to instruct S. Iames in the sacraments and in all manner fashion how he should vse himself in his vocation as he should say that Iames who learned of Christ himself knew not how to vse himselfe in the necessary poynts of Christes religion except Clement must teach him Sixtly there be few things in those epistles that either be obserued at this day or were at any tyme obserued sithens Christes religion fyrst beganne Seuenthly a great number of scriptures in those Epistles be so far wrasted from the true sence thereof that they haue an euill opinion of Clemēt that thinke that he would do such iniury to Gods word Eightly those epistles spake of Palles and Archdeacons and other inferior orders which is not like that those things began so soone but as the histories were inuented many yeres after Peters tyme. And finally in one of those epistles is contayned a most pernicious heresy that al things ought to be common and wives also which could not be the doctrine of Clement being the most pestilent errour of the Nicholaites whom the holy ghost doth hate as he testifieth in the Apocalips Now all these things considered who hauing either wit or good opinion of the Apostles and their disciples can thinke that they should write any such epistles But the Epistle of S. Clement say you speaketh not of bread what was it then I pray you that he ment when he spake of the brokē peces in the Lords supper Yf it were not bread it must be some other thing which Christ did eat at that supper Paraduēture you will say as some stick not to say now a dayes that Christ had some other meat at that supper then bred as if he fared daintely which we neuer read you might imagine he had capon partrich or fesaunt or if he fared hardly at the least you would say he had cheese to eat with his bread because you will defend that he did not eat dry bread alone Such vayne phantasies men may haue that will speak without Gods word which maketh mention in that holy supper of nothing but of bread and wine But let it be that Christ had as many dishes as you can deuise yet I trust you will not say that he called all those his body but onely the bread And so S. Clement speaking of the broken peeces of the Lords body of the residue and fragments of the Lords body of the portion and leauing of the Lords body must needes speak all this of bread And thus is if manifest false that you say that the epistle of Clement speaketh nothing of bread And then forasmuch as he calleth the leauings of the same the brokē peeces of the Lords body and the fragments and portion therof he calleth the fragments and portion of the Lordes body he sheweth that the bread remayneth and that the calling therof the lords body is a figuratiue speech The body of Christ hath no fragments nor broken peces and therfore the calling here is so materiall that it proueth fully the matter that to call bread Christs body is a figuratiue speech And although to auoid the matter you deuise subtill cauillatious saying that calling is not materiall because it signifieth that was Yet they that haue vnderstanding may soon discerne what a vayne shift this is imagined onely to blynd the ignorant readers eyes But if that which is bread before the consecration be after no bread and if it be agaynst the Christen fayth to think that it is still bread what occasion of errour should this be to call it still bread after consecration Ys not this a great occasion of errour to call it bread still if it be not bread still And yet in this place of Clement the calling can in no wise signify that was before consecration but must needes signify that is after consecration For this place speaketh of fragments broken peeces and leauings which can haue no true vnderstanding before consecration at what time there be yet no broken peeces fragments nor leauings but be all done after consecration But you wrangle so much in this matter to auoyd absurdities that you snarle your self into so many and haynous absurdities as you shall neuer be able to winde your selfe out For you say that Christes body which in all the hostes and in all the partes of the hostes is but one not broken nor distributed is called the leauing peeces of the body portiō of the body residue of the body yet euery peece is Christs whole body which things to be spoken of Christes body christian eares abhore for to heare And if you will say that your booke is false that you meant al these leauing peeces portion and residue to be vnderstand of the hostes and not of Christs body then you confesse the hostes which be broken to be called by name the leauings or peeces of Christs body the portion of his body the residue of his body by a figuratiue spech which is as much as I speake in my first note And so appeareth how vaynely you haue traueled for the confutation of my first note Now as touching the second note Clement declareth expressely that nothing might be reserued For where he sayth that if any thing remain it must not be kept vntill the morning but be spent and consumed of the clearkes how could he declare more playnly that nothing might be reserued then by those wordes And as for Iustine he speaketh not one word of sicke persons as you report of hym And concerning Cirill ad Calosyrium would to God that worke of Cyrill might come abroad for I doubt not but it would clerely discusse this matter but I feare that some Papistes will suppresse it that it shall neuer come to light And where you say that Linehood found fault with his owne countrey of England and blamed this realme because they hāged vp the sacrament contrary to the vse of other countreyes You haue well excused me that I am not the first finder of this fault but many yeares ago that fault was found that it was not the vse of other countreys to hang it vp And yet the vse of other countreys was fonde inough euen as they had charge commandement from Innocentius the third and Honorius the third And as for the receiuing of the Sacrament with feare and trembling ought not they that be baptised in theyr old age or in yeres of discression come to the water of Baptisme with feare and trembling as well as to the Lords supper Think you that Symon Magus was not in as great damnation for the vnworthy receyuing of Baptisme as Iudas was for the vnworthy receyuing of the Lordes supper And yet you will not say that Christ is really and corporally in the water but that the washing in the water is an outward signification and figure declaring what God worketh inwardly in them that truely be baptised And likewise speaketh this Epistle of the holy communion For euery good
to declare vnto miserable sinners good newes to heale them that were sicke to make the blinde to see the deafe to heare and the dumbe to speake to set prisoners at liberty to shew that the time of grace and mercy was come to giue light to them that were in darknes and in the shadow of death and to preach and geue pardon and full remission of sinne to all his elected And to performe the same he made a sacrifice and oblation of his owne body vpon the crosse which was a full redemption satisfaction and propitiation for the sinnes of the whole world And to commend this his sacrifice vnto all his faythfull people and to confirme their fayth and hope of eternall saluation in the same he hath ordayned a perpetuall memory of his sayd sacrifice dayly to be vsed in the Church to his perpetuall laud and prayse and to our synguler comfort and consolation That is to say the celebration of his holy supper wherein he doth not cease to geue himselfe with all his benefites to all those that duely receiue the same supper according to his blessed ordinaunce But the Romish Antichrist to deface this great benefite of Christ hatht that his sacrifice vpon the crosse is not sufficient hereunto without any other sacrifice deuised by him and made by the priest or els without Indulgences Beades Pardons Pilgrimages and such other Pelfray to to supply Christes imperfection And that Christen people cannot applye to themselues the benefytes of Christes passion but that the same is in the distribution of the Byshop of Rome or els that by Christ we haue no full remission but be deliuered onely from sinne and yet remaineth temporall payne in Purgatory due for the same to be remitted after this life by the Romish Antichrist and his ministers who take vpon them to do for vs that thing which Christ either would not or could not do O haynous blasphemy most detestable iniury against Christ. O wicked abhomination in the temple of God O pride intollerable of Antechrist and most manifest token of the sonne of perdition extolling himselfe aboue God and with Lucifer exalting his seat and power aboue the throne of God For he that taketh vpon him to supply that thing which he pretendeth to be vnperfect in Christ must nedes make himself aboue Christ so very Antichrist For what is this els but to be agaynst Christ and to bring him in contempt as one that either for lack of charity would not or for lack of power he could not with all his bloudshedding and death cleerely deliuer his faythfull and geue them full remission of their sinnes but that the full perfection thereof must be had at the handes of Antichrist of Rome and his ministers What man of knowledge and zeale to Gods honour can with dry eyes see this iniury to Christ and look vpon the estate of religion brought in by the Papists perceiuing the true sence of Gods wordes subuerted by false gloses of mans deuising the true christen religion turned into certayne hypocriticall and superstitious sectes the people praying with their mouthes and hearing with theyr eares they wist not what and so ignoraunt in Gods word that they could not discerne hypocrisy and superstition from true and sincere religion This was of late yeares the face of religion within this realme of England and yet remayneth in diuers realmes But thankes be to almighty God and to the Kinges Maiesty with his father a Prince of most famous memory the superstitious sectes of Monks and fryers that were in this realme be cleane taken away the scripture is restored vnto the proper and true vnderstanding the people may daylye read and heare Gods heauenly word and pray in their owne language which they vnderstand so that their hartes and mouthes may goe together and be none of those people whome Christ complayned saying These people honour me with their lips but their hartes be farre from me Thankes be to God many corrupt weedes be plucked vp which were wont to rot the flock of Christ and to let the growing of the Lords haruest But what auayleth it to take away beades pardons pilgremages and such other like Popery so long as two chiefe rootes remayne vnpulled vp whereof so long as they remayne will spring agayne all former impediments of the Lords haruest and corruption of his flocke The rest is but braunches and leaues the cutting away