature and substance At the same tyme was S. Ambrose who declareth the alteration of breade and wyne into the body and bloud of Christe not to be suche that the nature substance of bread wine be gone but that through grace there is a spirituall mutation by the mightye power of God so that he that worthily eateth of that bread dothe spiritually eate Christe and dwelleth in Christe and Christ in hym For sayeth saynte Ambrose speakynge of this chaunge of bread into the body of Christ if the woorde of God bee of that force that it can make thynges of noughte and those thynges to be ▪ whiche neuer were before much more it can make thynges that were before still to be and also to be chaunged into other thynges And he bryngeth for example here of the chāge of vs in baptisme wherin a man is so changed as is before declared in the wordes of Eusebius that he is made a new creature and yet his substance remaineth the same that was before And saint Augustin about the same time wrote thus That whiche you see in the altare is the bread and the cup which also your eyes do shew you But fayth sheweth further that bread is the body of Christ and the cuppe his bloude Here he declareth foure thyngs to be in the sacrament Two that we see whiche be bread and wine And other two which we se not but by faithe only whiche be the body and blud of Christ. And the same thyng he declareth also as plainly in an other place saiyng The sacrifice of the Church consisteth of two thynges of the visible kind of the element of the inuisible flesh blud of our Lorde Iesu Christe bothe of the sacrament and of the thynge signified by the sacrament Euen as the person of Christe consisteth of God and man forasmuch as he is very God and very man For euery thyng conteyneth in it the very nature of those thynges whereof it consysteth Nowe the sacrifice of the Churche consysteth of two thynges of the sacrament and of the thyng thereby sygnified that is to saye the bodye of CHRISTE Therfore there is bothe the sacrament and the thynge of the sacrament whyche is Christes bodye What can be deuised to be spoken more plainly against the errour of the Papistes which say that no bread nor wyne remaineth in the sacrament For as the person of Christe consisteth of two natures that is to say of his manhod and of his Godhead And therfore bothe those natures remayne in Christ euen so sayth saynt-Augustin the sacrament cōsisteth of two natueres of the elemētes of bread and wine and of the body bloud of Christ therfore both these natures must nedes remayne in the sacrament For the more playne vnderstandyng herof it is to bee noted that there were certayne heretyques as Simon ▪ Menander Marcion Ualentinus Basilides Cerdon Manes Eutiches Manicheus Apollinaris and dyuers other of lyke sortes whyche sayd that Christ was very God but not a very manne althoughe in eatynge drynkynge sleapyng and all other operations of man to mens iudgementes he appered lyke vnto a man Other there were as Artemon Theodorus Sabellius Paulus Samasathenus Marcellus Photinus Nestorius and many other of the same sectes whyche sayd that he was a very naturall man but not very God although in geuyng the blynd their syghte the dumbe theyr speeche the deafe their hearynge in healyng sodeynly with his worde al diseases in raysyng to life them that were dead and in al other workes of God he shewed himselfe as he had been God Yet other there were which seyng the scripture so playne in those two matters confessed that he was both God man but not both at one tyme. For before his incarnation sayde they he was God onely and not man and after his incarnation he ceased frō his Godhead became a man onely and not God vntyl his resurrection or ascension and then saye they he left his manhod and was only God agayn as he was before his incarnation So that whan he was mā he was not God and whā he was God he was not man But against these vain heresies the Catholike faith by the expresse word of God holdeth and beleueth that Christ after his incarnation lefte not his diuine nature but remained styll God as he was before beyng togyther at one tyme as he is styl
both perfect God and perfect mā And for a playne declaracion hereof the olde auncient authors geue two examples one is of man whiche is made of two partes of a soule and of a body and eche of these two partes remayne in man at one tyme. So that whan the soule by the almyghty power of God is put in to the body neither the body nor soule perisheth thereby but therof is made a perfect man hauyng a perfect soule and a perfect body remaynyng in hym bothe at one tyme. The other example whiche the olde authors brynge in for this purpose is of the holy supper of our Lord whiche consisteth say they of two partes of the sacrament or visible element of bread wyne and of the body and bloud of Christ. And as in them that duely receiue the sacrament the very natures of bread and wyne cease not to be there but remayne there styll and be eaten corporally as the body and bloud of Christ be eaten spiritually so likewyse doth the diuine nature of Christ remayne styl with his humanitee Let nowe the Papistes auaunt them selues of their Transubstantiation that there remayneth no bread nor wyne in the ministration of the sacrament if they wyll defende the wicked heresies before rehersed that Christ is not God and man both together But to proue that this was the mynde of the olde authors besyde the saiyng of sainct Augustyne here recited I shall also reherse diuers other Sainct Ihon Chrysostome wryteth against the pestilent errour of Apollinaris whiche affirmed that the Godhead and manhead in Christ were so myxed and confounded together that they bothe made but one nature Against whō sainct Ihon Chrysostome writeth thus Whan thou speakest of God thou must consyder a thyng that in nature is syngle without composition without conuersion that is inuisible immortall incircumscriptible incomprehensible with suche lyke And whan thou speakest of manne thou meanest a nature that is weake subiecte to hunger thyrste wepyng feare sweatyng and suche lyke passions whiche can not bee in the diuine nature And whan thou speakest of Christ thou ioynest two natures together in one person who is bothe passible and impassible Passible as concernyng his fleshe and impassible in his deitee And after he concludeth saiyng Wherfore Christe is bothe God and man God by his impassible nature and man because he suffred He himeslfe beyng one person one sonne one Lord hath the dominion and power of two natures ioyned together whiche be not of one substance but eche of theim hath his properties distincte from the other And therefore remayneth there two natures distincte and not confounded For as before the consecration of the bread we call it bread but whan Goddes grace hath sanctified it by the priest it is deliuered from the name of bread and is exalted to the name of the body of the Lorde although the nature of the bread remayne stil in it and it is not called two bodyes but one body of Gods sonne so likewyse here the diuine nature resteth in the body of Christ and these two make one sonne and one person These wordes of sainct Chrysostome declare and that not in obscure termes but in playne wordes that after the consecracion the nature of bread remayneth styll although it haue an hygher name and bee called the body of Christ to signifie vnto the godly eaters of that bread that they spiritually eat the supernatural bread of the body of Christe who spiritually is there present and dwelleth in them and they in him although corporally he sytteth in heauen at the right hand of his father Herevnto accordeth also Gelasius writyng gainst Eutyches and Nestorius of whome the one said that Christ was a perfect man but not God and the other affirmed clean contrary that hee was very God but not man But againste these two heinous heresies Gelasius proueth bi moste manifest scriptures that Christe is both god and man and that after his incarnacion remained in hym the nature of his godheade so that hee hathe in hym twoo natures with their naturall properties and yet is hee but one Christe And for the more euident declaratiō hereof he bringeth two examples ▪ the one is of man who beeynge but one yet he is made of two partes and hath in him two natures remaininge both togyther in him that is to saye the bodye and the soule with their naturall properties The other example is of the sacrament of the body bloud of Christ which saith he is a godly thing ▪ and yet the substaunce or nature of breade and wine do not cease to be there styll Note well these wordes againste all the Papistes of our time that Gelasius which was byshop of Rome more thā a thousād years passed writeth of this sacrament that the breade and wyne cease not to be there styll as Christ ceased not to be god after his incarnation but remayned styll perfect god as he was before Theodoretus also affirmeth the same both in his first and in his seconde dialoge In the fyrst he saith thus He that called his naturall body wheate and breade and also called him selfe a vyne the selfe same called bread and wyne his bodye and bloudde and yet chaunged not their natures And in his secōd dialogue he saith more plainly For saith he as the breade and wine after the consecration lose not their propre nature but kepe their former substance forme and figure whiche they had before euen so the body of Christ after his ascention was chaunged into the godlye substaunce Nowe lette the Papistes choose whyche of these two they wyll graunte for one of theim they muste needes graunte either that the nature and substaunce of breadde and wine remayne styll in the sacrament after the consecration and then must thei recant their doctrine of Transubstantiation or els that they bee of the errour of Nestorius and other which didde say that the nature of the Godhead remained not in Christ after his incarnation For all these old authors agree that it is in the one as it is in the other Nowe forasmuche as it is proued sufficientelye as well by the holye Scripture as by naturall operacion by naturall reason by all our senses and by the most old and beste learned authors and holy matyres of CHRISTES churche that the substaunce of breadde and wyne dooe remayne and be receaued of faithefull people in the blessed sacramente or supper the LORD It is a thinge woorthy to be considered and well waied what moued the schoole authors of late yeares to defende the contrarye opinion not onely so farre frome all experience of oure senses and so farre frome all reasone but also cleane contrarye to the olde Churche of CHRIST and to goddes moste holy worde Surelye nothing moued them thereto so much as did the vaine faithe whiche they hadde in the churche and sea of Rome For Iohannes Scotus otherwyse called Dunce the subtylest of al the schole authors in
expounding these wordeÌ„s thei vary amoÌ„g them selfes which is a tokeÌ„ that thei be vncertain of their owne doctrine For some of them saye that by this pronoune demonstratiue this Christ vnderstode not the bread nor wyne but his body and bloud And other som say that by the pronoune this he ment nether the bread nor wyne nor his body nor bloud but that he ment a particular thyng vncertayne whiche they cal Indiuiduum vagum or Indiuiduum in genere I trow some Mathematicall quiditee they can not tell what But let all these Papistes together shew any one authoritee either of scripture or of auncient author either Greke or Latin that saith as thei say that Christ called not breade and wyne his body and bloud but Indiuiduum vagum and for my part I shall geue theim place and confesse that they say trewe And if they can shewe nothynge for theym of antiquitee but onely their owne bare wordes than it is reason that thei geue place to the truthe confirmed by so many authoritees both of scripture and of auncient writers which is that Christ called very material bread his body and very wyne made of grapes his bloud Nowe this beyng fully proued it must nedes folow consequently that this maner of speking is a figuratiue speeche For in playne and proper speche it is not true to saie that breadde is Christes body or wyne his bloud For Christes body hath a soule life sence reason but bread hath neither soule nor life sense nor reason Likewise in playne speche it is not true that we eate Christes body and drynke his bloude For eatynge and drynkynge in their proper and vsuall signification is with the tong teeth and lyppes to swalow diuide and chawe in peeces whiche thyng to do to the fleshe and bloudde of Christ is horrible to be heard of any christian So that these speches To eate Christes body and drynk his bloud be speches not taken in the proper signification of euery worde but by translation of these wordes eatyng and drinkyng from the signification of a corporal thyng to signifie a spiritual thyng and by callyng a thyng that signifieth by the name of the thyng which is signified therby Which is no rare nor straÌ„ge thyng but an vsual maner and phrase in coÌ„mon speeche And yet least this fault shulde be imputed vnto vs that we doo fayne thynges of our owne heades without authoritee as the Papistes bee accustomed to do here shalbe cited sufficient authoritee as well of scripture as of olde auncient authors to approue the same Fyrst when our sauiour Christ in the sixte of Iohn sayd that he was the bread of life the wheÌ„che whosoeuer did eate should not dye but liue for euer that the bread whiche he would geue vs was his fleshe and therefore whosoeuer should eate his fleshe and drynke his bloud should haue euerlastyng lyfe and they that should not eate his fleshe and drynke his bloud should not haue euerlastyng life When Christ had spoken these woordes with many mo of the eatyng of his fleshe and drinkyng of his bloud both the Iewes mani also of his disciples wer offended with his wordes and sayd This is an hard saiyng For howe can he geue vs his fleshe to be eaten Christ perceiuing their murmuring heartes because they knewe none other eatyng of his fleshe but by chawyng and swalowyng to declare that they should not eate his body after that sorte nor that he ment of any suche carnall eatyng he sayd thus vnto theim What if you see the sonne of man ascende vp where he was before It is the spirite that geueth life the fleshe auayleth nothyng The wordes whiche I spake vnto you be spirit and life These wordes our sauior Christ spake to lift vp their myndes froÌ„ yearth to heauen froÌ„ carnal to spiritual eatyng that thei should not phaÌ„tasy that they should with their trethe eate him preseÌ„tly here in yearth for his flesh so eateÌ„ sayth he should nothyng profite them And yet â—o thei should not eate him for he would take his body away from them and ascend with it into heuen And there by fayth not with teeth they should spiritually eate him sittyng at the right hand of his father And therfore sayth he The wordes whiche I do speake be spirite and life that is to say are not to be vnderstand that we shall eate Christ with our teethe grossely and carnally but that we shall spiritually gostly with our fayth eate him beyng carnally absent from vs in heauen And in suche wyse as Abraham and other holy fathers did eate him many yeres before he was incarnated and borne As S. Paule sayth that they did eate the same spiritual meate that wee do and dranke the same spirituall drynke that is to saye Christe For they spiritually by their fayth were fed and norished with Christes body and bloud and had eternal life by him before he was borne as we haue nowe that come after his ascencion Thus haue you hearde the declaracion of Christe him selfe and of sainct Paule that the eatyng and drinkyng of Christes fleshe bloud is not taken in the common signification with mouthe and teethe to eate and chawe a thyng beyng present but by a liuely fayth in heart and mynde to chawe and degest a thyng beyng absent either ascended hence into heauen or els not yet borne vpon yearth And Origene declaryng the sayd eatyng of Christes flesh and drinkyng of his bloud not to be vnderstand as the wordes do sound but figuratiuely wryteth thus vpon these woordes of Christ Except you eate my fleshe and drinke my bludde you shall not haue lyfe in you Considre saith Origen that these thinges written in gods bokes are figures and therefore examine and vnderstande them as spirituall and not as carnall men For if you vnderstand them as carnall menne they hurte you and feede you not For euen in the gospels is there founde letter that kylleth And not only in the olde testamente but also in the newe is there found lettre that slayeth him that doth not spiritually vnderstande that whiche is spoken For if thou folowe the lettre or woordes of this that Christe saide Excepte you eate my fleshe and drinke my bludde this lettre kylleth Who canne more plainlye expresse in any wordes that the eatinge and drinkinge of Christes fleshe and blood are not to be taken in common significacion as the wordes pretend and sound than Origene doth in this place And S. Iohn Chrysostom affirmeth the same saying that if any man vnderstand the woordes of Christ carnally he shall surely profite nothyng therby For what meane these woordes The fleshe auaileth nothinge He ment not of his fleshe god forbid but he ment of them that fleshely and carnally vnderstode those thynges that Christe spake But what is carnall vnderstanding To vnderstand the woordes simply as they be spoken and nothinge els For we ought not so to vnderstande the
