subiectes but they must seeke it at a straungers hands in a straunge land the like whereof I thinke was neuer seene I would haue wished to haue had some meaner aduersaryes I thinke that death shall not greeue me much more then to haue my most dread and most gratious soueraygne Lord and Lady to whom vnder God I do owe all obedience to be mine accusers in iudgement within their owne realme before any straunger and outward power But forasmuch as in the time of the Prince of most famous memory King Henry the 8. your graces father I was sworne neuer to consent that the byshop of Rome should haue or exercise any authoritie or iurisdiction in this realme of England therefore least I should allow his authority contrary to mine oth I refused to make aunswere to the Byshop of Gloucester sitting here in iudgemēt by the Popes authority least I should runne into periury An other cause why I refused the popes authority is this that his authority as he claimeth it repugneth to the crowne imperiall of this realme and to the lawes of the same which euery true subiect is bound to defend Fyrst for that the Pope sayth that all manner of power aswell temporall as spirituall is geuen first to him of God and that the temporall power he geueth vnto Emperours and Kinges to vse it vnder him but so as it be alwayes at his cōmaundement becke But contrary to this clayme the Emperial crowne and iurisdiction temporall of this Realme is taken immediately from God to be vsed vnder him onely and is subiect vnto none but to God alone Moreouer the imperiall lawes and customes of this realme the king in his Coronation and all Iustices when they receiue their offices be sworne and all the whole realme is bound to defend and maintayne But contrary hereunto the pope by his authority maketh voyd and commaundeth to blot out of our bookes all lawes and customes being repugnant to his lawes and declareth accursed all rulers and gouernours all the makers writers executors of such lawes or customes as it appeareth by many of the Popes lawes whereof one or two I shall rehearse In the decrees distin x. is written thus Constitutione contra canones decreta praesulum Romanorum vel bonos mores nullius sunt momenti That is the constitutions or statutes enacted agaynst the Canons and decrees of the Bishops of Rome or their good customes are of none effect Also Extra de sententia excommunicationis merit Excōmunicamus omnes hareticos vtriusque sexus quocumque nomine censeantur fautores receptatores defensores eorum nec non qui de catero sernari fecerint statuta edita consuetudines contra ecclesia libertatem nisiea de capitularibus suis intra duos menses post huiusmodi publicationem sentencia fecerint amoueri Item excōmunicamus statutarios scriptores statutorum ipsorum nec non potestates consules rectores consiliarios locorum vbi de catero huiusmodi statuta consuetudines edita fuerint velseruatae nec non illos qui secundum ea praesumpserint iudicarem vel in publicam formam scribere iudicata That is to say we excōmunicate all heretickes of both sexes what name so euer they be called by and their fauourers and receptours and defenders and also them that shall hereafter cause to be obserued statutes and customes made agaynst the liberty of the Church except they cause the same to be put out of their bookes or recordes within two monethes after the publication of this sentence Also we excommunicate the statute makers and writers of those statutes and also the potestates consuls gouernors and counsellors of places where such statutes and customes shall be made or kept and also those that shall presume to geue iudgement according to them or put into publike forme of writing the maners so iudged Now by these lawes if the Byshop of Romes authority which be claymeth by God bee lawfull of your graces lawes and customes of your Realme being contrary to the Popes lawes be naught and aswell your maiesty as your iudges iustices and all other executors of the same stand accursed among heretickes which God forbid And yet this curse can neuer be auoyded if the Pope haue such power as he claymeth vntil such times as the lawes and customes of this Realme beyng contrary to his lawes bee taken away and blotted out of the law bookes And although there bee many lawes of this Realme contrary to the lawes of Rome yet I named but a few as to conuict a Clarke before any temporall Iudge of this Realme for debt felony murther or for any other crime which Clarkes by the Popes lawes be so exempt from the Kynges lawes that they can be no where sued but before their Ordinary Also the pope by his lawes may geue all byshoprickes and benefices sprituall which by the lawes of this Realme can be geuen but onely by the Kinges and other patrones of the same except they fall into the lapse By the Popes lawes ius patronatus shal be sued onely before the ecclesiasticall iudge but by the lawes of this realme it shall be sued before the temporall iudge and to be short the lawes of this realme do agree with the Popes lawes like fire and water And yet the Kinges of this Realme haue prouided for their lawes by the premunire so that if any man haue let the excution of the lawes of this Realme by any authority from the sea of Rome he falleth into the premunire But to meete with this the popes haue prouided for their lawes by cursing For whosoeuer letteth the Popes lawes to haue full course within this realme by the Popes power standeth accursed So that the popes power treadeth all the lawes and customes of this Realme vnder his feete cursing all that execute them vntill such time as they geue place vnto his lawes But it may be said that notwithstanding all the popes decrees yet we do execute still the lawes and customes of this Realme Nay not all quietly without interruption of the Pope And where we do execute them yet we do it vniustly if the popes power be of force and for the same we stand excommunicate and shall doe vntill we leaue the execution of our owne lawes and customes Thus we be wel recōciled to Rome allowing such authority wherby the Realme standeth accursed before God if the Pope haue any such authority These thinges as I suppose were not fully opened in the parliament house when the popes authority was receiued agayne within this Realme for if they had I do not beleue that either the King or Queenes maiesty or the nobles of this Realme or the commons of the same would euer haue consented to receiue agayne such a forrayne authority so iniurious hurtfull and preiudiciall aswel to the crowne as to the lawes and customes and state of this realme as whereby they must needes acknowledge themselues to
tyme to the entent he may be there quiet to accomplish my request let him lacke neither bookes ne any thing requisite for his study And thus after the kynges departure Doct. Cranmer went with my Lord of Wiltshyre vnto his house where he incontinent wrote his mynde concernyng the kynges question addyng to the same besides the authorities of Scriptures of generall Councels and of auncient writers also his opinion which was this that the Byshop of Rome had no such authoritie as wherby he might dispence with the word of God and the Scriptures When Doct. Cranmer had made this booke and committed it to the kyng the kyng sayd to him will you abide by this that you haue here written before the Bishop of Rome That will I do by Gods grace quoth Doct. Cranmer if your Maiestie do send me thether Mary quoth the kyng I will send you euen to him in a sure Ambassage And thus by meanes of Doct. Cranmers handlyng of this matter with the kyng not onely certaine learned men were sent abroad to the most part of the Uniuersities in Christendome to dispute the question but also the same beyng by Commission disputed by the Diuines in both the Uniuersities of Cambridge and Oxford it was there concluded that no such Matrimony was by the word of God lawfull Wherupon a solēne Ambassage was prepared and sent to the Byshop of Rome then beyng at Bonony wherein went the Earle of Wiltshyre Doct. Cranmer Doct. Stokesly Doct. Carne Doct. Bennet and diuers other learned men and Gentlemen And when the tyme came that they should come before the Bishop of Rome to declare the cause of their Ambassage the Byshop sittyng on high in his cloth of estate and in his rich apparell with his sandales on his féete offeryng as it were his foote to be kissed of the Ambassadours the Earle of Wiltshyre with the rest of the Ambassadours disdainyng thereat stoode still made no coūtenaunce thereunto and so kept them selues from that Idolatry In fine the Pontificall Byshop seyng their constancie without any farther ceremonie gaue eare to the Ambassadours Who entryng there before the Byshop offered on the kynges behalfe to be defended that no man Iure diuine could or ought to mary his brothers wife and that the Byshop of Rome by no meanes ought to dispence to the contrary Diuers promises were made and sundry dayes appointed wherein the question should haue bene disputed and when our part was ready to aunswere no mā there appeared to dispute in that behalfe So in the end the Byshop makyng to our Ambassadours good countenaunce and gratiffyng Doctour Cranmer with the Office of the Penitentiarishyp dismissed them vndisputed withall Wherupon the Earle of Wiltshyre and other Commissioners sauyng Doct. Cranmer returned home agayne into England And forthwith Doct. Cranmer went to the Emperour beyng in his iourney towardes Vienna in expedition agaynst the Turke there to aunswere such learned men of the Emperours Coūsaile as would or could say any thyng to the contrary part Where amongest the rest at the same tyme was Cornelius Agrippa an high Officer in the Emperours Court who hauyng priuate conference with Doct. Cranmer in the question was so fully resolued and satisfied in the matter that afterwardes there was neuer disputation openly offered to Doct. Cranmer in that behalfe For through the perswasion of Agrippa all