of them fo 2â— pa. 2. only remayne Secondlye ye erre shamefully when ye affirme that saint Austen maketh here with you for he sayeth that christes bodie and bloud are yn this sacrifice and that it is made of them beynge present as both the godhead and manhod are really present in christ of which he is made Where was your sight my lord whan ye sawe not this that is so playne Ye do now alledge Chrysostom out of an epistle forged yn his name and it yet proueth not your purpose For he meÌ„t not that the substance of breade remayned in the sacrament but the nature Ad Caesarium monachum of yt meanynge therbie the natural properties and qualites of bread or els he should haue bene directly against hymselfe in an other place which is Fo. 23. certainly his where he sayeth thus These works which he then doth wourke Homi. â—3 in Matth. in that soupper are not of mans power he hymselfe worketh now also he maketh the thinges perfect We priestes are the ministers but it is christ hymselfe that halloueth the bread and wyne and doth turne or change them Loo he sayeth that christ hymselfe chaungeth the breade and wyne how than do they remayne stil as ye saye that they do yn their substaÌ„ce Agayne Chrysostom sayeth The Homi. 24. in 1. cor 10. thinge that is in the chalice is that which ranne out of christes side and we are partakers of it Dyd wyne runne out of christes side vpon the crosse not bloud In an other place he vtterly denyeth that we do see bread and wyne yn the sacrament but I aske of Homi. 60. ad populuÌ„ my lord why he tryumpheth so much wheÌ„ some authours seame to saye that as twoo natures and substances remayne stil yn the sacrament which are christes bodie and bloud and bread wyne yf he saye wel eueÌ„ so two natures are whol yn christ not turned nor coÌ„sumed ffor this saiynge of them is fullye against his doctrine because it proueth that christes bodie bloud are realllye yn the sacrameÌ„t as the nature of man and of god both are really in christ our sauiour not by à signe only Wherfore may it not be wel sayed here that my lord is slayne with Episcopus iste suoiugulatur aiunt gladio Gelasius the pope his owne swerd as they saye common lye Gelasius the pope whom ye now alleage for yow is against you saynge Certeinly the sacrameÌ„tes of christes bodie and bloud which we receue are à dyuyne thinge wherfore we be also made by them partakers of the dyvyne nature yet not withstandynge that the substance or nature of breade and wyne ceaseth not to be And vndoubteldy an image à similitude of christes bodie and bloude are celebrated in the action of the mysteryes Wherefore it is shewed vnto vs euideÌ„tly enoughe that we muste iudge that Ex antidoto contra omnes hereses yn christ oure lord hymselfe that we do professe celebrate be in his image that like as they passe ouer yn to this dyuine substance when the holie goost makinge perfect permanente tamen in sua proprietate naturae yet the thinge abydinge stil yn the propertie of is nature euenso that principal mysterie whose workinge and vertu they do verilie represent vnto vs of the which it is euident that the priÌ„cipal mysterie is one christ properlie remayninge for as much as they do shewe plainly that one and à perfect christ abydeth stil hitherto that writer Note here first good reader that he sayeth that we be made partakers of the nature of god by the sacrament which his sayinge can not be vnderstanded of the receauinge of pure breade and wyne but it muste neades be taken of the very bodie bloud of christe ioyned to the godhead yn one personne which when we do receaue in the sacrament we are made partakers of that same dyuyne nature by hauinge it yn vs bodily Secondly this doctour sayeth not that Damascenus lib 4. cap. 14. onlye bread and wyne remayne yn the holy sacrament and that there is not the bodye and bloud of christ which you my lord do defende and therfore he maketh not for your purpose Thirdly this senteÌ„ce is so imperfect and so for from true latine as it appeareth by the latine wordes that no man can make of it any perfect seÌ„se or construe it and therfore it is not lyke that Gelasius which was very wel learned wrote it Fourthlye he was pope and setteth fourth the popes primacie largely in many places as it appeareth both in his boke of decrees also yn the decrees gathered by GratiaÌ„ Why theÌ„ do ye my lord alledge hym yn the matter of the sacrament whoÌ„ ye folow not yn the other Agayne he calleth the sacrament in an other place the holy bodie of christ and maketh plaine mention of the shewynge of it to the people which ye reproue Also he affirmeth that virgens Lib. suoruÌ„ decretorum cap. 8. and wydowes which haue made à vowe of virginite and chastyte may not marrye and calleth al such mariages whoredome and incest biddeth that they should be broken agayne as Cap. 20. ca. â—1 it doth appeare yn his decrees Why do ye not folow hym yn these thinges Now ye do alleage Theodoretus for yow which sayeth that christ called the breade ad wyne his bodie and bloudde and yet he chauÌ„ged not their natures To this authour I saye first Theodoretu lib. DialogoruÌ„ that he was an heretike and defended one Nestorius heresie which sayed that christ was not god and man both as it appeareth yn Cyrillus workes yn other dyuers bookes and therfore he ought not to be beleued in this matter of our fayth Secondly I saye that Lege anathematismos Cyrilli his adnexa he was à Greake writer and the Greakes did not generally receaue this doctrine of transubstaÌ„tiation before the procedynge of the holie goost from the father and the sonne althoughe many of the best learned meÌ„ of them beleued and taught both these thinges Now why should his errour in this our matter of transubstantiation make any more against oure belefe therin theÌ„ his or any other Greake doctours errour in the procediÌ„ge of the holy goost from the father the soÌ„ne shold hurt our faith therin Thirdly he teacheth not as ye do that christes bodie is not in the holy sacrament but only bread and wyne signes and figures of them wherfore he is not vpon your side as ye saye that he his And that doth appeare wel by these his wordes written vpon this sainge of S Paul He that eateth and drinketh vnworthilie shal be gyltie of our lordes bodie and bloud This is paules meanynge sayeth he Theodoritus in Gagnei scholijs that as the Iewes and Iudas did Christ wronge spake against hym spiteful checkinge wordes euen so they do iniurie to his name which do touch his
