THE PARLIAMENT OF CHRYSTE AVOVCHING AND DECLARING THE ENACted and receaued trueth of the presence of his bodie and bloode in the blessed Sacrament, and of other articles concerning the same, impugned in a wicked sermon by M. Iuell, Collected and sethfurth by THOMAS HESKYNS Doctour of dyuinitie. Wherin the reader shall fynde all the scripturs cōmonlie alleaged oute of the newe Testament; touching the B. Sacrament, and some of the olde Testament, plainlie and truely expownded by a nombre of holie learned Fathers and Doctours.
NON te praetereat narratio seniorum, ipsi enim didicerunt à patribus suis. Quoniam ab ipsis disces intellectum, & in tempore necessitatis dare responsum.
Go not from the doctryne of the elders, for they haue learned of their fathers. For of them thowe shalt learn vnderstanding, so that thowe maist make answer in tyme of nede.
AVDITE doctos catholicae Ecclesiae viros tanta pace animi, & eo voto, quo ego vos audiui.
Heare ye the learned men of the catholique Churche with as quiet a mynde, and with soche desyre as I haue heard yowe.
SCRVTAMINI
Imprinted in Antvverpe, At the golden Angell, by VVilliam Silvius prynter to the Kynges Maiestie. M.D.LXVI.
Ʋ Ʋith Priuilege.
- 1 Figured Exod. 16.
- 2 Prophecied. Malach. 1.
- 3 Promised Joan. 6
- 4 Jnstituted Math. 25
- 5 Practized Jac in Miss.
- 6 Reserued. [...]in. epist [...]
- 7 Continued. [...]. Cor. 11
- 8 Adore [...]
Priuilegium.
REgiae Maiestatis diplomate permissum est Thomae Heskins S. Theologiae professori, vti per aliquem Typographorū in hisce omnibus ditionis suae Regionibus admissorum, imprimendum curet librum, inscriptum: The Parliament of Chryste auouching and declaring, &c. Inhibitumue alijs omnibus intra eandem ditionem, ne ante triennium proximum absque ipsius Thomae licentia imprimant, aut alibi impressum diuendant: sub poena in eodem diplomate expressa.
TO M. IO. IVELL THOMAS HESKINS VVISHETH GRACE AND RESTITVcion of faith. A
DETESTING your heresie, yet louing your person, and therfor wishing your reformaciō and correctiō, I haue, M. Iuell cōpilled this booke, wherbie as I trust the vanitie of your bragge ys and shalbe disclosed and perceaued: so do I wish that by the same both yowe and soch as haue erred, maie be reduced from your foule errour, and all the people of my natiue contrie, for whose cause especialie I haue takē these labours, so staied in faith, that by your manifold vntrueths they be not seduced. Yow haue not onelie enwrapped your self in errour, but also to maintein the same cōmitted three heinouse offences. One is the abuse and contēpt of the authoritie ād doctrine of the holie Fathers of the primitiue ād aunciēt Church. Those Fathers youe do not onelie truncatelie alleage, ād with craftie sleight abuse ād falsifie: but also although yowe euidētlie see thē impugning your doctrine and heresie, yet without all regard of their great learning ād authoritie, of their perpetual cōsent ād agreement, B of their reuerēd antiquitie, of their famouse holinesse, yowe runne stil in the race of your deuised inuencion, and phantasie, vtterlie cōtēning whatsoeuer hath ben by thē saied or doen contrarie to your blinde affection, and wicked opinion. Now to vse to yowe the woords of the holie Father Leo to Eutyches: Quid iniquius, quam impia supene, & sapientioribus doctoribusue non credere? What ys more wicked then to haue vngodlie opinions, and not to beleue thē that be wises and better learned: Decet enim sequi patres nostros, nec cōmutare definitionē eorū perpetud; quorli regulā secundùm sacras scripturas esse didicimus. Yt becometh vs (saieth Flauianus) to folowe our Fathers, and not to chaunge their perpetuall definition, whose rule we haue learned to be according to the scripturs.
But yow staied not here. Yt was not enough for yow to cōtēne or abusethe perpetuall definitiō of the Fathers, but youe proceaded to the second offēce euē to mocke ād skorn the learned ād holie Fathers of Chrysts Church not onelie thē of the later daies, but soch as liued a thousand years agon, wherof some were famouse for their learning, some so constant in their faith and perfect in life that of the vniuersal Church thei haue bē hitherto, ād yet be reputed C ād esteemed blessed Saincts. Soch I saie as God hath exalted to his glorie, soch, as in heauē be honourable soch haue yow in earth dishonoured yea mockt ād skorned, ād as moch as in yow laie, made despicable to the worlde. Thus haue yow vsed or raither abused S. Siluester, who liued in the time of Cōstātine the great, a māright vertueouse ād holie, ād so reported in al good histories, as yourself know, ād so esteemed ād reuerēced of the whol Church. Thus haue yow vsed S. Isidore, a mā of great fame, ād an holie bishoppe in the time of S. Gregorie. Thus haue you vsed Innocētius, the third, Thomas de Aquino ād Roffensis all mē of singular vertue, ād in learning not inferiour to yowe, I am sure, but a great waie befor yow, wherfor no soch as yow aught to deride and mock. As for the Bishoppe of Rochester, who both learnedlie ād godlie wrote against both Luther and Oecolāp. his works stand yet vntouched, but of your mock, not able to be impugned by any Lutherā, Oecolāpadiā Caluinist, or otherlike, for of which sect yow be, I think yow disclose not. In this your mockrie yow are the right imitatour of Porphirius the enemie of all chrystianitie. For he (as Euseb. ād Niceph. wittnesse) derided the Euāgelists ād Apostles the writers D of the scripturs: yow deride the holie Bishops ād saincts their successours, writers vpō the script. He cōtēned the holie scripturs, he reprehended them; imagining cōtradictiōs in thē, he reputed thē (saith Niceph.) as things of naugh to [Page]yowe contēne the learned cōmentaries ād writings of the Saincts of God vpō the scripturs, ād matters incidēt ād apperteining to the scripturs, with skoffes yowe trauail to reprehēd their graue authoritie ād godlie writings. Yowe E plaie and dallie with them before the people like a ioung Porphirie, as though they were things of naught. Thus yow maie see, as all that be wise and staied by Gods grace doo see, howe fullie herin yowe bear the image, and iustlie folowe the steppes of him, that fiercelie (as yowe doe) persecuted with deadlie hatred the church and religion of Chryste.
Your third offence ys yet worse and more heinouse, wher yowe haue vttered so manie vntrueths and lies euen aduersus Dominū, & aduersus Christū eius, against our Lord, ād against his Chryste, against his holie gospell, and against his holie woord. Ys yowr matter soch (M Iuell) as yt can not be mainteined without lies? and (as the holie man Iob saied) Nunquid Deus indiget vestro mendacio? Hath God nede of your lies? No, so litle nede hath he of lies, that he will destroie al thē that speak lies, as the psalmist saieth. But that I seē not to charg yowe without proof, as yowe do other, ys not one of your chalenging articles against the presence of Chrysts bodie and blood in the blessed Sacr? ys not the doctrine yowe teach and preache in that poinct directlie contrarie to the doctrine of our Sauiour Chryst? Whē he saieth: This ys my bodie, This ys F my blood: and yowe auouche and teache that yt ys verie bread and verie wine ys not this a contrarie doctrine to his? ys yt not plain against his manifest woorde? ys yt not in effect to charge him with vntrueth, though yowe daie not yet in flat woordes saie that he lied? The craftie sleight yowe vse in handling the scripture, wher the trueth of Chrysts doctrin doeth appeare, ād your wielie suppressiō of those woords which cheiflie declare the same trueth, ād opē yowr vntrueth, doe wel proue youre wicked meening to be none other. For taking the woords of S. Paule for the theme of your sermō, yowe produced thē truncatedlie, and passed thē with moch sleight. Thus yowe vtter thē: I haue receaued of the Lord that thing, which also I deliuered vnto yow: that ys, that the lord Iesus in the night that he was betraied took bread, ād ther yowe end. Wher, although yowe pretēted to teach the first instituciō of the Sacr. yet either of malice to suppresse Christs trueth, or for feare to disclose your own vntrueth, you wold not or durst not reherse the verie words of the instituciō, which I wish al mē to note, but both in the latin ād inglish, as your faith staeth in bread, and as yow wold the faith of your audiēce should do the like, your theme ended in G bread, in so moch as whē yowe come to your last matter, to speak of priuate Masse (as yow tearm yt, though falselie, for ther ys none soch) and, to proue yowr Cōmuniō, beginne again to repete the woords of the instituciō, Lord, what shift yowe make to suppresse the words of Chryst: This ys my bodie, This ys my blood in the which lieth al the effect of his instituciō. These woords yowe flie, as frō a serpēt, yowe cā not abide the sownd of thē, ād therfor with shamful craft, yowe passe thē saing thus: Chryst in the last supper ordeined a Cōmuniō, ād shewed no maner token of priuate Masse, as maie plainlie appeare both by the woordes that he spake, and also by the order of his doings. For be tooke the bread, brake yt, deuided yt, ād gaue yt to his Disciples, and saied: Drinke ye all herof. These be yowr own woords. Yowe pretēded to proue your matter by Chrysts woords ād order, but whē yowe come to the verie point yowe do not as moch as touch his woords, but skippe ouer thē, so well maie your prof appeare bi thē, ād so loath are yowe to vtter Christ words, that his trueth might appear, ād your falshead be disclosed. Against your first offēce (which ys your abuse of the doctours in mutilating H their saings, as yow doo Anacletus: in falsifieng their meening, as yow do Tertullian, and S. Cyprian: in craftie alleaging two or three woordes, that apparantlie maie seem to make for yowe, leauing oute the rest that mightilie [Page]maketh against yowe, as yowe doe sainct Augustine: in corrupting authours by putting woordes to their saings, which they haue not, as yowe A doe with Leo: wherbie euidentlie appeareth yowr contēpt of their autoritie, whom by so manie means yowe labour to abuse, to shadowe, and hide the trueth by them so clerelie settfurth) I come in right vse, reuerentlie alleaging them, whollie and fullie producing them, truelie reporting them, and their mening, iustlie letting euerie of them plainlie to testifie that, whiche he hath written, and causing euerie one to speake his owne woordes without corruption. And that yowe maie perceaue that the catholique Churche ys strong, against the whiche the gates of hell, the power of heresie shall not preuaill, knowe yowe, that yt ys Terribilis castorum acies ordinata, a terrible fortresse in most goodlie order appoincted. Oute of the which fortresse in goodlie order ys comed a great nombre against yowe, marching by cooples, eche coople to shewe the vnitie of trueth and faith professed in bothe Churches, being one of the greke church, and other of the latine churche, and the seniours for the most part placed in the forewarde. These haue I brought furth not one alone and by piece meale so to rume awaie with the matter, as yowe doo, but in good nombres, and with their full saings, and the same doo I oftentimes conferr together, that the full and perfect cleernesse of the B trueth in ther consonant sentences maie appear, and shine to all that list to looke therat, and be disposed to knowe the trueth.
Against yowr second offence, which ys the mocking of holie writers and Saincts, wherbie yowe seke to dishonour and deface bothe them and the religion they professed, I come with due reuerence and honour of them, whō I knowe by Chrysts promesse to be honourable before the Father in heauen for their constant confession of his holie name whilest they liued here vpon earth. Wherfor as being vpon the earth they were not gests and straungers but the felowes of Saincts, and of the house of God, I tearme them as senatours of the Parliament house of Chryste, as knowing the enacted and receaued trueth of the matters of faith perteining to that house. For this cause I regard all their writings which the catholique Churche hath allowed, considering that the same Churche that hath taught me that the gospell, that ys the verie woorde of God written by the mocion and instruction of his holie Spirit, hath taught me that these mens wiritings vpon the same are good C and commendable. And as with S. Augustine I saie, that I wolde not beleue the Gospell but that the authoritie of the Churche moueth me therunto: no more wolde I beleue the Fathers expownding the scripturs, but that thervnto I am moued by the Churche. Then yt foloweth well that as I ought to beleue the Gospell for the authoritie of the Churche: so ought I to beleue the doctours for the autoritie of the Churche. And here to ouerthrowe your contempt of them and your self also, I do oftentimes conferre the expositions of the later Fathers with the expositions of the elder fathers, and finding them alltogether grauelie against youre euell doctrine to consent, and yt to confute as hereticall and deuelish, I let your light mockes and skornes flie home again to yowe as fleshflies to their carien.
Against your thirde wickednesse, I meen your cōtempt abuse and vntrue handling of the holie scripturs, I come in euerie place, where mencion ys made of the bless. Sacrament, with the wholl processe ther conteined. In the vi of S. Iohn, the xxvi. of S. Matth the xxiiii, of S. Luke, the x. and xi. of the first epistle to the Corinth, the v. to the Ephesians, and the xiii to the Hebrues, somoch as the Fathers expownd to appertein to the holie Sacr. I produce D not truncatelie and falselie, but fullie and trulie euery sentence, and euery woord, submitting my self to the authoritie of gods woord, ād not bi sleight subdewing yt to mine owne autoritie.
[Page]But here the learned perchaunce maie merueill, that I wold ioin with yowe in the scripturs considering the auncient counsell of Tertullian, who wolde not that anie catholique shoulde entre into disputacion with an heretique E with the scripturs. Nihil proficit congressio scripturarum cum haereticis, nisi planè vt aut stomachi quis meat euersionem aut cerebri &c. To ioin (saieth he) in disputacion with heretiques with scripturs yt doeth nothing auaill, except a man will turne vppe side down either his stomacke or his brain. what shall thowe gain, thowe great learned man in the scripturs, when yf thowe defend anie thing yt shall be denied of the contrarie part: yf thowe denie anie thing, yt shall be defended &c. And after he concludeth thus: Ergo non ad scripturas prouocandum est &c. We maie not therfor appeall to the scripturs, neither maie we appoinct our disputacion in them, in the which ther ys either none or vnceten victorie, or not verie certen. For this cause, and for that S. Hierom saieth that Scripturae non in legendo cōsistunt, sed in intelligendo the scripturs cōsist not in reading but in vnderstanding: I haue trauailed by diligent scarching of the fathers from the Apostles to this our time, to trie oute by ther common consent howe the scripturs are to be vnderstanded, and so haue I (as by a line drawen from hand to hand) descended from age to age, that the true vnderstanding of F them receaued and approued in all that diuersitie of ages and places, might be perceaued and knowen.
In this my doing I haue fulfilled the counseill of Vincentius lyrinen. who for remidies against errours among other willeth, that if anie errour hath ben committed in the olde time, either by certain men, or by anie one wholl citie, or by anie Prouince, to reforme that, the decrees of auncient generall Councells must be sought, and yf none soche can be founde (as in these daies though they be fownd, they be not regarded) then (saieth he) operam dabit, vt collatas inter se maiorum consulat, interrogetiue sententias &c. He shall gene diligence to seke and learn the iudgemēts of the elders, and cōferr thē together but of those elders onelie, which although they were in diuerse times and places abiding: yet in the Cōmunion and faith of one catholique Churche, were allwaies allowed as masters, or men of autoritie. And what soeuer he shall knowe, what not one or two of them, but what alltogether with one consent haue holden, written, and taught openlie, cōmonlie, and continuallie, let him vnderstand, that that ys without all doubt to be beleued. Thus he. As this counseill ys on my part fulfilled in that I haue searched and conferred the iudgements of the fathers, and G fownd them (though they were in diuerse ages and places) fullie and whollie agreeng in the matters of the presence of Chrysts bodie and blood in the blessed Sacrament, of the oblacion of the same, and of other articles apperteining ther to, whiche (as in this worke yt maie be clerlie perceaued) not one or two, but euery one of them haue, not obscurely but manifestlie, not in one place, or at one time, but cōmonlie and continuallie, holden, taught, and written: So wolde wolde I that yowe, M. Iuell, if yowe regarde the Fathers of the primitiue Churche in dede, as yowe bragge in woorde, that yowe (I saie) shoulde receaue and embrace these scripturs as expownded and deliuered to yowe by their hands, and their expositions to accept as a cleer and certen vndoubted trueth, whiche trueth so opened by thē, I bring furth against your vntrueths, and not the bare scripture alone, as Tertullian wolde I shoulde not. This, I trust, yowe shall well perceaue, if leauing your corruted affection apart, yowe will with a cleer eie and vpright iudgement read this worke, wherin yowe shall see all the Fathers that commonlie haue, expownding the scripturs, written of these articles of the Sacrament, whiche H yowe in your iolitie (I will not saie more arrogantlie than as a chrystian preacher should, mekelie and lowlie, more rashlie, then wiselie or aduisedlie) with so great bragge wttered in your sermon, all soche Fathers, I saie, shall [Page]yowe see, aswell grekes as latines, aswell auncient, as of later time, with one cōmon consent and agreement, so expownding the scripturs as though they A had ben in one time, and had cōspired vpon one sense and vnderstāding: all those shall yowe see impugning your negatiues, ād by the scripturs affirming the catholike doctrine, and faith catholiquelie and vniuersallie professed, ād thus shal the trueth of the scripturs ouerthrow the vntrueth of your heresies.
Nowe I haue in a generall maner shewed your offences, whiche moued me to write against yowe: in like generalitie I haue shewed howe I do procead against yowe: the specialitie of your offences and of the processe aunswerable to the same, yowe shall finde in this worke, though simplie without coolour, yet plainlie without craft, declared. Yf my trauaill herein obtein not his enrēded effect, namelie your conuersiō and amēdement, and to doo yowe that good that yow maie be staied frō running to pertual damnacion: yet staing other that by your pestilent heresies might be brought to that wofull daūger, I shall not onelie do thē that good I wish, but also helpe to make your dānaciō the easier, whiche howe greuouse yt shall be, he knoweth best, that knoweth howe manie soules yowe haue brought to damnaciō. Yf yowe being obdurated persist in your impietie, yt cā not be auoided but yowe doe yt of malice, hauing ben aduertised and admonished of your wicked errours B and heresies hertofore by doctour Harding and other, and nowe by me. Yowe knowe who saieth: Haereticum hominem &c. after one or two admonicions flie the companie of an heretique, knowing that soche one ys subuerted, forsomoche as he ys euen by his owne iudgement condemned. In dede being, as I saied, thus admonished, and seing with all your wicked doctrine by the whol multitude here alleaged, so plainlie and cleerly condemned, yt can not be but by your owne iudgemēt yowe must be condēned. For this ys so euidētlie true that yowe or any man can not denie yt, that no doctrine, nowe holdē of the catholique Churche for a trueth, and impugned by the Sacramentaries, was euer yet at anie time by the churche, or by any catholique writer, reputed as heresie or errour. Again this ys as true that euerie doctrine holden of the Sacramentaries, and nowe impugned by the catholiques, hath ben before time of the catholique Church and wtiters reputed and adiudged erour and heresie, a fewe late inuencions onelie excepted, which also are now by catholikes impugned, and by plain testimonies of the auncient Church proued to be erours and heresies, C and so condemned.
To make good the first saing, I will reherse certain catholi (que) propositions: Chrysts bodie ys verilie in the blessed Sacrament. Chrysts bodie ys ossred in sacrifice in the Masse. The holie Sacrament ys to be reserued for the cōmunion of the sicke. The blessed Sacrament maie be receaued vnder one kinde. The bodie of Chryste in the Sacrament ys to be adored. Saincts in glorie praie for vs and are to be praied vnto by vs. The dead receaue great benefitte by the sacrisice of the Masse. Praier and almose dedes doen for the dead doe auaill them. These and soche like the catholiques doe holde, the heretiques denie. I will not here proclame against yowe, but I will ioine this issue with yowe, that if yowe can bring anie catholique Coūcell or catholique doctour impugning these or anie of thē, as hereticall or erroneous, I will subscribe vnto yowe and saie as yowe saie: yf yowe can not (as I am sure yowe can not) thē will I saie, as I maie well, that your doctrine ys erroneous, hereticall, and deuelish. Nowe to saue your doctrine frō this fowle reproache, proue by soche testimonie as I haue saied, that our doctrine ys erroneous, or ells the shame will be on your side that teach the contrarie
To make good my second assertion, I will also reherse certain propositions D of your doctrine: Chrysts bodie ys not reallie in the Sacrament. The Sacrament ys onelie a figure of Chryste and not his bodie. The substance of bread ys not by due consecracion [Page] chaunged, turned, transmuted, nor transelementated into the substance of the bodie of Chryste. Ther ys no sacrifice of Chrystes bodie offred in the Masse. Praier and almose dedes nothing auaile the dead, neither the sacrifice of the Masse. These and soche like do E yowe and your likes teache and defend, for the whiche I will ioin this issue with yowe, that if I haue not in this booke sufficientlie proued, or can not hereafter, if I be required, more fullie proue euerie of these to be erroneous and hereticall, and long agon for soche to haue ben condemned, I will subscribe to them, and consesse thē to be good? Yf I haue or can euidentlie proue thē so to be, then confesse yowe thē to be naught and deuelish. Yf yowe refuse thus to doo: yet for the defence of your doctrine, yf yt maie be defended, doo that to vs, that I haue doen to yowe. I haue doen to yowe in this booke three things. First, I haue shewed yowe the beginning of the doctrine of the bless. Sacramēt, the progresse and cōtinuance of yt, and the defence of yt. Secōdlie, of the Masse which ys the solēne sacrifice of Chrysts Church, I haue shewed yowe good presidents, certē and assured practises, and these right auncient. Thirdlie, for the Sacramētaries doctrine, I haue shewed whē yt began, by whō yt was inuēted, whē and wher yt was condēned, and so ce F assed, and by whom yt was raised again in these our daies, in the whiche yt ys also laufullie again condēned. Nowe doo yowe the like, for your doctrine, and against ours, Shew the beginning, progresse, cōtinuance and defence of your Sacramentaries doctrine. Shewe the originalls and aunciēt presidents of your Cōmunion, which ys the kaie, and note of your religion, and cōferre thē as we haue done the Masse, with the aunciēt presidents of the primitiue Churche. Shew howe all your innouacions, whiche within these feweyears were in no place of the christian world vsed, were put down, howe and by whō that was compased: in what Popes time and Emperours reign they were suffred to be doen, yf anie suffred persecuciō or exile for thē, who stoode against these that ouerthrewe them, who wrote against thē that banished your religiō, and wher be the bookes, Yf your doctrine be so notablie good and ours so notablie wicked as yowe teache and preache yt to be, so great an alteraciō and decaie of religion frō so great a good to so grete an euell, coulde not be doē in the world withoute great note, without large testimonies of histores and cronicles of so lamentable a chaūge. Bring furth therfor yf G yowe can the monimētes and testimonies of this chaunge: Yf yowe can not, wise mā will thinke and beleue that ther was neuer none soche: Yf ther was none, thē be your procedings but nouelties, inuēted in these later daies, and neuer before in vse, and therfor well tearmed the newe religiō, newe doctrine, newe faith, newe churche, newe Communion.
Two things, M Iuell, I doubt not, but yowe knowe. Thone, that in the primitiue and auncient church ther arose no notable heresie, but yt was spedelie impugned: Thother, that of the originall and progresse of euerie soch ther were notes made and moniments for memorie left. As concerning the first, yt ys certē, that euē in the beginning of Chrystes Church Ebion and Cerinthus sowing their heresie were streight impugded by S. Iohn, against whō he was moued to write his gospell and epistles. Against the same also with other, as Valentinus, Marcion, Cerdon, Symon Samarites Basilides, Carpocrates, and soch like, wrote the holie Father Irenaeus not long after, who, as in his workes yt maie be seen in diuerse places, vsed for an argument against those heretiques, the presence of Chrysts bodie in the Sacramēt, and yet the same Irenaeus H was neuer noted of errour for his so affirming and teaching. Origen his works being fownde inspersed with diuerse errours, was noted for them, but wher he testifieth the presence of Chrystes bodie in the bless. Sacrament, he was [Page]neuer blamed: Ciprian the holie martir was verie vehemēt against Nouatus the heretique, and his sect, he diligentlie laboured to cut of soche weedes. A This holie mā in the matter of the presence wrote so plainlie as no mā more plainlie, he wrote also of baptisme. In the matter of the presence, the church hath allowed him, in the matter of Baptisme notwithstanding his holinesse they haue refused him. To be short Epiphanius and S. Augustine wrote bookes of the heresies of them that were before and in their times, and although manie besides the fore mēcioned had spoken so plainlie of the blessed Sacr. that they cleerly cōfessed the presence of Chrysts bodie in the same, as Martialis, Ignatius, Iustinus, Tertullianus, Hilarius, and manie other: yet be none of all these nor none other for that doctrine nōbred ther amōg heretiques, which vndoubtedlie they should haue ben, if the matter had so deserued. But trulie yt was neuer yet red in anie god writer, nor somoche as dreamed, that the cōfessiō of the presēce of Chryste in the bless. Sacramēt ys heresie or errour.
Nowe as touching histories witnessing the wicked beginning the miserable progresse, and open end and confusion of heresies, yt were superfluouse for me to write, sith ther hath ben no notable heresie or heretique, which are not recorded either by Eusebius, Teodoret, Sozomenus, Nicephorus, Aeneus Siluius, and soche other whose bookes be dailie in mens hands. By whom when B your Sacramētaries heresie begā we knowe, howe lōg yt continued openlie we knowe, who withstood yt and wrote against yt we knowe, in howe manie Councells yt hath be cōdemned we knowe. Furder who haue renewed the same in these later daies we knowe, when and howe Luther reigned we knowe: howe Oecolampadius folowed, though an other waie, we knowe, howe Caluine hath cōtroled both catholiques and heretiques we knowe, what the doings of these and their complices haue ben and be, we knowe, and that they haue ben and be condēned for heretiques we know. To be short, ther hath ben no notable alteracion or molestacion in religion by heresie, but yt ys committed to memorie in histories. Yf thē your doctrine and faith, your religion and profession, your notable Cōmunion, or raither confusiō, were once good and catholique, yt can not be but of so great an alteracion as to make catholique faith damnable heresie, or holie cōmunion wicked diuisiō ther must be some notable mencion in histories or some auncient monimēt in writing to declare yt. Yf yowe haue anie soche bring them furth, and thē C yowe shall doo fōwhat to allure wise men vnto yowe. For in this poinct I hold him nothing wise that will repute either your doctrine, faith, religion or communion to be good and catholique vntill yowe shewe good testimonies and presidents of the catholique vse of them, which I am certen yowe can neuer doo. As for soche euidences as your self nowe and your auncetours heretofore haue picked oute of the right and true euidences of the catholique Churche, I meen the holie scripturs, Councells, doctours, and approued histories, and with great boldnesse haue shewed thē to the world and auouched them to be yours and to assure your cause, they are allreadie well knowē ād tried not to be yours in dede, but to make all for the catholique faith and religiō, and mightilie against your singular phāsies and to ouer throw your wicked heresies, when they be plainlie opened, and deliuered frō your craftie corruptions, as they haue ben by sondrie and manie famouse learned men as well in this age, as before our time. And I, to my power, haue in this booke, for soche matters as I hādle, detected your forgerie, and corrupting of the euidences therto appertening, by your wresting, glosing, cutting, peicing, diminishing, adding, and other wise falsifieng the right, D cleer, wholl, perfect, godlie and true testimonies of the scripturs, Councells ād aunciēt doctours. And soch as be so flatte against your cause, as yowe can [Page]haue no aide of them, but be forced therfor either to depraue their authoritie with mocking and skorning, or flatlie to denie their workes, they are defended, E and holdē in their woorthie estimacions, and their denied works restored to the right authours. The first therfor, that ys the scripturs Coūcells and aunciēt doctours yowe can no more abuse for shame and chaleng to be on your side, whē being sifted frō your sleights, and clered frō your falshead all mē maie perceaue thē not to be your right euidēce, making, as thei do, so plainlie against yowe, ād mightilie ouerthrowing your cause. The other, that ys, the later learned writers and holie fathers, yow maie no lōger contemne being proued to agree, as they doe, with their elders and approued, as they be of the church, to be catholique and holie writers, your skoffesand mocks against them, will stand for no reason before wise men.
Nowe yowe vnderstand, M. Iuell, what I haue here doen, to the whiche yf either yowe or anie other for yowe shall by railing Rethorike make a pretensed answer, I do yowe to witte, that I will not vouchsafe to putt my penne to the papire for that kinde of answer. For I haue begonne with yowe in an other sort, and like a diuine, railing I haue left to ruffins F and skoldes, and coolours of persuasions to rethoricians, directlie according to my profession with all plain trueth haue I proceaded. Yf answere therfor shall be made, let yt be either a direct answere or none. Direct answer ys soche as I make to yow, where yowe abuse the vnderstāding of the scripture, or doctour, to proue the same vnto yowe: where yowe falsilie, to alleage the place truely: where yowe corrupt, to shewe the right saing: when yowe adde and put to, to declare what yowe adde and put to: whē yowe leaue oute, to expresse the woordes so by yowe left oute. And finallie, by full, plain, and expresse testimonie of scripturs, Councells, or doctours, as the condiciō of the matter requireth, to open and declare the trueth, and by like authoritie to proue and cōfirme the same. Thus haue I doē to yowe in plētifull maner, in euery matter here by me handled, so that the trueth of euerie thing ys so fullie opened, and by good authoritie so confirmed, that I trust, euerie man that will see maie see, and euerie man that will vnderstand, maie vnderstand, where the weight of the trueth ys.
Read therfor, M. Iuell, and diuorcing your self frō vainglorie to the which ye haue hen a lōg time maried, let your vnderstāding be captiuated vnto the G seruice of Chryste, Let not your vain estimaciō in errour and heresie detein yowe to come to the honorable estimacion, that ys gotten in the professing of Gods trueth. Let yt not be saied of yowe, as the holie father and Pope Leo saied of Eutiches: Noluit intelligere vt bene ageret. Iniquitatē meditatus est in cubili suo. My good will was that this mi doing should haue bē in your hāds a lōg timeer this, for yt was finished full three years past, but sicknesse, pouertie, and lacke of oportunitie to printe yt haue thus long staied yt. But sith nowe at the last yt ys by Gods helpe comed abroad, I heseche him of his great goodnesse to graūt that it maie be to his honour, ād to the helpe of his people ād that it maie be a medicine of health to yow, ād all that by your false doctrine ād sleight, haue bē entrapped ād deceaued. Yowe promised that yow wolde yelde to him that wolde bringfurth to yowe one scripture, or one doctour, or one Coūcell &c. as yow knowe: This being nowe doē by me ād other I wish that yow maie yeld your self prisoner, not in warrelike maner to vs, but in lowlie maner to Christe, ād his dere spouse the catholi (que) Churche, by acknowleging their faith, and professing their religion to saue your soule, which we shal be H most ioifull to vnderstād, ād for your soch cōuersiō yelde to God most hūble thanks. Yf yow doo not, yet let me wish yow for some better staie of your self hereafter, to haue this olde saing in minde: Ante victoriam ne canas triumphum.
THE PROLOGVE TO THE GENTLE READER. A
THe Phylystynes (gentle Reader) moued sore and great Haereilques moue Ware against the Churche. warre against the Israelites: The heretikes against the catholique Chruche of God, from whome ys comed furth a newe Golyath mightie in hys owne cōceit, with reprochfull woordes to reuyle the hoste of oure lyuyng God, and to blaspheme hys holie name, to raill at hys holie mysteryes and to comdemne hys holie ordināces, B who with impudēt mouthe (trusting, in the strēght of spere and sheilde) blustereth oute soche blasphemouse woordes, as the like to my knowledge (Crā, mer hys auncetour onelie excepted) neuer dyd phylistyne before hym.
He alone cometh oute, and prouokyng Israēl to battaill, maketh proclamation Proclamacion of the newe Goliath thus: Yf any learned man of all our Aduersaryes, or yf all the learned men that be a lyue, be hable to bring anye one suffycyent sentence, oute of anye olde catholique Doctour, or father: or oute of anye olde generall Councell: or oute of the holye scriptures of C God: or anye one example of the primatyue churche, wherbye yt may be elerely, and playnly, proued, that ther was anye pryuate masse in the wholl worlde at that tyme, for the space of syx hundreth years after Chryste &c. and a fewe articles recited, he proceadeth thus: or that the people were then taught to beleue, that Chryste bodye ys reallie, substantiallye, corporallye, carnallye or naturallye in the Sacrament: or that hys bodie ys, or may be in a thousand places, or mo, at one tyme: and sofurth proceadeng to laye oute hys matters enombreth xv. articles, all whiche (foure onelie excepted) be agaynst the holie Sacrament of Christes blessed bodie and bloode, And for that he D wolde not seem to faynte in hys doyng, he saieth, that he for hys parte wolde not onelie not call in anye thing that he had then saied, but also woldelaie more matter to the same, and so addeth he twelue mo artycles to the former, all whiche (one onelie excepted) be also against the blessed Sacramēt, and the mynystraciō of the same. whiche hys proclamation with the addycion he knytteth vppe thus: Yf any one of all oure Aduersaries, be able to auouche anye one of all these articles by anye soch suffycient anthorytie of Scriptures, Doctours, or Councells, as I haue required, as I saied before, so saie I nowe agayn: I am content to yelde vnto hym, and to subscrybe. E
VVhiche stoute bragge as some of hys likes (I suppose) myslyked, and manye good catholique men (I knowe) thought yt arrogant: So I thynking the same, like litle Dauid, not in faith, might, and powre: not in vertue and syngular fauour of God: but as the least and yongest of my breatheren, in the house of my ffather, not bearyng thys vyle reproche so arrogantlie, and shameleslie made against the hoste of God, of a good zeale hauyng sure trust in my lord God (whose cause for my powre, I wolde gladlie defende) hanyng some stones gathered together in my sheperdes bagge, I come in F the name of God against thys Goliath, and for thys tyme putting thys stone oute of my bagge into my slyng, I cast yt at hym, whiche, I trust, shall so hytte hym in the forehead, wher ys the seat of shamefastnesse, yf anye be in the man, that he shall be ashamed so to reuyle the wholl churche of God agayn. I saie the wholl Churche, for theise, hys lucyferouse woordes, be not spoken onelie against soche as were or be of the catholique Churche in Englō de: but to the contumelye of all the wholl catholique Churche of Chrystendome, whersoeuer ys or hath ben professed, and taught the reall presence G of Chrystes blessed bodie and blood in the holie Sacrament.
[Page]And for that hys cheif force ys bent agaynst that Sacrament, whyche ys H our comforte, foode, and nutryment to euerlasting life: I haue also bent my self therin cheiflie to withstande hym, not medling moche with anye other matter.
Wherunto yet when I prepared my self, and consydered one of the Articles of hys proclamaciō, wher in effect he saieth, that neuer mā was condemned as an herytyke, for saynge that the Sacrament was a fygure, a pledge, a tokē, or a remēbrance of Chrystes bodie: I began to be abasshed, First at his craft ād subletie vsed in so weightie matter of faith, wher all symplycitie and I playn dealing shoud be vsed. for if he referre theise his woordes to the syxe hondreth yeares next after Chryst, that in those ther was neuer man cōdemned for ā heretike, that saied that the Sacramēt was a figure, a pledge, a tokē a remēbrāce. yt ys true. for in all that tyme neuer was ther heretike that so saied in that sense that this proclamer ād his likes doo saye yt. wherfor that ys but a craftie toye to bleer the eye of the hearer to make him beleue that mē in those daies were not for so saing cōdemned, wher in dede none did so saye, and where none did so saie none coulde be condemned for yt. Moche like argumēt K might a felō make for hym self in these daies saing that Chryste, in whō after his resurrectiō, was the fullnesse of auctoritie and power, as he hym self wittnesseth, dyd neuer cōdemne anye of his Apostles or dysciples to deathe for felonye. wherfore he being a chrystian man aught not be condemned for felonye. This argument hath a trueth, for Chryste cōdemned none of them. for none of them were felons: but yt lacketh force, for though they not so offending were not condemned: yet thys felon so offending maye iustly be condemned. Likewise though none with in those syxe hondreth years, for as L muche as they so saied not, were not condemned: yet this proclamer so sainge maye wel be condemned And here I will ioyn issue with hym that if he can bring one within those sixe hondereth yeares that saied, as he saieth & was not condemned, I will subscrybe. Secundly I abasshed at hys impudencye. for if the man be so impudent as to saie, that neuer man was yet hitherto indged and condemned for an heretyke, that saied the Sacrament was a figure in that sense that he, and hys complyces do take yt, namelie to be a figure withoute the verie presence of the bodie of Christ, the contrarye M whereof ys knowen to all the worlde, and therfor not vnknowen to hym: what shall yt awaill me to buckle with so impudent a man?
For soche saiers haue ben condēned by eight Coūcells all readie, as heretykes, and theyr heresie so detested, hated, and abhorred of all christians, Sacramentaries condemned hyeight Councels. that the catholique learned men, yf they had but a suspicion, of anye that dyd in anie one title swarue from the verytie of Chrystes bodie in the Sacramēt, they furth with addressed them selues to their pennes, and with the swoorde of Gods trueth, vanquyshed, and ouerthrewe yt. N
Thys (as yt ys thought) moued Paschasius towryte in the matter of the Sacrament. for that Bertramus had in the tyme of kyng Charles wrytten therof Paschasi'. Bertramus wrote obscurclie and suspiciously of the Sacrament. suspycyouslie, and yet in suche sorte, as no mā coulde be certē what he assuredlie ment. Nowe that the treuth of the matter of the Sacramēt, shoulde not be obscured with soche doubtfull wryting, Paschasius wrotte a booke of the presence of the verie bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament, in soche expresse and playn woordes, as the symple man maye preceaue what was the faith of the Chruche in that tymeof that matter.
And for that, he was so playn, Gastius, one of thys proclamers faction, hauyng O gotten an olde exemplar of that worke (as yt ys appertynent to the [Page]syncerytie of soche men) he raced yt, he blotted yt, yea, he cutte oute wholl chapiters of yt. and that doen (that yt might to the woorlde appeare, A that Paschasius, who wrotte so long agone, wrotte yet nothing against the Sacramentaries) he sett yt furthe, so mutylated, so torn and so defaced, to be prynted.
But to return to speake of thys proclamer, consydering, as I saied, the Artycle wherin he saieth neuer man was condemned for an heretike, that affirmed the Sacramēte to be a figure, sign &c. I was so abasshed at hys impudecye, that I was partelye mynded not to haue ioyned with hym. B
But remembryng that yt was more impudencye to denye Chrystes presence in the Sacrament, whiche ys taught by Chrystes owne woordes delyuered by saincte Paule, beleued in the primytiue Churche, so receaued of holie men, wrytten by an infynyte nombre of learned wryters, confyrmed by Councells, and embraced and staied vpon, by all chrystyan nacions; I corrected my self, sayng that yf I wolde not spare to ioyn with hym in thys wicked assertyon, moche lesse shoulde I spare to ioyn with hym in that other.
Wherfore resumynge my former pourpose, I wyll in thys also ioyn with C hym. and shewyng from the begynnyng of the fyrst Aucthour of thys heresie euē vnto thys Proclamer, that they were all iudged for heretikes, whiche affyrmed and taught that the Sacrament ys a figure, (as thys Aduersarie and hys complyces do) I shall with all open the vanytie of hys bragge, wherin he saieth, that the catholique Churche▪ haith not one scrypture, not one doctour, &c. for the mayntenance of their faith.
For the playn openyng of whiche mattter, yt ys certen, by testymonye of manie learned mē, that though some dyd so cōfusedlie wryte in thys matter, D that they might be suspected, or dyd secretlie (as men fearyng the goodnesseof their cause) whisper in corners, whiche were very fewe: yet amonge all that rightlie beleued in Chryst, as God and man, Berengarius was the fyrst, that dyd openly wryte and teache, denyeng (as thys proclamer doth) the Berēgarius first openlie impugned the sacrament. reall presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode in the Sacrament.
Whiche Berengarius was about the yeare of our lorde a thousande ād three score, and So by computacion fyue hondreth yeares agon, & more, a man, as sundrye wryters testyfie) neither excellent in learnyng, nor commendable E Berēgarius neither excellent in learning nor cōmēdable in life. Leo nonus Platina in life: who publyshing thys doctryne by poure scholers, to whome he gaue stypende for that pourpose, he spredde yt abroad in corners.
Whiche when yt came to the knowledge of Leo then Pope, a man (as Platina saieth) of syngular sanctymonye, and holynesse of life: he condemned Berengarius in a Councell.
The woordes of Platina, for the certen declaracion of the matter, I shall not refuse to reporte. Thus he wryteth: Ad Leonem redeo virū certè pietate, innocentia, benignitate, gratia, hospitalitate, adeô insignem, vt eius Domus peregrinis, & F pauperibus semper patuerit. Nam cum semel ante fores suas leprosum pauperem inuenisset, cun (que) prae miscricordia collocari in lecto suo mādasset, apertis mane foribus à ianitore, nusquā pauper inuentus est. Christum pauperis nomine, eo loci recubuisse creditum. In rebus praeterea ad religionem pertinentibus, tanta diligentia. & solertia vsus est, vt & in Concilio Vercellensi Berengarium hereseos autorem damnauerit.
I come agayn to Leo, a man trulie in godlynesse, in innocēcye, benygnytie, grace, and hospytalytie so notable excellent, that to straūgers, and poure people hys house was allways open. For when vpon a tyme he fownde a poure G man, a leapre, lyeng before hys gate, and through mercye had godlie commaunded hym to be layed in hys bedde, in the mornyng when the gates were [Page]opened of the porter, the poor man was in no place fownde. And so yt was H thought that Chryste in the maner of a poor man was layed ther.
Besydes thys in matters apperteynyng to religyon he vsed so moche dyligence and wyse cyrcumspection, that in the Councell at Vercells he condemned Berēgarius condemned in the Coū cell of Vercells, at Rome, ād two other Coū cells. Berengarius the Author of an heresye. Thus farr Platina. This condē nacion notwithstandyng, the wicked man persysted in hys impyetie, wherfore an other Councell was holden at Towres, wher by dyuerse learned Fathers he was conuynced, and so abiured hys heresie.
And in à Councell holden at Rome, wher were cxiij. Byshops (as Lanfrācus I who then lyued testyfieth) he recanted also hys heresyes. Berēgarius recanteth and abiureth.
And yet all thys notwistāding, though thys cākre of heresie semed in the outwarde parte to be cured: yet yt fretted inwardlie, and grewe to an newe sore, that wher before he had taught that the Sacrament was but onelye a figure of the bodie of Chryst (as thys proclamer also tracheth) nowe he begā a newe doctryne, affyrmyng that in the Sacrament was the verye bodie of Christ: but that ther was also the Substāce of bread, with the Substāce of the bodie of Chryst. Wherupon ther was an other councell called vnder K Gregorye the vij, in the whiche the said. Berengarius beyng conuinced, dyd Gregorius. 7. acknowledge hys errour, and by expresse woordes recanted the same.
Not onelie these foure Councells condemned the heresye of Berengarius against the Sacrament but also the learned men that were in that tyme, peyned them selues to wryte wholl bookes to the confutacion of the said Berengarius, and hys heresies.
