Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
word_n	blood_n	bread_n	consecration_n	4,106	5	10.7048	5	false

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A12703	The high vvay to Heaven by the cleare light of the Gospell cleansed of a number of most dangerous stumbling stones thereinto throwen by Bellarmine and others In a treatise made vpon the 37. 38. and 39. verses of the 7. of Iohn: wherein is so handled the most sweete and comfortable doctrine of the true vnion and communication of Christ and his Church, and the contrarie is so confuted, as that not onely thereby also summarilie and briefly, and yet plainly all men may learne rightly to receiue the sacrament of Christs blessed bodie and blood, but also how to beleeue and to liue to saluation. And therefore entitled The highway to Heauen. By Thomas Sparke Doctor of Diuinitie.	Sparke, Thomas, 1548-1616.	1597 (1597)	STC 23021; ESTC S102434	161,682	384

Testament wherein by beeing dipped in or sprinkled vpon with water in the name of the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost we are assured that God the Father can and will in the blood and by the blood of his Sonne by the mighty working of the holy Ghost wash away our sins and so receiue vs and incorporate vs into his Church that we shal be his new borne children and inabled to be holy because he is holy We administer it to infants because it succeedeth Circumcision which was by Gods ordinance appointed to be ministred to the infants of the Iewes when they were but eight daies old Ge. 17.12 because Christ said Suffer little children to come vnto me for of such is the kingdom of heauen Mat. 19.13 because we read that the Apostles baptised whole households as Act. 16.33 amongest which sometimes it is most likelie there were some infantes and lastly because we finde that God promised not onelie to be the God of Abraham but also of his feede after him Gen. 17.7 and that Saint Paule most plainely teacheth that if one of the parents be beleeuing then is the seede holy 1. Cor. 7.14 And therefore it beeing administred to such and in water and in that manner that it is by Christs ordinance the nature of water beeing as we knowe it to bee we may and ought to learne all these lessons that we are all borne and conceiued in sinne and therewith so defiled that we stand need of washing that this washing and cleanseing is to be had at God the Fathers hands through Iesus Christ by the working of the holie Ghost and no where else that God both can and will thus wash and cleanse vs and that therefore this Trinitie in vnitie is onely to be beleeued in and trusted vnto for the matter of our saluation and to be honoured in all thankfulnesse for the same by our ceasing from sinne and doing of that which is good Whereupon we see that they that would lead vs after we haue once beene thus baptised to put our faith and confidence for any part of our forgiuenes of sinnes or saluation eyther in any other person or thing as the coÌ„mon fashion is amongst papistes doubtlesse they would haue vs to reuolt from that faith wherein we were baptised and whereunto therby we haue most solemnly bound our selues Heereby also we may perceiue that though Baptisme it selfe be but once to be ministred for the reason before shewed yet as oft as euer eyther we finde our sinnes readie to shake our faith or otherwise to trouble vs by meditation thereof we are thus to haue our recourse againe vnto it to the strengthening both of our faith and to the weakning of the power of sinne howsoeuer the papistes would perswade vs that it serueth onely to assure vs of remission of sinnes before because we may be sure that God is alwaies readie if we can beleeue in him to performe vnto vs whatsoeuer he hath offered vnto vs therein Which doubtlesse is the remission of all our sinnes before or after we beleeuing and repenting thereof Or else if onely thereby were offered forgiuenesse of sinnes before it then surely the Church would haue deferred it to the last or later then eyther it hath or yet doth And as for the other Sacrament Of the other Sacrament if we doe with any diligence but consider that which we finde set downe thereof Mat. 26.26 c. Mar. 14.22 c. Luk. 22.19 c. 1. Cor. 11.23 c. we shall there finde whatsoeuer appertaineth eyther generally to a Sacrament or particularly vnto it most plainely and effectually expressed For there it is euident that Christ instituted it and commanded his ministers to administer it vntill his comming againe that he ordained very bread and wine to be the outward visible elements and his bodie broken for his and his blood shed for the remission of their sinnes to be the things by the other figured signified and represented yea thereby both offered and truely deliuered and communicated to the right and worthy receiuer And therefore to assure theÌ„ of as much he called the bread broken distributed his body broken the wine powred forth giuen theÌ„ in the cup his blood of the new Testament shed for many to the remission of their sins We therefore by warrant from hence do define this To be a Sacrament of the new Testament instituted by Christ and to administred by his ordinance and to be receiued according to the same of his faithfull people consisting not onely of bread broken wine powred out into the cup to be distributed receiued of al worthy commers thereunto in remembrance of his death and passion and as vndoubted tokens by his institution though not of their own nature both that his body was broken and his blood shed for all his in general and also particularly for the full redemption and saluation of euery right receiuer hereof but also of the very broken body and bloodshed of Christ for our saluation therewith all as certainely offred to be fed on to eternall life and fed on indeed by euery worthy communicant though by spirituall meanes as the other are offered vnto them taken and fed on by the instruments of the bodie Whereupon most earnestly we exhort euery one that would worthily come vnto this table and so be partakers indeed to their comfort of this Sacrament with Saint Paule in any case to trie and examine themselues first and to iudge themselues least for want of so doing they be heere iudged of the Lord by eating of this breade and drinking of this cup vnworthily to haue made themselues guiltie of his bodie and bloode and so to eate and drinke their own damnation For though we holde breade and wine heerein still to retaine their former substance and essence because euen by the expresse wordes of the institution in the places before quoated so much is euident and the common nature of a Sacrament requireth the continuance of the outwarde element in his former nature that so it may carrie the better and apterresemblance of the thing whose name it beareth yet we know and most willingly confesse with all antiquitie that thereof heere by vertue of Christes institution which doth and shal remaine in force stil to the worlds end alwaies to effect the same in bread and wine according to his ordinance set aside and vsed to this purpose there is a verie great change and alteration But that is but in name vse and estimation For whereas before they were but called bread and wine and serued but to the common vse of the nourishing and cheering of the bodie and therefore so onely were to be esteemed heerein they beare the names of the verie bodie and bloode of Christ and they serue as the Lordes good meanes to lead and strengthen our faith to feede therupon indeed to our saluation The vse thereof and therefore we esteeme of them herein not as they are

haue bene so nousled therein that the conceite they haue yet of the trueth thereof will hinder them if it be not the better confuted from taking any great good by al I haue said hitherto though otherwise heere I might well haue ended this matter and would yet I must craue leaue of you to take some further paines for the better backing of that which I haue said to lay before you that which I thinke sufficient for the iust confutation of this grosse moutheating of Christ Iesus by all communicantes whatsoeuer The things that Lutherans papistes hold in comon for their grosse reall presence confuted Heerein I shall haue to deale with two sortes of aduersaries the one sort where of are the Lutherans which I late spok of who to that end interprete Christes words spoken of the bread and wine so as that therevpon they inferre such a Consubstantiation that is such a beeing together of the verie bodie and blood of Christ with bread and wine in the vse of this Sacrament that whosoeuerreceiues the one with his mouth receiues the other and the other sort are our common aduersaries the Papistes who interprete the wordes of Christ so as that by the force thereof they teach the bread and wine to be transubstantiated that is to be turned into the bodie and bloode of Christ as some of them haue held or at least thereby as now most of them hold so to be conueyed away that there remaines nothing but the accidents thereof vnder which and together with which the bodie and bloode of Christ really are so certainly present that euery receiuer thereof takes into his mouth the verie bodie and bloode of Christ Otherwise these two are at deadly warre one with another and the former in most of the groundes and principles of Christian Religion hold with vs foundly against the other and yet in this and for the maintenance of this their carnall and grosse presence they are as vehement and bitter against vs for the denying oppugning thereof as the other Orderly therefore todeale with them both whereas there are some thinges in this case common to them both wherein they both holde alike against vs set vs consider of them of the groundes thereof first and afterwardes we will take a viewe of those thinges and of their groundes also wherein they differ both betwixt themselues and also from vs least otherwise we should be driuen tediously to repeate one thing often By their bookes that they haue written daily doe about this matter it is cuident that they both holde a reall presence of Christes bodie and blood together with the outward elements in the vse of this Sacrament and likewise that they both therfore teach that together with the same euery receiuer haue he a right faith or no receiues in by his mouth the verie real true bodie blood of Christ And both of them ground both these their opinions first of Christes words vttered of the bread and wine then of his almightinesse and lastly of the state now of his glorified bodie In and about the outward elements when they come to be taken of the mouth of the receiuer what they be and how long this their reall presence of bodie and blood with them continues they could neuer yet agree For the maintainers of Consubstantiation plainely with vs notwithstanding Christes wordes and all their other grounds for their manner of his reall presence holde and teach that they remaine substantially bread and wine still and so are taken and eaten and the other will haue after those wordes are once pronounced the substances of breade and wine to be gone quite though vnto this day they coulde neuer agree to tell what was become of them and the onely accidentes thereof to supplie the roome alwaies after of the outward part of this Sacrament The other hold their reall presence continueth no longer or at least is tyed no longer to bread and wine nor to any more of it then is receiued and the ministerie thereof lasteth For Extra vsum as they speake that is besides the vse they hold neither the bread nor the wine that remaines to be the bodie and bloode of Christ whereas the other stiflie maintaine that all the hostes that they consecrate are euery one of them the bodie of Christ and therefore they hang them vp which they leaue in a Pixe vnder a Canopie and honour and worship them as the verie bodies of their Sauiour And for the wine they take careful order for that bicause they cannot tell howe so well to preserue and keepe that belike sweete as the other to consecrate no more then their priest may quite and cleane sup vp at that verie time But to let these their disagreeings alone the things wherein they agree herein are nowe to be considered of wherein their manner of reall presence of Christ offers it selfe first Touching the which to begin withall this I dare be bolde to say for I knowe it to be most true how drunken soeuer they be with a conceit to the contrarie it is contrarie to all doctrine taught vs in the Scriptures or in any ancient Father or Councell for six hundred yeeres after Christ at the least For with one consent all these when they speake of Christes presence in this Sacrament it is reall presence to the beleeuing communicant for whom indeed he gaue his bodie and blood that they speake for and that they speake of as for any such reall prefence of his eyther with or vnder bread and wine or vnder the accidentes thereof as these men now plead for neuer eyther any writer of any of the Canonical Scriptures nor any sound Father or Councel euer once dreamed off And this reall true presence of Christ to the right receiuer we do not denie but we vrge teach more plainlie and comfortablie than anic of them doc And this is it that bringeth inseperablie with it eternal life saluation in Christ as for this of theirs the verie force of trueth flat experience haue driuen them to confesse may be and yet the receiuer thereby neuer the better but the worse What a vaine thing then is it for men to keepe such a sturre to the vexing and disturbing of all Christendome for a thing so fruitlesse Alas who is so simple but that he knoweth or may soone knowe that Christes bodie was broken and his bloode shed for vs men and not for breade and wine and therefore that neyther bread nor wine are the thinges that haue to doe with his presence nor yet their accidents but onely we men and then that we may haue it sufficiently to our saluation who seeth not that it is the vainest thing in the world to striue for it for bread and wine and their accidentes Further seeing both of these doe confesse this to be a Sacrament wherof we now intreate neither of them yet could shew or euer went about it that in any other

