or fellowship of the Lords Body whereupon it followeth that after the Thanksgiving it is Bread which we break And how often in the Acts of the Apostles is the Lords Supper signified by breaking of Bread They did per severe in breaking of Bread And again They brake Bread in every house And again When they were come together to break Bread St. Paul who setteth forth most fully in his writing both the doctrine and the right use of the Lord's Supper and the Sacramental eating and drinking of Christs Body Blood call'd it 5 times Bread Bread c. The second Reason The Sacramental Bread is the mystical body and so is called in Scripture 1. Cor. 10. as it is called the natural Body of Christ. But Christs mystical Body is the Congregations of the Christians Now no man was ever so fond as to say that That Sacramental Bread is Transubstantiated and changed into the substance of the Congregation Wherefore no man should likewise think or say that the Bread is Transubstantiated and changed into the natural substance of Christs human nature But my mind is not here to write what may be gathered out of Scriptures for this purpose but only to note here briefly those which seem unto me to be the most plain places Therefore contented to have spoken thus much of the Sacramental Bread now I will speak a little of the Lords Cup. And this shall be my third argument grounded upon Christ's own words The natural substance of the Sacramental Wine remaineth still and is the material substance of the Sacrament of the Blood of Christ. Therefore it is likewise so in the Sacramental Bread I know that he that is of the contrary opinion will deny the former part of my argument But I will prove it thus by the plain words of Christ himself both in Matth and in Mark Christ's words be these after the words said upon the Cup I say unto you saith Christ I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the Vine-tree untill I shall drink that anew in my Fathers Kingdom Here note how Christ calleth plainly his Cup the Fruit of the Vine-tree but the fruit of the Vine-tree is very natural Wine wherefore the very natural substance of the Wine doth remain still in the Sacrament of Christ's Blood And here in speaking of the Lord's Cup it cometh to my remembrance the vanity of Innocentius phantastical Invention which by Pauls words I did confute before and here did promise somewhat more to speak and that is thus If the Transubstantiation be made by this word Blessed in Mark said upon the Bread then surely seeing that word is not said of Christ neither of any of the Evangelists nor of Paul upon the Cup then there is no Transubstantiation of the Wine at all For where the cause doth fail there cannot follow the Effect But the Sacramental Bread and the Sacramental Wine do both remain in their natural Substance alike and if the one be not changed as of the Sacramental Wine it appeareth evidently then is there no such Transubstantiation in either of them both All that put and affirm this change of the substance of Bread and Wine into the substance of Christ's Body and Blood called Transubstantiation do also say and affirm this change to be made by a certain form of prescript words and none others but what they be which make the change either of the one or of the other undoubtedly even they which write most sincerely in these our days almost confess plainly that they cannot tell For altho' they grant to certain old Authors as Chrysostom and Ambrose that these words This is my Body are the words of Consecration of the Sacrament of the Body yet say they these words may well be so called because they do assure us of the consecration thereof whether it be done before these words be spoken or no. But as for this their doubt concerning the Sacrament of the Body I let it pass Let us now consider the words which pertain unto the Cup. This is first evident that as Matthew much agreeth with Mark and Luke with Paul in form of words concerning the Sacrament of the Body so in this Sacrament of the Cup the form of words in Matthew and Mark is divers from that which is in Luke and Paul The old Authors do most rehearse the form of words in Matthew and Mark because I ween they seemed to them more clear But here I would know whether it is not credible or no that Luke and Paul when they celebrated the Lords Supper with their Congregations that they did not use the same form of words at the Lord's Table which they wrote Of Luke because he was a Physitian whether some will grant that he might be a Priest or no and was able to receive the order of Priesthood which they say is given by vertue of these words said by the Bishop Take thou Authority to Sacrifice for the Quick and Dead I cannot tell but if they should be so straight upon Luke either for his craft or else for lack of such power given unto him by vertue of the aforesaid words then I ween both Peter and Paul are in danger to be deposed of their Priesthood for the craft either of Fishing which was Peter's or of making Tents which was Paul's were more vile than the science of Physick and as for these Sacramental words of the order of Priesthood to have authority to Sacrifice both for the quick and the dead I ween Peter and Paul if they were both alive were not able to prove that ever Christ gave them such Authority or ever said any such words unto them But I will let Luke go and because Paul speaketh more for him himself I will reherse his words That which I received of the Lord I gave unto you for the Lord Jesus c. and so he fetteth forth the whole institution and right use of the Lords Supper now seeing Paul here saith that he received of the Lord that which he gave them and that which he had receiv'd given them before by word of mouth now he reherseth and writeth the same in his Epistle it is credible that Paul would never have used this form of words upon the Lords Cup except as he saith he had received them of the Lord and that he had given them before and now reherseth the same in his Epistle I trust no man is so far from reason but he will grant me that Paul did use the form of words which he writeth let us then consider Pauls words which he saith Christ spake upon the Cup This Cup is the New Testament in my Blood this do as often as you shall drink it in remembrance of me Here I would know whether that Christ's words spoken upon the Cup were not as mighty in work and as effectual in signification as they that were spoken upon the Bread If this be granted which I think no man can deny then further I