disceaue vs and so it appeareth that this your reason my lord is of none effecte nor force at al. We opeÌ„ no gate as ye say falsely that we do vnto valentinianus heresy nor to any such other For althoughe we do say that our senses are not to be trusted yn this matter of the holy sacrament yet we denye not but that some credence may be geuen wel vnto them in natural thinges hauyng their natural condition and state And as concernyng the heresy of them that sayed christ was not à very man or that he had not very flesh and bones the contrary was not proued sufficiently by their senses which sawe hym but by many textes both of the old and also the newe testament Moreouer the scriptures are manyfest enoughe in many places against Basilides and such other that sayed christ was not crucified for vs but Simon Cyrenaeus by which scriptures that article and the beliefe of it is approued and not by oure senses RomanoruÌ„ 10. for S Paul sayeth that fayth commeth of the hearyng of gods word and not of hearyng seyng feeling or of any of the other our senses for they may often tymes disceaue vs as Saint Homi. 93. in Matthaeum Ioan. 14. Chrysostom wytnesseth where gods word which is the trueth itself can neuer disceaue vs. Wherfore the senses are not to be trusted heryn and so is al that reasoniÌ„ge which ye make my lord here wythe so many wordes not worth à bleue point Ye say also thus And yf there be no trust to be geuen The bysshop fo 22 pa. 2. to oure senses in this matter of the sacrament why than do the papistes so stoutly affirme that the accidentes remayne after the consecration which can not be iudged but by the senses Syr we do affirme that there is no The confutation trust to be geuen to our senses in matters of our faith especially where they do iudge agenst goddes word as they do in this matter For the scripture sayth that christ promysed to geue his apostles bread which should be his owne very flesh that he wold geue for the lyfe of the world and that he gaue Ioan. 8. Matth. 28. 1. Cor. 11. to them his bodie which was crucified for them the senses did iudge that it was but bread of corne Agayne our senses do iudge only the accidentes properly as al learned men do wel know whiche every maÌ„ may affirme to be yn the sacrament but notthinke ther of that their substances do remayne althoughe the scripture expresselye sayeth not that there remayneth no bread but that it is christes bodie which he gaue for vs to death and so it can not be breade forthat was not geueÌ„ for vs vpon the crosse The sacrament is not an elusion of our senses as ye say althoughe in yt appeare bread Gen. 18 19. Mar vt Ioan. 20 Actorum 1. and yt is not there as god and the angelles seamed men to loth AbrahaÌ„ and other and were not very men in dede and yet they were no elusions of their senses werfore an aÌ„uwseare is now made to al this your reasoninge my lord vpon the iudgement of our senses and natural reason Now ye labour The bysshop lib. 2. fo 23. pag. 1. to proue that oure belefe in this matter is against the fayth of the old autours of christes church ye alleageiustine the Holie martyr affirminge The confutation Anno d. â—0 103 90. that he is the oldest author that is knowen this daie to writte any treatie vpoÌ„ the sacrameÌ„tes which is very false for Anacletus the martyr Clement dionise saynt Martial certen other moo wrate of that matter before hym à great while as it appareth plainlie by their lyues writinges and bookes The confutation I muche merueile my lord that ye are not à shamed falsely to alleage iustine Iustinus wordes for the furtheraÌ„ce of your wicked doctrine which neuer wrote as ye say butthus onlie ThaÌ„ afterward bread the chalice of wyne and water myxed together is broughe vnto the bisshop or priest This nourysshemeÌ„t is called of vs Eucharistia And we take not these thinges as euery meate and euery drinke but as throughe goddes word Christ oure sauiour was incarnate and toke fleashe and bloud for oure saluation euen so we haue learned by these wordes This is my bodie This is my bloud that this meate by the which oure flesh bloud are throughe alteration nouryshed when it is blessed by the prayers of the word goddes sonne he meaneth is the flesh and bloud of iesu hymselfe incarnate These are his wordes which are as plaiÌ„lie agaiÌ„st your doctrine as caÌ„ be in four pointes The Iustinus whoÌ„ my lord alleageth for hym is first is that he speaketh of meÌ„glinge of wyne water together in the chalice of which the scripture maketh no meÌ„tioÌ„ agaiÌ„st hym in four pointes therfore ye saye that it is not to be passed vpon Secondlye he is contrarie to your teachinge whan he affirmeth verites not Wrytten in scripture that christ prayed when he did consecrate and that by his prayers the bread and wyne were blessed which is not mentioned yn the scripture and for that cause ye despise it and say it is à thinge of no necessite at al. Thirdly he sayeth that these are the wordes of consecration This is my bodye This is mybloud which ye denie Four thely he sayeth that the bread wine by which our flesh bloud are nouryshed are after they be blessed throughe christes prayers the flesh and bloud Marke â–ª this reader of christ How blynd were ye theÌ„ my lord when ye alleaged this authour for oure purpose which is so euideÌ„tly against your doctrine But what yf Iustinus had thought as ye saye that he did yet did not so indede that bread wyne remayned stil yn the sacrameÌ„t Could that haue proued your doctrine that there is nothinge els in the sacrament but bread an wyne only No man is so blynd but he maye se that it doth not proue your purpose thoughe it seame to make with luther Also many of the Greakes affirmed that the holie goost proceded not froÌ„ the father and he sonne both they agreed not theryn with the latine church vntil the conseil holden at florentia wich was with yn these cxx yeres and yet that their opinion proued not that the latine church erred yn their belefe why then should either Iustinus saying Theodoretus or any other of the Greates which wrote that bread and wyne remayned stil yn the sacrament make against our faith touchyngetraÌ„substaÌ„tiatioÌ„ which Greakes generallie did not receaue manyyeres after the latine church had manifestly taught yt But Iustinus saye ye affirmeth that the bread and wyne are turned in to our flesh and bloud to nouryshe our bodies It is true but not as ye do take his sainge for he meÌ„t that coÌ„mon bread and wyne are turned by the alteration
of the scriptures the general conciles and the docteurs expositions of gods word to be so much blynded and so long à tyme But pride wyl haue à fal as it hath euer had heretofore espacially in theÌ„ that haue matched them selfes in matieres of religion against his dear espouse the church agaynst whom hel gates that is to say synne heresie neuer could nor neuer shal preuaile For did not Matth. 16. christ which euer was hard in his prayers as he sayth hym self praye for Peter that his fayth that is to say the fayth of the catholike church which Lucae 20. Ioan. 11. Heb. 5. he had receaued and confessed should not decaye Agayne doth not paul affirme Ephes 5. that christ loued his spouse the church so dearly that he gaue hymself for her to death for to cleanse her froÌ„ al fylthynes of synne that she should not haue one spotte therof Houe can these sainges of christ and paul stand wyth their opinion that say as my lord doth that the church hath erred yn the fayth and hath committed idolatry so many hundred yeares euen seÌ„ce the begynnyng of it Is this christ dearly to loue her Is this the office of Ro 12. 1. Cor. 11. 