all such conceits or murmuring by occasion of that doctrine of Christ written of those words of his whereat they so stumbled in his third booke of christian doctrine Chap. 16. saying thus That saying of Christ except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man drinke his bloode ye haue no life c. seemeth to commend an heinous thing and a wicked and therefore it is a figure commaunding vs to be partakers of Christes passion and to keepe in our mindes to our great comfort and profit that his flesh was crucified and wounded for vs. But I am not ignorant that these men would seeme to mislike the Capernaits opinion as much as we and that therefore they labour to put an infinite difference betwixt their fansie of eating his flesh and drinking his bloode and this of theirs For they imagined say they that then they should feede vpon them visiblie and by piece-meale as they did of other their vsuall meat and drinke whereas they purpose them to be fed on inuisibly and wholly But alas what a poore difference is this as though it were not as much against the lawe of God the law of all nations and nature also knowing it to eate and drinke mans flesh and bloode vnseene as seene all at a morsell or at a sup as by many morsels and suppes If yet they will needes vrge this their reall presence and their mouth-eating really of Christ how will they auoyde the daunger then that that generall and vniuersall proposition of Christ will bringe them vnto saying as we reade he did Mat. 15.17 What soeuer entreth into the mouth goeth into the bellie is cast out into the draught c Euen this hath caused many both as learned as any of them and farre more ancient to vnderstand the eating of Christ to be by the mouth of the soule faith and not by the very mouth of the bodie And they know with one consent the ancient Fathers teach that the wicked and vnbeleeuing whiles they remain such cannot eate the bodie and bloode of Christ which they neither could nor would haue done if they had knowne that there was any such reall presence eyther by Transubstantiation or Consubstantiation as nowe these men teach For eyther of these beeing graunted the other how absurd soeuer it be must follow thereupon And therefore is it because they know that the Consequent being absurd the Antecedent froÌ„ whence it floweth must needs be so also that these men are thus eager to defend this to be no absurditie that all that communicate though they be neuer so bad and faithlesse eate the bodie and drinke the bloode of Christ really for otherwise they know they cannot defend any longer their reall presence as they do For Isee no cause else why they should make so much a doe for persons so vnworthie to haue such care and paines taken for them But yet so wedded are these men vnto their groundes that they haue builded this their fancie vpon mentioned before Christes wordes proue not their purpose that vnlesse we can driue them froÌ„ thence notwithstanding all yet said against it it is to be feared that they wil think that they both may and ought to holde it still Wherefore whereas first they seeme to thinke that the wordes of Christ are plaine and pregnant to prooue their kind of reall presence and mouth-eating consequently of his bodie and bloode doubtlesse if with a single eie and without any preiudicate opinion we consider thereof we shall soone see that it is nothing but peeuishnesse wilfulnesse that makes them eyther so to say or thinke That the wordes of Christ are most certaine and true in the sense that he meant them when he vttered them we neuer denied nor will no nor yet we neuer gaue leaue vnto our selues so much as once to doubt thereof Wherefore if any of them perswade any man otherwise of vs they doe vs open and manifest wrong Neither can we thinke so vncharitablie of them but that we are perswaded that they so likewise thinke of them Heerein then is the difference and controuersie betwixt them and vs whether we or they hit of the right sense thereof Which beeing the question indeed as it is for the determining herof euery reasonable man must needes confesse that whose interpretation agrees best with the nature of the thing in hand with the analogie of faith and good manners with the rest of the Scriptures and sound antiquitie that is to be taken best to agree with Christes meaning and therefore is the fense to be followed and preferred before all others Nowe we interprete the wordes of Christ as spoken by a Metonymie that is by a figure of speech whereby one thing beares the name of the other as heere bread and wine we say doe of the bodie broken and blood shed of Christ because the one both signifies and representes the other vnto vs and also assures vs rightlie receiuing the one that we are and shal be partakers also of the other These men crie and vrge that the wordes are plaine and without any such figure and yet howsoeuer they therefore agree that they import a reall presence to the outward clementes and to the mouth of euerie receiuer as we haue heard yet the one sorte would haue them expounded to that end to inferre Consubstantiation and the other a Transubstantiation Iudge therefore now I beseech you by the foresaid rules whether theirs or ours be likest to be Christes meaning The matter in hande when those wordes were first vttered by him was a Sacrament and they know as wel as we that in all other Sacramentes when eyther they were instituted by God or afterwards spoken of by him though the very like Phrases for all the world were vsed of them that are here by Christ of these that yet vnto this day neuer any of themselues or others expounded them eyther as they doe these heere or otherwise then we doe these Circumcision is called the Couenant Gen. 17.10 the Lamb the Passeouer Exod. 12.21 the rocke that the people of Israel dranke the water of in the wildernesse Christ 1. Cor 10.4 the blood of their sacrifices the blood of the Couenant Exod. 24.8 the Arke the King of glorie and Iehouah Psal 24.8.10 and Baptisme is called the lauer or washing of our new birth Tit. 3.5 And yet who euer expounded these phrases eyther by Transubstantiation or Consubstantiation thereby really to make alwaies present to euery of these outward elements the spirituall matter thereby signified and resembled yea who euer vnderstoode these otherwise then to be as the wordes import onely by signification representation and for the assurance of the right vsers of them of the presence to them of the thinges therby signified and represented spiritually Why therfore should Christ either speake otherwise in the instituting of this then had beene vsed in all other Sacraments or speaking but euen so what reasoÌ„ is there why his speach should otherwise

