my body And by this reason prooueth our Sauiour Christs bodie to be not spectrum or phantasma a ghost or phantasticall body as Marcion that monster blasphemed but a true body like vnto ours because the Sacrament is a figure of it which it could not be except it were a true body But the Papists doctrin in this point sauoreth strongly of Martions blasphemie for to say that Christs body is in heauen and earth yea and in infinite places of the earth at one instant and that the natural real body of Christ is vnder the formes of bread and wine without any forme quality or quantity of a body without breadth length or thicknes what is this but to make it no true body as Martion did And euen so S. Augustine intreating of Christs bodie saith Epist 57. ad Dardanum NaÌ„ spatia locorum tolle corporibus nusqueÌ„ erunt quia nusquam erunt non erunt Tolle ipsa corpora qualitatibus corporum non erit vbi sint ideo necesse est vt non sint i. for take from bodies the spaces of place they shal be no where and because they be no no where they be not at al. Take the bodies from the qualities of bodies there can be no place where they may be and therfore it must of necessitie be that they be not But the Papists attribute neither place nor qualitie to Christs bodie in the sacrament therefore by S. Augustines iudgement they make it no body and so as I said agrée in one with that monster Martian But to returne to my purpose and to shew that the fathers haue expounded those words of our sauiour Christ in that sense which I haue before declared Augustine saith I may expound that commaundement to be put in the signe Lib. cont Adunantum Maneche dist cap. 12. for our Lord did not doubt to say This is my body when he gaue a signe of his bodie In Psal 3. in 1. â—or 11. Again he admitted him Iudas to the feast wherein he commended and deliuered to his disciples a figure of his bodie and blood Ambrose saith De iis qui initiantur cap. 9. In eating and drinking we do signifie the bodie and blood of Christ which were offered for vs. Againe De Conseâ—ra dist 2. cap. Reuera before Consecration it is named an other kind after Consecration the bodie of Christ is signified The gréeke Fathers in like maner call the sacrament a signe figure or token of Christs body Gegory NazianzeÌ„ Apâ—lâ—g pâ—g 1◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 how dare he which first hath not offred himselfe a liuely sacrifice offer to God that outward sacrifice which is a signe or example of those great mysteries and the like he hath in his oration vpon his sister Gorgonia Basile saith Pag. 56. In Canâ—â—â—â—â—turgia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he hath left vnto vs memorials or remembrances of his passion by which commeth saluation which according to his commaundement we propound vnto you So Theodoritus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tell me therfore Dialog 2. those mysticall signes which of the priests bee offered to God of what things be they signes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Lords bodie and blood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of his true bodie or not of his true bodie or not of his true bodie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of his true bodie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 verie wel for an image must haue a patterne whereof it is an Image 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euen as Painters also do imitate nature and paint the images of those things that be séene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if then the diuine mysteries be signes or figures of a true bodie the bodie of our Lord is yet a bodie not changed into the nature of the godhead but replenished with diuine glory Homil. 27. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So saith Macarius In the Church is offered bread and wine examples of his flesh and blood These places that I alledge no moe sufficiently shew that it was not straunge to the godlie fathers to call this sacrament a signe token figure and example of Christs bodie and that they vnderstood these words This is my bodie in that sense the bread to be called Christs bodie because it is an holie signe example and pledge of Christs bodie offred vpon the crosse for vs. Now although I may seeme to haue sufficientlie spoken of the true sense and meaning of these words This is my bodie withall to haue opened the true doctrine of this sacrament yet because many men be not as yet satisfied in this point but the popish doctrine of Transubstantiation and carnall presence of Christs bodie vnder the formes of bread and wine sticketh still in their stomaks I haue thought it very néedfull further to prosecute this matter and more particularly and largely to confute the said errors and to lay open the nakednesse and weaknesse of them The false doctrine of the Papists concerning their Transubstantiation which they corruptly gather of those words of our Sauiour Christ consisteth in two speciall points the one in that they say that after the words of Consecration there remaineth no substance of bread and wine but onely the outward accidences thereof as whitenes roundnes c. The other that the very naturall bodie of Christ which was borne of the blessed virgin is there vnder the said formes of bread and wine As touching the first that there remaneth no substance of bread wine I say that this is contrary to the holy scriptures contrary to the writings of the auncient godly fathers contrarie to the iudgement of all our senses contrarie to the nature of a Sacrament lastly such a doctrin as bringeth with it many absurdities Matth. 