For against hym wrote Lanfrancus somtyme Archbyshope of Cantorburye, of whom Tritemius saied: that he was vir in diuinis scripturis erudjtiss. et non minus Lanfrancus. Tritemius. L sanctitate, quam scientia clarus a man in the dyuyne scryptures most excellentlie learned, and no lesse in holynesse, then in knoweledge notable.
Against the same also wrote Algerus, and Guitmundns. men not by my commē dacion onelie to be accepted, but by the Iudgement of Erasmus also, a man Algerus Guitmundus. not onely knowen to the worlde, but also specyallie famouse in thys Realme of Englonde, who openyng to vs what these two men were, sheweth therwtih the benefitt of God that cometh to hys churche by hys sufferāce of errours, and heresyes to growe. And enombryng dyuerse heresies cōceaued M against the blessed Sacrament he saieth thus: Et tamen horum omnium error in hoc profecit, vt in tanti mysterij cognitionem, magis ac magis tum erudita, tum confirmata Sras. in epistola ad Balthasarum Episc. Hildesùm. sit ecclesia. Nulli tamē plus debet quàm Berēgario. imo nō Berēgario, sed Chrstisapiē tiae, qui malitiā hominū vertit in bonūsponsaesuae. Quos & qualiū virorū calamos excitauit impudens error Berengarij? Nuper exijt opus Guitmundi, ex monacho Benedictino episcopi Auersensis. Nunc prodit Algerus ex scholastico monachus eiusdem instituti. Guitmundus acrior est & ardētior, & plus habet spiritus Rethorici: hic sedatior est ac religiosior, vter (que) tum Dialectices, tum reliquae philosophiae bellè peritus, licet citra ostētationem: vter (que) in canonicis scripturis, ac priscis illis doctoribus, Cypriano, Hilario, Ambrosio, Hieronimo, Augustino, N Basilio, Chrisostomo (quorum scripta plurimùm adhuc reserunt spiritus Apostolici) studiosè versatus: vter (que) tantum habet eloquentiae, quantum requirere à theologo par est. Certè dictionis argutiam, & collectionis acumen, nusquam in eis desideres. Agunt solidis rationibus, nec (vt nunc quidam faciunt) bonam voluminis partem rixis, & Christ turneth the malice of Heretiques to the profett of his Church. contentionibus occupant, aut sophisticis ratiunculis rem tractant. And yet the erroure of all these (saieth Erasmus) dyd prosytt in this, that in the hnowledge of so great a mysterye, the Churche shoulde be both more and more instructed, O and also confyrmed, Yet ys she to none more bownde then to Berengarius, yet not to Berēgarius, but to the wysdō of Chryste, who turneth the malice [Page]of men to the profett of his spouse▪ what writing, iea and of what men hath this impudent erroure of Berengarius stirred vppe? Of late went oute Erasmus calleth the errour of Berēgarius impudent. A the woorke of Quitmundus somtyme a benedyctyne Monke, and Bishoppe of Auergne: nowe commeth furth the worke of Algerus of a scholer, made a monke of the same ordre: Guitmundus ys sharpe and vehement, and hath more of the rethoricall spiritte: the other milde, and religiouse; bothe of them well learned both in logike and philosophie, although withoute ostētation; both of them well studied both in the canonicall scriptures and in the olde doctors Cyprian, Hillarie, Ambrose, Hierom, Augustin, Basill, and Chrisostome. B whose writinges do yet declare moche of the Apostolicall spiritte: Bothe of thē haue as moch eloquence as ys meet to be required of a diuine. As for wittie speache, and sharpenesse of collection, ther ys no lacke in them in anie place. They go to yt with substanciall reasons, neither do they as some whiche occupie a good parte of ther bookes, with braulinges, and contenciōs, and handle the matter with sophisticall disputacions & reasons. Thus moche Erasmus.
I haue the more willinglie transcribed thus moche of Erasmus bicause the C Aduersaries haue had him in good price, and regarded his sainges. Yf this champion do the like, let him diligentlie obserue that Erasmus calleth the erroure of Berengarius, an impudenterroure. Whiche so being, forsomoch as this man ys drowned in the same, and mainteineth the same, maie we not Errour of the Proclamer impudent. iustlie saie, that he impudentlie mainteineth an impudent erroure? Let him also note, howe he commendeth these men, and what Iudgement he hath of their learning bothe in liberall sciences, in Scriptures, and doctours. whō he doth also no lesse extoll, but that by their writinges God hath doen a great benefet to his Churche. whiche so standing yt can not be but that the D Scriptures, and doctours be plain, and euident for the proof of the veritie Yf their writing be a benefett, then this chalengers doimgeys a detriment. Petrus Waldo skoureth the estie heresie of Berēgarius of the reall presence of Christes bodie in the Sacrament. whiche scriptures and doctours adduced by these learned men be mo then one, or one score, and yet this Proclamer crieth: bring one doc &c.
After Berengarius rose one Petrus Waldo a citizen of Lions, a man vnlearned, yet as vulearned as he was, when he had newlie skoured the rustie condemned heresie of Berēgarius (in soch rude maner as yt was) manie were so folish, and so readie to fall from faith to heresie, from life to death and damnacion, E from teaching of the learned to the teaching of the ignorarūt, that thei chose raither to folowe the phantasie of this one rude man void of knowledge, than to remain in the Substancial tried doctrine of a nombre of holie, and most excellent learned men of Christes Churche. Thus (more pietie yt was) a mombre folowed hym, and became his disciples, and were called Waldenses. Waldenses. Heretiques condēned Vnto whom becomminge an Aucthor and blinde guide, according to Christes saing, he led them so, as both fell into the ditche. This secte and heresie of this Waldo, was not suffred to stand, but (as Guido saieth) was condemned F in a Councell holden at Rome. And yet this Proclamer saieth ther was neuer man indged for an heretike that saied the Sacrament was a figure, a token, &c.
In the tyme of saincte Bernarde Satan wolde moue yet some more trooble to the Churche. and therfor raised one Peter de Bruis whom he taught to Petrus Brusian. his heresie. sell theise lies to the people for trueths, that though Christ in his last supper did in the Sacramēt, geue hys bodie to his Apostles: yet no preist doth so nowe, by the power of his woorde, as yt ys saied that they doe. For neuer anione G (quoth he) but Christ alone did geue his bodie in the Sacrament. [Page]Although thys heresie geuing soche preeminence to Christ that, by cause he H saied, thys ys my bodye, teacheth that he in dede gaue to hys Apostles hys verye bodie, ys woorthy of more fauour thē the heresie whiche thys Proclamer teacheth (for not withstanding that our Sauiour Chryst saied: Thys ys my bodie, yet thys Aduersarie teacheth yt ys not) yet passed not this heresie awaie in scylence, but was wrytten against by dyuerse. Among whyche Petrus Gluniacensis whose commendation ys so moche settfurth in dyuerse Epistles of saynct Bernarde, that he nedeth not myne to commend hym) wrote Petrus Cluniacen. a booke in the matter of the Sacrament against the sect of the same Peter de Bruys, called Petrobrusians, and other cleauing to them, called Henrycyans, I In the whiche booke, I am certen, ther be mo then one scripture, one doctour Almaricus a Sacramentarie condemned in the Coū cell of lateran. &c. alleaged and brought furth. Yt ys saied that one Almaricus amōge other heresies, dyd also sette furth thys heresie against the Sacrament, who with thys hys heresie and hys other, as Bernardus de Lutzēburgo saith, were condemned in the great Lateran Councell.
After all these commeth the famouse heretike Ihon Wycleff oure contrey man, whom God suffred with manye pestylent heresies to trouble the Churche. Amonge whiche heresies he helde two or three against K Iohn wicleff oure cō trie man an heretique condē ned. the Sacrament. All whose articles being in nombre fortie and fiue, Ioannes Hus, besides other of hys owne inuencion dyd holde and maynteyn, auouching them to be good and godlie. And as he embraced the doctryn of VVycleff. So dyd Hierom de Praga both the doctryne of Wycleff and of the said Ioannes Hus, who being conuented for the same in the Couuncell Ioānes hus condēned. Horonimus de Praga condemned. of Constance, dyd fyrst, as Berengarius dyd, abiure hys heresies. After, to declare what constancie was in hym, he reuoked hys abiuracion, ād auouched the doctrine of Wicleff and Hus. All whiche three with their heresies were in L that Councell of Constance condemned.
Luther and Oecolampadius, although repugnaunt one to the other, in this Luther Oecolampad. our time, they haue saied and doen as moche as this champyon can doe, and thought themselues as mightie as he. An yet they haue not onely bē impugned by writers: but also condemned as heretikes in the generall Councell of Trydent.
Thus haue ye nowe seen the wholl descent of this heresie against the blessed Sacrament, euen from Berengarius the first open teacher of the same, vnto M Luther and Oecolampadius the newe furbushers and skourers of the same: Ye perceaue that from time to time, they were euer condemned by Councells as heretikes, that taught the blessed Sacrament to be but a figure or token of Christes bodie, and not the bodie yt self: ye haue seen that learned mē haue written against them, and with learning beaten them downe, for that they reputed, esteemed, and iudged them as heretikes, and the enemies of gods trueth, as the breakers, subuerters, and destroyers of peace, and dissoluers of the vnitie of Christes churche. N
Maye I not therfore well saie, that this proclamer ys an impudent man, a shamelesse man, which feareth not to speake so openlie, to preache so boldelie, to write so shameleslie so manyfest an vntrueth, as to saie in effecte, that neuer man was iudged an heretike, that denied the presence of Christes bodie in the Sacrament, when they were neuer yet otherwise iudged? But to ende this parte of the matter, this dare I saie (for that I knowe I shall speake yt trulie) that to this daie ther was neuer man iudged or condemned by any O generall Councell that euer was, to be an heretike that saied, that Christes bodie ys reallie and substanciallie in the Sacrament. Nowe yf this doctrine [Page]neuer, and the other euer, hath ben condemned, yt ys easie to iudge, A what eche of these doctrines ys.
To come to this our time, beside the condemnacion of the heresies of Luther and Oecolampadius in the matter of the Sacrament, as before ys saied, Euē as Lanfrancus, Algerus, & Guitmundus did aginst Berengarius, auouche the catho like doctrine by their workes and Boorkes sett furth for the same pourpose: Euen so a great nombre as well of owre contrie men, as other, haue by scriptures, Councells, and doctours, against the said Luther and Oecolampadius, doen the like. B
For to beginne with our contrie men first, hath not the learned, graue, and reuerend Father Ihon somtime Byshoppe of Rochester, encountred against Rofensius neuer yet aunswered. them, and with Scriptures, Coūcells. and doctours so mightilie and inuiuciblie ouerthrowen them, that neuer till this daie any Philistin durst take weapon in hāde against hym to helpe vppe and recouer ther Goliaths and champions? And can not this Goliath see one scripture, one Councell, nor one doctour in all those his woorkes written to that pourpose? Tonstall of Tonstallus Dunelmen Steph. wint duresme, and Stephen of winchester, bothe reuerend Fathers, men not one C lie in Englonde, but also in other nacions right famouse, haue they not left their woorthie monumentes behinde them, replenished with scriptures, Councels, and doctours, for the assertion of their faithe in this matter of the Sacramēt, to the cōfusiō of the aduersaries. Also Ihon late of winchester, Ioā wyntō. hathe he not collected into one booke two hundereth wittnesses of scriptures, Councells and doctours, for the veritie of Christes bodie in the Blessed Sacrament?
Doctour watson Bishoppe of Lincolne, as heys right woorthely learned: watsonus Lincoln. D So to hys moche prayse hath he writtē godlie, and learned Sermons of the blessed Sacramēt, in the whiche be mo plain testimonies of scriptures, Coū cells, and doctours, alleaged for the trueth of this matter of the Sacrament, then the protestantes can bring apparaunt for their herisie. Doctour Albane Albanus Lāgdallue. Langdale Archdeacon of Chychestre in the confntacion of the determinacion made by Redleye, at the disputacion holden at Cambridge for the matter of the Sacrament, ys so plentyfull in scriptures, Councells, and doctours, and so pythie withall, and so plainlie laieth them furth for that pourpose, that this Goliath with all his blasphemouse, and prowde woordes shal neuer E be able to conuince him.
Yf heresie were not by election, and election of singularitie, and singularitie sett not more by her owne phantasie, then by most mens iudgementes, Heresie ys by election. be they neuer so graue, neuer so wyse, neuer so well learned, the iudgement of these men in the scriptures, Councells, and docturs, whiche they alleadge as sentēces euidēt, and plain, certēlie and clerely prouing the reall presence of Christes bodie in the Sacrament mighte suffice to pull downe the peacockes taile of this singular man. But in the iudgement of them that be wyse I F doubte not, but hys bragge semeth more prowde than true.
Besydes all these, to speake of other that be straungers hath not this man hearde of the fame of Alfonsus, who not long sence was here in Englonde, Alfonsus. and wrote here parte of his booke, which he hath written and sett furthe against al heresies, in the whiche he inueyeth against this newe Goliath and all like Philistines, their adherents, and complices, yea and against all their Thirtē sundrie heresies against the Sacrament. Auncetours. Where he maketh rehersall of thirten sundrie heresies inuented by that wicked generacion against this holie and blessed Sacrament and G conuinceth them all as well with scriptures, and Councells, as with many [Page]holie doctours and famouse writers, and yet this proclamer cryeth: bring H furth one scripture, one Councell, one doctour, one example, &c.
The time wolde not serue to nombre all that haue written in this matter, and tedyousnesse wolde encombre the Reader, wherfore leauing manie, as Gropperus, who right learnedlie, and largelie hath hādled and setfurthe the Gropperus. faithe of the Churche in all times of the high pointes of the Sacramēt, auouching the same by scriptures, doctours, and Councells: And Wernierus, who like vnto the Nycen Councell, hath made Collection of three hondreth Ʋernierus. eighten places of scriptures, doctours, and Councells, for the assertion of the trueth of the Sacrament: And also, Tauernerius, Eckius, Pighius, Hoffmeisterus, Garetius, I Tauernerius. Eckius. Pighius. Hosfmeister. Garetius. with other manie: I will onelie bring two, who be soche as, I suppose, this man will better regard, and better like their iudgementes in this matter, then of these before mencioned.
The one of them shall be, Erasmus who in hys epistle aboue alleaged wryteth thus: Ex euangelio habemus, Hoc est corpus meum, quod pro vobis tradi [...]ur. Ex Paulo Erasmus ad Balthas Episcop. habemus: Ego enim accepi à Domino quod & tradidi vobis, &c. Et qui ederit, & biberit indignè reus erit corporis & sanguinis Domini. Hoc nobis immobile fundamentum. Oute of the Gospell we haue: This ys my bodie, whiche ys delyuered for K yowe. Oute of Paule we haue: I haue receaued of our lorde, which I delyuered also vnto yowe, and so furthe. And he that eateth and drinketh vnwourthylie Erasmus his iudgement of the Sacramēt shall be giltie of the bodie and blood of our lorde. This ys vnto vs an vmnoueable foundacion. And after a fewe woordes he saieth: Cum igitur tam euidens à Christo & Paulo habeamus testimonium, quum per hos viros euidentissimè declaratum sit priscos, quibus non sine causa tantum auctoritatis tribuit ecclesia, concorditer sensisse in Eucharistia veram esse substantiam corporis & sanguinis Domini, quum ijs omnibus L etiā accesserit Synodorū constās autoritas, tantusque populi Christiani cōsensus, simus et nos concordes in tam caelesti mysterio, & hic sub enigmate edamus de pane et calice Domini, donec aliter edamus, & bibamus, in regno Dei. Vtinam autem qui Berengarium secuti sunt errantem, sequantur & paenitentem. Seing then we haue both of Christ and of Paule so euident testimonie, seing also by these men (meening, Guitmundus and Algerus) yt ys most euidentlie declared, that the olde auncyent Fathers (vnto whom the Churche not withoute cause yeldeth so moche authoritie) haue agreablie vnderstand the verie substāce of the bodie and blood of our M Lorde to be in the Sacrament: Seing also that to all theise agreeth the constant Authoritie of the Councells, and so great a consent of Christian people, let vs also agree in so heauenly a mysterie, and let vs here in a darke maner, as vnder a couert, eate of the bread, and drinke of the cuppe of our lorde, vntill otherwyse we maye eate and drinke in the kingdom of God. Wolde to God that all they that haue folowed, Berengariut in errour, wolde folowe hym also in penaunce. Thus farre Erasmus: Note gentle Reader, and I wolde the Aduersarie shoulde note also, that here ys most euident testimonie affirmed, N and auouched out of Christ, and Paule, and the common concorde of all the doctours, the constante Authoritie of Councells, the vniuersall and wholl consente of Christian people, all agreyng, beleuing, and teaching the very substance of Christes bodie and blood to be in the Sacrament. Forasmoch then as here ys produced asmoche and more to, then thys chalenger did require (for he did require but anye one scripture, one doctour, one coū cell) and here be produced sundrie scriptures, all the olde doctours the Authortie of the Councels, and besydes these the common and vniuersall consent O of the Christian orbe, yf ther be anye trueth in thys man, he will perfourme his promisse and subscribe to this trueth, whiche wolde to God were [Page]doen by him, that (to conclude with Erasmus his sayng) he might folowe, Berengarius in penaunce, as he hath folowed hym in erroure. Nowe to the better A confirmacion of this matter, and to the more confutacion of this hys impudent boast, and shamefull blasphemye, I shall ioyn his owne schoole with hym, I meen the learned of the Germanes, whiche write thus: Decimus Articulus approbatus est, in quo confitemur nos sentire, quod in coena Domini verè & Apologia Confess. August. substantialiter adsint corpus & sanguis Chrysti, & verè exhibeantur cum illis rebus quae videntur, pane & vino, his qui sacramentum accipiunt. Hanc sententiam constanter defenderunt concionatores nostri. Et comperimus non tantùm Romanam ecclesiam affirmare corporalem praesentiam Chrysti, sed idem & nunc sentire, & olim sensisse Graecam ecclesiā, vt testatur canon Missae apud Graecos. Et extant quorundam scriptorum testimonia. Nam Cyrillus in Ioannem cap. xv. inquit Chrystū nobis corporaliter exhiberi in coena. Sic enim ait: Cyrillus Non tamen negamus recta nos fide, charitateue syncera Chrysto spiritualiter coniungi. Sed nullam nobis coniunctionis rationem secundùm carnem cum illo esse, id profectò pernegamus, idue à scripturis diuinis omnino alienū dicimus. An sortasse putāt ignotā nobis mysticae benedictionis virtutē esse, quae cum in nobis fit, nónne corporaliter quo (que) facit cōmunicatione carnis Chrysti, Chrystū in nobis habitare? Et paulo post: Vnde considerandū est, non habitudine B solùm, quae per charitatē intelligitur, Chrystū in nobis esse, verumetiam participatione naturali, etc. Haec recitauimus, vt clarius perspicerent, qui ista legent, nos defendere receptam in tota ecclesia sententiam, quòd in coena Domini, verè et substantialiter adsint corpus, The Germanes acknowlege the verie presence of Chryst in the Sacrament. et sanguis Christi. The tenthe article ys approued, in the whiche we confesse that we beleue that in the supper of our Lorde be verilie and substantiallie present, the bodie and blood of Chryst, and that they be verilie geuen with those thinges that be seē, that ys, with bread and wine, vnto them that receaue the Sacramēt. Thys sentēce haue our preachers cōstantlie defended, And we finde not onelie the churche of Rome to affirme the corporall presence of Chryst in the Sacramēt, but also the greke churche both nowe to beleue, The greke and latine Churches, both nowe and in olde time affirme the corporall presence. and of olde time to haue beleued the same, as the Canō of the Masse emōg the grekes dothe testifie. And ther be also extant the testimonic of certain writers. For Cyrillus vpon Iohn in the fiuetene chapter saieth, that Chryst ys corporallie deliuered vnto vs in the Supper. Thus he saieth: We do not denie that we be spirituallie ioyned vnto Chryst by faith and syncere charitie. But C that we haue no maner of cōiunctiō with him after the flesh, that we verilie, denie, and that we saie, ys altogether against the scriptures. Doth he thinke the power of the mystical benediction to be vnknowen vnto vs? which whē Chryst dwelleth in vs corporallie not onlie spirituallie The receaued doctrine in all the Church ys, that Chryst ys verily, and substā tiallie present in the Sacramēt. yt ys doen in vs, doth yt not also by the communication of Chrystes flesh, make Chryst corporallie to dwell in vs? And a litle after he saieth: Wherfor yt ys to be consydered, that not by inward disposition onelie, wihiche ys vnderstand by charitie, Chryst dwelleth in vs: but also by naturall participaciō, &c. These thinges haue we recited, that what soeuer they be that shall read thys, they shoulde the more clearly perceaue, that we defende the doctrine receaued in all the Churche, whiche ys, that in the supper of our Lorde are verilie and substanciallie present the bodie and bloode of Chryst. Thus moche the Germans in their Apologie. I suppose this proclamer will nowe take a better minde with him, and somwhat contracte and drawe in the large sales of his great bragge, so vehementlie puffed vppe with a mightie vain gloriouse winde, when he seeth the learned of Germanie so franklie and plainly publishing their faith, whiche, though yt be not in euery point sownde, yet D auouche they the contrarie to the doctrine of this proclamer, and encoūter with him in this chalenge.
For first they cōfesse the very substāciall presence of the bodie and blood [Page]of Chryst in the Sacrament. Secondarely they confirme the same by the authoritie E of all the Christian churche, as well the latin, as the greke church, for that in them both, not nowe onely, but of olde time also, yt hath ben so taught, receaued, and beleued. Thirdly they alleadge a clere and most plain place oute of Cyrill, whiche by their iudgement, as yt dothe appeare, doth manifestly and inuinciblie proue the corporall presence of Chryst in the Sacrament. And as yt so doth by their iudgement: so doth yt by the iudgement of all catholike men, not onelie withstand this prowde Goliath, But yt plainly ouerthroweth hym. Of the force of whiche sentence, more shall be saied hereafter. Fourthlie earnestly acknowledging this trueth, and willing yt to be knowen to all the worlde, they declare that the cause of their thus writing ys, that all men might knowe, that they do defende the trueth receaued of all the Churche, which ys (saie they (that the bodie and blood of Chryst be verilie and substanciallie in the Sacrament.
This then being a treuth, that ys and hath ben receaued of all the wholl Church of Chryste, as besides these mens confession, all catholique people through oute all christendome do acknowlege yt so to be, I praie thee (good F Reader) what parte doth this mā take to defende, who with might and main dothe maintein the cōtrarie: And impugneth that, that the wholl Churche receaueth, reuileth that, that the whol Church reuerenceth: blasphemeth that, that the wholl Churche honoureth? and that so arrogantlie and impudētlie?
Yt ys pittie that ther ys so moche impudencie, and so moche arrogancie The Proclamer ys to be pitied. mixed with vntrueth in him. I saie pittie for that he ys Gods creature, and in Baptisme once professed Christes name, in this respecte charitie moueth me to pittie him, and the more for that he receauing the plentifull giftes of God, doth so wickedlie to the more encrease of his damnacion abuse them, and forsaking God and his trueth, becometh enemie to them bothe, which he well declareth in that with soche violence he impugneth, and blasphemeth them both.
In this parte and respecte as I cā not ioin with him: so for my masters cause, and the defence of my Mother the catholique Churche, in whose house I desire to cōtinewe, I cōtende with him, and contēne him, yea and hate him, not the substance that God hath created in him, but the wicked heresie that G the Deuell hath breathed into him, by which as he ys become enemie to God: so must all the people of God become enemies to him, as of the Prophet Heresiemaketh mā enemie to God. Psalm. 148 Dauid we haue good example. Do not I, o lord (saeth he) hate them, that hate thee? And am not I greiued with those that ryse vppe against thee? Yea, I hate them right sore, euen as though they were my enemies. And yet as I moue my penne against him: So shall I moue my tounge to praye for him. Possible yt ys that he being in the highest of his mischief, maye be stryken downe as Paule was in the hyghest of his rage of persecucion.
Saincte Augustine when he walked in heresie, and did most stowtly contempne the catholique professiō of Christes name: yt pleased God, sodenlie as yt were, to geue him a newe minde, and caused him to reuerence that, that before he despiced.
The like happie chaunce I wishe this mā, against whom yf I haue ben, or in this boke shall seme to be sharpe, let yt be referred to the euel cause wich the man defendeth, and not the person himself. The doctrine ys so wicked, so directly against Gods holie woord, so discrepant from the holie Councells, so H dissonant from the auncient Fathers, so dissenting frō the common consent of Christian people, so iniuriouse, and contumeliouse to the wholl Churche [Page]that hath ben from Christ vntill this daie, that yt ys by no means tollerable. A
Nowe Reader, I trust thowe seist, that as moche as this iolie Chalenger required, ys nowe perfourmed to him, let him therfor perfourme his promesse, and subscribe to the catholique faith, and confesse Christes reall presence in the Sacrament. Yf he will yet maliciouslie persist, and saie; ther ys no scripture, nor doctour, nor Councell brought furth, that plainly proueth yt, thē we must prouoke to iudges. Yf he will not beleue the Germanes being Protestantes, not Erasmus, who ys accompted of them an vppright man, not the Catholiques of our owne contrie, and of other contries, not the Councells, which be alleaged, not Cyrills plain and manifest sentēce, not the cōmon receaued faith of the wholl Churche, as well of that of the olde time, as that, that ys nowe, bothe of the latines, and of the grekes, not the plain woordes of Christ, who plainlie saith: This ys my bodie: Whiche woordes Erasmus saieth be owre sure and vmmoueable fundacion: I praie thee, Reader, whome will he beleue besides himself? Who shal bringe furth that one scripture, doctour, or Councell, that he will accept, as plainlie prouing the matter? None but he B himself, or his likes, moche like to the Felon that pleadeth not giltie, and stoutlie crieth to be tried by God, and the contrie. And when by verdict of the iurie and sentence of the iudge he ys cōdēned, he defieth thē all callinge bothe iudge and q̄st false harlotts, ad saieth, that true mē wolde neuer haue cōdēned him. But the true mē that he meeneth be soche as heys himself. Soche true mē they be nowe also, that this mā wil creditte in this matter, euē soche as he ys himself, yf he doe refuse all these kindes of mē aboue produced.
But howesoeuer he shall take this, and the rest of my booke in outwarde countenance, I trust yt shal touche his conscience. And then (as Chrysostom Smalle conforte wher conscience ys consounded. saieth) Leuis erit consolatio, vbi conscientiae sentiunt se esse confusas. Yt ys but a light or small comfort, when the consciences of men perceaue them selues confownded.
God of his mercie reduce him and all, that be gone astraie, home to hys folde again, that they be not in his terrible iudgement confownded before him and all his Angells.
Nowe, Reader, that the order of this my rude worke maye be knowen vnto C Ordre of the Booke. thee, vnderstād that wher the enemie of Gods trueth, hath in his saied sermō made his boast, that he ys sure, that not one sentēce cā be brought by the catholiq̄s to proue the Articles, ther by him rehersed, amōge the which, beside the reall and substāciall presence of Christ in the Sacramēt, he addeth manie other thinges apperteininge to the same, which he ioineth together vnder one predicamēt, that ys, that we haue no proof for them: that he maye be perceaued to be a vain and false man, I will proue yt by scriptures, doctours, and Councells. And incidentlie diuerse other of his rehersed matters, to this principal apperteining, Whiche, allthough I ouerpasse them not in soche maner as he doth, onelie to saie, and nothing to proue or improue thē, as they be of him vttered: yet ye shall finde thē answered, wher occasion ys ministred to speake of soche matter.
And although manie profownde, and excellent learned men, whose latchettes of their shoes I am not woorthie to loose, haue woorthlie written in this matter: yet for that none of them, to my knowledge, hathe after this maner proceaded orderlie to expownde the scriptures, that treact of the Sacrament, D whiche methinke to the confutacion of this man ys necessarie, I will, by the helpe of God, that waie proceade, and not by mine owne phantasie, but by the verie mindes of the doctours, truely seke oute the true vnderstanding [Page]of them. And for that these scriptures be in three sundrie bookes of the E Bible, that ys, in the olde Testament, in the Gospells, and in the epistles: ther The contens, and ordre of this work. for the matter beinge lōg, I haue diuided this rude worke into three bookes. In the first booke are opened soche promisses, figures, and prophecies of the olde Testament, as appertein to the Sacrament. The seconde booke geueth yow vnderstanding of the scriptures apperteininge to the same, conteined in the vj. of sainct Ihon his Gospell, the xxvj of sainct Matthew, and in the xxiiij. of saincte Luke. The thirde booke expowndeth so moche of the tenth, and the eleuenth chapiter of the first epistle to the Corinthians, as toucheth that matter, and also one sentence of the epistle to the Ephesians, and one other to the Hebrues.
In this exposition, to the more confutacion of the Aduersaire, and confirmacion of the catholique, I, for the most part, bringinge sundrie, and diuerse doctours vpon euerie text, doe ioin a greke doctour and a latine together, that the concord and agreement of bothe churches maye well appeare, and fullie be seen. So haue I also ioined the doctours that haue written within E the compasse of these nine hondreth yeares, to them that haue written before, that yt maie be iudged, whether that these of the later time doo differ, or dissent from them of the auncient time in the substanciall poinctes of our faith, as the aduersarie saieth they doo.
By which processe, gētle Reader, thow shalt, I trust, perceaue, that where the arrogante Philistine both blasphemouslie, and vntruelie hathe said of the Catholique Church of the liuing God, that yt hathe not one scripture, one doctour, nor one Councell: yt hathe vndoubredly, as touching the blessed Sacramēt, and other articles apperteining to the same, not onelie al the holie Scriptures that treact of that holie mysteric, but also the holie Fathers, and Councells, that speake of the same, both Grekes and latines, and them aswel of the auncient time before a thousand yeares, as thē, that were of the later time, within the cōpasse of a thousand yeares. So that the scriptures being thus explained by the common consent of so manie doctours, and all the same also conspiring vpon this one trueth (as yt shall be perceaued, not by a vain bragge, withoute proofe, but by euident and plain testimonie) we maic as truelie G as boldlie, returning his bragge into his owne lappe, saie, that this philistine and his cōplices, for the maintenance of their heresie against the presence of Christ in the blessed Sacramēt, haue not one scripture, one doctour, nor one Catholiq̄ Coūcel to make for thē. Which thīge, I dare saie, the indifferēt Reader, whē he shal haue perused this booke, wil not feare to auouche with me.
And wishinge that this my laboure might be profitable to the simple and Catholique Church Christes Parliamēt house. vnlearned, for whose helpe I haue most speciallie taken yt, I haue framed my writing, as neare as the matter will suffre, to their capacities. And wher in ciuill, and politike regiment, Lawes, Actes and statutes haue their force by Councells and Parliamentes, therfor wher the veritie of Christes reall presence in the Sacrament, ys a trueth establissed, enacted, and receaued by Christes Parliament house (I meen the catholique Churche) yt liketh me oftentimes to allude to the name, and therto agreablie to name this booke. I haue Title of the booke. not entēded to fall one heere breadth frō the faith of the catholiq̄ Churche. Yf anie thing hath slipped from me, I submitte yt to the correction of Christes H catholique Churche, and my self also, Prainge thee, god Reader, to accept my labours in good part, and remembre me in thy prayers. Vale.
THE FIRSTE BOOKE. A
THE FIRST CHAPITER VPON OCCASION THAT THIS ADVERSARIE, THIS PROCLAMER, AND CHALENger wolde haue the scriptures red of all men (presupposing the same to be easie to be vnderstanded) entreth, as by preamble, to treact of the difficultie of the scriptures, and to prooue that they aught not of all men to be red, without an hable interpretour or teacher.
HAVING in pourpose to declare by the testimonie of the noble men of Christes Parliament house, the enacted and receaued treuth, or true meening of all, or most of soche scriptures, as treact of the blessd Sacrament of the bodie and bloode of our Sauioure Christe, ther cometh to my minde the doctrine of Luther, the great Progenitour of this Aduersarie, who in his booke. De seruo arbitrio Luther. de seruo arbitr. B (as other his ympes likewise in their bookes) teacheth, that the scriptures of them selues be easie of all men to be vnderstanded, and nede no interpretour.
Wherunto also (the more to infatuate the people) he addeth, that we be all, Theodidacti, that ys to saie, taught of God, and of his Spirit, so that yt shall not nede for one man to teache an other, or for one to learn of an other. Of whiche mynde this Aduersarie semeth also to be, in that he woolde the scriptures shoulde be commō to all men. Whiche doctrine yf yt were true, then ys my pourpose here vain and superfluouse, which ys to seke oute the true meening of the scriptures by the holie fathers and doctours.
Wherfore, as a preamble to this rude worke, I haue thought good to discusse, and by discussion to make plain to the vnlearned Reader, that the scriptures be obscure, darke, and harde to be vnderstāded, and for that cause not of all men indifferentlie to be red. Wherbie yt shall appeare, that my pourpose shall be to good effecte. And for the better cōpasing therof, I minde to C shewe to the vnlearned the waie to atteign to the true vnderstanding of the scriptures, and that doen, to proceade to my matter principallie intended.
And wher our cheif pourpose ys, to treact of the blessed Sacrament this 1. Scriptures to be hard prooued by seuen argumentes 2. maie iustlie be the first argument, that the controuersies therof in theise oure daies moued (whiche be to manie) do make yt more then manifest, that ther be difficulties in the scriptures. Yf difficulties, then be they not plain.
The secōde: the disciples whiche heard Christes owne disputacion of this mysterie, proceading oute of his owne mouthe, as oute of the liuelie welspring, ād who, for that they were disciples, shoulde better haue disgested Cristes woordes, then the people of the Iewes, who groslie saied: Quomodo potest hic dare nobis carnem suam ad manducandum? howe can this man geue vs his flesh to eate? Yet they (the disciples I meen) in the ende of the disputacion saied: Durus Ioan. 6. The disciples vnderstode not Christes owne woordes. est hic sermo, quis potest eum audire? This ys an hard saieng, who can abide to heare him? So that neither the people of the Iewes, nor yet the verie disciples of Christe, whiche shoulde moch haue exceaded the other, did atteign to the trewe vnderstanding of Christes woordes, carnall reason preuailing against humble and lowlie submission to faithe. D
Vpon the whiche woordes of the disciples, Chrystome saieth, Quid ergo est, Durus? difficilis intellectu, & quē capere non posset eoram imbecillitas, plenus formidinis. Chrysost, in 6. Joan. [Page]What then ys this woorde, harde? A saieng not easie to be vnderstanded, and E whiche being full of dread, their imbecillitie coulde not beare or take. Yf then the woordes whiche Christe spake, being the gospell (although vnwritten) were (as Chrisostome saieth) not easie to be vnderstanded, what more easinesse maie we thinke to be in thē nowe being the gospel written?
And further yf we trulie saie that the scriptures be easie, and plain for euerie man to vnderstande, yt shoulde appeare, that yt was no great benefet, 3. that Christe did to his Apostles, in opening their wittes, that thei might vnderstande the scriptures. Neither was it anye great matter that he Luc. 24. did to the two disciples that went to Emaus. vnto whome beginning at Moyses, and the prophettes he interpreted in all scriptures whiche were written Jbid. of him.
But certenlie yt was agreat benefet, that Christe did at theise two sundrie Christes interpreting of the scripturs, and opēnig of wittes to vnderstād them argueth the difficultie. 2. Petr. 3. tymes geue, in openyng theyr wittes to vnderstand the scriptures to the one: and in interpreting the scriptures to the other. For withoute this benefet neither the one, nor the other coulde haue atteigned to that gifte. F Wherfore the depenesse of the scriptures weighed, and oure infirmitie considered, we maie verie well conclude with saincte Peter, that as (he wittnessing) the epistles of saincte Paule be hard: so be the rest of the scriptures harde.
Of this the chamberlain of queen Candace, of whome ys made mencion in the actes of the Apostles, beinge so well affected to the scriptures, that passing from Hierusalem homewarde, and sitting in his chariette he was reading 4. Acto. 8. them, and yet vnderstoode them not, had good experience. That he vnderstoode them not yt dothe well appeare by his owne confession. For Philippe beinge moued by the Spirit of God to ioin him self to his chariette, heard him reade Esaie the Prophete, and asked him saing: vnderstandest thowe, what thowe readest? and he aunswered and saied: howe can I, except I had a guide? wherefore when Philippe was with him in his chariette, and the scripture was red, the camberlain asked him saieng: I praie thee, of whome speaketh the Prophet this? of him self, or of some other man? Philippe opened his mouthe, and beganne at the same scripture G and preached vnto him Iesus.
This place teacheth vs, that not onelie by the saing, and doing of the chamberlain, but also by the doing of the holie Goste, the scriptures be obscure Philippe sent by the holie Gost to expownd the Scriptures to the Eunuche. and harde. For the holie Spirit of God dothe nothing in vain. wherfore when the same Spirit mercifullie beholding the good affection of this man, and knowing the scriptures to be soche, as he coulde not vnderstand them withoute an interpretour, did send Philippe vnto him, to open and declare that vnto him, that was obscure and dake before, yt dothe inuinciblie proue oure pourpose. Whiche facte of the holie Goste had ben vainlie doen, yf the scriptures were plain and easie of all men to be vnderstanded. Nowe yf this man coulde not vnderstande them withoute an interpretour, no more can anie other common man doo. And then what dothe yt auaill the scriptures to be commonlie red withoute an interpretour?
The Apostles them selues, when our sauiour Christe spake vnto them of 5. Ioan. 16. The Apostles vnderstood not Christes liuelie voice, his passion and resurrection (as yt appeareth in the xvj. of Iohn) coulde H not vnderstande him. For when he saied vnto them: After a while ye shall not see me, and again after a while ye shall see me. For I go to the Father: then saied some of them emongest them selues: what ys this that he saieth vnto vs, after a while ye shall not see me, and again after a while ye shall see [Page 7]me? and that I go to the father? they saied therfore, what ys this that he A saieth after a while? we can not tell what he saieth.
As this maner of speache beinge vttered by the liuelie voice of Christe was darke vnto the Apostles: so the same beinge nowe written in deade letters, ys yt not (trowe ye) as darke to manie as yt was to them, till yt be opened and declared? yf yt were not easie to them that heard Christe himself speake yt: howe shoulde yt be easie to the vnlearned, that do but read yt?
For as saincte Hierom saieth: Habet nescio quid latentis aenergiae viua vox, & in dures discipuli de Autoris ore transfusa, fortius sonat. Vnde & AEschines, cum Rhodi Hieron ad Paulinum. exularet, & legeretur illa Demosthenis oratio, quam aduersus eum habuerat, mirantibus cunctis atque laudantibus, suspirans, ait: Quid si ipsam audissetis Bestiam sua verba resonantem: The liuelie voice (saieth saincte Hierom) hath I wote not what an hidden vertue, or clerenesse of demonstration, and beyng vttered from The liuelie voice hath a more force in the eare then the dead letter in the eye. the mouthe of the Authour into the eares of the disciple, yt haith a more force in sownde. wherfore Aeschynes, when he was a banisshed man at the B Rhodes, and the oration, which Demosthenes made against him was red, when all men did wonder at yt, and praise yt, sithing he saied: what yf ye had heard the beast him self vttering his owne woordes? Thus moche saincte Hierom.
In the whiche saieng he declareth, that ther ys more clerenesse in a sentence liuelie spoken from the mouth of the Authour, and the hearers shall more easelie preceaue yt, and sooner vnderstande yt, then they shall onelie reading the same in the dead letter. Yt maie therfore be concluded, that the gospell as yt, ys written ys more hard to be vnderstanded, then as yt was of the mouthe of Christe spoken. But as yt was spoken yt was hard to be vnderstanded, wherfore being written yt ys more harde to be vnderstanded.
Saincte Paule enombring the giftes of the Spirit, saieth: To one ys geuen 6. 1. Cor. 12. the vtterance of wisdome: to an other the vtterance of knowledge: to an other ys geuen faith: to an other the giftes of healing: to an other power to do miracles: to an other prophecie: to an other iudgment to discern spirites: to an other diuerse tounges: to an other interpretaciō of toūges. All C theise (saieth he) woorketh one and the self same Spirit, diuiding to euerie man a seuerall gifte euen as he will.
In the whiche distinction of giftes, ye perceaue that the vtterance of wisdome, the vtterance of knowledge, the gifte of tounges, be seuerall giftes. And that they be not geuen to all men indifferentlie, but some to one, some to other, as yt pleaseth the holie will of that blessed Spirit, that ys the Authour and distributour of the same gistes. For saincte Paule in the ende of the same chapiter, wher the former alleaged woordes be writtē, saieth: Are all Apostles? are all prophetes? are all teachers? are all doers of miracles? haue all the giftes of healing? doo all speake with toūges? doo all interprete? &c. whiche his maner of questioninge includeth a negatiue, that euerie man hath not all th [...]se.
Then forasmuche as euerie man hath not the giste of vtterance, of knowledge, nor the gifte of prophecie, nor the gifte of interpretacion &c. Euerie Interpretation of Scripture not geuen to euerie man. man hath not the vnderstanding of the scriptures, Neither then be the scriptures easie to be vnderstanded of euerie man. For vnto him, that hath the D gifte of knowledge, prophecie, and interpretacion of scriptures, the same be easie; But euerie man hath not these giftes, wherfore the scriptures to all mē be not easie.
[Page]This also saincte Paule proueth verie well by the ordre and disposition E of the naturall bodie, from whiche he diduceth and taketh an argument to 7. 1. Cor. 12. proue an order in the misticall bodie the Churche. Ye are (saieth he) the bodie of Christe, and membres one of an other. And God hath also ordeined in the Congregacion: First Apostles, secondarelie prophetes, thirdlie Teachers, then them that doo miracles, after that the gifte of healinge &c. In the whiche description of the order in Christes Churche, ye see that the three cheifest, and highest states be Apostles, Prophetes, and teachers. Nowe if the Scriptures be easie for euerie mans vnderstanding then either these states be superfluouse, bicause euerie man vnderstanding the Scriptures, ther nedeth no teacher, nor Prophete: Or ells forasmoche as euery man vnderstandeth the scriptures he ys in this state to be a teacher, All be not Prophets, nor teachers. and a prophete, whiche ys directlie against saincte Paules doctrine. For he saieth all be not Prophetes, neither be all teachers.
Forasmoche then as Christe hath appointed, as one of the cheifest states of his Churche, the state of teachers, there must be of necessitie a great nombre of inferiour membres, that must be hearers, and learners. And F whie shoulde they so be, but that the scriptures being harde, and obscure, by the teachers they must be opened and declared, that other maie learn. So that as by this scripture yt maye be perceaued and learned that euery man hath not the gifte of knowledge, and therfore no easie vnderstanding of the scriptures: So by all the other before alleaged yt ys moste manifest that the scriptures be harde and full of difficulties, whiche shall also by other means well appeare to the Reader, in the processe ensewinge.
THE SECVNDE CHAPITER TO PROVE THAT THE SCRIPTVRES BE NOT EASIE, RECITETH CERtain hard and obscure places of the olde testament.
ALBEIT that this, that ys all readie saied, ys sufficiēt to proue the scriptures to be hard, and not playn, ne easie to be vnderstanded: yet that ye maye see yt more manysestlie before yowe face, G certain places shall be laied before yowe, whiche for their obscuritie and difficultie, shall compell and enforce yowe to confesse that they be not easie for euerie mans vndestanding.