other learned men there were much discouraged This matter thus prosperyng on D. Cranmers behalfe aswell touchyng the kynges questiō as concernyng the inualiditie of the Byshop of Romes authoritie Byshop Warrham then Archbyshop of Caunterbury departed this transitorie lyfe wherby that dignitie then beyng in the kynges gift and disposition was immediatly giuen to Doct. Crāmer as worthy for his trauaile of such a promotiō Thus much touchyng the prefermēt of Doct. Cranmer vnto his dignitie and by what meanes he atchiued vnto the same not by flattery nor by bribes nor by none other vnlawfull meanes whiche thyng I haue more at large discoursed to stoppe the raylyng mouthes of such who beyng them selues obscure and vnlearned shame not so to detract a learned mā most ignominiously with the surname of an Hostler whom for his godly zeale vnto sincere Religion they ought with much humilitie to haue had in regard and reputation Now as concernyng his behauiour and trade of lyfe towardes God and the world beyng entered into his sayd dignitie True it is that he was so throughly furnished withall properties qualities and conditions belongyng to a true Byshop as that it shal be very hard in these straunge dayes to finde many that so nearely resemble that liuely exemplar described by S. Paule the Apostle in his seueral Epistles to Titus and Timothée So farre he swarued from the common course of common Byshops in his tyme. But bicause the same is very well decipbred in the story at large it shall not be so néedefull to discourse all the partes therof in this place Yet may not this be forgotten That notwithstandyng the great charge now cōmitted vnto him The worthy Prelate gaue him selfe euermore to continuall study not breakyng the order that he vsed commonly in the Uniuersitie To wit by v. of the clocke in the mornyng in his study and so vntill ix continuyng in prayer and study From thence vntill dyner tyme to heare suters if the Princes affaires did not call him away committyng his temporall affaires aswell of houshold as other foreine busines to his officers For the most part hee would occupy him selfe in reformatiō of corrupt Religion and settyng forth true and sincere doctrine wherein he would associate him selfe alwayes with learned men for the siftyng boultyng out one matter or other for the commoditie and profite of the Church of England After dynner if any suters were he would diligently heare them and dispatch them in such sort as euery man commended his lenitie and gentlenes That done to his ordinary study agayne vntill fiue of the clocke whiche houre hee bestowed in hearyng common prayer After Supper he would consume an houre at the least in some godly conference and then agayne vntill it of the clocke at one kynde of study or other So that no houre of the day was spent in vayne but was bestowed as tended to Gods glory the seruice of his Prince or the commoditie of the Church As touching his affabilitie easines to be entreated it was such as that in all honest causes wherin his letter counsell or speach might gratifie either nobleman Gentlemā meane man or poore man no mā could be more tractable or sooner wonne to yeld Onely in causes appertainyng to God and his Prince no man more stoute more constant or more hard to be wonne as in that part his earnest defence in the Parlamēt house aboue thrée dayes together in disputyng agaynst the vi Articles of Gardiners deuise cā testifie And though the kyng would néedes haue them vpon some
presence of Christes body and bloud in the Sacrament so I trust to shew this author ouerseene in the article of transubstantiation For enter wherunto first I say this that albeit the word Transubstantiation was first spoken of by publique authority in that assemble of learned men of Christendome in a generall counsaile where the Bishop of Rome was present yet the true matter signified by that word was older and beleued before vpon the true vnderstanding of Christes wordes and was in that counsayle confessed not for the authority of the Bishop of Rome but for the authority of truth being the article such as toucheth not the authority of the Bishop of Rome but the true doctrine of Christes mistery and therfore in this realme the authority of Rome cessing was also confessed for a truth by all the clergy of this realme in an open counsayle specially discussed and though the hardenes of the law that by parliament was established of that and other articles hath bene repelled yet that doctriue was neuer hitherto by any publique counsayle or any thing set forth by authority empayred that I haue hard wherfore me thinketh this author should not improue it by the name of the Bishop of Rome seing we read how truth was vttered by Balsaam and Caiphas also and S. Paule teacheth the Philippenses that whither it be by contention or enuy so Christ be preached the person should not empayre the opening of truth if it be truth which Luther in deed would not alow for truth impugning the article of Transubstantiation not meaning therby as this author doth to empayre the truth of the very presence of Christes most precious body in the Sacrament of the aniter as is afore sayd in the discussion of which truth of Transubstantiation I for my part should be speciall defended by two meanes wherwith to auoyd the enuious name of Papist One is that Zuinglius himselfe who was no Papist as is well knowen nor good christen man as some sayd neither sayth playnly writing to Luther in the matter of the Sacrament it must nedes be true that if the body of Christ be really in the Sacrament there is of necessity Transubstantiation also Wherfore seing by Luthers trauayle who fauored not the Byshops of Rome neither and also by euidence of the truth most certayne and manifest it appeareth that according to the true catholqiue sayth Christ is really present in the sacrament it is now by Zuinglius iudgement a necessary consequence of that truth to say there is TransubstantiatioÌ„ also which shal be one meane of purgation that I defend not Transubstantiation as depending of the Bishop of Romes determination which was not his absolutely but of a necessity of the truth howsoeuer it liketh Duns or Gabriell to write in it whose sayinges this author vseth for his pleasure An other defence is that this author himselfe sayth that it is ouer great an absurdity to say that bread insensible with many other termes that he addeth should be the body of Christ and therfore I thinke that the is that is to say the inward nature and essence of that Christ deliuered in his supper to be eaten and dronken was of his body and bloud and not of the bread and wine and therfore can well agree with this author that the bread of wheate is not the body of Christ nor the body of Christ made of it as of a matter which considerations will enforce him that beleueth the truth of the presence of the substaunce of Christes body as the true catholique â—ayth teacheth to assent to Transubstantiation not as determined by the church of Rome but as a consequent of truth beleued in the mistery of the Sacrament which Transubstantiation how this author would impugne I will without quarell of enuious wordes consider and with true opening of his handeling the matter doubt not to make the reader to see that he fighteth agaynst the truth I will passe ouer the vnreuerent handling of Christes wordes This is my body which wordes I heard this Author if he be the same that is named once reherse more seriously in a solemne and open audience to the conuiction and condemnation as followed of one that erroniously mayntayned agaynst the sacrament the same that this author calleth now the catholique fayth Caunterbury IN this booke which answereth to my second booke rather with taunting wordes then with matter I will answere the chief poyntes of your intent and not contend with you in scolding but will geue you place therin First I charge none with the name of papistes but that be well worthy therof For I charge not the hearers but the teachers not the learners but the inuenters of the vntrue doctrine of Transubstantiation not the kinges faythfull subiects but the Popes darlinges whose fayth and belefe hangeth of his onely mouth And I call it their doctrine not onely bycause they teach it but bycause they made it and were the first fynders of it And as in the third booke concerning the reall presence of Christes body and bloud in the Sacrament you haue not shewed myne ignorance or wilfulnes but your owne so do you now much more in the matter of Transubstantiation Which word say you albeit the same was fyrst spoken of in the generall counsell where the Byshop of Rome was present yet the true matter signified by that word was older Here at the first brunt you confesse that the name of Transubstantiation was giuen at the counsell So that either the matter was not before as it was not in deed or at the least it was before a namelesse child as you do graunt vntill the holy father Innocent the thyrd which begat it assembled a company of his frendes as godfathers to name the child And by what authority the counsayle defined the matter of Transubstantiation it may easely appeare For authority of scripture haue they none nor none they do alleadge And what the authority of the Pope was there all men may see being present in the same no lesse then .800 Abbottes and Priours who were all the Popes owne chyldren of him created and begotten And as for the confession of all the clergy of this Realme in an open counsell the authority of Rome ceasing you speake here a manifest vntruth wittingly agaynst your conscience For you know very well and if you will denie it there be enough yet aliue can testify that diuers of the clergy being of most godly liuing learning and iudgement neuer consented to the articles which you speake of And what meruayle was it that those articles notwithstanding diuers learned men repugning passed by the most voyces of the Parliament seing that although the authority of Rome was then newely ceased yet the darkenes and blindnes of errours and ignoraunte that came from Rome still remayned and ouershadowed so this Realme that a great number of the Parliament had not yet theyr eyes opened to see the truth And yet how that matter was enforced
