treatinge of this mattier of transubstantiation â–ª sheweth playnlye the cause thereof For saith hee the woordes of the Scripture myghte be expounded more easylye and more plainlye withoute Transubstantiation but the churche dydde choose this sense whiche is more harde â—eeynge moued thereto as it seemeth chyefelye â–ª bicause that of the sacramentes men ought to holde as the holy churche of Rome holdeth But it holdeth that breade is transubstantiate or turned into the bodye and wine into the bloode as it is shewed De summa Trinitate et fide catholica Firmiter credimus And Gabriel also who of all other wrote most largely vpoÌ„ the Canon of y â— Masse sayth thus It is to bee noted that although it be taughte in the scripture that the body of Christ is truely contayned and receiued of christen people vnder the kindes of breade and wine yet howe the body of Christ is there whether by conuersion of any thinge into it or without conuersion the body is there with the bread both the substance and accidentes of bread remainynge there styl it is not founde expressed in the Bible Yet forasmuche as of the sacramentes menne muste hold as the holy churche of Rome holdeth as it is written De hereticis Ad abolendam And that churche holdeth and hath determined that the bread is traÌ„substantiated into the bodye of Christe and the wyne into his blood therefore is thys opinion receaued of al theÌ„ that be catholike that the substance of breade remayneth not but really and truelye is tourned transubstatiated and chaunged into the substaunce of the body of Christe Thus you haue hard the cause wherfore this opinion of transubstantiation at this present is holdeÌ„ and defended among christen people that is to saye bicause the churche of Rome hathe so determined although the contrary by the Papistes owne confession appeare to be more easy more trewe and more accordinge to the Scripture But bicause to our Englishe Papistes who speak more grossely herein thaÌ„ y e Pope himselfe affirming that the natural body of Christ is naturally in the bread and wine can not nor dare not grounde theâ— faith conâ—erning transubstaÌ„tiation vpon the churche of Romeâ— whiche although in name it may be called moste holy yet indeed it is the moste stynking doâ—gehill of all wickednes that is vnder heauen and the very synagoge of the deuil whiche whosoeuer foloweth can not but stumble and fall into a pit ful of errours Because I say the Englishe Papistes dare not now stablishe their fayth vpoÌ„ that foundacion of Rome therfore they seeke Fegge leaues that is to say vayn reasons gathered of their owne braynes and authorities wrested froÌ„ the intent and mynde of the authors â–ª wherwith to couer and hide their shameful errors Wherfore I thought it good somewhat to trauaile herein to take awaye those Fygge leaues that their shamefull errors may plainly to euery maÌ„ appeare The greatest reason and of most importance and of suche strength as they thynke or at the least as they pretend that all the worlde can not answere therto is this Our sauiour Christ takyng the bread brake it and gaue it to his disciples saiyng This is my body Nowe say they assone as Christ had spoken these woordes the bread was straight way altered and chaunged and the substaunce thereof was conuerted into the substaunce of his precious body But what christian eares can paciently heare this doctryne that Christe is euery day made a newe and made of another substaunce than he was made of in his mothers wombe â–ª For where as at his incarnation he was made of the nature and substaunce of his blessed mother nowe by these Papistes opinion he is made euery day of the nature and substaÌ„ce of bread wyne whiche as they say be turned into the substaÌ„ce of his body and bloud O what a meruailous Methamorphosis and abhominable heresye is this to say that Christ is dayly made a newe of a newe matter wherof it foloweth necessarily that they make vs euery day a newe Christ and not the same that was borne of the virgyn Mary nor that was crucifyed vpon the crosse as it shall be plainly proued by these argumentes folowyng Fyrst thus If Christes body that was crucifyed was not made of bread but the body that was eaten in the supper was made of bread as the Papistes say than Christes body that was eaten was not thesame that was crucified And againe If Christes body that was crucified was not made of bread and Christes body that was crucified was thesame that was eaten at his last supper than Christes body that was eaten was not made of bread And moreouer If Christes body that was eaten at the last supper was the same that was crucifyed and Christes body that was eaten at the supper was made of bread as the Papistes fayne than Christes body that was crucifyed was made of bread And in lyke maner it foloweth If the body of Christ in the sacrament bee made of the substaÌ„ce of bread and wyne and thesame body was conceiued in the virgyns wombe than the body of Christ in the virgyns wombe was made of bread and wyne Or els turne the argument thus The body of Christ in the virgyns wombe was not made of bread wyne but this body of Christ in the sacrament is made of bread and wyne than this body of Christ is not the same that was conceiued in the virgyns wombe Another argument Christ that was borne in the virgyns wombe as concernyng his body was made of none other substance but of the substance of his blessed mother but Christ in the sacrament is made of another substance than he is another Christ. And so the Antichrist of Rome the chiefe author of all Idolatry would bryng fayfthul christen people froÌ„ the true worshippyng of Christ that was made and borne of the blessed virgyn Mary through the operacion of the holy ghost and suffered for vs vpon the crosse to worship another Christ made of bread wyne through the consecracion of a Popishe priest And thus the Popishe priestes make them selues the makers of God For say they the priest by the woordes of consecracion maketh that thyng whiche is eaten and dronken in the Lordes supper and that say they is Christ him selfe both God and man and so they take vpon them to make both God and man But let all true worshippers worship one god one Christ ones corporally made of one only corporall substance that is to say of the blessed virgyn Mary that ones dyed and rose ones agayne ones ascended into heauen and there sitteth and shall sit at the right had of his father euermore although spiritually he be eueryday amongest vs whosoeuer come together in his name he is in the myddes among them And he is the spiritual pasture and foode of our soules as meate and drynke is of our bodies whiche he signifieth vnto vs by the institution of his most holy supper
a thing that we should knowe that the eatyng is our dwellyng in him and our drinkyng is as it were an incorporation in him beyng subiecte vnto him in obedience ioyned vnto him in our wylles and vnited in our affections The eatyng therefore of this fleshe is a certaine hunger and desire to dwell in him Thus wryteth Cyprian of the eatyng drynkyng of Christe And a lytle after he sayth that none do eate of this lambe but suche as be true Israelites that is to say pure christian menue without colour or dissimulacion And Athanasius speakinge of the eatinge of Christes fleshe and drinking of his bloud sayth that for this cause he made mention of his ascēcion into heauen to plucke them from corporall phantasie that thei might learne hereafter that his fleshe was called the celestiall meate that came from aboue and a spirituall foode which he would geue For those thinges that I speake to you saithe he be spirite and life Whiche is as muche to say as that thinge which you see shalbe slayne gyuen for the norishment of the worlde that it maye bee distributed to euerye body spiritually and be to all men a conseruacion vnto the resurrection of eternall lyfe In these woordes Athanasius declareth the cause why Christ made mention of his ascention into heauen whan hee spake of the eatinge and drinking of his fleshe and blud The cause after Athanasius mynde was thys that his hearers shuld not thinke of any carnal eating of his body with their mouths for as concerning the presence of his body he should be taken from them and ascende into heauen but that they shuld vnderstande him to be a spirituall meate and spiritually to be eaten and bi that refreshing to giue eternall lyfe which he doth to none but to suche as be his lyuely membres And of this eatinge speaketh also Basilius that we eate Christes flesh and drinke his blud beynge made by hys incarnation and sensyble lyfe partakers of his worde and wysedome For his fleshe and bludde he called all his mysticall conuersation here in his fleshe and his doctrine consistinge of his whole lyfe pertaininge bothe to his humanitie and diuinitye whereby the soule is norished and brought to the contemplacion of thinges eternall Thus teacheth Basilius howe we eate Christes flesh and drinke his blud which pertaineth only to the true and faithful membres of Christ. Saint hierome also saith All that loue pleasure more than god eate not the fleshe of Iesu nor drinke his bludde of the whiche himselfe saith He that eateth my fleshe and drinketh my blud hath euerlastynge lyfe And in an other place S. Hierome saith that heretiques do not eat and drynk the body and bludde of the Lorde And moreouer he saithe that heretiques eate not the fleshe of Iesu whose flesh is the meate of faythfull men Thus agreeth S. Hierome with the other before rehersed that heretiques and such as folow wordly pleasures eat not Christs flesh nor drink his blud bicause that Christ said He that eateth my flesh drinketh mi blud hath euerlastīg life And S. Ambrose saith that Iesus is y e bread which is the meat of Saintes and that he that taketh this breade dieth not a sinners deathe For this breade is the remission of sinnes And in an other booke to him intituled he writeth thus This breade of lyfe whiche came frome heauen doth minister euerlasting life and whosoeuer eateth this bread shall not dye for euer and is the bodye of Christe And yet in an other booke sette forth in his name he saith on this wise He that did eat Manna died but he that eateth this body shal haue remission of his synnes and shall not dye for euer And againe he saith As oftē as thou drinkest thou haste remission of thy sinnes These sentences of S. Ambrose be so playne in this matter that there needeth no more but only the rehersall of theim But S. Augustine in many places plainlye discussing this mattier saith He that agreeth not with Christe doeth neither eate his bodye nor drinke his bludde although to the condemnation of hys presumptiō he receiue euery day the sacramente of so highe a mattier And moreouer S. Augustine most plainly resolueth this matter in his booke De ciuitate Dei disputīg agaīst two kinds of heretiques Wherof the one said that as many as were christened and receaued the sacrament of Christs body and bludde shuld be saued howe so euer thei liued or beleued bicause that Christe saide This is the breade that came frō heauē that whosoeuer shal eate thereof shall not dye I am the bread of life which came from heauen whosoeuer shall eate of this breade shall lyue for euer Therfore said these heretiques all such men must needes be deliuered from eternall deathe and at length to be brought to eternall life The other said that heretiques and scismatiques myghte eate the sacrament of Chrystes bodye but not his verye body bicause they be no membres of his bodye And therfore they promised not euerlasting life to all that receaued Christes baptisme and the sacrament of his body but all suche as professed a true fayth althoughe they lyued neuer so vngodlye For suche sayde they doo eate the bodye of Christe not only in a sacrament but also in deede bicause they bee membres of Christes body But Saint Augustine aunsweringe to bothe these heresyes saith That neither heretiques nor such as professe a true fayth in their mouths in their lyuyng shew the contrary haue either a true faith which worketh by charity and doth none euel or are to be counted among the membres of Christ. For they cā not be both membres of Christ and membres of the diuell Therefore saith he it maye not be saide that any of theim eate the bodye of Christe For when Christe saythe he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bludde dwelleth in me and I in him he sheweth what it is not sacramentally but in deede to eate his bodye and drynke his bludde whiche is when a man dwelleth in Christe that Christ dwelleth in him For Christe spake those wordes as if he should say He that dwelleth not in me and in whom I dwell not lette him not saye or thinke that he eateth my body or drinketh my bloode These be the plaine wordes of S. Augustine that suche as liue vngodly although they may seme to eate Christes body because they eat the sacrament of his body yet in deede they neither bee membres of his body nor do eate his body Also vpon the gospel of sainct Ihon he sayth that he that doth not eate his fleshe and drynke his bloud hath not in him euerlastyng life And he that eateth his fleshe and drynketh his bloud hath euerlastyng life But it is not so in those meates whiche we take to sustayne our bodyes For although without them we can not liue yet it is not necessarye that whosoeuer receyueth them
