wyne not to meane that the bread should be in dede Christes body and the wyne Christes bluod He meaneth not this But he meaneth that therfore the bread is called Christes body and the wyne his bluod because thei be sacramētes and signes of Christes body ād bluod Also in a boke the which is against Adimantus the Maniche in the xij chapter Augustine sayth Against Adimantus ca. 12 The lord doubteth not to sai and he speaketh of Christ this is my body when he gaue the signe of his body Here Austen plainly expoundeth this sainge of Christ that is to say this is my bodye that is as muche to saye as this is the signe of my body The 3. boke cap. 16. And in the third boke called de doctrina Christiana in the xvi he sayth that if that thinge whiche Christ commaundeth shall seme strange inconuenient or euell done then we ought not to vnderstand such speach accordinge to the letter but figuratyuely And geuinge the examples of these words of Christ that is to say If you eat not the fleshe of the sonne of man and drink not his bluod you shall not haue lyfe in you He saith that such speche ought not to be vnderstand accordinge to the letter because that vnderstanding it according to the letter it is a disagreable and an inconuenient thinge that is to say that the flesh of a man should be eaten and his bluod dronk And therfore it ought to be vnderstand soundly that is to say that Christ did not meane of the eating of his flesh and drinkinge his bluode fleshly but spiritually beleuinge in him and hauinge remembraunce of so great a benefit as he hath wrought vs sufferinge and dyinge for vs. And this is the eatinge and drinking that Christ ment of And to eat and drinke after this sorte It nedeth not that Christ should be really in the consecrated bread and wyne The thirty treatise vpō Ihon. but onely that the faith of Christ should be in vs. And in the xxx treatise vpon Iohn he sayth The lord is aboue that is to say in heauen but the lord that is the trueth is also here Christes body in the which he rose must nedes be in one place but his troth is euery where and he meaneth by the troth Christes godhead And in the epistle which he wryteth to dardanus he sayth he shall come for to iudge the lyuinge and the dead in the self same forme that he ascēded into heauen to the which forme he hath seurly geuen immortalitie but he hath not taken away the nature of it we may not thinke that according to this maner of forme that is to sai mans he should be spred abrode euery where For we must take hede that we do not so affirme his god head that we take away the truth of his body for it followeth not that that which is in god should be so euery where as god Of these two saings of Austen the which before we haue also alledged in the seauenth reason is concluded that Austen wil not that Christes body may be in more then one place at one tyme he will in dede that his god head should be euery where but not his manhode the whiche is in one onely place that is to say in heauen The master of the sentences glosinge or els expounding certeyn sainges of Augustine in the fourth of his sentences the tenth distinction where he bringeth furth amongst his other sainges this In the 4. of the sentences the tenth distinction that is to say that Christs body may be in one place but the trueth is spred abrode euery where he sayth that Christes body may be in one placeseable in mans forme but his truth that is to say his godhed is euery where vpon Ihon the sixt And he addeth the truth also of the same that is to say his very body is on euery aultare in euery place where men celebrate Sauinge his reuerēce this is not to set forth Austen mynd but it is to geue it straūge senses that he neauer ment and it is in dede a maiminge of his saings Austē by that word troth meaneth Christes godhed the whiche is powred abrode euery where and doth not meane the bodye and yet he doth notwithstāding expounde it for the body the whiche is as he sayth on all the aultares where thei celebrat And so he doth with many other saings of S. Augustine in the sayd distinction and in other where he speaketh of the matter of the thanks geuing mayming S. Augustines sainges and calling those heretikes that say the contrary that is to say that hold not that Christes bodyly presence is in the sacrament But we will let him glose at his will and say what pleaseth him And it is to be maruelled-at that he should so lightly and without reason pronounce these to be heretiks that speak nothinge contrary to gods word but they do in such sorte honoure it as they do not alow in the matter of religion and faith any more then so muche as the same word speaketh not mindinge to stand to mens opinions except they be agreable with the holy scripture The master of the sentences here geueth an vniust and a wicked iudgement But in the third boke of the trinitie The third boke of the trinite ca. 10. Augustine sayth that no myracle happeneth about the sacrament of Christes body and bluod If it be so that according to Saint Augustine there chaunceth no myracle about that sacrament he then beleued not that Christ shuld be bodelye in the sacrament for if he had beleued it he wold neauer haue sayd that there was no myracle but he wold haue sayd that there happened many and most great myracles as before in the fifth reason we haue seene Well it is playne then after Austens mynde that Christ is not really in bodye and in soule in the sacramēt but he calleth the cōsecrated bread ād wyne Christs bodye ād bluod because they be signes of his bodye and bluod not that they should be really and in dede his true body and bluod because he will that those should be in heauen and not on the earth in the sacrament We might if we wold alledge the other old doctours as Ireneus Tertullian Origen Cyprian Ambrose Ierome and Chrysostome all the whiche be of the self same opinion but let S. Austen suffise vs who amonge all the rest is the most faythfull witnes of all the auntientie And this we do to be shorte not withstandinge if any wold see these doctours sainges let him loke vpon Ireneus who herd Policarp Ihō the Euāgelistes disciple in the fourth ād fift boke that he maketh against heresies Let him loke vpon Tertullian that was next to Ireneus in the first fourth and fift boke against Martian the heretike Let him loke vpon Origen vpon leuiticus the seauenth and nynth homely Let him loke vpon Ambrose in the eleuenth chapter vpō the first epistle to the
is red in the lyfe of Saint Gregorie that the consecrated bread maruelouslye chaunged into a mans finger It is red that that the brute beastes did knele doune at the presence of the thankes geuinge And somtyme there apered a childe when the host was listed vp What shall be sayde to these great myracles sewerlye if Christ were not in the sacrament god wold neauer haue wrought these great signes This reason is nothinge worth and it is like the reason that they make that defended purgatorie with saing that there was heard certaine lamentable voices of the soules of the dead which desired help of there parents or frends that they wold cause to be sayd masses and chefely those masses that be called Saint Gregories and as sone as they were sayd those voyces were heard no more It is told also in the lyfe of a certeyne seinct but in dede a fryars saincte that he saw ones a valley full of soules the which desired help and that seinct was moued to pytye of those poore soules I leaue to you to thinke how many those soules ought to be that filled that valleye when he had sayd I cannot tell how many masses because I do not well remember the storye he returned to se the vally and he found them no more there because they were delyuered out of purgatorye I do much maruell that all the soules in purgatorye went not thether into that vally that thei all might haue bene deliuered by that sainctes Masses Ergo there is a purgatorye What will the lutheranes that denye purgatorye say here what will they saie Thei that you call lutherans will sai that you be a blynde sorte of superstitious I will not sai ignoraunt Idiots of gods causes and that you haue no faith in Christe thinkinge that the materiall fier can do that to the soules that onely Christ hath done with his pretious bluod that is to saye to purge them and perfectly to satiffie gods iustice for all the sinnes of the beleuers And they will saye that you deserue to be begyled and mocked by the deuell that leadeth you to think that the soules of the dead do lament and desire masses and ye perceaue not that he is the same wicked spirite the which fayneth himself to be the soules of the dead and desireth help and caryeth aboute youre brayne and maketh you beleue that glow wormes be lanternes The soules of the dead go not a solasinge here ād there as Chrisostome vpon S. Mathew saith very well but thei abyde in there places apointed vnto thē those soules of the faithfull and godlye abyde with Christ the other abyde in there place lokinge for there finall condemnation Euen so I saye of these maner myracles thoughe thei weare in dede that thei be none other but illusions and disceyts of sathan for to geue credit to the Masse and to beinge to passe that we should not beleue sewerly in Christe And god by his iust iudgement doth suffer these disceyts because we will not receaue the knowledge of the troth nor beleue the holy gospell And for this most great sinne he will that we shall beleue lyes and be deceaued Nor sewerly we deserue none other but to receaue and allow Antichristes myracles as sainct paule sayth to the Thessalonicenses 2. Thess 2. seing that we will not stand to gods worde The holy scripture and gods worde ought without any doubt to be in much more credit with vs then as many such myracles the which in dede be all lyes yea then as many myracles althoughe they be true as can be wrought in the world The whiche worde of god doth affirme and say that Christ Iesus is in heauen Mar. 16. Luc. 24. and that from thence he shall come to Iudge the lyuing and dead and there he shall abyde Act. 3. as peter sayth in the Acts of the Apostels vntill the tyme of the restitution of all thinges and it maketh vs likewise to vnderstand that the sacramentes be signes and be not the thinges signified let vs take hede and geue credit to these thinges that be clere and plaine If we will not be disceaued and not to the opiniōs and phantasies of mē which be not founde in the scripture but be clerely against them the fourthe reason They make another reason the which I wold haue sayd nothinge of because it is allready answered yet for so much as they bringein with the same certeine examples or similitudes to geue a coloure to their opinion of the which we haue not yet spoken we will saie of them a few words to the greather and more plentifull clerenes of the truthe They saye that god can bringe it to passe that is to saie that whole Christ great ād thick as he was on the Crosse should be in the sacramēt and that he should be whole in euery parte of the same as the soule is whole in the whole bodye and whole in euery parte of the bodye and that he should be as man in many places in heuen on earth vpon all altares and in euery other place where the sacrament of thanks geuinge is He can turne one body into another as shall seme good and lik him because he is almighty then he can make that the bread shal be turned into his bodye and the wyne into his bluod Seing he could create the world of nothinge he can much easelyer chaunge one thinge into another They geue eyample of Moyses rodd the which was turned into a serpent and then the serpent was turned againe into the rod likewise the waters of Egypt were turned into bluod Concerninge the being of whole Christ in the sacrament as great and thick as he is in heauen they geue the similitude of the heauen which we see the which being so great is not withstandinge whole in oure litle eye Likewise oure whole face apereth in a glasse that is much lesse then the face is yea the whole man is seen in a litle glasse Concerning the being of whole Christ in euery parte of the sacrament they gyue the similitude of oure soule as we haue already sayd the which is whole in the whole and whole in euery parte of the body Oure face also is whole in the whole glasse and whole in euery parte of the glasse after this sorte that is to saye that if the glasse should be broken in many partes oure whole face wold apere in euery one of them Concerning Christes bodely beinge in many places that is to say in heauen on the earth and in euery place where the sacrament is they geue the similitude of a man the which should haue about him many glasses in euery one of these glasses the forme of a man will apere Likwise if one speak in the presence of many persons his voice is but one and yet it is whole in dyuers mens eares If nature bringe this to passe that is to saye that one thinge may be in dyuers places much more Christ who