by some persons they know right well that were then present But after when it pleased almighty God more clearly to shine vnto vs by the light of this word our eyes by his goodnes were opened darkenes discussed and that which was done in ignoraunce and darkenes was by knowledge and light in publique Counsell rehersed and taken away as well concerning the doctrine as the hardnes of the law For if the doctrine had bene true and godly there is no christen harted man but he would haue desired the establishment and continuaunce therof But the doctrine being false and such as came onely from Rome they be not worthy to be likened to those truthes which came from God and were vttered by Balaam and Cayphas but to be numbred among those lyes which came from his vicar who when he speaketh lyes ex proprijs loquitur he speaketh properly of himselfe And the Byshop of Rome was not cleane gone out of England as sone as the lawes were made agaynst his authority but remayned still by his corrupt doctrine as I feare me he doeth yet in some mennes hertes who were the chief procurers and setters forthward of the foresayd law But yet is all togither to be imputed to the Byshop of Rome forasmuch as from thens came all the foresayd errours ignorance and corruption into these parties Now where you take vpon you here to purge your selfe of Papistry by me and Zuinglius if you haue no better compurgators then vs two you be like to fayle in your purgation For neyther of vs I dare say durst swere for you in this matter though Zuinglius were aliue Or if your purgatioÌ„ stand to this poynt that Christ called not bread made of wheat his body although in a formall and proper speach bread is not in deede his body you may be as rancke a Papist as euer was for any purgation you can make by this way For Christ called bread made of wheate his body as the wordes of the Euangelistes playnly declare and all old writers teach and in your booke of the deuils sophistrie you haue confessed saying that Christ made demonstration of bread when he sayd This is my body And therfore bring some better purgation then this or els had you bene better not to haue offered any purgation in a matter that no man charged you withall than by offering a purgation aud fayling therin to bring your selfe into more suspition And where as in fortification of your matter of Transubstantiation you make your argument thus That forasmuch as the body of Christ is really in the sacrament there is of necessity TransubstantiatioÌ„ also This your argument hath two great faultes in it The first is that your antecedent is false and then you can not conclude therof a true consequent The second fault is that although the autecedent were graunted vnto you that the body of Christ is really in the sacrament yet the consequent can not be inferred therof that there is of necessity Transubstantiation For Christ can make his body to be present in the Sacrament as well with the substance of the bread as without it and rather with the substance of bread then with the accidents forasmuch as neyther Christes body there occupieth any place as you say yourselfe nor no more doth the substance of bread by it selfe but by meanes of the accidentes as you say also Now forasmuch as you say that you will passe ouer the vnreuerent handling of Christes wordes which you heard me once more seriously reherse in solemne open audience I knowledge that not many yeares passed I was yet in darkenes concerning this matter being brought vp in scholasticall and Romish doctrine wherunto I gaue to much credite And therfore I graunt that you haue heard me stand and defend the vntruth which I then tooke for the truth and so did I heare you at the same tyme. But prayse be to the euerliuing God who hath wiped away those Saulish scales from myne eyes and I pray vnto his diuine maiesty with all my hart that he will likewise do once the same to you Thy will be fulfillid O Lord. But forasmuch as you passe ouer my handling of Christes wordes as you vse commonly to passe in post when you haue no direct answer to make I shall here repete my wordes agayne to the intent that the indifferent reader may presently see how I haue handled them and then iudge whether you ought so slenderly to pas them ouer as you do My wordes be these ¶ The second booke THus haue you heard declared fower thinges wherin chiefly the Papisticall doctrine varieth from the trew word of God and from the olde catholique Christian fayth in this matter of the Lordes supper Now least any man should thinke that I fayne any thing of myne owne head without any other grounde or authority you shall heare by Gods grace as well the errors of the Papistes confâ—ted as the catholique truth defended both by gods most certayne word and also by the most old approued authors and Martirs of Christes Church And first that bread and wine remayne after the wordes of consecration and be eaten and drunken in the Lordes supper is most manifest by the playn wordes of Christ himselfe when he ministred the same supper vnto his desciples For as the Euangilistes write Christ tooke bread and brake it and gaue it to his disciples and sayd Take eate this is my body Here the Papistes triumph of these wordes when Christ sayd This is my body which they call the wordes of Consecration For say they assone as these wordes be fully ended there is no bread left nor none other substance but onely Christes body When Christ sayd this the bread say they remayned And when he sayd is yet the bread remayned Also whan he added my the bread remayned still And when he sayd bo yet the bread was there still But when he had finished the whole sentence This is my body then say they the bread was gone and there remayned no substance but Christes body as though the bread could not remayne when it is made a Sacrament But this negatiue that there is no bread they make of theyr owne braynes by their vnwritten verities which they most highly esteme Oh good Lord how would they haue bragged if Christ had sayd This is no bread but Christ spake not that negatiue This is no bread but sayd affirmingly This is my body not denying the bread but affirming that his body was eaten meaning spiritually as the bread was eaten corporally And that this was the meaning of Christ appeareth playnly by S. Paule in the tenth chap. to the Corinth the first epistle where he speaking of the same matter sayth Is not the bread which we breake the communion of the body of Christ Who vnderstood the mynd of Christ better then S. Paule to whom Christ shewed his most secret counsailes And S. Paule is not afrayd for our better
viii chap. prouing by authority of the oldest authors in Christs church that he called bread his body and wine his bloud And agayne in the ix x. xi and xii chapters I haue so fully intreated of such figuratiue speaches that it should be but a superfluous labour here to speake of any more but I referre the reader to those places And if M. doctor require a further answere herein let him looke vpon the late bishop of Winchesters booke called the detection of the diuels sophistry where he writeth plainly that when Christ spake these wordes This is my body he made demonstration of the bread THan further in this prologue this Papist is not ashamed to say that I set the cart before the horses putting reason first and fayth after which lye is so manifest that it needeth no further proofe but onely to looke vpon my booke wherein it shall euidently appeare that in all my fiue bookes I ground my foūdation vpon gods word And least the Papistes should say that I make the expositions of the scripture my selfe as they commonly vse to do I haue fortified my foundation by the authority of all the best learned and most holy authors and martyrs that were in the beginning of the church and many yeares after vntill the Antichrist of Rome rose vp and corrupted altogither And as for naturall reason I make no mention therof in all my v. bookes but in one place onely which is in my second booke speaking of Transubstantiation And in that place I set not reason before fayth but as an handmayden haue appoynted her to do seruice vnto fayth and to wayte vpon her And in that place she hath done such seruice that D. Smith durst not once looke her in the face nor find any fault with her seruice but hath flylye and craftely stolen away by her as though he saw her not But in his owne booke he hath so impudently set the cart before the horses in Christes owne wordes putting the wordes behind that goe before the wordes before that goe behind that except a shameles Papist no man durst be so bolde to attempt any such thing of his owne head For where the Euangelist and S. Paule rehearse Christes wordes thus Take eate this is my body he in the confutation of my second booke turneth the order vpside downe and sayth This is my body take eate After this in his Preface hee rehearseth a great number of the wonderfull workes of God as that God made all the world of nought that he made Adam of the earth and Eue of his side the bush to flame with fire and burne not and many other like which be most manifestly expressed in holy scripture And vpon these he concludeth most vainly and vntruly that thing which in the scripture is neyther expressed nor vnderstanded that Christ is corporally in heauen and in earth and in euery place where the sacrament is And yet D. Smith sayth that Gods word doth teach this as playnly as the other vsing herein such a kind of sophisticall argumēt as all Logitiās do reprehend which is called petitio principij whē a mā taketh that thing for a supposition and an approued truth which is in controuersy And