bothe in setting furthe the true doctrine of Christes religion also in the defence of the same against heretikes This autor as he hathe written most pleynteously in other maters of our faithe so likewise in this argument he hathe written at large in many of his workes so playnly against this errour of transustanciacion y t the papistes loue least to heare of hym of al other wrytours partly for his autoritie partly bicause he openeth the mater more fully than any other doth Therfore I will rehearse mo places of him thā hertofore I haue done of the other And furst what can be more playne than that which he wryteth vpon the 89. psalme speakīg of the sacrament of the Lordes body and blood and rehearsing as it were Christes wordes to his disciples after this maner It is not this body which ye doo see that ye shall eate nother shall ye drynke this blood which the souldyours y t crucifie me shall spill or sheade I doo commende vnto you a mysterie or a sacramēt which spiritually vnderstanded shall geue you life Now if Christ hade no moo natural and corporal bodies but that one which they thā presently bothe hearde sawe nor other natural blood but that which was in the same body and the which the souldiours did afterwarde cruelly shede vpon the crosse and nother this body nor this blood was by this declaracion of S. Augustine either to be eaten or dronken but the mysterie therof spiritually to be vnderstanded than I conclude if this sayeng and exposicion of S. Augustine be true that y e mysterie which the disciples should eate was not the natural body of Christ but a mysterie of the same spiritually to be vnderstāded For as S. Augustine sayeth in his 20. boke Contra Faustum ca. 21. Christes fleshe and blood was in the olde testament promysed by similitudes and signes of their sacrifices and was exhibited in dede and in truthe vpon y e crosse but the same is celebrated by a sacrament of remembraunce vpō y e aultare And in his boke De fide ad Petrum ca. 19. he sayeth that in these sacrifices meanyng of the olde lawe it is figuratiuely signified what was than to be geuen but in this sacrifice it is euidently signified what is allready geuen vnderstāding in the sacrifice vpon the aultare the remembraunce and thākes geuing for the fleshe which he offred for vs for the blood which he shedde for vs vpon the crosse as in the same place and euidently ther it maye appeare An other euident and cleare place wherin it appeareth that by the sacramentall bread which Christ called his body he ment a figure of his body As vpon the .3 Psalme wher S. Augustine speaketh this in playne termes Christ did admytte Iudas vnto the feast in the which he commēded vnto his disciples the figure of his bodye This was Christes last supper before his passion wherin he did ordayne the sacrament of his body as all learned men doo agree S. Augustine also in his 23. epistle to Bonifacius teacheth how sacramentes doo beare the names of y e thinges wherof they be sacramentes bothe in Baptisme and in the Lordes table euen as we call euery good frydaye the daye of Christes passiō and euery Easter daye the daye of Christes resurrection whan in very dede ther was but one daye wherin he suffred and but one daye wherin he rose And why doo we than call them so which are not so in dede but bicause they are in like tyme and course of the yeare as those dayes were wherin those thinges wer done Was Christ sayeth S. Augustī offred any more but once And he offred him self And yet in a sacrament or represētaciō not only euery solēne feast of Easter but also euery day to y e people he is offred so y t he dothe not lye y t sayeth He is euery daye offred For if Sacramētes hade not sō similitudes or likenesse of those thinges wherof they be Sacramētes they could in no wise be sacramētes for their similitudes and likenesse commonly they haue the names of the thinges wherof they be sacramētes Therfore as after a certayn maner of speche y e sacramēt of Christes body is Christes body the sacrament of Christes blood is Christes blood so likewise the Sacrament of faithe is faithe After this maner of speche as S. Augustine teacheth in his questiones Super Leuiticum Cōtra Adamantinū it is sayed in scripture that .vii eares of corne be seuen yeares seuen kyen be vii yeares y e rocke was Christ blood is y e soule the which last sayeng sayeth S. Augustine in his boke Contra Adimantinum is vnderstanded to be spoken in a signe or figure For the Lord himself did not sticke to saye This is my body whan he gaue the signe of his body For we must not considre in sacramētes sayeth S. Augustine in an other place What they be but what they doo signifie for they be signes of thinges being one thing in them selues and yet signifieng an other thing For the heauenly bread sayeth he speaking of the sacramental bread by some maner of speache is called Christes body whan in very dede it is the Sacrament of his body c. What can be more playne or more clearly spoken than are these places of S. Augustine before rehearsed if men were not obstinately bent to mayntene an vntruthe to receaue nothing what so euer dothe set it furthe Yet one place more of S. Augustine will I allege which is very cleare to this purpose that Christes natural body is in heauen and not here corporally in the Sacrament and so let him departe In his .50 treatise which he wryteth vpon Iohn̄ he teacheth playnly and clearly how Christ being bothe God and man is bothe here after a certayn maner and yet in heauen and not here in his natural body and substaunce which he toke of the blessed virgin Mary speaking thus of Christ and sayeng By his diuine Maiestie by his prouidence and by his vnspeakeable inuisible grace y t is fulfilled which he spake Beholde I am with you vnto the ende of the worlde But as concernyng his fleshe which he toke in his incarnacion as touching that which was borne of the virgine as concernyng that which was apprehended by the Iewes crucified vpon a tree and taken downe from the crosse lapped in lynen clothes and buryed and rose agayn and appeared after his resurrection as concernyng that fleshe he sayed ye shall not euer haue me with you Why so For as cōcernyng his fleshe he was conuersaūt with his disciples .xl. Dayes and they accompanyeng seing and not folowīg hym he wēt vp in to heauen is not here By y e presēce of his diuine maiestie he did not departe as concernyng y e presēce of his diuine maiestie w c haue Christ euer w t vs but as concernyng y e presence of his fleshe he sayed truly to his disciples Ye