And first shall be brought some places of the olde Testament, oute of the whiche I might bring, not places, but wholl bookes, and of them not a fewe, as all the Prophetes, as well the greater, as the lesse, the Booke of Iob, the booke of psalmes, the booke of the Preacher, and Cantica canticorum, englished the Ballett of ballettes of Salomon. All whiche bookes, certen I am, be of soche difficultie, hardnesse, and obsturitie, that, as queen Candaces Chā amberlain saied, they can not be vnderstanded with oute a guide, or ells Acto. [...]. speciall inspiracion of god.
As for Genesis, although it be counted so easie, and so plain a booke: yet Hieron presa. in Ezech. Genesis might not be red of the Iewes before thirtie yeares of age. the Iewes (as saincte Hierome witnesseth) might not read yt before they were thirtie yeares of age, as in whiche were many thinges verie harde to be vnderstanded, whiche required a staied heade, of mature, rype, and graue Iudgement, soberlie to seke the true sense, and vnderstanding of them, whiche rash youthe wolde sooen ouerpasse, and frame an vnderstanding at H their pleasure, soche as they phantasied, as manye do nowe a daies.
Oute of this booke, although saincte Augustin, and other that haue trauailed [Page 7]in the exposition of the same do mooue manie and sundrie doubtes: A yet I shall ouerpasse them, wisshinge the Reader to consider the 49. chapiter, in the whiche are cōteined the blessinges of Iacob to his twelue Sonnes, and let him trie howe he can waid through the vnderstanding of them, as for example: In the blessing of Iuda, Iacob saied: Iuda ys a lions whelpe, from the spoill, my sonne, thowe arte comed on high. He laied him dowen, Gen. 49. and couched him self as a lion, and as a lionesse, who wil stire him vppe? And after a litle: He shall binde his fole to the vine, and his Asses colte to the braunch. He wasshed his garment in wine, and his mantle in the bloode of grapes. His eies are reader then wine, and his teeth whiter then milke. Soche like be the other. Howe easie theise be for the vnlearned to vnderstande I referre yt to thy iudgement, Reader.
Exodus, and Leuiticus, withe the rest of Pentateuchon, although they require an higher sense for a Christian to vnderstand, then the letter sowndeth (as Origen declareth) whiche not all the learned atteign vnto, besides the applicacion of the figures to the things figured in the newe testament by B Allegories, as sainct Paule dothe in the Epistle to the Galatians, and in his Epistle to the Hebrues: yet they conteyn diuerse obscure senses, seming almost to haue no reason in them, as this in Leuitious: Ye shall kepe my ordenances. Thowe shalt not let cattle gendre with a contrarie kinde, neither Leuit. 19. so we thy felde with mingled seede. Neither shalt thow put on anie garment of linnen, and wollen.
And in Deutronomio, God thus commaunded: Yf thowe chaunce vpon a birdes nest by the waie, in whatsoeuer tree yt be, or on the grownde, whether Deut. 22. they be younge or egges, and the dame sitting vpon the younge, or vpon the egges: Thowe shalt not take the dame with the younge but shalt in any wise let the dame go, and take the young to thee, that thowe maist prosper and prolong thy daies. Thowe shalt not sowe thy vineyeard with diuerse seedes, lest the fruicte of thy vineyeard be defiled. Thowe shalt not Ibid. 23. plowe with an oxe and an asse together. And again in an other place: Thowe C shalt not mosell the oxe that treadeth oute the corne in the Bearn.
Shall we take theise places in their grammaticall sense? dothe the high prouidence of God occupie yt self in making ordeinances for birdes nestes? And by gods ordeinance, shall a man prosper, and prolong his daies that taketh not the dame with the younge? dothe the wisdom of God ioin soche rewardes, to soche trifles? And making the ordeinance for the thressing oxe, dothe God (as sainct Paule alleaging the same asketh) take thought for oxen? No. yt hath an other vnderstanding, as ther sainct Paule alleaging this 1. Cor. 9. ordeinance of God, applieth yt vnto.
Yt were enough to make a iust volume, yf all the obscure places shoulde be recited, that be in the olde Testament. But as by theise yt maie be perceaued, that the scriptures be not so easie, as men phansie them to be: So truly yt ys perilous that they (as the aduersaries wolde) shoulde be handeled commonlie of them, whose vnderstanding atteigning to none other sense, then the grammaticall sense, and oftentymes not to that neither, doo wounderfullie abuse them, to the great dishonour of God, and plain cōtempt of D the scriptures, his holiewoorde. As yf the rude and simple shoulde read theise sentences aboue alleaged oute of Genesis, Leuiticus, and Deutronomium, wolde he not saie they were fond and trifeling thinges?
And wher as wisedom and knowledge be the goodlie gifes of God: yf the Eccls. 1. vnlearned shoulde reade the booke of the Preacher wher yt ys saied: I commoned [Page 7]with my owne heart saieng: lo, I am comed to a great state, and haue E gotten more wisdom then all that haue ben before me in Hierusalem. yea my hearte hath great experience of wisdome and knowledge, for therunto I applied my minde, that I might knowe what were wisdom and vnderstandinge, what were errour and foolishnesse, and I perceaued that this also was but a vexaciō of minde. For wher moche wisdome ys, ther ys also great trauaill, and disquitnes &c. Yf the vnlearned (I saie) shoulde reade this, might he not take occasion to contēpne bothe wisdome and knowledge, and so dishonour God in his giftes? wherunto appeareth more occasion to be geuen in the next chapiter folowing, wher yt ys writen thus:
Then I tourned me to consider wisdome, errour, and foolishnes, for who ys he emonge men that might be compared to me the kinge in soche workes? Jbid. 2. and I sawe that wisdome excelleth foolishnes, as farre as light dothe darknesse. For a wise man hathe his eies in his head: but the foole goeth in darknes. I perceaued also that they bothe had one ende. Then thought I in my minde: Yf yt happen to the foole, as yt doth vnto me, what neadeth me thē F to labour any more for wisdome? So I confessed within my heart, that this also was but vanitie.
What maie appeare more vehement, to dissuade a man from wisdom? Howe moche ys wisdom the goodlie gifte of God, abased to appearance in this saing? Howe ys the gift of God magnified to the aduancement of gods honour, when in appearance Salomon accompteth the labour for yt to be but vanitie? I saie to yowe before God, whom I call to wittnes, that I speake trueth. I heard a man of woorshippe, of grauitie, of wisdom, of godlie life, and of competent learning, able to vnderstand, and likewise excercysed in in the scriptures, vpon the reading of this booke, and conference had betwixt hym and me for the same, earnestlie saye, that yt was a naughtie booke. Yf he dyd thus, what will the rude, the rashe vnlearned, and the vngodlie reader doe?
Howe litle incitament of vertue appeareth to be in the Ballettes of Salomon? Yea raitheir howe vngodlie and wanton seme they to be? raither in the outwarde face teaching, and prouoking wantonnesse, then godlynesse of life. In the first chapiter ye reade thus: O howe faire arte thowe my loue, G howe fair arte thowe. Thowe hauest doues eies, O howe fair arte thowe, my Cant. 1. beloued, howe well fawoured arte thowe. Owre bed ys deckt with flowres, the syllinges of oure house are Cedre tree. And again: O stand vppe my loue my beautifull and come. For lo; the wynter ys nowe past, the rain ys awaie and gone. The flowres are comed vppe in the feldes, the tyme of the birdes syngynge ys comed, and the voice of the Turtle doue ys heard in oure lande. The figge tree bringeth furthe her figges, and the Vines beare blossomes, and haue a good smell. O stande vppe my loue, my beautyfull, and come my doue oute of the caues of the Rockke, oute of the holls of the walls. O let me see thy coūtenāce, and heare thy voice. For swete ys thie voice, and fair ys thie face, &c. Like vnto this ys all that booke. What can the vnlearned finde, or vnderstande here? any thinge to edificacion of godlie life? or rather (as ys saied) a prouocation to wanton life?
Yet Iesus Sonne of Syrac semeth to haue more vnsemelie woordes then H theise, yea so vnsemelie, as an honest mē wolde be ashamed to speake them, as I also wolde be ashamed to wryte thē, yf they were not scripture. He speaking of an harlotte, writeth thus Like as one that goeth by the waie, and ys Ecclesiast. 62. thristie, so shall she open her mouth, and drynke of euerie next water, that she [Page 11]maie gette. By euerie hedge shall she sitte her downe, and open her quoiuer to euerie arrowe. A
What trifeling, what iestyng, what pastime, I haue heard and seen vpon the reading, and reherfall of this texte, and what vnseemlie, and vnchaist woordes haue fallen oute by occasiō of the same, yt ys vnmeete in this place to be rehersed. But this I will reporte, for that as trulie as God liueth, I knowe yt to be true. This texte was spoken in the presence of a good vertueouse gentlewoman, and one that feared God, and she misliking the same, yt was auouched to her to be scripture. The booke was turned, the place was red, she exclamed, and saied: that yf the scripture had soche bawdie woordes, she wolde no more beleue the scripture. for yt was naught. with mo soche like woordes, which nowe memorie reteyneth not.
Maye not this grieue a christian heart, that the scriptures Gods holie woorde shoulde be thus blasphemed? And what ys the cause of yt? verilie bicause they be made common to their handes, that vnderstande them not. That this place was not vnderstanded of them that handeled the same, as ys B afore saied, yt ys more manifest then I nede reporte. For the effecte well proueth yt.
Nowe to put a conclusion to this, that ys here saied: litle dothe yt awaill them to reade the scriptures, that vnderstand not what they reade. But raither (as Origen saieth) they maye as well take occasion of euell as of good by reading the scriptures, and not in their true sense and meeming vnderstand them. whose sentence for the better declaracion therof, I haue here noted:
Opera carnis diuinorum voluminū historia continet, non valde eos iuuans, qui sic eam intelligunt vt scripta est. Quis enim non docebitur scruire luxuriae, & fornicationem habere Origen. 10. li. Strom. pro nihilo, cum Iudam ad meretricem legerit ingredientem, & Patriarchas multas pariter habuisse vxores? Quomodo non ad idololatrian prouocabitur, qui sanguinem taurorum, & caeteras Leuitici victimas, non plus quàm in litera sonat, putauerit indicare? Gene. 38. Quod autem inimicitias in aperto positus scripturae sermo, doceat, & ex hoc loco probatur: Filia Babylonis misera, beatus qui retribuet tibi retributionem, quam retribuisti nobis. Psal. 136. Psal. 100. Beatus qui tenebit, & allidet paruulos suos ad petram. Et exillo: In matutino interficiebam C omnes peccatores terrae: et ex ijs similibus, de contentionibus videlicet, aemulatione, ira, rixis, dissentionibus. Ad quae, si non altius aliquid sentiamus, prouocant nos magis historiae exempla quàm prohibent. Haereses quoque magis de carnali scripturae intellectu, quam de opera carnis nostrae (vt plurimi aestimant) substiterunt. Nec non ebrietates, et inuidiam, per legis literam discimus. Inebriatur Noë post Diluuium, et Patriarchae apud fratrem Ioseph in AEgypto. The histories of Gods books (saieth Origen) contein the workes of the flessh whiche historie dothe not moche helpe them, whiche dooso vnderstande yt, as yt ys written. For who shall not be taught to serue voluptuouse pleasure, and to accompte fornycation for nothinge, when he shall reade Iudas to haue taken an harlotte, and the Patriarkes to haue had manie wifes at once? Howe shall he not be prouoked to Idolatrie, who shall thinke the blood of Bulls, and other Leuiticall sacrifices, no more to shewe vnto him then the letter sowndeth? That the plain sainge of the scripture teacheth enemities, yt ys proued both by this place: Daughter of Babilon, thowe shalt come to myserie thy self: yea happie shall he be that rewardeth thee, as thowe hauest serued vs. Blessed shall he be that taketh D thy children, and throweth them against the stones. And also by that place: I shall soon destroie all the vngodlie that are in the lande. And by soche other like vnto theise, as of contencion, enuie wrathe, brawlinges dissentions [Page]vnto the whiche yf ye vnderstand not some higher thing, the examples E of the histories do more prouoke vs then forbidde vs. Heresies also Diuerse histories of Scripture literallie taken, doe more prouoke sinne, than forbidde yt. haue ben more by the carnall vnderstanding of the scriptures, then by the worke of our flesh, as manie do thinke. We learn also by the letter of the lawe dronkennes, and enuie. Noë after the flood was dronken. And the Patriarkes also were droncken, being with their Brother Ioseph in AEgypte. Thus Origen.
Nowe then as in this chapiter ye haue heard a nombre of bookes and places of scripture recited, whiche well proue the obscuritie and hardnesse of the same: So yn the ende ye haue heard Origen declaring his minde, that to vnderstand but the carnall sense of yt, ys raither hurtfull to edificacion, then profitable. Peraduenture some will graunte that the olde Testament ys darke and hard, but the newe Testament (they will saie) ys easie and plain: But that this likwise, ys not easie for euerie man to vnderstande, the chapiter folowing shall declare?
THE THIRDE CHAPITER TO DECLARE F the newe Testament not to be easie to be vnderstanded bringeth diuerse obscure places of the same.
THAT the newe Testament ys hard to be vnderstanded yt ys sufficientlie proued in the frist chapiter. Neuerthelesse that the Reader maie haue some experiēce of that, that by Authoritie ys saied: I shall laie before hym certain places, whiche shall enforce hym to confesse, that by his owne iudgement to be true, whiche by the scriptures he hath allreadie heard taught and affirmed.
And first let him beginne with the Genealogie of Chryste described vnto vs by two Euangelistes, Matthew, and Luke. And let them be compared together, and triall made, whether yt be esaie to concile them or no.
Matthewe beginneth at the elders, as at Abraham, and so descendeth to Chryste: Luke beginneth at Chryste and ascendeth vppe to the elders; euen vnto Adā, and so to God. In the whiche Genealogie Luke saieth that Chryst G The Euange [...]istes Mathew, and Luke seem to varte in the genealogie of Chryst. was the supposed sonne of Ioseph, and that Ioseph was the sonne of Heli: Matthewe saieth that Iacob begatte Ioseph the husband of Mary, of whō was born Iesus, whiche ys called Chryste. So that Luke saieth: that Iosep was the sonne of Heli, and Matthew saieth he was the sonne of Iacob. Which dysagrement Iulianus Augustus, the Apostata, as saincte Hierō saieth, obiected vnto vs. Which obiection al though it be solued by saincte Hierō: yet ther remaineth a great difficultie howe these Genealogies shoulde be true, and both pertain to Chryste: seing that from Ioseph, to Dauid ther ys none agrement betwixt thē, as by comparing of the Euāgelistes together, ye shal easilie perceaue. Which I saie not as that ther ys in dede no agrement or consonant trueth betwixt thē: But that yt maie the raither appeare and be wel knowen, that the trueth of the historie of the Gospell lieng hid, yt ys not easie for euery man to finde oute the same.
Chrysostom also findeth an other obscure place, for thus he saieth: Illud Chrysostō. in pri. Matth. quoque inter occulta numeratur, quomodo Elizabeth de Leuitica existens tribu Mariae cognata dicatur. That also ys to be enombred emonge the hid thinges, howe H that Elysabeth being of the tribe of Leui, maye be called the cosine of Mary
Forasmuche as the lawe was, that men shoulde marrie within their owne [Page 5]tribes yt dothe, appeare that Elisabeth being married to Zacharie, she was of the same tribe. Likewise that Ioseph being of the tribe of Iuda, and marrieng A the virgen Mary, that she was of the same trybe. Whiche thinge ys declared by saincte Hierom and Chrysostom also in soluing this double: Why the Euangelistes do bring the ordre of the genealogle of Christ to Ioseph, seing that Ioseph was not the father of Christ in dede, but his putatiue or supposed father? To this they answere, that Ioseph and Mary being of one tribe, the Genealogie commeth right to Christe.
So then Mary being of the tribe of Iuda, and Elisabeth of the trybe of Leui, the doubte stādeth howe the virgen Marie shoulde be cousin to Elisabeth. And yet the Euangelist saincte Luke recitinge the woordes of the Angell, saieth: Et ecce Elizabeth cognata tua, & ipsa concepit filium in senectute sua. And beholde Luc. 1. thy cousin Elisabeth she also hath conceaued a sonne in her olde age.
Also yt ys not withoute Doubte that ys saied of our master Chryste (as the Euangelist saincte Marke reciteth) wher he speaking of the coming of Marc. 13. the Sonne of man to the general iugement saieth: De die autē illa, & hora, nemo nouit, ne (que) Angeli in caelo, ne (que) filius, nisi pater, But of that daie and howre knoweth B no mā, no not the Angells which are in heauē, neither the Sonne himself, saue the Father oneli. Whiche doubte ys liuelie opened ād sett furth by the holie father Chrysostom in the xlviij homelie vpon saincte Matthew, wher emong other godlie woordes as touchinge this matter he saieth thus: Quis haec vnquā Chrysost. hom. 48. dicere potuit? Patrem filius optimè nouit, & eo prorsus pacto, quo pater filium: diem autem illum ignorat? Praeterea, Spiritus dei profunda inuestigat: Filius verò nec tempus nouit? Sed quomodò quidem iudicare oporteat, non fugit eum, & archana singulorum clam eo non sunt, quod autem multo vilius est, id ignorat? Adhuc, quomodò is per quem omnia facta sunt, & sine quo factum est nihil diem illum ignorabit? Qui enim secula fecit, is profectò creauit & tempora, & diem produxit, quomodò igitur quae ipse produxit, ignorat? Who coulde at any time (saieth Chrysostom) saie thesethinges? The Sonne knoweth the Father verie well, and euē the verie same waye that the Father knoweth the Sonne, and dothe he not knowe that daie? Moreouer the Spirit of God searcheth the depe Botomes of the secretes of God, and dothe not the Sonne knowe the time? But howe he must Iudge the worlde, he C ys not ignorante, and the secretes of all men are not hidden from hym and ys he ignorante of that, that ys not so wourthie a thinge? Howe also dothe he by whom all thinges are made, and withoute whom nothing was made, not knowe that daie? he that made the worldes, he trulie created the tymes, and brought furthe the daie, howe thē doth he not knowe that, that he produced? Thus moche Chrysostome, wherby ye maie see what doubte ther ys in the text, Whiche yf yt shoulde be vnderstanded as yt lieth, what errour and heresie shoulde spring oute of yt?
Thus as many a man swimming aboue vpon the smoothe of the water seeth not the depe botome therof: So manie a man readinge the smoothe face of the Scripture, seeth not the depe doubtes of the same.
Algasia and Hedibia women bothe vertueouse, and studiouse by their studies Hieron. ad Alg. qn. 1. perceaued many darke places in the scriptures, whiche they not taking vpō them rashlie to explicate, as persuading them selues that the scriptures were not easie and plain, sent from the fordest partes of Fraunce to saincte Hierom then being at Bethleem, the one of them twelue questions: The other eleuen questions, whiche all be of the newe Testament, as well of the D gospells, as of the Epistles.
Algasia moueth this doubte: whie saincte Iohn the Baptist being in prison [Page]sent hys disciples to Chryste asking him this questiō: Arte thowe he that E shall come, or do we looke for an other? seing before he had appointed him Luc. 7. Ioan. 1. with his fingar, saienge of him. Ecce agnus Dei, ecce qui tollit peccata mundi Beholde the lābe of god, beholde him that taketh awaie the sinnes of the worlde.
Yt augmēteth the doubte also, that Ihon had baptised Chryste, at which time he knowing him to be Chryst the verie Messias, did not onelie saie to Chryst, I haue nede to be Baptised of thee, and comest thowe to me? But also sawe the heauens open and the Spirite of God descending like a doue, Matth. 3. and lighting vpō him, and heard also the voice from heauen saieng: Thys ys my beloued Sonne, in whō I am wel pleased: howe then dothe he aske this, whether he be the Messias that shoulde come, or that they must looke for an other? Thys (as I suppose) maie well appeare to be a doubte to a simple reader, and not withoute consultacion of learned men to be dissolued.
Hedibia moueth this doubte emōg other in the gospell, Howe saincte Matthew saieth, Mary Magdalen with the other Mary fell downe at the feete of Ioan. 20. Matth. 28 Hed. qu. 5. Hieron. ad Christ after his resurrection, and helde his feet: Seinge that sainct Iohn F saieth, that Christ forbod her saieng: Touche me not, For I haue not yet asscended to my Father. Yt semeth that one of theise must be vntrue.
An other doubte moche like vnto this ther ys betwixt saincte Iohn and saincte Marke. Sainct Marke saieth: when the Sabboth was past, Mary Magdalen, Marc. 16. and Mary Iacobi, and Salome, bought swete odoures, that they might come and anoynt Iesus. And early in the morning the first daie of the Sabboth, they came to the Sepulchre, when the Sunne was risen. Saincte Iohn saieth: The first daie of the Sabboth came Mary Magdalen earlie in Ioan. 20. the morning when yet was yet darke. Yt ys not verie eafie for an vnlearned reader to agree theise two.
In the storie of the resurrection of Christe, ther be a great nombre of apparant Matth. 28. Ioan. 20. Marc. 16. contrarieties: as of the time of the resurrectiō: of the appearinge of the Angells in the Sepulchre: of their nombre: of their place: and soche other, whiche all generallie to enombre yt were to long.
The same Hedibia moueth also this doubte: whether that Chryste breathinge on his Apostles (as sainct Iohn saieth) and saieng: Take ye the holie G Hieron. ad Hed. q. 9. Ioan. 20. Act. 1. Goste, gaue them then the holie Goste: Seing that saincte Luke saieth, immediatelie before his ascension, he promised that he wolde send them the holie Goste. Yf he gaue thē the holie Goste before his ascensiō, yt appeareth that he wolde not, or neded not to send him to thē after his ascension.
Tus yt maie be seē that ther be obscure and darke places in the Gospel. To conclude ther be innumerable places hauing moche doubte, whiche saincte Austen with great labour and trauaill doth right learnedlie dissolue, making for that pourpose a great volume intiteled, De consensu Euangelistarum. of the consent of the Euangelistes, whiche had ben vain and superfluouse, yf the gospells were easie & plain for euery man to vnderstand.
What neaded the commentaries of saincte Hierom. and of saincte Ambrose vpon the Euangelistes: The homelies of Chrysostom, and saincte Austen vpo the same: The expositions also of a great nombre of famouse and learned men, whiche with great studie, labour, and trauaill haue made their workes, yf the scriptures be so plain and easie?
I haue brought but a fewe places of the Gospells to make a litle shewe, H and to aduertise the reader, by these fewe to be circumspecte in medling. For the scripturs be a depth of a great profunditie. And nowe will I doo the like oute of the Epistles.
THE FOVRTH CHAPITER CONtaineth certain harde places of the Epistles. A
TO beginne with the Epistle of saincte Paule to the Romans, In the epistle to the Romans be mo obscure than plain places. whiche as yt ys first in the ordre of the epistles, so shall yt be here first spoken of, yt ys more easie ther to finde obscure and darke places, loaden with difficulties and doubtes, then yt ys to finde easie and plain places. Ther ys disputed the matter of iustification, whiche howe harde a matter yt ys, yf ther were none other argument to proue yt, the controuersies that be thervpon risen in this oure time, might sussice to declare yt.
And yet yt ys not easie for all men, that reade that same epistle, well to vnderstand this place of saincte Paule: Arbitramur iustificari hominem per fidem, sine Rom. 3. operibus legis. We holde that a man ys iustified by faithe, withoute the workes of the lawe: seinge sainct Iames in his epistle saieth: What auaileth yt my brethrē, though a man saie, he hath faithe, yf he haue no works, can faith saue him? After he concludeth thus: Euen so faith, if yt haue no workes, yt ys Iaco. 2. dead in ytself. B
Again sainct Paule saieth: We saie that faith was recknid to Abraham for Rom. 4. righteousnesse. And saincte Iames saieth: Was not Abraham our Father iustified by workes? Jaco. 2.
In that epistle also ys sett furthe the reiection of the Iewes, and the calling of the gentiles. In the discourse wherof sainct Paule saieth thus, alleaging the Prophete Esaie for the callinge of the gētiles: I am fownde of thē that sought me not, I am manifested vnto them, that asked not after me. But against Israel Rom. 10. he saieth: All daie long haue I stretched furthe my handes vnto a people, that beleueth not, but speaketh against me. And yet afterwarde he asketh thus: hath God cast awaie his people? He aunswereth: God forbidde: And yet he saieth again in the same chapiter, speaking of the Iewes: Yf the casting awaie of them be the reconciling of the worlde, &c. Wherbie he sheweth that the Iewes be cast awaie.
In that same chapiter also he asketh this question: Nunquid sic offenderunt, vt caderent? Haue they so offended or stumbled, that they shoulde fall? He aunswereth: C God forbidde. And yet within a fewe lynes after he saieth: Propter incredulitatem fractisunt. Bicause of vnbeleif they were broken of.
Theise matters require a clearer seight of vnderstanding, and heades of deper studie, and iudgemēt to decise thē, then haue the cōmō sorte of readers, which oftentimes are most busie, thinking thē selues to see, whē in dede they see nothing at all. God geue thē grace and open their eies to see their owne ignorance, that they maye walke within their compasse, and not streign aboue their reache,
In the matter of predestinacion, wher vpon saincte Paule entreth depely to dispute, ther ys no sentence withoute difficultie. So that, as wher ther be a great nōbre of thinges a man staieth, not knowing whiche to take first: Euen so I, in this great multitude of difficulties, knowe not wher to beginne, or whiche to take first? But at the last I take one of the least which ys this: Non Rom. 9. est volentis, neque currentis, sed miserentis Dei. Yt lyeth not in the will of man, nor the runninge of man, but in the mercie of God.
This sentence besydes manie other, hath this doubte: that sainct Paule in a Supra ca. 7 D chapiter before saieth: Velle adiacet mihi, perficere autē bonum non inuenio. Will ys present with me, but I finde no means to that, whiche ys good.
The same saincte Paule saieth also: Deus vult omnes hommes saluos fieri, & ad 1. Thim. 2 [Page] agnitionem veritatis venire? God will haue all men to be saued, and to come to E the knowledge of the trueth. Yf God so will, and (as the same saincte Paule saieth in an other place) voluntati eius quis resistet? Who can withstand his wil? Why then walke so manie in the broade waie to perdition? And whie be Rom. 9. ther so manie Infidells, that come not to the knowledge of the treuth? And so manie heretikes that forsake the trueth? And again: yf God will haue all men to be saued, how standeth the trueth of this scripture? Multi vocati, pauci electi: Manie be called, but fewe chosen. Yf God will haue all saued, then all must be chosen. For whome he will haue saued, him he choseth.
Algasia also moueth a doubte to saincte Hierom in the same chapiter of the epistle of saincte Paule to the Romans. What (saeth she) meeneth saincte Hieron. ad Alg. q 9. Algasia moueth great doubtes to sainct Hierom. Sup. 8. Paule by this saieng: I haue wished my self to be cursed from Chryste for my kinsmen as perteining to the flesh?
To the whiche sainct, Hierom aunswering, openeth the questiō and saieth: In very dede yt ys a great question, how the Apostle, who before had saied: who shall separate vs from the loue of God? shall tribulation? or anguyshe? or persecution? or hungar? either perill? either swoorde? And again: I am sure F that neither death, neither life, neither Angells, neither Rule, neither power, neither thinges present, neither thinges to come, neither height, neither lowght, neither any other creature shall be able to departe vs from the loue of God, whiche we haue in Chryste Iesus our Lorde. Nowe vnder an othe he saieth: I saie the treuth in Chryste, and lie not, my conscience also bearing me wittnesse by the holie Gost, that I haue great heauinesse by continuall sorowe in my heart. For I haue wished my self to be cursed from Chryste for my brethren my kinsmen after the flesh. Yf he be of so great loue to God, that neither for feare of death, neither for the hope of life, neither for persecution, hungar, nakednesse, perill, nor swoorde, he maye be separated from his loue: And if Angells also, and powers, and thinges present, and thinges to come, and all the strenght of the heauens, and if the heightes also, and the dephts, with the vniuersall creature shoulde come against him (whiche can not be) yet wolde he not be seperated from the loue of God, whiche he hath in Iesus Chryst: what ys this great mutacion or chaunge, yea rayther a wysdom neuer heard of before, that for the loue of Chryst he G wolde not haue Chryst? And least peraduenture we shoulde not beleue him, he sweateth and confirmeth yt by Chryst, and calleth the holie Gost to wittnes of hys conscience, that he hath no light, nor small, but great and incredible heauinesse, not sorowe that stingeth or vexeth for an howre, but that continuallie abideth in his heart. Whether tendeth this heauinesse? to what auaileth this incessant sorowe? He wisheth to be cursed, from Chryste and to perish, that other maie be saued. Thus moche saincte Hierom.
In the whiche woordes he openeth a great doubte that saincte Paule, who so feruentlie loued Chryst that nothing either in heauen, or in earthe, coulde separate him from Chryste, nowe semeth to wish for the loue he bare to the Iewes to be diuided from Chryst. Whiche might be an argument, that he loued the Iewes aboue Chryst.
As this, after the sentence of saincte Hierom, ys a great doubte: So ys ther an other by the same Algasia moued vpon the same epistle to the Romans, H Hieron. ad Alg. qu. 7. In what sense (saieth she) ys that to be taken, that sainct Paule writeth to the Romās: Vix enim pro iusto quis moritur. Nā pro bono forsitan quis audet mori. For skarce will any man die for the righteouse man. Peraduenture for a good man durst a man die.
[Page 7]This sentence semeth so plain, and the natiue sense therof so easie to be A perceaued, that saincte Hierom saieth for lacke of the true vnderstanding of Two contrarie heresies grownded vpō one scripture. Marcion yt, two horrible heresies being diuerse, and vnlike in sentence, but like in impietie and wickednesse, tooke here moche occasion.
Marcion by this maketh two Gods: one the iust God, and creatour of the Lawe, ād the Prophetes: The other the good God, which ys the God of the Gospell, and the Apostles, whose Sonneys Chryste. For the iust God (saieth he) fewe or none haue died. But for the good God (whiche ys Chryst) ther haue been innumberable Martyrs.
Arrius the other heretike (saieth saincte Hierom) contrariwise, calleth Chryst the iust God, and for his so saieng alleageth scripture oute of the Psalmes, Arrius. wher Dauid prophecieng of Chryst saied: Geue the king thy iudgementes (to God) and thy righteonsnes vnto the kinges Sonne. The good God he Psalm. 71. calleth the Father of heauen, of whom (saieth he) Chryst him self saieth: what Luc. 18. callest thow me good? ther ys none good, but one God, the Father.
As theise heretikes for the obscuritie of this sentence of saincte Paule (for B yt ys a darke maner of speache in dede; to saie: for a iust man scarce a manwildie: But for a good man, a man will peraduenture die, as though ther were a great difference betwen the iust and the good mā) through theyr wicked rashnesse and headinesse, haue vpō yt mainteined two notable, and abhominable heresies, manifestlie repugnant: So likewise haue some in this oure time, through their arrogant willfullnes vpon one sentence fownded two conttarie heresies, as moche repugnant as these. But leauing the further opening of this to a more conuenient place, I will proceade in that ys here appoincted to the doen.
Amandus a preist writeth to sainct Hierom, desiring to be resolued in foure Amādus. questions. Of the whiche one ys vpon the epistle of saincte Paule to the Corinthians, wher disputing of the resurrection, he cometh to this place: He must reign till he hath put al his enemies vnder his feet. The last enemie that 1. Cor. 15. shall be destroied ys deathe. For he hath put all thinges vnder his feet. But when he saieth all thinges are put vnder him, yt ys manifest that he ys excepted, whiche did put all thinges vnder him. When all thinges are subdued vnder him, then shall the Sonne also himself be subiect vnto him, that put all C thinges vnder him, that God maie be all in all.
Besides manie doubtes, whiche maie be moued vpon this scripture, this ys one verie notable for the mainteining of the Arrians heresie, wher he saieth that when all thinges be subdued, then shall the Sonne himself also be subiecte vnto him, as though the Sonne of God in Godhead, were subiecte to God the Father. Whiche maner of saing, for somoche as the holie catholique faith confesseth that he ys equall to the Father, ys to be taken Hila. li. 11. de Trinita. detestable heriticall. This proposition ys learnedlie handeled, and treacted of by saincte Hillarie in his eleuenth booke against the Arrians, and this doubte ther dissolued. Yt were to tediouse, and all most vnpossible for me to rehearse all the darke places of the epistles. Therfor one, or two mo, and so an ende.
To the Collosians Saincte Paule writeth thus: Nowe ioye I in my suffringes Colloss. 1. for yowe, and fulfill that, whiche ys behind of the passions of Chryste in D my flesh, for hys bodies sake, whiche ys the churche. In the which sentence, he semeth to make the passion of Chryste insufficient, in that he saieth, that he fulfilleth that, that wanteth of the passions of Chryst.
To the Hebrues he hath this sentence: For yt can not be, that they, which Hebr. 6. [Page]were once lightened, and haue tasted of the heauenlie gifte, and were become E partakers of the holie Goste, and haue tasted of the goodwoorde of God, and of the promisse of the worlde to cōme, yf they fall awaie, and as concerning themselues crucifie the Sōne of God a fresh, and make a mocke of him that they shoulde be renewed again by penaunce. And again in the same epistle he saieth: For if we sinne wilfullie, after that we haue receaued the knowledge of the truthe, ther remaineth no more sacrifice for sinne, but a fearfull Ibid. 1 [...]. looking for iudgement, and violēt fire whiche shal deuour the Aduersaries.
Theise two sentences, yf they had no fauourablier interpretacion, thē they seem to beare in their grammaticall sense, all Chrystendome might wail and mourne, For the former sentence semeth to teache, that yf a Christian fall in to mortall sinne, after that he ys christened, and hath receaued the giftes of God therunto appertaining, that he can not be reconciled by penaūce, and so were all hope of mercie for the remission of sinnes clean taken awaie. Which thing one Nouatus by occasiō of this scripture vnderstāding yt in the Nouatus sense, that yt semeth in the first face to haue, taught verie stoutelie, and so F becam the Authour of a wofull, and wicked heresie. Against whiche Athanasius wrote an epistle to Serapio, wher he declareth that the same saincte Paule receaued the incestiouse Corinthian, and also the Galathians, that had erred Athanas. in faith, to whom he saied. O insensati Galatae, quis vos fascinauit, non obedire veritati? O insensate Galathians, who hath bewitched yowe, that ye shoulde not obey the treuth? And yet afterwarde he saied: Filioli mei, quos iterum pariurio, donec Galat. 3. Ibid. 4. formetur in vobis Chrystus. O my litle children, of whom I trauaill again in byrth vntil Chryste be fashyoned in yowe.
The second sentence also semeth vtterlie to denie all means to atteign to gods mercie, after we haue wilfullie fallen to sinne, whiche sentence yf yt shoulde be vnderstanded as it sowndeth, desperaciō shoulde reign, and hope shoulde be abandoned.
What shall I saie for the vnderstanding of the scripturs by the common people vnlearned, when not onelie manie other learned men through their euell or wrong vnderstanding of them, haue swarued, and fallē into sundrie and diuerse heresies: But also saincteHierom, and saincte Augustin, two lightes G and pillers of the Christian orbe, haue dissented vpon the vnderstanding of a sayeng of saincte Paule to the Galathians, wher he saieth: When Peter Galat. 2. was comed to Antioche, I withstoode him openlie, bicause he was wourthie to be blamed. In the which their disagrement ther was nothing committed, that either charitie betwixt thē was empaired, or yet anie heresie obstinatelie defended: but raither the trueth learnedlie enquired and searched.
Wherfor, Reader, I saie vnto thee: Noli altū sapere, sed time. Be not high minded but feare For arrogācie is mother of errour. Put on therfore an hūble spirit, and in reading of the scriptures submitte thy self to the teaching of thy Rom. 11. Arrogā cie mother of errour. Mother the churche. For the loulie bowing man maie easelie go withoute harme, wher the stowte high looker shall breake his browe. Be humble therfore and feare to trust thine owne iudgement in the exposition of the scriptures, and so will the Spirit of God rest vpon thee. For vpon whome (saieth he) Esay. 66. shall my Spirit rest, but vpon him that ys humble, and fearing my woordes? H
THE FIFT CHAPITRE DECLARING THE MINdes A and Iudgementes of the Fathers and doctours vpon the difficultie of the Scriptures.
YT nedeth not to trauaill anye more in this matter, when (as I suppose) the Reader ys by this that ys allreadie saied, so perswaded, that he wil with hand and foote (as they saie) go with me, and ioin with me in one sentence, and minde. Yet that the arrogancie of the stoute ignorant and vnlearned, and the vntrueth of the learned maie be confownded, and suffer their wourthie shame: the Reader shall heare the iudgement of the famouse learned Fathers, and doctours, as touching the difficultie, and obscuritie of the scriptures. Wherbie the impudencie of soche arrogant persons maie clerlie and manifestlie be perceaued, and they, if they haue not (as the Prophet Hieremie in the voice of God saieth of the people of Israell) gotten an whoores forehead, and will not be ashamed, maye then in dede be ashamed. B Hierem 3.
Origen, a man both auncient, and famouse in learning handeling this place of saincte Paule to the Galathians: Vos in libertatē vocati estis fratres. Bretheren ye Galat. 5. Orig. 19. li. Storm. are called vnto libertie, saieth thus: Difficilis locus est et ita à nobis disserendus videtur. An hard place this ys, and thus vnto me yt semeth to be expownded. And after along discourse in the exposition of the same texte, he saieth thus: Quamobrem spiritum scripturae, fructus (que) quaeramus, qui non dicuntur esse manifesti. Multo quippe labore, et sudore, et digno cultu in scripturis fructus spiritus inuenitur. Vnde arbitror Paulum, diligenter, et cautè de scripturae sensibus dixisse carnalibus: Manifesta sunt opera carnis. De spiritualibus vero, non vt ibi posuisse; Manifestus est fructus, Sed ita: Fructus autcm spiritus est charitas, gaudium, pax etc. Wherfore let us seke the Spirit of the scripture, and the fruicts of the same, whiche are not saied to be manifest. For trulie the fruicte of the Spirit ys fownde in the scriptures with moche labour, and swette, and wourthie trauaill. Wherfore I Scripture must be studied withe moche labour. thinke Paule diligentlie and warelie of the carnall senses of the scriptures to haue saied; the workes of the flesh are manifest. But of the spirituall senses not to haue putte as in the other, The fruicte of the Spirit ys manifest; C but thus: The fruicte of the Spirit ys charitie, ioye, peace, &c. Hitherto Origen.
In the whiche saing, first by expresse and plain woordes, ye perceaue hym to saie of that place of saincte Paule ther alleaged, that yt ys an harde place. And asterwarde he concludeth of the wholl scripture, that the spirituall senses, and vnderstandinges therof are not manifest, but are to be sought with moche labour, swette, and wourthie trauaill. Whiche he proueth by saincte Paule.
Nowe thinges that be easie, and plain are acquired and gotten with moche facilitie without Laboure, or with verie easie labour: hard thinges be not so gotten but contrarie wise. Wherfor by Origen yt maie be concluded that forasmoche as the right senses, whiche he calleth the spirituall sense, or vnderstanding of the scripture, are to be gotten with moche labour, swette and wourthie trauaill, they be not easie, but raither hard.
Sainct Hierom exhorting Paulinus to the studie of the scriptures as well by the exāples of Ethnickes and Philosophers, as Plato, Pithagoras, Apollonius, D and soche other, whiche for knowledge trauailed ouer seas and contries: as also by the examples of christians, as of Saint Paule, Timothie, Tyte and soche other, maketh it not an easie matter, but raither teacheth howe moch difficultie [Page]ys therin. To the whiche pourpose he saieth: Aperiebantur coeli Ezechieli, E qui populo peccatori clausi erant. Reuela (inquit Dauid) oculos meos, et considerabo mirabilia Hieron. ad Paulinū. de lege tua. Lex enim spiritualis est, et reuelatione opus est vt intelligatur, ac reuelata facie gloriam Dei contemplemur. Liber in Apocalypsi septem sigillis signatus ostenditur, quem si dederis homini scienti literas vt legat, respondebit tibi; Non possum. Signatus est enim. Quanti hodie putant se nosce literas, et tenent signatum librū, nec aperire possunt, nisi ille reserauerit, qui habet clauem Dauid, qui aperit, et nemo claudite claudit, et nemo aperit? In Actis Apostolorum sanctus Eunuchus, imo vir (sic enim eum scriptura cognominat) cum legeret Esaiam, interrogatus à Philippo; Putàsne intelligis quae legis? Respondit; Quomodò possum, nisi aliquis me docuerit? Ego (vt de me loquar interim) nec sanctior sum hoc Eunucho, nec studiosior, qui de Aethiopia, id est, de extremis mundi finibus venit ad templū, reliquit aulam, et tantus amator legis diuinae (que) scientiae fuit, vt etiam in vehiculo sacras literas legeret, et tamen cum librum teneret, et verbum Domini cogitatione conciperet, lingua volueret, labijs personaret, ignorabat eum, quem in libro nesciens venerabatur. Venit Philippus, ostendit ei Iesum, qui clausus latebat in litera. O mira doctoris virtus, eâdem hora credit Eunuchus, baptisatur, et sanctus factus est. The heauens were open to Ezechiel, F whiche to the sinfull people were shette. Dauid saith: Open thowe mine eies, and I shall see the wonderfull thinges of thy lawe. The lawe ys spirituall, and yt hathe nede of reuelacion, that yt maye be vnderstanded, and that with open face, we maie beholde the glorie of God. The booke in the Apocalips ys shewed signed, or fastened with seuē seales, whiche if thow geue to a man hauing knowledge of letters, that he maye read it, he will aunswer; I can not. For it ys sealed. Howe manie nowe a daies thinke Manie nowe a daies holde the booke of scripture scaled. them selues learned? and do holde the booke sealed, neither yet can open it, except he onlocke it, which shetteth, and noman openeth, openeth, and no man shetteth. In the Actes of the Apostles the holie Eunuche, yea raither a man (for so the scripture doth call him) when he did reade Esaie the Prophet, being asked of Philippe; Thinkest thow, thow vnderstandest, what thow readest? he answered: howe can I, except some bodie shall teache me? As for me (that I maie speake somthing of my self) I am neither more holie, then this Eunuch, nor more studiouse, whiche came from Aethiope, that ys from the furthest coastes of the worlde, vnto the Tēple. He left the Courte, and was so great a louer of the lawe, and godlie Science, that he wolde G euen in his Chariett read the holie scriptures. And yet when he helde the booke, and conceaued in his minde the woord of God, when he spake it with his tounge, and sownded it with his lipps, he knew not him whom vnwitting he woorshipped in the booke. Philippe came, he shewed him Iesus, who laie hidde in the letter. O great vertue of a teacher. The same howre the Eunuch beleued, he was baptised, and made faithfull, and holie, Thus farre saincte Hierom.