not there bodyly preseÌ„t of any maner of sort but as maÌ„ he is onelie in heauen where he sitteth on the right haÌ„d of the father froÌ„ whence he shall come to Iudge the liuinge aÌ„d the deade The first reason as tharticle of our faith doth sai And this opinion we haue proued with many reasons First by the definition of a sacrament the which is none other but a signe of an holy thing and it is not nedefull for to be a sacrament that Christ should be really as man in the same and moch lesse that there should be made any substantiall turning of the bread and the wyne It suffiseth that the bread and the wyne be there as signes of his body and bluod The 2. reason Then next seinge that this sacrament was instituted only for remembrance it suffiseth that it doo bring vs in remembrance of Christs body and bluod geueÌ„ for our raunsominge And it nedeth not to put there the bodyly presence of th one or of thother for so moch as that the right of no sacrament either in generall or particular requireth thys c. The third seing the spirituall eating of Christ is only profitable and not the bodyly The 3. reasoÌ„ If Christ were as man in the sacrameÌ„t he should help nothing The turnekindinge of the bread and wyne into Christes body and bluod The. 4. re cannot stand together with certen playne and many fest effects which be sene that is to say with the noryshing because the sacrameÌ„t doth norish as other bread and wyne doth and with thingenderyng of certen beasts as magots or such like beastes the which things cannot be made admitting this turnkynding of the bread and the wyne in to Christes body and bluod The fift if any such thing were god with out any maner of nede shuld work some The fift reason yea many most stonishfull myracles such as was neuer the greater The syxt it should not be necessary that Christ on the day of iudgement should come down froÌ„ heauen The syxt reason but that he shuld stepp out of the sacrament seing he is here moch nerer on earth then in heauen The seuenth The seuenth reason the opinion of Christs bodyly presence in the sacrament dymynisheth the truth of his body and maketh it phantasticall yea nothingeth it The eyght The eyght reason The sursâ—â—m corda which is song in the masse geueth to vnderstand that in old tyme Christs bodyly presence in the sacrament was not beleued The nynth The nynth reason If forbecause Christ sayd this is my body shewing the bread and thit is my bluod shewing the wyne the bread and the wyne shuld be turned into his body and bluod or els that the body and bluod shuld be there present seing there be many other speaches in the scripture like vnto this it shuld be behoue full that the lyke shuld be done in all those from whens wold folow many inconueniences The tenth reason The tenth seing that Christes flesh can not be eaten nor his bluod droken but after .ij. sortes that is to say spiritually by fayth and sacramentally And this may be done without the bodyly presence 1. Chor. 10. as the auncients did eate and drink him before that he toke mans fleshe as paul saith wryting to the Chorynthyes there is therfor no necessytie to affirme that bodyly presence in the sacrament Then further all though that we shuld bringe forth no reason for vs it belongeth not to vs to proue our negatiue but it belongeth to them that affirme such a being there to proue their affirmatiue the which thei did neuer nor can not doo by any saing of the scripture We haue after also made appeare that our oppinion is of thold church and chefely Augustines And we haue answered to the obiections of the contrary opinion making it apparant that they be vneffectuall vnpithye and weak to proue their purpose declaring the maners of speach that the scripture vseth when it treateth of the sacraments In the end we haue added from when the false ImaginatioÌ„ of that maner error is proceded And we haue bene long in treating of this article and we haue made many moo wordes than we thought and haue repeated the self things often and haue somthing exceded the measure of a sermon for the which thing the readers shall haue me excused We haue coÌ„sidered first that the thing was most wayghty and worthy to be well expressed the which could not be done with few wordes Then further also the error was so coÌ„firmed and after such sort rooted in the myndes of the people that it could not be pluckt vp nor rooted out without as it is comonly said moch digging and deluing And therfor it was necessary for vs to be long and parauenture somthing tedious to the lerned neuertheles this labor is chefely taken for the vnlerned Well it suffiseth that this our purpose was vpright and that we toke not vpoÌ„ vs this entreprise for no nother end but for gods honor and for the loue and defence of the truth And last of all to doo good and help to the simple Christians who haue bene so long tyme drowned in so great an error and deceiued by the suttle and wicked Antichrist WhoÌ„ let vs all praye vnto god with a good hart aÌ„d continually that he will so roote owt and plucck vp or to speak better destroie sauing allwayes not withstanding the men to whoÌ„ we desire all good I sai euen destroie as the lytle stone did that great Image which Nabuchodonosor sawe in his dreame that is to sai that he will make him vtterly vanysh away and be come nothing to the entent that gods finall aÌ„d perfite kingdome mai come thorow Christ Iesus his son our lord and redemer to whoÌ„ be honor and glory world without ende Amen FINIS Faults escaped in the printing and corrected after this sort Take lea for the leafe A for the first side B for the secoÌ„de side Ly. for the lyne R for read Lea. 2. b. ly 8. headolugnes r headlongnes Lea. 4. a. ly 21 opinious r. opinions lea 6. b. ly 1. ehyrch r. church lea 9. b. ly 18. strst first Lea. 12 b ly 1 euy r any lea 11 b. ly 20 Hollis r. holies lea 21 a ly 2. vpistle r epistle 6. ly 13 soruant r seruant lea 25 b ly 13 and the blud r and the winne the bluod lea 35 b. ly 20 glorios r. gloriousnes lea 36 a ly 11. tedyosnes r. tediousnes lea 40 b. ly 8. ho r hoc lea 42 a. ly 26. poinctt r poinct b. ly 20. coÌ„secrationi r. consecration lea 49 a. ly 24 ony r any lea 54 b. ly 16. wat. r. was lea 60. a. ly 8 mades r. made and for CoÌ„secrauyon r. coÌ„secration lea 65 a ly 16. no r. not ly 25. superstitos r. superstitious Lea. 67. a ly 18. tho r. to lea 68 a li. 5. thert r. there l. 17. fom r from lea 74. a. ly 16 byleuers r beleuers and all waies after lea 72 a. ly 10 he fore r. before lea 77 a li. 19. candache r candace lea 81. b. ly 26. crimin crimine lea 88. a. ly 21 offied r offered lea 94 b ly 12. passhion r passion lea 111. b 21. except r except lea 115 a li 1 song r soung ly 2. rong r roung lea a li. 2. misfortutune r. misfortune lea 118 b ly 11. apostos r. apostles Lea. 120. ly r. super r. supper lea 121. b. ly 22 Now he he r Now. he lea 122 a ly 19 parauentur r. perauenture le 124. a li. 12. thes r. those lea 125 b ly 13. the chefe greatest miste ry r the cheefe mystery lea 126. a. li. 15. the lawe I speak r the lawe Nor there is no sinn but that is against gods lawe but gods law I speake lea 126. b. ly 7. haue heuier sinnes than r haue heuior sinnes then mans laughter then lea 127 a li. 5. Idolatros r Idolatrous li. 9. thcik r thicke li 13. in them r in it lea 127 b ly 8 benefice r benefite lea 128. a. ly 18 ame r. same Lea. 131. a. li. 19. saint or saintes r saint or sainctess ly 20 S. loreto r loreto b ly 6 say here willâ—â— say here be these Idolatreis how can thei de â—…ey it will Lea. 131. b. ly 9 Hiperdulia r Hyperdulia lea 137 a li. 5. wis r. with lea 138. a. li. 13 folow done a nother r folowed one an other lea 156 a li. 22. and and. r. and. lea 174. b. ly 19. mas r masse lea 177. a. li. 7. couered with r. couered wear couered with b. ly 1. crafft r. craft and lykewise in other places lea 178 a. li. 14 eschew r. issue and generally read for off of for thos those for thes these for couerid couered and for such other in vid read coÌ„meÌ„ly ved and often for ans or ens read ance or ence as for importans read importance and for reuerens reuerence and often for or read our as for sauior read sauiour and for byleuers allways beleuers and commenly for os read ous or ose as the word geueth as for gratios read gratious and for purpos read purpose Lea. 180. a. l. 8 yoie r. ioy 182. b. ly 15 trewe faults in the sermom read true and 185. b. li. 9. who euer read whosoeuer 186. a. li. 15. remembrans read remembraunce and after 187. a. ly 18. substans read substance 188. b. li. 5. body lithere read bodyly there 192. a. li. 7. dewe read due 193. a. il 3. euerlasting read euerlasting 193. b. li. 17. be beleweth read beleueth 194. b. li. 15. seane read seene 196. b. l. 14 blode r. bluod 199. b. l. 3. satisfing r satisfiing 205. a. l. 25. wheÌ„ should r. when thei should 222. b. l. 1. turne read turned and 228. a. li. â—… beinge r. bringe 225. b. li. 5. shose r. those FINIS
the substance of the forme albeit that comonly the doctors agree with Bonauenture And here is to be noted that according to the opinion of Scotus it is not yet knowē what shuld be the wordes of cōsecracion of the wine but in part It is sure that he said the truth that neither he nor Bonauenture nor Thomas of Aquina nor as many moo scole doctors as be defenders of the masse euer knewe certenly the very poinctt which shuld be the partes of consecracion And this is the profe theroff For iff thei had knowen it there shuld not haue bene so great a diuersitie and confusion of opinions as we haue sene And we could yet iff we wold speake of others This their so gret diuersitie sheweth plainely that thei neuer knewe it nor neuer were certen of the matter And it is most certen that iff the opinion that thei defend were trewe there shuld neuer haue bene so many and so diuers opinions What a vaine thing is it than to say that by the vertu of certen wordes shuld be made a changing of the breade and the wyne in to the body and blood of Christ which thing not withstonding by the holy scripture cānot be shewed that is that by the vertu of certen wordes the substance of things shuld be chāged and of the other part not to knowe or not to be certen which shuld be thos wordes Thei speake also in such sort of this consecratoin that affter their owne opinion the church or the peple that heare the masse are neuer certen whether the consecracion be made or not For the master of sentencis saith in the iiij that the heretikes can not bring it to passe that is to say to consecrate And also he saith yow must haue the intent for otherwise yow consecrate not And who can be certen either of the faith or of the intēt of him that celebrateth Surely no man being such things in the consciens of man which none seith but god and he that celebrateth Therfor the peple that heare the masse is neuer certen whan the consecracion is made and whan not The cause whi this confusiō is amōg them first is because thei knowe not properly what maner of thing consecracion is For consecracion meaneth one thing and thei thinck it shuld haue a nother meaning Besides thei beleue or at the least cause mē to thinck that thei beleue and thei preach the same as an article of the faith that that breade and that wine is changed th one in to the trew ād substāciall body of Christ that is to say the breade the other that is to say the wyne in to his blood And thei say that Christ really in body ād sowle as gret and as thick as he was vpon the wood of the crosse and as now he is in heauen is wholly in that litle host and wholly in that cupp where the wine was And thei will that here there shuld come to gether many miracles and thei hold that this meruelos change which thei call transsubstanciaciō shuld be done by the vertu of thos wordes of the consecracion And thei will that consecraciō doth meane changing of breade