A brief declaracion of the Lordes Supper written by the syngular learned man and most constaunt Martir of Iesus Christ Nicholas Ridley Bishop of London prisoner in Oxforde a litel before he suffred deathe for the true testimonie of Christ. Roma 8. For thy sake are we killed all daye long and are compted as shepe appointed to be slayne Neuertheles in all these thinges we ouercome through him that loued vs. Anno. 1555. To the Reader VNderstande good reader that this great clearke and blessed Martir bishop Nicholas Ridley sought not by setting furthe this notable godly piece of learned worke the vayne glorie of the world nor temporal frendship of men for his present aduauncement muche lesse he hunted hereby for Bishoprikes and benefices as all his aduersaries the enemies of Christes truthe and ordinaunce the Papistes cōmonly doo but hauing consideracion of the great charge of soule committed vnto him and of thaccompte therof which the iustice of God wolde require at his handes intending therwithall to be founde blameles in the great daye of the Lorde seing he was put aparte to defende the Gospel he not only forsoke landes goodes world frendes and him selfe withall and testified the truthe specified in this boke by his learned mouthe in the open presence of the worlde but also to leaue a sure monument and loue token vnto his flocke he hathe regestred it by his owne penne in this forme ensuyng and sealed it vp with his blood Forasmuch than as he hath approued him selfe no vayne disputour no wethercocke nor hipocrite seyng he hathe willingly geuen his lyfe for the truthe and inasmuche also as his loue and most constaunt christian conscience speaketh frely vnto thee gentill reader I beseche thee for Christes sake and thyne owne lende him thine indifferent heart and pacient hearyng ⧠MAny thynges confounde a weake memorie a fewe places well weighed and perceaued lyghten the vnderstādyng Truthe is ther to be searched wher it is certayne to be hade Though God dothe speake the truthe by man yet in mannes worde which God hath not reuealed to be his a mā may doubt without mystrust in god Christ is the truthe of God reuealed vnto man from heauen by God hym selfe and therfore in his worde the truthe is to be founde which is to be embraced of al that be his Christ biddeth vs aske we shall haue searche and we shall fynde knocke and it shal be opened vnto vs. Therfore our heauenly father the autor and fountayne of all truthe the botomles sea of al vnderstanding sende downe we beseche the thy holy spirite in to our heartes and lyghten our vnderstanding wyth the beames of thy heauenly grace We aske thee this O merciful father not in respecte of our desartes but for thy deare sonne oure saueour Iesus Christes sake Thou knowest O heauenly father that the controuersie about the Sacrament of the blessed bodye and blood of thy deare sonne our saueour Iesu Christ hathe troubled not of late only y e churche of Englāde Fraunce Germanye and Italie but also many yeares agoo The fault is ours no doubt therfore for we haue deserued thy plague But O Lorde be mercifull and releue our myserie with som light of grace Thow knowest o Lorde how this wicked world rolleth vp and downe and releth to fro and careth not what thy will is so it maye abyde in wealthe If truthe haue wealthe who are so stowte to defende the truthe as they But if Christes crosse be layed on truthes backe than they vanyshe awaye straight as waxe before y e fire But these are not they O heauenly father for whom I make my most moane but for those sely ones O Lord which haue a zeale vnto thee those I meane which wold and wishe to knowe thy will and yet are letted holden backe blynded by the subtilties of Satan and his Ministers the wickednesse of this wretched worde and the synful lustes and affectiones of the fleshe Alas Lorde thow knowest that we be of our selues but fleshe wherin ther dwelleth nothing that is good How than is it possible for mā without the O Lorde to vnderstande thy truthe in dede Can the natural man perceaue the will of God O Lorde to whom thow gauest a zeale of thee geue them also we beseche thee y e knowlage of thy blessed will Suffre not thē O Lorde blyndlye to be ledde for to stryue against thee as thow diddest those Alas which crucified thine owne sōne forgeue them O Lorde for thy deare sonnes sake for they knowe not what they doo They do thinke Alas O Lorde for lacke of knowlage that they doo vnto the good seruice euen whan agaynst thee they doo most extremely rage Remembre O Lorde we beseche the for whom thy martyr Stephan did praye and whom thyne holy Aopstle Paule did so truly and earnestly loue that for their saluacion he wished hym self accursed for them Remembre O heauenly father the prayer of thy deare sonne our saueour Christe vpon the crosse whan he sayd vnto thee O father forgeue them they knowe not what they doo