so doth he in this place when he sayth Doth not Gods word teach it thee as playnly as the other Here by this interrogatory he required that thing to be graunted him as a truth which he ought to proue and whereupon dependeth the whole matter that is in questiō that is to say whether it be as playnly set out in the scripture that Christes body is corporally in euery place where the sacrament is as that God created all thinges of nothing Adam of the earth and Eue of Adams side c. This is it that I deny and that he should proue But he taketh it for a supposition saying by interrogation doth not the word of God teach this as playnly as the other Which I affirme to be vtterly false as I haue shewed in my third boobe the xi and twelfe chap. where I haue most manifestly proued as well by Gods word as by aūcient authors that these wordes of Christ This is my body and This is my bloud be no playne speaches but figuratiue THen forth goeth this papist vnto the vi chap. of S. Thou saying Christ promised his disciples to geue them such bread as should be his owne very naturall flesh which he would geue to death for the life of the world Can this his promise sayth M. Smith be verified of common bread Was that giuen vpon the crosse for the life of the world Wherto I answer by his owne reason Can this his promise be verified of sacramentall bread was that geuen vpon the crosse for the life of the world I meruayle here not a little of M. Smithes eyther dulnes or maliciousnes that cannot or will not see that Christ in this chap. of S. Ihon spake not of Sacramentall bread but of heauenly bread nor of his flesh onely but also of his bloud and of his godhead calling them heauenly bread that giueth euerlasting life So that he spake of him selfe wholy saying I am the bread of life He that cōmeth to me shall not hunger and he that beleueth in me shall not thirst for euer And neyther spake he of common bread nor yet of sacramentall bread For neyther of them was giuen vpon the crosse for the life of the world And there can be nothing more manifest then that in this vi chap. of Ihon Christ spake not of the sacrament of his flesh but of his very flesh And that aswell for that the sacrament was not then instituted as also that Christ sayd not in the future tense the bread which I will giue shal be my flesh but in the present tense the bread which I will geue is my flesh which sacramentall bread was neyther then his flesh nor was then instituted for a Sacrament nor was after giuen to death for the life of the world But as Christ when he sayd vnto the woman of Samaria The water which I will geue shall spring into euerlasting life he ment neyther of materiall water nor of the accidents of water but of the holy ghost which is the heauenly fountayne that springeth vnto eternall life so likewise when he sayd The bread which I will geue is my flesh which I will geue for the life of the world he ment neyther of the materiall bread neither of the accidents of bread but of his owne flesh Which although of it selfe it auayleth nothing yet being in vnity of persō ioyned vnto his diuinity it is the same heauenly bread that he gaue to death vpon the crosse for the life of the world But here M. Smith asketh a question of the tyme saying thus When gaue Christ that bread which was his very flesh that he gaue for vs to death if he did it not at his last supper when he sayd This is my
contempt were meeter in an Ethnikes mouth to iest out all then to passe the lippes of such an author to play with the sillables after this sort For although he may read in some blind glose that in the instant of the last sillable gods worke is to be accompted wrought being a good lesson to admonish the minister to pronounce all yet it is so but a priuate opinion and reuerently vttered not to put the vertue in the last sillable nor to scorne the catholique fayth after which manner taking example of this author if an Ethnicke should iest of Fiat Lux at fi was nothing and then at at was yet nothing at lu was nothing but a litle little pearing put an x to it and it was sodenly Lux and then the light What christen man would handle eyther place thus and therfore reader let this entry of the matter serue for an argument with what spirite this matter is handled but to answere that this author noteth with an exclamation Oh good Lord how would they haue bragged if Christ had sayd This is no bread Here I would question with this author whether Christ sayd so or no and reason thus Christes body is no materiall bread Christ sayd This is my body Ergo he sayd this is no bread And the first part of this reason this author affirmeth in the 59. leafe And the second part is Christes wordes and therfore to auoyd this conclusion the onely way is to say that Christes speach was but a figure which the catholique doctrine sayth is false and therfore by the catholique doctrine Christ saying this is my body sayth in effect this is no bread wherat this author sayth They would bragge if Christ had sayd so In speach is to be considered that euery yea containeth a nay in it naturally so as who so euer sayth This is bread sayth it is no wine Who soeuer sayth this is wine sayth it is no beere If a Lapidary sayth This is a Diamōd he sayth it is no glas he sayth it is no christall he sayth it is no white Saphir So Christ saying this is my body sayth it is no bread Which plainesse of speach caused Zuinglius to say playnly if there be presēt the substaūce of the body of Christ there is trāsubstātiatiō that is to say not the substaūce of bread therfore who wil playnly deny transubstantion must deny the true presence of the substaunce of Christes body as this author doth wherein I haue first conuinced him and therfore vse that victory for his ouerthrow in transubstantiation I haue shewed before how Christes wordes were not figuratiue when he sayd This is my body and yet I will touch here such testimonie as this author bringeth out of one Hylary for the purpose of trāsubstātiation in the xxv leafe of this booke in these wordes There is a figure sayth Hylary for bread and wine be outwardly sene and there is also a truth of that figure for the body and bloud of Christ be of a truth inwardly beleued These be Hylaries words as this author alledgeth them who was he sayth within 350. yeares of Christ. Now I call to thy iudgement good reader could any man deuise more pithy wordes for the proofe of the reall presence of Christes body and bloud and the condemnation of this author that would haue an onely figure Here in Hilarius wordes is a figure compared to truth and sight outwardly to beleue inwardly Now our belief is grounded vpon gods word which is this This is my body in which wordes Hylary testifieth that is inwardly beleued is a truth and the figure is in that is sene outwardly I take Hylary here as this author alledgeth him whereby I aske the Reader is not this author ouerthrowē that Christs speach is not figuratiue but true and proper beyng inwardly true that we beleue Ye will say vnto me What is this to transubstantiation to the reprofe wherof it was brought in bicause he sayth bread and wine is seene First I say that it ouerthroweth this author for truth of the presence of Christes body and euery ouerthrow therin ouerthroweth this author in Transubstantiation not by authority of the church of Rome but by consequence in truth as Zuinglius sayth who shall serue me to auoyd papistry If one aske me what say ye then to Hilary that bread and wine is seene I say they be in déede séene for they appeare so and therfore be called so as Isaac sayd of Iacob it was his voyce and yet by his sence of féelyng denyed him Esau which was not Esau but was Iacob as the voyce frō within did declare him If ye will aske me how can there accordyng to Hylaries wordes be in the outward visible creatures any figure vnlesse the same be in déede as they appeare bread and wine I will aunswere Euen as well as this outward obiect of the sensible hearynes of Iacob resemblyng Esau was a figure of Christes humanitie and of the very humanitie in déede Thus may Hylary be aunswered to auoyde his authoritie from contrarying transubstantiation But this author shall neuer auoyde that him selfe hath brought out of Hylary which ouerthroweth him in his figuratiue speach consequently in his deniall of transubstantiation also as shall appeare in the further handlyng of this matter Where this author in the 18. leaf compareth these S. Paules wordes The bread that we breake is it not the communion of the body of Christ to the expoundyng of Christes wordes This is my body I deny that for Christes wordes declared the substaunce of the Sacrament when he sayd This is my body and S. Paul declareth the worthy vse of it accordyng to Christes institution and by the wordes The bread that we breake doth signifie the whole vse of the Supper wherein is breakyng blessing thankesgeuyng dispensing receiuyng and eatyng So as onely breakyng is not the communion and yet by that part in a figure of speach S. Paul meaneth all beyng the same as appeareth by the Scripture a terme in speach to goe breake bread although it be not alwayes so taken whereby to signifie to go celebrate our Lordes Supper and therfore bread in that place may signifie the commō bread as it is adhibite to be consecrat which by the secret power of God turned into the body of Christ and so distributed and receaued is the communiō of the body of Christ as the cup is likewise of the bloud of Christ after the benediction which benediction was not spoken of in the bread but yet must be vnderstanded As for callyng of Christes bread his body is to make it his body who as S. Paule sayth calleth that is not as it were and so maketh it to be The argumentes this author vseth in the 19. and 20. leafe of the order of Christes speaches as the Euangelistes rehearse them be captious deuises of this author in case he knoweth what S. Augustine writeth or els ignoraunce if he hath not read S. Augustine De
