washing hath a farther and higher end then only to cleanse the body That speache therefore wherein Christ commaÌ„deth his flesh to be eateÌ„ is figuratiue not that we should denye the true eating of his flesh but because that eating is referred to a greater purpose then to the feeding of the body for Christes flesh is meate in dede that is to say is eaten in dede as I shal proue vpon that place but it is not eaten only that it should be corporalâ—…y receaued but to th end we should partake of the spirit and godhead which is in it and so by the merit of that flesh really present in vs obteyn life euerlasting with it now from what a worthy meaning wold these figuratiue Gospellers bring the words of our sauiour whose hard harts I beseche God to mollify that when they heare the truthe their stomake do not kendle to maynteine their old fashon beâ—…ore they haue well loked about them rather choosing to confesse a fault and to amend it then to make a new synne by myssexcusing the former fault ¶ Christes slesh being meate in dede must nedes be really receaued into our bodyes HE that wil know exactly why the flesh of Christ is called meate in dede must put before his eies three thinges The first is that the Iewes hearing Christ say he wold geue them his flesh asked how he could geue it to be eaten The second is that although Christ answered not directly to their captious how and vnsaythful question yet he sayd the eating of his flesh to be necessary for them as without the whiche they could not haue life and profitable as whereby they shold haue euerlasting life that not in their soules only but also in their bodies for so much as he wold reise them vp in the last day after whiche two things well pondered the third is to marke that Christ confirmeth all these former sayings of his by suche wordes as geue a reason of them for my flesh saith he is meate in dede and my blood is drinke in dede as if he had sayd wonder not yâ— my flesh geueth you life euerlasting reiseth vp your bodies for it is meate in dede that is to say it hath truly in dede those proprieties which any man wold wish for in true meate Two thinges may be considered in meate the one that it is trulie receaued into the body of that liuing creature for whose vse it is appointed the other that it is receaued as a medicine whiche may preserue vs against death for meate is neither properly attributed vnto the feeding of the sowle but only by a metaphor and an vnproper speache neither is it worthy to be called true meat if it gene not a true remedie against death there fore when Christ saith My flesh is meate in dede he meaneth thus my flesh bothe shal be receaued into the verie bodies of my people and shall geue life euerlasting as well to their bodiâ—…s as to their soules â–ª the whiche interpretation S. Chrysostom maketh writing thus Quid significat c. what meane these words my flesh is meate in deede and my blood is truly drinke either it meaneth that flesh to be the true meate whiche saueth the soule or els he speaketh it to confirm them in the former wordes Nâ—… obscurè locutum in parabolis arbitrarentur sed scirent omnino necessariuÌ„ esse vt corpus comederent that they should not thinke him to haue spokeÌ„ in parables darkely but that they should know it to be by all meanes necessary to eate his body thus far S. Chrysostom By whiche interpretation Christ geueth a reason both of his first wordes wherein he sayd the bread which I wil geue is my flesh and of the second when he sayd he that eateth my flesh hath life euerlasting for my flesh is meate in deede both in that respect that it shal be geuen to you as true meate is wont to be deliuered to them who truly take and truly eate it and also in that respect that it nourisheth truly as true and eâ—…erlasting meate ought to nourishe he that denieth any one sense of the twaine deuieth one veritie of the ghospell he that graunteth both senses must needes graunt that the true eating of the flesh standeth not for eating truly the signe of flesh because he spake not obscurely nor in parables as S. Chrysostom affirmeth and yet it is an obsâ—…nre saying to put flesh for materiall bread or eating for beleuing it is a parabolicall speache if when flesh blood eating and drinking is named yet we shal â—…derstand that bakers bread must be eaten and wyne drunken and Christ must be loued beleued vppon these parables neither Christ thought of nor the Fathers knew If Adam had not synned the opinion of ancient doctors is that notwithstanding his body consisted of contrarie elements by whose continual fight and battail it should naturally haue drawen to corruption and dissolution yet through the maruelouse grace of God saith S. Augustine his body shoâ—…lo haue bene far from disseases from old age from death from all corruption by tasting of the wood of life whiche was in yâ— middest of paradise Tanquam caetera essent alimento illud Sacramento vt sic fuisse accipiatur lignum vitae in paradyso corporali sicut in spiritali hoc est intelligibili paradyso sapientia Dei de qua scriptum est Lignum vitae est omnibus amplectentibus eam So that other meates in paradise were to nourish Adam corporally the word of life was also in stede of a mysterie or Sacrament to th' end the word of life should be vnderstanded to be after such sort in the corporal paradise as the wisedom of God is in the spiritual paradise which is atteined to by only vnderstanding the which wisedom of God as it is writen thereof is the wood of life to all that embrace it As now the wood of life which should haue preserued man froÌ„ incorruption was to be bodily tasted of and yet to worâ—…e a Sacramentall and spirituall effect in preseruing mans body aboue al course of a corrutible nature so is it meant that Christes flesh which is in dede the wood of life should be a SacrameÌ„t vnto vs by the corporall eating and spiritual working thereof for bothe these canses together it is called meate in dede Take a way yâ— corporall tasting of Christes body and charitie â—…aith hope or any like vertue is proportionably in his degree meat in dede or drinke in dede as the SacrameÌ„t of Christes supper is For all those vertues coming from God feed vs in dede to life euerlasting therefore haue that second proprietie of trut meat which is to nourish for euer But they haue not yâ— first proprietie which is to be receaued after an external maner into our bodies To this externall maner Christ had also respect when he â—…ayd My flesh is meat in dede or
Iudas saith Panem cui tradidit ipse Qui panis tradendus erat to whom Christe himselfe gaue bread the whiche bread was to be betraied See the bread that Christ gaue it was not euery bread not the substance of coÌ„mon bread but euen that bread in substance which was betraied for vs to death For Christ is bread geuing himself to Iudas he gaue the same bread that was betraied except any other thing was betraied for vs beside Christ. I might surely bring a maruelouse number of suche testimonies all which declare the name of bread whiche is attributed to the body of Christ after consecration not to signifie materiall or wheaten bread as it was before the blessing and pronouncing of the words but to describe that meat that food that true Manna which is only the flesh of Iesus Christ eaten vnder the forme oâ—… common bread And that kinde of bread is neuer named without an article or pronoune ioyned with it Whereby the excellency of the bread is witnessed the difference of it from common bread It is called in S. Mathew supersubstantiall bread in S. Iohn the bread which is flesh and in S. Paul the bread which who so eateth vnworthely he is gilty of the body of Christ which is as much to say as that kind of bread is the body of Christ. ¶ The presence of the body and blood of Christ in his last supper is proued by the conference of holy scriptures taken out of the old Testament FRom Adam to S. Iohn Baptist all the faithfull people of God was both in continuall expectation of the coming of Iesus Christ partly foreshewed in dedes by holy figures and pagents partly foretolde in words by the spirite of prophecie what should afterward be done by Christ him self and be obserued in his kingdom the church After which sort the brasen serâ—…ent betokened the death of Christ and Ionas his resurrection The figures by the way of doing commended the same truth to the eyes which the prophecies by the way of speaking dyd set forth to the eares Which two senses are the chief meanes whereby we atteine to knowledge in this life And because both figures and prophecies are obscure darke and vnpleasant vntill they be fulfilled I thought best not tâ—… speake of them before I had declared the true meaning of that gift whiche Christ made at his last supper Now it remaineth yâ— we briefly conferre the one with the other shewing that sense of Christes wordes which the Catholiks defend to be agreable to suche old shadowes figures prophecies as apperteined to the SacrameÌ„t of the altar For to the Iewes as S. Paul affirmeth all things chanced in figures And Christ saith all things must nedes be fulfilled which are spoken of him in the law Psalmes and Prophetes ¶ The figure of Abel ABell the first shepherd Priest Martyr and perpetuall virgin made a sacrifice of the first begotten of his flocke and of the fat of them which God shewed him self to accept by sending down fier from heauen Abel then hauing first offered him self vnto God vnder the shape of other thinges afterward went forth to be offered in his owne person and shape being â—…aiterously put to death by his brother Cain with a deadly â—…ripe of a wodden club or stake whose blood the earth opening her mouth receaued into her bowels and from thence it cryed to God The prince of shepherdes the chief Priest greate martyr and witensbeaâ—… to al truth the flower and garland of all virginitie is Iesus Christ God and man whose flocke the faithful men are The first begoâ—…eÌ„ and fatte of them is the flesh and blood which Iesus â—…oke of the virgin Marie which flesh and blood he first offered to God by wil and affection when he toke into his hands bread and wiâ—…e within a certaine parler vpon mounte Sioâ—… where he did eate the Paschal lambe with his Apostles And God shewed him selâ—…o to accept that intent of the sonne of man by working with the consuming fiex of his Diuinity that marucilouse grace which turned the substance of bread and wine into yâ— substance of Christes own flesh and blood And from that place Christ went forth ouer the brook of Cedron to be offered in his owne person and shape betraied by Iudas and put to death vpon the wood of the crosse by his own brethren the Iewes whose blood the Church called forth from among both Iewes and gentils with al due honour receaueth into her mouth bowels whence it geueth a better crie then the blood of Abell did from the earth where it lay Abel vnder the sigâ—…e of his Lambes did by will and affection consecrate the same truth of his body and soule to God which at yâ— tyme of his death he actually rendred and gaue vp into the handes of his maker And surely if he had bene able to haue made the substance of his owne body anâ—… soule present in his owne handes when he offered he would much more 〈◊〉 haue offered it then yâ— dâ—…ad flesh of lambes which he vsed for a signe of 〈◊〉 For who would content him selfe with a barâ—… signe if he weâ—…e able to offer the truth it selfe He was not of such power as to change the lambes into him selfe thereby working that in his haudes outwardly which his hart inwardly offered But yet he shewed his desier to haue a change made in that he slew yâ— laÌ„bes taking from them theyr former substance to thinâ—…t by consecration they might obteiâ—…e a more holy and sacâ—…ed being God also looked vpon his gifts as wel accepting the mind of his Priest as the maner of his doing But that which lacked in Abel who was faine to shew outwardly the consecration of his owne hart by a thing of an othere substance that thing Christ fulfilled making the same substance of his owne flesh present in his hands which he dedicated to God in his hart For taking bread and blessing he sayd This is my body Abel offered his gift before he went forth into the field where he was â—…aine The Sacramentaries deâ—…e Christ to haue offered his giftes in his last supper before hâ—… went forth to his passion Abel contented not him self with the former substance which his lambes naturally had They teach that Christ contented him self with the former substance of bread wine Fier â—…rom heauen inâ—…amed the external giftes of Abel They deny yâ— fier of the word of God to swallow vp the substance of bread and wine which Christ toke Abel consecrated his own body and blood as farre as he was able vnder the outward signe of his lambes They deny Christ to haue consecrated his owne body and blood vnder the formes of the bread and wine which he toke although they must nedes confesse that both Christ was able really to do it and by yâ— way of blessing to haue sayd this is my body
this cost is bestowed vppon a peece of bread and wine Two kindes of sepulchers we reade to haue bene alwaies this day to be in vse the one is where the body lieth present and that is properly the place of buriall the other when the body is absent and only a token of it is erected and this later kinde is called Caenotaphium a voyd monument without hauing the body in it Iudge good Reader whether it be more semelie sith Christ wold this Sacrament to be made for his remembrance that it be a void monument without hauing the body in it or els a sepulcher truly conteining his body within it whose name it beareth specially seing himself sayd of this tumb and sepulcher This is my body and this is my blood The body is named of the Greekes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say of yâ— buriall or sepulcher as though the soule were buried therein as the carkase is put in the sepulcher And yet it is much more apt to call the body of Christ in the Sacrament of the altar the sepulcher of his passion because in it is buried yâ— who le vertue of that gloriouse sacrifice and thence it is applied and dispensed to the faithfull S. Chrysostom also called the body of Christ in the SacrameÌ„t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a carkase because it is present after the same rate as it was dead in the sepulcher not in dede without soule and life but yet without sensible mouinge as Epiphanius also hath noted The holy Martyrs whose death was of great price in yâ— sight of God haue leaft their bodies behinde them to our comfort neither haue they yet receaâ—…d the second robe of their flesh Deo pro nobis melius aliquid prouidente vt non sine nobis consummarentur God prouiding some â—…etter thinge for vs to the intent they should not be made throughly perfect without vs. euen as the Fathers of yâ— old Testament of whome S. Paule speaketh had not the reward of their faith vntill some of the new Testament were ioyned to them S. John the Eâ—…angelist although his carkase appered not yet he was not vnremembred because manna flowed out of his monument abundantly as Abdias hath witnessed And now shall Christ leaue a void memorie without his body or without Manna in it Are the reliques of the blessed Martyrs profitable vnto vs and is not the flesh of Christ who is Lord of all Martyrs more then necessary for vs It was mete that Christ should arise with body and soule because he is the first fruites of all them that arise from death But he now sitting at the right hand of his Father had before instituted a memorie wherein bread and wine should be conuerted into the substance of his body and blood that thereby we might both haue his body him selfe not lack it For so it becommed all iustice to be perfectly fulfilled in his person I trust by this tyme it appeareth that the remembrance of Christes death is maruelously set foorth by the reall presence of his body and blood Seing then the sayd remembrance is yâ— end why the Sacrament is made it is a better kind of reasoning to affirme that so profitable a meane as the body blood of Christ is for the remembrance of his death was not omitted by Christ then to teache that because it is a remembrance therefore it is not the body of Christ. Specially sith Christ sayd This is my body For when the thing which is intended is the more furthered by taking the words properly then figuratinely as wel the proper nature of the words as the scope of the whole matter compelleth vs to take them as they naturally and vsually sounde without any â—…arther circuition or seking of figures Si resâ—… icias sayth Origenes ad illam commemorationem de qua dicit Dominus Hoc facite in meaÌ„ commemoratio nem Inuenies quod ista est commemoratio sola quae propitium faciat hominibus Deum If thou looke to that remembrance whereof our Lord sayd Doe and make this thing for the remembrance of me Thou shalt find that this is the only remembrance which may make God mercifull to men Mark this propitiatorie kind of remembrance S. Augustine also declareth by conferring the Sacrament of the altar with the facrifices of the law how it is the remembrance of Christ saying In isto sacrificio gratiarum actio atque commemoratio est carnis Christi quam pro nobis obtulit In this sacrifice a thanksgeuing and a remembrance is of the flesh of Christ which he offered for vs and of the blood which the same God did shed for vs. Therefore in those olde sacrifices it was figuratiuely signi fied what should be geuen vs But in this sacrifice it is euidently shewed what hath now bene geuen vs. In those sacrifices it was before hand shewed that the sonne of God should be afterward kylled for wicked men But in this he is shewed to haue bene allready kylled for wicked men By this writer whether it were S. Augustine or as others think Fulgentius the whole nature of the remembrance which we kepe of Christes death is shewed wherein the death is in dede past and absent but the body of him that died is present But in the old sacrifices neither the death neither the body was preâ—…ent but only a shadow of both Therefore those sacrifices are a figuratiue signification as Fulgentius sayeth But the Sacrament of the altar is an euident shewing Marke the wordes of Fulgentius and you shall see two words of the old law answer vnto other two of the new law By the old sacrifices he sayeth siguratè significabatur it was figuratiuely signified By the new sacrifice euidenter ostenditur it is euideÌ„tly shewed Looke how much difference is betwene shewing signifiyng betwene euidence and figures so much is betwene the old sacrifices and the new Yet if vnder forme of bread the body were not and the blood vnder the forme of wine surely the olde did better shew Christes death then this for there was flesh to shew flesh and blood to shew blood The blood was both in dede and in shew also shed and in dede separated from the flesh and poured vpon the altar and the flesh in dede eaten by them that made the offering Therefore our sacrifice doth not passe that in shewing outwardly the maner of Christes death but in euideÌ„t shewing that which died In euident shewing I say vnder the forme of bread and wine which shewing is called euident not for the seing but for the certeyntie of the place and circiut within the which we know by Gods word yâ— flesh and blood of Christ to be vnder the same forme because Christ him self shewing to vs the foorm of bread sayd This is my body What nede I to bring the Fathers one by one sith the whole
are infected withall His discourse is to long to write it all in this place so muche as apperteineth to my purpose I will translate into English Quemadmodum qui per insidias venenum hauserunt caetera As those that by 〈◊〉 haue drunk in poyson doe by an other medicine put out the strength thereof and like as the poyson so the medicine must goe into the bowels that by meane of them help maie be spread throughout the whole body euen so is it to be don of vs. That seing we haue tasted poyson wher with our nature is dissolued we maie receaue a medicine whereby that nature of ours is gathered together that the infection of the poyson maie be expelled by the contrarie and holsome strength of the medicine What medicine is this None other beside that body which is declared to be aboue death and the cause of our saluatioÌ„ For as a litle leauen saith the Apostle maketh the whole lump of dow like to it self so that body which is made immortal of God entring into our body doth transferre and change the whole into it self For as if a pestilent thing be mixed with a holsom thing it maketh it hurtfull so the immortall body maketh all that wherein it is receaued of the like nature immortal But it can not enter into the body except it be mingled with the bowels by meate and drink Itaque necessarium est vt natura nostra quoad eius fieri potest vim salutarem intra corpus admittat Therefore it is necessarie that our nature as much as lieth in it do receaue that healthfull strength within the body And seing none other thing beside that diuine body of Christ hath receaued such grace to heale our sicknes and seing it hath ben shewed it can not be our bodies should attein to immortality vnlesse they be ioyned with the immortall body and so obtein incorruption it is to be consydered how it maie be brought to passe whereas that one body continually through the whole world is geuen to so many thousands of faithfull men the whole maie become euery mans for his part and 〈◊〉 tarie whole in it felf Consequently Gregorius goeth forward to shew how that 〈◊〉 be and he sheweth it to be brought to passe whiles bread and wine wherwith Christ was nourished in this mortal life and the which by the power of altering and 〈◊〉 were daily turned into his flesh and blood be now also in his holy Sacraments turned by the consecration of his blessing and by his words into his own body and blood For by that meanes he proueth it possible that Christes whole body should both be geuen to euery man a part and yet remain whole in it self But hereof we shall speak an other tyme. All that apperteined to my present purpose was to declare out of S. Bregorie of Nyssa who liued about twelue hundred yeres past that syth Christ hath made his body and blood in the blessed Sacrament of the altar a medicine against that poyson which AdaÌ„ first and in him all we tooke by tasting the apple against the commandement of God it is not only profitable but 〈◊〉 that as the poysoned apple entred in at Adams mouth and was not only receaued by faith spirit and vnderstanding but by hand tong iawes and was digested into his bowells and so poysoned all his flesh blood whereby the flesh that we tooke of Adam was also 〈◊〉 and poysoned and our soules vnited to that infected flesh were also infected euen so yâ— medicine which is the body and blood of Christ made of bread and wine must not only be receaued by faith spirit and vnderstanding neither only the figure of it must be receaued in at our mouthes and so be 〈◊〉 into our bowels but the body of Christ it self must come to our bodyes and it must be receaued as really into them by our mouthes as euer the apple came into the mouth of Adam Who euer heard that when a mans body was really poysoned it should be sufficient to think vpon a certain true medicine and to receaue withal the figure or signe therof into his body not at all touching and receauing really the medicine it self And yet surely they that teache the body of Christ to be 〈◊〉 into our bodies only by bread and wine the figures therof and into our soules by faith and spirit doâ—… manifestly tell him that is bodily poysoned that it is enough for him to think in his mind vpon mithridaâ—…icum or some other medicine and to receaue the token thereof into his body Such is the physike and yâ— diuinitie of the Caluinists Before that Adam had tasted of the apple he was gâ—…tie of death in the sight of God concerning his own person and soule in so much as in his hart he consented to taste thereof at his wyfes request For he did not taste it so hastely but that he first intended so to doe yea S. Augustine saith it is not to be thought yâ— deuyll should haue throwen doune Adam except a certain pride had ben first in his mynde But when he tooke the apple into his mouth to the eating whereof his hart had allready yelded then had he brought the inward disobedience into the outward acte so that he was inexcusable not only before God but in the sight of angels of his wife and of all creatures his hands his eyes his mouth his throte and stomack was now wytnes against hym Thence came the dredfull necessitie of death to all the children of Adam it was the tasting of his flesh which made all our flesh so farre gilty That polluted body could not beget innocent children with vncleane sede Well Christ is the second Adam which taketh away this obligation and bond of death that lay on our neckes and he taketh it away nâ—…t by force but by iâ—…stice changing and recompensing all that was before done amysse For the corrupt generatioÌ„ which we haue by the sede of Adam he geueth vs a new byrth in the Sa crament of water and renuing of the holy Ghost in which baptism our soule only is not cleansed but our body also is washed For the fruyt of death which Adam did â—…ate as well in mouth as hart he hath geuen the apple of lyfe as well to be eaten in our mouthes as in ouâ—… haâ—…tes so that as the olde Adam caryed a wytnes of damnation for hym and his posteritie in all his membres so doth the new Adam with his children cary the witnes of lyfe in all their membres They haue God and man not in hart alone but also in a Sacrament yea in their â—…ands in their mouthes in their bodyes and become one with the flesh of Christ which they eate as the apple which Adam did eate became one with his flesh This was the supper that Christ came to make not to gâ—…ue bread and wyne not to make figures and shadowes
that none other thing can 〈◊〉 inferred vpon those words then what thing this is as we saie or what thing this bread doth signifie as the Sacramentaries teache Admit now it were expresly said this bread is the signe of Christes body which sense is salsely ascribed to those words by the Zuinglians yet it wold not follow therevpon that the body of Christ is promised to our soules but only that by this bread we are brought to remember Christ. Now as for eating it is commanded and not promised Caluin had the cheif property of an heretike which was to be singular And therein he delighted so much that albeit he was determined not to tarie in the faith wherein he was Christened yet he wold neither goe to Luther who first withdrew himself from vs nor to Zuinglius whose sect he fauored rather but he wold make a religion of his own And therfore he deuised a new sense of Christes words Affirming This is my body not to be spoken to the bread as both Catholiks Lutherans and Zuinglians after diuers meanings doe confesse but to be words of preaching made vnto the people that stand about the Priest and that these words promise the body of Christ to al that beleue his death and resurrection as verily as that bread is really eaten into their bodies and yet neither be the words conceiâ—…ed in the manner of promising neither do they speake of faith or death or of the resurrection of Christ or of eating bread Is not this a strang sense to pick out of these words This is my body as if it were said Masters beleue that Christ is dead and risen again and then as this bread is eaten of your bodies so certainly shal you fede of his body in faith spirit Did â—…uer any man heare of such a 〈◊〉 Hoc This doth signifie and shew to Caluin the bread which must be eaten at the supper of Christ and pointeth also to a spirituall food which is promised Est Is doth stand both properly for the present time in yâ— it is a signe of Christes body at the tyme of speaking and also vnproperly for the tyme to come in that it is a promise of his body to be eaten spiritually Corpus meum My body doth signifie to him the signe of my body taken by mouth and the streÌ„gth or vertue therâ—…of that shal be taken by faith and spirit Put together This bread which you bodily eate is the signe this thing which I promise that your soules shall eate shall be the streÌ„gth or efficacie of my body and yet he addeth farther of his owne to them that beleue Christes death and resurrection This is the sermon which Caluin saith was made at Christes supper Wherein euery word must signifie at once two or three things and one verb in one tense must signifie two tymes and the same word body must signifie two proprieties and yet neither of them both properly For whether body stand for signe of body as he wold haue it taken in respect of bread it standeth vnproperly or whether iâ—… stand for efficacie of body as he wold haue it taken in respect of the communicants it standeth vnproperly whereas the proper signification thereof is to signifie the substance of Christes body If we presse him out of S. Paul and out of the Fathers that euil men eate the body of Christ then he will answere they eate the signe of his body without promise or efficacie If we saie that good men eate the body of Christ he expoundeth it in such sense that they first haue it promised them â—…ate both a certain pledge bodily and in their soules a spirituall efficacie thereof O crafty deuiser If thou canst thus deceaue a sort of miserable and either vnlerned or vngraciouse men thinkest thou to deceaue God or to escape his terrible iudgement Agree at the last how euery word shal be so taken that thy interpretation maie be like it self Let not the same word be now a signe now a pledge now a promise now an efficacie now again no efficacie no promise no pledge but only a signe We beleue that euery word standeth properly And that both euill and good receaue one and the same substance of Christes body But as one medicine receaued of two diuerse complexions worketh not one effect so the good men haue a good effect by eating worthely the body of Christ the euill haue condemnation by eating it vnworthely Thus we take the word body for the reall substance of the body the verb est is we take properly because it is in dede Christes body when the words are spoken This we saie doth finally point to the substance of Christes body as then prâ—…ently made vnder the foorm of bread In our interpretation there is no inconstancy no impropriety no changing of significations in the same words no bare promising of a thing to come bâ—…t a present perfoormance If any man aske by what scriptures I conuince Caluin I wold first â—…now by what scriptures he proueth his lewed interpretation Shall he speake a thing without scripture beside all truthe and reason and shall not we be credited vnlesse we conuince him by scripture Howbeit let vs forgeue that iniurie and confute his fond â—…pinioÌ„ by the word of God Caluin saith This ys my body be words of promise against which saing thus I reason S. Paule intending to shew that God was not bound to the carnall Iewes because they were the childern of Abraham by flesh but that rather he wold reward them who were the children of Abraham by faith and spirit declareth Isaac to haue ben the child of promise because the Angell said to Abraham Secundum hoc tempus veniam erit Sarae filius I will come according to this tyme and a sonne shal be vnto Sara out of which words S. Paule proueth a promise How so Promissionis enim hoc verbum est For this word or saing is a word of promise which word is that Veniam I will com filius â—…rit a sonne shal be as if S. Paule said wil shall be words of promise For when a speache is conceiued for the tyme to come with 〈◊〉 circumstance that it maie appere the speaker meant to warrant the thing spoken it maketh a promise If I will come and 〈◊〉 sonne shal be are words of promise I am come and a sonne is be words of perfoormance and that is also conâ—…irmed out os the word of God Where it is writâ—…n the Lord visited Sara as he had promised and fulfilled the things which he spake and she conceiued and brought foorth a sonne at yâ— tyme wherein god had foreâ—…old 〈◊〉 that which was before in S. Paul named a promise is â—…ow called also a foretelling or prediction For albeit euery prediction be not a promise yet euery promise is a prediction and a telling before hand so that we haue in the word of God that a promise telleth a
agreed for all scâ—…iptures call it the body and some doctours call it a signe But if these thinges can not both be true together awase with signes awaie with tokens let the worde of God be heard which saieth This is mâ—… body This is my blood Is it reason we obeie men or God If both stand in one degree men keping them selues vnder God let both be obeyed But if men draw from God he is more worth alone then all the men of the world What 〈◊〉 we now Will the sigâ—…e of the body and the body it selâ—…e stand together or no If not let the signe of the body which is not in scripture geue place let the body it selfe which is often times found there tarie still If the signe and the truth can not stand together the Sacramentaries must nedes be condemned who denie the truth which is in the scripture and preferre the signe before it which is not in the scripture If the signe truth doe both stand together yâ— Sacramentaries onlesse they repent be condemned because they denie the one part of yâ— twaine For they denie the true presence of Christs body and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine In what case stand these defenders which still be in state of damnation whatsoeuer be concluded true We verely teach and beleue the figure and the truth to stand together the supper of our Lord to be the signe of Christes body and to be his owne body The weaker part is the signe the greater is the truth But both doe not only stand together in one Sacrament but farther more the true nature of euerie Sacrament of Christ is to haue both that is â—…aie to haue oue certaine truth one certaine signe of the same truth The truth is hidden vnder the signe the signe is witnes of the truth Which thing once being declared you shall see the vaine doctrine of this Apologie with what kind of worthy Schoolâ—… the English Church is nowe gouerned to the greate 〈◊〉 and destruction of Christian soules Pardon me good reader if I stand somewhat long vpon the name of a Sacrament for in that word lieth hidden all the poyson of the Sacramentarie doctrine ¶ That the supper of our Lord is both the signe of Christes body and also his true body euen as it is a Sacrament GEue diligent care good Reader to the doctrine folowing Because as it is most true and profitable so is it somewhat hard I will shew that suche a signe as belongeth to Christes institution must nedes haue the same truth present whereof it is the Sacrament or holy signe The naturall sonne of God tooke naturall flesh of the virgin Marie to th' intent he being oâ—…e persone and there in hauing his humane nature common with men and his diuine common with God might by that meanes reconcile man to God againe His diuine personne staied in it the nature of man his manhod partly couered the diuine nature from the eyes of mortall men partly by maruelous signes and workes shewed the same to the faith of 〈◊〉 men Liâ—…ewise man consisteth of two parts of a soule inuisible and of a visible body The soule ruleth and gouerneth the body And the body sheweth to others by outward tokens what the soule thinketh and inwardly worketh Christ therefore intending to leaue certayn holy mysteries vnto his Church thereby to 〈◊〉 to her the fruite of his passion and death as well for regard of his owne selfe in whose personne two natures were vnited as for regard of vs who coÌ„siste of body and soule made the sayd holy Sacramentes to be of a dubble sort and nature so that the one part thereof might appere to the senses the other should lye priuie and only be seene by faith But as the outward workes and doctrine of Christ were vndoubted testimonies of the inward Godhed really present so the outward signe which is in the Sacraments is a most euident witnesse of the inward grace which they worke really present in them Aâ—…ter this sort Christ instituted the Sacrament of Baptisme that we might be newly borne and regenerated of water and of the holy Ghost as him selfe sayd to 〈◊〉 For the outward wasshing of the body in the naâ—…e of the Trinitie is an euident signe that the holy Ghost at the same instant by the meane of the word and water inwardly wassheth yâ— soule from synne Therefore S. Paul sayeth God hath saued vs by the wasshing of water and of the renewing of the holy Ghost The which holy scriptures S. Augustine embracing sayeth Aqua exhibens forinsecus Sacramentum gratiae spiritus operans intrinsecus beneficium gratiae regenerat hominem in vno Christo ex vno Adam generatum Water geuing outwardly the Sacrament or holy signe of grace and the holy Ghost working inwardly the benefite of grace begetteth man againe in one Christ which was begotten of one Adam Water is the outward signe Grace is yâ— inward benefite The outward water which wassheth the body is the signe of the inward grace which is wrought vpon the souâ—…e Here thou seest good Reader the signe of a thing and the thing it selfe to agree so well that the one is alwayes depending of the other Much lesse doth one of them hinder the other Except any man will say that Christ was not God in dede because his works were tokens signes of his Godhead which were a detestable saying Likewise the supper of Christ is both a signe of his body also his true body A signe outwardly the true body inwardly A signe by yâ— sound of words when it is first made a truth by the inward working of the holy Ghost by the meanes of the words of the censecration For as when the Priest spâ—…inkleth or dippeth the child in water saying 〈◊〉 wass he the in the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost At the same moment the holy Ghost wassheth the soule of the person baptized Right so when Christ or any lawfull Priest in his name taking bread blesâ—…ing duely sayeth This is my body making in those words an euident token of his body â—…eally present at the same instant the holy Ghost worketh inwardly the true substance of Jesus Christ really present vnder the forme of bread The outward pronouncing of the words ouer bread and wine is the Sacrament or holy signe that maketh and sheweth Christes body and the inward 〈◊〉 ning of the substance of bread into Christes reall body is the grace which is at the same tyme inuisâ—…bly wrought Thus in holy Scripture the signe of body and the true body stand so welâ—… together that both are true because one is true The which doctrine S. Chrisostom confessing writeth Sacerdotis oreverba proferuntur Et Dei virtute proposita consecrantur gratia Hoc est ait corpus meum hoc verbo proposita
the death and resurrection and life of Christ before our eyes Here is the Sacramentaries argument I eate bread and drinke wine in token of Christes death resurrection therefore he is dead and risen I pray you Syr how doth this argument hold What affinitie hath bread and wine with the death and with the resurrection of Christ But if bread and wine be turned into the same body blood of Christ which died and rose againe which wrought all the miracles done in this world Then is the death and resurrection and conuersation of Christ in dede it selfe set before the eyes of our faith Because as Chrisostom teacheth Hoc idem corpus cruentatum caet This very same body bloudied perced with yâ— speare gaue as it were out of a spring fountaynes of blood healthfull to the whole world And the selfe body God aâ—…anced vnto the highest seate the which body also he gaue to vs both to th' intent we should haue it and to the intent we should eaâ—…e it But what speake I of S. Chrisostom This sayeth Christ is my body which is geuen for you And againe the bread which I will geue is my flesh which I will geue for the life of the world How ofte so euer sayeth S. Paul ye shall eate this bread and drinke the chalice of our Lord ye shall shew his death vntill he comme So that the hauing of the death and resurrection and all yâ— miracles of Christ before our eyes at Masse tyme riseth chiefly of yâ— thing which is the body of Christ. And secondarily of the things which are done about that his body The consecrating the offering the eating of the selfe same body which wrought these miracles which died and rose againe those facts I say in that thing shew his death and resurrection All other wayes of setting the death and resurrection and conuersation of Christ before our eyes without the reall presence of Christ is painting and shadowing in comparison of this liuely representation O how many sayeth S. Chrisostom say now adayes I wold see the soorm shape of Christ I would see his very garmentes and shoowes Ipsum igitur vides ipsum taÌ„gis ipsum comedis Lo thou seest him selfe thou touchest him selfe thou eatest him selfe Non quòd corpus illud sayeth Damascen è coelo descendat sed quia panis vinum in Christi corpus sanguinem transmutatur Not as though the body of Christ came downe from heauen but because the bread and wine is changed into the body and blood of Christ. See now good Reader whether the Apologie say more truly that the signe or token of Christes body and blood the body it selfe not being made present vnder the soâ—…nes of bread and wine as it teacheth doe more effectuously set before our eyes that death and resurrection and all the miracles of Christ or els whether the incarnation life death and resurrection of him be not better and more according to the word of God set soorth by the Catholikes who teach that the substance of bread and wine is changed into that body and blood of Christ to th' end the death and resurrection of the same body might be effectually remembred So teacheth S. Cyrillus in these words Prebet Christus nobis carnem suam tangendam c. Christ geueth vs his flesh to be tou ched that we might beleue assuredly that he hath in deed reised his temple For that the communion of mystical blessing is a certayn confession of the resurrection of Christ it is proued by his own words For he distributed the bread after it was broken saying This is my body which shal be geuen for you for the remission of synnes Make and doe this thing for the remembrance of me Therefore the participation of that mysterie is a certain true confession and remembrance that for our sakes and for vs our Lord both hath died and is reuiued and through that filleth vs with diuine blessing Let vs therefore flee infidelity after the touching of Christ and let vs be found strong and stedfast being far from all doubtfulnesse Thus far S. Cyrillus Who alludeth in that place to S. Thomas the Apostle And as S. Thomas touching the syde of Christ cried out My Lord and my God euen so S. Cyrillus teacheth that we touche the body of Christ when we come to the holy communion For as vnder the visible flesh of Christ his Godhead lay priuie but yet was truly present and had assumpted his flesh into one person euen so vnder the visible foorm of bread the flesh of Christ is really present in the holy mysteries and therefore we touch that flesh when we touche the foorm of bread as S. Thomas did touche the Godhead when he touched the flesh of Christ. For in eche place we touche not either the Godhead or the flesh visibly but by the meane of that thing wherein it is truly present That thing I say receaued of vs doth make his death and resurrection to be remembred Hath not he all that euer Christ did presently before his eyes who hath Christ him selfe present But take Christ awaye and afterward it is a foolish dreame to talke how his deeds be set before our eyes by bread and wine The apparence of bread is the token that Christes body is here to be eaten And the similitude of wine doth shew that his blood is here to be drunken But the true shewing of his death life and resurrection ariseth of that truth which is vnder those foormes When I eate the body that died I shew the death of it because no sacrificed flesh was euer eaten before the host was offered But we eate really the body of Christ therefore our fact crieth that Christ is dead We eate his body aliue hauing the blood and soule in it therefore our fact crieth he is risen again Thus the Ca tholiks reason Let him that hath coÌ„mon sense iudge who goeth nere the truth of the Gospell the Sacramentarie or the Catholike ¶ Our thanksgeuing and remembrance of Christes death is altogether by the reall presence of his body TO th' intent we should geue thanks for his death and our deliuerance and that by often resorting to the Sacramentes we should continually renew the remembrance thereof These men presuppose we haue a signe or token left vnto vs in bread and wine to geue thanks withall We haue in deed a token but this token though it were made of bread and wine is not bread and wine For Christ in his last supper tooke bread and when he had geuen thanks he sayd This is my body which is geuen for you doe and make this thing for the remembrance of me Behold the token wherein Christ both him selfe gaue thanks and would vs to geue thanks in the same The making of his body for vs is the thanksgeuing for his death and for our deliuerance Ipso genere sacrificij sayeth S.