In whose sentence marke well howe many scriptures this holie doctour hath brought forth to declare, and proue, that the scriptures be obscure, and therfore of necessitie require to haue some exercised and learned in them, to open and declare them, as sainct Hierom declaring the cause whie, alleageth these scriptures, whiche ye haue heard, and immediately addeth and saieth: Haec à me breuiter perstricta sunt, vt intelligeres te in scripturis sanctis sine praeuio, et monstrante semitam non posse ingredi. Theise thinges are breiflie touched H of me to the entent thow shouldest vnderstande, that withoute a leader, and one shewing the path, thow canst not entre in to the scriptures.
Not moche vnlike to this, declaring the obscuritie and hardnesse of the [Page 9]olde Testament he writeth in his epistle to Algasia: Quaestiunculaetuae de Euangelio Hieron. ad Algasiā tantum, & de Apostolo propositae, indicant, te veterem scripturam aut non satis A legere, aut non satis intelligere, quae tantis obscuritatibus, & suturorum typis obu [...]luta est, vt omnis interpretatione egeat. Thy questions propownded onelie out of the gospell and the Apostle, doo declare, that either thowe hauest not sufficientlie red the olde scripture, or ells doest not sufficientlie vnderstand yt. whiche ys enwrapped with so manie obscurities, and figures of thinges to come, that euery parte of yt had nede of interpretacon. Thus moche saincte Hierom.
Saincte Basill teacheth that all the scriptures are not to be published, and made cōmon, for that some parte of them semeth to require a scilence or closenesse for their obscuritie. Wherfor he diuideth the scriptures into two sortes, or partis saieng: Aliud est Dogma, aliud Praedicatio. Dogmata silentur: Basil. li. de Sp. S. ca. 27 Praedicationes verò publicantur. Silentij autem species est & obscuritas, qua vtitur scriptura, ita dogmatum sententiam construens, vt aegrè assequi possis. The pointes of learning be one thing, and morall instruction ys an other. Pointes of learning, B be kept close or secret: Morall instructions are published, and openlie taught. A kinde of scilence also ys the obscuritie, whiche the scripture vseth, so framing the meening of the secret pointes of learning, that a man maye hardlie atteign therto.
Saint Ambrose also in a fewe woordes saieth moche to this matter, calling Lib 7. epist 44. the scripture of God the great sea, hauing in yt a depenesse withoute Botome of depe senses and vnderstādinges into the whiche manie flouddes doo entre.
Chrysostom also vpon this text: Vae vobis qui clauditis regnum caelorum, Wo be Math. 23. Chrysost. oinel. 44. in Matth. to yow whiche shett vppe the kingdom of heauen: saieth thus: Regnum est beatitudo caelestis. Ianua autem eius est scriptura, per quam intratur ad eam. Clauicularij autem sunt sacerdotes, quibus creditum est verbum docendi, et interpretandi scripturas. Clauis autem est verbum scientiae scripturarum, per quam aperitur homimbus ianua veritatis. Adapertio autem est interpretatio vera. Videte, quia non dixit: Vae vobis qui non aperitis regnum caelorum, sed qui clauditis. Ergo non sunt scripturae clausae, sed obscurae quidem, vt cum labore inueniantur, non autem clausae vt nullo modo mueniantur. Propterea C dicit Petrus in epistola sua de scripturarum obscuritate, quia non sicut voluit homo, locutus est spiritus: sed sicut voluit spiritus, ita locutus est homo. Ratio autem obscuritatis multiplex est: tamen satisfactionis causa dicimus duas. Obscurata est notitia veritatis, ne non tam vtilis inueniatur, quàm contemptibilis. Contemptibilis enim est, si ab illis intelligatur, à quibus nec amatur, nec custoditur. The kingdom ys the heauenlie blesse. The gates of yt ys the scripture, by the whiche we entre into yt. The keibearers Preistes are the keiebearers of the scriptures. are the preistes, vnto whom the woorde ys committed, to teache and interprete the scriptures. The keie ys the woorde of the knowledge of the scriptures, by the whiche the gate of trueth ys opened vnto men. The opening ys the true interpretacion. Marke ye that he did not saie: Wo be vnto yowe, that do not open the kingdom of heauen: but to yowe whiche do shette yt. Therfore the scriptures be not shett vppe, but obscure, that with labour they maye be fownd, but not shette vppe, that by no meanes they maie be fownd. Therfor Peter saieth in his epistle of the obscuritie of the scriptures: Not as man wolde, hathe the Spirit spoken, but as the Spirit wolde, so spake man. Ther be manie causes of the obscuritie of yt. But to D satisfie I tell twain: The knowledge of the trueth ys obscured, least yt shoulde not be fownd as profitable, as contemptible, yf yt maie be vnderded of those, of whō yt ys neither loued, nor kept. Thus moche Chrysostō.
[Page]Who also geueth an other cause of the obscuritie of the scriptures, whiche E I reserue to be declared in the next chapiter, minding to heare the saieng of sainct Gregorie, forsomoche as yt ys moche like, and agreable to the sainge of Chrysostome.
Magnae vtilitatis est ipsa obscuritas eloquiorum Dei, quia exercet sensum, vt fatigatione Gregorius super Ezech. hom. 9. dilatetur, & exercitatus capiat, quod capere non potest ociosus. Habet quoque adhuc maius aliud, quia siscripturae sacrae intelligentia in cunclis esset aperta, vilesceret, quae in quibusdam locis obscurioribus tanta maiore dulcedine, inuenta reficit, quanto maiore labore fatigat animum, quaesita. The obscuritie of the woordes of God (saieth saincte Gregorie) ys of great profit. For yt dothe exercise the vnderstandinge, that by wearinesse yt maie be stretched oute, and being exercised yt maie take that, that yt coulde not take being idle. Yt hath yet an other greater thing. For yf the vnderstanding of the scriptures were in all thinges open and plain, yt shoulde waxe vile. The whiche vnderstanding in certain obsture places being fownde, dothe with so moche the more pleasure or swetenesse delight, as with the more labour, being sought yt wearyeth the minde. Thus moche Saincte Gregorie. F
I might euen to wearinesse load the Reader, with saienges of the Fathers, testifieng the obscuritie of the scriptures. But for that I haue entred into this matter to vse yt but as a preparatiue to that, that ys here principapallie entended to betreacted of, I will not tarie vpon yt, but heare the testimonie Hieron ad Paulin. Fewe doe well vnderstand the epistles of Peter James, Iohum &c. of saincte Hierom, as concerning the lesser epistles, called canonicall, I meen the epistles of Iames, Peter, Iohn, and Iude, of the whiche he saieth thus: Iacobus, Petrus, Ioannes, & Iudas Apostoli septem epistolas aediderunt, tam mysticas quàm succinctas, & breues pariter et longas. Breues in verbis, longas in sententijs, vt rarus sit qui in eorum lectione non caecutiat. The Apostles, Iames, Peter, Iohn, and Iude, made seuen epistles, as misticall, as succincte, and bothe short and long. Shorte in woordes, but long in Sentences. So as he ys a rare man, that in the reading of them doth not want seight of vnderstandinge. Thus moche saincte Hierom.
Ye haue nowe heard the censure and iudgement of diuerse famouse Fathers, as touching the difficultie, and obscurytie of the scriptures, the contrarie G wherof hath not onelie most falslie, and shamfullie ben taught by Luther, as I haue saied, But also with like foolish arrogancie, hath ben pratled by his pettie disciples to the entrapping, and snaring of manie a simple Soule. For thei being persuaded that the scriptures were easie to be vnderstanded, proceaded with rash boldenesse to vnderstand euery scripture, as their Heresie through arrogancie hath almost ouerrunne Christendom. phansic moued them, vsing the scriptures as simple children do the bells, phatasing them to sownd, euen as their phansie conceaueth, according to the common saieng: As the childe doth sing: So dothe the bell ring. By the whiche arrogant presumption heresie hath at this daie onerrunne, yea almost ouerwhelmed a great parte of christendome. Whiche howe lamentable yt ys, the charitable christian heart feleth and perceyueth.
But nowe consider with me (gentle Reader) two thinges. Firste their arrogancie, and after their blindenesse. Their arrogancie ys to manifest, that wher the scriptures them selues (as yehaue heard) doo testifie, that they are obscure and hard: And sainte Peter by most plain woordes teacheth, that the epistles of saincte Paule be hard to be vnderstanded: the common consent and iudgement of the noblest learned men of Chrystes Churche be H agreable to the same, the experience also not onely of this our myserable time, but of diuerse other times, in the whiche heresies haue vexed the [Page 10]churche, whiche haue risen vpon the ohscuritie of scriptures (as Isidore saieth) A doth proue yt, and conuince yt: yet these arrogant heretikes will auouche them to be easie and plain. Ys yt not more then impudent arrogancye, to stand against so manie true, substanciall and inuincible wittnesses? ys yt not wicked that saincte Peter saing that saincte Paules epistles be hard, Luther, and his disciples, yea his verie petties, that can but read, and yet not that well, shall saie that they be esaie and plain? Ys ther anie credite to be geuē to theise wicked men in other matters, that so arrogantlie against all treuth teache this? Howe litle will they bassh in soome other matter, wher they maie through the darknesse and obscuritie of the scriptures, somwhat cloake and shadow their falshood, whē in so manifest a matter as this ys they bassh neuer one whitte?
As touching their blindnesse, the ignorant, that through ignorance can nothing saie, dothe not more open his blindnesse then these men do theirs, in sainge that the scriptures be esaie and plain. For as learning, witte and knowledge, moue question, Scruple, and doubte: So ignorante blindnesse B doth perceaue nothing but plainesse, easincsse, and saiftie.
The learned medleth with the scriptures, with feare, diligence and painfull Ignorance as bolde, as blinde. studie: The ignorant with boldnesse necligence and slackenesse. wherbie yt cometh to passe, that ys commonlie saied: who ys bolder then blind biarde?
As then Origen, Hierom, Ambrose, Augustin, Chrysostome, and Gregorie through knowledge and learning holpen with grace did finde perceaue, and see the scriptures respersed with manie difficulties and doubtes: So Luther and his ofspring, through blinde arrogancie destitute and void of grace see no other but that the scriptures be easie and plain for euerie man to read and vnderstande, and findeth neither Scruple, ne doubte.
Wherfore, Reader, I wissh thee to be aduertised raiher to folowe Origen Hierom, and the other holie Fathers, and with them to perceaue that the scriptures be hard, and so with circumspection, and instruction of the learned to read, or ells contenting thy self to heare, to forbear reading, raither then to folowe the blinde, and so withoute mistrust walke in rough places, C and ther stumbling fall into the ditche.
An obi∣ection. But here perchaunce ye will obiect and saie: why teache ye the scriptures to the hard, and therby diswade men from the reading of them: seing that Chrysostom in a nombre of places moste earnestlie exhorteth men to the reading of the scripturs, and doth not feare them with the obscuritie and difficultie therof?
An aun∣swere. I am not ignorante (gentle Reader) that Chrysostom doth so. Neither do I forgett that Erasmus being very earnest that the scriptures should be red of the common people, vseth for this pourpose; both the doyng and authoritie of Chrysostom. Wherfore I shall first aunswer thee for Chrysostom, and after Erasmus.
Although Chrysostom exhorteth yow to read, yet he maketh yow no warrantise of the easinesse of the scriptures, that ye maie vnderstand, interprete, and expownd them, and frame to your self a doctrine, soch one as shall like your phantasie. But (as all ready ye haue heard) he teacheth that the scriptures be hard and obscure. But ther be two causes why Chrysostom D willed the people to read. One that he expownding the scriptures to his people, he thought it shoulde be commodiouse to them for the better vnderstanding of the scripturs, if they wolde read that scripture before they [Page]came to hym, whiche he wolde expōde vnto them. An other that they shoude E read them to folowe thē. To these pourposes, and with this entent, with Chrysost. in psal. 90. the remembrance also, that they be full of difficulties, and therfore circumspectlie to be red, it were tollerable they shoulde be red. But otherwise to folowe their phantasies, to be doctours and framers of a faith and doctrine to them selues, with the contempte of them, whom God hath called and placed to be teachers, that Chrysostom willeth not as in the next chapiter folowing, ye shall heare him saie.
As for aunswer to Erasmus ther neadeth no better to be made, thē Alfonsus Alfonsus maketh. And yet first to saie to Erasmus, yt ys merueilouse that he, cōfessing the scripture to be hard, as he dothe in the argument of the epistle of sainct hierom to Paulinus, and in the argument of the epistle of saincte Paule to the Romans, wher he dothe with soche maner of woordes set furth the difficultie of that epistle (and yet truely) that it wolde raither discourage a man from the reading of it, then otherwise moue or prouoke him to read: yt ys merueilouse (I saie,) that he wolde the cōmō, rude and vnlearned people shoulde read that, that he teacheth to be so hard. In the whiche for F lacke of vnderstanding manie of them, either they spend their labour in vain, or ells vainly abuse the scriptures to errour, and heresie, according to the vanitie of their minde. So that to confesse the scriptures to be hard, and withall to will them to be common to the rude people yt hath but litle shewe of reason. Yf they were easie and plain (as Luther falslie teacheth) yt might seme consonante to reason that the people might medle with them, for that, that for the easynesse therof they might wade through them.
Alfonsus aunswereth thus: that although sayncte Chrysostom wolde the the people shoulde read the scriptures, as in that tyme, yt ys no good collection, that it aught to be so at this time. For oftentimes yt ys seen, that an order or a lawe taken & reputed to be good for the maners of the people, and condicion of the tyme, at one tyme, ys lefte and not put in execution at an other time. As in olde tyme yt was vsed to kepe night watches at the monumētes of holie Martyrs, the name wherof (whiche we call Vigills) yet remaneth. Vnto the hwich all maner of ages, men, women, bachelers, maidens, G and children repaired and came. Whiche thing was so estemed in the time of saincte Hierom, that when Vigilantius depraued yt, saincte Hierom wrote verie sharpelie against him for yt. And yet afterward (the maners of of the people so requiring) these Vigills were lefte. Why then dothe not Erasmus as well seke to haue these Vigills reuiued and restored, seing they were vsed in the tyme of sainct Hierom, and of Chrysostome as well as the other was?
In the time of sainct Augustin, children were communicated: but nowe yt ys not in vse.
The Apostles made an ordinaunce at Hierusalem that strangled and bloode, shoulde be forborne, and not eaten of, but yet yt ys not nowe in vse, for that the condicon of the tyme, and of the people ys otherwise,
Discipline and publike penance were in vse in the olde daies in the churche, but we be loth now to haue yt again in vse.
So, true yt ys that the people in the time of Chrysostom did read the scriptures, H but yt foloweth not therfore that yt ys good and expedient that yt be so nowe. For the condicion of the time, and maners of the people be farra different. Whiche two ostentimes, as they do alter & chaunge, cause alteracion [Page 11]of orders and lawes, as yt semeth to the rulars expedient. Yt ys the office A of the people to heare, and learn, and so by that mean to knowe the lawe of their Lord God as the scriptures do testifie, and putting yt in practise, to vse due obedience toward God, and his officers, as the next chapiter more at large shall declare.
THE SYXTE CHAPITER DECLARING HOWE the people shall come to the vnderstanding of the scriptures.
ALmightie God, who in moste goodlie wise disposith all thinges, and ordeineth nothing in vain, hathe thus appointed that the lawe shoulde be in the mouthe of ther preist, and that the people shoulde learne yt of him, as yt ys written: Yf ther ryse a matter Deuteron. 17 Matters of doubt must be refered to the preistes. to harde for thee in iudgemēt betwene bloode and bloode, betwē plee, and plee, betwē plague, ād plague, and the matters come to strife within thy gates: Thē shalt thow rise, ād get thee vppe vnto the place, which the B Lorde thy God hath chosen, and come vnto the preistes the leuites, and vnto the iudge that shall be in those daies, and aske, and they shall shewe thee the sentence of iudgement. And thow must doo according to that whiche they of that place, which the Lorde had choosen, shewe thee. And thowe shalt obserue to doe according to all that they enforme thee, accordinge to the sentence of the Lawe, which they teache thee, and according to the iudgement which they tell thee, shalt thowe doo and bowe not frō that whiche He that wil not heare the preist shall die. they shewe thee, neither to the right hande neither to the lefte. And that man that will do presumptuouslie, and will not harken to the preist that standeth ther before the Lorde thy God to ministre, or vnto the iudge, that man shall die, and thowe shalt put awaie euell from Israel. And all the people shall heare, and feare, and shall doo no more presumptuouslie.
Accordinglie to this also allmightie God saieth by his prophet Malachie. Malac. 2. Labia sacerdotis custodient scientiam, et legem requirent ex ore eius, quia Angelus domini exercituum est. The lippes of the preist shall kepe knowledge, and they shall require the lawe at his mouthe. For he ys the messenger of the Lorde of hostes. C
And forsomoche as yt ys so, God willed the prophet Aggaeus, to aske the Aggae. 2. the preistes the law, saieng: Interroga sacerdotes legē, Aske the preistes the lawe. Vpon the which texte saieth saincte Hierome: Considera sacerdotū esse officij, de Hieron. in 2. Agg. Office of preistes ys to knowe, and expownd the scripture. lege interroganti respondere. Si sacerdos est, sciat legem Domini: si ignorat legem, ipse se arguit non esse Domini sacerdotem. Sacerdotis est enim scire legem, & ad interrogationē respondere de lege. Cōsider (saieth sainct Hierō) that yt ys the office of a preist, to aūsweer him, that asketh of the Lawe. Yf he be a preist, let him knowe the lawe of God: yf he be ignoraunte he argueth himself that he ys not the preist of God. For yt ys appertaining to a preist to knowe the lawe, and to aunswer vnto a question, oute of the lawe. Thus moche saincte Hierome.
This ordre thus appoincted in the olde lawe, so farre was yt from the minde Authoritie ys to be obied wher corruption of life reigneth. of our Sauiour Chryste to breake yt in the newe lawe, that although the preistes were of corrupte maners, and wicked life: Yet he willed their authoritie D to be obeyed, and their office to be regarded. The Scribes and the Phariseis (saieth he) sitte in Moyses seate. All therfore what soeuer they bidde yowe obserue, that obserue and doo: But doo not ye after their workes, for they saie, and doo not.
[Page]Whiche thing also saincte Hierom by expresse woordes teacheth to be continewed in E Hieron. in Hggaei. c. 2 the newe lawe, and that by saincte Paules ordre to Timothee, and Titus, saing. Et ne forsitan in veteri solùm instrumento haec praecepta videātur, loquitur & Apostolus ad Timotheū: Episcopū non solum irreprehensibilē esse debere, & vnius vxoris 1. Tim. 3. virū, & sapientē, & pudicū, et ornatū, et hospitalē: sed etiā doctorē. Et ne casu hoc dixisse videatur, ad Titum quo (que) super presbyteris (quos et Episcopos intelligi vult) ordinandis, eadē cautela seruatur. Propter hoc reliqui te Cretae, vt quae residua erant corrigeres, et ordinares per ciuitates presbyteros, sicut ego praecepi tibi: Si quis est irreprehensibilis, vnius vxoris Tit. 1. vir, filios habens fideles, non in accusatione luxuriae, vel insubiectos. Oportet enim Episcopū irreprehensibilē esse, sicut Dei dispensatorē, non procacē, non iracundū, nō vinolentū, nō percussorē, non turpis lucri cupidū, sed hospitalē, benignū, iustum, sanctū, cōtinentē, habentē in doctrina sermonē fidelē, vt possit cohortari in doctrina sana, et eos qui contradicunt arguere. Sunt enim multi non subiecti, vaniloqui, et seductores, maximè qui de circumcisione sunt: qui bus oportet imponere silentiū. Haec prolixius posui, vt tam ex veteri, quàm ex nouo Testamē to, sacerdotum esse officiū nouerimus, scire legē Dei, et respondere ad quae fuerint interrogati.
And leste peraduēture (saieth saincte Hierom) theise thinges maie seme to be cōmaunded onelie in the olde Testament, the Apostle also speaketh to F Timothie that a Bishoppe shoulde not onelie be irreprehensible, and the husband Bishops ād preistes described. of one wife, and wise, sobre, discrete, and a keper of hospitalitie: But also a teacher. And leste peraduenture he shoulde seme to haue spoken this by happe or chaunce, the same cautele ys obserued vnto Tite, for the ordring of preistes, whome also he wil to be vnderstanded Bishoppes. For this cause haue I lefte thee at Crete, that thowe shouldest refourme the thinges, that are vnperfecte, and shouldest ordein preistes in euerie citie, as I haue commaunded thee. Yf anie be blamelesse, the husbande of one wife, hauing faithfull children, whiche are not slaundered of riotte, neither are dissobedient. For a Bishoppe must be blamelesse, as the Stewarde of God, not stobbourne, not angrie, not geuen to moche wine, no fighter, not geuen to filthie lucre, but a keper of hospitalitie, one that loueth goodnesse, sobre, righteouse, godlie, temperate, and soche as hathe the true woorde of doctrine, that he maie be able also to exhorte by holsome learning, and to reproue them, that saie against yt. For ther are manie vnrulie, and talkers of vanitie, and deceiuours of mindes, speciallie they that are of the circūcision, whose mouthes must be stopt. G Theise thinges I haue sette furthe at lenght, that we might knowe as well oute of the newe testament, as oute of the olde, that the office of the preistes ys to knowe the lawe of God, and to aunswer to soche thinges as they be asked of. Thus moche saincte Hierome.
To this also maye be added, that saincte Paule saieth to the Corinthians, that god hath so ordered his Churche, that he hath appointed some Apostles, 1. Cor. 12. Gods ordre in hys Church. some prophetes, some doctours and teachers.
All that ys hitherto alleaged, as well of the scriptures, as of saincte Hierome teacheth and includeth thre thinges. The first ys the duetie, and office of a preist: The seconde that the scriptures haue doubtes, and difficulties. The thirde that the people must be taught them, and learn of the preistes.
As touchinge the first, the duetie of à preist ys to be learned in the lawe of god, and godlie life also, To bothe whiche saincte Paule moueth Titus in one sentence, ioininge them together, euen as they anght to be iointlie Duetie ād office of preistes. in him that ys a preist. In all thinges (saith he) shewe thy self an ensample of good workes, in the doctrine with honestie and grauitie, and with the holsome H woorde, whiche can not be rebuked, that he whiche withstandeth Tit. 2. maye be ashamed, hauing no euell thing to saie of yowe.
[Page 12]As for the office of a preist, sainct Paule declareth yt to Timothee: I testifie (saieth he) before God, and before oure Lorde Iesu Chryst, preache 2. Tim. 4. A thowe the woorde, be feruent in season, and oute of season, improue rebuke, exhorte, with all long suffringe and doctrine, doo the worke of an Euangelist, fulfill thine office to the wttermoste.
As here the office and duetie of a preist ys breiflie and truelie declared: So wisshe I that they maie as breiflie and trulie be planted, and take good roote in all that beare that office. For I write this with the greif of my heart before God that yt greueth me to see the great lacke of these two partes in those that take the office vpon them, of the whiche manie lacke bothe good liuing and good learning. God take mercie vpon his people, and send them faithfull pastours, whiche maye feede his shepe with the holsom foode of true doctrine, and example of godlie liuing, that God bothe in his pastours and people maie be glorified.
As cōcerning the second, that the scriptures haue doubtes and difficulties: Scriptures ful of doubres. Yt appeareth by the expresse woorde of God, when he saieth: Yf ther rise a matter to hard for thee in iudgemēt, &c. Thow shalt get thee vppe to the preistes B the Leuites. But forsomoch as this matter ys allready sufficiētlie treacted of and proued, yt ys enough here nowe to haue touched yt and so to passe to the third: Which ys that the people must be taught, and learn the lawes of god of the preistes. Which thīg ys so manifestlie declared ād in so plain woordes Doubtes in the lawe of God must be dissolued by the preistes. opened in the scriptures alleaged, that I shal not nede to make any further declaraciō therof: forasmuche as yt ys plainlie ther saied, that the doubtes of the people in the lawe of God must be dissolued bi the preistes, to whose sentēce and iudgemēt they must in any wise stande, and not decline frō yt neither on the right hand, nor on the left, and that on the pain of deathe.
In the which saing of God yt ys euidēt, howe moche God wolde that the determinaciō of his church in the doubtes of his lawe should be estemed ād reuerēced, and his preistes in that respecte obeid. Which howe moche yt ys nowe disdained and contēned, and gods ordre and cōmaūdemēt neclected, his holie faith and religion infringed and violated, yt ys more with Sithes and teares to be lamented, then beinge so manifest as yt ys, nedefull to be opened C and declared.
Of whose mouthe the people should learn the lawe, AlmightieGod by his prophete Malachie telleth. Likewise that of the preistes the people should aske People must learn of the preistes. the lawe, God by the Prophete Aggaeus cōmaundeth. Who shoulde teach the people, the newe Testamēt he also prescribeth, Appointing some Apostles, some Prophetes, some Doctours or teachers, who to theise offices are appointed to rule and instruct the people, In ijs quae ad Deū pertinēt, in those thinges that appertein to God. But nowe al this ordre ys inuerted in manie places. The people teache the preistes, and not the preistes the people. The people dissolue the doubts of the lawe, the preistes not being asked for. The people God his ordre inuerted. speake, the preistes holde their peace. The people make lawes in religion, the preistes are cōpelled to obeie. The people take in hande the thinges that appertain to God, the preistes are put to scilence.
A moch like state we finde in the time of Moyses emōge the children of Israel in the time when Moyses was in the moūt with God. For they perceiuing him to be lōg absent, and thinking that he wolde no more come, they D began to take the rule vpō thēselues. And wheras Aarō before cōmaūded and taught thē the religiō of the true God, nowe they taking the rule, and inuerting the ordre, cōmaunded Aaron, and taught him soche Religion as lyked them, of a false God.
[Page]When the people sawe (saieth the booke of Exodus) that yt was long er E Moyses came downe oute of the Mountain, they gathered themselfes togeather Exod 32. vnto Aaron, and saied vnto him: Vppe make vs Gods to go before vs. For of this Moises the felowe, that brought vs oute of the lande of Aegypte, we wote not what ys become.
Hereby maie yt be perceiued, what religion shall be, when the ordre that God appointed being broken, they will teache and commaunde, which in matters to godwarde, shoulde be taught and commaunded.
But with all yt ys to be remembred, that for this wickednes the wrathe of God waxed hote against the people, and notwithstanding that ther was immediatelie Plaguesfor breaking Gods appoincted ordre in religiō and mynisterie. a greate slaughter of the people, aboute the nōbre of three thousand, and that Moyses made intercession to God for the people: Yet allmightie God in the ende saied: Neuer the latter in the daie when I viset, I will viset their sinne vpon them, and the Lorde plagued the people bicause of the calfe whiche Aaron made.
Wherfore seinge that the moche like trangression ys committed emonge F the Chrystian people, yt ys to be feared, that the wrathe of God will waxe hote against vs. But God graūte vs a Moyses, that by earnest intercessiō, maie yet mittigate the plague of God that shall come for this wickednesse.
The plague, I feare me, will be sore vpon Corah, Dathan, and Abiron, and vpon the capitanes of the multitude, whiche be the great and famouse mē in the Num. 16. congregacion, which haue gathered thē selues together against Moyses, and Aaron, and cā not contēt thē selues with soche ordre, as God hath put in his Church, and which by hys pleasure hath so long continued: But yet they come to Moyses, and Aaron, and saie, ye make muche to doo, seing all the multitude are holie, euery one of them, and the Lorde ys emonge them. Whieheaue ye your selues vppe aboue the Congregacion of the Lorde.
I must staie my hand, I shall ells be to tediouse to the reader in this matter, in the whiche I thought not to haue writtē the fourth parte of that that ys written, and for expedicion leaue vnto him to reade the strory in the booke of Nombres, and so further to consider yt.
And wher ther be manie stories declaring the displeasures of God to haue G commed vppon the people bicause they wolde not submitte them selues to the ordeinaunce of him, and his ministres, but wolde vsurpe vpon them both: Yet I will speake but of one, in the first booke of the kinges, which ys, that where God appointed Samuel, his beloued and holie Prophet to be the ruler of the people, they being a stiffnecked and disobedient people, to gods 1. Reg. 8. ordre so long before) vsed, al the elders gathered themselues together, and came to Samuel, and saied vnto him: Beholde thowe arte olde, and thy Sonnes walke not in thy waies, Nowe therfore make vs a king to iudge vs, as al other nacions haue.
See their phantasticall prouidence, and therwith their disobediēce. They take in hande to prouide for their common wealth, as though God coulde not prouide them as good a ruler after Samuel, as he did in prouiding of Samuel. And therfore (the ruler whiche God appointed reiected) make vs, saie they, a kinge. But what saied Almightie God to Samuel? Heare the voice of the people, for they haue not cast thee awaye, but me, that I shoulde not reign ouer them. 1. Reg. 12.
And after that they had a kinge, Samuel, to cause them to vnderstand, that H their offence was great, saied: I will call vnto the Lorde, and he shall send thunder, and rain, that ye maie perceaue and see howe that yower wickednesse [Page 13]ys great, which ye haue doen in thee seight of the Lorde, in asking yowe A a king. And they saied, Praye for vs thy seruauntes vnto the Lorde thy God that we die not, for we haue sinned in asking vs a king.
As theise people offended for that they abidde not in the ordre that God appointed thē: So oure people nowe a daies folowing the inuentiōs of their heades, and castinge awaie their rulers, which God hathe appointed, and takinge soche as God hath not appointed, reiectinge also the holie religiō and faith of God vniuersallie receaued, and framinge thēselues a faith and Religiō newlie inuēted, and but priuately vsed, haue not onelie offended, but (as sainct Augustine saieth) they haue shewed their great madnesse. Si quid diuinae Aug. ad. Ianuar. Epla. 118. scripturae praescribit autoritas, non est dubitandū, quin ita facere debeamus, vt legimus. Simi liter etiam si quid per orbem frequentat Ecclesia. Nam hoc quin ita saciendum sit disputare, insolentissimae insaniae est. Yf the authoritie of the scripture of God dothe prescribe anie thing, yt ys not to be doubted but that we aught to do as we read. Likewise what so euer the Churche through the worlde dothe obserue for to dispute but that this aught so to be done, yt ys most arrogant or foolish B madnesse.
As, I saie, oure people haue offended with the childrē of Israel in theise and other before mencioned: So God graūte thē to be cōtended with Gods ordre, and to repēt with the childrē of Israell and saie: peccauimus, we haue offended, ād so their eies through mekenes opened, theymaie mekelie se their igno raunce, and acknowledging the same, maie iudge thēselues more mete to heare then to speake, to learn then to teache, to obie then to rule, as the authoritie and exāples of the most famouse fathers and men of Chrystes Churchemaie moue. Of whiche some shalbe shewed in the next chapiter.
THE SEVENTH CHAPITER DECLARING THE same by examples of the Fathers and autorities of the Doctours of the Churche.
MOyses, when his death drewe nere, willing that the great woū ders that God had wrought shoulde not by obliuiō, be wiped oute of memorie, not onelie to the childrē of Israel that thē liued, but to al their posteritie, as wel their spiritual, as carnal childrē, he gaue this rule: Interroga patrem tuum, & annunciabit tibi, maiores C tuos & dicent tibi. Aske thy father and he will shewe thee, thy Elders and they will tell thee. Deut. 32.
Although Moyses had writtē fiue bookes, wherin he had most excellētlye declared the mightie workes, and wounderful miracles of God: Yet he did not sende all the people onelie thither to learn, but he willed thē to learn of Scripture must be learned of the Fathers. The Fathers learned of their elders. The Apostles learned of Chryst. Praier required to vnderstād the scriptures. their Elders, what were the great workes of God: Euē so nowe a daies all mē maie not be sent to the scriptures to learn, but they must learn of their fathers, what be the goodlie workes of God conteined in the Scriptures.
Yf ye aske all the holie auncient Fathers of whome they learned, they wil aunswere, of their teachers, Fathers, and Elders.
The Apostles learned of our master Chryste, who were not in a soddein absolutelie, and perfectlie learned, but were three yeares and more in learning, although they learned of so noble a Schoolemaster, whom yt pleased so to vse his Scholers the holie Apostles, as therby to insinuate vnto thē, that the knowledge of the scriptures ys not rashlie to be had, either with a daies hearinge, or with a yeares studieng, but yt ys (as Origen saieth) withgreate studie D and praier to be gotten. Non studin̄ solū nobis adhibendū est, ad discendas sacras literas, verùm & supplicandū Domino, & diebus ac noctibus obsecrandū, vt veniat Agnus ex tribu Iuda, & ipse accipiēs librū signatū, dignetur aperire. Not onelie studie (saieth Origen) [Page]ys to be applied to learn the holie scriptures, but supplicacion must be made vnto our Lorde, and praier vsed daies and nightes, that the Lābe of the E Tribe of Iuda maie come, and that he takinge the sealed booke, maie vouchesaif to open yt. Thus moche Origen.
After this maner the holie disciples ād fathers did learn of their Seniours as Fathers of the Church learned of their Elders. the histories do declare. So did Marke, Clemens, Linus, and Cletus learn of saincte Peter. So did Titus, Timothius, Lucas, and Dionysius of saincte Paule. Ignatius, Policarpus, and Papias of saincte Ihon. Of Papias, Tertulian. Of Pantenus Origen. Of Origen, Dionysius Alexandrinus. Of Tertulian, Cyprian. Of Dydimus and Gregorie Nazianzen, saincte Hierō. Of Theophilus, saincte Cyrill. Of saincte Ambrose, sainct Augustin. Of saincte Augustin, Primasius, and Orosius. And so agreat nōbre of other, which did not onelie with holie life, ād deuoute praier applie their great and plainfull studie: but also trauailed manie and diuerse cōtries to seke famouse and holie learned mē, of whome they might be instructed in the Scriptures.
The Ecclesiastical historie declareth that two notable learned holie Fathers Eccles. hist. li. 11. ca. 9. Sainct Basill and Grego Naziā. howe they learned the scriptures. Basil, and Gregorie Nazianzen laie thirtene years in a Monasterie, in the studie F of the Scriptures, and yet presumed not of their owne heades, but vsed the learned helpe and instructiō of their elders, whose learninge and authoritie, they diligentlie and obediētlie folowed. The woordes of the historie be these: Gregorius cum se totum dei seruitio mancipasset, tantum de collegae amore praesumpsit, vt sedentē Basiliū de doctoris cathedra deponeret, ac secū ad Monasteriū manu iniecta perduceret, ibiue per annos (vt aiunt) tredecim, omnibus Graecorū saeculariū libris remotis, solis diuinae scripturae voluminibus operā dabāt, eorumue intelligentiā, non ex propria praesum ptione, sed ex maiorū scriptis, & autoritate sequebantur, quos & ipsos ex apostolica successione intelligendiregulā suscepisse, constabat. Gregorie, when he had geuen and boū de himself whollie to the seruice of God, presumed so moche vpon the loue of his felowe, that he putte Basille sitting, from the chaire of a doctour or teacher, and taking him by the hande led him with him to the Monasterie, and ther by the space of thirtene yeares (as yt ys reported) all prophane or secular bookes of the Grecians remoued, they applied their diligēce and laboure to the onelie bookes of Gods Scripture, and poursewed the vnderstāding of the same, not of their owne presumption, but by the writinges and autoritie G of their Elders, who also themselues (as yt was wel knowē (receaued the rule of vnderstanding by succession frō the Apostles. Thus moche the historie.
Saincte Hierome of himself saieth: Nobis curaefuit, cum eruditissimis Hebraeorum hunc laborē subire, vt circumiremus Prouinciā, quam vniuersae ecclesiae Christi sonāt. Fateor Hier. ad Domnion, et Rogatiā Sainct Hierom howe he learned the scriptures. enim mi Domnion & Rogatiane charissimi, nunquam me in diuinis voluminibus proprijs viribus credidisse, nec habuisse opinionē meā, sed ea etiā, de quibus scire me arbitrabar, inter rogare me solitū. Quantomagis de ijs, de quibus anceps eram? This care had I, that with the best learned of the Hebrues I wolde go rownde aboute the Prouince, whiche all the churches of Chryste do speake of. For I acknowledge (my dearest beloued Domnion, and Rogatian) that I neuer trusted moche to my owne iudgement in the studie of gods bookes, neither haue I had my owne opinion, but I haue vsed to aske of other, yea euen those thinges, whiche I thought I did vnderstande, howe moche more those thinges of the whiche I was doubtfull. Thus moche saincte Hierom.
By the which saienge, howe maie they bashe and be ashamed who hauing Rasshe readers, and arrogant teachers maie be abasshed. skant anie taste of learninge, take vpō thē not onelie to reade the scriptures, H but also to determin, to expownde, to aunswer, to dissolue, yea withoute all stoppe to wade through all matters of the scriptures? wher saincte Hierom a man of great learninge, and famouse in knowledge, did not so sarre presume [Page 14]in matters, that he did thinke hïmself to vnderstāde, but he wolde cōsult, and A learn the ïudgement of his Elders beinge learned, and moche more wolde he so do in doubtefull matters.
Although in the time of Saincte Hierom manie did studie the scriptures, whiche if the people coulde nowe reuerentlie and mekelie vse, taking nomore vpon thē, then becometh them, and as to their calling apperteineth, Many presume to teache before they learn. Hieron. ad Prulinum. might be tollerated, but the arrogant abuse, then beginning emōge the people, whiche nowe hath inuaded and troubled a great parte of the Churche; that ys, that euerie man wolde be a teacher before he haith learned saincte Hierom coulde not conteine, but complain and exclame vpon yt sainge: Ad minores artes veniam, & quae non tam lingua, quàm manu administrantur. Agricolae, cemētarij, fabri metallorum, lignorumúe caesores, lanarij quoque & fullones, & ceteri, qui variam supellectilem, & vilia opuscula fabricant, absque doctore non possunt esse quod cupiunt. Quod medicorum est, promittunt medici, tractant fabrilia fabri. Sola scripturarum ars est, quam sibi passim omnes vēdicant. Scribimus indocti, docti (que) poëmata passim. Hanc garrula anus, hanc delirus senex, hancsophista verbosus, hanc vniuersi praesumunt, lacerāt, B docent antequam discant. Alij adducto supercilio grandia verba trutinantes, inter mulierculas de sacris literis philosophantur. I wil come to the lower sciēces, and soche as are excercised, not so moche with tounge as with hande. Plowmē, Masons, metall Smiths, Carpenters, Wollmen, fullers, and other whiche do make diuerse thinges of housholde, and vile workes, without a teacher they cannot be that they wolde be. Phisitions promisse what to Phisitions apperteineth, Craftes men handle thinges to crastes men apperteininge. Yt ys onlie Presumptuouse teachers. the science of the scripture, whiche all men euerie wher chalenge, and take vpon them. Learned and vnlearned, we write Poëtes workes euerie [...] This science of the scripture, the chatering olde wief, this science the old [...] [...]otinge man, this science the bablinge Sophistre, this science all men presume on, they teare yt, they teache yt before rhey can learn yt. Some with high looke and great pride weighing graue woordes, vtter ther wisdō oute of the scriptures emongest womē. Thus moche sainct Hierome. Whose woordes if a man will applie to this our time, he shall perceaue them, in euerie parte to be trewe And by theise woordes the Reader maie well perceaue C howe moche yt misliked sainct Hierome, that all maner of people woulde be prattelers, bablers, manglers, and mincers of the scriptures, medling, reasoninge, and disputinge of thinges they cā no skill of, and presuming to teache before they haue learned. Whiche great abuse. I wolde to God it were yet no more in this our time, then yt was in sainct Hieroms time.
Note further (whiche ys the thinge that ys intended here to be spokē of) No man maie be his owne teacher in the scriptures. that willinge no man shoulde be his owne master and teacher in the vnderstanding of the scriptures, he bringeth furth for an example mechanicall artes, or handy crastes, whiche (he saieth) be not perfectlie learned withoute a teacher, as though he shoulde therbie conclude, that the scriptures can moche lesse be learned, except the reader haue a teacher. He proueth the same also by the sciences liberall, for the obteininge of whiche, manie philosophers haue trauailed diuerse and manie farre contries to heare famouse men teache the same. Jbidm.
Likewise in the same epistle when he had by diuerse scriptures proued D the difficultie of the same, he assigneth the cause of his so doinge, as ys before shewed in the first chapiter, by these woordes. Haec à me breuiter per stricta sunt, vt intelligeres te in scripturis sanctis, sine praeuio & monstrante semitam non posse ingredi. Theise thinges (saieth he) are of me breifli touched, that thowe [Page]shouldest vnderstande, that without a foreleader and a shewer, thowe canst E not entre the path into the holie scriptures.
Nowe wher this Proclamer wolde, that yt shoulde be proued by some auncient writers, that the laie people were forbidden to reade the woorde of God in their owne toung, as though the Churche had nowe forbidden them, and wolde therbie bring the Churche in hatred with the people: I let him vnderstande that I neuer knewe anye soche prohibicion geuen to the laie people vniuersallie. For yf ther had ben any soche, ther shoulde not haue ben so manie learned laie men, bothe in this Realme, and in other, Proclamer chargeth the Churche with an vntrueth. as ther haue ben, and be, whiche haue bothe red, and written of the scriptures in their natiue tounges, and set their doinges abroad to the common reading of all people, as well before theise daies, as nowe, and were not reprehended for their so doinge, yf yt were well doen, I meen accordinge to the catholique faith. Wherfore I saie that he chargeth the Churche in this point with an vntreuth,
But this I saie that the Churche hath feared the abuse of the scriptures, F by soche of the laitie as be vnlearned, and therwith rashe, and therfore hath rebuked yt from time to time, as ye maie perceaue, saincte Hierom did in his time. And I wolde learn of the Aduersarie, whether yt be not better for the laie people to heare and learn, then to read and read with misunderstanding, forasmoche as misunderstanding maketh heresie, and Mysunderstading maketh heresie Hilarius. heresie condemnacon. De intelligentia enim haeresis, non de scriptura est, saieth Hillarye. Heresie riseth vpon the vnderstanding of the scripture, not vpon the scripture yt self.
Seing then, as yt ys proued, and yet more shall, that the scriptures be full of obscurities, ful of difficulties, and heardnes; seing also the scriptures haue Scripture ys full of hardnesse and diuerse senscis. manie senses, and in some places require Tropes and figures, in some none, in some place they beare one sense, in some other place they wil not beare the same: And the vnframed capacitie of the vnlearned, can not therunto atteign: shall yt not be better for them, to learn the true vnderstanding of the scriptures by hearing, then by reading to fall into misunderstanding?
Maruaill not, Reader, at this that I saie. For the learned, yf they be rassh G fall into this daunger. For the Arrians, the Macedonians, the Nestorians, the Eutichians, the Pelagians, the Lutherans, the Oecolampadians (of the which secte this proclamer ys) were learned men, and yet folowing their owne arrogaunt phantasie fell in to the misunderstandind of the scriptures, and by misunderstanding into heresie. Moche sooner the vnlearned maye thus fall. knowledge of misteries not common to all. Hierō. prafa. in Ezech.
Yt hathe ben vsed emong most people of sundrie sortes, not to make the knowledge of their high thinges common of all to be handeled.