as a necessary article of our fayth But it is not the doctrine of Christe but the subtill Inuension of Antechrist fyrst decreed by Innocent the thyrd and after more at large set furth by schole authors whose studye was euer to defende and set abrode to the worlde all suche matters as y e byshop of Rome had once decreed And the deuil by his minister Antichrist had so daseled the eyes of a great multitude of christen people in these latter dayes that they sought not for their fayth at the cleare light of Gods worde but at the Romishe Antichrist beleuyng whatsoeuer he prescribed vnto thē yea though it were against all reason all senses and Gods most holy worde also For els he could not haue been very Antichrist in dede except he had been so repugnaunt vnto Christe whose doctrine is cleane contrary to this doctrine of Antichrist For Christ teacheth that we receiue very bread and wyne in the most blessed supper of the Lord as sacramentes to admonishe vs that as we be fedde with bread wyne bodely so wee be fedde with the body and bloud of our sauiour Christ spiritually As in our baptisme we receiue very water to signifye vnto vs that as water is an element to washe the body outwardly so be our soules washed by the holy ghost inwardly The seconde principall thyng wherein the Papistes varry from the truth of Gods worde is this They say that the very natural fleshe and bloud of Christe whiche suffered for vs vpon the crosse and sitteth at the right hand of the father in heauen is also really substancially corporally and naturally in or vnder the accidentes of the sacramental bread and wyne which they cal the fourmes of bread and wyne And yet here they varry not a lytle among them selues For some say that the very natural body of Christ is there but not naturally nor sensibly And other saye that it is there naturally and sensibly and of the same bygnes fashion that it is in heauen and as the same was borne of the blessed virgyn Mary and that it is there broken and torne in peeces with our teethe And this appeareth partly by the schole authors and partly by the confession of Beringarius whiche Nicholaus the second constrayned him to make whiche was this That of the sacramentes of the Lordes table the sayd Beringarius should promise to holde that fayth whiche the sayd Pope Nicholas and his counsail held whiche was that not onely the sacramentes of bread and wyne but also the very fleshe and bloud of oure Lorde Iesu Christ are sensibly handeled of the priest in the altare broken and torne with the teethe of the faythfull people But the true catholike fayth grounded vpon Gods moste infallible woorde teacheth vs that our sauiour Christ as concernyng his mannes nature and bodely presence is gone vp vnto heauen sitteth at the right hand of his father and there shall he tarry vntyl the worldes ende at what tyme he shal come agayn to iudge both the quicke and the dead as he sayth him selfe in many scriptures I forsake the worlde sayth he and go to my Father And in another place he sayth You shal haue euer poore men among you but me you shall not euer haue And again he sayth Many hereafter shall come and laye Loke here is Christe or looke there he is but beloue them not And sainct Peter sayth in the Actes that heauen must receiue Christe vntyll the tyme that all thynges shall be restored And saint Paule writyng to the Colossians agreeth hereto saiyng Seke for thinges that be aboue where Christ is sittyng at the right hand of the father And sainct Paule speakyng of the very sacrament sayth As often as you shall eate this bread and drynke this cuppe shewe furth the Lordes death vntyll he come Tyll he come sayth S. Paule signifiyng that he is not there corporally present For what speeche were this or who vseth of him that is already present to say Untyl he come For Untyl I come signifyeth that he is not yet present This is the catholike fayth whiche we learne from our youth in our common Crede and whiche Christ taught the Apostles folowed and the martyres confirmed with theyr bloud And although Christ in his humayne nature substantially really corporally naturally and sensibly be present with his father in heauē yet sacramentally and spiritually he is here present in water bread and wyne as in signes and sacramentes but he is in deede spiritually in the faythfull christian people whiche accordyng to Christes ordinaunce be baptised or receyue the holye communion or vnfainedly beleue in him Thus haue you hard the seconde pryncipal article wherin the Papistes vary from the truthe of Goddes worde and from the catholike faith Nowe the thyrde thynge wherin they varye is this The Papistes saye that euell and vngodlye men receaue in this sacramente the very bodye and bloud of Christe and eate and drynke the selfe same thinge that the good and godly men doo But the truthe of Gods woorde is contrary that al those that be godly mēbres of Christe as they corporally eate the bread and drinke the wyne so spiritually they eate and drinke Christes very fleshe and bloude And as for the wycked membres of the dyuell they eate the sacramental bread and drinke the sacramental wyne but they doo not spiritually eate Christs fleshe nor drinke his blode but they eate and drinke theyr owne damnation The fourthe thynge wherein the Popyshe preestes dissente frome the manifest woorde of God is this They saie that they offre Christe euery day for remission of sinne and distribute by their Masses the merites of Christes passion But the prophetes apostels and euangelistes doo saye that Christe him selfe in his owne person made a sacrifice for our sinnes vppon the Crosse by whose woundes all our diseases were healed and our sinnes pardoned and so dyd neuer no preest man nor creature but he nor he dyd the same neuer more than ones And the benefite hereof is in no mannes power to gyue vnto any other but euery man muste receaue it at Christes handes him selfe by his owne faith and beliefe as the prophete saieth HERE ENDETH THE fyrste booke THE SECONDE BOOKE IS AGAINST THE ERROVR OF Transubstantiation THVS HAVE you hearde declared fower thynges wherein chiefly the papisticall doctrine varieth from the true worde of God and frome the olde catholyke Christen faith in this matter of the lordes supper Nowe lest any man shuld thynke that I faine any thinge of myne owne heade without any other ground or authoritee you shall heare by Goddes grace as well the erroures of the Papistes confuted as the catholike truthe defended both by goddes most certaine woorde and also by the moste olde approued authors and martyrs of Christes churche And fyrst that breade and wine remain after the woordes of consecration and bee eaten and drunken in the
both perfect God and perfect mā And for a playne declaracion hereof the olde auncient authors geue two examples one is of man whiche is made of two partes of a soule and of a body and eche of these two partes remayne in man at one tyme. So that whan the soule by the almyghty power of God is put in to the body neither the body nor soule perisheth thereby but therof is made a perfect man hauyng a perfect soule and a perfect body remaynyng in hym bothe at one tyme. The other example whiche the olde authors brynge in for this purpose is of the holy supper of our Lord whiche consisteth say they of two partes of the sacrament or visible element of bread wyne and of the body and bloud of Christ. And as in them that duely receiue the sacrament the very natures of bread and wyne cease not to be there but remayne there styll and be eaten corporally as the body and bloud of Christ be eaten spiritually so likewyse doth the diuine nature of Christ remayne styl with his humanitee Let nowe the Papistes auaunt them selues of their Transubstantiation that there remayneth no bread nor wyne in the ministration of the sacrament if they wyll defende the wicked heresies before rehersed that Christ is not God and man both together But to proue that this was the mynde of the olde authors besyde the saiyng of sainct Augustyne here recited I shall also reherse diuers other Sainct Ihon Chrysostome wryteth against the pestilent errour of Apollinaris whiche affirmed that the Godhead and manhead in Christ were so myxed and confounded together that they bothe made but one nature Against whō sainct Ihon Chrysostome writeth thus Whan thou speakest of God thou must consyder a thyng that in nature is syngle without composition without conuersion that is inuisible immortall incircumscriptible incomprehensible with suche lyke And whan thou speakest of manne thou meanest a nature that is weake subiecte to hunger thyrste wepyng feare sweatyng and suche lyke passions whiche can not bee in the diuine nature And whan thou speakest of Christ thou ioynest two natures together in one person who is bothe passible and impassible Passible as concernyng his fleshe and impassible in his deitee And after he concludeth saiyng Wherfore Christe is bothe God and man God by his impassible nature and man because he suffred He himeslfe beyng one person one sonne one Lord hath the dominion and power of two natures ioyned together whiche be not of one substance but eche of theim hath his properties distincte from the other And therefore remayneth there two natures distincte and not confounded For as before the consecration of the bread we call it bread but whan Goddes grace hath sanctified it by the priest it is deliuered from the name of bread and is exalted to the name of the body of the Lorde although the nature of the bread remayne stil in it and it is not called two bodyes but one body of Gods sonne so likewyse here the diuine nature resteth in the body of Christ and these two make one sonne and one person These wordes of sainct Chrysostome declare and that not in obscure termes but in playne wordes that after the consecracion the nature of bread remayneth styll although it haue an hygher name and bee called the body of Christ to signifie vnto the godly eaters of that bread that they spiritually eat the supernatural bread of the body of Christe who spiritually is there present and dwelleth in them and they in him although corporally he sytteth in heauen at the right hand of his father Herevnto accordeth also Gelasius writyng gainst Eutyches and Nestorius of whome the one said that Christ was a perfect man but not God and the other affirmed clean contrary that hee was very God but not man But againste these two heinous heresies Gelasius proueth bi moste manifest scriptures that Christe is both god and man and that after his incarnacion remained in hym the nature of his godheade so that hee hathe in hym twoo natures with their naturall properties and yet is hee but one Christe And for the more euident declaratiō hereof he bringeth two examples ▪ the one is of man who beeynge but one yet he is made of two partes and hath in him two natures remaininge both togyther in him that is to saye the bodye and the soule with their naturall properties The other example is of the sacrament of the body bloud of Christ which saith he is a godly thing ▪ and yet the substaunce or nature of breade and wine do not cease to be there styll Note well these wordes againste all the Papistes of our time that Gelasius which was byshop of Rome more thā a thousād years passed writeth of this sacrament that the breade and wyne cease not to be there styll as Christ ceased not to be god after his incarnation but remayned styll perfect god as he was before Theodoretus also affirmeth the same both in his first and in his seconde dialoge In the fyrst he saith thus He that called his naturall body wheate and breade and also called him selfe a vyne the selfe same called bread and wyne his bodye and bloudde and yet chaunged not their natures And in his secōd dialogue he saith more plainly For saith he as the breade and wine after the consecration lose not their propre nature but kepe their former substance forme and figure whiche they had before euen so the body of Christ after his ascention was chaunged into the godlye substaunce Nowe lette the Papistes choose whyche of these two they wyll graunte for one of theim they muste needes graunte either that the nature and substaunce of breadde and wine remayne styll in the sacrament after the consecration and then must thei recant their doctrine of Transubstantiation or els that they bee of the errour of Nestorius and other which didde say that the nature of the Godhead remained not in Christ after his incarnation For all these old authors agree that it is in the one as it is in the other Nowe forasmuche as it is proued sufficientelye as well by the holye Scripture as by naturall operacion by naturall reason by all our senses and by the most old and beste learned authors and holy matyres of CHRISTES churche that the substaunce of breadde and wyne dooe remayne and be receaued of faithefull people in the blessed sacramente or supper the LORD It is a thinge woorthy to be considered and well waied what moued the schoole authors of late yeares to defende the contrarye opinion not onely so farre frome all experience of oure senses and so farre frome all reasone but also cleane contrarye to the olde Churche of CHRIST and to goddes moste holy worde Surelye nothing moued them thereto so much as did the vaine faithe whiche they hadde in the churche and sea of Rome For Iohannes Scotus otherwyse called Dunce the subtylest of al the schole authors in
in bread and wyne declaryng that as the bread and wyne corporally comforte and feede our bodyes so doth he with his fleshe and bloud spiritually comfort and feede our soules And nowe may be easyly answered the Papistes argument whereof they do so muche boast For bragge they neuer so muche of the conuersion of bread and wyne into the body and bloud of Christ yet that conuersion is spirituall and putteth not awaye the corporall presence of the material bread and wyne But for asmuche as the same is a moste holy sacrament of our spiritual norishement whiche we haue by the body and bloud of our sauiour Christ there must nedes remayne the sensible element that is to say bread and wyne without the whiche there can be no sacrament As in our spiritual regeneration there can be no sacrament of baptisme if there be no water For as Baptisme is no perfect sacrament of spiritual regeneration without there be aswell the element of water as the holy ghoste spiritually regenerating the person that is baptised which is signified by the saide water euen so the souper of our Lorde can bee no perfecte sacramente of spirituall foode except there be as well bread and wine as the body and bloode of our sauiour Christ spiritually feeding vs which by the said breade and wine is signified And howe so euer the body and bloode of our sauiour Christ be ther presēt thei may as wel be present ther with the substance of bread wyne as with the accidentes of the same as the schole authors do confesse them selues and it shall bee well proued yf the aduersaryes will denye it Thus you se the strongest argumente of the Papistes answered vnto and the chiefe foundacion whervpon they buylde their errour of transubstantiation vtterlye subuerted and ouerthrowen An other reason haue they of lyke strengthe If the breade shoulde remaine saye they than shulde folowe many absurdities and chiefely that Christe hath taken the nature of breade as he tooke the nature of manne and so ioyned it to his substance And than as we haue God verely incarnate for our redemption so shoulde wee haue him Impanate Thou mayste consydre good reader that the reste of theyr reasons be very weake and feeble whan these bee the chiefe and strongest Truth it is in deede that Christe shoulde haue beene impanate yf hee hadde ioyned the breade vnto his substaunce in vnitee of persone that is to saye yf hee hadde ioyned the breade vnto hym in suche sorte that he had made the breade one persone with him selfe But for as much as he is ioyned to the bread but sacramentally ther foloweth no Impanation thereof no more than the holy ghost is Inaquate that is to say made water being sacramentally ioyned to the water in baptisme Nor he was not made a doue whan he toke vppon him the forme of a doue to signifie that he whome saint Iohn did baptise was verye CHRIST But rather of the erroure of the Papistes theym selues as one erroure draweth an other after it shoulde folowe the greate absurditie whiche they speake vppon that is to saye that Christe shoulde bee Impanate and Inuinate For yf Christe doo vse