in to the body and of wine in to the blood made with thes wordes So that they make this consecracyon as the inchanters were wont to make their inchantmēts with certē wordes wich they being deceiued by the deuel thinck to haue vertu to worke certen wōderfull effectys So doo they that thinck with thes wordes spoken softly ouer the breade and the wyne to change by vertu of the same the bread and the wyne in the body and blood of Iesus Christ Thes ij be the causes why they know not with what wordes the consecratyō is made nor whā it is made ffor hauing that opinyon that they haue that is to say that there is made that meruelous change of bread ād wine thes wordes hoc est corpus meum make than the difficultye and they knowe not what thing is shwesd by this word hoc For iff the breade be shewed the saing appeareth falss vnto them because the breade is not the body of Christ tyll all the wordes be spoken and whan they shewe the breade the wordes be not yet spoken Than seing the body is not yet there there can not be shewed by this word hoc the body which yet is not And if they say they shewe the body by this hoc that saing hoc est corpus meum semyth to them vntrew likewise for seing the body is not yet there in that host it can not be shwed in it And thus not knowing how to make trewe that saing what soeuer sort they shuld speake it they goo abowt writhing it a thowsand maner of ways ād wold fayne help the matter if they could but they fynd not the way for god will not As it chāced to Pharaos coniurers that could not doo that they wold Exo. ◅ So thei wold yet for all that holding that opinyon they hold and for to geue credyt to the masse they wold yet I say make that saing agree with this theyr opinion but there is no meanes how Let them turne it yet as they will theyr opynyon standing Christes saing hoc est corpus meum cannot be made trewe Thā theyr opynynō is most false which cānot stād with gods truth that is to say his word It is chanced also to them as to thos that wold haue bylded the gret tower of Babilon and haue made it meruelos high as it is writon in Genesis Gene. ◅ but god confused their tonges that one dyd not vnderstand a nother allthough that all did agre to the bylding of it Euē so it hapnyth to thes carpēters or builders of the masse wich also wold if they could lifft it vp euen to heauen and make it be cownted as a godly thing and an high worship And thei all are agreed to this workmanship And because they see that iff thei hold not that the trew body of Christ is in the host ād his trew ād naturall blood in the cupp the masse shuld not be in price or any estimacion but rather by and by shuld decay therfor aboue all things thei take hede to this to persuade and by all meanes thei can to make the peple beleue that Christ is really and bodily in that host and that cup. Neuertheles god hath confused their tōgs ād their mindes in to so many waies and opiniōs in to so diuers fansies ād spechis that the one is disagreing ād cōtrary to the other This is now a plain and a manifest tokē that this workmāship pleaseth not god and finally shall fall to the grownd to the intent that the saing of Iesus Christ may be verified that eueri plantinge which the heauinly father hath not planted shall be rooted vp Mat. 15. We doo not now intend to goo abowt to proue here that that their opinion is false that is to say that the breade and wine shuld be changed
of the altare the most holy body and blood of thy sonn may be fullfilled with euery heuenly blessing and grace thorow the same Iesus Christ our lord And here are made iij. crosses Masse prystes make ij manifest lyes in the canon euen whan thei are most deuoutly at mass which thei can not denie One vp on the host whan the body is named another ouer the cupp whā the same is named the third is made crossing him selff And at this praier the prest boweth him selff a litle but he ought to knele downe seing he saith that he prayeth vp on his kneis and yet he doth not knele but only boweth him selff As in the first part of this canon he saith also that he kneleth and yet he kneleth not And here William Durant vpon thes wordes that is to say command that thes things may be caryed by the handes of thy holy Angel vpon the high altare c sayth that they be of so gret depth that mans vnderstanding is veri hardly sufficyent to enter in to them And minding to expound them he bringeth furth first Gregories wordes registerd in the decree of consecracyon the 5. distinction Cap. Quid sit sanguis And because he semed not satiffyed he bringeth furth iij. other exposityons the first is that that word Hec that is to say thes things may meane not the body and the bloode but the supplicacyons and prayers of the faithfull which prayers the angels offer vnto god And than he geuyth a nother significatyō wich doth not satisfie hym And affter he geueth also the third that is this Command that thes things that is to say the mistycall body of Christ which is gods warfaring church may be caryed to the high altare that is to say to the victorios church and that by the hādes of thy holy angel that is to say of christ who is an āgel of the great coūcel as Esai in the ix saith He addeth yet a nother which for shortnes i will lett passe It is an hard matter surely to defend an vniust cause for a man is constrayned to say many things that be not to the purpos Id nedeth not here that master Durāt shuld find owt so many glooses For the canon speaketh whan it sayth thes things of the host and of the wyne consecrated as it spake before in the other prayer and speketh not neither of the praiers nor of the misticall body ffor it made no mencion neither of the one nor of the other in the tother praier And desyring in this prayer that god wold cōmād thes things to be caried by the hādes of his āgels ther is shewed by thos wordes thes things the selff same off which he spake off in the other prayer immedyately going before And iff he shuld haue ment of other things it shuld not haue bene to the purpos More ouer iff it shuld haue ment of the prayers or of the misticall body thes wordes shuld not haue bene of so gret depth as he sayth Yea they shuld haue bene very easy to vnderstand which is against Durant hym selff Therfor than the canon speaketh of the host and wyne consecrated which be as they thinck the very body and the very blood off Ihesus Christ and desyereth that they may be caryed and presēted vpon gods high altar that is to say in heauen in gods sight What a tale is this that Christ ◅huld be caryed by the hands of angels and pre◅ented in to gods sight Is not Christ now by hym selff present in heauē in the sight of the father withowt being caried ād presented bi the āgels What the article of our faith sayth that he sitteth at the right hand of god and Paul to the Hebrews saith that he sitteth there contynually He. x. what nedeth it than to cary hym where he is allredy Iff any mā wold say that the angels may cary hym so farr as he is in the sacramēt because that affter that sort he is on the earth This saing is a very mōster ād vanytye for Christ so farr as he is in the sacramēt because he is there vnpartably as thei thinck he is there in such sort as he cā not be caried as the scole mē thēselues say More ouer iff he shuld be caried forth affter such sort as he is in the sacrament it were necessary that the angels shuld cari the sacramēt in to heauen which is neuer sene I haue said now that he that hath put in thes ij praiers in to the canō bi the talcke that he maketh doth shewe that he by leueth not Christes corporall presence in the sacrament as we told yow in the former chapter For iff he had bileued it he wold neuer haue said such wordes iff he had had any vnderstōding He than that made thes praiers the opinion of thes scole men standing is an heretike And master Durant to defend the canon because he sawe that thes wordes according to his opinion could not stond he magnifieth them as diuine things but it neded not being mens wordes and not of the holy scripture so moch to magnifie them and to defend expresse errors desiring to make them holy matters as he is forced to doo in that his rationall or reason giuer The x. part is the Memento in which the dead are praied for And thus it saith Also o lord haue in thy rememberance thy seruants men and wemen here is made a particular rememberans for certen particular dead folkes as like him that saith masse and affter is added The which are gone before vs with the signe of faith and slepe in the slepe of peace To thes o lord and to all thos that rest in Christ we pray the that thow wilt grant place of comfort of light and of peace thorough the same Christ our lord Amen Here master Durant in thexposicion of this part saith that on the sonday thorough our lordes resurrectiō it is thought that the sowles shuld haue rest He meanith I think that thei suffer not the paines of purgatory but the other daies thei doo O master Durant it is very honest that the sowles in purgatory also shuld kepe the feastes But I meruel why thei haue not rest also on the friday on which day our sauior suffered to take from vs the paines that we had deserued Esay 53. as the scripture saith in so many places and chefely in Esay the Prophete where it is writton that he hath borne our greffes and that the lord hath layed vpon him all our iniquities and how he was beaten for the wickednes of the peple and other such saings which be there Thapostle Paule wold not that there shuld be difference of dayes in Christes church in this life And rebuked the galathians who obserued dayes Gala. 4. And he wrote to the colossians Let no mā iudge yow in meate or drinck Colos 2. or in part of an holy day or of a newe moone or off the sabboth dayes c. And shall we put
of the trueth they condemne them they imprison them they torment them and in the ende they kill theÌ„ And what is this but to shew plainely to the whole worlde that they be raueninge wolues and not shepherdes of Christs flock yea that they be very antichristes And the worshipfull inquisitours what els be they but antichristes Catchpoules creweller theÌ„ Neroes so that it were better to fall into the hands of Turks and Mores without comparison then into thers Besyde that they are vtterly ignorant of the holy scripture they are skilled in none other learning but in the skotish and sophisticall mouldines And these as you see are appointed to order the matters of oure faith and in there handes are the goods the honoure and the lyues of poore soules whom miserably they put to death by pretence of the faith although they be enemies of it and of all godlines I am desyrous to make this discours to open there eies Which fault not by maâ—…ice but by ignoraÌ„ce and to make them vnderstand that they should not maruell that I reproue the Masse and the Masse booke saing that they be full of falshod abuses aÌ„d many other errours as it may plainly be sene in this present booke Wherfore I deâ—…yre for the dere loue of Iesus Christ all the louers of the trueth and those that teÌ„der godlines to read â—…nd well consider this my labour for without â—…oubt they shall fynde trew that I say Praye to â—…od for me God be with yow THE TABLE The Table of the matters contained in this present book which we haue deuided in IIII. partes 1. The first parte examineth the Masse from the beginning that is from these words Introibo ad altare Dei vnto that parte which they call the Cannon when the Sanctus is said 2. The second examineth the Cannon it self the which they make the most holy and principall parte of the Masse and is said altogether in secret 3. The third examineth all the rest from the end of the Cannon beginning at these words Per omnia saecula saeculorum which goeth before the Pater noster vnto the end of the Masse 4. The fourth examineth the abuses and the superstitions that be in the same Masse coÌ„cluding after in the end that no Christian ought to be present at it but that it ought to be eschewed of all men as the plage The first parte is deuyded into foure chapters 1. The first saith that the introibo is false and a superstition 2. That the ConfÃteor is not Christian because it maketh no mention of Iesus Christ. 