be vnderstood heere then in all the rest To say that this hath a special and essentiall difference from all other Sacraments and therefore though these phrases be so to be taken in all other yet they cannot so be in this though when they say so they thinke they haue said much to the purpose yet indeed they haue said nothing For who knoweth not that a man hath an essential difference to distinguish him from all other creatures vnder the same General that he is And yet that letteth not but that whatsoeuer belongs to the nature of the General is coÌ„mon to him with al the rest For else he should not be defined by his General So if that which appertains to the nature of a SacrameÌ„t in general of which sort this is that now we talk of were not coÌ„mon vnto this with the rest it could not with theÌ„ be said to be a SacrameÌ„t as it is If therfore the outward elements bearing the names of the inward graces neither inforce or impart any such thing in any of the other no reason is there why it should in this And surely the disciples beeing so well acquainted with such kind of phrases in al the sacrameÌ„ts of the old Testament therby were prepared quietly to heare Christ to vse the like in this and readily rightly they vnderstood him as in the other therfore neuer once were offended or amased at his speach or made any questioning with him eyther then or afterwards about the sense therof Whereas if they had taken them in any such sense and had thought that they did import any such matter as eyther of these sortes of men imagine they did they beeing so bold with him at other times alwaies in matters of farre lesse importance and difficulty as to inquire his meaning they woulde also doubtlesse so haue done in this Which thing in some sort and that with some further matter verie fit to crosse these mens conceit Chrisostome in his 83. Homilie vpon Mathew hath noted saying euen speaking of the wordes of the institution now in question Quomodo non turbati erant cum hoc audissent quia multa magna de hoc antea disseruit c. that is how came it to passe that they were not troubled meaning his disciples when they heard this because many weightie things he had discoursed of this before vnto them And a little after he noteth that he himselfe drunke thereof least hearing those wordes they shoulde haue said what then doe we drinke blood and eate his flesh and therefore shoulde haue beene troubled For when he first spoke hereof saith he many were offended onely for his wordes least therefore heereby that also now should haue chaunced he did this first himself that so he might with a quiet minde induce them to the participation of these mysteries Now as for the second rule to examine our exposition of these wordes by that which I haue said alreadie is both sufficient to iustifie ours and to condemne theirs For in nothing ours can be said to be contrarie or but to carie any shew of contrarietie eyther to the doctrine of good manners or to the analogie of faith if you shoulde examine from point to point our iudgement hereof and of the nature and vse of the whole Sacrament as I haue expressed it and theirs as I lately shewed in the confutation of their reall presence both in shewe and in trueth most directly crosseth contrarieth both For hath not euen nature a loathing to the taking in by mouth and so swallowing of a whole man flesh bloode and bones at one morsell And a man that can be so taken in and eaten of so many communicantes as be in worlde at one time who can be perswaded that he hath the true nature indeed of a man And come to the third that is by the Scriptures themselues to trie this matter by and quickly we shal find by them our exposition warranted and this of theirs and the consequents thereof confuted For first whereas they would countenance theirs against ours by saying that Christes words are plaine without figure looke but a little vpon theÌ„ and you shal be inforced to confesse so they also wil they nil they that he hath vsed in the institutioÌ„ of this Sacrament in his words sundry figures For first he saith of the one that it was his body giuen for theÌ„ as Luke saith or brokeÌ„ for them as Paule speaketh then of the other that it was his blood shed for them as Mathew Marke Luke report his words so speaking of that which yet then was not done as it is wel known as though theÌ„ it had bene done by an vsual figure in the Scriptures vsing the time past or present for the time to come Againe concerning the latter elemeÌ„t Mathew saith that he said it was his blood of the new Testament and so doth Mark Luke sets down his words thus This cup is the new Testament in my bloode so also doth Paule wherin wherby any man may see that wilfully will not make himself blind two figuratiue kind of speeches besids this that we striue for For here is the cup coÌ„taining put for that which was therin coÌ„tained whatsoeuer they would haue that to be wine or his very blood I am sure they neither yet can or wil say that either the one or the other is the new TestameÌ„t it selfe Seing then it might stand with the nature of this Sacrament Christs care desire to be therin vnderstood to vse the figurs what letteth but that we may as lawfully thinke that he vsed the vsual Metonymie vsed in all other Sacraments in giuing the names of body blood to bread wine that were but representatioÌ„s seales of our coÌ„munion with his body blood to our euerlasting nourishment This variety in these in repeating setting down the words of the institution as may be sene by this that I haue already noted argues that they were not so superstitiously tied to a set sort number of words as these men imagine yea that they so they kept his very sense thought that it was lawful for them thus to ad or change a word or two tending onely to explaine the same hereby it is euident For Pauls word Broken in steed of Lukes Giuen shews how his body should be giuen euen to be broken with sorrows with whippings crowning with thorn nailing as it was to the crosse these two added by theÌ„ not vsed by Mat. or Mar. serue to shew vs what bodie of his it is I meane in respect of what state thereof it is that heere by this Sacrament we are occasioned to thinke vpon it and to feede on it and by the other chaunge of their phrase for Blood of the new Testament saying it was the newe Testament in his bloode most plainly we are taught that therefore called heit the blood of the new Testament because the new Testament

was ratified and so standeth by the shedding of that bloode to all beleeuers in him But indeed though they would seeme to be men that make wonderfull great conscience of the letter and wordes as though it were sacriledge to goe one iot from the sound thereof yet any man that lookes but with halfe an eye vpon either of their interpretations which they stand vpon to grounde their kinde of reall presence by shall soone perceiue that they are nothing the men they make shewe for For is it all one eyther to say together with this is my bodie and bloode or vnder the accidentes heereof is my bodie and blood and to say This is my bodie and bloode And yet thus when al is done Christes wordes must sounde or else neither will there or can there be either the Lutherans Consubstantiation or the popish Transubstantiation brought in therby to vphold their fond reall presence by Sure I am neyther any Dictionarie or Grammer in the worlde will allow them thus to expounde this worde Is. Were it not better for them with vs to retaine the word and also with vs so to expound it or vnderstand it as not onelie vsually alwaies it is in all other Sacramentall phrases but also commonly alwaies when it is placed betweene two thinges of so diuers natures as bread and wine and bodie and bloode be The rather yet to prouoke them so to doe let them but consider whether their newe found sense therof or this of ours vnderstanding it as placed for it signifieth representeth and sealeth vnto you my bodie broken and blood shed to be yours to eternall life stand better but with these wordes of Christ Doe this in remembrance of me Luke 22.19 1. Cor. 11.24 especially so taken as it is cleare Paule tooke them when thereof he inferreth 1. Cor. 11.26 as oft as ye shall eate this bread and drinke this cup ye shew the Lords death till he come For according to our doctrine by these words thus vnderstood Christ would teach vs that this Sacrament was instituted by him of purpose to keepe in our memories his death and passion and by the vse whereof wee might vntill his comming againe to iudgment professe and nourish our faith in his body then broken and blood shed for vs. Here is nothing sounding in the meane time towardes any corporall presence of his to the outward elements or mouthes of the receiuers whosoeuer but these words In remembrance of me and Till he come againe sounde plainly to the cotrarie For what need a thing to be done in remembrance of one bodily present or how can a thing with any good sence be said to be done but till one come that yet he being verily present in body is done We read Act. 1.11 that shortly after the institution of this Sacrament he visibly ascended into heauen the Apostles seing him so to doe with their eyes and there we read also that the Angels told them that even so likewise he shoulde come againe when he comes from thence reading also as we doe and haue alreadie noted once or twise that the heauens must containe him vntill the restitution of all things Act. 3.21 and that his comming from thence is plainely called his second coÌ„ming Heb. 9.28 how can we but thinke that Christ as well meant to forwarne vs of these fellowes that by their Consubstantiation or Transubstantiation say vnto vs lo heere is Christ with this piece of bread or vnder the accidents therof loe take him into thy verie mouth as of those that point vnto vs wrong Christes heere or there when he said if any should say vnto you speaking of such as should so doe after he had left the world was gone vnto his Father Loe heere is Christ or there is Christ beleeue him not And how is it possible that we should beleeue these places of Scripture to be true and hold stil them notwithstanding that Christ is really and in his full bodie present in euery communicants mouth May we thinke with Peter that the heauens doe and shall containe him still and that yet vpon this occasion he is alwaies thus heere And that beeing so how can it be that his comming from thence at the last daie shall be but his second comming or that it is true when he comes from thence he shall come visibly no such thing hauing euer beene seene heere I knowe they will say all these places are to be vnderstood of his visible body and that they speake of his inuisible bodie Yea but then we replie where euer learned they either in Scripture or in any ancient Father that euer he had any such inuisible bodie or howe can they euer make it sinke into any mans head that hath rightlie learned in the Scriptures to know Christes manhood that at one and selfe same time he shoulde haue a visible bodie and an inuisible yea one in the heauens to come inuisiblie againe when he pleaseth and yet the same both there and this heere also multiplied into so many inuisible bodies as there be receiuers mouthes If this be not with the olde rotten doting and long agoe condemned Marcion to make a meere phantasme of the bodie of Christ let any man iudge But once for all by this sworde of the Spirit to pierce this monstrous conceipt of theirs to the verie heart and so to leaue it for dead seeing they stande so much vpon the letter and wordes of the text I would haue them once againe to marke and remember that Saint Paule that saith therein That which he receiued of the Lord he deliuered hath vpon his credite told vs that the Lord speaking of the bread called it not simplie and nakedly his bodie but his bodie broken and they all agree in one that he called the other his blood shed If therefore they will sticke to the wordes of the text and yet haue a reall presence as they teach of his verie bodie and blood by vertue of the wordes thereof they see most plainely then it must be of his bodie broken and of his blood shed Vnlesse therefore nowe they can finde vs an inuisible bodie broken and blood inuisible shed of his for the mouth of euerie receiuer they neither say or doe any thing to the purpose according to the text But I hope they are not so farre gone but they know that it is now a thousand and fiue hundred yeares agoe and more since he had eyther his bodie broken or blood shed and that when they were so he died so that he dies no more as we reade Rom. 6.9 And therefore euen heereby the most simple may see that though they could shew that his bodie aliue or glorified could be inuisible infinite and so multipliable as their doctrine importes which yet they can neuer doe that yet all this were nothing to the reall presence of the bodie and blood of Christ in respect of that estate of his when the one was broken and the other shed for the