the breade in suche wise that he doeth not adnihilate and make nothing of it as the Papistes say but maketh of it hys owne bodye than is the bread ioyned to his body in a greater vnitee than is his humanitee to his Godhead For his Godhead is adioyned vnto his humanitee in vnitye of person and not of nature But our sauiour Christ by their sayinge adioyneth breade vnto his body in vnitee bothe of nature and person So that the breade and the body of Christe be but one thinge bothe in nature and person And so is there a more entier vnion betwene Christe and breade than betweene hys godheade and manhead or betwene his sowle and his bodye And thus these argumentes of the Papistes retourne lyke riueted nayles vppon their owne heades Yet a thyrde reason they haue whyche they gather out of the syxte of Iohn where CHRIST sayeth I am lyuely breade which came from heauen If anye manne eate of thys breade he shall lyue for euer And the breadde whiche I wyll giue is my fleshe whiche I wyll gyue for the lyfe of the worlde Than reason they after this fashion If the breade whyche Chryste gaue bee his fleshe that it canne not also bee materiall breade and so it muste needes folowe that the materiall breade is gone and that none other substaunce remaineth but the fleshe of CHRIST onlye To this is soone made answere that Christ in that place of Iohn spake not of the materiall and sacramentall breade nor of the sacrementall eating for that was spoken two or thre yeares before the sacramente was fyrste ordained but hee spake of spirituall breade manny tymes repetynge I am the bread of lyfe which came frome heauen and of spirituall eating by faith after whiche sorte hee was at the same presente tyme eaten of as manye as beleued on him although the sacramēt was not at that tyme made and instituted And therefore he saide Your fathers did eate Manna in the deserte and died but he that eateth this bread shall lyue for euer Therefore this place of S. Iohn canne in no wyse be vnderstand of the sacramentall breade which neyther came frō heauen neither giueth life to al that eat it Nor of such bread CHRIST coulde haue than presentlye saide This is my fleshe excepte they wyll saye that Christe dydde than consecrate so many yeares before the instititution of his holy supper Nowe that I haue made a full direct plain answere to the vaine reasons and cauillacions of the Papistes ordre requireth to make lykewise answere vnto their sophisticall allegacions and wresting of authors vnto their phantastycall purposes There bee chiefelye thre places which at the fyrste shewe seeme muche to make for their intent but when they shalbe throughly wayed thei make nothing for theim at all The fyrst is a place of Cyprian in his sermon of the Lordes supper where he saith as is alleged in the Detection of the diuels sophistrye This breade which our lorde gaue to his disciples chaunged in nature but not in outward forme is by the omnipotencye of goddes woorde made fleshe Here the Papistes sticke toothe and nayle to these woordes Chaunged in nature Ergo say they the nature of the bread is chaunged Here is one chiefe point of the diuels sophistry vsed whoe in allegacion of scripture vseth euer either to adde thereto or to take away from it or to alter the sense therof And so haue they in this author lefte out those woordes whiche would open plainly all the whole matter For next the wordes which be here before of them recited do folowe these wordes As in the person of Christ the humanitee was seen and the diuinitee was hyd euen so dyd the diuinitee ineffably putte it selfe
certayn tymes and was sent to do al thinges that pertained to saluation or that in his office of settynge foorthe Goddes word he vsed no witty persuasions whiche in deede he vsed moste discreetely or that the grafter and waterer bee nothyng whych be Goddes creatures made to his similitude without whose worke there shuld be no increase or to say that he was not alyue who both lyued and ranne from cuntrey to countrey to set foorth Goddes glory or clerely to affirme that he gloried and reioyced in no other thyng thā in Christes crosse who reioyced with all men that were in ioye and sorowed with all that were in sorowe or to deny vtterly that we wrastle agaynst fleshe and bloud whych ceasse not dayly to wrastle and warre agaynst our enemies the worlde the fleshe and the dyuel In all these sentences S. Paule as I sayde ment not clerely to deny these thyngs which vndoubtedly were all trewe but he ment that in comparison of other greatter thynges these smaller were not muche to be estemed but that the greater thynges were the chief thyngs to be consydered As that syn committed by his infirmitie was rather to be imputed to original syn or corruption of nature which lay lurkyng within hym than to his owne will and consent And that although he was sente to baptyse yet he was chiefely sent to preache Goddes worde And that althoughe he vsed wyse and discreete persuasions therin yet the successe therof came principally of the power of God and of the workyng of the holy spirite And that althoughe the grafter and waterer of the gardeyn be some thynges and doo not a lyttell in theyr offyces yet it is God chiefely that geueth the increace And that although he lyued in this worlde yet his chiefe lyfe concernyng God was by Christ whome he had lyuyng within hym And that although he gloried in many other thynges ye in his owne infirmitees yet his greattest ioy was in the redemption by the crosse of Christe And that althoughe oure spiryte dayly fyghteth agaynste our fleshe yet our chiefe and principall fyght is agaynst our gostely enemies the subtill and puisant wicked spirites and diuels The same maner of speeche vsed also S. Peter in his fyrste epistle saiyng That the apparayle of women shoulde not be outwardly with broyded heare and settynge on of golde nor in puttynge on of gorgious apparayle but that the inwarde man of the harte shoulde be with out corruption In whyche maner of speche he intended not vtterly to forbid al browderyng of hear al gold and costly apparell to al women For euery one muste bee apparailed accordyng to their condition state and degree but he ment hereby clerely to condempne all pryde and excesse in apparayle and to moue all women that they should study to deck their soules inwardly with al vertues not to be curious outwardly to deck and adorne their bodies with sumptuous apparell And our sauiour Christe hymselfe was full of suche maner of speeches Gather not vnto you saieth he treasure vpon earthe wyllynge vs therby rather to set our myndes vpon heauenly treasure whyche euer endureth than vpon earthly treasure whiche by many sundry occasions perysheth and is taken awaye frome vs. And yet wordly treasure muste nedes bee had and possessed of some men as the person tyme and occasion dooth serue Likewyse he said Whan you be brought before kynges and princes thynke not what and howe you shal answer Not willyng vs by this negatiue that we shuld negligently and vnaduisedly answere we care not what but that wee shoulde depende of our heauenly father trustynge that by his holy spirite he wyll sufficientely instructe vs of answere rather than to truste of any aunswere to bee deuised by oure owne wytte and study And in the same manner he spake whan he sayde It is not you that speake but it is the spirite of God that speaketh within you For the spirite of god is he that principally putteth godly wordes into our mouthes and yet neuer the lesse we do speake accordyng to his mouyng And to be short in al these sentences folowing that is to saie Call no man your father vpon erth Let no man cal you lord or master Fear not them that kyll the body I came not to send peace vpon earth It is not in me to set you at my right hand or left hande You shal not worshyp the father neither in this mount nor in Ierusalem I take no witnes at no man My doctrine is not myne I seke not my glory In all these negatiues oure sauiour Christe spake not precisely vtterly to deny al y e forsayd things but in cōparison of them to prefer other thinges as to preferre our father and lord in heuen aboue any worldly father lord or master in earth and his feare aboue the feare of any creature and his word and gospell aboue al worldly peace Also to preferre spirituall and inward honoryng of God in pure hart mynd aboue locall corporal outward honor and that Christe preferred his fathers glorye aboue his owne Now forasmuch as I haue declared at length the nature and kynd of these negatiue speches whyche bee no pure negatiues but by comparison it is easy hereby to make answere to S. Iohn Chrysostome who vsed this phrase of speche moste of any author For his meanynge in his foresayde homily was not that in the celebration of the Lords supper is neyther bread nor wyne neither priest nor the body of Christe which the Papistes themselues must nedes cōfesse but his entēt was to draw our myndes vpwardes to heauen that we shuld not consider so muche the bread wine priest and body of Christ we shuld consyder his diuinitee and holy spirite gyuen vnto vs to our eternall saluation And therfore in the same place he vseth so many tymes these words Thinke and thinke not willyng vs by those wordes that we shulde not fixe our thoughtes myndes vpon the bread wine priest nor Christes body but to lyft vp our hartes higher vnto his spirite and diuinite without the whiche his body auaileth nothynge as he saith hym selfe It is the spirite that gyueth lyfe the fleshe auayleth nothyng And as the same Chrysostom in many places moueth vs not to cōsider the water in baptisme but rather to haue respect to the holy ghost receued in baptisme and represented by the water euen so doth he in this homily of the holy cōmuniō moue vs to lift vp our mynds frō al visible corporal things to thīgs inuisible spiritual In so muche that although Christe was but ones crucified yet would Chrysostome haue vs to thynke that we see hym dayly whypped and scourged before our eies and his body hāgyng vpon the Crosse and the speare thruste into his side and the most holy bloud to flowe out of his syde into our mouthes After whiche maner S. Paule wrote to the
as the Papistes do fondly phantasy And likewise the substances of bread wyne do feede and norishe the body of them that eate the same and not the only accidentes In these answeres is no absurditie nor inconuenience nothyng spoken either contrarye to holy scripture or to natural reason Philosophy or experience or against any olde auncient author or the primatiue or catholike churche but onely against the malignant and Papisticall church of Rome Where as on the other syde y t cursed synagoge of Antichrist hath defined and determined in this matter many thynges contrary to Christes wordes contrary to the olde catholike church and the holy martyrs and doctoures of the same and contrary to all naturall reason learnynge and phylosophy And the final end of all this Antichrists doctrine is none other but by subtelty and crafte to bringe christian people from the true honouringe of Christ vnto the greatest ydolatry that euer was in this worlde deuised as by goddes grace shalbe plainly sette forth hereafter Thus endeth the seconde booke THE THIRDE BOOKE TEACHETH THE MANNER HOWE Christe is present in his supper NOW THIS MATTER OF transubstantiation being as I trust sufficiently resolued which is the fyrst part before rehersed wherin the papistical doctrine varieth from the catholicke truth ordre requireth next to intreate of the seconde part whiche is of the manner of the presence of the body and bloode of our sauiour Christe in the sacramente thereof wherein is no lesse contention then in the fyrste parte For a plaine explication wherof it is not vnknowen to all true faithfull christian people that oure sauiour CHRIST beeinge perfecte God and in all thinges equall and coeternall wyth his father for our sakes beecame also a perfect manne takynge fleshe and bloode of his blessed mother and virgine Marye and sauing synne beinge in all thinges lyke vnto vs adioyninge vnto hys diuynitie a moste perfecte soule and a moste perfecte bodye hys sowle beinge indued with lyfe sence wyll reason wysdome memory and all other thinges required to the perfect soule of man and hys body being made of very fleshe and bones not onlye hauinge all membres of a perfecte mannes bodye in due ordre and proportion but also beinge subiect to hunger thyrste laboure sweate werines colde heate and all other lyke infirmyties and passions of man and vnto death also and that the moste vile and painefull vppon the crosse And after his death he rose againe with y e selfe same visible and palpable bodye and appeared therwith and shewed the same vnto hys Apostels and specially to Thomas makinge him to put his handes into his syde and to feele hys woundes And with the selfe same bodye he forsooke this worlde and ascended into heauen the Apostels seeynge and beholdinge hys body when it ascended and nowe sytteth at the right hand of his father and there shall remaine vntyll the laste daye when he shal come to iudge the quick and the deade This is the trewe catholicke faythe whâ—che the scrripture teacheth the vniuersal churche of Christe hathe euer beleued frome the begynnynge vntyll within these fower or fyue hundreth yeares last passed that the Byshoppe of Rome with the assistaunce of his Papists hath sette vp a newe faithe and beliefe of theyr owne deuising that the same body really corporally naturally and sensiblye is in this worlde styll and that in an hundreth thousand places at one tyme beynge inclosed in euerye pyxe and bread consecrated And althoughe we do affirme accordinge to Gods word that Christ is in all persones that truelye beleue in him in suche sorte that with his flesh and bloode he dothe spiritually norishe theim and feede theim and giueth theim euerlasting lyfe â–ª and doth assure them therof aswell by the promise of his word as by the sacramentall bread and wine in his holy supper which he did institute for the same purpose yet we do not a little varye frome the hainous erroures of the Papistes For they teache that Christe is in the breade and wine But we say according to the truth that he is in them that worthely eate and drink the breade and wine They saye that when anye manne eateth the breadde and drynketh the cuppe CHRIST goeth into his mouth or stomake with the breade and wyne and no further But wee saye that CHRIST is in the whole man bothe in the body and soule of him that worthely eateth the bread and drinketh the cuppe and not in hys mouthe or stomacke onely They saye that CHRIST is receiued in the mouth and entreth in wyth the bread and wyne Wee saye that hee is receaued in the harte and entreth in by faithe They saye that Christe is reallye in the sacramentall breade beeynge reserued an whole yeare or so longe as the fourme of breade remaineth but after the receiuynge thereof hee flyeth vp say they frome the receiuer vnto heauen as soone as the breade is chawed in the mouth or chaunged in the stomacke But wee say that Christ remayneth in the man that worthely receiueth it so longe as the manne remayneth a membre of Christe They say that in the sacrament the corporall membres of Christe be not distaunt in place one from another but that wheresoeuer the head is there be the feete and wheresoeuer the armes be there be the legges so that in euery parte of the bread wyne is altogither whole head whole feete whole fleshe whole bloud whole hearte whole lunges whole brest whole backe and altogither whole confused and mixte withoute distinction or diuersitie O what a foolishe and an abhominable inuencion is this to make of the moste pure and perfect body of Christe suche a confuse and monstruous body And yet canne the Papistes imagine nothinge so foolishe but all Christian people must receyue the same as an oracle of God and as a moste certayne article of their fayth without whisperyng to the contrary Furthermore the Papistes say that a dogge or a Catte eate the body of Christe if they by chaunce do eate the sacramental bread We say that no yearthly creature can eate the body of Christ nor drynke his bloud but onely man They say that euery maÌ„ good and euil eateth the body of Christe We say that bothe do eate the sacramental bread and drynke the wyne but none do eate the very body of Christ and drynke his bloud but only they that be liuely membres of his body They say that good menne eate the body of Christ and drynke his bloud only at that tyme whan they receiue the sacrament We say that they eate drinke and feede of Christ coÌ„tinually so long as they be membres of his body They say that the body of Christe that is in the sacrament hath his owne proper fourme and quantitee We say that Christ is there sacramentally and spiritually without fourme or quantitee They say that the fathers prophetes of the olde testament did not eate the body nor drunke the bloud of Christ We