The Iewes were forbidden to read Genesis and the Balletts of Salamon, before they were thirtie yeares of age. Among the Romans, the Bookes of the Sibells were red but of certain selected, and speciall choosen men. Emong the Philosophers, Morall philosophie, and speciallie Metaphisick, was not to be handeled of all men, but of soche as were thought mete for that studie. Howe moche more then ys the scripture of God, with reuerence and fear to be handeled of the chrystians: not that I wolde yt should not be knowen of all, as yt aught to be knowen, but that yt shoulde not be H red of all, and therbie through misunderstanding God to be dishonoured, the scripture abused, and not onelie they that read but other also by them deceaued. And thus Reader I wish thee to perceaue the godlie meening [Page 15]of the Churche, to see the shaunder of this proclamer against yt, and with all to vnderstand that the scriptures be hard. Whiche meenyng ys not to A be imagined nowe to be in theise latter daies inuented (as this Proclamer semeth to charge the Churche) but the weightie consideracion of this matter, that the people shoulde raither learn then read them selues, was not onelie in the latin churche (as it appeareth by sainct Hierom) but also in the greke churche, as yt appeareth by Chrysostom. For he declaring the causes of the obscurities of the scriptures, and alleaging this for the first, saieth:
Primum, quia voluit Deus alios esse doctores, alios discipulos. Si autem omnes omnia scirent, doctor necessarius non erat, & ideò esset rerum ordo confusus. Nam ad eos quidē, Chrystomel 44. in Matth. Esay. 40. Deutr. 32. quos voluit esse doctores, sic Deus dicit per Esaiam prophetam: Loquimini sacerdotes in cordibus populi. Ad eos autem, quos voluit discendo cognoscere mysteria veritatis, sic dicit in Cantico: Interroga patrem tuum & dicet tibi, presbyteros tuos, & annunciabunt tibi. Et sicut sacerdotes, ne si omnem veritatem manifestauerint in populo, dabunt rationem in die Iudicij, sicut dicit Dominus ad Ezechielem: Ecce speculatorem te posui domni Israel, si non dixeris impio vt à vijs suis prauis discedat, ipse quidem in peccatis suis morietur, B animam autem eius de manu tua requiram: sic & populus nisi à sacerdotibus didicerit, & cognouerit veritatem, dabit rationem in die Iudicij. Sic enim dicit Sapientia ad populum: Et extendebam sermones meos, & non audiebatis. Ideò & ego in vestra perditione ridebo. Sicut enim paterfamilias cellarium aut vestiarium suū non habet cunctis expositum, sed alios habet in domo qui dant, alios autem qui accipiunt: sic & in domo Dei alij sunt qui docent, alij qui discunt. First bicause God wolde some shoulde why God wolde the scriptures to be obscure. be teachers, some learners. Yf all men should knowe all thinges, a teacher were not necessarie, and therfor shoulde the ordre of thinges be confownded. For vnto them, whome he wolde shoulde be doctours or teachers, God saieth thus by Esaye the Prophete: Speake ye preistes in the heartes of the people. But vnto them whom he wolde to haue knowledge of the misteries of trueth by learning of other, he saieth thus in the Canticle: Aske thy father and he shall tell thee, thy elders, and they shall shewe thee. And euen as the preistes, except they open all treuth to the people, they C shall make an accompte in the daie of Iugement, as our Lorde saieth to Ezechiell: Beholde I haue sett thee a watch man to the house of Israel. Yf thow saie not to the wicked, that he maie departe from his naughtie waies, he shall die in his sinnes, but I shall require his sowle at thy hande: So also the people except they learn of the prestes, and shall know the trueth, they shall make an accompte in the daie of iudgement. So saieth Sapience vnto The storehouse of God not comon to all. the people: I did sette furth my wordes, and ye did not heare. Therfor shall I also laugh in your perdicion. As the housholder dothe not make his storehouse or his wardrobbe common to all men, but he hath in his house some that deliuer, some that receaue: So in the howse of God, ther be some that teache, some that learn. Thus moche Chrysostome.
Whose saieng I nede not to expownde yt ys so plain of yt self. Ye perceaue that he teacheth yowe, that God hath sette this ordre, that the preistes shoulde be teachers, and the people learners, and that for this cause God hath willed the scriptures shoulde be obscure. Whiche in the ende of his saing he cōmendeth vnto vs to be remembred by à goodlie Similitude D that the housholder maketh not his storehouse, and wardrobbe cōmon to Scripture the storehouse of God. all but certain do deliuer, and other do receaue, no more thē ys deliuered.
The Storehouse ys the scripture, wher in for the feading and cloathing of mans sowle, ys reposed great plentie of knowledge, whiche yet God [Page]hath not made common to all men, to take at their owne pleasures. But he E hath appointed officiers to be kepers of this store, which be his preistes, to geue yt furthe to the people in due tyme, and in due maner and forme.
As all men haue not discrecion to vse plentie well, but some will wast yt, some will abuse yt, and turne yt to other vses then yt was made or appointed for & therfore they haue not accesse vnto yt: So all men hauing not grace, and discrecion to vse the plentie of Gods knowledge in the scriptures well, they wast yt, that ys they sett litle by yt, they do but bable and talke of yt, yt runneth aboute their lippes, as the meate doth aboute the childes mouthe, bosom, and cloathes, and ys wasted, but yt entreth not into their stomackes, I meen into their solues, ther to fede them, and make them lustie and fatte, that yt maie appeare in their faces, in their outwarde conuersacion, and godlie liuing. Theise be the verie wasters in dede, not wourthie to haue accesse to treasure houses, storehouses and places of plentie.
Some other likewise lacking grace and discrecion abuse thinges of plentie. As the father leauing to the Sonne great treasure for the mainteināce of his liuing, and the mercifull releiuing of soche as haue nede, the sonne abuseth F and absumeth the same, in mainteining of quarrells, Suites, contencions, and molestations of his bretheren and other, for whiche cause better yt had ben that soche treasure had ben deliuered vnto him as he had neded yt, to helpe his necessitie, than he hauing the libertie of the wholl, wickedlie shoulde abuse yt: Euen so men withoute grace and discrecion hauinge libertie to come to the treasure of the scripturs, wher yt was geuen them to good vse, as to maintein the godlie life that they shoulde lead in Christ, and by counsell to relieue thē, that haue nede of yt, they abuse yt to Scisme and Heresie, wherby cometh contencion, Sectes, and diuision, to the great molestacion of their christen bretheren. Wherfore were yt not better, that this treasure were deliuered vnto them, by soche as God hath appointed, and so to vse yt well, then hauing libertie of the wholl to abuse all? Howsoeuer then this Proclamer, to winne the people by flatterie, wolde haue the scriptures common to all sortes, yet as to the auncient Fathers yt hath appeared the best waie, that yt shoulde be deliuered: So shall our miserable experience teach vs at the last, that yt ys the best waie? G
Valdo, a man alltogether vnlearned hauing a desire to cōme into this storehouse of God, caused certain bookes of the scripture to be translated, Ʋaldo whiche he reading withoute vnderstanding, fell into diuerse heresies, and became an Authour of heresie, hauing many foloweing, as his Secte, which Ʋaldenses, siue Pauperes de Lugduno. were called after his name Valdenses. and by an other name Pauperes de Lugduno, the poor men or people of Lions.
Oute of the same fountain of ignorance (saieth Alfonsus) sprang an other sorte of Heretikes called Begradi Turelupini men plainlie ignorante, and clere Begardi Turelupini withoute all learning. All whiche mens errours proceaded of a peruerse sense, and wrong vnderstanding of the scriptures, whiche they through ignorance mixed with malice, framed to them selues according to their phansies?
Nowe Reader, hauing heard the mindes of the great learned and holie Fathers of the Churche, as touchinge the difficultie of the scriptures, the Luther ād zuīg. their straunge doctrines Luther. in Assertiō. reading also, and vnderstanding of the same, of whom also and at whose handes ye must learne the vnderstanding of them: what trueth ys to be H thought in Luther, and Zuinglius, whiche so plainlie to the contrarie, arrogantlie affirme the scriptures to be easie and plain for all men to vnderstand [Page 16]make yt free for all men to read and expowde them, teache that not onelie A men, but also womē maye openlie preache the woorde of God? And for the mainteinance of the same most wickedlie auouche all chrysten men and women to be preistes: and to all theise mischeiuouse and wicked heresies adde this most pestilent heresie, that as well a childe and a woman absolueth, as the Bishoppe:
O Lord how manifestlie repugnante be theise pestiferouse assertions vnto the scriptures? howe moche confownding and breaking the orde of the catholique Churche? howe farre dissenting from all the holie Fathers? Luther cō trarie to himself. yea and in some of theise how moche dothe Luther dissent from him self.
In one booke he teacheth (as ys saied before) that ther ys no difficultie in lib. de seruo arbitrio. Luthers prowdbragges and lies the scriptures, and boasting himself to be ignorant in no parte of them provoketh all men to bring him anie one place that he can not expownde. This ys one mete to be an Heresiarch in Satans Sinagog, that to gett him credite with his disciples extolleth him self with Luciferane pride accōpanied with falshood and lieng, euen vnto the heauens. B
But saincte Augustine endewed with an other Spirit and depressing and making himself lowe, saieth of himself thus: Fateor me in scripturis Dei, plura nescire quam scire. I acknowledge miself, not to knowe mo thinges in the scriptures of God, then to knowe. Thus saieth saincte Augustin. And yt ys easie for all men to iudge, that betwixt theise two their ys no comparison, whether ye haue respecte to excellencie of learning, or sanctimony of lief.
But what trueth ys yn this saieng of Luther, his owne woordes in an Luther, in praefatione super psalmos. other place shall be iudge, thus he saieth: Quocirca ingenuè me confiteri oportet, me ignorare, an legitimam habeam psalmorum intelligentiam. wherfor I must francklie confesse, that I am ygnorant whether I haue the lawfull vnderstanding of the psalmes or no. And a litle after that he saieth again: Scio impudentissimae temeritatis eum esse, qui audeat profiteri vnum librum scripturae, à se in omnibus partibus intellectum. I knowe him to be (saieth Luther) of most impudent Luther speaketh diuerselie, as though he were not one, but two diuerse mē. rashnesse or foolish blodnesse, that dare saie that he vnderstandeth anie one C booke of the scripture in all partes. Conferr theise two saienges with his other sentence before, and then iudge of the Spirit of the man. wolde ye not thinke them the sainges raither of two men, the one sobre, and the other drunke, or the one sobre, and the other stark madde? When I conferred him in his first saing with saincte Augustin yt semed to me that I hearde Goliath and Dauid, the condicions of the parties, so well resembled eche other.
Neuerthelesse howe wicked so euer his Spirit and doctrine ys. ther haue ben, and yet be to manie, that embrace and folowe the same. For haue not The peoples arrogante irreuerēcia to diuiue matters. the people, vpon this persuasion of the easinesse of the scriptures, taken a great boldnesse, to read and dispute of the highest and hardest matters of all the scriptures? Wil they not dispute, and determine in predestinacon? Ys yt not a common matter almost at euerie meting, that man hath no free will? Do not the Tauerns sownde of iustificacion? Are not Barbre Shopps Schooles, teaching God to be cause of Sinne? doo not Innes and Alehouses swarme with disputers of the Sacramentes, Howe manie ther be, what ys D the force of them, what ys the Sacrament of the Altare, what ys the woorthinesse of yt, And what yt conteineth? Do not the mouthes of women, boies, and Girles, breath oute most filthie stincking, and abhominable [Page]Blasphemie, against this blessed Sacrament and the ministracon of the same in streetes, high waies and feldes? Ah Lord ys this the reuerence that aught E to be geuen to the holie scriptures, and to the high misteries of God? Be theise matters mete foode for all kinde of people? Yf ther be any strong meat in all the scripturs this ys strong meat. And saincte Paule saieth: Perfectorum Hebr. 5. est solidus cibus, eorum, qui pro ipsa consuetudine exercitatos habent sensus ad discretionem boni et mali. Strong meat belongeth to them that be perfecte, euen those, whiche by reason of vse, haue their wittes exercised to discern bothe good and enell.
Agreablie to Saint Paule, saieth Gregorie Nazianzen. Non cuiusuis Christiani est, Grego. Nazian lib. 1. Theolog. de Deo disserere, non adeò res hec est vilis: neque eorum, qui humi serpentes terrenis studijs occupantur. Quoniam eorum tantùm est, qui habito delectu, ad tantum munus videntur idonei, qui (que) contemplandi acumine caeteros antecellunt, qui iam antè corpus et animam ab affectu purgarunt. Yt ys not apperteining to euery christian to reason and dispute of God. This ys not so vile a matter: nether ys yt apperteyning Euerie christian maye not reason and dispute of God. to them, whiche creping vpon the grownde, are occupied in earthlie F studies. For yt belongeth onelie to them, which beyng chosen, are perceaued to be mete for so great an office, and whiche also in sharpenesse of perceauing do excell other, whiche haue allready pourged both bodie and soule from affection. Thus moche Gregorie.
In whiche sentence ye maie percceaue what difference in Iudgement ther ys betwen theise destroiers of religion and order, and this holie auncient Father, for the medling with matters apperteining to God. Yet the wicked confownders haue not onelie wrought this mischeif, but they haue Laie mē haue vsurped the office both of preaching and ministring of Sacramē tes. also brought the people to soche contempte, that laie men haue in diuerse famouse places, openlie preached, and not onely soche as haue folowed studie, but plain Artificers, Bricklaiers Shoomakers, Tanners, Stacionars, Grossers, and soche like men all void of learning, but filled with pride and arrogancie. Yet Luther desirous to haue all order broken, and nothing to be doen in order, he geueth libertie also to women to preache. doo ye not see a wonderfull confusion? And yet ther ys more. For yt ys knowen that diuerse laie men haue ministred Sacramentes, aswell Baptisme as G other, and haue not abashed to ministre them openlie in churches.
O Reader dothe yt not lothe thee to read these thinges, as yt greiueth me to write them? Time will not suffer me to go so farre in the rehersall of these abhominacōns, as greif wolde enforce me. And yet see how farre greif hath drawen me, and as yt were by force and violence thrust me on, when I wolde haue staied.
But God open ther eyes to see in the scriptures, whiche they be so desierouse Paral. 26. Luc. 6. ibid. 10. Act. 14. 1. Tim. 4. &c. 5. None maie exercise the office of a preist but he that ys called. to read, the plagues that God hath sent vpon them, that haue vsurped the preistes office, being not called therunto, as theise doo, and that they maie beholde the order that our Sauiour Christ began in choosing his Apostles, and disciples, and geuing them autoritie to execute their office: to beholde also the imitation of the same in saincte Paule in the institution of Bishopps and preistes with his owne hande, and the order prescribed to other to be circumspect before they did laie on their handes: And then shall they perceaue, that not euery man for his owne phantasie maye intrude him self, but onelie soche as be called. H
THE EIGHT CHAPITER EXHORTETH MEN A to heare, or to read the expositions of the scriptures, and not to praesume vpon their owne vnderstanding.
SIt omnis homo (saieth sainct Iames) velox ad audiendum, tardus autem ad loquendum, et tardus ad iram. Let euery mā be swifte to heare, but slow to speake, and slow to wrathe. This counsel truly ys verie good and Jacob. 1. profitable. For as in the man of manie woordes ther lacketh not of fence: So the (foole as the wise man saieth) yf he holde his peace, he shalbe Prou. 10. Ibid. 17. Jbid. 17. reputed wise, and to haue vnderstanding, when he shetteth his lipps. And whie, for he hath the propertie of a wise man. For as Salomon saieth he ys wise and discreet that tempereth his woordes.
As by scilence, ys shewed wisdom: So by hearing wisdom ys gotten. For (as Salomon saieth) Audiens sapiens, sapiētior erit, & intelligēs gubernacula possidebit. Jbidem, Sup. 1. By hearing the wise man shall come by more wisdom, and hauing vnderstanding shall atteign to gouernment. Vpon the whiche place sainct Hierom B hath a goodlie saieng. Quód autē ait, sapientem cum audierit verbum, sapientiorē effici: ostendit neminem in hac vita ita sapientem fieri posse, cuius sapientia nequeat augeri, semper (que) moris esse sapientum, vt dictis maiorum, aliquando etiam minorum auscultent, Hieron. in ca. prim. Prou. & quicquid in illis vtilitatis audierint, ad se replicent, suoue in corde recondant. Denique audiuit sapiens minor maiorem, regina Saba Salomonem, & sapiētior redijt. Audiuit Moises socerum, multo inferiorem sublimior, et sapientior redditus est. Audierunt discipuli Christum, & spiritum sapientiae percipere meruerunt. Audiuit Nicodemus, audiuit Gamaliel, audiuit discipulus eius, tunc Saulus, nunc Apostolus Paulus, sapientes vtique verbum Euangelij, & sapientiores sunt facti. Qui etiam Paulus cum ad tertium calum raptus audiuisset ea, quae non licet hominibus verba loqui, nihilominus ad terram reuersus aiebat: Quia ex parte cognoscimus, & ex parte prophetamus.
Wheras he saieth the wise man to be made wiser, when he heareth the woord, he sheweth that no man in this life can be made so wise, whose wisdom The wiseman by hearing maie be wiser. maie not be encreaced, And further he sheweth yt to be alwaie the maner of wisemen, to take hede to the sainges of their betters, and somtime also of their inferiours, that what profitt so euer they finde in them; they maie replie C yt to themselues, and laie yt vppe in their heart. To be brief, the lesser wise heard the greater, the queen of Saba Salomon, and she retourned wyser, Moyses hearde his father in lawe, the higher the farre lower, and he was made the wiser. The disciples heard Chryst, and they receaued the Spirit of wisdom. Nichodemus heard, Gamaliel heard, Saulus being then his disciple, nowe the Apostle Paul heard, all these being wise men heard the woord of the gospell, and they were made wiser. The which Paul also when he was rapt into the third heauen, and had heard those woordes, which yt ys not laufull for a man to speake, yet being retourned to the earth he saied: Oure knowledge ys vnperfect, and oure prophecieng ys vnperfecte. Thus moche saincte Hierom.
In the whiche sentence two thinges maie emong other be noted: the one ys, that be ye neuer so wise, yet ye maie be wiser. Wherfore disdain not to learn either by hearing, or by reading. The other that all these, which S. Hierom bringeth in for example, contented them selues to heare, and by hearinge came to more wisdō. Let not then the prowde or arrogant, be singular in D his owne conceat, for the superiour maie heare and learn of the inseriour, as here ye haue perceaued Moyses to doo of Ietro, his wifes Father.
Yf thē we should hear ād learn of al mē, moche more should we heare and [Page]learn of them, whome God hath appointed in his Churche, to be pastours ād E teachers, whom of deutie we aught to heare, as being cōmended vnto vs by God and his Church, and preaching vnto vs nowe by their bookes, as somtime they did by their mouthes, whose holines and learning was soche, that they maie verie wel be takē for the elders that Iesus Sirach speaketh of saing: Ne despicias narrationē presbyterorū sapientiū, & in prouerbijs eorū conuersare. Ab ipsis enim disces sapientiā & doctrināintellectus, &c. Despise not the sermons of soche Eccles. 8. elders, as haue vnderstādinge, but acqueint thy self with the wise sentēces of thē. For of them shalt thow learn wisdom, and the doctrine of vnderstāding.
But for asmuche as men maie appoincte to thē selues soche elders, as they 2. Tim. 4. phantasie, as saincte Paule prophecieng both of soche masters and disciples saith: The time shall come, when they shall not suffer holsome doctrine, but after their owne lustes shall they, whose eares doo ytche, gett them an heape of teachers, and shall withdrawe their eares frō the trueth, and shal be turned to fables: yt ys expediēt that we learn of the wise what elders we shal folowe.
Iesus Syrach teacheth vs to learn of soche elders, as had learned of their F Fathers. Ne te praetereat narratio seniorum, ipsi enim didicerūt à patribus suis, quoniā ab ipsis disces intellectum, & in tēpore necessitatis dare responsum. Go not from the doctrine Ibid. [...]. of the elders, for they haue learned yt of their fathers. For of them thowe shalt learn vnderstāding, so that thow maist make aūswer in the time of nede In this godlie counsel ye perceaue the cause geuen, why ye shoulde learn of your elders, bicause (saieth he) they haue learned of their Fathers. As who Elders that are to be folowed. might saie, the learning that ys learned of the Fathers, ys no new inuēted doctrine, yt ys no straunge doctrine vnknowē to the cōgregacion, of the which S. Paule geueth yow admonitiō, saieng. Doctrinis varijs, et peregrinis nolite abduci. Optimū est enim gratia stabilire cor. Be not caried awaie with diuerse and straūge doctrines, for yt ys a good thing that the heart be established with grace: But Straūge doctrines are not to be folowed. yt ys a doctrine tried and continued frō successiō to sucessiō, a doctrine that ys permanent, through all ages.
Elders that are not to be folowedTherfor go not frō that doctrine, neither chose yow anie other elders to learn of, but soche as haue learned of their fathers. Therfor chose not soche elders, as be inuētours of their owne doctrine, as the Lutherās chose Luther, G who teaching that womē maie preache, teacheth an inuēted doctrine against the scripture. For S. Paule saieth. Mulieres in ecclesiis taceant, non enin permittitur eis loqui, etc. 1. Cor. 14. Let your women kepe scilence in the congregacion, for yt ys not permitted vnto them to speake, but to be vnder obedience, as saieth the law. Yf they will learn anie thing let thē aske their husbandes at home. For yt ys a shame for women to speake in the [...]ongregacion.
Luthers straunge doctrine. Luther taught that cōtritiō maketh a man a more sinner. In assert. art. 6. And that the righteouse man doth in euerie good worke, that he dothe, mortallie offende. Luther also taught that euery christian man ys a preist for the cōmon ministrie. Ibid. ar. 31 These be straunge doctrines, bothe to the scriptures, and to oure elders, and therfore we maie not learn of him, for he hath not learned of the Fathers.
Zuinglius straunge doctrine Zuinglius taught that original offēce ys no sinne. In libell. de Baptismo. Yet Dauid in the psalme hū blie confesseth. Psalm. 50. Ecce in iniquitatibus conceptus sum, et in peccatis concepit me mater mea. Behold (saieth he) I was conceaued in iniquitie, and in sinne hath my mother conceaued me. And saincte Paule saieth: Natura sumus filij irae. of nature we be the children of wrathe or damnacion. Zuinglius taught also, In articulis in fine. that the children H of christen men nede not to be Baptised, but yf they die withoute Baptisme, they shall be saued: yet Chryst saieth: Ioan. 3. Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua et spiritu sancto, non potest introire in regnum Dei. Except a man be born again [Page 18]of the water, and the holie goste, he can not entre into the kingdō of God.
Luthers lucifero use pride.Of this man therfore maie ye not learn, neither doo ye heare him, for A whie he hath not learned of the fathers. Whiche thinge most arrooantlie, euen Luther (like as yt becometh a Lucyferan) folowing his master Lucifer prowdelie protesteth not a fewe times, and saieth, that he will not be taught of men but of God.
O deuelish and wicked saing. This ys a second Paule. The first Paule saieth speaking of the gospell. Neque ab homine accepi illud, neque didici, sed per reuelationem Iesu Christi. Nether haue I receaued yt of man, nether learned yt, but by the In lib. cō [...]. Canon. reuelation of Iesus Chryst. The second Paule saieth that he will not learn of man, but of God. But as ther ys a first Adam, and a seconde, the one earthlie, the other heauenlie: And as in the first Adam all doo die, and in the secōde 1. Cor. 15. all be reuiued. So our first Paule ys heauenlie: this second earthlie that first leadeth to saluation; This seconde to damnacion.
Zuinglius wrote de claritate verbi Dei, of the clerenesse of the woorde of God, an whol booke, to the entent to make you suppose hard thinges to be Zuinglius wrote a booke of the clerenesse of scripture easie, and so to passe through thē not as the trueth woulde lead yowe, which B ys hard to finde, but as yowre phantasie should moue you, which ys at hāde, and that he might with like facilitie bringe yowe to errour, scisme, and heresie, and so consequentlie to damnacion. Wherof he being soche a secōd Paule, ys the right ministre. Howe falselie that booke ys compiled, this that ys here saied dothe manifestlie declare, and inuincible proue.
What shoulde I troble thee, Reader, with rehersall of the false doctrine of Heretiques dissēt emōg them selues but conspire al agaīst the Church Heretiques what Fathers they folowe. Oecolāpadius of Bullingerus, of Caluinus, of Bucer ād of soche like? Who although they dissent emong themselues in manie thinges: yet in manie they agree, ād specialle in this, that they be all mortall enemies to the catholique Churche.
Of theise fathers hath this our Aduersaire learned his doctrine, of the which he ys a stowte mainteiner as ye haue partlie heard. But maye we hope to drinke swete water, oute of a stinking puddle? Maie we gather (as our Sauiour Chryst saieth) grapes of thornes, or figges of thistles? Maie we hope to learn the wholsom trueth of him, who hath sucked the lothsom poyson of Heresie, of Luther and Zuinglius, of whose detestable doctrines ye haue Math. 7. C heard, of many their wicked assertions, afewe rehersed, that by them ye maie iudge of the rest.
He that foloweth soche doctors and buildeth vpō soche sandes, forsaketh the strong rocke: he also leaueth the fountain of the water of life, and puddleth Heretiques whie they are not to be folow. in the fowle puddles which they haue digged, whiche can not holde water. Wherfor as they be not to be folowed, no more ys this Aduersarie, being certen, that none of thē all haue taught the doctrine that they learned of holie catholike Fathers, but of soche fathers as be of the nōbre of the elders, ād teachers that faincte Peter spake of, whiche shoulde come emong vs. Fuerunt in populo Pseudoprophetae, sicut & in vobis erunt magistri mendaces, qui introducent sectas perditionis, etc. Ther were false Prophetes in the people, as emōg yow ther shalbe false teachers or lieng masters, which shall bring in damnable sectes euen denieng the Lorde, that hath bought thē, ād shal bring vpō thē selfs swifte dā nation. Wherfor coūt thē not as elders mete to learn of, leest ye be of the nō bre of thē, that saincte Peter immediatlie speaketh of: And manie (saieth he) shal folow their dānable waies, bi whō the waie of trueth shal be blasphemed
Of theise folowers ther be some, that solowing the arrogancie of their masters, D Corner teachers. wil assēble cōpanies in corners, ād being rude ād illiterate, not brought vppe in the studie of sciēce, but onelie in trade of worldlie craftes wil take vpon thē to teache before they learn as S. Hierō saieth.
[Page]And this emong other ys lamentable, that mē will sett so litle by the faith E of their Lord God: so litle by the doctrine of Gods Churche: so litle finallie by their owne sowles, that they will hassard all these vpon the credite of soche an ignorāte vppestarte, who neuer learned of his Fathers, neither knewe what the Fathers had taught.
But be not so light (o Brethren) be not so light, haue a more staie in you, be not so easilie caried awaie frō your Lord God, to your destruction. Yf ye haue cōmitted your selfs to soche light masters, open nowe your eyes, ād be holde howe ye haue ben deceaued. And to exhorte you with saincte Paules woordes, frō hencefurth be no more babes, wauering, and caried aboute Ephes. 4. with euerie winde of doctrine, by the wilinesse of mē, through craftinesse, wherwith they laie in wait for yowe, to deceaue yowe. But folow the trueth in charitie, and in all thinges growe in him which ys the head, euen Chryste.
And this shall yowe the better do yf ye wil well regard the counsel of Salomon, who saieth thus to euerie one of yowe: Audi fili mi disciplinam patris tui, Teachers meet to be beleued. Prou. 1. et ne dimittas legem matris tuae. My Sonne heare thy fathers doctrine, and forsake not the lawe of thy Mother. Vpon the which text sainct Hierom saieth F thus: Notandum, quod ita nos disciplinam patris audire praecipit, vt legem quoque matris nullo modo dimittamus, quia non sufficit vt quis se Deum diligere, & eius praeceptis obtem Hier. ibid. perare dicat, si vnitatem Ecclesiae fraterna charitate nō sequatur. Yt ys to be noted, that he commaundeth vs so to heare the doctrine of the father, that we also by no means forsake the lawe of the Mother. For yt sufficeth not that anie mā shall saie that he loueth God, and obeyeth his commaundementes, yf with brotherlie charitie he folowe not the vnitie of the Churche.
Note well, Reader, this note of saincte Hierom, and by this learne to knowe bothe when your teacherys good, and when his learninge ys good, Howe to know good teachers. yf your teacher remain in the vnitie of the Churche, and his learning swarue not from the same, nor teache dissention from that, that in yt ys taught, then ys your teacher, and his learninge soche, as ye maie withoute daūger accept. Yf otherwise, slee yt, as from a serpent.
And yf ye wolde learn or being learned wolde be resolued in doubtes (as ys before said) seke not onelie soche as be onelie learned, but seke soche as being best learned, haue learned of their Fathers, and abiding in the same G do so embrace the doctrine of their Fathers, that they in no poincte forsake the lawe of their mother the Churche, as by this Aduersary ye are taught to doo. For yf all christēdom maie be called the Churche, thē teacheth he yow to forsake the lawe of your mother the Church. For wher ys this doctrine of his professed through oute the Churche, and not raither the contrarie? Before Straunge doctrines these fewe yeares, where was yt taught in all the Christian worlde, that Chrystes bodie ys not in the Sacrament? that yt ys not to be offred for the quick and the dead? that yt ought not to be reserued for the commoditie of the sick? that yt aught not to be honoured? that soules departed are not to be praied for? that we maie not make requestes to Sainctes to praie for vs? ād manie soche other.
Teachers not meet to be beleued.Seing thē he forsaketh the lawe of his mother, though he pretende to haue learned of the Fathers: yet ys he not to be folowed, bicause he hath not bothe theise two, that ys, bothe the learning of his father, and also the lawe of his mother. For they onelie are to be folowed, that haue both theise. Thus shall ye finde the holie Fathers to haue doen, as first for exāple saincte Hierō, H a mā not of the cōmon sorte of learned mē, but an excellēt, and singular mā, who neither hauinge affiance in his owne iudgement, notwithstanding his [Page 19]great learning neither seking obscure teachers, but most famouse, reporteth A this of himfelf: Non ab adolescētia aut legere vnquam; aut doctos viros ea, quae nesciebā, Hieron in Prohemio Epist. ad Eph. ad Paul. & Eusto. Saincte Hierom howe he learned the scriptures. interrogare cessaui, & meipsum tātùm (vt pleri (que)) habui magistrū. Deni (que) nuper ob hāc vel maximè causam, Alexādriā perrexi; vt viderē Didymū, & ab eo in scripturis ommbus, quae habebā dubia, sciscitarer. I haue not frō my youth ceassed at any time, either to read, or ells to aske of learned men, soche thinges as I knewe not. Nether haue I had or vsed my self (as manie do) as master to my self. But of late euē speciallie for this cause I wēt to Alexādria, that I might se Didymus, ād that I might aske of him, soche doubtes as I had in all the scriptures. Thus sainct Hierom.
In the which reporte ye do heare (howe cleresoeuer Luther and Zuinglius make the scriptures) that saincte Hierō fownde doubtes therin, and for dissolution of thē trauailed to Alexandria to Didymus. In which facte also yt maie be learned that yf sainct Hierō so notable a mā, sought a famouse mā to learn him, yt maie well beseme other so to doo. Did not Damasus being Bishoppe of Rome send to saincte Hierō to be aunswered in certain doubtes, and disdeined Damasus learned of S. Hierom. S. Augustin of S. Amb. Many learned of S. Aug. not to learn of him? Did not saincte Augustin go to Millen to saincte B Ambrose to heare him, and to learn of him? Howe many that were learned worte to sainct Augustin to be taught of him in diuerse matters of scripture? Yt wolde well fill an whollvolume to nōbre vppe those that haue trauailed cōtries, to heare and learn of good holie learned men, and that haue written to other for the like. And therfore to conclude this matter, I will no more but bringe in the saieng of sainct Clement the holie Martyr, and disciple of saincte Peter the Apostle, and then enter into the matter, which principallie I haue in pourpose to treacte of.
Saincte Clement in his fiste epistle writeth thus: Relatū est nobis, quòd quidā in Clemens epist. 5. vestris partibus cōmorantes, aduersantur sanis doctrinis, & prout eis videtur, & non secū dū traditiones patrū, sed secundū suū sensum docere videntur. Multas enim quidā (vt audiuimus) vestrarū partium, secundum ingeniū hominū, ex ijs quae legunt verisimilitudines capiunt. Et ideò diligenter obseruandū est, vt lex Dei cum legitur, non secundum propriā intelli gentiālegatur, vel doceatur. Sunt enim multa verba in diuinis scripturis, quae possunt trahi ad eum sensum, quem sibi vnusquisque spontè praesumpsit. Sed fieri non oportet. Non enim sensū, quē extrinsecus adulteretis, alienū & extraneū debetis quaerere, aut quoquo modo it sū C ex scripturarū autoritate consirmare, sed ex ipsis scripturis sensum capere veritatis. Et ideò oportet ab eo intelligentiā discere scripturarum, qui à maioribus secundum veritatem sibi traditam seruauit, vt & ipse possit ea, quae rectè suscepit, competenter asserere.
Yt ys reported vnto vs, that some duelling in your partes, are aduersaires to wholsom doctrines, and are perceaued to teache euē as yt liketh thēselues, ād not according to the traditiōs of the Fathers, but according to their own vnderstanding. Some of your countries (as we haue heard) take many likelihoodes of those thinges, that they do read, according to the witte of men. And therfore yt ys diligentlie to be looked vnto, that the lawe of God whē yt ys red, be not red or taught according to mens owne vnderstanding. For ther be manie woordes in the scriptures of God, which maie be drawen to that vnderstāding, that euery mā at his own pleasure hath chosen. But it maie not Scripture maie be drawen to diuerse senses. so be doen. For ye ought not to seke an vnderstanding diuerse and straunge, which ye maie adulterate, or by any maner of means by autoritie of the scripturs in the outwarde face to confirme, but of the scriptures themselues to take the true vnderstanding. And therfore ye must learn the vnderstanding of D the scriptures of him, who kepeth yt according to the trueth deliuerid vnto him frō his elders, that he maie also agreablie teache, that he hath well receaued. Thus farre Sainct Clement.
[Page]To take and embrace this ordre, I meen, to mistrust oure owne iudgemētes, E ād therfore to heare our Fathers, ād vpō their iudgemētes, not vpō our own phātasies, to staie our selues in the true vnderstāding of the scriptures, I haue yf my iudgement faill me not geuen thee (gentle Reader) god occasion. For first to remoue and disproue the false saing of Luther and Zuinglius, who haue taught that the scriptures be easie and plain to be vnderstanded (wherun to this proclamer willing the scriptures to be common, semeth to agree, and consent, I haue proued by diuerse and sondrie places, yea and by whol bookes of the olde Testament, that the same ys verie harde, and full of difficulties not able to be dissolued, but by a mā wel exercised in the reading and knowledge of the same. And the like haue I doen of the gospells.
As for the epistles of saincte Paule, yt ys proued by the inuincible testimonie of sainct Peter, that they be harde, ād be depraued of manie to their own damnaciō. And that this might fullie appeare to thee I haue at large opened and proued the same, not onelie by the saing and iudgementes of the best ād most auncient fathers of Chrystes Churche, as of sancte Clement, Hierom, F Chrysostome and other: but also by their maner of atteigning to the vnderstanding of the scriptures for that they be hard. Whiche their maner I haue also declared by their owne testimonie.
The difficultie of the scriptures thus proued, cōtrarie to the sainges of Luther and Zuinlius, I haue proceaded to declare by the scriptures first, and after by the famouse learned Fathers, howe we shall come to the vnderstāding therof. Wher yt ys made manifest that we must atteign therunto by the teaching of the preistes, which God hath appointed to be pastours ād teachers, and Fathers of the people, to feede thē, to teache thē, and to bring thē vppe in God. And yet maie we not learn of euery one that taketh vpon him the Teachers meet to be folowed. name of a pastour, teacher or Father, but of soche as teache the lawe of our heauēlie Father, and ther withall forgetteth not the lawe of our mother the holie churche. Theise two propreties he must haue iointlie, for the one withoute the other sufficeth not in a teacher, as by sainct Hierom yt ys declared. Who also (as saincte Clement teacheth) must be soche one as teacheth the vnderstanding of the scriptures according to the trueth that he hath receaued and learned of his elders. G
According to which counsell I minding to searche the vnderstanding of certain scriptures which be in controuersie, I will repair to them that be the elders of Christes Churche, whiche I terme his Parliament house, and to learn of them the true vnderstanding of those scriptures. I wish therfore the reader, to submitte his iudgement vnto them, as I will doo, and all affection sett aparte, to learn of them, we ought to learn of, who, I doubte not, will so well and clerely open to vs the trueth of that matter, that we seke, that except we will not see, we shall perceaue yt.
The holie spirit of God geue vs the gifte of vnderstanding, and an humble and docible heart to receaue and embrace his trueth.
THE NINGHT CHAPITER DECLARING that oure redemption was prenunciated by promisses, figures, and prophecies, and what the promisses be, and to whome they were made.
ALmightie God beholding the miserable ruine of man, and mercifullie entending the repaire of the same, by his prouident wisdome, H Sap. 8. quae disponit omnia suauiter, which disposeth all thinges louinglie, according to his foreknowledge, whiche was from euer, declared vnto man the mean, howe by whom, and when hys [Page 20]laps or fall shoulde be restored, assuring hym of hys redemption, euen A by the woorde of hys owne mouthe, that wher man through hys fall had experience of the sore burden of Gods iustice, he might also haue a taste and hope of his mercie, and beholdinge the goodlie contēperament of bothe in God, might frame also in him self a right temperature of feare and loue, fearing for iustice, and louing for mercie, and therby in good ordre of spirituall melodie, yoifullie finge with the Prophete Dauid: Misericordiam et iudicui cantabo tibi Domine. Mercie and iudgement will I sing to thee, o Lord. Psal. 102. For Misericors Dominus et iustus. Oure Lord ys mercifull and righteouse.
Thus I saie Man hauing in practise that God ys a God of iustice, lest he Assurāce of mercie promised to man before full sentence of iustice was pronounced. shoulde be ouerwhelmed and depressed with desperacion for lacke of mercie, Before the ful sentence of Gods iustice was pronoūced, assurāce of mercie was made, that mā being nowe pressed with the one, should be releiued with the other. Inimicitias ponam inter te, et inter mulierem, et semē tuū & semē illius: ipsa conteret caput tuum. I will put enemitie (said allmightie God to the Serpēt) betwen thee, and the woman, betwen thie seed and her seed, the same shal B tread downe thine head. By the whiche woordes assuredlie our first Parentes conceaued a firme hope of a Messias, of a Redemer, and of a Sauiour to come of the seed of a woman, that as the Enemie the Deuell had craftelie supplāted, and therbie ouerthrowē mā: So he by noble victorie wrought on the crosse, and accepted and approued by the iustice of God, shoulde debel the enemie the deuell and take the spoill from him, whiche was mankinde.
And as our righteouse, and neuer the lesse our mercifull Lord God had signified this gladde tidinges of Redēption to oure first Parentes, that they might vnderstand the mercie of God, and therby conceaue and haue hope and comforth: Euen so likewise did he to our Fathers the holie Patriarkes, and other our elders notifie the same by diuerse means, as by promisses, figures, and prophecies. Of the whiche three I shall by Gods helpe seuerallie speake. And first as the order leadeth, I will treacte of promisses.
To our Father Abraham God declared the gladde tidinges of our Redemption by promisse, saing thus: In semine tuo benedicentur omnes nationes terrae. Gen. 22. In thy seede shall all the nacions of the earth be blessed. Who was this seede, C by whom al nacions shoulde be blessed, and howe they shoulde atteign Promisse made to Abrahā. vnto yt, saincte Paule to the Galathians by the teaching of the holie Goste, declareth saiēg: To Abrahā and his seed were the promisses made. He saieth not, in thie seedes, as to manie: but yn thy seed as of one which ys Christe.
As saincte Paule here by the instruction of the holie Goste, expowndeth this promisse to be made of Christe: So doubte ye not but the same holie Galat. 3. Spiritie, had breathed the like breath into the holie Patriarke Abrahā, wherbie he vnderstood, that Christ after the flesh shoulde descend from him, and that this blessing shoulde by him happen to all nacions. For all nacions shall atteign to this blessing, that beleue with faithful Abraham (as saincte Paule declareth in the same chapiter: The scripture (saieth he) seing before hand that God wolde iustifie the heathen through faithe, shewed before hande glad tidinges to Ahraham, saing: In thee shall all nacions be blessed. So Ibid. 3. then they whiche be of faith are blessed with faithfull Abraham.
In the whiche declaracion we maie learn, that the promesse was made to Abraham: the fullfillinge of the said promisse shoulde be doen by Christe, D who ys that one seed: the receauers of this promisse are the faithfull,
To kinge Dauid also he opened the same by promisse saienge: De fructu ventris tui ponam super sedem tuam. Of the frnicte of thy bodie, shall I seetevppe [Page]vpon thy seat. whiche woordes of the psalme, are a rehersall of the promisse E made to king Dauid in the second booke of the kinges, wher yt ys written thus: I will sett vppe thy seed, whiche shall proceade of thy bodie, and will 1 Reg. 7. stablish his kingdom, he shall builde an house for my name, and I will stablish the seat of his kingdom for euer.
Whiche promisse although the Ieues wolde haue to be vnderstanded and perfourmed in Salamon: yet yt can not so be, for that these woordes I will stablish the seat of his kingdom for euer can not be veryfied in Salomon, whose worldlie kingdom ys finished, and vtterly extingnisshed, and was so before the coming of Christe, according to the prophecie of the holy Patriarke Iacob, who prophecied thus: Non auferetur sceptrum de Iuda, & dux de femore eius, Gen. 49. donec veniat qui mittendus est: & ipse erit expectatio gentium. The scepter shall not be taken from Iuda, and the lawegeuer from betwixt his feet, vntill he comme that shall be sent, and he yt shal be, whom the gentiles shall looke for.
By whiche prophecie yt ys manifest, that at the coming of Christe, the F kingdom of the Iewes shoulde ceasse, wherby yt ys consequent, that the Christ ys the seed Promised to Dauid and not Salemon. Rom. 1. promisse of God made to Dauid, tendeth not to Salomō and his Successiō, whose kingdom must haue an ende, as the prophecie of Iacob signified: But yt respecteth Christe, who lineallie descended from Dauid. Qui factus ost ei ex semine Dauid secundum carnem, whiche was borne to him of the seed of Dauid after the flesh as sainct Paule saieth, whose kingdom ys euerlasting accordinge to the prophecie: Super solium Dauid, et super regnum eius sedebit, vt confirmet et corroboret illud in iudicio et iustitia, amodò et vsque in sempiternū. He shall sitte vpon the seat of Dauid, and in his kingdome to sett vppe the same, and to establish yt with equitie and righteonsuesse from hence furth for Esay. 9. euermore.
That this ys to be vnderstanded onely of Christe, the rest of the sentence goinge immediatelie before dothe make yt so plain, that all men of iudgement must nedes confesse, that yt can not admitte any other vnderstanding. For thus the prophete ordereth the woll sentēce: Vnto vs a childe ys born, and vnto vs a Sonne ys geuen, vpon his shoulder dothe the kingdom lie, and G he ys called by his owne name, wounderfull, the geuer of counsell, the mightie God, the euerlasting father, the prince of peace, he shall make none ende to encrease the kingdom, and peace. And shall sitte vpon the seat of Dauid, and in his kingdō, to sette vppe the same, and to stablish yt with equitie and righteousnesse from hencefurth for euer more.
