undrestond by adore the only gate into heauen and by the uyne the lycure of grace that confortithe euery troblyd coÌ„science and que nâ—ith thyre and displeasure of god the father agaynst us for our synnes So lyke wyce in these wordes Hoc est corpus meum there is none other thyng to be understond by them but that bread representyd unto his apostelles not only his precions body But also the manner how and wherefore it shuld be torn and rent upon the crosse and as they them selfes brak the bread betwene them so were they the cause that Chrystys body was broken and slayne upon the crosse and that by the meanes and use of this sacrament theremight be allwayes in the church of Christ à token of godes mercy towardes us an à remembrans of that glorious body that suâ—tenyd moost uyle death for the synne of the worold How be it the bread was nomore the body ner the winne his blud then Christ was à lame as Ioan callyd hym Ecce agnus dei qui tollit peccata muÌ„di Ioa. 1. so thowgh he sayd the wyne was his blud and the breade his body he ment none other wyce but that it representyd hys body and he that corporrally with trew repentence dyd eat of that corporall bread and corporall wynne in faith dyd eat spiritually Christes body and bludd and if thow confer Matthe and Mark. with Luke and Paule Thow shalt fynd that these wordes cannot be so grossly taken as men say withont trope or figure where as Mat saythe 26. and Mark 14. Et accepto poculo gratiâ—s actis dedit illis diceÌ„s Bibite ex eo omnes Hic est enâ—m sanguis meus qui est noui testamenti qui pro multis effunditur in remissionem peccatorum Luke and Paule sayt 22. 1. Cor. 11. Hoc poculum nouum testamentum est in meo sanguine Here Luke and Paule sayth playnli that the cuppe was the new testameÌ„t and attributith the same to the cuppe that Mattheu and and Mark attributithe unto the winne And sayth that the cuppe and not the wine conteynid in the cuppe is the new testament in the bludd of Christ Which was to be shed for the sinnes of the worold These wordes of Luke and Paule they will understond by a figure And let the letter passe what auctorite haue they to use thelpe and ayede of a trope in these wordes of Luke and Paule Where as they say plaineli Hoc poculuÌ„ est testamentum nouum in meo sanguine And exponud est in thys plae per Metonymiam And that Christ ment not that the cupp was the new testament but the wyne contaynid iâ— the cuppe Of equite and ryght if thay can take souche lycens to expound those texctes that makith agaynst them They must be conteÌ„tid that other men use them likewyce as mani times as necessite requirith by contrariete of textes Or when without thayed of a trope we cannot saue our fayth inuiolatyd But it may fortune They will say that Luk and Paule must be undrestond by Matthew and Marke Wherfore not rather Matt and Mark by the wordes of Luk and Paule for asmouch as they do more manifestly declare the supper of the lord then Matt and Mark. And likwyce there wordes better agreyth with the nature and propriete of à sacrament rerum natura quae in sacramento representatur then the wordes of Matt and Mark. Mark the worde of Luk and Paule and thow shalt perceaue playnly that this pronowne hoc cannot be referrid unto the cuppe only but unto all thaction of the hole supper wherin the lord institutyd aperpetuall memori and sacrament of his glorious passion and death But incase this pronowne hoc could be referryd un to the bread and wyne as it cannot yet can nomam expond these wordes of the supper without atrope for theris more difficultye in thys uerb est then in the pronowne Hoc Forincase when Christ sayd unto hys dystyples Thys ys my body delyueryng them the bread It was indeade as Christ sayed hys body before he callyd yt so For euery thyng is callyd by hys propere name Aâ—ter that it hathe his being and not before The lygt was not callyd the day nether the darknes nyght Vntill souche tyme as god had mad the sonne and the mone and appoyntyd eche of them there propre officyce Gen. 1. and the sonne of god was not callyd the sonne of of man untill souch time Aâ— he receauyd the nature of man in the bely of the blissid uirgine wherfore if this uerb est in these wordes of the lordes supper must neadys be simply and playnly reserryd Vnto the bread and wyne of the sacramente the bread and the wine was the body and blud of Christ before Christ callyd it so his body and blud and before he speake the se wordes that they call wordes of consecracion Hoc est corpus meum when then began these externall signes of brâ—ad and wynne that he gaue unto his discyples tobe his body and blud And what were the wordes that alteryd the substaynce of bread and wyne Into the substannce of his moost precious bodye and bludd It was not this uerbe est that dyd it for if it had not byn his body before he callâ—d it so Christ would neuer haue namyd it so For he can not lye he usith not to mysname ony thyng He leuyth fraude and false inuentyd termes unto the deuyll and souch as meane no godd faythe by there wordes Now if it were his body Very fleshe blud and bones in deade what wordes of the scripture or what wordes usyd Christ to make this alteracion Perauenture he whisselyd some othere wordes and put apeace of breade in hys slyffe an there secreatly consecratyd his precious body and then sayed takeye eat ye for thys ys my body and so sayth some of these new papyshe church where before transubstanciation of breade was neuer spoken of the mother of thys Idolatrye was Rome and the father unknowen Abaster is thys transubstancion doutles Lan francus that ennymiâ— of truith and trew religion that wrot agaynst Berengarius Paschasius Guymundus Guydo Aretinus Algerus monachus Corbeiensis Adelmannus Episcopus Hugo his recentiores Lombertus Comestor papa innocentius with other begate this wyckid woman transubstaÌ„cion Where as Christ nethere his Apostelles no nether long after unto the consell of uercellen sein the time of leo theix about the yere of our lord 1052 and 300. yere aster the death of bede A wounders mater and an horrible practyse of the Deuill that contrary unto the scripture and unto the olde fathers thys mystery ys happenyd unto the sacrament That these masters of the later dayes fyghtso sore to defend an accidens with out à subiect And hath taken from the supper the thing that wese we touche we taste we eat we drynke and we swalow throwghe the throte to say bread and wyne As the Apostelles dyd and yeat say it is no
by the hole undrestond the part to say the soule of man Confer not the wordes of Moses Deut. 31. with the other places of the scripture Pono ante te bonum uitam benedictionem maledictionem elige uitam ut uiuas c. and then were the pelagians doctrine trew Chiliaste by these wordes of Christ I will not drink of this wynne from heusforth tyll I drinke it new in my fathers Kingdome sayd that weshuld eat and drink affter this liefe in heauen Sabelliam sayd that god the father suffrid in the ffres he aswell as Christ and toke occacion by these wordes and like Ego pater unuÌ„sumus Ego in patre pater in me Hebionitae sayd Christe was only man and not god as the lewis at this present dooth By these wordes Deus meus deus meus ut quid dereliquistime Heluidius by the wordes of the scripture yle taken conceuid awrong opinion of the blessyd uirgine Marie And sayd she was mother of more chyldren then oneâ— Sainct Augustine lib. 21. de ciuitate dei cap. 25. â—â—ytith of asort of heretykes that sayd who so euer ons receauid the sacrament of Christes supper could neuer be damnid and defendyd there opinion with these wordes Ego sâ—m panis uiuus qui de coelo descendi si quis comederit ex hoc pane uiuet in aeternuÌ„ Arius and marcyon with many grear lernid men deâ—endyd moost detestable heresies by the mystaking of the scripture therfore no fayth owght to be yeuin unto the interpretour that rather intendyth to stablyshe an Error and false opinion then to confer place with place that no contradiction be found in the scripture ner ony uiolacion of oure catholicke faythe Saynct Augustine lib. 3. de doctrina Christiana teachith agodly waye to understond the scripture he that will ffolow his counsell shall not lightly erre in Expounding the scripture he shewith there when the wordes may be taken and when they may not be taken without atrope But the more to be Lamen tyd souche is now the condicion of all men deceauid in religion for the moost part they will raÌ„ther run still the wrong rase they haue begon then godly to return unto the truith they will not repent lest they shuld seme to haue erryd souche is the state and condicion of oure miserable nature Where as there lackyth probacion of the thing that shuld be prouid they tary in the letter yle undrestond and turnith them selfes ad peticionem principij Aske how the proue and why they make an alteracion of the bread and what place of the scripture prouith there proposicion They fle unto the text Hoc est corpus meum And for the probacion of the proposicion they aleige the proposicion itselfe Hoc est corpus meum is the proposicion where upon all this disputacion and contencion dependith They must proue by other places of the scripture that those wordes alter the substannce of the breade what union is betwen the body of Christ and the bread And how this union is made and where the scripture prouith The sone of gode â—o com into the worold to be bread and how he commyth and what profeit his body made of breade bringyth unto the worold and whether ony of the prophetes euer prophesid of souch acumming of godes sonne into the worold Shâ—w the scriptere that prouith this proposicion hoc est corpus meum To haue souch asen seas ye say that the conscience of those that ye would haue bâ—lyue this your doctrine may repose here selfe in â—rewth and uerite of godes word Or else noman wilbe lyue youre doctrine If Paule had no better fensid this generall proposicion to the Romaynes Arbitramurigiâ—ur hominem iustificari per fidem absque operibus legis Then stile to haue repetid the proposicioÌ„ There would nether lew nether gentyle belyuid his word But he confiâ—mith the proposicion and disputith the mater so pro and contra that he confutith all thargumentes that seme to repugne his purpose These men that would haue the bread to be turnid into god an man Hath none other word but still lik the cocke crye hoc est corpus meum and will hyre none other lay but this is my body so may aman aster the same sorth proue our lady to be Ioan the Euangelist mother And say allwayes what so euer text of the scripture be browghte agaynst him as Christ sayd Ioan. 19. Ecce mater tua say what ye lyst the â—e wordes be trew Christ spake them they be playne they neade no interpretacion if ony man aske à reason and confirmacion of the proposicion He may say still Ecce mater tua ye must mak no reason how it may beâ—â—t sufficit to haue the word of god the manifest text reason shall not melle with the mater it is amater of fayth And aâ—ter this sort aman may like wyce proue Ioanne the baptiste to be the person of Elias is not this ameruelous maner of resoning When they be askyd to proue the proposicion they repet the proposicion that is disputable and so false as they takeit that thextreame contrary is trew As the scripture prouith and callith the signis of the moost Diuine and sacrate supper of the lord bread and wynne 1. Cor. 10. 11. Who so euer eatyth of this bread unworthily shalbe culpable of the bodi of Christ These wordes be more playne to proue the bread to remayne aster the wordes as they call them of the consecracion then hoc est corpus meuÌ„ ar to mak à metamorphosin of the breade Now if it be the deuillis sophistrie as my lord callyth it to belyue with the auctorite of the scripture withe the iudgment of reason and by the consent and agrement of the senses that bread is breade and that god chay gith not the iust trew and uery body of his immaculat and glorious sonne in so lytle arome as too ynches of bread Then is the scripture the deuilles sophistrie whych teachyth to belyue that Christes body is in heauen and bread in the sacrament Act. 1. 3. Mat 16. 1. Cor. 10. 11. This doctrine only hurtyth not the faythe of man But also dishonorith the dignite of mannes creacion where as it was yeuen him to be lord of all the other creatures that god made Gen. 2. and more to auayle in reason Now by the malice of man this order of god is peruertyd and that that the byrdes of thayrâ— bestes of thearth and fishes of the water know to be à creature manne makyth it his god and prouithe hymselfe there by to be inferiour unto all other creatures Which is no smale offâ—nce the ymayge of god in man not to know as mouch in asensible peace of breade as the bestes unto whom god gaue onlye the iudgment of senses unto Then hath they an other defence for this wrong opinion of the sacrament they say it is don by miracle that the body of Christ is praesent doutles if I sawe the body