Ivy-Bush doth represent the Wine in a Tavern or as a vile person gorgeously apparrell'd may represent a King or a Prince in a Play Alass let us leave lying and speak the truth every man not only to his neighbour but also of his neighbour for we are members one of another saith St. Paul The controversy no doubt which at this day troubleth the Church wherein any mean learned man either old or new doth stand in is not whether the holy Sacrament of the blessed Body and Blood of Christ is no better than a piece of common bread or no or whether the Lords Table be no more to be regarded than the table of any earthly man or no or whether it be a bare sign or figure of Christ and nothing else or no for all do grant that St. Pauls words do require that the Bread which we brake is the partaking of the Body of Christ and also all do grant him that eateth of that Bread and drinketh of that Cup unworthily to be guilty of the Lords Death and to eat and drink his own damnation because he esteem'd not the Lords Body All do grant that these words of Paul when he saith if we eat it advantageth us nothing or if we eat not we want nothing thereby are not spoken of the Lord's Table but of other common meats Thus then hitherto yet we all agree but now let us see wherein the Dissention doth stand the understanding of it wherein it doth chiefly stand is a step to the true searching forth of the Truth for who can seek well a Remedy if he know not before the Disease It is neither to be denied nor dissembled that in the matter of this Sacrament there be divers points wherein men counted to be learned cannot agree as whether there be any Transubstantiation of the Bread or no any corporal and carnal presence of Christs Substance or no whether adoration due only unto God is to be done to the Sacrament or no and whether Christs body be there indeed offered unto the heavenly Father by the Priest or no or whether the evil man receiveth the natural Body of Christ or no yet nevertheless as in a man diseased in divers parts commonly the original cause of such divers diseases which are spread abroad in the body do come from some one chief member as from the stomach or from the head even so all those five aforesaid points do chiefly hang upon this one question which is What is the matter of the Sacrament whether is it the natural substance of Bread or the natural substance of Christs own Body The truth of this question truly tryed out and agreed upon no doubt shall cease the controversy in all the rest For if it be Christs own natural Body born of the Virgin then assuredly seeing that all learned men in England both new and old grant there to be but one substance then I say they must needs grant Transubstantiation that is a change of the substance of bread into the substance of Christs body Then also they must grant the carnal and corporal presence of Christs body Then must the Sacrament be adored with the Honor due unto Christ himself for the unity of the two natures in one person Then if the Priest do offer the Sacrament he doth offer indeed Christ himself And finally the murderer the adulterer and wicked man receiving the Sacrament must needs then receive also the natural substance of Christ's own blessed Body both Flesh and Blood Now on the other side if after the truth shall be truly tryed out it be found that the substance of the Bread is the material substance of the Sacrament altho for the change of the use office and dignity of the Bread the Bread indeed sacramentally is changed into the body of Christ as the water of Baptism is changed into the fountain of regeneration and yet the material substance thereof remaineth all one as was before If I say the true solution of that former question whereupon all these controversies do hang be that the natural substance of Bread is the material substance in the holy Sacrament of Christs body then must it follow of that former proposition confessed of all that be named to be learned so far as I do know in England which is That there is but one material substance in the Sacrament of the Body and one only likewise in the Sacrament of the Blood that there is no such thing indeed and in truth as they call Transubstantiation For the Substance of Bread remaineth still in the Sacrament of the Body then also the natural substance of Christs human nature which he took of the Virgin Mary is in Heaven where it reigneth now in glory and not here inclosed under the form of Bread then that godly Honour which is only due unto God the Creator and may not be done unto the creature without Idolatry and Sacriledge is not to be done unto the holy Sacrament Then also the wicked I mean the impenitent murtherer adulterer or such like do not receive the natural Substance of the blessed body and blood of Christ. Finally then doth follow that Christs blessed Body which was once only offer'd and shed upon the Cross being available for the sins of all the World is offer'd up no more in the natural substance there of neither by the Priest nor any otherthing But here before we go any farther to search in this matter and to wade to search and try out as we may the truth thereof in the Scripture it shall do well by the way Whether they that thus make answer and solution unto the former principal Question do take away simply and absolutely the presence of Christs Body and Blood from the Sacrament ordained by Christ and duely ministred according to his holy Ordinance and Institution of the same Undoubtedly they do deny That utterly either so to say or to mean the same and hereof if any man do or will doubt the Books which are written already in this matter of them that thus do answer will make the matter plain Now then will ye say what kind of presence will they grant and what do they deny Briefly they deny the presence of Christs Body in the natural substance of his human and assumpt nature and grant the presence of the same by Grace that is They affirm and say that the substance of the natural body and blood of Christ is only remaining in Heaven and so shall be until the latter day when he shall come again in glory accompanied with the angels of Heaven to judge both the quick and the dead And the same natural substance of the very Body and Blood of Christ because it is united to the divine nature in Christ the second person in the Trinity therefore it hath not only Life in it self but is also able and doth give life unto so many as be or shall be partakers thereof that is to all that do believe in his name which
reason thus But the word Is in the words spoken upon the Lords bread doth mightily signify say they the change of the substance of that which goeth before it into the substance of that which followeth after that is of the substance of bread into the substance of Christs body Now then when Christs words spoken upon the Cup be of the same might and power both in working and signifying then must this word Is when Christ saith this Cup is the New Testament c. turn the substance of the Cup into the substance of the New Testament And if thou wilt say that this word Is neither maketh neither signifieth any such change of the Cup and that altho it be said of Christ that this Cup is the New Testament yet Christ meant no such change as That Marry Sr even so say I when Christ said of the Bread which he took and after thanksgiving brake and gave them saying take eat this is my Body he meant no more any such change of the Bread into the substance of his natural Body than he meant of the change and Transubstantiation of the Cup into the substance of the New Testament and if thou wilt say that the word Cup here in Christs words doth not signify the Cup it self but the Wine or thing contained in the Cup by a figure called Metonymia for that Christs words meant and so must needs be taken thou sayest very well but I pray thee by the way here note two things First that this word Is hath no such strength or signification in the Lords words to make or signify any Transubstantiation Secondly That in the Lords words whereby he instituted the Sacrament of his Blood he used a Figurative speech How vain then