which is in hand Therfore it representeth the great and heauenly things which the holy words of the high priest of our Lorde and Sauiour Christ Jesus doe declare This is my body sayth he which is broken for you doe this in rememberance of me Againe of the Cup of wine This Cup is the newe Testament in my bloude which is shedde for you What meane these wordes what sence haue they what signifye they some prodigious thing or newe thing or light thing or thing of smale value No. But the most certaine testifycation and assurance of the forgiuenesse of our sinnes saluation life euerlasting which we obtaine by the death of Christ and which is exhibited by the outwarde elementes of bread and wine but receiued only by y inward hand of fayth and séene onely by the inwarde eye of Fayth Christ gaue to his disciples bread and wine ye he gaue also vnto theÌ„ his body and blood that they by fayth being fed with this heaeÌ„nly bread this heauenly drinke might haue life euerlasting which to printe more surely in their harts he playnly telleth theÌ„ of his blessed body y was to be rent for them and his precious blood that was to be shedde for them and for many other that God the Father being pacified with this rich sacrifice might forgeue theÌ„ there sinnes Therfore he called this a new league a new testament often promised by the holy Prophets which was to be confirmed not by the blood of beastes but by the sheadding of his holy and precious blood wherefore his will and pleasure was that this mistery of so great things should be celebrated euer in publique assemblies both that the remembrance of hym might euer be freshe with hys and that often thankes might be geuen to God the father that his louers and professoâ—â— might be stirred to mutuall loue by so godly a presideÌ„t also signed wyth the holy seale of eternall blisse But thus much at large the rest more briefly that truth may be sooner picked out and more plainely appere For as Marcus Tullius saieth of Philosophers So I thinke Deuines bounde to briefe arguments That which christ toke he brake that which he brake he gaue to his Disciples that which he gaue to his disciples he called his body Therefore he called breade his bodye For he toke breade brake breade and gaue it to his Disciples But that which is breade by nature is not the substance of Christes bodye Except we will prodigiously confounde the substance of things and so by consequente the naturall bodye of Christ is not really and bodily in the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ But here is made a stoppe that Christ blessed the bread after he had takeÌ„ it as S. Mathew and S. Marck sayeth by vertue whereof there followed such a chaunge that although he tooke bread yet he neyther brake bread nor gaue bread This sophistication is called of the Logitians Petitio Principij For fyrst S. Marcke doth not say that Christ blessed the bread but that when he had taken he blessed Secondly the gréeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth as well sygnify to geue thanks as to blesse and that it sygnifyeth there to geue thankes because the holy ghost is the best expounder of it selfe Both S. Luke S. Paule declare which both for that worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vse this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifyeth so geue thanks and not to blesse Thirdly as it was meÌ„t touching the bread So was it mente touching the Cuppe and Wyne But both Mathew and Marcke themselues speaking of the Cuppe or wyne vse not thys worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but the saide worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therfore it is manifest that both they ment hée gaue thankes after that he had takeÌ„ the bread and he gaue thanckes after he had taken the Cuppe Briefely thus that that is true about the bread is true also about the Cuppe of wyne but the cuppe or the wyne haue ioyned vnto them no wordes of consecration or transubstantiation or chaunging of one substaunce into another as it appereth by S. Luke and S. Paule Therefore the first principle is God that breade was taken the bread was broken and that bread was geuen to the Disciples Adde to these that S. Paule in the xx Chapter and fyrst Epistle to the Corinthians aduisedly purposely speaking of the Lords supper sayeth is not the bread which we breake the partaking of body of Christ And Luke in the secoÌ„d of the Actes They did continue together in the doctrine of the Apostles in pertaking and breaking of bread a little after he sayeth that the Disciples came together to breake bread by the which it is necessarily concluded that the same was broken which was taken and that that was broken was geuen 〈…〉 and of that that was geuen did Christ say this is my body Therefore christ did say of bread this is my body For as Christe ment of the bread so he ment of the wine but he ment of wyne to be drawen and drunke as it appeareth by Marcke and Mathew where he sayd I will drincke no more of the fruite of this wyne c. Therefore he ment also that bread that was eaten Agayne if the substaunce of the bread be chaunged into the substaunce of the body Then the substaunce of the wine should be chaunged to the substaunce of the blood but