3. The two prayers that are said softly when he goeth to the aulter the one is false and the other is very wicked aÌ„d lesseneth the honour of Iesus Christ The second Chapter 1. Examineth the Kyrie eleison and the Gloria in excelsis Deo 2. It declareth that many praiers said after the Gloria in excelsis Deo are wicked and â—…gainst the plaine word of God 3. It declareth that the epistle and the gospell and â—…enerally all Gods word are vnworthely and euell â—…auoredly handled in the Masse The third chapter 1. Declareth that the praier which is sayd in the â—…ffering of the bread or as they say of the host is 2. That the mixting of water with wyne wicked 〈◊〉 an inueÌ„tion of meÌ„ which ought not to haue plaâ—â— among holly thyngs 3. That the praier at the offering of the Cupp is â—…icked as that is of thost The fourth Chapter 1. That many praiers which they call secreats and are sayd before the preface hold in them these wickednesses that is to say 2. That fasting doth purge sinns and make 〈◊〉 Worthy of the grace of god and leadeth vs to thâ—… heauenly glory 3. That by the bread and Wine not yet consecrâ—…ted God is apeased toward vs. Te second parte vuhich is deuided into foure chapters 1. The first axamineth the thre first parts of thâ—… Cannon That is Te igitur the memeâ—…to of the liuinge and the CommunicaÌ„teâ—… The second chapter 1. Examineth the fourth aÌ„d first parte of the saâ—… Cannon that is Hanc igitur oblationem and Quam oblationem 2. It examineth the sixt and seauenth parte that Qui pridie quam pateretur and tâ—â— Simili modo postquam coenatuâ—… est which be parts of the Consecration The third chapter 1. Examineth the eight parte of the Cannon aâ—… â—…heweth that he who saith the Masse vsurpeth that office which is onely Christs 2. That he saith a most wicked praier the which wrongeth Christ. The fourth chapter 1. It examineth the nynth parte which is most wicked and praieth that the Aungels may beare â—…he body and blud of Christ into heauen before the â—…ace of god 2. It examineth the tenht parte of the Cannon â—…he which is folish and gaine saieth itself 3. It examineth the eleauenth and last parte of the Cannon The third parte vvhich is deuyded in to foure chapters 1. The first sheweth that the saing of the prayers in secret and the desyre that amen shuld be answered by him that vnderstandeth not the prayer as it is in the Masse is a foolish thing and without any reason and against S. Paules saing 2. That the prayers which they say after the Pater noster that is to say the libera nos quaesumus is with out reason said in secret 3. That the breaking of the host and making thre parts of it and the mingling one of those parts with the wyne is vnfitt The second chapter 1. Declareth how deuout and holy the thre praieâ—… sayd Inmediatly after Agnus Dei be and thâ—… Domine non sum dignus which is saâ—… thryse and the praier concerning the host and tâ—… cup and the two praiers that follow 2. That the last praiers which are said in the eâ—… of the Masse be most wicked because they geueâ—… to the sacrameÌ„t that office which is onely Christ â–ª 3. And certein other prayers doe gainsay the prâ—…uat Mass 1. The third chapter of the Masse for the dead 2. Declareth that the first praier is folish aÌ„d to 〈◊〉 purpose because it asketh that it ought not to asâ—… 3. That the Epistle taken out of the Apocalipâ—… gainsaith the strst prayer aÌ„d the whole Masse thâ—… praieth for the dead 4. The words of the books of the Machabees arâ—… examined That the offertory is foÌ„d aÌ„d an incoÌ„uenieÌ„t requeâ—… Te fourth chapter of the blessings 1. Declareth that the blessing of the ashes is blasphemy because it geueth to ashes the raunsom of sinn and likewise all the other blessings as of Candels of palmes of fyer of frankincense of the pascall of chese of eggs of bread of water and to be â—…hort of the popes Agnus Dei they are all wicked and full of superstition because they geue â—…o much to the bodyly things The fourth parte of the book is of the abuses of the Masse and is deuided into 6. chapters 1. In the first that it is a great errour that the Masse should
whose name is the repentaunce done of the which you wold that the spoken confession should be a parte In whose name I say is it made Is it made in the name of thother saincts or â—…n Christs name he himself suerly hath said Luc. 24. that repentauÌ„ce and remissioÌ„ of sinÌ„es ought to be done â—…n his name as we haue in sainct Luke And why â—…hen haue you not put him in this youre confÃteor If at all you beleue in him what will they â—…ay here paraduenture they will say that there is mention made of Christe in these words ConfÃteor deo Christ being god And also in that â—…ther place where there is made mencion of all the the saincts Christ being also a sainct A goodly answer And why is there not made meÌ„cion of Christ â—…s man seing that there is mencioned the rest that â—…re onely creatures Christ is not onely god but Rom. 3. Timo. 2. Hebr. 7. â—…so man and oure aduocate in that he is man Why â—…oo not we confesse oure self to him and pray to â—…im seing he onely is apointed by god to be our â—…ediatoure and intercessour and not the other â—…aincts as muche as we vnderstand by the holly scriptures And so much the rather also that we be â—…ot certeine that the other saints here vs And if we should make particular mencion of the others who although they be by gods fauour saincts yet they were not without sinn Wherfore should we not muche rather make mention of Ihesus Christ the sonne of god the saincte of sanictes and the hallower of al the rest Collos 2. And in whome dwelleth the fulnes of the god head bodely as S. Paule saith It is plaine therfore that this Confiteor deo oâ—… the Masse is not Christian for that it burieth Christe After the Confiteor is said the miserea tur tui and the indulgentiam and absolutioneÌ„ and the deus tu conuersus and the Ostende nobis domine misericordiam tuam c. Where neither is made any mention of Christe This ended they say two prayers the first is this Take from vs o lord we pray the al oure iniquities that we mai with pure mindes come to the holy of holies through Christ oure lord Amen This prayer were godly if there were not these words holye of holies or at the leasts if there were that had the true meaninge of them But because it semeth to shewe that that materiall aultar vpon which the Masse is sayd should be the holye of the hollies therfore it is superstitious and telleth not the trueth for the holly of the hollis was according to the scriptures a place in the tabernacle deuided from the rest by a certein veele or Corthein whether you will call it as it is written in Exodus Exod. 20. into which place none did entre except the high priest once in the yere And it signifieth the heauen whither Christ is now entered after he had ended his euerlasting raunsomming â—…s sainct Paule saith to the Hebrues Hebr. â—… So that seing this aulter wherupon the priest sayth Masse is not the hollie of the hollies but an inuention of men and not apointed by god It is called vnproperly ye falsely the holly of the hollies for that place the holly of the holiyes is ended as also the aultars be and is no more sence that Christe is come who hath ended that materiall tabernacle the leuiticall sacrifices and all that outward and ceremoniall worshipping Matth. 27. Marc. 15. And in token of that as the Euangelists wryte when Christ dyed on the Crosse that veele which parted the holly of the hollies from the rest of the temple was deuyded and torne in two from the topp to the grounde geuinge vs to vnderstand that the ceremoniall law in euery parte ended by Christ. It belongeth not then to vs to make moe new holly of hollies hauing no word of god for â—…t Where as neuertheles if the prayer had vnderstode by the holly of hollyes the heauen where Christ is entered aÌ„d wherin also we shall by his me â—…rits aÌ„d the grace of god enter the praier had bene â—…trew aÌ„d godly but this is not the inteÌ„t as it semeth for it enteÌ„deth to speake of the misteri of the Masse aÌ„d of that aultar to the which things meÌ„ ought to goo as they say with a pure minde and a cleâ—â— conscience Ther followeth next another praier which 〈◊〉 priest saieth in euery Masse softly and bowing hâ—…self to the aulter that is We beseche the o lord 〈◊〉 the deseruings of thy sainctes whose reliques 〈◊〉 here and of all the saincts that thou woldest voâ—â—safe to forgeue me all my sinnes Amen A folish â—…cked and blasphemous prayer first he saieth tâ—… by the deseruings of the sainctes that haue the reliques in that aultar or in the hallowed stone they say And who knoweth that they be reliqâ—… of saincts What fuerty hath the priest therof Pâ—… aduenture they be the reliques I will not say whome And yf haplye there shal be there no reliques of sainctes as I thinck and beleue in a grâ—… parte yea in the more parte of the aultars that â—…re are no reliques of sainctes in dede what shâ—… auaile this there praier in that parte making meâ—…tion of the sainctes that be not Then what wickâ—…nes and blasphemie is this to geue the remissionâ—… sinnes to the deseruings of mere men who thougâ—â— they be saintes yet they all haue had nede of the sâ—…me forgeuenes of sinnes 3. Reg. 8. 2. Petr. 6. Psal 142. and no one of theÌ„ was 〈◊〉 any time without sinne as the scripture saieth 〈◊〉 many places And Christ in the prayer that 〈◊〉 taught the holy Apostles declareth the same Eccles 18. Matth. 6. who â—â—â—eth that they should say when they pray forgeuâ—â—â— oure debts that is to say oure sinnes as we for 〈◊〉 oure dettours And S. IhonÌ„ saith 1. Ioan. 1. If we shall 〈◊〉 we haue no sinne we deceaue oure selues and truâ—…th is not in vs. What blasphemy I say is this to gâ—â—â— such remission to mere men thesame being 〈◊〉 office onely of Christe The holy scripture â—â—â—n it speaketh of the forgeuenes of sinnes it makâ—â—â— no meÌ„tion of any but of Christe and teacheth vs that by his onely merits sinÌ„es are forgeuen And this praiers doth geue it Ioan. 1. Acto 4. to the deseruings of other saincts IhonÌ„ Baptist pointing to Christ saieth beâ—â—â—d the lamm of god behold him that taketh away 〈◊〉 sinnes of the world and meaneth him onely â—â—d S. Peter in the Actes of the Apostles saith theâ—â—s none other name vnder heauen geuen to men 〈◊〉 which we must be saued If there be none other â—â—me by which we are saued but that of Christe nor by other deseruings then his whye then do we â—â—ing in in that case any other but him what meaâ—…th this to be saued if not to be freed from sinn 〈◊〉 Aungell also saieth to Ioseph as S. Mathew
And there he telleth the significacions of thos Agnus deies the which affter ward be distributed or delt to the peple by the pope him selff on the satterday in Aâ—…bis that is to say the first saterday affter caster And in th end describing the vertu of thes Agnus deies he saith that thei by the vertu of their consecracion and blessing defend the byleuers froÌ„ lightning aÌ„d teÌ„pest But sureli the pope hath done a great wrong to his Agnus deiies that hauing himselff auctoritie aÌ„d powr to giue to things all thos â—…tewis that him listeth as he hath geueÌ„ uÌ„to Asshes powr to work redeÌ„pcioÌ„ of sinÌ„es aÌ„d to the holy water salted the which euery prest caÌ„ blesse the vertu to driue a waie deuels aÌ„d to saue meÌ„ chefely to that water of the holisabbath which is caried from how 's to hous and hath geueÌ„ so meruelos vertuis so so many other things as we may see in this chapter of the blessings he hath done a gret wroÌ„g to his Agnus dei which no maÌ„ can blesse but himselff that he hath not geueÌ„ theÌ„ the vertu of the herbe Agnus casiê° of the which Dioâ—…corides aÌ„d Galene doo write seing the prestis the friers the monkes aÌ„d the noÌ„nys aÌ„d vniuersaly all the ecclesiastical state haue so moch nede off it For all haue vowed chastitie and mariage is forbidden them It were moch more to the purpos to geue them this vertu and so to take a way so great an abhomination from the world as sendeth the stink of it euen to heauen than that vertu to serue against lightning and tempest O benommed and blind world whaÌ„ wilt thow beginne to open thine eies to remember thy selff and to see how myserably thow art bowght and sold And by whom By them that professe to haue the in charge It is the right iudgement of god For whan fables are preched euery man bileueth them But let gods word christds doctrine and truth come and be preachet it is not only as a perelous error despised but