wherof is but like topping loppyng of a tree or cutting downe of weedes leauing the body standing and the rootes in the ground but the very body of the tree or rather the rootes of the weedes is the Popish doctrine of Transubstātiation of the reall presence of Christes flesh and bloud in the sacrament of the aulter as they call it and of the sacrifice and oblation of Chryste made by the priest for the saluation of the quicke and the dead Which rootes if they be suffered to grow in the Lordes vineyard they will ouerspread all the ground agayne with the old errors and superstitions These iniuries to Chryst be so intollerable that no christen hart can willingly beare them Wherfore seing that many haue set to their hands whetted their tooles to plucke vp the weedes and to cut down the tree of error I not knowing otherwise how to excuse my selfe at the last day haue in this booke set to my hand and axe with the rest to cut downe this tree and to pluck vp the weedes and plants by the roots which our heauenly father neuer planted but were grafted and sowen in his vineyard by his aduersary the deuil Antichrist his minister The lord graūt that this my trauaile and labour in his vineyard be not in vayn but that it may prosper and bring forth good fruites to his honor and glory For when I see his vineyard ouergrowen with thornes brambles aud weedes I know that euerlasting woe appertayneth vnto me if I hold my peace and put not to my handes and tounge to labour in purging his vineyard God I take to witnes who seeth the hartes of all men thorowly vnto the bottome that I take this labour for none other consideration but for the glory of hys name and the discharge of my duty and the zeale that I beare toward the flocke of Christ. I know in what office God hath placed me and to what purpose that is to say to set forth hys word truely vnto his people to the vttermost of my power without respect of person or regard of thing in the world but of him alone I know what account I shall make to him here of at the last day when euery man shall aunswere for his vocation and receiue for the same good or ill according as he hath done I know how Antichrist hath obscured the glory of god the true knowledge of his word ouercasting the same with mistes and cloudes of errour and ignoraunce through false gloses and interpretations It pittieth me
body from his spirite affirming that in Baptisme we receaue but his spirite and in the communion but his flesh And that Christes spirit renueth our life but increaseth it not and that his flesh increceth our life but geueth it not And agaynst all nature reasō and truth you confound the substance of bread and wine with the substance of Christes body and bloud in such wise as you make but one nature and person of them all And against scripture and all comformity of nature you confound and iumble so together the natural members of Christes body in the sacrament that you leaue no distinction proportion nor fashion of mannes body at all And can your church be taken for the true naturall mother of the true doctrine of Christ that thus vnnaturally speaketh deuydeth and confoundeth Christes body If Salomon were aliue he would surely geue iudgement that Christ should be taken from that woman that speaketh so vnnaturally and so vnlike his mother and be geuen to the true church of the faithful that neuer digressed from the truth of Gods word nor from the true speeche of Christes natural body but speake according to the same that Christes body although it be inseparable annexed vnto his Godhead yet it hath all the naturall conditions and properties of a very mans body occupying one place and being of a certayne height and measure hauing all members distinct and set in good order and proportion And yet the same body ioyned vnto his diuinitye is not only the beginning but also the contynuance and consummation of our eternall and celestiall life By him we be regenerated by him we be fedde and nourished from time to time as hee hath taught vs most certainly to beleue by his holy word and sacraments which remayne in their former substaunce and nature as Christ doth in his without mixtion or confusion This is the true and naturall speaking in this matter like a true naturall mother and like a true and right beleeuing christian man Marye of that doctrine which you teach I cannot deny but the church of Rome is the mother therof which in scripture is called Babilō because of commixtion or confusion Which in all her doinges and teachinges so doth mixte and confound error with truth superstition with religiō godlines with hipocrisie scripture with traditions that she sheweth her selfe alway vniforme and consonant to confound all the doctrine of Christ yea Christ him selfe shewing her selfe to be Christes stepmother and the true naturall mother of Antichrist And for the conclusion of your matter here I doubt not but the indifferent reader shal easely perceiue what spirit moued you to write your boke For seeing that your booke is so full of crafts sleightes shiftes obliquities manifest vntruthes it may be easely iudged that what soeuer pretence be made of truth yet nothing is lesse intended then that truth should ether haue victory or appeare and be seene at all Winchester And that thou reader mightest by these markes iudge of that is here intreated by the author agaynst the melt blessed sacrament I shall note certayne euident and manyfest vntruthes which this author is not afraid to vtter a matter wonderfull considering his dignity if he that is named be the author in déede which should be a great stay of contradiction if any thing were to be regarded agaynst the truth First I will note vnto the reader how this author termeth the faith of the reall and substanciall presence of Christes body and bloud in the sacrament to be the faith of the papistes which saying what foundacion it hath thou mayest consider of that foloweth Luther that professed openly to abhorre at that might be noted papish defended stoutly the presence of Christes body in the Sacrament and to be present really and substancially euen with the same wordes and termes Bucer that is here in England in a solemne worke that he wryteth vpon the Gospels professeth the same faith of the reall and substanciall presence of Christes body in the Sacrament which be affirmeth to haue béen beleued of all the church of Christ from the beginning hetherto Iustus Ionas hath translated a Catechisme out of dutch into latin taught in the citie of Noremberge in Germany where Hosiander is chiefe preacher in which Catechisme they be accounted for no true Christian men that deny the presence of Christes body in the Sacrament The wordes really and substancially be not expressed as they be in Bucer but the word truly is there and as Buter saith that is substancially Which Catechisme was translated into englishe in this authors name about two yeares past Phillip Melancton no papist nor priest writeth a very wise epistle in this matter to Decolampadius and signifiyng soberly his beléefe of the presence of Christes very body in the Sacrament and to proue the same to haue béen the fayth of the old church from the beginning alleadgeth the sayinges of Irene Ciprian Chrisostome Hillary Cirill Ambrose and Theophilacte which authors he estemeth both worthy credite and to affirme the presence of Christes body in the Sacrament plainly without ambiguity He answereth to certain places of S. Augustine and saith all Decolampadius enterprise to depend vpon coniectures and argumentes applausible to idle wittes with much more wise matter as that epistle doth purport which is set out in a booke of a good volume among the other Epistles of Decolampadius so as no man may suspecte any thing counterfayte in the matter One Hippinus or Oepinus of Hamborough greatly estéemed among the Lutherians hath written a booke to the Kinges Maiesty that now is published abroad in printe wherein much inueyng against the church of Rome doth in the matter of the sacrament write as followeth Encharistia is called by it selfe a sacrifice because it is a remēbrance of the true sacrifice offered vpon the crosse and that in it is dispensed the true body true bloud of Christ which is plainly the same in essence that is to say substāce and the same bloud in essence signifiyng though the maner of presence be spirituall yet the substaunce of that is present is the same with that in heauen Erasmus noted a man that durst and did speake of all abuses in the church liberallye taken for no papist among vs to much estéemed as his peraphrasis of the Gospell is ordered to be had in euery church of this Realme declareth in diuers of his workes most manifestly his fayth of the presence of Christes body in the Sacrament by his Epistles recommendeth to the worlde the worke of Algerus in that matter of the Sacrament whom he noteth well exercised in the scriptures and the olde doctors Ciprian Hilary Ambrose Hierome Augustine Basill Chrysostom And for Erasmus own iudgement he sayth we haue an inuiolable fountation of Christes own words this is my body rehearsed agayn by S. Paule he sayth further the body of Christe is hidden vnder those signes and sheweth also vpon what
tyme to the entent he may be there quiet to accomplish my request let him lacke neither bookes ne any thing requisite for his study And thus after the kynges departure Doct. Cranmer went with my Lord of Wiltshyre vnto his house where he incontinent wrote his mynde concernyng the kynges question addyng to the same besides the authorities of Scriptures of generall Councels and of auncient writers also his opinion which was this that the Byshop of Rome had no such authoritie as wherby he might dispence with the word of God and the Scriptures When Doct. Cranmer had made this booke and committed it to the kyng the kyng sayd to him will you abide by this that you haue here written before the Bishop of Rome That will I do by Gods grace quoth Doct. Cranmer if your Maiestie do send me thether Mary quoth the kyng I will send you euen to him in a sure Ambassage And thus by meanes of Doct. Cranmers handlyng of this matter with the kyng not onely certaine learned men were sent abroad to the most part of the Uniuersities in Christendome to dispute the question but also the same beyng by Commission disputed by the Diuines in both the Uniuersities of Cambridge and Oxford it was there concluded that no such Matrimony was by the word of God lawfull Wherupon a solēne Ambassage was prepared and sent to the Byshop of Rome then beyng at Bonony wherein went the Earle of Wiltshyre Doct. Cranmer Doct. Stokesly Doct. Carne Doct. Bennet and diuers other learned men and Gentlemen And when the tyme came that they should come before the Bishop of Rome to declare the cause of their Ambassage the Byshop sittyng on high in his cloth of estate and in his rich apparell