With this forgeuenesse O good Lorde geue me I beseche the thy grace so here briefly to set furthe the sayenges of thy sonne our saueour Iesu Christ of his Euāgelistes and of his apostles that in this aforesaide cōtrouersie the light of the truthe by y e lanterne of thy worde maye shyne vnto al them that loue the. Of the Lordes last supper do speake expressely the euāgelistes Matthewe Marke Luke but non more playnlye nor more fully declareth y e same than dothe S. Paule partly in the 10. Chaptre but especially in y e 11. Chap. of his furst epistle to y e Corinthianes As Matthewe and Marke doo agree muche in wordes so do likewise Luke and S. Paule But al. iiij no doubt as they were all taught in one schole inspired w t one spirite so taught they all one truthe God graunt vs to vnderstande it well Amen Matthewe setteth furthe Christes supper thus Whan euē was come he sate downe w t the .xij. c. As they did eate Iesus toke bread and gaue thankes brake it and gaue it to the disciples and sayed Take eate This is my body And he toke the cuppe gaue thankes gaue it to them sayeng Drynke ye al of this for this is my blood of the newe testament that is shedde for many for the Remission of synnes I saye vnto you I will not drynke hencefurthe of this frute of the vyne tree vntil that daye whan I shall drynke that newe in my fathers kingdome And whā they hade sayed grace they went out c. Now Marke speaketh it thus And as they eate Iesus toke bread blessed and brake and gaue to them and saied Take eate This is my body And he toke the cuppe gaue thākes and gaue it to them and they all dranke of it And he sayed vnto them This is my blood of the newe testament which is shedde for many
as he sayeth he receaued of the Lorde that he hade geuen them before and now rehearseth in his Epistle I trust no man is so farre from all reasō but he wil graūt me that this is not likely so to be Now than if you graunt me that Paule did vse the forme of wordes which he writeth Let vs than rehearse and considre Paules wordes which he sayeth Christ spake thus vpon y e cup. This cup is the new testamēt in my blood this do as often as ye shal drinke it in the remembraunce of me Here I wold knowe whether that Christes wordes spokē vpō the cuppe were not as mightye in worke and as effectuall in significacion to all intentes constructiones and purposes as our Parliamēt men doo speake as they were spoken vpon the bread If this be graunted which thing I thinke no man can denye than further I reasō thus But the worde is in the wordes spoken vpō the Lordes bread dothe mightily signifie saye they the chaunge of the substaunce of that which goeth before it in to y e substaūce of y t which foloweth after y t is of the substaunce of bread in to the substaunce of Christes bodye whan Christ sayeth This is my bodye Now than if Christes wordes which are spoken vpon the cuppe which Paule here rehearseth be of the same might and power bothe in working and signifieng Than must this worde is whan Christ sayeth This cuppe is the newe testament c. turne the substaūce of the cuppe in to the substaunce of the newe testament And if thow wilt saye that this worde is nother maketh nor signifieth any suche chaunge of the cuppe although it be saide of Christ that this cuppe is the newe testament yet Christ ment no suche chaunge as that Mary Sir euen so saye I whā Christ sayde of the bread which he toke and after thankes geuen brake and gaue them sayeng Take eate this is my body he ment no more any suche chaunge of the substaūce of bread in to the substaūce of his naturall bodye than he ment of the chaunge and Transubstanciacion of the cuppe in to the substaunce of the newe testament And if thow wilt saye that the worde cuppe here in Christes wordes dothe not signifie the cuppe it self but the wyne or thīg conteyned in the cuppe by a figure called Metonimia for y e Christes wordes ment and so must nedes be takē thow sayest very well But I praye the by the waye here note two thinges Furst that this worde is hathe no suche streynght or significacion in the Lordes wordes to make or to signifie any transubstantiacion Secōdly that the Lordes wordes wherby he instituted the sacramēt of his blood he vseth a figuratyne speache Now vayne than is it that some so earnestly doo saye as if were an infallible rule that in doctrine in the institucion of the sacramentes Christ vsed no figures but all his wordes are to be strayned to their propre significaciōs whā as here what so euer thou sayest was in y e cuppe nother y t nor the cup it selfe taking euery worde in his propre significaciō was y e new testamēt but in vnderstanding that which was in the cuppe by the cuppe y t is a figuratiue speache yea also thou cannest not verifie or truly saye of that whether thou sayest it was wyne or Christes blood to be the newe testament without a figure also Thus in one sentence spoken of Christ in the institucion of the sacrament of his blood the figure must helpe vs twyse So vntrue is it that some doo wryte that Christ vseth no figure in the doctrine of faythe nor in the institucion of his Sacramentes But some saye yf we shal thus admitte figures in doctrine than shall all the articles of our fayth by figures and allegories shortlye be transformed and vnlosed I saye it is lyke fault euē the same to deny y e figure where y e place so requireth to be vnderstanden as vaynely to make it a figuratiue speache which is to be vnderstāden in his propre significacion The rules wherby y e speche is knowen whan it is figuratiue wherby it is none S. Augustine in his boke De doctrina christiana geueth diuerse learned lessons very necessarie to be knowen of y e studentes in Goddes worde Of the which