thinges which we se but all misteries must be considered with inwarde eies and that is spirituallye to vnderstande theim In these wordes S. Iohn Chrysostome sheweth plainli that the words of Christ cōcerning the eating of his flesh and drinking of his blud are not to be vnderstande simply as they be spoken but spiritually and figuratiuely And yet most plainly of all other S. Augustine doth declare this mater in his boke De doctrina christiana in which boke he instructeth christian people how they should vnderstande those places of scripture which seem hard and obscure Seldō saith he is ani difficulty in proper wordes but either the circumstāce of y e place or y e conferring of diuers translatiōs or els the original tonge wherin it was written wyl make the seuce plaine But in woorde that be altered from their propre significatiō there is great diligence and heed to be takē And specially we must beware that w◠take not literally any thing that is spoken figuratiuely Nor contrary wise we must not take for a figure any thing that is spoken properly Therfore muste be declared saith S. Augustine the manner how to discerne a propre speache from a figuratiue wherin saith he must be obserued this rule that if the thing which is spokē be to y e furtherance of charite than it is a propre speache no figure So that if it be a cōmaundemēt that forbiddeth any euel or wicked act or commaundeth any good or beneficiall thing than it is no figure But if it commaūd any yll or wicked thinge or forbid any thing that is good and beneficiall than is it a figuratiue speache Nowe this saying of Christ Excepte you eate the fleshe of the sonne of manne and drinke his bloode you shall haue no lyfe in you seemeth to commaunde an haynous and a wicked thynge therefore it is a figure commaundynge vs to be partakers of Christes passion keeping in our mindes to our great comfort and profite that his flesh was crucified and woūded for vs. This is briefly the sentence of S. Augustine in his booke De doctrina christiana And the lyke he writeth in his booke De catechisandis rudibus and in his booke Contra aduersarium legis prophetarum and in diuers other places which for tediousnes I passe ouer For if I shuld reherse al y e authorities of S. Augustin and other which make mentiō of this matter it woulde weary the reader to muche Wherefore to all them that by any reasonable meanes wyll bee satysfyed these thinges before rehearsed are suffyciente to proue that the eatynge of Christes fleshe and drinkynge of hys blood ys not to be vnderstand symplye and plainely as the woordes do properly sygnyfye that we do eat and drink hym with our mouths but it is a figuratiue speach spiritually to be vnderstand that we must depely print and frutefully beleue in our hartes that hys flesh was crucifyed and his blud shed for our redemption And this our beliefe in him is to eate hys fleshe and to drynk hys blud although they be not present here with vs but be ascēded into heauē As once forefathers before Christs time did likewise eat hys fleshe and drunke his bludde which was so farre from them that he was not yet then borne The same authors did say also y t whē Christ called the breade his body and the wine his blud it was no propre speache that he than vsed but as al sacramentes be figures of other thinges and yet haue the very names of the thinges whiche they do signifye so Christ institutinge the sacrament of his most precious body and bloode dyd vse figuratiue speaches callynge the breade by the name of his bodye bycause it signified hys body and the wyne he called his bloude bicause it represented his bloude Tertulian herein writing against Martion sayth these wordes Christ did not reproue bread wherby he did represent hys very body And in the same booke he saith that Iesus taking bread distributing it amonges his disciples made it his body saying This is my body that is to saye saith Tertulian a figure of my body And therefore saithe Tertuliane that Christe called breade his body and wyne his bloode bycause that in the olde Testament breade and wyne were figures of his body and bloode And sainct Cyprian the holy martyr saythe of this matter that Christes bloode is snewed in the wyne and the people in the water that is mixte with the wyne so that the mixture of the water to the wyne signifieth the spirituall commixtion and ioynynge of vs vnto Christe By which similitude Cyprian ment not that the bloud of Christ is vyne or the people water but as the water doth signifie represēt the people so doth the wyne signify and represent Christes bloud and the vnityng of the water and wyne together signifyeth the vnityng of christē people vnto Christ him selfe And thesame sainct Cyprian in another place writyng hereof sayth that Christ in his last supper gaue to his Apostles with his own hādes bread and wyne whiche he called his fleshe and bloud but in the crosse he gaue his very body to be wounded with the handes of the souldiours that the Apostles might declare to the worlde howe and in what maner bread and wyne may be the flesh and bloud of Christ. And the maner he straight wayes declareth thus That those thinges whiche do signifye those thinges whiche be signifyed by them may be both called by one name Here it is certayne by sainct Cyprians mynd wherfore in what wise bread is called Christes flesh and wyne his bloud that is to say because that euery thyng that representeth signifyeth another thyng may be called by the name of the thyng whiche it signifyeth And therfore sainct Ihon Chrysostome sayth that Christ ordayned the table of his holy supper for this purpose that in that sacrament he should dayly shewe vnto vs bread and wyne for a similitude of his body and bloud Sainct Hierome likewyse sayth vpō the gospel of Mathew that Christ tooke bread whiche comforteth mans heart that he might represent therby his very body and bloud Also S. Ambrose if the booke bee his that is intiteled De hijs que misterijs initiātur sayth that before the cōsecration another kynde is named but after the consecracion the body of Christ is signified Christ sayd his bloud before the consecracion it is called another thyng but after the consecracion is signified the bloud of Christ. And in his boke De sacramentis if that be also his he writeth thus Thou doest receiue the sacrament for a similitude of the fleshe and bloud of Christ but thou doest obtain the grace vertue of his true nature And receiuyng the bread in that foode thou arte partaker of his godly substāce And in y e same boke he sayth As thou hast in baptisme receiued the similitude of deth so like wise
was Christe Amonge suche maner of speeches he reherseth those words which Christ spake at his laste supper This is my bodye whiche declareth plainly S. Augustines mynd that Christ spake those woordes figuratyuelye not meaning that the breade was hys bodye by substaunce but by signifycacion And therfore S. Augustine saith Contra MaximinuÌ„ that in sacraments we must not considre what they be but what they signifye For thet be signes of things beyng one thyng and signyfiyng an other Whych he doth shew specyally of thys sacrament saying The heauenly bread which is Christes flesh by some manner of speache is called Christes body when in very deede it is the sacrament of his body And that offering of the flesh whiche is doone by the priestes handes is called Christes passion deathe and crucifiyng not in very deede but in a mystycall signyfycacion And to this purpose it ys both pleasaunt comfortable and profytable to reade Theodoretus in hys Dyaloges wher he dysputeth sheweth at length how the names of thyngs be changed in scrypture and yet thynges remayne styll And for exaumple he proueth that the fleshe of Chryst ys in y e scrypture sometyme called a vaylor couerynge someâ—yme a clothe sometyme a vestiment and sometime a stole the blud of the grape is called Christes blood and the names of breade and wine and of his fleshe and bloode Christe doth so chaunge that sometyme he calleth his body corne or bread and sometime contrarye he calleth breade his body And likewise his bludde sometime he calleth wyne and sometyme contrary he calleth wyne his bludde For the more plaine vnderstandinge whereof it shall not be amysse to recite his owne saiyngs in his foresaid dialogs touchiÌ„g this matter of the holy sacrament of Christes fleshe and bluâ— The speakers in these dialoges bee Orthodoxus the ryghte beleuer and Eranistes his companion but not vnderstanding the right faith Orthodoxus saith to his companion Doest thou not knowe that God calleth breade his fleshe Eranistes I knowe that Orth. And in an other place he calleth his bodye corne Eran. I know that also for I haue heard him saye The hower is come that the sonne of man shalbe glorified and Except the grain corn that falleth in the ground dye it remaineth sole but if it dye than it bringeth forth much frute Orth. Whan he gaue the mysteries or sacramentes he called bread his body and that which was myxt in the cuppe he called bloude Eran. ' So he called them Orth. But that also which was his natural bodye maye well be called his body and his verye bludde also maye be called his bludde Eran. ' It is playne Orth. But oure sauiour without doubt chaunged the names and gaue to the body the name of the signe or tooken and to the tooken he gaue the name of the body And so when he called himselfe a vyne he called blud that whiche was the token of blud Era. Suerly thou hast spoken the truth But I would knowe the cause wherfore the names were chaunged Orthod The cause is manyfest to theim that bee experte in true religion For he would that they whiche bee partakers of the godly sacramentes should not sette their myndes vppon the nature of the thynges whiche they see but by the chaungyng of the names should beleue the thynged whiche be wrought in them by grace For he that called that which is his natural body corne and bread and also called him selfe a vyne he dyd honour the visible tokens and signes with the names of his body and bloud not chaungyng the nature but addyng grace to nature Eran. Sacramentes bee spoken of sacramentally and also by theim bee manyfestly declared thynges whiche all men knowe not Ortho. Seyng than that it is certaine that the Patriarche called the Lordes body a vestiment and apparelle and that nowe we be entred to speake of godly sacramentes tel me truely of what thyng thynkest thou this holy meate to be a tooken and figure of Christes diuinitee or of his body and bloud Era. It is cleare that it is the fygure of those thynges wherof it beareth the name Orth. ' Meanest thou of his body and bloud Era. ' Euen so I meane Orth. Thou haste spoken as one that loueth the trueth for the Lorde when he tooke the token or signe he sayd not This is my diuinitee but This is my body and This is my bloud And in another place The bread whiche I wylle geue is my fleshe whiche I wylle geue for the life of the worlde Era. The thynges be true for they be Gods wordes All this wryteth Theodoretus in his fyrst Dialogue And in the second he wryteth thesame in effect and yet in some thynges more plainly against suche heretikes as affirmed that after Christes resurrection and ascencion his humanitee was chaunged froÌ„ the very nature of a maÌ„ turned into his diuinitee Against whoÌ„ thus he writeth Orth. Corrupcion health sickenes death be accidentes for they go and come Era. ' It is meete they be so called Orth. Mens bodyes after their resurrection bee deliuered from corrupcion death and mortalitee and yet they lose not their propre nature Era. ' Trueth it is Orth. The body of Christ therfore did ryse quit cleane from all corruption and death and is impassible immortall glorifyed with the glorye of God and is honoured of the powers of heauen and yet it is a body and hath the same bygnes that it had before Era. Thy saiynges seme true and accordyng to reason but after he was asceÌ„ded vp into heauen I thynke thou wylt not say that his body was turned into the nature of the Godhead Orth. I would not say for the persuacion of mans reason nor I am not so arrogaÌ„t and presumptuous to affirme any thyng whiche scripture passeth ouer in silence but I haue heard S. Paule crye that God hath ordayned a day whan hee wyll iudge all the worlde in iustice by that maÌ„ which he appointed before performyng his promise to all men raisyng him from death I haue learned also of the holy angels that he wyll comme after that fashion as his disciples sawe him go to heauen But they saw a nature of a certaine bygnes not a nature whiche had no bygnes I heard furthermore the Lord say You shall see the soÌ„ne of maÌ„ come in y â— cloudes of heaueÌ„ And I knowe that euery thyng that menne see hath a certaine bygnes For that nature that hath no bignes can not be seen Moreouer to sytte in the throne of glory and to sette the Lambes vppon his right hande and the goates vpon his left hand signifyeth a thyng that hath quantitee and bygnes Hytherto haue I rehersed Theodoretus wordes And shortly after Eranistes sayth Era. Wee must turne euery stone as the prouerbe sayth to seeke out the truth â–ª but specially whan godly matters be propounded Orth. Tel me than the sacrameÌ„tal signes whiche
other common bread but for the dignitee whervnto it is taken it is called with addition Heauenly breade the breade of lyfe and the bread of thankes gyuyng The fift that no man ought to be so arrogant and presumptuous to affirme for a certayn truth in religion any thynge whiche is not spoken of in holy scripture And this is spokē to the great and vtter condemnation of the Papistes which make and vnmake newe articles of oure faithe from tyme to tyme at their pleasure without any scripture at all yea quite and cleane contrary to scripture And yet wyll they haue all men bounde to beleue what so euer they inuent vpon peryll of damnation and euerlastyng fyre And they woulde constrayne with fyre and fagotte all men to consent contrary to the manyfest woordes of God to these their erroures in this matter of the holy sacramente of Christes body and bloude Fyrst that there remaineth no bread nor wyne after the consecration but that Christes fleshe and bloud is made of them Seconde that Christes body is really corporally substancially sensibly and naturally in the bread and wyne Thyrdely that wycked persones doo eate and drynke Christes very body and bloude Fourthly that priestes offer Christ euery day make of him a new sacrifice propiciatory for syn Thus for shortnes of tyme do I make an end of Theodoretus with other olde auncient writers which do moste clerely affirme that to eate Christes body and to drynke his bloude be figuratiue speches And so be these sentences like wyse whiche Christe spake at his supper This is my body This is my bloudde And meruail not good reder that Christe at y e time spake in figures whan he did institute that sacrament seing that it is the nature of al sacramentes to be figures And although y e scripture be ful of Schemes tropes figures yet specially it vseth theim whā it speketh of sacramentes When the Ark which represented Gods maiestee was come into the army of the Israelites the Philistians said that god was come into the army And God hym selfe sayd by his prophete Nathan that from the time that he had brought the children of Israell out of Egypte he dwelled not in houses but that he was caried about in tentes and tabernacles And yet was not God hym selfe so caried aboute or wente in tentes or tabernacles but bycause the arke whiche was a figure of God was so remoued from place to place he spake of hym selfe that thyng whyche was to be vnderstand of the Arke And Christ hym selfe often tymes spake in similitudes parables and figures as whan he said The field is the worlde the enemy is the dyuell the sede is the worde of God Iohn is Helias I am a vine and you be the brāches I am bread of lyte My father is an husband mā and he hath his fanne in his hand and wil make cleane his flower and gather the wheat into his barne but the chaffe he wyll caste into euerlastyng fyre I haue a meate to eate whiche you knowe not Woorke not meate that perisheth but that endureth vnto euerlastyng life I am good shepherd The sonne of man wyl set the shepe at his right hand and the goates at his left hād I am a doore One of you is the deuil Whosoeuer dothe my fathers wylle he is my brother syster and mother And whan he sayd to his mother and to Ihon. This is thy sonne this is thy mother These with an infinite numbre of like sentences Christe spake in Parables Metaphores tropes and figures But chiefly whan he spake of the sacramentes he vsed figuratiue speches As whan in Baptisme he sayd that wee must bee baptised with the holy ghost meanyng of spiritual baptisme And lyke speeche vsed sainct Ihon the Baptiste saiyng of Christe that he should Baptise with the holy ghoste and fyre And Christ sayd that wee must be borne againe or els wee can not see the kyngdome of God And sayd also Whosoeuer shall drynke of that water whiche I shall geue hym he shall neuer bee drye agayne But the water whiche I shall geue him shall bee made within him a welle whyche shall spryng into euerlastyng lyfe And sainct Paule sayth that in Baptisme wee clothe vs with Christe and be buryed with him This baptisme washing and newe byrth by the fyre and the holy ghoste and this water that spryngeth in a man floweth into euerlastyng life can not be vnderstande of any material water material washyng and material byrthe but by translacion of thynges visible into thynges inuisible they must bee vnderstande spiritually and figuratiuely After thesame sort the mystery of our redemption and the passion of our sauiour Christ vpon the crosse aswel in the newe as in the old Testament is expressed and declared by many fygures and figuratiue speeches As the pure Paschal lambe without spot signified Christ. The effusion of the lambes bloud signified the effusion of Christes bloud And the saluacion of the children of Israel from temporal death by the lambes bloud signified our saluacion from eternall death by Christes bloud And as almightie God passyng through Egipt killed all the Egyptians heyres in euery house and lefte not one aliue neuerthelesse he passed by the children of Israels houses where he sawe the Lambes bloud vpon the doores and hurted none of them but saued them all by the meanes of the Lambes bloudde so lykewyse at the last iudgement of the whole worlde none shall be passed ouer and saued but that shall be founde marked with the bloud of the moste pure immaculate lambe Iesus Christe And forasmuch as the sheddyng of that lambes bloud was a token figure of the sheddyng of Christes bloud than to come and forasmuche also as all the sacramentes and figures of the old testament ceassed and had an end in Christ leste by our great vnkyndnes we should peraduenture bee forgetfull of the greate benefite of Christ therfore at his last supper when he toke his leaue of his apostles to departe oute of the worlde he dyd make a new wyll and testament wherin he bequeathed vnto vs cleane remission of all our synnes and the euerlastynge inheritance of heauen And the same he confirmed the nexte daie with his owne bloud and death And leste we should forget the same he ordeyned not a yerely memory as the Paschall lambe was eaten but ones euery yere but a dayely remembrance he ordained therof in bread wyne sanctified and dedicated to that purpose saiyng This is my body This cuppe is my bloud whiche is shed for the remission of synnes Do this in the remembrance of me Admonyshyng vs by these wordes spoken at the makyng of his laste wyll and testament and at his departyng out of the worlde bycause they should be the better rememored that whensoeuer we do eate the bread in his holy supper and drynke of that cup