12 Coloss 1. à good husband towardes his wyfe Is this to purge her from euery spot of synne Wold christ which is head of the church and the church his body suffre that his oune hody runne in to heresie superstition blasphemye Marke 1. paril 9. Psal 136 such other abymynable crimes and to abide so long yn them He suffered the Synagoge of the ieues to fal yn to bodilie captyuite and to lye afflicted theryn but. lxx yeres and then he made her francke and free agayne and wold he then suffre christes church which he loued much more then he did the Synagoge to runne in to such abomynations and to continue stil in them at the least as my lord sayeth in his booke foure or fyue hundreth yeares Went not as christ sayth in Matth. 20. the parable god furth in the morning early to cal men to wourke yn his vyneyard Howe is it then true that he called not men vnto the ryght fayth of this sacrameÌ„t the space of M. yeres after this sacrament was instituted vntil berengarius came and then called but à very fewe in nombre Called not christ his church the kyndome Matthaei 13 Note of heauen Why then do these men make her the kyndom of hel by ascribinge vnto her heresie blasphemye idolatrie What blynd arrogancye and arrogant blyndnes is this Who can abide it What hart is so hard and stony that it can forbeare weapyng lamenting and mournyng for them that are this blynded do dailie make many other meÌ„ so blynd that they do fal vnwares headlong in to the den of heresie and damnation for euer Cal and crye good reader contynuallie Psal 67. nyght daye vnto god and saye Aryse ó lord aryse that thy ennymies may be dispersed and confounded Say deuoutly wyth tongue and Psal 43. mynde Aryse vp o lord why doest thou sleap Aryse vp expel vs not from the for euer Why turnest thow thy face from vs Doest thou forget our pouerte and trouble Arise vp ó lord helpe vs ó lord and delyuer vs for thy names sake Pray I say Christian reader and ceasse not that thou be not led yn to tentation and fal froÌ„ the ryght belief of the holy church but that thou maest stand theryn maÌ„ly and confesse it vntil thy death and therby obteyne that infinite and endles ioyes which god hath promysed vnto al that contynue in his loue and the kepyng of his commaundementes vntil their lyfes endes The whych our lord Iesus Christ for his deare and bytter passions sake graunt vnto vs to whom wyth the father and the holie goost be honour and prayse for euer Amen ⧠That it pertayneth onlye vnto the church of christ to expound the scripture to discusse al doubtes of our fayth Whych shal at any tyme ryse emonge vs And that also the general concils ought not to be despised but much regarded obediently receaued and foloued NOwe for as much as euery man is as Dauid and Paul Psal 115 affirme à lier of hymself and the holie spirit of god Rom. 3. was promysed of Christ vnto the church to teache her al trueth and to abide stil wyth her for euer for to rule Ioan. 14. 1â— directe and lead her from tyme to tyme that she shold not erre in the faith and pure religion of Christ who can iustly denye but that the authorite to expound the scriptures and to determyne controuersies of the fayth rysing out of the same must neades pertayne vnto her only and not vnto one particuliere person nor to any one countrey or region For as S. Augustine A verite vnwritten sayed that he wold not haue beleued the euangele except christes De praescript haereticorum church had moued hym so to do and agayne as we knowe not which is scripture and which is not but only as Tertulian saith by the church so hou can I be certayne of the ryght sense of scripture and what I ought to beleue but by the catholike church If an heretike shold nowe denye any part of the scripture as Manicbaeus and other refused al the old testameÌ„t as MarcioÌ„ Holie scripture can not be ê“ued to be scripture but onlie by the church denyed al the gospels except lukes as Ebion wold not receaue pauls epistles and as luther repealed S. Iames epistle and the Apocalypsis what haue we to conuict theÌ„ but the churches authorite Why then ought not the church to expound scripture and to be iudge yn al matters of trauerse in religion For how tel me can the scripture be theryn iudge which euery man taketh as he lysteth and expoundeth it as lyrineÌ„sis sayeth also as experieÌ„ce doth teach after his oune mynde fantasie Did not al heretikes that euer haue bene afore our daies and that noue are alleage scripture for them as wel as the catholike men May she then Which is à wytnes alleaged vpon both sides be iudge betwene them This moued Tertulian to say that in De praescr matieres of doubt in our fayth we must not apeale vnto the scripture in which there is either no victorie or vncertayne or els but lyttle certayne but vnto the church of christ which is euer gouerned and ruled by the holie goost and so erreth not whollie in our fayth Did not this thing also stere the fathers euen at the begynnyng of the church to cal and make assembles and general concels to discusse matters of controuersie and to suppresse heresies What els but that caused S. Austen Ianuario to affirme that the authorite of general concils was very holsome good for mennes saluation that the iudgement of then ought to be preferred before any one bysshops iudgement and the
I aske nowe of yow my lord why may not god that made both the place and also the thyng placed in yt and appointed that One body may be in dyuers places at ones by gods pouer one body shold be naturally but in one place at ones cause that one body shold be against the common ordre of nature in dyuers places at ones May he not do this as wel as to make à virgen to conceaue beare á child wythhout mans helpe Is not this as much against the ordre of nature as the other Was it not as much impossible by mans reason christes body to walke vpon the sea to come out of his graue throughe the great stone lying vpon it and to go throughe the gates yet closed yn to the house where his apostles were as the same his body to be in dyuers places of the earth and in heauen also at one tyme If yow do de nye as Ihon frith peter martyr and Peter Martyr Ihon fryth dyuers other haue done that christ entred yn to the house where his apostles were the doores or gates beyng yet stil Io. 20. closed both the scripture it selfe also the doctours of the churche are against yow For leo sayeth thus vpon Epist 40. that matter Let these phantastical christians tel me what body Iesus brought into the sight of his disciples the gates Lib. 1. contra Iouinianum beyng yet closed S. Hierom also hath the same saying after this maner If christ went into the house the doores beyng shit which thing the nature of meÌ„nes bodies suffereth not to be done shal we then denye that both Peter and also our lord had true bodies because they agaynst nature walked vpoÌ„ the waters S. AusteÌ„ hath the same wheÌ„ Ser. 1â—9 de tempore Lib. 3. ad volusianum Libr. 10 in lucae ca. 24. he writeth thus It was à myracle that our lord entred in to the house vnto his disciples throughe the gates beyng closed Also S. Ambrose sayeth Thomas had à cause to merueile when he saw christes body brought iÌ„ to the house without hurt throughe the gates closed Lib. de trinitate which could not be passed throvghe with mennes bodies Hylary disseÌ„teth not from this sayng why doest thow aske throughe what paâ—tes of the closed doore christ hauin á body came in For the euangelist diligeÌ„tly expresseth christes entriÌ„g in to the house the doores beyng yet â—hit To passe ouer many authorites I wil recite but this one out of