with his sandales on his féete offeryng as it were his foote to be kissed of the Ambassadours the Earle of Wiltshyre with the rest of the Ambassadours disdainyng thereat stoode still made no coūtenaunce thereunto and so kept them selues from that Idolatry In fine the Pontificall Byshop seyng their constancie without any farther ceremonie gaue eare to the Ambassadours Who entryng there before the Byshop offered on the kynges behalfe to be defended that no man Iure diuine could or ought to mary his brothers wife and that the Byshop of Rome by no meanes ought to dispence to the contrary Diuers promises were made and sundry dayes appointed wherein the question should haue bene disputed and when our part was ready to aunswere no mā there appeared to dispute in that behalfe So in the end the Byshop makyng to our Ambassadours good countenaunce and gratiffyng Doctour Cranmer with the Office of the Penitentiarishyp dismissed them vndisputed withall Wherupon the Earle of Wiltshyre and other Commissioners sauyng Doct. Cranmer returned home agayne into England And forthwith Doct. Cranmer went to the Emperour beyng in his iourney towardes Vienna in expedition agaynst the Turke there to aunswere such learned men of the Emperours Coūsaile as would or could say any thyng to the contrary part Where amongest the rest at the same tyme was Cornelius Agrippa an high Officer in the Emperours Court who hauyng priuate conference with Doct. Cranmer in the question was so fully resolued and satisfied in the matter that afterwardes there was neuer disputation openly offered to Doct. Cranmer in that behalfe For through the perswasion of Agrippa all other learned men there were much discouraged This matter thus prosperyng on D. Cranmers behalfe aswell touchyng the kynges questiō as concernyng the inualiditie of the Byshop of Romes authoritie Byshop Warrham then Archbyshop of Caunterbury departed this transitorie lyfe wherby that dignitie then beyng in the kynges gift and disposition was immediatly giuen to Doct. Crāmer as worthy for his trauaile of such a promotiō Thus much touchyng the prefermēt of Doct. Cranmer vnto his dignitie and by what meanes he atchiued vnto the same not by flattery nor by bribes nor by none other vnlawfull meanes whiche thyng I haue more at large discoursed to stoppe the raylyng mouthes of such who beyng them selues obscure and vnlearned shame not so to detract a learned mā most ignominiously with the surname of an Hostler whom for his godly zeale vnto sincere Religion they ought with much humilitie to haue had in regard and reputation Now as concernyng his behauiour and trade of lyfe towardes God and the world beyng entered into his sayd dignitie True it is that he was so throughly furnished withall properties qualities and conditions belongyng to a true Byshop as that it shal be very hard in these straunge dayes to finde many that so nearely resemble that liuely exemplar described by S. Paule the Apostle in his seueral Epistles to Titus and Timothée So farre he swarued from the common course of common Byshops in his tyme. But bicause the same is very well decipbred in the story at large it shall not be so néedefull to discourse all the partes therof in this place Yet may not this be forgotten That notwithstandyng the great charge now cōmitted vnto him The worthy Prelate gaue him selfe euermore to continuall study not breakyng the order that he vsed commonly in the Uniuersitie To wit by v. of the clocke in the mornyng in his study and so vntill ix continuyng in prayer and study From thence vntill dyner tyme to heare suters if the Princes affaires did not call him away committyng his temporall affaires aswell of houshold as other foreine busines to his officers For the most part hee would occupy him selfe in reformatiō of corrupt Religion and settyng forth true and sincere doctrine wherein he would associate him selfe alwayes with learned men for the siftyng boultyng out one matter or other for the commoditie and profite of the Church of England After dynner if any suters were he would diligently heare them and dispatch them in such sort as euery man commended his lenitie and gentlenes That done to his ordinary study agayne vntill fiue of the clocke whiche houre hee bestowed in hearyng common prayer After Supper he would consume an houre at the least in some godly conference and then agayne vntill it of the clocke at one kynde of study or other So that no houre of the day was spent in vayne but was bestowed as tended to Gods glory the seruice of his Prince or the commoditie of the Church As touching his affabilitie easines to be entreated it was such as that in all honest causes wherin his letter counsell or speach might gratifie either nobleman Gentlemā meane man or poore man no mā could be more tractable or sooner wonne to yeld Onely in causes appertainyng to God and his Prince no man more stoute more constant or more hard to be wonne as in that part his earnest defence in the Parlamēt house aboue thrée dayes together in disputyng agaynst the vi Articles of Gardiners deuise cā testifie And though the kyng would néedes haue them vpon some
the possession of the Realme not long after came to London and after she had caused first the two Dukes of Northumberland and Suffolke and their two children the Lady Iane and the Lord Guilford both in age tender and innocent of that crime to be executed She put the rest of the Nobilitie to their lines and forgaue them the Archbishop of Canterbury onely except Who though he desired pardon by meane of frendes could obtaine none in so much that the Quéene would not once â—ouchsafe to sée hym For as yet the old grudges agaynst the Archbyshop for the diuorcement of her mother remained hid in the bottome of her hart Besides this diuorce she remembred the state of Religion chaunged all which was reputed to the Archbishop as the chief cause therof While these thinges were in doing a rumor was in all mens mouthes that the Archbishop to curry fauour with the Quéene had promised to say a Dirige Masse after the old custome for the funerall of king Edward her brother Neither wanted there some which reported that he had already said Masse at Caunterbury whiche Masse in déede was sayd by Doct. Thornton This rumor Cranmer thinkyng spéedely to stay gaue forth a writing in his purgation the tenour whereof being set out at large in the booke of Actes and Monumentes I néede not here againe to recite This Bill being thus written and lying openly a window in his chamber coÌ„meth in by chaunce Maister Scory Bishop then of Rochester who after he had read and perused the same required of the Archbishop to haue a Copie of the Bill The Archbishop when he had graunted and permitted the same to Maister Scory by the occasion therof M. Scory lending it to some frend of his there were diuers Copies takeÌ„ out therof the thing published abroad among the common people in so much that euery Scriueners shop almost was occupied in writing and copying out the same and so at length some of those Copies comming to the Bishops handes so brought to the Counsell they sending it to the Commissioners the matter was knowen so he commauÌ„ded to appeare Whereupon Doct. Cranmer at his day prefixed appeared before the sayd Commissioners bringing a true Inuentorie as he was commauÌ„ded of all his goodes That done a Bishop of the Quéenes priuie Counsell being one of the sayd Commissioners after the Inuentorie was receaued bringing in mention of the Bill My Lord said he there is a Bill put forth in your name wherein you séeme to be agréeued with setting vp the Masse againe we doubt not but you are sorie that it is gone abroad To whom the Archbishop aunswering againe saying as I doe not deny my selfe to be the very Authour of that Bill or Letter so must I confesse here vnto you concerning the same Bill that I am sorie that the sayd Bill went from me in such sort as it did For when I had written it M. Scory got the Copie of me and is now come abroad and as I vnderstand the Citie is full of it For whiche I am sorie that it so passed my handes for I had intended otherwise to haue made it in a more large and ample maner mynded to haue set it on Paules Church doore and on the doores of all the Churches in London with mine owne feele ioyned thereto At whiche wordes when they saw the constantnesse of the man they dismissed him affirming they had no more at that present to say vnto him but that shortly hee should heare further The said Bishop declared afterward to one of Doct. Cranmers frendes that notwithstaÌ„ding his attainder of treason the Quéenes determination at that time was that Cranmer should onely haue bene depriued of his Archbishopricke and haue had a sufficient liuing assigned him vpon his exhibiting of a true Inuentorie with commaundement to kéepe his house without medlyng in matters of Religion But how that was true I haue not to say This is certaine that not long after this he was sent vnto the Tower and soone after condemned of treason Notwithstanding the Quéene wheÌ„ she could not honestly denie him his pardon seing all the rest were discharged and specially seing he last of all other subscribed to king Edwardes request that against his owne will released to him his action of treason and accused him onely of heresie which liked the Archbishop right well and came to passe as he wished because the cause was not now his owne but Christes not the Quéenes but the Churches Thus stoode the cause of Cranmer till at length it was determined by the Quéene and the Counsel that he should be remoned from the Tower where he was prisoner to Oxford there to dispute with the Doctours and Diuines And priuely word was sent before to them of Oxford to prepare them selues and make them ready to dispute And although the Quéene and the Bishops had coÌ„cluded before what should become of him yet it pleased them that the matter should be debated with Argumentes that vnder some honest shew of disputation the murther of the man might be couered Neither could their hastie spéede of reuengement abide any long delay and therfore in all hast he was caried to Oxford What this disputation was and how it was handled what were the questions and reasons on both sides and also touching his condemnation by the Uniuersitie the Prolocutor because sufficiently it hath bene declared in the storie at large we mynde now therefore to procéede to his finall iudgement and order of condemnation whiche was the xii day of September an 1556. and seuen dayes before the condemnation of Bishop Ridley and Maister Latimer After the disputations done and finished in Oxford betwene the Doctours of both Uniuersities and the thrée worthy Bishops Doct. Cranmer Ridley and Larymer senteÌ„ce condemnatory immediatly vpoÌ„ the same was ministred against them by Doct. Weston and other of the Uniuersitie whereby they were iudged to be heretickes and so committed to the Maior and Sheriffes of Oxford by whom hee was caried to Bocardo their coÌ„mon Gaile in Oxford In this meane tyme while the Archbishop was thus remainyng in duraunce whoÌ„ they had kept now in prisoÌ„ almost the space of thrée yeares the Doctours and Diuines of Oxford busied them selues all that euer they could about Maister Cranmer to haue him recant assaying by all craftie practises and allurementes they might deuise how to bring their purpose to passe And to the intent they might winne him easely they had him to the Deanes house of Christes Church in the sayd Uniuersitie where he lacked no delicate fare played at the bowles had his pleasure for walking and all other thinges that might bring him from Christ. Ouer and besides all this secretly and sleightly they suborned certaine men whiche when they could not expugne him by argumentes and disputation should by entreatie and fayre promises or any other meanes allure him to recantation perceiuyng otherwise what a great