26.29 That it is contrary to the scriptures I proue it thus Christ saith I wil drinke no more of the fruit of this vine vntill that day that I shall drinke it with you new in the kingdome of my father Our Sauiour Christ heere speaking of his supper and after his supper calleth it the fruit of the vine which is wine and not blood S. Paul saieth the bread which we break is it not the communion of the bodie of Christ 2. Cor. 10.16 S. Paul here not onely saith that bread is the Communion of Christs body but also saith Which we breake Now what do we breake onely accidences without a substance that is an absurd follie or doe we breake Christs body as Pope Nicolas with his counsell compelled that learned man Berengarius to affirme Dâ— Consec dist 2. cap. Ego Berengarius but that is wicked blasphemie Therefore it is manifest that that which is broken is bread and that bread broken is the communion of the bodie of Christ that is as I before declared a Sacrament and pledge vnto vs of our spirituall and yet
vnderstand that which I haue spoken You shall not eate this bodie which you sée nor drinke that blood which they shall shead that crucifie mée I commend vnto you a certaine sacrament which being spiritually vnderstood shall quicken you For although it must of necessity be visiblie celebrated yet it must inuisibly be vnderstood Iustinus Martyr saith Iustinus Apol. 2 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pag. 162. that the substance of the sacrament is turned into vs and that thereby our flesh and blood is nourished But it were a great absurdity to say that our flesh and blood is nourished of Christs bodie and blood conuerted into them Therefore it is bread wine which be turned into vs and whereby we are nourished By these places that I alledge no more it is as cleare as the sunne that the godly fathers did nothing at all doubt of this our doctrin but were of this iudgement that the substance of bread and wine remaine still in the sacrament Now it followeth that I shew that this doctrine of the Papists is contrary to the nature of a sacrament the which sufficiently appeareth by that which is before declared for I shewed that a sacrameÌ„t consisteth of two things an earthly and an heauenly the signe the thing signified and that there must be a similitude and agréement betwéene these two or else as I alledged out of Augustine it can be no sacrament Epis 13. for as bread and wine féede strengthen and comfort mans heart and bodie so Christs bodie and blood féed strengthen and comfort our soules Now if there be no bread nor wine then it cannot féede strengthen and comfort vs and then it hath no similitude and agréement with Christs bodie and blood and so by consequent according to Augustines iudgement it is no sacrament And thus the Papists striuing through blinde ignorance to take bread and wine from the sacrament do indéede take away the sacrament it self and so haue nothing but an Idole of their owne Now it remaineth that I proue it to be contrarie to the iudgement of our senses the which néedeth no proofe for who knoweth not that to the eie it is bread and wine to the taste it is breade and wine to the féeling and smelling it is breade and wine and not the body blood of Christ Therefore I conclude that it is bread wine But here me thinke I heare some Papists exclaiming and saying phy for shame that you should vse such Arguments to measure these mysteries by the externall iudgement of our senses I answere that I am nothing at al ashamed of this argument séeing that the best disputer that euer was in the world and that most mightily maintained the truth and confounded his aduersaries vsed the same which was neither Chrisippus nor Aristotle but Iesus Christ the son of God for when he appeared after his resurrection to his disciples and they were abashed affraid Luke 24 37. Ioh. 20 2â— supposing they had séene a spirit he said vnto them why are ye troubled wherefore do doubts arise in your hearts 17. behold my hands my féete for it is I my self Handle me and see for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as yee sée me haue Here we sée that our sauiour proueth by séeing and handling his bodie to be no spirit but a true bodie The same reason doth Tertullian vse against that monster Martion of whom I before spake his words be these Hic primum manus ei iniectas animaduertens Lib. 4. adueâ—â— Martionem necesse habeo iam de substantia eius corporali prefinire quòd non possit phantasma credi qui contactum quidem violentia plenum detentus captus ad precipitium vsque protractus admisserit i. I considering that heere first hands were laid vpon him Christ I must of necessitie determine of his Corporall substance Luk. 4. that he cannot bée thought to be a spirit or ghost who being detained and kept and brought euen vnto the steypie place suffered himselfe