bread nor wyne If it be alteryd some were best that best can mayntayne alye to shew how and by what wordes it is changyd By these wordes hoc est it is not done For noman can do more by the uertewe of those wordes then Christ him selfe Now Christ by these wordes declaryd that it was his body And not made his body Then must ye shewe theother wordes that wrowght this meruelous transubstancion Or else we shuld make Christ alyer who is the fontayne of all ueryte and truyth But souch as defend thys alteracion of breade rather then they would say that by the wordes of Christ Hoc est corpus meum were not made the uery body of Christ They will expound thys uerb est per fit And say thus that by the poure of god and uertewe of his wordes spoken by the minister the substannce of the breade is alteryd into the substannce of Christe bodi So is Christes bodi made present by this word est But thys interpretacion the lettre without atrope will not admyt Nether that est schuld be expoundyd by fit Nether that the bread shuld be made the body of Christ but that it is already the body of Christ before these wordes be spoken Hoc est corpus meum If it be not before he calle it the body why dooth he lye then And call it other wyce then it is If it be the body as he sayth it is by what wordes of the scripture hath he made the breade te body and the wyne the bludd By these wordes hoc est corpus meum there is nether breade nether wyne alteryd But the text sayeth that the bread is the body and the wyne the blud Which this new doctrine will not admyt that bread shuld be booth bread and also the it glorious body of Christ For then duo corpora essent simul in eodem loco Which indeade reason will not graunt Nomore then it is possible that à trew body may be and yet ocopy no place Souch as would defend a wyckyd and moost damnable purpose good reader Cleane contrary to the nature of thys uerbe est expound it per fit Yet would they blynd the people and say thei use plainely with out trope Christe wordes and with opeÌ„ moÌ„the cry out upon souche as booht reuently godly and lernydly botth wryt use and speak of the sacramentz and say they be heretikes people depertid from god and all uertewe When they them selfes use souch à trope as the scripture froÌ„ the begynnyng to the latter end neuer usith se there trope in these wordes Hoc est corpus meum Christ sayde takeye eat of this this ys my body The popes doctrine sayth Vnder the forme of bread is Christes bodye Thow seyst that Christ sayd not so but sayd that the bread was his body As no dout it was if Christis meanyng betaken as well as his wordes as it must be of euery Christianeman and where Christ sayd est They understond Fit and teach Christ to speake as thowghe he could not for lack of wordes conuenient expresse his mynd in this mater But these wordes of the supper diligently consyderyd and one Euangelist conferrid with the other with iudgment it may esely be seen that these wordes hoc est corpus meum mak no more for the transubstanciacy on of the bread and the wynne Then in noua fert animus Mutatas dicere formas corpora prouith Verbum caro factum est habitabit in nobis For if the bread and the wynne be not really and substancially the corporall and naturall body of Christ this word est Prouith nothing at all and when they interpretat these wordes Hoc est corpus meum An say that under the form of bread is the body of Christ I will not admyt that interpretacion For asmouch as it hath no good ground nether in the scripture nether in the auncient doctors as I shall declare here aâ—ter But because they accuse other men for the use of à trope I would not that they offend in the same Irequire them to byde stille in the letter And to leaue these gloses under the forme of bread With the bread in the bread or under the bread Christ usyd none of these termes nor yet the holy fathers But playnly sayd This ys my body that ys broken for youe and. Where as Christ sayse this is they say under this forme hereys à uery playne trope and figuratiue loquucion Men seyth that they admyt metonomian and say under the forme of breade is the trew bodye of Christ Thowgh it be asfalse as godis trew that they say Adome thyng without senses is no harbor nor duelling place for Christes precious body nor for the spryt of god But the penitent soroufull hart of the Christiane by fayth logyth this goostlye and spirituall gestes The soule of man creatyd unto the similitude of god By fayth is made the temple of god To liue in all uertew and godly conuersacion ffolowing the stappes of Christ and to exalt the trewth of his afflyctid and persequutid church till ye cum Let these that defend this alteracion of bread do that them selfes whych they require of other and interpretat the wordes of Christ with out ony trope And then they may the better accuse other men that use atrope Incase they suppose there troppe and maner of speach under the form of brcade may better be made godd by the maner and fraunse of the scripture then this trope that we use to call à sacrament by the name of the thing that is signifiet by the sacrament The supper of the lord the lordes body present at the contemplacy on of fayth in spryt spiritually and not corporally For asmouch as I trust I haue sufficiently declarid that the papestes dooth use atrope I would they shuld name there trope and proue it tobe trew by the scripture that may warrant there trope to be good they may not confirme there saynges with an old wyues tale and say that the holy fathers belyuid so For the contrary wilbe prouid that thauncynt fathers belyuid as Christ tawght For booth they and euery man must be iudgid by the scripture Now likwyce to the other part of the sacrament If the will refer this pronowne hoc only unto the signe ad rem simbolicam Behold Luk Paule and thow shalt fee playnely that nether Christ callyd the winne that the Apostelles drank his blud nether the prist if he beliue Luke and Paule shuld not say that under the forme of winne is Christes bludd But under the forme of the cuppe or chalyce is the blud of Christ For Christis wordes be these Hoc poculum est nouum testamentum in meo sanguine Why dooth the prist speak of the form of winne when Christ speake of the cuppe and not of the winne If there be no trope to be admyttyd in the wordes of the supper I will not admit this figure continens pro contento let them proue
myssion of sinne only for Christes sake which we receaue by inuisible faith and stablys the same by the use and exercise of sensible sacramentes Thewhich in place an tymear neuer to be spoken agaynst with tong nor wroten agaynst by penne Now that these wordes can make no alteracyon of the breade an wynne nor make the naturall corporall nor phisicall presens of Christes body The fyrst reason is that the wordes Hoc est corpus meum prouith that the bread is already the body before the wordes be spoken or else thei miâ—name the thing and call bread fleshe The second reason If the wordes and the thing ment by the wordes be one thâ—n is the cuppe and not the winne in â—he cuppe the testameÌ„t in Christes blud Luce 22. 1. Co. 11. Thirdly if it were the uery body of Christ corporally present Christes wordes were not trew for he bid them do it in te Remembraunce of hym Now the Remembraunce of aâ—hing is not the same selfe thing that is remembrid as many men use to remem hre aweyghty mater by alitle ring upon there finger If Christes moost honorable body were present corporally in the sacrament it were no nede remembraunce at all for the thing present presentith it selfe without thealpe of memory Turne they whiche wayes the lyste these wordes Hoc est corpus meum will not serue for there purpose except they adde there interpretacion the best glose they haue is this that these wordes Hoc est corpus meuÌ„ bringith withe them the body of Christ but this is there interpretacion of the text and not the meaning of the text Pondre euery word and first this pronowne hoc Which de montratiue they refer unto the bread and winne only How be it we may withe saynct Paule referr hoc unto â—hole action an ceremonie of the supper as well as unto the breade an winne Paule sayth not Hic panis est communio corporis Christi as thowgh we shuld thinke that he spake of the bread only But with playne wordes sayth Panis quem frangimus to declare that the bread is not the sacrameÌ„t of Christes body till it be broken unto the church according to thinstitucion of Christe à spirituall meat As Paule callith it so that the bread lyffte upp ouer the prystes hed nor kept in the boxe is not the sacrament but the bread ryghtly distributid And in the same place he callith the bread broken the table of the lord by the whiche is undrestond thole institucion of Christes supper And where men contend so much of this word corpus repeting thole hoc corpus meum Sainct Paule the trew interpretour of Christes wordes resoluith them thus Nonne panis queÌ„ frangimus communio corporis Christi est Where Christ sayd this is my body Paule sayth is not the bread that we breake à communion of the body of Christ Now what difference is betwene the communion of Abodi and the body it selfe and what Paule ment by this word Coenonia coÌ„munion it wilbe best knowen by the processe of the text when we perceaue what Paules purpose was to proue in the same place Paule meÌ„t in that place to with draw souch as had recâ—â—uid the faith of Christ at Cor. ffrom ffesting of souch aâ— usid to eat of the meates dedicatyd unto Idoles Logismos talis est His consideracion and intencion was to declare that it was Idolatryre to eat of ydoles meat with ydolatres And prouith his proposicion deducing his argument à comparatis if thisrae lites in etyng the sacryfices dedicatyd unto god were participant of the thing that the sacrifices were offryd for Then souch as eat of meates dedicatyd unto ydoles were pertakers of the same religion wherfore this meates unto ydoles were offryd The first part of the reason is trew by the wordes that he à legith out of Moses Videte Israclem iuxta carnem c. They were suer to be pertakers of the temple that eat the meat dedicatyd into the temple So were they sure that eat of the meates dedicatyd unto ydoles pertakers of ydolatrye Therefore Paule concludith thus Non potestis poculum domini bibere poculum daemoniorum Non potestis mensae domini participes esse mensae daemoniorum They that communicatid with the fideles were participant of there religion they that communicatid with ydolatres were like wyce participant of the ydolatrie Now the same wayes that thinfideles were participant of the deuilles that they worshippid the same wayes the fideles we reparticipant of Christes body in false fayth were the knyt and unit unto the deuill in trew fayth the fideles unit unto Christ And as the ydolatres dyd not by hand with the meat dedicatyd unto ydoles exhibit and delyuer the deuill to him that eat of the deuilles sacrament so those that eat of the bread broken by the minister as Christ commaunded had not the body of Christ deliueryd by hand unto them but â—â—re in communion and societe with Christ and therfore dyd eat of one bread dedicatid to be the mistery of his glorious death So dooth Paules argument procede that because wear by fayth one body mystically with Christ we eat of one mysticall bread to testifie the same Quoniam inquit unus panis unum corpus multi sumus Nam omnes ex eodem pane participamus 1. Corin. 10. Paule in this place put too churches one of Christe and thother of the deuill all those at Corinth that were of Christes church came unto Christes sacrament participatyd and communicatyd with the companye and societe of Christes body souch as were infideles or souche as were nether hot nor cold associatyd them selfes with lik unto then selfes And so declaryd manyfestly that they were of the deuill as the other wer of god not that the deuill was yeuen I say by hand perauenture he had other businis at Ephesus or other where but it sufficid him that his membres assemblyd to gather and ty participacioÌ„ of the meat dedicatyd unto his ydoles in sprit communicatid with his sprit Repet agayne the proposicion of Paule 1. Corint 10. Panis quem frangimus nonne communicatio corporis estâ—in this word communio dependyth all the weyght of Paules argumentacion I haue shewyd what communion is and which wayes it is made by à sacrament conserning god or the deuill in this place of Paule where he callith Epulas immolaticiorum esse daemoniorum Coenonian illarum conuiuas daemoniorum Caenonous As communio in one place is taken in this purpose of Paule so must it be taken in thother or else Paule could proue no coÌ„clusion att all by reoson of aequiuocacion of the wor deâ— And thowgh the word coÌ„munio be indifferent and may be taken boothe actyuely and passiuely Vtapud Latinos Communicare dicimur siue alâ—s imparciamus aliquid siue ipsi cum alâ—s in participationem â—eniamus But in this place of Paule it cannot be taken actiuely as men say that the minister dooth exhibit and yeue