him self to be almyghty God He said also that it was profytable because he that dyd eate his flesh and drinke his blood should be raised againe to life euerlasting If they had beleued him in these pointes they might haue asked yea without asking they had knowen at or not long after his last supper the maner how it should haue bene coÌ„ueniently done as those Apostles did know who continued in their belefe And the way of knowledge was at his last supper where taking breade with speaking of these wordes this is my body he changed the substance of the breade into his body and wylled his disciples to take and eate his body This much those could not fre because thei would not beleue but to say that Christ hyndred their belefe by words more hard then neded that is more cruelly sayd thê it neded Oportebat c. they ought saith S. Cyril first of al to cast the rootes of faith in their mind and then to aske the thinges that were to be asked but the Iewes asked importunely before they beleued for this cause our Lord shewed them not how it might be brought to passe aâ—…terward S. Cyrill declareth how Christ in his last supper shewed yâ— maner also to theÌ„ who dyd beleue although they asked not for it ¶ The right vnderstanding of those words It is the spirite that quickeneth the flesh profiteth nothing I May be the shorter in this point because none of those who are meanely conuersant in the bookes of auncient writers though otherwyse they beleue not well haue applied these words against the reall presence of Christes body in his last supper for how can it be that Christes fleshe which is geuen for the life of the world should profite nothing Therefore S. Basil S. Chrysostom and S. Augustin do expound the name of flesh after one sort for the fleshly and carnall vnderstanding of the Iewes who thought they should haue eaten Christ as men eat mutton and beefe whereas Christ meant to geue his flesh in a secret maner as the faithful know which notwithstaÌ„ding the Luciferian spirit of Caluin reproueth this first vnderstanding in his comments vppon this place But it is sufficient to say that he difsented from those three notable pillers of Gods Church before named The second vnderstanding is on Christes behalf whose flesh should not profit any thing if the spirit that is to say the Godhead did not make it able to geue vs euerlasting life The which sense is chiefly followed by S. Augustin also and by S. Cyrillus Now seing the flesh of Christ is geuen so to vs vnder the foorm of bread that the Godhead is present with it we are sure to haue much profit by it What nede moe words If this saying appertem not to the last supper it maketh nothing against our belefe If it doe appertein to it the words are Propheticall because they speake before hand of a thing which most certeinly shall come to passe in the last supper and then the fulfilling of them will make them plaine For as Procopius saith A prophecie at the first sight is not clere but when it is come to the euent which was forespoken and is coÌ„ferred with the thing it self then draweth it to a perfit clerenes If now the sayd words were fulsilled at the supper and take a clere vnderstaÌ„ding thereof what meaning can they haue but that when Christ gaue his body he gaue it after a spiritual sort not after a fleshely maner He gaue not a shoulder to one Apostle and a legg to an other a brest to the third and a ribbe to the fourth but the whole body to euery 〈◊〉 not visible in the forme of flesh but inuisible in the forme of bread so making plaine why he had so often called him selfe bread and said that the bread which he would geue is his flesh He gaue not his body without his soule and Godhead neither his blood without his bones and flesh but the spirite quickened al things eche kinde had whole Christ. He lost not his visible body by geuing of it but by his words which are spirit and life turned bread and wine into his body and blood shewing yâ— as he was at the table in his whole body notwithstanding they did eate the same body so he might be in heauen although the sub stance of his true body and blood were geuen in his Sacrament in earth What shall I say more If the vnderstanding of these words depend vpon the last supper they must not geue vs a rule how to vnderstand the last supper but they must take their vnderstanding of it Who dare say that bread was crucified for vs because Ieremie sayd Mittamus lignum in panem eius let vs put wood into his bread Do we not rather say that because we are sure that the true flesh of Christ was crucified therefore in Ieremie bread is taken for flesh Who dare say that Christ had hornes in his hands because Habacuk said Cornua in manibus eius Do we not rather say that by hornes he meante the corners of the crosse because we are sure that Christ had vpon the crosse no materiall hornes in his hands If then these words the spirit quickeneth be referred to the supper and there we finde bread wine taken and after blessing body and blood geuen we may be well assured that one truth doth not take away the other Spirit doth not take away flesh but spirit must be taken for the Godhead which maketh the flesh both to be present and profitable to all such as receaue it worthely ¶ The words of Christ being spirit and life shew that his reall flesh is made present in his last supper aboue all course of nature and reason VErba quae ego locutus sum vobis spiritus vita sunt The words which I haue spoken or as the greke text readeth which I doe speake to you are spirit and life The Capharnaits hearing Christ say he wold geue his flesh to be eaten partly thought it not possible for him to geue partly not semely for them selues to take They imagined a diuisioÌ„ of yâ— flesh which should be deliuered and consequently the person whose flesh were cut in such peeces must die but how could a dead man geue his own flesh to be eaten Again though he could doe it what a cruel thing were it for them to eate mans flesh Christ knowing this theyr grosse concept sayth that the sonne of man wil ascend into heauen where he was before Thereby declaring first his almighty power and Godhead Next that the gift of his flesh doth not import the lacke of life either in yâ— geuer or in the thing geueÌ„ For theÌ„ in dede the gift should be litle worth because it is the spirit life which quickeneth dead flesh profiteth nothing to euerlasting life My words sayth Christ be spirit and life that is to say they
we hope to see that agreement of minds that consent of wils that vniformitie of life and belefe which our grandfathers and great grandfathers had The Trinitaries of Polonia vnder their Capitain 〈◊〉 who is a false preacher in 〈◊〉 that chief citie of yâ— Kingdom said that the name of the blessed Trinitie is a monsterouse thing not because they openly deny the father yâ— sonne yâ— holy ghost or the equality of them nor because they defend any more then one God But they affirm yâ— albeit there are three vnius naturae of one nature of one Godhead yet there are not three say they yâ— are vna natura vel Deitas one nature or Godhead And for proufe hereof they appeale to the new Testament and old and to the Churche which they call priuatiue which was of the first two hundred yeres or thereabout bidding vs looke whether we find Trinum vnum deuÌ„ or Trinitatem in vnitate or vnum deum in tribus personis in any scripture or in any Father of that age As for S. Athanasius S. Hilarie S. Basil S. Augustin so forth they esteme no more then our new brethren esteme S. Bede or S. Thomas of Aquine The booke intituled of the Trinitie which is in S. Iustinus works they affirm not to be his vsing presently the same shamles shifts against the blessed name and nature of that Trinitie which the Sacramentaries vse against the nature name of the Masse Not long after these Trinitaries an other cumpany began to think circumcision so necessarie that in Lituania many 〈◊〉 them selues who to defend that heresy must nedes deny S. Pan les epistles as Luther hath denied S. Iames his epistle for that it is against his iustification of only faith And what forbiddeth an other sect to doe the like in an other matter Thus alwaies are we seeking as Tertullian sayth but we neuer find any thing if once we goe from that which we all beleued If then a stay be to be made at any tyme in questions of belefe if we may be sure of any article of all our faith it behoueth we vndoe not that which our forfathers haue so long before concluded to be true No reason of induciÌ„g a new faith can be so weighty as the peace and preseruation of vnitie in Christes Churche ought to be singularly weighed of euery man There was but one vniuersall chang to be loked for in religioÌ„ from the beginning of Christes Church to the last end thereof And that was at the coming of Christ into the world The which chang that it might not be sodein it was prophecied of before in all ages both by yâ— dedes and words of Patriarchs of Prophets and of Priests And when the fulnesse of tyme was come it was proued to become by miracles of so great vertue and name that the very stones that is to say the infidels were turned by them so great a matter it was with God to haue the order of his religioÌ„ altered And now shal we after Christes faith preached beleued fiften huÌ„dred yeres together shall we now take a new faith of Luther of Zumglius and of Caluin If they be Christ I graÌ„t we must admit theyr doctrine but if they be not so it is not possible they should come of God though they came with neuer so many miracles but they must be the forerunners of 〈◊〉 To come again nere 〈◊〉 own matter if we shall geue any eare to them who affirm the words of Christes supper to be figuratiue that must be with some dout of our former faith and in douting thereof we are become men that lacke faith which if it be not sure it is not good for so much as it hath not the foundation of the things which the Apostle sayd were to be hoped for Or tell me he that first gaue eare to BereÌ„garius or Zuinglius against the bessed Sacrament of yâ— altar may the same man geue care now to another that should wickedly say the Apostles had no authoritie geuen them to write holy scriptures If he may theÌ„ he may dout of the sayd â—…utoritie and yet surely it were very hard to proue to a wrangler that such autoritie of writing Gospels or epistles could be iustified out of the expresse words of the holy Bible But if it be vnlawfull to heare any such seditiouse man how could it be lawful when eare was first geuen to Berengarius or Zuinglius for then it was no lesse generally receaued through all Christendom and much more expresly to be proued by the holy scripture that the things set foorth and consecrated vpon the holy table and altar were the reall body and blood of Christ then it is sayd that whatsoeuer the Apostles did write should be confirmed and established as the words of the holy gooâ—… Where yet I will enter farther into the 〈◊〉 of the cause â–ª And before we heare what reasoÌ„s he can bring who wil reproue the faith of the church in the blessed Eucharist I say he is not to be heard because it is not possible that his reason can haue any sufficient ground why we should geue ouer our old faith and that whether we respect the writen word of God or yâ— faith of all Christians or the glorie of God or the loue of Christ toward vs or the profite of his churche For â—…either can he shew where it is writen or when it was beleued This is not my body nor can proue that it is more honorable to God or more agreable to Christes coming or more profitable to vs that we should lack his body present vnder the forme of bread rather then haue it For if the death of Christ did procede from excessiue charitie of him toward vs and of God and our profite that his Sonne should take flesh and dye for vs I can not deuise how the most honorable remembrance of the same death should not be most according to th' intent of Christ and to our soules health And doubtles it is a more honorable and a more louing remembraÌ„ce where the true substaÌ„ce of Christ is made really present for the keping of his death in memorie we take more benefite by such a commemoration of his bloody sacrifice then if in stede of Christes reall body a peece of bread and wine be left vnto vs with neuer so great a feding by faith For imagine ye the faith to be neuer so great I am sure it will not be the lesse because Christ is taken into our hands mouthes and brests The touching of his garment neuer hindred any good hart much lesse can the taking of his whole body hurt our faith or deuotion And yet if corporal touching did not also help the faithfull womaÌ„ troubled so long with a bloody fluxe had not bene so miraculously cured by touching the hemme of Christes garment Her faith touched his Godhead and her soule
true bread not because it was not a signe of true bread neither because who so deuoutly receaued it should not be deliuered froÌ„ euerlasting death of God but because it selfe had not in it any thing which being corâ—…ally taken â—…ight saue a man otherwise good from euerlasting dâ—…ath whereas the true bread which the Apostles toke into theyr hands through Christes gift was that very â—…esh which by the power of the Godhead whereunto it is annexed kepeth our soules that they dye not by synne and râ—…eth out bodies to liue for euer S. Augustine sayth Dominus sinit Iudam accipere inter innocentes disipulos quod fideles nouerunt preciuÌ„ nostrum Our Lord suffereth Iudas to take among the innocent disciples our price which the faithful know See what kind of taking S. Augustine speaketh of surely of that which was common to Iudas and which was made with hands See what Iudas toke precium nostrum our price Is bread and wine our price We are then derely bought in dede But if the reall substaÌ„ce of Christes body and blood be only our price when Christ sayth take he meaneth take yâ— real substance of my flesh into your haÌ„ds that thence it may come afterward vnder your harâ—…s ¶ The sixtenth circumstance of eating CHrist sayd eate ye once only and he sayd it of that one thing only which he deliuered to his Apostles corporally and they so toke it but Christ meant they should eate it as wel in soule as in body as wel by faith as by mouth For he had sayd before worke ye the euerlasting meat which the sonne of maÌ„ wil geue you and he declared the worke of God to be this that they should beleue in Christ who is the bread of life and who said his flesh to be meat in dede â–ª therefore when Christ sayd eate this is my body he meant eate bodily that I geue you and eate it also spiritually because it is a heaueÌ„ly kind of bread and a meate which neuer perisheth Neither doth the verbe eate by this meane stand vnproperly because â—…ating belongeth naturally both to the soule and to the body but yet concerning the cause of eating principally to the soule as the which alone geueth power to the body to eate and concerning the meane of eating principally to the body as the which only hath conuenient instruments to receaue corporall meat For neither a dead body can eate at al neither a soule which lacketh a body can eate properly Now when the soule and body may both not only eate but also be nourished by the eating that is the truest eating which can be deuised Christ then in saying eate meaneth eate ye as ye are men who consist of soules and of bodies eate in both and feede them both together For this is my body which hath in it the Godhead corporally dwelling Eating this you eate a food both spirituall and corporall This feedeth the whole man this is it which TertulliaÌ„ saith Caro c. The flesh is fed with the body and blood of Christ that the soule may also be made fat of God Note the perfit eating the flesh is fed and yâ— soule is made fat The Catholiks vpon this ground beleue the flesh which must be eaten spiritually to be vnder the form of bread which is eaten really and that Christ saying to a reasoable man eate this is my body saith by the reason of that kind of meat which he nameth eate in body and soule my body The SacrameÌ„taries teache a dubble substance to be eaten in a dubble maner of which yâ— one is present corporally yâ— other absent they teach bread wine to be eaten drunken corporally as things present but the flesh of Christ only to be eaten spiritually as a thing absent in his own substance they diuide the work of our bodies from the worke of our soules But the word eate ye can not be so meant sith it only pointeth to yâ— which the disciples had taken into theyr hands none other literal meaning can be of this word eate eating by faith hath no part in Christes supper neither is at al commanded if the thing eaten be not in the haÌ„ds of the Apostles ¶ The 〈◊〉 circumstance of these words this is my body I Wil speake of these wordes not al that may be sayd but rather no more then the nature of one circumstance among so many as Christ vsed in his supper will conueniently beare who taking bread after blessing and thaÌ„ks geuing sayd this is my body If yâ— meaning be this bread is yâ— signe of my body he gaue thaÌ„ks for the institution of a bare signe for so I must needs call it seing bread remaining still in his owne nature can neuer be any more then a bare signe so long as it is not the body it self which it doth signifie For euery figure image token whiche differeth in substance from his originall is always bare and naked in respect of that truth which it 〈◊〉 hath not the same in it selfe So was Christ a bare maÌ„to the Ebionits because they denied yâ— substaÌ„ce of God to be in him howsoeuer they extolled him otherwise 〈◊〉 Christ come theÌ„ to leaue naked bare signes to his Church and is he so glad of that promotion that he thanketh his father for it was this the ioy he had of eating the new passouer wherein he would geue vs only bread and wine mixed with water in â—…ede of bread wine herbs and flesh which were geuen vnder the law of Mâ—…yses is not his outward gift at the least desaced by this doctrine Uerily seing with thanks geuing Christ ioyned this is my body presenting in effectuall words that whiche his hart intended before to consecrate vnto God we must no more say that he instituted a bare figure of his body in these wordes then that he presented a bare signe in his hart when he gauc thanks For who can think that Christ who had said by God and by his Prophet Dâ—…uid Sacrifice and offring thou wouldest not but thou hast framed me a body meanig that none other sacrifice pleased God beside his vnspotted fleshe who can thinke that he now expresly naming that his body yet presenteth to his father bread wine only as figures signes of his body and blood and that he gaue thanks for them â–ª Melchisedech ended the mysterie of his bread and wine in the blessing of Abraham him self and doth Christ after bread wine taken end his blessing only in a figure of the sede of AbrahaÌ„ that whereof Moyses said this is the bread which our Lord hath geueÌ„ you to eate was in dede a more excelleÌ„t bread then he could name and â—…oth Christ name more then is really present Surely the signe of Christes supper is so bare if that which he pointeth vnto be not in dede his body yâ— in words he geueth greater 〈◊〉 to God his Father then in his dedes For
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in meam commemorationem in the accusatiue case the true English whereof must be for the remembrance of me Christ sayd make this thing for the remembrance of me that is make my body which is geuen for you to thend my geuiug of it for you vpon yâ— crosse may through that your fact and doing be remembred This is the true meaning of Christes words For so doth S. Paule expoimd them to the Corinthians where after he had declared the history of Christes supper of purpose teachig vs what is meant by the remembrance of him thus he writeth As ofte as ye shall eate this bread and drinke the chalice ye shall shew our Lordes death vntill he come Lo the shewing of our Lordes death is the kind of remembrance for which Christ willeth his body to be made eaten his blood to be made and â—…runken Wherefore saying make or doe this for the remembrance of me he sayth this much Take bread blesse saying this is my body breake geue eate and all to this ende that my death may be remembred vntill my second coming Here we learne that the remembrance whereof Christ speaketh is the shewing of his death and that not by word only but by dede and facte and by making and doing For the making of Christes body by chaunging the substance of the bread into the substance of his flesh is a marâ—…ilouse shewing of his death For as his death was the dissolution of the soule from the body so his soule which as S. Ambrose noteth is vnderstanded by the blood is shewed vnder the form of wine his body is shewed a part from it vnder an other form of bread I doe not say that either the body is without soule and blood or the blood without flesh and soule but I say the shewing of the body vnder form of bread and of the blood vnder yâ— forme of wine in â—…che of which whole Christ is conteyned is the shewing of his death and also of his resurrection For at the death in dede the soule and body were a sonder and at the resurrection they came againe together Euen as now in figure and shew they are a sonder not withstaÌ„ding that in truth they are together But if the bread and wine remayned in their old nature still taking only the name and signe of Christes body blood Then should nothing be made for the remembrance or to shew our Lords death whereas he sayd Make this thing for the remembrance of me That is sayeth S. Paule for the shewing of my death the which death is yet fâ—…rther shewed when the same body in a signe is broken and geuen to be eaten the blood drunken For then as Christes flesh was in dede broken vppon the Crosse so it is in shew signe broken first in the Priests hands vnder forme of bread and next in his or their mouths who communicate with him by eating and chewing of it And likewise yâ— blood is powred or shedde into his or their mouthes vnder the forme of wine as it was in dede shed vppon the Crosse and as in dede Christ there deliuered his ghost into his Fathers hands But if the breade and wine were not changed into the body blood of Christ then that body which at all were not so much as in signe and shew broken because it were not present and that blood whiche were not so muche as in apparence apart from the fleshe or shed into the mouthes of the receauers could not shew our Lords death at all whereas Christ would his own death to be shewed by the making of his own body and blood with the signes of breaking shedding parting and dissoluing Thou seeâ—… now good Reader how the kind of remembrance which Christ required to he had of him is not only nothing at all against the reall presence of his body and blood yea rather it is so singularly set forth thereby that without the presence of the body blooâ—… it shal be somewhat hard to deuise what memorie at all here can be of Christes death Most sure it is that though mans wit may deuyse much yet can it neuer inuent so perfect a meane to make the death of Christ be remembred as if his own self be present to warne vs thereof If it hath chaunted to any man whiles by manly fighting he hath delyuered his frind from perill of death to take some great wound in his owne face tell me on thy conscience is there any way more effectual for that wounded man to put his frind in remembraunce of that fighting then if him self come with the skar in his face to his frinâ—…s presence and sight Is it not more then if he sent an hundred letters an hundred tokens and messengers to warne his frinde thereof Euen so fareth it with Christ at this tyme who fighting for vs vppon the Crosse whiles he delyuered mankind from the bonde of death toke a wound which made him geue vp his ghost Can therefore a more vehement remembrance be stirred vp in our harts then if the same Christ offer him self present to vs with â—…he skar vpon his face Thou wilt I think graunt that nothing would moue vs or make vs more vehemently remembre the death which he tooke for vs. But thou wilt say that Christ now coÌ„meth not before vs that we see him not Well Sir First you graunt that the remembrance of Christes death is nothing at all hiudered by the presence of his body why then sayd you before if the Sacrament of the altar be a remembrance of Christ it is not Christ him self Why sayd you that the remembrance of a thing must uedes differ from the thing it self And now you see and confesse that Christ present with the resemblance of his woundes should make you best remember his death Beware hereafter of this kind of reasoning Christ made a resemblance of his death at his supper therefore it is not his own body That argument is not good yea rather this is good Christ made a perfecte remembrance of his death therefore his own body is geuen to put vs in mind that he died for vs. Now let vs returne to that you said Christ was not seene of vs. If he were seene your faith should be of small merite besyde that you could not receaue him into your body after that visible quantitie wherein he walked vppon the earth He therefore that died for you hath now geuen you the substance of his naturall flesh and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine Where he is as verily present as if you saw him or touched him For I trow you vnderstand that eye sight is not necessary to make a thing present Otherwise blinde men were in euill case and to them nothing should be present Which seing it is not so the body of Christ is not therefore the lesse present because you see it not But if it may please
by it selfe aâ—… also being one of those things which doth principally declare the saith of the whole Churche in this behalfe For no man would adore the body of Christ in the Priestes hands or vpon the altar if it were not really present there The Chapiters of the sixth Booke 1. The adoration of Christes body is proued out of the Prophet Dauid in the Psalm 21. 2. Item of the Psalme 98. 3. It is proued out of the Prophetes that it can be no idolatry to worship the body and blood of Christ in the Sacrament of the altar 4. The adoration of Christes body is proued out of the new Testament 5. That the Fathers of the first six hundred yeres after Christ dyd honour the body blood of Christ in the Sacrament of the altar 6. The adoration of the body blood of Christ is proued by the custome of the Priestes and people of the first six hundred yeres 7. The reall presence is proued by the doctrine consent of the auncient Fathers 8. Item by the faith of the people 9. That no man can be coÌ„demned for beleuing the reall presence of Christes body and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine ¶ The adoration of Christes body is proued out of the Prophete Dauid OF this adoration due to the body of Christ the holy ghost forewarned vs by the Prophete Dauid in that psalme which Christ him selfe hanging vpon the Crosse declared to be literally ment of him selfe and that as well concerning his death whch he suffered for vs as also concerning the memory of the same death which he instituted in the night wherein he was betraied Christ therefore hauing she wed in that psalme the cruelty of Iewes in killing him most humbly asketh of his Father through his manhod that his soule may be deliuered by resurrection from the mouth of yâ— lion promising or vowing therewithal that he will open the name of God vnto his brethren and praise him in the middest of the congregation And when I cried vnto him he heard me If God hath fauorably heard Christ as there can be no doubt but he hath Christ is bouÌ„d by his own promise to praise his Father in a greate Church therefore saith he will doe so adding thereunto I will render or performe my vowes in the sight of them that feare him By what meane wil he performe them It foloweth immediatly Edent pauperes caet The poore shal eate be silled and they that seeke him shal praise the Lord theyr hartes shall liue for euer all the endes of the earth shall remember and be turned to the Lord. All the families of the Gentils shall adore in his sight Because the kingdome is the Lords and him selfe shall beare rule among the nations All that be fat on the earth haue eaten and adored al they that goe doune into the earth shall fall doune before him 1. Christ then â—…or his resurrections sake 2. made a vow to praise God 3. in the great Church of all nations 4. the performance whereof should be stablished by the meanes of eating filling 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and worshiping â—…ose that after baptism by yâ— grace of God are preserued froÌ„ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the body of Christ in the SacrameÌ„t of yâ— altar 〈◊〉 be filled 〈◊〉 praise God for euer Eating is the acte of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 spirituall 〈◊〉 is the heauenly effect thereof the praising of God is the fruit of the 〈◊〉 For we 〈◊〉 to be 〈◊〉 are filled to the end we should praise God for euer 〈◊〉 that after 〈◊〉 fall into greate 〈◊〉 partly they so fal that they rise 〈◊〉 and then they remember in yâ— memory of Christes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his last supper is that Christe died for them and so the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 forceth presseth them by penance to returne Partly they so fall that they care not to returne to God but lye wallowing still in their synnes yet they departe not by 〈◊〉 or infidelity out of the Church but kepe stil the bare belefe of Gods truth without performing his â—…dementes Such men eate worship but because they wil not remeÌ„ber be 〈◊〉 to God but come to the table of Christ vnworthely they are not filled by their eating But there are two other kinds of men who sometime haue bene of Christes church but now are not of it of which two the one doth eat and not worship because it beleuâ—…th not the thing eaten to be the flesh of God such are the Zinglians the other doth neither worship nor eate which are the vnfaithfull Iewes who are not only departed from the Catholike Church but also froÌ„ yâ— coÌ„fession of Christ our true Messias of whom S. Pâ—…ule saith we haue an altar whereof they haue no power to eate who serue the tabernacle Christ being absent in the visible forme of his body sitting therein at the right hand of his father ruleth his Church reigâ—…eth in it not as the vnfaithfull Iewes thought he would haue done by exâ—…ising violent inâ—…isdiction and subduing the bodies of men by force but he reigneth in yâ— hartes through faith charitie which he geueth vs. This inuisible reigning among visible men requireth for conuenient maâ—…tenance thereof an inuisible kinde of presence concerning the person of the king bâ—…t yet visible concerning the forâ—…ies of bread and wine to theâ—…d his members may know where to worship him For as his Church is visible through the bodies of them whose soules do inuisibly serue him so his body is visible through the formes of bread wine vnder the which it lieth inuisibly distributing the frutes of his death and resurrection All this eating adoring filling raigning and praysing doth chieâ—…ly belong in this place to the Sacrament of Christes body and blood Through those mysteries Christe the bread of life is really eaten wee are filled with grace God is praised in good works reigneth in our hartes we bowe downe to his body and worship him for our maker our King and our Lord. And that this interpretation is not of mine owne making it shall nowe appere S. Hierome vpon those wordes vota mea reddam I wil render my vowes which I promised saith Vota Christi natiuitas vel passio vota Ecclesiae opera bona vel mysterium corporis sanguinis mei offeram cum his qui in eius timore haec celebrant The vowes of Christ are his birth or passion the vowes of the Church are good workes or els I will offer saith Christe the mystery of my body and blood with them who celebrate these thinges in his feare First S. Hierome taketh the vowes of Christ to haue bene the promises that he made to be borne or to die but afterward he geueth an other sense which is more agreable to the letter For Christe had spoken before of his passion
and found a man in figure not in substance that is to say not in flesh Thus did the Marcionite reason out of the word of God it selfe to proue that Christ was not true man as M. Iuel now because the Fathers name the figure of the body would disproue the true body of Christ in the SacrameÌ„t But what answereth â—…rtullian Quasi non figura caet as though the figure and likenes and shape be not also ioyned to the substance So say we the figure whereof we dispute is ioyned to the substance of Christes body so that yâ— body signe of the breade make both but one perfite Sacrament or mysticall figure And that I will proue yet more plainly out of this very place of Tertullian who speaketh moste literally of bread as it was an old figure of Christes body whereof in Hieremie it was said let vs put the word of the â—…rosse into his bread to wit vpoÌ„ his body Christ theÌ„ fulfilling the old figures fecit panem corpus suum made the bread his body as Tertullian saith If he did so it could not tary bread any longer For as ayer being once made fier tarieth no more ayer so can not the bread whiche is made Christes body be any longer the substance of bread This grouÌ„d being put whiche is most true and it is expressed in Tertullian himselfe goe you forward and say this is the figure of my body as long as you wil yet the ground of that figure can not be the substance of bread sith it is made alredie the body of Christ and consequently the substance of Christe it selfe being made of the substance of bread and mystically conteined vnder the forme of bread is that figure of Christe him selfe walking visibly and suffering death where of Tertullian speaketh By this meane the worde is fastened into his bread as Hieremie said because his bread and his body is all one Iuel After consecration saith S. Ambrose the hody of Christ is signified San. S. Ambrose doth speake of that signification whiche is made whiles the Priest pronounceth Hoc est corpus meum this is my body Our Lord Iesus him selfe saith S. Ambrose crieth out this is my body Before the blessing of the heauenly wordes it is named an other kind after coÌ„secration the body is signified The which place wel vnderstaÌ„ded doth vtterly ouerthrow your figuratine opimon For S. Ambrose presseth vpon the signification óf these words this is my body and this is my blood The body saith he is signified the blood is named by mouth and this signification is made when Christ or his minister doth consecrate by these heauenly words Now immediatly before he said Quid dicimus de ipsa consecratione diuina vbi verba ipsa domini Saluatoris operantur What say we of the selfe consecration of God where the self words of yâ— Lord our Sauiour do work Now put together M. Iuel The words of our Sauiour do signify his body blood and yâ— selfe words doe worke verily them selues caÌ„ worke none other thing then they signifie therefore the wordes of our Sauiour which doe signifie Christes body and blood doe worke and make the same body and blood That is the signification whereof S. Ambrose speaketh The which his meaning when you dissemble you shew your selfe to be an enemie of the truthe Iu. I am oppressed with the multitude of witnesses San. As for these witnesses that say the Sacrament is a figure be no witnesses to your belefe because they proue your intent as well as if a man would proue by solenâ—…e witnesses that I had no soule because I hauc a body For whereas a Sacrament consisteth of two parts of an â—…uisible grace and of a visible signe whereas the inuisible grace of the Sacrament of Christes supper is the substance of his body made present to vnite vs to him and the visible signe thereof is the form of bread whosoeuer nameth that Sacrament a signe or a figure whether he meane both the grace and the signe or the signe alone certeinly he nâ—…er meaneth to deny the substaâ—…ciall presence of Christes body which is the chefe part of the same Sacrament Iu. It is a bondage and death of the soule saith S. Augustine to take the signe in steede of the things signified San. It is more a miserable bondage and death to exponud the things them selues for the signes as you doe S. Augustine meaneth of such a kind of signes when â—…ither the thing that appeareth to be signified is not at all true according to the letter as when God is said to be angrie or to repent or els wheÌ„ the thing signified is absent in substance as it was in the old sacrifices which yet the Iewes estemed as if they had bene the truth As therefore he that being athirst if he come to the yuie bush it selfe goe no further he should thereby neuer the more be filled with drincke so if a man come to an vnproper or to a bare signe he is miserably deceaued as those are who come to you for holy orders who were not your selues laufully ordeined Bishopes But as if a glasse of wine staÌ„d in the window to signifie what kind of wine is to be sold he that cometh to that signe may quenche his thirst because the substance whiche is signified to be sold is also there conteined so he that cometh to yâ— holy signes instituted by Christ he shal haue the truth of the signe really present and really geuen to him He that commeth to baptime is in dede borne by the vertue of that Sacrament and â—…e that commeth to our Lordes table shall â—…ate by his mouth therein the bread of life really present ¶ That the supper of Christe is a naked and bare figure according to the doctrine of the Sacramentaries HArding The Sacramentaries hold opinion that the body of Christ is in the Sacrament but in a figure signe or token only Iuel M. Harding vniustly reporteth of vs. San. I must say to you in this case M. Iuel as S. 〈◊〉 said to the Arrians who called Christ Dominum the Lord but yet denied him to be God Dominum licet nuncupes dominum tamen esse non dicis quia tibi ex communi genere potius familiari nomine quâm ex natura sit Dominus Albeit you name him Lorde yet you meane him not to be the Lorde Because he is a Lord to you rather by a commoÌ„ kind and a familiar name then by nature Euen so pretend what honorable opinion or doctrine you list of Christes supper as long as by nature and substance you thinke not that externall gift to be his body which him selfe called so you rather 〈◊〉 it by a better name then meane it to be any better thing then a bare signe and figure Ebion although he denied Christes Godhead yet as Epiphanius telleth he
geue Whereas the Sacrament was not yet deliuered but was only commended and set foorth in words vnto the Iewes when Christ sayd the bread which I will geue is my flesh 2. Iâ—… commendare were Latine to geue yet it should haue bene translated I haue geuen 3. For viuificabit M. Iuel readeth viuificat it doth geue life for it shall geue life He was â—…oth to haue any commendation past or any geuing of life to come For he wold so vnderstand Christes words that the gift the quickening might be present lest it should apperteyn to the supper Whereas the commendation of the gift was past in those words I wil geue and the geuing of life to come verily because the Sacrament should then geue life when it should be receaued These are miserable shifts to saue your selfe from subscribing Iu. We haue a spirituall mouth a spirituall tast eyes eares as Basill Leo Origen Tertulliá say Christ is to be digested by faith he is the bread of the mind not of the belli to beleue in him that is to eate the liuing bread therefore Christes meaning is spirituall and not reall San. What grosse ignorance is this to thincke that the reall preseÌ„ce of Christ in the SacrameÌ„t hindereth my spiritual mouth tast eares eyes faith or minde All these muste goe together Christ tooke his body to bring to our bodies the meate whereof our soule might spiritually eate It is the fondest kind of reasoning in the world by one truth to denie an other seing both staÌ„d together Is my faith the lesse because Christ was bodily seen in earth How is then my spiritual feeding the worse because the foode of life is in my mouth Doth not Tertullian say the flesh is fed with the body blood of Christ to thend the soule may be made fat of God Iu. M. Harding wil say eating with mouth and grinding with teeth is a worke spiritual And so he is a good proctour for the Ca pharnaites San No that hâ—… will not say except the meate be so eaten that the manner of eating it be so cleane and spirituall that although it enter into the mouth yet the â—…aith both may and doe worke vpon it by adoration and participation as it chanceth in Christes supper And therefore Christ said work the meat which perisheth not which the sonne of man wil geue you And he meaneth work it by soule by beleuing and in body by eating And the Prophet Dauid saieth They haue eaten and worshiped This vnderstanding neither yâ— Capharnaites had nor the Sacrmentaries haue therefore they grind now common bread with their teeth whereâ—… they shal bitterly gnash if they repeÌ„t not yâ— soner Iuel Chrysostom will not suffer this euasion who sayth to vnderstand carnallie is to vnderstand plainly as the things be vttered and to thinke vppon nothing els San. We vnderstand not so For we seing the forme of bread thinke vppon the body of Christ which is vnder it Therefore S. Chrysostom is not against our euasion Iuel S. Augustine sayeth the saying of Christ is a figure or maner of speache San. What you meane by your maner of speache I can not tell S. Augustine vseth not those words But except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man is in dede a figure and the speaking thereof is figuratiue because it was not meant that a maÌ„ should be visiblie eaten as flesh is eaten at common tables But yet that he should be really eaten Albeit the maner of eating be figu ratiue as we know And therefore when Christ had consecrated the bread into his body and sayd this is my body that speache was not figuratiue because as the truth of the body was to be eaten so the maner of the eating it was determined And theâ—… all was plain to good beleuers but not to Iudas and his companions who beleue no more then they see bodily S. Augustine then calling those words except ye eat my flesh figuratiue referreth the figure to the maner of eating But not to the substance which is to be eaten For els if by no meane the flesh of Christ might be eaten it should not be eateÌ„ by faith But if it may be so eaten it may be eaten by mouth also in that pure maner as it is geuen vs. Iuel The figure commaundeth vs to be partakers of Christes passion San. It had bene more truly translated that we ought to communicate with Christes passion Communicare is to partake in the fullest maner that may be And how can you possiblie communicate better or more fully with Christes passion then to eate worthely the self body that suffered Whereof S. Paule sayeth How oft so euer ye eate this bread and drinke the chalice of our Lord ye shall shew his death vntill he come That is the communicating whereof S. Augustine speaketh Iuel And with comfort and profit lay vp in our memorie that Christ hath suffred death for vs. San. The perfit laying of this matter in our memorie is with Penance loue to eate the thing which is made for the remembrance of Christ. Thence cometh power to liue through or for Christ so really as he liueth through or for his Father with whome he is one thing and nature Of this whole saying of S. Augustine I haue intreated more fully in my 3. b. the. xiiij Chapiter Iuel This therefore is Christes meaning and the very eating of his flesh San. Not this which you meane But this it is M. Iuel as I haue told you The whole man must eate as well in body as in soule because the whole is taken and assumpted of Christ the whole is incorporated by Baptism the whole redemed by death and the whole shal be crowned with glorie therefore the true eating is to eate that meate which of it selfe coÌ„sisteth of body soule and Godhead to eate it I say in body soule and spirite and not by faith only Iuel The Capharnaites vnderstoode Christe grossely of éating with teeth that whiche Christe spake spiritually and so would M. Harding teache the people San. D. Harding 〈◊〉 no more then he toke of Christ and of the Euangelists It is no grosie thing vnder the form of bread to eate the bread of life The Capharnaites went no farther then to theyr teeth and belly But we make the teeth to serue the mind also That of Origenes S. Dierom S. Augustine maketh not againste vs. Iu. Tertullian saith the Capharnaites thought his speachâ—… was hard and intolerable as though he had determined to geue them his flesh verily and in dede to be eaten with theyr mouthes therin saith Tertullian stode theyr erroure San. You know they thought not of eating it vnder the forme of bread For S. Augustine saith in Christes person Quis modus sit manducandi istum panem ignoratis Ye know not what waie there is of eating this bread Therefore the
parte Is that enough to buyld your consciences vpon agaynst the playne scripture vniuersall tradition consent of nations deâ—… of generall Councels and so vndouted witnesses as are in the aâ—…cient Fathers are you so slenderly buylt vpon Christ that euerie blast of 〈◊〉 â—…inglius or Caluins mouth is able to remoue you from the scriptures tradition Councels Fathers and 〈◊〉 belefe of all Christendome I speake not this God is my witnesse to vpbrayd you of your 〈◊〉 but to warne you of the miserable state that your 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seâ—…ses haue caried you to I now requier not anie other thing of you then that yow depelie ponder and all parâ—… set a side calling for the grace of God earnestly examine what was the sirst motion that made you doute of Christes 〈◊〉 and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine Was it not your senses Did not your sensuall man saie how can this white round cake be the body of Christ How can this bald shoren Priest make God How can Christe sitting at the ryght hand of his Father he also present in a thousand places at once Tell not me but tell your ghostly fathers whether theis reasons chefely moâ—…ed you not to discredit this high mysterie If those or suche like where the beginning of your departing from the Catholike â—…aith remember that God is almightie that Christ is God that he said This is my body doe and make this thing and all those thoughtes of infidelitie are straight driuen away But if now ye replie that there was in dede the beginning but afterward you found more strong argumentes I tell you the argumentes also be daily the stronger because your faith is daylie the weaker But for so muche as I am not with euerie of you face to face where I maye shew the weakenes of your argumentes I haue answered in this booke such as I found in the Apologie of the Churche of England beseching you most hartely to take my paynes in good worth If any where I seme to charge my aduersaries with malice or any like faulte take not that spoken to you but to hym that is giltie of it If my laboure lyke you in this argument it shal be redie to serue in anie other to my best habilitie Fare well and pray for me as I beseche God of his grace that I may pray especially for all them that reade my booke To th'entent it may offend none but the desperate helpe some that be not incurable comfort others that desier comfort of God to whom be all honour and glorie Amen ¶ Certeyne notes about the vse and translation of holy scripture to be remembred of hym that shall reade this booke IN alleging the holy scriptures although I haue had alwaies dew regard vnto the tonges wherein they were first writen yet I haue specially kept that texte which hath bene aboue these thousand yeres generally receaued throughowt all the weast Churche and therefore is expounded best and best knowen to the Latyns Concerninge the number of the Psalmes I haue followed the seuentie interpretours whom vniuersally the whole Churche hath followed from the Apostles tyme namely in the distinction of the Psalmes Concerning the englyshe bible I haue almost neuer vsed the wordes thereof partely because I am not bounde therevnto but specially because it almost neuer translateth any text well whereof any controuersie is in these our daies And to omit for this present other falsified places to the number of a great many hundreds these that followe are found not to be well translated in the onely matter of the Sacrament of Christes body and blood Christ saieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Operamini cibum permanentem The true Englishe were worke the meate which tarieth The translation appointed to be read in the Churches turneth Operamini labour for Whereby the sense of the place is corrupted We labour for that which we seeke and haue not we worke that stuffe which is present with vs and must nedes be present before we can worke it I suppose there is a difference whether a carpenter worke a piece of tymber or labour for a piece of tymber He that woorketh it hath it present he that laboureth for it seeketh it absent Christ bad the Iewes not labour for a meate which should be absent when they came to work but he bad them work the meate which taryeth to life euerlastinge which the sonne of man will geue them The sonne of man which is Christ will make the meate present and the Iewes are willed to worke the sayed meate being first made present and geuen to them It is not therfore the commaundement of Christ that they should labourfor it as if it were to be sought out by their diligeÌ„ce for they should labour in vain as neuer being able to find of them selues so preciouse a thing But Christ meaneth that they shuld work by faith and mouth by soule and body by soule in beleuing by body in eating that meate which the sonne of man doth promise to geue them That is the trew meaning of the word Operamini work ye as the wordes that follow to the end of the Chapiter do plainly declare But because the Sacramentaries do not beleue the meate that tarieth which is afterward shewed to be the flesh of Christ eaten in dede whereby he tarieth in vs and we in him for euer to be made really present so that we maye work it by faith and body therfore they haue changed working into labouring for as thowgh in the supper of Christ we laboured for his body and did dot rather work his body Againe Christ saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Qui manducat me ipse viuet propter me The trew English is He that eateth me he also shall liue for me The Englishe Bible teadeth He that eateth me shall liue by the meanes of me There is a similitude made in that place that as Christ being sent of the Father liueth for the Father so he that eateth Christ liueth for Christ. The Greek word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in both places It is construed with an accusatiue case in both places it is latined by propter in both places yet in the former place it is englished in the common Bible for the Father in the later not for me as it owght but by the meanes of me Whereas Christ wold proue that as him self doth liue for his Father with whom he is one nature and Godhead by eterna generation so we doe liue for him with whom we are one flesh and manhod by eating him worthely As therforâ—… the Godhead of the Father is really present in the whole substance thereof with Christ so is Châ—…ist really present with vs in his whole substance when we eate him in the Sacrament of which kind of eating he speaketh in that place by the waie of promise as I haue proued vpon S. Ihon. What honâ—…sty can be here pretended in one sentence to turne one
a stroÌ„g stout effectual figure ioyned with words of promise stirring vp the hart of him that heareth the promise and worthely râ—…aueth the pledge therof to mounte into heauen and there by faith to fede in spirite vpon Christes owne body and blood as he in earth corporally feedeth vpon bread and wine For Caluin teacheth bread and wine to be the figures and signes of Christes body and those wordes This is my body to be wordes of preaching or of promising Christes body to them that doe beleue O pitifull tossing and tearing of Gods holy mysteries Are those words which make and shew the body of Christ present words of promise But hereof I will speak more hereafter Now concerning that he willeth vs to goe into heauen by faith know ye not that because our nature was not able to 〈◊〉 â—…y to the seat of God in heauen therefore y◠〈◊〉 oâ—… God came 〈◊〉 from heauen to earth to leade and list vs vp to the â—…ition oâ—… his Father Know ye not that because our body more quickly â—…weth our soule dounward then our spirit is able to draw our body vpward therefore Christ 〈◊〉 not only yâ— soule but also the body of man geuing vs in his last supper that body of his to th'inthent our bodies taking hold in the Sacrament of the altar of his body might be caried into heauen to haue the sight of God And because faith without th'incarnation of Christ cannot lift vp our bodies therefore Christ fulfilled â—…aith with truth and hauing taken of the virgin oure nature gaue his body in dede to our bodies and soules yâ— we again might in body soule be lifted vp with it As a man that is cast into a depe pit calleth by the meane of his tonge for help but when a cord is let doune to him for the aide and 〈◊〉 of him it is not then sufficient to vse his tong still and to let his handes alone euen so our faith called for Christ to come from heauen to help vs to let doune the corde of his humanitie of his flesh and blood And shall we now when it is let doune to be fastened in our bodies and in the bottom of our hartes by eating it really shall wee now refuse it and saie wee will goe into heauen by faith ourselues and there take holde of Christ whereby wee maie be saued and deliuered out of the depe vale of misery As though the corde should haue neded to haue ben let doune if wee could haue fastened our bodies to any thing in heauen and yet our bodyes are they which weigh doune our soules châ—…ely But what meane I to reason in this place of that point whereof in all the booke folowing by Gods grace I will fully intreat For as it happeneth they are the scholars of Calnin with whom specially wee must haue to do at this time Of whose lerning and prâ—…ncie â–ª I most crueâ—…y craue this fauour that none of them all thinâ—… me to speak against their persons but only against their opinions and so to speak against them as I am instructed by the holy Scriptures not graunting that either they loue more intierly or study more carefully or reuerence more hartily the word of God then my Fathers brethren and I my selfe doe in the Catholike Church of Jesus Christ. Only about the meaning of it I rather would trust the common iudgeâ—…ent of auncient Doctours and practise of the whole Church theu mine owne priuate election and phantasie or the deuise of a newly planted congregation A Catholike man must kepe the most auncient path and most commonly troden high waie Priuie bypathes carie mâ—…n a side to the 〈◊〉 dennes of 〈◊〉 My purpose is to proue out of the word of God specially against zuinglius and Caluin that Christ geueth in his last supper the true substance of his flesh and blood not only to our soules by words of promise but also to our bodies vnder the formes of bread and wine And for as much as the present Church of England in the Apologie thereof hath set forth to the world an other doctrine contrarie to that wce reâ—…ued of our fore Fathers I will first disproue and confute the wordes and reasons oâ—… the Apologie and afterward will by the grace of God proue the Catholike faith out of the holy Scriptures and auncient Fathers But first of all I must declare what we Catholiks and what the Protestants and Sacramentaries beleue the supper of Christ to be That seing I make the Title of my booke Of the supper of our Lord it maie straight appere whose 〈◊〉 is more worthy to be instituted of Christ that which we through his word beleue or that which they assigne him against y◠〈◊〉 truthe of his own words ¶ what the supper of Christ is according to the belâ—…e of the Catholikes BEcause my purpose is to intreat of the blessed supper of our Lord I thought it best to declare before hand what we take that supper to be shewing withal how the Sacramentaries vnder the pretense of refoorming the abuses thereof haue taken away the whole supper of Christ and geuen vs a bare drinking of their own 〈◊〉 And whence maie that be more truly and soundly proued then chiâ—…fly out of the word of God next out of the monuments of the a aâ—…cient Fathers The word of God is a most faithfull witnesse oâ—… the institution of Christ the monuments and writings of auncient Fathers doe shew the right vnderstanding of the word of God which thing I speake not as though the Catholike Doctours of this later tyire had not the self same holy Ghost which the first had but seing our aduersaries refuse Albereus magnus Thomas of Aquine Bonauenture Alexander of â—…ales Dionyâ—…ns the Carthusian Nicolaus de Lyra Gabriel Biel and such other men of excelleÌ„t vertue wit and lerning who not withstanding by a rule that S. Auguâ—…stine geueth ought to be of credit in so much as all they liued before this question rose beâ—…wene the Sacramentaries and vs and therfore can not beare nor shew more affection to the one syde then to the other but seing our aduersaries refuse them for 〈◊〉 and yet follow men of later 〈◊〉 as Luther zuinglius 〈◊〉 we are content to put all the matter into the hands of the old Doctours And to beginne as we promised with the word of God thus writeth S. Paul in his first 〈◊〉 to the Corinthians Conuenientibus vobis in vnum iam non est dominicam coenam manducare vnusquisque enim suam coenam praesumit ad manducanduÌ„ when yow come together now there is no eating of our Lords supper For euery man taketh 〈◊〉 his owne supper to eate By the name of supper in the old tyme that one meale was meant wich ordinarily was made after noon and it serued for diner and supper The Corinthians coming together to yâ— holy communion taried not one for the other but
euery man as he was most riche so he made hast to take his owne meale neglecting to call other poore men to it S. Paule mislyking this custome in them sheweth that Christ did other wise who communicated his supper to all his Apostles equally For as S. Cyprian saith Aequa omnibus portio datur An equal porcion is geuen to all men And S. Hieroine sayeth Christi corpus aequaliter accipimus We take the body of Christ equally And Theodorite sayeth All men are indifferently partakers of our Lords supper At this time we chiefly consider that Christ hath a supper of his own as yâ— Corinthians had one of theirs And it is our question what Christes supper was If we shall beleue the holy scriptures 〈◊〉 toke bread wine when he had geuen thankes he said This is my body which is geuen for you and this chalice is the new testament in my blood By which words we are informed the supper of Christ to be his owne body blood geuen vnder yâ— signes of yâ— bread wine whâ—…re vpoÌ„ he gaue thaÌ„kes turning by his almighty power the substance of bread and wine into the substance of his body and blood The Sacramentaries take the wordes of Christ to be spoken figuratiuely and therefore they put bread and wine to remaine in their olde substance sayng we are 〈◊〉 by faith with the body and blood of Christ. Leauing other argumentes for other places we now only deâ—… whether the name and nature of a supper be more agreable to our belefe or to their meaning Whether is more like that Christ made his 〈◊〉 supper to his Apostles of the substance of common bread and wine or of his owne reall body and blood When a man departeth from his frends taking his leaue with a banket it is lyke that his banket shal be according to his habilitie full of deinty dishes and costly cates specially if it be published before and long tyme loked for as Christes banket was The which Melchisedech had prefigured more then two thousand yeares before 〈◊〉 had foreshewed it shuld contein al that might be delectable to the taste Dauid had called it a table prouided by God Salomon a table set forth by the wisedome of God whereunto poore men in spirit and the fooles of the world were called Elias lying hidden at the Torrent of Laryth was sed by crowes that brought him bread and flesh euery euening Christ in a parable describing the great supper made at the mariage of the kinges sonne which him self was telleth of oxen and other satlings kylled and made readie for that purpose And now shal we suppose that the sonne of the king of heauen making a parting supper unto his best beloued and the pillours of all his Church doth geue them ouâ—…wardly at his farewel none other deâ—…uties besides common bread and wine sanctified in vse only and not 〈◊〉 in substance A 〈◊〉 before he had 〈◊〉 with the same Apostles the paschall lambe and rising from that table as being the table of Moyses rather then of Christ he 〈◊〉 his Apostles feere to make them meete â—…or a greater mysterie And sitting doune againe he toke bread and wine not as the dishes of his banket but as matter and stuff wherof he wold make his owne supper For it is to be well weighed that this banket is called our Lords supper that is to say made and ministred and â—…ornished by Christ himselfe He now did not send S. Iohn S. Peter to prepare his supper as he sent them to make ready the Paschall lambe Christ in his owne supper is the prouider and maker of it He taketh bread and wiâ—…e into his holy handes inteÌ„ding lyke a most conning workeman of simple and litle stuff to make the greatest and finest feast that euer was hard of It is a great glorie in the profession of cookery to be able to make of one kinde of stuff as for example of egs alone sixtene or twenty diuerse dishes But to doe that feate much labour many spices and sauces great compositions and mixtures are required Christ in stede of all those shyfts vsed blessing working words of thankes geuing which were so sure to worke their intent that some men haue doubted whether he gaue thanks first because he forsaw the whole purpose out of hand should be obtained as him selfe wished or else which is more probable whether the very working of the feate were not the selfe thankes geuing for the worke For his blessing and thankes geuing was the sayng ouer the bread This is my body and ouer the wine This is my blood By the vertue of which wordes his body and blood being made of the creatures of bread and wine as well were a thankfull sacriâ—…ice them selues to God euen vnder the forme of bread and wine as Christ also in his visible foorm hauing wrought this worke did praise and thanke his Father for such an excellent effect The which body and blood his Aposâ—…les eating drinking were made partakers of the greatest baÌ„ket that euer was made in earth For the better vnderstanding wherof it maye please the reader to repete in his minde how God in the beginning adorned this world first with angels and heauenly spirits Secondly with the heauens them selues Thirdly with the elements of fyer ayer water and â—…arth And as the angels occupie the highest place so doe the heauens with the lights and starres in them occupie the second place the foure elements are beneth them When 〈◊〉 were come after this sorte from the highest order of 〈◊〉 to the earth which is the lowest element of all then it pleased the wyâ—…edome of God to make as it were a reuolt of all things and to returne his creatures from the bottom of the earth vpward againe towards him selfe He therefore made the â—…arth to bring sorth grene grasse with all such kind of things as haue animam vegetatiuam that is to saye as liue and are quick by the strength which they haue in them selues to grow and encreace of which kinde all herbes springs and trees be Aboue those in a higher degre were byrdes fishes beasts which haue a life sensitiue being able those that be perfit to moue from place to place Last of all God made man who hath not only the vegetatiue power and sensitiue in his soule but also reason and vnderstanding In whose body are the vertues of the foure elements with the 〈◊〉 of the heauâ—…ns in whose soule is free will and power to gouern agreable to the nature of angels and of heauenly spirits For which cause this creature hath bene worthely called euen of the Christâ—…n Philosophers 〈◊〉 a lytle world for that he alone hath in him all the degrees of creatures both liuing and without life both sensible and reasonable and therefore he is called in holy scripture Omnis creatura â—…ll creatures Now when the sonne of
God taking pitie that this litle world the worke of his great power was by the deuyll seduced came doune and toke flesh of the virgyn Mary being true God and true man in one person At that tyme were all things briefly brought again to God whence they first were created brought forth Christ aboue is all in one In his Godhed he is all that is aboue the heauens and that fylleth the world In his manhod which is the 〈◊〉 of God he is all that is in or vnder the heauens In this manhod are all creatures most perfectly compiled without all blemmysh of nature of mynd or of body So that seing this body of Christ wherein also the fullnes of Godhed dwelleth is geuen and eaten at a banket there is no doubt but the same is such a banket as can not be made with all the creatures of heauen and earth gathered together In this one dysh is a composition most delicate of angels heauens elements of herbes fysshes byrds beasts of reasonable men and of God hym selfe No kind of salit meate sauce sruyts confection no kynde of wyne aqua vite aqua composita liquors syrops can be found in nature made by arte deuysed by wyt but it is all set vppon this table and that in a small rome where it cloyeth not with the abundance ue annoyeth with the vncleane handling it sylleth without lothsomues it prouoketh the appetite without daunger of surfcating To be shorte were it not a banket prouided by the sonne of God no man wold think it possible to haue any such feast made in the desert of this wycked world Thus good reader doe the Latholyks teache of the supper of our Lord and beleue it agreable to his word and worthy his worship This banket fedeth the whole man there is a reasonable soule to fede our reason a naturall substance of flesh to fede and nourysh our flesh there is the spirite of God which quyckeneth both soule and flesh to lyfe euerlasting This is the true Manna which conteyneth the taste of all swetenes and hath in it selfe all maner of pleasant refection This is the fode of lyfe the which who so eateth worthely he shall lyue for euer This is the feast whereof SalomoÌ„ speaketh Hoc itaque visum est mihi bonuÌ„ vt comedat quis bibat fruatur laetitia ex labore suo This therefore semeth good to me that a man should eate and drinke and enioye myrth of his traualic Which words S. Augustine allegeth and expoundeth after this sorte Vbi ait Non est bonuÌ„ homini nisi quod manducabit bibet quid credibilius dicere intelligitur quà m quod ad participationem mensae huius pertinet quam Sacerdos ipse mediator testamentinoui perhibet secundum ordinem Melchisedech de corpore sanguine sue when Salomon sayeth There is no good thing to a man but that which he shall eate and drinke what is he more credibly thought to meane then the thing which belongeth to the partaking of this table yâ— which table yâ— Priest him selfe who is mediatour of the new testament doth furnish according to yâ— order of Melchisedech with his owne body and blood If then the Prophet haue affirmed the greatest good that man hath in this life to be eating and drinking and that eating and drinking belong to the supper of Christ we maye perceaue right well that the matter and substance of Christes supper consisteth not in bread and wine for then we might be better occupied then in eating and drinking it but in the reall flesh and blood of Jesus Christ wherein all goodnes spirituall and corporall is collected into one heape and geuen to vs vnder the forme of bread and wine For so God hath appoiÌ„ted Instaurare omnia in Christo quae in caelis quae in terra sunt in ipso Briefly to renew all things in Christ which are in heauen and which are in earth in him The Breek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 importeth such a brief gathering to one certain head and somme that not only heauen and earth but all things that are in them are brought into Christ and in him as it were begun again renewed The which cometh to passe by the taking of his flesh and geuing it to death vpon the crosse sor man in whom all things were both briefly collected and pitiously corrupted Now when Christ gaue to vs in his banket that flesh which he toke of his mother and that blood which he did shed on the crosse bidding vs make and eate that thing for the remembrance of him then was the head the floure the cheif composition of all meats drinks and iunkets in the world geuen vs in his last fupper S. Cyprian consydering the great deinties of this feast sayth Vident haec Sacramenta pauperes spiritu hoc vno contenti ferculo omnes mundi huius delicias aspernantur possidentes Chri stum aliquam huius mundi possidere supellectilem dedignantur The poore in spirit see these Sacraments and contenting them selues with this one dishe they despise all the delicates of this world and possessing Christ they disdaine to possesse any stuff of this world Contrariwise the wise men of this world abhorring as the same Cyprian saith the commandement of this religion euen to this day go backward he alludeth to the Capharnaits who through the doctrine this Sacrament forsoke Christ à secretis diuinis omnium intra se mysteriorum continentibus summam diffugiunt recedunt And they flee and depart from the diuine secrets which conteine within them the brief or somme of all mysteries A great deale more is found in S. Cyprian after the same sense in so much he calleth the supper of our Lord Omniâ—… consummationis sinem the end of all perfection All which praises only rise vpon this ground because these mysteries truly really contein within them the body and blood of Christ. when S. Cyprian sayth within them intra se he meaneth within the compasse or soormes of bread and wine For those only are the things that we can point vnto within or without Other meate or drink we see not S. Chrysostom hath so much in the praise of this feast that it wold make a great volume to bring all he saith therof I will con tent myself at this tyme with one place Quando corpus Christi tibi propositum fuerit dic tecum Propter hoc corpus so foorth When the body of Christ is set before thee saiâ—… with thyselfe For this bodies sake I am nomore earth and ashes For this I hope to receaue heauen and the good things which are in heauen immortall life the seat of Angels the cumpanie of Christ. The verie table is the strength of our soule the bond of trust the foundation our hope saluation life If we goe hence pure with this sacrifice with most great confidence we shall ascend to the
holy porche or entry as it were compassed round about with golden garments But what reherse I things to come Dum in hac vita sumus vt nobis terra caelum sit facit hoc mysterium Whiles we are in this life this mysterie causeth that the earth is heauen to vs. By the iudgement of Chrysostom the fame body of Christ which is our saluation and life is set besore vs vpon the verie table to th' intent whiles we liue the earth should be heauen to vs and when we departed heuce carying that body with vs we should be safe conueied vnto heauen it self When he saith the earth is heauen to vs through this mysterie he meaneth nolesse to be set vpon the table it self or altar then is at the right hand of God the Father And this is the supper of our Lord which the Catholiks beleue and not an emptie dish of faith which although it be much worth when truthe is absent yet as in heauen where clere vision is no faith abydeth euen so when earth is through this mysterie made heauen to vs we receaue and eate the body of Christ not only by faith from heauen but also in truthe from the verie altar and table For as there is a truthe lesse of our bodies then of our soules and as the soules of the faithfull neuer lacked God whom they might feede on by faith spirit so Christ therefore toke flesh that our bodies also might haue a banket made to them and so the whole man might be noâ—…rished to life euerlasting Oportuit enim certe sayth Cyrillus vt non solum anima per spiritum sanctum in beatam vitam alcenderet verum etiam vt rude atque terrestre hoc corpus cognato sibi gustu tactu cibo ad immortalitatem reduceretur For it behoued truly that not only yâ— soule should ascend by the holy Ghost into the blessed life but also that this rude and earthly body should be brought to immortality by tasting touching eating the meate which were of alliance or kynred with it that is to say of the same nature and substance whereof our bodies are Thus in the Câ—…tholik banket of Christes supper not only the soule but euen the body eateth tasteth and toucheth such meat as is of the same blood and kynred with it That is to say our flesh eateth Christes flesh our body his body It was flesh that made vs all borne in originall synne it is flesh that maketh vs all regeâ—…erate in Christ. Our soule was spâ—…tted by the entrance into that flesh which was spotted Thereiore our soule is made cleane by the wasshing of that our flesh which was borâ—… in syn The flesh sayth Tâ—…rtullian is washed that the soule maie be cleansed The flesh is oynted that the soule maie be consecrated The â—…esh is sigued that the soule maie be defenced The flesh is shadowed with imposition of hand that the soule also may be defenced The flesh is fed with the body and blood of Christ that the soule may also be made sat of God Non possunt ergo separari in mercede quas opera coniung it They cannot therefore be parted in reward whom work ioyâ—…eth Hitherto hath Tertullian commended to vs the great priuileges which God geueth to our flesh The greatest of all which is the eating and drinking of the body and blood of Christ. As therefore we Catholiks beleue most vndoutedly not only that our soules be 〈◊〉 and redemed of Christ but euen that our flesh is the creature of God made with his own hands redemed by Christ and shall 〈◊〉 again at the later daie really and liue for euer with the soule of the iuste man euen so we beleue and professe that not only our soules but euen yâ— same flesh receaueth â—…to it the benefits of Chriâ—…s paâ—…on the Sacraments which he left to vs eating draiâ—…ing really vnder the formes of bread and wine the true substance of Christes body and blood This is the last supper of Christ which we Catholiks beleue and prosesse ¶ whâ—…t the supper of Christ is according to the doctrine of the Protestants and Sacramentaries with a confutation thereof NOw let vs consyder on the other syde what kinde of banket our new brethern teache They saye Christ geueth to the body bread and wyne but to the soule he geâ—…eth hym selfe by faith spirit and vnderstanding This opinion shall by Gods grace be straight waies proued faulâ—…ye and erroneous In dede before that Christ was made man such a banket as they speake of had bene much worth and was kept of Melchisedech and Abraham of the children of Israell eating Manna of the priests eating the bread and cakes which was offered according to the lawe For then with an earthly banket of bread of flesh and of wyne the ioyning of a spirituall eating by fayth and vnderstanding was the highest banket that could be made For as the spirit and fayth was vertuously occupied in lifting vp it self to God So was the body occupied in making a figure and signe of the true banket of Christ which was to come But when Christ had taken flesh of the virgyn Marye tunc 〈◊〉 Christum facta est then the truth was made by Christ. Truth perfoormed outwardly in fulfilling the corporall figures doth adde much vnto fayth and spirit In the fayth of good men and in the spirit of God Christ was euer man but not euer man in truth of nature Whilâ—…s Christ was only a spirit and only God so long the feast or banket which was geuen for hym had no better thing in it then the fayth and spirit of the eaters and drinckers for that was the highest gyft thâ—…t God as yet had geuen to man But all those eatings and drinkings which were in nature and in the law of Moyses though they had corporall meate with faith and spirit are so farre behind the supper of Christ after his manhod really assâ—…pted as the fayth of Christes incarnation is behind the incarnation it felfâ—… Mark the point good reader and thou shalt not be deceaued by false doctrine As Christ by his incarnation did geue a reall truth to the fayth of the old fathers and not a new spirite so in his last supper he geueth the same spirituall gyft to vs that he gaue to Abel Noe Abraham Moyses Dauid Daniell and such others but he geueth vs an other kind of truth then euer he gaue them The truthe made by Christ is the true flesh and blood which he tooke of his mother and the geuing of that truth to be eaten is the geâ—…ing of that flesh and blood vnder the formes of bread and wyne Therefore they that now say Christ geueth bread and wyne with spirituall gyfts wherein our soule eateth and drinketh Christes flesh and blood they graunt a good thing one way but an other way they take away the greatest goodnes that euer was geuen to man Their
spirituall eating is not euill but it lacketh some truthe How so because the whole man is not fed For faith feedeth bue the soule and yet the name of feeding is proper to the body and thence is transferred to the soule that feeding therefore is not fully true which eateth not that in the mouth which it eateth in the harte whereas the true supper of Christ is meat in dede and drink in dede and must be the eating of that in our body which our mynde and soule doth eate So sayd Leo the great of Christes supper Hoc enim ore sumitur quod fide creditur For that is taken in the mouth which is beleued in fayth The reall flesh of Christ is beleued in faith therefore the same real flesh must be eaten with mouth And what other cause can be deuysed why allways from the beginning of the world to this day eating by mouth hath beâ—…e ioyned to the highest sacrifices and chefe kind of worshipping of God that euer was vsed what meaneth the â—…ating of the Paschall laâ—…be of Manâ—… of shew bread wheateâ—… meale and all such offerings as were in the law Could not God haue inueuted an other waye to haue occupied his people in seruing him but only by eating and drinking Surely the meaning of all those diners and suppers and feasts were to shew that in tyme to come the same Messias that they loked for 〈◊〉 in whom they beleued should so truly come for our sakes into the earth that he should come also into our bodies to dwell by his flesh caten in vs that we might dwell in him Neither let this seme a laughing matter to thee good Reader For sith Christ was born to vs and geuen to vs as Esaie saith he sought not his owne commoditie but ours and perceauing that in paradyse the whole nature of man was ouercome of the deuill specially by cating with mouth of the fruit which was forbiddeÌ„ him As against the deuill persuading Eua to disobaye God he sent the arâ—…hangell Babriell to persuade the blessed virgin Marie to consent to his will as against that appletree he planted the crosse of our redemption as for yâ— disobedience of Adam him selfe came to be obedient euen to death right so for the apple of the forbiddeÌ„ tree 〈◊〉 eaten he gaue him selfe the fruit and apple of the crosse which is the tree of grace lawfully and medefully to be eaten and his blood to be drunken Bibimus sayth S. Cyprian de sanguine Christi ipso iub eÌ„te vitae aeternae cum ipso per ipsum participes animalis vitae peccata quasi sanguinem impurum horrentes fatentes nos per peccati gustum â beatitudine priuatos damnatos nisi nos Christi clementia ad societatem vitae aeternae suo sanguine reduxisset We drink of the blood of Christ him self commanding being partakers of euerlasting life with him and by him abhorring the sinnes of bare natural life as vnpure blood and graunting ourselues to haue ben depriued from blisse and damned through the taste of sinne except the clemencie of Christ had brought vs again to the fellowship of euerlasting life by his blood S. Cyprian setteth the drinking of Christes blood against the taste of syn which man fell into by tasting vnlawfully the apple which was forbidden to be tasted of The like phrase also Prosper Aquitanicus hath vsed who firsâ—… declareth our fall by eating and drinking and afterward our arising again by eating the body and drinking the blood of Christ. Concerning our fall thus he writeth Liberum ergo arbitrium id est rei sibi placitae spontaneus appetitus vbi vsum bonorum quae acceperat fastidiuit vilescentibus sibi felicitatis suae praesidijs insanam cupiditatem ad experientiam praeuaricationis intendit bibit omnium vitiorum venenum totam naturam hominis intemperantiae suae ebrietate madefecit Free will therefore that is to saie yâ— voluÌ„tarie appetite of the thing which pleased it being ones 10thsome of the good things which it had takeÌ„ and without regard or care had to the aydes of his own blessednes hauing bent his impoteÌ„t gredines to the triall and experience of disobedience and preuarication drank in the poyson of all vices and drowned the whole nature of man with the drunkeÌ„nes of his intemperance Thus was poison drunk in Let vs now coÌ„sider whence helth maie be recouered Inde priusquam edendo carnem filij hominis bibendo sanguiuem eius lethalem digerat cruditatem labitur memoria errat iuditio nutat incessu neque vllo modo idoneus est ad illud bonum eligendum â–ª concupiscendum quo se sponte priuauit Thence it commeth that man faileth in memorie erreth in iudgement wauereth in his going neither is he by any meanes mete to choose and desier that good thing whereof he depriued himself of his own accorde before that by eating the flesh of the sonne of man by drinking his blood he digest the deadly surâ—…et which he toke As therefore the apple that Adam did really eate against the commandement of God doth make vs all yâ— were in his body at that tyme gilty of disobedience and the children of wrath so the reall eating of Christes flesh according to the worthy eating thereof which Christ commanded doth make vs all free from the pain of euerlasting death and the children of grace and glorie But as euery man did not eate the prohibited apple in his own person and by his own act but by the act of our father and mother and as being in them and of them so it is not nedefull that euery man in his own person eate the flesh of Christ which is geuen vs in the Sacrament to be eaten but it is absolutely nedefull that some or other eate it as really as euer the apple was eaten that all the rest who by baptisme enter into the same body maie be one perfitly with Christ whiles they are one mystically with them who really eate the substance of Christes flesh being the substance of our true sacrifice truly rosted vpon the crosse and truly rising from death to th' intent it might be truly eaten of vs without any corruption or perishing therof Thus we find that the supper of Christ can not in any wise consist of eating the flesh of Christ by faith and spirit alone But we that is to saie some of the mystical body that are of lawfull age must eate it to saluation as the apple was eaten to damnatioÌ„ And because before Christ was incarnat we had no apple to damnatioÌ„ he toke flesh and went of his own accord to death that thence we might plucke the apple of life and the fruit of the wood of life which preserueth vs to euerlasting ioyes For as Gregorius Bishop of Nyssa brother to S. Basil doth teache the medicine must be according to the poyson which we
not to geue vs a drinking in stede of a solemne feast In comparyson of this banket all fayth is impeâ—…t For we eate the ende of our belefe All vnderstanding fayleth in so much as more is in our mouth then we are able to comprehend in our wyt or mynde All spirituall gyfts are inâ—…erlour because the flesh is present which triumpheth ouer death and ascending into heauen sytteth at the right hand of God thence distributing gyfts vnto men We haue the cause of all 〈◊〉 present and letting it go shall we chiefly commend the feast for â—…ertayn spirituall effectes In respect of Christes reall substance thy supper O Caluyn is but a mere sauour of swete meates Geue me the flesh of Christ and take thou the sauour of it But alas the sauour hath alredy kâ—…lled thee â–ª so much the lesse I wonder if thou art wery of the flesh it selfe In setting forth our damnation in old Adam thou lackest neither diligence nor eloquence thou hast therin set foorth the lumpe of perdition the seuere doctrine of induration the impotent weakenes of the wounded man to helpe forward his owne destruction But when thou commest to Christ the new Adam he hath a sâ—…ly pore vnknowen and vnsene cumpanie fewe children a cold supper small offering of sufficient grace his baptisme is with thee lyke a marke set vpon shepe that sheweth somewhat and worketh nothing his Church hath no externaâ—… sacrifice no priesthod no one chief shepherd in earth no authoritie to make lawes no communion of Saâ—…ts by the way of praying to them or for yâ— soules departed no reall ioyning vâ—…iting with Christes flesh and blood in the holy mysteries What is this but to preferr euill before good the deuill before God shadowes before truth vice before vertue and the power of darknes before the kingdom of light It is no eating now as S. Paule sayeth of our Lords supper for euery heretyke taketh a supper of his owne before hand making Christes supper to geue place to hym And that I maye speake nothing of so great change of communions as hath bene in England Luther saith that Christes words be proper and that his supper is bread and flesh wyne and blood as though the immortall flesh of Christ must be eaten with materiall bread How do mortal things agree with immortal in one banket Carolstadius supposeth that Christes words be proper but that he touching hym selfe on the brest sayd Take bread and wine this is my body which I touche as though it were a supper mete for Christes making if he only shewed his body to his Apostles which euer was in their sight not suffering them to eate thereof Zuinglius said the bread and wine were only figures of Christes body and blood geueÌ„ to our bodies to represent to our harts tâ—…e death of Christ. And that the words of Christes supper were figuratine only by which reason the supper of the Paschall lambe was better then the supper of Christ because the dead flesh of an vnspotted lambe was more apt then bread and wine to shew the death of Christes innocent flesh wich is the lambe of God that taketh away the sinnes of the world Calâ—…in added to Zuinglius bare figures an efficacie of feeding by faith and taught the words of Christ not so much to be figuratiue as words of promise which being heard with faith cause that the minde by faith eateth of Christ sitting in heauen a mete supper for such a deuiser who setting the men that should be fed vppon earth kepeth the meate wherof they should be filled in heauen promising them who consist also of bodies mortal and corruptible that they shall fede vpon immortall meat in their soules such an eating were good for Angels I denie not but it is not the supper that Christ made to corporall men for his farewell when he said Take and eate this is my body and Drinke ye all of this for this is my blood Taking with our bodies is more then beleuing in our soules eating yâ— body of Christ is more then signifying the eating of his body The meate is the body of Christ the drinke is the blood of Christ. Beleue and thou hast it in harte before thou commest to the table But come to the blessed Sacrament of the altar and thou hast it in thy mouth and body Bothe is better then one Christ hath 〈◊〉 and fullfilled all maner of iustice he made both body and soule redemeth both fedeth both rayseth both crowneth both He doth not now diuide the hand from the harte the mouth from the minde the figure from the thing the token from the truth That he sayth he doth that thou beleuest in heauen thou receyuest at his table in earth yea earth is heauen to thee saith Chrysostom through this mysterie make his gift no lesse then he nameth it leste for vnthankfullnes thou be giltie of iudgement He that beleueth his plaine wordes is on the surer syde The Corinthians fault concerning the supper of our Lord was partely for that they came to it after they had eaten their own supper and vndoutebly so doe heretyks They first deuise with them seâ—…ues what supper they will allow to Christ and then they come to his supper entending to conforme it to their formeâ—… deuise Partely the 〈◊〉 were reproued of S. Paule for eating and drinking alone without making their meate common to the poore Euen so the heretiks eate and drinke alone teaching that euery man eateth Christ only by the measure of his own faith which hath diuerse degrees in euery man and therefore it maketh euery man eate Christ after his own faith only Whereas the supper of Christ is equall and common to all as S. Cyprian S. Hierome and Theodorite witnessed before wherein he geueth oâ—…e 〈◊〉 one blood one person to all that come without any respecte concerning the meate and substance of the supper although not without discerning the diuerse merites of the geastes It is the honour of him that maketh the feast to haue the meate most bouÌ„tifull and most reall howsoeuer the weak stomaks of euill men are able to beare it Wilt thou yet see more plainly how liberall Christ is in his supper All that he hath he geueth for he geueth his own selfe indifferently to euery man that sitteth at his table be the nian riche or poore good or bad The 〈◊〉 of this feast at his table is the maker of the feast him selfe Who sayeth so Uerily he that caÌ„not lye Who after that he said My flesh is meate in dede douted not to add moreouer He that eateth me shall liue for me doing 〈◊〉 to vnderstand that by eating his flesh we eate himself The same thing teacheth S. Hierom a man worthy to be credi ted as well for his own great learning as for that tyme wherein he liued and the faith wherof in his writing he witnesseth S.