Epiphaniâ— an old writer which sayeth Our lord entred in to the â—owâ— primo lib. priâ—â—â— house the gates beyng yet closed that he myght declare his body to be of thiÌ„ne peaces which was afore he rose vp agayne of grosse partes and the same body that had fleash and bones Nowe it is manifest that christes body entred in to the house throughe the doores beyng theÌ„ stil closed Who caÌ„ theÌ„ my lord denye but that his body was that tyme of his eÌ„trye in to the house iÌ„ one ê“pre place with the body of the doore so there were two bodies iÌ„ one place Why theÌ„ may not his body be in heaueÌ„ Two bodies in one placâ— at oâ—es in earth both at one tyme Is not the one of the two as much impossible by nature as the other Wy do ye not folowe the fayth of AbrahaÌ„ which beleued Gene 2â— Rom. 4 steadfastly the ê“mes of god made by the angel coÌ„cerning the hauing of à child by Sara his wyfe both old also barreÌ„ wheÌ„ the thing was by nature impossible S. Chrysostom beleued that christes very natural body was both in heaueÌ„ also in the holy sacrameÌ„t at ones for he saieth thus O great Lib. 4 cap. 3 de 〈…〉 good wyl of god towardes vs oÌ„ miracle â–ª He â–ª that sitteth vpon the right hâ—d of his father iÌ„ heaueÌ„ aboue is coÌ„teined in mennes handes in the tyme of the sacrifice Also he sayeth in an other place There is one bodye of christ daily Homi. â— â—n â—pi 〈…〉 offered in sacrifice one christ in euery place where the sacrameÌ„t is which is here in this place ful there in that Homiâ—â—â— 2. 〈…〉 popular also ful or whole Thirdly he writeth thus Helias the prophete asceÌ„dyng vp lefte his mantel vnto his disciple but Christes body i◠〈…〉 the soÌ„ne of god asceÌ„ding vp in to heaueÌ„ hath lefte vnto vs his oune flesh As for helias leauing his mantel vnto his in the sacrament also not wythstaÌ„ding his ascensió in to heauen disciple lefte it from himselfe but our sauiour christ hath both left his fleash with vs also taken it with hymselfe in his asceÌ„sioÌ„ See ye not now my lord that this holy doctour notable clearke plainly setteth furth both the sacrifice of the masse also christes bodily preseÌ„ce in heauen in the blessed sacrament of the aulter both at one tyme Are ye not theÌ„ ashamed to denye both of these two thinges and yet saye that the ancieÌ„t writers be altogether vpon your side S. Chrysostom perceaued right wel that christ departed not so out of this world at the tyme of his ascension that he taried not stil bodily therin Also he sawe that christes body was at ones in diuers places beleued the same taught it vs. Wherfore this our beliefe that ye my lord do cal so often blasphemie heresie idolatry and say that it rose vp of late is the old godly catholike faith of the chuch Nowe ye alleage these christes wordes for your purpose Ye shald haue euer The bysshop Matth. 26. The confutation poore people with yow but me ye shal not euer haue This authorâ—te proueth not your doctrine for christ ment only that they shold not haue hym with them euer visibly in his oune for me of fleash and bloud and by familiar conuersation that Mary Magdalen might when she listed anoynte his body which she did whiles she might and therfore christ commended her dede That this was his meaning the text of Matthew sheweth plainly and Saint Marke more plainly Marci 14. saing Ye haue poore men euer with yow and wheÌ„ ye wil ye may do them good but me ye haue not euer with yow As yf he had saied ye may not at al tymes do me good nor ye haue me not after any such common mortal and neadful sorte with yow as ye haue me now and as ye haue the poore people to whom ye may do good when so euer ye list Saint Hierom expounded that place after the same sorte saying Hierom in Matth. 26. that christ ment that they should not haue hym with them by familiar conuersation and lyuing together with them as they had hym before his resurrection And it is no straung thing to say that christ is present euer with vs inuisibly in the forme of bread althoughe he be absent from vs visibly for he vsed à lyke maner of
diseases were healed and our synnes pardoned and so dyd neuer no priest nor creature but he nor he did the same neuer but ones What The confutation ignorance is this my lord that ye are yn Who denyeth that Christ hath redeamed vs perfectly and sufficiently by his one sacrifice ones for al offered vpon the crosse at the least coÌ„cernyng his office duyte parte and merite but yet not in effecte and actually as it is declared before but he only then deserued grace remission of synne and euer lasting lyfe for al them that wold beleue in hym hope in gods mercy fear god do penaunce for their synnes praye gyue almes to the poore fast receaue the sacrameÌ„tes loue god and their neyghbours keape gods Hebr. 5. facto est causa salutis c. commaundementes Why then may we not wel say that à priest as à ministre of god sayeth masse and offereth christes body and bloudde for to applye his sacrifice made vpon the crosse vnto vs for the actuall remission of our synnes althoughe they do not take away our synnes nor pardonne them nor heale our diseases but god onely doth yt for christes perfect sacrifices sake For sayeth not the scripture Matth. 6. Marci 11. 1. Timo. 4. Matth. â— Iacoâ—i 5. that we do forgeue one an other our offences that the preacher of gods word doth saue the people and hymselfe therby that we must praye for the remission of our synnes of others also that they may be saued that Ecclesiast 1. Ioan. 20. Daniel 4. fear expelleth synne that priestes do remitte synne that synne is taken a way by almes fastinge baptisme Danielis 4. Luc. 11. Matth. 17. Esaie 43 and yet god only for christes merites sake remitteth our synnes Ye saye that euery man must apply christes sacrifice and merite vnto hymselfe and Abacuc 2. by his oune fayth receaue the frute of it at christes handes not at the priestes What then my lord Is this à good argument I besech yow euery man must receaue the benefite of christes death by his oune faith at christes handes ergo the priest sayeth not masse for the obteyning the remissioÌ„ of synnes Do not they for whom the priest offereth christ at masse receaue that christes benefite for the remission of their synnes and saluation throughe their faith and repentaunce of god only for christes sake Doth not this your argument my lord proue as much against oure praying one for an other Iacobi 5 Matth. 