whom I delyt and dooth also with reuerence and honor inbrace and receaue hys commanudement whych is ipsum audite hyre hym Now let us with the healpe of his holy spryt se whether Christ euer tawght thys doctrine that in the sacrament of his holy supper he ment ony alteracyon or transubstanciacion of the bread into hys uery naturall body and the wynne into his ueâ—y naturall blud as my lord of wynchester teachyth in hâ—s booke or not Or whether â—ith his gloriouse body was ascendyd into heauens heuen herth man and Angell baryng recod therof without cryes and admiracion Viri Galilâ—â—i quid admiramini aspicientes in coelum hic â—e sus qui assumptus est à uobis in coeluÌ„ c. Act. 1. Mark the maner of his uisible and corporall ascencyon and belyue the scripture thangellis an holy Apostoles yâ—ys that sawe hym body ly ascend and these wordes Sic ue niet c. better then this new massers whether it be possible that the seade of Abraam the â—rute an yssew of the bely of that gâ—oâ—yous uirgyne mary being in all thynges except synne as consubstancyall equall and like unto the nature of hismother and nothyng dysferyng from the sonne of Adame consernyng hys humanyte Ebre 2. as in hys godhed ys aegall and lyke in all thynges unto the father eternall that hath nether begynnyngner endyng Can be or may be agaynst the nature of atrew body Present bodely at the commanudement of euery pryst when he speakyth these wordes Hoc est corpus meum whych thyng is as possible tobe donne by aword as to make an end of the worold when he would for when so euer hys gloryons body shall descend from aboue thend is come act 1. Matth. 24. untill that day Christiane reder loke not for hyme but belyue thy crede and what so euer thow heryst spoken by those yle persones of the newe lernyng that it schuld be present corporallie in â—he masse whych is but à yesterdayes byrd trust thow to the hold lernyng of godes word Sedet ad dextram dei patris inde uenturus est iudicare uiuos mortuos Act. 1. 7. 1. Ioan. 2. belyue Chrystes body to be really and corporally in the sacrament when tho seist him there with thy corporall yeies and not before for Christ hath no body inuisible nor insensible as men dreame but auery trew and naturall mannys body like unto mortall man exceptsynne and now likewyce à glorifyed body immortall as oure shalbe in tyme tocum and as many places of the new tâ— stament prouyth Chrystes humanyte as prouyth hys deyte and more and as the word attributyth unto the one nature dyuine all qualites condicyons and propertyes appertayning unto the godhed so of thoâ—her part it more manisestith openyth and declaryth his humany â—e to be anature of other contrarye qualites and condycyons For a smouch as god dyffyrith from man so far dooth thone nature in Christ differ from thother and as I must belyue that these wordes betrewe in all thynges coÌ„sernyng the godhed of Christ deus erat uâ—rbum Lik unto god and uery god So must Ibelyue this uerbum caro factum est Ioan. 1. Christ to be in all thyngzlike unto man and uery trew man in all thynges except synne And as the scripture prouyth these too natures to be unit and knyt in one person and that god and man ne is but one Christ So prouyth it like wyce the qualytes of thone nature to be contrarie unto the qualites of the other nature thone mortall thother immortall thone tobe buryd in the sepulchre the other to resustytat the insensible and ded body 27. 29. Mar. 15. Lu 23. Ioan. 19. thone nature uisible to be taken aster xl dayes of his resurrexcyon from thearth into heauens Mark 16. Act. thother nature inuisible to contynew with his electis in â—e churche untill the woroldis end Matt. 28. he that kno with thus by the scripture that thone nature of Christ uery man is taken out of the worold And shall not be in the worold till the great day of iudgment Act. 3. Can not be persuadyd Contrary unto the word of god That the same body maybe naturrally and corporally under the forme of bread But will diligently incase the scripture seme by wordes to proue the same sarch how that place may be agreyd wy â—hother that manysestly repugnith the presens of Christes body And so agre them that no coÌ„traryete may be admittyd in the scripture for if one place be false there is none trew which were ablasphemy to say The prophete Dauid thus commendyth the scripture Psalm 19. Lex domini perfecta conuertens animas testimonium domini uerum imperitis sapiâ—ntiam suppeditaÌ„s Decreta domini recta sunt cor exhilarancia praeceptum domini repurgatum illuminans oculos Therefore there must be as good hede yâ—uento the meanyng of the wordes As unto the wordes or else they illuminat not the consciens but rather darken the coÌ„sciens and led it into all false doctrine and detestable heresis As we may se hyre in those wordes of the lordes supper Hoc est cotpus meum Matt. 26 leauyng Christes meanyng playne and constrayng the letter forsyng it to serue awyckyd purpose men would make the people belyue that these wordes consecratyd the bread into the naturalle body of Christ and tellyth the people that thowghe it repung neuer so mouch unto reson yet it repugnyth not unto fayth which belyuyth euery thyng agaynst reson Christ sayth they spak these wordes and made hys body of the breade and byd us do the same â—o these bethey wherwith all this alteracyon of bread is made the substannce therof turnyd into the substaynce of Christis body Hoc est corpus meum dispute not how belyue the words and leaue reson sai with the blessid uirgine Ecceancilla domini Luce 1. she held here selfe contentyd when she knew by the word of god that by diuine operacion of the holye goost she shuld be the moder of godes only sone she stayed hereselfe by fayth in the promese and committyd the meanes and doyng therof unto god so say they ye must hold captyue all your reson and thynk that god is able to do it belyue and it sufficyth Godis able to do all thynges as in dead he can and all these wordes be trew that they persuade the people withall if they were placyd aryght And applyed to proue à trew conclusion as they be alegyd to stablyshe afalse and detestable heresy god could haue yeuen manne wynges to flye as he gaue unto the byrdes of thayre if he would But he would not therefore he could not Quia omnia quecunque uoluit fâ—cit in coelo in terra And as for the literall senses of these wordes Hoc est corpus meum which they say must be undrestond with out ony trope or figure prouy the nothing Christ callid hymselfe adore Ioan. 10. auyne Ioan. 15. and yet was nether dore nor uyne except ye
the goldin chalice tobe transubstanciatid into the bludd And say there remaynith nor gold nor syluer The substannce of the gold is chaungyd into the substannce of the blud of Christ And then let them drink the chalice as well as the winne And dout no more of godes poure in the cuppe then in the Breade For he that sayed by the bread this ys my body Sayd likwyce at the same tyme that the cuppe was the new testament And byd them drink of it them all and if Hoc est corpus meum Can alter tho substance of the bread then can Hic calix est nouum testamentum alter the substannce of the chalice and then as the eat the bread they shuld drink also the chalice for these wordes of the cuppe were spoken by Christ booth god and man The same word spoken by the same Apostellis in one sprit at one tyme for one purpose to one and to the same end and he that can change the bred with hoc est corpus meum Can change the chalice with Hic est calix nouum testamentum I trow or Christ perauenture and his wordâ—s auaylid not as mouche in the golde as in the brâ—ad And that were wondre for the Psalmist sayth dixit facta sunt Psal 148. he made all the worold with aworde and of nothing and now shuld his mighty poure be abrydgyd no god Christiane reader he can do now as he hath don before tyme. Mak the thing that he purposith to mak But to mak of bread his naturall Phisicall and corporall body he neuer ment it If he had donde He would haue so made it that thow shuldes haue sinne it As thow seyst heauen and earth he would not be ashamyd and hyde his body now gloryfied more then he was ashamyd to be trayce hym selfe and open his awne person unto the wyckid companysent from the highe pristes and phariseis Ioan 18. it is not therefore as they say For the scripture dooth not testify that our saniour Christ Iesus euer tok ony other nature then the nature of man in the bely of the blessyd uirgine Marie And untill souche time as thow seyst the chalice eatyn as well as the bread belyued not that the breadis alteryd more then the chalice For as of the substance of an old chalice somtyme thowgh masse hath byn oâ—ten sayd with all is made new grotesâ— So of à new singyng looffe that hath bynne consccratyd with hoc est corpus meum somtyme hath creping wormes byningendrid Yea and some tyme cast into the ffyre and burnyd as Benno Cardinalis writtithe of Gregorie the seuenth other wyse callyd Hilbrandus Good prouffe hath byn tahen that bread remaynith aâ—ter the consecracion For by the sacrament poysenid ther was an Emperoure and Abyshope of Rome poysnid in what subiect shuld this poyson remayne in some subiect doutles for Aristoles scole will admittyd no accidens to be without his subiect nether admytony accidens to peryshe without his substance and when these men that say the muld and rot of the bread is nothyng euery man that hath his senses knoyth it is a manyfestlye For so long it may be kept that it will rune rowne about thaulter yâ—a if man had no senses at all and knew the scripture it were sufficient to proue that bread remaynid stille aâ—ter the coÌ„secration 1. Cor. 11. and there is no papist among them all but will graunt this moost folyshe and found contradiction some thynk tobe nothing Forse them to auswere what it is that corruptith What it is that is muldyd then will they say it is nothing thowgh ye se the uermynne ingendryd of the bred crepe byfore youre face If this proposicion of Aristotell shuld be disputyd an generacio unius sit corruptio alterius And they would saye that the generacyon of wormes in the sacrament were ingendrid of the corrupcion of nothing he would not be able in Aristotyles scole to auswere unto one argument Farthere it is souche ablasphemy agaynst god that euery Chrtstiane man awght to abhor it to say that ony creature can haue his being of nothing this is properly the Epitheton of god to be of nothing but of hymselfe and if they say god hathe made these corrupcions in the sacramâ—nt of nothing it repugnith the â—aythe that we haue in