an accession after by merite and that he was conceiued onely man pag. 309. lin 12. Christ vseth vs as familiarly as he did his Apostles pag. 83. lin 54. Christ is not to be sayd conuersaunt in earth pag. 101. lin 16. ¶ Concessa ON what part thou Reader seest craft slyght shift obliquitie or in any one poynt an open manifestly there thou mayst consider what soeuer pretence be made of truth yet the victory of truth not to be there intended pag. 12. lin 19. When Christ had taught of the eatyng of him selfe being the bread descended from heauen declaryng that eatyng to signifie beleuyng then hee entred to speake of the geuyng of his flesh to be eaten pag. 27. lin 7. Christ must be spiritually in a man before he receiue the sacrament or he can not receiue the sacrament worthely pag. 48. lin 46. and pag. 140. lin vltima and pag. 172. lin 28. and 181. lin 28. How Christ is present pag. 61. lin 10. and pag. 71. lin 41. and pag. 90. lin 44. pag. 57. lin 17. and pag. 197. lin 30. By fayth we know onely the beyng present of Christes most precious body not the maner therof pag. 61. lin 43. What we speake of Christes body we must vnderstand a true body which hath both forme and quantitie pag. 71. lin 34. Although Christes body haue all those truth of forme and quantitie yet it is not present after the maner of quantitie pag. 71. lin 37. For the worthy receiuing of Christ we must come endued with Christ and clothed with him seemely in that garment pag. 92. lin 31. Really that is to say verely truly and in deede not in phantasie or imagination pag. 140. lin 21. All the old prayers and ceremonies sounde as the people did communicate with the Priest pag. 145. lin 9. Really and sensibly the old Authors in syllables vsed not for somuch as I haue read but corporally naturally they vsed speakyng of this sacrament pag. 155. lin 13. Christ may be called sensibly present pag. 155. lin 26. pag. 159. lin 10. By fayth Christ dwelleth in vs spiritually pag. 158. lin 16. Our perfect vnitie with Christ is to haue his fleshe in vs and to haue Christ bodily and naturally dwellyng in vs by his manhode pag. 166. lin 30. c. and pag. 17. lin 34. Euill men eate the body of Christ but sacramentally and not spiritually pag. 222. lin 47. Christes flesh in the sacrament is geuen vs to eate spiritually and therfore there may be no such imaginations to eate Christes body carnally after the maner hee walked here nor drinke his bloud as it was shed vpon the Crosse but spiritually vnderstanded it giueth lyfe pag. 241. lin 18. To eate onely in faith is specially to remember Christes flesh as it was visibly Crucified pag. 243. lin 28. We eate not Christ as he sitteth in heauen reignyng pag. 243. lin 32. The word Transubstantiation was first spoken of by publique authoritie in a generall Counsell where the Byshop of Rome was present pag. 250. lin 28. The word Nature signifieth both the substaunce and also propertie of the nature pag. 291. lin 27. The sensible thyng after the capacitie of common vnderstandyng is called substaunce but the inward nature in learnyng is properly called substaunce pag. 338. lin 31. In common bread the substaunce is not broken at all pag. 257. lin 32. The Catholicke doctrine teacheth not the dayly sacrifice of Christes most precious body and bloud to be an iteration of the once perfected sacrifice on the crosse but a sacrifice that representeth the sacrifice and sheweth it also before the faythfull eyes pag. 386. lin 20. The effect of the offeryng on the Crosse is geuen and dispensed in the Sacrament of Baptisme pag. 386. lin 30. By vertue of the same offeryng on the Crosse such as fall be releued in the sacrament of penaunce pag. ead lin 16. The dayly sacrifice of the Churche is also propitiatory but not in that degree of propitiation as for redēption regeneration or remission of deadly sinne which was once purchased and by force thereof is in the Sacramentes ministred but for the increase of Gods fauour the mitigation of Gods displeasure prouoked by our infirmities the subduyng of temptations and the perfection of vertue in vs. pag. 387. lin 15. c. All good workes good thoughtes and good meditations may be called sacrifices sacrifices propitiatory also for asmuch as in their degree God accepteth and taketh them through the effect and strength of the very sacrifice of Christes death pag. ead lin 19. c. To call the dayly offeryng a sacrifice satisfactory must haue an vnderstandyng that signifieth not the action of the Priest but the presence of Christs most precious body and bloud the very sacrifice of the world once perfectly offered beyng propitiatory and satisfactory for all the worlde pag. eadem lin 43. c. Or els the word satisfactory must haue a signification and meanyng that declareth the acception of the thyng done and not the propre counteruaile of the action For otherwise the dayly sacrifice in respect of the action of the Priest can not be called satisfactory and it is a worde in deede that soundeth not well so placed although it might be saued by a signification pag. eadem lin 46. c. I thinke this speach to be frequēted that the onely immolatiō of Christ in him selfe vpon the aultar of the Crosse is the very satisfactory sacrifice for the reconciliation of mankynd to the fauour of God pag. ead lin 50. I haue not read the dayly sacrifice of Christes most precious body to be called a sacrifice satisfactory pag eadem lin 52. But this speach hath in deede bene vsed that the Priest should sing satisfactory which they vnderstode of the satisfaction of the Priestes duety to attend the prayer he was required to make Ibid. lin 53. In the sacrifice of the Church Christes death is not iterated but a memory dayly renewed of that death so as Christes offeryng on the Crosse once done and consumate is now onely remembred pag. 391. lin 5. The same body is offered dayly on the aultar that was once offered vpon the Crosse but the same maner of offeryng is not dayly that was on the aultar of the Crosse. For the dayly offeryng is without bloudshedyng and is termed so to signifie that bloudshedyng once done to be sufficient pag. eadem lin 8. c. ¶ Matters wherein the Byshop varyeth from the truth and from the old Authours of the Church IF we eate not the fleshe of the sonne of man we haue not lyfe in vs bycause Christ hath ordered the Sacrament c. pag. 17. lin 12. When Christ sayd Take eate this is my body he fulfilled that which he promised in the vj. of Iohn that he would geue his flesh for the lyfe of the world pag. 27. lin 28. Mar. Ant. fol. 168. When Christ sayd the flesh profiteth nothyng he spake
we be in nature vnited to Christ as man and by his glorified flesh made partakers also of his diuinitie pag. 181. lin 8. Christes body and fleshe is a spirituall body and flesh and is present in the Sacrament after a spirituall maner and is spiritually receiued pag. eadem lin 26. 351. lin 19. In this Sacrament Christes humanitie and Godhead is really present and in Baptisme his Godhead with the effectuall vertue of his bloud in whiche we be washed not requiryng any reall presence therof pag. 191. lin 35. Spirite and lyfe may fall vpon naughtie men although for their malice it taryeth not pag. 211. lin 17. Christes woordes were not figuratiue but true and proper when he sayd this is my body pag. 9. lin 1. pag. 257. lin 1. and. 14. Marcus Antonius fol. 24. fa. 1. All the namyng of bread by Christ and S. Paule and all other must be vnderstand before sanctification and not after pag. 258. lin 15. When S. Paule sayd we be partakers of one bread he speaketh not of materiall bread pag. 258. lin 7. No mā knoweth the difference betwene the substaūce of bread cheese and ale pag. 271. lin 39. pag. 272. lin 23. pag. 339. lin 33. The accidentes of bread may be called the visible part of bread the outward kynde and forme of bread the appearaunce of bread a true sensible part of bread bread the nature of bread the matter of bread the visible matter of bread not that it is property bread but after the common speach and capacitie of men pag. 272. lin 16. and pag. 273. lin 25. pag. 283. lin 11. and pag. 289. lin 31. and. 290. lin 7. and. 292. lin 16. and pag. 396. lin 43. c. and. 305. lin 44. c. and pag .243 lin 45. pag. 359. lin 22. The accidentes of bread do corrupt putrifie and nourish pag. 273. lin 30. pag. 290. lin 7. and pag. 296. lin 48. and pag. 358. lin 28. The glorified body of Christ is of the owne nature neither visible nor palpable pag. 273. lin 40. In Baptisme the whole man is not regenerated but the soule pag. 286. lin 10. The soule onely of man is the substaunce of man Ibidem The soule onely is made the sonne of God pag. 286. lin 23. It is called meate bycause of the outward visible matter pag. 290. lin 9. As really and as truly as the soule of man is present in the body so really and so truly is the body of Christ present in the sacrament pag. 296. lin 5. and pag. 396. lin 15. The sacrifice of the Churche is perfected before the perception pag. 396. lin 32. In the Sacrament beyng a mystery ordered to feede vs is the truth of the presence of the natures earthly and celestiall The visible matter of the earthly creature in his propertie and nature for the vse of signification is necessaryly required pag. 310. lin 44.48 This saying of Gelasius The substaunce or nature of bread and wyne cease not to be there still may be verified in the last and nature he taketh for the proprietie pag. 310. lin 50. Theodorets saying that the substaunce of bread remayneth seemeth to speak of substaunce after the common capacitie and not as it is truely in learnyng vnderstanded an inward inuisible and not palpable nature pag. 321. lin 2. Christ in his Supper fulfilled this promise Panis quem ego dabo c. pag. 329. lin 25. Accidentes in common vnderstandyng bee called substaunces pag. 339. lin 31. In common bread the substaunce is not broken at all Ibidem lin 39. Accidentes be broken