so violently to be handled and to that purpose immediatly after alledgeth a verse of Lucretius Tangere enim tangi nisi corpus nulla potest res i. Nothing can touch and be touched but a bodie Therfore either our sauiour Christ and Tertullian vsed a reason that hath no reason which I trust our aduersaries will not say or else our reason is verie strong that trie it by touching séeing tasting and it will appeare to be bread And so much the stronger is this reasoÌ„ for that our said aduersaries caÌ„not shew one example in all the scriptures where one substance by Gods mighty power being changed into an other there was not also an outward change of the qualities and properties thereof to be deserued by the outward senses As when Moses rodde was chaunged into a serpent Exod. 4.3 it was not onely in substance but also in externall shew a serpent so that Moses for feare fled from it Exod. 7.21 When the water in Egypt was turned into blood it was blood not onely in substance but also in external appearance to the eye tast so that the Egyptians could not drinke of it Iohn 2.9 When our sauiour Christ had in Cana of Galile turned the water into wine the gouernour of the feast as soone as he tasted it perceiued it to be verie good wine And therefore this should séeme to be very straunge that here should be such a chaunge or transubstantiation as they terme it of one thing into another and no alteration of any outward qualities to be discerned by the iudgement of the senses This were contrarie to Gods working in all other myracles So that it is hereby euident that this is no such myracle as they imagine as also Augustine flatly affirmeth in his third Booke and 10. Chapt. of the Trinitie Aug. de mirabâ—â— libus Script And the same Augustine writing a particuler booke of all the myracles in the scriptures maketh no mention at all hereof by these reasons before alledged it doth I trust plainely appeare that the substance of bread wine in the sacrament do remaine and continue well then say the Papists it is but bread and we may receiue it as onely a péece of bread Nay not so we teach and beléeue Iustinus Apog 2 Ireneus lib. 4. cap. 34. that it is not to compted nor receiued as common bread and wine but a sacrament of Iesus Christ a seale of Gods promises yea and an effectual instrument of Gods grace whereby Iesus Christ with his righteousnes and al other benefits of his passion is offred vnto vs. And to make this matter more plaine by an example euen as the Queenes maiesties seale ioyned to her Letters pattents is in substance waxe stil but yet not to be reputed as commoÌ„ waxe but to be reuerenced as her maiesties seale and it and the said Letters pattents to the which it is ioyned carry a power
Fathers did teach touching the two natures of the deitie and humanity in our Sauiour Christ that they are neither to be distracted a sunder and seperated as did Nestorius nor the properties of them to be confounded as did Eutiches but the said properties are to be distinguished Euen so are we to deale in this matter of the sacrament concerning the signe and thing signified that neither they are to be distracted a sunder deuided nor to be confounded â—ogether but to be distinguished The sign which is the bread and wine are things visible and corruptible which wil in short time putrifie Iesus Christ the thing signified is to our outward eyes inuisible and is incorruptible The bread and wine are vpon earth Iesus Christ is in heauen at the right hand of God The bread wine are receiued with our mouthes broken with our téeth and féede our bodies Iesus Christ is fide digerendus saith Tertullian Tertull. de resurrect carnis receiued and eaten by faith féedeth our soules to liue to God eternally The bread and wine are receiued of all both faithfull and vnfaithfull godly and wicked Iesus Christ is onely receiued of them who be faithful Ephes 3. in whose hearts he dwelleth by faith They that do eate the bread and wine do die not onely this outward death but also many die eternally Iohn 9.51 but he that eateth this bread that came downe from heauen which is Iesus Christ himselfe shal liue for euer Thus a difference is to be put betwéene the externall sacrament and Iesus Christ of whom it is a SacrameÌ„t And yet we must not distract seperate altogether Iesus Christ from the sacrament but beléeue that he is truely offered to all and effectually receiued of those that be gods children and haue a true faith which is the very mouth of the soule whereby they eate his flesh drinke his blood as Christ saith Iohn â— 35 I am the bread of life he that commeth to me shall neuer hunger and he that beléeueth in me shall neuer thirst Now I will onely shew briefly the vncertainty of this doctrin of Transubstantiation Lib. 4. dist 11. cap. Si autem and so I will end this discourse Peter Lombard the master of the sentences writeth thus Si autem quaeritur qualis sit illa conuersio an formalis an substantialis vel alterius generis definire noÌ„ sufficio formalem tamen non esse cognosco quia species quae ante fuerant remanent i. If it be asked what kinde of conuersion that is whether formal or substantiall or of any other kind I am not able to define But yet I know that it is not a formal conuersion because