28. preaching of the gospel ministring of the sacramentes for the remission of our synnes and against many such other thinges requyred of god in the scripture for remission of our synnes Marke reader and saluation as it doth against the sacrifice of the masse For must they not receaue of christ by their oune fayth remission of their synnes for whom ye daily praye to whom ye do ministre the sacramentes and preache gods word Why then did yow thus trifie myspend your tyme in such vayne thinges to seduce the people Ceasse for shame ceasse I saye thus to reason vnreasonably and vnlearnedly against the trueth which euer obteyneth the 3 Esd 3. psal 11â— victorie and endureth Thus ye ende your first boke and so I do myn The confutation of the seconde The bysshop booke which is of Transubstantiation After ye had my lord made to the Lib. 2. ca. 2. fo 18. pa. 1. reader à great promes in the begynning of this your booke ye saye that christ gaue at his last soupper bread vnto his disciples and for the profe therof ye say thus Whan christ sayed This the bread say thei remayned O vayne tryfler And whan he sayed is yet the bread remayned stil And whaÌ„ he sayed bo yet the bread was there stil But when he finished the whole sentence This is my body thaÌ„ they say the bread was gone and there remayneth no substaÌ„ce but christes body as thoughe the bread could not remayne when it is made á sacrameÌ„t This is in dede my The confutation lord the very true sense of those christes wordes althoughe ye mocke much therat as it doth right wel become your estate and degree and your reason maketh no lesse against your oune My lords reason is as muâ—h against his oune doctrine as it is against oures opinion than it doth against oures For the bread and wyne are not made holy signes as ye say that they are only of christes body and bloud vntil the wordes of consecration be fully pronounced and therfore we may vse this your oune reason after lyke sorte against your doctrine as ye do vse it against oures Agayne when the priest baptizeth à child saying I do christen Matth. 28. the in the name of the father the sonne and the holy goost the child is not baptized nor his sinnes forgeueÌ„ hym when the priest sayeth I christen the and so of the rest of those wordes but only whan the whole sentence is pronounced â—uc 22. Moreouer christ gaue vnto his apostles authorite to coÌ„secrate the bread and wyne to offre his body and bloud in sacrifice and to ministre theÌ„ vnto other when he saied do this in remembraunce of me and yet when he sayed Do they had not that authorite nor when he sayed This but when al these wordes were spoken or els he speakinge them gaue that authorite Wherfore ye haue gotten nothing by this your reasoning my lord but only declared therby your ignoraunce as ye do when you folowing your great Matth. 26. Hoc est c god peter martyr denye that these wordes This is my body are the wordes of consecration For S. Ireneus Lib. 4. c. 32. De coena d. Tertulian Saint CypriaÌ„ Chrysostom Hierom Ambrose basile libro de institutione monachorum cap. 70. Damascene Contione 2. in psal 33. lib. 4. cap. 14. S. Austen and many other of the oldest writers affirme plainly that those are the wordes of consecratioÌ„ but I wil rehearse nowe onely the wordes of certen of them for diuers causes S. Ambrose thus writeth Afore it be consecrated it is bread Lib 4. ca. â— de sacramentis but after christes wordes are come vnto it is christes body Heare hym saying Take and eate This is my body S. Damascene also saieth The bread Lib. 4. c. 14. and wyne are not à figure of the body and bloud of christ god forbidde that but our lordes body it selfe ioyned vnto the godhead our lord hymselfe sayng This is my bodye not à figure of my bodye but my bodye Is Marke reader not this plainly spoken of that holy saint to declare both that those are the wordes of consecration and also that christes very natural body and bloud are in the sacrament and not only à figure of them Where it not theÌ„ great folly to beleue your doctrine my lord before his which was à notable clearke Hom.
45 in Ioannem à saint about D. ccc yeres passed Heare now S. Chrysostom sayng It is not man that maketh our lordes Marke this reader body bloud of the thinges set furth vpon the table to be consecrated but it is christ that was crucified for vs. The wordes are pronounced of the priest and the thinges bread and wyne are consecrated by gods pouer Matth. 26. grace he sayed This is my body Hoc verbo proposita consecrantur the bread and wyne which are set furth be cōsecrated by this word See ye not my lord how plainly this holy father and great learned man that was almost M. cc. yeres sence sayeth that christe hymselfe maketh his oune body and bloud of the bread and wyne set furth vpon the aulter to be consecrated and that by these wordes of consecration This is my body Wold ye then haue men to beleue your cōtrary teaching which are nothing lyke vnto hym nother in vertu of lyfe nor in learnyng May ye not be yet agayne ashamed that ye sayed in the title of your boke that your doctrine was approued of the anciēt doctours of christes church seing they are so manifestly against it In psal 33. S. Austen also sayeth Christ bare his oune body in his handes whā he sayed This is my body and that he then did S. Austen beleued that christes very natural body was yn The sacrament that thing then which no man could euer do for no man can beare hymselfe in his oune handes and therfore he mēt that christ cōsecrated the bread by these wordes This is my body and turned it in to his natural body which he bare at his mandy in his handes not bread only à figure of it for els he had not sayed truely that no man might beare hymselfe in his oune hādes but only christ for euery mā may easely beare his picture or image in his oune handes Doth not them S. Austen declare my lord very plainly in this place that he beleued christes body to be in the holy sacrament and not bread à signe only of it as ye do teach and saye also that he taught But of this sufficient Ye say moreouer But this negatiue that there is no bread The bysshop fo 18. pa. 1. they make of their oune braynes by their vnwritten veritees No not so my lord for christ his apostles the cōciles The confutation the catholike church and al the old doctours taught it vs as partly I haue already proued and wil by gods grace more largely hereafter And as touching vnwritten veritees I wrote A booke of vnwritten veritees not yet anusweared vnto of the cōtrary side à boke of them which sheweth manifestly how far your doctrine dissēteth from the fayth religion of the apostles the primitiue church and from al the ancient doctours where ye pretende to restore christes religion to that purenes that it had in the begynning of the church Why mocke youe so often at vnwritten verites which came from Christ and his apostles as it appeareth in that my booke and yet anusweare not vnto that boke Are your mockes and iestes à sufficient anuswere to it Ye say that we make this negatiue there is no bread of our oune braynes which is very false for christ taught it vs and his apostles and the church by these wordes This is my body but ye make this negatiue There is not our lordes natural body but bread onely of your oune braynes Matth. 26. Ioan. 6. pais against christes playne wordes S. Paules wordes the concels the catholike church al the holy doctours of the church for none of them al euer sayed as ye do teache that christes very body is not in the sacramēt but the cleane contrary Wherfore your doctrine is to be abhorred and detested of al good christen people It foloweth in The bisshop your booke Oh good lord how wold they haue bragged if Christ had sayed lib. 2. fo 18. pa. 1. The confutation this is no bread But Christ spake not that negatiue c. Oh good lord howe wold yow my lord haue bragged yf christ had sayed this is material bread not my body but onely à signe or à figure of it but Christ spake nother Marke this that affirmatiue This is material bread as ye defende nor that negatiue This is not my body but he sayed the cleane contrary to them both This is my body that shal be giuen for yow For these wordes can not be vnderstanded of material bread because that is not his body that was geuen for vs. Againe both the Greake texte and the latine also wil not permyt that these Matth. 