seruice and orders of the Apostles them selues If Caluin had that spirit he were farr from hearesy But now see what spirit Caluin hath Thus he writeth in this matter Immediatly after the words which I rehersed in the 〈◊〉 of this chapiter thus he writeth His rationibus constat repositionem Sacramenti c. It is euident saith Caluin by those reasons the reseruation of the Sacrament which some men presse to th end it maie be distributed extraordinarily to the sick to be vnprofitable For either the sick shall receaue it without rehersall of the institution of Christ or the minister together with the signe will ioyne the true explication of the mysterie If the institution of Christ be not spoken of it is an abuse and a fault If the promises be rehersed and the mysterie be declared so that they who shall receaue maie receaue with fruit we nâ—…de not dowt this to be the true consecration To what purpose then is the other whose strength reacheth not so farr as to come to the sick But you will saye they that doe so to wit that reserue the Sacrament haue the example of the old Churche Fateor I graunt but in so weighty a matter wherein errour is not committed without great danger nothing is more safe then to follow the truthe it self Hytherto Caluin hath reasoned who putteth the whole streÌ„gth of the Sacrament of Christes supper in promising and preaching therefore if any where preaching and promising be not vsed in the geuing of the Sacrament he calleth it an abuse and fault And seing the primatiue Church euen whiles the Apostles were â—…liue did by the witnesse of 〈◊〉 reserue the SacrameÌ„t so long after consecration as to send it to such Bishops which might come to strange dioceses out of an other prouince and seing the deacous vsed to carie it in the tyme of Iustinus Martyr who liued within a hundred yeres of Christes death to those which were absent Caluin I saie perceauing the vse of all Apostolicall Churchs to stand against him will seme to conâ—…ute them all with this fond reason Either the sick and absent persons for all is one concerning this matter shall receaue that which was consecrated in the Church without a new rehersall of these words This is my body And then it is an abuse saith Caluin a fault he calleth it an abuse which the scholars of the Apostles vsed or â—…ls saith he the words shal be ioyned with the signe and it is a true consecration And then saith he the first consecration made at the Church was in vain concerning the sick and absent men But the second is good which is made by preaching and rehearsing the words of promise to the sick persons I haue most faithfully behersed the opinion of Caluin But let vs now examine why it is an abuse and fault to deliuer to the sick or to the absent persons the holy hoste which was consecrated in the Churches without a new rehersall of Christes words why is that an abuse who told Caluin it was an abuse or a fault For south his own mind gaue him so his wisedom thought so his grauitie said so his blasphemonse penue wrote so But other cause reason or scripture he bringeth none for it â—…e first 〈◊〉 that the consecration of Christes supper consisteth in saying to the people This is my body which is geuen for you And proneth it not at all but graunt him once his dream consequently he inferreth that if such an hoste whereupon the words of consecration were once dewly pronouÌ„ced be afterward geueÌ„ to him that heaâ—…d not those words of promise because he was sick or absent if the â—…ost I say he geuen without a new rehersall of the words it foloweth that it is an abuse Yea but some Papist will saye the old Churche did so For now he calleth the primatiâ—…e Churche the old Churche I graunt saith Caluin But it is better yet to follow the truthe it self Why 〈◊〉 doest thow only know what the truth it self is we allege the old Church to proâ—…e that the truthe 〈◊〉 Christes gospell doth stand for vs and to proue that consecration is not made by preaching and by the hearing of the people but by the vertue of Gods word which spoken ouer the elements of bread and wine saith by the one This is my body making it so And by the other This is my blood making it so We saye these words make the body of Christ vnder the form of bread and his blood vnder the form of wine For our saying we bring the gospell where â—…t is writen this is and this is When other 〈◊〉 the gospell we shew that the Apostles and their successours practised this which we beleue For they all vnderstode by these words directed to brcad and wine that the body and blood of Christ was really made vnder the formes of them How proue we that Because if once the words had ben spoken by a Priest vpon those elements the things consecrated were afterward kept and caried as a most holy sacrifice to men abâ—…ent as the which things coÌ„teined really within them the body blood of Christ. Why els should they be caried to others that were absent A 〈◊〉 maye say that when they came to the absent persons the words were again rehersed First that appereth not in Iustinus or in Ireneus of whom the one sayth the 〈◊〉 was sent to straâ—…gers the other saith that the things consecrated which were receaued of the present Christians the same were caried to the absent How is the Eucharist sent if it be no Eucharist vntill it come to the stranger and then be made a new Or is it 〈◊〉 to iterate the consecration of any Sacrament Hath Caluin lerned so farr Did the first consecration lack â—…ertue so that an other must be made or the first be repeted Last of al the Deacons caried the Eucharist who possibly could not reherse the words of consecration This is my body and this is my blood And yet if they were words of promise preaching the Deacon who may 〈◊〉 and in preaching may 〈◊〉 yâ— spiritual seeding of our soules might also reherse those words But from the Apostles tyme to this day it was neuer heard that â—… Deacon might consecrate the body and blood of Christ. For noman is able to doe any more then wherevnto he is lawfully called But no Deacon hath the power to coÌ„secrate geuen him And that his name sheweth which is to say a 〈◊〉 or a waiter on For he waiteth vpon the Priest at Masse and is not as yet promoted to the office of 〈◊〉 Seing then the Deacons caried the Eucharist and they could not say the words of consecration doubâ—…lesse they that receaued it of their hands receaued neither words of promise nor of preaching but they receaued that blessed body and blood of Christ which was coÌ„secrated before vnder the foormes of bread wine This faith
to this kind of bread food which Christ gaue at his last supper saying take and eate this is my body So that S. Paul by bread meaneth a thing eaten By the bread a certayn knowen thing eaten By this bread one certayn kind of thing eaten which alitle before was declared to be the body of Christ. Who so euer eatet◅ this kind of bread vnworthely he is gilty of the body of Christ. Why so Because he eateth the body of Christ vnworthely oth◅wise by eating he can not be gilty of that body which he doth not eate But hereof we shall saye more vpon S. Paule Thus now I reason out of the holy gospel That thing where of Christ sayd to the twelue take and eate and drinke was taken eatē drunken of all y◠twelue that was one thing only cōceruing y◠eating one thing only concerning y◠drinking that is to say the body of Christ y◠blood of Christ. For he sayd This is my body This truly is but one thing which Peter Iohn Iames likewise Iudas did eate If Iudas did not eate this he did eate nothing of Christes supper But Christ cōplaineth at his owne last supper that his betrayer had his hand on the table with him He did therefore eate somewhat And consequētly this one thing which was only at Christes supper geuen to be eaten But this one thing is my body sayeth Christ therefore Iudas did eate Christes body If that argument be not plaine ynough take an other Iudas and Iohn did eate one thing Eche of them that foode whereof Christ sayd This is my body But S. Iohn by the confession of the Apologie did truly eate Christes body because I suppose the Apologie doth take S. Iohn for a faithfull man Therefore Iudas did truly eate the same body As truly as really did Iudas eate the body of Christ as S. Iohn but not so worthely Or made Christ in his supper two giftes Did he deliuer one thing to S. Iohn an other to Iudas What gospell teacheth that sayd not Christ This Is not This the singular nomber Is it not one certayn thing This was deliuered to all twelue and to euery of them This was eaten of all twelue and of euery of them Therefore seing this was to S. Iohn the body of Christ as the Apologie confesseth it was as also to all others that do beleue likewise this was to Iudas y◠body of Christ and to all others that receaue at Christes table What Iuglers be these that of one certayn thing whereof Christ sayd This is my body doo make the true body to Iohn and not the true body to Iudas If they say that this doth nor point to the body of Christ but to Bakers bread then how doth S. Iohn by eating this eate the body of Christ S. Iohn eateth that same thing which Christ deliuereth to Iudas But you say Christ deliuereth Bakers bread and none other thing to Iudas Therefore S. Iohn though he beleue neuer so well yet by eating this he doth not eate any thing besyde Bakers bread and so he doth not eate the body of Christ. More then Christ deliuereth him he can not eate at the supper of our Lord. But Christ geuing this deliuereth bread to Iudas and not his body as you say Then how can S. Ihon by eating this eate the body of Christ You will say S. Ihon may eate it by faith Yea Syr but that is not the eating this whereof Christ spake Here againe I presse you with y◠word of God The eating whereof Christ spake in his supper was an eating by body It was such an eating as agreed with the geuing of Christ and with the taking of y◠Disciples But Christ gaue with his hands they toke with their hands and they did eate by the meane of their tonges teeth and mouthes Therefore the eating and drinking whereof Christ sayd take and eate drinke was an eating and drinking by body albeit y◠end of that banket was to feed also y◠soule by that bodily food The end I say intended on Christes part But you can not out of that outward precept of eating and drinking deduce an eating and drinking of y◠body and blood an other way that is to wit by faith and spirit only If you can it must nedes folow that Iudas did eate and drinke the body and blood of Christ by faith and spirit also For as it is sayd Bibite ex hoc omnes drinke ye all of this so it is sayd Biberu◅t ex illo omnes they all dranke of that If the precept be fulfilled such as the precept is such the fulfilling is If Christ by saying drink did will them to drinke wine in their mouthes and his blood in spirit only Then they whom y◠gospell ◅heweth to haue drunken did also drinke wine in their mouthes and his blood in spirit Or will you take in the historie of y◠same supper Bibite otherwise then biberunt Is not drinke ye sayd of the same thing whereof it is sayd They dranke Now then either Ihon dranke not truly according to the precept geuen in the supper the blood of Christ or Iudas dranke also the blood of Christ. For this whereof Christ sayd drinke ye all of this came as wel to Iudas as to S. Ihon. Christ sayd to all drinke ye of this and they all dranke of that Lo that which S. Ihon dranke also Iudas dranke concerning I say the drinking of the supper And the drinking of that thing which is the substance of the Sacrament of the altar Ihon truly dranke as ye confesse Iudas truly dranke as the Gospell teacheth Wherefore Iudas drank the same blood that S. Ihon did Had Iudas then as greate merite by drinking as S. Ihon God forbid But Iudas dranke the same thing as all the children of Israel did eate one and the same Manna but not to one and the same merite as S. Paul hath declared The merite riseth not of drinking but of worthy drinking As Manna tasted better to the good Israelites then to the bad so S. Ihon dranke worthely Iudas vnworthely S. Ihon had by drinking life euerlasting Iudas had by drinking damnation S. Ihon dranke by body by faith working by charitie Iudas dranke by body alone with a maliciouse intent to betraye Christ. The good faith of S. Ihon was not the thing whereby he dranke the blood according to the outward precept of Christ in his last supper but it was the thing whereby and wherewith he worthely dranke the blood Did not then Christ will and command his Disciples to come worthely to his supper Yeas forsoth he not only willed them to come worthely but for his part he offered them grace to come worthely He not only for his part was redy to ◅euse their soules but in token thereof washed also their bodies Saying they were all cleane except one which was Iuda◅ The preparing to haue a
Christ are his members which are incorporated by grace ioyned to him being their head This incorporation is wrought by the grace of baptisme in one degrâ—… and finisâ—…ed by the Sacrament of the altar in a higher degree whereof we shall speake hereafter more at large The naturall body of Christis that which he tooke of the virgine and gaue to death for vs. Now Christ in his last supper gaue yâ— substaÌ„ce of his natural body to be â—…aten of his disciples to th' intent they should be made one mysticall body euen by eating his flesh blood Seing then the naturall body of Christ is geuen to thâ—…end we maie be nerer knitte in the mysticall body according as S. Paul sayeth The bread which we breake is the communicating of our Lords body because we being many are one bread one body all that partake of one bread Seing I say we communicate the natural body to be made a mystical body in a greater vnitie then we had in baptisme any man of discretion may perceaue that in som sense euill men receaue not the thing or the effect of the body of Christ vnderstanding by the effect of body the vnitie of the mysti call body the obteining whereof is the end of the eating Which vnitie S. Augustine somtime calleth Rem ipsam The thing it selfe that is to say the last effect and benefite which ariseth to vs by worthy eating of the Sacrament of the altar After which sort S. Augustin saieth euill men are not to be said to eate the body of Christ adding therevnto this reason QuoniaÌ„ nec in membris computandi sunt Christi Because they are not to be rekoned among the membres of Christ. So that euil men eate the substance of the naturall body but not the thing for which that substance was geuen which is the vnite of the body mysticall because they eate not worthely Whereas worthy eating only maketh them to obteyne the vnitie of the mysticall body which is to abide in Christ and to haue Christ abiding in them Therefore S. Augustine him selfe sayeth Non quocunque modo quisquà m manducauerit carnem Christi biberit sanguinem Christi manet in Christo in illo Christus sed certo quodam modo Not how so euer a man eateth the flesh of Christ and drinketh the blood of Christ he abideth in Christ and Christ in him but by a certain kind of way As though S. Augustine sayd Euery waye the flesh and blood of Christ is receaued in the supper of our Lord But not euery way it is so receaued that we maye dwell in Christ and Christ in vs. S. Bregorse saith by euell men Salutis fructuÌ„ non percipiunt in comestione salutaris hostiae They receaue not yâ— fruit of saluation in yâ— eating of yâ— healthful sacrifice They eate yâ— healthfull sacrifice which surely is nothing els but the naturall body of Christ but the fruit they receaue not as many men take an healthfull medicine but because their bodies be euil affected it proueth not healthfull to them S. Bede coÌ„pareth him to Iudas who with his sinfull members presumeth to violate Illud inestimabile inuiolabile Domini corpus That inestimable and inuiolable body of our Lord. And how could he violate it with his members if with no part of his body he touched it I omit Arnobius vpon that Psalm 74. S. Ambrose Theodorite Decumenius Haimo Theophilact Anselme vpon S. Paule who agree with the rest of the Fathers that there is in euery mysterie the substance of the SacrameÌ„t and the effect thereof As well the euill as the good receaue the substance which in our Lords supper is the body and blood of Christ. But only the good receaue th' effect Which is the grace of spirituall nourishment to life euerlasting and the vnion with Christ. Now as we haue shewed by the holy Scriptures euen so haue we proued out of the holy Fathers that euell men recâ—…aue the body and blood of Christ as really as the purple is one still whether it be spotted or cutt as really as one meate is eaten of some to their hurte of others to their helth as really as good and euill Iewes had all one measure of Manna but not all one swetenes in yeâ—…ast thereof as really as Iudas did kisse trayterously the same body of Christ which him self as all euill men trayterously receaued at Christes supper If nowe the Apologie hath neither Scriptures nor Fathers it maie leaue those boasting vpbraidinges as though the Catholikes fled the triaâ—… of bâ—…th Scriptures and Fathers It is Gods cause we haue committed it to Gods word The Fathers when they agree in anie one article are knowen to haue yâ— spirite of Christ and they beare witnesse that we haue rightly expouÌ„ded the holy scriptures He that listeth to see more of the same argument 〈◊〉 read that which I haue writen vpon that saying of S. Paule He that eateth this bread vnworthely shal be gilty of the body and blood of our Lord. ¶ What is the true deliuerance of Christes body and blood IN the supper there is truly deliuered the body and blood of the Lord the flesh of the soÌ„ne of God quickening our soules The food of immortalitie grace truth life In these words no euil doctrine is conteined but all sound and Catholike In so much a man wold woÌ„der to what purpose these things are now brought being extreme contrary to yâ— which the Caluinists defend saing they wold seme to speake as the holy scriptures and primitiue Churche hath spoken Seing therefore these words conteine true doctrine I wil reason briefly out of them against their opinion that wrote them You say The body and blood of the Lord is truly deliuered in the suâ—…per If it be so it is truly present And seing none other thing can be warrauted to haue bene deliuered in the supper besyde that which Christ gaue with his own hands which semed bread whereof he sayd This is my body and besyde that which semed wine where of he sayd This is my blood by the doctrine of the Apologie it will folow that Chrisâ—…es body was deliuered truly vnder that which semed bread and his blood was deliuered truly vnder that which semed wine Or tell me Can 〈◊〉 any man proue out of the word of God that any other thing was deliuered in the supper of Christ besyde two kinds the one being bread vntill Christ had sayd This is my body The other being the cup of wine vntill Christ had sayd This is my blood Is there mention made of any other thing truly exhibited offered or deliuered to the Apostles Or doth the supper of Christ consist of fower kinds of bread body of wine and blood In what gospell reade we of bread and wine deliuered Bread and wine were takeÌ„ but body and blood were only deliuered For Christ sayd Take this is my body Drinke this is my
blood This can be but one thing Therefore Christ deliuering that whereof he sayd This and this deliuered at eche tyme but one thing in all but two things He deliuered his body blood as him self sayd and you coÌ„fesâ—…e he truly deliuered them wherevpon I conclude that he deliuered neither bread nor wine and consequently that the bread taken was changed in to the body of Christ and the wine was changed into his blood For seing Christ toke both bread and wine and deliuered truly his body and blood yet deliuered but one thing at eche tyme and that also keping the forme of bread and wine it must nedes be graunted that the substance of bread and wine which was truly taken and not truly deliuered because an other thing was truly deliuered was in the meane tyme truly changed into that body and blood which was truly deliuered O masters truth is strong and by the aduersaries own weapon getteth the victorie Again remember that the name of body and the name of blood are names belonging to the manhod of Christ to which manhod when you adioyne any act or work which may truly be verisied thereof it must be meant according to that truth which properly belongeth to the nature of the manhod When we say Christ was truly scurged nailed to the Crosse bound and buried it is not here to be vnderstanded that these things were don in figure in spirit in faith But that his body suffered according to the fâ—…esh all these things And he that saith the contrarie is an 〈◊〉 which heresie wold the manhod of Christ to be changed into his diuine nature If then the body and blood of Christ be truly dâ—…red you must not vuderstand a figure only to be dâ—…red neither a spiritual dâ—… only For if the body of Christ be deliuered truly and yet by spirit only then the truth of his body is by these men brought vnto the truth of a spirit and the flesh of Christ hath losi his true nature and propâ—… Mark wel the reason when the body of Christ is truly deliuered it is deliuered according to the truth of his own nature The nature of a body is to be dâ—…d after some bodily maner verily by hands or by some other corporail action And they to whom it is delâ—…red likewise receaue it by some part or sense of their body For so requireth the true nature of flesh and blood not immediatly to be geuen to the spirit and soule but to come to it by meane of the body Whereof it is inferred that the body and blood of Christ which are truly deliuered in the supper are bodily deliuered and bodily receaued But from the body of Christ who made the dâ—…ance vnto the bodies of the Apoâ—…es who receaued the things deliuered none other thing can â—…syde that which semed bread and wine therefore vnder that foormes the body and blood of Christ were truly contâ—…ined and by yâ— meanes truly deliuered and truly receaued Thirdly when you say the â—…sh of God quickeneth our soules you should haue sayd also that it quickeneth our bodies as in other places I haue proued out of the sixth of S. 〈◊〉 anâ—… out of S. Jreneus â—…tullian Cyrillus and other auncient Fathers ¶ what it is which nourisheth vs in the supper of Christ â–ª ANd that the same supper is the coâ—…ion of the body and blood of Christ by the partaking whereof we are qâ—…ned we are 〈◊〉 and sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That which 〈◊〉 and â—…th can not be 〈◊〉 from them whom it nourisheth and when it is cut of their reache they can not haue it before it be geuen If then we haue in 〈◊〉 yâ— body and blood of Christ we receaued it by his gift at his supper And surely it was the thing whereof he sayd Eate and whereof he sayd Drinke Other food was not deliuered in Christes supper beâ—… his body and blood Nor possiblie can we haue the food of his supper at any other mans table then at his Wel. If we be nourished by the meate which Christ gaue vs when he sayd Eate and yet we be nourished by his body and blood vndoubtedly he sayd Eate of that which he gaue with his hands and which the Apostles toke into their mouthes and that was bread to see vnto therefore vnder that â—…orme of bread we take the nourishment whereby we are sed to immortalitie Otherwise what warrant haue we to come by this food which is cleane out of our reache vntil God geue it saying Eate this is my body Drinke this is my blood By those words oâ—…â—…ate one liquour only is geuen which also â—…deth vs to immortalitie as yâ— Apologie coâ—…h But none other food that man may receaue bodily can feed vs to immortalitie besyde the reall substance of Christ. therefore that substance is receaued nourisheth vs when Christ sayd Eate this is my body Drinke this is my blood ¶ The vnion which is made by eating Christes reall flesh must nâ—…s be a naturall vnion â—…ore it be a mysticall ANd by the which we are coupled we are vnited and grafted into the body of Christ that we might â—…well in hinâ—… and he in vs. Christes â—…sh is deliuered to the end we should be nourished therewith And the end of nourishing is to make one thing of yâ— which is eaten and of him that eateth it The flesh deliuered to nourishe vs is not any mysticall flesh but only the natural flesh of Christ neither can it be any other food For none other thing that coâ—…th in at the mouth of man is able to seed him to immortalitie besyde the substance of Christes flesh and blood If then it be the naturall flesh which feedeth and the vnion doe come by seeding the vnion must of necesâ—…ty be made with the naturall flesh of Christ. And because that is such a flesh as being vnited to God hath power to geue life and â—…mortality out of the naturall vnion which is made with it by eating an other spiritual and mystical vnion floweth which maketh all the members of Christ to be one mysticall body So that we haue now fiâ—…e degrees First the slesh of Christ is deliuered to vs in his supper Next we eate the same flesh Thirdly we are fed by it if we eate it worthely Fourthly of yâ— feeding conuneth a reall and naturall vnion and ioyning with Christes flesh as S. Hilarie teacheth and other auncient Fathers Of that naturall vnion procedeth a spirituall vnion with the whole body of the Church Because being made one with Christes flesh we are vnited thereby to his spirit and Godhead liuing for him as he â—…th for his Father whereof I will speake more hereafter The Apologie acknowledgeth a ioyning with Christ by eating But it surely meaneth the last spirituall ioyning which ariseth of the other naturall vnion Whereas that spiritual ioyning doth â—…ude the other natural as euery effect presupposeth the necessarie
the remembrance of Christes death As the birth of Christ was a true birth but most miraculous withall so is the Sacrament of the altar a true signe and therefore his true body and blood by the great miracle of turning the substance of bread wine in to them This is yâ— signe that Christ made in his last supper This is such a signe as is withall a secret miracle For it is a miracle not shewed to 〈◊〉 but only to the faithfull For as the birth of Christ is a 〈◊〉 to the faithfull only who beleue Christ being God and man truly to haue bene borne of a virgin withouâ—… sede of man by the almighty power of the holy â—…host Right so the suppâ—… of Christ is a sigâ—…e of his body 〈◊〉 blood to the faithfull only who beleue the 〈◊〉 of bread and wine to be â—…urned into his body and blood without 〈◊〉 or corruption by yâ— only 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉 oâ—… Chrisâ—… Who sayd after bread taken and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This is my body and this is my blood Doe and make this thing for the remembrance of me Behold the making of Christes body â—…nd blood â—…or yâ— remembrance of his death that is the signe we speake of This was the memorie or the remembrance whereof Dauid sayd Memoriam fecit mirabilium suorum misericors miserator Dominus eseanâ—… dedit timentibus se. Our mercifull graciouse Lord hath made a remembrance of his maruelous works he hath geuen meate to them that feare him And think we that a remembrance of maruelous things is made of God without a miracle S. Cyprian saith the bread to be made slesh Omnipotentia verbi By the allmighty power of the word S. Augustine calleth it Mirabile sacrificium A maruelous sacrifice S. Chrysostom crieth out o miracle o the goodnesse of God he that sitteth aboue with the Father in the self same moment of tyme is touched with the hands of all men If thou ask how it is made saith Damascene it is enough for the to heare that it is made by the holy Ghost euen as our Lord made for him self and in him self a body out of the virgin Mother of God And we know no more but that the word of God is true strenghtfull allmighty Eusebius calleth it Admirabilem exitum oraculi a maruelous euent of the oracle S. Bede nameth it a sanctification of the holy Ghost that can not be vttered by speache The like words haue S. Baâ—…ile S. Gregorins Nyssenus S. â—…ieront Nicephorus This much I thought good briefly to say concerning yâ— manner how the blessed Sacrament of the altar is a signe token figure mysterie remembrance Euery word whereof expounded according to the Gospell and to the state of the new Testament doth proue the reall presence of Christes body and blood vnder yâ— foormes of bread and wine It is a Sacrament which outwardly signiâ—… that which is inwardly wrought It is a figure coÌ„teyning the truth figured It is a signe mete for the institution of Christ whose signes are miraculous it is a secret token knowen only to them that beleue It is a remembrance of Christes death by the presence of the body which died What shall I say more It is the body and blood of Christ couered from our eyes reueled to our faith feeding presently our bodies and soules to life euerlasting ¶ That the supper of our Lord is no Sacrament at all if these words of Christ This is my body and This is my blood be figuratiue THere is a great difference betwen a figure of Rhetorike and a Sacramentall figure made by Christ. The Rhetoricall figures consist in words or sentences the mysticall figures of Christ consist in deeds secret workings Those sometymes sound one way and meane an other way These meane and sound always one thing but they shew it one way and doe it an other way Those chiefly serue the eares of mortall men These chiefly serue the harts of faithfull men Those were found by men these were instituted of God Christ sometime vsed figures of Rhetorike because in taking the nature of man he addicted him selfe to vse the kind of speakiÌ„g which men obserued But now Christians vse yâ— mystical signâ—…es of Christ because he that toke their nature left vnto them the vertue of his almightie Godhead Let noman therâ—…ore think when yâ— supper of our Lorde is called sometime a figure that a Rhetori cal figure is meant it is not so A mystical figure a secrete knowlege a priâ—…ie watch word is vnderstanded by the name of a figure as if Christ should say to his Apostles folowers Let this be a token betwen you and me betwene one of you toward yâ— other that when a faithfull man is washed with water and in the meane tyme it is said ouer him I Baptize the in the name of the Father and of the sonne and of the holy gost straight all synnes are forgeuen him And he is of my flock and receaued into my fold Lett it be again an other couenant or signe betwene vs. When my Apostles or those which are made Priests by them say ouer bread this is my body and ouer wine this is my blood hauing the intent to blesse and geue thanks and to make a remembrance of my death that my body and blood are really present vnder the formes of bread and wine accordingly as my words doe sound These are mystical signes priuie tokens and secret figures to be kept only among the faithfull and not to be published to infidels For as men by vse of speaking haue agreed to transferr certain words from their most proper signification to an other figuratiue custom euen so Christ hath transferred certain natural things to an other mystical vse which is now called in some Fathers by that name of holy signes or figures or tokens or which is most common of all by the name of sacraments or mysteries See good reader to what myserie we are growen He that commeth late from his grammar where he lerned certain figures of construction or he yâ— beginneth his Rhetorik where he more depely entreth into the treatise of tropes and shemes when he readeth in a two peÌ„ny booke the place alleged where it is said in Tertullian this is my body that is to saie the figure of my body he iudgeth owt of hand that Tertullian meaneth a figure of Rhetorik and Decolampadius Caluin or Peter Martir is a mete Scholemaster for him to expound what kind of Rhetorical figure it is verely saithei metonymia or synecdoche Again wheâ—… thei heare S. Augustine affirm that Christ gaue a'signe of his body thei think he meaneth such a signe as is set vp at an ale howse or wine tauern that Doctors meane a peculiar signe and token miraculously instituted by Christ which conteyneth geueth to the faithfull the truthe which it betokeneth This kind of signes and figures concerning the substance of
Chrysostom ad iugem nos pro beneficijs suis inuitans gratiarum actionem Stirring vs to geue thanks perpetually for his benefites by the very kind of the sacrifice And shewing farther in an other place what kind of sacrifice it is God sayth Chrysostom did yerely by certain holydays set the remembrances of his benefites before the Iewes Tibi vero quotidiè ipse ne obliuiscaris proponitur But he is set before thee daily him selfe lest thou shouldest bee vnmindfull See now by what meanes the death of Christ is renewed Not by tokens wherein he is doubtfully called to minde him selfe being absent for that were a feble token but by these tokens wherein him selfe is made present lest we should forgett his death The body of Christ must be made to th' intent we maye remember his death If you take from vs the making of his body which causeth the vehement remembrance of the death it is afterward a vaine thing to talke of the remembraunce of his death by eating bread and drinking wine For the necessarie meane of necessarie remembrance of his death consisteth in the reall presence of him that died For who can forget his death whose body is daily made worshipped and eaten to the end the death may be remembred But I may right well eate bread and drinke wine not yet remembring thereby that Christ is dead for me ¶ The true resurrection of our bodies commeth by eating that body of Christ which is both true and is true in vs. TO th' intent we being fed with the body and blood of Christ may be brought into the hope of the resurrection and of euerlasting life and may most assuredly beleue that the body and blood of Christ doth in like manner feed our soules as bread and wine doth feed our bodies I omit to say any thing vpon that ouersight wherein the English translation of a body hath left out the word Vero the true body which the Latine edition hath But here the Apologie presupposeth that Christes supper consisteth as wel of bread wine as of body and blood The first two they will haue geuen to the bodies The later twaine to the soules The bread wine they will haue present on the table whence they be deliuered The body and blood they will haue to be receaued from heauen by faith and vnderstanding Against this dreame thus I reason out of the word of God Christ made his whole supper vpon a visible table accordingly as it was prophecied by king Dauid Parasti in conspectu meo mensam Thou hast prepared a table in my sight And by Salomon Sapientia proposuit mensam suaÌ„ insipientibus locuta est venite comedite panem meum bibite vinum quod miscui vobis Wisedome hath set foorth her table and hath spoken to simple men come ye eate my bread and drinke the wine which I haue mixed for you S. Paul sayth Non potestis mensae Domini participes esse mensae Daemoniorum Ye can not be partakers of our Lords table and of the table of deuils Put these three together and the sense will be the supper and table of our Lord was prepared and set foorth in the sight of the faithfull that they might thence cate and drinke such as the wisedome of God gaue them at his supper Therefore no meate no foode no banket is to be looked for at his supper but such as is prepared by Christ set foorth vpon his table Otherwise Christ had prepared no supper in the sight of that faithfull as Dauid foretold nor had not set foorth his table as Salomon prophecied nor we had not bene partakers of our Lords table as S. Paul writeth For bread and wine is not prepared of Christ But was before hand made ready by the baker and vintner or by the seruants yâ— brought them foorth The preparing which Christ made was by blessing and conseâ—…ng to make of earthly bread the bread of life euerlasting And hauing made it he deliuered the same to the Apostles and bad them both make and doe that thing If he deliuered not his owne body with his owne handes doubtles they did not eate his body For he sayd in respect only of that which he deliuered take and eate Wherevpon S. Chrysostom sayeth to him that cometh to our Lords table Cogita quid manu capias caet Bethink thy selfe what thou takest in thy hand and kepe it free from all couetousnes and violent robbery Consider againe that thou takest it not only in thy hande but also puttest it to the mouth and after thy hand and tonge the harte receaueth that dreadfull mysterie Thus much S. Chrysostom Let any reasonable man iudge whether he sayeth not that the hart receaueth the same which the hande doth and the hande the same which the hart doth For if the hart receaue it after that hand the hand receaued it before the hart It is not therefore as the Sacramentaries falsely teach bread only in hand and body only in harte But body as well in hand as in harte And none other true body in the harte then was first in the hand and mouth For this cause euer sith we receaued the faith we called this blessed supper The Sacrament of the altar As if we sayd the SacrameÌ„t which is made vpon the altar or vpon the table of Christ. for the table of Christ is an altar as in Malachie it may appere and in an other place by the fauour of God I will declare This name of the SacrameÌ„t of the altar was deliuered to vs with our Christianitie and it is found very ofte in the olde writers namely in S. Augustine By which we are enformed that the consecration and oblation thereof is made not in the hartes of men by words of promising and preaching but vpon the visible altar in the sight of Christian people by yâ— visible Priest who as a publike minister ordeined by God consecrateth the body of Christ by the same power which Christ gaue when he sayd Hoc facite doe and make this thing This is 〈◊〉 table prepared in the sight of Dauid set foorth by the wisedome of God whereof we are partakers when we receaue the blessed Sacrament of the altar At this altar S. Augustines mother desired a memorie of her to be made vnde sciret dispensari victimam sanctam qua deletum est chirographum quod erat contrarium nobis From which altar my mother knew sayeth S. Augustine the holy sacrifice to be distributed whereby the handwriting that was contrarie to vs is put out Behold the sacrificed body of Christ was dispeÌ„sed and geuen from the altar as both S. Augustine and his mother and all the faithfull then beleued Thus thou seest the dreame of the Apologie by the word of God to be blowen away like chaf dust dispersed with the wind The Apologie sayeth our bodies are
fed at Christes supper with bread and wine that is not in the word of God where it is sayd Eate This is my body The Apologie semeth to say that our bodies be not noâ—…rished with the body and blood of Christ for it assigneth body and blood to our soules as our bodies are fed with bread and wine But Christ gaue his body to noâ—…rish our bodies also And therefore sayd Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood ye shall not haue life in you That is as Cyrillus expoundeth it In corpore vestro in your body And therefore on the other syde Christ sayd he that eateth my flesh drinketh my blood hath life euerlasting and I will reyse him again in the last day Ego sayeth Cyrillus Id est corpus meum quod comedetur I will reyse him that is to say my body which shal be eaten Reysing belongeth to the body which falleth into putrefaction by death As therefore the body is reysed by Christes body so the body liueth in the state of grace by Christes body and such life is by spiritual nutriment which is receaued of the flesh of Christ really present in vs. For which cause Tertullian confessed that not only our soule but also our body seedeth vpon the body and blood of Christ to th' intent our soule may be made fat of God Likewise Ireneus writeth that our flesh is nourishâ—…d of the body and blood of our Lord. We may now see what errour they fall into who assigne the body and blood of Christ to our soules and bread wine to our bodies whereas there is no substance left of bread or wine but euen our bodies feede vpon Christes body as Ireneus Cyrillus and Tertullian haue sayd ¶ Nothing is wrought in the supper of Christ according to the doctrine of the Sacramentaries AFter the Apologie had spoken of communion vnder both kinds and of transubstautiation of which points as yet I speake not it returneth again in a confuse manner to the matter of the reall presence and thus it sayeth And in speaking thus we meane not to abase the Lords supper or to teache that it is but a cold ceremonie only and nothing to be wrought therein as many falsely slaunder vs we teache If they that pluck down altars and other ornaments of Christes supper if they that call the blessed Sacrament of the altar by so vile names as you and your scholars haue done be not of your number if they be not your derelings if they lerned not that coÌ„tempt of holy things and the denyall of the vnbloody sacrifice of you if they first persuaded not the licenciouse youth and faithlesse companie of men and wâ—…men in EnglaÌ„d rather by blasphemous names geuen to the Eucharist then by any word of God which you stil pretend and neuer allege then let it be thought that you meane not to abase the Lords supper But if you did set all the players and minstrels in the realme a work with such scoffes as your brotherhead inuented against the blessed body and blood of Christ I feare me you be not slaundered when you are sayd to teach it to be but a cold ceremonie sith you doubt not to call euen in this Apologie yâ— honour done to it the worshipping of bread whereas it is in deed the worshipping of the true body and blood of Christ. Wel you teach not that nothing is wrought or made in the supper Then by like you teach that somewhat is wrought there I wold fain see what it is which you teach to be wrought in the sup per. For where you say that Christ geueth him self in his supper that we may eate him by faith You teach a work of Christ in geuing him self a work of ours in eating him but not any thing wrought or made in the supper it self For the supper is that meate which is prouided to be eaten at the table of Christ. There you confesse bread and wine to be taken But seing you teache the same things notwithstanding he speaketh otherwise of them yet to tarie bread and wine stil I can not perceaue what substanciall thing you teachâ—… to be wrought in the supper concerning the matter of the supper which is bread and wine Now concerning the body and blood of Christ which you graunt to be geuen by faith I trow you teache not any thing to be wrought a new and made therein sithens they be impassible and therefore can not haue any thing made in them what is it then which you teache to be made in the supper Either bread and wine is the supper or the body and blood of Christ or both together For nothing els is there mentioned Bread and wine you say remayne still as they were before concerning their substaÌ„ce Then I say nothing is wrought in them The body and blood of Christ can haue nothing wrought in their substance because that wherein somewhat shal be made must suffer of that which worketh it therefore glose the matter how ye will you teache not any substanciall thing to be wrought in the supper of Christ except you call the geastes them selues the supper And then I weâ—…e they must be eaten vp of some body in so much as euery supper is prouided to be eaten We teache the substance of bread and wine to be made the substance of Christes body and blood And that is yâ— true work made in the supper of Christ where the mutable creatures are turned into the immutable substance of Christ. which work sith you deny bable what you wil you teache nothing to be wrought in the supper of Christ. ¶ The reall presence of Christes flesh is proued by the expresse naming of flesh blood and body which are names of his humane nature FOr we affirme that Christ doth truly and presently geue his owne self in his Sacraments in Baptisme that we may put him on and in his supper that we may eate him by faith and spirite and may haue euerlasting life by his crâ—…sse and blood Heare ye not how they affirme that Christ presently geueth his own self wold not a maÌ„ thinke they meant honestly and truly But sith they can make the words of Christ figuratiue when they lyst wonder not if they require their own words to be taken figuratiuely They meane not that Christ doth geue him self presently to our bodies and soules as is requisite to the presence of the flesh and blood of man why then vse they such words Uerily because they see the Scriptures so playne the Fathers and Councells so manifest the â—…aith and practise of the Church so euident for yâ— reall presence of Christ that in no wyse they may confesse any other thing then they doe And yet on the other side being fully determined to sticke to their desperate opinion that we really neither eate nor drinke vnder forme of bread and wine
the flesh blood of Christ they haue inuented such kind of speaking as may both seme to agree with the Scriptures and yet withall mayntein their false doctrine The which thing that thou mayest the better vnderstand this is to be consydered The Catholike faith is that Christ in one person hath two natures The nature of God and the nature of man which two natures are ioyned and vnited together into one person after such sorte that what so euer is said of the one nature may be sayd of the other if we speake by that worde which signifieth the person For example we may say that man was in heauen before the ascension of Christ and that God died not because the nature of God could be borne of a woman or dye or the nature of man could be in heauen before the ascension of Christ but because that which was borne and dyed was also God and that which was in heauen was also man albeit his byrth and death was by the nature of man and his being in heauen by the nature of God The natures then tary distinct but yâ— pâ—…rson of God man is but one Now shall you see the meane whereby these new prechers go about to deceaue you They say Christ geueth him selfe in his SacrameÌ„ts The word Christ doth signifie his person wherein he is both God man Likewise the word him self is a word belonging to his person wherein both natures of God man are conteyned Now when they say Christ geueth him self they meane that he being God man geueth by some spiritual way the vertue of his flesh blood which they call him self for that he as God being euery where may dwell in vs more excellently by charitie as the Father and the holy Ghost doe But they meane not by geuing of him selfe the reall gifte of his person and of both natures which are ioyned therein after such sort that our whole nature might receaue his nature For then they should teache that which we doe But howsoeuer they bable of our soules they will graunt our bodies no touching nor tasting of him no not so much as vnder yâ—â—…oormes of bread and wine You haue heard what they say Now heare what Christ sayeth Christ speaketh of him self in diuerse places diuersely Due where he sayeth I will not leaue you Orphans I will come vnto you There he speaketh of his person and concerning the nature of Godhead as it appereth afterward where it is written If any man loue me he will kepe my word and my Father will loue him and we will come vnto him and make a mansion or dwelling with him or at his howse Here he speaketh first in such sort of his own coming that his Father as it appered afterward might come after the same sort Then was it the coming of God and not of man At his departure when he ascended from the world into heauen he sayd Behold I am with you all dayes euen vntill the consummation of the world These words may be meant as well by the nature of manhod which we haue with his Godhead in the Sacrament of the altar and so some holy Doctors haue taken them as also by the only nature of the Godhead which is euery where by maiestie and in good men by grace In an other place he sayd Poore men ye shall haue allwayes with you me ye shall not haue allwayes Where by the word me he meaneth not his Godhead which is allways euery where but the nature of his manhod and that not as it is in the Sacrament but as it was when he spake in a visible forme of a poore man who had not any howse of his own where he might reste his head Last of all let vs marke after what sorte he sayd that he wold be in his blessed supper Dyd he say I will geue my self to be eaten and to be drâ—…nken If he had sayd so yet seing he had mentioned eating and drinking which according to the letter rather belongeth to his manhod then to his Godhead we should rather haue thought that the words must haue bene taken properly then improperly To eate the substance of a man may be sayd properly for in deed it may be eaten with mouth and teeth but to eate the substance of God it is sayd vnproperly For it can not be eaten with teethe and mouth as also S. Cyrillus hath noted but only with vnderstanding and faith If then Christ had sayd before supper I will geue my self to be eaten and had sayd at his supper I do geue my self to be eaten These words with a circumstance of a supper had made so stroÌ„gly for the bodily geuing of him selfe that their part had bene more probable who had vnderstanded it of his manhod With whom if the tradition of the Apostles had stood there were no doubt but he should haue bene a wicked heretik who when Christ had sayd I geue my self to be eaten wold haue denyed that we had eaten the humane nature of Christ. But now attend what words Christ vsed He forcseing this hearesie made 〈◊〉 agaynst it and therefore he sayd not I will geue or do geue my self to be eaten as heretiks now delight to speake but I geue my flesh my body my blood These are not wordes of personage which may be applyed two wayes but they are the words of nature and only of mans nature For God by yâ— nature of his Godhead hath neither flesh ne blood ne soule ne body ne bone Christ as man hath all these things Now do the heretiks and false preachers of our age maruclously deceaue the people of God who alwayes say that they diminish not Christes benefite nor do not abuse the Lords supper 〈◊〉 say they we teache that Christ geueth his owne self and they repete agayne and agayn his owne self his owne self And thereby they meane no more then the comming of his grace and charitie into our soules by fayth spirit and vnderstanding Wholy robbing vs of that flesh which dyed for vs and of that blood whiche was shed for vs. For although God was able to haue saued man otherwyse yet he swetely disposed our saluacioÌ„ by sending his dere soÌ„ne to take of the virgyn our flesh and blood This flesh and this blood worketh our saluacion Which he yâ— taketh away from the Sacrament of the altar depriueth vs of the meane whereby to come to life euerlasting For as by this flesh and blood we are redemed So that redemption is applyed to all that be of lawful age by worthy eating and drinking thereof Now when these preachers cry vnto you of God of fayth of spirit of vnderstanding of vertue they seme perhaps to say goodly things but they craftily put you from that only meane of fleshe and blood whereby God hath ordeyned our saluacion Abraham was the sather of al beleuers because neuer any mans belefe was so
throughly tryed as hys He lacked not grace vertue and vnderstanding but he lacked the flesh and blood of Christ Which flesh when it came really into the world when it was crucified and gusshed out streames of blood then the soule of Christ deliuered the soule of Abraham and all the other Fathers out of prison Wel to end this matter Christ to shew that he wold be in his supper by yâ— nature of his manhed for that cause he named not his person but his flesh his body his blood And S. Paule named his bones as you shall see hereafter Wherefore yâ— talke of his presence by fayth is vnfaythfull yâ— talke of his presence by spirite as thereby excluding his body soule from our bodies and soules is spritish and diuelish A spirit hath no flesh and bones Christ is with vs in the substance of his owne flesh of his owne bones And yet that we might vnderstand that Christ naming flesh blood meaneth not that either his flesh is vnder yâ— forme of bread without blood or his blood vnder the forme of wine without flesh but that vnder eche kinde both flesh and blood and soule and Godhead is he saith he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood taryethin me I in hym That is to say when I promise flesh and blood I name them only to declare plainly that my being in the Sacrament is a being according to yâ— truthe of my humane nature and not as though I were not there in mine owne person for he that eateth my flesh and drynketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him But it I had sayd that I geue my self no more 〈◊〉 false preachers had expouÌ„ded my selfe by my Godhead and by fayth vppon me my simple faythfull people might haue bene deceaued I name flesh body and blood to shew according to what nature I am 〈◊〉 But I am not diuided as though my flesh were vnder one kynde and mie blood vnder the other And therefore I say last of all He that catcth me he also shall lyue for me so that I am altogether in mine owne person vnder eche kynde after coÌ„secration Marke this agayne and agayne and let not the doctrine of Christ him self preteÌ„ded in suttil words deceaue thee any longer Beleue thou the presence of body of blood of flesh and of bones as the word of God speaketh ¶ It is a cold supper which the Sacramentaries assigne to Christ in comparison of his true supper ANd we say not this is done sleightly and coldly but effectually and truly The eating of Christ by faith and spirit is no sleight or cold thing But to say that no more is done in his supper that is sleightly coldly sayd Partly because so much may be done without the supper namely when so euer a man with good faith and charitie doth meditate vpon his gloriouse victorie ouer death synne Partly because it is a cold thing to 〈◊〉 men who consist of bodies to a supper of Christes making and to geue their bodies none other meate then corruptible bread and wine as you teache whereas Christ did forbid vs to work the perishing meate at his banket How can yâ— be worthely called yâ— supper of Christ which a man may make at home without coming to the table of Christ As though it were not for his honour to haue a singular kind of supâ—… of his owne Euery man may eate bread and drinke wine at his owne howse with his wife and children and remember that Christ died for them neither wil Christ leaue his good deuotion vnrewarded wherein the supper that you assigne to Christ consisteth and is fulfilled And is not that which may be done at priuate mens tables coldly and sleightly done in comparison of that great sacrifice of the true Melchisedech who by his blessed word turneth the substance of the bread and wine into that body of his which died and into that blood which was shed for vs ¶ By eating we touche the body of Christ as it may be touched vnder the foorm of bread FOr although we do not touche the body of Christ with teeth and mouth yet we hold him fast and eate him by faith by vnderstanding and by the spirit These men haue lost their wits through malice As who can deuise an eating of meate in a supper which eating shal be without touching the meate that is eaten with teeth and mouth For in the supper of Christ it is a detestable heresie and an intolerable ignorance to say that Christ saying Take and eate did not meane taking by hands or mouthes and eating by teeth and mouth Taking and eating is not without touching Christ sayd Take and eate this is my body therefore he sayd in effect touche my body with your teeth and with your mouth Neither doth it skil that his body is immortal and impassible for though it be not perished by the eating yet the eating and tou ching is not therefore false but so much the truer by how much the meate receaued is the more profitable cueÌ„ to our bodies And as we are sayd truly to kisse the Kings knee when we kisse his hose vnder which the knee is conteined euen so in touching the accidents of bread and wine we touche the body and blood of Christ which is coÌ„teined vnder them For which cause S. Chrysostom sayd 〈◊〉 we doe not only see we doe not only touch but we eate and fasten our teeth in yâ— slesh of Christ thereby noting and teaching the vndoubted presence thereof vnder the foorm of bread Which foorm we see we touche we eate we chaw and by that meanes we doe these things to the body of Christ vnder that foorm not perishing the body one whit For the same cause S. Cyrillus speaking of the blessed Eucharist sayeth of Christ Praebet nobis carnem suam tangendaÌ„ vt firmiter credamus quia templum verè suum suscitauit He geueth vs his flesh to be touched that we might beleue assuredly that he hath truly reised his temple that is to say his own body Christ geueth vs his flesh to be touched and yet doe we not touche it But how do we touche it Uerily as S. Thomas touched the Godhead of Christ. For as in touching his flesh he confessed him to be God because the Godhead lay hid in that flesh right so when we touche with teeth mouth the forme of bread in the holy mysteries we confesse that we touche thereby the flesh which lieth hid vnder that forme and yet the Apologie denieth vs to touche the body of Christ with teeth and mouth And whereas it sayeth we hold him fast by faith that is true also but it is not the whole truthe for as S. Thomas the Apostle did beleue vpon the Godhead of Christ and withall touche the flesh wherein it dwelt corporally euen so we beleue the presence of his body and