Who ys he that ys a childe born to vs, that ys or maye be called the mightie God, and the euerlasting Father, but our Messias, our Sauiour Christe, God and man? who ys the Sonne geuen to vs, that shall sitte vpon the seat of Dauid, for euer more, making no ende to encrease his kingdom, and stablishe yt with equitie and righteousnesse for euer more, but Iesus Christe, oure verie Messias, the verie naturall Sonne of our heanenlie Father, which 1. Cor. 1. ys geuen to vs to be our Redemption, iustificacion, and sanctification? Who geuing his commission to the Apostles, to preache his Gospell appointed them no termes, limittes or bowndes, neither did he make anie difference of creatures or people, but Ite, (saied he) in vniuersum mundum, et Mar. vlt. praedicate Euangelium omni creaturae. Go ye through oute all the worlde, and H preache the Gospell to all creatures. whiche thing they so doinge, In omnem terram exiuit sonus eorum, et in fines orbis terrae verba eorum. Their found ys gon Psal. 18. into all londes, and their woordes into the endes of the worlde.
[Page 21]His kingdom ys wounderfullie encreaced, so that the prophecie of Malachie ys fullfilled: Ab ortu solit vsque ad occasum magnum est nomen meum in gentitibus, A et in omni loco sacrificatur, et offertur nomini meo oblatio munda. From the rising Malac. 1. of the Sunne vnto the goinge downe of the same my name ys great emō ge the gentiles, yea in euerie place ys ther sacrifice doen, and a clean meat offing offerd vppe vnto my name.
Yt ys to be noted that the Prophete saieth: To the name of God in euery place shall sacrifice be doen, whiche maner of doing of sacrifice, being mēt of the Sacrifice of Christes Church so to be doē eueriewher, well declareth the great encreace of Christes kingdom. Whiche must nedes so be, For Dominabitur à mari vsque ad mare, et à flumine vsque ad terminos orbis terrarum. His dominion shall be from the one sea to the other, and from the flood vnto the Psal. [...]1. woorldes ende. They that dwell in the wildernes shall knele before him, his enemies shall licke the dust. The kinges of Tharses, and of the Iles shall geue presenttes, and the kinges of Arabie and Saba shall bring giftes. All kinges shall fall downe before him, all nacions shall do him seruice. B
Here Iacobus de valentia expounding the dominion of Christe, whiche shal Iacobus de Valentia. be from one sea to an other, saieth that yt ys from the Sea Mediterranian vnto bothe he Ocean Seas, and vnto the Southe, and so yt comprehendeth all Affrike, and vnto the north Sea, and so yt comprehendeth all Europe: And he shall haue dominion from the flood Nilus and Tanays, vnto the endes of the worlde that be toward the Easte, whiche comprehendeth all Asia, and so his dominion ys ouer all the worlde. For being ouer these three partes, all whiche three receaued Christes faith, and submitted them selues to his holie religion, in to the whiche three partes the wholl worlde ys diuided, yt maie well be saied, that hys dominion, ys ouer all the worlde.
Christe then alone and no pure earthlie kinge ys he, that ys promised to Dauid, to sitt vpon his seat for euer, and to dilate his kingdom, so that ther Chryst, not Salomon promised to Dauid. Act. 13. shall be none ende of the encreace of yt
That in this promisse made vnto Dauid was ment Christe, saincte Paule, also in the Actes of the Apostles declareth. Inueni Dauid filium Iesse virum secundùm C cor meum, qui faciet omnes voluntates meas. Huius ex semine Deus secundùm promissionem eduxit Israëli saluatorem Iesum. I haue fownde (saith allmightie God) Dauid the Sonne of Iesse, a man after my owne heart, which shall fullfill all my will. Of this mans seed (saieth saincte Paule) hath God, according as he had promised brought furth to Israël a Sauiour Iesus. By which woordes saincte Paule teacheth plainlie that Iesus our Sauioure, was promised to comne of Dauid.
And for that the promisse was made both to Abraham and to Dauid (as yt ys declared) that Messias shoulde descend from them both: Therfore the Euangelist saincte Matthew describing the Genealogie of oure Sauiour Christe after the flesh, beginneth the same at Abraham and Dauid, calling Christ the Sonne of Dauid and Abraham, saing: Liber generationis Iesu Christi, filij Dauid, filij Abraham. The booke of the generacion of Iesus Christ the Sō ne of Dauid, the Sonne of Abraham.
And to conclude, two prophetes of the newe Testament, namelie the most excellent Prophetisse the virgen Marie, the mother of that promised D seed Christe, and Zacharias the Father of Iohn the Baptist, do testifie this also. She saieth: Suscepit Israël puerum suum, etc. He hath holpen his seruannt Israël in remembrance of his mercie, euen as he promised to owre Fathers, Luc. 1. [Page]Abraham and his seed for euer. The other saieth: Et erexit corna salutis nobis, E in domo Dauid &c. And he hath raised vppe an horn of saluacion to vs in the house of his seruannt Dauid, Euen as he promised by the mouthe of his holie Prophetes, whiche were sence the worlde began.
In the whiche prophecies we maie perceaue, that the holie Goste did strike an vniforme sownde in these two instrumentes fownding that the promisses made to Abraham and Dauid, and spoken by the Prophetes sence the worlde began, were nowe fullfilled in that, that Christ the Sauioure of the worlde was conceaued and incarnate in the wombe of the immaculate virgen Mary, by whom the blessing promissed, shoulde come to all the nacions of the earth, as nowe we haue seen profourmed.
THE TENTH CHAPITER TOVCHETH THE FIgures of Christes Incarnation, passion, Resurrection, and Ascension.
AS vnto these two noble Fathers before spoken of, God by manifest promise opened the ioyfull coming of our Sauioure F into shesh: So to other did he describe, and painte by figures, all the misterie of our Redemption to be wrought, doen, and perfected, by the same oure Sauiour. wherby their faith in Christe to come was moche nourished, and they by hope of redemption in Gods mercy moche comforted.
Vnto the wife of Manoah, the Angell of God appeared and saied: Ecce sterilis es, concipies, & paries filium. Beholde as yet thow arte barren, or hast Iudic. 13. Figures of Chrysts in carnation. had no childe before. Thowe shalt conceaue, and bring furth a Sonne. This was a figure of the Salutacō of the Angell to the virgē the mother of Christe Ecce (saied the Angell to the virgen) concipies & paries filium. Beholde thowe shalt conceaue and bring furth a Sonne.
Obserue and note the conformitie, and likenesse of both messages. Wherin note by whom the messages were doen, to whom they were doen, and what maner of persons they were doen, vnto by vhom the thing promised shoulde be perfourmed, of what force value and wourthinesse the thinges promised be, And then shall ye perceaue, howe liuelie the figure (for that G part that yt ys a figure) painteth and setteth furthe the thing that ys figured. Figures be not in euerie point cōparable to the thinges figurated.
Note also that I saie, that a figure for that parte that yt ys a figure, dothe paint and sett furth the thing figurated, For euery storie conteining a figure, ys not a figure for the wholl storie, neither the persons of the figure, are in al poinctes to be likened, compared, or assembled to the thinge figurated. As for example.
Ioseph being solde of his bretheren for money, was a figure of Christe Gen. 38. Joseph and Chryst cō pared together. solde by Iudas to the Iewes for moneie. In the whiche figure application maye not so be made, that the person, who ys the figure, shall expresse or aunswere the thing figured in all pointes and euery condicion: or that the person, who ys the figure, shal counteruaill the wourthinesse of the person figured. For Ioseph the person in this figure was a pure man: Christe the person figured God and man. Ioseph subiecte vnto sinne: Christ free from sinne. Ioseph solde not to die, but to be saued from death: Christe solde not to be saued from death, but to die. wherfore Ioseph in these partes and H cōsideracōs, ys not a figure of Christ, but in this parte, that as Ioseph being innocent, his bretheren conspired against him: So Christ being innocent, [Page 22]Iudas with the phariseies conspired against him. Ioseph was solde of his A bretheren: Christe of Iudas his elect Apostle, and brother. Ioseph was called the Sauiour of the worlde: Christe was called, and ys the Sauioure of the worlde. Vocabis nomen eius Iesum: ipse enim saluum faciet populum suum à peccatis Math. 1. eorum, Thowe shalt call his name Iesus, saieth the Angell. For he shall saue his people from their sinnes. In these poinctes Ioseph ys a figure of Christe.
So the Mother of Sampson, and Sampson himself being the persons of the figure, maie not aunswere the persons figured in all partes. For the mother of Sampson conceaued by man: The mother of Christe withoute man. Sampson a sinfull man: Christe void of sinne. Therfor let vs consider the figure in that parte that yt ys a figure: and first by whome the message of the conception of those childeren was doen.
The conception of Sampson was declared by an Angell: The conceptiō of Christe likwise by an Angell. The Angell saied to the mother of Sampsom: Sampsons conception and Chrystes compared to gether. Ecce concipies & paries filium. Beholde thow shalt conceaue, and bring B furthe a Sonne: The Angell to the virgen saied, Ecce concipies & paries filium. Behoholde thow shalt conceaue, and bring furth a Sonne. The Mother of Sampson was alone when the Angell appeared to her: The mother of Christe was alone, when the Angell saluted her.
Secondlie, consider what maner of persons they were, to whome these messages were sent. Yt ys to be supposed that the mother of Sampson was in Mother of Sampson compared with the mother of Chryst. Bernardus epist. 174. Gods fauour, to whome he did vouchesaif to sende his Angell with a message moche desiered: Yt ys to be beleued that the mother of Christe was certenlie in Gods fauoure, who sanctified her in her mothers wombe, and appoincted her to be the mother of his owne Sonne, and certifiied her ther of by the Angell. The mother of Sampson had neuer childe before: The mother of Christe had neuer childe before.
Nowe thirdlie. Let vs cōsider by whom the thinges promised, that ys the conception of theise children shoulde be perfourmed. The mother of Sāpson being barren, wher the ordre of nature coulde not cause her to conceaue, conceaued by Gods disposition helping nature: The mother of Christe beinge a virgen, and not knowing man, coulde not by the course of nature C conceaue, but conceaued by the power of God, and operacon of the holie Goste. Spiritus sanctus superueniet in te, & virtus altissimi obumbrabit tibi. The holie Goste shall come vpon thee, and the power of the highest shall ouershadow thee. Luc. 1.
Fourthlie and last, let vs searche of what wourthinesse these childeren Sāpson and Chryst cō pared. together. promised were. Sampson was an a Nazarite vnto God from his youthe: Christ most acceptable to God from his youthe. Sampson began to deliuer the children of Israel oute of the handes of the Philistines tirannouslie reigning ouer them: Christ began to deliuer the people oute of the handes of the Deuell tirannoustie reigninge ouer them. Thus beholding and weighing, howe goodlie the ordre of the conception of Christ aunswereth the ordre and maner of the conception of Sampson, we maie well perceaue the one did prefigurate the other.
As the conception of our Sauioure Christe was thus prefigurated: So was his passiō and deathe also. Abraham hauing but his onelie begottē Sonne D and best beloued Isaac, yet at the commaundement of God, willing to slaye him, and offer him, he was a figure of the mercifull will of God the Gen. 22. Father, who hauing but his onelie begotten, and beloued Sonne Iesus [Page]Christe, was willing that he shoulde suffer death and be offred for vs. E
Isaac bearing the woodde to the place of Sacrifice, and obedient to his fathers will, therto be slain and offred, was a figure of Christe bearing the Isaac a figure of Christ Philip. 2. woodde of his crosse to the place wher he shoulde suffer, and being obedient to his Fathers will did suffer death, euen the deathe vpon the crosse. In whiche facte he did not onelie fullfill the Scriptures, but also aunswereth the figures, whiche prefigurated that this his death shoulde be the saluaciō of them, that shoulde beleue in him. Whiche figure ys the setting vppe of Nū. 21. ca. Joan. 3. the Brasen Serpent mencioned in the booke of Nombres. Of the whiche figure he himself maketh mencion in the Gospell, applieng yt to him self, saing: Sicut Moises exaltauit serpentem in deserto, ita exaltari oporiet filium hominis, vt omnis qui credit in ipsum, non pereat, sed habeat vitam aeternam, As Moyses lifted vppe the serpent in the wildernesse: Euen so must the Sonne of man be lifted vppe, that whosoeuer beleueth in him maie not perish but haue eternall life.
As God opened the misterie of our redemption by these and soche other like figures to the Fathers in their owē persons: So did he the like by sundrie F and manifolde figures in ceremonies and sacrifices of the lawe of Moises. What was the wholl preisthood of Aron, with all the sacrifices therto apperteining, but a prefiguracion of the sacrifice doen by our Sauiour Christe vpon the Altar of the crosse? Wherof sainct Paule being not ignorant, doth at large treacte in his epistle to the Hebrues, not onelie conferring and comparing the thing figurated to the figure: but also therby prouing the excellencie, wourthinesse, value and force of Christes sacrifice, confirmeth and establissheth the placing and continuance of the newe Testament so set furthe by the same newe sacrifice to endure for euer. In the ninght chapiter he teacheth that the olde lawe had ordinaunces, and seruinges of God and describeth the ordre of the tabernacle, and the ordre also of thinges Hebr. 9. therin conteined in a brief maner, of whiche he saieth, he can not speake particularlie.
And after that he had in a like compendiouse sorte, touched the maner of sacrifices doen as well in the first Tabernacle, as in the second, into the whiche the high preist alone entred once euery yeare, and that not withoute G blood whiche thinges were figures of better thinges to come, as ther he saieth, that the holie Goste by these thinges signified, that the waie of holie thinges was not yet opened, he descendeth to the thinges signified and figurated.
But Christ (saieth he) being an high preist of good things to come, came by a greater, and a more persect tabernacle, not made with handes, that ys to saie, not of this buildinge, neither by the bloode of goates, and calues, but by his owne blood he entred once into the holie place, and fownde eternall redemption. In the which saieng yt ys woorthie to be noted, howe wounderfullie well he adapted the thinges figurated to the figures, and therwith declareth the excellencie of them, aboue theise.
In whiche applicacion this we maie learn, that the high preist of the lawe figured Christe our high preist. The tabernacle by which he entred into the holie place, figured the tabernacle of Christes bodie, by whiche he entred into the holie place. The blood wherwith the preist entred, figured the H Chrysost. in 9. ad Heb. blood of Christe. The entring and sacrificing of the high preist once in the yeare, figured the sacrificing of Christ, and his entringe into the holy place of heauen once for all. The cleinsing and purifieng of the people by vertue [Page 23]of the sacrifice of the high preist whiche (as saincte Paule saieth) purified the vnclean as touching the purifieng of the flesh, figured the clensing and A purifieng of the consciences of the beleuers, from dead workes, and all filthinesse of sinne For Lauit nos à peccatis nostris in sanguine suo. he hath washed vs Apoca. 1. from our sinnes in his bloode (saieth saincte Ihon)
As the death and blood shedding of kiddes and calues, and soche other, ād the sacrifices doen by thē, did figure the passiō, and bloodshedding of Christ ād the holie sacrifice offred by him (for he was sacerdos & victima, both preist and sacrifice) by the whiche the beleuing people in Chryst to come, were instructed, that the Sauiour of the woorlde shoulde die for the sinnes of the same: So by figures also were they taught, that he should rise again the third daie: As by that figure which Chryst applieth to him self for that pourpose in the Gospell: Sicut enim Ionas suit in ventre ceti tribus diebus, & tribus noctibus: sic erit filius hominis in corde terrae, &c. As Ionas (saieth he) was three daies and three nightes in the whalls bellie: So shal the Sonne of man be thre daies, ād three Matth. 12 nightes in the heart of the earth.
Which figure liuelie declareth not onelie that Chryst shoulde be three B nightes in the earth, as Ionas was in the belly of the whall: But that as Ionas the third daie cā oute of the whalls bellie aliue: So Christ the third daie shoulde rise oute of the earth aliue. Whiche thing to be verified, and so doen in Chryst all the Euangelistes do testifie.
As his buryall, and abode in the graue, and his resurrection was figured by Ionas: So was his Ascension by the takinge vppe of Elias in a chariett of fyre into heauen. Elias went to heauen by the powre of God: Chryst ascended into heauen by the power of his Godhead.
Tediousnes that should moche offende the Reader, moueth me to staie to bring in anie mo figures of Chryste, at this present to this pourpose. Wherfore I will ceasse at this time any farder to procead therin, and treact of the like matter by prophecies, which ys the third waie, by which God vsed in sundrie times and ages, to reueill the misterie of our redemption.
THE ELEVENTH CHAPITER DECLARETH by the Prophetes of what line Messias shoulde come, with his conception, birth, passion, and deathe. C
IN the shewing ād opening of the prophecies I wil obserue this ordre before vsed. First, to set furthe of what line Messias shall come. Secondlie, of his conception and birth, Thirdlie, of his passiō and death. Fourthlie, of his resurrectiō, and last of his ascēsiō. As cōcerning the first: As God promised that the same Messias, Sauiour of Prophecie of the line and stock of Christ. the worlde should be of the seede of Abrahā, ād of the fruict of the bodie of Dauid: So long after their times, by his prophet Esaie did he manifestlie speak the same Egredietur virga de radice Iesse, et flos de radice eius ascēdet. Ther shal come a rodde oute of the kinred of Iesse, ād a blossom, or flowre shal flowrish oute of his roote. Who ys the roote, the rodde, and the flower, S. Ambrose expoū deth, Esay. 11. saing. Radix, familia Iudaeorū: virga, Maria: flos Mariae Christus est, qui foetorē mun Ambr. de Benedict Patriach. ca. 4. danae colluuionis aboleuit, et odorē vitae aeternae infudit. The roote ys the familie, of the Iewes: The rod ys Marie. The flower of Marie ys Christ, who hath takē awaie the stinke, and hath powred in, the odoure of euerlasting life.
That Christ ys that flower, that the Prophete speaketh of, the scriptures also, that do ther immediatelie folowe, do euidentlie proue. Whiche to auoid D prolixitie, and in consideracion that I writte not to Iewes, but to Christē mē I leaue to induce, referring the Reader to the place of the Prophet, which he [Page]maie easelie peruse, supposing yt sufficiēt to shew how Gods woords ād his E trueth ys constante, vnifourme, and permanente in all ages, and howe agreable his woorde spoken by his prophete ys to his promissemade to Abraham, and Dauid as before ys mencioned.
Nowe therfor let vs procead to weigh other prophecies, howe they will Prophecie of the cōceptiō of Christ Esay. 7. aunswer the figures. And first the prophecie of the conception. What the figure was ye haue heard. The Prophet Esaie being taught of God thus saied: Ecce virgo cōcipiet, & pariet filiū. Behold a virgē shal cōceaue, and beare a Sōne. As the person of the figure, for that, that nature failed, cōceaued ād brought furth a childe by Gods power: So a virgen, wher nature hath not her ordre to conceaue, hath besides nature, and against the ordre of nature, conceaued by Gods power.
And this prophecie of Esaie doth wel opē ād declare the former prophecie. He saied a Rod shal come furth of the kinred of Iesse, ād a flower shal florish oute of his roote. Virga virgo est. The rodde ys the virgē, the florishing flower ys the Sōne of the virgē. What maner of Sōne yt ys, the Prophete immediatelie F declareth: Et vocabitur nomē eius Emanuel. And his name shall be called Emanuel. Matth. 1. What Emanuel ys the Euāgelist declareth: Quod interpretatur nobiscum Deus, which, yf a mā interprete, ys as moche to saie, as God with vs. Whiche interpretaciō geueth vs to vnderstād, that the Sōne of this wirgē ys the verie Messias God and man, who was God with vs: For In terris visus est, & cum hominibus Baruch. 3. cōuersatus est. He was seen in the earth and was cōuersaunt with mē, or dwelt with men. So thē wher the prophete said. A rodde shall bring furth a flower, nowe by plain woordes he saieth: A virgen shall bring furth a Sonne called Emanuel.
And that this was fulfilled as yt was prefigured and prophecied, the Euā gelist testifieth: Cùm esset despōsata mater Iesu Maria Ioseph, antequam cōuenirēt, inuenta Math. 1. est in vtero habēs de spiritu sancto. Whē Marie the mother of Iesus was maried to Ioseph, before they came to dwel together, she was founde with child by the holie Goste.
That she cōceaued by the holie Goste, the Angel testified to Ioseph: Ioseph fili Dauid, noli timere accipere Mariā coniugē tuā. Quod enim in eanatū est, de spiritu sancto est: Ibidem. G Ioseph the sōne of Dauid (saieth the Angel) feare not to take vnto thee Marie thy wief. For that, that ys cōceaued in her, cometh of the holie Goste. And to cōclude thus the Euāgelist saieth. Hoc autē totū factū est, vt adimpleretur quod dictū est à Domino per Prophetā dicentē: Ecce virgo cōcipiet, & pariet filiū, & voca būt nomē eius Emanuel. Al this was doē that yt might be fulfilled which wasspokē Esay. 7. of oure Lord by the Prophete: saieng: Beholde a maide shal be with child, ād shall bring furth a sonne, And they shal cal his name Emanuel. In this processe yt ys easie to be perceaued, how the prophecie aūswereth the figure, ād the Euāgelist aūswereth both figure, ād prophecie, certifieng vs that to be fulfilled ād doē in facte, that thei promised, the one in figure the other inwoord Christs passion and all notable partes therof conferred to the prophecies. Ioan. 3. Esaie. 53. Prophecie of Christes passion. We haue heard of Chrystes cōminge into flesh by his cōception ād birth: Now let vs procead to speake of the third, which ys his passiō ād death. And for ētrie therūto, first let vs search by the prophecies wherfor he cā into flesh Chryste himself saieth: Venit filius hominis quaerere, et saluū facere quod perierat. The Sōne of mā came to seke, ād saue that, that had perished. But by what meanes was yt his pleasure to saue that, that had perished? The Prophet declareth, H saieng. Ipse autē vulneratus est propter iniquitates nostras, attritus est propter scelera nostra. Disciplina pacis nostra super eū, et linore eius sanati sumus. He was woūded for our offences, ād smittē for our wickednes. For the chaistesemēt of our peace was laied vpon him, and with his stripes are we healed. By what means did he come [Page 24]to his passion? and howe came he into the hādes of his enemies? By the treason of one of his Apostles, who (as by the figure was prefigurated) solde A him to the Iewes, as the Brethren of Ioseph solde him to the Ismaelites.
But that prolixitie maie be auoided, and yet so notable a matter not omitted, as wherbie the faithfull maie take occasion to reioice in the sowndenesse of their faith, and therin glorifie God, I will by the helpe of God, passe through the storie of the Passiō, as yt ys written of the Euangelistes, comparinge euery notable parte of yt with the prophecies, wherby shall appeare, that the faith of the chrystians, beleuing Chryst to haue died for the sinnes of the woorlde, and by that death to haue wrought the redemption of the same, ys a sure, substancial, and a grownded faith, fownded vpon the vnmoueable trueth of Gods woorde.
As yt was by his foreknowledge, by his holie prophetes liuelie and plainlie spoken, howe, and by what means Messias should woorke the saluaciō of mā: Euē so plainly and liuelie hath our Messias wrought and doen the same in facte, that was before spoken in woorde, as by this brief comparison ensewing yt shall appeare. B
And to beginne, the howre of the passiō of our Lorde drawing nere, which he right wel knewe: Sciens Iesus quia venit hora eius, vt transeat ex hoc mundo ad Patrem, Iesus knowing that his howre was cōmed, that he should departe oute of this worlde to the father, he prepared him, and willinglie went to Hierusalē. Appropinquante hora passionis, appropinquare voluit loco passionis. The howre of Joan. 13. his passion drawing nere, he wolde also drawe nere to the place of his passion. And therfore (as S. Matthew saieth) he going vppe to Hierusalem, tooke the xii. disciples aside in the waie, and saied to them. Beholde we go vppe to Gregor. Hierusalem, and the Sonne of man shall be betraied vnto the chief preistes, and vnto the Scribes, and they shall condemne him to death and shall deliuer him to the gentiles to be mocked, to be scourged, and to be crucified, ād Matth. 20 the thirde daie he shall rise again.
By the which his saieng and doing yt appeareth, that he willinglie went to suffer his passion. Which yet at the instant of the same, when Iudas with his companie came to the garden, wher he and his disciples were, he did more C plainlie shewe in effecte. For (as S. Iohn saieth) Sciens Iesus omnia quae ventura erant, processit, et dixit eis. Iesus knowing all thinges that shoulde come on him, wente furth and saied, whome seke ye? They saied: Iesus of Nazareth. Iesus Ioan. 18. saieth to them: I am he. As soen as he saied vnto them: I am he, they wēt backward ād fel to the grownd. Wherbie yt ys manifest both in that, that he came to mete them, ād also in that, at his meting with thē, with his onelie woorde he threwe thē on the grownd, that he with like power might haue eschaped Ibid. Zach. 26. their hādes, yf yt had not ben his will to haue suffred. In further argument wherof also, when Peter drewe his sworde, and cutte of the eare of Malchus, Iesus saied vnto him: Putte vppe thy sworde into the sheath. Shall I not drinke of the cuppe which my Father hath geuen me? And (as S. Matthew testifieth) saied further to Peter: Thinkest thowe that I can not now praie to my Father, and he shall geue me by and by more then twelue legiōs of Angels? But howe then shall the scriptures be fulfilled? for thus must yt be.
By all whiche processe, yt dothe most euidentlie appeare, that willinglie D he suffred his passion. So did God by his Prophet foresaie that he shoulde doo. Oblatus est, quia voluit. He was offred vppe bicause he wolde.
Iudas betraied him with a kisse: Iuda, osculo filium hominis tradis? Iudas be Esay. 53. traiest thowe the Sonne of man with a kisse? The prophecie saied lōg before [Page]that yt shoulde so be. Homo pacis mea in quo sperani, qui edebat panes meos, magnificauit E super me supplantationem, My owne familiar frende, whom I trusted, which did also eate of my bread, hath laied great wait for me. Psal. 40.
That this prophecie was spoken of Iudas, Chryste him self ys wittnesse, who speakinge of Iudas in the Gospell alleageth this same scripture: Qui manducat mecum panem, leuabit cōtra me caleaneum suum. He that eateth bread with Joan. 13. me, shall lifte vppe his hele against me.
To procead in the story of the passion, when the Iewes laied handes vpon him, and apprehended him, Discipuli omnes relicto co fugerunt. All his disciples Matth. 26 fledde and forsooke him. Whiche thing allmightie God had spoken by hys Prophet Zacharie, that so yt shoulde come to passe: Percutiam pastorem, & disper gentur oues gregis. I will smite the sheaperd, and the shepe of the flocke shall be scatered. That this prophecie ys thus to be vnderstanded. Christe ys witnesse, Zach. 14. who in the Gospell of saincte Marke, applieth yt to the same pourpose.
In the house of Caiphas they entreacted our Sauiour very euell. For emongest other thinges: Expuerunt in faciem eius. They did spitte in his face. Of F the whiche the Prophete Esaie spake, as though yt had ben doen to hys own Mat. h. 26 Esay. 50. person: Faciem non auerti ab increpantibus & conspuentibus in me. I turned not my face from shame and spitting on me.
That in the morninge the cheif preistes and the elders of the people had a councell against Iesus to putte him to deathe, yt was not ouerpassed withoute prophecie. For the Prophete Dauid speaketh thus of yt in the person Mat. 21. of Chryste: Circumdederunt me can [...]s multi, concilium malignantium obsedit me. Manie dogges compased me rownde aboute, the councell of the wicked laied siege Psal. 21. against me.
When Iudas (as yt foloweth in the storie) seing Chryste condemned, brought the moncie again, sainge: I haue offended betrayeng an innocent Mat. 27 bloode, and that the cheif preistes wolde not putte these siluer plates into the treasurie, bicause yt was the price of blood, but tooke coūsell, and bought with them a potters fielde to burie straungers: the Euangelist himself affirmeth the prophecie therby to be fulfilled, saing. Then was that fulfilled, G whiche was spoken of by the Prophet Hieremie sainge: And they tooke thirtie siluer peices, the price of him that was valued, whom they bought of the children of Israell, and gaue them for the potters feilde.
Theise woordes be not fownde in Hieremie after the translation of the Bibles that nowe be comonly vsed: yet this prophecie maie well be alleaged oute of Hieremie. For saincte Hierom saieth, that he hath red a booke of Hieremie in the Hebrue tounge, in the whiche this sentence ys conteined woord for woorde.
But emōge the prophetes that we haue in vse nowe, Zacharie hath yt most plainlie, wher we read yt thus: Yf ye thinke yt good bring hether my price: Zachar. 11 Yf no, then leaue. So they weighed down thirtie siluer peices, the value that I was priced at. And the Lorde said vnto me: Castyt vnto the potter, a goodlie price for me to be valued at of them. And I tooke the thirtie siluer peices Matt. 27 and cast them vnto the potter. Thus moche Zacharie.
In whose woordes ye perceaue the price of him that was solde, which was thirtie siluer plates, for the whiche summe our sauiour was solde. Ye perceaue further more what was doen with those thirtie plates. In the prophecie H they were cast to the potter. And the cheif preistes cast thē likewise to the potter, for they bought a porters feilde with thē, to burie strangers in. Thus maie [Page 25]ye se how agreable thinges doen in the Gospell, be with the prophecie, and A how liuelie and well the one aunswereth the other.
Pilate hearing that Iesus was a man of Galilie, which belonged to the iurisdiction of Herode, he sent him to Herode, before whom the high preistes and Scribes accused him straitlie. But Herode with his men of warre, when they had despised him, they sent him again cloathed in a white garment, vnto Pilate, Wherby the prophecie was fulfilled which saied. Quare fremuerunt gē tes, & populi meditati sunt inania? Astiterunt reges terrae, & principes conuenerunt in Psal. 2. vnum, aduersus Dominum, et aduersus Christum eius. Whie do the heathē so furiouslie rage together, and why dothe the people ymagen vain thinges? The kinges of the earthe stand vppe, and the rulers take counsell together against the Lorde, and against hys enointed.
That this prophecie of Dauid was herefullfilled, the holie Goste by the holie multitude testifieth in the actes of the Apostles, which in their praier to God praied thus: Domine, tu es qui fecisti caelum et terram, etc. Lorde thow arte God, which hast made heauē and earthe, the Sea ād all that in thē ys. Which Act. 4. B in the holie Gost by the mouth of thy seruaūt Dauid our father hauest saied: why did the heathē rage, and the people ymagen vain thinges? The Kinges of the earth stoode vppe, and the rulers came together against the Lorde, ād against his enointed. And of trueth against thy holie childe Iesus, whom thow hauest enointed, both Herode, and also Ponce Pilate with the gentiles ād the people of Israell gathered thē selfs together in this Citie, to doo what soeuer thy hādes, and thy counseil determined before to be doen. Thus ye se not onelie the Gospel aunswereth the prophecie, but also by mē full of the holie Goste, yt ys so taken, vnderstāded, and applied.
To procead in the storie. When Chryst was before Herode, who questioned withe him manie woordes, he aunswered nothing, as S. Luke testifieth: Luc. 23. Matth. 27. So being before Pilate, when he was accused of the cheif preistes and elders, as S. Mathew wittnesseth, he aunswered nothinge, And whē Pilate also saied to him, doest thowe not heare how manie wittnesses they laye against thee? And he aunswered him neuer one woorde, insomoche as the deputie merueiled greatlie. Wherbie was fulfilled the prophecie which saieth. Tanquam ouis C Esay. 53. ad occisionē ducetur, et tanquam agnus corā tondente se obmutescet, et non aperiet os suū. He shall be led as a shepe to be slain, yet shall he be as still as a lambe, before the sherer, and not open his mouth.
This ys the prophecie which the Chāberlain of queen Candace, did read Act. 4. sitting in his chariet, retourning frō Hierusalē. To whose chariett the Spirit of God cōmaunded Philippe to ioin himself, who hearing him reading this place, asked him: vnderstandest thow what thowe readest? &c. And Philippe went yppe into the chariette, and began at the same scripture, and preached vnto him Iesus. By the which yt ys manifest that this scripture or prophecie ys to be vnderstanded of our Sauioure Chryst Iesus.
When Pilate (as yt foloweth in the storie) sate in iudgemēt, and asked the people, what he shoulde doo with Iesus, which was called Chryste, They all Math. 27. saied: Let him be crucified. Whē Pilate saied: what hath he doen? They cried the more, let him be crucified. Whē Pilate called for water, and wasshed his handes, saieng: I am innocent, of the blood of this iust person, their feircenesse, and crueltie was so great, that they cried: His bloode be vpon vs, and on D owre children. Which their lionlike crueltie and fiercenesse was foreseen by God, and spokē by the Prophete in the psalm: Aperuerūt super me os suū sicut leorapiēs et rugiēs. They haue opened their mouth vpō me, as yt were a rāping, ād roringe Lion.
[Page]Whē Pilate sawe their importunitie, he willing to cōtēt the people, let Barrabas E loose vnto thē, ād whē he had scourged Iesus, deliuered him to be crucified. Accordinlie saieth the Prophete: Corpus meū dedi percutientibus, et genas meas Esay. 50. vellentibus. I offred my backe to the smiters, and my chekes to the nippers.
Which prophecie dothe not onelie declare the scourginges that Chryste shoulde sustein in his bodie, but also the buffettes and blowes, that he suffred on the face in the house of the high preist, and of other ministres, as the Euangelist doth declare.
Then Iudas seing that Chryst was condemned, he hanged him self, fullfilling Matth. 26. Mar. 15. Luc. 22. the prophecie whiche saieth: Fiant dies eius pauci, et episcopatum eius accipiat alter. Let his daies be fewe, and let an other take hys office.
That this was prophecied of Iudas saincte Peter dothe testifie, saing: Ye men and bretheren, this scripture must nedes haue ben fullfilled, whiche the holie Gost through the mouthe of Dauid spake before of Iudas, whiche was Acto. 1. guide of them that tooke Iesus, &c. And when he was hanged he brust in sundre, and his bowels gusshed oute. For yt ys writtē in the booke of psalms. F Fiat Commoratio, &c.
After all theise persecutions, when Chryst was deliuered to the soldiers to be crucified, they led him into the common haul, wher they entreacted him like a most vile man, putting on him a purple Robe, and plectinge a Crowne of thornes vpon his head, and a rede in his hand, and they on their knees, saing: Haill king of Iewes.
Wherin was verified the prophecie of Esaie, spoken in the person of the Iewes: We haue recknid him so vile, that we haue turned our faces frō him: yea Esay. 53. he was despised, ād therfor we regarded him not. So that our Sauiour might verie well saie, at that same time, with his owne mouthe, that the Prophet Dauid spake before by the spirit of prophecie in the person of Chryste: Ego sum vermis, et non homo, opprobriū hominū, et abiectio plebis. I am a woorme and no Psal. 21. man, a verie scorne of men, and the outcast of the people.
Those cruell handlinges of him doen, yet most cruellie to his vnspeakeable pain, percinge hys most blessed, and swete handes and feete, they crucified him, in this also fulfilling the scripture prophecieng that yt should so be, G and speaking yt in the person of Christe, who suffred yt: Foderunt manus meas, Ibid. & pedes meos, & dinumerauerunt omnia ossa mea. They perced my handes, and my feet. I maie tell al my bones. What prophecies coulde more liuelie expresse this parte of Chrystes passion, then this dothe?
But I shall haste me to other speaking as plainlie as this. And to folow the ordre after the narration of saincte Luke, they crucified with him two euell doers, one on hys right hand, the other on hys left, fulfilling the prophecie which saieth: Et cum iniquis reputatus est. And he was reputed with the wicked. Esay. 53. Marc. 15. Whiche prophecie S. Marke applieth to this pourpose, sainge yt here to be fullfilled.
When he was thus crucified, they parted his garment, and cast lottes for yt. The prophecie agreablie saieth: Diuiserunt sibi vestimenta mea, et super vestem Psal. 21. Math. 27. meam miserunt sortem. They parted my garments amōg them, and vpon my ve sture they cast lottes. That this prophecie ys fulfilled by this facte, S. Matthew ys wittnesse, who saieth: They parted hys garmentes, and cast lottes, that yt might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Prophet, &c. H
When this was doen they passed by, reuiling him, and wagging their heades. Accordinglie was yt prophecied and spoken in the person of Chryste. Omnes videntes me deriserunt me, locuti sunt labijs, et mouerunt caput. All that Psal. 21. [Page 26]did see me, laught me to skorne, they spake with their lipps, and wagged A their heades.
Likewise the high priestes with the Scribes and the elders mocked him, and saied: He saued other, himself he can not saue. He trusted in God, let Math. 27. him deliuer him nowe yf he wil haue him. Nowe beholde if the prophecie haue not almoste euen the same woordes: Sperauit in Domino, eripiat eum, saluū Psal. 21. faciat eum, quoniam vult eum. He trusted in God that he wolde deliuer him. let him deliuer him, if he will haue him.
All these their wicked mockes, and cruell tormentes not with standinge, hanging vpon the crosse he praied for them to his Father, sainge: Pater dimitte Luc. 23. illis, non enim sciunt quid faciunt. Father forgeue them, for they knowe not what they doo. Herin also he fullfilled the prophecie, whiche saied of him, Pro transgressoribus Esay. 53. orauit, He made intercession for misdoers. And when the sixt howre was commed, darknesse arose ouer all the earth vntill the ningth howre (as saincte Marke writeth) Iesus cried with a loude voice saing: Eloy Eloy Lamasabathani, whiche ys if one interprete. My God my God, why Mar. 15. B hauest thow forsaken me? In the whiche crie, Christ spake the verie woordes of the prophecie: Deus, Deus meus respice in me, quare me dereliquisti? My God, my God, looke vpon me, why hauest thow forsaken me? When he Psal. 21. Mar. 15. had thus cried, one ranne, and filled a sponge with vineagre, and put yt vppō a Reed, and gaue him to drincke. Saincte Matthew saieth, that they gaue him vineagre mingled with gall, which fullie aunswereth the prophecie Math. 27. which saieth: Dederunt in escam meam fel, & in siti mea potauerunt me aceto. They gaue me gall to eate, and when I was thirstie, they gaue me vineagre to Psal. 68. drinke. Saincte Iohū concludinge here the wholl storie of the passion saieth thus. Postea sciens Iesus quia omnia consummata etc. After these thinges Iesus knowing, Ioan. 19. that all thinges were nowe perfourmed, that the scripture might be fullfilled he saied: I thirst. Ther stoode a vessell by full of vineagre. Therfore they filled a sponge with vineagre, and wounde yt aboute with Isope and put yt to his mouth. As sooen as Iesus receaued the vineagre he saied: Yt ys finished: and bowed downe his head, and gaue vppe the Goste:
In this woord, Consummatum est, yt ys finished, Christe, who saied, that all Ioan. 19. Luc. 24. C must nedes be fullfilled, which was written of him in the Lawe of Moises, and in the prophetes, and in the Psalmes, perceauing that all those that spake of his incarnacion, conuersation, and passion (the ende of whiche passion was instante) were fullfilled in him, and by him, signified to vs the ende of the same. whiche ende was that all thinges be doen in dede, as these bookes forespake by woorde in figures and prophecies. Nowe the end of these bookes being commed, and therfore well finished, as one that had doen his worke appoincted at his own pleasure, he gaue himself to rest, and yelded vppe his most blessed Spirit.
THE TVVELVETH CHAPITER BRIEFLIE TOVcheth a prophecie or two of Christs Resurrection and Ascension.
NOwe (gentle Reader) thowe hauest heard the goodlie storie of the passion of our Sauiour Iesus Christe, not according to the woorthinesse of soche a matter treacted of, and handled, D but for the avoiding of tediousnes breiflie, and as yt were in a transcourse ouerrunne. Wherin yet yf you well note the conference and applicacion of the storie of the Gospell to the prophecies, and [Page]weigh well, howe the one aunswereth the other, yt will occasion yowe (as E I suppose) to honour God in his prouident wisedom, and foreknowledge, and to reuerence his holie mysteries in the scriptures also, teaching vs the same.
Nowe to perfourme my promisse, I will bringe furth a prophecie or two of his Resurrection, and ascension, and so end this matter.
As the storie of the Gospell hath sufficientlie wittnessed that Christe our Sauiour gaue vppe the gost vppon the crosse, and ther (to declare himself a Prophecie of Chrystes resurrect. and ascēsiō mortall man) died: So doth yt testifie vnto vs, that he was buried, and that the third daie he rose again, and that (as sainct Paule saieth) accordinge to the Scriptures. And for asmoche as the Gospell was not perchaunce then written, or receaued as of autoritie to proue that article to vnbeleuing men: 1. Cor. 15. yt ys to be supposed, that saincte Paule ment the Scriptures of the Prophetes, whiche did prophecie the resurrection of Christe. of the whiche matter we read thus in the psalme: I haue sett God allwais before me, for he ys Psal. 15. on my right hand. therfor I shall not fall. wherfore my hearte was gladde, F and my tounge reioced, my flesh also shall rest in hope. for whie? Thowe shallt not, leaue my sowle in Hell, nether shalt thowe suffer thy holie one to see corruption.
That this prophecie speaketh of the resurrection of Christe, saincte Peter in the first sermon that he made, after he hadde receaued the holie Goste, whiche was euen the same daie of Pentecost, dothe alleage the same scripture by the teaching of the same holie Spirit to proue the resurrectiō of Christe, wher he saieth thus: Ye men of Israell heare these woordes. Iesus of Nazareth Acto. 2. a man approued of God emong yowe with miracles, wonders, and signes, which God did by him in the middest of yowe (as ye your selues knowe) him haue ye taken by the handes of vnrighteouse persons, after he was deliuered by the determinate counseill, and foreknowledge of God, and haue crucified and slain him, whom God hath raysed vppe, and loosed the sorowes of death, bycause yt was vnpossible that he shoulde be holden of yt. For Dauid speaketh of him before hand: I sawe God allwais before me &c. as ys before alleadged.
And proceading in this matter, noteth the speciall poinctes of this Prophecie, G that doo proue the resurrection of Christe and saieth: Therfore seing he was a Prophete (speking of Dauid) and knewe that God had sworne with an othe to him, that Christe (as concerninge the flesh) shoulde come of the fruicte of his loines, and shoulde sitte on his seat, he knowing this before spake of the resurrection of Christe, that his sowle showlde not be lefte in hell, neither his flesh shoulde see corruption. This Iesus hath God raised vppe wherof all we are wittnesses.
In the whiche wholl sentence and saieng of saincte Peter two thinges are to this pourpose to be noted. First, that before the allegacion of the prophete Dauid he saieth thus, speaking of Christe: whom God hath raised vppe, and loosed the sorowes of death. Yf ye aske the holie Apostle, the cause whie God hath raised him from deathe, he aunswereth: Bicause yt was vnpossible that he shoulde be holden of yt. Yf ye procead to aske him why yt was vnpossible. he aunswereth: For Dauid speaketh of him. Wherin he noteth the immutabilitie of God, and the certentie of his woorde. As who should H saie, forsomoch as God hath spoken by his Prophete Dauid that he wolde raise vppe Christe again, yt ys vnpossible but he must be raised, and therfore he was raised. [Page 27]The second thing to be noted in the Apostle ys, that he noteth, as yt were A with his fingar, the verie speciall woordes of the prophecie of Dauid, that forespake the resurrection of Christe, where the Apostle speking of Dauid, saied: He knowing of this before spake of the resurrection of Christe, that his sowle shoulde not be left in Hell, nether his flesh shoulde see corruption.