to be turned into the bodie and bloode of Christ and therefore to shune both these straites they cannot tell what to vnderstand by it and so are at their wittes end By that which they say and doc they yet are resolute that they coÌ„uey and bannish away the substances of bread and wine and leaue nothing but the bare accidents thereof vnder which they hold lustilie Christ to be flesh blood bone And therefore they sing merilie in their Hymne or Carrol vpon Corpus Christi day Sub diuersis speciebus signis tantÃ¹m non rebus latent res eximiae caro cibus sangnis potus manet homo Christus totus sub vtraque specie a sumente non concisus non confractus nec diuisus integer accipitur c. that is Vnder diuerse kinds signes onely and not thinges most excellent thinges lie hid flesh meate bloode drinke yea whole Christ abideth vnder eyther kinde of the taker not bruised not broken nor deuided but whole is he taken But for all this their sturre it should seeme yet that nowe they are perswaded they haue him rather by bannishing of bread and wine though they cannot tell eyther how whither or into what then by transubstantiation of breade and wine thereinto or of anything else Howsoeuer it were or bee that there should remaine nothing but the bare accidentes or out ward formes of bread and wine that is inough vtterly to ouerthrow the nature of the Sacrament For in Sacramentes alwaies there must bee an Analogie betwixt the signes and the thinges signified which cannot be betwixt bare accidents of bread and wine for that they alone feede not at all and the bodie and blood of Christ which are our foode to eternall life and therfore to abolish or abandon by what meanes soeuer bread wine is to destroy quite the nature of the Sacrament That the verie substances thereof remaine for all their prating when they haue vsed all their art the trickes therof they can both Scripture Fathers and reason make it most euident For in the wordes of the institution scanne and marke them wel who list it is most cleare that Christ tooke verie bread and wine and that he both gaue that which he tooke and that they tooke the same and no other though by his institution now chaunged in name vse and estimation as I haue said And therefore Paule retaineth the name of the bread and cup still euen when they come to be eaten and drunken vpon 1. Cor. 11.26 and Christ calles it the fruite of the vine tree and that after he had deliuered it and they had drunken therof Mar. 14.25 And in all other Sacramentes as we haue hearde though the like phrase of speach haue bene vsed yet alwaies haue they beene fulland forcible Sacramentes to offer to deliuer and to seale the deliuerie of the inwarde grace thereby intended to the right receiuers without any such abolishing or transubstantiating of the outwarde elements thereinto as is heere imagined And if Christ had had anie such purpose it had sure beene as easie a matter with him to haue vttered his minde in and by wordes sounding plainely that he ment to effect some such thing as by saying this is turned into my bodie or let this be transubstantiated thereinto or let the substance of this cease and in the romph thereof let my bodie come and bee as onely to haue saide affirmatiuelie that it was his bodie But hauing but saide so it is most certaine it was some certaine thing that he affirmed to be so for he would neuer call bare nothing or an indiuiduum vagum an vncertaine thing as Gardiner holds he ment by This his bodie And therefore wil they nil they by Christs words interpreted as they doe eyther we must haue Christes bodie which once was of the nature of the Virgin his Mother that so he might be that seede of the woman to treade downe the serpentes head and in whome all the nations of the world shoulde be blessed whensoeuer any of their priestes therby intend to consecrate as they speake made of a wafer againe or at least now growne to be such an one as that it can lie hid vnder the forme therof the substance of breade beeing gone to giue it romph But once againe I must tel them that the words of Christ are so farre from sounding any such thing as that if they should be taken litterally as they sound they rather shew that his bodie and blood were become bread wine or turned thereinto then the contrary For when Moses rod was turned into a serpent or when Lots wife was turned into a pillar of salt if one shoulde haue saide of the one that it was Moses rod or of the other that it was Lots wife woulde anie thereby haue vnderstoode that he mente that the scrpent was transubstantiated into the rod or the pillar of salt into Lots wife nay would not the verie sounde of the wordes most plainly lead any man rather to vnderstand that his meaning was to shew Moses rod was turned into the serpent and Lots wife into the pillar of salt Wherefore they haue not onely no ground in the Scriptures for this their opinion but not onely other scriptures but the verie words of the institution are directly against them And the ancient Fathers are plaine that though Christ called breade and wine his bodie broken and his blood shed that yet neyther by transubstantion nor anie way else the substances thereof are gone Theodoret both in his first Dialogue second also though most plainely as I haue noted alreadie he confesse that Christ honored bread and wine with the names of his bodie and blood most flatly saith that yet he changed not their natures but added grace to nature and that the mysticall signes after sanctification as he pleaseth to speake goe not from their nature figure or forme And Gelasius against Eutiches writeth directly that in the Eucharist the nature of bread and wine cease not Ambrose also as Gratian alledgeth him De consecr dist 2. cap. pâ—nis writing de sacramentis of the Sacraments noteth that in this Sacrament the word of Christ is so powerfull vt sint quae erant in aliud commutentur that they remaine that which they were before and yet are turned into another thing And if we would know in what sense and sort they are chaunged into another thing remaining also still the same that they were before the same Gratian a little before in the chapter quia corpus teacheth vs to learne that of our selues by the chaunge that we finde in our selues by regeneration and that out of Eusebius Emissenus which as he noteth and we all know is true not at all in respect of outward substance for that is the same in vs when we are regenerate that it was before but onelie of inward grace and qualitie which is that which I call heere in this Sacrament an alteration of the outward elementes in name

desert or merit of man but onely the deserts and merits of his said sonne by faith through imputation made to the beleeuers therein the Apostle saith as he doth not onely that we are iustified by grace but also addeth freely not of our selues it is the gift of God not of workes least any man should boast himselfe How it is possible if God should haue studied of purpose to crosse and to preuent for euer all these popish gloses and trickes that he shoulde haue spoken more plainely or pregnantly to aduouch iustification freely and only by faith in Christ Iesus and not for the worthinesse or merit of any thing in our selues first or last And who be so simple that hath any thing had his spirit exercised in the word of God and knowledge of Christ Iesus as by any means to be brought to thinke that Christ comming to be the meritorious and satisfactorie cause of mans saluation as he did that yet so farre off is it that he hath gone quite thorowe with this worke in and by himselfe that in verie deede by the things accomplished in his owne person he hath enabled and dignified thinges to be founde in man and to be done and suffered him at the least to finish vp and perfect by the meritorious and satisfactorie cause of mans saluation For this were not onely to leaue the worke of mans iustification and saluation to be vnperfect for all that hath beene done by him in his owne person but also most vncertaine whether euer it shoulde be finished or no because if the matter be thus to be deuided betwixt Christ and mans owne selfe howsoeuer man might be sure that Christ hath done his part he coulde neuer be sure that he hath or shall hit in iust manner and measure of all that is left for him to doe to perfect the same Yea if this were thus that amongst otherendes that Christ had in his merits and sufferinges he had this thereby so to die our doings and sufferings therewith that they nowe shall be meritorious of and satisfactorie for our owne saluation though by thus saying they would seeme to attribute vnto Christs merits more then we doe in that we denie them this effect in deede and trueth in thus dealing they with Iudas giue him faire wordes saying vnto him haile maister when in secret cunninglie they most vnkindlie and wickedlie seeke to betraye him Heeretofore when they taught this doctrine of mans merits bluntly and flatly without this new colour of their so doing we iustly charged themselues to be the sacrilegious robbers of Christ of that chiefe and speciall honour that appertaines vnto him but now whiles they haue sought to auoyd to put froÌ„ themselues the grieuousnes of this charge by this their new deuise in steed of making Christ some restitution and amendes for the wrong they did him they nowe are flatly come to this obstinately to continue in the doing of him the same old wrong still but nowe they will no longer be the onely doers thereof them selues but he himselfe must bee if not the plaine and full principall yet at the least an open and notorious accessary and helper forward of them in this their robbing of him But whatsoeuer they say or doe herein let vs with the apostle beleeue that he is able perfectly to saue them that come vnto God by him seeing he euer liueth to make intercession for them and hath an euerlasting priesthoode Heb. 7.24.25 For as we haue often heard before an other of them writeth his owne selfe bare our finnes in his body vpon the tree and so that thereby we are both deliuered from sinne and so healed thereof that thenceforth we shoulde liue in righteousnesse 1. Pet 1.2.4 And with all our heartes let vs shunne and detest all these their popish demses tending as we see all more or lesse to the robbing of Christ of this speciall honour to be a full and a perfect sauiour in That he is King Friest Prophet of and by him selfe To proceed therefore as thus in these two pointes particularly you haue heard howe the gospell sheweth you this to be his office so for the rest before mentioned if we looke into it it will teach vs that in this his office he is our Christ that is our annointed and appointed kinge priest and prophet in and for his Church King to rule gouerne and to protect it from all the enimies and dangers there of priest to redeeme it and to make full and perfect atonement and reconsiliation thorowe his eternall intercession betwixt God and it and prophet to teach and instruct it by his worde from time to time So that he hath of his Church a priestly kingdome which he hath purchased not with gold or siluer but with his owne preticus blood as Peter speaketh 1. epist 1.19 which he gouerneth and ordereth by the scepter of his worde and perfecteth by the powre of his spirit Of the title and right of his kingrick Paule Heb. 4.8 vnderstandeth that Psal 45.6 and 7. as spoken of Dauid thorow the spirit thy throne is for euer and euer the scepter of thy kingdome is a scepter of righteousnesse thou hast loued righteousnesse and hated iniquitie wherfore cuen God thy God hath annointed thee with the oyle of gladnes aboue thy fellowes And touching his priesthoode to proue him to be a farre more excellent priest then euer was any of the tribe of Leui. Cap. 7.12 he saith that he was made priest with an oath by him that said vnto him as it is written Psal 110.4 The Lord hath sworne and will not repente thou art a priest for euer according to the order of Melchizedech And lastly concerning his office of a prophet and teacher of his Church Mathew sheweth vs that when he was transfigured in the mount this voyce was heard from heauen vttered of him doubtlesse by his heauenlie father to establish him heerein This is my welbeloued sonne in whome I am well pleased heare him Cap. 17.5 And to teach vs that all doctors teachers must alwaies stoupe to him and learne that first of him which they teach others he saith be not called doctors for one is your doctor euen Christ Math. 23.10 thereby not forbidding the title but the abuse thereof which is when any dare take vpon them as doctors and teachers onely of trueth to vrge that for trueth vpon the Church or to Gods people which they cannot warrant so to be by the vndoubted voyce and word of Christ His kingdom is not of this world for so he himselfe told Pilate Iohn 18.36 and yet he is such a king as that he is king of kings and Lord of Lords Reue. 19.16 And as king he is lawgiuer vnto his people in whose power it is to saue and destroy Iam. 4.12 As king he gouerneth and guideth his Church both heere and in heauen as the head thereof Ephe. 1.22 As king he liberally bestoweth thereupon from time to time those rich