rather fersely persecuted THE FOVRTH PART The fourth aÌ„d last part foloweth the which is of the abuses and of the abhomynacions of the masse and hath vi chapters THe first is that the mass doth not satisfie for them nor applie such things to man THE I. CHAPTER ALthough we haue in the former partis touched many abuses and errors of the mass neuertheles we intend in this last specially to treate of certen partycular and great abusis As for example that the mass shuld forgeue sinnes that it shuld satisfie for them or els that it shuld applie to vs such forgiuenes or satisfaction and that it shuld be a sacrifice for the liuing and for the deade Than next also that the same masse is mans inuention and not gods made by many And to be short we will speake of many other abuses which partly are touched aÌ„d of many wheroff yet ther is no mencion made And first we will proue that the mass forgeueth not sinnes satisfieth not god for them nor applieth not to vs the forgeuenes and satisfactioÌ„ made by Christ And to say the contrary is a very gret error and abuse And I proue it affter this sort For thos that affirme the mass to worke thes effectis either thei will and meane it of all the mass that is to say of all thos words that are said and ceremonies that are done from the beginning to the end and of all that made heape of wordes and gestures or els thei meane of the sacrament of the body and of the blood only the which is chefely considred in the mass Iff thei meane it of the whole masse it is false For by saing of wordes and by doing of ceremonies sinnes are not forgeuen Seing that iff a man shuld say the whole bible ouer which are gods wordes from the beginning to the ending an hondreth times thei could not forgeue him his sinnes How than shall sinnes be forgeuen or satisfaction made for them by saing masse which is mans inuencion as we will proue in the third chapter It is plaine that sinnes are not forgeuen by saing of wordes nor doing of ceremonies bycause that Iustificacion els shuld be by workes which is contrary to Paule Who dowâ—…eth that the speaking and vttring of wordes shuld be our worke Yea who is that wicked man that can not doo this say many Psalmes praiers lessons and doo ceremonies Roma 3.4.5.8 Gallat 2.3.4.5 Coloss 2. The deuell him selff can say many wordes that be holy and of god Paul thapostel as we haue in so many places of his epistles to the Romans to the Galathians and the colossians saith that no man is Iustified that is to say no mans sinnes are forgeuen him by the workes of the lawe commanded by god And he meaneth of those lawe whether it be of the commandementis which is the morall lawe or els of the ceremoniall lawe And will we say that sinnes be forgeuen by reading or speaking of wordes or els by doing of cerimonies not commanded by god but diuised by men This can not be Iff thei will say that thei meane not of all the mass but only of the sacrament the which hath this vertu and strength to forgeue sinnes and to satisfie god for them or els to applie Christes redemption to them for whom the masse chanceth to be said This is not trewe neither but is veri fals For the office of the sacraÌ„ents is not to worke thes effectis but it is to be token theÌ„ and to bring theÌ„ to mind and to assure vs of them For iff the sacrament shuld haue this vertu it shuld haue it chefely towardes them that worthily shuld receiue and take the sacrament but it hath it not to wardes thos same wherfor it hath it not towardes no nother That no sacrament not only that of the lords supper shuld haue this office I wil make it plaine and proue it For the worthy receiuing of the sacrameÌ„t whether it be of thankes geuing or of baptime presupposeth forgiuenes of sinnes and Iustificacion than neither the one nor the other doth it It is plaine that none ought to take what so euer Sacrament yow will iff he be of age except he doo trewe repentance and haue trewe faith But he that doth trewe repentance and hath trewe faith Actor 10. his sinnes are forgeuen him and he is Iustified as we haue in thactes of thapostles Peter saith speaking in Cornelius the hunderders how 's in Caesarea To this saith he that is to sai to Christ for he spake of him all the Prophetes beare witnes that euery one that byleueth in him receiueth forgeuenes of sinnes by his name And Paule also saith Actor 13. knowe ye o men and brethern that by this and he spake of Christ the forgeuenes of sinnes is declared to yow and by him that is to say by Christ euery one that byleueth is iustified from all thos things from the which yow could not be Iustified
S. Lucia or of a nother saint How moch shuld it be to the purpos ād conueniēt iff one hauing nede to intreate the Emperor or a king wold goo to a poore mā and on his kneis wold say vnto him I commend my selff to your magestie ād I besech yow that yow wold shewe me this fauor and wold desire of him such things as he could not doo and as were not conuenient to be axed of such a parson shuld not that poore man cownt him selff mocked and scorned Thei doo moch wors becaus thei attribute to a plaine creature that which belōgeth to god only and to Christ who withowt measure doo more excede euery creature thā any earthly estate doth any poore or base parson as to the world And marke that in the councelles of thes owre times their is no worde spokē of thes and manie other so greate ād grosse errors and abuses as Reingne nowe Amonge Christes flock Be thes things deuociōs Men must not touche thē Well it is ynough that thei goo abowt to condēne the Lutherā Heretikes that is christ with all the whole holy scripture as their fathers haue done that is to say the chefe priestes the scribes ād the phariseis Who crucified Christ condemned euelhādled and in the end killed the holi Apostels Euen soo doo they A nother abuse is that they geue to vnderstand that the angels with all the court of heauen be present at the masse This is ouergret a falshode for that the angels ād the sowles of Iust mē can not be but in one place And according to this opiniō we must say that thei be eueri where wher so euer the masse is said For seing that thei must accompany Christ and that Christ as thei think is in all thos places where thei celebrate there must be also the angels and the sowles of saintes ād so the plaine creatures shall be at one time in diuers places the which cānot be we can not say that thei accompany him more in one place thā in a nother seing that Christ as thei think is equally in all places where the sacramēt is Wherfor we must say that eyther thei accōpany him in all places or in none A nother abuse is that thei say the masse for the deade against Christes institutiō The caus is this for that the sacraments auaile for thē for whō thei were instituted and not for other It is clere that thei were instituted for the liuing ād not for the deade therfor thei auaile not for them As for baptisme it is plaine that it auaileth not for the dead seinge the deade be neither baptised thē selues nor ani other for thē And though sōtime it were done as some vnderstand the saing of Paul to the Chorinthes 1 Corin. 15. Vt quid baptisantur pro mortuis This was by error and it was not well done So we will say of the super that it was instituted for the liuing and not for the deade becaus that the deade can not vse it in Christes rememberans nor eate it nor drinck it Some man will say the deade can not vse it but the liuing may vse it for the deade I wold haue of thes men that thei wold alledge me the caus why this sacrament may rather be vsed for the deade than baptisme There is differens betwene baptisme and the supper I know it becaus baptisme is vsed only ones in the life for a man But the holy supper many times I doo confesse that in this point there is a differens and there be also other differencis but this notwithstanding baptisme at thos times that it is vsed may also be taken for the deade such a nomber of childern being baptised as there is for so moch as that in baptisme there is made memory of the passion crossing death and burieng of Christ Roman 6. 2 Coloss 2. as we haue to the romans and to the collossians and mencion is made of the forgiuenes of sinnes Yea iff we shuld speake by the scripture it semeth to attribute more vnto baptisme than to the holy supper Marc. 1. Luc. 3. Act. 2. et 22. Iff we shuld consider many saings according to the letter we haue in Mark ād in Luke that Iohn did baptise in forgeuenes of sinnes We haue in the actes of thapostles how Peter said let euery one off yow be baptised in the forgiuenes of sinnes and Ananias said to Paul Rise vp baptise the and wassh thy sinnes The article off the faith which saith I doo confesse one baptisme in forgeuenes off sinnes c. All thes saings and other which we could bring forth iff we wold seme according to the letter that they shuld attribute more to baptisme as concerning forgeuenes of sinnes than to the supper And yet no one of the catholiks euer said that baptisme shuld help the deade Why than shall the holy supper help for the sinnes off the dead It is certen that where the holy supper is spoken off there is not so offten and so expresse mencion made that it shuld be taken in forgeuenes off sinnes as where the baptisme is spoken of I meane not by this my saing to affirme that by baptisme sinnes be forgeuen I will not affirme this for before we haue proued the contrary that is to say that the baptisme is in dede a signe off the forgeuenes off sinnes and it certifieth vs and maketh vs more sure off the same not that it doth it But I will say that in the writings of theuangelists and Apostles there is more mencion made of the forgeuenes of sinnes whan the baptisme is spoken of than whan the supper is spoken off And that iff the lords supper shuld auayle for the deade baptisme also shuld auaile but baptisme doth not auaile for the deade wherfor also the sacrament of thanks giuing doth not auaile A nother abuse is so gret a variete of gestures of strange dedes now this now that now the prist stoupeth now he standeth vp And this may haue some reason becaus the stouping there is a signe of prayer and in the masse are said diuers prayers But how many gestures and cown enancis be made withowt any purpos Somtime he Ioynith his handes and fingars By and by sondereth them Now he liffteth vp his armes now he putteth them down Now he speaketh now he saith nothing Now he speaketh sofftly now a lowd somtime he standeth at one end of the altare a nother time he standeth at the other and remoueth the masseboke Now he he turnith him to the peple by and by he turneth his back somtime he semith to slepe Oh there be made I can not tell how many crosses and how moche a doo I know well that thei geue to all thes things their significacion Imagined at their pleasure ād fained of their own head The which significaciō neuertheles neither the peple that seith and heareth nor thei thē selues that say the masse doo vnderstād But tell me I pray yow to