wee should remembre howe muche Christ hath done for vs and howe he dyed for our sakes Therefore saith saint Paul As often as ye shal eate of this bread and drinke the cuppe you shall shew foorth the Lordes death vntyll he come And forasmuche as this holy breade broken and the wine deuided doo represent vnto vs the death of Christ nowe passed as the kyllynge of the Paschall lambe dyde represent y â— same yet to come therfore our sauiour Christ vsed the same maner of speeche of the bread and wyne as God before vsed of the Paschall lambe For as in the olde Testament God sayd This is the Lordes Passeby or Passeouer euen so sayth Christ in the new Testament This is my body This is my bloude But in the old mistery and sacrament the Lambe was not the Lordes very Passeouer or passyng by but it was a figure whiche represented his passynge by So likewise in the newe Testament the breade and wine be not Christes very body and bloude but they be figures whiche by Christes institution bee vnto the godly receauers thereof Sacramentes tokens significations and representations of his very fleshe and bludde instructyng their faith that as the bread and wine fede them corporally and continue this temporall lyfe so the very fleshe and bloud of Christ feedeth them spiritually and geueth them euerlastyng lyfe And why shulde any man thinke it strange to admit a figure in these speches This is my body This is my bloude seyng that the coÌ„munication the same nyghte by the Papistes owne confessions was so full of figuratiue speeches For the Apostles spake figuratiuely whan they asked Christ where he would eate his passeouer or passeby And Christe hym selfe vsed the same figure when he sayd I haue muche desyred to eate this passeouer with you Also to eate Christes body and to drynke his bloude I am sure they wyl not say that it is taken proprely to eate drike as we doe eate other meates and drynkes And when Christe sayde This cup is a newe testament in my bloude here in one sentence bee two figures One in this worde Cup whych is not taken for the cup it selfe but for the thynge conteyned in the cup. An other is in this worde Testament for neyther the cuppe nor the wyne contained in the cuppe is Christes Testament but is a token signe and figure whereby is represented vnto vs his Testament confirmed by his bloudde And if the Papists wil say as thei say in dede that by this cup is neither ment the cup nor the wine conteyned in the cuppe but that therby is ment Christes bloud contained in the cuppe yet must they nedes graunt that there is a fygure For Christes bloude is not in proper speche the New testameÌ„t but it is the thyng that coÌ„firmed the new testament And yet by this strange interpretation the Papistes make a very straunge speche more strange then any figuratiue speche is For this they make the sentence This bloud is a newe testament in my bloud Which saiyng is so fonde and so farre from all reason that the foolyshenes therof is euident to euery man Nowe forasmuch as it is plainly declared and manifestly proued that Christe called bread his body and wyne his bloud and that these sentences be figuratiue speeches and that Christe as concernyng his humanitee and bodily presence is ascended into heuen with his whole fleshe and bloudde and is not here vpon earthe and that the substance of breade and wyne doo remayne styll and be receaued in the sacrament and that although they remayne yet they haue changed theyr names so that the bread is called Christes bodye and the wyne his bloudde and that the cause why theyr names bee chaunged is this â–ª that we should lyft vp our hartes and myndes frome the thynges whyche we se vnto the thinges whyche we beleue and be aboue in heauen wherof the bread and wyne haue the names althoughe they bee not the very same thynges in dede These thynges well considered and waied all the auctoritees and argumentes whyche the Papistes fayne to serue for theyr purpose be cleane wyped awaie For whether the authors which they alledge say that we doo eate Christes fleshe and drynke his bloudde or that the bread and wyne is conuerted into the substance of his fleshe and bloud or that we bee tourned into his fleshe or that in the Lordes supper we do receaue his very fleshe and bloudde or that in the breadde and wyne is receaued that whyche dydde hange vppon the Crosse or that Christe hathe lefte his fleshe with vs or that Christe is in vs and wee in hym or that he is whole here and whole in heauen or that the same thynge is in the Chalice whyche flowed oute of his syde or that the same thynge is receaued with our mouthe whyche is beleued with our faythe or that the breade and wyne after the Consecration bee the body and bloudde of CHRISTE or that we bee nouryshed with the body and bloude of Christ or that Christe is bothe gone hence and is styll here or that Christe at his laste supper bare hym selfe in his owne handes These and all other like sentences may not be vnderstanded of Christes humanitee litterally and carnally as the wordes in common speeche doo proprely signifie for so doothe no man eate Christes fleshe nor drinke his bloudde nor so is not the bread and wyne tourned into his fleshe and bloud nor we into hym nor so is the breade wyne after the consecration his flesh and blud nor so is not his fleshe and bloud whole heere in earth eaten with our mouthes nor so dydde not Christe take hym selfe in his owne handes But these and all other lyke sentences whiche declare Christe to be here in earth and to be eaten and dronken of christian people are to bee vnderstande eyther of his diuine nature wherby he is euâ—ry where or els they must be vnderstanded figuratiuely oâ— spiritually For figuratiuely he is in the breade and wyne and spiritually he is in them that worthyly eate and drinke the bread and wyne but really carnally and corporally he is onely in heauen frome whence he shall come to iudge the quycke and deade This briefe aunswere wyll suffice for all that the Papistes can bryng for their pourpose yf it bee aptely applyed And for the more euidence hereof I shall applye the same to somme suche places as the Papistes thynke doo make moste for theym that by the aunswere to those places the reste maye bee the more easyly aunswered vnto They alledge saint Clement whose words be these as thei report The sacramentes of Gods secretes are coÌ„mitted to thre degrees to a priest a Deacon and a minister whiche with feare and tremblyng ought to kepe the leauynges of the broken peeces of the Lordes body that no corruption be founde in the holy place least by negligence great iniury bee done to the portion
spirituall and pure eatinge with hart and mind which is to beeleue in oure hartes that his fleshe was â—ente and torne for vs vppon the crosse and his bludde shedde for our redemption and that the same fleshe and bludde nowe sitteth at the ryght hande of the father making continual intercession for vs and to imprint and digest this in our mindes puttinge our whole affiaunce and trust in him as touchinge our saluacion and offering ourselues clearlye vnto hym to loue and serue hym all the dayes of our lyfe thys is trewely sincerely and spiritually to eate his flesh and to drinke his bludde And this sacryfyce of Christe vpon the crosse was that oblation whyche Cypriane saithe was figured and signifyed before it was done by the wyne whiche Noe dranke and by the breade and wyne whiche Melchisedech gaue to Abraham and by many other figures which Cyprian there reherseth And nowe when Christe is come and hath accomplished that sacrifice the same is figured signified and represented vnto vs by that bread and wine which faithfull people receaue daylye in the holy communion Wherein lyke as wyth their mouths carnally thei eat the bread drink the wyne so by their faithe spiritually they eate Christes very fleshe and drinke his very bloode And herby it appeareth that S. Cyprian clearly affirmeth the moste true doctrine and is wholy vpon oure side And against the Papistes hee teacheth moste plainly that the communion ought to be receaued of all men vnder bothe the kindes and that CHRIST called breade his body and wyne hys bloude and that there is no transubstantiation but that breade remaineth there as a figure to represent Christes body and wine to represente his blud and that those whyche bee not y â— lyuely membres of Christe doo eate the breade and drynke the wyne and bee nouryshed by theym but the verye fleshe and bludde of CHRIST they neyther eate nor drinke Thus haue you hearde declared the mynde of Saint Cyprian But Hylarius thynke they is plainest for theym in this matter whose woordes they translate thus If the worde was made verely fleshe we verely receiue the worde beyng fleshe in our Lordes meate howe shall not Christ be thought to dwel naturally in vs who beyng borne man hath taken vnto him the nature of our fleshe that can not be seuered and hath put together the nature of his fleshe to the nature of his eternitee vnder the sacrament of the communion of his fleshe vnto vs. For so wee bee all one because the father is in Christe and Christe in vs. Wherfore whosoeuer will denye the father to be naturally in Christe he muste denye fyrste either him selfe to be naturally in Christ or Christ to be naturally in him For the beyng of the father in Christe and the beyng of Christ in vs maketh vs to be one in them And therfore if Christ haue taken verily the fleshe of our body and the man that was verely borne of the virgyn Mary is Christ and also we receiue vnder the true mysterye the fleshe of his body by meanes whereof wee shall bee one for the father is in Christ and Christ in vs how shall that be called the vnitee of wylle when the naturall propertie brought to passe by the sacrament is the sacrament of vnitee Thus doth the Papistes the aduersaries of Gods woorde and of his trueth allege the authoritee of Hilarius either peruersely and purposely as it seemeth vntruely cityng him and wrastyng his wordes to their purpose or els not truely vnderstandyng him For although he sayth that Christe is naturally in vs yet he sayth also that we be naturally in him And neuerthelesse in so saiyng he ment not of the natural and corporal presence of the substance of Christes body of ours for as oure bodyes bee not after that sorte within his body so is not his body after that sorte within our bodyes but he ment that Christe in his incarnacion receyued of vs a mortall nature and vnited the same vnto his diuinitee and so be we naturally in him And the sacramentes of Baptisme and of his holy supper if we rightly vse the same do moste assuredly certifye vs that wee bee partakers of his godly nature hauyng geuen vnto vs by him immortalitee and life euerlastyng so is Christ naturally in vs. And so bee wee one with Christ and Christ with vs not onely in wylle mynde but also in very naturall properties And so concludeth Hilarius against Arrius that Christe is one with his father not in purpose and wylle onely but also in very nature And as the vnion betwene Christe and vs in baptisme is spiritual and requyreth no real and corporall presence so lykewise oure vnion with Christ in his holy supper is spiritual and therfore requyreth no real and corporall presence And therfore Hilarius speaking there of both the sacramentes maketh no difference betwene our vnion with Christ in baptisme our vnion with him in his holy supper And sayth further that as Christ is in vs so be wee in him â–ª whiche the Papistes can not vnderstand corporally and really except they wyll say that all our bodyes be corporally within Christes body Thus is Hilarius answered vnto both plainly shortly And this answere of Hilarius wyll serue also vnto Cyril whom they allege to speake after the same sort that Hilarius doth that Christ is naturally in vs. The wordes whiche they recite be these We denye not sayth Cyril against the heretike but we be spiritually ioyned to Christ by fayth and syncere charitee but that we shuld haue no maner of coniunction in our fleshe with Christ that we vtterly deny and thynke it vtterly discrepant from Goddes holy scriptures For who doubteth but Christ is so the vyne tre we so the branches as we get thence our life Heare what sainct Paule sayth Wee be all one body with Christe for though we be many we be one in him All we participate in one foode Thynketh this hereticke that we knowe not the strength and vertue of the mistical benediction whiche when it is made in vs doth it not make Christ by coÌ„munication of his fleshe to dwell corporally in vs Why be the membres of faythful mens bodyes called the membres of Christe Knowe you not sayth sainct Paule that your membres be the membres of Christ And shall I make the membres of Christ partes of the whoores body God forbyd And our sauiour also sayth He that eateth my fleshe and drynketh my bloud dwelleth in me and I in him Although in these wordes Cyril doth say that Christ doth dwell corporally in vs whan we receiue y â— mistical benediction yet he neither sayth that Christ dwelleth corporally in the bread nor that he dwelleth in vs corporally onely at suche tymes as wee receiue the sacrament nor that he dwelleth in vs not we in him but he sayth aswel y t we dwel in him as that he dwelleth in vs. Whiche dwellyng is
neither corporal nor local but an heauenly spiritual supernatural dwellyng wherby so long as we dwell in him he in vs we haue by him euerlastyng life And therfore Cyril sayth in the same place that Christ is the vyne and wee the braunches because that by him wee haue life For as the braunches receiue lyfe and nourishement of the body of the vyne so receiue we by him the natural propertie of his body whiche is life and immortalitee by that meanes we beyng his membres do liue and are spiritually norished And this ment Cyril by this worde Corporally when he sayth that Christ dwelleth corporally in vs. And the same ment also sainct Hilarius by this woorde Naturally whan he sayd that Christ dwelleth naturally in vs. And as sainct Paule whan he sayd that in Christ dwelleth the full diuinitee Corporally by this worde Corporally he ment not that the diuinitee is a body so by that body dwelleth bodely in Christ. But by this worde Corporally he ment that the diuinitee is not in Christ accidentally lightly and slenderly but substantially and perfectely wyth all hys mighte and power so that CHRIST was not onely a mortall manne to suffre for vs but also hee was immortall God able to redeeme vs. So S. Cyril whan he sayd that Christ is in vs corporally he mente that we haue him in vs not lightly and to small effecte and purpose but that we haue him in vs substantially pythelye and effectually in suche wise that wee haue by hym redemption and euerlastinge lyfe And this I sucke not out of myne owne fyngers but haue it of Cyrils owne expresse words where he saith A lyttle benediction draweth the whole manne to god and filleth him with grace and after this manner Christe dwelleth in vs and we in CHRIST But as for corporall eatinge and drinkinge with our mouths and digesting with our bodies Cyril neuer ment that Christ doth so dwel in vs as he plainly declareth Our sacrament saith he doth not affirme the eatinge of a manne drawynge wickedly christen people to haue grosse imaginacions and carnal fantasies of suche thinges as be fine and pure receiued onely with a sincere faithe But as twoo waxes that be molten put togither they close so in one that euery part of the one is ioyned to euery parte of the other euen so saith Cyril he that receiueth the flesh and bloode of the Lord muste needes bee so ioyned with Christ that Christ must be in him and he in Christ. By these wordes of Cyril appeareth his mind plainly that wee maye not grossely and rudelye thinke of the eating of Christ with our mouths but with our faith by which eatinge although he be absente hence bodely and be in the eternall life and glorye with his father yet we bee made partakers of hys nature to bee immortal and haue eternall lyfe and glorye with him And thus is declared the minde aswell of Cyryll as of Hylarius And here may be wel enough passed ouer Basilius Gregorius Nissenus and Gregorius Nazianzenus partely bycause they speake lyttle of this mattier and partely bycause they maye bee easyly aunswered vnto by that which is before declared and often repeted whiche is that a fygure hath the name of the thing wherof it is the figure and therefore of the fygure maye be spoken the same thinge that maye be spoken of the thynge it selfe And as concerninge the eatinge of Christes fleshe and drinkinge of his bludde they spake of the spirituall eatinge and drinkinge thereof by faith and not of corporall eating and drnkinge with the mouth and teethe Likewise Eusebius Emissenus is shortly answered vnto for he speaketh not of any real and corporall conuersion of breade and wyne into Christes body and bludde nor of any corporall and reall eating and drinkinge of the same but hee speaketh of a sacramentall conuersion of bread and wyne and of a spirituall eatinge and drynkyng of the body and bloode After whiche sorte Christe is as well present in baptisme as the same Eusebius plainly there declareth as he is in the Lordes table Which is not carnally and corporally but by faithe and spiritually But of thys authour is spoken beefore more at large in the matter of transubstantiation fo 24. And now I wyll come to the saying of S. Ambrose whiche is alwaies in their mouthes Before the consecration saith he as they allege it is bread but after the woordes of consecration it is the body of Chryste For answere herevnto yt muste be fyrste knowen what Consecration is Consecration is the separation of anye thing from a prophane and wordely vse vnto a spirituall and godly vse And therfore whan vsual and common water is taken frome other vses and put to the vse of baptisme in the name of the father and of the sonne and of the holy ghost than it may rightly be called Consecrated water that is to saye water put to an holy vse Euen so whan cōmon bread wine be taken seuered frō other bread and wyne to the vse of y e holy cōmunion that portion of bread and wyne although it be of the same substance that the other is frō the whych it is seuered yet it is nowe called consecrated or holy bread and holy wyne Not that the bread and wine haue or can haue any holynes in them but that they be vsed to an holy worke and represent holy godly thinges And therfore S. Dionyse calleth the breade holy breade and the cuppe an holy cuppe as soone as they bee sette vppon the aultate to the vse of the holy communion But specially they maye be called holye and consecrated when they be separated to that holy vse of Christes owne wordes whiche he spake for that purpose saying of the breade This is my body And of the wyne This is my bloude So that commonly the authors before those wordes be spoken do take the breade and wyne but as other common bread and wine but after those woordes be pronounced ouer theym than they take theym for consecrated and holy breade and wyne Not that the bread and wine can be partakers of any holynes or godlynesse or can be the body and bloode of Christ but that they represent the very bodye and bloude of Christe and the holy foode and nourishement which we haue by him And so thei be called by the names of the body bloud of Christ as the signe token and figure is called by the name of the very thinge whiche it sheweth and signifieth And therefore as S. Ambrose in the wordes before cited by the aduersaries saith that beefore the consecration it is bread and after the cōsecration it is Christes body so in other places he dothe more plainly sette forth his meaninge saying these wordes Before the benediction of the heauenly wordes it is called an other kinde of thinge but after the consecration is signified the body of