without substaunce pag. 339. lin 6. c. All alteration is in accidentes and the corruption of accidentes in the generation of new accidentes pag. 355. lin 4. Substaunce in Theodorete signifieth the outward visible nature that is to say accidentes pag. 359. lin 20. One thyng is but one substaunce sauyng onely in the person of Christ. pag. 359. lin 41. Baptisme is not wondred at how the holy Ghost is there but the wonder in this Sacrament is specially directed to the worke of God in the visible creatures how they bee chaunged into the body and bloud of Christ whiche is wrought before we receiue the Sacrament pag. 366. lin 45. Priestes do offer dayly Christes flesh and bloud pag. 384. lin 26. Christ offered him selfe in his Supper pag. eadem lin 27. Otherwise then Christ did can not be now done pag. 384. lin 28. The dayly offeryng by the Priest is dayly offered for sinne bycause we dayly fall pag. eadem lin 30. That is done in the aultar is a sacrifice and the same that is offered once and dayly to be the same Uisible Priestes Ministers to our inuisible Priest offer the dayly sacrifice in Christes Church pag. 392. lin 46. The body and bloud of Christ is properly sacrificed by the Priestes and is there offered for the effect of increase of lyfe in vs as it was offered vpon the Crosse to atcheue lyfe vnto vs. pag. 390. lin 46. c. The same body is offered dayly vpon on the aultar that was once offered vpon the Crosse but the same maner of offeryng is not dayly that was on the aultar of the Crosse for the dayly offeryng is without bloudshedyng and is termed so to signifie that bloudshedyng once done to be sufficient pag. 391. lin 7. c. The sacrifice of the Church is propitiatory pag. 391. lin 8. The sacrifice of the Church is a sacrifice geuyng lyfe Ibidem lin 8. Our sacrifice of laude and thankes geuyng can not be sayd a pure and cleane sacrifice to fulfill the Prophecie of Malachie Ibidem lin 10. Certayne godly and fruitfull Letters of D. Cranmer late Archbishop of Caunterbury ¶ A Letter to Queene Mary IT may please your Maiesty to pardon my presumption that I dare be so bold to write to your highnes but very necessity constrayneth me that your Maiesty may know my minde rather by mine owne writing then by other mens reportes So it is that vpon Saturday being the 7. day of this moneth I was cited to appeare at Rome the lxxx day after there to make aunswere to such matters as should be obiected agaynst me vpon the behalfe of the King and your most excellent Maiesty which matters the Thursday following were obiected agaynst me by Doctor Martin and Doctor Story your maiesties Proctors before the Bishop of Bloucester sitting in iudgement by commission from Rome But alas it can not but greue the hart of any naturall subiect to be accused of the King and Queene of his owne Realme and specially before an outward iudge or by authority comming from any person out of this Realme where the king and Queene as if they were subiectes within theyr owne Realme shall complayne and require iustice at a straungers handes agaynst theyr owne subiect being already condemned to death by their owne lawes as though the King and Queene could not do nor haue iustice within their owne Realme agaynst their owne
the spirite doe onely blesse or say well how shall he that occupieth the place of a priuate person say Amen to thy thanksgeuing for he perceiueth not what thou sayth Thou doost geue thankes well but the other is not edifie◠And not onely the ciuill law and all other writers a thousand and fiue hundred yeares cōtinually together haue expounded S. Paule not of preaching onely but of other Seruice sayd in the church but reason also geueth the same that if men be commaunded to heare any thing it must be spoken in a language which the hearers vnderstād or els as S. Paule sayth what auayleth it to heare So that the pope geuing a contrary commaundement that the people comming to the church shall heare they wer not what and aunswere they know not whereto taketh vpon him to commaunde not onely agaynst reason but also directly agaynst God And agayne I sayd whereas one sauiour Christ ordayned the Sacrament of his moste precious body and bloud to be receiued of all Christian people vnder the formes both of bread and wine and sayd of the cup drinke ye all of this the Pope geueth a cleane contrary commaundement that no lay man shall drinke of the cup of their saluation as though the cup of Saluation by the bloud of Christ pertayneth not to lay men And wherefore as Theophilus Alexandrinus whose works S. Hierome did translate about eleuē hundred yeares passed sayth that if Christ had bene crucified for the Deuils his cup should not be denied them yet the Pope denieth the cup of Christ to christen people for whome Christ was crucified so that if I should obay the Pope in these thinges I must needes disobay my sauior Christ. But I was aūswered hereto as commonly the Papistes do aūswere that vnder the forme of bread is whole Christs flesh and bloud so that whosoeuer receiueth the forme of bread receiueth aswell christes bloud as his flesh Let it be so yet in the forme of breade onely Christs bloud is not drunken but eaten nor receiued in the cup vnder forme of wine as Christ commaunded but eaten with the flesh vnder forme of bread and moreouer the bread is not the sacrament of his bloud but of his flesh only nor the cup is not the sacramēt of his flesh but of his bloud onely and so the pope keepeth from all lay persons the sacrament of their redemption by Christes bloud which Christ commaunded to geue vnto thē And furthermore Christ ordayned the sacrament in two kindes the one seperated from the other to be a representation of his death where his bloud was separated from his flesh which is not represented in one kind alone so that lay people receiue not the whole sacrament whereby Christes death is represented as he commaunded Moreouer as the pope taketh vpon him to geue the temporall sword or royall and imperiall power to kinges and princes so doth he likewise take vpon him to depose them frō their imperiall states if they be disobedient to him and commaundeth the subiectes to disobay their princes assoyling the subiects aswell of their obedience as of their lawfull othes made vnto their true Kinges and princes directly contrary to Gods commaundement who commaundeth all subiectes to obay their kinges or other rulers vnder them One Iohn Patriarche of Constātinople in the time of S. Gregory claymed superiority aboue all other bishops to whom S. Gregory writeth that therein he did iniury to his iii. brethren which were equall with him that is to say the bishop of Rome of Alexandria and of Antiochia which iii. were Patriarchall seas aswell as Constantinople and were brethren one to an other But sayth S. Gregory if any one shall exalt himselfe aboue all the rest to be the vniuersall Byshop the same passeth in pride but now the bishop of Rome exalteth himselfe not onely aboue all Byshops but also aboue all Kinges and Emperours and aboue the whole world taking vpon him to geue and take away to set vp and put downe as he shall thinke good And as the deuill hauing no such authority yet tooke vpon him to geue vnto Christ all the kingdomes of the world if he would fall down and worship him in like manner the Pope taketh vpon him to geue Empyres and Kingdomes being none of his to such as will fall downe and worship him and kisse his feete And moreouer his Lawyers and glosers so flatter him that they say he may commaund Emperours and Kinges to hold his stirrop when he lighteth vpon his horse and to be his footemen and that if any Emperour or King geue him any thing they geue him nothing but that is his owne and that he may dispense agaynst Gods word against the old and new Testament agaynst S. Paules Epistles and agaynst the Gospell And furthermore whatsouer he doth although he draw innumerable people by heapes with himselfe into hell yet may no mortall mā reproue him because he being iudge of all men may be iudged of no man and thus he sitteth in the temple of God as he were a God and nameth himselfe Gods Uicar and yet be dispenseth agaynst God If this be not to play Antichristes part I cānot tell what is Antichrist which is no more to say but Christs enemy and aduersary who shall sit in the temple of God aduauncyng himselfe aboue all other yet by hipocrisy and fayned Religion shall subuert the true Religion of Christ and vnder pretense and colour of Christian religion shall worke agaynst Christ and therefore hath the name of Antichrist Now if any man lift him selfe higher then the Pope hath done who lifteth him selfe aboue all the world or can bee more aduersary to Christ then to dispense agaynst Gods lawes and where Christ hath geuen any commaundement to cōmaunde directly the contrary that man must needes be taken for Antichrist But vntill the tyme that such a person may bee founde men may easly coniecture where to finde Antichrist wherefore seyng the Pope thus to ouerthrow both Gods lawes and mans lawes taketh vppon him to make Emperours and Kyngs to be vassals and subiectes vnto him specially the crowne of this Realme with the lawes and customes of the same I see no meane how I may cōsent to admit this vsurped power within this Realme contrary to myne othe myne obedience to Gods law myne allegeaunce and duetie to your Maiestie and my loue and affection to this Realme This that I haue spokē agaynst the power authoritie of the Pope I haue not spokē I take God to record and iudge for any malice I owe to the Popes person whom I know not but I shall pray to God to geue him grace that he may seeke aboue all thynges to promote Gods honour and glory and not to follow the trade of his predecessours in these latter dayes nor I haue not spoken it for feare of punishmēt and to auoyde the same thinkyng it rather an occasion to aggrauate then to diminish my trouble but I