seing that he wrote of the sacrament at king Charles request it is not like that he would write against the receiued doctrine of the church in those daies And if he had it is without all doubt that some learned man either in his tyme or fithens would haue written against him or at the least not haue commended him so much as they haue done Berengarius of himselfe had a godly iudgement in this matter but by the tiranity of Nicholas the 2. he was constrained to make a diuelish recantation as I haue declared in my first booke the 17. chapter And as for Iohn Wicklif he was a singuler instrument of God in his tyme to set forth the truth of christes gospell but Antichrist that sitteth in gods temple boasting himselfe as god hath by gods sufferance preuayled against many holy men and sucked the bloud of martirs these late yeres And as touching Martin Luther it semeth you be sore pressed that be faine to pray aide of him whom you haue hitherto euer detested The foxe is sore hunted that is faine to take his borow and the wolfe that is fayne to take the lions den for a shift or to run for succour vnto a beast which he most hateth And no man condemneth your doctrine of Transubstantiation and of the propiciatory sacrifice of the masse more seuerely and earnestly then doth Martin Luther But it appeareth by your conclusion that you haue waded so farre in rhetorike that you haue forgotten your logike For this is your argumeÌ„t Bertrame taught this doctrine and preuailed not Berengarius attempted the same and failed in his purpose Wickliffe enterprised the same whose teaching god prospered not therefore god hath not prospered fauoured it to be receiued at any tyme openly as his true teaching I will make the like reason The Prophete Osee taught in Samaria to the ten tribes the true doctrine of god to bring them from their abhominable superstitions and idolatry Ioell Amâ—s and Mitheas attempted the same whose doctrine preuailed not god prospered not their teaching among those people but they were condemned with their doctrine therefore god hath not prospered and fauoured it to be receiued at any tyme openly as his true teaching If you will aunswer as you must nedes do that the cause why that among those people the true teaching preuailed not was by reason of the aboundant superstition idolatry that blinded their eies you haue fully answered your own argument and haue plainly declared the cause why the true doctrine in this matter hath not preuailed these 500. yeares the church of Rome which all that time hath borne the chiefe swinge being ouerflowen and drowned in all kind of superstition and idolatry therfore might not abide to heare of the truth And the true doctrine of the sacrament which I haue set out plainly in my booke was neuer condemned by no councell nor your false papisticall doctrine allowed vntill the deuill caused Antichrist his sonne and heire Pope Nicholas the second with his monkes and friers to condemne the truth and confirme these your heresies And where of Gamaliels wordes you make an argument of prosperous successe in this matter the scripture testifieth how Antichrist shall prosper and preuaile against saintes no short while persecute the truth And yet the counsail of Gamaliel was very discrete and wife For he perceiued that God went about the reformation of religion growen in those dayes to idolatry hypocrisie and superstition through traditions of Phariseis and therfore he moued the rest of the Councell to beware that they did not rashly and vnaduisedly condemne that doctrine religion which was approued by God least in so doing they should not onely resist the Apostles but God himselfe which counsail if you had marked followed you would not haue done so vnsoberly in many things as you haue done And as for the prosperitie of them that haue professed Christ his true doctrine they prospered with the Papistes as S. Iohn Baptist prospered with Herode and our sauiour Christ with Pilate Annas and Caiphas Now which of these prospered best say you Was as the doctrine of Christ and S. Iohn any whit the worse because the cruell tirantes and Iewes put them to death for the same Winchester But all this set apart and putting aside all testimonies of the olde church and resortyng onely to the letter of the scripture there to search out an vnderstanding and in doyng therof to forget what hath bene taught hitherto How shall this author establish vpon scripture that he would haue beleued What other text is there in scripture that enâ—ountreth with these wordes of scripture This is my body wherby to alter the signification of them There is no scripture sayth Christ did not geue his body but the figure of his body nor the geuing of Christes body in his supper verily and really so vnderstaÌ„ded doth not necessarily impugne and contrary any other speach or doyng of Christ expressed in scripture For the great power and omnipotencie of God exclodeth that repugnance which mans reason would déeme of Christes departyng from this world and placing his humanitie in the glory of his Father Caunterbury THe Scripture is playne and you confesse also that it was bread that Christ spake of when he sayd This is my body And what nede we any other scripture to encounter with these words seyng that all men know that bread is not Christes body the one hauing sense and reason the other none at all Wherfore in that speach must nedes be sought an other sence meanyng then the wordes of themselues do geue which is as all olde writers do teach and the circumstances of the text declare that the bread is a figure and sacrament of Christes body And yet as he geueth the bread to be eaten with our mouthes so geueth he his very body to be eaten with our faith And therfore I say that Christ geueth himselfe truely to be eaten chawed and digested but all is spiritually with fayth not with mouth And yet you would beare me in hand that I say that thing which I say not that is to say that Christ did not geue his body but the figure of his body And because you be not able to confute that I say you would make me to say that you can confute As for the great power and omnipotency of God it is no place here to dispute what God can do but what he doth I know that he can do what he will both in heauen and in earth no man is able to resist his wil. But the question here is of his will not of his power And yet if you caÌ„ ioyne together these two that one nature singuler shal be here and not here both at one time and that it shal be gone hence when it is here you haue some stroÌ„g syment and be a cunning Geometrician but yet you shall neuer be good Logician that woulde
represented vnto vs his testament confirmed by his bloud And if the Papistes will say as they say in deed that by this cup is neither mēt the cup nor the wine cōtayned in the cup but that thereby is mēt Christs bloud contayned in the cup yet must they nedes graunt that there is a figure For Christes bloud is not in proper speach the new testament but it is the thing that confirmed the new Testament And yet by this strange interpretation the Papistes make a very strange speach more strange then any figuratiue speach is For this they make the sentence this bloud is a new Testament in my bloud Which saying is so fond and so far from all reason that the foolishnes therof is euident to euery man Winchester As for the vse of figuratiue speaches to be accustomed in scripture is not denyed But Philip Melancthon in an epistle to Decolampadius of the sacrament geueth one good note of obseruation in difference betwene the speaches in gods ordinances and commaūdementes and otherwise For if in the vnderstanding of Gods ordinaunces and commaundementes figures may be often receiued truth shal by allegories be shortly subuerted and all our religion reduced to significations There is no speach so playne and simple but it hath some peece of a figuratiue speach but such as expresseth the common playne vnderstanding and then the common vse of the figure causeth it to be taken as a common proper speach As these speaches drink vp this cup or eate this dish is in deed a figuratiue speach but by custome make so common that it is reputed the playne speach bicause if hath but one onely vnderstanding commonly receyued And when Christ sayd This cup is the new testament the proper speach therof in letter hath an absurditie in reason and fayth also But whan Christ sayd this is my body although the truth of the lytterall sence hath an absurditie in carnall reason yet hath it no absurditie in humilitie of fayth nor repugneth not to any other truth of scripture And seing it is a singuler miracle of Christ wherby to exercise vs in the fayth vnderstanded as the playne wordes signifie in their proper sence there can no reasoning be made of other figuratiue speaches to make this to be their fellow and like vnto them No man denieth the vse of figuratiue speaches in Christes supper but such as be equall with playne proper speach or be expounded by other Euangelestes in playne speach Canterburie I See well you would take a dong forke to fight with rather then you would lack a weapon For how highly you haue estemed Melancthō in tymes past it is not vnknowne But whatsoeuer Melancthon sayeth or how soeuer you vnderstand Melancthon where is so conuenient a place to vse figuratiue speeches as when figures and Sacraments be instituted And S. Augustine giueth a playne rule how we may know when Gods commādemēts be giuen in figuratiue speches yet shal neither the truth be subuerted nor our religion reduced to significations And how can it be but that in the vnderstanding of Gods ordinances commaundements figures must needes be often receaued contrary to Melancthons saying if it be true that you say that there is no spech so playne and simple but it hath some peece of a figuratiue speech But now be all