vs Secondly we must be like Egles in life and faith In life by forsaking earthly affectioÌ„s In faith by quicknesse of mind whiles we beleue that not withstanding bread and wine appeare to vs yet it is in deed an other 〈◊〉 The Egle hath many proprietes as to flee highe to looke â—…edfastly vpon the sun to see most clerely a farr of and to take his pray most swiftly To the flying high our good life must answer to yâ— quicknesse of sight our faith Not in suche sort to flee a highe as though the matter we seeke were not present but to â—…spie the body and blood of Christ vnder the formes of bread and wine For as S. Chrysostome saith This is the table of Egles He speaketh not now of heauen which is a boâ—…e the sun he speaketh of the table which standeth in the Church before vs wherupon the sonne of righteousnes is situated from which we take the foode of life the ioye of heauen yâ— earcase yâ— hath died for vs. The table is it whereof he speaketh What impudencie is this so to abuse the wordes of that blessed man as if he spake of going into heauen by faith whereas in dede he speaketh of them that liue like the saints of heauen and of theÌ„ that haue a quick sight to witt a faithfull vnderstanding yâ— they be able as it were to loke through the formes of bread and wine there to see vnder those formes the reall body and blood of Christ. For straight vpon the naming of a quick sight he inferreth yâ— this is the table of Egles not of Iaies As who shoâ—…ld say here is a meate that none can see but those who haue a most pure eye of faith Aquila sayth S. Augustine sublimiter volaÌ„s de tanto intervallo sub fluctibus natantem piscem dicitur ê‘â—…idere grauiter aquis illisa extertis pedibus atque vnguibus rapere The Egle flying a high is sayd most perfitly to see a great way of a fishe swiÌ„ming vnder the waues and vehemeÌ„tly beating her self against the water by stretching out her feet and clawes to snatch vp the fishe Behold an Egle seeth one thing vnder an other And so must we repute yâ— table of Christ to haue in it one thing vnder an other To haue vpon it the body of Christ vnder the form of bread And therefore noâ—…e but Egles can espie the said body As for the Sacramentaries Zuinglians they are like Iaies euer pratling of the body of Christ but neuer espying it or seing where it lieth they flee low as the Iaies doe as thinking that good works bring smal aide to â—…ife euerlasting They see weakely and coÌ„tent them selues with a base banket of bread and wine requiriÌ„g to theyr bodies none other food of life And whereas the sonne of reghteousnesse hath couered him self as it were with the cloudes of bread and wine to thintâ—…nt our eye might be able to beare more easily the brightâ—…esse of his shyning yet they are of so dull and of so dimme eye sight that thâ—…y say ther is nothing but 〈◊〉 vpon the table So that our table is the table of Eâ—…les where faithfull Egles may eâ—…pie the sonne of 〈◊〉 present vpon the altar and table and theyr table is the table of Iaies where nothing is 〈◊〉 besydes that which iufidell Iaies may find out by naturall eye sight bare naming without true being It foloweth in S. Chrysostm If noman wil rashly handle an other mans garment how dare we to our great shame and reproche receaue this pure and immaculate body â–ª which is Lord of al which is partaker of the diuine nature through which we haue our being and liuing by which yâ— gates of hel are broken downe and the gates of heauen set wide open Thus S. Chrysostome sheweth vs to receaue this body of Christ from yâ— holy table or altar as truly coÌ„cerning the substance thereof as we may truly touche an other mans garment Heauen is vsed both in holy Scriptures and in the Fathers for the heauenly life And so we must flee in to heauen not to receaue this body so it is not said but when we approche vnto this body The body is in earth with vs coÌ„cerning the nature and substaÌ„ce thereof vnder the formes of bread But as it is a body gloriâ—…ied and thereby made heauenly euen so we must clense and purge our selues from synne when we come to it and so be made heauenly or flee in to the state of them who liue in heauen And that state we professe who are called the kingdome of heaueÌ„ yâ— howse of God ¶ The bread that is the meate of the mind and not of the belly can be no wheaten bread but only the bread of lyfe which is the body of Christ. ANd Ciprian this bread sayith hee is meate of the mynd not meate of the belly The truth is so strong that yâ— more is brought agaynst it the better it is seene The sayng of S. Ciprian maketh so clearly for the contrarie of that wich the Apologi teacheth as it is possible to deuise If this bread be meate of the mind not meate of the belly out of questioÌ„ it is not material bread it is not the substaÌ„ce of coÌ„mon bread for though such materiall bread be neuer so much hallowed by prayer and thanksgeuing yet it still remayneth in substance bread of the belly But seing yâ— substance of yâ— common bread is changed into yâ— flesh of Christ as we catholikes beleue and teach now it can by no meanes be meate of the bellye for albeit wee receiue it really vnder the formes of bread into our bodyes and that also to feed them as wel as our sowles yet there ar two kinds of feedyng one wich is to liue in this world and in that case meate is for the belly and the belly for meate and God shall destroye both the one the other But an other feeding is to life euerlasting that is called by Christ cibus permanens meate which abideth which perisheth not Such a meate is the blessed body of Christ. It is a meat iÌ„ deed A meate wiche is truly eaten but is not digested into our corruptible flesh and voided as common meates are but a litle and a litle it feedeth and nourisheth vs to life euerlasting These defenders thought if it were â—…aten in deed that it could not be but meate of the belly As well they might blasphemously say that because Christ was man in deed he was born in synne And in that opinion they are like the Capharnaits who could imagine none other kinde of meate besides that which is diuided into peeces and consumed by eating The true Christians haue learned by the mercy of God with holy Cyrillus how the flesh of Christ because it is yâ— flesh of God may be eaten and yet quicken the eaters
and make them liue to God and notbe wasted by eating but rather how it may profite our soules being worthely receaued into our bodies For so Tertullian sayeth The flesh is fedde with the body and blood of Christ to th' ende that the soule may be made fatte in God Perhaps the Apologists will say that S. Cyprian doth call it bread I answere he calleth it bread because it is meate for he sayeth This bread is meate But what kinde of meate Panis iste quem Dominus Discipulis porrigebat non effigie sed natura mu tatus omnipotentia verbi factus est caro This bread which ouâ—… Lord gaâ—…e to the Disciples being changed not in shape but in nature is made flesh by the almighty power of the word Behold the kind of bread it is coÌ„mon bread in sha pe but made the flesh of Christ in substance In the olde tyme sayth S. Ciprian the shew loues being cold and hard were changed euery Sabothe daie and hote loaues of the same nomber were wonte to be sette vpon the table I am nulla â—…itpanis panis mutatio vnus est panis caloris continui Now there is no change of bread made there is one loase os coÌ„tâ—…al heate which neuer is cold By this we vnderstand that somtyme S. Ciprian speaketh of common bread which Christ tooke into his handes and that is changed and is at euery tyme a new loafe At other tymes he speaketh of the bread whereunto the change is made And yâ— bread is the flesh of Christ which is neuer changed The first bread if it tarâ—…ed in substance it should sill the belly But because the substance thereof is changed the flesh of Christ which is made by consecration is the meate of the mind and not of the belly For it feedeth vs to that state of immortalitie where the belly shall no more be filled with coruptible meates So that it feedeth vs in such sorte that we leaue to cherishe oâ—…r bellies so much the lesse by how much the more we eate it 〈◊〉 ¶ SacrameÌ„tall eating differreth from eating by faith alone whereof only S. Augustine speaketh in yâ— place alâ—…aged by the Apologie ANd Augustine how sayth he shall I hold him that is absent How shall I reache forth my hand into hâ—…auen that I might hold him there sitting Reach out sayth he faith thou hast caught him To make vp and to conâ—…lnde all these wrested places which haue bene alleaged heretofore out of the Fathers a plaine text is brought forth out of S. Augustine which speaketh neuer a whâ—…t of yâ— present controuersie nor can not be at all applied to it The question betwixt vs is whether Christes body bee present in the Sacrament of the altar or â—…o The Apologie reasoneth thus A Iewe that yet beleued not niay beginne to beleue and so may streche forth his hand to heauen and hold Christ fast by faith although he be bodily absent therefore Christes body after consecration dewly made is not present vnder forme of bread Is not this a mighty argument and worthy to be kept for the last place A Iewe may hold Christ by faith if he wil beleue vpon him therefore he is not to be eaten really of faithful Christians in the Sacrament Nos indicemus modo Iudaeis vbi sit Christus Let vs now shew to the Iewes sayeth S. Augustine where Christ is Occisus est a parentibus eorum he is â—…aine of their Pa rents Venturus est iudex he shall come a iâ—…dge Audiant teneant let them heare and hold Respondet quem tenebo The Iâ—…we maketh answere whom shall I hold Absentem Shall I hold him that is absent Quomodo in coelum manum mittam vt ibi sedentem teneam How shall I stretch my hand vnto heauen that I may hold him sitting there Fidem mitte tenuisti strech out faith and thou hast caught him Parentes tui tenuerunt carâ—… tu tene corde Thy Parents haue holden him in flesh hold holdâ—… him in harte Quoniam Christus absens etiam presens est because Christ being absent is also present And againe corpus suum intulit coelo maiestatem n on abstulit mundo Christ hath caried his body into heauen he hath not taken away his maiestie from the world This dialogue S. Augustine made betwen him selfe a Iew not intending any whit to spcake in that place of the Sacrament of the altar wherof Iewes ought to know nothing And yet commeth yâ— Apologie and will proue that we touch not the body of Christ with our teeth and iawes but by faith mind and spirite bycause beside all the former argumentes which be not woreth a strawe S. Augustine telleth a Iewe that he may beleue vpon Christ absent in body but present in maiestie of his Godhead You will say perhaps If Christ be absent in body that his body is not present vnder the form of bread after consecration Syr S. Augustine speaketh not of Christs body as it is in yâ— SacrameÌ„t to be eaten but as it is visible in heauen And to assure you therof it was yâ— custome of yâ— primitiue Church to let no infidel see or be present at yâ— tyme of Masse of yâ— ChristiaÌ„s Therefore S. Augustine might not lawfully talke to a Iewe of yâ— misticall presens of Christ in the Saâ—…ament neither surely any word of his in that alleaged place is to be referred to the Sacramentall eating They are two distinct things to receaue Christ by faith alone and to receaue by faith and SacrameÌ„t together that may be done before baptisme as it appeareth by Cornelius in the Actes of the Apostles But a Sacramentall receauing in the supper of Christ is graunted only to Christians after baptisme as S. Justinus yâ— martyr and the experience it selfe doth witnesse For as he that is not borne can not eate so he yâ— is not regenerated in Christ may not be suffered to eate his body drinke his blood in the Sacrament And truly except a man hath so addicted him selfe to Christ that he wil be contented to beleâ—…e what so euer he shal say vnto him he would neuer be persuaded that vnder the forme of so small a peece of bread the reall body of Christ were conteyned But when he hath learned in the articles of his faith that Christ is God and therefore almighty after that belefe he both can beleue his word to be true when he sayd ouer bread which was taken This is my body and also may eate the same body of Christ to his profit and to the encrease of life euerlasting But what ignorance was this to applie the eating of an infidell Iew to the mysticall eating which only the faithfull make in Christes supper ¶ The preface of the third Booke THe mysterie of Christes supper was so great that not only diuerse figures in the lawe of nature and of Moyses were by the Patriarches Priests
reall flesh 17. VVe are one with Christ by eating his flesh in the naturall substaÌ„ce thereof as he is one nature with his Father by eternall generation 18. The reall presence of Christes hody vvas so true that it vvas taught with the losse of many disciples 19. How the flesh profiteth nothing vvithout the spirit 20. The wordes of Christ being spirit and life make and witnesse his flesh to be present miraculously and aboue the course of nature ¶ The argument of the sixth Chapiter of S. Ihon is declared WHereas Christ may be receaued either by faith spirit only without the Sacrament of the altar or els in the Sacrament of the altar only without liuely faith and grace or in both together which is the most fruitfull kinde of communicating some haue thought that in the sixth chapiter of S. Iohn there is no talke of the second and third kinde of receauing which is referred to the Sacrament of the altar but only of the first which is by faith and charitie Merily those men are not to be blamed for saying yâ— Christ speaketh not there of yâ— second kinde of eating which is by SacrameÌ„t alone without spirituall eating and drinking for thereof in deed he speaketh not but they are to be reprehended if they denie yâ— he speaketh of such SacrameÌ„tall eating as is vsed in our Lords supper when it is as it always ought to be worthely receaued My purpose is at this tyme to shew that albeit Christ in the former part of that Chapiter speaketh for the most part of spirituall eating and drinking only yet afterward he speaketh also of that eating which is by receauing worthely the Sacrament of that altar at yâ— Priests hands for to that ende chiefly goeth all the talke of it not as though spirituall receauing alone were not better then only Sacramentall receauing but because both together are better then one alone Christ presseth his Disciples to such a receauing of him selfe as is most perfit of all For proofe of which thing I am constrained briâ—…fly to touche the tyme and order of Christes talke A litle more then one whole yere before his passion Christ about the greate feast of Easter went beyond the sea of Galilee and wrought that notable miracle wherein he fedde about fiue thousand men with fiue loaâ—…es and two fishes Wherby yâ— people were induced yâ— rather to seeke him that next day at 〈◊〉 Whom he no 〈◊〉 sawe but he did put them in mind of yesterdays miracle telling them that they followed him not for the signessake which they had sene but because they had eaten their bellies full of bread as though he had sayd my intent was that you should rather haue noted the miracle then haue respected your bellies â–ª which 〈◊〉 sith you haue not done of your selues I warne you thereof willing you to worke not the meate which perisheth as yesterdays bread fish did but that which tarieth vnto life euerlasting which the Sonne of man will geue you In these words Christ doth manifestly declare as also S. Chryâ—…ostom hath noted that the miracle of fiue loaues appertained in some part vnto his last supper whereof he intended at that tyme to speake taking an occasin of that bread which by blessing and thanksgeuing he had multiplied For which cause he sayd worke 〈◊〉 other kind of meaâ—…e then ye did yesterday for yâ— meate is now perished and ye are a hungred againe Worke a meate that may tary longer with you yâ— may tary vnto euerlasting life Hitherto the words of Christ may be meant â–ª by spirituall eating and drinking only Bâ—…t the words that follow do meane also a further kinde of eating and drinking For when he sayth which the sonne of man wil geue you he plainely meaneth that gift of his last supper as Theophylact doth witnesse but yet vttereth his meaning after a secret sort as S. Cyrillus doth write vpon the same place And in dede that is the gift which is namely reserued in this Chapiter to the sonne of man as it shall appere afterward But because they could not come to yâ— worthy working of Chrstes own gift vntill yâ— worke of faith were by y◠〈◊〉 wrought in them he straight declareth by an occasion taken of the olde figure manna how they must haue faith from God to beleue vpon him for that he was the bread of life who came downe from heauen to geue life euâ—…rlasting both in body and soule to all such as his Father brought vnto him for who so euer should eate of that bread which him selfe was should liue for euer After which preparation made he retourneth to expound his owne gifte which he named the gifte of the Sonne of man shewing most expressely that which he will geue in his last supper And the bread which I will geue is my flesh for the life of the world The gift of spirituall eating by faith charitie was not to come when Christ spake vnto his Disciples For it was then present therefore he sayd presently I am the bread of life meaning that he was presently so coÌ„cerning spiritual feeding in so much as if any man would haue beleued in him euen at that instaÌ„t he might through grace haue eaten of Christ. But Christ sayth his own peculiar gift was to come and there fore he continueth expounding his gift in many sentences vntill at the last he sayth he that eateth this bread which him self had before promised to geue to be eaten shall liue for euer I will by Gods grace make the proofe hereof so plaine hereafter as any reasonable man shall desire Only first protesting that I folowe not myne own braine herein but that iudgemeÌ„t of all yâ—â—…cient Fathers who with one accorde haue taken this Chapiter to speake by way of promise of the Sacrament of the altar which was iustituted by Christ in his last supper ¶ It is proued by circumstances by the coÌ„ference of holy Scriptures yâ— Christ speaketh in S. Ihon of his last supper HE yâ— doth well consider the only time when this talke was had he that weygheth how Christ hauing made that greate miracle in blessing fiue loaues doth the next daie about the time of Easter one whole yere before the celebrating of his last supper as it wer make both a prophecie and a promise what he would do yâ— Easter twelue moneth after he that conferreth as well what was done and sayd abonte the sea of Tiberias and at CapharnauÌ„ as what was done and said in the last supper which was kept the night wherein he was betrayed he that noteth the fathers gift to be accompted present and that to be the working of belefe in that hartes of the faithful which is a spiritual eating of Christ but yâ— soÌ„nes gift to be rekoned as a thing to come hereafter and to be called eating his flesh and drinking his blood Wich if it
of eatinge him by faith and therefore saith this is the worke of God that ye should beleue in him whom he hath sent He that beleueth in 〈◊〉 shall not hunger but there be some of you whiche beleue not so that the eating is the beleuing and the not beleuing is the not eating Christ in dede speaketh of belefe which is very necessarie and euen the foundation as S. Cyrillus noteth of his last supper but he speaketh also of a farther act whiche is to build vpon the foundation of faith the working of the euerlasting meat that he wil geue â–ª and to work not onely by faith but lykewise by eating and drinking and therefore as he chalengeth belefe to his godhead so doth he say that we muste eate his fleshe and drinke his blood according as he is the sonne of man Thus may we consyder in Christes wordes a dubble kind of eating the one is called maÌ„ducare ex hoc pane to eate of his bread the which bread Christ is the other is manducare hunc panem to eate this bread by faith we eate of Christ by his last supper we eate Christ. By eating of him we partake some effect of grace froÌ„ him By eating him we receaue his whole flesh blood soule and godhead into our bodies As therfore Christ willeth vs not ouly to eate of him but also to eate him self so besyds the eating which is by faith he geueth vs to vnderstand there is another eatinge proper to his last supper described in S. Ihon. The third argument of theirs is that Christ was the bread of life presently when he spake to the Iewes For he sayd I am the bread of life or the liuely bread which am come downe from heauen my father doth geuâ—… you yâ— truâ—… bread from heauen Therefore Christ was presently the bread of life yea rather he was so when he was incarnate firste of the virgin for euen then he came down from heaueÌ„ but how can this stand together if his words be applied to his last supper which was not yet instituted Christ through his Godhead was the bread of life to vs all for euer and straight vpon his incarnation he was the bread of life through his manhod and so continued stil at the tyme when he spake to the Iewes and after that visible and corporall sort he was to be eaten by faith not corporally But he saâ—…d also worke the meate which the Sonne of man wil geue you and the bread which I wil geue is my flesh This gift which Christ sayth he wil make differeth in tyme and maner from the gift which his Father doth presently make so that as he is the bread of life by faith so he wil be the bread of life by corporal participation which second gift is fulfilled in his last supper which he him self now promiseth For no reason can be shewed why Christ should say his gift was to come except it had bene some other gift theÌ„ to eate him by faith alone The which eating by faith sith it was lawful euen at the same instant wherein he spake he wold not say I wil goue of any spiritual eating therefore he spake of the Sacramental geuing which he intended to make at his last supper Against this last saying of mine Caietane or some other of his opinioÌ„ wil pretend that Christes gift whereof he speaketh in S. Ihon was in dede to come but yet not meant of his last supper because it was the gift of him self to death vpon the Crosse which he meant And therefore he sayd the bread which I wil geue is my 〈◊〉 for the life of the world signifying that the gift which he wil make shal be such as shal redeme the world Which gift was only performed vpon the Crosse was partaken always of the old Fathers and may be dayly howerly partaken of vs. Which points doe not agree with the gift of the holy Eucharist in Christes â—…upper This argument although it were wittily deuised yet it is insufficient and for many causes First becausâ—… Christ spake of a meate which he wold geue euen vnto our bodies and not only vnto our soules And that may â—…ppeare to be so as wel for that he ordeined the miracle of multiplying fiue loaues to be an introduction to this talke the which loaues were corporally eaten as also for that he shewed him self to be the true bread which would fulfill and excede â—…anna the figuratiue breade of the Iewes and therefore S. Cyrill saith that Christ saying my fleshe is meat in dede maketh a distinction betwene the mysticall benediction and manna â–ª for manna dyd not geue life euerlasting but by the blessing of the mysterie saith S. Cyrill we take the verie sonne of God Nowe seing manna was eaten of the Iewes both spiritually of the iust men and also corporâ—…llye of all the Israelites Christ who sayd his father to geue presently the true bread and promysed that him selfe would geue hereafter his flesh to be eaten which is â—…ate in dede dyd shewe the spirituall eating of manna to be presently fulfilled by his fathers gifte whereby he toke fleshe and that the corporall eating shuld likewise be hereafter fulfilled in his last supper Whiche being wel consydered it is plain that Christ when he speaketh of a gift which he will make doth speake of suche a kind of gifte as the miracle of fyue loaues as the figure of manna as the name of bread and nature of eating requireth But his death vpon the crosse is not the fulfilling of manna in that respect as manna was eaten either corporally or spiritually It is in dede the cause of all our feeding both in spirit and body the fontain of all our sacraments the welspring of al grace Bâ—…t we seek a similitude of things which are spoken together an agreement of one matter with an other Manna was a sacrameÌ„t onely and not properly a sacrifice and therefore it being eateÌ„ betokened the gift of Christ which he wold make in his supper wherein the true manna shulde be sacramentally eaten For which cause after Christ had said the bread which I will geue is my flesh he both commanded his flesh to be eaten shewed the profit of eating it and concluded in this wise not as your fathers haue eaten maÌ„na be dead he that eateth this bread shall line for euer If now we must eate that which he wil geue we must eate it after the rate as manna was eaten albeit yâ— thing eaten is far better surely the gift promised must be of a thing that shal be geuen to vs in a supper and not yâ— shal be made for vs vpoÌ„ the Crosse. for noman as it is alleged out of Origines eateth properly the flesh of Christ as it was crucified In so much that S. Hierom distincteth expresly the flesh of Christ whereof Christ speaketh in S. Ihon from the respect
what answere ought to be made therevnto Thus I haue proued by the proprietie of yâ— words in S. Ihon by the circumstance of the tyme and place by the coÌ„ference of holy Scriptures by the vniform consent of the auncient Fathers by the authoritie of generall Councels by the yerely practise of the west Church by the confutation of the reasons which are made to the contrarie that Christ in his disputation at Capharnaum spake in some part of yâ— sixth Chapiter by the way of promise of yâ— Sacrament of his last supper All which things if they proue not my intent I desier the learned Reader to shew me wherein they faile from the truth But vntill that be shewed I must say all the authoritie that is an yâ— earth semeth to concurre to that my position And therefore God willing I intend to build vpon this so sure a ground the rest of my disputation against the heretiks of our tyme who teach false doctrine in the matter of Christes supper affirming that Christ promiseth in S. Ihon to geue his flesh in spirit only and not vnder the forme of bread Against whom I wil from hence foorth dispute if yet I first shew somwhat more particularly that the euerlasting meate which Christ promiseth in S. Ihon doth appertein to that part of Christes talk whicâ—… is before proued to appertein to his last supper ¶ The meate tarying to euerlasting life which Christ promiseth to geue is meant of his reall flesh and blood to be geuen at his last supper CHrist going about to drawe the people from filling of their bellies to a more spiritual feeding said worke not the meate which perisheth but that which tarieth to life euerlasting which the sonne of man wil geue you This proposition is diligently to be consydered as being the chief keye of the whole dispâ—…ation folowing And therefore I wil declare how euery part of it doth agree with the processe of the talke which towardes the end of the chapter is made concerning Christes owne gift First where he saith the sonne of man will geue meate he afterwarde vttereth the kinde of meate or foode more plainly saying The Bread which I wil geue is my flesh And whereas he â—…ad them worke the sayd meate he afterward sheweth that by working he meaneth first beleuing in him with a true and working faith and afterward also eating and drinking worthely his owne flesh and blood And therfore sayth this is the worke of God that you beleue in him whom he hath sent and again Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood ye shal not haue life in you he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath life euerlasting And yet farther expounding his former wordes he sayth for my flesh 〈◊〉 meate in dede the word verè in dede declareth what kinde of worke belongeth to this meate not only a metaphoricall worke but a true worke of the body and soule of the soule in beleuing of the body in eating So that if we marke well the meate that must be wroâ—…ght the bread that he wil geue and his owâ—…e flesh which must be eaten is al one thing The working of this meate reqâ—…reth the helpe as well of the minde as of the body accordingly as Tertullian sayth Caro corpore sanguine Christi vescitur vt anima de Deo saginetur non possunt ergo separari in mercede quas opera coniungit The flesh eateth the body and blood of Christ to thintent the soule also mâ—…e be made fat of God They can not therefore be seperated in reward whom the worke ioyneth The body worketh with the soule in eating yâ— flesh of Christ the work ioyneth them because they both work and eate one thing and therefore they must be rewarded both together in the daye of Iugdement But if we did eate the body of Christ by faith only as the Sacramentaries teache our bodies should not worke the meate which perisheth not but only should eate bread and drinke wine which must nedes â—…erish But Christ goeth forward to shewe his owne flesh to be meat in dede to be that true meate which he sayd before should not perish but tary and abide still saying for he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood tarieth in me and I in him which thing cometh so tâ—… passe because Christes flesh being eaten is not digested into our earthly flesh and so consumed of vs as other meates are bâ—…t rather as being incomparably stronger then oâ—…r stomaks it consumeth all our carnall and fleshly humours If then it cause vs not to perish how much more is it selfe a meate not perishing but tarying for euer And to shew that the sayd worker of the meate and flesh which Christ will geue taâ—…ieth in Christ â—…ot only for a time but to life euerlasting as the not perishing meate was before sayd to doe againe it foloweth He that eateth this brâ—…ad shall liue for euer By which 〈◊〉 of Christes words it is euident when he sayeth worke not the meate whiche perisheth but which tarieth to life euerlasting which the sonne of man wil geue you that then he meaneth they shuld eate his flesh drinke his blood in such â—…orte as the sonne of man wil geue it I 〈◊〉 thee good Reader once againe to conferre these sayinges Is it not all one to say the sonne of man will geue and I wil geue Likewyse the sonne of man wil geue you meate and the bread which I will geue is my flesh only this difference there is that in the later wordes he nameth the kinde of meate which in the former he did not name The sonne of man will geue the meate which perisheth not and what is that 〈◊〉 say but that he will geue his flesh as meate which flesh he will geue for the life of the world And how can that fleshe be thought able to perish which maketh all other men that beleue in it to liue for euer The meate which the sonne of man wil geue must be wrought and the bread which Christ sayeth to be his flesh which he wil geue must also be eaten for except ye â—…ate the flesh of the sonne of 〈◊〉 and drinke his blood ye shal not haue life in you The meate of the sonne of man tarieth and he that eateth the flesh of Christ and drinketh his blood tarieth in Christ and Christ in him The meate of the sonne of man dureth to life euerlasting And he that eateth the flesh of Christ hath life euerlasting If these things answere throughly if Christ be the sonne of man if the bread he wil geue which is his flesh for the life of the world be the meat which perisheth not if the working of this meate be both beleuing and eating if the meat make the eater â—…arie for euer then â—…ith so many thinges agree let these wordes
be coÌ„fessed no lesse to perteine to the promise of Christes supper then those doe towardes th ende of the chapter when he sayth the bread which I wil geâ—…e is my flesh So doth Theophilact expoâ—…d this place Cibum manentem mysticam dicit sumptionem carnis domini quam nobis ipse dat filius hominis factus He calleth the meate which tarieth the mycall receauing of our Lords â—…esh which him selfe being made the Sonne of man geueth vs. What name I Theophilact All the Fathers yea all Christians agree that Christe in his supper is the meate whereof it is sayd it perisheth not Now Christ perisheth not whether he be geuen to vs by faith as his Father is sayd to geue him or in the Sacrament of his supper as yâ— Sonne of man is afterward sayd to be of the will to geue his flesh which is meate in dede As therefore we can not denie Christ when he is geuen by faith to be the not perishing meate so it were woâ—…derfull impiety to say the substance of Christes flesh geuen at his supper not to be the same not perishing meate or seing it is also a not perishing meate at his supper why should not these words be vnderstaÌ„ded of the same supper And seing Christ would it to be wrought not only as his Father geueth it presently but also as the Sonne of man wil geue it hereafter to wit vnder the form of bread at his last supper it must nedes be graâ—…ted yâ— Christ speaking of working the gift of the SoÌ„ne of man meant no lesse of working his own gift which he nameth afterward eating then the working of his Fathers gift which is straghtways called beleuing How beit concerning equalitie of substance in Godhead all is common betwixt them In fine the not perishing meate which the Sonne of man wil geue to yâ— Iewes is his flesh which he wil geue to be eateÌ„ Which flesh 〈◊〉 not perish as well because it is wholly 〈◊〉 in by the na ture substance of almightie God as also because it is not chaÌ„ged into our flesh when it is â—…aten as other meats are but spiritually changeth vs into it Now that fleshe not perishing but tarying in our soules bodies maketh them also kepe and preserue 〈◊〉 life whereby we come to the ioyâ—…s of heauen For that Christ meant of suche a not perishiÌ„g meat as might be receaued not only into our soules but into our bodies Also S. Cyrillus hath witnessed vpoÌ„ this place Operemur igitur vt saluator ait non eum â—…ibum caet Let vs work therefore â—…s our sauiour saith not that meat which â—…iding into the belly and geuing vs a short pleasure at the leugth goâ—…th forth in excrements and perisheth but let vs work the spiritâ—…all meat which strengtheneth the hartes leadeth to life â—…uerlasting the which meate he promiseth that he wil geue saying the Sonne of man will geue you this meate Thus he hath ioyned the things oâ—… man to the things of God and touched the whole mysterie of the incarnation For he sheweth sum what priuily the spirituall meate whereby we liue in Christe being sanctified both in soule and body But he wil say this thing more openly anon wherefore we also wil write there more at large an interpretation that shall agree to this place 〈◊〉 dured the words of S. Cyrillus who as he was a most excellent man of wit and lerning so hath he most exactly declared the meaning of these wordes which I now expound Christ meaÌ„t to persuade the Iewes his diuine nature and that he was himself according to his flesh the true maâ—…a which came down from heauen and that he would geue the self same flesh as truely to be â—…aten into the bodies of the faithfull for a spirituall nourishement of them as euer the Iewes dyd corporally feede vpon manna To persuade this he wrought a miracle in bread he traiâ—…ed them to talk of bread and of manna withal exhorting theÌ„ to sede vpon the â—…corruptible meate which he would geue This meate was his owne fleshe but he as yet would not vtter so muche vntill their myndes were somwhat prepared therunto by true faith For this cause S. Cyrillus wryteth that Christ as yet describeth the spirituall meate occultius somwhat secrâ—…tly Buâ—… that afterward hâ—… will shew it apertius more openly Agame S. Cyrillus saith Christ hath ioyned humana diuinis the things of man to the things of God The things of man are that flesh assumpted by Christ and the sanctifying of our bodies by receauing his fleshe into them through the gift of Christ whiche he gaue as man The thinges of God are the feeding of our soules by right belefe vpon God Thirdly by the iudgement of S. Cyrillus this place apperteineth to that which foloweth concerning the sanctification as wel of our bodies as of our soules but that whiche foloweth is most properly meant of the sanctification which our bodies receaue by the food of Christes supper of which supper S. Cyrillus exponndeth those words except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man c. What nede more words this place is like to the othâ—…r following in the end of the same chapiter The bread which I wil geue is my flesh whiche wordes al the auncient fathers without any contradiction teache to belong to the supper Therefore doubtlesse they are of the same mynd concerning this place also but because this place is not so plaine as the other no man nede to maruaile why they rather allege the other then this And yet euen to this place of S. Iohn the holy martyr Ignatius alluded when he sayd in that epistle which both Eusebius S. Hierom acknowledged to be his Non mihi placet cibus corruptionis nequè voluptates vitae huius panem Dei volo panem coelestem panem vitae quod est caro Christi filij Dei poculum volo sanguineÌ„ eius quod est charitas incorruptibilis perennis vita The perishing meaâ—…e and pleasures of this life plâ—…ase me not I long for Gods bread the heaneÌ„ly bread the bread of liâ—… whiche thing is the flesh of Christ the sonne of God and for the cup his blood which thing is â—…haritie not perishing and life euerlasting Thus as wel the coÌ„ference of holy scriptures as the witnesses of S. Ignatius of S. Cyrillus of Theophilact of S. Augustine and of Tertullian do shew this place to belong to the SacrameÌ„t of the Altar therefore therein we muste eate not bread and wine which perishe but only the permanent fleshe of Christ and so we must eate it by mouth as we beleue on it in hart For eating and beleuing is referred in this Chapiter to the selfe same fleshe of Christe therefore as really it must be eaten by mouth as it is beleued in hart to be most râ—…all in it selfe ¶ The equalitie of substance with his father which Christ allegeth
or nothing els is here called the signe thereof If the maÌ„hood be the signe surely the maÌ„hood is now promised and is deliuered euen to Iudas at his last supper which being so I graunt it to be a most true â—…se yâ— Iudas did eate such a signe of Christes flesh as his owne substance is But if the Sacramentaries will needes haue materiall bread meant by these words The bread which I will geue besydes that they take that word otherwyse then it is taken in all the talke which apperteineth to yâ— true bread which came down â—…rom heauen I wil confute that grosse error an other way also Christ ioyneth together two diuerse tenses the future and the present Dabo I will geue and est it is aâ—…ing that the geuig of his bread is to come but the substance or being oâ—… the same bread which he wil geue is presâ—…nt for he sayd not yâ— bread which I will geue shal be my flesh but is my flesh And yet if the word bread did stand for materiall bread and the word flesh for yâ— signe and figure of fleshe as some doubt not falsely to teache or it the 〈◊〉 is oâ—…d stand â—…or the verbe signiâ—…icat which mâ—…aneth to betoken or to signifie theÌ„ Christ euen by our aduersaryes interpretation should haue sayd the bread which I will geue shal be my flesh and not as he now said is my flesh For seing that Christ spake these words one whole yere before his supper as by the ghospell it maie appere if the bread whiche he said he would geue should only betoken his flesh and not be his fleshe in dede then were it falsely spoken that the same bread now presently is his flesh for if the bread it self he not yet made yea perhappes not so much as the corne thereof in the grounde and certainly not yet blessed of Christ how is it possible that the bread which now is not can be now a signe or token of Christes flesh That which is not it self can much lesse be a â—…oken of an other thing but that which Christ sayd he wold geue was extaÌ„t in substance at that tyme when he spake and at that present instant when he spake For he sayd the bread which I will geue is my flesh as I say is now is at this moment wherein I speake But the materiall bread that I will take into my hands turne into my flâ—…sh is not as yet extant any where Or if it be it is not a token vntill I blesse But the bread that I will geue is euen now my flesh As much as if Christ sayd that which I will geuâ—… at my last supper howe so euer it seme coÌ„mon breade and appeare in the forme of bread which forme and figure is to come and therefore I say that I will geue it hereafter yet the substance that shal be conteyned within that forme of bread that sub stance which is the being and essence of my gift whereof now I speake that substance is now present in your eyes What substaÌ„ce is that Forsoth the substance of my flesh For as the forme of brâ—…ad is to come and the substance of my flesh is here present in me so by the forme of bread I say I wil geue it but concerning the substance thereof I say it is my flesh I say not it shal be lest you should thinke I meante to make such a giâ—…t of my flesh the substance whereof were to come rather then present But I say it is my flesh For within the forme of that bread none other sub stance shal be then that which you see here which is my flesh so that these words the bread which I wil geue is my flesh are as much to say as I will geue you the substance of my flesh to eat And that the word flesh doth here signifie the substance of Christes flesh Tertullian hath witnessed almoste fourtene hundred yeres past Who disputing against those heretiks that confounded the flesh and the soule of Christ taketh vpon him to declare that they are two distincted natures Of yâ— soule of Christ it was sayd Anxia est anima mea vsque ad mortem my soule is sorowfull to death of his flesh Panis quem ego dedero pro salute mundi caro mea est The bread which I shall geue for the life of yâ— world is my flesh Quod si vna caro vna anima illa tristis vsque ad mortem illa panis pro mundi salute saluus est numerus duaruÌ„ substantiarum 〈◊〉 genere distantium excludens carneae animae vnicam speciem If the flesh be one and the soule an other yâ— soule sorowâ—…ui to death the flesh bread for the saluation of the world the number of two substances differring in their kinde is safe excluding the one kind of a fleshly soule If in this disputatiâ—…n we might expound flesh for the signe of flesh and being for the signe of being Tertullian by this place had not proued a reall substance of flesh sith a signe of flesh is not the substance of flesh but now as in this saying my soule sorowfull the word soule standeth for the substance of the soule so in this the bread which I will gene is my flesh the word flesh standeth for the true substance of Christes flesh Seing then Christ promiseth to geue the substance of his flesh it must nedes be that he fulfilled his promyse vndonbtedly he hath geuen vs in dede the true substance of his flesh in his last supper when he sayd Take and eate this is my body that is to say as now I haue prosâ—…d the substance of my body Thus it is proâ—… first that these words belong to the Sacrament of Christes supper Next that the word bread 〈◊〉 â—…eth Christ him self the bread of life Thirdly that if it were exâ—… for common bread yet euery way the sense should serue to proue of 〈◊〉 the true gift of Christes substance in his last supper ¶ A farther declaration of the reall presence of Christes bo dy blood taken out of the discourse of his â—…wn words concerning the different eating of him by fâ—…ith and the reâ—…auing of his fleshe and blâ—… in the Sâ—…amente of the â—…ltar MAruaile not good Reader that I stand long about a little The strength of the word of God is so greate that a fewe syllables of his can not be sufficieÌ„tly expounded by a great many bookes of any mortall maÌ„s making for God spake but one and yet Dauid heard two things to wit the power and mercy of God Whereby are vnderstanded the two hole bookes of the old and newe Testament Now I wil goe forward to shew you the plaine differerence that Christ him selfe hath set forth in this Chapiter betwene eating of him by faith and eating of his flesh and blood in the Sacrament of the altar For these two are not one as our new preachers goe about against the worde
to that heauenly instrument of Christes flesh So that sometyme we say the Fathers gift is reall and externall but then we meane the visible flesh of Christ in his owne person Somtyme we say the Fathers gift is only spiritual and then we vnderstand the faith charitie and grace which the Father worketh in vs whom he bringeth to Christ by faith and spirit This distinction well remembred I trust to make the matter playne enough The state of our nature is suche that sith we consist of body and soule our soule being the chief part of vs and our body the inseriour parte God the Father in his gift intendeth to feed our soules which being fed our body shal be fed by reason it dependeth vppon the soule But Christ considering that our heauy bodies most commonly weigh down our soules to the pit of hell wold also inuent a way that our very bodies might not only not hindre but rather helpe our soules and not only through our soules but also through a meate that them selues should receaue be made lyght and meet to rise vpward and to obey the spirit gladly So that the meate which God the Father geueth to the soule Christ bringeth to the body And because the body hath no faith to apprehend the flesh of Christ withall neither vnderstanding nor spirite whereby to folowe the flesh of Christ into heauen it hath pleased his infinite mercy to leaue his flesh in so maruelouse a manner vnder the forme of bread that it might be geuen into our handes mouthes and breastes by which meanes we are able to receaue it corporally and naturally The Sonne therefore and the Father geue one thing on Christes behalfe but not one way on our behalfe For the Father geueth Christ vnto the world in dede but to vs in faith and spirit The sonne geueth him self to vs in faith and spirit with the Father and moreouer he is here sayd to geue him self in truth of body and blood to oursoules and bodies Because therefore the thing it self is one which the Father and the Soune geue one effect doth folowe in vs of both gifts For as it is sayd of the Fathers gifte He that beleueth in me hath euerlasting life So it is sayd of the Sounes gifte He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath euerlasting life But for so much as the Father and the Sonne geue not theire gifts after one sorte Therefore their two giftes are in this chapiter of S Ihon diuersly described First as I sayd before of the Fathers gift it is sayd He doth geue the true bread in the present tense Of that Sonne I wil geue in the future tense The Father geueth Christ in the forme of man and therefore it is sayd This is the will of my Father which sent me that euery one who seeth the Sonne and beleueth on him may haue euerlasting life and again ye haue sene me and haue not beleued Behold by the manner of the Fathers gift the faithful may see that Sonne of man vppon whom they beleue But of the Sonnes gifte it is only sayd The bread which I will geue is my flesh where it is not sayd that his flesh shal be seen but rather insinuated that it shal be vnder a couering of an other kinde of food which the naming of bread signifieth And in the supper where this prophecie was fulfilled it is most clere The Fathers gift is called Verus panis de coelo the true bread or meate from heauen The Sonnes gift is called not only true bread but also truly bread and meate in dede Caro mea verè est cibus my flesh is truly meate some true meate may chaunce not to be truly meate because it is not eaten but nothing is meat in dede and truly meate except it be in dede eaten There is difference betwene being the true vyne and a vyne truly Christ sayd him self was the true vyne but he sayd not that he was truly any certeyn vyne The Iewes and Disciples went not away from Christ for any thing that was spoken about the Fathers gyfte For albeit they beleued not Christ to be yâ— sonne of God yet they well perceaued that suche a gifte of eating by faith myght stand with the custome of Gods people but when the sonnes gifte came to be declared they could abyde no longer Seing then it is playne that they lacked faith but yet lacked not vnderstanding we may be sure they sawe more apparaÌ„t absurditie in the sonnes gifte as they toke it then in the Fathers because it semeth straunger for mans flesh to be eaten as the sonne semed to saye then God to be made man which is the Fathers gift who sent his sonne to take our flesh The gifte of the Father is called by suche names only as belong to the persone of Christ or to his dyuine nature to say the bread of life the liuely bread the true bread for God only is absolutely the true bread of life or by the pronownâ—… ego which is to say I. but yâ— gifte of Christ is called also by yâ— names of his humane nature to wit the flesh and blood oâ—… the sonne of man An other difference may be to coÌ„sider that Christ endeth his talke of eche gifte with repeating the old figure Manna betokening yâ— as wel by the giste of the Father as of the sonne the shadow of manna was fulfilled But as it shall hereafter appeare Manna was more perfectly fulfilled in outward doynges by the sonnes gift As therefore when he had longe reasoned of the belefe which they ought to haue in him whom God the Father had sent he last of al concludeth I am the bread of lyfe Your Fathers did eate manna in the desert and be dead yf any man eate of this bread he shall lyue for euer ryght so hauing at large reasoned of eating his owne flesh and of yâ— effect which ryseth thereof he at the last endeth This is the bread which came downe from heauen not as your Fathers haue eaten manna and be dead he that eateth this bread shall lyue for euer The like peroration vsed in both places with wordes somwhat vnlike doth declare that one substance is gyuen of the Father to be eateÌ„ of vs by faith and of the sonne to be really eaten so that the maner differeth because we eate only ex Christo that is to say of Christ by faith but we eate and receaue Christum Christ him self in the Sacrament of the altar For it pleased the whole Trinitie yâ— the fulnesse of our saluation should be in the manhood of Christ whose food it is to end his Fathers worke The Fathers gift is to beleue in Christ the soÌ„nes gifte is to eate and drink in very dede his flesh and blood In working the Fathers gifte a working faith is sufficient in working the sonnes gifte â—…aith is required with taking and eating that wherein we
beleue The Fathers gifte is to worke Christ in vs as Christ is God and man but more as he is God then as he is man for oure â—…aith and belefe is due to the Godhead first of all aâ—…d vnto the manhood because it is ioyned vnto the Godhead and therefore Christ sayd ye beleue in God beleue also in me But drinking and eating is first apperteyning to the manhood and afterward reacheth vnto the Godhead because yâ— Godhead is in that meaâ—…e and drinke which we take therefore Christ sayd he that 〈◊〉 my flesh dwelleth in me and I in him The Fathers gift is belonging first to our spirite and then to oure flesh because it is the flesh of such a spirit which beleueth in God and loueth him the sonnes gifte is first in our body and flesh concernyng the Sacramentall receauing of him and then in our spirite because it is a spirite belonging to such a flesh which receaueth the flesh of God thorough Christ. In the Fathers gift we are not sayd to receaue yâ— true bread it self which the Father gaue into the world but to receaue as it were an effect wrought by yâ— streÌ„gth thereof for after Christ had at large described his Fathers gifte he said this is the bread comming downe from heauen to the entent that if any man shal eate ex ipso of it he may not dye he saith not ipsum if any man eate it but of it Again Ego sum panis qui de coelo desceÌ„di si quis manducauerit ex hoc páne viuet in aeternum I am the bread which came downe from heauen if any man eate of this bread he shall liue for euer to eat of this bread is to receaue some grace and effect comming from it And this much coÌ„cerning yâ— Fathers gift But concerning the sonnes gifte Christ saith except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of maÌ„ He saith not of the flesh but yâ— wholè flesh it self Again My flesh is truely meaâ—… he that eateth my flesh tarieth in me and afterward he that eateth meâ—… he saith not now of me but me Last of all qui maÌ„ducat hunc panem viuet in aeternum he that eateth this bread shal liue for euer he saith not now he that eateth of this bread as he sayd before speaking of spirituall eating but he that eateth this bread And yet to make the matter more playne such an eating is assigned to the gifte of Christ which is made in his supper as before was named of MaÌ„na for it was sayd thereof Our Fathers did eate Manna they sayd not of Manna but Manna in his owne substance which words are three tymes conformably rehearsed and euery where they did eate Manna not only of Man na as though they had only taken a certeyn vertue out of it but they did eate Manna as we eate common bread Seing then we may eate of a thing or els the thing it self the eating of it is a spiritual eating by faith and vnderstanding But the eating it is a reall eating in the nature and substance of the thing it self When I say that by the Fathers gifte we eate of Christ and by the Sonnes gifte we eate Christ I meane not to deny but that also by the Sonnes gifte we eate of Christ. For as he that hath syxe hath fower so he that eateth worthely Christes flesh eateth both Christ and of Christ but not only of Christ for he eateth Christ in his humane nature wherein the diuine nature dwelleth and is geuen thereby to be eaten of He eateth of Christ I say concerning that effect grace which by Sacramentall eating the Godhead worketh in his body and soule For the Godhead it self is the bread whereof we must partake But the meane to partake it most abundantly is to receaue worthely yâ— manhood wherein the Godhead corporally dwelleth Therefore Christ geuing all the spirituall gifts that his Father doth as meane to make vs partakers of yâ— Godhead geueth also besydes all them the truth of his flesh and blood in the Sacrament of the altar as yâ— meane far yâ— highest to ioyne vs most nigh to yâ— spirit of God And although his Father geue vs by his appointment the same flesh and blood which Christ doth geue yet Christ calleth it for a great reason his own gift because the substance of it procedeth from his own person where vnto he assumpted flesh and blood For in this Chapiter as in many other places by the Fathers gift the gift of God and of the whole Trinitie is meant And by yâ— Sonnes gift that chiefly is meant which peculiarly procedeth by meane of yâ— incarnatioÌ„ strength of Christes flesh ioyned always with yâ— dyuine nature the which flesh we receaue in the Sacrament of Christes own institution wherein he sayd in his own person Take and eate this is my body drink ye all of this for this is my blood Who seeth not nowe the difference betwene the gift that God geueth vs by charitie which he spreadeth in our hartes and the gifâ—… wherein he gaue his owne Sonne wheÌ„ he toke flesh and became man with vs and the gift which the Sonne being made man geueth in his supper No gifte of God could saue vs the prophecies standing as they did but only the geuing of his soÌ„ne into the world when he tooke reall flesh for vs. And yet was not that enough except the Sonne again had geuen him self to death for vs. Then the flesh of Christ is the meane for vs to be saued that is a ladder let down from heauen whereon we may steppe and so clyme vp God him self we could not eate thereby to be chauÌ„ged into him and made membres of him But God became man that we eating maÌ„ might receaue God as he dwelt in that flesh which we reâ—…aued The conclusion is that if the Fathers gifte which is the inâ—…arnation of Christ and his manhood be to be taken in spirite and faith concerning the feeding of our soules as you haue seen it plainly proued the sonnes gifte which is an other different maner of geuing and hath an other kynde of working appoin ted to it must be receaued not in faith spirit and vertue only but also in the substance of flesh and blood Our new preachers expound the whole matter as though Christ gaue his flesh in his last supper noâ—…e otherwise excepting materiall bread and wine then his Father geueth it vnto vs by faith And therefore they teache that we receaue in the supper of our Lord with common bread and wine Christ him self by faith and spirit But by that meanes Christ geueth a great deale lesse then his father gaue For bread and wine is lesse then the gift of faith when Christ geueth faith he doth it as God therein being one with his father Is then his owne gift only bread and wine Came he into the world to geue a lesse tokeÌ„ then God had