the scripture Gonesis 2. Igitur perfectisunt coeli terra omnis ornatus corum So that aâ—ter those ui dayes wherin god mad the mater of all thynges sithe that tyme neuer thing in this worold was made of nothing there fore we must for the reuerence and honor of our saythe sck aâ—athere for these putrifactions in the sacrament It shalbe the bread Say what they will boothe by the iudgment of the scripture and also by reason as for there termes that they crye sye upoÌ„ souche maner of speache and sye upon them herytykes that belyuâ— it is but breade and no sacrament as long as it is kept in the pyx it forsith not god for yeue them they know not what they say The deuyll hath closyd there yeys they haue nether iudgmeÌ„t of senses ner reason But this false doctrine Lanfrancus browght deuylyshly into the church aâ—ter that he had optaynid of leo the ix That the good and godly man Berengarius shuld be condem nyd for an herytyke an excellent clerk of great lernyng and notable uerteus as platina makith mencyon in uita Ioan. 15. Who tawght and wrot that the corporall presence of Christis body could not be in the sacrament These men hath conseuyd in them selfes acertayne persuacyon of new and late iuuentyd doctrine and holdyth the same as a principle of infallible uerite And rather then they would depart one iot from this adulterous doctrineâ— They will graunt an heresye not only folishe but also detestable A worme or muld in the bread to beingendiyd of nothing which is so far wyde from the fayth of 〈◊〉 Christiane man that itnedythe no probacyon God sayth Atanasius the â—ather à nullo est â—actus nec creatus nec genitus God when he would destroy the worold with water by myracle gatheryd to gather too of cucry kind that lyuyd into thark of noâ— that they might in there kind replynis the worold agayne as we at this day se and mad not euery thing agayne of nothing no he made aster thei ui dayes at the beginnyng neuer othing of nothing But that the substannce of one thing was made by and of the substaÌ„ce of othere creatures Euery thing in his kynd Man by god and man best by god and best Christ hymself god and man by god and the blessid uergyne mary The muld and bestes that ar ingendryd in the bread if there be no mater wherof they shuld be ingendryd they were no creatures But whatlerning is this tobe preachid and defendid among the people good Christiane reader to proue some thing nothing God of his infinite goddenys râ—store agayne his holy worde
by hand the corporall body of oure moost blessyd sauioure Iesus Christ For incase Paule had mentony exhibition dystribution or deliueraunce of Christes bodie He would haue declaryd his mynd aâ—ter an other sort And haue sayede we ar one body and that for the distribucion and delyueraynce of Christes body and not haue sayed we ar one body and that by the participacion of one bread These wordes shewith playnely that Paule ment nothing of yeuing or distributing of Christes body But â—awght the Corin that souch as dyd eat of this holy sacrament according to thinstitucion of Christe were pertakers of the spirituall graces and communion of Christes body and blud representyd by the breade and as Christ was not really ner corporally present in those sacramentes and sacrifice of thisraelites that signifiyd Christ to cum But by fayth in effect they receauid the thing ment and representyd by the sacrifices So like wice we thowgh that gloriouse body of Christe be in heauen that this holy and moost honorable sacrament representyth yet when with trew penitence we receaue the externall sacrament faith receauithe theffect of that precious body representyd by the sacrameÌ„t This is Paules doctrine he ment of no delyuerayncener exhibicion of that body ascendid into heauens there is no place of the scripture shewith the nature of Christes supper better then this place of Paule whos purpose was onlye to destroy this error among the Corinthions that was repugnant to trew religion souche as had proffessyd one god thowght yet they myght eat an drinke wit inâ—idâ—lis of of souche meates as was offryd unto Idoles Paule denith it and sayth noman can be the membre of too contrarie churches I would souch as god hathe yeuen knoleg unto what is trew and what is false would lâ—kewice remembre these wordes better and refrayne from the doing of souch thinges as there awne conscience is persuadyd to be yle they be to fauorable unto them selâ—es agreat dele and extenuat godes Ire ad displeasure agaynst Idolatriâ— to mouche They will not be able to make good there act at the cumming of the great iudge to iudgment To saue à litle mucke and inconstant treasure of this worold and to offend the maiestie of the lyuing god that hath pore to loost booth body and soule in eternall fier Better it were to ffolow the commaundement of Paule Charissimi fugite idolatriam Vobis prudentibus loquor God hath yeâ—en unto many men this prudence to know that the masse is yle yet as yle as it is they let nether to say it nor to hyre it which is uery Idolatrie and shalbe cruelly reuengid with out they amend Thenature of man by the infection of originall sinne is so corruptyd and the hart so oppressid with contrarie moâ—ions and uiolent resistaynce unto uertew that men neuer consent so willingly and sted fastly unto the knolege of uertew as they shuld do Rom. 1. Sâ—d uâ—ritatem dei in iniustitia detinent This knolege that men hath of god is deteynid with iniustice as prisoner captiue it can bare no rule in the soule for the impetie of iniustice which repugnith this trew knolege The man is drawyne with his awne lustes and loue of the worold unto the contempt of god and consentith not unto his trew knolege nethere unto the law that for biddith all dishonestie and Idolatrie This auersion and malicious obstinacie of the will must be dayly mortified or els it will work thyne eternall displeasure and make the the euela sting ennymie of god Lament abuse of knolege and that thow coÌ„sentist not as well and assone to the iugmeÌ„t of reason and folow it in the principles practyue as speculatiue Nomam douttith of this principle too and too to be foure ffoure and foure eight With all other geometricall and physicall principles Men dooth not only acknolege them tobe trew but coÌ„sentith unto the same knolege The other shuld be likewice as manifest and as sone consentyd unto as these To say thole naturalle diuersite of all thinges honest and dishonest and this light in mannis reason the philorophers call noticiam priâ—ciporum And man shuld consent unto these principles and knolege of them scilicet deo obediendum esse Adulterium est uitandum Honesta pacta sunt seruanda quod tibi noÌ„ uis fieri alteri ne facias thes I say shuld be assone consentyd unto as to consent quod bis quatuor sunt octo The knolege remanyth of these thynges but the assent is infirm by reason of contumacie and rebellion of thart Of all enymies an Ennymie most to be feryd whom Paule describit with these wordes sensus carnis inimicitia est contra deum ann horrible description of mannes natures that it is the perpetuall ennymie of god and will not be subiect unto the law of god this infirmyte makith that men be ner hot nor could caÌ„not tell which part to take in there chambre to professe god where as none can bare record but amusse nor none edified by his knolege Abrode in the worold where as god shuld be spoken of they know hym not but as wisse and discreat men Will do then as the moost part of people doothe And would all were well thowgh not long of them for they will Kepe silence for euer rather then to speake as they know yea and with there exemple stablyshe the thing that they know is nowgh If god be god wy ar people for fere so ashamyd to confesse if he be not god let hym go God abhorrith souch as be nor hot ner cold If Christes bodye be in heauen wherfore is ony man so hardye to resort unto the place where as the pristes of Baall make apeace of bread booth god aman and teachith people to honer it why dooth they not consent unto there knolege and folow it he that is partaker of the sacrifice in the aulter is Partaker of the religion ment by the sacrifice and those that be pertakers of like signes and sacramentes be declaryd there by to be the membres of one church Wear unit and knyt to gather made one by one sprit of â—ewyth wyh shuld we breake this knot by external ceremonyes we ar not made by eating of Christes bodye corporally nether the scripture teachith of no souch union betwen him and his churche But by the sprit of god receauid by saythe as thow mayst well perceaue how god the father and his sonne our sauiour hath yeuing this office and defense unto the holy sprit lik god with them Remembre thy creade Credo in spiritum sanctum sanctam ecclesiam catholicam Sanctorum communionem and thynk that it is by the yeuing of godes sprit into our hartes for the moost mercifull deathe of Christ that makith this communion of saynctes which is the churche of Christ and thus all redy coniunyd with god we receaue the holy meat of his blessyd body in sprit by fayth not to make the union betwen god and us but confirm
the union in our selfes and to shew the lege of amyte unto the church And to understond the bettet what this word Caenoniae communio is Red the fist capiter of the first Epistole of Ioanâ— where as this word communio is 4. times rehersid There shalt thow se the communion betwen Christes body an us how it is made and by what meanys And then shalt thow se that Paule 1. Cor. 10. and Ioan so well agreyth â—o mine interpretation that the Christiane reader wilbe satisfied I trust in the lord for as all the trew subiectes sworn to the Kyng by there fayth and alegaynce ar prest and redy where so euer the se the Kynges Baner spleyde refort ther unto and say what so euer the Kyng hath to do or with whom so euer he hath Ennymite with all I will associat my selfe to be of this part tyde what be tyde may happe well or woo Vnto this prince I unit my liefe and death the cause He is my lord the making good and reason of the cause I am his sworn subiect fayth yeuen and mi consciens bound Therefore to manifest myne obedience and loue by this baner I procleame liefe and death agaynst his contraries So those that be Christâ—s when thei see the baner of Christ the holy supper and sacrament of the death that wan the uictory of death and the deuill they will there lyue and dy with this baner to declare there obedience they that be not of Christ they care not under whois baner they beâ— so the auaryce mind and detestable loue of the worold be satisfied it is godd Inowgh to theÌ„ with yâ—y For south and nay for south as incoÌ„staÌ„t as the wind lik unto the byshoppes lawes in Inglond that ten tymes hath byn Changid sithens I knew the right hand from the leffte and yet were they proclemyd as moost certayne and infallible uerites With great penalty as mouche as Iieue wz worthe But what man wilbe so made to leade his coÌ„science by souch inconstaÌ„t persones that hathe lawes to damme one yere and to saw an other that that is good and catholike this yere shalbe heresy the next yere They be more inconstant then the wind oure lord of his mercy amend them and yeue theÌ„ grace to know there offences And to promote the only word of god And theach the people therby to know god and his sacramentes They would stablyshe the carnall presence of Christes body in the sacrament by the wordes of Christ Ioan. 6. Panis quem ego dabo caro mea est quam ego dabo pro mundi uita The bread that I will yeue is my fleshe which I will Yeue for the lyue of the worold they say that the first part of Christes wordes is à promese unto the churche to eat his precious body ln the sacrament Panis queÌ„ ego dabo caro mea est And that Christe performyd this promesse in his last supper when he made the breade his bodyeâ— And the rest of â—he wordes quam ego dabo pro mundi uita is à promesse that his bo dy shuld be slayne for the redempcyonof the worold Thus they interpretat the wordes of Christ because dabo is twysse repetyd By the first dabo he promisid his reall and corporall body in the sacrament By the second dabo he promisid the death of his body so that they