speches figuratiue when it pleaseth you What need I then to trauaile any more to proue that Christ in his supper vsed figuratiue speches seyng that all that he spake was spoken in figures by your saying And these wordes This is my body spoken of the bread and This is my bloud spoken of the cuppe expresse no playne comon vnderstanding wherby the common vse of these figures should be equall with plain proper speches or cause them to be taken as common proper speches for you say your felf that these speches in letter haue an absurdity in reason And as they haue absurdity in reason so haue they absurdity in fayth For neither is there any reason fayth myracle nor truth to say that materiall bread is Christes body For then it must be true that his body is material bread a conuersa ad conuertentem for of the materiall bread spake Christ those words by your confession And why haue not these words of Christ This is my body an absurdity both in fayth and reason aswell as these words This cup is the new Testament seyng that these wordes were spoken by Christ as well as the other and the credite of him is all one whatsoeuer he sayth But if you will needes vnderstand these wordes of Christ This is my body as the playn wordes signify in their proper sence as in the end you seeme to do repugning therein to your owne former saying you shall see how farre you go not onely from reason but also from the true profession of the christian fayth Christ spake of bread say you This is my body appoynting by this word this the bread whereof followeth as I sayd before If bread be his body that his body is bread And if his body be bread it is a creature without sence and reason hauing neither life nor soule which is horrible of any christian man to be heard or spoken Heare now what followeth further in my booke Now forasmuch as it is playnly declared manifestly proued that Christ called bread his body and wine his bloud and that these sentences be figuratiue speches and that Christ as concerning his humanity bodily presence is ascended into heauen with his whole flesh and bloud and is not here vpon earth and that the substance of bread and wine do remayne still and be receaued in the sacrament and that although they remayne yet they haue changed their names so that the bread is called Christs body and the wine his bloud and that the cause why their names be changed is this that we should list vp our harts minds frō the things which we se vnto the things which we beleue be aboue in heauē wherof the bread wine haue the names although they be not the vey same things in deed these things well considered and wayed all the authorities and arguments which the Papists fayn to serue for their purpose be clean wiped away For whether the authors which they alleadge say that we do eat Christes flesh and drink his bloud or that the bread and wine is conuerted into the substance of his flesh and bloud or that we be turned into his flesh or that in the Lordes supper we do receiue his very flesh and bloud or that in the bread and wine is receiued that which did hang vpon the crosse or that Christ hath left his flesh with vs or that Christ is in vs and we in him or that he is whole here and whole in heauen or that the same thing is in the Chalice which flowed out of his side or that the same thing is receiued with out mouth which is
yea conteineth a nay in it naturally Therfore Christ saying it is his body sayth it is no bread If this forme of Argument were infallible then I may turne the same to you agayne and ouerthrow you with your own weapon thus S. Paule sayd it is bread Ergo it is not Christes body if the affirmation of the one be a negation of the other And by such Sophistication you may turne vp all the truth quite and cleane and say that Christ was neither God nor man bycause he sayd he was a vine bread And euery yea say you conteineth a nay in it naturally And where you boast that you haue conuinced me in the matter of the reall presence of Christes body I trust the indifferent Reader wil say that you triumph before the victorie saying that you haue wonne the field when in deede you haue lost it and when Golyathes head is smitten of with his owne sword But the old English Prouerbe is here true that it is good beating of a proude man for whē he is all to beaten backe bone yet will he boast of his victorie and bragge what a valiant man he is And it is an other vayne bragge also that you make whē you say that you haue shewed before that Christes wordes were not figuratiue when he sayd This is my body For you haue neither proued that you say nor haue aunswered to my proofes to the contrary as I referre to the iudgement of all indifferent Readers but you haue confessed that Christ called bread his body made demōstration vpon the bread when he sayd This is my body How can then this speach be true but by a figure that bread is Christes body seyng that in proper speach as you say euery yea conteineth a nay and the affirmation of one thyng is the deniall of an other And where you alledge as it were against me the wordes of Hylarie that there is both a figure and a truth of that figure for answere hereunto the truth is that your matter here is gathered of an vntruth that I would haue onely a figure where as I say playnly as Hylarie sayth that in the true ministration of the Sacrament is both a figure and a truth the figure outwardly and the truth inwardly For bread and wyne be sensible signes and Sacraments to teach vs outwardly what feedeth vs inwardly Outwardly we see and feele bread and wyne with our outward senses but inwardly by faith we see and feede vpon Christes true body and bloud But this is a spirituall feedyng by faith which requireth no corporall presence And here I aske you two questions One is this whither Hylarie say that the body of Christ is vnder the formes of bread and wyne and that corporally If he say not so as the Reader shall soone iudge looking vpon his wordes then stand I vpright without any fall or foyle for Hylarie sayth not as you do The other question is whither Hylarie doe not say that there is a figure let the Reader iudge also and see whither you be not quite ouerthrowen with your owne crooke in saying that Christes speach is not figuratiue And yet the third question I may adde also why S. Hylarie should say that bread and wine be figures if there be no bread nor wine there at all but be taken cleane away by transubstantiation And where as for aunswere hereto you take the example of Iacob who for his hearynes resembled Esau and was as you say a a figure of Christes very humanitie you doe like an vnskilfull Mariner that to auoyde a litle tempest runneth himselfe vpon a rocke For where you make Iacob who resēbled Esau and was not he in deede to be a figure of Christes humanitie you make by this example that as Iacob by his hearynesse resembled Esau and was not he in deede so Christ by outward apparence resembled a man and yet he was no man in deede And where you denye that these wordes of S. Paule is not the bread which we breake the communion of the body of Christ declare the meaning of Christes wordes this is my body because Christes wordes say you declare the substaunce and S. Paules wordes declare the vse I deny that Christes body is the substaunce of the visible Sacrament For the substaūce of the Sacramēt is bread and wine and the thing thereby signified is Christes body and bloud And this is notable which you say that these words the bread which we breake do signifie the whole vse of the Supper not onely breakyng but also blessing thankesgeuing dispensing receauyng and eatyng that bread in this place signifieth common bread taken to be consecrated In which saying it is a world to see the phantasies of mens deuises how vncertain they be in matters perteining to God How agreeth this your saying with your doctrine of transubstantiation For if S. Paule when he sayd the bread which we breake is it not the communion of Christes body ment by bread common bread and by breaking ment also the blessing thankesgeuing receauing and eating then is common bread broken blessed receaued eaten And then where becōmeth your transubstantiation yf cōmon bread be eaten in the Sacramēt And whē is the bread turned into the body of Christ if it remaine cōmō bread vntill it be eatē Yet now you seeme to begin some thing to sauour of the truth that the bread remaineth still in his proper nature enduring the whole vse of the Supper And as touching this place of S. Paule that God calleth things that be not as they were if it perteine vnto Sacrament where Christ called bread his body what could you haue alledged more against yourself For if in this place Christ call that which is not as it were then Christ called bread as it were his body and yet it is not his body in deede But in this your aunswere to the arguments brought in by me out of the very wordes of the Euangelistes is such a shamelesse arrogancie and boldnesse shewed as abhorreth all Christian eares for to heare which is that three Euāgelistes telling the maner of Christs holy Supper not one of them all doe tell the tale in right order but subuert the order of Christes doinges and sayinges and that in such a necessary matter of our Religiō that the diffinition of the whole truth standeth in the order The Euangelistes say you rehearse what Christ sayd and did simply and truely But is this a simple and true rehearsall of Christes wordes and deedes to tell them out of order otherwise then Christ did sayd them And S. Paule also if it be as you say speaking of the same matter cōmitteth the like errour And yet neuer no auncient authour expounding the Euangelistes or S. Paule could spye out this fault and in their Commentaries giue vs warning therof And I am not so ignoraunt but I haue many tymes read S. Augustine De doctrina Christiana where he sayth that