Nyssa reasoneth our nature is not at any certain state but continueth in his substance by perpetuall motion drawing to it that which it lacketh and expelling superfluoâ—…se things As therefore our baptim is made by real washing with water real renewing of yâ— holy Ghost so nowe in the supper of Christ it behoueth we be really fed with the fruit of the 〈◊〉 of life which is â—…one other thing besyde the flesh of Christ. That flesh thâ—…n 〈◊〉 be really eaten of vs and not only eaten by spirit 〈◊〉 is conuenient for Angels but satisfieth not the necessitieâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nature but eaten by mouth and body For of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ at this tyme neither is it worth while to say that the body shall eate bread while the soul feedeth vpon the flesh of Christ. For the bread and wine haue no promise made in this place of them For albeit bread and wine be necessarie to the consecrating of the Sacrament yet the substance of theÌ„ is not necessarie at yâ— tyme of receauing the Sacrament it is only the flesh which died for vs that Christ promiseth to geue to be eaten it is the flesh of the sonne of man which if we eate not we shall not haue life in vs. It is Christes flesh which if we eate he will reise vs vp at the last day That flesh of his must be eaten his only blood must be drunken This threatning which is made if we receaue not worthely the flesh of Christ must be vnderstanded in his kind like the other threatning precept made before concerninge baptism where it was sayd except a man be borne again of water and of the holy ghost he can not enter into the kingdom of heauen bothe are Sacraments both necessarie to faithful men and both profitable to life euerlasting that whiche water doth in wasshing vs the fleshe of Christ must do in feeding vs. for this cause the ancient Fathers haue alwais both ioyned these two Sacraments together and haue alleged these two places for them the one out of the third the other out of the sixth of S. Iohn and they haue named the one baptism of wasshing and the other is called Christes body and blood of that substance whiche is geuen in it What should I name here S. Cyprian S. Basil S. Ambrose S. Augustine all the rest who reckon euery where the same truth of flesh to be in the 〈◊〉 which is concerning water in baptisme Therefore as the water which washeth vs is present really so must the fleshe of Christ which feedeth vs be made really present As baptisme can not be truely kept without naturall water so can not the supper of Christ be truely kept without his naturall flesh As if an euil maÌ„ come to baptism he is truly washed though not profitably to him self so if an euill man come to the supper of Christ he truly though not worthely receaueth his flesh As it is not enough for the Sracrament of baptism to haue water present in faith only and in spirite or vnderstanding so the presence of Christes flesh by faith spirite or vnderstanding only suffiseth not to make the Sacrament of his supper I pray you what vnderstanding had children wherewith they might receaue the body and blood of Christe and yet seing it is 〈◊〉 by the witnesse of S. Cyprian of S. â—…unocentius and of S. Augustin that children although without euident 〈◊〉 receaued the 〈◊〉 in many places of christendoÌ„ euen while the Churche was yet in his cheife floure it can not be denied but in that age all those Bishops Doctors and preachers which vsed to do so dyd well vnderstand that the receauing of the Eucharist consisted not in receauing Christ by actuall faith and meditation of his death and resurrection but in the vertue of those visible giftes which were sanctified by the Priestes vpon the holy altar of God and thence distributed to the faithfull people Tâ—…at custome of so auncient time vsed more for a securitie theÌ„ for necessitie yet was approued of God thus farre that we thereby might haue an 〈◊〉 witnesse of the learned farthers aucthority against them who doubt not to affirme all the writers and preachers of the first six hundred yeres after Christ to haue beleued of our Lords supper as the new preachers do now proâ—… in England But the new preachers make the substance of Christes supper to 〈◊〉 in faith in spirite and in vnderstanding And that not in 〈◊〉 saith whiche another man 〈◊〉 for me as it is dâ—…ne for 〈◊〉 antes at the 〈◊〉 bâ—…t teache tâ—…e â—…upper â—…o conâ—…ist in 〈◊〉 faith as euery man for him self bringeth and 〈◊〉 So that if a man thinke not of Christes death and lifting vp his hart doe not swetely feede vppon Christ sitting at the right hand of his Fa ther they say he doth not receaue our Lords body And they teach that he eateth nothing but breade and wine and toucheth nor the body and blood of Christ at all Of whoÌ„ I aske what S. 〈◊〉 what all the other Bishops of Aâ—…rica thought If they had thought so as these men doe they would not haue geueÌ„ the Eucharist to children and infants who could not â—…uminate Christes passion nor thinke vpon him sitting in heauen They doutlesse beleued farre otherwise of the Sacrament then so They beleued the body and blood of Christ to be really conteined vnder the formes of bread and wine and therefore that children might haue profite by receauing it into their verie bodies soules albeit they could not lift vp their mindes actually to heauen The matter in those daâ—…es dyd not stand vppon the faith of men but vpon the word of God who said this is my body This I say which I bid you take this whiche I geue this whiche I bid you eate What a toy is it nowe for our Sacramentaries to imagin an eating aboue the sky whereas the body is geuen to the Apostles hands mouthes by Christ himself and to the haÌ„ds or mouthes of other faithfull men by his ministers in earth ¶ That S. Augustine did not teach these words except ye eate the flesh c. to betoken the eating oâ—… Christ onâ—…y by faith and spirit nor yet the eating oâ—… materiall bread with 〈◊〉 remembrance of him but the eating of his flesh to theâ—…d we may be the better wyned to the spirit of God IF any speache sayth S. Augustin seme to command a dishonorable acte or vncharitable deed or to forbyd a profitable or benesiciall thing that speache conteineth some figure Fxcept ye eate sayth our Lord the slesh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood ye shall not haue life in you He semeth to command a dishonorable act or an euyll deed It is therefore a figure coÌ„manding that we should communicate with the passion of our Lord and yâ— we should swetely and profitably remember that his flesh was crucified and wounded for vs. This place of S. Augustine
geue it them This is a hard talk sayd they they were hard and not the talk for if they were not hard but gentle they wold say to them selues He speaketh not this thing rashly but because there lieth priuie some Sacrament â—…eing gen tle not hard they wold â—…arie with him and should learn of him that thing which after their departure those lerned who taried for when yâ— twelue had taried with him the other being departed they as who were sorie of yâ— others departing warned Christ that they were offended with his word so were departed but Christ instructed them and sayd It is the spirit which quickeneth the flesh profiteth not the words which I haue spoken to you are spirit and life vnderstand that which I haue spoken spiritually Ye shall not eate this body which ye see ne shall not drink that blood which they shal shed who wil 〈◊〉 me I haue commended to you a certain Sacrament which being spiritually vnderstanded shal make you liue and although that Sacrament mustenedes be visibly celebrated yet it must be inuisibly vnderstanded thus much S. Augustine First I note in these words against the Lutherans that S. Augustine vnderstandeth the precept of eating Christes flesh of the Sacrament of his last supper for there only a Sacrament of his death is visibly folemnized and inuisibly vnderstanded Secondly I note against the Zuinglaâ—…s that the figuratiue speache which S. Augustine acknowlegeth in Christes words is to be measured and meant according to the natural and customable speaking and vnderstanding of carnall men who yet be not fully faithfull for they thought they should haue eaten Christes flesh torne into peeces to fâ—…l their bellies there withal for in dede the eating of flesh naturally imploieth cutting or tearing before it come to our month and afterward chawing with the teeth and so the filling of the bellye but in respect of all suche meanings the words of Christ be figuratiue For seing it is against the honestie of maners to order mans flesh after such a cruel fashion the Iewes should haue deuised how to make an honest meaning of his words whom they confessed to be a great Prophete or at the least they should haue asked of Christ the true meaning of his own words For seing Christ had multiplied siue loaues miraculously to feed them and did so many other miracles and so much good in al the countrie that all men who were voide of malice confessed him to be of God reason geueth they should harken obediently to his words as the which they might perceaue to be spoken by no meane or common man and that therefore they should not measure them by their own phantasie experience Now then to say that except ye eate my flesh is a siguratiue speache is no more to say but you must not take the eating of Christes flesh so as at the first sight it cometh to your mind neither concerning the vsuall maner nor concerning the customable end of yâ— eating for that is vnhonest Tarie therefore vntill you find a better sense Whiche sense is found when it is knowen that Christ vnder the forme of bread geueth the substance of his flesh whole sound and quick with the Godhead corporally dwelling in it to the end we should liue spiritually for euer by worthy receauing it into our bodies and soules Thirdly I note much the kind of speaking which S. Augustine vseth For he calleth that thing a Sacrament vpon yâ— words of the Psalm now alleged which in his bookes of Christian doctrine he called a figure Shewing him self to take the name of a figure for all that when a farther and higher thing is to be vnderstanded then was outwardly expressed in which case the thing expressed is a Sacrament to wit a figure or a holy signe of that higher truth which is to be vnderstanded but he meant not by the name of a figure either to exclude the truth of eating Christes flesh or the truthe of drinking his blood but only the grosse maner of eating and drinking it to a carnal end which the Iewes thought vpon for as the killing and eating of the Paschall lamb was not only natural but also gaue yâ— faithful to vnderstand that Christ â—…ould be both killed on the crosse and eaten in a Sacrament and as the figure which was in that Lamb did not diminish the real killing and eating thereof but only did refer it to a higher truthe so the figure which is in eating Christes flesh doth not diminish the true eating thereof but only declareth that eating to be a figure because it is referred again to a higher truthe both in Christ whose flesh that once died is now eaten and in vs who eate it not so much for to eate it corporally as to fede spiritually of God him self who maketh that flesh profitable and that S. Augustine thought so it is euident by his own words vpon S. Iohn ye know not what is that maner of eating this flesh but except ye eate it c. Lo the maner of eating was secret but the thing that should be eaten was naturall flesh Again Carnem sic intellexerunt quomodo in cadauere dilaniatur aut in macello venditur non quomodo spiritu vegetatur They so vnderstode flesh as it is torne in a carcase or solde in the shambles And not as it is quickened with the spirit or Godhead Here it is reported wherein the Iewes did erre They toke the word flesh amisse not concerning the substance of it which must be really eaten but concerning the maner of eating it Is not modus Latin for the maner Is not quomodo as much to say as by what maner The Iewes vnderstode yâ— name of flesh Quomodo dilaniatur non quomodo vegetatur After such maner as it is torn into pecces and not after such maner as it is quickened with the spirit of God Do not these words import that the Iewes erred in the manner of eating Christes flesh Doth not he that findeth fault only with the maner of eating flesh sufficiently allow the eating of the flesh it self if it be done after a good maner Yea farther doth not he that sheweth the maner how it may be well eaten approue that kind of eating it As we must not â—…ate Christes flesh after such a grosse maner as is vsed in eating such flesh which is commonly cut into peeces Right so we must eate Christes flesh after such maner as it is quickened with the Godhead So doe S. Angustines words import I beseche thee good Reader see the oddes betwene the argument of a Catholike and of a SacrameÌ„tarie He reasoneth thus we must not eate Christes flesh carnally and butcharly therefore we must not eate really yâ— substance thereof We reason thus We must eate Christes flesh as it is quickened with the Godhead therefore we must eate really the substance thereof The argument of the Sacramentarie is naught
meate vnto the body for how saith he can a ' thing whiche lacketh a body be made meat vnto the body as who should say there is no doubt but the flesh of Christ is made meate vnto one body because Christ sayd my flesh is meate in dede and meate is ordinarilie promised to nourish the body although it being the meate of God helpeth the soule also If the bread that came downe from heauen whiche is the flesh of Christ be true meate it is a bodily thing for els how could a thinge that hath no body be made meate for the body if that can not be so truly the flesh geuen at the supper of Christ whiche is meate in dede and drinke in dede can not be only receaued in spirit but it must be so reall that it may fede our bodies also to thinteÌ„t they may be reised in the later day therefore that whiche our body receaueth when Christ saith take and eate is the same flesh of Christ which is meate in dede and seing it is proued to be a body because it is made meate vnto the body it must be meate in dede vnto vs and must be really taken into our bodies by our mouthes or els Nyssenus â—…ayleth in his whole discourse for he proueth it a body because it is meate vnto the body then certainlie it is not meate only to the soule nor it is not only receaued by faith but trulie and in dede And seing al wise men reason vpon a sure ground we may not doubt but all the Catholike Church twelue hundred yeres past and so vpward toke it for an euident truthe that Christes body was meate vnto our bodies ¶ By the maner of our tarying in Christ it is proued that we receaue his reall flesh into our bodies WHereas hitherto the necessitie the profite and the truth of eating Chrisies flesh hath bene shewed and confirmed Now the proper effect of that banket is also declared because he that eateth Christes flesh and drinketh his blood tarieth in Christ and Christ in him In respect whereof the same thing was before named Cibus permanens the meate which tarieth Whereby we may perceaue that in the SacrameÌ„t of Christes supper we doe not beginue to liue as in baptism but we maintein kepe nourish increase the sede of life which we toke in our spirituall birth Neither only doe we preserue life during the tyme of our feeding but also when the banket is ended some effect remaineth in vs through the which we are sayd to tary in Christ and he in vs. Let vs then trye out what effect that is for by the maner kind of the effect we may gather somewhat of the cause What meaueth it that Christ tarieth in vs and we in him S. Chryâ—…ostom answereth In me manet dicit vt cum ipso se admisceri ostendat Christ sayth He tarieth in me to shew that him self is mingled with him S. Chrysostom meaneth that whiles we receaue worthely the substance of Christes flesh into our bodies we are so intierly ioyned to him that we may be sayd to be mingled with him And how that is done S. Cyrillus declareth by this similitude As if a man poure wax vppon melted wax he wholy must nedes mingle the one with the other so it must nedes be if any man receaue the flesh and blood of our Lord that he be so ioyned with him that Christ may be found in him and he in Christ. And again Sicut parum fermenti caet As a litle leauen tempereth the whole lump of dow so a litle benedictioÌ„ whereby he meaneth a peece of the consecrated host be it neuer so smal draweth the whole man vnto it and filleth him with his grace and by this meanes Christ tarieth in vs and we in him S. Cyrillus calleth the things which are consecrated at Christes supper Benedictio a blessing because they are consecrated by the words of blessing the which Christ left vnto vs. Now a litle of that blessed food being receaued worthely of vs is not so properly sayd to tary in vs as we to tary in it for that though it be small in forme yet in vertue it is great And therefore it draweth vs vnto it as leauen turneth the dow to his nature It can not be auoided by these interpretations but that the heauenly food which we receaue into our mouthes is the reall substance of Christes flesh For it is here called Benedictio the blessing that word is not meant of an inward vertue coming srom heauen but of that which semeth bread and is visibly receaued at our Lords table For euen in the same Chapiter S. Cyrillus exhorteth men ad recipiendam benedictionem to receaue the Sacrament of Christes supper The which SacrameÌ„t if it were wheaten bread how could it be true that a litle thereof should draw the whole man vnto it Doth wheaten bread make vs like it are we then made vnreasonable vnsensible and a corruptible creature as wheateÌ„ bread is Christ sayth his meat tarieth to life euerlasting so doth not wheateÌ„ bread Christ sayth by eating his flesh we tary in him But we tary in him whiles the gift which at his supper he deliuereth is mingled with vs and conuerteth vs vnto it as S. Chrysostom and S. â—…yrillus teache And yet we be not conuerted or drawen to the nature of materiall bread or wine therefore it appeareth the gift which Christ deliuered not to haue bene bread and wine but his own body and blood vnder those formes S. Hilarie bringeth the very same word of tarying to proue that as Christ is in his Father by the nature of Godhead we in him by his corporall birth so he is in vs by the mysterie of the Sacraments and tarieth in vs naturally The like witnesse Theophilact geueth saying Contemperatio fit noua super rationem ita vt sit Deus in nobis nos in ipso There is made by eating Christes flesh a new mingling together so that God is in vs and we in him Briefly thus Christ meaneth He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood receaueth me as meate into his body and soule But because I come not to nourish carnall life but spiritual in him he doth not digest and turn my body into his as it happeneth in other meates but he is turned to be like me For the real ioyning and knitting of my flesh to his maketh a maruelouse mixture as if melted wax were poured to other wax so that a great grace and vertue is left of me in him whereby he may tary still in me and increase the fountain of life which is in him This kind of our tarying in Christ and of his with vs could not be true if we â—…ed spiritually only vpoÌ„ Christ absent in body For how can the body which is only in heauen be so teÌ„pered tâ—… our bodies soules in earth as one melted wax being powred
to an other wax doth make one thing of twain which is the similitude made here by S. Tyrillus What like ioyning to that other similitude of the leauen can be if no leaueÌ„ that is to say no benediction or no flesh of Christ be receaued into vs which may draw vs to it What mingling together is made of things that be so far distant as heauen and earth If you say faith and spirit doth ioyne mingle knitte Christ to vs and vs to Christ and make vs to tarie in him and him to tarie in vs either you geue a cause of yâ— ioyning which may stand with the cause alleged by Christ or els you correct his cause and put a better If the faith spirit whereof you speake shal stand with Christes cause it must be such faith as doth concurre with the eating of his flesh For he now sayd not he that beleueth in me tarieth in me but he yâ— eateth my flesh tarieth in me Therefore though ye beleue neuer so wel yet your present tarying in Christ is not assigned to faith but vnto eating Faith is necessarie to worthy eating and coÌ„sequently to our tarying in Christ. But not euery ground which is necessarie to a thing is by and by yâ— cause thâ—…reof Or though it be one cause it is not the only cause In the former part of this chapiter saith had his due commendation But now Christ speaketh of eating his flesh and saith it maketh vs tary that is to say to be ioyned to him wholy and to be mingled with him as well in body as in soule which thing can not be otherwise then through that we eate his flesh substantially He that leauing that eating of Christes flesh staieth vpon feeding by faith alone correcteth the cause assigned by Christ and also depriueth vs of that naturall tarying in him whereof he now intreateth ¶ We are made one with Christ by natural participation of his flesh as he being one nature with his Father hath assumpted our nature into his own person HE that eateth Christes flesh tarieth in Christ and receaueth life of him not by the meanes of faith spirit only but also by natural participation of his flesh which thing Christ declareth by this example As the liuing Father hath sent me and I liue for the Father also he that eateth me shal him self liue for me But Christ liueth not for his Father by faith at all because he seeth his glorie face to face nor yet by the meane of spirit alone as we take spirit for deuotion or els for spiritual gifts and qualities but he liueth for his Father hauing his Fathers whole substance really present in him self therefore we that eating Christ liue in like maner for him must haue his whole substance really present in vs and so must we receaue life not by faith or spirit alone but by taking the flesh of life it self into our bodies and soules Thus veriâ—…ic Christ doth meane That we may reache to the true ground of this comparison it behoueth we lerne first how Christ liueth for his Father and then we may vnderstand how we receauing his flesh worthelie shall liue also for him Christ hauing two natures in one person may be sayd to liue for his Father according to either of bothe natures As God he liueth for his Father for that he is eternally begotten of him to whom the Father geâ—…eth his whole nature substance life glorie so that uo diâ—…ference is betwene the Father and the sonne but that the sonne is begotten of the Father and the Father is altogether vnbegotten and without any relation to a farther beginning This order wherein the sonne otherwise equall God 〈◊〉 his Father doth yet alwaies refer his generation and life to an euerlasting beginning is the cause why Christ as God liueth for his Father the which interpretation S. Hilarie S. Basile S. Chry sostom and S. Augustine doe confesse may well agree to this place Christ as man liâ—…eth for his Father because his Father sent him to take flesh whose flesh being of it self neither able to geue life euerlasting nor to haue it in his own nature yet for the word wherevnto it is vnited in one person both hath life and geueth life now the word is naturally one God and one life with the Father this second sense doth better please S. Basile S. Augustine and S. Cyril although they allow the former also but this second sense doth more agree with those words sicut misit me pater as my Father sent me For the sending of Christ was the taking of flesh at his incarnation bothe senses agree herein that both life is really and corporally dwelling in Christes flesh through the Godhead and the Godhead is naturally with Christ through that he is the sonne of God the Father Two things are to be noted in this comparison the one is the real presence of life the other is the hauing of it by gift and by relation to a farther cause or beginning For as Christes flesh liueth for the word of God to whom it is really vnited and the word of God liueth for the Father whose whole substaÌ„ce it hath really receaued by generation without beginning of tyme so he that eateth Christ liueth for Christ hauing the substance of his flesh really present with him and thereby partaketh life euerlasting This verie sense Christes words haue both by the conference of the text it self and also by the interpretation of S. Hilarie who by this scripture confuteth the Arrians that sayd Christ to be inferiour to his Father not to be equall God with him To mainteine the which heresie they brought foorth a similitude of vnitie which is made in holy scripture betwene God the Father Christ and vs affirming Christ to be one with his Father as we are one with him but sayd they we are one with Christ only by will and consent therefore Christ is one with his Father only after the same sort to which argument S. Hilarie answering turneth it vpon their own heads in this wise Viuit ergo per patrem quomodo per patrem viuit eodem modo nos per carnem eius viuemus omnis enim comparatio c. Christ then liueth by his Father and as he liueth by his Father after the same maner we shal liue by his flesh for euery comparison is presumed to be made according to the forme and concept of our vnderstanding to thintent the matter whereof we intreat may be so perceaued as the example geueth which is proponed This truly is the cause of our life in so much as we haue Christ abyding by flesh in vs who consist of flesh and he shall liue through him by such condition as he liueth through his Father Yf we then liue through him naturally according to flesh that is to wit hauing obteined the nature of his flesh how can he but haue naturally the Father
in him self according to the spirit or Godhead sith he liueth through the Father S. Hilarie sheweth first in these words y◠there is a similitude of liuing betwene vs and Christ and betwene God the Father and Christ. we liue for Christ by eating his flesh as he liueth for his Father who sent him but we saith S. Hilarie liue for Christ by eating his flesh in such sort that we haue the nature of his flesh in vs. Therefore Christ liuing for his Father hath his Fathers nature in him self Thus haue the Arrians gained nothing by saying that the Father was one with Christ as Christ is one with vs. For Christ is found to be one with vs naturally and thereunto it suffiseth not that Christ toke our naturall flesh in his mothers womb for Christ spake not of that vnitie otherwise the gentils Iewes heretiks and heinouse synners should be naturally one with Christ which thing is not so for to be one with Christ it behoueth that as he toke our nature into his own person we take his nature into our bodies soules Two reasonable parties which haue both free will consist of bodies be not properly made one in nature if they bothe do not as well consent thereunto in mind as also approche in bodies Lett vs put an example betwene Dina and Sichem for although Sichem had by force oppressed Dina corporally yet she not consenting in hart thereunto was not throughly and in her whole nature made one with him for that the cheif part of her dissented Again lett vs put the ca◅e that two other persons be together in hart wisshing to be man and wise but yet that they can not come together because bothe or one of them is inclosed in prison these also are not one naturally as long as their bodies be asonder euen so albeit Christ haue the same nature which all men haue excepting synne yet he is not naturallie that is to say in the whole truth of nature one with vs thereby except we both in hart and body approche vnto him If we come to him in body alone we come vnworthely if in hart alone it is a spiritual coniunction which will serue if either necessitie or infamie kepe vs from natural coniunction but if we come to lawful age haue opportunitie we must approche both in body and soule to the Sacrament of Christes supper to be made one with him naturally that is to say to take his body really into ours to th' end the spirit and Godhead which dwelleth corporally in that body of his may fede our spirit and soule which beleueth in him to life euerlasting Of this kind of liuing Christ spake when he sayd he that eateth me lineth for me as I liue for my Father And it is to be consydered that Christe brought the similitude of his own liuing for his father to shew thereby how we doe line for him when we eate him But S. Hilarie was so sure of this later part of the similitude to wit that we liue for Christ by naturall coniunction of his body and spirite to our bodies and soules when we eate him that thereby he proued Christ to be one with his father in nature and substance And now come our new Sacramentaries teaching the argument of S. Hilarie to be nothing worth because they presuppose Christes fleshe not to be eaten of vs and consequently not to be in vs in his own nature and substance whereby they also affirm that the father is not proued to be in Christe naturally by these wordes of our sauiour as the liuing father sent me and I liue for the father also he that eateth me shall liue him selfe for me For if here the comparison be only in this point that as Christ referreth his life to another beginning which is his father so we liue by Christ who is the cause of all the grace we haue if I say nothing els be respected in both partes but that a thing whiche is lesse receaueth a benefite by the greater these words rather seme to proue against the Godhead of Christ then for it Yea the māhood is not by thē shewed to be really vnited to the worde And so that which the Catholike fathers bring for the truth which is beleued in Christ the Sacramentaries make altogether voyd Let vs adde to the former consyderations that we eating Christ liue for Christ. we then so liue for him as we eate him For seing the eating is the cause of the life such is the life as the eating is But the Sacramentaries auouche that we eate bodily nothing els at Christes supper beside bread and wine therefore by theyr iudgement we shall liue bodily none other way then to that end whereunto bread wine cā fede vs. They can not feed vs to life euerlasting therefore it foloweth of the Sacramentarie docrine that our bodies haue no meate whereby they may liue for euer What say ye masters Haue we not bodies as wel as soules ▪ Doe not our bodies eate in theyr kind as wel as our soules Do not our bodies line by theyr proper meat as our soules doe liue by the meat which is conuenient for them If Christ be meat vnto vs is he not meat to vs as well in respect of our bodies as of our soules Doth he not heale the whole man regenerate the whole feed the whole and saue the whole ▪ Then by like he feedeth our bodies to life euerlasting What food it that Where is it geuen how cometh it vnto vs The Catholiks answere It is the flesh of Christ which is geuen to vs vnder the form of bread But ye Zuinglians who deny that real presence of Christ shew what meat our bodies receaue which is able to make them liue for euer Either say they shal not liue or shew the meane of life You say our bodies eate sanctified bread at Christes supper Be it so But is that sanctified bread stil bread or is it made the flesh of Christ which is the bread of life If it be made Christes fleshe ye agree with me our bodies haue the true food of life But if it tarie bread stil it can not geue our flesh life euerlasting Ye will say Christ is able to vse wheaten bread tarying bread for his instrument or tokē to geue vs by that maane euerlastiug life As common water tarying water is in baptism y◠instrumēt meane as wel to our bodies as to our soules of life euerlastig In which reason ye vaunt your selues ouer much and think ye haue found a goodly defence But beware least ye triūph before the victorie As hitherto I haue resorted to the word of God to confute your vain doctrine so now I wil repair to the same vndouted fountain of true wisdome It is most certain that God were able to saue vs by what mea nes he would But his will is now committed to writing that heretiks might
not fame vpoÌ„ him what should please them but should be controlled by his word For as vniuersal tradition suffiseth to Catholiks who beleue it so the heretik who estemeth no tradition must haue his ouerthrow by the holy Scriptures In them we read that who so beleueth and is baptized shal be saued Whereby is most clere that baptism hath his promse of saluation annexed to it But when we come to our Lords supper no promise at al is made to him that eateth material bread or driketh wine Therefore no man may be so bold to say that by eatig bakers bread we shal be saued Eating verily hath his promyse of saluatioÌ„ annexed thereunto but it is the flesh of Christ whiche must be eaten it is the blood of the sonne of man which must be drunken it is the food of life Christ him felf whiche must be Sacramentallie receaued In all S. Iohn there is promyse of life made to none other thing At the last supper it is said this is my body take eate and this is my blood drinke ye all of this Where no mention of eating bread or of drinkâ—…g wine is made much lesse anie promise of life is thereunto annexed S. Paul speaketh of none other breade then of that which is the communicating of his flesh and which being one is receaued and partaken of al faithful and yet neither in him nor in the actes of the Apostles nor in anieplace place els is any promise made by Christ that who so eateth material bread in his remembrance though he eate it neuer so deuoutly shall by that eating liue foreuer Nowe whereas Caluin pretendeth yâ— words of Christes supper to be words of promise it is already confuted and albeit they were words of promise yet they neither promise bread to be eateÌ„ nor life to them that deuoutly eate bread In coÌ„sideration whereof we may conclude that water is the instrument to giue life because baptism is expresly named andd hath the promyse of saluation in Gods word But seing bread hath not suche promise they speake beside all scriptures who think it sufficient for our bodies to eate bread and to drinke wine at Christes supper And lest any man should think that I may be deceaued in the word of God and that some promise there made to bread wine may escape me I answer that euen here Christ sheweth vs not only to liue for him but also to line for him by eating him so that we haue the word of God that Christ him self is our food not only by faith but by eating We haue then two aduaÌ„tages one that no promise of life is made to bread and wine The other that expresse promise of life is made to him who eateth Christ. whereupon thus I reason Either this promise of life which is made to him that eateth Christ suâ—…iseth in the kind of eating or no. If this suffise not the word of God is reproued which sayth He that eateth me shall liue for me And by eating Christ he vnderstandeth as I haue often tymes declared beleuing vpoÌ„ him doing his wil and besydes al that the receauing of him corporally in the Sacrament of his supper If now his promise of life be alone sufficient what place is left for the Sacramentaries to chalenge life to their bodies by the eating of wheaten bread and by drinking wine Their bodies verily can not liue without the food of life for as Christ said before except ye eate my flesh ye shall not haue life in you and I am sure he spake to men that had bodies But material bread is not Christes fleshe neither hath it any promise to geue life to our bodies therefore either our bodies die for euer or els they liue through yâ— that they receaue Christ into them corporally the which saying of myne is confirmed by this place of S. Cyrillus Non poterat aliter corruptibilis haec natura corporis ad incorruptibilitatem vitam traduci nisi naturalis vitae corpus ei coniungeretur This corruptible 〈◊〉 of the body could not otherwise be brought to incorruption and life 〈◊〉 the body of the naturall life were ioyned vnto it which if it be true 〈◊〉 not they who take the body of Christe who is the naturall life from 〈◊〉 corruptible bodies depriue vs of all hope of life in our bodies How theÌ„ do we lyue for Christ through him as he liued for his father Doth not he liue for his father as well in body as in soule because his manhood is vnited to the word which word is the sonne of yâ— father Therefore as we liue for him by eating him as he liueth for his father who sent him so must we be naturally ioyned to his flesh in the SacrameÌ„t of his supper by receauing yâ— same worthely into our bodies liue in body and soule for euer ¶ The eating of Christes flesh was so true that it was taught with the losse of many disciples IT is not to be thought that Christ who forbiddeth all occasioÌ„s of geuing offence to other men wold him self cast a stumbling block in his disciples way by pressing them to eate his fleshe and to drinke his blood if in dede they were not really to be eaten and drunken But if Christ spake that which was true in dede and spake it as it was true then was it their fault who had sene him the day before working so great a miracle not to beleue such a Prophet as their own experieÌ„ce and expresse words witnessed him to be If then they were bound to beleue him and yâ— they could do no otherwise then if they beleued that he would geue them his flesh to eate in dede their fault was in that they did not beleue that he was both able and in dede would by a conuâ—…nient meane geue them his true flesh in the way oâ—… meate and his true blood in the way of drinke If that were their fault then is it their â—…ault likewise who in our daies thinke teach that Christ hath not geuen vs in his last supper his 〈◊〉 flesh to be really eaten true blood to be really drunken 〈◊〉 the maner of eating flesh and drinking blood 〈◊〉 should in time conuenient haue learned that also Al men do know that when a thing is to be done the first question is to demand whether it may be done or no. wherein it is also conteined how easily a thing may be done The second is whether it be worthy yâ— taking in hand The third how it may be brought to passe As loÌ„g as the thig is thought either vnpossible or very hard or vnproâ—…itable so long it is in vaine to talke of the maner of the doing it Christ did talke with the Iewes of the two first points shewing that he was able to do it Quia hâ—…nc pater signauit Deus because God the father hath signed him whereby he declared
In whom we liue are moued and haue our being Therefore the words which are called spirit and life are called in effect diuine and almighty Spirit sometyme standeth to signific the words of God as when S. Paule sayth the letter killeth the spirit quickeneth the letter in that place doth signiâ—…ie the law and the spirit doth signifie the words of our Lord as S. Basile doth expound it For Christ our Lord geueth grace to his words that they should not only signifie things as the words of the law did but also make and work the things which they signified The words that be spirit must be vnderstanded spiritually that is to say diuinely and as it becometh the words of him who is God him self whose words haue power in them selues to worke that which they betoken To vnderstand the words of Christ spiritually it behoueth we beleue them first as they sound to humble reasonable men for if we beleue not we shal not vnderstand but if we do beleue then we may be assured as S. Chrysoâ—…tom vppon this place hath writen that they conteine no naturall course but are free from al earthly necessity and from the lawes of this life Which being so when Christ taking bread and blessing saith this is my body we may not say with our selues how can this be so what other body can here be then a peece of bread which mine eye seeth and my tong tasteth If we speake after this sort we call the words of Christ from the spirit of God to the course of nature and of reason and we do not beleue them to be spirituall that is to say diuine and aboue the course of nature but we vnderstaÌ„d theÌ„ carnally loking for no miracle to be wrought by them and yet they are spirit and life able to quicken what soeuer they list they can make bread to be Christes body wine to be his blood they haue power to change natures and to worke inuisibly In a parable it is not nedefull that all things be in dede as the words doe sound but when Christes words are sayd to be spirit and life then it is declared to vs that they partake the nature of his Godhead that they worke a thing aboue our capacitie and make all that which they say Yea but say you shew me the body which they haue wrought I answer they are spirit and haue wrought a spiritual body not such as lacketh the truthe of flesh but such as through the vnion which it hath with the Godhead hath disposed the substance of flesh vnder the form of bread in such sorte as our soules are disposed within our bodies which are vndoubtedlie there but they can not be touched or felt by any sense euen so we beleue the real presence of Christes flesh vnder the form of bread and wine because the words of Christ are spirit life albeit no scuse or reason can attein to that highe mysterie Seing then these words of promise the bread which I wil geue is my flesh be spirit and life these words of performance which after bread taken say presently this is my body must nedes be much more spirit and life yâ— is to say of diuine power to worke that which they sound Let now al heretikes ceasse to mock vs of so many miracles as we teache to be in the sacrameÌ„t of the altar for so much as Christ hath witnessed it should be a miraculouse sacrameÌ„t and aboue al course of nature as being made by words which are spirit and life Let them likewise no more abuse the name of spirit to make men beleue that Christ spake not properly sith Christ calleth his words spirit because they be so proper that they come nere to yâ— nature of the Godhead as being his words who is naturally God then the words of men are able to doe and as the Godhead is most immurable and not at al subiect to any change euen so those words which partake most of the Godhead are most vnchangeable and least figuratiue for al figuratiue speaches are changed and abused hauing the name of tropes among the Grecians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ab eo quod vocabula mutantur a propria significatione in alienam figuratiue speaches are called in greake tropes that is to say chaÌ„ges because yâ— words are changed from their proper significatioÌ„ to an vnproper meaning but God is not changed nor those words be not changed froÌ„ their proper signification which God hath called spirit life but as they partake yâ— Godhead so doc they partake the proprietie of not being changed from their most accustomed meaning proper nature It is a world to see what difference there is betwene yâ— words of Christes Ghospell the interpretation of the false Ghospellers betwene the old Fathers and the new brethern betwene Catholikes Protestants Mark I pray thee good Reader the differences diligently Christ by his incarnation was made to vs the bread of life to the end we might eate his Godhead otherwise then the Fathers had done before the new brethern after the incarnation and supper of Christ wherein we should haue the Godhead geuen vs bid vs beleue vpon Christ in heauen and so to fede vpon him by faith alone as Noâ—… Abraham did Their councâ—…l is not 〈◊〉 in bidding vs sede by saith but where is yâ— Godhead 〈◊〉 by this meanes is that also receaued by faith why so it might haue bene receaued and so it was receaued before Christ was man Where is the food of Angels made the food of man where is the word of God so geuen to me after his incarnation as it could not be geuen before Where is any euerlasting meate for my body Where is the supper which may fede the whole man faith fedeth my vnderstaÌ„ding but my wil affectioÌ„ hath as much nede to be fed my flesh is rebelliouse to my spirit it hath nede to be fed my body was the meane to poyson my soule therefore my soule must haue a medicine which shal be receaued into my body and so be communicated vnto my soule S. Ireneus reproued those heretiks who because men were called in scripture spirituall denied the true resurrection of their flesh as though their spirit only should tary for euer and yet our new brethern where so euer mention is made of spirit or of a spirituall body and flesh so wrast it as though the reall substance of flesh in the Sacrament were by that word denied or diminisshed whereas it is rather increased for so much as that flesh which is spirituall is not thereby the lesse true flesh but it partaketh the more of the spirit And because a spirit once created is by the natural gift of God immortal a spiritual flesh is likewise like to the spirit in that case S. Augustine writeth that after resurrection the body shall no more haue nede of corporal
according to yâ— Hebrew worde Lehem which betokeneth all what soeuer is to be eaten of man but espe nally bread as being the chief fruite of the earth After which sorte when Christ saith in yâ— Ghospel man lyueth not by bread alone but by euery worde which procedeth from the mowth of God he meaneth by the name of bread al kinde of natural nourishment which man taketh by moâ—…th without all whiche he may liâ—…e either by naturall bread as Manna was or if it so please God to say the worde without any meat at all as Moyses and Elias fasted fortie days according to which generall taking of bread we aske in our Lordes praier our daily and supersubstantiall bread that is to saye all necessary sustenance for body and sowle It is further to be noted that in holy scriptures when one thinge is conuerted into an other the later thinge is many times called by the name of the first thing not because it is still the first but because it was made from the first As when it is sayd that the rod of Aron deuoured the rods of the Coniurers of Pha rao where that is called a rodde which was in dede a serpent and not then a rod but it is named a rod because from a rod it was turned into a 〈◊〉 Likewise Adam is called earth because he was made of earthe Thirdly a thing is callâ—…d in holy scripture not only as it is but also as it semeth outwardly to be so the Angel which the godly wâ—…men sawe at the sepulcher of Christ is called a yonge man because he appered so although in dede he were not so Which things being wel pondâ—…red it is casie to satisâ—…ie them that saye the holy communion is bread still because after consecration it is called bread To whome I answere first that it is called bread because it was bread and still semeth bread but that notwithstanding it is flesh and was made flesh from of the substaâ—…ce of bread being conuerted into flesh by the almightie wordes of Christ who taking bread sayd in the way of blessinge of thanks geuing this is my body Secondly I answere that in dede after consecration it is a kinde of bread and foode not that whiche it was before but ineâ—…ably bitter and of more price and more worthy of that name of true bread then it was before that is to say it is the true flesh of â—…hrist which nourysheth the bodies and soules of the faithfull men to liâ—…e euerlasting And to proue this answere true it may please the Reades to remember that Christ called himself the bread of life and named the gifte of his supper the meate which tarieth to life euerlasting the liuely bread which came downe from heauen After which meaning he saith and the bread which I wil gene is my â—…esh Behold the kind of bread Agayne S. Paule saith The bread which we breake is it not the communicating of our Lords body For we being many are one bread one body all we that partake of the one bread all partake of the one bread and it be the bread which we breake surely that which is brokeÌ„ can not be any material bread but is only the body of Christ the bread of life And least any man should thinke that in saying the name of bread in Christes supper standeth for meate for flesh I speake without sufficient authoritie besyde the authoritie of yâ— scriptures already alleged which can not be otherwise taken let him also weigh together with me how coÌ„formably the auncieÌ„t Fathers taught the same doctrine S. Ignatius sayth Panem Dei volo quod est caro Christi I desier the bread of God which thing is the flesh of Christ Which thing in the nenter gender is none other to say then which substance Iustinus the Martyr affirmeth first that the Deacons geue to euery man the bread wine and water which are coÌ„secrated with geuing of thankes Where he calleth them by the â—…ames which they had before consecration And sâ—…raight expounding yâ— names of bread wine and water which they haue by consecration he writeth thus Hic cibus apud nos Eucharistia nominatur This foode is called with vs the Eucharist Wherefore for all three names he putteth this one name of food wherein they all meete Neither so content he sayth yet againe For we take not these things as common bread and drink but we haue learned the meat which is consecrated by the words of prayer taken of him to be the flesh and blood of Christ. So that first he declareth him self by bread wine and water to meane the matter of the SacrameÌ„t Secondly he confesseth the consecration to make them a more heauenly food Thirdly he denieth them to be now common bread and drinke Fourthly he affirmeth it to be that kind of foode which is the flesh and blood of Christ. Of the same very Sacrament S. Hilarie sayth Nos vere verbum carnem cibo Dominico sumimus We take the word truly â—…esh in our Lords meate Where he calleth the thing which is geuen at Christes supper cibum Dominicum the meate which our Lord geueth meaning it not to be any more common bread but that kind of bread which is also called meate or food S. Cyprian sayth Christ offered bread and wine suum scilicet corpus sanguinem that is to say his own body and blood Mark the kind of bread S. Ireneus sayth It is not now to wit after coÌ„secration common bread but the Eucharist S. Ambrose asketh why after coÌ„secration we say in oâ—…r Lords prayer Geue vs this day our daily bread And him self aunswereth He calleth it bread in dede Sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hoc est supersubstantialem That is to say as S. Hierom expoundeth it qui super omnes substantias sit such a bread which is aboue all substances And yet farther S. Hierom sayth Panem illum petimus qui dicit Ego sum panis viuus we aske that bread which sayd I am the liâ—…ely bread But to return againe to S. Ambrose he concludeth Non iste panis est qui vadit in corpus sed ille panisvitae aeternae qui animae nostrae substantiam fulcit It is not that bread which goeth into the body but that bread of euerlasting life which holdeth vp the substance of our soule Gregorius of Nyâ—…a speaking of the Sacrament of the altar saith Panis est absque semine absque aratione absque alio humano opere nobis paratus It is bread prouided for vs without seed without plowing and without any other work of man S. Augustine saith wheÌ„ would flesh vnderstand this thing that he called bread flesh Isychiâ—…s nameth the bread whiche S. Paule saith is eaten vnworthely nutritorem substantiae nostrae intelligibilis the nourisher of our intelligible or spiriâ—…all substance Sedulius speaking of the bread whiche Christ gaue to
of Iob. THe men of the tabernacle of Iob sayd Who might geue vs of his flesh to the intent we may be filled The tabernacle or houshold of Iob whome some of his seruants hated some loued was the figure of the Church wherein are good and bad The bad wish for one that might geue them Christes flesh to fill their hatred vpon it as the proude Pharises bought Christ of Iudas and now a daies the Iewes wil geue any mony for the blessed body of Christ in the forme of breade that therevpon they may shew their malice against Christ whom the Heretikes of our age folow in that point Therefore these souldiours of darknes when they can finde Christ visible or inuisible shewe all the spite they can against him But on thother side good men that be in the tabernacle of Iob with loue and reuerence wish for his flesh and desyre to be filled with it to their inestunable comfort Christ gaue his visible body to the handes of the Pharisees and Iewes Wherein hauing their desires satisfied they nailed it to the crosse And how much more is Christ to be thought to haue fulfilled really the desyre of good men who long for the inuisible substance of his owne body especially seing his owne desire was so vehement to eate this passouer of his owne body with his Apostles at which tyme he sayd to them Take and eate this is my body which is geuen for you If we had not as really yâ— flesh of Christ geueÌ„ to our handes and mouthes as the Pharisees had the same deliuered to their cruell handes it might seeme that the worse parte of the tabernacle of Iob had obtined more truth and more fulfilling of their desire then the better which is a thought vnworthy of Christen men The iust men of the tabernacle of Iob loued him so well that they desired to be filled with his flesh euen for the loue they bare to him which loue the greater it is the greater vnion it wisheth and 〈◊〉 Christ fulfilled to his people that which the sernantes of Iob figured in their vehenient affection which they had to be filled with their maisters flesh They of the tabernacle of Iob wished not only to see him or heare him speake nor they wished not at all to fâ—…ede vpon him in spirite and vnderstanding for they knew well he was not God but they would fill their flesh with his flesh and their soâ—…le with his soule and so make a perfite vnion for so much as them selues consisted as well of body as of soule This vnion Christ hath truly graunted vs making vs one with his very flesh saying his flesh to be meate in dede which who so eateth worthily 〈◊〉 in Christ and Christ in him for euer That is the vnion of reall flesh which was prophecied of in Iob and which is made betwâ—…e Christ and vs when we receiue worthelie his naturall fleshe vnder forme of bread into our naturall bodies and soules and are made one with it re ipsa in dede it self as meate is made one substance with him that eateth and digesteth it well ¶ The prophecies of Dauid and Salomon THou hast prepared a table sayeth Dauid to God in my sight against them who afflicte me And my chalice which maketh me drunke how excellent is it Wisedome hath offered his sacrifices set foorth his table and sayeth to the innocent and simple Come eate my bread and drink my wine which I haue mingled vnto you They falsyfie the holy Scriptures who teache the substance of common bread and wine to be by Christe prepared at his last supper But his preparing was to conuert the substance of them into his flesh and blood And those were the sacrifices which wisedome made That was his bread his wine which if it were only receaued by faith and spirite how sayeth the Prophet that the table was prepared in his sight No man is able to see that which is only spirituall But according to the word of God the Catholikes beleue that their meate is prepared set and layed vpon the table before they receaue it and it is set foorth in their sight in that visible forme of bread which is consecrated Againe the table is but one come good come bad They eate the same meate and surely none other at the supper of Christ besydes yâ— which is vpon his table Iudas did eate the same meate that Peter and Ihon did although diuers effectes came of it because them selues were not like affected But the Sacramentaries make Christ to haue two tables one where the good men receaue Christ him self with bread and wine as they â—…each an other where only common bread and wine is geuen to the wicked men And yet Dauid Salomon and S. Paule speake but of one table and it is prepared and set foorth not by faith and spirite but in our sight It is not only drunk of by mind and vnderstanding â–ª but the very chalice of it is of strength to make vs drunk because it conteyneth the blood of life and saluation ¶ An other Prophecie of Dauid ALl that be fatte vppon earth haue eaten and adored which thing the Prophete spake thereby to shew as it may appeare in the same place that all the nations of the world were by faith subdued to Christ. And he bringeth a most vndouâ—…ed token thereof in so much that they adore that which they eate which thing is peculiar to Christians because none other people doth â—…ate the reall flesh of God which only may and must be adored This propertie and token of the true faith they take away who say we eate in our Lords supper the substance of coÌ„mon bread forbidding vs to adore the blessed SacrameÌ„t of the altar the footestole wherein the 〈◊〉 of Godhead corporally dwelleth ¶ Many figures and prophecies ioyned together for breuities sake WHat shall Isay that Noë being made drunke with yâ— wine of his owne planting lieth naked is lawghed to scorne of his own childe to shew that Christ hauing drunke in his supper of the same blood which he planted for him selfe in the virgyns womb hangeth afterward naked vppon the crosse and is lawghed to scorne not only of the Iewes for his nakednesse but also of the SacrameÌ„taries for so grosse a dede as they repute it to be that he drank his own blood vnder the form of wine What shall I reherse that Abraham did set cakes made of â—…ine wheaten meale befoâ—… the Angels they allowed his dede not for the 〈◊〉 which they nâ—…ded not but for tâ—…e excellenty of the mysticall cake which was come in Christes supper That Isaac hauing stablished his sonne Iacob with corne and wine sayth to Esau demanding his blessing what more can I doe now to thee as who should say al goodnesse is already figured in that which I haue assigned to thy yonger brother which betokeneth yâ— faithfull people of