2◠christes wordes this is my body shold be expounded of material bread For the greake hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the latine hoc est corpus meum Both in the neutre gendre and therfore we can not say that christ ment of the bread when he sayed This is my body for then he shold haue sayed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et hic panis est Note wel this reader corpus meū that the pronome This myght haue bene referred vnto the bread but he vsed the neutre gendre both in the Greake and also in the latine Matth. 26. and therfore he mēt not of the material bread when he saied This is my body but of his oune very natural body that was crucified for vs. Doth it not then appeare now my lord that Christ ment this negatiue there is no bread when he sayed this is my body that shal be geuen for yowe althoughe he sayed not expressely there is no bread Moreouer dyd not Christ promyse to his apostles to geue then bread that shold be his oune fleash which he wold geue for the lyfe of the Ioan. 6. panis world and performed that his promes at his last soupper sayeng take and eate this is my body that shal be geuen for yow How can this be true of bakers Marke bread Was that geuen of Christ for the lyfe of the worlde Is it not as false to say this bread made of corne is christes body as to say à man is an asse or an asse à man for that bread differeth much more from christes body than à man from an asse whych both are lyuely creatures and haue sēses in which they do agree When ye haue my lord made anusweare vnto this ye shal heare more to anusweare The bysshop fo 19. lib. 1. pag. 2. vnto Nowe ye go about to proue that bread remayneth stil in the sacrament sayng thus Christ toke bread brake it and gaue it vnto his disciples and sayed Take eate Al this was spoken before the wordes of consecratiō Wherfore they must neades be vnderstand of very bread that Christ toke bread brake bread and gaue bread vnto his disciples c. This reason is very The confutation weake my lord and
such other S. Cyprian sayeth Lib. 4. epi. 2 there is much difference betwene philosophers and Christian people for the philosophers and natural reasoners measure al their knowlage by wit and reason but christen men measure their belyefe by fayth Tertulian sayeth Lib. de praescriptione aduersus haereticos that al heresies spring out of philosophie Wil ye bring men my lord wyth your natural reasoning in this article of our fayth to say as one Abaillardus did of whom bernard writeth Epist 180. that nothyng ought to be beleued of vs that excedeth natural rea son What caused many men to say Epist 1â—0 as Salomon wytnesseth that men perysh euen as beastes and therfore Ecclesiast 3 they sayed let vs eate drinke fil ourselues 1. Cor. 15. with delites and plaisirs for after this lyfe there is no pleasure Was it not natural reasoning and measuring of thinges by their wyttes Ceasse then my lord for shame ceasse this reasoninge in mattiers of our fayth and folowe S. Ambrose sayng De fide ad Gratianum against such reasoninge Awaye hence with argumentes where the fayth is sought Let logicke or the science of reasonyng and disputing probably of matters nowe keepe silence and speake in the scholes Those men are daily forsaken of their compaynions that dispute they do encrease daily which beleue simply philosophers are not beleued and fisshers are Wherfore leaue my lord I say agayne leaue this your reasonyng vpon this highe mystery that passeth al mans wit and reason Now I wil examine your vnreasonable reasons and declare howe foyble they are of wich this is one Natural reason abhorreth vacuum The bisshop fo 21. pag â— that is to say that there shovld be any emptie place wheryn no substance should be but yf there remayne no bread nor wyne the place where they were before and where theyr accideÌ„tes be is fylled wyth no substance but remayneth vacuum cleane contrary to the ordre of nature This reason The confutation may wel perswade á paynym á heithen philosopher or any man that wyl rather folowe reason than fayth but no good christian man which beleueth against al natural reason and the ordre of nature as he is bound and â—ene 22. Rom. 4 as Abraham beleued that Sara his wife beyng both old also barren should beare à child wich was against reason and the ordre of nature Zachary S. Than baptistes father wold not beleue that his wyfe beyng barreÌ„yn her yougth shold beare á child because yt was against reason and the whole ordre of nature therfore good toke from hym his speach vntill his sonne S. Ihan was Luc. 1. Libro debis qui mysterijs initiaÌ„tur cap. 9. Marke reader borne S. Ambrose sayeth why doest thou seake here yn the sacrament the ordre of nature yn christes body seyng Christ our savyour was borne of the vyrgeÌ„ agaiÌ„st the ordre of nature This body wich we priestes do make is of the virgen Doth not Ambrose here my lord ouerthrow vtterly al your reasoning in this matter when ye seake theryn the ordre of nature agaiÌ„st our fayth What yf the place in wich bread and wyne were afore the consecration be afterward emptie vnoccupied of any body against the natural reason of man and the ordre of nature Wyl ye bynde god that made maÌ„s reason nature the ordre of nature to do nothing against those his creatures Dyd he not make al thinges of nothing wyth his word Caused he not á Gene. 1. vyrgen to beare á child contynuing stil in her virginite reysed he not vp agayne the deade did many other thiÌ„ges Lib. 2 de generatione as much against natural reason the ordre of nature as á place to be emptie and wythout á body to fil yt May not god that made both the place also the body which occupieth it and appoynte that ever place naturally shold be occupied with some body breake this ordre course lawe of nature wich he made hymselfe cause á place to be emptie and voyde Marke of euery thing See ye not then my lord howe lyttel this your reason is to be esteamed and regarded but yf I sayed unto yow my lord that the a yer occupieth the place of bread wyne when their substance is turned in to christes body and blowd and so there is not vacuum nor any emptie place what can ye say against me Nowe I wyl make one briefe aunsweare my How the consecrated wyne turneth in to vinaygre the bread mouleth cet lord vnto diuers of your natural reasons and obiections that no man be seduced by them I say that the consecrated wyne turneth not in to vynaigre nor the coÌ„sectated bread mouleth nor engeÌ„dreth wormes nor is burned nor receaueth yn to yt any poyson as long as christes body bloud are vnder the formes of them wich do abyde there so long as the natural qualitees and properties of bread and wyne tarrye there yn their natural disposition and condition that the bread wyne myght be naturally there yf they had not bene chaunged in to christes hody and bloud and also as loÌ„g as the hoost and consecrated wyne are apte to be receaued of man and no leÌ„ger