one I will rehearse which is thys If sayeth he the scripture dothe seme to commaūde a thing which is wicked or vngodlye or to forbidde a thing that charitie dothe require than knowe thou sayeth he that the speche is figuratiue And for exāple he bringeth the sayeng of Christ in y e .6 chap. of S. Io. Except ye eate the fleshe of the sōne of mā drinke his blood ye can not haue lyfe in you it semeth to cōmaunde a wicked or an vngodly thing Wherfore it is a figuratiue speche cōmaūding to haue cōmuniō felowship w t Christes passiō deuoutly holsomlye to laye vp in memorie that his fleshe was crucified and wounded for vs. And here I can not but maruel at some men surely of muche excellēt fynesse of wyt of great eloquēce that are not ashamed to wryte say y t this aforesaid sayeng of Christ is after S. Austin a figuratiue speche in dede howbeit not vnto the learned but to the vnlearned Here let any man that but indifferently vnderstandeth the latine tongue read the place in S. Austen if he perceaue not clearly S Augustines wordes mynde to be cōtrary let me abyde therof the rebuke This lessō of S. Augustine I haue therfore the rather set furthe bicause it teacheth vs to vnderstāde that place in Iohn̄ figuratyuely Euen so surely the same lesson with the example of S. Augustines exposiciones therof teacheth vs not only by the same to vnderstande Christes wordes in the institucion of the Sacrament bothe of his body and of his blood figuratyuely but also the very true meanyng and vnderstanding of the same For if to commaunde to eate the fleshe of the sonne of man and to drinke his blood semeth to commaunde an inconueniēce and an vngodlynesse and is euen so in dede if it be vnderstandē as the wordes doo stāde in their propre significacion and therfore must be vnderstanden figuratyuely spiritually as S. Augustine dothe godly and learnedly interprete them Than surely Christ commaunding in his last supper to eate his body and to drinke his blood semed to cōmaunde in sounde of wordes as great and euen the same inconuenience and vngodlinesse as did his wordes in the .6 chap. of S. Iohn̄ and therfore must euen by the same reason be lykewise vnderstanden and expounded figuratyuely spiritually as S. Augustine did the other Wherunto that exposicion of S. Augustine may seme to be the more mere for that Christ in his supper to the commaundement of eating and drinking of his body blood addeth Doo this in the remēbraunce of me Which wordes surely were the keye that opened
by the subtile sophister Duns and lately renewed nowe in our dayes with an eloquent stile muche finesse of wytte But what can craftye inuencion subtiltie in sophismes eloquēce or fynesse of wytte preuayle against the vnfallible worde of God What nede we to striue and cōtend what thing we breake for Paul sayeth speaking vndoubtedly of the Lordes table The bread sayeth he which we breake is it not the partaking or feloweship of the Lordes bodye Whervpon it foloweth that after the thākes geuyng it is bread which we breake And how oftē in the Actes of y e apostles is the Lordes supper signified by breaking of bread They did perseuer sayeth S. Luke in the Apostles doctrin cōmunion breakīg of bread And they brake bread in euery house And again ī an other place whā they were come together to break bread c. s. Paul which setteth furth most fully in his wryting bothe the doctrine ye right vse of y e Lordes supper y e sacramētal eating drīking of Christes body blood calleth it fyue times bread bread bread bread bread The sacramental bread is the mysticall body and so it is called in scripture ▪ 1. Cor. 10. as it is called the natural body of Christ. But Christes mystical body is the congregacion of christianes Now nomā was euer so fonde as to saye that that sacramētal bread is transubstanciated and chaunged in to the substaunce of the congregaciō Wherfore no man should likewise thinke or saye y t y e bread is trāsubstāciated chaūged in to y e natural substaunce of Christes humayne nature But my mynde is not here to wryt what maye be gathered out of scriptures for this purpose but only to note here briefly those which seme vnto me to be the most playne places Therfore contented to haue spoken thus muche of the sacramētal bread I will now speake a litel of y e Lordes cuppe And this shalbe my thrid argumēt groūded vpō Christes owne wordes The natural substaunce of the sacramental wyne remayneth still and is y e material substaūce of the sacrament of y e blood of Christ Therfore it is like wise so in y e Sacramental bread I know that he that is of a cōtrary opinion wil denye the former parte of myne Argument But I wil proue it thus by the playne wordes of Christ him self bothe in Mathewe and in Marke Christes wordes are these after the wordes said vpō the cup. I saie vnto you saieth Christ I wil not drīke hēcefurthe of this frute of the vyne tree vntil I shall drinke that newe in my fathers kingdome Here note how Christ calleth playnlie his cuppe the frute of the vyne tree But the frute of the vyne tree is very natural wyne Wherfore the natural substaunce of the wyne dothe remayne still in the Sacrament of Christes blood And here in speaking of y e Lordes cup it cometh vnto my remembraunce y e vanitie of Innocentius his sātastical inuencion which by Paules wordes I did confute before here did promise somwhat more to speake that is this If the transubstanciacion be made by this worde Blessed in Marke sayed vpon the bread as Innocentius that pope did saye Than surely seing that worde is not sayed of Christ nother in any of the euangelistes nor in S. Paule vpon the cuppe Ther is no transubstanciacion of the wyne at al. For wher the cause dothe faile ther can not folowe