This sentence ys yt, that plainlie proueth the resurrection. Wherfore the Apostle, to conferre the fullfilling of the prophecie to the prophecie yt self, concludeth the sentence thus: This Iesus hath God raised vppe, wherof we all are wittnesses. Albeit the learned Fathers alleage other places also: yet for so moche as I haste to the matter principallie entended, I will staie my hande in this matter, Mindinge with like expedicion to finish the rest that remaineth to be doen by my promesse, that ys onelie to declare the ascension of Christ by prophecie, as I haue doen by figure.
Of the Ascension of our Sauiour Christe the Prophete Dauid also in the Psal. 67. Prophecie of the Ascē sion. psalme dothe Prophecie thus: Ascendisti in altum, cepisti captiuitatem, accepisti B dona in hominibus. Thow arte gon vppe on high, thowe hauest led captiuitie captiue, and receaued gistes for men. That the Prophete did in this sentence speake and prophecie of the ascension of Christe, saincte Paule ys wittnesse, who alleaging this prophecie proceadeth vppon yt thus Vnicuique nostrū data est gratia secundùm mensuram donationis Christi. Propter quod dicit: Ascendēs in altum, Ephes. 4. captiuam duxit captiuitatem, dedit dona hominibus, &c. vnto euerie one of vs ys geuen grace, according to the measure of the gifte of Christe. wherfore he saieth: when he went vppe on high, he led captiuitie captiue and gaue giftes vnto men. That he ascended, what meeneth yt, but that he also descended first into the lowest partes of the earth? He that descended ys euen the same also that ascended vppe aboue all heauens, to fullfill all thinges.
By the whiche woordes, that saincte Paule taketh the sainge of Dauid to be a prophecie of Christes Ascencion, yt ys more manifest, then yt neadeth anie further probacion of me or anie other man.
But this scruple perchaunce maie moue a diligente reader, that the Psalme C saieth: Thowe arte gon vppe on high, thowe hauest led captiuitie captiue, and receaued giftes for men, or emonge men: Accepisti dona in hominibus: And the Apostle saieth: Dedit dona hominibus. He hath geuen giftes to men. betwixte geuinge and receauing ther ys a great difference.
This doubte doth saincte Augustine dissolue, writting in this wise: Sed Aug. l. 15 de Trinit. cum Propheta dixerit, Accepisti dona in hominibus: Apostolus maluit dicere, Dedit dona hominibus, vt ex vtroque scilicet verbo, vno Phrophetico, Apostolico altero, (quia in vtroque est diuini sermonis autorites) sensus plenissimus redderetur. Verūque enim verum est, & quia dedit hominibus, et quia accepit in hominibus. Dedit hominibus, tanquā caput membris suis: accepit in hominibus, idem ipse vtique in membris suis, propter quae membra sua clamauit de coelo, Saule, Saule, quid me persequeris? But when the Prophete hath saied: Thowe hauest receaued giftes in men, or emong men: the Apostle hath chosen to saie: Thow hauest geuen giftes to men, that oute of both sainges, the one of the Prophete, the other of the Apostle (by cause that in bothe ys the autoritie of Gods woord) a most full and perfecte sense might be geuen. For both be true, bothe that he gaue giftes vnto men, and D also receaued giftes in men. He gaue giftes vnto men, as the head to the membres, the self same also receaued giftes in his membres, for the whiche his membres he cried from heauen: Saul, Saul, why doest thowe persequute [Page]me? Thus moche sainct Augustin. E
Albeit the Scriptures be copiouse and plentifull of Prophecies as well of this matter as of other, all teachinge vs one trueth, though they be vtterred by diuerse organs, or instrumentes of the holie Goste, forbicause the holie Goste the Schoolemaster of all trueth ys but one: Yet I will not molest the Reader with the rehersall of anie mo, well knowing, that the truthe ys as Holie Gost schoolmaster of all trueth. perfecte, as sure, and as substācial in one sentēce of the holy Goste, as in twē ti: Neuerthelesse he that ys desierouse to read mo prophecies of this matter I referre him to the xlvj. psame, to the lxiij. chapiter of Easie, and to the second of Micheas, as the holie learned fathers haue taught me.
Thus (praise be to God) I haue through his helpe profourmed that, that I entended: namely, declared that the misteries of our Redemptiō were by diuerse meanes, that ys to saie, by promisses, figures, and prophecies reueiled vnto the Fathers by Allmightie God, and that in diuerse ages, and times, as in the time of the lawe of Nature, in the time of the lawe of Moyses, All whiche promisses, figures, and prophecies, promised, figured and prophecied soche thinges, as by our Sauiour Christe, were fullfilled, accōplisshed, F and ended. whiche so beinge they haue their ende, according as Christ himself saied: Etenim quae de me scripta sunt, finem habent. For the thinges, whiche are written of me, haue an ende. Luc. 22.
THE THIRTENE CHAPITER HOW THAT MELCHIsedech was a figure of Christe bothe in preisthood, and sacrifice.
NOwe to approche to the matter in this first booke principallie entended: Wheras Allmightie God, did paint, open, and shewe the misterie of our Redemption, by promises, figures, and prophecies in the olde testament to the great comforth of thē, that liued in that testament, whiche Redemption ys alredie wrought, doen and perfected: Euen so hath he by figures, and prophecies, shadowed, and spoken before of thinges that shal be doen in the new Testament, as a perpetuall memoriall of the same redemption, to the great and spirituall comforth of them that liue vnder the newe testament. whiche memoriall G ys nowe in the Churche of Christendom, vsed and continned. For as by his bloodsheding vpon the Crosse, he did the verie thing in dede, that the legall Sacrifices did prefigurate, & shadowe in the olde testament: So by the same blood he (as being the thing yt felf, and the verie light causingge figure to ceasse, and the shadow to be remoued) abolished the olde Testament, and established and confirmed a newe Testament, not to remayn for a season, as the other was appointed to do, when Moises saied: Hic sanguis Testamenti, quod mandauit ad vos Deus. This ys the bloode of the Testament, whiche God hath made with yowe: But a newe euerlasting Testament, according Exod. 24. Hebr. 9. Hebr. 13. Aeternum Testamētū as saincte Paule saieth.
This euerlasting Testament hath accordinglie an euerlasting preist, and an euerlasting sacrifice. The euerlasting preist ys our Sauiour Christe, as wittnesseth sainct Paule: Nec Christus semetipsum glorificauit, vt pontifex sieret, sed qui dixit ad eum: Filius meus es tu, ego hodie genui te. Quemadmodum & in alio loco dicit. Tu es sacerdos in aeternum secundùm ordinem Melchisedech. Neither did Christe glorifie him self, to be made the high preist, but he that saied vnto him: H Hebr. 5. Thowe arte my Sonne, this daie haue I begottē thee, As he saieth also in an other place: Thowe arte a preist for euer after the order of Melchisedech.
[Page 28]The euerlasting sacrifice ys the verie bodie and bloode of the same our Christes bodie and blood an euerlasting sacrifice. Luc. 22. A Sauiour Iesus Christe. whiche as he, according to the ordre of his preisthood, did sacrifice in his last Supper vnder the formes of bread and wine: So did he geue auctoritie and cōmandement to the Apostles and ministres of his Churche to do the same saing: Hoc facite in meam cōmemorationē. This do ye in the remembrance of me.
The continuance of the doing of this thing in the remembrance of him, sainct Paule declareth saing: Donec veniat. vntill he come, vnderstande to the general iudgemēt. wherbie yt doth appeare that this sacrifice, ād preisthood, 1. Cor. 11. shall continewe vnto the worldes ende.
These be the thinges, whiche I saied before, that God had sheued, by figures, and prophecies. Whiche figures and prophecies, being doen and past, and ment of these thinges, must as necessarelie be fullfilled, as the other before mencioned figures, and prophecies were fullfiled of the Authour, and Institutour of them.
The figures and prophecies before mencioned were of thinges, whiche B as touchinge the facte (not the vertue, efficacie, and merite, which haue none ende) were ended in Christe. As his incarnacion ys doen and ended, his passion, resurrection, and ascension be doen, and ended in facte, not in vertue, efficacie, and meritte.
But the newe Testament, wherin the vertue, efficacie, and merites of these factes be continued, and applied, ys begonne and confirmed in Christes A new lawe a newe preisthood Heb. 7. bloode. The preisthood also of the same, whiche he ordeined in that newe lawe or Testament. For a newe lawe must nedes haue a newe preisthood, and a newe preisthood most haue a newe lawe, as saincte Paule maketh this argument of necessitie, that Translato sacerdotio, necesse est vt legis translatiox fiat. The preisthood being taken awaie, the lawe must nedes be taken awaie. A newe preisthood a newe sacrifice. For lawe and preisthood go together. And with a newe preisthood cometh a newe sacrifice. For the diuersitie of preisthood standeth in the diuersitie of sacrifice. These three shall endure, and remain, as the figures and prophecies of the same shall manifestlie declare, and proue.
Of these thinges ther be figures in the lawe of nature, and in the lawe of Moyses. In the lawe of nature, albeit that Seth, Noe, and other holie men, C did offer sacrifices vnto God: yet were they not figures of this Sacrifice, vsed nowe in Christes church, but raither of Christes Sacrifice offred vpon Apoca. 13. the Crosse after the maner of Aaron. For the whiche cause saincte Iohn saieth, he ys Agnus, qui occisus est ab origine mundi. the Lambe that was slain from the beginning of the worlde, Both for that he was figured in the sacrifices doen to God from the beginnig of the worlde, & also that he gaue vertue to all soche sacrifices.
But the first that figureth bothe the preisthood and sacrifice of the newe lawe, ys Melchisedech, of whome we read thus: And Melchisedech, king of Salem brought furth bread and wine (for he was the preist of the most high God) and blessed him saieng: Blessed be Abraham vnto the high God, possessour of heauen and earth. And blessed be the high God whiche hath deliuered thine enemies into thy handes. And Ahraham gaue him tithes of all. D Heb. 6. &. 7. Christ and Melchisedech cōpared togethe
To proue this Melchisedech to be the verie figure of Christe, we can haue no better argument, then the applicacion which S. Paule maketh by the holie Goste, in the epistle to the Hebrues, wher in the ende of the sixte chapiter he saieth thus: Wher the forerenner ys for vs entred, euen Iesus, that ys [Page]made an high preist for euer, after the ordre of Melchisedech. And then yt foloweth E in the beginning of the next chapiter: This Melchisedech king of Salē, who being preist of the most high God, mette Abraham, as he returned again from the slaughter of the kinges, and blessed him, to whom also Abraham gaue tithes of all thinges, first ys called by interpretation king of righteousnesse, after king of Salem, that ys to saie, king of peace, without Father, without mother withoute kinred, And hath neither beginning of daies, neither ende of life, but ys likened to the Sonne of God, and continueth a preist for euer.
In the whiche sentence saincte Paule first reciteth the storie, and after doth interprete the woordes, and applie the same to Christe, as the figure to the thing figured.
First (saieth he) ys he called the king of righteousnes, wher in saincte Paule dothe interprete the name of Melchisedech For as the learned in the tounges saie, Melec, doth signifie kinge, and Sedech righteousnesse, and so saincte Paule by the name of Melchisedech calleth him king of righteousnesse. After, king of Salem. Salem by interpretatiō ys peace. And therfore saincte F Paule saieth king of Salem, that ys to saie, of peace.
Yet ther was a Cittie in dede called Salem, of the whiche Melchisedech (as the Hebrues do saie) being the eldest Sonne of Noë, whome the scripture otherwise calleth Sem, was the verie king. In the whiche (as saincte Hierom Hierom. in Esay. 41. dothe testifie) ther remain the ruines of his palace, which doth testifie what a goodlie thinge yt was.
Whiche Melchisedech notwithstanding that he was a king, he was also a preist. For (as saincte Hierom doth also saie) the eldest or first born sonnes in the lawe of nature were preistes. And therfore yt dothe appeare that he was an eldest Sonne.
Sainct Paule goeth on, and saieth, that he was withoute father, and with oute mother: By the whiche, saincte Paule meeneth not, that he had no father, nor mother, but that the Scripture maketh no menciō of his father, nor mother.
Likewise ys that to be vnderstanded whiche foloweth, wher he saieth: G that Melchisedech was withoute kin, hauing neither beginning of daies nor yet endinge. In dede he had bothe, but the Scripture maketh no mencion of them. But all these thinges doth saincte Paule inferre to declare howe liuely Melchisedech as a figure of Christe, doth expresse him.
As First, wher Melchisedech ys called king of righteousnesse, he figureth Christe verie well. For Christe ys that righteouse kinge, who according to the saieng of the Prophete Esaie: Non secundùm visionem oculorū iudicabit, neque Esay. 11. secundùm auditum aurium arguet, sed iudicabit in iustitia pauperes &c. He shall not geue sentence after the thing, that shal be brought before his eies, neither reproue a matter at the first hearinge, but with righteousnes shall he iudge the poor. And again the Prophete saieth: He shall sitte vpon the seat of Dauid, and in his kingdom, to sett vppe the same, and to establish yt with Id. 9. equitie and righteousnes, for the whiche cause (as the Prophete saieth) vocabunt eum, Dominus iustus noster. They shall call his name, owre righteouse Lord.
And wourthilie ys he so called. For dailie dothe he righteouslie, for that Ioan. 5. that Pater omne iudicium dedit Filio. The Father hath geuen all iudgement to H the Sonne. Before whome, Omnes nos manifestari oportet, vt referat vnusquisque 2. Cor. 5. prout gessit in corpore, siue bonum, siue malum. We must all appeare, that enery [Page 29]man maie receaue the workes of his bodie, according to that he hath doen, be yt good or euell. At the whiche time: Procedent, qui bona fecerunt, in resurrectionem A vitae, qui vero mala egerunt, in resurrectionē iudicij. They shall come furth Ioan. 5. that haue don good, vnto the resurrection of life, and they that haue doen euell vnto the resurrection of damnacion.
Thus maie ye perceaue that Melchisedech being called the king of righteousnesse, figureth well Christ our righteouse king.
He ys called also, Rex Salem, king of peace, wherin he doth wonderons well figure Christe, who of the Prophet ys called: Princeps pacis, Esay. 9. çuius regnum multiplicabitur, & pacis non erit finis. The prince of peace, whose kingdom shall be multiplied, and there shall be no ende of peace. Wherfore the Angells at his birth sange: Et in terra pax hominibus bonae voluntatis. And in earth peace vnto men of a good will. For (as saincte Paule Luc. 2. saieth) Annunciauit pacem ijs, qui longè erant, & pacem ijs qui propè. He preached peace to those that were a farre of, and to them that were nigh. For Ephes. 2. why? Ipse est pax nostra, he ys our peace.
In this then howe well Melchisedech figureth Christe, though no admonicion B were geuen, the thing will shewe yt self, and howe well Christe aunswereth Melchisedech.
In this also that he saieth. Mechisedech to be withoute father and withoute mother, he ys also a right figure of Christ. For as Melchisedech ys not fownde in the Scriptures to haue anie naturall father in the earthe: Nomore hath Christe in very dede anie naturall father in the earthe. And as Melchisedech Mariechristes mother by nature and aboue nature. hath no mother, So Christe proprelie hath no naturall mother, calling a naturall mother, a woman that conceaueth by naturall course and ordre. For a woman that conceaueth aboue nature, and bringeth furth a child aboue nature, ys also a mother aboue nature. And being a mother aboue nature, properlie ys no mother natural. Eor that ys natural that ys conteined within thecōpasse of nature. And thus in this respect he had no natural mother. Yet maie she be called a naturall mother, for that she imparted to him her natural fleshe, and her naturall bloode to the worke of his incarnacion. Wherby also he in that respecte that he had naturall flesh, and naturall blood of man, C was and ys a naturall man.
Melchisedech also (saieth sainct Paule) was without kynred: wherin he ys also likened to Chryst, who although as touching his flesh, he hath a genealogie, as Matthew and Luke declare, Yet as concerning his Godhead the Prophete Esay. 53. saieth: Generationem eius quis enarrabit? Who can declare, or nombre hys generacion? As who shoulde saie, No man can declare, howe God the Father begatte God the Sonne. Yt ys inexplicable. And after thys maner Chryste trulie answereth his figure Melchisedech, for that in the Godhead he hath no kinne.
Melchisedech, hathe neither beginning of daies, nor ende of life: So Chryste, Apoc. 21. as God, hath neither beginning nor endinge. For he saieth: Ego sum alpha & omega, primus & nouissimus, principium & finis. I am alpha and omega, the first and the last, the beginning an the endinge. And saincte Paule: Iesus Christus heri Heb. 13 et hodie, ipse et in secula. Iesus Chryste ys yesterdaie, and to daie, and the same continueth for euer.
When sainct Paule had enombred all these thinges to declare therbie that Mechisedech was a figure of Chryste, he saieth: Assimulatus est filio Dei. Jbidem. 6. D He ys likened to the Sonne of God. Which ys as moche to saie, as he ys the figure of Chryst the Sonne of God.
[Page]Of the which matter saincte Augustin speaketh vpon the same place: Locus diligenti consideratione dignissimus. Cum enim per Melchisedech, in E Augu. de Gen. ad literam. quo huius rei futurae figura praecesser [...]t, discerneret sacerdotium Christi, à sacerdotio Leui, vi dete ergo (inquit) qualis hic est, cui & decimam partem Abraham dedit de primitijs, Patriarcha. A place most woorthie diligent consideracion. For when by Melchisedech, in whom the figure of the thing to come went before, he wolde discern the preisthood of Chryst, from the preisthoode of Leui, See therfore (saieth he) what maner of man this ys, vnto whom Abraham the Patriarke gaue the tithes of his first fruites.
But forsomoche as here ys no controuersie, but that Melchisedech ys a figure of Chryst, and of Chrysts preisthood, I will not trauaill here, nor hinder the reader with allegacion of manie doctours, vntill we come to the handling of the Prophecie, whiche shall aunswer the figure according to the ordre, which I haue vsed in other figures heretofore brought furthe, for the declaracion and setting furthe of other misteries of Chryst. But I shall go on to bringe in an other figure of the lawe of nature.
THE FOVRTENE CHAPITER DECLARETH, after the minde of Chrysostom, that Iob was a figure of Chryste, for the desire his seruantes had to eate his flesh.
IN Iob we do reade, that the men of his owne housholde should saie: Quis det de carnibus eius, vt saturemur? Who shall geue vs of his flesh, that we maie be fylled or satisfied? or as the common translation ys, Who shall let vs haue our bellies full of hys flesh?
As they that were of the housholde of Iob, for the great loue they bare Job. 31. Desire of the eating of the flesh of Job applied to the desire to eate Chrystes flesh. vnto him, wolde euen haue eaten of his flesh: So they that be of the houholde of Chryste, for the loue they beare to him, wolde eate of hys flesh.
The desire of the eating of the flesh of Chryste, Chrysostome applieth to the desire of those that were of the housholde of Iob, whiche desired to eate the flesh of Iob, as a thinge figuringe or signifienge the eatinge of Christes flesh, thus saieth he: Vt autem non solùm per dilectionem, sed reipsa in carnem illam conuertamur, per cibum id efficitur, quem nobis largitus est. Cum enim suum in nos amorem G Chryso. in 6 Ioan. omel. 45. indicare vellet, per corpus suum se nobis commiscuit, & in vnum nobiscum redegit, vt corpus cum capite vniretur. Hoc enim amantium maximè est. Hoc Iob significabat de seruis, à quibus maximè amabatur, qui suum amorem praeseferentes dicebant: Quis daret nobis, vt eius carnibus impleremur? Quod Christus fecit, vt maiori nos charitate astringeret, & vt suum in nos ostenderet desiderium, non se tantùm videri permittens desiderantibus, sed & tangi, et manducari, et dentes carni suae infigi, et desiderio sui omnes impleri. Ab illa igitur mensa tanquam leones ignem spirantes surgamus, Diabolo formidolosi, et caput nostrum intelligamus, et quam in nos prae se tulit charitatem. Parentes saepenumerò liberos suos alijs alendos dederunt: ego autem mea carne alo, me ijs exhibeo, omnibus faueo, omnibus optimam de futuris spem praebeo. Qui in hac vitaita se nobis exhibet, multo magis in futura. Vester ego frater esse volui, et communicani carnem propter vos, et sanguinem, et per quae vobis coniunctus sum, ea rursum vobis exhibui.
That we should be turned into that flesh (speaking of the flesh of Chryste) not by loue onelie, but in verie dede, yt ys doen by the meat whiche Chryst and we ioined two maner of waies. he hath graunted vs. For when he wolde shewe his loue to vs. he mixed himself H with vs by hys bodie, and made himself one with vs, that the head might be vnited with the bodie. This did Iob signifie by his seruantes, of whom he was greatlie beloued, whiche declaring their loue, did saie: [Page 30]Who will geue vs of his flesh that we maie be filled: The which thing Christ A did, that with a more greater charitie and loue he might bind vs to him, and also that he might shewe his desyre that he had to vs, he doth not Christ geueth himself to be toched, and eaten in the Sacramēt. onelie suffer him self to be seen of these that desire him, but also to be touched, and eaten, and their teeth to be fastned in his flesh, and them all to be filled with the desyre of him. Let vs therfore rise from that table as lions breathing oute fyre, being fearfull to the Deuell, and let vs consider our head, and what charitie he hath declared vnto vs. Parentes oftentimes haue deliuered their children vnto other to be fedde. But I do feade with my owne flesh. Vnto these I exhibit and geue my self. I loue and fauour all, I geue a good hope to all of thinges to come. He that thus exhibiteth and geueth himself to vs in this life, moche more he will geue himself to vs in the life to come. I wolde be your brother, And I tooke flesh and bloode with yowe, for your sakes. And by what thinges I was ioined to yow, the same again I geue to yowe. Thus moche Chrysostome.
In the which sentence, that thinges woorthie of note be not with to moche negligence ouerpassed, yt ys to be obserued, that this learned Father B (besyde the declaracion of the ardente loue of Christe toward vs, for the which he did vouchsaif to geue vs his verie flesh to eate, to the entēt we should be turned into yt, as the seruantes of Iob, who for ther great loue vnto him, desired to eate his flesh, that they might be all one with hym, whiche verie well signified the mutuall loue of Chryst and hys seruantes, He for loue geuing his flesh to be eaten, and they desiering through loue to eate the same) in the beginning of the sentence also saieth, that to the entent we shoulde be ioined to Chryste, not onelie by loue, but by the thing yt self in verie dede, that ys hrought to passe by the meat which he hath we be ioined to Christ. two waies. graunted vs.
In the which woordes yt ys verie euident that we are ioined to Chryste two maner of waies, that ys by loue, and by the thing yt self. Which in other Oure flesh ys turned into the flesh of Christ by receipt of the Sacrament. termes ys called spirituallie, and reallie. Spirituallie we are ioined to Chryste by charitie and faith, and therby incorporated to hys mysticall bodie: Reallie or substanciallie we are ioined to him, when by eating C hys verie substanciall flesh in the Sacrament, the substance of oure flesh ys turned into the substance of his flesh, and therby so ioined to him, as we are made one flesh with him, of the which we will speake more at large, whē we shal come to the sentence of S. Hilary.
Here by the waie note that Chrystes flesh ys not disgested in our bodies after the maner of naturall disgestion of otheir meates, and so passeth Christes flesh ys not digested in vs as other meates. through the bodie accordinglie, as the Stercoranites of our tyme haue blasphemed. But as the meate ys celestiall, and yet substanciall, and not nowe proprelie terrestriall, being a glorified bodie and flesh: So yt draweth vs vppewarde to yt, conuerting and turning vs into yt, according to the nature of a celestiall thing, and not terrestriallie depressing vs to the Stercoranites of our time. earthward.
But principallie to the chief entent and pourpose of the thinge that this part of the sentence moueth vs to note, Marke that, where the Sacramentaries of our time wolde haue none other receauing of Ghrystes bodie, but onelie a spirituall receauing: this holie Father teacheth vs, the faithe of Chrystes Churche in his time, whiche was before anye controuersie or heresie D was rysen aboute the Sacrament, that we be ioined to Chryste [Page]not onelie spirituallie by loue (which maie be and ys doen withoute the receipt E of meate) But we are also ioined to Chryste, reipsa, that ys, by the thing yt self, or in verie deed, by the receipt of a certain meate. And therfor he saieth: Id efficitur per cibum, quem nobis largitus est, This ioining of vs to Chryst in verie dede, ys brought to passe by the meate, whiche he hath graunted vs.
What the meate ys he openeth mediatelie when he saieth: that he might declare his loue towarde vs. Per corpus suum se nobis commiscuit. He hath myngled Christ ys ioined to vs corporallie by oure receipt of hys bodie in the Sacrament him self to, or with vs by his bodie. So his bodie then ys the meat, wherbie, when we receaue yt, we are in verie deed ioined to Chryste.
That this was his minde he liuelie declareth, applieng the storie of Iob, as a thing signifieng this matter, in the whiche the seruantes of Iob desiered in verie dede, to eate his verie flesh, reallie, and substanciallie, and not spirituallie onelie.
Whiche thinge yet more manifestlie he openeth in the ende of the sentence, speaking in the person of Chryste and sainge: I wolde be your brother, Christ geueth vs the same flesh by which he was ioined to vs. and for your sakes, I did take flesh and bloode with yowe, And the same thinges F (that ys to saie flesh and bloode) by the which I was ioined to yowe, I gaue to yowe again.
Note that Chryste geueth vs those thinges in the sacramēt by the which he was ioined to vs. He was ioined to vs by verie substancial flesh and blood, wherfore he geueth vs verie substanciall flesh and bloode. Yf he shoulde geue him self to vs onelie spirituallie, then he should not geue vs those thinges, by the whiche he was ioined to vs. For Christes flesh and blood spirituallie, and his flesh and blood substanciallie or reallie, be as farre different as flesh and spirite.
Albeit this Authour hath declared that, that was spoken by me as concerning the eating of the flesh of Chryste figured by Iob, and therto added other sentences most euidentlie declaring the veritie of Chrystes bodie and blood in the Sacramēt: Yet, that ye maie perceaue in him bothe constancie, and consonancie, in vttering the substāciall poinctes of our faith, I shall bring in one other place of the same, wher he handeleth the same place of Iob to the pourpose before mencioned. Medio draconis ventre rupto at (que) discerpto, ex G adytis clarissimus euasit, & radios non ad hoc vsque coelum, sed ad ipsum supernum thronum Chrys. in 101. Cor. omel. 24. dimisit. Illuc namque ipsum extulit, quod nobis etiam exhibuit, & vt teneremus, et mā ducaremus, quod maximum dilectionis signum est. Quos enim amamus, nonnunquàm etiam morsu petimus. Quare Iob, vt seruorū in se amorē ostenderet, dicebat illos nimio in se amore dixisse: Quis det de carnibus eius vt saturemur? Ita & Christus suam carnē dedit nobis, vt ea saturemur. Quo nos in plurimum sui amorem allexit. The beallie of the dragon being brast, and torne in the middle, frō the darke place he came furth most bright and clere, and sent oute his beames, not vnto this heauē, but vnto the verie high Throne. Thyther hath he caried vppe that, which also he hath geuen vnto vs, that we shoulde holde and eate yt, which ys the greatest token of loue. For whome we loue, oftentimes we desire to byte. Therfor Iob, that he might declare the loue of his seruantes towardes him, saied, that they for the exceading loue, that they bare towards him, haue oftentimes saied: Who will geue vs of his flesh, that we maie be filled? Euen so Christ hath geuen vs hys flesh, that we might be fylled withal, wherbie he hath allured vs vnto his great loue. H
In the which sentēce (gentle Reader) thow seist and perceauest fyrst, howe Chrysostome reherseth the storie of Iob, and secondlie, how he applieth yt [Page 31]vnto Chryst, saing: Euen so Christ hath geuen vs his flesh to holde, and to eate. The A which his applicacion doth verifie my saing, that Iob was in this behalf a figure that Christes flesh shoulde be eaten, and that not spirituallie onelie, but reallie and substāciallie, which Chrysostome signifieth by this woorde (Ita, euen so) as who should saie: As the very substanciall flesh of Iob was desired to be eaten: Euen so Chryst hath geuen vs his verie substanciall flesh to be eaten.
Thus am I not onelie moued to vnderstand Chrysostō for the cause now mencioned: But I am therunto compelled by that, that in him immediatelie foloweth: Ad eum igitur cum feruore accedamus, & dilectione quàm vehementissima, ne grauius subeamus supplicium. Quanto enim maius beneficium accepimus, tanto magis puniemur, quando eo indigni apparebimus. Let vs therfore come vnto him with feruēt Chrys. ibi. desire, and moste vehement loue, leste we suffer more greuouse punishment. For the more great benefet we haue receaued, the more shall we be punished, yf we be fownde vnwoorthie of yt. And he addeth: Hoc corpus in praesepi reueriti sunt Magi, &c. This bodie did the wise men reuerence or honour in the maunger. Wherby he declareth what bodie of Chryst he moueth vs to B come vnto, here in this his conclusion. Wherbie also we maie vnderstande, what flesh of Chryste he ment in the former sentence, by the applicacion of the figure to the thing figured. But this maie suffice for the sigures in the law of nature.
THE FIFTENE CHAPITER DECLARETH BY scripturs, that the eating of the Paschall lambe was a figure of the eating of Chryst our Paschall Lambe.
NOwe that I haue spoken of soche scriptures, as declare soche thinges to haue ben doen in the law of nature, which by other scriptures, and holie Fathers, are applied and taken, as figures of Chrystes preisthood and mysterie: I will go forwarde to the figures Four figures of the Sacrament to be treacted of. in the time of the lawe of Moyses, of the which I will speake and treact of foure, whiche be figures of this mysterie. Which be: The Paschall Lambe, Manna, The Shewbread, and the Stone flowing oute water. C
Of the fyrst, that ys of the Paschall Lābe we read thus: In the tenth daie of Exod. 12. this moneth euery mā shall take vnto him a lambe, accordinge to their houses and families, &c. And let the lambe of yours be withoute blemish, a male of a yeare olde, whiche ye shall take oute from emonge the Shepe, and ye shall kepe him vntill the xiiij. daie of the same moneth. And euery man of the multitude of the children of Israell shall kill him at euen. And they shall take the bloode, and strike yt on the two syde postes, and on the vpper doer poste, euen in the houses wher they shall eate hym. And they shall eate the flesh that same night rosted with fyre, and with vnleauened bread, and with sowre herbes they shall eate yt. See that ye eate not therof rawe, nor soddē in water, but rosted with fyre, the head, feet and purtenaūce therof.
In this declaracion of the maner, of eating the Paschall Lambe, ther be Two notable thinges in the olde Paschall lā be. two principall partes. The one ys of the killinge of yt: The other of the eatinge of yt. D
The condicion and maner of the lambe, and the killing of the same, figureth the condicion of Chryste, and the crucifyeng of hym. And albeit that other beastes being taken to be sacrificed, as oxe, cowe, calf, [Page]and kilde, did figure the passion of Chryste: Yet none of these doth so liuelie, E and expressedlie figure Chryste and hys death, as the lambe dothe. For the lambe was but younge: Chryst was but younge. The lambe was withoute Christ and the Paschall lābe compared together. blemish: Chryste was withoute sinne. The lambe was taken from emonge the shepe: Chryste from emonge hys Apostles. By the offringe of that lambe, the people of Israell were deliuered from the seruitute of Aegypte: By the offringe of Chryst the people are deliuered from the seruitude of the deuell and sinne. Their daile sacrifice was a lambe: Owre daile sacrifice ys Chryste. And for this consideracion Chryst ys more oftentymes Christ more often called a Lābe then by name of anie other beast called a lambe in the scripture, then by the name of other beastes, which were sacrificed, and figured Chryst the euerlasting sacrifice.
Wherfore saincte Ihon the Baptist applieng the figure of the lambe, as a thing most speciallie and fullie figuring Chryste, pointed him, with his fyngar, sainge. Ecce Agnus Dei, ecce qui tollit peccata mundi. Beholde the Lambe of God, beholde him that taketh awaie the sinnes of the Joan. 1. woorlde. F
The Prophet also calleth him a lambe: Tanquam ouis ad occisionem ducetur, & tanquam agnus coram tondente se obmutescit. He shall be led awaie Esai. 53. like a shepe to be slain, and as a lambe before the sherer shall he holde hys peace?
For like consideracion sainct Ihon being instructed by the reuelacion of the holie Gost, dothe so call him after he had fulfilled the figure by suffring of his passion. I beheld (saieth he) and lo, a great multitude, whiche no man coulde nombre of all nacions, people, and tounges stood Apoca. 7. before the seat, and before the Lambe, cloathed in long white garmentes, and palmes in their handes. And they cried with a Loude voice, sainge: Saluacion be asscribed vnto him, that sitteth on the Seate of our lorde God, and vnto the lambe which Lambe ys Chryste.
Of whome again he saieth by plain woordes: I beheld and lo, in the middest of the seate, and of the foure beastes, and in the middest of the elders Apocal 5. stoode a lambe, as though he hadde ben killed. And when he had taken the booke, the foure beastes, and the xxiiij. elders fell down before the lābe, and with instrumentes sang a newe songe, saing: Thow arte woorthie to take the G booke, and open the seales therof. For thow was killed and hauest redemed vs with thy bloode.
But forasmoche as this parte of the figure, namely the passion of Christe, ys allreadie treacted of, and of this ther ys no controuersie: I shall diuert me to speake of the other parte of the figure, which ys of the eatinge of the lambe. Whiche figureth the eatinge of our Paschall lambe, in the institucion of the newe passouer. And of yt also, nowe so frequented and vsed in the churche of the same Lambe our Sauiour Christe, and that by his commandement, whervpon standeth nowe the controuersie.
In this matter to make a comparison: As the lambe killed, was a figure of Christe verelie killed: So the same lambe being verilie eaten, ys a figure of Christ verilie eaten. As the Lambe was eaten reallie and substanciallie. So ys Christe eaten reallie and substanciallie.
That the eating of this lambe was a figure of the eating of Christ our lambe in his last Supper, Christ himself doth wittnesse, who speaking of the H verie Paschall Lambe saied: Desiderio desideraui hoc Pascha manducare vobiscum antequam patiar I haue Inwardlie desiderd to eate this Pasouer with yowe Luc. 22. before that I suffer.
[Page 32]This was not spoken of the olde pasouer, whiche he had eaten with A them before, but of the newe, whiche was figured by yt, whiche he entred immediatelie to institute, to answere the figure and to fullfill the Scripturs.
Therfore saincte Paule considering bothe the principall partes of the figure the lambe, that he must be bothe offred in sacrifice, and also eaten, applieth them bothe vnto Christe, and ioineth thē together, sainge: Pascha nostrū immolatus est Christus, itaque epulemur. Christe our pasouer ys offered vppe for vs (behold here the sacrifice) Therfore lett vs eate (note here the eating of Christ) For as the lambe that was offred for the passouer, was also eaten: So Christ (as saincte Paule saieth) was also offred vppe for our passouer, therfor let vs eate. The same lambe that was offred for the figure was eaten: The same Christe that was offred to answer the figure, was and ys eaten.
And for further probacion of his matter, note that in good thinges, the thing figured ys better, then the thing, that ys the figure. And cōtrarie wyse August in Psal 77. Figures in good thinges not so god, as the thinges figured: Figures in euell thinges not so euell. the figure in euell thinges ys better, then the thing figured. Or more proprelie B and trulie to saie: In euell thinges the thing figured ys woorse then the thing, whiche ys the figure. As for example first of this latter, that we maie with the other procead.
King Pharao tirannouslie reigning ouer the children of Israell. ys a figure of the Deuell tirannouslie reigninge ouer sinfull men, and with holdinge them from the due seruice of God. The seruitude, that the childeren of Israell were in, ys a figure of the seruitude of sinne that man was in.
The bretheren of Ioseph conspiring the sale of him, were a figure of Iudas, and the Iewes conspiring the like matter against Christe.
In the whiche, as in other of like sorte, ye maie note and preceaue, that Pharo being the figure of the deuell, and the seruitude of Egipte, being the figure of the feruitude of sinne, And the bretheren of Ioseph being the figure of Iudas and the Iewes, the thinges figured are woorse, then the figures. For the Deuell the thing figured, ys woorse, then Pharao the figure. The seruitude of sinne being the thing figured, ys woorse then the seruitude of Egipte being the figure. Iudas and the Iewes conspiring against our Sauiour Christe being the thinges figured, are woorse, then the bretheren of Ioseph C being the figure. So shall ye finde in all other figures of the olde lawe of thinges that be not good, that the thing figured ys allwaies woorse, then the thing that ys the figure.
But as for goodthinges, the thing figured ys better, then the thing that ys the figure. As for example: Abraham ys a figure of God the Father, Isaac a figure of Christ Gods sonne: God the Father and Christ his sonne, the thinges figured, are withoute comparison better, then the thinges that be the figures.
The rodde of Aaron, and the blossomme of the same, are figures of the virgen Marie, and Christ the blossome of the same. The Brasen Serpent vpon the pole ys a figure of Christe vpon the crosse. Ionas in the beallie of the whall, a figure of Christe in the heart of the earth: In euerie of these, the thinges figured be better, then the thing that ys the figure, as by comparison Passouer of the Christians more excellent then the Passouer of the Jewes. ye maie perceaue. D
Nowe then to the pourpose: As the Paschall Lambe beind offered was a figure of Christe offred: So the lambe eaten, ys a figure of Christ by ys eatē. Wherfore as Christe offred being the thing figured, ys better then the lambe offred being the figure: So of consequence must the passeouer figured [Page]being eaten, be better then the passouer, the figure whiche was eaten. Yf the passeouer, which ys nowe eaten, be but a peice of bread, a bare signe, or E figure (as the Sacramentaries do affirme) then the Paschall lambe ys the sigure of a peice of bread, which bread in special thinges hath no similitude, to answer the figure, as all thinges figured doo. And so also shall not the thing figured in the newe Testament, be better, then the figure, whiche ys in the olde testament, whiche maie not be.
But that the Reader, that hath ben seduced and drawen from the catholique faith, conceaue no sinistre opinion of me, and thinke that I go aboute to deceaue him with rules of mine owne inuencion, as thinges feigned besides the Scriptures: Let the same vnderstande, that this rule: that thinges figured be better, then the figures, as ys aboue declared, ys not the dreame Argumēt of S: Pauls epistle to the Hebr. of mine own head, but a substanciall trueth grownded vpon the sure foundacion of Gods woorde. I meen vpon the cheif argument of Saincte Paules epistle to the Hebrues. For what dothe saincte Paule in that epistle trauaill to proue more, than that Christe, and the newe Testament, and all thinges F therin conteyned, doo farre excell Melchisedech, Moises, and the olde Testament, and all the ceremonies and sacrifices of the same.
As first, in the first chapiter he declareth the excellencie of the newe Testament aboue the olde, for that yt was geuen by Christe the Sonne Heb. 1. of God, by whome God spake to vs, who excelleth Angels, Fathers, and Prophetes, by the whiche God spake in the olde Testament as ther he proueth.
Thē after he declareth Christe to be a preist, after the ordre of Melchisedech. But he proueth him to be farre more excellent, then Melchisedech. Jbid. 7.
This doen he descendeth to the preist of the olde lawe, and comparinge Jbid. 8. the officie of Christe to the office of the preist of the lawe, and teaching yt to be vnperfecte, proueth the office of Christe by all meanes to be preferred.
Then he maketh mencion in a brief rehersall of the religion, and high Ibid. 9. seruice of Gost emong the Iewes, teaching, that they hadde a fore Tabernacle, and what thinges ther were within conteined. And also a seconde Tabernacle, G whiche was called. Sanctum sanctorū, and what was therin conteined, with their Ceremonies, seruices, and Sacrifices doen in eche of those.
Which doē, he cōpareth the high preist to the high preist, Tabernacle to tabernacle, Sacrifice to Sacrifice, blood to blood, effecte of blood to effect of blood, clensing ād purifieng, to clensing, ād purifieng holy place, to holie place, and allwaies according to his principall entēt, and argument, proueth all the figured things of the newe Testament, to be farre better then their figures in the olde Testament. And finalie, to conclude and knitte vppe all the wholl disputacion of the olde Testament withe one woorde, he saieth: Vmbram Heb. 10. The olde lawe had but the shaddowes: the newe lawe hath the verie: thinges habens Lexfuturorum bonorum, non ipsam imaginem rerum &c. The Lawe hathe but a shadow of good thinges to cōme, and not the verie fashion of the thinges them selues.
In the whiche woordes, as yt were in a brief, he describeth the condicion and state of bothe lawes, whiche ys, that the olde lawe hathe the figures of good thinges, and the newe lawe hath the good thinges them selues.
By the whiche processe yt ys not onelie euident, and proued, that the H thinges figured be better, then the figure: But also by this last conclusion of saincte Paule yt ys improued, that the thinges of the newe Testament shoulde be but bare figures. But they are in dede the good thinges (as he [Page 33]doth terme thē) and the verie thinges of the figures and shadowes, whiche haue gon before in the olde Testament, A
Wherbie also I maie conclude that the Sacrament of Christes bodie and blood (being according to Christes institution consecrated to be offred and receaued in the memoriall of Christes passion and death: being also as Dionysius Dionys. Eccle. Hierarch. Parte. 3. Areopagita in his ecclesia sticall Hierarchie saieth, Omnium sacramentorum consummatissimum & augustissimum, of all Sacramentes most perfecte, and noblest, withoute the whiche no ministracion almost shoulde de doen, but that this diuine Sacrament should ende yt) ys not a bare figure, as the Paschall lābe, being the figure of this, was: but ys the verie good thing in dede, that ys, the verie bodie and bloode of owre immaculate Paschall Lābe of the newe Testament figured by that Paschall Lambe of the olde Testament. For ells the figure shoulde not be a figure of a good thing (as saincte Paule saieth) but the figure shoulde be the figure of a bare figure, whiche ys inconuenient, and against saincte Paule, and against the worthinesse of the newe Testamente, and the excellencie of the same, whiche in a great parte consisteth in the Sacramentes, whiche haue the verie thinges, and trueth of the B figures and Shadowes of the olde Testament.
And albeit, I haue (as yt semeth to me, and so, I truste, yt appeareth to anie right christian reader) sufficientlie proued by the Scriptures, that the Paschall Lambe eaten, was a figure of owre Paschall Lambe Christe eatē in the Sacrament: yet lest anie man malicioustie maie cauille, saing that I haue vsed the Scriptures at my owne pleasure, and wrested them to my owne phantasie, and perchaunce that some weake man maie be better satisfied, I will resorte to the Parliament house of Christes Churche, and learn of them whiche ys the verie trueth determined and enacted, approued, and receaued ther.
THE SIXTENE CHAPITER TEACHETH THIS matter by Tertullian and Isychius.