say that they dyd eate his body drunke his bloud although he was not yet borne nor incarnated They say that the body of Christ is euery day many tymes made as often as there be Masses sayd that than and there he is made of bread and wyne We say that Christes body was neuer but ones made and than not of the nature and substance of bread and wyne but of the substance of his blessed mother Thei say that the Masse is a sacrifice satisfactory for sinne by the deuocion of the priest that offereth not by the thyng that is offered But we say that their saiyng is a most haynous lye detestable error against the glory of Christ. For the satisfactiō for our synnes is not the deuociō nor offeryng of the priest but the only hoost and satisfaction for all the sinnes of the world is the death of Christ the oblacion of his body vpon the crosse that is to say the oblacion that Christ him selfe offered ones vpon the crosse and neuer but ones nor neuer none but he And therfore that oblation whiche the priestes make dayly in their papistical Masses can not be a satisfactiō for other mens synnes by the priestes deuocion but it is a mere elusion and subtyll craft of the deuil wherby Antichrist hath many yeres blynded and deceiued the worlde They say that Christe is corporally in many places at one tyme affirmyng that his body is corporally and really present in as many places as there be hoostes consecrated We say that as the sonne corporally is euer in heauen and no where els and yet by his operation and vertue the Sonne is here in yearth by whose influence and vertue all thynges in the worlde be corporally regenerated encreased and growe to their perfecte state so lykewise oure sauiour Christe bodely and corporally is in heauen sittyng at the right hande of his father although spiritually he hath promised to be present with vs vpō yearth vnto the worldes ende And whansoeuer two or thre be gathered together in his name he is there in the myddes among them by whose supernal grace all godly menne bee first by him spiritually regenerated and after encreace and growe to their spiritual perfection in God spiritually by fayth eatyng his fleshe and drinkyng his bloud although the same corporally bee in heauen farre distant from our sight Nowe to returne to the principal matter lest it might bee thought a newe deuise of vs that Christe as concernyng his body his humayne nature is in heauen and not in yearth therfore by Gods grace it shal be euidently proued ▪ that this is no newe deuised matter but that it was euer the olde fayth of the catholike churche vntyll the Papistes inuented a newe fayth that Christ really corporally naturally and sensibly is here styll with vs in yearth shut vp in a boxe or within the compasse of bread and wyne This nedeth no better nor strōger profe than that whiche the old authors bryng for the same that is to say the generall profession of all christian people in the common Crede wherein as concernyng Christes humanitee thei be taught to beleue after this sorte That he was conceiued by the holy ghost borne of the virgyn Mary that he suffered vnder Pontius Pilate was crucified dead and buryed that he descended into hell and rose againe the third day that he ascended into heauen and sitteth at the right hand of his almightie father and from thence shal come to iudge the quicke and dead This hath been euer the catholyke fayth of christian people that Christ as concernyng his body and his manhood is in heauen and shall there continue vntyll he come doune at the last iudgement And forasmuche as the Crede maketh so expresse mencion of the article of his ascencion and departyng hence from vs if it had been an other article of oure fayth that his body taryeth also here with vs in yearth surely in this place of the Crede was so vrgēt an occasion geuen to make some mention therof that doutlesse it would not haue been passed ouer in our Crede with silence For i◠Christe as concernyng his humanitee be both here gone hence and both those two be articles of our fayth whan mencion was made of the one in the Crede it was necessary to make mencion of the other least by professyng the one we should be dissuaded from beleuyng the other beyng so contrarye the one to the other To this article of oure Crede accordeth holy scripture and all the olde auncient doctours of Christes churche For Christe himselfe saide I leaue the worlde and go to my father And also he saide You shall euer haue poore folkes with you but you shall not euer haue me with you And he gaue warninge of this errour beefore hande saying That the tyme wolde come whan many deceiuers shulde be in the worlde and saye Here is Christe and there is Christe but beleue theim not said Christ. And S. Marke writeth in the last chapiter of his gospell that y e Lorde Iesus was taken vp into heauen and sytteth at the ryghte hande of his father And S. Paule exhorteth all men to seeke for thinges that be aboue in heauen where Christe sayth he sitteth at the ryght hand of God hys father Also he saith that we haue such a bishop that sitteth in heauē at the ryght hand of the throne of Gods maiesty And that he hauing offred one sacrifice for sinnes sitteth continuallye at the right hande of God vntyll his enemyes be put vnder his feete as a foote stoole And herevnto consent all the olde doctoures of the churche Fyrste Origen vpon Mathew reasoneth this matter howe Christe maye be called a stranger that is departed into an other cūtrey seing that he is with vs alwai vnto the worldes end and is among al them that be gathered togither in his name and also in the middes of them that know him not And thus he reasoneth If he be here among vs stil how can he be gone hence as a strāger departed into an other contrey Wherevnto he answereth that Christe is both god and man hauinge in him two natures And as a manne he is not with vs vnto the worldes ende nor is present wyth all hys faythfull that bee gathered togyther in his name but his diuyne power and spirite is euer with vs. Paule saith he was absent from the Corinthes in his body when he was present wyth them in his spirite So is CHRIST sayth he gone hense and absent in his humanitee whiche in his diuine nature is euery where And in this saying saith Origene we diuide not his humanitee for S. Iohn writeth that no spirite that diuideth Iesus can be of God but we reserue to both his natures their owne properties In these wordes Origene hath plainly declared his mind that Christes body is not both present here with vs also
gone hence estranged from vs. For that were to make two natures of one body to diuide the bodye of Iesus for as much as one nature can not at one tyme be both with vs and absent from vs. And therfore saith Origen that the presence must be vnderstand of his diuinitie and the absence of hys humanitee And according herevnto S. Augustin writeth thus in a pistle ad Dardan Doubt not but Iesus Christe as concernynge the nature of his manhode is now there from whence he shal come And remēbre well and beleue the profession of a christian man that he rose from death ascēded into heauen sitteth at the righte hande of his father and from that place and none other shall he come to iudg the quick and the dead And he shal come as the angels said as he was sene go into heauen that is to say in the same forme substaunce vnto the which he gaue immortalitee but changed not nature After this forme saith he meaning his mans nature we may not thinke that he is euery where For we must beware that we do not so stablyshe hys dyuinitee that wee take awaye the veritee of his body These bee S. Augustines plaine wordes And by and by after he addeth these woordes The Lorde Iesus as god is euery where and as manne is in heauen And fynally he concludeth this mattier in these fewe woordes Doubt not but our lorde Iesus Christe is euerye where as God and as a dwellar he is in man that is the temple of God and he is in a certayne place in heauen bicause of the measure of a very bodye And againe S. Augustine writeth vpon the gospell of S. Iohn Our Sauiour Iesus Christ saith S. Augustine is aboue but yet his truth is here His body wherein hee arose is in one place but his truthe is spred euerye where And in an other place of the same boke S Augustine expoundyng these woordes of Christe You shaleuer haue poore menne with you but me you shall not euer haue saithe that Christ spake these woordes of the presence of his bodye For saith he as concernyng his diuine maiestie as concerninge his prouidence as concerninge his infallible and inuisible grace these woordes bee fulfilled whiche hee spake I am with you vnto the worlds end But as concerning the flesh which he toke in his incarnation as concerninge that which was born of the vigin as cōcerning that which was apprehended by the Iewes and crucified vppon a tree and taken doune frome the Crosse lapped in linnen clothes and buried and rose againe and appered after his resurrection as concernyng that fleshe he said You shall not euer haue me wyth you Wherfore seeyng that as concernyng his fleshe he was conuersaunt with his disciples fortye daies and they accompanyeng seyng and folowyng him he wente vp into heauen bothe hee is not here for hee sytteth at the ryght hande of his father and yet hee is here for hee departed not hense as concernynge the presence of hys diuine Maiestie As concernynge the presence of his maiestie wee haue Christe euer with vs but as concernyng the presence of hys fleshe he said truely to his disciples Ye shall not euer haue me with you For as concernynge the presence of hys fleshe the churche had Christ but a fewe dayes yet nowe it holdeth hym faste by faythe though it see him not with eyes All these be S. Augustines woordes Also in an other booke entitled to sainct Augustine is written thus We muste beleue and confesse that the sonne of god as cōcerning his diuinite is inuisible without a body immortal and incircumscriptible but as concernyng his humanitee we ought to beleue and confesse that he is visible hath a body and is contayned in a certayne place and hath truely al the membres of a man Of these wordes of S. Augustyne it is most cleare that the profession of the catholike fayth is that Christ as cōcernyng his bodely substāce and nature of man is in heauen and not present here with vs in yearth For the nature and property of a very body is to be in one place and to occupie one place and not to be euery where or in many places at one tyme. And though the body of Christ after his resurrection and ascencion was made immortal yet the nature therof was not chaunged for than as saint Augustyn sayth it were no very body And further sainct Augustyne sheweth bothe the maner fourme howe Christ is here present with vs in yearth howe he is absent saiyng that he is present by his diuine nature and Maiestie by this prouidence and by his grace but by his humaine nature and very body he is absent frō this worlde and present in heauen Cyrillus likewyse vpon the Gospel of sainct Ihon agreeth fully with S. Augustyne saiyng Although Christ toke away frō hence the presence of his body yet in the Maiestie of his Godhead he is euer here as he promised to his disciples at his departyng saiyng I am with you euer vnto the worldes ende And in another place of the same boke sainct Cyril sayth thus Christian people must beleue that although Christ be absent from vs as concernyng his body yet by his power he gouerneth vs and all thynges and is present with all them that loue him Therfore he sayd Truly truly I say vnto you whersoeuer there be two or thre gathered together in my name there am I in the myddes of them For like as when he was conuersant here in yearth as a man yet than he fylled heauen did not leaue the company of Angels euen so beyng nowe in heauen with his fleshe yet he fylleth the yerth is in them that loue him And it is to be marked that although Christ should go away onely as concernyng his fleshe for he is euer present in the power of his diuinite yet for a lytle tyme he sayd he would bee with his disciples These be the wordes of sainct Cyril Sainct Ambrose also sayth that we must not seeke Christ vpon yearth nor in yearth but in heauen where he sytteth at the right hand of his father And likewyse sainct Gregorye wryteth thus Christe sayth he is not here by the presence of his fleshe and yet he is absent no where by the presence of his Maiestie What subtiltee thynkest thou good reader can the Papistes nowe imagyne to defend their pernitious errour that Christe in his humayne nature is bodely here in yearth in the consecrated bread and wyne seyng that all the olde Churche of Christ beleued the contrary and all the olde authors wrote the contrary For they all affirmed beleued that Christe beyng but one parson hath neuerthelesse in him twoo natures or substaunces that is to say the nature of his Godhead and the nature of his manhood They say furthermore that Christe is both goone hence from vs vnto heauen and is also here with vs in yearth but