the effecte But the sacramental bread the sacramental wyne doo bothe remayne in their natural substaunce alike and if the one be not chaunged as of the sacramental wyne it appeareth euidētly than ther is no such transubstanciacion in nother of them bothe All that put affirme this chaunge of y e substaunce of bread wyne in to the substaunce of Christes bodye and blood called Transubstanciacion doo also say this chaunge to be made by a certain forme of prescripte wordes and non other But what they be that make the chaunge either of the one or of the other vndoubtedly euē they that doo write most fynely in these our dayes almost confesse playnlye that they can not tell For although they graunt to certayn of the olde autors as Crysostome and Ambrose that these wordes This is my body are the wordes of consecracion of the sacrament of the body yet saye they these wordes maye well be so called bicause they doo assure vs of the consecracion therof whether it be done before these wordes be spoken or no. But as for this their doubt concerning the sacrament of the bodye I let it passe Let vs now considre the wordes which perteyne to the cuppe This is furst euidēt y t as Matthewe muche agreeth w t Marke likewise Luke with Paule much agreeth herin in forme of wordes so in the same the forme of wordes in Matthewe and Marke is diuerse frō that which is in Luke Paule y e olde autors doo most rehearse y e forme of wordes in Matthewe Marke bicause I wene they semed to thē most cleare But here I wold knowe whether it is credible or no that Luke and Paule whan they celebrated the Lordes supper w t their congregaciones that they did not vse the same forme of wordes at the Lordes table which they wrote Luke in his gospel and Paule in his epistle Of Luke bicause he was a phisicion whether some will graunt that he might be a priest or no and was hable to receaue y e ordre of priesthoode which they saye is geuen by vertue of these wordes sayed by the bishop Take thou autoritie to sacrifice for the quycke and the dead I can not tell but if they shoulde be so strayt vpon Luke either for his crafte or elles for lacke of suche power geuen him by vertue of thaforesaid wordes than I wene bothe Petre and Paule are in daungier to be deposed of their priesthoode for the crafte either of fyshing which was Petres or making of tētes which was Paules were more vile than the the science of phisike And as for those sacramental wordes of the ordre of Priesthoode to haue autoritie to sacrifice bothe for y e quyck and the dead I wene Petre Paule yf they were bothe alyue were not hable to proue that euer Christ gaue them such autoritie or euer saied any suche wordes vnto them But I will let Luke goo and bicause Paule speaketh more for hym self I will rehearse his wordes That sayeth Paule which I receaued of the Lorde I gaue vnto you For the Lorde Iesus c. And so he setteth furth the hole instituciō right vse of the Lordes supper Now seing that Paule here sayeth that which he receaued of the Lorde he hade geuen them and that which he hath receaued and geuen them before by worde of mouthe now he rehearseth wryteth the same in his epistle is it credible that Paule wolde neuer vse this forme of wordes vpon the Lordes cuppe which
reuealed the spirituall and godly exposicion vnto S. Augustine But I haue taried longer in setting furthe y e forme of Christes wordes vpon the Lordes cuppe written by Paule and Luke than I did inteÌ„de to do And yet in speaking of the forme of Christes wordes spoken vpon his cuppe cometh now to my remebrauÌ„ce the forme of wordes vsed in the latine Masse vpon the Lordes cuppe Wherof I doo not a litell maruaile what shoulde be the cause seing the latine Masse agreeth with the euangelistes and Paule in the forme of wordes sayed vpon the bread why in the wordes sayed vpon the Lordes cuppe it diffreth from them all yea and addeth to the wordes of Christ spoken vpon the cuppe these wordes Misterium fidei that is the mysterie of faith which ar not redde to be attributed vnto the sacrament of Christes blood nother in the euangelistes nor in Paule nor so farre as I knowe in any other place of holy scripture yea and if it maye haue som good exposicion yet why it should not be aswell added vnto the wordes of Christ vpon his breade as vpon his cuppe surely I doo not see y e mysterie And bicause I see in the vse of the latine masse the sacrament of y e blood abused whan it is denyed vnto the laye people cleane contrary vnto Goddes most certain worde for why I doo beseche the should the sacrameÌ„t of Christes blood be denyed vnto the lay christiaÌ„ more thaÌ„ to y e priest Did not Christ sheade his blood aswell for y e laye godly maÌ„ as for y e godly priest If thow wilt saye yeas that he did so But yet y e sacrameÌ„t of the blood is not to be receaued without the offring vp sacrificeing therof vnto God the father bothe for the quicke and for the dead and no man maye make oblacion of Christes blood vnto God but a priest and therfore the priest alone that but in his Masse only maye receaue the sacrament of the blood And call you this Maisters Misterium fidei Alas alas I feare me this is before God Misterium iniquitatis the misterie of iniquitie suche as S. Paule speaketh of in his epistle to the Thessalonians The Lorde be mercifull vnto vs and blesse vs lighten his countenaunce vpon vs and be mercifull vnto vs. That we may knowe thy waye vpon earthe and among all people thy saluacion This kynde of oblacion standeth vponTransubstanciacion his cousyn germayne and they doo growe bothe vpoÌ„ one grouÌ„de The lord wede it out of his vineyard shortly if it be his blessed wil pleasure y e bitter roote To speake of this oblacioÌ„ how muche is it iniurious vnto Christes passion How it can not but with highe blasphemye and haynous arrogauncie intolerable pryde be claimed of any man other than of Christ hym self how much and how playnly it repugneth vnto the manifest wordes the true sense and meaning of holy scripture in many places especially in the epistle to the Hebrues the mater is so long and other haue written in it at large that my mynde is nowe not to intreate therof any further For onlye in this my scribling I intende to search out and set furth by the scriptures according to Goddes gracious gifte of my poore knowlage whether the true sense and meaniÌ„g of Christes wordes in y e institucioÌ„ of his holy supper do requyre any TraÌ„substaÌ„ciacioÌ„ as they cal it or that the very substauÌ„ce of bread and wyne doo remayne still in the Lordes supper and be the material substaunce of the holy Sacrament of Christ our saueours blessed body and blood Yet ther remayneth one vayne Quidditie of Duns in this mater y t which bicause some that write now doo seme to like it so well that they haue strypped him out of Dunces dustye and darke termes and pricked hym and paynted hym in freshe colours of an eloquent stile may therfore deceaue the more except the errour be warely eschued Duns sayeth in these wordes of Christ This is my body this pronowne demonstratyue meanyng the worde this if ye will knowe what it dothe shewe or demonstrate whether y e bread that Christ toke or no he answereth no but only one thing in substaunce it poynteth wherof the nature or name it dothe not tell but leaueth that to be determyned and tolde by that which foloweth y e worde is that is by Praedicatum as the logician dothe speake and therfore he calleth this pronowne demonstratiue This Indiuiduum Vagum that is a waÌ„dring propre name wherby we maye poynt out and shewe any one thing in substaunce what thing so euer it be That this ymaginacion is vayne and vntruly applyed vnto these wordes of Christ This is my body it may appeare plainly in y e wordes of Luke and Paule sayed vpon the cuppe coÌ„ferred with y e forme of wordes spokeÌ„ vpoÌ„ y e cuppe in Mathewe and Marke For as vpoÌ„ the bread it is sayed of al This is my body so of Matthewe and Marke it is sayed of the cuppe This is my blood Than if in the wordes This is my body the worde this be as Duns calleth it a waÌ„dring name to appoynt and shewe furthe any one thing wherof the name and nature it dothe not tell so must it be likewyse in those wordes of Matthewe and Marke vpon the Lordes cuppe This is my blood But in the wordes of Matthewe and Marke it signifieth and poynteth out y e same that it dothe in the Lordes wordes vpon the cuppe in Luke and Paule wher it is sayd This cuppe is the newe testament in my blood c. Therfore in Matthewe Marke the ê“nowne demonstratyue this dothe not wandre to poynt only one thing in substaunce not shewing what it is but telleth it plainlie what it is no lesse in Mathewe and Marke vnto the eie than is done in Luke and Paule by puttiÌ„g to this worde cuppe bothe vnto the eie and vnto the eare For taking the cuppe and demoÌ„strating or shewing it vnto his disciples by this ê“nowne demonstratiue this and sayeng vnto them Drinke ye all of this it was than al one to say This is my blood as to saye This cuppe is my blood meanyng by the cuppe as the nature of the speche dothe require the thing conteyned in the cuppe So likewise without all doubt whan Christ hade taken bread geuen thankes and broken it and giuing it to his disciples sayed Take and so demonstrating and shewing that bread which he hade in his handes to saye than This is my body to haue saied This bread is my body As it were all one if a man lacking a knyfe goiÌ„g to his oisters wold say vnto an other whoÌ„ he sawe to haue two kniues Sir I praye you lende me the one of your knyues Were it not now all one to answer hym Sir holde I will lende you this to eate your meate but not to open oysters withall and holde I will lende you this knyfe to eate your
man drinke his blood c. This lettre dothe kill Yf in that place the lettre dothe kil wherin is cōmaūded the eating of Christes fleshe than surelye in those wordes of Christe wherin Christ cōmaundeth vs to eate his body the literal sense therof likewise dothe kill For it is no lesse crime but euen the same and all one in the literal sense to eate Christes bodye to eate Christes fleshe Wherfore if the one doo kil except it be vnderstanden figuratiuely and spiritually than the other surely dothe kill likewise But that to eate Christes fleshe dothe kil so vnderstanden Origene affirmeth playnly in his wordes aboue rehearsed Wherfore it can not be iustly denyed but to eate Christes body literally vnderstanden must nedes after hym kill likewise The answer that is made to this place of Origen of the papistes is so folishe that it bewrayeth it self without any further confutacion It is the same that they make to a place of S. Augustine in his boke De doctrina Christiana Wher as Saint Augustine speaketh in effecte y e same thing that Origene dothe here The papistes answer is this To y e carnal mā y e literal sense is hurtful but not so to the spiritual As though to vnderstande that in his propre sense which ought to be taken figuratiuely were to the carnall man a daungerous perile but to the spiritual man non at all Now to Chrisostome whom I bring for the seconde wrytour in the greke churche He speaking agaynst y e vnholy vsing of mānes body which after S. Paule ought to be kept pure and holy as the very tēple of the holy goost sayeth thus If it be a fault sayeth he to translate the holyed vesselles in the which is conteyned not the true body of Christ but the mysterie of