haue spoken it for my most bounden duetie to the crowne liberties lawes and customes of this Realme but most especially to discharge my conscience in vttering the truth to Gods glory castyng away all feare by the comfort whiche I haue in Christes wordes who sayth Feare not them that kill the body and can not kill the Soule but feare him that can cast both body and soule into hell He that for feare to lose this life will forsake the truth shall lose the euerlastyng life and he that for the truthes sake will spend his life shall finde euerlastyng life And Christ promiseth to stand fast with them before his Father which will stand fast with him here which comfort is so great that whosoeuer hath his eyes fixed vpon Christ can not greatly passe of this life knowing that he may be sure to haue Christ stand by him in the presence of his Father in heauen As touching the Sacramēt I sayd that forasmuch as the whole matter stādeth in the vnderstādyng of these wordes of Christ This is my body This is my bloud I say that Christ in these words made demōstration of the bread wine and speake figuratiuely calling bread his body wine his bloud bycause he ordeined them to be the Sacramētes of his body bloud And where the Papistes say in these two points cōtrary vnto me that Christ called not bread his body but a substaunce vncertaine nor spake figuratiuely herein I sayd I would be iudged by the old Churche and which doctrine could be proued the elder that I would stād vnto And forasmuch as I haue alledged in my booke many old Authors both Greekes Latins which about a M. yeares after Christ cōtinually taught as I do if they could bryng forth but one old Author that sayth in these two pointes as they say I offred vj. or vij yeares agoe do offer yet still that I will geue place to them But when I bring forth any Author that sayth in most playne termes as I do yet sayth the other part that the Authors meant not so as who should say that the Authours spake one thyng and meant cleane contrary And vpō the other part whē they cā not finde any one Authour that sayth in wordes as they say yet say they that the Authors meant as they say Now whether they or I speake more to the purpose herein I referre it to the iudgement of all indifferent hearers Yea the old Church of Rome about a thousand yeares together neither beleued nor vsed the Sacrament as the Church of Rome hath done of late yeares For in the begynnyng the Church of Rome taught a pure a sound doctrine of the Sacrament but that after the Church of Rome fell into a new doctrine of Trāsubstantiation and with the doctrine they chaunged the vse of the Sacrament cōtrary to that Christ commaunded and the old Church of Rome vsed aboue a M. yeares And yet to deface the old they say that the new is the old wherein for my part I am content to the triall to stād But their doctrine is so fonde and vncomfortable that I marueile that any man would allow it if he knew what it is what soeuer they beare the people in hād that which they write in their bookes hath neither truth nor comfort For by their doctrine of one body of Christ is made two bodies one naturall hauing distance of members with forme and proportion of a mans perfect body and this body is in heauen but the body of Christ in the Sacrament by their owne doctrine must needes be a monstruous body hauyng neither distance of members nor forme fashion or proportion of a mans naturall body and such a body is in the Sacrament teach they and goeth into the mouth with the forme of bread and entreth no farther then the forme of bread goeth nor tarieth no longer then the forme of bread is by naturall heate in digestyng so that when the forme of bread is digested that body of Christ is gone And for asmuch as euill men be as long in digestyng as good men the body of Christ by their doctrine entreth as farre and tarieth as long in wicked as in godly men And what comfort can be herein to any Christian man to receaue Christes vnshapen body and it to enter no farther than the stomacke and to depart by and by as soone as the bread is consumed It seemeth to me a more sound and comfortable doctrine that Christ hath but one body and that hath forme and fashion of a mans true body which body spiritually entreth into the whole man body and soule and though the Sacrament be consumed yet whole Christ remaineth and feedeth the receauer vnto eternall life if he continue in godlynes neuer depart vntill the receauer forsake him And as for the wicked they haue not Christ within them at all who can not be where Belial is And this is my fayth and as me seemeth a sound doctrine accordyng to Gods word and sufficient for a Christian to beleue in that matter And if it can be shewed vnto me that the Popes authoritie is not preiudiciall to the thyngs before mentioned or that my doctrine in the Sacrament is erroneous which I thinke cā not be shewed then I was neuer nor will be so peruerse to stand wilfully in myne owne opinion but I shall with all humilitie submit my selfe vnto the Pope not onely to kisse his feete but an other part also An other cause why I refused to take the Byshop of Gloucester for my Iudge was the respect of his owne person beyng more then once periured First for that he beyng diuers tymes sworne neuer to consent that the G. of Rome should haue any iurisdiction within this Realme but to take the kyng and his successours for supreme heades of this Realme as by Gods lawes they be contrary to this lawfull oth the sayd B. sate then in iudgement by authoritie from Rome wherein he was periured and not worthy to sit as a Iudge The second periurie was that he tooke his Byshopricke both of the Queenes Maiestie and of the Pope makyng to eche of them a solemne othe which othes be so contrary that in the one he must needes be periured And furthermore in swearyng to the Pope to maintayne his lawes decrees constitutions ordinaunces reseruations and prouisions he declareth him selfe an enemy to the Imperiall crowne and to the Lawes and state of this Realme whereby hee declared him selfe not woorthy to sit as a Iudge within this Realme and for these considerations I refused to take him for my Iudge This was written in an other Letter to the Queene I Learned by Doct. Martin that at the day of your Maiesties Coronation you tooke an othe of obedience to the Pope of Rome and the same tyme you tooke an other othe to this Realme to maintaine the lawes liberties customes of the same And if your Maiestie did make an othe to the
the sayd M. Peter Martyr and other iiij or v. which I shall chose will by Gods grace take vpon vs to defend not onely the cōmon prayers of the Church the ministration of the Sacraments and other rites ceremonies but also all the doctrine and Religion set out by our soueraigne Lord kyng Edward the vi to be more pure accordyng to Gods word then any other that hath bene vsed in Englād this M. yeares so that Gods word may be the Iudge and that the reasons and profes vpon both parties may be set out in writing to the intent aswell that all the world may examine and Iudge thereon as that no man shall start backe from his writyng And where they boast of the fayth that hath bene in the Church this M. and v. hundreth yeares we will ioyne with them in this point and that the doctrine and vsage is to be followed which was in the Church a M. v. hundreth yeares past and we shall proue that the order of the Church set out at this present in this Realme by Act of Parliament is the same that was vsed in Church .1500 yeares past and so shall they be neuer able to proue theirs ¶ An Epistle to a certaine Lawyer for his aduise and counsell touchyng his Appeale THe law of nature requireth of all mē that so farforth as it may be done without offence to God euery one should seeke to defend and preserue his owne life Which thyng whē I about three dayes agoe bethought my selfe of and there withall remembred how that Martin Luther appealed in his tyme from Pope Leo the tenth to a generall Councell least I should seeme rashly and vnaduisedly to cast away my selfe I determined to Appeale in like sort to some lawfull and free generall Counsell But seyng the order and forme of an Appeale pertaineth to the Lawyers wherof I my selfe am ignoraunt and seyng that Luthers Appeale commeth not to my hand I purposed to breake my mynde in this matter to some faythfull frend and skilfull in the law whose helpe I might vse in this behalfe and you onely among other came to me remembraunce as a man most meete in this Uniuersitie for that purpose But this is a matter that requireth great silence so that no mā know of it before it be done It is so that I am summoned to make myne answere at Rome the xvi day of this moneth before the which day I thinke it good after sentence pronoūced to make myne Appeale But whether I should first Appeale from the Iudge delegate to the pope so afterward to the generall Councell or els leauyng the Pope I should Appeale immediatly to the Councell herein I stand in neede of your counsell Many causes there be for the whiche I thinke good to Appeale First because I am by an Othe bound neuer to consent to the receiuyng of the Byshop of Romes authoritie into this Realme Besides this whereas I vtterly refused to make aunswere to the Articles obiected vnto me by the Byshop of Gloucester appointed by the Pope to be my Iudge yet I was content to aunswere Martin and Story with this Protestation that myne aunswere should not be taken as made before a Iudge nor yet in place of Iudgement but as pertainyng nothyng to Iudgement at all and moreouer after I had made myne aunswere I required to haue a Copy of the same that I might either by addyng thereunto by alteryng or takyng from it correct and amend it as I thought good The which though both the Byshop of Gloucester and also the kyng and Queenes proctors promised me yet haue they altogether brokē promise with me and haue not permitted me to correct my sayd aunsweres accordyng to my request and yet notwithstandyng haue as I