neuerthelesse both present and absent he is all one Christe Hytherto you haue herd Uigilius speke that Christ as concernynge his bodily presence and the nature of his manhode is gone from vs taken from vs is gone vp into heuen is not with vs hath left vs hath forsaken vs. But as concernyng the other nature of his deitee he is styl with vs so that he is bothe with vs and not with vs with vs in the nature of his deitee and not with vs in the nature of his humanitee And yet more clerely doth the same Uigilius declare the same thyng in an other place sayenge If the worde and the fleshe were bothe of one nature seyng that the word is euery where why is not the fleshe than euery where For whan yt was in earthe than verily it was not in heauen and nowe whan it is in heauen it is not surely in yearth And it is so sure that it is not in earth that as concernyng it we looke for hym to come from heauen whom as concernyng his eternall woorde we beleue to bee with vs in earthe Therfore by your doctrine saith Uigilius vnto Eutyches who defended that the diuinitee and humanite in Christe was but one nature either the word is conteyned in a place with his fleshe or els the fleshe is euery where with the worde For one nature can not receaue in it selfe two diuers and contrary thinges But these two thinges be dyuers and farre vnlyke that is to say to be conteyned in a place and to be euery where Therfore in as muche as the word is euery where and the fleshe is not euery where it appeareth playnly that one Christ hym self hath in hym two natures that by his diuine nature he is euery where and by his humain nature he is conteined in a place that he is created hath no beginnyng that he is subiect to death can not die Wherof one he hath by the nature of his worde wherby he is God the other he hath by y ◠nature of his fleshe wher by the same God is man also Therfore one son of God the self same was made the sonne of mā and he hath a begynnynge by the nature of his fleshe and no begynnynge by the nature of his Godheade He is created by the nature of his fleshe and not created by the nature of his Godhead He is comprehended in a place by the nature of his fleshe and not comprehended in a place by the nature of his Godhead He is inferiour to angels in the nature of his fleshe and is equall to his father in the nature of his Godhead He dyed by the nature of his fleshe and died not by the nature of his Godhead This is the faithe and catholyke confession whyche the Apostles taught the martyrs dyd corroborate and faithfull people kepe vnto this daie All these be the saiynges of Uigilius who accordyng to al the other authors before rehersed and to the faith and catholike confession of the apostles martyrs and all faithfull people vnto his tyme saith that as concernyng Christes humanitee whan he was here on erthe he was not in heauen and nowe whan he is in heauen he he is not in earthe For one nature can not bee both conteyned in a place in heauen and be also here in earthe at one tyme. And for asmuche as Christe is here with vs in earth and also is conteined in a place in heauen he proueth thereby that Christ hath two natures in hym the nature of a man wherby he is gon from vs and ascended into heauen and the nature of his godhed wherby he is here with vs in erth So that it is not one nature y t is here with vs that is gone from vs that is ascended into heauen and ther cōteined that is permanēt here with vs in erth Wherfore the Papistes whiche nowe of late yeares haue made a newe faythe that Christes naturall bodye is really and naturally present bothe with vs here in earthe and sytteth at the ryght hande of his father in heauen do erre in two very horrible heresies The one that thei confound his two natures his godhead his manhod attributynge vnto his humanitee that thyng which appertaineth only to his diuinitee that is to say to be in heuen and erth and in many places at one tyme. The other is that they deuide and separate his humain nature or his body makyng of one body of Christ. ii bodyes and ii natures one whiche is in heauen visible and palpable hauing al membres and proportions of a most perfect natural man an other which they say is in erth here with vs in euery bread and wyne that is consecrated hauing no distinction forme nor proporcion of membres whiche contrarieties diuersities as this holy martyr Uigilius saith can not be together in one nature But now seyng that it is so euident a matter bothe by the expresse wordes of scripture also by all tholde authors of the same that our sauior Christ as cōcernyng his bodely presence is ascended into heauē and is not here in yerth And seyng that this hath been the true confession of the catholike fayth euer sithens Christes ascencion it is nowe to be cōsidered what moued the Papistes to make a newe and contrary fayth what scriptures they haue for their purpose What moued them I knowe not but their own iniquitie or the nature and condicion of the sea of Rome whiche is of all other most contrary to Christ and therfore most worthy to be called the sea of Antichrist And as for scripture thei allege none but only one that not truly vnderstāded but to serue their purpose wrested out of tune wherby they make it to gerre sound cōtrary to al other scriptures partainyng to that matter Christ toke bread say they blessed and brake it and gaue it to his disciples saiyng This is my body These woordes they euer styll repeate and beate vpon that Christe sayd This is my body And this saiyng they make their shote anker to proue therby aswell the real and nataral presence of Christes body in the sacrament as their imagined Transubstantiation For these woordes of Christ say they be most playne and most true Than forasmuch as he sayd This is my body it must nedes be true that that thyng whiche the priest holdeth in his hādes is Christes body And if it be Christes body than can it not be bread whereof they gather by their reasonyng that there is Christes body really present and no bread Nowe forasmuche as all their profe hangeth onely vpon these wordes This is my body the true sence and meanyng of these wordes must be examined But say they what nede thei any examinacion What wordes can bee more playne than to say This is my body Truth it is in deede that the woordes bee as playne as may be spoken but that the sence is not so plaine it
expounding these wordeÌ„s thei vary amoÌ„g them selfes which is a tokeÌ„ that thei be vncertain of their owne doctrine For some of them saye that by this pronoune demonstratiue this Christ vnderstode not the bread nor wyne but his body and bloud And other som say that by the pronoune this he ment nether the bread nor wyne nor his body nor bloud but that he ment a particular thyng vncertayne whiche they cal Indiuiduum vagum or Indiuiduum in genere I trow some Mathematicall quiditee they can not tell what But let all these Papistes together shew any one authoritee either of scripture or of auncient author either Greke or Latin that saith as thei say that Christ called not breade and wyne his body and bloud but Indiuiduum vagum and for my part I shall geue theim place and confesse that they say trewe And if they can shewe nothynge for theym of antiquitee but onely their owne bare wordes than it is reason that thei geue place to the truthe confirmed by so many authoritees both of scripture and of auncient writers which is that Christ called very material bread his body and very wyne made of grapes his bloud Nowe this beyng fully proued it must nedes folow consequently that this maner of speking is a figuratiue speeche For in playne and proper speche it is not true to saie that breadde is Christes body or wyne his bloud For Christes body hath a soule life sence reason but bread hath neither soule nor life sense nor reason Likewise in playne speche it is not true that we eate Christes body and drynke his bloude For eatynge and drynkynge in their proper and vsuall signification is with the tong teeth and lyppes to swalow diuide and chawe in peeces whiche thyng to do to the fleshe and bloudde of Christ is horrible to be heard of any christian So that these speches To eate Christes body and drynk his bloud be speches not taken in the proper signification of euery worde but by translation of these wordes eatyng and drinkyng from the signification of a corporal thyng to signifie a spiritual thyng and by callyng a thyng that signifieth by the name of the thyng which is signified therby Which is no rare nor straÌ„ge thyng but an vsual maner and phrase in coÌ„mon speeche And yet least this fault shulde be imputed vnto vs that we doo fayne thynges of our owne heades without authoritee as the Papistes bee accustomed to do here shalbe cited sufficient authoritee as well of scripture as of olde auncient authors to approue the same Fyrst when our sauiour Christ in the sixte of Iohn sayd that he was the bread of life the wheÌ„che whosoeuer did eate should not dye but liue for euer that the bread whiche he would geue vs was his fleshe and therefore whosoeuer should eate his fleshe and drynke his bloud should haue euerlastyng lyfe and they that should not eate his fleshe and drynke his bloud should not haue euerlastyng life When Christ had spoken these woordes with many mo of the eatyng of his fleshe and drinkyng of his bloud both the Iewes mani also of his disciples wer offended with his wordes and sayd This is an hard saiyng For howe can he geue vs his fleshe to be eaten Christ perceiuing their murmuring heartes because they knewe none other eatyng of his fleshe but by chawyng and swalowyng to declare that they should not eate his body after that sorte nor that he ment of any suche carnall eatyng he sayd thus vnto theim What if you see the sonne of man ascende vp where he was before It is the spirite that geueth life the fleshe auayleth nothyng The wordes whiche I spake vnto you be spirit and life These wordes our sauior Christ spake to lift vp their myndes froÌ„ yearth to heauen froÌ„ carnal to spiritual eatyng that thei should not phaÌ„tasy that they should with their trethe eate him preseÌ„tly here in yearth for his flesh so eateÌ„ sayth he should nothyng profite them And yet â—o thei should not eate him for he would take his body away from them and ascend with it into heuen And there by fayth not with teeth they should spiritually eate him sittyng at the right hand of his father And therfore sayth he The wordes whiche I do speake be spirite and life that is to say are not to be vnderstand that we shall eate Christ with our teethe grossely and carnally but that we shall spiritually gostly with our fayth eate him beyng carnally absent from vs in heauen And in suche wyse as Abraham and other holy fathers did eate him many yeres before he was incarnated and borne As S. Paule sayth that they did eate the same spiritual meate that wee do and dranke the same spirituall drynke that is to saye Christe For they spiritually by their fayth were fed and norished with Christes body and bloud and had eternal life by him before he was borne as we haue nowe that come after his ascencion Thus haue you hearde the declaracion of Christe him selfe and of sainct Paule that the eatyng and drinkyng of Christes fleshe bloud is not taken in the common signification with mouthe and teethe to eate and chawe a thyng beyng present but by a liuely fayth in heart and mynde to chawe and degest a thyng beyng absent either ascended hence into heauen or els not yet borne vpon yearth And Origene declaryng the sayd eatyng of Christes flesh and drinkyng of his bloud not to be vnderstand as the wordes do sound but figuratiuely wryteth thus vpon these woordes of Christ Except you eate my fleshe and drinke my bludde you shall not haue lyfe in you Considre saith Origen that these thinges written in gods bokes are figures and therefore examine and vnderstande them as spirituall and not as carnall men For if you vnderstand them as carnall menne they hurte you and feede you not For euen in the gospels is there founde letter that kylleth And not only in the olde testamente but also in the newe is there found lettre that slayeth him that doth not spiritually vnderstande that whiche is spoken For if thou folowe the lettre or woordes of this that Christe saide Excepte you eate my fleshe and drinke my bludde this lettre kylleth Who canne more plainlye expresse in any wordes that the eatinge and drinkinge of Christes fleshe and blood are not to be taken in common significacion as the wordes pretend and sound than Origene doth in this place And S. Iohn Chrysostom affirmeth the same saying that if any man vnderstand the woordes of Christ carnally he shall surely profite nothyng therby For what meane these woordes The fleshe auaileth nothinge He ment not of his fleshe god forbid but he ment of them that fleshely and carnally vnderstode those thynges that Christe spake But what is carnall vnderstanding To vnderstand the woordes simply as they be spoken and nothinge els For we ought not so to vnderstande the