in the second place not the substaunce of wyne but the substaunce of the cuppe should be chaunged into the new Testamente by the wordes of coÌ„secration as their terme is For wheras Mathew and Marck briefely saye This is my blood Luke and Paule doe set downe at large this cuppe is the new testameÌ„t in my blood But you will say that the cuppe doth signify the wine in the cuppe by a fygure called Metonomia Then you graunt that the holy Ghost doth speake fyguratiuely in the matter of the Sacrament but let that goe and let it be this wyne is the new testament in my blood if the wyne should be chaunged it must be changed into the newe Testamente of Christes blood but that spéech caÌ„not stand except it be vnderstood fyguratiuely and spiritually thus This Wine is a visible signe of mine new inuisible league couenaunt will grace and mercy which shall be confirmed and sealed with the sheadding of my blood Then neyther the fyrste wordes touching the bread implye any chaunge of substaunce but haue a spirituall and figuratiue meaning For whether you say the cuppe or the wyne the spéech must needes be fyguratiue For neither the cuppe or the wyne eyther is or can be properly called a testamente Nowe if the second spéech of the wyne do necessarily imply two figures at the leaste why should it seeme so strange to saye that the first spéech of the bread deth also imply a figure Doe you then saye you thinke that Christ spake doubtfully and woulde in his last
that his godhead and manhood be plucked asunder because we auouch that the naturall body of Christ is in heauen at the right hand of God the Father and yet his godhead to be euery where did not his godhead then fill heauen and earth when his naturall body was in a corner of the earth wheÌ„ it lay in the graue And may not nowe the Godhead fill the whole world and his naturall body be onely in heauen and the two natures not seuered Away then away with quarrels and let truth preuayle and tryumphe by the which the two natures of christ tyed togeather with the merueylous bonde of the vnion be distinguished but not seperated And truely to continue in the same resemblance of saint Basill the fyre doth not chaunge all the properties of the Iron for the Iron fyred and hotte is heauy falleth downward is a solidde and thicke body This is S. Basils meaning that these forces of the fyre be transferred into the Iron of the which the nature of the yroÌ„ is capable not those which ouer throwe the nature of the yron And in like manner that those forces and proprieties of the godhead be transferred into the body of Christ of the which the nature of the body is capable not those which ouerthrow the nature of the body For we must â—uer haue recourse to that worthy shying of S. Austen he gaue immortallity to his body but he tooke not awaye the nature of the body neyther is the godhead of the man so to be mainteined that the truth of the body be destroyed But why do I stand vpon this poynt why doth my spéech so long waÌ„der why doe I not open the spring of this controuersy For al this conteÌ„tion floweth froÌ„ the question aboute the presence of the naturall body of Christ being in the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ For if that matter be once ordered and adiudged the other will soone be ended But that is a matter of great importaunce of the greatest in the worlde it oughte not to be handled but warely and reuerently most warely and most reuerently Your good name shal be rent with the bad spéeches not only of the enemies but of the enuious I refer that to god The matter is very hard The questyon to too darke discoursed in Sermons Jossed in disputations varyed of through all Christendome and as it should séeme of passing great difficulty God will helpe out with that whose both helpe we most humbly pray and busines most faythfully do out of whose most blessed and most certayne most true wordes all the reste of our spéeche shall grow It is written in the .26 Chapter of the Gospell after S. Mathewe in this wise when Jesus had taken bread and blest he did breake and gaue to the Disciples and sayd take ye eate ye this is my body And taking the Cup after he had geuen thanks he gaue to them saying drink all ye of this For this is my blood of the new Testament which is shed for many for the forgeuenesse of sinnes And in the .14 after S. Marke when Jesus had taken the bread and geuen thanks he did breake and gaue to them and sayd Take yée eate yée this is my body and when he had taken the Cuppe and geuen thanks he gaue to them and sayd Drinke ye all of this and he sayde to them this is my blood of the newe testament which is shead for many And in the .22 after S. Luke when he had taken bread and geuen thankes he brake and gaue to them saying This is my body which is geuen for you doe you this in remembraunce of me Likewise also the cuppe after he had supped saying This cuppe is the new testameÌ„t in my blood which is shed for many Lastly saint Paule to the Corinthians the .xj. Chapter and the fyrst Epistle The Lorde tooke breade and when he had giuen thankes he brake and said Take ye eate ye this is my body which is broken for you do ye this in remembrance of me Likewise also the cup after he had supped saying this cup is