would these wordes Hoc est corpus meum shuld be the fulfilling and delyueraynce of Christes promes Ioan. 6. Panis quâ—m ego dabo caro mea est Read the hole sermon of Christ Ioan. 6. and then thow shalt perceaue that this interpretation cannot be admittyd Christ ment to bring his audience unto the knolege of â—aythe that they might be pertakers of godes promeses throwgh him onlie And shewid them that he was the bread of consolacion and solace to satisfie the consciens of euery Hungery and afflictyd person Ego sum panis qui de coelo descendi si quis ederit de hoc pane ui uet in aeternum Etpanis quem ego dabo caro mea est quam ego dabo pro mundi uita Now Marke the wordes the bread that I shall yeue is my fleshe he promysid to yeue the breade by these first wordes that was his fles â—e But how to gyue it to be eatyn or to be betyn to be inuisible in the mouth of the Aposteles or uisible with all opprobrie and contempt before his iudges to be liffâ— uppe ouer the pristes head and there sacrificid Orelse upon the crosse to sacrifice him selfe Christ that allwayes promisith with the thing promisid how the thing promisid may be reseauid and usid prescribith the maner howe and after what sort he would yeue his fleshe unto the worold quaÌ„ dabo pro mundi uita I will yeue iâ— for the liffe of the worold his body rent and torn upon the crosse was the form and maner how he wold yeue it for the lyefe of the worold not to be in the sacrament But to dye upon the crosse As this relatyue quam declarith quam ego dabo pro mundi uita The same flâ—she that he spake of in the first part of the sentence Panis quem ego dabo caro mea of the same he speakith in the second part quam dabo pro mundi uita And as thone part of the senteÌ„ce speakith of his body to be sâ—ayne and not eatyn so dooth thother this may be prouid by Christes wordes â—n the same place for he speakyth of his body that shuld yeuelyue unto the worold which only is by the body slayne and not eatin as Paule saith Rom. 6. Ebre 9. 10. as for the sacramentall eating where as Christes institution is trewly obseruid there is nothing but Amemory of this death where of Christ all togather spake in the 6. of Ioan and interpreâ—atith many times in â—hat place this word eat for belyue qui confidit inquit mihi habet uitam Ä™ternam Nether the repeticion of this word dabo is none other thing then accustomyd repeticion of one and the same thing by more expresse wordes It is no meruell that people for lack of knolege and the holy sprit of god so obstinatlye defend the carnall and bodily eating of the body for Christ with all his wordes could not bring his carnall audience to à spiriâ—uall undrestonding As he ment thes wordes Hoc est corpus meum panis quem frangimus nonne communicatio corporis Christi estâ— Etpanis quem ego dabo pro mundi uita must be taken as Christ ment them and as they may best agre withe thother places of the scripture Wondrefull detrement shuld our fait take if theâ— se wordes shuld not be taken with conuenient tropesâ— and figures with out atropelo what shuld folow Christes body to be Pantotopon Christ must haue so great abody as might fill heauen and earthe if it be corporally present booth in heauin and in earthe Also it were inuaine to looke for him at the day of
present and the thing don indeade I would confesse the same and that it were agreat miracle to call Christes moost blessid body from heauen with aword But now herin consistith this hole mater Miracles of god be open and theffect of the miracle so makyth manifest the miracle tkat reason is contendyth that god shuld do his pleasure what so euer reson would atteÌ„pt to the contrary As for an Example the blyssyd uirgine when she hard the messayge of god by thangell that she shuld bare à child in here uirginite it passid the capacite of her intendement and thowgh reason knew not how it might be yet sowghth reason to know the meanes how it shuld be and sayd quomod fiatistud when she was assurid that it shuld be by noman but by the holy gost She let fall reason and belyuid the wordes of godâ— And as she in fayth conceuid by the holy gost the sonnâ— of god wounderfully abouâ— the reche of reason So the sonne of god made man in the bely of that blessid uirgine naturally there incressid for the space of certayne monethes and declarid unto reason the fact that was donne agaynst reason So that reason could not denye but that the blessid uirgine was with childe and had testimonie therof by the mother of loan Baptist Vnde hoc mihi ut ueniat mater domini mei ad me Lucâ—â—â— with souch à godly greating as is confortable for euerie Christiane this miracle was shewid after ward unto all the worold by thactes that Christ dyd which prouid hym selfe to be the sone of god Now mark althowgh man cannot comprehend which wayes Amiracle is don by reason yet must the miracle be perceauid and knowyn by reason Thowgh the leper Matt. 8. could not know by reason how he was helyd sodenly of his diseace yet perceauid he right well theffect of this miracle The Apostoles of Christ that knew not how so great à Numbre of people 5000â— beside wemen and châ—â—dren shuld befed with 5. loues and too fishys Matt. 14. Mar. 6. Luc. 9. loan 6. the miâ—acle that passid there reason was shewid not only to there reason but also unto there senses So all the worold that was inade of nothing agaynst reason by miracle is declaryd manifest unto reason and senses aâ— we see at this day Now if thei would proue Christes body by miracle to be present uery god an man in the â—acrament thowgh reason cannot comprehend how it may be yet let them shâ—w unto reason and unto the senses that it is so then men wilbe lyue it And not before Let them shew me ony miracle that god dyd upon the erthe lik unto there inuisible miracle All the worold seyth the bread remayne and no body of Christe present yet say they it is there is god so mouche thennymie of man to yeue him his senses to his destruction No he hath of his aboundant mercy yeuen them to decern whit from blak soware from swet chalke from chese the gloriouse body of Christe from the signe of à sacrament which is bread There miracle in the transubstacion of bread is asmouâ—h à miracle as the miracle of him that sayth he will make hole amannes blind Iy and yet the blind man seith nothing the better God usith no souche blind miracles But mad eueri thing for man meruelously because man shuld honor him in his workes According to out fayth Credo in deum patrem omnipotentem creatorem coeli terrae It agreith as well to mak the body of Christe present in the sacrameÌ„t without his corporall qualites as to make agreat fier without het An other glose is there which Eckius usith to defend the alteracion of bread with all and sayth thowgh Paule call the body of Christ bread yet it is no bread indead but the uery body of Christ and attemptith to proue his sayng by the rode that Moses usid in Aegypt Before Pharo When the rod was turnid into Aserpent yet was the serpent callid stille arod This simile prouith nothing ffor when the text sayth sed deuorauit uirga Aharon uirgas illorum Exoâ— 7â— there remaynid nor form not figure of Arod but of à uery horrible an ferfull serpâ—nt If this place serue to proue thalteracion of bread into the naturall body of Christ let them shew me the form of bread changid into as naturall aman as therod was changyd into à naturall serpent and then iam content I will not dispute of the name so greatly thowgh they callyd ffleshe and bludd bread but they must mak demonstracion of Christes body unto thexternall senses as Moses made of the serpent unto thygypcious When god callyd oure first father Adam because he was creatyd of the earth And Adam sayd by his wief be hold abone of myne bones Gen. 1â— there was nether Adame that had the forme of erth nor Eue the fform of Abone Thone was aman and the other awoman How be it they Kept stille the name of the thing they were creatyd of Change the form of bread in the sacrameÌ„t and make therof the form of Aman. Then thâ—se places will suffre the maner of speche right well that aman may be callyd bread if he be made of breade as well as Aserpent callyd Arod because he was se made of arod But for asmouch as there is no forme of the breade changid in the sacrament belyue with the Euangelistes and Apostoles that it is in mater and substannce uery bread how it apoyntid to an holy use to be ministrid unto the church of god in the remembrace of Christes death With these wordes Christ tok bread and gaue it to his disciples Mat. 26. Luce 22. 1. Cor. 10. 11. These men agre with them selfes in the sprit of god and teachith acertayne doctrine those that defend these maâ—ses and transubstancion agreyth not with them selfes And hath nothing certayne thone sayt the thing that corruptyd is nothing but accidens thother sayth that it is the uery substannce of bread Rede the booke of innocentius tercius de officio missoe where as be these wordes quod sicut miraculose substancia panis uertitur in corpus Christi remanentibus accidentibus panis ita miraculose redire substancia prioris panis possit de qua generetur uel uermis uel quid aliud tale Into what substaynnce the water mynglid in the chalice with the winne is turnid se the mind of Clement in the 3. booke of the Decretalles it is turnid say he into ffleume God of his mercy Delyuer his church effrom souche doctrine Yet haue they an other Reason where with the deceaue themselfes with all and other The pore of god that can do all thinges And of these moost holy wordes they fframe many à false conclusion Be cause god can do all thing therfore Imust belyue that the breade in the sacrament is turnid into the body of Christ I would belyue it were it not agaynst his word Now agaynst his word he will do nothing à sfull
Christianly sayth Tertullian agaynst Marcion Posse deum nthil aliud est quam uelle econtrario Non posse idem esse in deo quod nolle it is thoffice of à Christiane to know what god can do by the word of god and not to be curious to sarche what his absolute pore is He could saue the damnyd soules in hell But he will not it were agaynst his word Non remittetur in hoâ— seculo neque in futuro He could haue sauyd Adame and all his posteryte other wyce then by the death of his only sonne For August sayth lib. 4. de Trinitate Mors Christi non fuitnecessitatis sed sue uoluntatis potestatis But he wold not By the cruâ—ltie of his death he would haue us to know how horrible athing sinne is before the face of god and there by teache us to be ware how we fall into his displeasure but we be trunkes and in maner insensible nothing mouith us to uertew He is more curiouse then wisse to sar che to know the thing that appertaynith not unto hym to know It is the next way not only to bring aman out of the fauoure of god but also out of his witt for he that sarchith to know aboue the reche of à mortall man shal be coÌ„fundid with immortall glorie of god Let no Christiane hart therefore troble it selfe with this question what god can do But lik à diligent scoler lern his lesson in the scripture what he is bound to do For the scripture was wroten to lede us unto god and unto repentaynceofyle It was wroten to teach us god and all godlynis and not to moue souch questions as ingendrithe nor fayth nor uerteue but contencion and discord and wordes with out end It was wroten to be iudge of all mennes doctrine and to saue those that Christ redemid with his precious bludd from all heresis and false opinions therin is conteynid all treuith and uerite And better was it with the church â—f god when it was only tawght and instructyd by it then aster that ony mannes decres were browght into the church Mannis wysdome yeuith as mouch light unto the worde of god as alitle can dell yeuith unto the bryght sonne in the mydde daye Yet condemne Inot the holy fathers that hath wroteso mouche in the defense of Christes Religion But yeue god thankes that he had souche organnes upon therth that would rather dye then to see the name of god and his holy word to be contemnid of the worold And à no table thing is it to mark the godly fathers in there workes wher as in the defense of the truth they à