was Christe Amonge suche maner of speeches he reherseth those words which Christ spake at his laste supper This is my bodye whiche declareth plainly S. Augustines mynd that Christ spake those woordes figuratyuelye not meaning that the breade was hys bodye by substaunce but by signifycacion And therfore S. Augustine saith Contra MaximinuÌ„ that in sacraments we must not considre what they be but what they signifye For thet be signes of things beyng one thyng and signyfiyng an other Whych he doth shew specyally of thys sacrament saying The heauenly bread which is Christes flesh by some manner of speache is called Christes body when in very deede it is the sacrament of his body And that offering of the flesh whiche is doone by the priestes handes is called Christes passion deathe and crucifiyng not in very deede but in a mystycall signyfycacion And to this purpose it ys both pleasaunt comfortable and profytable to reade Theodoretus in hys Dyaloges wher he dysputeth sheweth at length how the names of thyngs be changed in scrypture and yet thynges remayne styll And for exaumple he proueth that the fleshe of Chryst ys in y e scrypture sometyme called a vaylor couerynge someâ—yme a clothe sometyme a vestiment and sometime a stole the blud of the grape is called Christes blood and the names of breade and wine and of his fleshe and bloode Christe doth so chaunge that sometyme he calleth his body corne or bread and sometime contrarye he calleth breade his body And likewise his bludde sometime he calleth wyne and sometyme contrary he calleth wyne his bludde For the more plaine vnderstandinge whereof it shall not be amysse to recite his owne saiyngs in his foresaid dialogs touchiÌ„g this matter of the holy sacrament of Christes fleshe and bluâ— The speakers in these dialoges bee Orthodoxus the ryghte beleuer and Eranistes his companion but not vnderstanding the right faith Orthodoxus saith to his companion Doest thou not knowe that God calleth breade his fleshe Eranistes I knowe that Orth. And in an other place he calleth his bodye corne Eran. I know that also for I haue heard him saye The hower is come that the sonne of man shalbe glorified and Except the grain corn that falleth in the ground dye it remaineth sole but if it dye than it bringeth forth much frute Orth. Whan he gaue the mysteries or sacramentes he called bread his body and that which was myxt in the cuppe he called bloude Eran. ' So he called them Orth. But that also which was his natural bodye maye well be called his body and his verye bludde also maye be called his bludde Eran. ' It is playne Orth. But oure sauiour without doubt chaunged the names and gaue to the body the name of the signe or tooken and to the tooken he gaue the name of the body And so when he called himselfe a vyne he called blud that whiche was the token of blud Era. Suerly thou hast spoken the truth But I would knowe the cause wherfore the names were chaunged Orthod The cause is manyfest to theim that bee experte in true religion For he would that they whiche bee partakers of the godly sacramentes should not sette their myndes vppon the nature of the thynges whiche they see but by the chaungyng of the names should beleue the thynged whiche be wrought in them by grace For he that called that which is his natural body corne and bread and also called him selfe a vyne he dyd honour the visible tokens and signes with the names of his body and bloud not chaungyng the nature but addyng grace to nature Eran. Sacramentes bee spoken of sacramentally and also by theim bee manyfestly declared thynges whiche all men knowe not Ortho. Seyng than that it is certaine that the Patriarche called the Lordes body a vestiment and apparelle and that nowe we be entred to speake of godly sacramentes tel me truely of what thyng thynkest thou this holy meate to be a tooken and figure of Christes diuinitee or of his body and bloud Era. It is cleare that it is the fygure of those thynges wherof it beareth the name Orth. ' Meanest thou of his body and bloud Era. ' Euen so I meane Orth. Thou haste spoken as one that loueth the trueth for the Lorde when he tooke the token or signe he sayd not This is my diuinitee but This is my body and This is my bloud And in another place The bread whiche I wylle geue is my fleshe whiche I wylle geue for the life of the worlde Era. The thynges be true for they be Gods wordes All this wryteth Theodoretus in his fyrst Dialogue And in the second he wryteth thesame in effect and yet in some thynges more plainly against suche heretikes as affirmed that after Christes resurrection and ascencion his humanitee was chaunged froÌ„ the very nature of a maÌ„ turned into his diuinitee Against whoÌ„ thus he writeth Orth. Corrupcion health sickenes death be accidentes for they go and come Era. ' It is meete they be so called Orth. Mens bodyes after their resurrection bee deliuered from corrupcion death and mortalitee and yet they lose not their propre nature Era. ' Trueth it is Orth. The body of Christ therfore did ryse quit cleane from all corruption and death and is impassible immortall glorifyed with the glorye of God and is honoured of the powers of heauen and yet it is a body and hath the same bygnes that it had before Era. Thy saiynges seme true and accordyng to reason but after he was asceÌ„ded vp into heauen I thynke thou wylt not say that his body was turned into the nature of the Godhead Orth. I would not say for the persuacion of mans reason nor I am not so arrogaÌ„t and presumptuous to affirme any thyng whiche scripture passeth ouer in silence but I haue heard S. Paule crye that God hath ordayned a day whan hee wyll iudge all the worlde in iustice by that maÌ„ which he appointed before performyng his promise to all men raisyng him from death I haue learned also of the holy angels that he wyll comme after that fashion as his disciples sawe him go to heauen But they saw a nature of a certaine bygnes not a nature whiche had no bygnes I heard furthermore the Lord say You shall see the soÌ„ne of maÌ„ come in y â— cloudes of heaueÌ„ And I knowe that euery thyng that menne see hath a certaine bygnes For that nature that hath no bignes can not be seen Moreouer to sytte in the throne of glory and to sette the Lambes vppon his right hande and the goates vpon his left hand signifyeth a thyng that hath quantitee and bygnes Hytherto haue I rehersed Theodoretus wordes And shortly after Eranistes sayth Era. Wee must turne euery stone as the prouerbe sayth to seeke out the truth â–ª but specially whan godly matters be propounded Orth. Tel me than the sacrameÌ„tal signes whiche
wee should remembre howe muche Christ hath done for vs and howe he dyed for our sakes Therefore saith saint Paul As often as ye shal eate of this bread and drinke the cuppe you shall shew foorth the Lordes death vntyll he come And forasmuche as this holy breade broken and the wine deuided doo represent vnto vs the death of Christ nowe passed as the kyllynge of the Paschall lambe dyde represent y â— same yet to come therfore our sauiour Christ vsed the same maner of speeche of the bread and wyne as God before vsed of the Paschall lambe For as in the olde Testament God sayd This is the Lordes Passeby or Passeouer euen so sayth Christ in the new Testament This is my body This is my bloude But in the old mistery and sacrament the Lambe was not the Lordes very Passeouer or passyng by but it was a figure whiche represented his passynge by So likewise in the newe Testament the breade and wine be not Christes very body and bloude but they be figures whiche by Christes institution bee vnto the godly receauers thereof Sacramentes tokens significations and representations of his very fleshe and bludde instructyng their faith that as the bread and wine fede them corporally and continue this temporall lyfe so the very fleshe and bloud of Christ feedeth them spiritually and geueth them euerlastyng lyfe And why shulde any man thinke it strange to admit a figure in these speches This is my body This is my bloude seyng that the coÌ„munication the same nyghte by the Papistes owne confessions was so full of figuratiue speeches For the Apostles spake figuratiuely whan they asked Christ where he would eate his passeouer or passeby And Christe hym selfe vsed the same figure when he sayd I haue muche desyred to eate this passeouer with you Also to eate Christes body and to drynke his bloude I am sure they wyl not say that it is taken proprely to eate drike as we doe eate other meates and drynkes And when Christe sayde This cup is a newe testament in my bloude here in one sentence bee two figures One in this worde Cup whych is not taken for the cup it selfe but for the thynge conteyned in the cup. An other is in this worde Testament for neyther the cuppe nor the wyne contained in the cuppe is Christes Testament but is a token signe and figure whereby is represented vnto vs his Testament confirmed by his bloudde And if the Papists wil say as thei say in dede that by this cup is neither ment the cup nor the wine conteyned in the cuppe but that therby is ment Christes bloud contained in the cuppe yet must they nedes graunt that there is a fygure For Christes bloude is not in proper speche the New testameÌ„t but it is the thyng that coÌ„firmed the new testament And yet by this strange interpretation the Papistes make a very straunge speche more strange then any figuratiue speche is For this they make the sentence This bloud is a newe testament in my bloud Which saiyng is so fonde and so farre from all reason that the foolyshenes therof is euident to euery man Nowe forasmuch as it is plainly declared and manifestly proued that Christe called bread his body and wyne his bloud and that these sentences be figuratiue speeches and that Christe as concernyng his humanitee and bodily presence is ascended into heuen with his whole fleshe and bloudde and is not here vpon earthe and that the substance of breade and wyne doo remayne styll and be receaued in the sacrament and that although they remayne yet they haue changed theyr names so that the bread is called Christes bodye and the wyne his bloudde and that the cause why theyr names bee chaunged is this â–ª that we should lyft vp our hartes and myndes frome the thynges whyche we se vnto the thinges whyche we beleue and be aboue in heauen wherof the bread and wyne haue the names althoughe they bee not the very same thynges in dede These thynges well considered and waied all the auctoritees and argumentes whyche the Papistes fayne to serue for theyr purpose be cleane wyped awaie For whether the authors which they alledge say that we doo eate Christes fleshe and drynke his bloudde or that the bread and wyne is conuerted into the substance of his fleshe and bloud or that we bee tourned into his fleshe or that in the Lordes supper we do receaue his very fleshe and bloudde or that in the breadde and wyne is receaued that whyche dydde hange vppon the Crosse or that Christe hathe lefte his fleshe with vs or that Christe is in vs and wee in hym or that he is whole here and whole in heauen or that the same thynge is in the Chalice whyche flowed oute of his syde or that the same thynge is receaued with our mouthe whyche is beleued with our faythe or that the breade and wyne after the Consecration bee the body and bloudde of CHRISTE or that we bee nouryshed with the body and bloude of Christ or that Christe is bothe gone hence and is styll here or that Christe at his laste supper bare hym selfe in his owne handes These and all other like sentences may not be vnderstanded of Christes humanitee litterally and carnally as the wordes in common speeche doo proprely signifie for so doothe no man eate Christes fleshe nor drinke his bloudde nor so is not the bread and wyne tourned into his fleshe and bloud nor we into hym nor so is the breade wyne after the consecration his flesh and blud nor so is not his fleshe and bloud whole heere in earth eaten with our mouthes nor so dydde not Christe take hym selfe in his owne handes But these and all other lyke sentences whiche declare Christe to be here in earth and to be eaten and dronken of christian people are to bee vnderstande eyther of his diuine nature wherby he is euâ—ry where or els they must be vnderstanded figuratiuely oâ— spiritually For figuratiuely he is in the breade and wyne and spiritually he is in them that worthyly eate and drinke the bread and wyne but really carnally and corporally he is onely in heauen frome whence he shall come to iudge the quycke and deade This briefe aunswere wyll suffice for all that the Papistes can bryng for their pourpose yf it bee aptely applyed And for the more euidence hereof I shall applye the same to somme suche places as the Papistes thynke doo make moste for theym that by the aunswere to those places the reste maye bee the more easyly aunswered vnto They alledge saint Clement whose words be these as thei report The sacramentes of Gods secretes are coÌ„mitted to thre degrees to a priest a Deacon and a minister whiche with feare and tremblyng ought to kepe the leauynges of the broken peeces of the Lordes body that no corruption be founde in the holy place least by negligence great iniury bee done to the portion
Christ. Likewise before the consecration it is called an other thing but after the consecration it is named the bludde of Christe And again he saith When I treated of the sacramentes I tolde you that that thinge whiche is offered before the woordes of Christ is called Bread but when the wordes of Christ be pronounced than it is not called bread but it is called by the name of Christes body By whiche woordes of S. Ambrose it appereth plainly that the bread is called by the name of Christes body after the consecration and although it be styll bread yet after consecration it is dignyfyed by the name of the thing whych it representeth as at lengthe is declared before in the proces of transubstantiation and speciallye in the woordes of Theodoretus And as the bread is a corporal meat and corporally eaten so saith S. Ambrose is the bodye of Christe a spirituall meate and spiritually eaten and that requireth no corporall presence Now let vs examine S. Iohn Chrysostome who in sounde of woordes maketh moste for the aduersaries of the truthe but they that bee familyar and acquainted with Chrysostomes maner of speaking how in all his writinges hee is full of allusions schemes tropes and figures shall soone perceyue that he healpeth nothyng their purposes as it shal wel appeare by the discussyng of those places whiche the Papistes do allege of him whiche bee specially two One is in sermone de Eucharistia in Encaenijs And the other is De perditione Iudae And as touchyng the first no maÌ„ can speake more plainly against them than sainct Iohn Chrysostome speaketh in that sermone Wherefore it is to be woÌ„dered why they should allege him for their partie vnlesse they be so blynde in their opinion that they can see nothyng nor decerne what maketh for them nor what against them For there he hath these woordes Whan you comme to these mysteries speakyng of the Lordes boorde and holy Communion do not thynke that you receyue by a man the body of God meanyng of Christe These bee S. Ihon Chrysostome his owne wordes in that place Than if we receiue not the body of Christe at the handes of a man Ergo the body of Christ is not really corporally and naturally in the sacrament and so geuen to vs by the priest And than it foloweth that all the Papistes bee lyars because they fayue and teache the contrary But this place of Chrysostome is touched before more at length in answeryng to the Papistes Transubstantiation Wherfore nowe shall be answered the other place whiche the allege of Chrysostome in these wordes Here he is present in the sacrament and dothe consecrate whiche garnished the table at the maundy or last supper For it is not man whiche maketh of the bread and wyne beyng set furth to be consecrated the body and bloud of Christe but it is Christe him selfe whiche for vs is crucifyed that maketh him selfe to bee there present The wordes are vttered and pronounced by the mouthe of the priest but the consecration is by the vertue myght and grace of God hym selfe And as this saying of God Increase be multiplied and fyl the yearth ones spoken by God toke alwayes effect towarde generation Euen so the saiyng of Christe This is my bodye â–ª beyng but ones spoken doth throughout all churches to this present and shall to his last commyng geue force and strength to this sacrifice Thus farre they reherse of Chrysostomes wordes Whiche woordes although they sound muche for their purpose yet if they be throughly considered and coÌ„ferred with other places of the same author