say that he is not there is the euel vnderstanding of Christes own wordes the which he spake whā he instituted the same sacrament For one opinyon vnderstandeth them after one sort and thother after a nother so that the controuersy ād contraryetye of the opinyons is because they vnderstand not Christes wordes as they ought to be vnderstand Matth. 26. Marci 14. Luk. 22. 1. Cor. 11. Whan Christ dyd institute this sacrament he toke first the breade and called it his body saing this is my body ▪ After he toke the wine ād called it his bloode They of the first opinyō say that seing the wordes be christes in dede they cā not be fals seing he hath playnely sayd this is my body shewing the breade ād this is my bloode shewing the wyne We must nedes say that christes body ād blood be there for els his wordes should not be trewe but fals which cā not be for somoch as that Christ being the chefe trouth can not say an vntrouth He hathe sayd that the breade is his body ād the wyne is his bloode ther for it must nedes be soo And in this opinyon there be also ij diuers myndes One sayth that Iesus Christ is not only in the sacrament but wil that neyther breade nor wyne shuld remayne in the sacramēt but that both of thē should be chāged and should be cownted turnkynded that is to say transsubstātiated as they call it the which meaneth turned in to Christes body ād blood The bread in to Chrystes trew ād natural body the wyne in to his blood And thei call this turnīg or chāging trāssubstātiacyō that is to say turning of the substances in such sort as there remayneth nothing of the bread ād the wyne but the withcommes or accydētes that is to say the whytenes of the breade the rowndnes the tast the sauor And so of the wyne there remayneth the rednes if it be redd the swetenes or the sharpnes according as the tast is and so of the other withcommes the which remayne withowt any subiect that is withowt any body to be in But the substances of th one ād thother be turned in to the substāces of christes body ād blood ād this is done by myracle becaus god can doo all things And this is the opinion of the prystes and fryres of the romish church And they haue in such sort preached it that the worlde in tyme past from certen hondreth yeares hetherto haue beleued it ād cownted it as an article of the faith And woo to hym that had sayd the contrary For they wold haue cōdemned ād burnt him as an heretik And that because the pope who was taken for god on earth for Christes lefetenant and had auctoritie to make men beleue what so euer liked hym and euery man was brought to his determinacion wold nedes haue it so Certen other of the first opinion too the which holdeth that Christ is realli and bodily in the Sacrament doo saie that not witstanding that Christes body is wholly in the breade and his blood wholli in the wine yet the breade and the wine abide in their substance as before and be not turned nor changed in to a nother thing as the former opinion saith And thes maner of mē must nedes saie that at the least .iij. very great miracles must come to passe in this Sacrament The first is that Christ is wholli under that breade ād under that wine as great ād as thick as he was on the crosse and as presentli as he is in heauen This is a gret thing that a great body continewyng great shuld be inclosed in a litle thing moch lesse then the same bodi The second miracle is that Christes whole bodi and his wholle blood is in the whole bread and in the whole wine and in eueri yea the least part of th one and the other as it is said of our reasonable sowle that it is whole in the whole bodi and whole in euery part of the body in such sort as if there shuld be made x. thowsand partes of the breade ād the wine whole Christ ād his whole blood shuld be in eueri of thos diuided partes which is yea a greater thing withowt cōparison thā that of the being of the sowle in the whole bodi ād in eueri part of the bodi For allthough the sowle be in eueri part of the bodi whilest that the partes abide yoined together yet it is not in all the partes of the bodi whan thei be separated For whan one part is diuided from the body the sowle is no more in the same But Christes bodi and blood according to this opinion be in all the partis of the bread ād of the wine whan thei be yoined to gether and whan thei be diuided or sondred The third miracle is that the same body and the same blood is in heauen and in earth both at a time and is in all places of the world where the sacrament is In France in Spayne in England in Almainy in Flanders in Italy in the east in the west in this in that citie In this in that church on this The tabernacle is a litle-closet wherein the sacrament is kept nere the altare on that Altare In this in that tabernale as thei say Yea and that thei say that Christ is euery where and filleth euery thing But it is behouefull for them that put or will haue the changing of the substances of the bread and the wine that is to say that their transsubstantion to put besides thes .iij. miracles others also and to make a better marcket of miracles than thei that put it not yea a better market than the holy scripture and god maketh to whom notwithstonding belongeth to make miracles who is not so liberall of mirakels as thei be The chefe grownd worck of this first opinion is that Christ said This is my bodi shewing the breade ād This is my blood shewing the wine And therfor Christ must be in the same sacramēt For els he shuld haue spokē falsely the which cā not be Thei bring furth in dede other reasōs but thei all doo litle auaile as that same that if Christ were not in the sacrament it shuld not haue bene so gret a fawt to him that had receiued it vnworthely as Paul saith that is to say who euer eateth that breade and drinketh that wine unworthyle he eateth and drinketh Iudgement that is to say cōdemnation If Christ were not there say they it shuld not be condemnation to eate that breade and to drink that wine But the condemnacion is to him that eateth and drinketh vnworthily Therfor Iesus Christes very body and blood is there And the same Paul in the self same chapter doth call the consecrated bread the lords body and therfor they say that Christ is in that breade and in that wine Thei of this opinion to my Iudgemēt doo make no other reasons that be any thing worth Not withstanding whan
we shall haue placed the trewe opinion we will answer to this shewsom reason and with the help of the lord we will make it appeare that it is triffling and of no valewe The other opinion and mind abowt this matter is that Christes body and blood be really in heauen where he sitteth on the right hand of god the father and that thei be not really and bodily in the sacrament but saith that the bread and the wine be signes appointed to signifie the body and the blood how Christ Iesus hath geuen both th one and thother for our ransom and satisfaction for our sinnes to th entent that we shuld kepe in our rememberans so great a thing and mistery as he him self whan he did institute the same sacrament in the presence of thapostles sayd Matth. 26. Marc. 14. Luk. 22. 1. Cor. 11. that is to say as oft as yow shall doo this yow shall doo it in my rememberās And this is the trew and catholik opinion a greable with the holy scripture and with the doctrine of the old church and awncient teachers the which haue not said as any one of the for said opinions saith that is to say that Christes body and blood be inclosed in that breade and wine ād moch lesse as thother opinion sayth the which affirmeth that the substances of the breade and wine be turned in to Christes body and blood and that there is no more neyther breade nor wine but only the withcommes of th one and thother but haue sayd that the breade and the wine remaine ād be signes of the body ād of the bloode for to bring to our remēbrans the most great ād high benefite that Christ hath wrought vs dieng for vs that is to say of our redempciō And the growndworkes of this opinion be sure and of such sort stedfast that all the Ingines in the world be not sufficient to throwe them to the grownd because thei be grownd wrought vp on the sure rock that is to say thei agree with gods trowth ād his word that abideth for euer We doo not Intend now here to bring furth all the reasons and grownd workes with the which this opinion is proued For we shuld than make a long treatyse and not a sermon to informe the ignorante and Iōglings in the knowlege of gods things as we intend to doo But we will only bring furth some fewe persuasions by the which it may be clerely knowen that it is euen soo as we sayd First this opinion saith The first reason that the definicion of the sacrament must nedes shewe and make Plaine to vs that the matter standeth thus that is to say that the breade and the wine remayne and that Christes body and blood is not really there in them For the definicion of a sacrament receiued of all men and is sent Augustines a catholike doctor is this that is to say that a sacrament is a signe of a holy thing Euery man confesseth that the thankes geuing is a sacrament If it be a sacrament it is no nother but a signe of an holy thing If it be a signe of an holy thing it nedeth not that the breade and the wine for to be signes shuld be changed in to other substances for so moch as that the signes that thei may be signes do not change any substans but only take a newe significacion And it is moch lesse nedefull that Christes body and blood shuld be really and bodily present in the same breade and wine for so moch as it is not necessary that the things signified and represented by the signes shuld be inclosed or present in the same signes as by experiens we may see in many sortes of signes that it is not nedefull that the thing signified shuld be either present or inclosed in the signe It is ynough that it be represented Let vs geue an exāple The Emperours Image is a signe of the Emperor And because it is no nother but a signe we will neuer say that the Emperor him self is in that Image nor that that Image is changed in to the emperors parson For if he were present where his Image is he neded not to sett vp the ymage for so moch as the Image is therfor sett vp speaking of the bodied things in any place because the thing signified is not there present and therfor it is sett vp to th entent that it may represent it So will we say of the breade and of the wyne that Christ hath Instituted them to th entent that thei might be representers of his body and blood to th entent that whan we see them and vse them for a sacrament as he hath ordeined we shuld remember that Christ hath geuen them that is to say his body and blood for our ransoming And for to be signes affter this sort it nedeth not that the body and blood shuld be there bodily present and moch lesse that thei shuld be changed in to other substances It suffiseth as we haue said that thei be signes as we haue spoken of the signes of the emperours ymage The reason standeth in this that the thāks geuing or for to vse paules wordes the lordes supper is no nother but a sacrament therfor it is no nother but a signe Because by the definiciō allredy geuen A sacrament is a signe of an holy thing The signe of a thing is not the thing it self nor is not changed in to it but only doth signifie it Therfor the breade and the wyne be not changed in to Christes body and blood nor they be not inclosed in them that is to say in the bread and the wyne And it suffiseth that thei be truly represented by the bread and the wyne And though we say that the bread eād the wyne be no nother but signes we meane not to denye the effects that the spyrite of god of the which the same sacraments be the mynistery doth worke in the beleuers that receiue them For by meanes of the sacraments the trewe beleuers be as it were by certen signes and seales of god confirmed in his promises and be assuered of gods grace and of many benyfites which god doth geue vs through Christ but we doo only denye that Christ is body lythere for so moch as that to work thes effectis which we say that the sacraments by the verteu of the holy gost doo work it suffiseth that they be signes appoynted by god to that end And it nedeth not that Christ shuld be there bodyly present nor that there shuld be made any change of the sustances of the breade and the wyne The second reason Luk. 22. 1. Cor. 11. Further this sacrament was instituted by Christ in remembrans as the wordes them selues of the same insttucion doo witnes saing Doo this in mi rememberans If it be so than that it was instituted for remembrans it is not necessary that Christ should be bodyly there and moch lesse that there should be made