lege not only the scripture But also the testimony and Example of the primatiue church Not to stablyshe there fayth because it was so usid of antiquite But because they sawe there elders use the worde of god in the same senses that they dyd As Epiphanius wrytithe of one peter bishope of Alexandriae whom the Tyrannt Maximinus put to death in this peters tyme there was one Meletius that so wid à false doctrine and sayd that euery sinne committid was irremisseble As the nouacians and catharence say this doctrine so preuaylid that the greater part of the people in Aegypt and Syria belyuid it Peter resistit not only by the scripture But also that the disciples of the Aposteles condemnyd this doctrine for an heresie the lik may ye rede inthistorie of Ioan the Apostele apud Euseb li. 3. pag. 60. As Christ is trew and his word trew so hath there byn allwayes in the churche souch as hath folowyd the trewyth and in that they haue wroten trewly we ar greatly edified To se that they and we agre in one fayth and undrestond the scripture alike and use the sacramentes as they dyd according to institucion of Christ if ony error be in there wrytinges we may leaue it by thauctorite of the scripture and offend nothing at all they wrot not to be iudges if the scripture but to be iudgid by the scripture Were it not to satisfie the weake conscience of those that yet be ignorant of the truith I would not in this mater of the sacrament reherse the mynd of one doctor because we may so fully and playnely know by thonly scripture what the supper is and how it shuld be usid and think that souche as hath wroten of late dayes to be the first autors of this doctrine that the holy supper of the lord shuld be acommunion and no priuat masse or receauing of the sacrament by one man no thowgh danger of death seme to require the same If souch as be sycke will neades receaue the sacrament let them receaue it as Christ hath institutyd it with souch other as shalbe present at the declaracion of his fayth But alon noman may receaue it thowgh his fayth be nouer so good and the minister neuer so godly How be it boothe the scripture and lik wyce the law ciâ—ile dooth rather improue thact then alowe the doing of it In this supper we shuld folow Christ and the Aposteles there doingâ—s was absolute and perfeyth Noman for a good intencion befide the worde of god shuld add ony thing to the doing of this supper Or tak ony thing from it we reade not that they celebratyd the supper in ony priuat house for ony sick person The wordes of Iames seme to defend this religion cap. 5. infirmatur aliquis inter uos Accersat presbyteros ecclesiae orent super eum c. Vnto thâ—se syâ—ke people that he speaky the of he would like wyce haue commaundyd the bread of the holy supper to haue byn browght had it byn the maner in the Apostoles tyme Saynct paule with many wordes declarith that this supper when so euer it be celebratyd shuld be don with solemnyte in the churche Cum conuenitis in ecclesia in quit Audio dissidia esse c. Agayne Igitur cum conâ—enitis in eundem locum non licet do minicam coenam edere 3. Num sane domos habetis ad edendum biben dum 4. Itaque fratres cum conuenitis ad edendum alius aliud expectet quod si quis esurit domi edat It shall not be preiudicial nor nothing derogat thonor of the blessid sacrament thowgh it neuer be celebratyd in à priuate house nor he that absteynith from the receauing of hit out of the congregacion nothing the warse Christiane man intyme past it was sufficient for the people to celebrat openly this holy supper and was not usid to be browght unto the sicke Iustinianus imperator Conâ—stitu 57â— unto tharche bishope of CoÌ„stantinople Mâ—me hathe these wordes Etiam prisciâ—â—ancitum est legitur Nulli penitus esse licentiam domi quae sacratissima sunt agere sed publice c. and in the same place Omnibus interdicimus magnae huius ciuitatis habitatoribus magis autem totius nostre ditionis in domibus suis habere quasdam quasi orationum domus
in his sacra celebrare mysteria hinc fieri quaedam extranea catholice Apostolice traditioni coÌ„traria Sed siquidem domos simpliciter aliqui habere putant oportere in sacris suis orationis 〈…〉 uidelicet gratia nullo celebraÌ„do penitus horam quae sacri sunt mysteriâ— id eis permittimus This godly Emperoure Raygnid Anno domini 500. whereby it aperith it was not the maner of those days to celebrat the supper no where but in the congtegacion openlye as the paesah was commaundyd to be don neuer part of the lamme browght unto the syck man But â—tyn in there congregations as ye rede Exo. 12. Num. 9. where as Eusebiâ—s lib. 6. cap. 34. Ecclesiastes wrytith of one or too to whom the bread was ministrid in there priuate houses It was doune upon à singuler consideracion The persones that receauid this sacrament in there priuate houses were before excommunicatyd by thauctorite of godes word and before there reconsiliacion fell into this danger of deathe by sickenys the deaken was commaundyd to minister the bread unto them that in the reseauing therof they might declare there trew penitence unto the churche and dye in the promeses of god that desirith not the death of sinnerse In the tyme of Cypriane it was usid to yeue the bread of the supper unto chyldren if it were yeuen them as à sacrament it was yle But I cannâ—â— belyue it graunt it were I will not folow Cypriane but the institucion of Christ I know that he was but aman and had his faultes as ye may se by his opinion where he would souch as were Christenyd of herytikes to be rebaptisid We shuld not yet by this auctorite leaue thexample of the Aposteles Except it be in souch places where as the commune ministery of the churche is corruptyd and the sacrament usid contrary unto the institucion of Christe there euery man may in his priuate chambre with his Christiane and faythfull brothers commuâ—icat according unto thorder of the scripture As we sâ—â—ct 2 20. how the Apostoles dyd when the Pharises and pristes of the temple contemnid Christ and his ministery as well of the sacramentes as of the preaching of the gospell where as the faithfulles may receaue openly the sacrameÌ„t it sufficith them it is not nede to to haue it browght unto the syckmannes bedd For the doing therof hath don hurt in the church of god causid many times the pore sick man to put his hope and confidens in thexternall â—act and receauing of the sacrament and thowght himselfe neuer sufficiently preparyd to death but when he had recâ—auid this externall signe And thus was thabuse of the blessid sacrament Men say it is nether commaundyd nether for byddin by the scripture that the sick shuld use the sacrament in there priuate houses The wordes of Paule Ego accepi à domino c. with the textes à fore rehersid shewyth not only how the supper shuld be celebratyd but also where it shuld be celebratyd Sufficiat nobis tradicio Apostolica Let us conform oure selfes unto them as nere as we may Would to the lord that there were no more ceremonâ—es in the doing of this sacramoÌ„t or ony other in the churche then the scripture makyth mencioÌ„ of then blessid and fortunat were the pore ignorâ—t people that now by te and gnaw the bitter bark and neuer tastythe the swetnis conteynid with in this externall signes and no meruell there curates be as wyse as they the blind leadith the blind into ignorancie souch godly preacheres hathe there mother the holy church apoyntyd to haue the charge of those soules that Christ redemid with his preciouâ— blude Person and uicar patrone and byshope shaâ—â—e wayle doutles this horrible sinne to deceaue the people of god of his moost holy worde were the yeuerse of beneâ—ices so god unto there â—enentes or pore people of the paryses as they be unto there dogges and horses it were well for noman yeuith his dogg to kâ—pe but unto hym that hath skyle how to diet hym and to kepe hym in breath to mayntayne his course To saue hym he wax not mange his horse unto hym that best can skyle to hand ill him as well in the stable as in the â—eld Euery thing in the worold is better prouidyd for then the soule of man God matiners for the shyppe Polityk men for the commue wealth an Expert phisicions for the body à pleasaunt coke for the mouth A well practysid capitayne for the wart none in ony affers concerning the body shall be admittid unto ony office but apt and coÌ„uenient persones the best that may be gote in the church of Christ it is no mater passyd of who bare office thowghe he know nomore what appertayth to the charge that is committid unto hym then the lest of his paryâ—he They take great payne to uisit the sick and to ministre the sacramentes it were better they neuer came anere the sick with the sacrament except they knew better what à sacrameÌ„t ment and could shew them godes promises Which ar not only sealyd but also openlye declarid unto the church by the sacramentes And to make more open that the masse is no ceremonie nor the bread there usid no sacrament of gâ—des I will declare it unto the Christiane reder by the scripture that teachith us what the sacrament is and how it must be usid That the Christiane reader by reason of thabuse contemne not the thing it selfe Thowgh the abuse of sacrameÌ„tes is coÌ„demnid yet must we not contemne the sacrament thowgh thabuse of prayer be nowghte yet prayer as god commaundythe is good thowgh winne make men drouke yet noman sayth winne is nowght â—emoue then thabuse of euery thing that is godd and let the thing remayne style This is the diffinicion of the lordes supper It is à ceremonie institutyd by Christ to confirme and manifest oure societie and coÌ„munion in his body and blud untill he he cumme to iudgment Euery word in this diffinicion is in the scripture that it is à ceremony institutyd by Christ Matt. Mark Luâ— and Paule testifieth that it confirmith the coniumction and societe of Christ and his church these wordes of Paule prouith Quoniam unus panis unum corpus multi sumus Nam omnes ex eodem pane participamus â— Cor. 10. and that it shalbe donne till thend of the worold Paule prouith â— Cor. 11. Mortem domini annuncia bitis donec uenerit Now the maner how it was institâ—tid and how it must be usid in the churche It is wroten by Matt. Mar. Luc. and Paule in the places aford reher sid And Paule by name sayth coÌ„uenientibus uobis c. would the supper of the lord to be à ceremony of à puplik and commune assembâ—ance and would in this assemblance the gospell to be preachyd god to be callyd upon in the remembrance and â—ayth of Iesus Christ with yeuing god thanges that he would saue us by the death