is it that some say that Christ in Doctrine and in the Institution of the Sacraments used no Figures but all his words are to be strained to their proper signification when as here neither That was in the Cup nor the Cup it self taking every word in its proper signification was the New Testament Thus in one sentence spoken of Christ the figure must help us twice But some say if we shall thus admit figures in Doctrine then shall all the Articles of our Faith by figures and allegories shortly be transformed I say it is like fault and even the same to deny the figure when the place so requireth as vainly to make It a figurative speech which is to be understood in its proper signification The rule whereby it is known when the speech is figurative and when it is none St. Aug. in his Book de Doctrina Christi lib. 3. ch 16. giveth diverse learned Lessons of the which one is this If saith he the Scripture doth seem to command a thing which is wicked or ungodly or to forbid a thing that Charity doth require then know you that the speech is figurative As for example he bringeth the saying of Christ the 6th of John Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood ye can have no Life in you It seemeth to command a wicked or ungodly thing wherefore it is a figurative speech commanding to have communion or fellowship with Christs passion and devoutly and wholsomly to lay up in memory that his flesh was crucified and wounded for us This Lesson of St. Aug. I have therefore the rather set forth because as it teacheth us to understand that place in John figuratively even so surely the same Lesson with the example of St. Aug. Exposition thereof teacheth us not only by the same to understand Christs words in the institution of the Sacrament both of his Body and of his Blood figuratively but also the very true meaning and understanding of the same For if to command to eat the flesh of the Son of man and to drink his blood seemeth to command an inconvenience or an ungodly thing and is even so indeed if it be understood as the words do stand in their proper signification and therefore must be understood figuratively and spiritually as St. Aug. doth learnedly and godly interpret them then surely Christ commanding in his last Supper to eat his Body and to drink his Blood seemeth to command in sound of words as great and even the same inconvenience and ungodliness as did his words in the sixth Chapter of St. John and therefore must even by the same reason be likewise understood and expounded figuratively and spiritually and as St. Aug did the other Whereunto the same exposirion of St. Aug. may seem to be more meet for that Christ in his Supper to the commandment of eating and drinking his Blood addeth Do this in remembrance of me which words surely were the Key that opened and revealed this spiritual and godly exposition unto St. Aug. But I have tarried longer in setting forth the form of Christs words upon the Lords Cup written by Paul and Luke then I did intend to do And yet here cometh to my remembrance the form of words used in the Latin Mass upon the Lords Cup whereof I do not a little marvel what should be the cause that seeing the Latin Mass agreeth with the Evangelists and Paul in the form of words said upon the Bread why in the form of words said upon the Cup it differeth from them all yea and addeth these words mysterium Fidei yea and if they might have some good exposition yet why it should not be as well added unto the words of Christ upon the Bread as upon the Cup. Surely I do not see the mistery And when I see in the Latine Mass the sacrament of the Blood abused when it is denyed unto the Lay-man clean contrary to Gods most certain words for why I beseech thee should the Sacrament of Christs Blood be denyed unto the Lay-Christian more than to the Priest Did not Christ shed his Blood as well for the Lay Godly man as for the Godly Priest If thou wilt say yes he did so but yet the Sacrament of the Blood is not to be received without the offering up and sacrificing thereof unto God the Father both for the quick and for the dead and no man may make oblation of Christs Blood unto God but a Priest and therefore the Priest and that but in his Mass only may receive the Sacrament of his Blood And call you this Masters Mysterium Fidei alass alass I fear me this is before God mysterium Iniquitatis such as St. Paul speaketh of in his Epistle to the Thessalonians The Lord be merciful unto us and bless us and lighten his countenance upon us and be merciful unto us that we may know thy way upon earth and among all people thy Salvation This kind of Oblations standeth upon Transubstantiation his German-cousin and do grow both upon one ground The Lord weed out of his vineyard shortly that bitter root To speak of this Oblation how much it is injurious to Christs Passion how it cannot but with highest blasphemy hainous arrogancy and
intolerable pride be claimed of any man other then of Christ himself how much and plainly it repugneth unto the manifest words the true sense and meaning of holy Scripture in many places and especially in the Epistle to the Hebrews the matter is too long and others have written in it at large that my mind is now not to entreat thereof any further Yet there remaineth one vain Quiddity of Dunse in this matter the which because some that write now do like it so well that they have stripped it out of Dunse's dusty and dark Terms and prickt and painted it in fresh colours of eloquent stile and therefore may deceive more except the error be warily eschewed Dunse saith in these words of Christ This is my Body that this Pronoun Demonstrative meaning the word this if you will know what it doth show or demonstrate whether the Bread that Christ took or no he answereth no but only one thing in substance it pointeth whereof the nature or name it doth not tell but leaveth that to be determined and told by That that followeth the word is that is by the Praedicatum as the Logicians doth speak and therefore he calleth this pronoun demonstrative Individuumvagum that is a wandring proper name whereby we may point out and shew any one thing in substance whatsoever it be That this Imagination is untruly apply'd unto those words of Christ this is my Body and the vanity thereof may appear plainly by the words of Luke and Paul said upon the Cup in Matthew and Mark. For as upon the Bread it is said of all this is my Body so of Matthew and Mark it is said of the Cup this is my Blood Then if in the words this is my Body the word This be as Dunse calls it a wandring name to appoint and shew forth any one thing where of the name or nature it doth not tell so must it be likewise in those words of Matthew and Mark upon the Lords Cup this is my Blood But in the words of Matthew and Mark it signifieth and pointeth out the same that it doth in the Lords words upon the Cup in Luke and Paul when it is said This Cup is the New Testament in my Blood Therefore in Matthew and Mark the pronoun Demonstrative This doth not wander to point one thing in substance not shewing what it is but telleth it plainly what it is no less in Matthew and Mark unto the Eye then is done in Luke and Paul by putting to this word Cup both unto the Eye and to the Ear. For taking the Cup and demonstrating or showing it unto his Disciples