the body to priuate vses how muche more offence is it to abuse and defile the vesselles of our body These be the wordes of Chrisostome But I trowe that here many fowle shiftes are deuised to defeate this place The autor sayeth one is suspected I answer But in this place neuer fault was foūde with hym vnto these our dayes And whether this autor was Iohn̄ Chrisostome him self the Archebishop of Constantinopole or no that is not the mater For of all it is graunted that he was a writour of that age and a man of great learnyng so that it is manifest that this which he wryteth was the receaued opiniō of learned men in his dayes Or elles vndoubtedly in suche a mater his sayeng shoulde haue bē impugned of som y t wrote in his tyme or nere vnto the same Naye sayeth an other if this soluciō will not serue we maye saye that Chrisostome did not speake of the vesselles of the Lordes cuppe or such as were than vsed at the Lordes table but of the vesselles vsed in the temple in the olde lawe This answer will serue no more than the other For here Chrisostome speaketh of suche vesselles wherin was y e which was called the body of Christ although it was not y e true body sayeth he of Christ but the mystery of Christes bodye Now of the vessels of the olde lawe the wrytours doo vse no suche maner of phrase for their sacrifices were not called Christes body For than Christ was not but in shadowes and figures and not by the Sacrament of his body reuealed Erasmus which was a mā that coulde vnderstande the wordes and sense of the wrytour although he wolde not be sene to speake agaynst this errour of transubstanciacion bicause he durst not yet in his tyme declareth playnely that this sayeng of this wrytour is non otherwise to be vnderstanden Yet can I sayeth the thirde papist fynde out a fyne subtil solucion for this place graunt all that yet is sayed bothe allowing here the wrytour also that he ment of the vessels of the Lordes table For sayeth he the body of Christ is not conteyned in them at the Lordes table as in a place but as in a mysterie Is not this a prety shifte and a mystical solucion But by the same solucion than Christes body is not in the Lordes table nor in the priestes handes nor in the pixe and so is he here no where For they will not saye that he is either here or ther as in a place This answer pleaseth so well the maker that he hym self after he had played with it a litel while and shewed the fynesse of his wytte eloquence therin is content to geue it ouer say but it is not to be thought that Chrisostome wolde speake after this fynesse or subtiltie and therfore he returneth agayn vnto the seconde answer for his shoore Ancor which is sufficiētly confuted before An other shorte place of Chrisostome I will rehearse which if any indifferēcy maye be hearde in playne termes setteth furth the truth of this mater Before y e bread saieth Chrisostome Ad Cesariū Monachū be halowed we cal it bread but y e grace of God sanctifieng it by the meanes of the priest it is deliuered now frō the name of bread and estemeth worthy to be called Christes body although the nature of bread tarye in it still These be Chrisostomes wordes wherin I praye you what can be sayed or thought more playne against this errour of transubstanciaciō than to declare that the bread abydeth so still And yet to this so playn a place som are not ashamed thus shamefully to elude it sayeng we graunt y e nature of bread remayneth still thus for that it maye be sene felt and tasted and yet the corporal substaunce of y e bread therfore is gone least two bodies should be confused together Christe should be thought impanate What contrarietie and falshead is in this answer the symple man maie easily perceaue Is not this a playne contrarietie to graunt that the natur of bread remayneth so still y t it maye be sene felt and tasted yet to saye the corporal substaunce is gone to auoide absurditie of Christes impanacion And what manifest falshead is this to saye or meane that if the bread should remayne still than must folowe the inconuenience of impanaciō As though the very bread could not be a sacrament of Christes body as water is of baptisme except Christ should vnyte the nature of bread to his nature in vnitie of persone and make of the bread God Now let vs heare Theodoretus which is the last of the thre Greke autors He wryteth in his dialoge Contra Eutichen thus He that calleth his natural body corne and bread and also named hym self a vyne tree euen he the same hathe honoured the Symboles that is the sacramental signes with the names of his body and blood not chaungeing in dede the nature it self but adding grace vnto the nature what can be more playnly sayed than this that this olde wrytour sayeth that although the Sacramentes beare the name of the body and blood of Christ
darken it and wraste it quite froÌ„ y e true meaning to a coÌ„trary seÌ„se And I knowe also y e eloqueÌ„ce crafte and fynesse of wytte hathe gone about to bleare mennes eies to stoppe their eares in thaforenamed writours that men should nother heare nor see what those autors both wryte and teache so playnlye that except men shoulde be made bothe starke blynde and deafe they can not but of necessitie yf they will reade and weye them indiffereÌ„tly bothe heare and see what they doo meane whan eloqueÌ„ce crafte and fynesse of wytte haue done all that they can Nowe let vs heare the olde wrytours of the Greke churche Origene which lyued about .1250 yeares agoo a man for the excellencie of his learnyng so hyghly estemed in Christes churche that he was coÌ„pted â–ª iudged y e singular teacher in his tyme of Christes religioÌ„ the coÌ„fouÌ„der of heresies the scholemaister of many godly