but he doth tourne the very bread and wyne into the very fleshe and bloude of Christe These be the wordes whyche the Papistes do cite out of Theophilus vpon the gospel of saint Marke But by this one place it appeereth euidently either howe negligente the Papistes bee in serchyng out and examynyng the saiynges of the authors which they allege for their purpose or els howe false and deceytfull they be whyche willyngly and wittyngly haue made in this one place and as it were with one breath two loude and shamefull lyes The first is that bycause they wolde geue the more authorite to the woordes by them alleged they like fals Potycaties that sell quid pro quo falsifie the authors name fatherynge suche sayenges vpon Theophilus Alexandrinus an olde and auncient author whiche were in dede none of his wordes but wer the wordes of Theophilactus who was many yeres after Theophilus Alexandrinus But suche hathe euer been the Papisticall subtiltees to set forth their owne inuentions dreames and lyes vnder the name of antiquitee and auncient Authors The second lye or falshod is that thei falsifie the authors wordes and meanyng subuertynge the truth of his doctrine For where Theophylactus accordynge to the catholike doctrine of auncient authors sayth that almightie God cōdescēdyng to our infirmitee reserueth the kynde of bread wyne and yet tourneth them into the vertue of Christes fleshe and bloud They saye that he reserueth the formes and apparances of bread wyne and turneth them into the Uerite of his fleshe and bloud so tornyng and alteryng kyndes into fourmes and apparances and vertue into Ueritee that of the vertue of the fleshe and bloud thei make the veritee of his flesh and bloud And thus haue they falsified as well the name as the wordes of Theophilactus turnyng veritee into playne and flatte falsitee But to sette foorth playnely the meanyng of Theophylactus in this matter ▪ As hot and burnyng yron is yron styll and yet hath the force of fyer and as the fleshe of Christ styl remainynge fleshe geueth lyfe as the flesshe of hym that is God so the sacramentall bread wyne remayne styll in their propre kyndes and yet to them that worthyly eate and drynke them they be tourned not into the corporall presence but into the vertue of Christes fleshe and bloud And although Theophylactus spake of the eatyng of the very body of Christ and the drinkyng of his very bloud and not only of the figures of them and of the cōuersion of the bread and wyne into the body and bloud of Christ yet he meaneth not of a grosse carnal corporall and sensible conuersion of the breade and wyne nor of a lyke eatyng and drynkynge of his fleshe and bloud for so not only our stomakes wold yerne and oure heartes abhorre to eate his fleshe and to drynke his bloude but also suche eatyng and drynkynge could nothyng profit and auayle vs but he spake of the celestial and spiritual eatyng of Christ and of a sacramental conuersion of the bread callyng the bread not onely a figure but also the bodye of Christ◠geuynge vs by those woordes to vnderstande that in the sacramente wee not onely eate corporally the bread whyche is a sacrament and figure of Christes body but spiritually we eate also his very body drynke his very bloud And this doctrine of Theophilactus is both true godly and comfortable Besides this our aduersaries doo allege saint Hierome vpon the Epistle ad Titum that there is as great difference betwene the loaues called Panes propositionis and the body of Christe as there is betwene a shadowe of a bodye and the body it selfe and as there is betwene an ymage and the thyng it self and betwene an example of thynges to come and the thynges that be prefigured by them These wordes of saincte Hierome truely vnderstand serue nothyng for thentent of the Papistes For he ment that the Shew breade of the lawe was but a darke shadow of Christ to come but the sacrament of Christes body is a clere testimony that Christ is already comme that he hath performed that whiche was promysed and doth presently comforte and feede vs spiritually with his precious body and bloud not withstandyng that corporally he is ascended into heuen And the same is to be answered vnto all that the aduersaries bryng of S. Augustin Sedulius Leo Fulgentius Cassiodorus Gregorius and other concernyng the eatyng of Christe in the sacrament Which thyng can not be vnderstanded plainly as the wordes sounde but fyguratiuely and spiritually as before is sufficiently proued and herafter shalbe more fully declared in the fourth parte of this booke But here Iohn Damascene maye in no wyse be passed ouer whom for his auctoritee the aduersaries of Christes true naturall bodye do reken as a stout champion sufficient to defend all the whole matter alone But neyther is the authoritee of Damascene so greate that they may oppresse vs thereby nor his woordes so playne for them as they boaste and vntruely pretende For he is but a yonge newe author in the respect of those which we haue brought in for our party And in diuers pointes he varieth frō the most ancient authors if he meane as thei expound him as when he saith that the bread and wine be not figures which all the old authors call figures and that the bread and wyne consume not nor be auoyded downewarde which Origen and S. Augustine affirme or that they be not called the examples of Christes body after the consecration whiche shall manyfestely appere false by the Liturgy ascribed vnto S. Basill And moreouer the sayde Damascene was one of the byshoppe of Romes chiefe proctoures against the Emperours and as it were his ryght hande to set abroade all ydolatrye by his owne handewrytynge And therefore yf he loste his hande as they saye he dyd he lost it by Goddes moste righteous iudgemente what soeuer they faine and fable of the miraculous restitution of the same And yet what so euer the sayd Damascene writeth in other mattiers surely in this place wiche the aduersaries doo alledge he writeth spiritually and godly although the Papistes either of ignorance mystake hym or els willyngly wraste him and writhe hym to their purpose cleane contrary to his meanynge The sum of Damascene his doctrine in this matter is this That as Christ beyng both God man hath in him two natures so hath he twoo natiuitees one eternal thother temporall And so lykewise we beyng as it were double men or hauyng euery one of vs two men in vs the new man the old man the spirituall man the carnall man haue a double natiuitee One of oure first carnall father Adam by whom as by ancient inheritance cometh vnto vs malediction and euerlastyng damnation the other of our heauenly Adam that is to saye of Christ by whom we be made heires of celestiall benediction and euerlastyng glory and immortalitee And bycause this
a thing that we should knowe that the eatyng is our dwellyng in him and our drinkyng is as it were an incorporation in him beyng subiecte vnto him in obedience ioyned vnto him in our wylles and vnited in our affections The eatyng therefore of this fleshe is a certaine hunger and desire to dwell in him Thus wryteth Cyprian of the eatyng drynkyng of Christe And a lytle after he sayth that none do eate of this lambe but suche as be true Israelites that is to say pure christian menue without colour or dissimulacion And Athanasius speakinge of the eatinge of Christes fleshe and drinking of his bloud sayth that for this cause he made mention of his ascēcion into heauen to plucke them from corporall phantasie that thei might learne hereafter that his fleshe was called the celestiall meate that came from aboue and a spirituall foode which he would geue For those thinges that I speake to you saithe he be spirite and life Whiche is as muche to say as that thinge which you see shalbe slayne gyuen for the norishment of the worlde that it maye bee distributed to euerye body spiritually and be to all men a conseruacion vnto the resurrection of eternall lyfe In these woordes Athanasius declareth the cause why Christ made mention of his ascention into heauen whan hee spake of the eatinge and drinking of his fleshe and blud The cause after Athanasius mynde was thys that his hearers shuld not thinke of any carnal eating of his body with their mouths for as concerning the presence of his body he should be taken from them and ascende into heauen but that they shuld vnderstande him to be a spirituall meate and spiritually to be eaten and bi that refreshing to giue eternall lyfe which he doth to none but to suche as be his lyuely membres And of this eatinge speaketh also Basilius that we eate Christes flesh and drinke his blud beynge made by hys incarnation and sensyble lyfe partakers of his worde and wysedome For his fleshe and bludde he called all his mysticall conuersation here in his fleshe and his doctrine consistinge of his whole lyfe pertaininge bothe to his humanitie and diuinitye whereby the soule is norished and brought to the contemplacion of thinges eternall Thus teacheth Basilius howe we eate Christes flesh and drinke his blud which pertaineth only to the true and faithful membres of Christ. Saint hierome also saith All that loue pleasure more than god eate not the fleshe of Iesu nor drinke his bludde of the whiche himselfe saith He that eateth my fleshe and drinketh my blud hath euerlastynge lyfe And in an other place S. Hierome saith that heretiques do not eat and drynk the body and bludde of the Lorde And moreouer he saithe that heretiques eate not the fleshe of Iesu whose flesh is the meate of faythfull men Thus agreeth S. Hierome with the other before rehersed that heretiques and such as folow wordly pleasures eat not Christs flesh nor drink his blud bicause that Christ said He that eateth my flesh drinketh mi blud hath euerlastīg life And S. Ambrose saith that Iesus is y e bread which is the meat of Saintes and that he that taketh this breade dieth not a sinners deathe For this breade is the remission of sinnes And in an other booke to him intituled he writeth thus This breade of lyfe whiche came frome heauen doth minister euerlasting life and whosoeuer eateth this bread shall not dye for euer and is the bodye of Christe And yet in an other booke sette forth in his name he saith on this wise He that did eat Manna died but he that eateth this body shal haue remission of his synnes and shall not dye for euer And againe he saith As oftē as thou drinkest thou haste remission of thy sinnes These sentences of S. Ambrose be so playne in this matter that there needeth no more but only the rehersall of theim But S. Augustine in many places plainlye discussing this mattier saith He that agreeth not with Christe doeth neither eate his bodye nor drinke his bludde although to the condemnation of hys presumptiō he receiue euery day the sacramente of so highe a mattier And moreouer S. Augustine most plainly resolueth this matter in his booke De ciuitate Dei disputīg agaīst two kinds of heretiques Wherof the one said that as many as were christened and receaued the sacrament of Christs body and bludde shuld be saued howe so euer thei liued or beleued bicause that Christe saide This is the breade that came frō heauē that whosoeuer shal eate thereof shall not dye I am the bread of life which came from heauen whosoeuer shall eate of this breade shall lyue for euer Therfore said these heretiques all such men must needes be deliuered from eternall deathe and at length to be brought to eternall life The other said that heretiques and scismatiques myghte eate the sacrament of Chrystes bodye but not his verye body bicause they be no membres of his bodye And therfore they promised not euerlasting life to all that receaued Christes baptisme and the sacrament of his body but all suche as professed a true fayth althoughe they lyued neuer so vngodlye For suche sayde they doo eate the bodye of Christe not only in a sacrament but also in deede bicause they bee membres of Christes body But Saint Augustine aunsweringe to bothe these heresyes saith That neither heretiques nor such as professe a true fayth in their mouths in their lyuyng shew the contrary haue either a true faith which worketh by charity and doth none euel or are to be counted among the membres of Christ. For they cā not be both membres of Christ and membres of the diuell Therefore saith he it maye not be saide that any of theim eate the bodye of Christe For when Christe saythe he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bludde dwelleth in me and I in him he sheweth what it is not sacramentally but in deede to eate his bodye and drynke his bludde whiche is when a man dwelleth in Christe that Christ dwelleth in him For Christe spake those wordes as if he should say He that dwelleth not in me and in whom I dwell not lette him not saye or thinke that he eateth my body or drinketh my bloode These be the plaine wordes of S. Augustine that suche as liue vngodly although they may seme to eate Christes body because they eat the sacrament of his body yet in deede they neither bee membres of his body nor do eate his body Also vpon the gospel of sainct Ihon he sayth that he that doth not eate his fleshe and drynke his bloud hath not in him euerlastyng life And he that eateth his fleshe and drynketh his bloud hath euerlastyng life But it is not so in those meates whiche we take to sustayne our bodyes For although without them we can not liue yet it is not necessarye that whosoeuer receyueth them
shall liue for they may dye for age sickenes or other chaunces But in this meat and drynke of the body and bloud of our Lord it is otherwise For both thei that eate and drynke them not haue not euerlastyng life And contrary wyse whosoeuer eate and drynke them haue euerlastyng life Note and ponder well these wordes of sainct Augustyne that the bread and wyne and other meates and drynkes whiche norishe the body a man may eate neuerthelesse dye but the very body and bloud of Christ no mā eateth but that hath euerlastyng life So that wicked men can not eate nor drynke them for then they must nedes haue by them euerlastyng life And in thesame place sainct Augustyne sayth further The sacrament of the vnite of Christes body and bloud is taken in the Lordes table of some men to life of some men to death but the thyng it selfe wherof it is a sacrament is taken of all men to life and of no man to death And moreouer he sayth This is to eate that meate and drynke that drynke to dwell in Christ to haue Christ dwellyng in him And for that cause he that dwelleth in him And for that cause he that dwelleth not in Christe and in whom Christe dwelleth not without doubt he eateth not spiritually his fleshe nor drynketh his bloud although carnally and visibly with his teethe he byte the sacrament of his body and bloud Thus wryteth sainct Augustyne in the xxvi Homelie of sainct Ihon. And in the next homelie folowyng he sayth thus This day our sermon is of the body of the Lorde whiche he sayd he would geue to eate for eternal life And he declared the maner of his gift distribution howe he would geue his fleshe to eate saiyng He that eateth my fleshe drynketh my bloud dwelleth in me and I in him This therefore is a token or knowlege that a man hath eaten and dronken that is to say if he dwell in Christe and haue Christe dwellyng in him If he cleaue so to Christe that he is not seuered from him This therfore Christe taught admonished by these misticall or figuratiue Wordes that we should be in his body vnder him our head among his membres eatyng his fleshe not forsakyng his vnitee And in his boke De doctrina Christiana sainct Augustyne sayth as before is at length declared that to eate Christes flesh and to drynk his blud is a figuratiue speache signifiyng the participation of his passion the delectable remembrance to our benefite and profite that his fleshe was crucified and wounded for vs. And in another sermō also De verbis Apostoli he expoundeth what is the eatyng of Christes body the drinkyng of his bloud saiyng The eatyng is to be refreshed and the drinkyng what is it but to liue Eate life drinke life And that shall be when that whiche is taken visibly in the sacrament is in very deede eaten spiritually and drunken spiritually By all these sentences of S. Augustyne it is euident manifest that all men good and euil may with their mouthes visibly sensibly eate the sacrament of Christes body bloud but the very body and bloud them selues bee not eaten but spiritually that of the spirituall membres of Christ whiche dwell in Christ haue Christ dwellyng in them by whom they be refreshed haue euerlastyng life And therefore sayth sainct Augustyne that when thother Apostles did eate bread that was the Lorde yet Iudas did eate but the bread of the Lorde and not the bread that was the Lorde So that the other Apostles with the sacramentall bread did eate also Christ him selfe whō Iudas did not eate And a great numbre of places moe hath sainct Augustyne for this purpose whiche for eschewyng of tediousnes I let passe for this tyme wyll speake some thyng of sainct Cyrill Cyrill vpon sainct Ihon is Gospell sayth that those whiche eate Manna dyed because thei receyued thereby no strength to liue euer for it gaue no life but only put away bodely hunger but they that receyue the bread of lyfe shalbe made immortal and shall eschewe all the euils that partayne to death liuyng with Christ for euer And in another place he sayth Forasmuche as the fleshe of them to Christe doth naturally geue life therefore it maketh lyfe that bee partakers of it For it putteth death awaye from them and vtterly dryueth destruction out of them And he concludeth the matter shortly in another place in fewe woordes saiyng that when wee eate the fleshe of our sauiour then haue wee life in vs. For if thynges that were corrupt were restored by onely touchyng of his clothes howe can it bee that wee shall not liue that eate his fleshe And further he sayth that as two waxes that be molten together do rūne euery part into other so he that receyueth Christes fleshe and bloud must needes be ioyned so with him that Christ must be in him and he in Christ. Here sainct Cyrill declareth the dignitee of Christes fleshe beyng inseperately annexed vnto his diuinitee saiyng that it is of suche force and power that it geueth euerlastyng life And whatsoeuer occasion of death it fyndeth or let of eternal life it putteth out and dryueth cleane away all the same frō them that eate that meate and receiue that medicine Other medicines or plaisters somtyme heale and somtyme heal not but this medicine is of that effect and strength that it eateth awaye all rotten and deade fleshe and perfectely healeth all woundes and sores that it is laide vnto This is the dignitie and excellencie of Christes fleshe and bloode ioyned to his diuinitie of the whyche dignytie Christes aduersaries the Papistes depriue and robbe him when they affirme that suche men do eate his fleshe receiue this plaister as remaine styll sicke and sore and be not holpen thereby And now for corroboration of Cyrils saying I would thus reason with the Papistes and demaunde of them When an vnrepentant synner receiueth the sacrament whether he haue Christes body within him or no If they saye no than haue I my purpose that euel men although they receaue the sacramente of Christes body yet receiue they not his verye body Yf they saye yea Then I wolde aske them further Whether they haue Christs spirit with in them or no If they say nay then do they separate Christs body from his spirite and his humanitye frome his diuinite and be condemned by the scripture as very Antichristes that diuide Christe And yf they say yea that a wicked man hathe Christes spirit in him then the scripture also cōdemneth them saying that as he which hath no spirite of Christes is none of his so he that hathe Christe in him lyueth because he is iustified And yf his spirite that raised Iesus from death dwell in you he that raised Christe from death shall gyue lyfe to your mortall bodyes for his spirits sake whiche dwelleth in you Thus on