by this pronoun Demonstrative This and saying unto them Drink ye all of this it was then all one to say This is my Blood as to say This Cup is my Blood meaning by the Cup as the nature of the speech doth require the thing contained in the Cup. So likewise without all doubt when Christ had taken bread given thanks and broken it and giving it to his Disciples said Take Eat and so demonstrating and shewing that Bread which he had in his Hands to say then This is my Body and to have said This Bread is my Body is all one thing as it were all one if a man lacking a knife and going to his Oysters would say unto another whom he saw to have two Knives Sir I pray you lend me the one of your Knives were it not now all one to answer him Sir hold I will lend you this to eat your meat but not to open Oysters withall and Hold I will lend you this Knife to eat your meat but not to open Oysters This Similitude serveth but for this purpose to declare the nature of speech withall whereas the thing that is demonstrated and shewed is evidently perceived and openly known unto the Eye But O Good Lord what wonderfull thing it is to see how some men do labour to teach what is demonstrated and shewed by the pronoun Demonstrative This in Christs words when he saith This is my Body This is my Blood And here the Transubstantiators do not agree among themselves no more than they do about the words which work the Transubstantiation some attributing the work unto the word Benedixit and the most part to Hoc est corpus meum Innocentius therefore Duns and that Sect which putteth the change in the word Benedixit say that this word This was then indeed Christs Body tho' the word did not import so much but only one thing in substance which after Duns now the Bread being gon must needs be the substance of Christs Body The other which do say that this change is made when the whole Sentence This is my Body is fully finished and not before cannot but say that Christs This did demonstrate and shew Bread indeed which so remain'd till the Sentence was fully pronounced But how can they make and verifie Christs words to be true demonstrating the substance of Bread and saying thereof This is my Body that is as they say the Natural substance of Christs Body except they will say that the Verb is fignifieth is made or is changed into and then in Christs words upon the Cup rehersed by Luke and Paul the Cup or the Wine in the Cup must be made or turned into the New Testament as was declared before There be some amongst the Transubstantiators which would be Mediators yea rather Newtrals or Ambidexters which can shift on both sides for where the one saith that this word This demonstrateth the substance of Bread the other saith No not so the Bread is gone and it demonstrateth a substance which is Christs Body Tush saith this third Man Ye understand nothing at all They agree well enough in the chief point which is the ground of all that is this Both do agree and bear witness that there is Transubstantiation They do agree indeed in that Conclusion but their proof and Doctrine thereof do even as well agree together as did the false Witnesses before Annas and Caiaphas against Christ or the wicked Judges to condemn Susanna for they did all agree to speak against Christ and the wicked Judges to condemn poor Susanna but in the Examination of their Witnesses they were found false and clean contrary one to the other Thus much have I spoken in searching out a solution to this principal Question which was What was the Material Substance of the Holy Sacrament in the Lords Supper Now lest I should seem to set by my own Conceit more than is meet I have thought good to establish this mine Answer and Opinion by the Authority and Doctrine of the old Ecclesiastical Doctors such I mean as were before the wicked Usurpations of the See of Rome grown so immeasurably great that not only with Tyrannical Power but also with Corrupt Doctrine it began to subvert Christs Gospel and to turn the state of the Church set by Christ and his Apostles clean upside down And I will reherse
doth not lie that saith He is every day offer'd For if Sacraments had no similitudes or likeness of those Things whereof they be Sacraments they could in no wise be Sacraments and for their similitude and likeness commonly they have the names of the Things whereof they be Sacraments Wherefore as after a certain manner of speech the Sacrament of Christs Body is Christs Body the Sacrament of Christs Flood is Christs Blood so likewise the Sacrament of Faith is Faith c. After this manner of speech as St. Augustin teacheth in his Questions Super Leviticum contra Adamantium it is said That seven ears of Corn be seven years seven Kyne be seven years and the Rock was Christ Blood is the Soul The which last saying saith St. Augustin in his Book Contra Adamantium is understood to be spoken in a sign or figure for the Lord himself did not stick to say This is my Body when he gave the sign of his Body For we must not consider in Sacraments saith St. Augustin contra Maximinum Lib. 3. cap. 22. what they be but what they do signifie for they be signs of Things being one Thing in themselves and yet signifying another Thing for the Heavenly Bread saith he by some manner of speech is call'd Christs Body when indeed it is the Sacrament of his Body What can be more plain or more clearly spoken than are these places of St. Augustin if Men were not obstinately bent to maintain an untruth Yet one place more of St. Augustin will I alledge to this purpose That Christs Natural Body is in Heaven and not here Corporally in the Sacrament In his 50th Treatise upon John he speaks thus of Christ. By his Divine Majesty by his Providence by his unspeakable and invisible Grace That is fulfilled which he spake Behold I am with you unto the end of the World But as concerning the Flesh which he took in his Incaruation as concerning that which was born of the Virgin as concerning that which was apprehended by the Jews and Crucified upon the Tree and taken down from the Cross lapped in Linnen Cloths and buried and rose again and appeared after his Resurrection as concerning that Flesh he said Ye shall not ever have me with you Why so for as concerning his Flesh he was conversant with his Disciples forty days and they accompanying him seeing and not following him he went up into Heaven and is not here By the presence of his Divine Majesty he did not depart As concerning the presence of his Divine Majesty we have Christ ever with us but as concerning the presence of his Flesh he said truly to his Disciples Ye shall not ever have me with you For as concerning the presence of his Flesh the Church had him but a few days now it holdeth him by Faith tho it see him not Thus much St. Augustin speaketh repeating one thing so oft and all to declare and teach how we should understand the manner of Christs being here with us which is by his Grace by his Providence and by his Divine Nature And how he is absent by his Natural Body which was born of the Virgin Mary died and rose for us and is ascended into Heaven and there sitteth as is in the Article of our Faith on the right hand of God and thence and from none other place saith St. Augustin shall come on the latter day to judge the quick and the dead at the which day the Righteous shall