it shall well appeare that he mente nothyng lesse than that Christes bodye should be corporally and naturally preseÌ„t in the bread and wyne but that in suche sorte he is in heauen only and in our myndes by fayth we ascend vp into heauen to eat him there although sacramentally as in a signe and figure he be in the bread and wyne and so is he also in the water of Baptisme in theim that rightly receiue the bread wyne he is in a much more perfectioÌ„ than corporally whiche should auayle them nothyng but in them he is spiritually with his diuine power geuing them eternall lyfe And as in the first creation of the world al lyuyng creatures had their first life by gods only word for god only spake his word and al thinges were created by and by accordingly and after their creation hee spake these woordes Increase and multiply â–ª and by the vertue of those wordes al thinges haue gendred and increaced euer sithens that tyme euen so after that Christe sayd Eate this is my body Drink this is my bloud Do this hereafter in remembrance of me by vertu of these words and not by vertu of any man the bread and wine be so consecrated that who so euer with a lyuely faithe dothe eate that bread and drink that wine doth spiritually eate drynke and feede vpon Christe syttynge in heauen with his father And this is the whole meanynge of S. Chrysostome And therefore dooeth hee so often saye that wee receaue Christe in baptisme and whanne he hathe spoken of the receauinge of hym in the holy Communion by and by he speaketh of the receauing of him in baptisme withoute declarynge any diuersytee of his presence in the one from his presence in the other He saieth also in many places that we ascende into heauen and do eate Christe sittinge there aboue AND where S. Chrysostome â—nd other Authors doo speake of the wonderfull operation of God in his sacramentes passynge all mannes wytte senses and reason he meaneth not of the workyng of God in the water bread and wyne but of the meruaylous workyng of God in the hartes of them that receaue the sacramentes secretely inwardly and spiritually transformyng them renuyng fedyng comfortyng and nourishyng them with his fleshe and bloud thorough his most holy spirite the same fleshe and bloud styll remaynyng in heauen Thus is this place of Chrysostome sufficiently answered vnto And yf any man requyre any more than let hym looke what is recited of the same author before in the matter of transubstantiation Yet furthermore they bryng for theim Theophilus Alexandrinus who as they alledge saieth thus CHRISTE gyuynge thankes dydde breake which also we do addynge therto praier And he gaue vnto them sayeng Take this is my body this that I doo now gyue and that whiche ye nowe doo take For the breade is not a figure onely of Christes body but it is chaunged into the very body of Christe For Christ saith The bread whiche I wyll geue you is my fleshe Neuerthelesse the fleshe of Christ is not sene for our weakenesse but bread and wyne ar familiar vnto vs. And surely yf we shoulde visibly see fleshe and bloude we coulde not abyde it And therefore our Lord bearing with our weakenes doth reteyne and keepe the forme and apparaunce of bread and wyne
but he doth tourne the very bread and wyne into the very fleshe and bloude of Christe These be the wordes whyche the Papistes do cite out of Theophilus vpon the gospel of saint Marke But by this one place it appeereth euidently either howe negligente the Papistes bee in serchyng out and examynyng the saiynges of the authors which they allege for their purpose or els howe false and deceytfull they be whyche willyngly and wittyngly haue made in this one place and as it were with one breath two loude and shamefull lyes The first is that bycause they wolde geue the more authorite to the woordes by them alleged they like fals Potycaties that sell quid pro quo falsifie the authors name fatherynge suche sayenges vpon Theophilus Alexandrinus an olde and auncient author whiche were in dede none of his wordes but wer the wordes of Theophilactus who was many yeres after Theophilus Alexandrinus But suche hathe euer been the Papisticall subtiltees to set forth their owne inuentions dreames and lyes vnder the name of antiquitee and auncient Authors The second lye or falshod is that thei falsifie the authors wordes and meanyng subuertynge the truth of his doctrine For where Theophylactus accordynge to the catholike doctrine of auncient authors sayth that almightie God cōdescēdyng to our infirmitee reserueth the kynde of bread wyne and yet tourneth them into the vertue of Christes fleshe and bloud They saye that he reserueth the formes and apparances of bread wyne and turneth them into the Uerite of his fleshe and bloud so tornyng and alteryng kyndes into fourmes and apparances and vertue into Ueritee that of the vertue of the fleshe and bloud thei make the veritee of his flesh and bloud And thus haue they falsified as well the name as the wordes of Theophilactus turnyng veritee into playne and flatte falsitee But to sette foorth playnely the meanyng of Theophylactus in this matter ▪ As hot and burnyng yron is yron styll and yet hath the force of fyer and as the fleshe of Christ styl remainynge fleshe geueth lyfe as the flesshe of hym that is God so the sacramentall bread wyne remayne styll in their propre kyndes and yet to them that worthyly eate and drynke them they be tourned not into the corporall presence but into the vertue of Christes fleshe and bloud And although Theophylactus spake of the eatyng of the very body of Christ and the drinkyng of his very bloud and not only of the figures of them and of the cōuersion of the bread and wyne into the body and bloud of Christ yet he meaneth not of a grosse carnal corporall and sensible conuersion of the breade and wyne nor of a lyke eatyng and drynkynge of his fleshe and bloud for so not only our stomakes wold yerne and oure heartes abhorre to eate his fleshe and to drynke his bloude but also suche eatyng and drynkynge could nothyng profit and auayle vs but he spake of the celestial and spiritual eatyng of Christ and of a sacramental conuersion of the bread callyng the bread not onely a figure but also the bodye of Christ◠geuynge vs by those woordes to vnderstande that in the sacramente wee not onely eate corporally the bread whyche is a sacrament and figure of Christes body but spiritually we eate also his very body drynke his very bloud And this doctrine of Theophilactus is both true godly and comfortable Besides this our aduersaries doo allege saint Hierome vpon the Epistle ad Titum that there is as great difference betwene the loaues called Panes propositionis and the body of Christe as there is betwene a shadowe of a bodye and the body it selfe and as there is betwene an ymage and the thyng it self and betwene an example of thynges to come and the thynges that be prefigured by them These wordes of saincte Hierome truely vnderstand serue nothyng for thentent of the Papistes For he ment that the Shew breade of the lawe was but a darke shadow of Christ to come but the sacrament of Christes body is a clere testimony that Christ is already comme that he hath performed that whiche was promysed and doth presently comforte and feede vs spiritually with his precious body and bloud not withstandyng that corporally he is ascended into heuen And the same is to be answered vnto all that the aduersaries bryng of S. Augustin Sedulius Leo Fulgentius Cassiodorus Gregorius and other concernyng the eatyng of Christe in the sacrament Which thyng can not be vnderstanded plainly as the wordes sounde but fyguratiuely and spiritually as before is sufficiently proued and herafter shalbe more fully declared in the fourth parte of this booke But here Iohn Damascene maye in no wyse be passed ouer whom for his auctoritee the aduersaries of Christes true naturall bodye do reken as a stout champion sufficient to defend all the whole matter alone But neyther is the authoritee of Damascene so greate that they may oppresse vs thereby nor his woordes so playne for them as they boaste and vntruely pretende For he is but a yonge newe author in the respect of those which we haue brought in for our party And in diuers pointes he varieth frō the most ancient authors if he meane as thei expound him as when he saith that the bread and wine be not figures which all the old authors call figures and that the bread and wyne consume not nor be auoyded downewarde which Origen and S. Augustine affirme or that they be not called the examples of Christes body after the consecration whiche shall manyfestely appere false by the Liturgy ascribed vnto S. Basill And moreouer the sayde Damascene was one of the byshoppe of Romes chiefe proctoures against the Emperours and as it were his ryght hande to set abroade all ydolatrye by his owne handewrytynge And therefore yf he loste his hande as they saye he dyd he lost it by Goddes moste righteous iudgemente what soeuer they faine and fable of the miraculous restitution of the same And yet what so euer the sayd Damascene writeth in other mattiers surely in this place wiche the aduersaries doo alledge he writeth spiritually and godly although the Papistes either of ignorance mystake hym or els willyngly wraste him and writhe hym to their purpose cleane contrary to his meanynge The sum of Damascene his doctrine in this matter is this That as Christ beyng both God man hath in him two natures so hath he twoo natiuitees one eternal thother temporall And so lykewise we beyng as it were double men or hauyng euery one of vs two men in vs the new man the old man the spirituall man the carnall man haue a double natiuitee One of oure first carnall father Adam by whom as by ancient inheritance cometh vnto vs malediction and euerlastyng damnation the other of our heauenly Adam that is to saye of Christ by whom we be made heires of celestiall benediction and euerlastyng glory and immortalitee And bycause this
Adam is spirituall therefore our generation by hym muste be spirituall our feedyng muste bee lykewise spirituall And our spirituall generation by hym is playnly set forth in baptisme and our spirituall meate and foode is set foorth in the holy Cōmunion supper of the Lorde And because our sightes bee so feble that we cannot see the spiritual water wherwith we be washed in baptisme nor the spiritual meat wherwith we be fedde at the Lordes table therfore to healpe oure infirmities and to make vs the better to see the same with a pure fayth our sauiour Christ hath set furth the same as it were before our eyes by sensible signes and tokens whiche we be daily vsed and accustomed vnto And because the common custome of men is to washe in water therfore our spiritual regeneration in Christe or spirituall washyng in his blud is declared vnto vs in baptisme by water Lykewise oure spiritual norishement feadyng in Christ is sette before oure eyes by bread and wyne because they be meates and drynkes whiche chiefly and vsually we be fedde withal that as they feade the body so doth Christe with his fleshe and bloud spiritually feade the soule And therefore the bread and wyne bee called examples of Christes fleshe and bloud and also they be called his very fleshe and blode to signifie vnto vs that as they feade vs carnally so do they admonishe vs that Christe with his fleshe and bloud doth feade vs spiritually and moste truely vnto euerlastyng life And as almyghty God by his moste myghty worde and his hollye spirite and infinite power brought forth all creatures in the begynnyng and euer sithens hath preserued theym euen so by the same worde and power he woorketh in vs from time to tyme this meruailous spiritual generation wonderfull spirituall norishment feedyng which is wrought onely by God and is comprehended and receiued of vs by fayth And as bread and drynke by natural norishement be chaunged into a mannes body and yet the body is not chaunged but the same that it was before so although the bread and wyne be sacramentally chaunged into Christes body yet his body is the same and in the same place that it was before that is to say in heauen without any alteracion of the same And the bread and wyne bee not so chaunged into the fleshe and bloud of Christ that they bee made one nature but they remayne styll distinct in nature so that the bread in it selfe is not his fleshe the wyne his bloud but vnto them that worthely eate and drinke the bread and wyne to them the bread and wyne be his flesh and bloud that is to say by thynges naturall and whiche they be accustomed vnto they bee exalted vnto thynges aboue nature For y ◠sacramental bread and wyne be not base and naked figures but so pithy and effectuous that whosoeuer worthely eateth them eateth spiritually Christes fleshe and bloud and hath by them euerlastyng life Wherfore whosoeuer cōmeth to the Lordes table must come with all humilitee feare reuerence and puritie of life as to receiue not onely bread and wyne but also our sauior Christ both God and man with al his benefites to the relief and sustētacion both of their bodies and soules This is briefly the summe and true meanyng of Damascene concernyng this matter Wherfore they that gather of hym either the natural presence of Christes body in the sacramētes of bread and wyne or the adoration of the outward and visible sacrament or that after the cōsecracion there remayneth no bread nor wyne nor other substaunce but onely the substaunce of the body and bloude of Christe eyther they vnderstand not Damascen or els of wilful frowardnes they wyll not vnderstande hym whyche rather seemeth to bee true by suche collections as they haue vniustly gathered noted out of him For although he say that Christe is the spirituall meate yet as in baptisme the holy ghost is not in the water but in hym that is vnfaynedly baptised so Damascene ment not y t Christ is in the bread but in hym y t worthily eateth the bred And though he say that the bread is Christes body and the wyne his bloud yet he mente not that the bread considered in it selfe or the wyne in it selfe beyng not receyued is his fleshe and bloud but to suche as by vnfayned faith woorthely receyue the breade and wyne to suche the breade and wyne are called by Damascene the body and bloude of Christe bycause that suche persons through the workyng of the holy gost be so knytte and vnited spirituallye to Christes fleshe and bloude and to his diuinitee also that they bee fedde with them vnto euerlastyng life Furthermore Damascene sayeth not that the sacrament should be worshipped and adored as the Papistes terme it whiche is playne ydolatrye but we must worship Christ God and man And yet we may not worship him in bread and wyne but sittyng in heauen with his father and beyng spiritually within our selues Nor he sayeth not that there remayneth no bread nor wyne nor none other substaunce but onely the substaunce of the body and bloud of Christe but he sayeth playnely that as a burnyng coale is not wodde onely but fyre wodde ioyned together so the bread of the Cōmunion is not bread onely but bread ioyned to the diuinitee But those that say that there is none other substance but the substāce of the body and bloud of Christe doo not onely denye that there is bread and wyne but by force they must denye also that there is either Christes diuinitee or his soule For if the fleshe and bloud the soule and diuinitee of Christe bee foure substances and in the sacrament be but two of them that is to say his fleshe and bloud than where be his soule and diuinitee And thus these men diuide Iesus separatyng his diuinitee from his humanitee Of whom sainct Ihon sayeth Whosoeuer diuideth Iesus is not of God but he is Antichrist And moreouer these men do so separate Christes body from his membres in the sacrament that they leaue hym no mans body at all For as Damascene saith that the distinction of membres pertayne so muche to the nature of a mannes body that where there is no suche distinction there is no perfecte mans body But by these Papistes doctrine there is no suche distinction of membres in the sacramente for eyther there is no head fete handes armes legges mouthe eyes and nose at all or elles all is heade all feete all handes all armes all legges all mouthe all eyes and all nose And so they make of Christes body no mannes bodye at all Thus beynge confuted the Papistes errours as well concernyng Transubstantiation as the reall corporall and natural presence of Christ in the sacrament whiche were two principall pointes purposed in the begynnyng of this woorke Nowe it is tyme som thyng to speke of the third errour of the Papistes whyche is concernynge the