that the formes and shewes which were before do still remaine Afterward he addeth some think that it is a substantiall conuersion saying that one substance is so coÌ„uerted into an other substance that the one is essentially made the other to the which sense the fore alledged authorities do séeme to consent But some do not graunt that the substance of bread is at any time made the flesh of Christ Others be graunt that that which was bread or wine after consecration is the body and blood of Christ Some doe say thus that that conuersion is so to be vnderstoode that vnder those accidences vnder which before was the substance of bread and wine after consecration is the substance of the body blood but others haue thought that the substance of bread and wine doe there remaine and that there also is the body and blood of Christ Hitherto the master of all the Popish schoolemen whose booke of Sentences was of such credite and autority with them that it was more read expounded then the holy bible Whereby wée may plainely sée how vncertaine this their doctrine is and what diuers opinions haue bene of it So Gabriel Byell Gab. Biell in exposit Canonis Missae lect 40. an other great scholeman writeth thus Quomodo ibi sit Christi corpus an per conuersionem alicuius in ipsum an sine conuersione incipiat enim corpus Christi cum pane manentibus substantia accidentibus panis non inuenitur expressum in canone Bibliae Vnde de hoc antiquitus fuerunt diuersae opiniones .i. How the body of Christ is there whether by conuersion of some thing into it or without conuersion there beginne to the body of Christ with the bread the substance and accidences of the breade remaining still it is not found expressed in the canon of the bible Whereupon in old time there were diuers opinions hereof And afterward he rehearseth foure Besides this what if Iohn Fisher bishop of Rochester a great patrone of the Pope and his doctrine doe flatly confesse that this presence of Christs body and blood in the sacrament cannot be proued by the scriptures Ioh. Roffens Episc in defentio Regiae assertionis cont captiuit Babilonicam M. Lutheri N. 8. O. Whose words be these Hactenus Mattheus c. Hitherto Matthew who onely maketh mention of the new Testament neither is there any word here set downe whereby it may be prooued that in our masse there is made a true presence of Christs bodie and blood for although Christ made of the breade his flesh and of the wine his blood it doth not therefore follow that we by vertue of any word here set downe can doe the like when we attempt the same Again he saith Non potest per vllam scripturam probari c. It cannot be proued by any scripture that either a layman or priest as often as he attempteth the same can in like manner make of bread and wine the bodie and blood of Christ as Christ himselfe made séeing this is not conteined in the scriptures And again he concludeth this matter thus Ibid. Ex iis opinor c. By these things I suppose euery man perceiueth that the certenty of this matter depeÌ„deth not so much of the gospel as of the vse and custome which so many ages hath bene commended vnto vs from the verie first fathers Héere by the iudgement of Bishop Fisher this doctrine of Transubstantiation and reall presence dependeth not so much vpon the Gospel as vpon custome that it cannot be proued by the Scriptures whereby we may sée how vncertaine it is So that we may say with Tertullian Nihil de eo constat Lib. de carne Christi quia Scriptura non exhibet .i. We know nothing thereof because the Scripture doth not shew it And againe Lib. de monogamia Negat scriptura quod non notat .i. The scripture doth deny that which it doth not expresse wherefore let vs forsake this doubtful doctrine yea this erronious absurd and false doctrin and let vs imbrace the truth before declared let vs not séeke Christ here vpon earth but let vs lift vp our hearts into heauen there by faith eate Christs blessed body that was offred and drinke his
by words and externall signes If it be by words committed to writing for continuance we vse to those writings wherein be contained graunts couenants to put seales which serue for the further ratifying confirming of them If a man take possession of a peece of ground he doth it not only by vttering certaine words but for further confirmation thereof he diggeth vp and taketh a clod or péece of earth in his hand If a man make a promise to do this or that he doth it not onely by words and spéech but for ratifying thereof giueth his hand When a King or Quéene take vpon them the gouernement of a kingdome they do it not onely by certaine words but also they haue a crowne set vpon their head and a septer put in their hand which be outward signes and tokens of that dignitie dominion which they receiue And thus commonly wée deale in all other matters Whereby we sée and plainely perceiue that our gratious God hauing in mercy respect to our infirmitie as it were humbling himself to our capacity doth vse the like meanes in offring to vs our saluation in Iesus Christ that we vse in these earthly matters and affaires that is to wit his word wherin be contained his swéet promises of mercy 2. Cor. 6.16 that he will be our God and we his people that he will bée mercifull