then lift up their Heads and the light of Gods Truth shall so shine that all Falsehood and Errors shall be put to utter confusion Righteousness shall have then the upper hand and Truth that day shall bear away the Victory all the Enemies thereof quite overthrown to be troden under foot for evermore O Lord I beseech thee haste this day then shalt thou be glorified with the glory due unto thy holy Name and we shall sing unto thee in all joy and felicity laud and praise for evermore Here now would I make an end for methinks that St. Augustin is in this matter so full and plain and of that Authority that it should not need after this his Declaration to bring you any more Authors Yet because I promised to alledge three Writers of the Latin Church I will now alledge last of all Gelasius which was a Bishop of Rome but before the wicked Usurpation and Tyranny thereof spread and burst out abroad unto the World For this Man was before Bonifacius and Gregory the first in whose days both corruption of Doctrine and Tyrannical Usurpations did chiefly grow and had the over-hand Gelasius in an Epistle of the two Natures of Christ Gelasius Contra Eutychen writeth thus The Sacraments of the Body and Blood of Christ are Godly things whereby and by the same we are made partakers of the Divine Nature and yet nevertheless the substance or nature of Bread and Wine doth not depart or go away Note these words I beseech you and consider whether any thing can be more plainly spoken against the Error of Transubstantiation which is the ground and bitter root whereupon springeth all the horrible Errors before rehersed Wherefore seeing that the falsehood hereof doth appear so manifestly and by so many ways so plainly so clearly and so fully that no man needeth to be deceived but he that will not see or will not understand let us all that do love the Truth embrace it and forsake the Falsehood for he that loveth the Truth is of God and the lack of the Love thereof is the cause why God suâ—â—ered Men to fall into Errors and to perish therein Yea and the cause as St. Paul says why God sendeth unto them illusions that they believe Lies unto their own Condemnation because they loved not the Truth This Truth no doubt is Gods Word the Love and Light thereof Almighty God our Heavenly Father give us and lighten it in our Hearts by his holy Spirit through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen An Epistle of Mr. John Bradford Prisoner of the Lord to a faithful Christian in Coventry THe Peace which Christ left to his Church and to every true Member of the same the Holy Spirit the Guide of Gods Children be so ingraft in your Heart and the Heart of your good Wife and all my good Brothers and Sisters about you that unfainedly you may in respect thereof contemn all worldly peace which repugneth that peace I speak of and driveth it utterly out of the hearts of all them which would patch them both together For we cannot serve two Masters No Man can serve God and Mammon Christs peace cannot be kept with this Worlds peace God therefore of his mercy give unto you his peace which passeth all understanding and so keep your hearts and minds that they may be pure Habitacles and Mansions for the Holy Spirit yea for the Blessed Trinity who hath promised to come and dwell in all them that love Christ and keep his sayings
Iterum Incognitus mihi quidam de Ridleus scribarum numero ut opinor nihil ibi de Transubstantiatione decreverunt sed eam materiam tanquam Ecclesiarum concordiae minime convenientem intractatam reliquerunt quem vera dixisse Ridleius confirmabat Id nos adoramus quod Magi in praesepi adoraverunt Weston Chrysost. Hom. 20. in 1. Cor. sed Magi adoraverunt in praesepi positum verum naturale corpus Christi Ergo Et rursus ibidem Non hic Dominum in praesepi sed in altari nec mulierem in ulnis tenentem sed sacerdotem Adoramus nos fateor eundem verum Dominum Ridley servatorem mundi quem adoraverunt magi in praesepi Nos inquam adoramus eundem in mysterio in sacramento caenae Dominicae Sed eum adoramus spirituali libertate ut ait August lib. 3. de Doct. Christ. c. 10. non carnali servitute hoc est non adoramus serviliter signa pro rebus quod esset ut ille ait servilis Infirmitatis sed mente in caelum elevata illum sursum sedentem qui ab angelis adoratur eundem nos oculis fidei praesentem secundum gratiam spiritualiter in mensa sua assidentem intuemur adoramus Assistit enim semper Christus suis mysteriis ut habet Augustinus divina Majestas ut ait Cyprianus nunquam se absentat divinis mysteriis sed haec assistentia praesentia Christi quemad modum in Baptismo tota spiritualis est per gratiam non autem per carnis corporalem substantiam Ita plane habetur in mensa Domini legitime juxta verbum Dei rite administrata Sub finem Dominus Proloquutor hostiliter in me debacchatus Wiston est inimicum hominem palam appellans praefractum singularis audaciae Clamabat etiam Hereses jam sub ipsorum conspectu protritas conculcatas quamobrem omnes vehementer adhortabatur ad carmen victoriale 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concelebrandum ipso Doctore Proloquutore voce praeeunte Vicit veritas Vicit veritas Adque ad hunc modum triumphali applausu celebri acclamatione sanctissimorum sacrificorum Dominorum Doctorum qui pro aris focis pro Laribus Diis penatibus strenue dimicassent terminata est haec gloriosa Disputatio A Brief Treatise of the most blessed SACRAMENT of the Body and Blood of Christ. THE PREFACE MANY Things confound the weak memory a few places well weighed and proved lighten the understanding Truth is there to be searched with Diligence where it is to be had Tho God doth speak the Truth by man yet in mans word which God hath not revealed to be his man may doubt without mistrust in God Christ is the Truth of God reveal d unto man from Heaven by God himself and therefore in his word the truth is to be found which is to be embrac'd of all that be his Christ biddeth us ask and we shall have search and we shall find knock and it shall be open'd unto us Therefore O Heavenly Father Author and Fountain of all Truth the bottomless sea of all true understanding send down we beseech thee thy holy Spirit into our Hearts and lighten our understanding with the beams of thy heavenly grace We ask thee this O heavenly Father not in respect of our deserts but for thy dear Son our Saviour Jesus Christ's sake Thou knowest O heavenly Father that the controversy about the blessed Body and Blood of thy dear Son our Saviour Christ hath troubled not of late only the Church of England France Germany and Italy but also many years ago The fault is ours no doubt thereof for we have deserved thy Plague But O Lord be merciful and relieve our misery with some light of grace Thou knowest O Lord how the wicked World rolleth up and down and reeleth too and fro and careth not what thy Will is so it may abide in wealth If Truth have wealth then who is so stout to defend the Truth as they but if Christ's Cross be laid on Truth 's back then they vanish straight away as wax before the fire But these are not they O Heavenly Father for whom I make my most moan but for those silly ones O Lord which have a zeal unto thee those I mean which would and wish to know thy will and yet are letted holden back and blinded by the subtelties of Satan and his