euery side the scripture condemneth the aduersaries of goddes worde And this wickednes of the Papistes is to bee wondred at that thei affirme Christs flesh blud soule holy spirite and his deite to be a man that is subiect to sin and a limme of the diuell They be wonderfull iuglers and coniurers that with certayne woordes can make god and the dyuell to dwel togither in one man and make him both the temple of god and the temple of the diuell It apeareth that they be so blinde that they can not see y ◠light frō darknes Beliall from Christ nor the table of y ◠lord from the table of diuels Thus is confuted this third intollerable errour and heresye of the Papistes That they which be the lymmes of the diuell do eate the very bodye of Christ and drinke his bludde manifestly and directly contrary to the wordes of Christ himself who saith Who so euer eateth my flesh and drinketh my bludde hath euerlasting life But leaste they shuld seeme to haue nothinge to say for themselues they alleag S. Paule in the eleuenth to the Corinth where he saith Hee that eateth and drinketh vnwortheli eateth and drinketh his owne damnation not discerninge the lordes bodye But S. Paule in that place speaketh of the eatinge of the breade and drinkinge of the wine and not of the corporall eating of Christes flesh blud as it is manifest to euery man that wyll read the text For these be the words of S. Paul Let a mā examine himselfe and so eat of the bread and drynk of the cuppe for he that eateth and drinketh vnworthely eateth and drinketh his owne damnation not discerninge the Lordes bodye In these wordes S. Paules mynde is that for asmuche as the breade and wyne in the Lordes supper do represent vnto vs the very bodye and blud of our sauiour Christe by his owne institution and ordinance therfore although he sit in heauē at his fathers right hand yet shuld we come to this mysticall bread wine with faithe reuerence purite and feare as we wold do if we should come to see and receaue Christe himselfe sensibly present For vnto the faithfull Christ is at his owne holy table present with his mightye spirite and grace and is of them more frutefully receaued than if corporally they shulde receaue him bodely present And therefore they that shal worthely come to this goddes bord muste after due triall of themselues considre first who ordained this table also what meate and drinke they shall haue that come therto and how thei ought to behaue themselues therat He that prepared the table is Christ himselfe The meat drynke wherwith he feedeth theim that come thereto as they ought to do is his owne body ▪ flesh blud They that come therto muste occupy their myndes in considering howe his bodye was broken for them and his blud shed for their redemptiō and so ought they to approache to this heauenly table with all humblenes of hart and godlynes of minde as to the table wherin Christe himselfe is gyuen And they that come otherwise to thys holy table thei come vnworthely and do not eat drinke Christes flesh blud but eat and drink their owne damnacion bicause thei do not duely considre Christes very fleshe and blud which be offered ther spiritually to be eaten and drunken but dispising Christs most holy supper do come therto as it were to other meates and drinkes without regard of the lordes body which is the spirituall meat of that table But here maye not be passed ouer the answere vnto certain places of auncient Authors which at the firste shew seeme to make for the Papists purpose that euel men do eate and drink the very fleshe and bludde of Christe But if those places be truely and throughely waied it shall appeare that not one of theym maketh for theyr errour that euel men do eat Christes very body The first place is of S. Augustin contra Cresconium grāmaticum wher he saith that although Christ himselfe say He that eateth not my fleshe and drinketh not my bludde shall not haue lyfe in him yet doth not his apostels teache that the same is pernicious to theim whiche vse it not well for hee saith Whosoeuer eateth the bread and drinketh the cuppe of the Lorde vnworthely shalbe gylty of the body and bloud of the Lorde In whiche wordes S. Augustyne seemeth to conclude that aswell the euil as the good do eat the body and bloud of Christ although the euil haue no benefite but hurt therby But consider the place of S. Augustyne diligently and then it shall euidently appeare that he ment nat of the eatyng of Christes body but of the sacrament therof For the intent of sainct Augustyne there is to proue that good thinges auaile not to suche persons as do euil vse them and that many thynges whiche of them selues be good and be good to some yet to other some they bee not good As that light is good for whole eyes and hurteth soore eyes that meate whiche is good for some is euil for other some One medicine healeth some and maketh other sicke One harnes doth arme one and combreth another one coate is mete for one to straight for another And after other examples at the last S. Augustyne sheweth the same to bee true in the sacramentes both of Baptisme and of the Lordes body whiche he sayth do profite onely them that receiue the same worthely And the wordes of sainct Paule which sainct Augustyne citeth do speake of the sacramental bread and cuppe not of the body and bloud And yet sainct Augustyne calleth the bread and the cuppe the fleshe and bloud not that they be so in dede but that they so signifie As he sayth in another place contra Maximinum In sacramētes sayth he is to be considered not what they be but what they shewe For they be signes of other thynges beyng one thyng and signifiyng another Therfore as in baptisme those that come faynedly and those that come vnfaynedly both bee washed with the sacramental water but both be not washed with the holy ghost clothed with Christ so in the Lordes supper bothe eate and drynke the sacramental bread wyne but bothe eate not Christ himselfe and bee fedde with his fleshe and bloud but those only which worthely receiue the sacrament And this answere wyll serue to another place of sainct Augustyne against the Donatistes where he sayth that Iudas receiued the body and bloud of the Lorde For as S. Augustyne in that place speaketh of the sacrament of Baptisme so doth he speake of the sacrament of the body and bloud whiche neuerthelesse he calleth the body and bloud because they signifie and represent vnto vs the very body fleshe and bloud And as before is at length declared a figure hath the name of the thyng that is signifyed thereby As a mannes ymage is called a man a Lyons image a
the sacramentall bread and wyne or any vysyble thynge is to bee woorshypped in the Sacrament For sainct Augustynes mynde was so farre from any suche thought that hee forbyddeth vtterly to woorship Christes owne fleshe and bloud alone but in consideracion and as they bee annexed and ioyned to his diuinitee Howe muche lesse than could he thynke or allowe that we should worshyp the sacramentall bread and wyne or any outwarde or visible sacrament whiche bee shadowes figures and representacions of Christes very fleshe and bloudde And saynt Augustin was afrayde lest in worshyppyng of Christes very body we shoulde offende and therfore he byddeth vs whan we worshyp Christe that we shoulde not tarry and fixe our myndes vpon his fleshe whyche of it self auayleth nothyng but that we shuld lyfte vp but our myndes from the fleshe to the spirite whiche giueth lyfe and yet the Papistes be not afrayde by crafty meanes to induce vs to worship those thynges whyche be signes and sacramentes of Christes bodye But what wyl not the shamelesse Papistes alledge for theyr purpose whan they be not ashamed to maynteyne the adoration of the Sacrament by these wordes of saynt Augustins wherin he Speaketh not one word of the adoration of the sacrament but onely of Christe hym selfe And although he saie that Christe gaue his fleshe to be eaten of vs yet he ment not that his fleshe is here corporally presente and corporally eaten but onely spiritually As his wordes declare playnly whyche folowe in the same place where saynt Augustine as it were in the persone of Christe speaketh these wordes It is the spirite that geueth lyfe but the fleshe profiteth nothynge The wordes whiche I haue spoken vnto you be spirite and lyfe That whiche I haue spoken vnderstande you spiritually You shall not eate this body which you se and drynke that blud whyche they shall shedde that shall crucifie me I haue commended vnto you a sacramente vnderstande it spiritually and it shall geue you lyfe And although it must bee visibly minystred yet it muste be inuisibly vnderstande These wordes of sayncte Augustine with the other before recited do expresse his mynd playnlye that Christe is not otherwyse to bee eaten than spiritually whyche spirituall eatynge requyreth no corporall presence and that he intended not to teache heere any adoration eyther of the visible sacramentes or of any thyng that is corporally in them For in dede there is nothyng really and corporally in the bread to be worshipped although the Papistes say that Christe is in euery consecrated breade But our Sauiour Christe hym selfe hath geuen vs warnyng before hande that suche false christians and false teachers shoulde come and hath bydde vs to beware of them sayeng If any man telle you that Christe is here or Christe is there beleue hym not For there shall ryse false Christes and false prophetes and shall shew many signes and wonders so that if it were possyble the verye electe shoulde bee broughte into erroure Take heede I haue tolde you before hande Thus our Sauiour Christe lyke a moste louynge pastour and sauioure of our soules hath gyuen vs warnyng before hande of the perylles and daungers that were to come and to bee wise and ware that we shoulde not geue credite vnto suche teachers as woulde perswade vs to worshyppe a peece of breade to kneele to it to knocke to it to creepe to it to folowe it in Procession to lyfte vp our handes to it to offer to it to lyght candels to it to shut it vp in a cheste or boxe to dooe all other honoure vnto it more than we dooe vnto God hauynge alwaye this pretence or excuse for our Idolatrie Beholde here is Christe But oure sauiour Christe calleth theym false Prophetes and saieth Take heede I tell you before Beleue theym not If they saie to you Beholde Christe is abrode or in the wyldernesse go not out And if they say that he is kepte in close places beleue them not And yf you wyll aske me the question who be those false Prophetes and seducers of the people the aunswere is soone made The Romishe Antichristes and theyr adherentes the authors of all errour ignorance blyndenesse superstition hypocrisie and ydolatrie For Innocentius the thyrd one of the moste wycked men that euer was in the sea of Rome dyd ordeyne and decree that the hoste should be diligently kept vnder locke and keye And Honorius the thirde not only confirmed the same but commanded also that the priestes shulde diligently teache the people from tyme to tyme that whan they lyfted vp the breadde called the hoste the people should then reuerently bowe downe and that lykewyse they shoulde do whan the prieste carrieth the hoste vnto sycke folkes These be the statutes and ordynances of Rome vnder pretence of holynesse to leade the people vnto all errour and Idolatrie not bryngynge theym by breadde vnto Christe but from Christe vnto bread But all that loue and beleeue Christe hym selfe lette theym not thynke that Christe is corporally in the breadde but lette theym lyfte vp theyr hartes vnto heauen and woorshyp hym syttyng there at the ryght hande of his Father Lette theym worshyp hym in them selues whose temples they bee in whome hee dwelleth and lyueth spiritually but in no wyse let them worshyp hym as beynge corporally in the breadde For he is not in it neyther spiritually as he is in manne nor corporally as hee is in heauen but onely sacramentally as a thynge maye bee sayde to bee in the fygure whereby it is sygnyfyed Thus is sufficientely reproued the thyrde pryncipall errour of the Papistes concernynge the Lordes supper whyche is That wycked membres of the deuyl do eate Christes very bodye and drynke his bloude Thus endeth the fowerth booke THE FIFTH BOKE IS OF THE OBLATION AND SACRIfice of our Sauiour Christe The greatest blasphemye iniury that can be against Christe yet uniuersally vsed through the Popishe kyngdom is this that the priestes make their Masse a sacrifice propitiatory to remit the synnes aswell of theim selues as of other both quicke and dead to whō they list to apply the same Thus vnder pretence of holynes the Papistical priestes haue taken vpon them to be Christes successours and to make suche an oblacion and sacrifice as neuer creature made but Christe alone neither he made the same any mo tymes than ones and that was by his death vpon the crosse For as sainct Paule in his Epistle to the Hebrues witnesseth Although the high priestes of the olde lawe offered many tymes at the least euery yere ones yet Christe offereth not him selfe many tymes for then he should many tymes haue dyed But nowe he offereth him selfe but ones to take awaye synne by that offeryng of him selfe And as menne must dye ones so was Christ offered ones to take awaye the synnes of many And furthermore S. Paule sayth That the sacrifices of the olde lawe although they were contynually offered
59 1 4 Christ called not bread his body 72 2 16 This baptisme and washynge by the fyre the holy goste this newe byrthe this water that spryngeth in a man and floweth into euerlastyng lyfe and this clothyng and buryall can not be vnderstande of any materiall baptisme materyall washyng â–ª material byrth clothing and burial but by translatioÌ„ of â–ª c. 96 2 8 For asmuche as the fleshe of Christe dothe naturally geue lyfe therfore it maketh them to lyue â–ª c. 97 â— 30 That as he whiche hathe not the spirite â–ª c All other faultes may bee easyly corrected A TABLE OF THE CHIEF AND PRINCIPALL MATTERS CONteyned in this Booke The contentes of the first booke THe abuse of the Lordes supper Fol. 1. The eatyng of the body of Christ. Eodem The eatyng of the sacrament of his body fol. 2. Christ calleth the material bread his body fol. 4. Euil men do eat y e sacrameÌ„t but not the body of Christ. fo 5. Thynges sufficente for a christen mans faythe concernyng this sacrament Eodem The sacrament which was ordeined to make loue concord is tourned into the occasion of variance and discord fo 6. The spirituall hunger and thirstynesse of the soule fol. eod The spirituall foode of the soule fol. 8. Christ farre excelleth all corporal foode fol. 9. The sacrameÌ„tes were ordayned to confirme our fayth eodeÌ„ Wherfore this sacrameÌ„t was ordayned in bread and wyne fol. 11. The vnitee of Christes mistical body Eodem This sacrament moueth all men to loue frendship fol. 12. The doctrine of transubstantiation doth cleane subuert our fayth in Christ. Eodem The spiritual eatyng is with the heart not with the teethe fol. 13. Foure principal errors of the Papistes fol. 14. The first is of transubstantiation fol. eod The second is of the presence of Christ in this sacrament fol. 15. The third is that euil menne eate and drynke the very body and bloud of Christ fol. 17. The fourth is of the dayly sacrifice of Christ fol. eod The contentes of the second booke The confutation of the error of TraÌ„substantiation fol. 17. The Papistical doctrine is contrary to Gods worde EodeÌ„ The Papistical doctrine is against reason fol. 20. The Papistical doctrine is also against our senses fol. 21. The Papistical doctrine is contraye to the fayth of the olde authors of Christes Churche fol. 23. Transubstantiation came from Rome fol. 29. The first reason of the Papistes to proue their Transubstantiation with the answere therto fol. 31. The seconde argumente for Transubstantiation with the aunswere fol. 33. The thirdâ— argument with the answere fol. 34. Authours wrested of the Papystes for theyr transubstantiation fol. 34. Negatives by comparison fol. 36. Absurditees that folowe of transubstantiation fol. 43. The contentes of the thirde booke ¶ The presence of Christe in the sacrament fol. 45. Christe corporally is ascended into heauen fol. â—od The difference betwene the trewe and the Papisticall doctrine concernyng the presence of Christes body fol. 46. The profe wherof by our professioÌ„ in our coÌ„mon crede fo 48 An other profe by the holy scripture fo 49 Also an other profe by auncient authours fol. eodem One body can not be in dyuers places at one tyme fol. 52. An answere to the Papistes alledgyng for them these wordes This is my body fol. 56. The argumente of the Papystes fol. eod The interpretation of these wordes This is my body fol. eod Christ called bread his body wine his bloud fo 57. Bread is my body wyne is my bloudde bee figuratiue speeches fol. 59. To eate Christes fleshe and drynke his bloud be figuratiue speeches folâ— eod This is my body This is my bloudde