the newe testament in my bloude Doe ye thys as often as you shall drinke in remembraunce of me For as oft as you shall eate this bread and drinke of this cup you shall shewe the Lordes death vntill his comming I haue set downe the whole words of the holye ghost done out of greeke into Englishe worde by worde That so good a foundation being layde the rest that foloweth myght be the more fyrmly builded thervpon Let vs nowe view and waigh all these things Christ toke the same bread in his hande which was vpon the table Christ gaue to his Disciples the same breade and whiles he was giuing the breade to his disciples he speaketh as before whiles his Disciples eate this breade whiles they did broose it with their téeth and swallowed it into their stomaks where was christ was be not at the table did he not speak to theÌ„ did he not both eate drink with them was he not séene hearde and touched In which place was the bodye of Christ In the mouth and stomack of his disciples or at the table where they both sawe Christ and heard Christ if you say in both places Then this followeth That eyther Christ had two bodies or else that there was two christs both which aunsweres be very vngodly and absurde But you wil say the words be plaine for Christ saide plainely and distinctly This is my body This is my bloude Neyther is it lyke that Christ woulde speake doubtfully in the last talke that he had with his disciples I graunt the words be plaine after the maner of misteries in the which things subiect to the sense doe represent and shewe things which be taken onely of a godly minde and by a religious fayth I graunt that Christ gaue his bodye and that his Disciples toke it and eate it not after a naturall and grosse maner but after a supernaturall that is he heauenly and spirituall What then doe you denie that the breade is the bodye of Christ That the wine is the bloud of Christ not I truely But I saye that they be so in truth of religion sacrament and mistery and not by chaunging of nature element or substaunce For Christ doth call the breade his body but he doth not say that it is chaunged into his bodye Then you call it breade and the holye writer of this holy Storie doth himselfe call it breade the wordes be these He toke breade he gaue thankes he brake he gaue doth he not meane by this circumstance of wordes to make the matter plaine I praye you what toke he bread What brake he the same bread What gaue he the same bread For that that he toke that he brake and that that he brake that he gaue to hys Disciples and that that he gaue to his disciples that did his disciples eate But bicause it is a mistery
to the godhead to be lesse then the Father Of this point be the Fathers Irencus Ambrosius Ierononius Vigilius Augustinus and almost all the rest most sufficient witnesses As sayth Irenens the soule is present to the flesh dying and suffreth nothing so the godhead of Christ is present with the manhood suffring and suffering nothing onely rested Ambrose of that vpon S. Iohn Hereafter you shall see the sonne of man sitting on the right hande of the vertue This sitting doth so appertayne to the man sayeth he that in no case it is applyed to the Godhead which is infinite for God that is euer euery where cannot goe from place to place Ierâ—me Christ did die according to that he could die Vigilius agaynst Vtiches he one and the same sonne of God the Lord Jesus Christe both died according to the fourme of a seruaunt and died not according to the fourme of god Austen vpon that of S. John. None went vp into heauen but he that came down from heauen the sonne of man which is in heauen â–ª he was here sayeth S. Austen by flesh in heauen by Godhead yea euery where by Godhead and a little after shall not man Christ be called the sonne of God which his fieshe alone deserued to be called in the graue For what else doe we confesse when we say that we beléeue in the only begotten son of God which was crucifyed and suffered vnder Pontius Pilate died and was buryed what was buryed of him but his flesh without his soule And more playnly afterwardes who is he by whome the world was made Christe Jesus but in the fourme of God who was nayled to the crosse vnder Pontius Pilate Christ Jesus but in the fourme of a seruaunt Who was net lefte in Hell Christ Jesus but in soule alone Who lay thrée dayes dead in the graue and rose agayne the same Christe Jesus but in flesh alone Christ is sayd in ech one of these but all these be not two or thrée but one Christ Whereby it is playne the certayne properties or peculier graces of the one nature may be ascribed to the other in word thorough the vnion of the person but cannot agree in déede thorow the difference of the two natures The which Vigilius doth most playnly expresse agaynst Vtiches Then according to the property of nature onely the flesh died only the flesh was buried but according to the vnion of the person God dyed and was buryed For the person of the word is in the flesh which died Also according to the propertie of the nature the word came downe from heauen not the flesh And according to the property of the nature the flesh died and not the word but according to the vnion of the person both the flesh came downe from heauen and the word dyed