not born is made I say Therfore hoc facite signifieth make this thing 〈◊〉 sayth Inefficabili operatione 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 traÌ„sformatur etiam si nobis videatur panis although it seme bread to vs it is made an other thing or transformed by an vnspeakeable working 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after this sorte If the word of God be liuely and of efficacy and all things what soeuer it wold it hath made if it sayd Let light be made it was made let the firmament be made and it was made If the 〈◊〉 be establyshed by the word of God and all the vertue of them by the spirit of his mouth if heauen and earth water fier aier and all the decking of theÌ„ and man himself a lyuing creature spred and made common euery where were made perfecte with the word of God If God the word him self of his owne wil was made man and hath vpholden and staied in his own person flesh without seed of maÌ„ out of the most pure and 〈◊〉 blood of the holy virgine is he not able to make bread his own body and wine and water his blood He said in the beginning let the earth bring forth 〈◊〉 spring to this day reyne being made it bringeth forth springs holpen and strengthned with the commandement of God God hath sayd This is my body and this is my blood and make this thing for the remembrance of me Et omnipotenti eius praecepto donec veniat efficitur and by his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is made 〈◊〉 he come Marke whether Damascene doth not ground all his authorities vppon making and the authoritie of Christes supper vpon these words make this thiÌ„g 〈◊〉 expouÌ„ding these words Hoc facite sayth Hoc inquit nouum mysterium non illud vetus make this new mysterie sayth he and not that old Haymo sayth Hoc facite id est hoc corpus sanctificate sanctifie this body that is to say make holy and consecrate this body 〈◊〉 Archbysshop of Cantorbury although he sheweth first that by this word Hoc facite eating and drinking for the remembrance of Christes death is commamded to al Christians yet declaring also a farther sense of yâ— same words he sayth Aut corde vos qui Sacerdotes estis hoc facite quod ego 〈◊〉 feci id est calicem vini consecrate vt 〈◊〉 sanguismeus hoc facite in meaÌ„ commemorationem vt in hoc facto sitis memores mei eorum quae pro vobis passus sum Or els ye that are Priests make that which I haue now made that is to say consecrate the chalice of wine that it may be made my blood make this thing for the remembrance of me and of those things which I haue suffred for you 〈◊〉 the Archebisshop of Constantinople sayth that the holy Ghoste maketh the mysteries by the hande of Priestes and toâ—…g Nicolaus Methonensis sayth the body and blood of Christ to be those thinges quae hoc ritu perficiuntur which are made peâ—…fit with this ryte If sanctificare efficere panem corpus Christi panem facere corpus Christi vinum sanguinem if consecrare operari diuinissima fieri eucharistiam facere panem corpus Christi conficere corpus Christi ore conficere oblationem Christi conficere paneÌ„ calicem mysticum fieri panem sui ipsius corpus facere nouum mysterium sacere corpus effici corpus hoc sanctificare coÌ„secrare calicem vini vt fiat sanguis Christi If al these phrases and kindes of speache can not be â—…nglished by doing but only by making and yet the aucthority and commandement that any Priest hath to make the body and blood of Christ commeth only from these words Hoc facite it must nedes be confessed that these words do signifie much more make this thing then doe this Otherwise we should not make the body of Christ at al whereas S. Iames Dionysius Areopagita S. Iustinus S. Ireneus Tertâ—…llian S. Hierom S. Chrysostom S. Augustine Theophilaet Euthymius Haimo Damascene Germanus Methonensis yea al the whole Church doth say with one accorde that Priestes doe make and are commanded to make the body of Christ. Is it now possible that the body of Christ which is thus made froÌ„ of wheaten bread by yâ— coÌ„mandement of God him self should not be for al yâ— present with vs vnder the form of the same bread If when the word was made flesh in the virgins wombe it was present with vs not only by saith and spirit but dwelt really in the world being conuersant among men and was sene in earth likewise when the body of Christ is made from of the creature of bread by the Priests mouth in the vertue of Christes word it is present with vs not only by faith and spirit but in deede and trâ—…th it self it dwelâ—…eth not only among vs but euen within vs as meate dwelleth in him who receaueth it weth a sound stomake and digesteth it well For seing Christ hauing taken bread and blessed sayd this is my body and â—…ad his Apostles make this thing bread is in such sorte made his body yâ— when y◠〈◊〉 of the words is past the body of Christe remaineth still according to the distinction of S. Basill as the work which was wrought by yâ— sayd words and it is receaued of the faithfull people vnder the form of bread to nourish theyr soules and bodies to euerlasting life ¶ What these words doe signifie For the remembrance of me that they much help to proue Christes reall presence vâ—…der the formes of bread and wine IT may be some man will say I deale not honestly â–ª for Christ sayd not only make this thing which I haue most pressed vpoÌ„ but he added other words thereunto which declare that a figure should be made and not his true body For he sayd do this in the remembrance of me If it be a remembrance of Christ how is it Christ him self The remembrance of a man differeth from the man him self Thus much if any man say against me I feare nothing but I shall satisfie him concerning my doing if now I shewe that the words of remeÌ„brance whereof he taketh holde doth much more help my saying theu his Which that I may the better perform I besech him to remember that Chist said not hoc agite in coÌ„memoratione mei doe this in my remembrance or in remeÌ„brance of me but hoc facite in meam commemorationem which signifieth as wel to make as to do this thing not only in but rather for the remembraÌ„ce oâ—… me and yet so haue these words bene commonly Englyshed and 〈◊〉 by the 〈◊〉 as though he had said only hoc agite doe this not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hoc facite which is both doe this and make this thing Again as though he had said in mea commemoratione in the ablatiue case in the remembrance of me and not 〈◊〉
you to beleue Christ that sayd This is my body and this is my blood the remembrance of Christes death shall no lesse worke in your mind by reason of your faith theÌ„ if you sawe with your bodily eyes yâ— self same body of Christ which is vnder the forme of bread For faith is that to ChristiaÌ„s which eye sight is to infidels You must consyder that Christ geueth this Sacrament only to them that being already Christened professe to beleue him in all things He now telleth yâ— this is his body and this is his blood If you beleue him not you haue denyed your faith and are become an infidell But yet ye may repent recouer your old faith againe If then you beleue him now tell me what his bodily presence doth hurte the remembrance of his death or contrarywise what hinderance cometh to the memory of his death by the bodily presence Doth not one helpe the other and so helpe that no lyke helpe can be deuised by all the world Doth not his blessed body as it were crye vnto thy hart Behold here it is that suffred al the scorues scourges nayles thornes speare and death for thee And yet come our new preachers and crye O good people Christ called bread his body by a figuratiue speache and that appereth because he sayd doe this in my remembrance In my remembrance I say It is therefore no body but a remembrance of his body Is not this gaye diuinitie Is not this trew dealing 〈◊〉 Gods people Are not these preachers worthy of Bishopriks and the contrary teachers worthy of chaynes Haue they not found a fresh remembrance to put the fruyt of Christes death out of all remembrance Whiles the faithfull people beleued the body of Christ to be present they came with that preparation with that circumspection with that humble and contrite hart vnto this blessed Sacrament that in all their lyfe after they were the better They died vnto sinne and mortyfied them selues to comme worthely to this high banket and by those meanes they so wel remembred Christes death that they practised it in their owne flesh and printed it in their hartes And this was a great cause why Christ himself wold put the nature and substance of his body vnder the forme of bread to the intent he might so be remembred of vs that for feare of comming to this dreadfull Sacrament vnworthely we might conforme our selues to his death by contrition confession and satisfaction For besides the pauges of bodily death none other thing in the world maketh vs so fruitfully mindefull of Christes death as the Sacrament of the altar And this to be one peece of the remembrance which Christ wold haue to be made in our hartes S. Basile doth witnesse Oportet igitur accedentem ad corpus sanguinem Christi in commemorationem ipsius c. He that cometh to the body and blood of Christ must not onely be cleane from all filthy spot of flesh and sowle that he eate and drinke not to his damnation but also he must euidently shew the remembrance of him who died for vs and rose again in mortifying himself to synne and to the world and to himself so that he may liue to God in Christ Iesu our Lord. This great lerned and vertuouse man putteth our mortification for a peece of the remembrance which is made of Christes death and resurrection And in dede the reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament the belefe thereof in vs causeth vs to mortifie our selues lest we come vnworthely to such high mysteries But now Christ is so well remembred in bread and wyne that neither synnes be confessed neither amendment mynded neither faith exercised neither charitie vsed Is this the remembrance which Christ wold haue of his death Men of woorship and honor when they see death at hand prouide to haue a goodly tumbe built Whereby their memories may be preserued as long as it is possible And the Egyptians wisely considering how the life is very short and the tyme of being in the graue exâ—…eding long did bestowe much more cost vppon their tumbs then vppon their houses Thinking it best there to buyld most surely where they should dwell longest Christ for his part refused not an honorable burying and a gloriouse sepulcher Which to this day standeth at Dierusalem But yet sith he tooke his body for mens sake only he chose his longer memorie and perpetuall sepulcher to be rather in the body hart of man then in the bowels of the earth Rising therefore the third day from death he left no more his body in the earthly sepulcher But the night before he died he had instituted such a memorie of his death as became the sonne of God For such a one in dede no man were able to make His memorie is to haue bread turned into the substaÌ„ce of his body and wine turned into the substance of his blood and the same to be receaued of vs To th' intent we might be turned into Christ dwelling in him for euer Hereby his death is shewed vntill he come to iudgement at the end of the world As the noble Actes which other men haue done be writeÌ„ vpoÌ„ their sepulchers so in this memorie of Christ his acts are daily shewed and rehersed Then his incarnation is betokened most mystically when bread is made flesh as the worde was before made flesh and that incarnatioÌ„ is represented in outward shew also by singing of the Angels Hymne Glory be to God in the highest Then the going before of Ihoâ—… Baptist is expressed by reading of the Epistle Then Christes preaching is represented by singing of the Gospell Then the faith of his Apostles and Disciples is betokened in pronouncing the Crâ—…de or articles of the faith Then the supper of Christ is made with no lesse authoritie then himself instituted it Then his Crosse is shewed by making the signe thereof vppon the holy mysteries Then his death is inuisiblie wrought vnder the formes of bread wine by turning their substances into him self and shewing them as if the body were diuided from the blood Then the fruit thereof is sowen in the hartes of the faithfull people by geuing them the grace to feare him to loue him to come penitentlie vnto him and to be made one with him Then the resurrection is outwardlie shewed because the seuerall formes of bread and wine eche of them conteine whole Christ vnder them Then the body is adored which suffred for vs. Then Christ is glorified for the redemption of all mankinde Then thankes be geuen to God blessing to the people and prayer is made for all the world This is the memorie of Christ whereby his name is greate among the Gentils as Malachias did prophecie And this is the gloriouse sepulchre which Esay spake of this is the memory whereof Dauid saith Our Lord hath made a memory of his maruailons doings Now is it likely that al
partake of the bread which is broken if the bread broken â—…e materiall we partake of the material bread and yet the bread whereof we partake is by S. Paule named one bread Therefore we partake of one materiall bread which can not be so For seing the bread is broken it is not still one These and many like absurdities can neuer be escaped except we say as the truth is that the bread broken is the flesh of Christ vnder the form of bread for our partaking is named of taking part of that which is brokeÌ„ but we al that are one patake only of Christ him selfe and be one in him alone and be not one in any materiall bread Therefore Christ is the bread broken by the reason of the form of bread vnder the which he is and the bread coÌ„municated and the bread which we are for that he is the cause of our mysticall coniunction For albeit the mysticall bread and body which we are be in seuerall persons and diâ—…tinct proprieties of men yet the substancial cause of that bread which we are is only found in the person and substaÌ„ce of Christ who is the beginner mainteyner and the end of that our mysticall body from Christ as from the cause of our vâ—…itie the same vnity procedeth to vs in an effect wrought by him But either to make vs one materiall bread or to make it being stil bread in substance to be notwithstanding the communicating of Christes body to vs or to be the bond which holdeth vs together by partaking thereof it is a doctrine which can not hang together And because the matter is of great importauce I will yet intreat farther of this our vnion ¶ Now we are one mysticall body in Christ. THe Church is one body more then one wâ—… First because it is called and holden together with one sâ—…ite of God Next because it is grounded in one faith 〈◊〉 â—…reaching of one true Gospel maiÌ„teined with one hope perfited â—…th one charitic watered with one baptisme of spiritual regeneâ—…ation redemed by one Mediatour ruled by one head 〈◊〉 to one husband ioyned in mariage to one fâ—…esh of Christ rewarded with one essentiall fruition of one euerlasting God The first foundation of this one cumpany which is the house the tabernacle yâ— teÌ„ple of God is the blessed Trinitie of whome by whome and in whome all things are In his diuine spirite we mete and be one not only with the Patriarches Prophets but also we therein be one with the Aungels Thrones and Seraphins in so muche that he vseth them for our ministery who neuer synned or swarued from the way of truth righteousnes Next after God all mankinde putteth his euerlasting confidence in the flesh of Iesus Christ who is the only Mediatour of all men that fell by synne either actuall or els originall there is no saluation in any other man Christ toke really our flesh to make it an iustrument whereby we might be brought again to God Therefore he both offered the same flesh vnto God euen to death and gaue the same flesh to be partaken of vs for the obteining of euerlasting life The partaking whereof is called in holy scripture by the name of eating drinking because although it be graunted to vs by diuers meanes yet the chiefe meane of all is when we eate his flesh and drinke his blood The first and most necessary meane of all is faith without which it selfe in men of lawfull age or without the Sacrament thereof in children none other 〈◊〉 can serue But faith alone though it worke by charitie doth not always â—…uffise because it is conueaient for a corporall substance such as the flesh of Christ is to be partaken by corporall meanes also For seing the corruption of our fleshe was the thing whiche did most incline vs to synne as the sonne of God toke our true flesh without synne to th end by it he might purge our synnes so he instituted diuerse Sacraments in certeine corporal things and in mystical words whereby the grace of his flesh might â—…e applied to our flesh and by that meane also to come to our soâ—…es Against the corrupâ—…ion of our birth he would vs to be washed in water which element his own fleshe had sanctified in the flud Iordan against the tentation of the deuill he coÌ„firmeth vs with the holy Ghost In stede of the custome of synning he geueth vs heauenly nourishement as well in body as in soule By these meanes I say we are one body in Christ of the which faith and charitic are meanes only spirituall the Sacraments are both spirituall meanes through the inward grace corporal through the visible formes of them The meanes only spirituall be neuer changed sith our faith is all one with that of the Patriarches but our Sacraments differ from theirs as whiche conteine the truth whereof the old Sacraments were only the shadow Hitherto it hath bene said that we can not be of the mysticall body of Christ vnlesse we partake his flesh either by faith or by the Sacraments For as S. Augustine writeth Albeit in some the grace of faith be so great that they are now assigned to the body of Christ and to the holy temple of God yet in some it is such as doth not suffise to obteine the kingdom of heauen as in the Cathecumenis as in Cornelius antequà m SacramentoruÌ„ participatione incorporaretur Ecclesiae before that he was incorporated to the Church â—…y paraking of the Sacraments The SacrameÌ„t wherein we are first incorporated to Christ is wel knowen to be Baptim which seing it consisteth of speaking holy words and of washing with the elemeÌ„t of water it is not to be denied but that God worketh our incorporation by corporall meanes also and not by faith a lone And as it is not enough for hauing the nature of a man to be conceaued only except he be also borne so if when he is borne he be not fed he can not long coÌ„tinew a man Therefore as the Sacrament of baptim beginneth the incorporation specially nowe when we al are baptized in our infancy euen so after the we are come to the yeres of discretion an other SacrameÌ„t is requisite to mainteyne vs in the body of Christ which is called the SacrameÌ„t of his body and blood whereof Christ said he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood tarieth in me and I in him Now sâ—…ing the sacrament which maketh vs tary in the body of Christ must â—…edes be a corporal thing as baptism was and yet it hath none other nature then that which Christ geueth it he nameth it his own body and blood we ought to confesse that the Sacrament which nourisheth the state of life euerlasting in vs is the body and blood of Christ corporally present that is to say
Sacramentaric doctrine whereof I haue the gladlier writen to thintent S. Augustines doctrine might be opened who alwaies noteth this Sacrament to be the signe of the vnitie which is made by Christ in baptism among the faithfull but he meaneth such a signe as Christ him â—…elf maketh vnder the forme of bread when he affirmeth him to consecrate herein yâ— mystery of vnitie Is it not an extreme madnes to affirme that wheaten bread keping his own earthly nature should be the mystery of vnitie Christ is that mystery first because he is both God who alone made all things to serue him and man in whom all things are a new collected which where before made Secondly because Christ maketh vs one with God reconciling vs to him by the blood of his crosse Thirdly because he maketh vs one among our selues by his one spirit and Baptism Last of all because he sheweth and geueth him self really present vnder the forme of bread wherein he would vs to vnderstand the vnitie which is really made betwene vs and him and God Of this vnitie S. Hilarie writeth If Christ assumpted truly the flesh of our body and we take truly vnder a mysterie the flesh of his body and by this thing we shal be one because the Father is in him and he in vs quomodo voluntatisvnitas asseritur cùm naturalis per Sacramentum proprietas perfectae Sacracramentum sit vnitatis How is yâ— vnitie of wil affirmed whereas the naturall proprietie through the Sacrament is the holy signe of a perfite vnitie This place good Reader openeth al the hard points of the mystery of vnitie First Christ toke truly flesh Next we take truly the same flesh vnder a mystery By his taking God and man were made one concerning the whole nature of man By our taking we and Christ are made one concerning euery particular man who receaueth worthely his body And that is not only done so but withall it is shewed so for the thing which we receaue is the flesh of Christ vnder the forme of bread The flesh yâ— is there being receaued maketh vs in dede to be one with Christ. The form of bread sheweth not only them to be one that receaue this food but those also who now doe not receaue it if yet they be or shal be baptized to be one in Christ. And sayeth S. Hilarie so much Ye doubtlesse and that he twise repeteth For when he sayth Verè sub mysterio carnem corporis sui sumimus we take truly vnder a mysterie the flesh of his body then he meaneth that vnder the forme of bread we take Christes flesh Under what other mysterie can it be sayd we take it Or seing he speaketh of the last supper doth he not meane the signe of the same supper which was bread But yet let vs heare more plaine words Naturalis per Sacramentum proprietas perfectae Sacramentum est vnitatis The natural proprietie through the SacrameÌ„t is the SacrameÌ„t of a perfite vnitie The word proprietas meaneth one particular substance proper to one thing which in men is commonly called a person S. Augustine witnesseth that Christ is called the true vine Per similitudinem non per proprietatem by likenes not by proprietie that is to say Christ is yâ— true vine by like condition and not by the self substance of a true vine S. Hilarie then sayeth The naturall proprietie of Christ by a Sacrament is a Sacrament of perfite vnitie Here is the word Sacrament twise iterated the proprietie of Christ is a Sacrament and it is a Sacrament by a Sacrament A Sacrament is a holy signe Therefore the proprietie or substance of Christ is a holy signe But how Euery substance is the truth How is it then a sigue It is not barely and absolutely called a signe but a signe by a signe that is to say the true substaÌ„ce of Christ put vnder the form of bread by that signe of bread is seâ—… to signifie a most perfite vnitie made betwene God and vs. The natural proprietie of Christ by the signe of bread maketh and signifieth a perfite vnitie It maketh it whiles we receaue Christ into vs who is one with his Father in nature as we naturally haue him in our bodies and soules It signifieth the same vnitie because the substance of Christ who is one nature with his Father in Godhead one with vs in manhod being now vnder the signe of bread sheweth him self as it were with al his faithfull members about him offering them all to God as if he sayd Ecce ego pueri mei mecum Behold Father I am here and my seruants or children with me This sayeth S. Augustine is the sacrifice of the Christians we being many are one body in Christ Quod etiam Sacramento altaris fidelibus noto frequentat Ecclesia vbi ei demonstratur quâ—…od in ea oblatione quam offert ipsa offeratur The which thing also the Church celebrateth in the Sacrament of the altar knowen to the faithful Where it is shewed to the Church that in that sacrifice which she offereth her self is offered It is well knowen that the Priests of yâ— Church taking bread and wine according to the institution of Christ consecrate them saying in Christes name This is my body and this is my blood If by those words the body and blood of Christ be not made pre sent vnder the forme of bread and wine how is the Church offered in the offering which she maketh Who doth make an oblation of her to God Wil ye say that Christ sitting in heauen presenteth to his Father the bread wine which is in earth saying Father looke vppon my faithfull members See what a mysticall body I haue gotten to me in the earth Might not God answer Why sonne is the substance of your mysticall body bread and wine Haue you coupled my seruants your brethren whome I created reasonable to those vnseâ—…sible creatures Or is the handy work of the baker your oblation or the oblation of your mysticall body But if Christ be vnder the forme of bread and thence make an oblation to his Father of all his obedient members which are there signified by the forme of bread then is none other substance of those mysticall members presented besyde the true substance and head of the mysticall body to wit the flesh of Christ which worketh gathereth a body to it self through out the whole world TheÌ„ the Church offereth none other substance besyde the one oblation which dyed for vs. The same reall coniunction of the faithfull to Christes flesh may be declared also by the example of building a howse For as euery howse is in the fundation moste large and afterward it is drawen alwaies so muche the nigher together by how much it approcheth to the top or end thereof euen so the Church being the howse of God must be one so that it may in some partes thereof be
ioyned together in the top it self which is the flesh of Christ. For they that are one mysticall howse by faith and charitie alone they are one in the fundation through the spirit of God but not yet one in the top And the vnitie of that fundation wold not cause them to be a perfite howse if some stones being reised thereon did not at the length mete really together in the top of the building which is the flesh of Christ through the connexion of which stones those also which laie in the lowest place may be sayd to mete in the top for that they are necessary and substancial parts of that howse which is builded from the lowest parte of the ground vp to the very highest top Faith is the fundation and ground of the things which are hoped for Baptisme goeth nerer the top because beside the grace of faith it partaketh some other grace proceding not only from the spirit of Christe but also from his flesh in that the water according to the minde of S. Chrysostom of Leo is as it were the wombe wherein and the worde is the sede wherewith man is regenerated as wel in body as in soule Confirmation geueth strength to the new building wherein the stones are as it were with strong barres of iron holden together But when Christe geueth him selfe to vs vnder the forme of bread then are we come to the top of the building and are ioyned really to him that is yâ— end of the law For which cause this Sacrament of Christes body blood is called of the Grecians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 perfectio the end or perfitenes of our heauenly building This flesh is also in the fundation but by spiritual efficacie not by reall vnion It is in Baptisme by the vse of corporall instruments of water and the word and so by spirituall efficacie and also by meane of bodily instruments proceding from the flesh by that Sacrament of Baptisme which he constituted in his body and sanctified the element thereof with his body In the Sacrament of perfection this flesh it self is present to make a moste perfite end of the whole spirituall building Thus are the baptized Christians built vpon yâ— faith of the Patriarchs and Prophets and the faithfull who receaue Christes body in his last supper are built in a higher degree aboue the faith of the Fathers and aboue the Baptisme of those who died before they partaked Sacramentally Christes flesh And seing all these concurre to make vp one howse the top whereof may touche Christes naturall body which he toke to make the reall coniâ—…nction with vs who consist of bodies all the mysticall body of Christ is perfitly one through them who being one with the rest in faith spirit and baptisme be also one with Christes flesh in truth of naturall and corporall vnion to Christes flesh really partaken at his holy table Let vs once deny the flesh of Christ to be really in the blessed Sacrament of the altar and here is no perfite building toward the flesh of Christ and consequently no reason why we should be called his mysticall body or flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones For as if Eue had not bene taken really out of the naturall body of Adam she should not haue bene in truth bone of his bones so we are not flesh of Christes flesh in truth it self except the flesh of Christ in the naturall substance thereof be the meane by our natural coâ—…ction to it that we are framed wrought into a spirituall man These last wordes of S. Paule where he toucheth how we are â—…esh of Christes flesh doe also leade vs to an other notable example of our natural vnion which is to be made to that flesh of Christ. For when S Paule had said that the husband is head of the woman as Christ is head of the Church he prouoketh the husbands to loue their wiues as Christ hath loued his Churche Who haue loued it so intierly that he hath cleansed it in the washing of water and the word to th end he might make him self a gloriouse Church without spot or wrinkle Behold baptisme is a token of Christes loue but to what end That he might haue a cleane spouse To what purpose Will he then come nere to his wife and as it were be cloupled with her Yea verily not for any fleshly pleasure but to nourish her by his reall flesh And therefore S. Paul goeth forward saying Husbands ought to loue their wiues as their own bodies He that loueth his wife loueth him self And surely noman euer hated his own flesh but he nourisheth and cherisheth it as Christ doth his Church What meane you S. Paule Is then the Church the flesh of Christ For your words import so much He answereth it is so For we are members of his body of his flesh and of his bones For this cause the man shall forsake Father and mother and shal be ioyned to his own wife and they shal be two in one flesh This is a great Sacrament or mysterie but I meane in Christ and the Church Hitherto S. Paul hath prouoked the husbands to loue and to cherish their wiues as Christ hath loued his Churche in cleansing it through baptisme and as he cherisheth it as being members of his body of his flesh and of his bones Note that as the loue of husbands toward their wiues is coÌ„pared to baptisâ—… so the cherishing of them is compared to the cherishing nourishing which Christ vseth toward his Churâ—… â–ª whiche is knowe to be done after baptisme for no man cherisheth that which is not yet borne When we are borne again in Christ we are made members of Christes body and therefore those words Membra sumus corporis eius we are members of his body may be ment of baptisme â–ª where we are made members of his my stical body according as S. Paule had said before Sumus inu icem membra we are members one of an other But when he addeth de carne eius de ossibus eius of his flesh and of his bones he then speaketh not of any mysticall flesh and blood but euen of the naturall flesh and bones of Christ whereof we are made members not by faith and mystery alone as in baptisme but by naturall participation of them in the last supper So doth S. Ireneus take these words For S. Paule spake not saith he of any spirituall or inuisible man sith a spirit hath neither bones nor flesh but of that disposition which is agreable to man the which consisteth of flesh of sinewes of bones the which disposition is nourished of the chalice which is his blood and is increased of the bread which is his body So doth S. Chrysostome also take these words saying we are members of his flesh and bones And again he hath mingled him selfe with vs and brought him selfe into
death of that holy thing which is eaten for a liuing and sensible creature is not vsed to be eaten without it be depriued first of his life Therefore Theophilact sayth Quinta vesperi fecit Dominus coenam caet Nemo enim quicquà m edit nisi prius mactatum fuerit The fift euening which was on Maundy Thursday night our Lord made a supper and â—…ayd to his Disciples Take and eate for this is my body And so because he was of power to lay down his soule it is euident that he then sacrificed him self from that tyme wherein he deliuered the Disciples his body For no man eateth any thing vnlesse it be first killed Thus we see that the reall presence of Christes flesh to th' end it may be eaten is the consequent whereby S. Paule proueth the shewing of Christes reall death Who perceaneth not that it is a good argument to say I eate in a Sacrament Christes reall flesh thereâ—…ore he is 〈◊〉 dead Doth it not follow well in the discourse of reason I drink the true blood of Christ therefore Christ hath truly shed his blood Or doth any faithfull man at the table of God eate the flâ—…sh and drink the blood of that thing which is not yet dead and offered in a sacrifice This argument of S. Paule they make vtterly voyde who say that we eate a figure and not the truth of Christes substance for then should Christ be shewed figuratiuely dead as he should be figuratiuely eaten Neither could it folow that because Christ is eaten by faith in a figure therefore he is already dead in truth it self but only that he is dead in a figure or in bare name without the truth of death as yet presently shewed When the Paschall Lamb was eaten the Lamb was truly dead but as the Lamb was the figure of Christ and not Christ did it thereof follow that it was only shewed in a figure that Christ sometyme should dye and not that in dede he was dead But now that he is dead in dede and so dead that his death is shewed true by the eating of his own body and by the drinking of his own blood vndoubtedly as truly as â—…uer that same Paschall Lamb was killed which was eaten so truly is the same body of Christ dead which is eaten and therevpon it wil folow that by eating the flesh of the man that dyed that maÌ„ is shewed to be dead in dedâ—… Wherefore S. Ambrose sayth vpon this place Quia enim mor te Domini liberati sumus huius rei memores in edendo potando carnem sanguinem quae pro nobis oblata sunt significamus Because we are made free through the death of our Lord being mindful thereof we in eating and in drinking flesh blood signifie those things which were offered for vs. Lo the very fact of eating flesh and of drinking blood shew the things that were offered to death for vs That is to say shew the flesh and blood of Christ as dead Damascene in that pleasant history of Iosaphat maketh the King Auenite to demaunde of certeyne Eremites why they caried about them that bones of dead men to whome they answered Ossa ista munda caet we cary about with vs ô King these cleane and holy bones representing the death of these maruelousemen whose they are and bringing our selues in minde of their exercise and of their conuersation beloued of God and flyring our selues to the like zeale And afterward the bones of dead men cause the remembrance of death to them that are a line Here we see many commodities which the blessed reliques of Sayntes do bring to good men Among other things they cause vs to remember the vertues of them whose bones we reâ—…erently kept And for as much as Christ did shew his charity chefely in dying for his enemies we haue no greater thing to remember by the presence of his body theÌ„ the same louing death of that body But if the bare presence of dead bones make vs remember that Saynts that be with God whose bones they were how muh more doth the eating of Christs body both make vs remember his death and shew it to our eyes being eaten after such sorte as this body is eaten This kinde of reasoning which S. Paule vseth is called of the logicians A consequentibus when by those things that are put for true and follow an other thing is proued to haue necessarily gone before As for example we may reason thus This woman is brought a bed therefore she hath companyed with a man in so much that reason declareth that no woman by the course of nature caÌ„ haue a childe except she lye before with a maÌ„ Now as if the bringing a bed be but in a shadow thereof no true cumpany with a man may directly be inferred euen so at this time if by eating yâ— body of Christe we shew Christs death and yet we do eate the body of Christe only in a shadow then may it not be inferred hereof that Christ is shewed to haue dyed truly in dede but only in a shadow Such as yâ— Consequent is where vpon we reason such antecedent may be inferred thereof If yâ— ConsequeÌ„t be reall true perfyt yâ— Antecedent is shewed to haue bene like If the Consequent be imperfyt figuratiue or sayned the Antecedent is not thereby shewed to be true If two persons are maryed together it may be well inferred that they consented together but if their maryage be â—…ained to say made vppon a sâ—…afold in the way of playing some Comedy or enterlude then is the coÌ„sent also sayned If the maryage were true the consent was true Christe made his last supper chefely to haue it a remembrance of his death and therefore he sayd Hoc facite in meam commemorationem doe and make this thing for the remembrance of me S. Paule hauing before declared how this thing may be made by the preistes of the new Testament for the remeÌ„brance of Christ in declaring that Christe toke bread brake and sayd this is my body he sheweth afterward how the sâ—…me body may be eaten by the common people for the remembrance of Christes death saying As often as ye shall eate this bread and drinke this chalice ye shall shew our Lords death vntill he come so that yâ— consecrating of Christes body by priests and the eating thereof by all Christian men is the shewing of Christes death Here I would know whether Christ instituted this Sacrament to shew his death as past in dede or els past in a bare shadow If to shew it in a bare shadow theÌ„ two absurd sequeles may seme to be employed One is yâ— it may shew Christes death as well to come as already past An other is that if it be past it is rather shewed to haue bene a figuratiue death theÌ„ a true death For as the eating of vnleauened bread vnder the law were
most commonly made by act these by nature or grace No manifest externall signe is made in Christes supper sufficient to shew or to expresse his body and blood outwardly vnto our eyes albeit some likenes and similitude be kept outwardly betwene the figures and the things figured otherwise as S. Augustine reasoneth they should not be Sacraments or holy signes But as Epiphanius well noteth of this Sacrament Videmus quòd non aequale est neque simile non imagini in carne non inuisibli deitati non lineamientis membrorum hoc enim est rotundae formae insensibile quantum ad potentiam We see that this thing he meaneth the Sacrament of Christes supper is not equall nor like either to the shape in flesh or to the inuisible Godhead or to the proportion of his members for this thing is of a round forme and vnsensible concerning the power of feling or mouing Seing then the things consecrated vppon the 〈◊〉 be not so like Christes nature person that thereby they may be in dede his image in any parte of their outward shape it appereth that the figure made in them is not so much seene in the outward forme as it is to be sought for in some inward vertue of them Internall figures be either naturall or typicall The Sonne is a naturall image or figure of his Father and the serpent lifted vp in the desert was a mysticall image of Christ. There is likewise no mere natural image of Christ in his last supper because there is nothing which procedeth from him by the way of birth or of generation and yet a certein proportion is kept in the Sacrament of Christes supper with this kinde of figure also Typicall signes be dubble some of the olde lawe which did signify as it were in a shadow yâ— truth absent in substaÌ„ce which was to come in Christ others of the new Testament which doe euidently geue vs the truth it self which they by visible â—…ormes both signify and conteine Those of the olde law are called in S. Paule vmbra futurorum bonorum the shadow of the good things to come these of the new lawe are named ipsa imago reruÌ„ the self image of the things of which matter I haue spoken before at large The supper of Christe belongeth to the new Testament the chalice whereof is the new Testament in his blood Therefore the figure which is made in Christes supper is ipsa imago reruÌ„ The self image of the things as also Baptisme conteyneth really the grace of regeneration which it geueth to him that is worthely baptized There is an image and a self image The image may be of a thing whose substance is absent as it chaunceth in all artificiall images The self image is it which hath the truth ioyned with yâ— image or els which is an image rather through that self substaÌ„ce which it hath common with the truth then in his outward resemblance Such an image is Christ of his Father and Christes supper of him self Hauing after the rate of artificiall and external figures by breaking of the bread a resemblance of the naturall flesh broken with nailes and scourges but much more hauing the proprietie of a naturall image in being that substance whereof it is the figure And whereas it hath the properties of â—…the kind of images or figures yet it is neither of both but farre passeth both therefore is called not only a typicall figure such as those of the old law were nor only a mystical figure of yâ— new Testament as other Sacraments of Christes Church are but it is called singularly the Sacrament of Sacraments the perfection and the vnbloody sacrifice which who so receaueth vnworthely he is worthy to be gilty of no lesse punishment then the thing is great which he 〈◊〉 He is gilty of the sacriâ—…iced body of Christ because he really eateth it But if it were the image of a truth absent in substance as the figures of the old Testament were the negligent eating thereof could by no meanes make a man gilty of violating Christes body partly because no image of the old law did by eating it make any man gilty of laying 〈◊〉 hands vppon Christes body and yet they were all figures of his body partly because any other Satrament of the new law should likewise make vs gilty of missordering his body For as bread and wine doe signify the spirituall nourishment which Christ geueth to our soules right so Baptisme doth signifie the spirituall birth which we receaue of Christ in our soules But seing it is a thing neuer heard of that either Manna or the shew bread vnworthely eaten or baptisme vnworthely taken made any man gilty of Christes own body and blood certeinly there is some other heauenly substance vnder the forme of bread and wine then either Manna or the shew bread had or baptisme now hath He that did eate Manna vnworthely might be gilty of contempt disdaine lothsomnes or negligence according as his fault was wherewith he did eate it but the thing eaten made him not gilty of Christes body and blood Otherwise the Iewes must haue prepared and examined them selues euery day least they should haue committed a new synne against the body of our Sauiour which as it is a thing not readen of so it had required more perfection in the law then now is vsed for so much as we receaue our maker perhaps but once a yere surely at the most but once a day whereas they did fede vppon Manna so oft as hunger or custome prouoked them by the space of forty yeres What shal I say more As the Sacrament of Christes body blood is really and in dede it self the bread which through the substance thereof vnited to God is able to make the worthy eaters liue for euer so it is the body whiche through the substance thereof whereunto power of iudging and coÌ„demning is geuen doth make the vnworthy receauers thereof to be damned euen for the only negligence vsed in eating it Death and life comme from the substance of that which is eaten and therein it differeth froÌ„ Manna exceding it so far as the body it selfe is more worth then the shadow thereof whereas otherwise one slesh and blood of Christ were signified by both but not really present in both ¶ The reall presence of Christes body is confirmed by the oft repâ—…rting of the name of flesh body blood eating drinking and such like wordes THat which Ioseph said vnto Pharao concerning that his dreame seene yâ— second tyme was an assured token of Gods will in bringing the matter to passe I may much more â—…ustly allege at this tyme sith touching the real presâ—…ce of his body blood Christe was not content to say it the second or third tyme but he hath by him self or his Apostles and Euangelists repeted it aboue
coming of his grace into our hartes His grace can not come except we first be made mete to receaue it but his body may come to our bodies so may condemne our soules before that we are made mete to receaue it His grace therefore must come first to vs by faith and charitie that we may thereby haue power to receaue worthely afterward his blessed body least if we receaue it vnworthely we take it to our damnation But so great preparation should not be requisite if our bodies receaued none other substance besyde bread and wine for they are of baser degree then eating by faith is But now we may somtime absteine from the Sacrament euen for honour and reuerence whiche we beare to it and yet we may not absteine from eating by faith or spirite Therefore it is a worthier kind of substance which is receaued in the SacrameÌ„t then the grace is which is the effect of spirituall eating And seing it should not be a worthier thing if it were the substance of bread and wine we may be assured the substance of the Sacrament to be that selfe body whereof the Centurion sayd Lord I am not worthy that thou shouldest enter vnder my roof It is the honour of that body whiche S. Paul and S. Augustine respect and not the honour of bread and wine in so much that the faithfull as well in the Greke as in the Latin Churche haue vsed alwaâ—…s the very same wordes in adoring the Sacracrament whiche the Centurion vsed to Christ. one praier to one Lord the same reuerence to the same God and man ¶ That the Fathers of the first six hundred yeres after Christ did adore the body and blood of Christe in the Sacrament of the altar DIonysius Areopagita scholer to S Paule made a praier to the Sacrament of the Altar in these wordes Sed ô tu diuinum sanctumque Sacramentum c. but o thou diuine and holy Sacrament open and display clerely to vs as it were the veyles and clokes wherewith thorough the signes of obscurities thou art couered and fill the eyes of our vnderstanding with suche clere light as may no more be dymmed Thus did that auncient Father pray not to bread and wine ye may be sure but to that blessed body of our Lord which is present in the mysteries Upon whiche place Pachymeres noteth that S. Dionisius speaketh vnto the Sacrament as being a thig which hath sense and life and that worthely For so the greate diuine Gregory saith But o passouer that great I say and holy passouer For that our passouer and this self holy Sacrament our Lord Iesus Christ him self is to whoÌ„ the holy man spâ—…aketh Lo this selfe holy Sacrament is Christ. And as nothing in the world is our great and holy passouer besyde Christ him selfe so this holy Sacrament hath none other substance at all besyde the substance of Iesus Christ who couereth him selfe as it were with the veyles of bread and wine As you haue heard the most direct wordes of S. Dionysius adoring this blessed mystery and of Pachymeres geuing the reason why he did speake vnto it as the which is Christe him selfe now you shal perceaue that all the other Fathers did beleue the same in so much as all men will graunt that they must needes adore that thing which they confessed to be either Christ or God or one in person with the sonne of God S. â—…yprian writing of the Sacrament of Christes supper saith In sacrificio quod Christus est non nisi Christus sequendus est In the sacrifice which is Christ only Christ must be followed It is knowâ—…ll well what sacrifice we offer how we take bread and wine coÌ„secrating them by the wordes of the last supper wherein it was said This is my body and this is my blood doe and make this thing for the remembrance of me This consecration of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ is our sacrifice and because Christ is not diuided nor dieth any more but where his body and blood is there him selfe is therefore S. Cyprian saieth Our sacâ—…ifice is Christ. Neither doth he speake of the death and passion where Christ was our sacrifice bloodily but he speaketh of the sâ—…pper of our Lord where we daily sacrifice Christ vnbloodily For he speaketh of yâ— matter of coÌ„secration which he saith must be wine mingled with water and not water alone because Christ made his owne blood of wine mingled with water Now saith S. Cyprian In the sacrifice which is Christ none must be followed but Christ. If our sacrifice be Christ because of bread and wine which we bring foorth the body and blood of Christ is made by his word is it possible that Christe should not be worshipped of S. â—…yprian with godly honour If Christ be so worshipped and our sacrifice be Christ our sacrifice must be worshipped with Godly honour our sacrifice I say because the thing that is made by coÌ„secration is none other besyde that body of Christe which is the price of the world and the only sacrifice for mankinde The same thing S. Ambrose saith euen as expressie of the Sacrament which S. Cyprian speaketh of the sacrifice In illo SacrameÌ„to Christus est quia corpus Christi in that Sacrament Christe is because it is the body of Christe To the same purpose apperteine the words of S. Ignatius calling this Sacrament the bread of God the heauenly bread the bread of life which thing saith he is the flesh of Christe the Sonne of God And of S. Ambrose calling it the nourishment of the diuine substance And of Eusebius Pamphili calling it Sacrificium Deo plenum And againe horroreÌ„ afferentia mensae Christi sacrificia a sacrifice full of God and the sacrifices of the table of Christe making men to tremble and quake And of Cyrillus saying those that receaue those mysteries to be made diuinae naturae participes Partakers of the diuine nature And again corporaliter in nobis Christum habitare participatione naturali that by these mysteries Christe dwelleth in vs corporally and by naturall partaking And of Isychius calling the same mysteries the bread of life panes mysticos viuificantes and mysticall loaues and those which quicken vs to life euerlasting And is it to be thought that Christ that the bread of God of life the diuine substance the sacrifice full of God which maketh men tremble quake that yâ— mysteries which cause Christe corporally to dwell in vs yâ— the nature of God whereof we are partakers by eating that the Sacrament of Christes supper being al this yet should not haue godly honour done to it Did al the Fathers who wrote thus of that mysterie honour and worship it according to their own doctrine and writings If all they and al the rest did professe that which was vpon yâ— table of Christ