bee figuratiue speeches fol. 62. The breade representeth Christes bodye and the wyne his bloude fol. eod Signes and fygures haue the names of the thynges whyche they sygnifie fo 64. Fiue principall thinges to be noted in Theodoretus fo 70. Figuratiue speeches bee not straunge fo 71. Christe hym selfe vsed figuratiue speeches fol. eodem The Paschall Lambe folio 72. The Lordes Supper folio eodem What figuratiue speeches were vsed at Christes laste supper folio 73. Aunswere to the auctoritees and argumentes of the Papystes folio 74. One brefe aunswere to all fol. eod The aunsweres to all the doctours folio 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87. The contentes of the fourth boke Whether euill men do eate and drynke Christe fol. 90. The godly onely eate Christ Eodem What is the eatyng of Christes fleshe and drinkyng of his bloud fol. 91. Christ is not eaten with teethe but with fayth Eodem The good only eate Christe fol. 92. The aunswere to the Papystes that doo affyrme that the euyll doo eate Christes body c. fo 97. The aunswere to the Papystes authors whyche at the fyrste shewe seeme to make for theym foli 98. Figures be called by the names of the thynges whiche they sygnifie fol. 99. The adoration of the sacrament folio 101. The simple people be deceyued Eodem They be the Papistes that haue deceiued the people fol. 103. An exhortation to the true honoryng of Christ in the sacrament foli 104. The contentes of the fift booke ¶ The sacrifice of the masse fol. 104. The difference betweene the sacrifice of Christe and of the priestes of the olde lawe folio eodem Two kyndes of sacrifices fol. 106. The sacrifice of Christe folio eodem A more playne declaration of the sacrifice of Christ. fo eod The sacrifices of the olde lawe fol. 107. The masse is not a sacrifice propiciatorye fol. 108. A confutation of the papistes cauillation fol. 109 The true sacrifice of all christen people Eodem The Popishe Masse is detestable Idolatry vtterly to be banished from all christen congregations fol. 110. Euery manne ought to receiue the sacrament himselfe and not one for another fol. 111. The difference betwene the priest the lay man Eodem The answere to the Papistes concernyng the sacrifice propiciatorie fol. 112. An aunswere to the authors fol. eodem The lay persons make a sacrifice aswel as the priest fol. 114 The Papistical Masse is neither a sacrifice propitiatorye nor of thankes geuyng Eodem There was no Papistical Masses in the primatiue churche Eodem The causes and meanes howe Papisticall Masses entered into the Churche fol. 115 The abuses of the Papisticall Masses fo eod What Churche is to bee folowed fo 116. A shorte instruction to the holy communyon fol. eod Here endeth the Table IMPRINTED at London in Poules churcheyarde at the signe of the Brasen serpent by Reynold Wolfe Cum priuilegio ad imprimendum solum ANNO DOMINI M.D.L. Math â–ª 15 â–ª The eatyng of the body of Christ. Ihon. 6. Augustin in Ioan Tractat 26. Eodent tract Aug. de Ciuitate Lib. 21. cap. 25. Chap. 3. The eting of the sacramente of his bodye Math. 26 Matâ— 14 Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 10. 1. Cor. 11. Chap. 4. Christ called the materiall breade his
body 1. Cor. 10. 1. Cor. 11. Chap. 5. Euill men do eate the sacrament but not the bodye of Christe Iohn 6. 1. Cor. 11 â— Corin. 11. Chap. 6. These thiÌ„ges suffice for a christen mans faith concerninge this sacrament Chap. 7. The sacrament whiche was ordained to make loue and concord is turned into the occasioÌ„ of variaÌ„ce and discord Chap. 8. Chap. 9. The spirituall hunger thirstinesse of the soule Ephe. 2. Rom. 3. Psal 41 Ps. 62. Rom. 4. Roma 7. Rom. 8. Math. 5. Luc. 1. Iohn 4. Iho. 4. Iohn 6. Cha. 10. The spiritual foode of the soul Math. 11. Iohn 7. Ioh. 6. Iho. 6. Iohn 6. Gal. 2. Chap 11. Christâ— far excelleth all corporall foode Ioh. 11. Cha. 12. The sacrameÌ„ts wer ordeyned to coÌ„firme our faithe Chap. 13. Wherfore this sacrament was ordeyned in breead and wyne Chap. 14 The vnite of Christs mysticall body â— Co. 10. Dionysius Chap. 15 This Sacramente moueth al meÌ„ to loue and frendshyp The doctrine of traÌ„substaÌ„tiation doeth cleane subuerte our faythe in Christe Chap. 16. The spiritual etyng is with â—he harte not with the teethe Iohn 6. Luce. 22 1 Cor. 11. Luce. 22 Chap. 17 Four principall errors of the Papistes The fyrste is of transubstantiation De summa trini et fide catholica The secoÌ„d is of the preseÌ„ce of Christ in this sacrament De consecrati Distin. 2. Ego Beringarius Ioan. 6. Mat. 26 Mat. 24 Act. 3. Colos. 3 1. Cor. 11 The thyrd is that euil men eate drinke the very bodye and bloode of Christ. Aâ—acult 2. Chap. 1. The conâ—utacion of the erroure of transubstantiatioÌ„ Chap. 2. The papisticall doctrine is coÌ„trarye to Goddes worde Math. 26. Mark 14. Luce. 22. â— Cor. 10. Mat. 26 Mat. 26. Mat. 14 Luc. 22. Mat. 26. Mar. 14. 1. Co. 10 1. Co. 10 Chap. 3. The Papistical doctrin is against reason Chap. 4 The papisticall doctrine is also agaynst all our senses Ioh. 20. Chap. 5. The papysticall doctrine is coÌ„trary to y e faythe of the old authours of Christes Churche Iustinus Irenaeus contra Valentiâ—â—um lib. 1. cap. 4. Origenes in Mat. ca. 15. Cyprian ad CeciliuÌ„ li. 2. epistola 3. Mat. 26. Eusebius Emissenus De conseâ—r Distinction 2. Hilarius Epiphanius contra haere ses lib â–ª 3. to 2. Et in Anacephaleosi Chrysosto in Mat. cap. 26. hom 83 Ad CesariuÌ„ monachum Ambrosius De ijs qui mysterijs iniciantur Ca. â—lti De sacramentis li. 4. cap. 4. Augustinus in sermone ad infaÌ„tes In lib. sententiarun Prosperi Chrysosto ad Cesarium monachum Gelaâ—ius coÌ„tra EuticheÌ„ et NestoriuÌ„ Theodoretus in dialogis Chap. 6. Transubstantâ—atioÌ„â—ame from Rome Scotus sup 4. seâ— di 12 Grabriel Chap. 7. Chap. 8. The first reason of y e Papistes to proue their transubstaÌ„tiation Math. 26 Mar. 14. Luc. 22. The answere The answere more directly Chap. 9. The secoÌ„d argument for traÌ„substantiation The aunswere Math. 3. Mark 1. Luce 3 Chap. 10. The thyrd reason Iohn 6. The aunswere Iohn 6. Iohn 6. Chap. 11. Authores wrested of the Papistes for their transubstantiaion Cyprianus De coena domini The aunswere Chap. 12 Chrysostomus The answere Negatiues by comparison 1. Reg. 8. Psal. 21. Rom. 7 1. Cor. 1. 1. Cor. 1. 1. Cor. 3. Gal. 2. Gal. 6. Ephe. 6. 1. Cor. 1. Rom. 15. 2. Cor. 11. 2. Cor. 11. 12. Gal â–ª 5. 1. Pet. 3. Mat. 6. Mat. 10 Mat. 10 Mat. 23 Mat. 23 Mat. 10. Mat. 10 Mat. 20 Ioh. 4. Ioan. 5. Ioan. 7 Iohn 8. Iho. 6. Gal. 3. Chrysostomus Chap. 13. Ambros. de ijs qui mysterijs initiantur Exo. 7. Exo. 7. Exo. 14 Exo. 17. Exod. 15. 4. Reg. 6 Ps. 148. The aunswere Lis. 4. De sâ—â—ramentis cap. 4. Chap. 14 Absurditees that folowe of TransubstaÌ„tiation Chap. 1. The presence of Christe in y e sacrameÌ„t Christ corporally ys ascended into heaueÌ„ Act. 1 3. Chap. 2. The difference betwene the true the papisticall doctrine coÌ„cerâ—ing the preseÌ„ce of Christs bâ—by Chap. 3. The profe hereof by our profession in our common Crede Chap. 4. The profe hereof by the scipture Ioh. 16. †Mat. 26. Mat. 24. Mar. vlt. Colos. 3. Hebre. 8. Hebre. 10. Chap. 5. The profe thereof by aunciente authors Origen in Mat. tracta 33. August ad Dardanum epist. 57. In Ioan. tracta 39. Tract 50. De essentia diuinitatis Cyrillus in Ihon. lib. 6. ca. 14. Libro 9. cap. 21. Ambrosius in Lucam li. 10. ca. 24 Gregorius in Ho. paschatis Chap. 6. One bodye can not be in dyuers places at one tyme. Ad Dardanum Cyrillus de Trin. lib. 2. Didymus de spiritu saÌ„cto lib. 1 cap. 1. Basilius de spiritu sancto ca. 22. Fulgentius ad TrasimuÌ„ dum Regem lib. 2. Vigilius Contra Eutychen libro 1. Ioh. 14 Ioh. 16. Act. 1â— Mat. vlâ— Contra Euâ—ycheÌ„ lib. 4 Chap. 7. An answer to the Papistes alledgynge for theym theâ—e wordes This is my bodye The argumente of the Papistes The aunswere The interpretation of these woordes This is my body Chap. 8. Christ called breade his body and wyne his bloud Irenaeus contra Valent. lib. 4. ca. 32 Cap. 34. Cap. 57. Lib. 5. Tertulianus aduersus Iudaeos Cyprianus ad MagnuÌ„â—â— 1. epi. 6. Lib. 2. Epist 3. Epiâ—phan in Ancorato Hieron ad Hedibiam Augusti de trinita li. 3. cap. 4. De verbis a pâ—stoli sermo 2. Cyrillus in Ioannem li. 4. ca. 14. Theodoretus dialogo 1. Chap. 9. Breade is my body wyne is my bloud be figuratiue speeches Chap. 10 To eate Chrystes fleshe and drynk his bloud bee figuratiue speeches Ioh. 6. 1 Cor. 10 1. Cor. 10. Origen in Leuit. ho. 7 Chrisostom in Ioannem Hom. 26. Augâ—stinus de dâ—ctrina christ lib 3. Iohn 6. De catecâ— rudib ca. Contra aduers legis Propheâ— cap. 9. Chap. 11. This is my bodye this is my bloodde be figuratiue speaches The bread represeÌ„teth Christes body the wyne hys bloode Tertulia nus coÌ„tra MartioneÌ„ Librâ— 1 Cyprianus libr. 2 Epist. 3 De vnctioÌ„e Chrismatis Chrysosto in Psal. 22. Hieronym in Math. 26. Ambros. de hijs qui mysterijs initiantur cap. vlt. De sacramentis li. 6. ca. 4 Lib. 4. cap. 4. Lib. 4. cap. 5. 1. Co. 11 Signes figures haue the names of the thiÌ„ges which thei signifie August ad Bonifatium Episto 23. Suâ—er Leui. quest 57. Leui. 17. Be. 41. â— Cor. 2. CoÌ„tra AdamantiuÌ„ cap. 12. Leui. 17 Math. 26 Contra MaximinuÌ„ li. 3 cap. 22. In lib. senteÌ„tiarum Prosperi de coÌ„scrat distin 4. hoc est Theodoret in dialogis In y e firste Dialoge Iohn 12 Mat. 26. Mat. 14 Luc. 22 Ihon. 15. Ihon. 12. Ihon. 15. Mat. 26. Gen. 46. Iho. 6. Dialo 2. Act. 17. Act. 1. Mat. 24. Fiue principall thinges to bee noted in Theodoretus Chap. 12 Figuratiue speeches bee not straÌ„ge â— Reg. 4. 2. Reg. 7. Christe him self vsed figuratiue speeches Math. 13. †Mat. 11. and. 17. * Iohn 16 †Iohn 6. * Iohn 15 Math. 3.2 †Iohn
Lordes supper is moste manyfest by the plaine woordes of Christe hym selfe whan he ministred the same supper vnto his disciples For as the Euangelistes write Christe toke breade and brake it and gaue it to his diciples and sayde Take eate â–ª this is my body Here the Papistes triumph of these words whaÌ„ Christe saide This is my body whiche they call the woordes of Consecration For say they as soone as these woordes be fully ended there is no breade lefte nor none other substaunce but onlye Christes bodye Whan Christe saide this the breade saye they remayned And whan he sayde is yet the breade remained Also whan hee added my the breade remained styll And whan he sayd bo yet the breade was ther styll But when hee hadde fynyshed the whole sentence Thys is my body than saye they the breade was gone and there remained no substaunce but Christes bodye as thoughe the breade coulde not remaine whan it is made a sacramente But this negatiue that there is no breade they make of their owne braynes by theyr Unwrytten verities Oh good lord howe wold they haue bragged if Christ had sayd This is no bread But Christ spake not that negatiue This is no bread but said affirmingly This is my body not denying the bread but affirming that his body was eateÌ„ meaning spiritually as the breade was eaten corporally And that this was the meaning of Christ appeareth plainly by S Paule in the tenth chap. to the Corinth the fyrste epistle where he speakinge of the same matter saithe Is not the breade whiche wee breake the communion of the body of Christe Who vnderstode the mynde of Christ better than S. Paule to whom Christe shewed his moste secrete counsailes And saint Paule is not afraide for our better vnderstandinge of Christes wordes somewhat to alter the same least we might stande stiffely in the letters and syllables and â—rre in mistaking of Christes wordes For where as our sauiour Christ brake the bread and said This is my body S. Paule saith that the bread which we breake is the communion of Christes body Christ â—aid his body and saint Paule said the coÌ„munion of his body meaning neuertheles both one thinge that thei which eate the breade worthely do eate spiritually Christes very body And so Christe calleth the bread his body as the olde authors report bicause it representeth his body and signifieth vnto them whiche eate that bread according to Christes ordinance that they do spiritually eate his bodye and be spiritually fed and nourished by him and yet the breade remaineth still there as a sacrament to signifie the same But of these words of Consecration shal be spoken hereafter more at large Therfore to returne to the purpose that the bread remayneth and is eaten in this sacrameÌ„t appeareth by the woordes whiche go before the consecration For that Christ tooke bread and brake it and gaue it to his disciples and sayd Take eate All this was done and spoken before the woordes of consecracion Wherfore they must nedes be vnderstand of y e very bread that Christ toke bread brake bread gaue bread to his disciples coÌ„maundyng them to take bread and eate bread But the same is more plaine and euident of the wyne that it remayneth and is dronken at the Lordes supper aswell by the wordes that go before as by the woordes that folowe after the consecracion For before the wordes of consecracion Christe tooke the cuppe of wyne and gaue it vnto his disciples and sayd Drynk you all of this And after the wordes of consecracion foloweth They dranke all of yt Nowe I aske all the Papistes what thyng it was that Christ commaunded his disciples to drynke whan he sayd Drynke you all of this The bloud of Christ was not yet there by their owne confession for it was spoken before the coÌ„secracion Therfore it could be nothyng els but wyne that he commaunded them to drynke Then I aske the Papistes ones againe whether the disciples dranke wyne or not If they say yea then let them recant their errour that there was no wyne remainyng after the coÌ„secracion If they say nay then they condempne the Apostles of disobedience to Christes commaundement whiche dranke not wyne as he coÌ„maunded them Or rather they reproue Christ as a Iuggler which commaunded his Apostles to drynke wyne and whan they came to the drynkyng therof he him selfe had conuayed it away Moreouer before Christ deliuered the cuppe of wyne to his disciples he sayd vnto them Deuide this among you Here would I aske the Papistes another question what thyng it was that Christ commaunded his disciples to deuide among them I am sure they wyll not saye it was the cuppe except they bee disposed to make menne laugh at them Nor I thynke they wyll not say it was the bloud of Christ aswell because the woordes were spoken before the consecration as because the bloud of Christ is not deuided but spiritually geuen whole in the sacrament Than could it be vnderstande of nothyng elles but of wyne whiche they should deuide among them and drynke all together Also when the CoÌ„munion was ended Christ sayd vnto his Apostles Uerely I say vnto you that I wyll drynke no more hencefurth of this fruite of the vyne vntyl y e day that I shal drynke it newe with you in my fathers kyngdome By these wordes it is cleare that it was very wyne that the Apostles draÌ„ke at that godly supper For the bloud of Christ is not y e fruite of the vyne nor the accideÌ„tes of wyne nor none other thing is y e fruit of the vine but very wyne only Howe could Christ haue expressed more plainly that bread wyne remayne than by takyng the breade in his handes and breakyng it him selfe and geuyng it vnto his disciples comaundyng them to eate it And by takyng the cuppe of wyne in his handes and deliueryng it vnto them commaundyng them to deuide it among them to drynke it callyng it the fruit of the vyne These wordes of Christ be so playn that if an Angel of heaueÌ„ would tel vs the contrary he ought not to be beleued And than much lesse may we beleue the subtyl liyng of the Papistes If Christ would haue had vs to beleue as a necessary article of our fayth that there remayneth neither bread nor wyne would he haue spoken after this sorte vsyng all suche termes and circumstaunces as should make vs beleue that styl there remayneth bread wyne What maner of teacher make thei of Christ that say he ment one thyng when his wordes be cleane contrary What christian heart can paciently suffre this contumely of Christ But what crafty teachers be these Papistes who deuise phantasies of their owne heades directly contrary to Christes teachyng and than sette the same abrode to christen people to bee moste assuredly beleued as Goddes owne moste holy worde Sainct Paule did not so but folowed herein the maner of Christes speakyng in callyng of