maters an opener of the hyghe mysteries in scripture He writing vp on the .15 chap. of S. Matthewes gospel sayeth thus But yf any thing entre into the mouthe it goeth away into the bely is auoided into the draught Yea that meate which is sanctified by the worde of God prayer concerning the mater therof it goeth away into the belye is auoyded into the draught But for y e praier which is added vnto it for y e proporcion of the faithe it is made profitable making the mynde hable to perceaue and see that which is profitable For it is not the material substaunce of bread but the worde which is spoken vpon it that is profitable to y e man that eateth it not vnworthely And this I meane of the typical symbolical that is sacramental bodye Thus farre go the wordes of Origene where it is playne furst that Origene speaking here of the sacrameÌ„t of the Lordes supper as the last wordes do playnly signifie dothe meane teache that the material substaunce therof is receaued digested auoyded as the material substaunce of other bread meates is which could not be if ther were no material substauÌ„ce of bread at all as the fantastical opinioÌ„ of traÌ„substaÌ„ciacioÌ„ dothe put It is a worlde to see y e answer of y e papistes to this place of Origene In y e disputacioÌ„s which were in this mater in the Parliament house and in bothe the vniuersities of Cambridge and Oxforde they that defended transubstaÌ„ciacioÌ„ sayd that this parte of Origene was but set furth of late by Erasmus and therfore is to be suspected But howe vayne this their answer is it appeareth playnly For so may al the good olde autors which laye in olde libraries are set furthe of late be by this reason reiected as ClemeÌ„s Alexandrinus Theodoretus Iustinus Ecclesiastica historia Nicephori other suche An other answer they hade sayeng that Origine is noted to haue erred in som pointes and therfore faithe is not to be geuen in this mater vnto hym But this answer well weighed dothe ministre good mater to y e cleare confutacion of it self For in dede we graunt that in som poyntes Origene did erre But those errours are gathered out and noted both of S. Ierome and Epiphanius so that his workes those errours excepted are now so muche the more of autoritie y e suche great learned men toke paynes to drawe out of hym what so euer they thought in him to be written amysse But as concerning this mater of the Lordes supper nother they nor yet euer any other auncient autor did euer saye that Origene did erre Nowe bicause these two answeres haue ben of late so confuted and confounded that it is wel perceaued that they will take no place therfore some which haue written sence that tyme haue forged twoo other answerres euen of the same molde The former wherof is that Origene in this place spake not of the sacrament of bread or wyne of the Lordes table but of an other mystical meate of the which S. Augustine maketh mencion to be geuen vnto them that were taught the faithe before they were baptised But Origenes owne wordes in .ij. sentences before rehearsed being put together proue this answer vntrue For he sayeth that he meaneth of that figuratiue and mystical body which ê“fiteth them that doo receaue it worthily alluding so playnlye vnto S. Paules wordes spoken of the Lordes supper that it is a shame for any learned man ones to open his mouthe to the contrary And that breade which S. Augustine speaketh of he caÌ„ not proue that any such thing was vsed in Origenes tyme. Yea though that coulde be proued yet was ther neuer bread in any tyme called a sacramental body sauing the sacramental bread of the Lordes table which is called of Origene the typical and symbolical bodye of Christ. The seconde of the two newe fouÌ„de answeres is yet most monstrous of al other which is this But let vs grauÌ„t saye they that Origen spake of y e Lordes supper and by the mater therof was vnderstanded the material substaunce of bread wyne what thaÌ„ say they For though y e material substauÌ„ce was once gone departed by reason of Transubstanciacion whiles the formes of the bread and the wyne did remayne yet now it is no inconuenieÌ„ce to saye that as the material substauÌ„ce did departe at the entring in of Christes body vnder thaforesayd formes so whan the sayd formes be destroyed and do not remayne than cometh agayn the substaunce of bread wyne And this say they is very mete in this mysterie that that which beganne w t the miracle shall ende in a myracle Yf I hade not redde this fantasie I wolde scarcely haue beleued that any learned maÌ„ euer wolde haue set furth suche a foolishe fantasie which not onlye lacketh all grounde either of Goddes worde reason or of any auncient wrytour but is also cleane contrarie to the common rules of schole diuinitie which is that no miracle is to be affirmed and put without necessitie And althoughe for their former miracle which is their TransubstanciacioÌ„ they haue some colour thoughe it be but vayne sayeng it is done by the power and vertue of these wordes of Christ This is my bodye yet to make this seconde miracle of returnyng the materiall substaunce agayne they haue no colour at all Or elles I pray them shewe me by what wordes of Christ is y e seconde myracle wrought Thus ye maye see that the sleightes and shiftes which crafte and witte can inuente to wraste the true sense of Origene can not take place But nowe let vs heare one other place of Origene and so we wyll let him go Origene in the .11 Homilie Super Leuiticum sayeth that ther is also euen in the foure Gospelles and not onlye in the olde Testament a lettre meanyng a literall sense which kylleth For yf thou folowe sayeth he y e lettre in that sayeng Except ye eate the fleshe of the sonne of