the receauers or no that Shepherd of Christes flok sayth that if it were not his true body and receaued in the mouth it were in vaine to say Amen It is true For seing the Priest bringing meate vnto their mouthes did say The body of Christ if notwithstanding it were only to be receaued in hart not in mouth also it were in vaine to say Amen or to answere it is so it is true and yet to think in hart otherwise To end this matter at the length The whole Church before Berengarius beleued the reall presence and they toke that their belefe of their auncestours from hand to hand euen vntill we come to the Apostles and by them to Christ. In the primatiue Church the Priest cried out at the altar This is my body and this is my blood All the people answered it is so It is true S. Ambrose biddeth them think as they speake yea euen as the word soundeth S. Leo sayth they say in vaine it is true if they dispute against the truth thereof And he teacheth the truth to be that the same thing is receaued in the mouth which is beleued in faith S. Hilary sayeth No place of doubting is left sith both by our Lords profession and by our faith it is verily flesh and verily blood Epiphanius witnesseth that euery man beleueth our Lords saying wherein he sayd This is my body And who so doth not beleue it eueÌ„ as him self spake it he is fallen from gracâ—… and saluation Seing all these things doe euidently proue the faith of the whole Church to haue bene that Christes body and blood was really present in the Sacrament of the altar and really receaued into the mouthes of the faithfull people it remaineth that thosâ—… who haue bene deceaued in this behalf do returne agaiâ—…e to their former belefe and that as wel in al other points as iâ—… this they do for euer beleue the Catholike Church the piller of truth Knowing for surety that it can not be a Catholiâ—…e doctrine which is begun in our age or any tyme after thâ—… preaching of the Apostles and that specially when it is conâ—…rary to the faith always preached and beleued ¶ That no man possibly can be condemned for beleuing the body of Christ to be really present in the Sacrament of the altar WHen Christe had almost ended his talke at Capharnaum and shewed his wordes to be spirit and life perceauing all the fault why the Iewes thought his sayinges so absurde to be for so much as they estemed him no more then a naturall man weighing his doctrine by theyr senses earthely reason he for declaration of theyr incurable dyssease for the detection of the cause thereof sayd Sed sunt quidam ex vobis qui non credunt But there are some of you who beleue not For Iesus knewe from the beginning who they where which beleued not Here we may see the chefe fault in all matter and question of the supper of Christ to consist in not beleuing He that beleueth is safe but wo to him that beleueth not S. Peter beleueth and confesseth Christ to haue the wordes of euerlasting life Iudas beleueth not and therefore he is called a deuil The chefe point of ChristiaÌ„ belefe is to acknowlege Christ to be God to be almighty to be able to make and to doe what soeuer pleaseth him This point he lacketh who so denieth Christ to be able to make the substance of his owne body present in diuerse places at once vnder diuerse formes of bread and wine If â—…herefore any man wil not beleue this he may be assured his portioâ—… is rekned with Iudas who as Leo hath witnessed beleued not thâ—… almighty power and Godhead of Christ. But if all men agree 〈◊〉 this point it is very well then let vs passe to the nexte Christ said â–ª The bread which I will geue is my flesh the which I will geue for tâ—…e life of the world Now are we come from the power of Chist to the will of Christ. We all were agreed that he was able to make the substance of his body present vnder diuerse formes of bread and wine Nowe these wordes affirme that he will geue a kind of bread the substance whereoâ—… is his own flesh euen that flesh the which he will geue for the life of the world And if we goe to his last supper we see bread taken and after blessing and thankes geuen he said This is my body which is geuen for you And he gaue his twelue disciples twelue fragmeÌ„tes or peeces bidding euery one of them take and eate in which deede he sheweth him self to make the substance of his body present vnder the formes of bread in diuerse places at one tyme allthough not after the manner of locall situation because his body hath not in the Sacrament actually that naturall dimention and occupying of place which it hath otherwise But as he hath ordeined it to be so is it vnder twelue diuerse formes of bread Here I am sure many will stand with me and say they beleue not so to whom I answere yâ— by so saying they haue condemned them selues to be of those of whom Christ said there are some of yow who beleue not For yf Christ said by yâ— which was bread before his blessing which still seemed bread yf Christ said thereof this is my bodie gaue it vnder twelue peeces or formes seing they confesse him to be able to make his body present vnder diuerse formes and to haue promised to geue his flesh and to haue said this is my body and to haue geuen it to twelue how can they deny that his body was present at that supper vnder twelue diuerse formes of bread being whole and all vnder eche forme The confessing of that which Christ said is a thing that apperteineth vnto faith because the speaker is God to whom all faith beloÌ„geth To beleue this that God saith must nedes be a vertue and to discredite it is a great vice You will perhap allege that fleshe profiteth nothing the wordes of Christ are spirit and life â–ª that is true therefore I beleue that when he said take eate this is my body he gaue his body not without life spirit but yet as really as euer by saying Let the light be made he made yâ— light for his wordes be not dead flesh which profiteth nothing but quicken and geue lyfe how and when so euer it pleaseth hym muche better then the spirit and soule of man is able to quicken make liuely the body wherein it is These two sayinges this is my body and my wordes are spirit and life stande so well together that I beleue the one for the others sake Christes words neuer lacke spirit and life and power to quicken other thinges euen as his flesh neuer lacked al kynd of spirit in it selfe for when the soule was out of
it yet the godhed remayned corporally dwelt in it and the soule returned to it agayne the third day Therefore when Christ saith This is my body which is geuen for you I am bound to beleue that his body is neither without soule nor godhead for ells it were not truly said it is geuen for vs yf it were not profitable to vs. Thus you se that I beleue al that words of Christ together and that you not doing so are without ye do repeut certeine to be condemned for not beleuing these words take eate This is my body You wyll say ye beleue these words yet not carnally but spiritually as it is mete for Christes wordes to be beleued O syr he that assigneth a meane howe he will beleue Christes wordes in that very faut sheweth hym selfe not to beleue them for belefe inuenteth nothing of his owne but followeth the autoritie of God that speaketh I beleue in deed that Christes words can not be carnal as you take carnal words for foule and grosse meaninges But I see it to be a very cleane and pure meaning that the moste pure substance of the flesh of Christ should he geuen vnder the form of bread to thend it may be eaten of vs and the chiefe and cleanest thing that we vse to eate is bread To geue therefore the chiefe and most healthfull flesh in the world to be eaten vnder the form of the purest eatable thing is a very pure and cleane work far from all carnality You will say it is more pure if it be rather beleued to be eaten only of yâ— harte of man by faith spirit then by mouth and body I answere that is no pure eating of a corporall thing which taketh away the truth of corporall eating Againe both ways of eating are better then one of them alone I beleue his real flesh to be eaten with hart and mouth to be eaten with body minde to be eaten in deede and in faith Here faileth your belefe because of two true thinges you beleue but one the other you discredit To be short let vs imagine him that beleueth the real presence of Christes body and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine to stand before the seate of Christes iudgement and that Christe asketh him why he did beleue and worship his body and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine May he not wel answere in this wise I beleued so and did so because your maiestie taking bread and hauing blessed douted not so say This is my body which words al my forefathers vnderstode to be spoken properly and to be true as they sounded therefore at the commandement of my prelats I adored your body vnder the form of bread If Christ reply that he had preachers who tought him otherwise and cryed to him to beware least he committed idolatrie first that obiectiâ—… might not be made to any man that died aboue fiftie yeres past because no preacher taught publikely any such doctrine Secondly if so much were said to one of our time he might answere that he had 〈◊〉 forefathers and moe preachers and those much more anncient and more honest men who required him to beleue Christes wordes and to worship the body of his maker Well now we are come to the point all the Catholikes haue preaâ—…hed with one accorde that it is the true body of Christ and the Gospell witnesseth that Christ 〈◊〉 This is my body Here is the word of God and the tradition and preaching of man ioyned together I aske whether it be possible for Christ who requireth nothing so earnestly of vs as briefâ—… to 〈◊〉 that simple man who being otherwise of good 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his word and his forefaâ—… and the preachers agreable with both or not Answere me for what fault shall this poore man be condemned First to beleue Christ it is no fault Secondly Christ faid this is my body Thirdly he being yet an infant was of his parentes taught that to be the body of Christ which was holden ouer the Priests head Fourthly as many and moe preache vnto him when he cometh to laufull age and say this is the body of Christ as there are that aâ—…terward preache the contrary Tell me then what was his fault for which he may be coÌ„demned If you say his eyes told him it was not yâ— body of Christ he will answere that for the reuerence he bare to the word of God he denied the fensible instruction of his eyes as geuing more credit to Christ then to him selfe Is that a fault If you reply that by that meaâ—…es he might haue worshipped the roâ—… in steâ—…de of Christ he wil answere he knoweth not what you meane he neuer had any rok shewed him by most graue authority which was said to be Christ. If any suche thing had bene taught him he for his parte was so obedient to beleue so willing to adore Christ that he would haue done any thing which had bene commanded to him vnder the name of Christ or of his religion Is this a fault why the poore man should be condemned No surely seing the Prophet Dauid saieth Vt iumentum factus sum apud te I am become as it were a beast before thee It is â—…andable saith Euthymius that in the sight of God we take our selues as beastes which being so I can deuise no fault in this poore and simple man who if he be deceaued he is deceaued by Christ by his forefathers by diuerse Catholike and vertuous Preachers by yâ— vertue of humility of obedience of pure loue towards God But on the other side if Christ call one of them before him who denieth his reall presence aske him why he did not beleue the Sacrament of the altar to be the body of Christe what will he answer for himselfe â–ª Will he say Syr I beleâ—…ed your body to sit at the right hand of God the Father and therefore that your body was not in the Priestes hand Why then thinkest thou that I am not able to make the same which is at the right hand of my father to be alsâ—… present vnder the form of bread Sir whether you be able or no I can not say but I haue hard many preachers tel that one body caÌ„ not be at one time in diuerse places O howe dreadfully would Christ answere in this case Did not those preachers whom thou preteÌ„dest to folow say alwaies they preached to thee the sincere word of God Did they not by that colour ouerthrow monasteries Churches altars images of Saintes and mine owne image and crosâ—…e Did they not denie the sacrifice of the Masse praing for the dead and such like auncient vsages only for pretence of the word of God And now see how inexcusable they thou art I said Take eate this is my body I said this to twelue men I gaue eche of them my body â—…ad
faith at Christes supper came from Christe howe could els any man haue it and it is described in the Gospel how could we els know it But all that he is writen to haue geuen came from his haÌ„ds when he saied take eate therefore either his body was not eaten by faith at all as by his gift there made and by the Euangelistes rehersed or his body came then from his owne hands Can you proue that he gaue his body at his supper otherwise then by his own hands where is that writen For though he â—…wel in vs by faith yet no such thing was spoken of at his last supper Answere the Gospel M. Iuel or els blaspheine no more What soeuer was geuen at Christes supper came from the handes of Christ. shew me els an other gift and shew me where it is witnessed He gaue saith the 〈◊〉 said take eate nothing was eaten at his table but that whiche was there taken Nothing was there taken but that which was there geuen nothiâ—… was there geuen but that which Christ prepared and gaue Christ can be knowen to haue geuen nothing but that which the Euangelistes tel haue wâ—…ten They witnesse that he gaue such a tâ—…ing which at the least he called his bodie Now if in that external foode he gaue not his own reall body as you say his body was not eaten at all by the gift of his last supper not so much as by faith If it be so where or when shall his body be eaten by faith but if it was eateÌ„ by faith as vndoutedly it was by the eleuen Apostles who were al cleane as Christ said if that eating of theirs can be proued by the gospell it must be proued by these words take eate but these words were spoken of that visible thing whiche Christ gaue to their mouthes therefore all the eating by faith that can be shewed to haâ—…e bene made at Christes supper depended at that tyme vpon the eating by mouth Therefore the body of Christ which at Christs supper must nedes be eateÌ„ by faith if it shal be eateÌ„ worthelie as it ought to be was in the handes of Christe and thence came to the mouthes of the Apostles and so M. Iuel hath affirmed a proposition directly 〈◊〉 the veritie of the gospel Secâ—…dly the 〈◊〉 teach yâ— we eate Christes body by our â—…thes noâ—… by 〈◊〉 only â—… 〈◊〉 speaking of euil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 uing denied Christ yet came 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 meates 〈◊〉 vp to 〈◊〉 vnto oâ—…r Lords table faith 〈◊〉 modâ—… in dominum manibus atque ore delinquunt quà m cum dominum negauerunt they 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more againâ—… our lord with their handes and mouth 〈◊〉 when thei denied our Lord. Consider wel this saying An 〈◊〉 man 〈◊〉 Christ with his tonge before the tyran for feare of death eateth of things offered to idols The same man without 〈◊〉 cometh to Christes â—…able he synneth in both places and that with his mouth 〈◊〉 by denying Christ and by 〈◊〉 polluted meates here by touching and eating â—…ur lordes bâ—…die S. 〈◊〉 saith the 〈◊〉 committed in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the more 〈◊〉 â–ª Why so Is there aâ—…ie 〈◊〉 more 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to deny Christ to communicate with idols How is it then a more grâ—…uouse fault to come without repentance to Christes supper then to deny him both in worde dede Studie M. Iuel as long as you will you shall neuer find any solution wherein you maie 〈◊〉 but only this because he that commeth vnworthely to Christes table toucheth the reall and substantial body of Christ inuading and doing violence as S. Cyprian there saith to our Lords body blood So that the only cause why it is more heinouse to communicate vnworthely then to committe idolatrie or to deny Christ is the substance of Christ which is vnworthely touched Take away the reall substance from the handes or mouth of the receauer and it is not possible that it should be a greater synne to receaue vnworthely a peece of bread theÌ„ to denie Christ in word and to committe idolatrie in dede But as the treason that is committed against the kings owne person is the greatest of all so the greatest synne that can be bodily committed against Christ is the touching of his own substance with a polluted mouâ—…h therefore S. Cyprian beleued our Lord him selfe and the substance of his body to be receaued into the mouth of the communicant S. Chrysostome likewise witnesseth vs to take in our hands in our mouthes to touche to eate to receaue into vs Christes sleshe Is all this done by faith only Pope Leo writeth thus of this matter Ye ought so to coÌ„municate of the holy table that ye doubt nothing at al of the truth of Christes body and blood Hoâ—… enim ore sumitur quod fide creditur For that thing is receaued in mouth which is beleued in faith but yâ— true substance of Christ is beleued in faith therefore the true substance of Christ is receaued in mouth Whereupon it foloweth that M. Iuel falsely affirmeth Christ to be eaten by faith only none otherwise Diuerse other testimonies I will bring hereafter as occasion shall serue Last of all S. Cyrill reporteth that a certaine Arrian saied Patet quia corpora nostra non dependent â—… carne Christi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is euident that our bodies hang not of the flesh of Christ as braunches of the vine Neither is the fruit of yâ— Sainctes bodily â–ª but rather spiritâ—…all therefore the Godhead of the sonne is the vine whereon we depend by faith Thus saied the heretike To whome S. Cyrillus making answere saith because he thinketh vs to be ioyned with Christe by faith and loue and not in fleshe let vs say somwhat herein Doth he thinke vs not to knowe the vertue of the mysticall blessing The which when it is in vs doth it not make Christe to dwell corporally also in vs by communicating of his flesh Here S. Cyrill placeth corporall being against being by faith and loue Christ by communicating of his flesh dwelleth corporally in vs and not by faith and charitie alone and yet our communicating is made by mouth Therefore M. Iuel doth communicate with the Arrian in saying that we eate Christes body by â—…aith only and none otherwise For S. Cyrill of purpose to destroie that heresiâ—… sheweth vs to 〈◊〉 Christ corporally also Iu. We place Christ in the hart M. Harding placeth him in the mouthe San. D. Harding placeth him in the hâ—…rt and mouth you place him touchiÌ„g his corporal presence neither in hart nor in mouth And touching faith in hart only and not in mouth D Harding teacheth the flesh of Christ to be ioyned to our flesh for the increasing of spiritual grace You teach bread to be vnited to our flesh affirming beside the word of God that our bodies eate bread as our soules are fed with Christe D. Harding teacheth the meate of Angels which
miraculouse 26. Ye expound to be gilty of Christes body and blood for eating that is to say for not eating or resusing to eate For you teache euill men not to eate the body of Christ which is against S. Paule 27. Ye will not haue Christes supper to be an externall sacrifice but to be worse in that point then the Iewish or idolatours altars and tables who both did sacrifice and also S. Paule compareth Christes table with theirs 28. Ye so expound the shewing of Christes death by eating bread a figure of him that you rather shewe him not to be truely dead because your figure is yet emptie voide which can neuer proue Christes death truely past 29. Ye expound the not making a difference betwene Christes body eaten and other meates in suche sort that ye wil not haue the body present wherein the difference is to be made 30. Ye deny our vnion with Christes flesh by corporall participation which S. Paule teacheth by the example of Adam Eue being two in one flesh 31. Whereas S. Pauie saieth Christe to be so muche better then Angels by how much he had a more excelleÌ„t name theÌ„ they you regard not yâ— name body blood geuen to yâ— mysteries of Christ but affirme them to be still that they were before and therefore not to be that excellent substance which they are named to be 32. In all the scriptures so great and oft mention being made of Christes supper as there is yet no promise can be found made to him who eateth materiall bread and drinketh wine But all the promise is made for eatinge Christes fleshe and drinkinge worthely his blood Therefore you affirm bread to be eateÌ„ and wine to be drunken in Christes supper beside the word of God 33. Although Dauid prophecied of cating and adoring yet you wil graunt no such meat to be geueÌ„ to vs which may be external ly adored 34. Notwithstanding that the prophets teache that by Christes comming al externall idolatrie shal be taken away yet you feare not to say that Christes owne Sacrament bearing the name of his owne body and blood is it selfe an idol which was left with vs to kepe vs from all idolatrie 35. The sonne of man came as to saue so to fede the whole man why then denie you the food of life to our bodies affirming them to eat common bread and to drinke common wine whiles the soule is fed by faith with the body and bloode of Christ 36. If in the Sacrament of the altar we fede vpon Christ by faith alone why is that Sacrament called a supper more theÌ„ baptism where also we must fede on Christ by faith 37. Seing a figure may also be the truth it selfe whereof it is the figure as Christ is the figure of his Father and yet the same substance what reason haue you why you would rather detract this hoâ—…our from Christes Sacrament then geue the same vnto it 38. Christ being equal with his Father made promise to vs of his â—…ne fleshe whiche his Father had geâ—…en Why then denie you the gift of Christ to be as real to vs as his Father gaue him real fleshe 39. How teache you the words of Christ which are spirit life to be notwithstanding figuratiue and consequently deade and voide of al life or strength 40. Because yâ— word of God who was only able to be fed vpon by faith and so was the food of Angels or soules woulde be also the meate of man in respect of the body it toke flesh aâ—…d at his supper sayd to vs take eate this is my body And yet you make him still to be only the meate of the minde whereby we are excluded frome hauing God corporally in vs through the fleshe of Christe 41. To coÌ„clude whereas ye find flesh bodie blood ioyned with eating drinking taking partaking geuing breaking distributing coÌ„municating dâ—…udicating ye expound all those words figuratiuelie as though God by so manie waies repeating those words had not strengthned the coÌ„mon and proper significatioÌ„s of them Let this suffise for this time to shew that you obserue nor gender nor number nor nominatiue case nor verb nor antecedent nor relatiue nor the condition of the maker of the supper nor the nature of the sacrament nor the state and perfection of the Gospel nor the sayings of the prophetes nor the â—…ulfilling of the old law nor the oft repeting of the matters belonging to Christs supper but onlie to serue the eye and the senses deny al the marueilous workes of the new testament yâ— remeÌ„brance of al which this one mysterie is affirmed to be â—…rag no more M. Iuel of our figuratiue expositions sith you haue thus erred in graÌ„mar in Logick in Diuinitie in truth in faith in coÌ„mon sense Iu. If in these words except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of maÌ„ ye follow the letter it killeth San. To follow yâ— letter is to take words as thei sound to an inâ—…del as to haue flesh torn in to peeces and so eaten but he that taketh them as Christ in his supper by his fact did expound them doth folow yâ— spirit and not the letter ¶ A notable place of S. Augustine corrupted by M. Iuel IVel. S. Augustine sayth The Sacrament of Christes body after a certain phrase or manner or trope or â—…igure of speache is the body of Christ. Sander This place is wickedly abused because it is nakedly alleged and falsely englished whereas it dependeth wholy vpon the words going before which are these Nónne semel immolatus est Christus in se ipso tamen in Sacramento caet Was not Christ once offered vp in him selfe and yet in the Sacrament he is offered vp for the people not only at euerie feaste of Easter but euerie day Neither surely doth he lye who being demanded Eum responderit immolari Doth answere that he is offered vp For if the SacrameÌ„ts had not a certain likenes of those thinges whereof they are the Sacramentes they were not at all Sacramentes Out of this likenes they take also for the most parte the names of the things theÌ„ selues As therefore according to a certaine â—…anner the Sacrament of Christes body is the body of Christe the Sacrament of the blood of Christe is the blood of Christ so the Sacrament of faith is faith In these words of S. Augustine it is to be seen euidently that he putteth a difference betwene the thing and the Sacrament of that thing The thing therefore it selfe must be first knoweâ—… and then we shal see how the Sacrament thereof is both like vnâ—… it and taketh the name thereof The thing it selfe in ouâ—… question is Iesus Christ not only so but the true body of Iesus Christe neither only true in substance but euen
true in shape in form in quantitie and qualitie Christ was made man in dede borne in dede he grew and walked vpon the earth in dede according to the true and visible nature and forme of man He suffered death in the same forme and did shed his blood apart from his fleshe Now marke when it pleased him to depart out of this world he woulde haue all these thinges beleued of vs remembred of vs and folowed as our weakenes through his grace might suffer In cōsideration whereof he iustituted a Sacramēt of his own body and blood Of which body Of that which he had taken which was but one The first point of this Sacrament must be saith S. Augustine that it haue a certaine likenes or similitude with Christes own body and blood and consequently that likenes shall make it to haue the name it selfe What is the likenes in the sacrament of Christes supper betwene it and the naturall body of Christ Seeke as long as you are able M. Iuel prie and serche neuer so intierly you shall find the likenes to be in this point specially that the substance of Christes body blood not hauīg any outward image made of them are made presēt vnder the forme of an other thing are so made present that thereby all the highe mysteries of Christes visible body are mystically set before the faith of the true beleuer Christ being the sonne of God was made man by turninge some of the purest blood of the virgin Marie into his own flesh and blood and that was done without the sede of man by the vertue of the worde and power of the whole Trinitie through the ministery of the Archangel Gabriell euen so the purest creatures of bread and wine are made the body and blood of Christ and turned into the substance of them not by generation corruption but by the vertue of these wordes This is my body Which thing y◠who le Trinitie worketh by the ministerie of the Priest who is the Angel of Christ. Christ thus borne and hauing walked in his flesh came to die vpon the crosse where his blood was diuided from his flesh the soule from the body but the Godhead taried stil with both right so this sacrament hath the body consecrated vnder one kind the blood vnder an other kind and they are adored of the saithfull a part yet the person which is one whereunto they are vnited and the Godhead in that person causeth the two partes to make but one Sacrament and the whole to be vnder eche kind Thus the likenes whiche is not in form but in substance and in the consecration of true faith betwene Christ him self and this sacrament maketh this sacrament to be called his body blood although in al respectes it be not so Upon whiche ground S. Hierom saith Dupliciter sanguis Christi caro intelligitur c. The flesh and blood of Christ is vnderstanded two waies either that spiritual and diuine whereof him self said my flesh is truly meate and my blood is truly drinke and except ye eate my fleshe and drinke my blood ye shall not haue euerlasting life or els the fleshe which was cru cified and the blood which was shed with the speare of the soldiour Thus haue we one fleshe and blood in substance consydered vnderstanded two waies and that not falsely vnderstanded as the Sacramentaries imagine but truely and in dede For a false vnderstanding is hated of God This difference and this likenes is also noted in the present words of S. Augustin when he saith Christ was once offered in him self Note the worde in him selfe to wit in his visible shape form and truth as wel of substance as of quātity the same Christ is dayly offered in a sacramēt Are not these S. Augustines words ▪ Christ is offered in him self Christ is offered in a Sacrament is it not all one Christ or is Christe diuided No no al is one substāce but the m◅ner is not al one And farther note very dyligently good Reader that of the two immolations or offeringes the one is referred to the other The one is the signe token figure Sacrament of the other And therfore the one is but once done because it was y◠great immolation which absolutely fulfilled al the law prophets and it was made vppon the Crosse. The other being made in the Sacramēt sheweth kepeth preserueth and applieth daily the fruits of that one oblation but Christ is alwaies one in bothe Now this likenes of the Incarnation and passion of Christ made and represented to the faithfull by the Sacrament of the altar causeth it to be called the body blood of Christ. And therefore S. Augustine concludeth The Sacrament of Christes body according to a certain maner is the body of Christ. M. Iuel englisheth these wordes according to his maner falsely corruptly and ignorantly he turneth Secundum quendam modum after a certaine Phrase or maner or trope or figure of speache True it is that modus doth signifie a maner or meane Again it may be sometime y◠the maner is tropicall or figuratiue but now it is not so meant And that is proued two waies First because S. Augustine saith the Sacrament of the body of Christ according to a certein manner est is the body of Christ. he saith not only it is called the body after a certain manner but it is the body Therefore the manner that that he speaketh of is in the Sacrament in the thing it self in the substance thereof and not only in the phrase or trope or figure of speache as M. Iuel would haue it Againe the name whiche the Sacrament taketh is geuen as S. Augustine saith according to a likenes which is betwene the Sacrament and the thing it selfe That likenes then must be first in the Sacrament really and afterward in respect of priority of nature though not in respect of tyme the name is geuen Seing then the likenes of things goeth before the likenes of names When S. Augustine saith the Sacrament of Christes body is the body of Christ according to a certain manner that manner must respect the likenes of the thinges before it respecte the likenes of names Therefore M. Iuel hath erred altogether in translating modum a phrase or manner of speache But first he should haue sought wherein the things were like for in dede the likenes in dinerse things is diuerse In one thing it is in substance as God the Father and his sonne are like equall and one in substance Yet because there is some difference in that they are diuerse persons the sonne is the figure of his Fathers substance according to a certaine manner to wit as he is a diuerse person but not as a diuerse substance In other things the substāce may differ also as the rock and Christe and
the qualitie alone may be like As when Christ is called the vine the doore the way But to coÌ„clude with this place of S. Augustine he saith the holy signes whiche are like vnto the truth take also the name of the truth he bringeth that rule to shew that a child baptized maie well be called â—…aithfull because although he beleue not actually yet he hath faith in yâ— he hath baptisme which iâ—… the Sacrament of faith For saith S. Augustine Sacramentum fidei quodammodo fides est The Sacrament of faith after a certaine manner is faith He saith not only it is called faith after a certain phrase of speache as M. Iuell would haue it but it is faith after a certaine manner of being and not only of speaking and that being or truth whiche yâ— infant hath â—…eceaued is so great that as it foloweth in S. Augustine the Sacrament shal be of strength to defende him froÌ„ the power of the deuill and from euerlasting damnation And iudge you M. Iuel that to be only a name not a truth which is able to bring the child to saluation It is faith and it is not faith as the Sacrament of the altar is Christes body and not Christes â—…ody It is not faith in actuall consent of the will It is faith in the vertue of that power which the Sacrament printeth in the soule of the iufant it is the habit of faith and not the act euen so the Sacrament of yâ— altar is the substance of Christes body not the outward forme thereof the thing it selfe and not the shape thereof The name therefore of faith is geuen to yâ— child in respect of a truth which by baptism is wrought in the child although it be not all the truth which is requisite to actuall beleuing And the Sacrament of Christes supper is called the body of Christe for the substance of the body which is present although it be not visibly present according to al the maÌ„ner of a true naturall mans bodie ¶ Of the signification of aduerbes HArding By these vvordes really substantially cae The Fathers ment only a truth of being not a meane of being after carnal or natural vvise Iuel Al aduerbes taken of nounes signifie euer more a quality and neuer the substance Sander An aduerbe hath his name because it is ioyned to the verb and it doth make plaine and fill vp the signification therof so that if the verb whereunto it is ioyned do signifie the substaÌ„ce of a thing the aduerbe maketh it to signify the same substance more perfectly as when the king Nabuchodonosor said to Daniel Verè deus vester deus deorum est Your God is verily the God of Gods The aduerb verily doth not signifie a qualitie as M. Iuel reporteth but it doth affirme most vehemently the substance of one God aboue all other Gods or iudges rulers And when the Centurion said this man was verily the sonne of God it is not to be meant that Christ was the sonne of God in â—…alitie at all but only in substance Now concerning that some aduerbes be taken of nounes it is to be knowen yâ— if they be taken of suche nounes as import rather a similitude of a substance then a real truth thereof in that case M. Iuels resolution will serue that they shall signifie the manner and qualitie of the thing as virilter doth signifie manly because it commeth of virilis whiche signifieth manlike and it commeth of vir which doth signifie rather the sexe then the substance of a man But when the nounes doe signifie the substance it selfe the aduerbes deriued of them must nedes draw with thâ—… the signification of the same substance as corporalis carnalis substantialis and naturalis be nounes which signifie a thing that belongeth to the body the flesh the substance the nature of yâ— wherof we speake and the aduerbes comming of them of necessitiâ—… must signifie the truth of that nature whereof we intreate But whether it shall signifie the qualitie also with the truthe that dependeth of the circumstance of the thing which is in hand For example Christe walked corporally vppon the water that saying must be vnderstaÌ„ded in the truth of a mans body but not in any such accustomed manner as other mens bodies are wont to walke vpon the water For there is no such manner of walking at all And whereas the aduerbe must be referred wholy to the verbe whose signification it maketh perfite that saying must be this resolued Christes bodily walking vpoÌ„ the water was a true walking concerning the truth of the flesh which did walke notwithstanding the manner of the walking did excede the qualitie of a mere â—…atural body Thus the aduerbes shall signifie the truth of the substance of a body walking and yet not the manner of walking belonging to a natural and true body Euen so when Syrill writeth that Christ dwelleth corporally also in vs and not only by right faith and charitie the meaning of him shal be that Christ in the true substance of his body dwelleth in vs although he dwell not in vs after suche manner as other naturall bodies of men dwel in the places where they are Thus M. Iuel is cast in his grammar also whereof he iâ—…iteth D. Harding But to thend his ignorance or malice may appere yâ— better I beseche the discrete Reader to consider the ods betwene D. Harding and M. Iuel D. Harding saieth when the Fathers teache Christ to be in vs carnally corporally or naturally for al these termes S. Hilary S. Cyrill haue then they meane that Christe is in vs by the true substance of his fleshe and not in suche manner as common flesh is wont to be any where This saying of D. Harding is so true yâ— he neuer thought it nedeful to proâ—…e it yet M. Iuell saith yâ— the Fathers must meane that Christ is in vs after a corporall carnall natural maÌ„ner not in substaÌ„ce For he saith aduerbs taken of nounes signifie euermore yâ— qualitie neuer yâ— substaÌ„ce Wel how think you then M. Iuel is Christ after a carnal sort in vs or no It is wel seen by your work yâ— you think nothing lesse For he yâ— graâ—…teth the manner of body or flesh much more should graunt if he were wise the nature substance thereof because it is not possible that the qualitie or manner of fleshe should be without the truth of flesh Sith no qualitie ordinarily consisteth of it selfe but only resteth in the substance of that thing whose qualitie it is But a substance may be without qualities as the substance of God is without all manner of accidents Now D. Harding affirmeth at the lest wise the truth of body and of fleshe to be meant by the Fathers without the common qualitie thereof Which thing may right well be so M. Iuel wil haue their sayings meant
vsed the same kind of speach before saying NoÌ„ se tantum videri permittens desyderantibus sed tangi manducari dentes carni suae infigi desyderio sui omnes impleri Christ permitteth him self not only to be seen of theÌ„ that long after him but also to be touched eaten the teeth to be fastened to his fleshe and all men to be filled with the desire of him Which notwithstanding M. Iuel writeth in the margent of Berengarius his consâ—…on This is an horrible blasphemie not knowing that the denying of this reall presence vâ—…der those formes of bread and wine is that horrible blasphemie whereof he speaketh And not to speake as S. Chrysostome and other holy Fathers haue spoken Iuel Bertram and Ihon Scotus wrote openly against it with the contentation of the world San. Against which it did they write Iuel Against this if it be the Catholike faith Sander Which this Whether against the confession of Bereugarius You say theâ—… were two hundred yeares before hun what then wrote thei against the Catholike faith if they did so howe could the Catholike world be content therwith again where are the words which the world was contented withal thinck you it lawfull to faine or glose what you list Iuel That M. Harding calleth the Catholike faith is in dede aCatholike errour Sander No errour can be Catholike because Christe said hell gates should not preuaile againste his Church And it is a citie built vpon a hill which can not be hiddeÌ„ The rest of your words shall hereafter be proued vayne ¶ Of Christes glorified bodie and the place of S. Hierom expounded HArding The body vvhich vvas before the death thereof thrall and frail is novv spirituall Iu. M. Harding in the end concludeth against him selfe San. You say so but you proue it not Iu. Only Stephen Gardener geueth the world to vnderstaÌ„d that Christ is not yet fully possessed in this glory thus he saith the time of the despensation or seruice of his hâ—…militie remaineth stil vntil 〈◊〉 deliuer vp the Kingdom vnto God his Father Sand. B. Gardiâ—…er dot noth say that Christ is not fully possessed in his glory for his own part that is your addition Again the word seruice was of your putting in least any authority might escape you vncorrupted How be it B. Gardiner semeth to meane no more therein then S. Paule sayd before him witnessing that Christ sitteth at the right hand of the maiesty in heauen minister sanctorum the minister of holy thinges for he is yet a minister stil by reason of his mysticall body If it were any part of our principall purpose to stand vppon that matter I wold shew you what holy things they were and how he ministred them by dispensation of his humility during the time of the peregtination of his members notwithstanding his own glory at the right hand of his Father wherein he is fully possessed Iuel To what end allegeth M. Harding the spirituall state of Christs body Eutiches sayd it is changed into the very substance of God which heresie is like M. Hardings if it be not the same Sand. I know not what you meane by burdening D. Harding with the heresie of Eutiches sith the defence of the reall presence is as directly against that heresie as may be for how can the naturall and substantiall flesh of Christ be present in the Sacrament if his flesh were turned into the substance of the Godhead as Eâ—…tiches sayd could that be in the Sacrament which were not in it self Therefore the places alleged out of S. Augustine S. Dionysiâ—…s S. Cyprian and other holy Fathers concerning the truth of Christes humane substance and nature â—…ill remaining and not changed into the diuine substance or els concerning our â—…mitation or likenes of God is wholy confessed of vs. neither doth D. Harding meane by the body deiâ—…ed other then yâ— body immortal spirituall yet so farre aboue our bodies as the vâ—…ion in yâ— person of the naturall sonne of God excedeth our adoption by grace But for so much as you doubted not M. Iuel to burden D. Harding with the Eutichian heresie I will briefly shew that your opinion is far more like vnto it then D. Hardings belefe As Eutiches destroyed the truth of humane flesh in the person of Christ so the Sacramentaries destroye the truth and reall presence of the same flesh in the Sacrament of the altar And yet the old Fathers proued that as the Sacrament of the altar consisted of two things of the signe or foorm of bread and of yâ— body of Christ so Christ consisteth of two natures the one diuine the other humane But seing the Sacramentaries take away yâ— reall presence from the visible signe of bread they falsifie the argumeÌ„t of the old Fathers and further the cause of the Eutichians For as the Eutichians turned the naturall flesh of Christ into the Godhead so the Sacramentaries turn the Sacramental eating of naturall flesh into mere diuine and spirituall eating which is made by faith alone But as the old Fathers proued against the Eutichians that Christ who truly suffered death could not suffer it in his diuine nature so I tell the Sacramentaries that Christ who â—…aid take eate this is my body can not be taken into our hands or eaten with our mouthes by faith and spirit aloue We must haue such an eating as may proue Christ to haue had reall flesh because we eate by mouth his reall flesh So S. Hilarie proued our naturall vnion with Christes flesh against the Arrians S. Gregorie Nyâ—…sen that Christ had taken true flesh of the Uirgin For how can a thing saith he which hath no body be made meate vnto the body So S. Cyrill proueth that there is but one person because the flesh which we receaue doth geue lifâ—… to our soules and bodies which it could not doe except it were the proper flesh of God who only geueth life Thus M. Iuel may perceaue that his opinion agreeth with the Arrians Ualentiâ—…ians Neâ—…orians Eutichians And the like might be sayd of the Marcionites Manichees Apellians briefly of all those heretikes who denying a reall truth of Christes diâ—…ine or humane nature were always confuted by the Fathers by the reall truth of Christes manhod and Godhead confessed of the Catholikes in this blessed Sacrament Harding S. Hierom shevving tvvo vvays of vnderstanding Christes flesh one spirituall as it is verily meate an other as it vvas crucified declareth the maner of eating it only to differ from the maner of it being crucified the substance being all one Iuel He speaketh neither of the Sacrament nor of any reall presence San. He meaneth both Iuel S. Hierom speaking of the dubble vnderstanding of Christes flesh meaneth that we haue our saluation in Christ eating him and liuing by him not for that his flesh was
by diuerse places of your booke Another way the incarnation may be considered according to that nature which is generally common to all men As that thei consist of bodies of soules of reason and of certain accidents The question is whether Christ at his incarnation toke al man kind after such sorte that he is now the coÌ„mon substance of vs all or no. Here I know not what M. Iuel would answer if he were namely put in mind thereof But his wordes draw to the affirmatine sense altogether For he saith Christs body dwelleth in our bodies by his natiuitie whiche saying semeth to haue no real truthe in it except Christ be common man kind whiche is in 〈◊〉 man If he be that vniuersall substance then I see that as reason as life as sense as fleshe and blood are no lesse in one man then in an other so Christe who is supposed to be that generall reason life sense fleshe and blood is supposed likewise to be really in euery mans owne body But this kind of opinion is foolish and vain as it shall appere anon The third way of considering the incarnation is to say that Christ toke not yâ— common substance of al mankind but only the whole particular nature of man so that the 〈◊〉 of God hath assumpted so much into his own 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as any other 〈◊〉 euer had in his 〈◊〉 and corruptible 〈◊〉 to wit he hath assumpted the mind the 〈◊〉 the body and the 〈◊〉 shape of a true man According to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only is true S. Paul saith that he is not 〈◊〉 to call vs his brethern and that because the children whome God 〈◊〉 to him had 〈◊〉 and blood common among them ipse similiter participauit eisdem and he also likewise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he toke parte that is to say he toke to himselfe fleshe and blood for his own part as they had the same for their parts And therefore as they had a particular 〈◊〉 and generation so Christ was not gathered or taken generally out of the bodies soules of al men 〈◊〉 he was born of the virgin Marie alone the sonne of Dauid and of Abraham according to the fleshe whiche being so his body was no more really in our bodies by his natiuitie then one of our bodies is in the body of an other man For wheÌ„ we speake of our bodies we speake of that which is particularly proper to euery man in his own persoâ—… and not of that which is common to all mankind But yet certeyn general benefites are deriâ—…ed out of Christes 〈◊〉 euen to euery man Due is that our nature is in him marucilously honoured and auanced in so much that it is truly said man is God and God is man Moreouer S. Cyrillus affirmeth that euery particular man shal rise in his owne body at the later day because of the mysterie of Christes resurrectâ—…on who as man conteined all men in him self But seing they that haue done euill shall rise to be punisheâ—… and that more greuously then death it self is as there S. â—…llus witnesseth and yet sith no damnatioÌ„ is vnto them who are in Christ Iesus we may well say that Christ doth not only not dwell in euery mans body by his natiuitie but also that he dwelleth not in their bodies or soules who either did not partake of his flesh at al by faith or els did vnworthely partake thereof either by Baptism or by the Eucharist or any other way All this notwithstanding M. Iuel will proue that Christes body dwelleth euen really in our bodies by his natiuitie And when all is done it will proue either an heresie or noâ—…ing or a dwelling rather in the whole truth of mans nature assumpted then in any mans body after that sort of dwelling which is properly called reall or substanciall But let vs heare his proof Iuel S. Bernard sayth the body of Christ is of my body and is now become mine San. S. Bernard sayth Corpus Christi de meo est the body of Christ is of mine He saith not of my body as you traÌ„â—…ate it But of mine yâ— is to say of the same kind of stuffe whereof I am Of the same stock and 〈◊〉 of like flesh blood but not of my proper flesh of my proper blood not really dwelling in my bowels or in the partes of â—…y body Again when he sayth 〈◊〉 est and the body of Christ is mine he meaneth it is mino to take commoditie thereof mine to vse mine to 〈◊〉 mine to offer to enioy but not mine through this only condition because it is born but because I am ioyned to it by faith by Baptism by Penaunce and by râ—…auing it into my body at Christes holy table and by such like meanes Iuel A babe is born to vs. San. That is to say to th' end we should take 〈◊〉 by the birth of it But by the only birth it is not really in our bodies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not only to vs or for vs. Iuel A Sonne is geuen vnto vs. 〈◊〉 Unto 〈◊〉 who 〈◊〉 in him but not to them who receaued him not For he came into his own and his own receaued him not Iuel S. Basill We are partakers of the word by his incarnanation and 〈◊〉 called all his mysticall conuersation flesh and blood San. We partake him in his nature comming to ours and in ours communicated to him but not yet in our bodies coâ—…ing to his bodie except we also be ioyned to him by som other mean beside his natiuitie Iuel Nyssenus sayth His body is all mankind wherevnto he is mingled San. You haue abused this testimonie turning the due construction of the words â–ª and haue put that before the verb which should haue come after the verb. The true construction is The whole nature of man wherevnto he is mingled is the body of Christ. And he meaneth not the natural body of Christ which he toke of the virgen by his natiuitie whereof you intreate but he meaneth the mysticall body of Christ whereof he said before The subiection of the body of the Church is referred to him which doth inhabitie the body And immediatly before yâ— words 〈◊〉 out by you Our Lord is the life by whome it doth happen to all his body that it is brought to the Father Againe Si Pater diligit â—…lium caet If the Father do loue the Sonne and we all that through faith whereby we beleue in him are made his body be in the Sonne consequenâ—…e he that loueth his owne Sonne loueth also the bodie of his soâ—…e euen as he loueth his Sonne himselfe And we are that bodie Lo we are that bodie He spake not therefore of Christes naturall body Iuel Christ being in the womb of the blessed virgin beâ—… â—…esh of our slesh and bone of our bones San. Of the same kind of â—…sh and
marke yâ— point consider the whole discourse of S. Chrysoâ—… who writeth thus Because Christ hath said this is 〈◊〉 bodie let vs be â—…gled with no dout Thou saieth Chrysostome desirest to see his garments but he deliuereth him selfe to thee Vt tangas in te habeas so that thou maiest touch him and haue him in thee Beware therefore lest after so great benefites thou begiltie of his bodie and blood by receauing with an vncleane soule For it suâ—…ed him not to be made man to be scourged crucified but he mingleth him selfe with vs or bringeth vs into one lump with him and â—…hat not by faith alone but he maketh vs his own bodie by the thing it selfe This is the true discourse of S. Chrysostom in that place as it may appere to any maÌ„ who shall reade it We are theÌ„ made one with Christ to worke the whiche thing it is common to faith and to baptisme or to the Sacrament of â—…ance But S. Chrysostome saith farther that the meane of this making vs one is in that Christe deliâ—…eth him selfe to vs. Ipse se ipsum tibi tradidit he deliuereth his owne selfe to thee And by that meanes he is mingled with thee not by faith alone but by the thing it selfe By which thing By him selfe or by his own body so that the excellency of Christes loue consisteth as much in the 〈◊〉 of the vnioâ—… â–ª â—…s in the vnion it selfe God might haue saued vs without sending his sonne to take flesh but when he sent his only begotten and made him in his own humane nature which he assumpted the meane to saue vs then his loue appered most singularly Euen so at this tyme the meane of the vnion is that whereof S. Carysostome speaketh For whereas there is a meane by faith to vnite vs to God he saith Christ was not content to be made man neither to die for vs by whiche points the faith of the old Fathers was fulfilled and therefore it might haue suffised for Christ to haue rested in his naâ—…tie and in his death letting our faith through his grace to make vp the knot of vnion without going any farther but that meane suffised not He hath brought vs into one lump with him not by faith alone to wit not by the meane of faith alone after his natiuitie Crosse he was not conteÌ„t with the meane of his birth death faith but he mingleth him selfe with vs by the thing it selfe Faith is one word yâ— thing is an other Fide is the same case yâ— re ipsa is one verb doth serue both As therefore it must of necessitie beenglished efficit he maketh nos vs suum corpus his own bodie non solum not only fide by saith so must it be englished sed but re ipsa by the thing it selfe The vnion therefore is made by faith and by the thing it selfe I come nere you M. Iuel I saie the thing it selfe is neither water nor bread and wine nor â—…th nor anie other creature but only the real substance of Christes bodie blood The which â—…bstance is yâ— meane whereby we are vnited yet yâ— same snbstaÌ„ce is not the meane exept 〈◊〉 be deliuered in the Sacrament of the altar for of that Sacrament and of the worthie coÌ„municating and of the 〈◊〉 thereof S. Chrysostom now speaketh it is called not only the bodie of Christ but Christ him selfe and therefore Christe is said not only to be seen but to be touched eaten and to be within vs. That bodie and blood of Chriâ—… being consecrated 〈◊〉 the holy table and so seen vnder the forme of bread being deliuered by the priests hand to vs and so touched eaten and being within vs that is the thing it selfe whereby we are nowe made the mystical body of Christ. That hody and blood was made present by changing the bread and wine into theÌ„ And therefore S. Chrysostom saith in yâ— same homilie Qui haec sanctificat transmutat ipse est It is Christe him selfe who maketh holie and changeth these things That bodie and blood is offered and partaken and therefore it foloweth immediatly after the wordes whereof we now chefely dispute that he ought to be cleaner then anie thing Qui hoc sacrificio participaturus est who wil partake this sacrifice That hand which breaketh in peeces this fleshe the mouthe which is filled with spirituall fier the tong whiche is made red with this wonderful blood ought to excede the sonne beames â–ª What can be deuised of man more plaine then to name changing sacrifice hand mouth tong seing touching eating hauing within vs Al these words are affirmed of these marueilouse gifts of Christes supper It is not therefore bread and wine which is res ipsa the thing it selfe but it is the body of Christ and that body being made in the SacrameÌ„t of Christes supper is the meane to make vs one mystical body therefore that bodie is really present in the Sacrament of the supper How could it otherwise be seen touched taken into the hand into the mouth be receaued with the tong and be in vs and whiche is the chefe of al howe could it be the meane to make vs one bodie For as when by faith or Baptism we are incorporated faith is present really with vs and Baptism is really present so when we are vnited by the bodie of Christ it must nedes be really present And how present If thou wert without a body saith S. Chrysostome God had geuen thee his giftes naked and without bodies But because the soule is knit vnto the bo dy In sensibilibus intelligibilia tibi praebet In things yâ— are sâ—…sible he geueth thee things which are intelligible or such as may be atteined only by vnderstanding The bodie of Christe therefore as it is the thing it selfe which vniteth vs in his Sacrament so is it geuen vs in sensibilibus in things which maie be seen felt and touched And to speake all in one the real bodie is geuen really to vs vnder the formes of bread and wine Moreouer when we are vnited by faith Baptism we are not vnited vnto faith or vnto Baptisme but by them vnto the flesh of Christe But of this Sacrament it is said not only that we are vnited by it but also vnto it in so much that S. Chrysostom saith That thing at the sight whereof the Angels quake neither dare boldely behold it for the brightnes whiche shineth out of it therewith we are fed thereunto we are vnited Lo we are vnited to the thing wherewith we are fed â–ª and straight S. Chrysostom sheweth that whereas no shepherd fedeth his shepe with his own blood yea whereas some mothers geue out their childern to be nourished Christ doth not so but he fedeth vs with his owne blood and by all meanes he ioyneth vs to him selfe If by faith