to our iniquities Heb. 8 â—0 12. neuer remember our sins any more sacrameÌ„ts which being outward signes elements he doth annex vnto his word to seale those promises the more effectuallie to confirme them vnto our consciences Hereby as I said we may learn the true nature and vse of Sacraments which is to seale confirme gods promises vnto vs thereby to strengthen our faith in them and to be gages and pledges to vs of our saluation in Christ Iesus For this cause it is said that Iesus tooke bread It now followeth And when he had blessed c. The papists by blessing vnderstand consecrating and by coÌ„secration they meane a conuerting by the speaking of certeine wordes of one thing into another But this is not true consecration but rather a magicall incantation neyther can they shewe any good Latine writer that euer vsed this Latine word Consecrare in such sense but it signifieth to dedicate a thing to a holy vse And so we do consecrate the sacrament when by preaching gods word rehearsing the institutioÌ„ of Iesus Christ and calling vpon God by prayer we do take the bread wine from a common vse to be a sacrament of Christs bodie and blood giuen for vs to be a seale of Gods promises and a pledge of our saluation in Christ Iesus This is our consecration which is true consecration as for their secreat whispering of certain words to turne one thing into another we will none of it we are content they vse it which is more méete for wicked coniurers then godly Christians But in this place by blessing is ment nothing els but thanksgiuing as most plainelie appeareth in the next verse for wheras it is said that Christ taking the bread did blesse in the verse following it is said that he taking the cuppe gaue thankes And whereas S. Matthew S. Marke say that he taking the bread blessed Matth. 26 2â— Mark 12.22 Luk. 22.19 1. Cor. 11.24 S. Luke and S. Paul say that he gaue thanks Wherby it most plainly appeareth that blessing and thanksgiuing is al one the which also is euident by that saying of S. Paul 1. Cor. 14.16 when thou blessest in the spirit how shall he that occupieth the roome of the vnlearned say Amen at thy giuing of thanks séeing he knoweth not what thou saiest heere it is most plaine that which S. Paul in the former part calleth blessing in the latter he calleth thansgiuing So that our sauiour Christ when he blessed gaue thanks to his heauenly father And as our Sauiour did neuer tast any of Gods creatures but always as the Gospel sheweth he gaue thanks to God his father to teach vs that we should walke in his steps and whensoeuer we receiue or inioy any of Gods benefites alwaies to giue God thanks for them from whose hand gratious goodnes we do receiue them so here at this time no doubt but our sauiour Christ had a further respect giueth thaÌ„ks to his father for his great infinite mercy to mankind for that great wonderful work of our redemption which he was then ready to accomplish Whereby we haue in like manner to learne that as we ought to giue God most hearty thankes for all good giftes which he giueth vs al benefits that he bestoweth vpon vs so when we come to this holy Supper of Iesus Christ wée ought to consider on the one side our owne mysery by sinne how that we be of our selues childreÌ„ of wrath enimies of gods grace vnprofitable seruants yea prodigall children which are not worthie to be called or counted Gods children on the other side gods great and infinite mercy who spared not his owne deare sonne but gaue him for vs to redéeme vs and reconcile vs to his mercy and to be a spiritual foode to norish vs to eternall life Of these inestimable mercies wée ought most specially when we come to this holy table to bée mindfull and to giue God most harty thanks for them Not onely in sounding forth the praises of God with our tongues but also in indeuoring carefully to yéeld holy obedience to God in our liues And for this cause the godly fathers called this sacrament Eucharistia which doth signifie thanks giuing for that it being a pledge of our redemption saluation by Iesus Christ we should when we receiue it giue thanks vnto god for the same The which I beséech you as at all times so specially when yée come to this holy mistery diligeÌ„tly for to do Xenoph. lib. 1 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The old Persians condemned no sin more greatly nor punished none more seuerely then vnthankfulnes If therefore we be not sincerely thaÌ„kful to God for his great mercies powred vpoÌ„ vs by Iesus Christ we shal not escape his fearefull and terrible plagues It followeth He brake it and gaue it to his disciples c. The breaking of the bread doth set forth vnto vs the breaking of Christs body the powring of the wine the shedding of his blood vpon the crosse for vs for this sacrament is as it were a glasse for vs to beholde Christ crucified in hereunto we must apply all the holy actions vsed in the administration thereof So the giuing of the bread and wine representeth vnto vs the giuing of Iesus Christ for vs once vpon the crosse for our redemption and dayly to be a spiritual food to nourish vs to eternall life The receiuing also of the bread and wine into our bodies doth signifie shew vnto vs our inward receiuing of Iesus Christ into our hearts