and was buried Then when we saye that God died and suffred Let not Nestoreus be afrayde For we speake according to the vnion of the person Againe when we say that God neyther died nor suffered Let not Vtiches dreade for we speake according to the proprietie of the nature To this purpose writeth Theodorete you are to vnderstande that the vnion of the two natures doth make the names and proprieties common you will not say I suppose that the fleshe of God came downe from heauen For it was made in the Virgins wombe Howe then doeth the Lorde saye if you shall see the sonne of manne go vp the ther where he was before And againe none goeth vp into heauen but he that came downe from heauen the sonne of manne which is in heauen this he meaneth not of the flesh but of the godhead And the godhead is of God the father how then doth he call him the son of man They be reckned common to the person thorowe the vnion which be peculier to the seuerall natures So we are to expounde the rest in this sorte as the Fathers do The word became fleshe What is the mind what is the meaning of this spéeche was the deuine nature made the humayne nature God forbidde Naye it did take vnite to the selfe the humaine nature God did purge his church by his bloude What meaneth this hath the deuine nature bloud God forbidde that anye body should so think but God did purge his church by the bloude of that nature which he did appropriate by inâ—arnation or taking our flesh vpon him They nayled to the crosse the GOD of glory what is the the sence of these wordes was the godheade pierced or nayled to the woode God forbidde Nay that nature was so affected which the godhead did take to the self of the virgins wombe Wherefore thorowe the vnion of the person such things maye be spoken in worde but they cannot agrée in déede Neyther doth that of saint Basill of the birth of Christ disagrée with these How is the godheade in the fleshe as the fyre is in the yron not transitiuely but distributiuely For the fyre doth not runne into the yron but abyding in the place doth imparte and bestowe the peculier facultie vppon it Howe then was not God the word fylled with bodily weaknesse as the fyre doth not get to it selfe the proprieties of the yron IroÌ„ is black and colde and yet fyred it becommeth bright and hotte So the humayne nature of the Lorde was made partaker of the denine nature but did not poure into the deâ—â—e nature the owne weaknesse And so I see certaine proprieties dispersed but I doe not vnderstand all for after the vniting of the godhead the body of Christe was hungrie coulde thirstie wearie and gréeued and this is true of Christ the voyce My Soule is heauier euen vnto death And nayled vpon the crosse he sayeth I am dry He suffred truely he dyed truely hée was compassed about with place truly I would therefore gladly learne why the two natures should be sayd to be deuided because the seuerall proprieties of ech nature be set downe after his rysing agayne rather then they were wheÌ„ the seuerall proprieties of eache nature were set downe before his death For I reasoÌ„ thus the body of Christ liuing vpon earth was in one certayne and peculier place but the Godhead was in euery place And yet none will say that the person of Christ was then deuided why then may we not likewise say that the body of christ being in heauen is in one certayn and peculier place and yet not deuide the person of Christe For in Christes person being vpon earth perfecte God and perfect man were coupled together As S. Paule doth exceleÌ„tly say to the Colossians In him doeth dwel all the fulnesse of the Gohhead bodily The true full and absolute Godhead did dwell in the true full and absolute body comprised in one certayne and peculier place and yet was there no renting of the person of Christ What ground then haue these lameÌ„table and bitter outeryes that the persoÌ„ of Christ is denided
departure leaue hys Churche doubtfully Not I truely Why then do you talke of figures and troupes and figuratiue speeches and spirituall senses â–ª Not euerye figuratiue speeche is doubtfull and it is as great a faulte to refuse a figure when the place geueth it as to force a figure when there is none And it is most manifest by Saint Luke and saint Paule that the second speech of the Cup or wine is figuratiue and hath a spirituall sence For bothe they expounding the briefe wordes set downe by saint Mathew and S. Marke expressely saye that Christ saide this Cup is the newe Testamente in my blood And what sence or meaning can these wordes haue but this that in this sacrament there is deliuered vnto Christians a visible and most certayne signe or seale of that new inuisible truse will grace and mercie which God hath made and assured hys church of in these more mylde and gracyous dayes and would seale and ratify with the bloude of his sonne For the words in S. Luke doe proue this sence which he addeth of Christ saying Doe this in rememberance of me and also of saint Paule Ye shall thewe the Lordes death vntill he come Neyther here do I doubt that the true godly learned wil thinke that I haue not spokeÌ„ reuerently of this most holye and blessed misterie For I geue more honor and reuerence to it by a great deale then any that doth fansye