Eucharistia nourisheth our flesh and bloud by alteration which they could not do if no bread wine nor water were there at all But here is not to be passed ouer one exceeding great craft and vntruth in your translation that to cast a mist before the readers eyes you alter the order of Iustines wordes in that place where the pith of the matter standeth For where Iustine sayth of the foode of bread wine and water after the consecration that they nourish our flesh and bloud by alteration the nourishment which Iustine putteth after consecration you vntruly put it before the consecration and so wilfully and craftely alter the order of Iustinus wordes to deceaue the reader and in this poynt will I ioyne an issue with you Is such craft and vntruth to be vsed of Bishoppes and then in matters of fayth and religion wherof they pretend and ought to be true professors But I meruayle not so much at your sleights in this place seeing that in the whole booke through out you seeke nothing lesse then the truth And yet all your sleightes will not serue you for how can the foode called Eucharistia nourish before the consecration seeing it is not eaten vntill after the consecration The next author in my booke is Irene whome I alleadge thus Next him was Irenaeus aboue 150. yeares after Christ who as it is supposed could not be deceaued in the necessary poyntes of our fayth for he was a disciple of Policarpus which was disciple to S. Ihon the Euangelist This Irenaeus followeth the sense of Iustinus wholy in this matter and almost also his wordes saying that the bread wherein we geue thankes vnto God although it be of the earth yet when the name of God is called vpon it it is not than common bread but the bread of thankes geuing hauing two thinges in it one earthly and the other heauenly What ment he by the heauenly thing but the sanctification which cōmeth by the inuocation of the name of God And what by the earthly thing but the very bread which as he sayd before is of the earth and which also he sayth doeth nourish our bodies as other bread doth which we do vse Winchester Next Iustine is Irene in the allegation of whome this author maketh also an vntrue reporte how hath not this for mē of wordes in the forth booke contra Valentinum that the bread wherein we geue thankes vnto God although it be of the earth yet when the name of god is called vpon it is not thru common bread but the bread of thankes giuing hauing two thinges in it one earthly and the other heauenly This is Irene alleadged by this author who I say writeth not in such forme of wordes For his wordes be these Like as the bread which is of the earth receauing the calling of God is now no common bread but Eucharistia consisting of two thinges earthly and heauenly so our bodies receauing Eucharistian be no more corruptible These be Irenes wordes where Irene doth not call the bread receauing the calling of God the bread of thankes giuing but Eucharistia and in this Eucharistia he sheweth how that that he calleth the heauenly thinges is the body and bloud of Christ and therfore sayth in his fift booke When the chalice mixt and the bread broken receaue the word of God it is made Eucharistia of the body and bloud of Christ of which the substance of our flesh is stayed and increased And how say they that our flesh is not able to receaue gods gift who is eternall life which flesh is nourished with the body and bloud of Christ These be also Irenes wordes wherby appeareth what he ment by the heauenly thing in Eucharistia which is the very presence of Christes body and bloud And for the playne testimony of this fayth this Irene hath bene commonly alleadged and specially of Melancton to Decolampadius as one most auncient and most playnly testifying the same So as his very wordes truly alleadged ouerthrow this author in the impugnation of Christes reall presence in the Sacrament and therfore can nothing help this authors purpose agaynst Transubstantiation Is not this a goodly and godly entre of this Author in the first two authorities that he bringeth in to corrupt them both Caunterbury WHo seeth not that as you did before in Iustine so agayne in Irene you seeke nothing els but meare cauilations and wrangling in wordes Is not Eucharistia called in english thankes giuing If it be not tell you what it is called in English And doth not Iren say Panes in qup gratiae actae sunt that is so say bread wherein thankes be giuen what haue I offended then in englishing Eucharistiam thankes giuing Do not I write to English men which vnderstand not what this greeke word Eucharistia meaneth what greate offence is it then in me to put it into English that English men may vnderstaud what is sayde Should I do as you do put greeke for English and write so obscurely that English men should not know the authors meaning And do you not see how much the words of Ireneus by you aleadged make agaynst your selfe These be his wordes after your citation When the chalice mixt and the bread broken receaue the word of God it is made Eucharistia of the body and bloud of Christ of which the substance of our flesh is stayd and encreased Doth not Irene say here playnly that the chalice mixt and the bread broken after the word of God which you call the wordes of consecration is made Eucharistia of the body and bloud of Christ and not the body and bloud of Christ And sayth he not further that they stay and increase the substance of our bodies But how can those thinges stay and increase our bodies which be transubstantiated and gone before we receaue them And haue you forgotten now in Irene what you sayd in the next leafe before in Iustine that the alteration and nourishment by the foode of bread and wine was vnderstande before the consecration which you confesse now to be after the consecration And when you thus obscure the authors wordes peruerting and corrupting both the wordes and sences yet shall you conclude your vntrue dealing with these wordes concerning me Is not this a goodly and godly entres of this author in the first two authorities that he bringeth in to corrupt them both Now followeth Origene next in my booke Shortly after Ireneus was Origene about 200. yeares after Christs ascension Who also affirmeth that the materiall bread remayneth saying that the matter of the bread auayleth nothing but goeth downe into the bealy and is auoyded dounward but the word of God spoken vpon the bread is it that auayleth Winchester As for Origene in his owne wordes sayth the matter of the bread remayneth which as I haue before opened it may be graunted but yet he termeth it not as this author doeth to call it materiall bread When God formed Adam of clay
hath defyned and determined in this matter many thinges contrary to Christes words contrary to the old catholick church and the holy martirs and doctors of the same and contrary to all naturall reason learning and philosophy And the final end of al this Antichristes doctrine is none other but by subtilty and craft to bring christen people from the true honoring of Christ vnto the greatest idolatry that euer was in this world deuise as by Gods grace shal be plainly set forth hereafter Winchester It hath vene heard without fables of certaine men that haue liued and bene norished with sauors onely And in gold and certayne precious stones that they geue a kinde of nurriture to an other substance without diminution of their substance experience hath shewed it so and therefore the principle or maxime that this author gathereth hath no such absurdity in it as he noteth to say that substaunce is nourished without substance But when vermin by chaunce happen to deuour any host as I am sure they cannot violate Christes most precious body so what effect foloweth of the rest what néedeth it to be discussed If it nourisheth then doth that effect remaine although the substaunce be not there If euery nurriture must néedes bee of substaunce then would those that discusse those chances say the substaunce to returne but hell gates shall not make me speake agaynst my fayth And if I be asked the question whether the visible matter of the sacrament nourish I will answere yea Ergo sayth he there is substaunce I deny it He shall now from the effect to the cause argue by physicke I shall disproue the conclusion by the authority of faith who is it most méet should yeld to other And if in nature many things be in experience contrary to the generall rules why may not one singular condition be in this visible matter of the sacrament that the onely substaunce being chaunged all other partes properties and effectes may remayne Is it an absurdity for a mayde to haue a child because it is against the rules of nature Is it an absurdity the world to be made of nothing because the philosopher sayth Of nothing commeth nothing The principle of nature is that whatsoeuer hath a beginning hath an end and yet it is no absurditye to beléeue our soules to haue a beginning without end and to be immortall Wherefore to conclude this matter it is a great absurdity in this author to note that for an absurdity in our fayth which repugneth onely to the principles of phylosophy or reasō when that is onely to be accounted for an absurdity that should repugne to the scripture and gods will which is the standerd to try the rule of our fayth Howsoeuer reason or Phylosophy be offended it forceth not so gods teaching be embraced and persuaded in fayth which néedeth no such plaisters and salues as this author hath deuised to make a sore where none is and to corrupt that is whole Caunterbury MEn may here see what fayned fables be sought out to defend your errors and ignorance which is how so manifest that it appeareth you neuer read or els haue forgotten the very principles and diffinitions of Philosophy Of which this is one that nutrition is a conuertion of substance into substance that is to say of the meate into the substance of the thing that is fedde An other is thus Ex eisdem sunt nutriuntur omnia All thinges be nourished of thinges like themselues And so I graunt you that a man made of sauoures and a man made of the vertue of gold and precious stones may be nourished by the same bicause he is made of the same And yet it may be that some certayne sauor or the vertue of some precious stone may increase or continue some humor wherof a man may be nourished as we read of some men or certayne people that haue liued no small time by the sauonr of apples But still in your booke you crye fayth fayth and catholike fayth when you teach but your owne inuentions cleane contrary to the true catholike fayth and expresse worde of God And in all your arguments here you commit the greatest vice that can be in reasoning called Petitio principij taking that thing which is chiefly in controuersy to be a principle to induce your conclusion Fayth fayth say you where is no fayth but your bare faining I haue disproued your fayth by gods word by the vniuersall consent of all Christendome a M. yeares togither and you crye out still fayth fayth which is not the fayth of Christ but of Antichrist Let christen men now iudge who should yeld to other If you had proued your doctrine by fayth founded vpon Gods word I would condescend vnto you that it is no absurdity that accidents remayne when the substance is gone But gods word is clearly agaynst you not onely in your doctrine of transubstantiation but also in the doctrine of the reall presence of the eating and drinking and of the sacrifices of Christes flesh and bloud Winchester The best plaster and medicine that could now be deuised were to leaue a part questions and idle talke and meekly to submit our capacities to the true fayth and not to ouerwhelme our vnderstandinges with search and inquiry wherof we shall neuer finde an ende entring the bottomles secresy of Gods misteries Let vs not seeke that is aboue our reach but that God hath commaunded vs let vs do Each man impugneth an others learning with wordes none controleth in others liuing with better dedes Let all endeuour themselues to do that God commaundeth and the good occupation therof shall exclude al such idlenes as is cause and occasion of this vayne and noysome curiosity And now to returne to this author whiles he seeth a mate in an other mans iye he feeleth not a beame in his owne Who recommendeth vnto vs specially Theodoret whome he calleth an holy Bishop and with him doth bring forth a pece of an Epistle of S. Chrisostome The doctrine of which two ioyned with the doctrine of this author in such sence as this author would haue all vnderstanded to be called catholike touching the fayth of the sacrament hath such an absurdity in it as was neuer hard of in religion For this author teacheth for his part that the body of Christ is onely really in heauen and not indeed in the sacrament according wherunto this author teacheth also the bread to be very bread still which doctrine if it be true as this author will needes haue it then ioyne vnto it the doctrine of the secret Epistle of Chrisostome and Theodoret whose doctrine is that after the consecration that is consecrate shal be called no more bread but the body of Christ. By these two doctrines ioyned togither it shall apeare that we must call that is consecrate by a name that we be learned by this author it is not and may not by the doctrine of Theodoret call it by the name of the