then to the vniting of Christes bare bodie and bloode and the right communicant togither For as he both in bodie and soule standeth neede of him to be his Sauiour so it is certaine as Christ both God and man perfecte God and perfecte man in one person is the head and husband of his Church and the redeemer and Sauiour thereof so here faith is to feed so vpon his body broken blood shed as that withall it must stedfastly conceiue and beleeue that it was is the body and blood of such an one as was and is both very God and man and yet but one person For thence it coÌ„meth that the things done for vs by his broken bodie and blood shed though in number and time wherein they were done they were finite are in the sight of the heauenly Father of infinite value and dignitie as once I said before to worke our perfect redemption and saluation that they were done by such a man that had not onely a perfect bodie and soule of a man and in them both was such an one as it became vs to haue that was seperate from sinners Heb. 7.27 but also was and remaineth for euer a true euerlasting God and therefore was able thus to dignifie the workes done for vs in his manhood And to this end it is most heauenly and diuinely noted Heb. 9. that the force that the offring that Christ made of himselfe vpon the crosse for vs to purge our consciences from dead workes to serue the liuing God commeth and riseth from hence that then by his eternall Spirit he offered himselfe without fault to God for vs. And though I am not ignorant that Chrisostome to very good purpose in his 46. Homilie vpon Iohn interpreting those wordes of Christ Iohn 6.63 It is the spirit that quickneth the flesh profiteth nothing the wordes that I speake vnto you are spirit and life notes that they were spoken by Christ not to disable his flesh altogether from being profitable because so to thinke is absurd but to warne vs that carnally we vnderstand not his wordes which by his interpretation there we doe if we take his wordes simplie as they sound thinke no otherwise of them for that as he saith all misteries are to be considered with inward eies that is spiritually yet I cannot but thinke with others also that in so saying Christ meante not onely to teach vs that his wordes were not grosly and camally to betaken that he had spoken of the eating of his flesh and drinking of his bloode as the Capernaits and such of his hearers that beleeued not then tooke them but spiritually as his beleeuing disciples who notwithstanding them taried with him when the other murmured or departed by occasion thereof but that therin he had this further meaning and purpose to shew them that if his flesh and blood were as they tooke them but the flesh and bloode of a man then they could not be indeed such foode for their soules as he had taught them to be but beeing as they were the flesh and blood of such an one as withall was a spirit and that an eternall creating Spirit euen very God thence they might be sure that they rightly fed on by faith and the spirite both could and would bring life Thus therefore we teach and exhort all men in the vse of this Sacrament to feede vpon the bodie broken and blood shed of our Christ and Sauiour And yet thus we speake with Christ and according to the phrase vsed in the institution therof because as by Christ God and man as by our onely mediatour we come to the Father so it hath pleased God in his word to reueale him vnto vs that by his manhood and the workes done therin we should grow on to faith in his Godhead vnited thereunto and so shining manifesting it selfe vnto vs therin Thus then I hope by this time euen by this plaine and short declaration onely of our faith and iudgement concerning the doctrine and nature of this Sacrament The conclusion of this our doctrine you may most clearely see and perceiue that we are wonderfully wronged and slandered and that so also are all the Churches of our profession by our aduersaries whiles to discredit vs withal they would make men belecue that we make it but a naked Supper of bread and wine and so seeke to feede our people therein but with bare signes and figures For you may see and heare that most plainely and earnestly we vrge our hearers therein to seeke to feed to their eternall saluation of Christ Iesus himselfe both God and man and so many other notable vses thereof as you heare we teach that euen in respect thereof all the names and titles that any sound antiquitie hath honoured this Sacrament withal may most iustly be giuen vnto it as it is ministred and vsed by vs. We finde it hath beene called the Supper of the Lord the Table of the Lord the Sacrament of his bodie and bloode the Eucharist a Sacrifice and Synaxis and vsually with vs it is called the CoÌ„munioÌ„ And which of these is it not with vs It is the supper of the Lord because as we teach at the last supper he instuted it and it is his Table because therin he feedeth his with himself it is the Sacrament of his body blood because to his it is a sacred meanes of the Lord to nourish strengthen and exercise their faith therein it is the Eucharist because thereby we are so directly forceably occasioned as we are to yeeld all heartie thankes vnto God for the death and passion of Christ lesus whereof it is so notable a memorial and a Sacrifice euen therfore also it may be tearmed also Synaxis it is because it is an excellent bond of our assemblies and meetings together to receiue it and lastly worthily we may and doe call it the Communion be cause it is a seale first of our communion with Christ and then of one of vs with an other in him And yet for all this though this most certainely be the generall doctrine held with one consent by all the Churches that professe the Gospell with vs except of a fewe peeuish and wilfull Lutherans our aduersaries nor these neither will not be satisfied but when we haue said and done what we can all is nothing with them that in this case we say or doe vnlesse we will with them by vertue of Christes wordes spoken by him in the institution heere of hold such a real presence of Christes bodie and blood in this Sacrament as that by the mouthes of all commers thereunto and receiuers thereof haue they true faith or no his verie bodie and blood really be taken in and sed vpon Which beeing a doctrine so directly contrarie to that which lutherto I haue taught you rouching our vnion and communion with Christ by faith and his spirit onely especially seeing also it is to be feared that a number