said that Christ was a crafty iuggler that made thinges to appere to mens sightes that in dede were no suche thynges but formes onely figures and apparances of them But to conclude in fewe wordes this processe of our senses let al the Papistes lay their heades togither and thei shal neuer be able to shew one article of our faith so directely contrary to our senses that all our senses by dayly experience shall affirme a thynge to be and yet oure fayth shall teache vs the contrary thervnto Nowe for as much as it is declared how this Papisticall opinion of Transubstantiation is against the woorde of God agaynst nature against reason and agaynste all our senses wee shall shewe furthermore that it is agaynst the fayth and doctrine of the old authors of Christes churche begynnyng at those authors whiche were nerest vnto Christes tyme and therefore myght best knowe the truthe herein Fyrst Iustinus a great learned man and an holy martyr the oldest author that this day is knowen to write any treatie vpon the sacramentes and wrote not muche aboue one hundred yeres after Christes ascension He wryteth in his seconde apologie that the bread water and wine in this sacrament ar not to be taken as other cōmon meates and drinkes be but they bee meates ordeyned purposely to geue thankes to god and therfore be called Eucharistia and be called also the body and bloude of Christ. And that it is laufull for none to eate or drynke of them but that professe Christ and lyue accordyng to the same And yet the same meate and drynke saith he is chaunged into our fleshe and bloud and norisheth our bodies By which saiyng it is euident that Iustinus thought that the bread and wine remained still for els it could not haue been tourned into our fleshe and bloud to nourishe our bodies Next hym was Ireneus aboue 150. yeres after Christ who as it is supposed could not be deceiued in the necessary pointes of our faithe for he was a disciple of Polycarpus which was disciple to saint Iohn the Euangelist This Ireneus foloweth the sense of Iustinus wholly in this matter and almoste also his woordes sayenge that the bread wherein we geue thankes vnto God although it be of the yearth yet whan the name of God is called vpon it it is not than common bread but the bread of thankes geuyng hauyng two thyngs in it one earthly and the other heuenly What ment he by the heauenly thyng but the sanctification whyche cometh by the inuocation of the name of God And what by the earthly thynge but the very bread which as he sayd before is of the earth and which also he saith doeth nourishe our bodies as other bread dothe whiche we doo vse Shortely after Ireneus was Origen about 200. yeares after Christes ascension Who also affirmeth that the materiall bread remaineth saiyng that the mattier of the breade auayleth nothyng but goeth doune into the bealy and is auoided dounewarde but the woorde of God spoken vpon the breade is it that auaileth After Origen came Cyprian the holy martyr about the yeare of our Lorde 250. who wryteth against theym that ministred this Sacrament with water onely and without wyne For as muche sayth he as Christ sayd I am a true vyne therefore the bloud of Christ is not water but wyne nor it can not bee thouhgt that his bloud wherby wee bee redemed and haue life is in the cuppe whan wyne is not in the cuppe whereby the bloud of Christ is shewed What woordes could Cyprian haue spoken more plainly to shewe that the wyne doth remayne than to say thus If there bee no wyne there is no bloud of Christ And yet he speaketh shortly after as plainely in the same Epistle Christ sayth he takyng the cuppe blessed it and gaue it to his disciples saiyng Drynke you all of this for this is the bloud of the newe testament whiche shall bee shedde for many for the remission of synnes I say vnto you that from hencefurth I wyll not drynke of this creature of the vyne vntyll I shall drinke with you newe wyne in the kyngdome of my father By these woordes of Christe sayth sainct Cyprian we perceiue that the cuppe whiche the Lorde offered was not onely water but also wyne And that it was wyne that Christ called his bloud whereby it is cleare that Christes bloud is not offered if there be no wyne in the Chalise And after it foloweth Howe shal we drynke with Christ newe wyne of the creature of the vyne if in the sacrifice of God the father and of Christ we do not offre wyne In these wordes of sainct Cyprian appereth moste manyfestly that in this sacrament is not only offered very wyne that is made of grapes that come of the vyne but also that we drynke the same And yet the same geueth vs to vnderstand that if we drynke that wyne worthely we drynke also spiritually the very bloud of Christ whiche was shed for our synnes Eusebius Emissenus a mā of syngular fame in learnyng about CCC yeres after Christes ascention did in fewe wordes set out this matter so plainely bothe howe the bread and wyne be conuerted into the body bloud of Christ and yet remayne styll in their nature and also howe besydes the outwarde receiuyng of bread and wyne Christ is inwardely by fayth receyued in our heartes al this I say he doth so plainly set out that more playnnesse can not be reasonably desyred in this matter For he sayth that the cōuersion of the visible creatures of bread wyne into the body and bloud of Christ is lyke vnto our cōuersion in baptisme where outwardly nothyng is changed but remayneth the same that was before but all the alteration is inwardely and spiritually If thou wylt knowe sayth he howe it ought not to seme to the a newe thyng and impossible that yearthly and corruptible thynges be turned into the substance of Christ loke vpon thy selfe which art made newe in baptisme whan thou wast farre from life and banished as a straunger frō mercy and fro the way of saluation and inwardely wast dead yet sodeynly thou beganste another lyfe in Christ and wast made newe by holsome mysteris and wast turned into the body of the churche not by seyng but by beleuynge and of the childe of damnation by a secrete purenesse thou waste made the chosen sonne of God Thou visibly dyddest remayne in the same measure that thou haddest before but inuisibly thou wast made greater without any increase of thy body Thou wast the self same person and yet by increace of faythe thou wast made an other man Outwardely nothynge was added but all the chaunge was inwardly And so was man made the son of Christ and Christe fourmed in the mynd of man Therfore as thou puttyng away thy former vilenesse diddest receaue a newe dygnitee not feelyng any change in thy body and as the curynge of thy
Galathiās that Christ was painted and crucified before their eies Therfore saith Chrysostom in the same homily a litle before the place rehersed What dost thou O man dyddest not thou promise to the prieste whiche sayd Lift vp your myndes and hartes and thou dyddest answere We lift them vp vnto the Lord Art not thou ashamed and afrayde beyng at that same houre found a lyar A wonderfull thyng The table is set furth furnished with Goddes mysteries the Lambe of God is offered for thee the priest is careful for thee spiritual fyer cōmeth out of that heauenly table the Angels Seraphyn be there presēt coueryng their faces with vi wynges All the Angelical powers with the priest be meanes intercessors for thee a spirituall fyer commeth doune from heauen bloud in the cuppe is drunke out of the most pure syde vnto thy purification And arte not thou ashamed afrayde and abashed not endeuorynge thy selfe to purchase Goddes mercy O man doth not thine owne conscience condemne thee There be in the weke 168. houres and God asketh but one of them to bee geuen wholly vnto him and thou consumest that in worldly busynesse in triflyng and talkyng with what boldnesse than shalte thou come to these holy mysteries O corrupt conscience Hytherto I haue rehersed sainct Ihon Chrysostomes woordes whiche do shewe howe our mindes should be occupied at this holy table of our Lorde that is to say withdrawen from the consideracion of sensible thynges vnto the contemplacion of moste heauenly and godly thynges And thus is answered this place of Chrysostom which the Papists toke for an insoluble and a place that no man was able to answere But for a further declaracion of Chrysostomes mynde in this matter reade the place of him before rehersed fol. 26. and 28. Yet there is another place of sainct Ambrose whiche the Papistes thynke maketh muche for their purpose but after due examinacion it shal plainly appeare howe muche they be deceyued They allege these wordes of sainct Ambrose in a booke intituled De ijs qui initiantur mysterijs Let vs proue that there is not that thyng whiche natur formed but whiche benediction did cōsecrate and that benediction is of more strength than nature For by the blessyng nature it selfe is also chaunged Moyses helde a rodde he cast it from him and it was made a serpent Againe he tooke the serpent by the tayle and it was turned againe into the nature of a rodde Wherfore thou seest that by the grace of the prophet the nature of the serpent and rodde was twyse chaunged The fluddes of Egypt ranne pure water sodenly bloud beganne to brast out of the vaynes of the sprynges so that men could not drynke of the fludde but at the prayer of the prophet the bloud of the fludde went away and the nature of water came againe The people of the Hebrues were compassed aboute on the one syde with the Egyptians and on the other syde with the sea Moyses lyfted vp his rodde the water deuided it selfe stoode vp like a walle and betwene the waters was left a waye for them to passe on foote And Iordane against nature turned backe to the head of his sprynge Dothe it not appere now that the nature of the sea fludds or of the course of freshe water was changed The people was dry Moyses touched a stone and water came out of the stone Dyd not grace here woorke aboue nature to make the stone to bryng forthe water whyche it had not of nature Marath was a most bytter floud so that the people beyng drye could not drinke therof Moyses put woode into the water and the nature of the water lost his bytternes whiche grace infused did sodeynly moderate In the tyme of Heliseus the prophete ▪ an axe head fell from one of the prophetes seruauntes into the water he that loste the yron desyred the prophet Heliseus help who put the helue into the water and the yron swam aboue Which thyng we know was done aboue nature for yron is heuier than the liquor of water Thus wee perceaue that grace is of more force thā nature and yet hitherto we haue rehersed but the grace of the blessing of the prophets Nowe yf the blessynge of a man be of suche valewe that it may chaunge nature what dooe wee saye of the consecration of God wherein is the operation of the woordes of our sauiour Christe For this sacrament whiche thou receauest is doon by the woord of Christe Than if the worde of Helias was of suche power that it coulde brynge fyer downe frome heauen shall not the woorde of Christe be of that power to chaunge the kyndes of the elementes Of the makynge of the whole worlde thou haste redde that God spake and the thynges were doone He commaunded and they were created The worde than of Christe that coulde of no thynges make thynges that were not can it not change those thynges that be into that thynge whiche before they were not For it is no lesse mattier to geue to thynges newe natures than to alter natures Thus farre haue I rehersed the woordes of Saynt Ambrose yf the sayd boke bee his whiche they that bee of greatest learnyng and iudgement doo not thynke by which woordes the Papistes would proue that in the supper of the Lorde after the woordes of Consecration as they bee commonly called there remaineth neither bread nor wyne bycause that S. Ambrose saieth in this place that the nature of the bread and wyne is chaunged But to satisfie their myndes let vs grant for their pleasure that the forsaid boke was Saint Ambrose owne worke yet the same boke maketh nothynge for their purpose but quite agaynste them For he saieth not that the substaunce of bread and wyne is gone but he sayth that theyr nature is chaunged that is to saye that in the holy communion we oughte not to receaue the bread and wyne as other common meates and drynkes but as thynges cleane chaunged into a hygher estate nature and condition to be taken as holy meates and drynkes wherby we receaue spirituall feedyng and supernaturall norishement from heauen of the very true body and bloud of our sauior Christ through the omnipotent power of God and the wonderfull workyng of the holy ghost Whiche so well agreeth with the substance of bread and wyne styl remainynge that if they were gone awaye and not there this our spirituall feedyng coulde not be taught vnto vs by theim And therfore in the most part of the exāples whiche S. Ambrose allegeth for the wonderful alteration of natures the substaunces dyd styll remayne after the nature and proprieties were chaunged As whan the water of Iordane contrary to his nature stoode styll lyke a wall or flowed against the streame towardes the head spryng yet the substaunce of the water remayned the same that it was before Lykewyse the stone that aboue his nature and kynde flowed water was
as the Papistes do fondly phantasy And likewise the substances of bread wyne do feede and norishe the body of them that eate the same and not the only accidentes In these answeres is no absurditie nor inconuenience nothyng spoken either contrarye to holy scripture or to natural reason Philosophy or experience or against any olde auncient author or the primatiue or catholike churche but onely against the malignant and Papisticall church of Rome Where as on the other syde y t cursed synagoge of Antichrist hath defined and determined in this matter many thynges contrary to Christes wordes contrary to the olde catholike church and the holy martyrs and doctoures of the same and contrary to all naturall reason learnynge and phylosophy And the final end of all this Antichrists doctrine is none other but by subtelty and crafte to bringe christian people from the true honouringe of Christ vnto the greatest ydolatry that euer was in this worlde deuised as by goddes grace shalbe plainly sette forth hereafter Thus endeth the seconde booke THE THIRDE BOOKE TEACHETH THE MANNER HOWE Christe is present in his supper NOW THIS MATTER OF transubstantiation being as I trust sufficiently resolued which is the fyrst part before rehersed wherin the papistical doctrine varieth from the catholicke truth ordre requireth next to intreate of the seconde part whiche is of the manner of the presence of the body and bloode of our sauiour Christe in the sacramente thereof wherein is no lesse contention then in the fyrste parte For a plaine explication wherof it is not vnknowen to all true faithfull christian people that oure sauiour CHRIST beeinge perfecte God and in all thinges equall and coeternall wyth his father for our sakes beecame also a perfect manne takynge fleshe and bloode of his blessed mother and virgine Marye and sauing synne beinge in all thinges lyke vnto vs adioyninge vnto hys diuynitie a moste perfecte soule and a moste perfecte bodye hys sowle beinge indued with lyfe sence wyll reason wysdome memory and all other thinges required to the perfect soule of man and hys body being made of very fleshe and bones not onlye hauinge all membres of a perfecte mannes bodye in due ordre and proportion but also beinge subiect to hunger thyrste laboure sweate werines colde heate and all other lyke infirmyties and passions of man and vnto death also and that the moste vile and painefull vppon the crosse And after his death he rose againe with y e selfe same visible and palpable bodye and appeared therwith and shewed the same vnto hys Apostels and specially to Thomas makinge him to put his handes into his syde and to feele hys woundes And with the selfe same bodye he forsooke this worlde and ascended into heauen the Apostels seeynge and beholdinge hys body when it ascended and nowe sytteth at the right hand of his father and there shall remaine vntyll the laste daye when he shal come to iudge the quick and the deade This is the trewe catholicke faythe whâ—che the scrripture teacheth the vniuersal churche of Christe hathe euer beleued frome the begynnynge vntyll within these fower or fyue hundreth yeares last passed that the Byshoppe of Rome with the assistaunce of his Papists hath sette vp a newe faithe and beliefe of theyr owne deuising that the same body really corporally naturally and sensiblye is in this worlde styll and that in an hundreth thousand places at one tyme beynge inclosed in euerye pyxe and bread consecrated And althoughe we do affirme accordinge to Gods word that Christ is in all persones that truelye beleue in him in suche sorte that with his flesh and bloode he dothe spiritually norishe theim and feede theim and giueth theim euerlasting lyfe â–ª and doth assure them therof aswell by the promise of his word as by the sacramentall bread and wine in his holy supper which he did institute for the same purpose yet we do not a little varye frome the hainous erroures of the Papistes For they teache that Christe is in the breade and wine But we say according to the truth that he is in them that worthely eate and drink the breade and wine They saye that when anye manne eateth the breadde and drynketh the cuppe CHRIST goeth into his mouth or stomake with the breade and wyne and no further But wee saye that CHRIST is in the whole man bothe in the body and soule of him that worthely eateth the bread and drinketh the cuppe and not in hys mouthe or stomacke onely They saye that CHRIST is receiued in the mouth and entreth in wyth the bread and wyne Wee saye that hee is receaued in the harte and entreth in by faithe They saye that Christe is reallye in the sacramentall breade beeynge reserued an whole yeare or so longe as the fourme of breade remaineth but after the receiuynge thereof hee flyeth vp say they frome the receiuer vnto heauen as soone as the breade is chawed in the mouth or chaunged in the stomacke But wee say that Christ remayneth in the man that worthely receiueth it so longe as the manne remayneth a membre of Christe They say that in the sacrament the corporall membres of Christe be not distaunt in place one from another but that wheresoeuer the head is there be the feete and wheresoeuer the armes be there be the legges so that in euery parte of the bread wyne is altogither whole head whole feete whole fleshe whole bloud whole hearte whole lunges whole brest whole backe and altogither whole confused and mixte withoute distinction or diuersitie O what a foolishe and an abhominable inuencion is this to make of the moste pure and perfect body of Christe suche a confuse and monstruous body And yet canne the Papistes imagine nothinge so foolishe but all Christian people must receyue the same as an oracle of God and as a moste certayne article of their fayth without whisperyng to the contrary Furthermore the Papistes say that a dogge or a Catte eate the body of Christe if they by chaunce do eate the sacramental bread We say that no yearthly creature can eate the body of Christ nor drynke his bloud but onely man They say that euery maÌ„ good and euil eateth the body of Christe We say that bothe do eate the sacramental bread and drynke the wyne but none do eate the very body of Christ and drynke his bloud but only they that be liuely membres of his body They say that good menne eate the body of Christ and drynke his bloud only at that tyme whan they receiue the sacrament We say that they eate drinke and feede of Christ coÌ„tinually so long as they be membres of his body They say that the body of Christe that is in the sacrament hath his owne proper fourme and quantitee We say that Christ is there sacramentally and spiritually without fourme or quantitee They say that the fathers prophetes of the olde testament did not eate the body nor drunke the bloud of Christ We