of his sonne Therfor it is sayd Hoc facitead recordationeÌ„ mei do it in the Remembrance of me what the supperis And how it was institutid we se by the scripture Now of the other part behold the masse and bring it to the gospell then shalt thow perceaue it is no ceremonie institutid by Christ or his Aposteles Nether nothing done therin according to the scripture but euery thing contrary unto the scripture Where as Paule callyth it à communion and would all the church to receaue it under booth kindes They say it is best to be apriuat masse and eatyn by one pryst Paule willith the gospell of Christe to be preachyd unto the congregacion they mummul and dreame à sort of collectes and other beggery unto dead saynctes as nether profetyth them selfes nor other but blasphemith godes holy name Yet say they it is a godly thing wher as god nether the scripture neuer ment souch Idolatrye it is à ceremony instiâ—utid by more byshopes then twentye to the great iniury of godes wotd And thauctors therof damnyd eternally except they repentyd before they departyd out of this worold for they nolesse deceauid the people of god then the deuill in paradyse He was not content to suffre godes commaundement as it was yeâ—en without à false glose ner these membres of the deuill would not Christes church to use Christes holy supper as it was yeuen by Christe without there deuillyshe and detestable addicions yet wyckyd membres of Antechrist they must be callyd the holy church Thowgh all that euer they intend is the pest and destruction of the church and there religion as contrarie unto Christ as darkenys is to light And say if there were not souche ceremonies addyd unto the lordes supper as they haue inthe Masse people shuld be prouokid to no deuocion nor could not religiousâ—y honor that moost holy sacrament therfore say they is all these ceremonies addyd Aprofound reason doutles as meite for the mater as can be and as farr fet as he that neuer wist what à ceremony of Christes to stamentis But as one that neuer suckt other mylke then of à cowe that hath caluid full many à thowsand Bulles of ledd therfore Iwill set before thies of the Christiane reader the ceremonys of this holy supper conteynid in the scripture and the signification of the ceremonie not ffaynid of my brayne but by thexpresse wordes of the scripture and so teach the Christiane to loue the ceremonies there expressid and to detest the blind ceremonies of men Christ the same nyght that he was betrayde unto the lewis sate at supper with his 12. aposteles and among other godly talke in his sermon unto them he sayde that one of them shuld be tray him Mat. 26. Mar. 14. Christ that knew thart of all men saw the treason that Iudas had wrowght agaynst him and knew that he was at à full poynt with the lewes to deliuer him unto them the mater was ffully concludyd upon and mony receauid This wyckyd man was not yet so far paste but there remanyd place of indulgence and for yeuenis or else Christ would neuer haue admouyshyd him so many times because god hatyth sinne he admouishid ludas in time to repent But as awyckyd person he contemnyd all admonicions desirid to finishe his treyterons purpose and after that he had eatyn of that holy supper he depertyd out of Christes companye and with all dilâ—gence sowght how to haue his admonitour slaine Ioan 13. 14. declarith more at large Christes wordes and factes at this supper But these wordes of Matt. and Mark. Shall admouishe the Christiane reader what ceremony owghte to be usid in te church before the use of the sacrament What te minister shuld do and what the rest of the people shuld do The ministers office is to make à solenne sermon to admonyshe euerie man of his deuty and office towards god and to exhort all men unto godly and unfaynid repentaynce The peoples deutiis euery one to proue and examine his conscience and fayth and so to eat of the bread and to drink of the winne as Paule teachith 1. Cor. 11. And so to mark the word of god preachyd agaynst sinne as thowgh god himselfe spake it And remembre that when Christ sayd unto the Aposteles that one of them shuld be tray him all were amasid at these wordes and with sorowfull countynaÌ„ce thone beheld thother with great fere who it shuld be they hard à wounderfull sine namyd euery one examinid his awne conscience whether it were culpable of ony souch sinne or notâ— and with fere demaundid who it shuld be this act of the Aposteles declare what euery mannes office is that cummith to the sermon wher by the word of god sinne is accusid to examine his awne coÌ„science and se that no souch sinne be in him that god condemnith by his word If he be culpable to repent from the botom of his hart and desyre for yeuenis But now adayes when sinne is rebukid ffew men entrythe into there awne conscience but rather into other mennis Suppoâ—â—th that the word of god rebukith the sinne of nthers and not his or elsâ— he iudgyth himselfe to be no sinner where as â—uery man hath abundannce and to many if he knew himselfe well and souch horrible fautes as decerue eternall death A good conscience wilbe sone pryckyd at the name of sinne and be ashamed that he hath offendyd so myghty alord and aferd also of his iudgmentes and diligently amend his liefe The conscience destitute of godes fere passith not adele of the worde is mouid nether with fere ner with loue but contemnyth booth god and his wordeâ— as we may se by Iudas not only this sinne of obstinacy and contempt of godes admonicions unto penitence But also uery Hypocrysie as raynith now adayes ouer all the worold men associat themselses in to the company of souch as fere god cum unto the sermones to hyre godes wordes and be nothing the better they amend there lief nothing at all They say it was à good sermon the man spake well But what a uaylith it that he spake well and the herer to lyueyle What am the better that god and his word bâ—â—holy or an other man uerteus except I transform myâ—â—yleliefe unto commaundement of god and lyue 〈…〉 nestly nothing at all They yoies of Abraam Isaac and Iacob in heauen appertainith not to souche as know only the faythe of them But unto souche as obey the coÌ„ma undement of god as they dyd Man must yeue place to the word of god when it is told hym and refrayne from all thinges repugnaunt unto the word to promote the worde that godes Kingdom maye raygne upon therte Who so euer prechyte it hyrith it prechid or permittith it to be preachyd except he folowe it nothing auaylithe him Those tescripture declarithe to be blessyd that worke the word and haue there medicacions in the lawe of god the sermon must
then thole right title or Cleme that is confirmid by the seale thowghe the mater of the seale be nothing but wax not for the ualew of the mater for too pence will by ten times asmouche wex But for the use that the mater is apoyntid unto And he that would take upon him to deny the Kynges seale in souch à purpose and say it is but apece of wax it were nolese then treason and à uery contempt of the Kyng him selfe Because the kyng hathe apoyntid that seale to be honorable receauid and reuerently usid of all men And as the wrytinges sealyd dooth confirme and declare the right of the honowre unto all he worold so dooth the sacramentes confirm thassurannce of euer lasting liefe unto the fayth fulles and declarith the same to all the worold And as the mater substance and land itselfe is not corporally nor really conteynid in the wryting nor annexid to the writingâ— nether browght when ony mater of contrauersie is for the lond before the iudge with the wryting Nomore is the corporall body of Christ browght before the church neque cum pane neque in pane neque sub pane neque per panem neque ante panem neque post panem But when the minister delyuerith unto me the thing that is in his poure to delyuer to say the bread and wynne rehersing the wordes of Christes institucion the holy goost deliuerithe unto my fayth which is mountyd and ascendid into heauen the precious body and bludd of my sauiour Iesus Christ spiritually and not corporally so dooth the merites of this precious body in heaueÌ„ fede my poure wrechid soule upon therthe and no contradiction or impossibilite for Christes body so to do It may be in heauen and yet extend his uerteue by the operacion of the holy gost into my soule by the meanes of fayth which at the time of the receauing of this sacrament is in my soule and out my soule as the sprit of god is in euery godly hart and out of the hart in heauen with god so was god at the creacion of man unto his awnelyknice in man and out of man Yet to make it more playne as the sone in heauen dooth extend downe his beames and ligthyn the hearthe So dooth Christes body by fayth in sprit expulse all darknis and sinne out of the hart mouith not bodely but is euery where where faythe is spiritually an at one tymeâ— As a man Remaining in one place may adresse his thowgh tes into heauen or in to hell as many times as he lystithe to meditat ether thone place or the other So Paule exordith the Christiane man Ebr. 4. Accedamus ad tronum gratiae ut misericordiam gratiam axilium opportunum inueniamus Calling the trone of grace our sole mediatour to say the peace maker betweÌ„ god and man This body of Christ is only in heauen and no where else as Io sayth 1. Epist 2. so dooth August writ tractat in Ioan. 30. Sursum est dominus iterum corpus enim domini resurrexit in uno loco oportet esse so dooth the master of the sentence alege his wordes and not in uno loco esse potest as the later edicion redith How ffonde doctrine the scole men teachith it is playne Lambertus in the sentence innocentius in the decretales De summa trinitate fide Cath. ca. ffirmiter and Nicolaus pape de consec Dict. 2. cap. Ego Berengarius This doctrine subuertith it selfe if men Mark it well For assone as they haue confessid the breade to be the essenciall and substanciall body of Christ and the wyne his naturall bludd they add sed inuisibiliter ineffabiliter non ut in loco non qualitatiue ant quantitatiue So doth Thomas aquinas parte 3. Quaest 76. and Lombertus lib. sentent 4. Distinct 10. sophistically dispute the mater Is it not à wounder that men will not mark what contradiction is in there wordes ffirst the say Christes uery naturall corporall phisicall substanciall and reall body is in the sacrament The body that died upon the crosse Was burid that ryse the third day that was taken into heauens and yet they mak it with out qualite and quantite es notis this amerueloê° doctrine to say Christe now hatâ— abody that is nether great nether smale trewly if he haue now souche abody as is inuisible without all qualites and quantites then had he neuer upon therth à trew body but à phantasticall body as they make him to haue in the sacrament But I confirm my faythe by the scripture that teachith of his incarnacion and uery manhod Matt. 1. Luc. 1. Rom. 1. Ebrâ— 1. 2. 9. 10. Matt. 26. 27. Mark 14. 〈◊〉 and by all the scripture and let this â—alse imaginacion of Christes body passe that they speake of to be in the sacrament And would the Christiane reader not to be mouid with this doctrine at all But to set saynct August agaynst the master of the sentence and all other scole doctors be the realistes or fformalistes He declarith playnly that no body can be except it ocopy place Epist ad Dardanum 57. Spatia inquit locorum tolle corporibus nusquam erunt quia nusquam erunt nec erunt Tolle ipsa corpora qualitatibus corporum noÌ„ erit ubi sint ideo necesse est ut non sint Thowgh Christ be Absent bodely from his churche yet with his ayed Helpe and consolacion he is present in sprit which sufficit untill the end of the worold where as we shall sâ— his glorious body in dead really and corporally that now haue but à signe and sacrament therof whiche sufficithe to kepe that holy sacrifice in memorie and is profetable so that 〈◊〉 Christiane man be well instructid what differens is betwene the signe and the thing representid by the signe and takythe not the one for the other as saynct Augustine teachith lib. 3. de doctrina Christiana ca. 5. 8. and as Paule teachith Roma 4. interpretating the wordes of Moses Ge. 17. Hoc est pactum meum And saith that Abraam receauid Sphragida iusticiae quae per fideÌ„ apprehenditur and sayth playnly that circunsicion was not the allyance betwene god and Abraam But the coÌ„firmacion of the promesse grauntyd and yeuen before And so be all othere sacramentes whether they be of thold churche or of the New callid Sphragides signes and confirmacions quia sunt uacalia uisibilia quaedam palpabilia testimonia ac ueluti consignationes promissionis dei accepte per fidem in Christo Therfore it shalbe necessarie for the Christiane Reader to lern be hart what à signe is and to know the nature and office therof Asigne is athing subâ—ect unto the senses where by is remembrid the thing signified by the sinne This thâ—ng knowen men must tak hede they attribute nomore nor no lesse unto the signes then is to be attributid of right And what so euer uerteue be representid by the signe