or contrary to the Scripture or direct not the forme of life accordyng to the same then it is not the piller of truth nor the Church of Christ but the sinagogue of Sathan and the temple of Antichrist which both erreth it selfe and bringeth into errour as many as do folow it And the holy Church of Christ is but a small herd or flocke in comparison to the great multitude of them that folow Sathan and Antichrist as Christ him selfe sayth and the word of God and the course of the world from the begynnyng vntill this day hath declared For from the creation of the world vntill Noes floud what was then the open face of the Church How many godly men were in those thousand and sixe hundred yeares and moe Dyd not iniquitie begyn at Cain to rule the worlde and so encreased more and more that at the length God could no lenger suffer but drowned all the world for sinne except viij persons which onely were left vpon the whole earth And after the world was purged by the floud fell it not by and by to the former iniquitie agayne so that within few yeares after Abraham could find no place where he might be suffered to worshyp the true liuyng God but that God appointed him a straunge countrey almost clearely desolate and vnhabited where hee and a fewe other contrary to the vsage of the world honored one God And after the great benefites of God shewed vnto his people of Israell and the law also geuen vnto them wherby they were taught to know him and honor him yet how many tymes did they fal from him Did they not from tyme to tyme make them new Gods worshyp them Was not the open face of the Church so miserably deformed not onely in the wildernesse and in the tyme of the Iudges but also in tyme of the kynges that after the diuision of the kyngdome amongest all the kyngs of Iuda there was but onely three in whose tymes the true Religion was restored among all the kynges of Israell not somuch as one Were not all that tyme the true Priestes of God a few in number Did not all the rest maintaine Idolatry and all abhominatiōs in groues and mountaines worshippyng Baal and other false Gods And did they not murther and slea all the true Prophetes that taught them to worshyp the true God In so much that Helias the Prophet knowyng no mo of all the whole people that folowed the right trade but him selfe alone made his complaint vnto almightie God saying O Lord they haue slayne thy Prophetes and ouerthrowen thine aultars there is no mo left but I alone and yet they lye in wayte to flea me also So that although almighty God suffered thē in their captiuitie at Babylon no more but lxx yeares yet he suffered them in their Idolatry folowyng their owne wayes and inuentions many hundred yeares the mercy of God beyng so great that their punishment was short and small in respect of their long and greeuous offences And at the tyme of Christes cōmyng the hygh Priests came to their offices by such fraude simony murther and poysonyng that the like hath not bene often read nor heard of except onely at Rome And when Christ was come what godly religion found he What Annasses and Cayphasses what hypocrisie superstition and abhomination before God although to mens eyes thyngs appeared holy and godly Was not then Christ alone his Apostles with other that beleued his doctrine the holy true Church Although they were not so takē but for heretickes seditious persons blasphemers of God were extremely persecuted and put to vilanous death by such as accompted them selues were taken for the Church which fulfilled the measure of their fathers that persecuted the Prophets Upon whō came al the righteous bloud that was shed vpon the earth from the bloud of iust Abell vnto the bloud of Zachary the sonne of Barachie whom they slew betwene the Temple and the aultar And how many persons remayned constantly in the true liuely fayth at the tyme of Christes passion I thinke M. Smith will say but a very fewe seyng that Peter denyed Christ his Maister three tymes and all his Apostles fled away and one for hast without his clothes What wonder is it then that the open church is now of late yeares fallen into many errours and corruption and the holy church of Christ is secret and vnknowne seing that Sathan these 500. yeares hath beene let lose and Antichrist raigneth spoyling and deuouring the simple flocke of Christ. But as almighty God sayd vnto Helias I haue reserued and kept for mine ownne selfe seuen thousand which neuer bowed their knee to Baall so it is at this present For although almighty God hath suffered these foure or fiue hundred yeares the open face of his church to be vggely deformed and shamefullye defiled by the sects of the Papistes which is so manifest that now all the world knoweth it yet hath God of his manifold mercy euer preserued a good number secret to himselfe in his true religion although Antichrist hath bathed himselfe in the bloud of no small number of them And although the Papistes haue ledde innumerable people out of the right way yet the church is to be folowed but the Church of Christ not of Antichrist the church that concerning the fayth contayneth it selfe with in gods word not that deuiseth daily new artcles contrary to gods word The church that by the true interpretation of scripture and good example gathereth people vnto Christ not that by wrasting of the scripture and euill example of corrupt liuing draweth them away from Christ. And now forasmuch as the wicked church of Rome counterfayting the church of Christ hath in this matter of the sacrament of the blessed bodie and bloud of our sauior Christ varied from the pure and holy Church in the Apostles tyme and many hundred yeares after as in my booke I haue plainely declared manifestly proued it is an easy matter to discerne which church is to be folowed And I cannot but maruaile that Smith alleadgeth for for him Vincentius Lirenensis who contrary to D. Smith teacheth playnly that the canon of the Bible is perfect and fufficient of it selfe for the truth of the Catholicke fayth and that the whole church cannot make one article of the fayth although it may be taken as a necessary witnes for the receiuing and establishing of the same with these three conditions that the thing which we would establish thereby hath bene beleued in all places euer and of al men Which the Papistical doctrine in this matter hath not bene but came from Rome sins Beringarius time by Nicolas the ii Innocentius the third and other of their sort where as the doctrine which I haue set forth came from Christ and his Apostles and was of all men euery where with one consent taught and beleued as my book sheweth plainly
the spirite doe onely blesse or say well how shall he that occupieth the place of a priuate person say Amen to thy thanksgeuing for he perceiueth not what thou sayth Thou doost geue thankes well but the other is not edifie◠And not onely the ciuill law and all other writers a thousand and fiue hundred yeares cōtinually together haue expounded S. Paule not of preaching onely but of other Seruice sayd in the church but reason also geueth the same that if men be commaunded to heare any thing it must be spoken in a language which the hearers vnderstād or els as S. Paule sayth what auayleth it to heare So that the pope geuing a contrary commaundement that the people comming to the church shall heare they wer not what and aunswere they know not whereto taketh vpon him to commaunde not onely agaynst reason but also directly agaynst God And agayne I sayd whereas one sauiour Christ ordayned the Sacrament of his moste precious body and bloud to be receiued of all Christian people vnder the formes both of bread and wine and sayd of the cup drinke ye all of this the Pope geueth a cleane contrary commaundement that no lay man shall drinke of the cup of their saluation as though the cup of Saluation by the bloud of Christ pertayneth not to lay men And wherefore as Theophilus Alexandrinus whose works S. Hierome did translate about eleuē hundred yeares passed sayth that if Christ had bene crucified for the Deuils his cup should not be denied them yet the Pope denieth the cup of Christ to christen people for whome Christ was crucified so that if I should obay the Pope in these thinges I must needes disobay my sauior Christ. But I was aūswered hereto as commonly the Papistes do aūswere that vnder the forme of bread is whole Christs flesh and bloud so that whosoeuer receiueth the forme of bread receiueth aswell christes bloud as his flesh Let it be so yet in the forme of breade onely Christs bloud is not drunken but eaten nor receiued in the cup vnder forme of wine as Christ commaunded but eaten with the flesh vnder forme of bread and moreouer the bread is not the sacrament of his bloud but of his flesh only nor the cup is not the sacramēt of his flesh but of his bloud onely and so the pope keepeth from all lay persons the sacrament of their redemption by Christes bloud which Christ commaunded to geue vnto thē And furthermore Christ ordayned the sacrament in two kindes the one seperated from the other to be a representation of his death where his bloud was separated from his flesh which is not represented in one kind alone so that lay people receiue not the whole sacrament whereby Christes death is represented as he commaunded Moreouer as the pope taketh vpon him to geue the temporall sword or royall and imperiall power to kinges and princes