of the Lordes bodye And by and by foloweth So many hostes muste bee offered in the altare as wyll suffice for the people And yf any remayn they must not be kept vntill the mornyng but be spent and consumed of the clearkes with feare and tremblynge And they that consume the residue of the Lordes bodye may not by and by take other common meates least they shoulde mixte that holy portion with the meate which is dygested by the bealy and auoyded by the foundament Therfore if the Lordes portion bee eaten in the mornynge the ministers that consume it must faste vnto sixe of the clocke and if thei do take it at thre or four of the clocke the minister must fast vntyl the euenyng Thus much writeth Clement of this matter If the Epistle which they alledge were Clementes as in dede it is not But they haue fayned many thynges in other mennes names thereby to stablyshe their fayned purposes But whose so euer the Epistle was if it be throughly consydered it maketh muche more agaynst the Papâ—stes than for their pourpose For by the same Epistle appereth euidently thre speciall thyngs against the errours of the Papistes The fyrst is that the breade in the sacramente is called the Lordes body and the peeces of the broken bread be called the peeces and fragmentes of the Lordes body whyche can not bee vnderstande but fyguratiuely The seconde is that the bread oughte not to be reserued and hanged vp as the Papistes euery where doo vse The third is that the priests ought not to receyue the sacrament alone as the Papistes commonly do makyng a sale therof vnto the people but they ought to coÌ„municate with the people And here it is diligently to bee noted that we ought not vnreuerently and vnaduisedly to approche vnto the meate of the Lordes table as we doo to other common meates and drynkes but with great feare and dreade least we shulde come to that holy table vnworthely wherein is not onely represented but also spirytually geuen vnto vs very CHRISTE hym selfe And therfore we ought to come to that boord of the Lorde with all reuerence faythe loue and charitee feare and dread accordyng to the same Here I passeouer Ignatius and Ireneus whiche make nothyng for the Papistes opinions but stand in the commendacion of the holy Communion and in exhortacion of all men to the often and godly receiuyng therrof And yet neither they nor no manne els can extolle and coÌ„mende the same sufficiently accordyng to the dignitee therof if it bee godly vsed as it ought to be Dionysius also whom they allege to praise extoll this sacrament as in dede it is most worthy beyng a sacrament of moste high dignitee and perfection representyng vnto vs our moste perfect spiritual coniunction vnto Christ oure continual norishyng feadyng comforte spiritual life in him yet he neuer sayd that the fleshe and bloud of Christ was in the bread and wyne really corporally sensibly and naturally as the Papistes wold beare vs in hand but he calleth euer the bread and wyne signes pledges and tokens declaryng vnto the faythfull receiuers of the same that they receiue Christ spiritually and that they spiritually eate his flesh drynke his bloud And although the bread and wyne bee the figures signes and tokens of Christes fleshe and bloud as sainct Dionyse calleth them bothe before the consecracion and after yet the Greke annotations vpon the same Dionyse do say that the very thynges them selfes be aboue in heauen And as the same Dionyse maketh nothing for the Papistes opinions in this point of Christes reall and corporall presence so in diuers other things he maketh quite and clean against them and that specially in thre pointes In transubstantiation in reseruacion of the sacrament and in the receauinge of the same by the priest alone Furthermore they do alleage Tertulian that hee constantly affirmeth that in the sacramente of the altare we do eate the body and drinke the blud of our sauiour Christ. To whoÌ„ we graunte that our flesh eateth and drinketh the bread and wyne whiche be called the bodye and bloude of Christ bicause as Tertulian saith they do represent his body and bloude although they bee not really the same in very deed And we graunt also that oure soules by faith do eate his verye body and drinke his bludde but that is spiritually suckinge out of the same euerlastinge lyfe But we deny that vnto this spirituall feedinge is required any reall and corporall presence And therefore this Tertulian speaketh nothinge against the truthe of our catholicke doctrine but he speaketh many thinges most plainly for vs and against the Papistes and specially in thre pointes Firste in that he saithe that Christe called breade his body The second that Christ called it so bycause it representeth his bodye The thirde in that he saithe that by these wordes of Christe This is my bodye is mente This is a figure of my body Moreouer they allege for theym Origen because they would seeme to haue many aunciente authors fauourers of their erronious doctrine whiche Origen is moste clearely against them For although hee do saye as they allege that those things which before were signified by obscure figures be nowe truely in dede and in theyr very nature and kinde accomplished and fulfilled And for the declaration therof he bringeth forth thre examples One of the stone that floweth water an other of the sea and cloude and the thirde of Manna whiche in the olde testamente did signifie Christ to come who is now come in deed and is manifested and exhibited vnto vs as it were face to face and sensibly in his worde in the sacrament of regeneracion and in the sacramentes of breade and wine Yet Origene mente not that Christ is corporally either in his worde or in the water of baptime or in the breade and wine nor that we carnally and corporally be regenerated and borne againe or eate Christes flesh blood For our regeneracion in Christ is spiritual and our eating and drinking is a spirituall feeding which kinde of regeneration and feeding requireth no real and corporall presence of Christ but onlye his presence in spirite grace and effectuall operacion And that Origen thus mente that Christes fleshe is a spirituall meate and his bludde a spirituall drinke and that the eating and drynkinge of his fleshe and bloude maye not bee vnderstande literallye but spirytually it is manifested by Origenes owne woordes in his seuenth homylye vppon the booke called Leuiticus where hee sheweth that those wordes must bee vnderstande figuratiuely and who so euer vnderstandeth theim otherwise they bee deceaued and take harme by their owne grosse vnderstandinge And likewise ment Cypriane in those places whiche the aduersaries of the truthe alleadge of hym concernynge the true eatinge of Christes very fleshe and drinkinge of his bludde For Cyprian spake of no grosse and carnal eatinge with the mouth but of an inward
Adam is spirituall therefore our generation by hym muste be spirituall our feedyng muste bee lykewise spirituall And our spirituall generation by hym is playnly set forth in baptisme and our spirituall meate and foode is set foorth in the holy Cōmunion supper of the Lorde And because our sightes bee so feble that we cannot see the spiritual water wherwith we be washed in baptisme nor the spiritual meat wherwith we be fedde at the Lordes table therfore to healpe oure infirmities and to make vs the better to see the same with a pure fayth our sauiour Christ hath set furth the same as it were before our eyes by sensible signes and tokens whiche we be daily vsed and accustomed vnto And because the common custome of men is to washe in water therfore our spiritual regeneration in Christe or spirituall washyng in his blud is declared vnto vs in baptisme by water Lykewise oure spiritual norishement feadyng in Christ is sette before oure eyes by bread and wyne because they be meates and drynkes whiche chiefly and vsually we be fedde withal that as they feade the body so doth Christe with his fleshe and bloud spiritually feade the soule And therefore the bread and wyne bee called examples of Christes fleshe and bloud and also they be called his very fleshe and blode to signifie vnto vs that as they feade vs carnally so do they admonishe vs that Christe with his fleshe and bloud doth feade vs spiritually and moste truely vnto euerlastyng life And as almyghty God by his moste myghty worde and his hollye spirite and infinite power brought forth all creatures in the begynnyng and euer sithens hath preserued theym euen so by the same worde and power he woorketh in vs from time to tyme this meruailous spiritual generation wonderfull spirituall norishment feedyng which is wrought onely by God and is comprehended and receiued of vs by fayth And as bread and drynke by natural norishement be chaunged into a mannes body and yet the body is not chaunged but the same that it was before so although the bread and wyne be sacramentally chaunged into Christes body yet his body is the same and in the same place that it was before that is to say in heauen without any alteracion of the same And the bread and wyne bee not so chaunged into the fleshe and bloud of Christ that they bee made one nature but they remayne styll distinct in nature so that the bread in it selfe is not his fleshe the wyne his bloud but vnto them that worthely eate and drinke the bread and wyne to them the bread and wyne be his flesh and bloud that is to say by thynges naturall and whiche they be accustomed vnto they bee exalted vnto thynges aboue nature For y ◠sacramental bread and wyne be not base and naked figures but so pithy and effectuous that whosoeuer worthely eateth them eateth spiritually Christes fleshe and bloud and hath by them euerlastyng life Wherfore whosoeuer cōmeth to the Lordes table must come with all humilitee feare reuerence and puritie of life as to receiue not onely bread and wyne but also our sauior Christ both God and man with al his benefites to the relief and sustētacion both of their bodies and soules This is briefly the summe and true meanyng of Damascene concernyng this matter Wherfore they that gather of hym either the natural presence of Christes body in the sacramētes of bread and wyne or the adoration of the outward and visible sacrament or that after the cōsecracion there remayneth no bread nor wyne nor other substaunce but onely the substaunce of the body and bloude of Christe eyther they vnderstand not Damascen or els of wilful frowardnes they wyll not vnderstande hym whyche rather seemeth to bee true by suche collections as they haue vniustly gathered noted out of him For although he say that Christe is the spirituall meate yet as in baptisme the holy ghost is not in the water but in hym that is vnfaynedly baptised so Damascene ment not y t Christ is in the bread but in hym y t worthily eateth the bred And though he say that the bread is Christes body and the wyne his bloud yet he mente not that the bread considered in it selfe or the wyne in it selfe beyng not receyued is his fleshe and bloud but to suche as by vnfayned faith woorthely receyue the breade and wyne to suche the breade and wyne are called by Damascene the body and bloude of Christe bycause that suche persons through the workyng of the holy gost be so knytte and vnited spirituallye to Christes fleshe and bloude and to his diuinitee also that they bee fedde with them vnto euerlastyng life Furthermore Damascene sayeth not that the sacrament should be worshipped and adored as the Papistes terme it whiche is playne ydolatrye but we must worship Christ God and man And yet we may not worship him in bread and wyne but sittyng in heauen with his father and beyng spiritually within our selues Nor he sayeth not that there remayneth no bread nor wyne nor none other substaunce but onely the substaunce of the body and bloud of Christe but he sayeth playnely that as a burnyng coale is not wodde onely but fyre wodde ioyned together so the bread of the Cōmunion is not bread onely but bread ioyned to the diuinitee But those that say that there is none other substance but the substāce of the body and bloud of Christe doo not onely denye that there is bread and wyne but by force they must denye also that there is either Christes diuinitee or his soule For if the fleshe and bloud the soule and diuinitee of Christe bee foure substances and in the sacrament be but two of them that is to say his fleshe and bloud than where be his soule and diuinitee And thus these men diuide Iesus separatyng his diuinitee from his humanitee Of whom sainct Ihon sayeth Whosoeuer diuideth Iesus is not of God but he is Antichrist And moreouer these men do so separate Christes body from his membres in the sacrament that they leaue hym no mans body at all For as Damascene saith that the distinction of membres pertayne so muche to the nature of a mannes body that where there is no suche distinction there is no perfecte mans body But by these Papistes doctrine there is no suche distinction of membres in the sacramente for eyther there is no head fete handes armes legges mouthe eyes and nose at all or elles all is heade all feete all handes all armes all legges all mouthe all eyes and all nose And so they make of Christes body no mannes bodye at all Thus beynge confuted the Papistes errours as well concernyng Transubstantiation as the reall corporall and natural presence of Christ in the sacrament whiche were two principall pointes purposed in the begynnyng of this woorke Nowe it is tyme som thyng to speke of the third errour of the Papistes whyche is concernynge the
eatynge of CHRISTES very bodye and drynkyng of his bloude Thus endeth the thirde booke THE FOVRTH BOOKE IS OF THE EATYNG AND DRINKYNG OF the body and bloud of our Sauiour Christe THE GROSSE errour of the Papistes is of the carnal eatyng and drynkyng of Christes fleshe bloud with our mouthes For they say that whosoeuer eate and drynke the sacramentes of bread and wyne do eate and drynk also with their mouthes Christes very fleshe and bloud be they neuer so vngodly and wicked persons But Christ hym selfe taughte cleane contrary in the .vi. of Iohn y t we eate not hym carnally with our mouths but spiritually with our faith saiyng Uerely verely I say vnto you he y t beleueth in me hath euerlastiÌ„g life I am y e bread of life Your fathers did eate Manna in the wildernes and died This is the bread that cam froÌ„ heauen that who so euer shall eate therof shall not dye I am the liuely bread that cam from heuen If any man eate of this bread he shal lyue for euer And the bread whiche I wyll geue is my fleshe whyche I wyll geue for the lyfe of the worlde This is the moste trewe doctrine of our sauiour Christe that who so euer eateth hym shall haue euerlasting life And by and by it foloweth in the same place of Iohn more cleerely Ueryly verely I say vnto you except you eate the fleshe of the sonne of man and drynke his bloud you shall not haue lyfe in you He that eateth my fleshe and drynketh my bloud hath lyfe euerlastyng and I wyll rayse hym agayne at the laste daye For my fleshe is very meate and my bloudde is very drynke He that eateth my fleshe and drynketh my bloud dwelleth in me and I in hym As the lyuyng father hath sente me and I lyue by the father euen so he that eateth me shal lyue by me This is the bread whiche came downe from heauen not as your fathers dyd eate Manna and are dead he that eateth of this bread shall lyue for euer This taught our sauiour Christe as well his disciples as the Iewes at Capernaum that the eatyng of his fleshe and drynkyng of his bloude was not lyke to the eatyng of MaÌ„na For both good and badde dyd eate Manna but none do eate his fleshe and drynke his bloudde but they haue euerlastyng lyfe For as his father dwelleth in hym and he in his father and so hathe lyfe by his father so he that eateth Christes fleshe and drynketh his bloud dwelleth in Christ Christ in him by Christ he hath eternall lyfe What nede we any other witnesse whaÌ„ Christe hym selfe doth testifie the matter so plainly that who so euer eateth his fleshe and drynketh his bloud hath euerlastynge lyfe and that to eate his fleshe and to drinke his bloud is to beleue in hym And who so euer beleueth in him hath euerlastyng lyfe Whereof it foloweth necessaryly that vngodly persons beyng lymmes of the diuell do not eate Christes fleshe nor drynke his bloud excepte the Papistes wold saie that suche haue euerlastyng lyfe But as the dyuell is the foode of the wycked whiche he nourisheth in all iniquitee and bryngeth vp into euerlastyng daÌ„nation so is Christe the very fode of al them that bee the liuely membres of his body and them he norisheth fedeth bringeth vp and cherisheth vnto euerlasting life And euery good and faythfull christian man feeleth in hym selfe bowe he feedeth of Christe eatyng his fleshe and drynkyng his bloud For he putteth the hole hope and trust of his redemption and saluation in that only sacrifice which Christ made vpon the Crosse hauyng his body there broken and his bloud there shedde for the remission of his synnes And this greate benefite of Christe the faithfull man earnestly considereth in his mynde chaweth and digesteth it with the stomake of his harte spiritually receauynge Christe wholly into hym and gyuyng agayne hym selfe wholly vnto Christe And this is the eatyng of Christes flesh drinkyng of his blud the felyng wherof is to euery maÌ„ the felyng how he eateth drynketh Christ which none euil maÌ„ nor meÌ„bre of the diuel can do For as Christ is a spiritual meate so is he spritually eaten digested with the spirituall part of vs and geueth vs spirituall and eternall lyf and is not eaten swalowed and dygested with oure teeth tungues throtes and bealyes Therfore saith S. Cyprian he that drynketh of the holy cup remembrynge this benefite of God is more thirsty than he was before And lifting vp his hart vnto the lyuyng God is taken with suche a singular hunger and appetite that he abhorreth all gally and bytter drynkes of synne and al sauour of carnall pleasure is to him as it were sharpe sowre vineger And the synner beyng conuerted receauyng the holy mysteries of the Lordes supper geueth thankes vnto God boweth downe his head knowyng that his sinnes be forgeuen and that he is made cleane and perfecte and his soule whiche God hath sanctified he rendreth to God agayne as a faythfull pledge and than he glorâ—eth with Paule and reioyseth saieng Nowe it is not I that lyue but it is Christ that lyueth within me These thynges be practised and vsed among faithfull people and to pure myndes the eatyng of his fleshe is no horrour but honour and the spirite delyteth in the drynkyng of the holy and sanctifyenge bloude And dooyng this we whette not our teethe to byte but with pure faith we breake the holy breade These be the woordes of Cyprian And acording vnto the same S. Austen saith Prepare not thy iawes but thy hert And in an other place as it is cited of him he saith why dost thou prepare thy bely thy teeth beleue thou hast eaten But of this matter is sufficiently spokeÌ„ before where it is proued that to eate Christs flesh and drinke his bloud bee figuratiue speeches And now to returne to our purpose that only the liuely membres of Christ do eate his fleshe drynke his blud I shal bryng furth many other places of auncieÌ„t authors before not meÌ„cioned Fyrst Origen writeth plainly after this maner The worde was made fleshe and very meat whiche whoso eateth shall surely liue for euer whiche no euil man can eate For if it could be that he that contynueth euil might eate the woorde made fleshe seyng that he is the woorde bread of life it should not haue been written Whosoeuer eateth this bread shall liue for euer These wordes be so plaine that I nede say nothyng for the more cleare declaracion of them Wherfore you shal heare howe Cyprian agreeth with him Cyprian in his sermon ascribed vnto him of the Lordes supper sayth The author of this tradicion sayd that except we eate his fleshe and drynke his bloud we should haue no life in vs instructyng vs with a spiritual lesson and openyng to vs a way to vnderstaÌ„d so priuy