Ministers the wickedness of this wretched world and the sinful lusts and affections of the flesh Alass Lord thou knowest that we are of our selves but flesh wherein there dwelleth nothing that is good How then is it possible for man without thee O Lord to understand thy Truth indeed Can the natural man perceive the will of God O Lord to whom thou givest a zeal of thee give them also we beseech thee the knowledge of thy blessed Will suffer not them O Lord blindly to be led for to strive against thee as thou didst those alass which crucified thine own dear Son Forgive them O Lord for thy dear Son's sake for they know not what they do They do think alass O Lord for want of knowledge that they do unto thee good service even when against thee they do extreamly rage Remember O Lord we beseech thee the Prayer of thy Martyr St. Stephen of thy holy Apostle Paul which wisheth him accursed from thee for the salvation of his brethren the Jews Remember O Heavenly Father the Prayer of thy dear Son upon the Cross when he said to thee O Father forgive them they know not what they do With this forgiveness O good Lord God give me I beseech thee thy grace so briefly here to set forth the sayings and sentences of thy dear Son our Saviour Christ of his Evangelists and Apostles that in this foresaid controversy the light of thy truth by the Lanthorn of thy word may shine to all them that love thee Amen OF the Lords last Supper speak expressly three of the Evangelists Matthew Mark and Luke but none more plainly and more fully declareth the same than doth St. Paul partly in the 10th c. Cor. 1st As Matthew and Mark agree in form of words so doth likewise Luke and Paul but all four no doubt as they were altogether in one school and inspir'd with one spirit so taught they all one truth God grant us to understand it well Matthew setteth forth Christ's supper thus When Even was come he sate down with the Twelve as they did eat Jesus took Bread and gave thanks brake it and gave it to the Disciples and said take eat this is my Body and he took the Cup gave thanks and gave it to them saying drink ye all of this for this is my Blood of the new Testament that is shed for many for the remission of Sins I say unto you I will not drink of the Vine-tree untill that day when I shall drink it new in my Father's Kingdom and when they had said
are not born of blood as John saith or of the will of flesh or of the will of man but are born of God tho the self same substance abide still in Heaven and they for the time of their Pilgrimage dwell here upon Earth By Grace I said that is by the gift of this life mentioned in John and the properties for the same meet for a Pilgrimage here upon Earth the same body of Christ is here present with us As for example we say the Sun which in substance never removeth his place out of the Heavens is yet present here by his Beams Light and natural Influence where it shineth upon the Earth for Gods word and his Sacraments be as it were the Beams of Christ who is Sol Justitiae Thus thou hast heard wherein doth stand the principal state and chief point of all the Controversies which do properly pertain unto the nature of this Sacrament As for the use thereof I grant there be many other things whereof here I have spoken of nothing at all And now least thou justly mayest complain and say that I have in opening this matter done nothing else but digged a Pit and have not shut it up again or broken a Gap and have not made it up or opened the Book and have not closed it again or else to call me what they list as neutrall Dissembler c. Therefore here now I will by Gods Grace not only shortly but also so clearly and plainly as I can make thee now to know whether of the aforesaid two Answers to the former principall state and chief point doth like me best Yea and also I will hold all those accursed which in this matter which now so troubles the Church of Christ have of God receiv'd the Key of Knowledg and yet go about to shut up the Doors that they themselves will not enter in nor suffer others that would And as for my own part I consider both of late what cure and charge of Souls hath bin committed unto me whereof God knoweth how soon I shall be called to give an Account and also now in this world what peril and danger of the Laws concerning my Life I am now in at this present time what folly were it to dissemble with God of whom assuredly I look and hope by Christ to have everlasting life Seing that such charge and danger both before God and man do compass me in round about on every side therefore God willing I will frankly and freely utter my mind and tho my body be Captive yet my Tongue and my Pen as long as I may shall freely set forth that which undoubtedly I am perswaded to be the Truth of Gods word And yet will I do it under this Protestation call me a Protestant who list I do not pass thereof my Protestation shall be this that my mind is and ever shall be God willing to set forth sincerely the true sense and meaning to the best of my understanding of God's most holy word and not to decline from the same either by fear of worldly danger or else for hope of gain I do protest also due obedience and submission of my judgment in this my writing and in all other mine affairs unto those of Christs Church which be truly learned in Gods holy word and guided by his Spirit After this Protestation I do plainly affirm and say that the second answer made unto the chief Question and principal point I am perswaded to be the very true meaning and sense of Gods holy word That is that the natural Substance of Bread and Wine is the true material substance of the holy Sacrament of the blessed Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ and the places of Scripture whereupon this my Faith is grounded be these both concerning the Sacrament of the Body and also of the Blood First let us repeat the beginning of the Institution of the Lords Supper wherein all the three Evangelists and St. Paul do agree saying That Jesus took Bread gave thanks brake and gave it to the Disciples saying Take Eat this is my Body Here it appeareth plainly that Christ called very Bread his Body For that which he took was very Bread In this all men do agree and that which he took after he had given thanks he brake and that which he took and brake he gave it to his Disciples and that which he took brake and gave to his Disciples he said himself of it This is my Body So it appeareth plainly that Christ called very Bread his Body But very Bread cannot be his very Body in very Substance thereof therefore it must needs have another meaning which meaning appeareth plainly what it is by the next sentence that followeth immediately both in Luke and in Paul and that is this Do this in remembrance of me whereupon it seemeth unto me to be evident that Christ did take Bread and called it his Body for that he would institute thereby a perpetual Remembrance of his Body specially of that singular benefit of our Redemption which he would then procure purchase unto us by his Body upon the Cross. But Bread retaining still its own very natural substance may be thus by grace and in a sacramental signification His Body whereas else the very Bread which he took brake and gave them could not be in any wise his natural body for that were confusion of substances