so doth he likewise take vpon him to depose them frō their imperiall states if they be disobedient to him and commaundeth the subiectes to disobay their princes assoyling the subiects aswell of their obedience as of their lawfull othes made vnto their true Kinges and princes directly contrary to Gods commaundement who commaundeth all subiectes to obay their kinges or other rulers vnder them One Iohn Patriarche of Constātinople in the time of S. Gregory claymed superiority aboue all other bishops to whom S. Gregory writeth that therein he did iniury to his iii. brethren which were equall with him that is to say the bishop of Rome of Alexandria and of Antiochia which iii. were Patriarchall seas aswell as Constantinople and were brethren one to an other But sayth S. Gregory if any one shall exalt himselfe aboue all the rest to be the vniuersall Byshop the same passeth in pride but now the bishop of Rome exalteth himselfe not onely aboue all Byshops but also aboue all Kinges and Emperours and aboue the whole world taking vpon him to geue and take away to set vp and put downe as he shall thinke good And as the deuill hauing no such authority yet tooke vpon him to geue vnto Christ all the kingdomes of the world if he would fall down and worship him in like manner the Pope taketh vpon him to geue Empyres and Kingdomes being none of his to such as will fall downe and worship him and kisse his feete And moreouer his Lawyers and glosers so flatter him that they say he may commaund Emperours and Kinges to hold his stirrop when he lighteth vpon his horse and to be his footemen and that if any Emperour or King geue him any thing they geue him nothing but that is his owne and that he may dispense agaynst Gods word against the old and new Testament agaynst S. Paules Epistles and agaynst the Gospell And furthermore whatsouer he doth although he draw innumerable people by heapes with himselfe into hell yet may no mortall mā reproue him because he being iudge of all men may be iudged of no man and thus he sitteth in the temple of God as he were a God and nameth himselfe Gods Uicar and yet be dispenseth agaynst God If this be not to play Antichristes part I cānot tell what is Antichrist which is no more to say but Christs enemy and aduersary who shall sit in the temple of God aduauncyng himselfe aboue all other yet by hipocrisy and fayned Religion shall subuert the true Religion of Christ and vnder pretense and colour of Christian religion shall worke agaynst Christ and therefore hath the name of Antichrist Now if any man lift him selfe higher then the Pope hath done who lifteth him selfe aboue all the world or can bee more aduersary to Christ then to dispense agaynst Gods lawes and where Christ hath geuen any commaundement to cōmaunde directly the contrary that man must needes be taken for Antichrist But vntill the tyme that such a person may bee founde men may easly coniecture where to finde Antichrist wherefore seyng the Pope thus to ouerthrow both Gods lawes and mans lawes taketh vppon him to make Emperours and Kyngs to be vassals and subiectes vnto him specially the crowne of this Realme with the lawes and customes of the same I see no meane how I may cōsent to admit this vsurped power within this Realme contrary to myne othe myne obedience to Gods law myne allegeaunce and duetie to your Maiestie and my loue and affection to this Realme This that I haue spokē agaynst the power authoritie of the Pope I haue not spokē I take God to record and iudge for any malice I owe to the Popes person whom I know not but I shall pray to God to geue him grace that he may seeke aboue all thynges to promote Gods honour and glory and not to follow the trade of his predecessours in these latter dayes nor I haue not spoken it for feare of punishmēt and to auoyde the same thinkyng it rather an occasion to aggrauate then to diminish my trouble but I
of the Cardinalles Colledge in Oxford refused it Question of the kynges diuorce with Katherine Dowager Doct. Stephens and Doct. Foxe chief furtherers of the kynges diuorce Doct. Stephens D. Foxe Doct. Cranmer coÌ„ferryng together of the kynges cause Doct. Cranmers aunswere in the question of the kynges diuorce Doct. Cranmers deuise well lyked of The king troubled about the cause of his diuorce Doct. Cranmer sent for to the kyng in post Talke betwene the kyng and Doct. Cranmer The king troubled in coÌ„scieÌ„ce Doct. Cranmer excusing and disabling himselfe to the kyng Doct. Cranmer assigned by the kyng to searche the Scriptures in the cause of his diuorce The kyng first geuen to vnderstand that the Pope hath no authoritie to dispence with the word of God The kynges matter remoued from the popes Canon law to the triall of the Scriptures The kynges Mariage fouÌ„de by Gods word vnlawfull Doct. Cranmer with other sâ—nt to Rome Ambassadour to the Pope Arguing to the popes face that contrary to the word of God he had no power to dispense Doct. Cranmer made the popes Penitentiary Doct. Cranmer Ambassadour to the Emperour Conference betwene Byshop Cranmer and Cornelius Agrippa Doct. Cranmer made Archbyshop of Cant. 1. Tim. 3. Titus 1. The order of Doct. Cranmers study The gentle nature of Doctour Cranmer Doct. Cranmer stoute and constant in Gods cause Doct. Cranmer a stoute enemy agaynst the sâ—â— Articles Of this commyng of the I. Cromwell and the two Dukes to the Archbyshop ExaÌ„ple for Ecclesiasticall Pastours Archb. CraÌ„mer in displeasure about the imployng of Chauntrey landes The singular patience of this Archbyshop A story betwen the Archb. of Caunterbury a popish Priest his enemy The rayling of a popish Priest agaynst Doct. Cranmer Chersey â—â—yng for his kynseâ—â— to the Archb. The Priest sent for to the Archbyshop The Archbyshops wordes vnto the Parson The Priest coÌ„fesseth his fault to the Archb. The raâ—he tâ—â—ngeâ— of men sclaunderously speakyng â—uill by meÌ„ whoÌ„ they neuer knew nor saw before The Priestest aunswere The Masse Priest ignoraunt in the Scripture The giâ—e of popish Priests when they fauour not the Religion of a man they sclauÌ„der his person Euill will neuer sayd well The Archbyshop forgâ—â—eth and dismisseth the Priest The liberall doynges of this Archbyshop The Archbyshop clearyng all his debtes before his attainder The Archb. Cranmer euer constant in defence of Christs truth and Gospell The Archb. alone standeth in defence of the truth Bishop Heath and Byshop Skippe forsake the Archb. in the playne field The Archb. incensed by B. Heath and B. Skippe to geue ouer the defence of the Gospell The aunswere of the Archb. to Doct. Heath Skippe The Papistes busie to bryng the Archb. out of credit with the kyng The Archbyshop agayne accused to the kyng The kyng sent Syr Antony Deny at midnight for the Archb. The kynges wordes and aduise for the supportation of the Archbyshop The Archbyshops auÌ„swere to the kyng The kyngs fauourable care consideration towarde the Archb. of Cant. The kyng sendeth his â—â—gnet in the behalfe of the Archb. of Canterbury The Archbyshop beyng one of the Counsell made to staÌ„d at the Counsell chamber doore waityng Doct. Buttes the kings Phisition a frend of the Archb. The Archbyshop called before the Counsell The CouÌ„sel beyng set agaynst the Archb. hee sheweth the kyngs Kyng appealeth from them The kynges wordes to the Counsell in defence of the Archbyshop The Lordes of the Counsell glad to be freÌ„ds againe with the Archbyshâ—p The kyng a great supporter of Cranmer The Lord CroÌ„wels wordes to the Archbyshop The true and goâ—ly doctrine of the Sacrament in fiue bookes set forth by the Archb. of Canterbury An explication of StepheÌ„ Gardiner agaynst Cranmer Archbyshop of CaÌ„t. Manâ—taltameÌ„te repostum Iudicium paridis spraetaeque inniria matris Virg. AEneid 1. This Doctour Thornton was after the Byshop of Douer a cruell wicked persecuter This Byshop was Doctour Heath Byshop after of Yorkâ— Cranmer condemned of treason Cranmer released of treason and accused of heresie Cranmer had to Oxford Of this condeÌ„nation read in the last 〈◊〉 pag. 1554. The Archbyshop contented to recant Causes mouyng the Archbyshop to geue with the tyme. The Queenâ—s hart set agaynst Cranmer The Queene conferreth with Doct. Cole about Cranmers burnyng L. William of Thame L. ShaÌ„doys Syr Thomas Bridges Syr Iohn Browne appourted to be at Cranmers execution Cranmer writteth subscribeth the Articles with his owne handes Doct. Cranmer brought to D. Coles SerinoÌ„ Doct. Cranmer set vpoÌ„ a stage Doct. Coles Sermon deuided into three partes The summe effect of Doct. Coles Sermon at Oxford If Cole gaue this iudgement vpon Cranmer wheÌ„ hee had repented what iudgement is then to be geueÌ„ of Cole whiche alwayes hath pâ—â—dured in errour and neuer yet repented If all heretickes in England should be burned where should Doct. Cole haue bene ere now Lex non aequalitatis sed iâ—iquitatis No state in this earth so hye nor so sure but it may fall Doct. Cole encourageth the Archb. to take his death patiently 1. Cor. 10. Doct. Cole reioyseth in the Archbyshops conuersion bâ—t that reioysing lasted not long Dirâ—ges and Masses promised for Cranmers soule The teares of the Archb. Cranmer required to declare his fayth CraÌ„mer willing to declare his fayth The wordes of the Archb. to the people The Prayer of the Archb. The last words of exhortatioÌ„ of the Archb. to the people Exhortation to contempt of the world Exhortation to obedience Exhortation to brotherly loue Exhortation to rich meÌ„ of this world mouyng them to charitable almes Luke 18. 1. Iohn 3. The Archb. declareth the true coÌ„fession of his fayth without all colour or dissemblyng The Archb. reuoketh his former recantation and repenteth the same The Archb. refuseth the Pope as Christes enemy and Antichrist The Archb. standeth to his booke written agaynst Wincester The expectation of the Papistes deceaued The Popistes in a great chaffe agaynst the Archbyshop Cranmers aunswere to the Papistes Cranmer pulled downe from the stage Cranmer led to the fire The Archb. brought to the place of execution M. Ely refuseth to geue his haÌ„d to the Archb. The Archb. tyed to tht â—â—â—ke Cranmer putteth his right haÌ„d which subscribed first into the â—râ— The last wordâ— of Cranmer at his death The Friers lying report of Cranmer I would as much as may be do my due to the matter and him also The craft of winchester in the beginnyng The summe of the booke Because the author pretendeth a defence of the catholick faith it were reason to know what it is The effect of that this author calleth his faith Untrue report Bread wine water be not holy but holy tokens They be not bare tokens Christ is preseÌ„t in his sacramentes A catholike fayth Thus authors fayth hath no point of a catholike fayth Untrue report Scripture in letter fauoureth not thus autors fayth My doctrine is catholike by your owne description