Sacrament either of the olde or new Testament there was euer any such real coniunction of the inward and spiritual part thereof with the outward and yet al men know for all that they were and are effectuall Sacramentes and seales of the deliuerie thereof to the right receiuer what reason in the world can they haue why they should not thinke that this likewise may be and also is a full and effectuall Sacrament to participate the bodie and bloode of Christ without any such coupling of them and the outward elements therof as for the defence of this their real presence here they vrge If that were heere necessarie it should be so eyther by the generall right of all Sacramentes or by some speciall right that may be shewed this hath therunto But neither of these can they or shall they euer be able indeed to shew in this case Further Christs owne sitting visibly seuered in place without any altering of his forme or mouing of his place hauing vttered the words of the institution they being doubtlesse as powrefull then as euer they were since or shal be to make him really to be present to and with the outward elements doth most clearely ouerthrow this conceite And for the next of hauing him so really heerewith present and conioyned that the receiuers thereof though they haue neyther faith nor good manners yet receiue him also therwith as I haue alreadie sufficiently proued it is both against Scripture and sound antiquitie and the former beeing so absurd whereupon it followeth and is built as I haue nowe shewed it is that must also therewith fall downe and be ouerthrowne Yet for the further mabling of thee welbeloued to see yet more not onely the vanitie and impietie thereof vnderstand that such a kinde of presence of Christ shakes all the articles touching the manhood of Christ and in verie deed leades men most strongly so to spoyle him of all the true properties of his manhood that in effect it leadeth them and most forceably teacheth them to denie him indeede to be come into the flesh and to be the seede of the woman of Abraham Isaac and Iacob of Iuda Iesse and Dauid according to the ancient prophesies that are of the Messiah And so for a bootlesse eating of him and fruitlesse as they themselues must needes confesse this mouth-eating of him to be for that they graunt ouen to the worst sort of men that receiue the outward elements in the end they will leaue vs no true Christ at all eyther for vnbeleeuers or beleeuers to feede vpon I knowe their refuge and shift is to auoide this withall to say that it is by miracle as they teach and yet Christes manhood and all the articles touching the same true sound and whole Indeede any man may see that eyther they must say so or else they can say nothing and that in trueth and of absolute necessitie it must be graunted to be the greatest miracle that euer was wrought if it be as they say and yet all these things be vpheld sound according to the true ancient catholicke faith For of both these it must needs follow that Christ at one and selfe same time hath a bodie visible and inuisible palpable and impalpable compassed in place and vncompassed yea that he hath but one bodie and yet many bodies or that one multiplied into many vnlesse contrary to manifest Scripture they wildenie him in the heauens Which shall containe him as Peter saith vntill the restitution of al thinges Act. 3.21 to haue though a glorified bodie yet a true bodie the contrarie whereof all the ancient Fathers as they know well enough with vs against them haue taught And they know though sundrie of these Fathers of purpose haue written of the miracles of the Scripture that yet they haue not once reckoned vp this of theirs amongst them Neither haue they any reason why to thinke that there is heere any such A mysterie and great mystery we willingly acknowledg it to be that in the right vse of this Sacrament Christ by his Spirit by the meanes of the faith of his verily vnites himself vnto his but yet no miracle we count it or cal it because it is Gods ordinary work in other Sacraments so to coÌ„municate himselfe to those that rightly vse them and because when he worketh a miracle there is some straunge thing done beyond nature that the verie senses can iudge of which we finde not heere For they all with one consent iudge them in respect of their substances to be verie bread and wine still in the mouthes of all receiuers O but say they neyther sense nor reason are to be consulted withall in this case Indeed I graunt they neuer are against any trueth certainely taught and warranted by the Scriptures but when their iudgement concurres and consents therewith then it is verie lawfull and good to listen thereunto and so alwaies haue the godlie learned in all ages thought and taught And therefore seeing both sense and reason striue against this their deuise for the maintenance of Christes true manhoode and the right sense of all the articles of our faith touching the same with vs euen thereby their cause hath a greater wound than they are euer able to cure againe Besides all this whiles they thus teach without all warrant from Christ or hir word they are compelled least otherwise they shoulde be inforced most absurdly to say that the wicked eate the bodie and blood of Christ to saluation to seperate Christ and his sauing graces the one from the other whereas they cannot be seuered For that must alwaies remaine an absolute trueth Whosoeuer eateth his flesh and drinketh his bloode hath eternall life Iohn 6.54 and so that also he that hath the Sonne hath life and he that hath not the sonne hath not life Iohn 5.12 A spirituall vnion and communion with him they shall both finde oft promised and spoken of as I haue at large alreadie shewed but a beeing of his bodie and bloode in the verie mouthes of all receiuers as they talke of otherwise then Sacramentally that is when the outward sacramentes or signes therof are there they shall neuer finde so much as once spoken for in the scriptures or in any sound and ancient writer indeed I cannot denie but that indeed the Capernaits Iohn 6. by misconceiuing of Christes speeches there had of the eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood began to dreame that he meant some such thing but we haue heard that Chrisostome plainely sheweth by the answere that he made them that he had no such meaning his wordes were spiritually to be vnderstood and so should giuelife and not otherwise And Athanasius vpon these wordes Whosoeuer speaketh a worde against the Sonne of man writeth that withall then Christ put them in minde of his ascension as indeed he did Iohn 6.62 to draw them from corporall and fleshly vnderstanding of his wordes And therefore verie excellently hath Augustine to preuent

remission of our sinnes And yet heereby it is most euident that the bodie and bloode of Christ in respect of this their estate and condition are the bodie and blood of his that expresly by the words of the institution we are heere to seeke for and to feede vpon How can this then be otherwise but as we teach by calling heereby to our remembrance that once most certainely they were thus handled for vs and by beleeuing that therby our saluation was wrought which as oft as we doe we are fed and nourished therewith to eternall life Thus then you see the matter in hand the Analogie of faith and good manners and not onely other Scriptures but the verie words of the institution lead strongly to the maintenaÌ„ce of our expositioÌ„ of Christs words in the institution of this Sacrament and to the vtter ouerthrow of theirs And truely the ancient Fathers as we haue a thousand times shewed theÌ„ are wholly also of our side against them It were infinite to bring al that might be found in them to this purpose as by large volumes written and published by vs about this matter we haue made it euident Howbeit somwhat yet now againe let vs heare what some of the chiefe of them haue said Christ tooke bread which comforteth mans heart that he might therby represent the trueth of his body saith Hierome vpon the 26. of Mathew Christ in his last supper saith Cyprian in his sermon de vnctione Chrismatis with his owne hands at his table gaue his Apostles bread wine but vpon the crosse he gaue his body to be wouÌ„ded by the hands of the souldiers that sincere trueth more secretly imprinted in the Apostles the true sincerity might expound vnto the nations how bread wine was the body blood and after what sort the causes and their effects agreed and diuers names and kindes should be reduced to one essence and the things signifying and the things signified were called with one selfe same names And Ambrose in his 4. booke 4. chapter of Sacraments writeth that as in Baptisme we receiue the similitude of death so in this sacrameÌ„t we drink the similitude of Christs blood And Chrysostome most plainly saith in his 11. Homily vpoÌ„ Mathew that Christ his body it selfe is not in the holy vessels but the mysterie Sacrament therof Augustine in his 57. question vpon Leuiticus prescribeth for a rule that the thing that signifieth is wont to beare the name of the thing which it singifieth as Paule said saith he the rock was Christ not ti signified Christ but eueÌ„ as it had bene indeed which neuerthelesse was not Christ by substance but by signification And in his 23. Epistle he saith that the similitude betwixt the signe and thing signified is the verie cause why the one beareth the name of the other in Sacramentes and therefore in his third booke of Christian doctrine he saith it is a miserable slauerie of the soule to take the signes for the thinges signified Cap. 5. Christ honored the signes and representations which are seene with the names of his bodie and blood saith Theodoret in his second dialogue Gelasius against Eutiches affirmeth the image similitude of the body and blood to be celebrated in these mysteries Bede vpon Luke 22. writeth that because bread doth comfort mans heart and wine doth make good blood in his bodie therefore the breade is mystically compared to Christs bodie and the wine to his blood And who hath not heard vs an hundred times tell them that Tertullian in his fourth booke against Marcion interpreteth This is my body saying that it is to say this is a figure of my bodie and that likewise Augustine against Adimantus the Manichee writeth that Christ doubted not to say This is my body when he gaue a signe of his bodie and vpon the third Psalme that he saith that Christ admitted Iudas to a banquet where he commended a figure of his bodie to his disciples And what can be plainer then these eyther against them or for vs All these thinges considered therefore we may boldlie conclude that they haue no ground from Christes wordes for their grosse reall presence And surely as little haue they eyther from his omnipotencie Neither his omnipotency nor glorified body will helpe them or from the state of his glorified bodie For he will not shew his omnipotencie in whatsoeuer we list but in effecting whatsoeuer himselfe pleaseth and therefore they failing in the proofe as they haue that it is his pleasure to haue it as they would it is in vaine for them to thinke that this can or will helpe them out But indeed and trueth howsoeuer they would seeme to grounde much vpon his almightinesse to haue a strong faith therein and seeke to discredit our faith in the same yet in this verie point lot theirs and ours be but a little indifferentlie compared togither and ours soone will prooue farre the stronger For I woulde haue them tell me in good sadnesse whether the Centurion Math. 8.8 that professed that he beleeued that though Christ came no nearer his house then he was in respect of his bodilie presence that yet he was perswaded that if he but spake the word his scruant should be healed or Iairus that said come and lay thy handes on my daughter and she shall liue Math. 9.19 shewed themselues to be better perswaded of Christes omnipotencie Sure I am both reason and Christes magnifying of the Centurions faith ought to leade them and all men to giue the preeminence to the Centurion aboue the other many degrees Why should they not then see and confesse that we shewe our selues more strongly perswaded of his omnipotencie then they in that we shew by our doctrine that we firmly beleeue that he can wil euen remaining stil in heauen feed vs with his body brokeÌ„ blood shed though that were so with them so long agoe as it hath or they that by theirs seeme to be perswaded that this cannot be vnlesse according to their fancy to the shaking and crossing needlesly of so many grouÌ„ds both of good maÌ„ners faith as we haue heard he conuey himself into our mouthes And to what purpose is it for the maintenaÌ„ce of this their opinion for theÌ„ to labour as they do to put infinite difference betwixt his body vnglorified glorified and to seeke to perswade men that it may be as they say in respect of his body now glorified though not in respect therof before seing it is most certaine that when Christ instituted this Sacrament his body was not glorified and by his words expresly as I lately shewed he instituted this to be a Sacrament of his body broken and bloode shed For who doth not or at least may not heereby perceiue that we haue not here any otherwise to deale with his estate glorified theÌ„ therby now the more stroÌ„gly to be perswaded that indeed he is able to feede vs with his broken