but do go and depart thence by gods pouer as yt pleaseth hym and then á newe substance is made of god wich turneth in to vynegre engendreth wormes mouleth is burned fedeth men the myse receaueth poyson et c. and so neyther the substance of bread wyne remayneth stil yn the sacrament nor they that burne the hoost are christ burners as ye mockyngly say that they shold be yf christes body wereyn the sacrament S. Cyprian sayeth that Sermone â— de lapsis á certen vngodly man wold haue eateÌ„ of the sacrifice coÌ„secrated but he could not handle nor eate the holy of god and when he opened his handes he founde that he bare asshes yn them by the example of that one man sayeth S. CypriaÌ„ yt is declared that our lord goeth away when he is denyed and that the thyng wich is receaued profiteth not the vnworthy seyng the hol some grace is turned in to asshes the holynes fleyng awaye-See ye not my lord that christ and his body departed away when the vnworthy man wold Marke reader haue receaued them and that asshes only remayned there yn their place Why then may we not wel say that christes body then goeth away and departeth when the hoost mouleth corrupteth to engendre wormes and shold be burned as yt doth when poyson is put to the hoost and the consecrated wyne soureth or turneth yn to vynaigre For is not the other as strang á thing as this ys and as much vnlyke to be true Agayne yf I sayed that the accidentes and qualities of bread and wyne remaynyng in the sacrament should nourysshe the receauer aboue and also against their natures as they
do leaue out those wordes which would open al the whole matter are these in s. CypriaÌ„s sermon As in the person of christ the humanite was seene and the diuinite was hid euen so did the diuinite ineffablye put it selfe in to the visible sacrament These woordes sayeth my lord do He mysconstrueth saiÌ„t Cyprians wordes shew manifestly that the diuinite is poured in to the bread and wyne the same bread wyne stil remayninge lyke as the same diuinite by vnite of person was in the humanite of christ the same humanite stil remaynynge with the diuinite Which thing S. Cyprian neuer ment by that comparysoÌ„ but only that as the manhod of Christ was seene and his godhead not seene in hym but hid secretely from mans sight couered vnder neâ—th the manhode eueÌ„ so did the godhead powre it selfe in to the visible sacrament vnspeakeably The true seÌ„se of S. Cyprians wordes when that it turned the bread and wyne in to christes fleash and bloud ioynynge itselfe vnto them in vnite of person which how they were done no man can tel or expresse with his tongue This was Saint Cyprians mynde in that place Now he goeth about to aunswere to cyprians wordes which are that the bread is chaunged in nature not in outward forme sayeth thus in effecte bryefely It is not chaunged in substaunce but The bysshop in nature that is to saye it hath other properties and an other condition thaÌ„ folio 35 pagina 1 it had afore it was consecrated which farre passeth the nature condition of common breade It sheweth to vs that we be partakers of the spirite of god most purely ioyned vnto christ spirituallie fead with his fleash and bloud This is your oune dreame my lord The confutation which is directelie agaiÌ„st the doctours meaninge For he ment that the bread which christ gaue vnto his disciples at his mandie was chaunged in substance in to christes very natural fleash as these his last wordes of that same sentence is by the almightie power of his worde made flesh do shewe plainlie Why winked ye my lord at these wordes Marke this reader Do not they declare that cyprian ment that the bread was so chaunged in nature that it was made christes very flesh by goddes almyghtie power What madnes is it theÌ„ to wreast those words to anyother seÌ„se thaÌ„ vnto that Againe s. CypriaÌ„ sayeth à lytle before after he had recited these wordes This is my bodie The differeÌ„ce of corporal spiritual meat is also made manifest that it was an other thinge that was set vpoÌ„ the table confumed an other that was geueÌ„ distributed of the maistre how caÌ„ mylord this be true if bread remayned stil in the sacrament For is it theÌ„ coÌ„sumed an other thinge geueÌ„ thaÌ„ was set vpoÌ„ the table if bread remayne stil S. Cyprian sayeth also thus This coÌ„moÌ„ bread chauÌ„ged in to flesh bloud procureth lyfe encrease to the bodies Seest thou not then good reader that my lord wreasted cyprian to his purpose where he saieth that we do wreast hym vnto ours Now he aunswereth to Chrysostom which wrote so plainly against hiÌ„ iÌ„ this matter that he can not be wel wreasted ChrysostoÌ„ fo 35. pa 2. from oure belefe for he sayeth thus Doest thou see bread Doest thou see wyne Do they auoide beneeth as other meates do God forbid thiÌ„ke not so For as waxe yf it be put ones in to the fyre yt is made lyke the fyre no substance remayneth nothynge is lefte so here also thinke thou that the mysteries be consumed by the substaÌ„ce of the bodie Hitherto Chrisostom Who would desire more playne wordes Homilia de eucharistia than these are of this holy father and great clearke For doeth he notdenyee vtterly that we see bread or wyne yn the sacrament Sayeth he not playnly that they goo not awey beneth yn to the draught as other coÌ„moÌ„ meates do Affirmeth he not also that the bread and wyne are so consumed that no substance remayneth as waxe is consumed by fier What follye is it Marke then to folow AEcolampadius Peter martyrs this bissoppes such others wreasting of this playne wordes But let vs nowe see how learnedly my lord auoideth this authorite â–ª this he sayeth The bisshop fo 36. pa. 1. Saint Chrisostoms wordes which do folowe there immediatly do declare his mynde for he writeth thus Wherfore fo 36. et 83 wheÌ„ ye come to those mysteries do not thinke that ye receaue by à maÌ„ the bodye of god but that with tongues you receaue fyer by the angels Seraphim of these wordes ye my lord do gather that yow may as wel say that Chrisostom ment that there is neither priest nor christes bodie as we may gather that there is neither bread nor wyne in the sacrament of those wordes which are afore recited and be gynne thus Doest thow see bread But ye are shamefullye disceaued theryn The bysshop for he sayeth not doest thow se the priest Doest thowe see Christes bodie God forbyde thinke not so for they are consumed as he doth of the bread and wyne why then do ye my lord so trifle and cauil yn this so manifest à matter Are ye not ashamed yet of your part Wherfore when chrisostom sayeth do ye not thinke that ye receaue by à man the body of god he meÌ„t that we ough to thinke that we receaue goddes boddie not of hym principally but of hym only as à minister and of christ hymselfe chyefely as he sayeth yn an other place by these wordes Homi. 51 in Matth. 14. Whan thow doest see the priest geue to the christes bodye thinke not that the priestes hand but christes Ioan. 1. hand is reached vnto the as he doth 1. cor 3. principallie baptize This sayed he to stere meÌ„ for to receaue christes bodye with greater reuerence and more purenes of conscience as he did saye Doest thowe see bread et c. to make men beleue that althoughe theyr eies should iudge bread and wyne to be in the sacrament yet they shold not thinke that there were very bread and wyne in dede for the sense are disceaued easely in this mysterie and therfore we must beleue these christes wordes this is my bodie althoughe al our senses reason and vnderstaÌ„dynge be vtterly Homi. 93 in Matth. 28. against it as he sayeth in an other place Wherfore my lord was disceaued yn this point playnlie and so he was yn the wronge alleagynge of these wordes out of chrysostoms booke Thinke De eucharistia in Enceniis ye that the bloud of saluation floweth out of the pure and godly side of christ and so commynge to yt receaue it with pure lippes Chrysostom hath not so but quasi è diuino impolluto latere effluere that is to saye as it were to flowe out of the godly pure side not to flowe