and therefore the very words of Christ joyned to the next sentence following both enforceth us to confess the very bread to remain still and also openeth unto us how that Bread may be and is thus by his divine power his body which was given for us But here I remember that I have read in some writers of the contrary opinion which do deny that That which Christ did take he brake For say they after this taking he blessed it as Mark doth speak and by his Blessing he changed the natural substance of the Bread into the natural substance of his Body And so altho he took the bread and blessed it yet because in blessing it he changed the substance of it he broke not the bread which then was not there but only the form thereof Unto this Objection I have two plain answers both grounded upon Gods word The one I will reherse here the other answer I will defer untill I speak of the Sacrament of the Blood Mine answer here is taken out of the plain words of St. Paul which doth manifestly confound this fantastical invention first invented I ween of Pope Innocentius and after confirmed by the subtil sophist Dunse and lately renewed now in our Days with an eloquent stile and much fineness of wit But what can crafty Inventions subtilty in Sophisms Eloquence or fineness of Wit prevail against the infallible word of God What need we to contend and strive what thing we break for Paul saith speaking undoubtedly of the Lords Table The Bread saith he which we break is it not the partaking
but few of them that is three old Writers of the Greek Church and three of the Latin Church which do seem unto me to be in this matter so plain that in reading of them no man can be ignorant in this matter but he which will shut up his own eyes and blindfold himself The Greek Authors are Origen Chrysostome and Theodoret the Latin are Tertullian St. Augustin and Gelasius And first let us hear the old Writers of the Greek Church Origen who lived above Twelve hundred and fifty years ago a Man for the excellency of his Learning so highly esteemed in Christs Church that he was counted and judged the singular Teacher in his time of Christs Religion the Confounder of Heresies the Schoolmaster of many godly Matters and an Opener of the high Mysteries in Scripture He writing upon the Fifteenth Chapter of St. Matthews Gospel saith thus But if any thing enter into the Mouth it goeth away into the Stomach and Belly and is voided into the Draught yea and that Meat which is sanctified by the Word of God and Prayer as concerning the matter thereof it goeth away into the Belly and is avoided into the Draught but for the Prayer which is added unto it for the proportion of the Faith it is made profitable making the mind able to perceive and see that which is profitable for it is not the Material substance of the Bread but the Word which is spoken upon it that is profitable to the Man that eateth it not unworthily And this I mean of the Typical and Symbolical that is Sacramental Body Thus far goeth the words of Origen wherein it is plain that Origen speaking here of the Lords Supper doth mean and teach that the Material substance thereof is received digested and avoided as the Material substance of other Bread and Meats is which could not be if there were no Material substance of Bread at all as the Transubstantiators do say It is a World to see the Answers of the Papists to this place of Origen They say that this part of Origen was but set forth of late by Erasmus and therefore it is to be suspected But thus may all the good old Authors which lay in old Libraries and are set forth of late be by this reason rejected as Clemens Alexandrinus Theodoretus Justinus Ecclesiastica Historia Nicephori and others such Another of their Answers is that Origen was suspected to have erred in some points and therefore Faith is not to be given to him in this matter Indeed we grant that Origen in some points did err but these Errors are gathered out and noted both of St. Hierome and Epiphanius so that his Works those Errors excepted are so much the more of Authority And as concerning this matter of the Lords Supper neither they nor yet ever any other ancient Author did ever say that Origen did err Now because these two Answers have been of late so confuted and confounded that they will take no place therefore some which have written since that time have forged two other Answers even of the same mould The former whereof is That Origen in this place spake not of the Sacramental Bread or Wine of the Lords Table but of other Mystical Meat of the which St. Augustin maketh mention to be given to them that were taught the Faith before they were Baptized But Origens own words in two Sentences before rehersed being put together prove this Answer untrue For he saith that he meaneth of that Figurative and Mystical Body which profiteth them that do receive it worthily alluding so plainly unto St. Pauls words spoken of the Lords Supper that it is a shame for any Learned Man to open his mouth to the contrary And that Bread which St. Augustin speaketh of he cannot prove that any such thing was used in Origens time yea and though that could be proved yet was there never Bread in any time call'd a Sacramental Body saving the Sacramental Bread of the Lords Table which is call'd of Origen the Typical and Symbolical Body of Christ. The second of the two new found Answers is yet most monstrous of all others which is this Let us grant say they that Origen spake of the Lords Supper and that by the matter thereof was understood the Material Substance of Bread and Wine What then say they for tho the Material substance was once gone and departed by reason of Transubstantiation whilst the form of Bread and Wine did remain yet now it is no Inconvenience to say that as the Material substance did depart at the entring in of Christs Body under the foresaid forms so when the said forms be destroyed and do not remain then cometh again the substance of Bread and Wine and this say they is very meet in this Mystery that That which began with Miracle shall end with a Miracle But this Fancy lacketh all ground either of Gods Word Reason or any Ancient Writer and clean contrary to the common Rules of School Divinity which are that no Miracle is to be affirmed and put without Necessity And altho' for their former Miracle they have some ground altho' it be but vain yet to make this second Miracle of returning of the Material Bread again they have no colour at all or else I pray thee shew me by what words of Christ is that second Miracle wrought Thus you may see that the sleights and shifts which craft and wit can invent to wrest the true sense of Origen cannot take place But now let us hear another place of Origen and so let him pass Origen in the 11th Cap. sup Levit. saith That there is also even in the four Gospels and not only in the Old Testament a Letter meaning a Literal sense which killeth for if thou follow saith he the Letter in that saying Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood c. This Letter doth kill If in that place the Letter doth kill wherein is commanded the eating of Christs Flesh then surely in those words of Christ wherein Christ commandeth us to eat his Body the literal sense thereof doth kill for it is no less Crime but even the same and all one in the literal sense to eat Christs Body and to eat Christs Flesh. Wherefore if the one doth kill unless it be understood Figuratively and Spiritually then the other also doth kill likewise The Papists answer is this That unto the Carnal man the literal sense is hurtful but not so to the Spiritual As tho' to understand that in its proper sense which ought to be taken Figuratively were to the Carnal dangerous and to the Spiritual not at all Now to Chrysostom whom I bring in for my second Author in the Greek Church He speaking against the ungodly using of Mans body which after St. Paul ought to be kept pure and holy as the very Temple of the holy Ghost saith thus Cap. 5. Hom. 11. operis Imperfecti If it be a fault saith he to