euery side the scripture condemneth the aduersaries of goddes worde And this wickednes of the Papistes is to bee wondred at that thei affirme Christs flesh blud soule holy spirite and his deite to be a man that is subiect to sin and a limme of the diuell They be wonderfull iuglers and coniurers that with certayne woordes can make god and the dyuell to dwel togither in one man and make him both the temple of god and the temple of the diuell It apeareth that they be so blinde that they can not see y ◠light frō darknes Beliall from Christ nor the table of y ◠lord from the table of diuels Thus is confuted this third intollerable errour and heresye of the Papistes That they which be the lymmes of the diuell do eate the very bodye of Christ and drinke his bludde manifestly and directly contrary to the wordes of Christ himself who saith Who so euer eateth my flesh and drinketh my bludde hath euerlasting life But leaste they shuld seeme to haue nothinge to say for themselues they alleag S. Paule in the eleuenth to the Corinth where he saith Hee that eateth and drinketh vnwortheli eateth and drinketh his owne damnation not discerninge the lordes bodye But S. Paule in that place speaketh of the eatinge of the breade and drinkinge of the wine and not of the corporall eating of Christes flesh blud as it is manifest to euery man that wyll read the text For these be the words of S. Paul Let a mā examine himselfe and so eat of the bread and drynk of the cuppe for he that eateth and drinketh vnworthely eateth and drinketh his owne damnation not discerninge the Lordes bodye In these wordes S. Paules mynde is that for asmuche as the breade and wyne in the Lordes supper do represent vnto vs the very bodye and blud of our sauiour Christe by his owne institution and ordinance therfore although he sit in heauē at his fathers right hand yet shuld we come to this mysticall bread wine with faithe reuerence purite and feare as we wold do if we should come to see and receaue Christe himselfe sensibly present For vnto the faithfull Christ is at his owne holy table present with his mightye spirite and grace and is of them more frutefully receaued than if corporally they shulde receaue him bodely present And therefore they that shal worthely come to this goddes bord muste after due triall of themselues considre first who ordained this table also what meate and drinke they shall haue that come therto and how thei ought to behaue themselues therat He that prepared the table is Christ himselfe The meat drynke wherwith he feedeth theim that come thereto as they ought to do is his owne body ▪ flesh blud They that come therto muste occupy their myndes in considering howe his bodye was broken for them and his blud shed for their redemptiō and so ought they to approache to this heauenly table with all humblenes of hart and godlynes of minde as to the table wherin Christe himselfe is gyuen And they that come otherwise to thys holy table thei come vnworthely and do not eat drinke Christes flesh blud but eat and drink their owne damnacion bicause thei do not duely considre Christes very fleshe and blud which be offered ther spiritually to be eaten and drunken but dispising Christs most holy supper do come therto as it were to other meates and drinkes without regard of the lordes body which is the spirituall meat of that table But here maye not be passed ouer the answere vnto certain places of auncient Authors which at the firste shew seeme to make for the Papists purpose that euel men do eate and drink the very fleshe and bludde of Christe But if those places be truely and throughely waied it shall appeare that not one of theym maketh for theyr errour that euel men do eat Christes very body The first place is of S. Augustin contra Cresconium grāmaticum wher he saith that although Christ himselfe say He that eateth not my fleshe and drinketh not my bludde shall not haue lyfe in him yet doth not his apostels teache that the same is pernicious to theim whiche vse it not well for hee saith Whosoeuer eateth the bread and drinketh the cuppe of the Lorde vnworthely shalbe gylty of the body and bloud of the Lorde In whiche wordes S. Augustyne seemeth to conclude that aswell the euil as the good do eat the body and bloud of Christ although the euil haue no benefite but hurt therby But consider the place of S. Augustyne diligently and then it shall euidently appeare that he ment nat of the eatyng of Christes body but of the sacrament therof For the intent of sainct Augustyne there is to proue that good thinges auaile not to suche persons as do euil vse them and that many thynges whiche of them selues be good and be good to some yet to other some they bee not good As that light is good for whole eyes and hurteth soore eyes that meate whiche is good for some is euil for other some One medicine healeth some and maketh other sicke One harnes doth arme one and combreth another one coate is mete for one to straight for another And after other examples at the last S. Augustyne sheweth the same to bee true in the sacramentes both of Baptisme and of the Lordes body whiche he sayth do profite onely them that receiue the same worthely And the wordes of sainct Paule which sainct Augustyne citeth do speake of the sacramental bread and cuppe not of the body and bloud And yet sainct Augustyne calleth the bread and the cuppe the fleshe and bloud not that they be so in dede but that they so signifie As he sayth in another place contra Maximinum In sacramētes sayth he is to be considered not what they be but what they shewe For they be signes of other thynges beyng one thyng and signifiyng another Therfore as in baptisme those that come faynedly and those that come vnfaynedly both bee washed with the sacramental water but both be not washed with the holy ghost clothed with Christ so in the Lordes supper bothe eate and drynke the sacramental bread wyne but bothe eate not Christ himselfe and bee fedde with his fleshe and bloud but those only which worthely receiue the sacrament And this answere wyll serue to another place of sainct Augustyne against the Donatistes where he sayth that Iudas receiued the body and bloud of the Lorde For as S. Augustyne in that place speaketh of the sacrament of Baptisme so doth he speake of the sacrament of the body and bloud whiche neuerthelesse he calleth the body and bloud because they signifie and represent vnto vs the very body fleshe and bloud And as before is at length declared a figure hath the name of the thyng that is signifyed thereby As a mannes ymage is called a man a Lyons image a
Lyon a byrdes image a byrde and an image of a tree and herbe is called a tree or herbe So were we wont to say Our lady of Walsyngham Our lady of Ipiswyche Oure lady of Grace Our lady of pytie sainct Peter of Myllan Sainct Ihon of Amyas and suche like not meanyng the thynges them selues but callyng their images by the name of the thynges by them prepresēted And lykewise we were wont to say Great sainct Christopher of Yorke or Lyncolne Oure lady smyleth or rocketh her childe Let vs go in Pilgrymage to sainct Peter at Rome and sainct Iames in Compostella And a thousand lyke speeches whiche were not vnderstand of the very thinges but onely of the images of them So doth sainct Ihon Chrysostome say that wee see Christ with oure eyes touche him feele him and grope him with our handes fixe oure teethe in his fleshe taste it breake it eate it and digest it make redde our tongues and dye them with his bloud and swalowe it and drynke it And in a Cathechisme by me translated set furth I vsed like maner of speeche saiyng that with our bodely mouthes we receiue the body bloud of Christ. Whiche my saiyng diuers ignorant persones not vsed to reade olde auncient authors nor acquainted with their phrase and maner of speeche did carpe and reprehende for lacke of good vnderstandyng For this speeche and other before rehersed of Chrysostome all other like he not vnderstand of the very fleshe and bloud of our sauior Christ whiche in very deede wee neither feele nor see but that whiche wee do to the bread and wyne by a figuratiue speeche is spoken to bee done to the fleshe bloud because they bee the very signes figures and tokens instituted of Christ to represent vnto vs his very fleshe and bloud And yet as with our corporal eyes corporal hādes and mouthes wee do corporally see feele taste and eate the bread and drynke the wyne beyng the signe and sacramentes of Christes body euen so with oure spiritual eyes handes and mouthes we do spiritually see feele taste eate his very fleshe and drynke his very bloud As Eusebius Emissenus sayth Whan thou commest to the reuerend altare to be fylled with spiritual meates with thy fayth looke vpon the body bloud of him that is thy god honor him touche him with thy mynde take him with the hād of thy heart drynke him with the draught of thyne inwarde man And these spiritual thinges requyre no corporall presence of Christ him selfe who sytteth continually in heauen at the right hand of his father And as this is most true so is it ful and sufficient to answere all thynges that the Papistes can bryng in this matter that hath any apparance for their partie Nowe it is requisite to speake some thyng of the maner and forme of worshippyng of Christ by them that receiue this sacrament lest that in the steade of Christ him selfe be worshipped the sacrament For as his humanitee ioyned to his diuinitee and exalted to the right hande of his father is to be worshipped of all creatures in heauen yearth and vnder the yearth 〈◊〉 if in the steade thereof we worshyp the signes and sacramentes we committee as greate Idolatrye as euer was or shall be to the worldes ende And yet haue the very Antichristes the subtilest enemies that Christe hath by their fyne inuentions and crafty scholastical diuinitee deluded many simple soules and broughte theym to this horrible Idolatry to worshyp thynges visible and made with their owne handes persuadyng them that creatures were theyr creatour theyr God and theyr maker For els what made the people to runne frome theyr seates to the altar from aultar to aultar and frō sakeryng as they called it to sakeryng peepyng tootyng and gasynge at the thynge whiche the priest helde vp in his handes if they thought not to honour that thyng whiche they sawe What moued the priestes to lyft vp the sacrament to hye ouer their beades or the people to crie to the prieste holde vp holde vp and one man to saie to an other stoupe downe before or to saie This daie I haue sene my maker And I can not be quiet excepte I see my maker ones a daie What was the cause of al these and that as well the priest as the people so deuoutely dyd knocke and kneele at euery syghte of the sacrament but that they woorshypped that vysyble thynge whyche they sawe with theyr eyes and tooke it for very God For yf they worshypped in spirite onely Christe syttynge in heauen with his father what needed they to remoue oute of theyr seates to toote and gaase as the apostles dyd after Christe whan he was gone vp into heauen If thei worshypped nothyng that they sawe why dyd they ryse vp to see Doubtles many of the simple people woorshipped that thyng which they sawe with their eies And although the subtyl Papistes doo colour and cloke the matter neuer so finely sayeng that they worshyp not the sacramentes whiche they see with theyr eyes but that thyng whyche they beleue with their faith to be really and corporally in the sacramentes yet why doo they than run frō place to place to gase at the thinges whiche they see yf they worshyp them not giuyng therby occasion to them that be ignorant to worship that whyche they see Why doo they not rather quietly syt styll in their seates and moue the people to doo the lyke woorshyppynge God in hart and in spirite than to gadde aboute from place to place to see that thyng whyche they confesse theim selues is not to bee worshipped And yet to eschue one inconuenience that is to saie the worshyppyng of the sacrament they fall into an other as euyl and worshyp ▪ nothyng there at al. For they worship that thyng as thei say whiche is really and corporally and yet inuisibly present vnder the kinds of bread and wine whiche as before is expressed and proued is vtterly nothyng And so they geue vnto the ignorant occasion to worshyp breade and wyne and they them selues worshyp nothynge there at all But the Papistes for their owne commoditee to kepe the people styll in Idolatrye do often allege a certain place of S. Augustyne vpō the Psalmes where he sayth that no man dothe eate the fleshe of Christe excepte he fyrste worship it and that we do not offende in worshippyng therof but we should offende if we should not worship it That is true whiche sainct Augustyne sayt◠in this place For who is hee that professeth Christe and is spiritually fedde and nourished with his fleshe and bloud but he wyll honour and worship him sittyng at the right hande of his father and tendre vnto him frō the bottome of his heart all laude prayse and thankes for his mercyfull redemption AND as this is moste true whiche sainct Augustyne sayth so is that moste false whiche the Papistes would persuade vpon sainct Augustynes woordes that