a grosse and carnall presence But some will saye that I ouerthrowe all bring all to naught and make the holy sacrament nothing else but a péece of bread and a little wine that is a most false and malicious slaunder For I most certainely beléeue it to be one of the most precious Jewels that Christ left to hys church and that both the body and blood of Christ is truely and effectually exhibited by the power and grace of God and truely and effectually receaued by the fayth of the christian receyuer But such men deale with me as they such other deale with good preachers which to pull downe the pryde of mans harte telleth him that he is nothing but dust earth ashes and smoke and grasse and then a worldling wyll saye that that preacher maketh a man no better then a beast Whereas the preacher mente this onely of the one parte of man that is his body wisedome beautie glorye pompe and porte which in déede be nothing else but dust and grasse smoke that fade and perishe away and not of the seconde parte of manne that is hys soule which is immortall and eternall and certainly as man hath two partes the first the bodys which is visible fading the seconde his soule which is inuisible and eternall euen so this holye and blessed sacrament hath two partes The fyrst of the element of breade and wyne which is visible and fading the second the grace and fruites and benefites of the bod of Christ rent and his blood shed for the raunsome of man And as he that sayeth the body of man is meere flesh and fading flesh and nothing but flesh deeth not deny the immortality of â—â—e so de therby nor make whole man nothing the but body and flesh for he meaneth onely of the fyrste and fading parte of man which is sensible and not of the second part of man which is insensible euen so he that sayeth that the elemente of breade and wyne be n 〈…〉 re bread and wyne fading bread and wyne and nothing but bread and wyne doth not therby deny or take away the grace and benefyte of the body and blood of Christ nor make that blessed sacrameÌ„t nothing else but bread and wyne For he meaneth onely the fyrst and fading part of that sacrament which is sensible and not of the seconde which is insensible And let any indifferent man iudge whether he speaketh more honourably or doth more set forth the maiesty of that sacrament which sayth that free forgeuenesse of all our sinnes and a sure possession of eternall life springing froÌ„ the free mercy of God is deriued and poured into christian heartes by that sacrament and as a Conduite thorough the force of a true liuely fayth in the death and merittes of our only Sauyoure Christ Jesus or he which by fancying of a real carnal or corporall presence doth binde and tye al the grace and power to creatures I confesse with all my harte â— Christ hath left vnto his church nothing eyther if a man consider profite more fruitfull or if swéetenesse more pleasant or if honour more glorious then the most holy and blessed sacramente of the body and blood of Christe by the which the moste aboundaunt grace and mercy of God is dropped into holy and faythfull soules but to speake otherwise of creatures then can be iustified by the word of god is wicked and damnable And such as would haue al things litterally vnderstood let them view the wordes well and neyther this worde Cuppe nor Is can be litterally vnderstood which also Thomas Aquinas there Archscholeman doth confesse saying By that that is contayned in this Cuppe is remembred the new Testamente confyrmed by the bleed of Christ For this worde cuppe he sayeth that that is contayned in the Cuppe For this worde Is he sayeth is remembred is represented or is sygnifyed And although in others they condemne necessary plaine figures yet they themselues be forced to immagine vnnecessary to to straunge fygures fyrst where the Tert sayeth Hoc meaning this bread they will not haue it so but theyexpound it to be indiuidium vaguÌ„ which is not any certayne determined thing but onely one certayn thing at large in generality where y text doth say Est is they saye transubstantiatur transelementatur is chaunged into the substaunce the nature of the element is changed These wordes take ye eate ye this is my body they turne thus this is my body take ye eate ye by a fygure called Husteron Proteron which setteth that behind that should goe before He blessed sayeth the text he transubstantiated he chaunged the substaunce saye they he brake sayeth the text the accidentes the formes or sheaues of bread say they Do ye sayth the text sacrifyce ye say they This word bread hath a Quatermon of fygures Fyrst because it was bread Secondly because the Infydell taketh it onely to be bread Thirdly because the fourme and shewe of bread remayneth stil Fourthly because the forme or shew of bread doth nortish as perfectly as though it were bread Frangitur is broken sayth the Texte frangebatur it was broken or videtur frangi séemeth to bée broken say they Now seemeth to be broken is as much as is not broken Then the word of the Text Is is broken their word or expositioÌ„ Is is not broken and this is a to too straunge kinde of fygure For Is broken and is not broken imply a playne and full contradiction Much like as the glose expoundeth the Texte statuimus