familiar vnto us And surelie yf we should vysibly see flesh bloud we could not abide it And therfore our lord bearynge wyth our weekenes doth reteyne and keepe the forme and apparaunce of bread and wyne but he turneth the bread and wyne yn to the The bysshop fo 95. pa. 2 very flesh and bloud of christ These are the very wordes of Theophilus In catenaaurea in Marcum althoughe my lord saye that they are not his wordes but one Theophilactus maketh therof no profe at al. Saint Thomas à great clearke and á holy father and dyuers other blessed men many yeares afore my lord was borne sayed that he wrote those wordes my lord of canterburye sayth nay wether partie wil à wise man beleue I aske of my lord why may not these wordes be Theophilus bysshop of Alexandria as the first authour of them and yet the same to be after written our of hym by Theophilactus as wel as Theophilactus folowed saynt Chrysostom and vsed many sentences of his in his commentaries Which sentences no man can denye but they are chrysostoms For Chrysostom and Theophilactus hath this sentence vpon paul The thiÌ„ge which is in the chalice is that that hath flowed out of the side and we Homi. 24 in 1. Cor. 10. are partakers of yt May à man gather nowe of that that Theophilactus writeth those wordes folowyng ChrysostoÌ„ that the same sentence was not wrytten by Chrysostom Why then sayeth my lord that Theophilus wrote not the sentence aboue recited vpon S Marke but it was only writteÌ„ after his tyme of Theophilactus Myght not Theophilus first write it and Teophilactus borowe it of hym as Theophilactus did many sayinges of Chrysostom But to-go nearer the matter it apearethe plainlye by many thinges that those wordes were not written by Theophilactus vpon Marke for first Theophilactus hath not these wordes And he gaue it vnto then sayinge nor these wordes This that I do nowe geue nor this word onlye for this he Theophila writeth there as the Greake letter hath When he had blessed it that is to say geuinge thankes he breake the bread which thinge we do also addinge prayer This is my body this I say that ye do receyue For the bread is not a figure Note this lege Grace and a certen exemplar of our lordes bodye but it is chaunded in to the Ioan. 6. selfe same bodie of christ For oure lord sayeth the bread which I wil gyue is my flesh He sayed not it is à figure of my flesh but it is my flesh And thow sayest howe is not flesh seene O man this is done for oure weakenes For bycause bread and wyne are of those thinges wyth which we haue bene accustomed we do not abhorre them but we seynge bloud and flesh sette furth would not abide it but abhorre it clene Wherfore the mercyful god bearinge wyth our infirmite doth reteyne stil the forme of bread and wyne but he turneth them iÌ„ to the vertu of flesh bloud Hitherto Theophilactus by whose wordes we see both that he wrote not the other sentence which is before rehersed of my lord because these his wordes varye much from those other of theophilê° also that theophilactus is vtterly against my lordes doctrine in this matter Wherfore we father The byshop fol. 95. not wronge that sainge vpon theophilus as my lord sayeth that we do Agayne my lord sayeth vntruely that we do falsifie this authours wordes and meaninge For as Teophilus hath the same wordes afore in his name recited even so Theophilactus hath I denie not these wordes God condesceÌ„dinge vnto oure iÌ„firmite reserueth the kinde of bread wyne but he turneth them in to * the vertu of flesh bloud Which wordes my lord thinketh doth declare playnly that he ment that bread wyne remayne stil in their substance are turned only in to the vertue of christes flesh bloud for as much as that they wich do worthilye receaue theÌ„ receaue therby the vertu of christes body bloud spiritualy Which exposition is vtterly against his meanynge for he sayeth evideÌ„tly that the bread ys not á figure of our lordes body but that it is turned in to the very natural bodie of christe For sayth he not that there is flesh and bloud in the sacrameÌ„t but they appeare Marke not there to oure eyes and sight but the formes only of theÌ„ least we should abhorre the receauiÌ„ge of theÌ„ Whould he haue so saied yf he had beleued that only bread wyne were present in the Theophilactus sacrament Agayne he doth vpon Matthe we declare his mynde more plaiÌ„lye Matth. 2â— sayingt thus Christ sayiÌ„ge This is my bodie sheweth that the bread which is halowed vpon the aulter is oure lordes Aulters bodie it selfe not á figure aunsweriÌ„ge to it For he sayed not this is á figure but this is my bodie For it is transformed by an operation vnspeakable yea althoug it seame bread bycause we be weake do abhorre to eate rawe flesh chyefely the flesh of à man for that cause it appeareth to be bread but it is flesh in dede Agayne vpon Ihons gospel In cap. 6. Ioannis he is as playne as may be agaiÌ„st my lordes doctrine when he sayeth thus But marke that the bread which is eaten of vs in the sacrament is not only à figure of oure lordes flesh but our lordes flesh itselfe For christ sayed not Ioan. 6. the bread which I wil gyue is à figure of my flesh but my flesh For that bread is transformed wyth secret wordes in to oure lordes fleshe throughe the mystical blessinge and commynge of the holy goost vnto it Nowe what can my lord say to this Hath he here any startinge hole or euasion but he must neades graunt his errour and recante it S Hierom writeth thus There is as Hierom in â—iti cap. 1. great difference betwene the loaues of shewe bread and the bodie of christ as is betwene à shadowe of à bodie and the bodie itselfe and as there is betwene an ymage and the thinge itselfe betwene an example of thinges to come and the thinges that be prefigurated by them Vnto this authorite my lord maketh this sclender anusweare He ment that the shewe bread of the The bysshop fo 86. pa. 2. lawe was but à darke shadowe of christ to come but the sacrament of christes bodye is á clere testimonye that christ is already come and that he hath performed that which was promysed doth presently conforte and feed vs spirituallie wyth his precious bodie bloud Is not this à shameful wreastinge of this sentence S Hierom allegeth 1. ReguÌ„ â—â— there that Abymelech wold not gyue to dauid and his compaynye the shewe bread to eate when they were almost famyshed throughe want of meate vntil he had perceaued that they had forborne the coÌ„payniÌ„ge with their wyfes twoo