vnderstand Registred the same as actes formally done in place of iudgement Finally forasmuch as all this my trouble commeth vpon my departyng from the Byshop of Rome and from the popish Religion so that now the quarell is betwixt the Pope him selfe and me and no man can be a lawfull and indifferent Iudge in his owne cause it seemeth me thinke good reason that I should be suffered to Appeale to some generall Councell in this matter specially seyng the law of nature as they say denieth no man the remedy of Appeale in such cases Now since it is very requisite that this matter should be kept as close as may be if perhaps for lacke of perfect skill herein you shall haue neede of further aduise then I beseech you euen for the fidelity and loue you beare to me in Christ that you will open to no creature aliue whose the case is And for asmuch as the tyme is now at hand and the matter requireth great expedition let me obtaine this much of you I beseech you that laying aside all other your studies and businesse for the tyme you will apply this my matter onely till you haue brought it to passe The chiefest cause in very deede to tell you the truth of this myne Appeale is that I might gayne tyme if it shall so please God to liue vntill I haue finished myne aunswere agaynst Marcus Antonius Constantius which I haue now in hand But if the aduersaryes of the truth will not admit myne Appeale as I feare they will not Gods will be done I passe not vpon it so that God may therein be glorified be it by my life or by my death For it is much better for me to dye in Christes quarell and to raigne with him then here to be shut vp and kept in the prison of this body vnlesse it were to continue yet still a while in this warrefare for the commoditie and profite of my brethren and to the further aduauncyng of Gods glory to whom be all glory for euermore Amen There is also yet an other cause why I thinke good to Appeale that whereas I am cited to goe to Rome to aunswere there for my selfe I am notwithstandyng kept here fast in prison that I can not there appeare at the tyme appointed And moreouer for asmuch as the state I stand in is a matter of lyfe and death so that I haue great neede of learned coūsell for my defence in this behalfe yet when I made my earnest request for the same all maner of counsell and helpe of proctors aduocates and lawyers was vtterly denied me Your louyng frend T. C. ¶ To maistres Wilkinson a godly matrone exhortyng her to flye in the tyme of persecution and to seeke her dwellyng where she might serue God accordyng to his word THe true cōforter in all distresse is onely God through his sonne Iesus Christ and who soeuer hath him hath company enough although he were in a wildernesse all alone and he that hath xx thousād in his company if God be absent is in a miserable wildernesse and desolation In him is all comfort and without him is none Wherfore I beseech you seeke your dwellyng there as you may truely and rightly
of the Cardinalles Colledge in Oxford refused it Question of the kynges diuorce with Katherine Dowager Doct. Stephens and Doct. Foxe chief furtherers of the kynges diuorce Doct. Stephens D. Foxe Doct. Cranmer coÌ„ferryng together of the kynges cause Doct. Cranmers aunswere in the question of the kynges diuorce Doct. Cranmers deuise well lyked of The king troubled about the cause of his diuorce Doct. Cranmer sent for to the kyng in post Talke betwene the kyng and Doct. Cranmer The king troubled in coÌ„scieÌ„ce Doct. Cranmer excusing and disabling himselfe to the kyng Doct. Cranmer assigned by the kyng to searche the Scriptures in the cause of his diuorce The kyng first geuen to vnderstand that the Pope hath no authoritie to dispence with the word of God The kynges matter remoued from the popes Canon law to the triall of the Scriptures The kynges Mariage fouÌ„de by Gods word vnlawfull Doct. Cranmer with other sâ—nt to Rome Ambassadour to the Pope Arguing to the popes face that contrary to the word of God he had no power to dispense Doct. Cranmer made the popes Penitentiary Doct. Cranmer Ambassadour to the Emperour Conference betwene Byshop Cranmer and Cornelius Agrippa Doct. Cranmer made Archbyshop of Cant. 1. Tim. 3. Titus 1. The order of Doct. Cranmers study The gentle nature of Doctour Cranmer Doct. Cranmer stoute and constant in Gods cause Doct. Cranmer a stoute enemy agaynst the sâ—â— Articles Of this commyng of the I. Cromwell and the two Dukes to the Archbyshop ExaÌ„ple for Ecclesiasticall Pastours Archb. CraÌ„mer in displeasure about the imployng of Chauntrey landes The singular patience of this Archbyshop A story betwen the Archb. of Caunterbury a popish Priest his enemy The rayling of a popish Priest agaynst Doct. Cranmer Chersey â—â—yng for his kynseâ—â— to the Archb. The Priest sent for to the Archbyshop The Archbyshops wordes vnto the Parson The Priest coÌ„fesseth his fault to the Archb. The raâ—he tâ—â—ngeâ— of men sclaunderously speakyng â—uill by meÌ„ whoÌ„ they neuer knew nor saw before The Priestest aunswere The Masse Priest ignoraunt in the Scripture The giâ—e of popish Priests when they fauour not the Religion of a man they sclauÌ„der his person Euill will neuer sayd well The Archbyshop forgâ—â—eth and dismisseth the Priest The liberall doynges of this Archbyshop The Archbyshop clearyng all his debtes before his attainder The Archb. Cranmer euer constant in defence of Christs truth and Gospell The Archb. alone standeth in defence of the truth Bishop Heath and Byshop Skippe forsake the Archb. in the playne field The Archb. incensed by B. Heath and B. Skippe to geue ouer the defence of the Gospell The aunswere of the Archb. to Doct. Heath Skippe The Papistes busie to bryng the Archb. out of credit with the kyng The Archbyshop agayne accused to the kyng The kyng sent Syr Antony Deny at midnight for the Archb. The kynges wordes and aduise for the supportation of the Archbyshop The Archbyshops auÌ„swere to the kyng The kyngs fauourable care consideration towarde the Archb. of Cant. The kyng sendeth his â—â—gnet in the behalfe of the Archb. of Canterbury The Archbyshop beyng one of the Counsell made to staÌ„d at the Counsell chamber doore waityng Doct. Buttes the kings Phisition a frend of the Archb. The Archbyshop called before the Counsell The CouÌ„sel beyng set agaynst the Archb. hee sheweth the kyngs Kyng appealeth from them The kynges wordes to the Counsell in defence of the Archbyshop The Lordes of the Counsell glad to be freÌ„ds againe with the Archbyshâ—p The kyng a great supporter of Cranmer The Lord CroÌ„wels wordes to the Archbyshop The true and goâ—ly doctrine of the Sacrament in fiue bookes set forth by the Archb. of Canterbury An explication of StepheÌ„ Gardiner agaynst Cranmer Archbyshop of CaÌ„t. Manâ—taltameÌ„te repostum Iudicium paridis spraetaeque inniria matris Virg. AEneid 1. This Doctour Thornton was after the Byshop of Douer a cruell wicked persecuter This Byshop was Doctour Heath Byshop after of Yorkâ— Cranmer condemned of treason Cranmer released of treason and accused of heresie Cranmer had to Oxford Of this condeÌ„nation read in the last 〈◊〉 pag. 1554. The Archbyshop contented to recant Causes mouyng the Archbyshop to geue with the tyme. The Queenâ—s hart set agaynst Cranmer The Queene conferreth with Doct. Cole about Cranmers burnyng L. William of Thame L. ShaÌ„doys Syr Thomas Bridges Syr Iohn Browne appourted to be at Cranmers execution Cranmer writteth subscribeth the Articles with his owne handes Doct. Cranmer brought to D. Coles SerinoÌ„ Doct. Cranmer set vpoÌ„ a stage Doct. Coles Sermon deuided into three partes The summe effect of Doct. Coles Sermon at Oxford If Cole gaue this iudgement vpon Cranmer wheÌ„ hee had repented what iudgement is then to be geueÌ„ of Cole whiche alwayes hath pâ—â—dured in errour and neuer yet repented If all heretickes in England should be burned where should Doct. Cole haue bene ere now Lex non aequalitatis sed iâ—iquitatis No state in this earth so hye nor so sure but it may fall Doct. Cole encourageth the Archb. to take his death patiently 1. Cor. 10. Doct. Cole reioyseth in the Archbyshops conuersion bâ—t that reioysing lasted not long Dirâ—ges and Masses promised for Cranmers soule The teares of the Archb. Cranmer required to declare his fayth CraÌ„mer willing to declare his fayth The wordes of the Archb. to the people The Prayer of the Archb. The last words of exhortatioÌ„ of the Archb. to the people Exhortation to contempt of the world Exhortation to obedience Exhortation to brotherly loue Exhortation to rich meÌ„ of this world mouyng them to charitable almes Luke 18. 1. Iohn 3. The Archb. declareth the true coÌ„fession of his fayth without all colour or dissemblyng The Archb. reuoketh his former recantation and repenteth the same The Archb. refuseth the Pope as Christes enemy and Antichrist The Archb. standeth to his booke written agaynst Wincester The expectation of the Papistes deceaued The Popistes in a great chaffe agaynst the Archbyshop Cranmers aunswere to the Papistes Cranmer pulled downe from the stage Cranmer led to the fire The Archb. brought to the place of execution M. Ely refuseth to geue his haÌ„d to the Archb. The Archb. tyed to tht â—â—â—ke Cranmer putteth his right haÌ„d which subscribed first into the â—râ— The last wordâ— of Cranmer at his death The Friers lying report of Cranmer I would as much as may be do my due to the matter and him also The craft of winchester in the beginnyng The summe of the booke Because the author pretendeth a defence of the catholick faith it were reason to know what it is The effect of that this author calleth his faith Untrue report Bread wine water be not holy but holy tokens They be not bare tokens Christ is preseÌ„t in his sacramentes A catholike fayth Thus authors fayth hath no point of a catholike fayth Untrue report Scripture in letter fauoureth not thus autors fayth My doctrine is catholike by your owne description