things There was not withstanding difference betwene those sacraments ād oures because that thei beside that they were apointed to spirituall things serued also for the bodely things that is to say to the necessitie of the present lyfe for so much as the manna and the water were their dayly meat and drink so that they had two vses the one spirituall because it was to them a sacrament the other bodely the which serued to the necessitie of their bodyes Our sacraments be not so the which be taken onely for the spirituall vse that is to say for sacraments and not for the necessitie of the body To cōclude therfore I saie that seing Christ cānot be eatē nor drunke but after one of these two sorts that is to say spiritually and by faith and then sacramentally also And after these two sortes Christ may be receaued though he be not really that is to say in body and in soule in the sacramēt It is not therfore proffitable and much lesse necessary to affirme such reall being in the same sacrament They that say that Christ is really in that host and in that cup do not know what meaneth to eat and drink Christ sacramentally for so much as that to eat and drink sacramētally as we haue said is none other but to receaue the sacrament that is to say the signe of the holy thinge and doth not meane to take bodely the self same thinge that is represented by the sacrament I might if I wold and did not feare to be tedious to the readers make dyuers other reasons also but it nedeth not and those that we haue made do suffice But let vs put the case that we had made no one reason to proue this oure negatiue that is to say that Christ is not really in the sacrament nor there is not made any turninge of the bread and the wyne into his body and bluod nor that we had not alledged any saing of the scripture the which not withstanding god ayding vs we haue sufficiently done let vs put the case I say that we had done no one of those things yet they of the contrary opinion should not by this haue had their purpose because that it doth not belong to vs to proue our negatiue but it belongeth to them to proue there affirmatiue For eueri one that affirmeth any sainge is boūd if he speak reasonably to proue it If it were not already so plaine that euery man might see it He that denyeth is not boūd to proue his negatiue It is not enough for a mā of what so euer aucthoritie he be for to be beleued to say it is so the matter stādeth thus but he must proue his affirmatiue sainge chefely if it be a matter of weight ād pertaining to faith as this is Nor it is not enough nether to be hable to defend and maintaine it for so much as that many false opinions be with witt with distinctions with wrangelinges and intangelinges defended as thoughe they were true We mai see this by experience in the schoole doctoures and questionists for few or none of them do agree to gether but they be of contrary and d◅uers opinions and alwaies euery one of them defendeth his oune fantasies and they striue cōtinually and it is neauer knowen who hath the right and they confound the minds of men they lose the tyme and cause other also to lose it I desire then of these maner men that they wold proue this their rule or opinion that is to say that Christ is bodely in the sacrament and that the substance of the bread and the wyne be turned into his body and bluod I desire that they wold proue it me other by reason or such aucthoritie as I should be boūd to beleue This my request is iust reasonable and honest By reason they can not proue it this is clere and themselues by agrement do confesse it by aucthoritie how do they proue it They bring furth the old doctours they alle◅ge the determinations of popes and of Councels the common opinion of the churche last of all they alledge Christs words when he did institute the supper that is to say this is my body shewinge the bread and this is my bluod shewinge the wyne and Christs sainge also in S. Iohn Io. 6. that is to saye I am the bread of lyfe I am the lyuinge bread that am come doune from heauen and he that eateth of this bread shall lyue for eauer And the bread which I shall geue is my flesh which I will geue for the lyfe of the world And after truely truely I say vnto you if you eat not the flesh of the sonne of man and drink not his bluode you shall not haue lyfe in you he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath lyfe euerlastinge And further my flesh is veryly meat and my bluode is veryly drink these be the aucthorities that thei alledge To the which aucthorities I answer and first to those of the old doctours that is to say as for exāple of Ireneus Tertulian Cyprian Origen Hilary Athanasius Basill Iōh Chrisostom Gregory Nazianzene Gregory Nicene Cyrill Ambrose Iherom Augustine And such other holy fathers the which labored for Christs church in wrytinge bokes expounding the scripture disputinge against heretiks preachinge and teachinge wherby they do in dede deserue to be honoured for their lerninge and holynes but I say that no one of them nor of the other anucients was cauer of this opinion that Christ should be bodely in the sacrament and much lesse that the substances of the bread and wyne should be turned into his body and bluod but in dede they haue sayd the contrary And thoughe somtyme it semeth that they should affirme that the bread and the wyne be Christes body and bluode yet this is for none other cause but that they speak of the sacraments after the maner of the scripture the which doth call them by the name of the thinges signified by them as we oftē finde that Augustine did Who very often hath declared such maner of speches as we will tell here after And let vs admit also that all the old doctours had bene of that opinion and that all the world wold say it yet ought we not to beleue them if thei bringe not furth the witnes of the holy scripture because that this is a thinge pertaining to faith and faith is ground wrought onely vpon gods worde as paule saith to the Romains Ro. 10. faith cōmeth of hearinge but hearinge is by the worde of god he doth not say by the word of men the whiche may all err but he sayeth it commeth of gods word and the holy scripture is gods worde Let them alledge vs in such thinges the holy scripture and we will beleue them els not And if any wold say and the scripture also was made by men therfore we ought not to beleue it I answer that the scripture is writ-told and made by the holy
is god the maker of nature can bringe it to passe in his body that is to saye that first the bread should be turned into his bodye and the wyne into his bluod and after then that it should be whole in the whole hoste and in the cupp and whole in euery parte of the sacrament and that it should be in dyuers places If he can do those thinges and will doo them as we vnderstand by the words of the sacrament the whiche say this is my bodye shewing the bread and this is my bluod sh◅winge the wyne then they be done because it is written in the psalme Quaecunque uoluit fecit dominus All thinges that the lord wold do he did I answer first to the reason it self and after I will speake of the similitudes To the reason that is to say if god can do it therfore he hath done it I say that it awayleth not and it is already answered before in oure seauenth reason that god doth not all that he can do as we geue the example of the twelue thousand legions of Aungels the which god if he wold could haue sent to help Christ and yet he sent them not God can bringe to passe that we all maie walke vpon the sea without shippes as some tyme Christ did And as it is written in the boke of wysdom and yet he doth it not Oure question is not whether god can do it or no but it is whether god hath done it or no. Thei saiyes and we saye no It belongeth to them to proue that he hath done it and that he doth it a fresh the which they shall neauer do nor can neauer bringe it to passe by gods word this is a suer rule Concerninge that they go aboute to saye that god had desire to do it this is not onely false but most false What reason is this Christ sayd this is my body shewinge the bread and this is my bluod shewinge the wyne therfore he will that the bread should be turned into his body and the wyne into his bluod or at the least that he should be in the sacrament in such sort as they say This reason doth not deserue any answer for so much as Christ by these words ment not to saye any other but that the bread and the wyne were a sacramēt and signes of his body and bluod and ment not to saye that which they affirme as before we haue so often declared The exāples or similitudes that they bringe furth be not to the purpose and thei be rather dissimilitudes then otherwise The example of Moyses rodd turned into the serpent and after the serpent turned into the rod and of the waters turned into bluod it is not like because the serpent Note further that in turninge of Moyses rod of the water into bluod and such other myracles the senses did witnes the chaunge of the thinges which holdeth not in the transubstantiation into the which the rodd was turned was not before but was newly made Likewise that bluod into the which the waters were turned was newlye made and was not before but Christes body and his bluod were and be before the bread They put certayne turninges against nature not maruelous but rather monstrous and Imaginatiue Let them geue me but one example in the hole scripture that god eauer turned one thinge into another that was before they shall not fynde it How dare they then be so bold to affirme such a thinge yea that which is more to go aboute to make men beleue it as an article of the fayth and yet thei cannot neather proue it by gods worde nor bringe furth any example that eauer any lyke thinge was done The example of the heauen that it is in oure eye which is litle is nothinge worthe because the heauē is not really in oure eye but there is onely the image or the similitude of the heauen the which similitude is litle as the eye nor it is not vnconuenient that the similitude or the Image of a great thinge shuld be litle as the Image of Cesar was in the coyne that was shewed to Christ by the pharisees the Image of Cesar was in that coyne the which was much lesse then Cesar himself and neuertheles it did represent Cesar who was great and much greater then that Image We will say the like of the Image of the man in the glasse the which althoughe that it be muche lesse then the man yet it doth represent the man This is no great matter that the Image of agreat thinge should be litle but it should be agreat matter that agreater body should be conteined in one much lesse as they say of Christ that great and thick as he was vpō the wood of the crosse and as presently he is in heauen he should be whole conteyned in a litle cake They that geue these examples of heauen and of the thinges that be seen in glasses do not proue that agreat bodye is conteyned in a litle as they say of Christ that he is conteyned in the hoste but they proue onely the Image or similitude of agreat thinge may be whole in a litle thinge the which we denie not but if the similitude or image of agreat thinge be in a litle thinge this is because that that Image it self also is litle and no greater then that body wher in it apereth yea it is lesse so that these exāples be not to the purpose To the other similitudes I say also that they auayle not that of the soule that it should be whole in the whole bodye and whole in euery parte of the bodye This is because the soule seing that it geueth lyfe to all the bodye as it is playne must nedes be in euery parte of the bodye for so much as that seinge it geueth lyfe not onely to the whole body but to euery parte of the same It is necessarye that it should be in all the partes because that if it were not in any parte that parte should not be a lyue And because that the soule wheresoeauer it is of necessitye it must be whole there being vndyuidable and not hauing partes because it is a spirite there fore it is necessary that the soule be whole in the whole and whole in euery parte of the body but Christes body not being a spirite and hauinge many partes beinge longe brode and thinke cannot be whole in the whole and whole in euery parte of the place where he is and as it is repugnaunte to a bodye to be a spirite so is it repugnant to it to be vndeuydhable in a place To the other similitude of oure face the which is whole in the whole and whole in euery parte of the glasse after this sorte that is to saye that when the glasse is broken the Image of the face is in euery peece of the glasse I say they be deceaued nor it is not true that one Image is in all those peeces of the glasse when it is