that â—…or a tyme they are vnited in flesh right so is it in this blessed mysterie where Christes flesh is ioyned to our flesh for a tyme only 〈◊〉 ' â—…nd yâ— spirit of Christ by so excellent a meane as his own flesh is may be more fully partaken Thus it is clere that S. Cyprian saith the same thing with vs who likewise deâ—…nd our vnion with God to be made in will and hart and not that we be at any tyme made consubstanciall with the blessed Trinitie But the meanes of vniting vs to God are not our 〈◊〉 only but the nature of faith the regeneration of Baptism and the reall flesh of Christ receaued vnder yâ— forme of bread The whiâ—…h reall presence of Christes fâ—…esh S. Cyprian so plainly teacheth that I can not suâ—…iclently mâ—…e at the â—…dencie of M. Iuel â–ª Who knoweth him to teache 1. That the bread is changed in nature and not in forme 2. That vnder â—… Sacrament we eate the bread of Angels in earth the which selfe same we shall eate more manifestly in heauen without a Sacrament 3. That this doctrine came newly from Christ alone that Christian men should drinke blood which thing was forbidden to the Iewes and seing it was not forbidden them to drink Christes blood in faith but only to drinke common blood in their mouthes it foloweth euidently that the Christians by this new order of Christ drink blood into their mouthes also not by faith alone Al these argumeÌ„ts besyde many other which are in the same sermon declare euidently that S. Cyprian vtterly abhorred from this blasphemouse heresie of the Sacramentaries Iuel The coÌ„iunction because it is spiritual true full and perfit is expressed by this terme corporall San. As though God because he is spiritual true ful perfit he might therefore be called corporall Who euer heard of such diuinitie Because it is spiritual it is termed corporal Because it is red it is called grene because it is chalke it is named chese Nede these words any confutation Were not the writer of them worthy to be rebuked rather then to be refelled Iuel Corporall coniunction remoueth all maner light and accidentall ioyning San. If all accidentall ioyning be remoued only substancial ioyning remaineth A substancial ioyning requireth the substances to be present which are ioyned together If then we are substancially ioyned to Christes body our bodies and his must be present For the substance of our soules is not without the cumpasse of our bodies Neither can they be substancially ioyned to Christes body as long as they are absent from the real body of Christ. As for the ioyning which is made by faith or charitie it is made by an accident and not by substance Iuel It is vtterly vntrue that we haue Christ corporally within vs only by receauing the Sacrament San. Neuer a Father by you named saith as you doe and therefore you speake of your own head whom no man that wise is wil beleue For seing we can not haue him corporally within vs without his body be within vs and yet none other thing is his body beside yâ— which is deliuered at his supper by that meane only he may be corporally in vs. Iuel By M Hardings construction the child is damned who dieth without receauing the Sacrament of Christes body San. Neither he nor no Catholike teacheth so Baptism suffiseth as we beleue vntill a man come to the yeres of discretion Iuel Without natural participation of Christes flesh there is no saluation San. If it be so it is you that teache the damnation of al those who receaue not the Eucharist for only in the Eucharist we partake the nature and substance of Christes flesh in it self But we partake the grace thereof by faith and Baptism Iuel S. Chrysostom saith In the Sacrament of Baptism we are made flesh of Christes flesh and boan of his boanes San. Those words you haue not in S. Chrisostom Who in â—…hat place confesseth plainly that those who are partakers of the holy mysteries can tel how thei are foormed Germanè ac legitimè ex ipso properly and lawfullie out of him Moreouer he geueth an other sense expounding ex ipso for secundum ipsum according to him saying as Christ was born without the sede of man so we are made the same thing in baptism Thirdly he sheweth that we were taken out of Christes side as Eue out of Adam But the proposition that you haue framed in his name is not in him but although it were in him yet it is not to the purpose For it is one thing to be made of the flesh of Christ whiche maie be meant of his mystical flesh and an other thing to partake his fleshe naturally We are made of his flesh by spiritual meanes For to be of his flesh it is to belong to his flesh that is to say to be members therof by any meane at al. But when we speake of natural or cor poral partaking of flesh we exclude al mystical flesh and restrain the talke onlie to Christes own real fleshe whiche he toke of the virgin Marie Last of al yâ— reason why certain places of holy scripture are interpreted somtime of baptisme somtime of Christes supper is because in the old time in manie couÌ„tries yâ— SacrameÌ„t of Chrites body was geuen straight after baptism as it maie appere in S Dionysius Areopagita and in S. Ambrose in so much that somtime these two SacrameÌ„ts are so intreated of in S. Cyprian Eusebius Emissenus and S Augustine as if thei were one Sacrament for that thei were ministred together But in so weightie a matter as we now intreate of it was not vprightlie done of M. Iuel to make a proposition of his owne and to set it out in the name of S. Chrysostom Iuel M. Harding is not yet able to find that Christes bodie is either corporally receaued into our bodies or corporally present in the Sacrament San. It is you that are not able to find it for D. Harding hath found it and shewed it many wayes and as I haue shewed it in S. Chrysostom in S. Hilarie in S. Gregorie Nyssen so wold I shew it at large out of Cyrillus but that partly this booke is growen alredie to great partly a marueilouse number of places in S. Cyrillus doe proue both Christes body to be corporally receaued into our bodies and to be corporally 〈◊〉 in the Sacrament 1. CoÌ„cerning vs he saith It behoued this earthly body should be brought to immortality cognato cibo by meate of his owne substance for so himself expoundeth the word afterward saying that Christes body is cognatum nostris corporibus hoc est consubstantiale It is of kin with our bodies that is to say of the same substance 2. As two waxes being melted are mingled together so he that receaueth Christes flesh and blood is mingled with Christ. It
spiritually forsoth not carnally For there is no cause why we should say either yâ— apparitioÌ„ which was made to the fathers of yâ— old testament either that presence of his flesh which was exhibited to the Apostles to be dâ—…nied in these oure daies For to them who faithfullie consider the matter â–ª it shal be clere that neither of both lacketh For the true substance of the flesh it selfe is present now also to vs no dout verilie but that it is so in the sacrameÌ„t Here is M. Iuel the true substance of Christes own flesh affirmed to be no lesse present in a spiritual maner but not in a carnal manner of being as it was present to the Apostles who saw Christ in flesh I omit Nicholaus Methonensis and 〈◊〉 and Photâ—…s Grecians Albertus Magnus Alexander de Haâ—…s Iâ—…nocentius the third with diuerse moe aboue three huÌ„dred yeres old Iu. Their doctrine is without coÌ„fort thei hold that the bodie of Christe remaineth no longer in our bodies but only vntill the formes of the bread and wine begin to alter San. That doctrine M. Iuel is not without coÌ„fort in so much as the Sacrament serueth as a meane to bring to vs the body of Christ which when it hath deliuered vnto our bodies a coniunction is made by touching and eating Christ out of whiche coniunction made by flesh â–ª riseth a marueilouse commoditie to our spirite and soule So that albeit when the formes of breade and of 〈◊〉 be altered the body of Christe can not be affirmed to be corporally in our bodies any loÌ„ger yet a grace vertue strength is left stil with vs of inestimable operatioÌ„ toward life euerlastiÌ„g If this do seme absurd to M. Iuell how thinketh he of al those whome Christ healed by touching them with his fleshe was it not a corporall and real touching because Christ ceased to touche any more when the helth was once procured was not all Christes comming and walking in fleshe true real and corporall because when the tyme of his humble dispensation â—…as 〈◊〉 he departed bodily out of our sight and taried with vs in his godhead and power Moreouer I haue said often times our coÌ„â—…ton with Christ in this Sacrament is like the carnal copulation betwen the wife and husbaÌ„d where twain are in one flesh A great mysterie saith S. Paule in Christ his Church As therefore the man and wife being corporally ioyned tarie not alwayes together but after a tyme departe a sunder and yet for all that of their coniunction iâ—…ue commeth and they kepe yet alwaies the bonde of wedlock and of loue in eche of them so after that Christe hath vnited him to vs vnder the foorme of bread he departeth in bodily presence when those foormes cease to be vnder whiche it pleased him to comme to vs but the vertue of that coniunction tarieth still Iuel Some others say that as sone as our teeth touch the bread straight wayes Christes body is taken vp into heauen The words be these Certum est quod quà m cito species dentibus teruntur tam cito in coelum rapitur corpus Christi San. Haue you not yet done with gloses M. Iuel I marueil not For the greatest flour of your gardeÌ„ lieth in gloses and phrases But yet if the gloses â—…e of them selues not at al tymes moste wary because they were made in greaâ—… security of yâ— faith the authors of theÌ„ neuer thinking yâ— such a desperat generatioÌ„ of â—…leuers should haue sprong vp surely you ought not to make theÌ„ more odiouse then they deserue by false and corrupt translation You haue englished nowe teruntur touched and species bread for you say as sone as our teeth touch the bread the body is takeÌ„ into heauen But species doe signifie the formes of bread wine teruntur doth signifie are wasted or consumed The which word in Berengarius coÌ„fession you could turne by the word grynded thus at one tyme terere is to grynd with you at an other tyme it is to touch Why M. gloser of gloses is terere latine to touch to grind But you haue a new kind of malice in your hart which can make new latine new english new Gospell new faith and a new Church at your pleasure Iu. Here a man may say vnto M. Harding as he did before to the Arrian heretike San. You can not so speake to D. Harding as he spake to the Arrian heretike to whome he spake not by his owne authoritie but by the authoritie of S. Cyrillus who disputing against an Arrian heretike saied vnto him as D. Harding may right well say vnto you An fortassis putas caet What troweth this Arrian heretike parhaps that we knowe not the vertue of the mysticall blessing Whiche when it is become to be in vs doth it not cause Christ to dwel in vs corporally also by receauing of Christes body in the communion Thus farre S. Cyril whose words touched M. Iuel a thowsand yeres before he was borne because his heresie is one in this behalf with the Arrian heresie who taught vs not be corporally ioyned by naturall participation to Christe as braunches are ioyned to the vine but â—…aughte euen as M. Iuel doth that we depend of Christ by faith and none otherwise And troweth M. Iuel now that he may talke to D. Harding by his own contemptible authoritie as D. Harding talked to him out of S. Cyrillus Bring if you can M. Iuel a saying of aboue a thowsand yeres old where D. Hardinges doctrine may be accused of heresie Iuel Commeth Christ to vs from heauen and by and by forsaketh vs San. As Christe at his incarnation came not frome heauen by forsaking his glorie but by assupting flesh of the virgin so nowe at the time of the consecration his body commeth not doune froÌ„ heaueÌ„ but the bread is changed into his body and by that meane his body is present with vs. and as after his resurrection he ascended into heauen so after the communion the formes of bread and wine being consumed Christe caeaseth to be corporally with vs to th end we should again desier his presence and well know these two chefe pointes of our belefe the one that the end of the ioyning consisteth in spirit rather thâ—…n in flesh the other that the flesh of Christ really eaten is the meane whereby we haue accesse to the spirit of God with trust and confidence Iuel Or that we eate Christe and yet receaue him not or hauâ—… him not or that he entreth not caet San. We eate him and receaue him and haue him he entreth into vs. Who teacheth the contrarie but that your owne shadow troubleth you Iuel He saith this presence is knowen to God only then it foloweth M. Harding knoweth it not San. He sayd not this presence but the maner of the presence is knowen to God only and so is it in dede But why
doe you 〈◊〉 his wordes Iuel So this article is concluded with an Ignoramus San. Not so because the question is not of the maner of Christes presence but of his real presence though the maner be vnknoweÌ„ But did you call that an â—…gnoramus if we know not how Christ is vnder the foorm of bread I am sure you know not howe the vnion was made in the virgins womb are you therefore reproued as ignorante In dede if ye belâ—…ue not Christes presence ye haue concluded this article with a Non credimus whiche is a worse fault then Ignoramus For he that beleueth not shal be con demmed Iuel The old lerned Fathers neuer left vs in suche doutes San. S. Cyrillus in this very matter willeth vs to geue strong faith to the mysteries but to leaue the way and knowlege of his worke vnto god the first part you haue broken The first and last D. Harding hath obserued and you shal be concluded with a dam naberis if ye repent not S. Chrisostom saith it is the part of a scholar not to serch out curioufly the things which the master affirmeth but to here and to beleue and to looke for a conuenient time of soyling the question Iuel Emissenus saith Christ is present by his grace San. You haue put a false nominatiue case 〈◊〉 doth say that Christ consecrated the Sacrament of his bodie and blâ—…od to thend Perennis illa victima viueret in memoria et semper praesens esset in gratia that euerlastig sacrifice should liue in remembraÌ„ce and be alwaies present in his grace It is victima the oblatioâ—… or sacrificed hoste which is present in grace for in dede the act of crucifying is vtterlie past but the sacrifice is present in his grace for so muche as it is present in that flesh whiche suffered death Againe he saith not yâ— it is present bi his grace as you haue turned it but in his grace You wold haue grace to be the meane of presence but it is not so Grace is the effect of presence But the meane of the grace in this Sacrament is the presence of Christes own body Iuel S. Augustine saith Christ in vs by his spirit San. That is true also when he is in vs by his flesh for in that flesh his spirit dwelleth And he that denieth Christ to be in vs by his owne flesh taketh away the chefe way by whiche the spirit of God may be in vs. Iuel Ye shall not eate this body that ye see it is a certain Sacrament that I deliuer you San. The words of S. Augustine are I haue commended or set foorth a certain Sacrament to you and not I deliuer you a câ—…rtain Sacrament For this was spoken of S. Augustine in Christes person in respect of the talke had aâ—… CapharnauÌ„ Where the Sacrament was commended before it was deliuered But that which was commended at Capâ—…naum was only the same flesh which 〈◊〉 for vs Therefore that flesh must be deliuered not in a visible and sensible maner but yet in truth of geuing by body and of taking by body For of such geuing and taking Christ spake as by the last supper it may appere where he perâ—…oormed his promise But M. Iuel was lothe that relation should be made to the talke had at Capharnanm For then he saw that the very reall flesh must be the thing which should be deliuered again he wold not haue either the commendatioÌ„ past or the gift to come and thereforâ—… he turned commendaui into trado I haue coÌ„mended into I deliuer Indede M. Iueâ—… Christ deliuered his flesh as well at Capharnaum as at his supper by your doctrine But not so by the doctrine of the Ghospell Where the promise is shewed to be made at Capharnaum and the perfoormance at the last â—…upper In which supper neither the body which the Iew s saw was deliuered and much lesse bread or wine which was not promised but vnder the forme of bread wine that flesh and blood was deliuered which at 〈◊〉 was promised Iuel Thus the holy Fathers say Christ is present not corporally San. Both S. â—…yril and S. Hilarie haue the word corporally as I haue shewed concerning the Sacrament Iuel Not carnally San. S. Hilarie hath the word carnally in the 23. chapit the number 37. of this booke Iuel Not naturally San. S. Hilarie hath the term naturally diuerse times S. Lyrill calleth it naturall partaking and naturall vnion Iuel But as in a Sacrament by his spirite and by his grace Saâ—… Here appereth what stuff you haue fed the reader with all in your whole booke For partly you deny a truthe which is that Christ is not corporally present and that you doe against the expresse word of God and the Fathers as I haue shewed partly you proue that your heresy by an other truthe which rather stablisheth then hindereth the real presence For Christ can not be better present in spirit and grace theÌ„ if he be present in his flesh therein to conuerte to vs his spirit and grace for the cause of his taking flesh was to make his flesh an instrument to deliuer his spirit and grace to our flesh to thend no meane of prouiding for our saluation might be omitted by so louing a Father In consideration whereof S. Ambrose saith Thou that takest his flesh art made partaker of his diuine substance in that food Note that the spirit substance of God cometh to vs by taking Christes flesh ¶ The Conclusion COnsider first good Reader that of moe then twenty articles there is but one answered yâ— not the longest wherein if aboue two 〈◊〉 faultes and vntrutâ—…es without curiouse searching be 〈◊〉 what may a man thinke of the wholâ—… booke of M. Iuell how many hundred yea 〈◊〉 thousand vntruthes may you think to be conteined therein who when he proueth his matter bâ—…t and least of all abuseth himselfe his proufe is none other then to say one thing is not true because another is true Thus he teacâ—…th Christ to be eaten by faith and spirite and thinketh that thereof he may conclude Christ is not eaten in the sacrament by moâ—…th Christ is corporally in heauen therefore his bodie is not vnder the forme of bread The Sacrament is a figure therefore by his iudgemeÌ„t it is not the truth As well he might say a man hath a soule and therefore no bodie or Christ is man and therefore not God In Disputinge of the holie scriptures he neuer answereth to these words which is geuen for you beyng the most principall poynt of D. Hardings answere he neuer considereth the promise made by Christ in yâ— tyme to come Dabo I wil geue but talketh of it as if it were past and present He hath Englished non habebitis vitam Ye shall haue no life He expoundeth that we are
not more coÌ„tra 390 1 5 mere coÌ„tradictionâ—… one vnion 392 1 15 of our vnion God or 405 1 2 God the father or chariti loue 412 1 21 charitie alone gifts are cor ibideÌ„ yâ— ethniks are coÌ„corporal â–ª    superturally 417 1 29 supernaturally ¶ Other smaller faultes in misplacing of letters points I leaue to the iudgement of the discrete Reader LOVANII Apud Ioannem Foulerum â–ª Anno Domini 1566. Mense â—…anuar Mat. 26. Psal. 98. Heb. 10. Malac. 1. Prou. 3. August de Baptis coÌ„â—…a Donaâ—…st lib 2. Cap. â—… 1. 〈◊〉 3. 1. Cor. 8. Hebr. 10. August adâ—…anua Epist 118 Matt. 28. The Anabaptistes The Catholikes The practise of the whole Churche 〈◊〉 a good interpreta tion of scripture â—… Cor. 11 Act. 8. Matt. 26. The 〈◊〉 of a 〈◊〉 must not be trusted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Cor. 11 1. Scriptuâ—… Matt. 26. Marci 14 l. 〈◊〉 22. 1. Cor. 11. 2. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of god 3. Generall Councels 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reâ—… 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. No vse of 〈◊〉 Church of God 3. No generall Coun 〈◊〉 The first 600. yeres 〈◊〉 not for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. 2. 3. The signes of Christes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the signified 〈◊〉 The 〈◊〉 mentaries are fam tâ—… 〈◊〉 yâ— Fathers of yâ— first 600 â–ª yeres 〈◊〉 â—…ye Roma 1. Nowell in his preâ—… The Scri ptures wold neuer abyd him that shâ—…ld say This is not my body Luce. 22. The Catholiks lack no Scriptures 1. 2. 〈◊〉 4. Tâ—…e 〈◊〉 caÌ„not confer scri ptures in this matter If the wordes of the supper be figuratiue none other can be plaine 1. Tim. 3. 1. 2. 3. 4. Con. Ni. CoÌ„ Lat. 5. Ephes. 4. Tâ—…e reasâ—…s that 〈◊〉 our faith Luce. 22. Ioan. 6. Certâ—…in places not weltranslated â—… Why thâ—… Sacrainâ—… taries haue corrupted thâ—… text 2. Ioan. 6. 〈◊〉 Matt. 26. Marc. 14 Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11 Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11 Fol. 213. Tom. 2. Fol. 213. Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11 1. Cor. 10 Ioan. 6. All the Church 〈◊〉 y◠〈◊〉 presence of Christes body Noman denied openly the 〈◊〉 presence of Christes body Luc. 22. The opiâ—… of the reall presence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first six hundred yeres â—… 〈◊〉 that had 〈◊〉 six hundred yeres could not 〈◊〉 sodâ—…nly changed without great tumulte No history maketh 〈◊〉 of any chaÌ„ge of yâ— faith after yâ— first six huÌ„dred 〈◊〉 No 〈◊〉 can be paâ—… because none 〈◊〉 Euthimius In panoplia Libro 2. Bernardus Concil VieÌ„nen Marc. 1. Matt. 16. Ioan. 16. Cyrillus in Anathematis mo 11. Thre couÌ„ cells kept against Berenga rius 〈◊〉 his life tyme. The meaâ—… 〈◊〉 Chri 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 presence Luc. 22. Luc. 22. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of y◠〈◊〉 The faultes of the 〈◊〉 The 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉 Matt. 23. 1. Pet. 4. Ierem. 1. Who were meâ—…e to re ceaue 〈◊〉 doctrine The profit which yâ— Church taketh of 〈◊〉 Luce. 1. In epist. ad argen to ratenses â—… The 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 ther. In the great ConÌ„ sâ—…l of 〈◊〉 etc. 2. The opiâ—…on oâ—… zumâ—… Decolamâ—… Ioan. 1. Luc. 24. 3. The opiâ—… of Caluin SapieÌ„ 9. The flesh of Christ was sent down to lift 〈◊〉 vp SapieÌ„ 9. The Author inten deth not to speak against the person of the Sacra meÌ„taries Ierem. 6. Matt. 24. The inteÌ„t of the wâ—… ter Augustinus in sine libr. 2. coÌ„tra IulianuÌ„ PelagianuÌ„ 1. Cor. 11. Oecume nius in 1. Cor. 11 Cyprianus de caena Do mini Hiero. li. 2. aduersus Iouinian Theodo ritus in 1. Cor. 11 Matt 26. Marc. 14 〈◊〉 22. 1. Cor. 11 Gen. 14. SapieÌ„ 16. Psal. 22. Prou. 9. 3. Reg. 17 Matt. 2â—… Luce. 14. Galat. 2. Ioan. 13. Matt. 26. 1. Cor. 11. Luce. 22. Marc 14. What the blessing of Christ was Gene. 1. From the â—…owest grow vpward again Man is yâ— briâ—…f and somme of all creatures Marc. 16. Exod. 8. Luce. 1. Christ alone is all Ierem. 23 Psal. 98. Coloss. 2. Sap. 16. Ioan. 6. Eccle. 3. 5. 7. Augustinus De ciuit Libr. 17. Capi. 20. Ephes. 1. Luc. 22. De caena Domin De coena Domi ni In 1. cor Hom. 24 1. Cor. 13 In Ioan. Libro 4. c. 14. Tertulli De resur rectione 〈◊〉 Gene. 1. 1. Cor. 15 Gen. 14. Exo. 16. Leuit. â—… Ioan. 1. Christ 〈◊〉 by faith â—…ly Christ eateÌ„ ty faith oâ—…ly Christ really man Christ really eaten â—… his own supper A true ea tiÌ„g is to ea te 〈◊〉 thiÌ„g boâ—…h with body and soule Ioan. 6. Ser. 6. de ieiunio 7. men Exo. 12. Exo. 16. Leuit. 2. 24. Ioan. 6. Esai 9. 1. The deuil Eua. 2. Gabriel Maria. 3. The apâ—… The crosse 4. Adaâ—… Christ. 5. The apple eaten The flâ—…sh of Christ eaten Cyprianus de Coena Domini Prosper Aquitan contra Collato we were poysoned in Adam we digest our surfet 〈◊〉 Christ. It is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 eueri child eate really yâ— flesh of Christ. The flesh of Christ is yâ— wood of life 〈◊〉 Orat. 〈◊〉 Poyson tasted The 〈◊〉 of Christ is the medicine The body of Christ entreth into oure body The medecyne must nedes enter into our bodyes How Christes â–ª body to ge uen really to many and yet re mayneth whole Transubst aÌ„ttation Gregorius an D. 370. Driginall syn The 〈◊〉 re of a me 〈◊〉 hea leth not Gen. 3. August de Gen. ad lit li. 11. cap. 5. Iod. 14. 1. Cor. 15 Ro â–ª 5 â–ª Tit. 3. 1. Cor. 10 Spiritâ—… gifts are not here reproued but Chrâ—…l is â—…fered before them all Ephes. 4 2. Cor. 2. Caluin setteth foorth the kingâ—…om of yâ— deuiâ—… abaseth yâ— kingdâ—… gifts of God 1. Cor. 11 Luthers supper Corolstadius supper Zuinglius supper Ioan. 1. Caluins supper Matt. 26. Matth. 3. Chrysostom in 1. Cor. hom 24. The first fault of yâ— Corinthians The 'r seeoÌ„d fault Rom 12. Ephes. 4 Hieroni mus li. 2. aduersus Iouinianum Ioan. 6. Hiero. in Ozeam Capit. 11. Hieron ad Hedib 2. Augustinus De Trinit Libro 4. Cap. 14. Esaie 63 Ioan. 13. Cyprianus De 〈◊〉 Domini Colos. 2. 〈◊〉 22. Ioan. 6. Matt. 26. 1. Cor. 10 Matt. 26 The words of 〈◊〉 in his institutions De coena Do. The wordes of the 〈◊〉 the leafe 213. pag. 〈◊〉 The 〈◊〉 of the English new preachers Words of promise are of two sorts Gala. 4. Gen. 18. 20. 22. Galat. 3. Ioan. 6. 〈◊〉 Cor. 11 How Cal uin taketh the name of promise De Coena Dom. Matt. 17. Matth. 9. The diffe rence betwene a promise a perfoormance Matt. 26. Luc. 22. Ioan. 6. 1. Cor. 11 Matt. 26. Matth. 3. 2. Cor. 2. This â—…inteth to 〈◊〉 thing Caluin wold â—…des set vp a new religion 1. Cor. 11 The Catholike interpreta tion oâ—… Christes words Rom. 9. 〈◊〉 21. A promiâ—… is a prediction In 〈◊〉 de verb. oblig Matth. 8 Matt 21. Matt. 17. Matt. 8. Matt. 9. Matt. 26. Iob 38. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 4. Ioan. 2. Roma 1. Tertull. aduersus Marcionem Libr. 4.
〈◊〉 Chapiter Psal. 61. Thre 〈◊〉 Three workings 1. Manna was wrought corporally 2. Ioan 6. Christ wrought on by faith Augu. in Ioan. c. 6 Christ receaued cor porally Christ geuen Faith geuen Ioan. 6. The reward of faith The diuision of the Chapiter The third gift is cateÌ„ with body â—… soule Christes gift â—…issereth from manna The who le trinitie worketh How manie ways yâ— Father geueth The Father feedeth the soule Sap. 9. Christ 〈◊〉 yâ— spirituall food euen to the body The Faâ—… and 〈◊〉 geuâ—… one thing not one way Thereward is one of both gifts The diuerse wayes of geuing The â—…irst difference The 〈◊〉 difference The 〈◊〉 difference The iiij difference The v. difference The vi difference Manna was fulfil led in both gifts To eate oâ—… this bread To eate this bread Ioan. 4. Ioan. 14. 4. 5. We eate of Christ by the Fathers gift We eate Christ by yâ— Sonnes gift 6. We eate Christ in his supper as Mana was eateÌ„ He that eateth Christ may eate also of Christ. Colos. 2. Mat. 26. Theword made 〈◊〉 Christ maâ—…e our sacrifice Christ made our food The Sacramentaries exâ—… Ioan. 1. In Ioan. hom 45. In Ioan. hom 44. In Ioan. hâ—…m 45. In Ioan hom 47. In Ioan. hom 45. In Math. hom 83. Theophi lact in 6. Ioan. Euth in c. 6. â—…oaÌ„ The xiâ—…ij 〈◊〉 Ioan. 6. 2. Cor. 5. T it 3. Greg. in orat cathecheâ—… ca apud Euthy in Panoplia li 2. Hor. 21. Cyp. ad Quiri li. 3. cap. 26. 26. Basil. de baptis li. 1. c. 2. 3. Ambr de sacrameÌ„ de 〈◊〉 qui initiaÌ„ Aug de 〈◊〉 mer. remis cap 20. 〈◊〉 in ser. de lapsis InnoceÌ„t epist. 92. to 2. apud Aug. Aug. epi. 106. The comâ—… 〈◊〉 of infants doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 taries Cypr. in 〈◊〉 de 〈◊〉 The xiii Chapâ—…ter â–ª Aug. de doctrina Christ. li. 3. c. 16. The obiectioÌ„ of the â—…utheraÌ„s The aunswere Luc. 22. â—… Co. 11. Aug. de pec me li. 1. c. 20. in Leuit 9. q. 57. in ep 106. c. in Ps. 68. contra Crescon li. 1. cap. 25. The obieâ—… of the 〈◊〉 The annswer Aug. de doctrina Christ. l. 3. cap. 10. What a fi guratiue speache is to S. Augustine â—…agitiuÌ„ facinus L. 3. c. 10. August tract 26. in â—…oan Aug. in Psal. 98. 1. 2. Ioan. 6. Ioan. 9. Colos. 2. Psal. 98. lib. 3. ca. 10. August in Ioan. tractat 26. 27 Modus The Sacramentarie The Catholike Why the Sacramentaries argument faileth Why the Catholiks argu ment is good tract 27. Gen. 14. Exo. 〈◊〉 16. Pro. 9. Hila. li. 8 de Trin. Augu. in Psal. 98. Hebr. 1. Coloss. 1. Phil. 2. Tert. coÌ„ Mar. l. 5. 〈◊〉 ep 46. Aug. in Psal. 98. Iustin. in Apol. 2. Bread 〈◊〉 are not â—…ned at Ca 〈◊〉 Cyr. li. 3. ca. 35. in Ioan. Chrys in Ioan. ho. 44. Wherein yâ— SacrameÌ„ taries â—…re in 〈◊〉 ding thâ—…e worâ—…es Ambr. in 1. cor ca. 11. Li. 3. â—… 1â—… de doct Christ. 〈◊〉 that figureth another thing must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 secoÌ„d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 y◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a 〈◊〉 of it self Breade â—… 〈◊〉 are not the 〈◊〉 which S. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aug. de doctr Christ. li. 3. c. 16. Flesh can not signifie bread Vlpia de leg 3. l. 4. Gen. 14. Leu. 2. 1. Cor 10 Ioan. 6. Rom. 10. How flesâ—… must be eaten in a figure 1. 2. 3. These words coÌ„ firm the former talk Two proprieties in 〈◊〉 Chryso in Ioan. Hom. 46 Note that Christ â—…pake not now in parables It were a parable if flesh stode for bread and 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 Aug. de â—…iuit dei lib. 13. c. 20. Gen. 2. Prou. 3. Corporall â—…asting is â—…ecessarie to make yâ—â—…eat true â—…eate Iacob 1. verè â–ª Truly The theme of y◠〈◊〉 of S. Ihon. Verus panis How the Sonnes gift is differeÌ„t from the Fathers gift Hilarius lib. 8. de Trinitat Accepta Naturally Truly Lib. 8. de Trinitat Gregor Nyssen in vita Moysit Nyssenus proueth the truth of Christes body by the truth of the eating it The faith of the primatiue churche The xvi chapit The effect of Christes supper Chryso hom 46. in Math. Cyril in Ioan lib. 4. ca. 16. Cyril li. 4. in IoaÌ„ cap. 17. Benedictio Hilar. 8. de trinit Theophi lact in Ioan. 6. 〈◊〉 tary â—…ng in Christ is assigned to eating and not only to 〈◊〉 The xviâ—… Chapiter Christ â—…ueth not for his Fa ther in faith How Christ liueth for his Father as God Hilar. li. 8 de trinitate How he liueth as man â–ª Wherein both senses agree Wherein be similitude standeth Arrians Ioan. 17. Hilar. li. 8. de Tri nitate Christ in vs by flesh The 〈◊〉 nation ma keth not Christ to be in vs naturally Gen. 34. One in bo dy without mine One in mind with out body One in bo dy and mind 1. The Sacramenta ries be agaâ—…st S. Hilarie 2. Against â—… Godhead of Christ. 3. Against â—… life of our bodies 4. Against that food our bread Ioan. 7. Our bodies bo fed to liue for euer Bread is no food of life The obiec tion The aunswere Scriptures wer prouided against he retikes Marc. 16 No promise is made to bread Ioan. 6. Matt. 26. 1. Cor. 10 11. In the. 1. booke It suffiseth â—…ocate Christ. Our bodies receaue Christ. Cyril in Ioan. lib. 10. ca. 13. The 〈◊〉 Chapiter Matt. 18. Christ gaue no offence Ioan. 6. The disci ples shuld haue beleued The natu rall order of questions The Iewes beleuing not the â—… first points ler ned not yâ— third Matt. 26. Cyril li. 4. c. 14. in Ioan. The xix Chapiter 1. de bap li. 1. ca. 2. 2. in IoaÌ„ hom 46. 3. in IoaÌ„ tract 27. The pride of Caluin Aug. in Psal. 98. in IoaÌ„ Cyril in Ioan. li. 4 c. 23. 24 Procop. in praefationem genesim HowÌ„e Christes flesh was geuen spiritually Hie. c. 11. Habac. 3. The xx Chapiter The errour of the Capharnaits The spirit of Christ is his Godhead Ioan. 4. Ioan. 1. Cyril in Ioan. lib. 4. ca. 24. Spiritus De spiritu Note Damasc. de Orth. sid li. 4. cap. 14. Ioan. 3. How the words be spiritâ—…al Ambros. de ijs qui init myster c. 9. Spiritual food Ambros. ibidem August in Ioan. tract 27. Roma 5. what spirit may signifie Acto 17. Basil. de baptis l. â—… cap. 2. Spiritually Esaiae 7. Chryso hom 47. in loan The Sacramentaries make Christes words no spirit The wordes of parables A spiritual body This Sa crament is miraculouse Tropi Malach. The errour of yâ— SacrameÌ„ taires Psal. 77. Ireneus aduersus Her li. 5. August lib. 1. retractat cap. 13. de ciuit Dei lib. 13. cap. 22. 12. The mysterie of faith 1. Tim. 3. The first Chapâ—…ter The gift or legacy of Christ. The law of Christ. The writing of both Neâ—…e doubts â–ª The question decided of old Paulus ff de leg
Custom The vse of Gods church The adoration of Christes body A new heresie in PoolelaÌ„d Circumâ—… of them selâ—…s Tertull. de prae scriptioÌ„ aduersus haeretic One chaÌ„ge only could be in religioÌ„ Iacob 1. Heb. 11. A teacher of new doctrine is not to be heard Berenga rius preached a new doctrine The Sacramentaries can haue no ground of their doctrine 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The honour of God The profite of the faithfull Lucae 6. Lucae 8. Two cau ses of spea king figuratiâ—…ly Aug. de doctrina Christ. l. 3. cap 10. The proper sense of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is nother agaâ—… the 〈◊〉 nor good maners We can neuer be sure that Christ spake figu ratiuely The ii Chapiter Wordes are to be taken as they do properly signifie Tertull. de carne Christi Things must be beleued aâ—… they are named Li. 67. de leg 3. The names vsed at Christes supper are to be kept This is body my EpiphaÌ„ lib. 2. to 1. haer 61. TraditioÌ„ is to be re spected in exposiding holy scriptures The iiâ—… Chapiter Ioan. 13. This can be said but of one substance Christes words directed to the bread The streÌ„gth of the pronoun this The prâ—…per sense of Christes wordes TransubstantiatioÌ„ 1. Co. 11. Luc. 22. hoc this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the noune body Christes naming to making Rom. 4. The 〈◊〉 Chapiter The optmoÌ„ of the protestants The substance of bread is not pomted vnto 1. Co. 11. Mat. 21. Luc. 22. Ioan. 6. This and bread be not of one gender CypriaÌ„ de coena Domini not farre from the beginning This in English is of all genders The v. Chapiter This doth not stand to signifie many things All the doings be not pointed vnto 1. Co. 10. 1. in Apo. 2. 2. in Or. cathech 3. li. 4. de Sacram. 4. depro dit lud 5. contr Faust. li. 20. ca. 13. epi. 59. Breaking is not poin ted vnto Of S. Iames. Of S. 〈◊〉 Of S. Chrysost. Of S. Chrysost. Eating or drinkig is not alone pointed vnto 1. Cor. 10 The body or blood is only pointed vnto The brea king The taking The eating Luc. 22. The geuing The vi Chapiter Theop. â—… Math. 26 In Marc. 14. This doth mean particular ly this eatable thiâ—… The vii Chapiter 1. Cor. 11 The obiecion The aunswere 1. The Cha lice 2. The chalice expouÌ„ ded in holy scripture 3. The chalice by vse of speakig signifieth the drinke in it 4. This cha lice where in liquor is knoweÌ„ to be can not make the speach obscure 5. Matt. 16. The word ioâ—…ned with the name of 〈◊〉 maketh aâ—… plaâ—… 6. Luc. 22. 7. 26. 14. 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 is â—…amed The 〈◊〉 Chapiter Ioan. 15. 1. Cor. 10 Uniuersal consent is a way to knowe figuratiue speaches 〈◊〉 dore The dore Chiâ—…ore Ezec. c. 5 The circuÌ„ stance of yâ— speache is to be considered Aug. lib. quaest 83 q. 69. The intâ—…t of the author in this chapi ter Ioan. 1. 14. God Ioan. 6. Sent 〈◊〉 flesh To men that were flesh Rom. 12. Col. 2. Promiseth flesh Geueth flesh He is to be beleued Euseb. homil 5. in pasch Men speake most ware ly toward their death 1. Co. 11. Aug. ep 118. ad Ia nuar. Christ 〈◊〉 not bethought lesse discrete in his words then other men wold 〈◊〉 The Apostles haue 〈◊〉 Christes words to vs without any mentioÌ„ of a figure Math. 13. Parableâ—… hide the truth in part Math. 13. Ioan. 6. Leo in serm de pass do Exo. 12. 1. Cor. 5. Ioan. 1. Ireneus lib. 4. ca. 32. Leo de pass do serm 7. Heb. 7. Ioan. 1. Lucae 22. Chryso in Math. ho. 83. Christ did not eaâ—… his own flesh by faith but in dede Hom. 83. Psal. 77. The old Lamb was not desired for his own sake Psal. 49. Malac. 1. Tertul. l. 4. aduer Marcio Chryso in Ps. 37. Chryso in Math. hom 82. 83. Ioan. 13. In fine di lexit eos Chrys. hom 61. ad Anti. Chrys. 1. Cor. homi 24. great loue cauleth yâ— greatest gifâ—…s Ioan. 13. Dionys. de Eccl. Hierar cap. 3. Hieron in Math. 26. Luc. 22. Why the bread of Christ is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yâ— of 〈◊〉 Luc 22. Niceph. li. 1. 〈◊〉 Eccles. cap 28. Damasc. de orth fi lib. 4. cap 14. Gal. 4. Hebr. 11. Psal. 22. Prou. 9. Leuit. 24 Christos supper is vpon the table it self If yâ— table be râ—…ll muche more the meate Luc. 6. The bread â—… Christ toke was already ha lowed The 〈◊〉 of Christes supper is made in bread and wine Gen. 14. Leuit. 1. 2. c. Al things that be sacrificed be changed Matth. 5. Cypr. ad Caecil li. 2. epi. 3. Blessing Psal. 148 Ioan. 6. Marc. 6. Luc. 24. The blessing of god is a doing The word blessing sheweth yâ— intent of Christ. Amb. de ijs qui init mys cap. 9. Cyril li. 4. in IoaÌ„ c. 16. 17. 19. lib. 11. ca. 22. Chrys. in 1. Cor. hom 24. Nysse in orat cathechet Amb. de ijs qui init ca. 9. Blessing Thanks 〈◊〉 Iustin. in Apol. 2. Euchar. The best kind of thanks True words be most thaÌ„k full â—…ren lib. 4. ca. 34 Theod. Dial. 3. The order of doing and speaking 1. Cor. 10 Christes supper diuided into 〈◊〉 and wordâ—… Manna Exod. 16 Hieron aduersus Iouinia lib. 2. Ephes. 4. Rom. 12. 1. Cor. 12 1. Cor. 11 Hieron aduersus Iouinia lib. 2. Homil. 〈◊〉 in Pasch. Ignatius ad Phila delphien 〈◊〉 In Theo 〈◊〉 Eccles. 1. Cor 10 The one bread to Christ who 〈◊〉 breaking 〈◊〉 whole 1. Cor. 10 Christ gaue with his hands Ioan. 6. The meat of Christes supper came from his hands 26. 14. 22 1. Cor. 11 Christes gift in S. 〈◊〉 is meant of an externall gift The Sacramentaries can not 〈◊〉 when Christ ful filled his promise 1. The profite of words 2. The necessitie of words 3. The wordes of God 4. Mysteries 5. The mysterie of Christes supper 6. The Sacramentaries trust not Christes words 26. 14. 1. Co. 11. 22. 7. Dedes be doubtfull Chryso in Math. Hom. 83. 8. The 〈◊〉 of the supper were para bles 9. The words of the supper expound yâ— parable of the dedes 10 Mere 〈◊〉 words ex pound nothing 11. The words of yâ— supper geue 〈◊〉 to y◠〈◊〉 Ioan 3. Matt. 28. In yâ— secoÌ„d booke ca. 〈◊〉 12. It is no singâ—… 〈◊〉 che is not knowen The 〈◊〉 The aunswerâ—… Ioan. 6. In Epi. 162. 〈◊〉 belongeth to the body â—… soule Tertul. de resur carnis â—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epipha haer 30. Hebr. 10 Christ pre sented no external sacrifice besyde his own flesh Gen. 14. Exod. 16 Malac. 1. Working words caÌ„ not be figuratiue Chrys. homi de prodit Iudae Ioan. 6. Howe the SacrameÌ„ taries 〈◊〉 Chri stes wordes Chryso in Ioan. Hom. 35. How S. 〈◊〉 placed 〈◊〉 â–ª words There is but one noun substantiâ—… in Christes 〈◊〉 By the Sacraâ—… doctrâ—…e a â—…gure was cruâ—… for vs. The obâ—…ction The aunswer One word can not haue at once a pro
psal 98. Coloss. 2 Gen. 9. Cypr. li. 3. epist. 3. ad Caecilium Gen. 18. Gen. 27. Gen. 49. Exo. 22. Leuit. 2. Iustin. in Triph. Leui. 24. Leui. 21. 1. Reg. 2. Mala 2. Aug. de ciuâ—… Dei li. 17. c. 5. Luc. 22. 1. Reg. 21 secuÌ„d 70 Aug. in Psal. 33. Ioan. 6. Luc. 22. Psal. 4. Psal. 103. Psal. 22. Psal 110. 3. Reg. 17 3. Reg. 19 Esaiae 62 Hieron ibidem Iere. 11. Zach. 9. Mala. 1. Psal. 77. Ioan. 6. Eccl. c. 3. 5. 8. Eccl. c. 7 Aug. de eiuitate Dei li. 17 c. 20. The best thing vnder yâ— Soâ—… may be eaten and drunken Origin tractatu â—…o in c. Math. 22 The custom of scriptures in coÌ„mending so much bread and wine sheweth that the body blood of Christ should be geuen vnder their formes Eph. 5. Ioan. 17. Now all things are one by the Sacrament of yâ— altar Eccles. 3. 5. 8. Luc. 22. The xiâ—… Chapiter Facere Hoc facere The supper had both doing making Creare Facere Cont. Marc. l. 4 Facere ex aliquo Facere de aliquo De Sacâ—… li. 4. c. 4. Basilius hom 1. in hexame specular Agere Facere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ireneus li. 4. c. 32. The pricst hod of the new testament Aâ—… sauing yâ— body of Christ is rather a like thing then this thing Ioan. 13. Psal. 110. A memorie is made Can. 32. â—…acobus in liturgia Clemens li. 〈◊〉 constâ—…ut Apoâ—…ol Cyrillus in Caâ—…a myst 5. Dionys. de eccle hierar cap. 3. The most 〈◊〉 things be made â—…ustin in Apol. 2. Ireneus aduersus 〈◊〉 l. 5 The 〈◊〉 is made 〈◊〉 aduersus Marcionem li. 4. To 〈◊〉 bread his body Amb. de iis qui 〈◊〉 myst c â—… The body is made We make Christes â—…ody because he said make this thing Hoc 〈◊〉 in Epist. ad Heli. The body of Christ is made 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lib. â—… The priest maketh yâ— holy oblation Chry. de sacerdotio li. 3. Chrys. hom de prodit Iudae Man maketh not Christes body by his own vertue Aug. coÌ„tra Faust. Man lib. 20. ca. 3. Ourbread is made vnto vs mysticall Theoph. in Math. 26. Damasc. de Orth. fide li. 4. ca. 14. Psal. 113. 134. Ge. ca. 1. Psal. 32. God was made maÌ„ Christ ma keth bread his 〈◊〉 body Gen. 1. Euthy in ca 26. Matt. Make this mysterie Ansel. in epist. 1. Cor. c. 11 Make yâ— whiche I haue made Germ. in rerum Eccles. theoria in tract ad eos qui haesi Aâ—… authority of ma king Chri stes body â—…ometh froÌ„ these wordes make thâ—… thing Ioan. 1. Barâ—… 3. Basil ho. 1. in Hex The 〈◊〉 Chapiter An obâ—…tion The aâ—…swere The wordes of Christ were not wet Englished by the Prote 〈◊〉 What the remembraÌ„ce is whereof Christ spaâ—…e 1. Cor. 11 The remeÌ„ brance of Christ is the shewing of his death by fact Ambros. in ca. 11. 1 ad Cor. Christes body and blood made vnder diuerse kinds doth shew and make vs remember his death The reall body with the signes of breakig is the remeÌ„brance yâ— Christ spake of The presence of yâ— benefactour is yâ— best meane to make his good dede 〈◊〉 bred The presence of a man hyndreth not his 〈◊〉 A perfect remeÌ„braÌ„ce requireth yâ— real presence of yâ— thing remembred A thing may be pre seÌ„t though it be not seen The faith of Christ his body is as much to vs as the sight of it The new preachers What kiÌ„d of fruitful remeÌ„bran ce the belief of Christes bodily pre sence did worke Basil. de baptis li. 1. cap. 3. How Christ is remeÌ„bred in eating bread in drinking wine The tuÌ„bs of the Egyptians The body of a faithful man is the tumâ—… of Christ. The monument of Christ. What remeÌ„brance is made of Christ at the masse tyme. Malac. 1. Esaiae 11. Psal. 100 Two 〈◊〉 des of sepulchers Caenota phium Christes remeÌ„braÌ„ce is no void monumeÌ„t The body is yâ— tumbe of yâ— soule Chrys. in 1. Corin. Hom. 24 Epipha in Ancorato Psal. 115. Heb. 11. Abdias historiae Apostol li. 5. 1. Co. 15. Math. 3. The body of Christ is the best mean to re member his death The inteÌ„t of Christ is furthered by taking the words 〈◊〉 Origen Hom. 13. in Leuit. A propitiatorie re meÌ„brance Aug. de fide ad Petrum cap. 19. Euidenter osten ditur Mark the difference betwene a figurauue signifying an euident shewing If we had not Christes body present yâ— old shadowes wold shew 〈◊〉 is death better then bread and wine Concil NicenuÌ„ secuÌ„dum In vnblo dy sacrifice in the remeÌ„braÌ„ce of Christ. Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11 Fol. 102. M. Nowels words The aunswere to M. Nowell What traÌ„substaÌ„tiation meaneth 〈◊〉 real substaÌ„ces be requisite to a transubâ—… Two grounds of traÌ„substantiatioÌ„ Breade is not â—…ited to Christ. Leu. 1. 2. 〈◊〉 bread is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christâ—…s body Gen. 14. Psal. 109. Cyp ep 3. lib. 2. The true vine is no particular substance distincted froÌ„ Christ How Christ iâ—… the true vine Ioan. 2. In these words eyther christ is changed or nothing Câ—…rist coÌ„ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mala. 3. The bred is 〈◊〉 to change M. Nowels 〈◊〉 assertion Eche part of M. N. propositioÌ„ is against 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eche part in this pro position beareth a transubstaÌ„ tiation The obietion The aunswere The signi fication of the verbe Sum es fui how sâ—…nne is said to be God is most properly Exo. 3. Particular â—…ces haue their being next vnto God Ioan 1. Ioan 6. Matt. 12. 〈◊〉 1. Maâ—… 16. Matt. 21. Why the verbe Sum â—…th not â—…gnifie Christ to bâ—… the substanâ—…e of a 〈◊〉 It is against reason to take away Christes subâ—… by words which signifie a vertue thereof Ioan. 10. 14. 15. 1 Co 10. Math. 11. Two sub stances be neither na med nor meant in This is my body This can not be referred to bread or wine The body of Christ is not com moÌ„ bread The consequent whereby â—…substan station is gathered Euery â—…ord of y◠〈◊〉 â—…ropo â—…tions is against 〈◊〉 Noâ—… That is grated for argumeÌ„ts sake which is not true The more semely traÌ„ substantia tion wold be the â—…ter proued The both not shew a thing present 1. Co. 10. Exo. 17. Num. 20 The true vine might be 〈◊〉 to the â—…posties Proufe He proueth best who sheweth the thing moste really present Bread was turned into Christes body whiles he liued In orat Catech. Li. 4. ca. 14. in Ioan 6. in Math. 26 Noman euer tokâ—… any vine or 〈◊〉 to be Christ. TransubstaÌ„tiation 〈◊〉 TransubstaÌ„tiation decreed taught In Apo. 2 2. li. 4. ca. 34. 3. l. 4. coÌ„t Marc. 4. de caen Dom. 5 de ijs qui init cap. 9. 6. hom 60. ad P. Antio The faith 〈◊〉 doctri ne of the Church is a reason of the thing taught 1. Co. 15. M. Nowell Act. 15. Galat. 1. Ioan. 21. Chryso ibidem These words be
come from God and belong to causes of religion And yet in them as euery thing is most obscure so are words more necessarie for the opening of it All mysteries by their very name pretend a secret and an obscure knowlege Among all the mysteries which were lest vnto the Church by Christ none hath obteined that name so peculiarly as the Sacrament of Christes supper whereupon it foloweth that words are most necessarie of all for the declaration of that Sacrament therefore noman ought to wonder that with so many dedes of sitting down at yâ— table of eating the paschal Lamb of washing the Apostles fete of raking bread and wine of blessing thanksgeuing breaking geuing words at the length be ioyned which may shew plainly the meaning wherevnto all those dedes tend Let vs not therefore follow the Sacramentaries in this behalf who looke only to this that Christ toke bread and will not consyder his promise going before his present performance in geuing that which he promised his blessing and his words Wherein he plainly sayth This is my body But because bread was taken and still bread is tasted and seen doâ—… and say Christ what him list they will trust their eyes and not his word But S. Mathew S. Marke S. Paule 〈◊〉 that Christ did these things sayd S. Luke writeth he did them saying All meane that saying is a principall part of the supper And that not without a cause For whereas dedes may haue many and diuerse interpretations as it appeareth by the figures of the law except words be ioyned withall to make them certein and plaine we shall not know how to vnderstand the dedes and therefore we can not tell how to beleue them For this cause S. Chrysostom sayd that whereas Christes words ought in al things to be more credited then our senses yet he addeth Quod praecipue in mysterijs faciamus the which thing let vs do specially in the mysteries Ponder then I pray you whether Christ did expound one parable by an other For the dedes of his last supper 〈◊〉 to me vndoubted parables Who could tell what the taking of bread meant after supper or to what end the blessing and geuing of thankes wolde goe except Christes own words had interpreted his mysticall doings For whereas all Christes doings are our instruction it can not be denied but when he toke bread blessed gaue thanks brake and gaue those dedes were a certein aduertissement or dark lesson to his Disciples Of the which some vnderstode more some lesse according as they had grace and wit Now the words of Christ come to these dedes as it were a plain exposition added to an obscure parable And yet shall we think that the words also are paraâ—… Shal we say the thing that is spoken to geue more light bringeth more darknesse Or did the comment of Christ nede again an other comment He did certain things and to shew what he did He sayd this is my body If these words be 〈◊〉 it had bene better he had sayd nothing but only doâ—… this for the remembrance of me For by that meanes we might haue done as he did and so haue referred obedieÌ„tly the meaning of the dede to his wisedom But he in words expounded the secrete meaning of the dedes sayd This is my body What reason can now excuse vs why we should not rest in the authoritie of the speaker sith he spake as an expositour or interpreter of his own doings This reason alone ought to persuade any man But now I will bring a greater Not only the interpretatioÌ„ of Christes dedes dependeth vpon his words but also the whole substance of them For he being the word of God hath ordeined that no Sacrament shal be made without words Yea that words shal be the chief part of euery Sacramâ—…t This appereth in baptisme where the washing with water is the lesse part and the pronouncing of the words is the chefe part Hereof I haue spoken before and haue declared out of S. Chrysostom S. Ambrose S. Augustine that yâ— Sacraments haue their verie chese being through words As therefore water breade wine and oile whiche are the inferiour elements and the baser part of the Sacraments be most commonly knowen and most easily gotten so the words which are the higher part of the same Sacraments must be such as be most common easy For euery Sacrament is a signe euery signe is to geue knowledge of a thing whiche otherwise had bene secrete Now if the token it self be secrete what knowledge can rise thereof Seing therefore Chriâ—… making a Sacrament said this is my body we must think either no signe at all to haue bene made or els we must beleue the wordes as they sound outwardly ¶ The fiftenth circumstance of taking SEing Christ willed all the twelue Apostles among whom Iudas also was to take that one thing which he gaue we must vnderstand such a taking as may agree to 〈◊〉 nolesse then to the other Apostles Againe whatsoeuer taking be vnderstanded it must appertein to corporal appreheÌ„sion whereof only Christ sayd take 〈◊〉 thing therefore which was taken either was 〈◊〉 bread being a bare figure of Christ or the body of Christ vnder the form of bread For in bothe these ways Iudas might take that which all the other toke As for any effectual signe whereof Caluin vseth to brag no man corporally toke sith it is clere that Iudas toke none such yet it was sayd to him no lesse then to the other take Nâ—…w if the Apostles toke only a bare 〈◊〉 of Christes body Christ gaue no more with his hands but a 〈◊〉 signe 〈◊〉 they â—…oke that which he gaue but Christ was not sent to geue bare signes which thing was thâ—… 〈◊〉 of the old lawe therefore it being false that he gaue a bare signe it must nedes be true that the Apostles toke at his haÌ„ds his own body vnder the form of bread Neither will it serue here if a â—…cramentarie say yâ— Christ gaue spiritually more â—…heÌ„ bare signes and likewise that yâ— good Apostles toke more spiritually for if we speake of spirituall gifts they wanted â—…ot in y◠〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 and of the old law Abraham beleued God and it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to instice Elizeus receaued the dâ—…bble spirit of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beseching God to restore him y◠〈◊〉 of his 〈◊〉 to strengththen him with his chefe spirit doth 〈◊〉 that both he had once the holy Ghost and loked again for greater comfort of him Seig then the good men always receaued â—…pirituall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 betwene Christ and the old law doth not stand only in â—…all gifts receaued in the soule but in this that Christ in his maÌ„hod which he toke for that purpose left vs such coâ—…poral meanes and instruments of grace as might work also vpon our soules And therefore Christ denyed 〈◊〉 to be the
〈◊〉 tasted to euery man according to his owne will in the mouth of the faithfull euen so it is to be iudged conceâ—…ing the receauing that Sacrament of the altar into euery Christians mouth For both one man for honours sake dareth not take it euery day an other for honours sake dareth not once to take it in any day As Manna would no lothsomnes so this meate will no contempt For the Apostle for that cause saith it to haue bene vnworthely receaued of them Qui hoc non discernebaÌ„t a caeteris cibis vendratione singulariter debita Who did not discerne this thing or make a difference of this thing from other meates by a worshipping singularly 〈◊〉 For straight when he had said he eateth and drinketh damnation to him selfe he said moreouer Non diiudicans corpus domini not discerning our Lords body the which appereth sufâ—…iently in all that place in the first epistle to the Coriâ—…thians if it be diligently marked Thus far S. Augustine whose wordes I haue rehersed the more fully to thintent by the whole argument the Reader might the better iudge his minde His answer in effect is the honour of the Sacrament is the thing chefely to be attended which sith it is honoured both of him that for honours sake doth receaue and of him who for honours sake doth not receaue eche of theÌ„ auoideth the contempt thereof and sufficiently putteth a difference betwene it and other meats which difference being not put was the cause that some Corinthians did eate this meat vnworthely Note well good Reader what I shall say for this place is marueilouse notable First S. Augustine speaketh euidently of the Sacrament of Christes supper and of Sacramentall receauing 2. He signifieth that this Sacrament must not be dishonoured by any meanes nor despised in minde or fact 3. By dishonouring or despising he meaneth the omitting to geue it due honour in thought or deede so that by all meanes the honour thereof must not be neglected or left vndone 4. We must striue to honour this Sacrament but whether it be done by this or by that meane it skilleth not so it be honoured 5. It is a kind of honour done to it sometyme to receaue it into our mouthes for honours sake sometyme for yâ— same honours sake not to receaue it Put these two notes together and it must nedes be that he meaneth the honouring of that thing which is receaued into our mouthes Then the honouring of yâ— SacrameÌ„t is the honouring of that which semeth bread and wine but if it were in dede the substance of bread and wine he would ueuer exhorte vs to be so carefull how to honour a mere creature were it neuer so greate a signe But let vs yet goe forward 6. The Sacrament which is taken into our mouthes is also called a kind of meate cibus ille that meate 7. It is that kind of meate which the Apostle would to be separated for honours sake from other meates 8. What call ye separating for honours sake He answereth it was a fault not to seperate it veneratione singulariter debita with a worship singularly due 9. what is a worshipping singularly due but such a worshipping of which sorte there is but one For that is singular which is alone and which hath no fellow 10. Such a worshipping that only is which is due to God for as he hath no fellow in nature so he hath no partaker in honour and worship Therefore the SacrameÌ„t or that meat which sometimes for honours sake we receaue into our mouthes and sometymes for honours sake we absteine from that selfe same substaÌ„ce is to be honoured of vs with a singular duety of worshipping or with a worshipping due in a singular manner that is to say with godly honour I seke not hereby to declare only that S. Augustine is of the mind to haue the Sacrament and the meate receaued into our mouthes to be worshipped with a singular duety but much more to shew that he affirmeth S. Paule to meane so For the fault of the Corinthians was not to discerne this meat with a worshipping singularly due For if they had worshipped it as it ought to be worshipped they would not haue taken it in their mouthes without they had first prepared them selues for the receauing of such a meate so singularly to be worshipped What figuratiue interpretation wil now serue Is not Sacramentum honorare good latine Is not the English of it to honour the Sacrament Is it not plainly said cibum illum discernere à caeteris cibis veneratione singulariter debita to discerne that meate from other meates by a worshipping singularly due Is that a worship which may be geuen to any creature which is not vnited to God The meat in yâ— mouth must be so honoured therefore that in the mouth is yâ— real substaÌ„cial natural body of Christ. The Sacrament must be honoured therefore the substance therein conteined is the body of Christ. Otherwise shall we think that S. Augustine who so diligently always disceâ—…eth yâ— kind of worshipping God shal we think that he wil haue material bread to be discerned and separated froÌ„ meates by a worshipping singularly due Did that greate Clerk so litle vnderstaÌ„d what singular worship was that he gaue that name not only to holy men or to the iust Angels but euen to the vnsensible creatures of bread and wine No no. S. Augustin neuer doubted nor none of all the faithfull but that the SacrameÌ„t of yâ— altar was to be adored with godly honour euen by the doctrine of S. Paule because it conteineth vnder the formes of bread and wine the natural substance of Christes body and blood It is worthy to be remembred that S. Augustine vseth in this place the word Sacramentum for the substance of Christes flesh 〈◊〉 vnder the signe of bread otherwyse he would neuer haue taught that eyther the substance of materiall bread or the forme thereof ought to be honoured For honour can be geuen to no vnreasonable creatures If this kind of vnderstanding the word Sacrament be wel consydered many places in S Augustine otherwise very hard wil be much the easier to perceaue Last of al what should it meane yâ— S. Augustine saith yâ— Sacrament may be honoured by our absteining sometimes from receauing it into our mouthes It Were surely no honor done to God if we should at any moment absteine to fede vpoÌ„ him in faith or spirit Why is it then some honour to his SacrameÌ„t not to be receiued in certaine cases Was it not counted a vertue in yâ— CenturioÌ„ wheÌ„ he said him self to be vnworthy that Christ should enter vnder the roof of his house And yet the same Centurion did not refuse to receaue yâ— effect grace of Christes word into his house There is therefore a difference betwene the corporall coming of Christe into our house or body and betwene the