body blood shed once to our eternall saluation For that falling out sence and succeeding the institutioÌ„ of this Sacrament wherin both by audible word and visible action in breaking bread powring forth of wine calling them as he did he promised vs that proues vnto vs inuincibly that whatsoeuer here he offred promised vs either by word or deed that he hath gone through with for vs and so now that he by his resurrection ascention sitting at the right hand of his Father hath begot vs againe to a liuely hope But vnles we would haue Christ otherwise now to be present to vs and our mouthes then he was when he himself ministred it to the disciples and their mouthes in the state and time of his passible and vnglorified bodie let them neuer talke more of the state of his glorified bodie His wordes shew that this was and is a Sacrament of him dying for vs and so a memoriall of his death and abasement that he vndertooke to merit our saluation by and not of his glorie and of the life that he now hath therein and therefore is able to bestow vpon his and to apply vnto them whatsoeuer in his former estate he deserued The bread called his bodie broken and the wine called his bloode shed as I haue said are both heere set before vs seuered the one from the other and by his commaundement we are bound to take as wel the one as the other and yet the one after the other the more forceably thereby to leade vs to the meditation of his death and passion and to feede vpon his bodie and bloode so handled for vs. And as his hauing not yet so suffered letted not the Apostles when he first did institute it from yet taking occasion thereby and by his administring of it vnto them by faith from feeding vpon his broken bodie and blood to the confirming of their communion with him so no more doth his hauing had his bodie broken and bloode shed nowe aboue a thousand and fiue hundred yeares agoe and neuer since hinder vs from feeding vpon the same by faith through the mightie working of his Spirit For the same Christ that then coulde make that which was not yet done as verelie done to their faith and so to bee fed vpon as done the same nowe doubtlesse is able as easily to make that which was done so long agoe present to our faith to nourish vs to eternall life By this then you see both their reall presence that they talke of to be fonde and to too grosse and the groundes that they hold in common for the same to be as bad The speciall grouÌ„ds of the Lutherans confuted And to goe on now to scan and examine likewise what they holde seuerally in this case against vs it is notoriously knowne the one sorte the fond imitators of Luther I meane would maintaine their reall presence of his body and blood together with bread and wine in this Sacrament when these common groundes of theirs that they haue with the papistes as they feare will not serue their turne by the force and strength of the trueth of the personall vnion of the two natures in Christ Whereupon as it appeares by their bookes extant and confidently published about this matter I speake it with griefe and coÌ„passion towards theÌ„ because otherwise in the chiefest points of Christian faith we account them our brethren and fellow souldiers against the Antichristian Synagogue of Rome they boldly vrge aduouch teach that immediatly vpon this vnion consummate in the Virgins wombe the natures properties of his Godhead were are so vnited vnto his manhood that as the Godhead is eueriwhere almighty of infinite maiesty c. so is the manhood and therfore in this SacrameÌ„t as they teach Especially they insist vpon the being euery where of his manhood as his Godhead is to this purpose Suppose the antecedent were graunted them yet they could neuer thereupon inferre their consequent For when will they be able to prooue that his Godhead is so present heere with bread wine that the receiuer of theÌ„ by his mouth alwaies receiues the other But indeede their antecedent is vntrue absurd verie hetetical but that I know it is a most fearful thing before God to haue our faith in respect of persons contrary to the rule of the holy Ghost Iam. 2.1 and that the Lord will therefore most seuerely punish it especially when wilfully men will set themselues to defende that which they haue but receiued from some person or persons whom they haue in admiration against a clearer trueth crossing the same I should neuer make an end of wondring that men otherwise of such learning and iudgement as some of these bee euer should dare in these daies of so great light and after so often and manifest solemne sentences of condemnation giuen of this their conceit in the auncient and primitiue Churches of Christ set abroach such an assertion The vntrueth thereof appears enough euen by that the Angels saying when he was risen He is risen and is not heere Math. 28.6 For seeing that cannot be vnderstood of his Godhead which is euery where and alwaies was it must of necessitie be vnderstood of his manhood But besides that we haue his owne saying The poore ye haue alwaies with you but me ye shall not haue alwaies Iohn 12.8 to backe the speach of his Angels which as they knowe well inough all the auncient Fathers conferring with that of Math. 28.20 also so vnderstand that by this the presence of his manhood they shewe we may not looke for heere in the earth vntill his second comming after once he had left the world and gone to his father as he said he would Iohn 16 28. by the other yet to our comfort they shew heere we inioy his Godhead Let any man but read Fulgentius his second Booke to King Trasimund Vigilius his fourth Booke against Eutiches Chap. 4. and Augustines 57. Epistle and there he shall find notwithstanding they were as soundly and truely perswaded of the vnion of the two natures in Christ as any of these men be the veritie localitie and circumscriptiblenes of Christes manhoode by these and otherplaces and argumentes so vrged that any man may perceiue this their position was counted verie false in those daies The absurditie thereof appeares in that heerein they take that to be the cause sufficient of his beeing euerie where in his manhood that can be no cause thereof indeed For see we not naturally and inseperably the Sunne and light and heat to be conioyned and yet who findes not daily by experience that the globe of the bodie of the Sunne remaining still in heauen yet we heere in earth inioy both the other Yea many other thinges there are which though they be vnited together yet whereof one streacheth and reacheth further then the other as the sight of the eye reacheth further then the eye it selfe the