persuacionem as Quintiliane dooth Now if we be persuadyd that the scripture is trew and that ffayth must be groundyd there upon we must belyue no alteracion of the bread but belyue that the bred remaynithe aâ—ter the wordes of confecracion as Paule â—aith 1. Cor. 11. the scripture saythe it is à memory of Christes bodye and not the body The scriptnre saythe of Christes body ascendit ad coelos sedet ad dexteram dei patris omnipoteÌ„tis inde uenturus iudicare uiuos mortuos Expedit ut ego uadaÌ„ pauperes semp habebitis uobiscum menoÌ„ semper habebitis Christes body is aboue and nowhere else this saythe faythe groundid upon the scripture And asfor that my lord comparyth souche as trustithe unto there senses and say there styll remanythe bread unto the ffoly of the Epicures that would beliue the sonne to be but too fote brode because it semyd no greater unto the Iye Verely if my lord would haue studid à hole iere he could not haue fouÌ„d amore apt and propre simâ—litude to condemne the wrong opinyon that he defendithe nether better haue accusyd his awne igno rancye The Epicures by reasone of the great distayunce betwen the zodiack and the erth could not iudge the sonne as bygg as it is in dede but folowyd there senses and sayd it was abyg as the knew These men that belyue alteracion of bread be not so far of the aulter but they may iudg what it is and how bygg it is the may tak the bread in there hand and wey it if the lyst take and proue all experience and warrant booth reason and sensesthat it is alitle peace of bread and noman Had the Epicures byn as Nere the sonne as the Aposteles were unto the hody of Christ at his departure out of this worold they would haue iudgid of the sonne other wyce but for asmouche as they iudgyd affter there senses they be more to be commendyd then those men that nether belyuythe the word of god nether reason nor there senses but plainly deny the thing theysee and say à peace of bread is god and man wher as is not at all one ynche of a man nor of mannys proporcion These men ar worthy to be persuadyd as he that seyth the snow whyt and yet wil not belyue it uerberibus as the scoles theachithe non ratione then hathe my lord an other mocpareson and would make godd the thyng that he purposith And saythe why be men more offendyd to belyue the body of Christ to be in the sacrameÌ„t more then wheÌ„ that god beyng immensus could be holy includyd in the uirginnesbely the wherfore is that the scripture coÌ„maundiâ—â— us to belyue the on and not the other Conceptus est de spiritu sancto natus ex Maria uirgine Matt. 12. Luc. 12. Men saw him in the worold and when he departid out of the worold Now my lord knowith right well that in Christ be too natures one diuine and the other humane And eche of them hathe his proper qualites God was holye in the bely and holye out of the bely man was holy in the bely and not out of the bely till the time of his byrthe then holy out of the bely and not within the bely So sayth Augustine fuit totus in uentre totus in cruce totus in inferno totus in sepulchro But this is the property of his godhed and not of his manhed that is in one place and neuer with out place the other in all places andyet in no place Dâ—us est totus in toto totus in qnalibet eius parte as the soule of man is And asfor the auctorite of loan Chrysost he prouith not my lordes purpose but disprouith for he saythe oculis intellectus perspiciamus there is noman but saith the body of Christe is present to the faythe of man how be it not carnally nather bodely receauid of him that receauithe the sacrament De modo presentiae est totum dissidium Chrysost declarith how he is present in sprit unto fayth and not in the body unto the Mouthe And godly spokeÌ„ of this doctor so sayd Ireneus before him that there is too thin ges in the sacrament one to the senses and the other to the sprit for if there were nothing representid unto the faythe by the sacramentes then were they no sacramentes but bare signes which noman saythe then accusi the my lord those that say it is the btead that muldy the and saythe the deuill hathe tawght men to say somwhat if it be not bread let some man tell us what it is that muldith it cannot be nothing he would make men helyue that nothing corruptithe by miracle this is à wounderfull miracle that is wrowght in nothing Here is thre thinges putrefactioÌ„ nothing And à miracle by the poure of god and yet all thre nothing after my lordes mind I deny ony miracle at all to be in the sacrament But euery thing wrowghthe by god accustomydly by â—ayth remission of sinne and augmeÌ„tacion of godes yefftes and the signes to remayne in there propere nature so dooth Augnstine deny ony miracle to be in the sacrament lib. de Trinit 3. cap. 10. It is innocentius 3. that would proue this wrong opinion of transubstanciacion by miracle in his booke de officio missae Then doothe my lord name 1500. Yers that the churche hath belyuid it If it be trew why dooth not he name thauctors that makyth godd his sayng all the scripture and old doctors be agaynst him The breaking of the bread hath byn usid in the churche this 1500. yeres and od but not in à priuate masse as it is at this day but unto all the churche Gregories time was ouer chargid with supersticion yet was the communion of booth kyndes usid then among the people And this manne died not for 1500. hundrithe yers sithe He was creatyd byshope of Rome 157. yers aster the dethe of August And died Anno 604. in the reigne of phocas themperour That first deâ—rede te church of Rome to be the hed of Grekys and Latinnes thowghe the churche of Constantinople neuer consentid there unto The name of the masse beganne then ffyrst tobe knowen among the people how be itâ— it was à communion and no priuate masse Souch as make Iames the Apoâ—â—elâ— and Basilius thauctors of this wyckid and deuillyshe priuat Masse Moost proue that they say by good auctorite Except the meane by the name of the masse the communion of the lordes supper It shuld seme by the canon of the masse That is at this day redyn which was wroten iâ— Gregories time that the masse was à communion for the pryst offryd the yeâ—â—tes of the people the bread ad wâ—nne unto god with thankes by these wordes Per Christum dominum nostrum per quem haec omnia domine semper bona creasâ— sanctificas uiuificas benedicis c. so callith Ireneus and Tertullian the bread of thankes yeuing the
creature of god wher by is notyd the difference betwyne commune bread and the bread dedycadyd unto an holy use and memoâ—y of Christes deatheâ— yet not with stonding they call the bread and the wynne creatures and not the accidence of creatures as oure men of late dayes doothe Were there nomore bookes but the Masse booke wherin is conteynyd all â—his prophanacion and abuses of Christes supper it is easy to be prouyd by the prayers therin conteynyd and uâ—yd in Gregoryes tyme that the Masse was à coÌ„munion thus the pryst and the people prayed Corporis â—acri preciosi sanguinis repleti libaminae queâ—umus domine Deus noster c. Agayne Saciasti domine â—amiliam tuaÌ„munâ—ribus sacris Beda that was 90. yers aâ—ter the deathe of Gregorie in the time of Sergius primus knew not of transubstantiacion nor of pryuat Masses No in the â—yme of Carolus the great 200. yers aâ—ter deathe of Gregorie there was no souche Massyng as my lord speakythe of But Masses then beganne to 〈◊〉 into estimacion when the order of Benedict inlargyd there Closters in fâ—roaunce other orders were not then begoten These Monkes sayde pryuate Masses and applyd the Merites therof for the synnes of other Aâ—ter the death of Carolus Raygnyd his sonne Hludouicus Anno 815. in whois dayes priuate Masses came into souche estimacion that people neglectyd the coÌ„munion and thowght it sufficieÌ„t if the pryst sayd Masse and receauid the breâ— for them wher upon the prince made al aw that the people shuld coÌ„municat with the church thre tymes in the yere As Ausegisus whrytyth canone 38lib 2. yet people estimed the Masse more holy and better theÌ„ the institution of Christ and passyd nether of god nether of the law of the prince Then was there an other law made that all men shuld ons in the yere communicat and use the lordes supper as the Canon Omnis utriusque sexus testyfieth This priuate breaking of bread is not of souche antiquite as my lord speakythe of as we may se by the decrees of Clement the thyrd de penitenâ— Remâ—ss Who lyuid in Anno 1200 Lombartus dooth à lege in the sentence no elder auctor then Sergium 2. Os porci cognominatum who reynid Anno 842. 30. yere aâ—ter the deathe of Carolus Magnus The causes of this ffraction dooth Bonauentura shew distinct 12. li. 4. Hostia diuiditur in partes tincta beatos Plane sicca notat uiuos seruata sepultos He that lystith to rede more of this yle let hym rede the 4. booke of Lombert There keping of it in the box and kneling downe at the time of sacring is but the commaundement of Honorius 3. bishope of Rome as it apperith by his wordes lib. 3. decretalium Titulo de celebracione MissaruÌ„ And this Honorius died Anno 1226 As conserning the boothe kindes of the sacramentes it was not for byddyn in the time of the master of the â—â—ntence who lyuid Anno 11â—2 Friderycho Sueuo Imperatore Augusto Nor in the time of Tomas Aquinas for in à certayne Hymne he speakythe thus of the distrybution of the sacrament unto the hole churche Sic sacrificium istud instituit Cuius officium committi uoluit Solis presbyteris quibus sic congruit Vt sumant dent caetâ—ris If the prist gaue unto the people that he receauid himselfe there was no part of the sacrament taken ffrom them as it is at this daye Yet Shame they not yle men to say there masse is 1500. yeres old No no this yle came into the church after the condemnacion of the great clark Berâ—ngarius as is sayde before When my lord woulde stablyshe his doctrine by the auctorite of the doctors be cause thei say the winne and the bread is changid They make not for my lordes purpose for they speake of one alteracion and my lord speakith of an otherâ— They say not that the substance and mater of the bread and winne is changid But that the use of it is changid for where before it was commune bread and commune wynne now it is with great religion takyn for the presentacion and confirmacion of all godes promyses unto his churche for the deathe of his sonne The doctors doothe wâ—â— to call the bread the body and the wynne the bludd For Christ so callid it As it hath byn usid ffrom the begynning of the church untill this day to call à sacrament by the name of the thing â—ignified by the sacrament Vâ—e thy selfe unto the scripture Christiane Reder and then thow shalt perceaue all the doctors for the space of 900. yers to stand of thy part and neuer mindid this transubstancion of the bread and winne Red Augustine de sermonibus fidelium quia Christus inquit Passus â—st pro nobis commendauit nobis in isto sacramento corpus et sanguinem suum quem etiam â—ecit nos ipsos Nam et nos ipsius corpus â—acti sumus per misericordiam ipsius quod accipimus nos sumus and in the same sermon he sayth in nomine Christi tanquam ad calicem uenistis ibi uos estis in mensa ibi uos estis in calice As oure bodies naturally ar not the body of Christ nor corporally oure bodis be not in the chalice but by â—ayth we ar h is membres and spiritually coniugnid with him in the chalice so spiritually he yeuithe us his bodyeâ— if Christe corporally be yeuine unto us in the sacrament then corporally ar those that receaue the sacrameÌ„t in the chalice whiche were an absurdite to graunt So likewice he interpretatith this spirituall recâ—auing of Christes body in sermone ad infantes Expounding these wordes of Paule Vnus panis unuÌ„ corpus multl sumus Tertul. lib. 4. contra Marcionem dooth expounde these wordes Hoâ— est corpus mâ—um And prouithe there by that the bread is not the body naturally of Christ But prouithe by these wordes that Câ—rist had à treue body and was uery man sayng phantasma non capit figuram sed ueritas aliud enim à pane corpus Iesus habet nec pro nobis panis traditus sed ipsum Christi uerum corpus traditum in crâ—cem quod panis figura in coena exhibitum est He callithe this sacrament the signe of his body and yet neuer condemnid for an hery tike And this shuld the berter content the mind of man that wher as August in lib. de heresibus doothe note certayne erroures of Tertullian yet conserning this mater of the sacrament he speaky the not one word agaynst him ffor Augustine himselfe beliuithe as Tertullian did As he testifiethe contra Adamantum Non dubitauit dominus dicere Hoc est corpus meum cum signum daret corporis sui Why is not Augustine condemnyd for an heretick and his bookes burnid berause he sayth that the lord douttid not to say this is my body When he graue the signe of his body Tertullian denith playnly the bread to be his body li. 4. contra