against the Error of Trausubstantiation I refer here unto the Judgment of the indifferent Reader And now I will also reherse the saying of other three old Ancient Writers of the Latin Church and so make an end And first I will begin with Tertullian whom Cyprian the holy Martyr so highly esteem'd that whensoever he would have his Book he was wont to say Give us now the Master's This old Writer in his fourth Book against Marcion the Heretick saith Jesus made the Bread which he took and distributed Tertull. to his Disciples his Body saying This is my Body that is to say saith Tertullian a Figure of my Body In this place it is plain that after Tertullian his Exposition that Christ meant not by calling of Bread his Body and the Wine his Blood that either the Bread was his Natural Body or the Wine his Natural Blood but he call'd them his Body and Blood because he would institute them to be unto us Sacraments that is holy Tokens and Signs of his Body and Blood that by them remembring and firmly believing the benefits procured to us by his Body which was torn and Crucified for us and of his Blood which was shed for us upon the Cross And so with thanks receiving these holy Sacraments according to Christs Institution might by the same be spiritually nourished and fed to the increase of all Godliness in us here in our Pilgrimage and Journey wherein we walk unto Everlasting Life This was undoubtedly Christ our Saviours mind and this is Tertullian's Exposition The wrangling that the Papists do make to delude this saying of Tertullian's it is too far out of all frame Tertullian writeth here say they as none hath done either before him or after him This saying is too-too manifestly false for Origen Hilary Ambrose Basil Gregory Nazianzen St. Augustine and other old Authors likewise do call the Sacrament a Figure of Christs Body And where they say that Tertullian wrote this when he was in a heat of Disputation with an Heretick coveting by all means to overcome his Adversaries as who would say he would not take heed what he did say and specially what he would write in so high a matter so that he might have the upper hand of his Adversary Is this credible to be true in any Godly Wise Man How much less then is it worthy to be thought and credited in a Man of so great a Wit Learning and Excellency as Tertullian is worthily esteem'd ever to have been Likewise this Author in his first Book against the same Heretick Marcion writeth thus God did not reject Bread which is his Creature for by it he hath made a Representation of his Body Now I pray you what is this to say that Christ hath made a Representation of his Body by Bread but that Christ hath instituted and ordained Bread to be a Sacrament for to represent unto us his Body Now whether the representation of one thing by another requireth the corporal presence of the thing which is represented or no every man that hath understanding is able in this point the matter is so clear of it self to be a sufficient Judge The second Doctor and Writer of the Latin Church August is St. Augustine of whose Learning and Estimation I need not to speak for all the Church of Christ both hath and ever have had him for a Man of much singular Learning Wit and Diligence both in setting forth the true Doctrine of Christs Religion and also in the Defence of the same against Hereticks This Author as he hath written more plenteouslly in other matters of our Faith so likewise in this Argument he hath written at large in many of his Works so plainly against the Error of Transubstantiation that the Papists love least to hear of him of all other Writers partly for his Authority and partly because he openeth the matter more fully than any other doth therefore I will reherse more places of him than heretofore I have done of the other And first What can be more plain than that which he writeth upon the Ninety eighth Psalm speaking of the Sacraments of the Lords Body and Blood and rehersing Tom. 8. Col. Nov. B. as it were Christs words to his Disciples after this manner It is not this Body which ye do see that ye shall eat nor ye shall not drink this Blood which the Soldiers which Crucify me shall spil or shed I do commend unto you a Mystery or a Sacrament which spiritually understood shall give you Life Now if Christ had no more Natural or Corporal Bodies but that one which they there then presently both heard and saw and none other Natural Blood but that which was in the same Body and the which the Soldiers afterward did cruelly shed upon the Cross and neither this Body neither this Blood was by this Declaration of St. Augustin either to be eaten or drunken but the Mystery thereof spiritually to be understood Then I conclude that the Mystery which the Disciples should eat was not the Natural Body of Christ but a Mystery of the same spiritually to be understood For as St. Augustin saith in his Twentieth Book Contra Faustum Christs Flesh and Blood was Cap. 21. in the Old Testament promised by Similitudes and Figures of their Sacrifices and was exhibited indeed and in truth upon the Cross but the same is celebrated by a Sacrament of Remembrance upon the Altar And in his Book De Fide ad Petrum Cap. 19. he saith That in those Sacrifices meaning of the old Law it is figuratively signified what then was to be given but in this Sacrifice it is evidently signified what is already given Understanding in the Sacrifice upon the Altar the Remembrance and Thanksgiving for the Flesh which he offered for us and for the Blood which he shed for us upon the Cross. Another evident and clear place wherein it appeareth that by the Sacramental Bread which Christ call'd his Body he meant a figure of his Body is upon the Third Psalm where St. Augustin speaketh thus Christ did admit Judas unto the Feast in the which he commended unto his Disciples the Figure of his Body St. Augustin also in the 23 Epist. ad Bonifacium teacheth how Sacraments bear the name of Things whereof they be Sacraments both in Baptism and in the Lords Table even as we call every Good-Friday the Day of Christs Passion every Easter-Day the Day of Christs Resurrection where in very deed there was but one day wherein he suffered and one day wherein he rose And why do we then call them so which are not so indeed but because they are in like time and course of the year as those days were wherein those things were done Was Christ saith St. Augustin offer'd any more but once and he offered himself and yet in a Sacrament or Representation not only every solemn Feast of Easter but also every day to the People he is offered so that he