offered Heb. 7.24 c. If they say that that which they offer is another than that which Christ himselfe offered then why and nowe shoulde it be saide That hee by his owne bloode entered once into the holy place and hath obtaynedeternall redemption for vs. Heb. 9.12 And to say that it is the same onely repeated againe by them what neede that seeing by this by himselfe once offered as we reade Hebre. 7.27.9.26 10.10 hee hath done it sufficiently for our redemption Whether therefore they woulde make it the same or an other which they say their priestes offer they cannot escape but that they must imuriously goe about both to robbe Christ and his sacrifice of that honour and prerogatiue that is due vnto them Paule takes it for graunted that if Christ himselfe shoulde offer himselfe often then he must often die Hebre. 9.26 and that thereupon it came that his offering of himselfe once for all was sufficient to procâ—â—â— vs that by him so offered which he calles the newe and liuing way Capâ—oâ— 20. â—eeke to come to heauen first that he was a man without sin Heb. 7.26 and such a man as liueth for euer and so hath a presthoode that cannot passe from one to an other 24. and then that hee offered himselfe without faulte to GOD by the Aeternall spirite What an absurde thing then were iâ— to imagine that a popish sinfull Priest that hath no such eternall spirit in him to dignifie his offering can offer Christ againe or can without attempting to pull Christ out of beauen to the crosse againe take vpon him to offer him to his Father I know they say their sacrificing or offering of him is vnbloodie and so they thinke they can auoyde these absurdities as long as they leaue onely to Christ the offering of the bloody But this will not serue their turne one whit For if Christes bloodie sacrifice of it selfe be sufficient as these places most strengly prooue it is what neede is there of this vnbloodie sacrifice of theirs For where perfect remission of sinnes and iniquities is such that God according to his conenant will remember them no more there is no more offering for sinne saith Paule Heb. 10.17.18 and in confessing theirs to be vnbloodie they must confesse that howsoeuer they haue picked the purses of men both aliue and deade with the contrarie perswasion it is utterly vnauailable to put away the sinnes eyther of the aliue or deade For without shedding of blood is no remission Heb. 9.22 A sacrifice sometimes the Fathers call is because it is the commemoration of Christes sacrifice and so that which occasioneth vs to offer vnto God the sacrifice of thankesgiuing in regard whereof they call it also the Eucharist but a reall offering againe of Christ to his Father for the sinnes of others aliue or dead visible or inuisible bloodie or vnbloodie neuer any of them thought or taught iâ— to bee We haue to offer our selues bodies and soules a liuing sacrifice to God which we doe in seruing of him according to his word Rom. 12.1 An acceptable sacrifice to God is a broken and contrite heart Psal 51.17 and we are willed Heb. 13. to offer the sacrifice of praise alwaies to God that is the fruit of our lipâ— which confesse his name mamely in powring forth our prayers pralses vnto him to do good to distribute we are there also commaunded for that with such sacrifices God is pleased Other sacrifices then this we are not taught to offer and offering these well we may boldly trust to the most perfect and absolute sacrifice that Christ made once for all which for euer remains fresh and new in the sight of the heauenlie Father to make vs acceptable vnto him in his beloued Hoc facite doe this though Virgill helpe them with his phrase Cum faciam vitula when I sacrifice Calues is too caluish a reason or grounde to make them thus proude and saucie to take vpon them any way to offer Christ againe to his Father for the sinnes of men But whither will not foolish man runne when once he hath left the beaten way of the Lord in his word to follow his owne deuise and conceite Christes offering of himselfe by himselfe doubtlesse was neuer applied to the good of any that whiles they were aliue tooke not hold of it and yet such is the impudencie of these men that nowe they hold the intention of their Priest in saying of his Masse shall carie the benefit of this sacrifice whether he list to liue or dead Yea heereby seeing their credit growe as it hath and their gaines come rowling in they haue not beene ashamed not yet are in this greate light to make their sacrifice in the Masse a salue for all sores and phisicke for all diseases both of man and beast Well yet this is not all the mischiefe that their conceit of reall presence by transubstantiation hath brought them vnto For besides this heereupon they are growne euen to honour and worshippe their hoastes once consecrated euen as Christ himselfe and therefore whereas Christ commanded that which he eate brake and gaue to be eaten streight they hoyst it vp ouer their heades that all the people may gaze vpon it adore and worshippe it for their Christ and Sauiour and then when they haue plaide with it their fill for the most part they eate vp all themselues alone that be the massing priestes and if they leaue anie them they hang vp in a Pixe ouer the Altar to serue them an other time which all commers into the Church in the meane time must adore and reuerence though so hanged vp and hidden from their eyes Wherein doubtlesse they committe most grosse idolatrie For first they themselues manie of them holde that the priest must haue an intention to consecrate or else though he vtter the wordes there followes no transubstantiation thereupon and therefore wisedome woulde if they had anye care to auoyde Idolatrie that they shoulde be sure of the priestes intention before they fell to worshippinge of the hoaste or rather because they can neuer bee sure of that because no man can know a mans thought but himselfe and euery one can and often doth dissemble and make show to thinke that which he doth not they should and would if there were any feare of God in them vtterlie abstaine therefrom Againe vnto this day they cannot agree amongest themselues of the wordes and meanes of consecration their Schoolemen I am sure Scotus Petrus de Aliaco Occam Thomas Aquinas Durand and others wonderfully haue iarred about this matter and as yet I cannot finde they are fully agreed In the meane time therfore whiles they be they should in all reason be better aduised what they doe But to let these reasons alone who can or may thinke that it can stand with Christes saying Iohn 4.24 God is a spirit and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and trueth that they should nowe thus

most plainely he confesseth that the principall ground of interpreting Christes wordes by transubstantiation is this that de sacramentis tenendum est sicat tenet sancta Ecclesia Romana of sacraments we must hold as the holy Romaine Church holdeth For the which axiome or rule in so weightie a matter in his next wordes he shewes that the best grounde he had was an Extrauagant de haereticis Cap. ad abolendam wherein some such things be determined by a sauorite of the same Which is as good ouidence as if we shoulde aske a theoues follow whether he be a theife if not worse Gabriell Biell another great Doctor of theirs writing vpon the Canon of the Masse confesseth that it is not expressed in the Canon of the Bible whether by transubstantiation or consubstantiation the bodie of Christ be there And Iohn Fisher a bishop and martyr of theirs as they count him writing against Luthers booke of the captiuitie of Babilon thinketh that euerye man vnderstandeth that the certaintie of that matter dependes not so much of the Gospell as it doth vpon the vse tradition and custome of the Church And more truely and easilye in show if it had pleased the Church might those wordes of Christ otherwise haue beene expounded saith Scotus in the forefaide place These things saide togither and conferred with that saying of Christ They worshippe me in vaine reaching for doctrines mens praecepts Math. 15.9 and with Peser 1. Epist â— Cap. 14. Vers 18. where he telles all them to whome he wrote that generall Bpistle that Christ had redeemed them from the vaine conuersation which they had receiued by the traditions of the Fathers we shall soone see that it is noe rocke whereupon they builde this their transubstantiation but a very sand and a rotten foundation Yet because they are so confident in this matter as they are I will not leaue them thus Will you then know the first author that gaue them any inkling or grounde of inuention heere of Truely it was not Marke the Euangelist nor any such but yet vnlesse I be much deceiued one Marke markt them out the way the first of all others to finde it out This Marke that I speake of was a samous Magition and a damnable filthie heretique of the brood of Valentilians a verie ancient one I must needs confesse For I finde that he liued in the time of the Emperor Antarinus Pius which was but 150. yeares after Christ Of this wretch writeth Epiphanius in his 34. heresie prouing that which he saith out of Irenaus his 9. chapter against the heresies of the Valentinians where indeed it is so testified of him that when by his enchantment or inkling he had caused a cup of white wine to beare the colour of blood that theÌ„ he made his fellowe beleeue that by his inuocation ouer it it was so transubstantiated into blood that so by his meanes it might be thought that the grace that is super vniuersa that is oner all had instilled sanguinem suum in illud poculum his bloode unto that cup by which meanes when he had made them in admiration of him and so desirous to drinke there of he gaue them as it is there noted with greate solemnitie of wordes and so wonderfully bewitched many And the rather was I led and am thus to thinke because the same Irenaeus in the 8. chapter of the said booke secretly directed as I take it by the spirit of prophecie said that he was verÃ¨ pracursor Antichristi that is truely Antichristes forerunner If therefore the former nouitie of their transubstantiation please them not let them hence fetch the petigree therof and so let Marcus be the first conceiuer of it and Innocentius he that bore and brought it forth Or if this be not to their mindes I will confesse that it may be that they learned it of the heathen who as they imagined with certaine words gestures could call downe their Hecate Iupiter and Elicius as oft as they list For neuer made or at this day maketh any heathen man more adoe then they about this businesse about the most idolatrous toy of superstition that euer they went about For the wordes must be pronounced with one breath and they vse such crossing such bending and bowing breathing and haling of the wordes to the elementes as they make themselues verie ridiculous to any that are wise that see them marke their doings No iugler nor sycophant vpon a stage are more full of fond and trifling actions and gestures then a Priest at Masse and all to effect this their transubstantiation Who can be perswaded that the Lord of heauen and earth that delighteth in no vanitie but altogether in sinceritie and simplicitie can take delight in this geare Whiles they haue beene so busie to establish the credite of this their deuise by fonde tales of diuerse miracles showed heere and there and I cannot tell where it had beene more needefull for them to haue laboured first to agree amongest themselues about the matter and to cleare the doubtes that they haue moued themselues by occasion thereof But this hitherto they haue founde so combersome a thing to doe that I dare be bolde to say by that which I haue red and coulde set downe thereof the varieties of their opinions and intricate doubtes heereupon moued by themselues and vnanswered and vnsatisfied as yet would require a longer time than I haue yet spent since I began to talke of this Sacrament to set them downe in Yea though they vse and like the word Transubstantiation neuer so well yet though they know that both by the words of the institution and by Saint Paules speaches had thereof 1. Cor. 10.11 and by the testimonies with one consent of all the ancient Fathers as we haue often shewed them Christ called vndoubtedly the bread which he brake and gaue his bodie broken and the wine in the cup his bloodshed they cannot yet be brought to tell vs or to agree amongst themselues what it is that should be or is heere transubstantiated and conuerted into his body Nay in trueth they dare not say that eyther bread or wine or any thing else are the thinges and yet we must yealde to a transubstantiation though no man yet could or would tell vs and stand to it when he hath done whereof it is Howsoeuer eyther they must say it is of some thing or not if of any thing then they know that therupon it will follow that of that thing whatsoeuer it be here Christs bodie is made which is absurd they themselues seeme to thinke to say nothing is turned or transubstantiated into it is quite to loose their cause In very deed they are inforced to see that if they should once by the demoÌ„stratiue particle This that Christ vsed vnderstand the bread wine that then it would most cleerly follow that there is a Trope or figure in the speech of Christ or that else they must confesse bread and wine

Selected quad for the lemma: word_n

Text snippets containing the quad