hād of god vnderstand you the thinges aboue and not the earthly thinges And shose men do the contrary for they drawe vs doune alow and to the earth sainge that Christ in the litle closeth and in the litle holes when we should haue oure conuersation aboue and in heauen and that we might saye with paule Oure conuersation is in heauen from whence we loke for oure lord Iesus Christ who shall chaunge oure wretched bodyes and shall make them lyke to his glorious bodye We think yea we be certayne that thus farr we haue playnely proued and shewed manye wayes that Christ Iesus is not bodelye in the sacrament of thankes geuinge or the lords supper as paule calleth it and that there is muche lesse made in the same anye substantiall turninge of the bread and the wyne into his body and bluod And we haue made it apere that the opinions whiche affirme such thinges be false ād erroneous There remayneth now in the end to see who were the auctoures of those strainge and phantasticall Imaginations and wherby they were moued to fynde them oute seinge they be withoute all reason and contrarye to Christes mynd and the whole holy scripture I haue not yet heatherto bene hable to know whan this opinion of the reall and bodely being of Iesus Christe in the sacrament did beginne It apereth that aboute the yere of oure lorde 877. or about the tyme of pope Iohn the eight or a litle before men began to dispute about that matter Iohn scotus an Englishe man not he that was called sottell but another more auntiēt and wery worthye in lerninge who florished in fraunce vnder Charles surnamed balde made a boke against this new opinion of the sacrament whose Iudgement shortly after Beringarius of the coūtrye of Turonne and deacon of Aungee followed a mā of singular lerninge ād of holy lyfe who dealt all his goods to the poure and lyued by the labour of his hādes as Platina writeth in the lyfe of Pope Iohn the fiftenth But one lanfranck of pauia bishop of Canterbery in England so much preuayled with his auctoritie with Pope Leo the nynth and so much persuaded him that in the councell of vercels he caused the sayd Ihon scotusses boke and berengarionses opinion who followed him to be condemned And it was ordeined in that councell that men ought to beleue not onely Christes presence in the sacrament but the turning of the bread and the wyne into his body and bluod And this was as Mat. palmerius and Iohn lucidus Samothenus in the amendements of the tymes saye in the yere of the lord 1052. so that it is now iust 500. yeares sence this new opinion of the turninge of the substāces of the bread and the wyne into Christes bodye and bluod was first determined Beringarius opinion of the sacrament the which was condēned as lanfrāck setteth it out in his booke made against him is this The sacrifice of the church is mad of 2. things of the seeable and of the vnseeable that is to say of the sacrament and of the thing of the sacrament The which thing not withstanding that is to say the body of Christ if it were before mens eyes it should be seeable but it is lifted vntill the tymes of the restitutiōs of all thinges vp into heauen and sitting on the right hand of the father can not be called back from heauen as thapostell peter wryteth be cause that the parson of Christ hath his being of god and of man but the sacrament of the lords table is made of bread and of wyne the which things consecrated be not turned but abyde in their substances hauing lykelynes with those things whereof thei be a sacramēt This true and godly opynyon of Beringarius the which as we haue sayd before ◅s the opinion of the old church and is taken out of the holy scripture was condemned in the forsayd councell of ve◅selles And afterward a nother tyme in Rome by pope Nicholas the second who compelled Beringarius to recant and make a beastly and shamefull confession contrary to his own true confession Beringarius recantation is put in the decree of consecration the .ij. distinction capite Ego beringarius where he confesseth and affirmeth that he beleueth with the church of Rome that the bread and the wyne which be set on thaltare be not onely a sacrament but also they be the true body and bluod of our lord Iesus Christ and that he is not only in the sacramēt but also in trowth sensually handled with the priestes handes and is brokē in peces ād with the teeth of the faithfull is gnawed in to morsels Doo ye think that this was a godly confession that they compelled this holy man Beringarius to make the which confesseth that Christ is in deede sensibly handeled that is to say towched and broken with the priestes handes and than after This host was such one as beleued all things that he is knawed in to morsels with the teeth of the faythfull Me thinketh that this confession is like vnto that bost of Bachanus that beleued to moch as it is said The gloser of the decree to whom such a maner of confession semed strange and crewel saw this well ynough and therfor he sayth if thow dowst not after a safe sort vnderstād Beringarius words thou shalt fall into a greatter heresy than that which he had The master of the sentences in the fourth the .xij. distinction myndy◅g to glose the words of the same confession sayth that the same to be sensibly handled may be referred both to th one and thother that is to say to the body and to the sacrament of the body But the same to be broken in peeces and to be knawed into morsels can not be said but of the sacrament only A good glose that speaketh contrary to the text This glose hath .ij. faultes First it speaketh against the auctor that is to say against the master of the sentences him self who geueth it because he will that Christ shuld be in the sacrament vndyuydably whole in the whole and whole in euery part of the sacrament If it be soo how can he be towched and handled with the priestes handes For somoch as that the thing which is handled is felt with the hādes and if it be felt it must nedes be hote or cold moist or drie hard or soft rough or smoth who did euer touch Christes body syns it ascended into heauen and dyd euer feele it whether it were whote could or of what qualytie it should be If the master of the sentences had said that the withcommes of the bread and the wyne be handled with handes he had sayd true according to his opynion because that the greatnes of the bread and the withcommes of it may be felt with handes but the withcommes of Christes body can not be felt Therfor Christes body can not be handled with the priestes handes Further if Christs body in the sacrament may be handled
that masse where he that saith it onely taketh the sacrament and doth not deale it to the people We must vnderstand that in old tyme the masse was not said as it is now said as before we haue noted in the bocke of the Anatomy for so moch as that the masse then was no nother but the ceremony of the lords supê‘ the which was dealt to the church and the mynyster did not take it alone as hath bene vsed froÌ„ certeÌ„ hondreth yeares hetherto against Christes expresse ordynaÌ„ce aÌ„d coÌ„maundement who sayd whan he did institute the sacrament that thei should take it and dyuide it amoÌ„g theÌ„ and not that one alone should receue it Thei sawe that this mass was that wych made theÌ„ rych aÌ„d mighty It multiplied the churches reuenewes aÌ„d in th end it made theÌ„ lyue in delytes as before in the boke of the anatomy in the chapter of the abuses of the masse we haue sayd And for to wyne theÌ„ credite and bring to passe that the people should be inclined to theÌ„ and shuld haue deuocioÌ„ to theÌ„ there could not be found a thing more to the purpose then to geue men to vnderstand and make the comoÌ„ sort beleue that Christ shuld be in the sacrameÌ„t and that there shuld be made a turning of the substances of the bread aÌ„d the wyne into his body and bluod and to saie that there be so many myracles and to make the thing so great and wonderfull Thei were sure that if the people were persuaded that Christ were not in the sacrament but that there were only the bread and the wyne as holy signes thei wold haue cared littell for it nor they wold neuer haue beleued that the masse shuld haue so many vertues as thei haue geueÌ„ to vnderstand And thei should not haue had that vnmesurable gaine ther shuld not haue bene drawen out of that golden well thoes infinite richesses Let euery man that hath reason and is without affection consider aÌ„d he shal find as much as I sai to be true This is a sure rule if the people did not beleue Christ to be in the sacrament and were not I meane the people bewitched with some straÌ„ge Imagination that thei wold make lytle count of the masse The popes that sawe this goodlye inuention to be moch for their purpose thei after did not only with their decrees and coÌ„cels allowe it but they did bynd the Christian people beleue it as an article of the faith I haue spokeÌ„ of the first dyuisers of these opinions what causes I thinck did moue theÌ„ to seke owt so strange Imaginations and so farr from the trouth Of the other that folowed next after that is to say of the scholemen I doo not sai soo As for example of one Thomas of Aquine of BonauaÌ„ture of Egidus Romanus and such lyke as were questionistes without noumber and haue dysputed endleslie on the master of the sentences and thereby intangled the world I think well that the first cause that is to say the ignorance of the scripture did seduce them to beleue thus because they did attend more to the wordly knowleges and to the bookes of phylosophy then to the holy scripture But I doo not beleue that any such malyce did moue them as moued those first inueÌ„ters It is true in deede that a nother ignorance made them to erre that is to say that when they sawe that the pope and the councels had so determined thei Imagined that they were tyed and bound to beleue all that that thei had appointed and ordeyned to be beleued of all the faithfull And therfor thei haue affirmed this opinioÌ„ as an article of the faith thinking they should haue bene heretikes if they should haue holden any other wyse And to proue this true certen of them and among the rest Thomas of argeÌ„tyne the heremyte in the fourth the .xi. distinction saye that before the article of the turnkeÌ„ding was determyned by the church It was no heresy to sai the contrary that is to sai that the bread and wyne remayne after the consecration This is that which deceyued them the popes auctorytye whom they thought was Christes lefetenant and that euery thing that the see Apostolyke and those councels determyned was an oracle against the which it was not lawfull to speake the poore soules not vnderstanding that no man is bound in matters perteyning to faith to beleue eyther pope or councles but so farr as gods word speaketh from the which if they swarue though there should come an angel from heauen we should not be bound yea I say we ought not to beleue him as paul sayth writing to the galat. And if we haue particular reuerence to any councels Gala. 1. it is because that in their determinacions they agree with the holy scripture which ought to be the paterne aÌ„d the rule to all the meÌ„ in the world And therfor we haue in specyall worshyp those .iiij. councels that is to say the councel of Nece in the which the error of Arrius was destroyed the councel of ConstaÌ„tinople gathered together against Eunomius and Macedonius the first councel of Ephesus where Nestorius was iudged aÌ„d condeÌ„ned the couÌ„cel of CalcedoÌ„ in the which the wickednes of Eutyches and dyostorus and certen other were reproued because thei haue not spokeÌ„ nor determined any further then is conteined in the holy scriptures But if that men let them be of what so euer knowlege holynes and auctoritie ye will shall not bring furth in gods things the holy scripture we ought not to beleue theÌ„ nor all the whole world to gether can not make a man to beleue a thing as an article of the faith except it be conteyned in the holy scripture A short rehersall It is tyme now that we knyt vp the some of this present sermon in the which this article that is whether Christ be really and bodyly in the sacrament of thanks geuing or no is largely examyned And first we haue sene how there be in this article .ij. principall IudgemeÌ„ts or opinions The first saith that Christ in body and in soule great and thick as he is presently in heauen is whole in the sacrameÌ„t And this opinion is diuided into ij For some say that not only Christ is in the sacrament but that the substance of the bread and wyne be turned into his body and bluod and that there remaineth no more eyther bread or wyne but the only withcoÌ„mes of the one and the other Some other sai that Christ is really in the sacrament but the substances of the bread and wyne remayne and that there is made no turning in them And we haue seene the obiections where vpon this their fantasy is ground-wrought TheÌ„ next we haue put the secoÌ„d opinioÌ„ the which we hold and sure beleue is catholik and godly and it is this that is to sai that the substances of the bread aÌ„d wyne doo not only remaine in the sacrament but Christ is