ANd first for the applicacion of the figure of the Pafchall Lambe C to the thinge figured: I will conferre with Tertullian a man of great learninge. Who also ys so anncient, that he ys of some accompted the eldest writer of the latin churche. He was verie neare to the time of the Apostles, aboute the 166. yeare after Christ. Whome saincte Cyprian so highlie esteemed, that no daie passed, in the whiche Tertullian was not in his hande, and some parte of him redde.
This man being a noble man of Christes Parlament house, can certifie vs, what was enacted and receaued as a truthe through oute all the house of Christe in his tyme. Therfore we will heare what he saieth in this matter. Tertu. li. 4 cont. Marcion. He did write against one Marcion an heretike, and in that booke he saieth thus: Professus itaque se concupiscentia concupiscere edere Pascha vt suum (indignū enim vt quid alienum concupisceret Deus) acceptum panem, & distributum discipulis, corpus suū illum fecit. Therfore when he had openlie saied, that with desire he had desiered to eate the passouer as his own passouer (for yt was vnmete that God should desire anie straung thing) he made that bread, that he did take and distribute D to his disciples, his bodie.
Remembre (gentle Reader) what ys before saied, that the Paschall Lābe of the olde lawe, as touching that, that he was offred, was a figure of the [Page]oblacion of our Lambe Christ, whiche ys withoute all controuersie: But E whether the eating of the lambe reallie, and substanciallie did figure, that Christe our Paschall Lambe shoulde be eaten reallie, and substanciallie in the Sacrament, ys the verie controuersie. Wherin what this auncient man of Christes Parliament house hath saied, yowe haue heard.
In the whiche his saing yf yowe haue noted, yowe maye preceaue, that he maketh menciō of two passouers: One that was not proprelie his, which he did not so earnestlie desire to eate: An other that was proprelie his owne, whiche he did earnestlie desire to eate. Wherbie he toucheth the the figuratiue Passouer, and the true passouer. What the true Passouer ys, he plainlie declareth when he saieth: The bread that he did take, and distribute to his disciples, he made his bodie.
I can not contein but to breake, oute to declare, that I do not a litle wonder to see the obstinate blindnesse of the enemies of Gods trueth, that Hereti (que)s barck against the trueth as dogges do against the Moone. hearing and seing so manifest, so plain, and so cleare a sentence, spoken and vttered withoute anie confuse, or obscure tearmes, breiflie knitte, and compacte, withoute anie long am bages, hearing will not heare, and seing will F not see, but wilfullie will be blinde, and not vnderstande, and yet malicioustie barke against the clear light, whiche they can not extinguish, As the dogges doo against the Moone, whiche they can not vanquish. But lett thē brak as long as they list, Veritas Domini manet in aeternum. The trueth of our Lorde abideth for euer. To the whiche God geue them grace to turne.
But let the true Christian heare and marke what enacted and receaued Psalm 116 truth was in the parliament house of Christes Churche, nowe opened and testified by the Auncient elder of the same, whiche ys that Christe made the bread, which he did take, and distribute to his disciples, his bodie. Hereti (que)s build tehir faith vpon reason and senses. whiche was, and ys the true Pascall Lambe, figured by the olde Paschall lambe. And by this let him cōforte him self, in the true faith that the hath receaued, ād cōfirme him self to be mightie against all the assauts of heresie, how moche so euer their sainges shall delight, or please reason, or the knowe ledge of our senses, wherpon they do so builde their faith, that they wolde haue no poincte ne parte therof directlie repugnant to reason, or Iudgment G of sense, as Cranmer, or the Authour of that booke, which ys sett furth in his name, with moche boldenesse affirmeth,
Whose verie woordes for the triall, I will asscribe. Thus shall ye ther Cranmers sensuall sentence Li. 2. read: But to conclude in fewe woordes, the Papistes shal neuer be able to shewe one article of our faith, so directlie contrarie to our senses, that all our senses by daile experience shall affirme a thinge to be, And yet our faith shall teache vs the contrarie therunto. Thus he.
In whiche saing (gentle Reader) yowe maie perceaue that these sensuall men were so moche captiue to sensuall knowledge, that not cōtent to haue faith a knowledge aboue, or at leste equall with reason, whiche in dede surmounteth, Faith surmounteth reason, or senses. and passeth all reason, wolde abase her to be an hand maiden to the knowledge of our senses, as one that shoulde teach no article contrarie to them, which yet teacheth all aboue the knowledge of senses, and moche directlie contrarie. As for example.
Owre senses by dailie experiēce teach vs that men do die. And that some of their bodies being burned, ther ys nothing lefte but Asshes blowē abroad H Faith teacheth many thinges contrarie to the senses. with the winde. And some consumed of the foules of the aire: Some of the fishes of the sea: Some vtterly doo putrifie in the earth, as thinges that shoulde neuer be the same flesh, the same substance, the same man again. [Page 34]And yet faith teacheth vs directlie contrarie. that ys, that the thing which A the senses Iudge to be dead, whiche ys so diuided and separated from life, that yt shall neuer liue, the same thing in nombre again, that in dede yt ys not dead, but sleapeth, and shall be the same in person again that yt was before.
The senses taught none other but that the woundes whiche Christe had in his bodie after the resurrection, and specially the wounde of his side, into the which he willed Thomas to pute his hande, were verie fore and painfull: and yet faith saieth directlie contrarie. For a glorified bodie yt not passible.
Thus these men building ther faith vpon their senses, when their senses perished, their sensuall faith preished with all, Wherfor cleaue not to soche a faith whiche neadeth to be mainteined with vntruthe, and false sensuall knowledge. But embrace that faith, whiche ys grownded vpon Christ, and lined oute, and tried by the sure and streight piller of truthe the Catholique Churche. B
But perchaunce the Aduersarie will saie, that although the sentence of Obiection out of Tertull. Tertullian for so moche as I haue brought in, sowndeth plainlie to my pourpose: yet yf I had brought in the wholle sentēce, yt wolde haue ouerthrowē the same. Wherfore I deale not sincerelie, but vse crafte. To this I saie, that this, that ys alleadged oute of Tertulliā, ys his verie saing, ād neadeth no dependence to make yt perfecte, but ys of yt self a perfecte proposition, and therfore hath yn yt self a trueth, or falshood, and maie then well be alleaged to confirme my pourpose.
And yet I haue not so omitted yt, as though I wolde not see yt, but I haue reserued yt to be handled, wher we shall seke the exposition of his texte: Hoc est corpus meum.
But that we maie perceaue in the meā while, that Tertullian in his place minded no other wise, then these his woordes alleaged pourporte (I meen that Christs bodie ys made present in the Sacrament, and in the same geuen, and dipensed) I shall bring himself to wittnesse in an other place, wher he testifieth, that the slesh, that ys to saie, the natural man eateth the bodie of Christ: Caro (inquit) abluitur, vt anima emaculetur. Caro vngitur, vt anima consecretur. Caro signatur, Note that the flesh eateth the bodie and blood of Chryst. C vt anima muniatur. Caro corpore & sanguine vescitur, vt anima de Deo saginetur. The flesh (saith Tertullian) ys washed, that the Soule maie be pourged. The flesh ys enoynted, that the soule maie be consecrated. The flesh ys signed, that the soule maie be defended: The flesh eateth the bodie and bloode of Christe, that the soule maie be made fatte, or lustie in God. Thus Tertullian.
In the whiche woordes he teacheth, that as verilic, as we be washed with verie water, and enointed with verie oile, and signed with the verie signe of the crosse, and not with the figures of these: So be we fedde with the verie bodie and blood of our Sauiour Christe, and not with the figures of them. Teflesh (saieth he) eateth the bodie, and blood of Christ, and not the spirit onlie. Nowe then that yowe haue heard one of the one side of the parliamēt house, yowe shall heare one of the other side.
Iyschius an aunciente author, Disciple to the great learned father Gregorie Naziancen. saieth thus: Non oportet eos, qui Pascha euangelicum celebrant, quod nobis tradidit Ecclesia, legale Pascha peragere, quod bouem, & ouem, legislator dicens, significauit, D Jsychius in Le. lib. 6. cap. 22. quia haec praecepit Moises in die Paschae, quod traditum est Iudaeis immolare. They, that doe celebrate the euangelicall Passouer, whiche the Churche hath deliuered vs, maie not celebrate the legall Passour, whiche the lawegeuer [Page]commaunding, hath declared to be an oxe and a shepe. For Moises hath E commaunded to offer these thinges in the daie of the passeouer, that ys appointed to the Iewes.
And a litle after foloweth: Non ergo oportere nos, habentes in manibus, & consummantes verum mysterium, sequi figuras, quae praedicta sunt, demonstrant. Neque enim est eiusdem temporis, Sed aliud quidem pertinere ad figuram, aliud autem ad veritatem, qui vtraque sanciuit, praecepit. Propter quod & Christus primùm celebrauit figuratum Pascha. Pòst caenam autem intelligibilem tradit, & angustante eam tempore, pro die horā immutauit, vel magis etiam diem. Sic enim ad vesperam quartae decimae diei caenae Iudaicae Paschalis festiuitatis celebratur. Post hoc autē Christus propriam tradidit caenam. The thin ges therfore, which are afore saied, doe declare, that we, hauing present, and doinge the true misterie, maie not folowe figures. Neither ys yt apperteining to the same time. But he that ordeined both, cōmaunded one time to appertein to the figure, an other time to the veritie. Wherfore Crist also did first celebrate the figuratiue passeouer, but after supper he deliuered the intelligible Supper, and the time straicting the same, he chaunged an howre for a daie, or raither also the daie. For so in the euening of the fourtenth daie, F the Supper of the Iewish Paschall solemnitie ys celebrated. And after this Christe deliuered his owne Supper. Thus farre Isychius.
In whose woordes yt maie be perceaued: first, what was the Iewish Paschall offring, whiche was an oxe or àshepe, whiche were a figure of Christ our Paschall oblation.
Secondlie, he teacheth, that we nowe hauing the true misterie, maie not folowe figures. In whiche wordes note (gentle Reader) that he saieth that we nowe haue the true misterie, wherby we are taught, that we haue in our Paschall solemnitie, the verie or true presence of Christe. For he putteh here this terme (true misterie) to answere the figuratiue presence in the figure. Paschal lā be ād christ compared. The figure hath but the shadowe of the thing, but that, that ys figured, hath the thing yt self. The Paschall Lambe of the Iewes eaten in their Passouer, was a figure of Christ our Paschall lambe eaten in our Passouer. Wher for, as the Iewes had a verie earthlie lambe, the figure, in their supper: So we haue the verie heauenlie Lambe Christ, the truthe of that figure in our G Supper.
Whiche thing this Authour in the woordes folowinge doth plainlie declre. For (saieth he) one time serueth not for the figure, and the thing figured: Ʋerie Christ in oure Passouer. but ther ys one time for the figure, an other time for the veritie. Note then again that he calleth the thing figured the veritie. what ys the veritie, but the verie thing in dede, that the figure did perfigurate? The lambe the figure did perfigurate Christ: Wherfore verie Christe ys in our passouer.
This ys not fallen from this Authour as a thing vnwittinglie spoken, but proceading aduisedlie in the matter, and applieng the thinge figurated, and declaring the accomplishing of the thing by Christe, he saieth: Wherfore Christ also did first celebrate the figuratiue Passouer. But after supper he deliuered the intelligible Supper.
What ys meāt by the intelligible Supper, ye shall better perceaue by other places of this Authour, wher he vseth this woorde, whiche he doth almost in every leaf. As in his same chapiter, shewing wherof Aegipte ys a figure, he saieth: Etenim AEgyptus intelligiblis, praesens mundus, quia AEgyptus cōtenebratio inter H Isych. Ibid. pretatur. The intelligible Aegipt ys this present worlde, For Aegipt, by interpretacion, ys called a darkning.
Likewise vpon this text of Leuiticus, wher Allmightie God saied to the [Page 35]children of Israel by Moyses: When ye shall come into the land, A whiche I will geue vnto yowe, and reape downe the haruest therof, ye Iebitic. 23. shall bring a sheife of the first fructs of your haruest vnto the preist, who shall waue the sheife before the Lorde, to be accepted for yowe. First teaching who were figured by the sheiues he saieth: Illi enim sunt & Jsic. li. 6. ca. 23. Matth. 9. messores, et intelligibiles segetes, ad quos Dominus dicebat: Messis quidem multa, operarij autē pauci, etc. They be both the reapers, and the intelligible sheiues, to whom our lord said: The haruest trulie ys great, but the woorkmen, or reapers are fewe.
And likewise opening, who was figured by the preist, that shoulde make their oblacion accepted of God for them, he saieth: Manipulum autem primitiarum intelligibilis sacerdos Christus, corpus proprium offerebat. The intelligible preist Chryst did offer his owne bodie a sheif of first fruicts.
Again in the same chapiter vpon this text: And ye shall offer that daie when ye waue the sheife an he lambe withoute blemish, of a yeare olde, for a burnt offring vnto the Lorde, he saieth: Volens nos in die, qua celebramus Domini resurrectionem, et manipuli intelligibilem oblationem celebramus, non obliuisci B dominici sacrificij, ex quo nobis est oblatio manipuli: sed caedere agnum immaculatum, anniculum, in holocaustum Domino, intelligibilem agnum, Domini traditionem immolantes mysticè, et offerentes, ipsius autem, vt sacrificium caedentes, memoriamfecit. Owre Lorde willing vs, in the daie, wherin we do celebrate the resurrection of him, and do celebrate the intelligible oblacion of the sheif, not to forgett our Lordes sacrifice, of the which we haue the oblacion of the sheif, but to offer vppe a lambe withoute spotte of one yeare olde, for a burnt sacrifice to our Lorde, mysticallie sacrificing, and offring the intelligible lambe, being the tradicion of our Lorde, in the doing of this sacrifice, he hath made his memoriall.
In an other place also, wher almightie God saied: A man that hath sinned Isich. li. 7. ca. 5. through ignorance, and hath doen against the, lawe, and knoweth himself giltie, shall offer an vnspotted Ramme vnto the preist: Rectè intelligibilis aries Christus, huius peccatum, in sacrificio pro eo oblatus, diluit. Euen verie wel Chryste the intelligible ramme, being offred for him in sacrifice, wipeth awaie the sinne of this man. C
In all these places, these woordes, the intelligible Egypte, the intelligible sheiues, the intelligible preist, the intelligible oblacion, the intelligible lambe, the intelligible Ramme, what doe these ells signifie, but the verie thinges shadowed, and signified by the figures? Wherby we maie conclude by this authour, that the legall Supper, and the lambe therin eaten, were the figures of Chrystes Supper, and the lambe therin eaten beinge the verie thinges in dede, that ys Chrystes owne Supper, and hys owne blessed bodie, whiche ys the intelligible lambe, that was and ys therin eaten.
And that this shall be so plain, that the Aduersarie shall not against saie Leuit. 24. yt, heare this Authour clerelie opening the matter. Expownding howe Aaron, and hys children, were touched with the bloode of the Ramme, Isich in Leuit. li. 2. ca. 8. that was sacrificed for them, and applieng yt to that, that yt was a figure of, he saieth: Sed tamen primus sacerdos sanguine, & post eum filij eius secundùm legem vngebantur: quia ipse Dominus primus in coena mystica intelligibilem accepit sanguinem, atque deinde calicem Apostolis dedit. Sed ecce legislator hic post D vnctionem Aaron & filiorum subdidit: De sanguine reliquum fudit super altari per circuitum. Quod et Christum fecisse inuenimus. Bibens enim ipse, et Apostolis bibere [Page] dans, tunc intelligibilem sanguinem super altare, videlicet suum corpus effudit. Corpus autem Christi, Ecclesia est, et omnis plebs eius. Quod specialiter dicentem Marcum E inuenimus: Et sumens, gratias agens, dediteis, et biberunt ex eo omnes, et dixit eis: Hic est sanguis meus noui testamenti, qui pro multis effusus est. But first the preist, and after him his Sonnes were according to the lawe anoincted with blood. For our Lorde him self also first in the misticall Supper, did take the intelligible blood, and then gaue the cuppe to hys Apostles. But yet lo, this lawgeuer after the enoincting of Aaron, and his sonnes, saieth: The rest of the blood he powred rownde aboute vpon the Altar. Whiche thing also we finde Chryst to haue doen. For he drinking and geuing his Apostles to drinke, then he powred the intelligible bloode vpon the altar, that ys to saie, vpon his bodie. The bodie of Chryst ys the Churche, and all his people. Whiche thinge we finde Chryst drā ke his owne blood, and gaue yt to his Apostles. Marke speciallie sainge. And he tooke the cuppe, and gaue thankes, and gaue yt to them, and they all dranke of yt, and he saied vnto them: Thys ys my blood of the newe Testament, whiche ys shedde for manie. Thus moche Isychius.
I shall not nede to note any thing in this place of this Authour, wher F euery parte of his saieng ys so plain. Yt ys verie manifest, that he saieth, that Why Christ first drank his owne blood. Christ gaue vnto the Apostles his bloode, whiche he calleth, as before ys declared, the intelligible bloode. Which ys as moche to saie, as the bloode of Chryst figured by the bloode of the lambe, and also of the Ramme offred for Aaron ad his Sonnes. Whiche bloode (as Chrysostō also together with this Author wittnesse) Chryst himself, because his Apostles beleuing yt verilie, according to the woorde of their master, to be bloode, shoulde not therfore loathe to drinke of yt, dranke first vnto them, and then dranke all they. Yf Chryst dranke his owne blood, he dranke yt either spirituallie or corporallie. Spirituallie he could not, wherfore he dranke yt corporallie.
As touching this wittnes of Chrysostome, more shall be saied in the second booke. And although this place conuinceth the Proclamer, who saith, Li. 2. ca. 55 that we can not bringe anie one olde catholique Doctour or Father: Yet in the thirde booke (shall be brought oute of this father diuerse and many places, more plainlie teaching Gods truthe, then this doth. Wherfore leauing him with his ioint felowe, who haue plainly testified Chrystes verie presence G in the Sacrament, for that the figure must be aunswered by the verie thing, and truthe, wherof yt ys the figure: I shall cal two other mo wittnesses to testifie the same.
THE SEVENTENE CHAPITER PROCEADETH in the same matter by sainct Cyprian, and Euthymius.
SAincte Cyprian martir, Bishoppe of Carthage, a man in learninge, and vertuouse conuersacion most excellent, and in propinquitie of time to Chryst, right aunciente, as Eusebius doth testifie, whom sainct S. Cyprian his commē dacion. Lab. 7. eccl. li. Hist. c. 2 Cypriā. de coena. Augustine in his workes doth moche reuerence, who liued aboute 256. yeares after Chryste, whome I make to folowe emong the latines, Tertullian, for that he so moche esteemed and loued him, as ys before saied, In this matter he speaketh after this sorte. H
Coena itaque disposita inter sacramentales epulas, obuiarunt sibi instituta noua, & antiqua, & consumpto agno, quem antiqua traditio proponebat, inconsumptibilem [Page 36] cibum magister apponit discipulis. Nec iam ad elaborata impensis, et arte conuiuia A populi inuitantur, sed immortalitatis alimonia datur, à communibus cibis differens, corporalis substantiae retinens speciem, sed virtutis Diuinae inuisibili efficientia probans adesse praesentiam. The Supper therfore beinge ordered, emonge the sacramental meates, their mett together the olde ordeinances and the newe. And when the lambe was consumed or eaten, which the olde tradition did sett furth, the master did put before hys disciples, the inconsumptible meate. Neither nowe be the people bidden to feastes prepared with conninge, and charges, but here ys geuen the food of immortalitie, differing from common meates, reteining the forme of corporall substance, but prouinge by the inuisible efficiencie, the presence of Gods power to be therin. Thus sainct Cyprian. Christ gaue his disciples inconsumptible meat: Sacramentaries giue ther disciples ccnsumptile meat.
In the which woordes of this holy Father, ye perceaue, first, the comparison of the two passouers. Which he calleth the olde ordeinaunce, and the newe, that mette together emong the sacramentall meates. Secondarelie, ye maie perceaue the difference of thē bothe. For the olde Passouer was a lābe, which was cōsumed. Whiche he teacheth when he saieth. Et consumpto agno, B and when the lambe was consumed, which the olde tradicion dyd sett furth. The other ys a meate, whiche neuer ys able to be consumed, whiche he plainlie vttereth thus. The master (meening Chryst) did put before his disciples inconsumptible meat.
Nowe note howe different the Sacramentaries be from this holie elder Sacramentaries glose vpon S. Cyprian ouerthrowen. of Chrystes church. They saie ther ys put, or sett before vs but bread, which ys consumptible, as the paschall lambe was: but this Father saieth: The master put before hys disciples inconsumptible meat.
Neither maie they here vse their feigned glosing, sainge that we do receaue inconsumptible meate in the Supper of the Lorde, for we receaue Chryst spirituallie, that ys, the merite and grace of his passion. For neither these Meate of Christes supper differeth frō common meates. woordes will beare that glose, neither the woordes that folowe. For these woordes saie, that the master did putte before them inconsumptible meate. He did not putte the merite of his passion before them. For yt ys not a thing of that nature, that yt maie be taken by hand, and laied before men in seight, C but yt ys taken by the inward man onelie. But this meate was put before them. H. 3. Bread of the hereticall cōmunion differeth not frō common bread. Christes meat reteining the forme of corporall substāce cā not be the spirituall meat of the Sacramentaries.
And the woordes that do folowe, do yet more clearlie shewe the matter, and wype awaie their glose, for yt foloweth that this meate, whiche Chryste putte before his disciples, did differ from cōmon meates, and yet yt reteined the forme of naturall substance. Yf yt did differ from common meates, then yt can not be taken for the bread vsed in the Sacrament. For that bread (as Cranmer, or the Authour of that booke saieth) differeth not from other meates. For yt ys yerie pure materiall breade, hauing no more holinesse, then other creatures haue, for that, that dome creatures are no partakers of holinesse.
And further this meat (as Ciprian saieth) differing frō other meates, reteineth the forme of corporall substance. Yf this meat also doth retein the forme of corporall substance, then ys yt not that spirituall meate, whiche they call the merite of Christes passion, or the belief that Chryst hath suffred for vs, for that meat reteineth not the forme of corporall substance. D
So that this newe ordeinaunce that was instituted by our Sauiour Christ, to mete, and to aunswer the olde ordeinaunce of the Paschall Lambe, was no bare bread, for that neither differeth from other meates, neither yt [Page]ys meat inconsumptible, neither ys yt the spirituall meate of the merite of E Christes passion. For that reteineth not the forme of corporall substance. Wherfore I maie be bolde to affyrme, that yt ys the verie reall and substanciall bodie of our Sauiour Iesus Christ, which ys the inconsumptible meate as the Churche in the praise of God, for hys wonderfull worke in this Sacrament, D. Tho. Aquin. singeth: Sumit vnus, sumunt mille, tantum isti, quantum ille, nec sumptus absumitur. One dothe eate, and a thousande do eate, as moche do these eate as he, and yet receaued, he ys not absumed.
This also ys that foode of immortalitie that Ciprian speaketh of, which cā not be bare materiall bread, but yt ys the bread of life, euen the flesh of Chryste, which ys the medicine of immortalitie, as saieth holie Ignatius, disciple of sainct Ihon the Euangelist, who exhorting the Ephesians, whome he wrote vnto, speaketh verie aptlie to the matter here nowe entreated. Be ye Ignatius in epistola ad Ephes. taught (saieth he) of the comforter, obediēce to the Byshoppe, and the preist with vnswaruing, or stable minde, breakinge the bread, whiche ys the medicine of immortalitie, the perseruatiue of not dieng, but of liuinge by Iesus Chryste. Thus Ignatius. F
Note nowe that he calleth the bread that ys broken in the Sacrament, The bread broken in the blessed Sacrament ys the medicine of immortalitie. the medicine of immortalitie, the preseruatiue from death. Whiche effectes can not be attributed to the sacramentall bread of the Sacramentaries, but to the heauenlie bread of the Catholiques, which ys the bodie of Christe.
This inconsumptible meate, this foode of immortalitie, reteineth the forme of corporall substance. For the bodie of Chryste in the Sacrament reteineth and ys couered with the formes of the corporall substances of bread and wine. Whiche meat ys not so prepared to vs, and for vs (saieth Ciprian) by the conning of man, but by the inuisible woorking of God, wherby being made a meat of soche excellencie, and singular prerogatiue, yt proueth the presence of Gods power to be ther, whiche presence ys not, that his general presence, wherby he ys euery wher, but yt ys aspeciall maner of presence, as yt was Luc. 1. with the virgen, when the Angell saied: Et virtus Altissimi obumbrabit tibi. And the power of the highest shall ouershadowe thee.
Wheigh nowe with me (christian Reader) what maner of thing this new G Honorable ād worthie titles of the Sacrament meate ys, which Chryste hath sett in the place of the olde meate, I meen, of the Paschall lambe: Yt ys an inconsumptible meate yt ys a foode of immortalitie, yt ys wrought by the inuisible woorkinge of God, yt hath a speciall presence of gods power. All which declare yt a thing moche more honorable, moche more excellent, then the Paschall lambe, which excellent tearmes can be verified in no one thing of this Sacramēt, but in him onelie that saied: Caro mea verè est cibus. My flesh ys verilie meate. Wherfor this excellent meate ys his verie flesh, whiche Joan. 6. ys our verie Paschall Lambe of the newe Testamēt, not onelie verilie offred, but also verilie eaten to aunswer the figure, whiche was both offred, and eaten.
And that the Aduersarie shall not saie, that I feign and make soche an exposition of S. Cyprians woordes, as liketh me, or make him to meen as pleaseth Cyprian. eodem. serm. de Cana. me, he shall perceaue the same Cyprian himself, with one shorte sentence of the same sermon, in the which the former sentence ys conteined, to expownde yt, as I haue doen, which ys this: Panis iste, quem Dominus discipulis porrigebat, non effigie, sed natura mutatus, omnipotentia Verbi factus est caro. Et sicut in H persona Christi humanitas videbatur, & latebat diuinitas: ita sacramento visibili ineffabiliter se diuina infudit essentia. This bread, which oure Lorde gaue to his disciples, chaunged, not in outwarde shape, but in nature, by the allmightinesse of the [Page 37] woorde ys made flesh And as in the person of Chryste the humanitie was seen, A and the Godhead laye hidden: Euen so the diuine nature inspeakeablie powreth, The bread ī the blessed Sacrament by the omnipotencie of the word ys made flesh. and putteth yt self in the visible Sacrament. Thus moche Saincte Cyprian.
In the former sentence he speaketh of a meate, geuen to the disciples in the last Supper: Here he speaketh of the same meate, geuen at that same time to the disciples. Ther he saied, that that meate ys an inconsumptible meate, meate of immortalitie, diffring from other meates, but yet reteining the forme of corporall substance: Here he saieth, that being chaunged in nature, but not in outward forme, by the omnipotēcie of the woord yt ys made flesh. Ther he saied, that thepresēce of the diuine powr was proued to be present: Here he saieth, that the diuine nature vnspeakablie putteth yt selfin the visible Sacramēt, So that, that he called before indeterminatelie incōsumptible meat: Here he calleth yt determinatelie flesh, into the which the nature of breade ys turned. Before indeterminatelie he saied, that the meat reteineth the forme of corporall substance: Here he determinatelie saieth, that the B breade which ys made flesh, nowe being flesh, reteineth the outwarde forme still. In the other sentence he saied, that the feast ys not prepared with arte and charges of man: In this he saieth determinatelie, by what mean yt ys prepared, By the omnipontencie of the woord (saieth he) yt ys made flesh.
Note further what Similitude he vseth for the declaracion of Christes in uisible being in the Sacrament: As in the person of Chryste, the humanitie S. Cyprian his similitude to declare Chrystes presence in the Sacrament. was seen, and the Godhead was hidden: Euen so the diuine nature (which ys Chryst verie God) vnspeakablie putteth yt self in the visible Sacramēt. Wher by he teacheth, that as the Godheade was hidden vnder the humanitie: So Chryste ys hidden vnder the visible Sacrament, that ys, vnder the formes of bread and wine, which are seen.
And wher the Aduersaries being sore pressed with this manifest, and most plain sentence, haue gon aboute to elude yt with a glose vpon this woorde, Sacramētaries glose vpon S. Cyprian ouerthrowen. nature, saieng that nature ys here taken for the propertie of nature, and not for the substance of nature: that glose ys ouerthrowen by these woordes ther immediatelie folowing: Factus est caro, was made flesh. C
Nowe ye haue heard holie Cyprians faith in this matter, so plainlie vttered, that his testimonie alone were sufficient to make the aduersarie to rubbe his forehead for shame, yf anie shame be in him, ād to cal in his proclamaciō, for asmoche as he heareth the matter so clerelie, and so manifestlie spokē, ād vttered, as neither he, ne anie of his likes can well fasten any darke, or blinde glose to take awaie the clearnesse of this sentence. But trusting that the thing yt self confowndeth sufficiently the arrogancie of the Aduersaries: I will procead and bring furth one of the other side of Chrystes Parliamēt house, who shall be Euthymius, a man so auncient, and so famed emong learned men, that I nede not here to stand moche in his commendacion.
As touching this matter he saieth thus, speaking of our Sauiour Chrystes doing in his last Supper. Egit gratias, & nunc ante panē, & postmodū ante poculum, Euthym in Matth. 26 docens quòd gratias agere oportet ante huiusmodi mysterium, quod perfectum est ad praestandum naturae nostrae beneficium. Si enim agni figuratiui immolatio ab interfectione liberationem, & à seruitute libertatem Iudaeis praestitit, quanto maiora praestabit Christianis veri agni immolatio? Simul etiam ostendens, quòd vltroneus D ad passionem veniret, & praeterea docens nos gratias agere in omnibus quae patimur. Sicut autem pictores in vna tabula, & lineas supponunt, & picturas adumbrant, et colores superinducunt, ac formant: ita quoque Christus in eadem [Page] mensa et figuratiuum ac vmbratile Pascha subscripsit, et verum, ac perfectum apposuit. He gaue thankes, bothe nowe before the bread, and afterward before the E cuppe, teachinge that we must geue thankes before soche a mistery, as was doen to geue a benefet to owre nature. For yf the sacrificinge of the figuratiue lambe gaue vnto the Iewes deliuerance from being slain, and libertie from seruitude: Howe moche greater benefettes shall the sacrificing of the trew lambe geue vnto the Christians? Shewing also withall, that he came willinglie to his passion, and besides that, teaching that we shoulde geue thankes in all thinges, that we suffer. As painters in one table first drawe their lines, and shadowe their paintinges, and then laie on their colours, and sett yt oute in forme or fashion: Euen so also Chryst in that one table sette oute the figuratiue and shadolike passouer, an then putte vnto them the true, and perfect passeouer. Hitherto Euthymius.
In whose sentence ye maie first perceaue, that he teacheth that the lambe eaten of the Iewes, was the figure and shadowe of the true paschall lambe, that Chryst gaue to hys Apostles. Secondarelie, that yt ys to be cōsidered, that he calleth Chrystes Passouer, in respect of the Iewes passouer, F a perfight and true Passouer.
Nowe the Aduersaries teache, that the good Iewes eating their Paschall Sacramentaries opinions. Lambe receaued Chryste Spirituallie: And they saie likewise, that the good Chrystians, eating the sacramentall bread (as they terme yt) receaue Chryst also but Spirituallie, They saie also that the Iewes receaued Chryste in a signe, or figure: They saie that the Christians likewise, receaue Chryste but in signe, or figure. Howe then riseth thys difference, that their Paschall feast ys called but a shadow, or figure, and owre ys called the true, and perfecte paschall feast? And yet, according to the Aduersaries doctrine, ther ys no more in the one, then in other, but bothe be figures, bothe be signs, and Chryst but spirituallie receaued in bothe.
Wher ys then the trueth, that maketh our paschall feast, a true feast? And wher ys the perfection, that maketh yt perfecte, as thys authour tearmenth yt?
Yt can not be, but that in Christes Supper ther must be the trneth, and verie thing of that, that was figured in the iudaicall Supper. And that perfect G Christ in the iudaicall feast imperfectlie in our feast perfectie. thinge, in perfecte maner, whiche in the Iewes Supper was vnperfectlie, as ye haue hearde, that that lambe, and Supper was a figure of Chryste oure lambe, and our Supper. Wherfore then yt must nedes folowe, that as Chryst was in that Supper but in a figure, and therfore vnperfectlie: So must he be present in our Supper, more then in a figure, euen by verie true, and reall presence, and so perfectlie.
And that this Authour (as I haue declared) meant of soche a perfectereall presence of Chryst in the sacramēt, not onelie his own woords allreadie rehersed do wel proue, but this his saieng also in the same chapiter: Sicut vetus Testamentum hostias et sanguinem habebat: Ita sanè et nouū, corpus videlicet, et sanguinem Domini. Euen as the olde Testament had sacrifices and bloode: So trulie hath the newe also, that ys to witte, the bodie and bloode of our lorde, Thus Euthymius.
Ys not this saieng plain ynough? can the Proclamer finde anie tropes, or A plain place for master Juel darke figures, to saie that this ys not a plain sentence, declaring the verie real presence of Christes blessed bodie, and bloode in the Sacrament, forasmoche as he saieth not onelie that the newe Testament hathe the bodie H and bloode of Chryste: But yt hathe them as the propre sacrifice of the same.
[Page 38]Neither maie the Proclamer drawe this saing & pinche yt to meen the A sacrifice of the crosse. For this authour proceadeth immediatelie in the proif of Christes reall presence in the Sacrament, by Christes owne woordes: This ys my bodie, And teacheth, that not onelie signes of Christes bodie and bloode be ther, But his verie bodie and blood, as in the second booke, where we shall haue a more apte, and couenient place to speake of these woordes, more at large oute of this Authour Yt shall be declared.
And for this place, supposing enoughe to be saied as cōcerning the minde of these two Authours, for the applicacion of the figure of the Paschall Lābe to Christe our Paschall Lambe, and howe the one ys but the figure, the other the veritie, And that therfore the thing in dede, that was figured, whiche ys Christes verie bodie ys otherwise present, then in a figure: I will leaue these, and call other two of Christes Parliament house, to heare ther testimonie also, what the enacted trueth of this matter ys.
THE EIGHTENE CHAPITER TREACTETH OF B the same matters by saincte Hierom, and Chrysostome.
Amonge the elders of the latin churche, whiche remain I will first heare saincte Hierom, a man in fame so excellent, in learning so deape, and profownde, in liuing so holie, in time so auncient, as being born the yeare of our Lorde 331. of diuerse holie men so highlie commended, of all true Chtistians so well accepted, and receaued, that his testimonie in this matter can not be refused. Thus saieth he: Postquam typicum Pascha fuerat impletum, & agni carnes cum Apostolis comedisset, assumit panē, qui confortat cor hominis, & ad verum Paschae transgreditur Hieron. in 26. Matth. sacramentum, vt quomodò in praefiguratione illius Melchisedech, summi Dei sacerdos, panem & vinum offerens, fecerat, ipse quoque veritatem sui corporis, & sanguinis repraesentaret. After that the figuratiue Passouer was fulfilled, and he had eaten the flesh of the lambe with his Apostles, he taketh breade, whiche cōforteth the heart of man, and goeth to the true Sacramēt of the Passouer, that as Melchisedech the preist of the highe God, in offringe bread and wine, did in the prefiguracion of the same, he also might represent the veritie of C his bodie and bloode. Thus moche saincte Hierom.
I nede not here to note the applicacion of the olde Paschall Lambe to the newe, as of the figure to the thinge figured. For this Authour speaketh yt so plainlie, that yt nede not be noted to him, that will see, perceaue, and vnderstande. But forasmoch as the weightiest parte of the controuersie consisteth in the thing figured, what yt shoulde be, whether yt be breade, the figure of Christes bodie, or Christes verie bodie and bloode in dede, and trueth, verilie present, and reallie, in the Sacrament: therfore I will weigh the sainge of this Authour, wher he speaketh of yt.
He saieth, that as Melchisedech did offer bread and wine, Christe also wolde represent the truthe of his bodie and bloode. The aduersaries perchaunce Obiection of the Aduersaries oute of S. Hierom. will triumphe, and saie, that Saincte Hierō ys here on their side, for that he saieth not plainlie, that Christ did geue his verie bodie, but that he did represēt his verie bodie. And representing (saie they) ys a shewing of a thing by signe, or figure, and not by the thing yt self. Wherfor Christ by the bread D as by a figure, did represent his bodie, but not verilie, and realie geue yt to the Disciples.
To aunswer this obiection, I wolde learn of them, yf emong learned mē [Page]this verbe be so striected, as oneli to signifie, to shewe a thing by figure or sign. And whether this be the propre significaciō of the woorde or no. And E yf they be ygnorant therof, let them woorthilie take the taunte, that Luther the fownder of Sectes in our time, vnwoorthilie gaue to King Henrie the eight, that ys, let them go looke the Vocabularies.
But bicause their trauaill shall be eased, I will shewe them, howe they shall finde yt yn two sundrie editions of Calepine. In the first thus: Repraesento Represent what yt signifieth. praesentem sisto. that ys, I represent, I sett, or make present. In the which signification Collumella also vseth this verbe Repraesento, as by his saing ther alleaged, yt ys manifest. For thus he saieth: Itaque villicus curabit vt iusta reddā tur. Istaue non aegrè consequetur, si semper se repraesentauerit. Therfore shall the bailif see, that dueties be paied. And these shall he easilie atteign, yf he allwaies represent himself. Thus he. Wher yt ys euident, that Repraesentarit in the latine, or represent in the english, signifieth not a figuratiue representing, but a verie reall and personal representing of the bailiff in his owne verie person. And in moche like signification, the same Calepine in an other place hath yt thus: Repraesento, id est praesens assero. I presentlie bring. Whiche signification F ys often vsed in the lawes, as when they saie: Repraesentare rei precium, and repraesentare mercedem.
In the english Dictionarie Repraesento ys to represent, to rendre, to bring in presence, to present a thing, to laie before one, to shewe or declare. By all these places yt ys manifest, that Repraesento signifieth not onelie to shew a thīg by figure sign, or token, but by the verie thing yt self present. And thus by their Grammar, their argument of representation ys not onelie aunswered, and they of ignorance reprehended, that wolde frame yt to confirme their wicked assertion: but also the true meening of the woord, Repraesento, moche opened to the better vnderstanding of this Authour here alleaged.
Wherfor, gentle Reader, vnderstand, that when sainct Hierom had declared, that the figuratiue Paschall Lambe was afigure of the true Paschall Chryst, in in the lawe presented in figure: in the Gospelin veritie. Lambe Christ, who in the same was presented, as in a sign: And likewise had saied of the bread, whiche Melchisedech offred in the prefiguration of Christ, wherby also Christ was once presented, as in his figure: Nowe he saieth, Christ wolde in veritie present himself again, in whiche G veritie ys vnderstanded his verie bodie, and verie blood. As by plain, and brief woordes he might saie: Melchisedech in bread, and wine did figuratiuelie present the bodie and blood of Christ, but Christ hath presented again verilie, and truelie his bodie, and blood.
To this vnderstanding, the woorde, veritie in saincte Hierom enforceth vs. For if he had meant, that Christ had sette or laied before his Apostles, but a signe, he might haue saied: Ipse quoque corpus, & sanguinem suum repraesentaret. He also might represent his bodie and blood. But when he saieth: Ipse quoque veritatem coporis, & sanguinis sui repraesentaret. He wolde represent the veritie of his bodie and bloode, this woorde, veritie, bannisheth signes and figures, and geueth vs to vnderstande a verie and reall presence whiche Christe, according to the significacion of the woorde, wolde shewe or declare to this Apostles.
And for the further declaracion that this ys the meening of saincte Hierom: Note that when he first spake of the lambe, he calleth yt Typicum Pascha the figuratiue passouer. When he speaketh of the figured passeouer, he H calleth yt, verum Pascha. the true Passouer. So likewise when he did speake of bread and wine, which Melchisedech offred, he saieth, he did yt in praefiguratione, [Page 39]in the prefiguration. When he speaketh of Christes doinge, he saieth, he did A geue the veritie. So that Christ was presented twice: once in figure ād again in veritie. Wherfor sainct Hierom saied verie well, that he wolde represent, that ys, he wolde present himself again.
This maie appeare also by the Scripture whiche sainct Hierom ther alleageth, sainge: Assumit panem, qui confortat cor hominis. He taketh the bread, that comforteth the heart of man. To what pourpose? To celebrate the Sacrament of the true Passouer. What ys the true passouer? The bodie and bloode of Christ. Whiche ys the verie right bread, that comforteth the hearte of man in verie dede, with that spirituall and heauenlie cōforte, that ys permanent, whiche ys the right and true comforte.
Forasmoche as yt ys most manifest, that this sentence of the Psalme ys to be vnderstanded of Christ, that excellent bread of life, for that the Prophete Dauid in that Psalme dothe speake of the greate prouidence of God, in ordering, and disposing all thinges in heauen, in earthe, and in the Seas, signifieng therby in the spirite of prophecie, the goodlie disposition of thinges in the Church of Christe, beautified, adorned, and confirmed with Sacramentes, B in most goodlie wise, of the which Christe, and his Churhe, ys the wholl prophecie of that booke, as here after more at large shall be declared, amonge the whiche sacramentes, speaking of the Sacrament of Christes bodie and bloode the prophet saied. Vt educas panem de terra, & vinum laetificet cor hominis, & panis cor hominis confirmet. That thow maist bringe furthe foode Psalm. 103 oute of the earth, and wine, that maketh gladde the heart of man, and bread to strenghthen màns hearte: yt shall suffice for this present to declare the same by the woordes alleaged of saincte Hierom. For he, ther declaring the ceassing of the olde Paschall lambe, and the beginning of the newe, whiche he calleth the true Passouer, in the beginning of the same, saieth thus: Assumit panem, qui confortat cor hominis, He taketh bread, whiche comforteh the hearte of man.
Yt was most certen (as saincte Ciprian saieth) that Manducauerunt de eodem pane secundùm formam visibilem. They had eaten of the same bread after a visible maner. But to that bread so eaten, sainct Hierome wolde not applie the C sainge of the Prophete, but wher he beginneth to shewe howe Christe commeth to the institucion of this blessed Sacrament, in the whiche they shoulde eate the true Paschall Lambe, the bodie of Christe, the verie bread of life, and comforth, Ther he applieth the propheicie, of the Prophete, to the verie thing that yt prophecied of, and saieth: He taketh the breade, that comforteth the heart of man.
Thus the placing, and applicacon of that Scripture well considered, and weighed of the reader, shall cause him well to perceaue, howe the same ys to be vnderstanded, as ys by me before saied.
And nowe, altough saincte Hierom hath sufficientlie declared his faith in this matter of the veritie enacted, and receaued throughout all the house of Christe in his time: Yet for the satisfieng of them, that thirst for the trueth, I will bring in saincte Hierom in an other place, speaking so plain woordes, Hieron. ad Heliodorū cpistola. 1. Christes bodie ys cō secrated of the preist. as neither the enemie can withstāde so euident a trueth, nor other men take occasiō of doubte. Absit (saieth he) vt de ijs quicquam sinistrū loquar, qui apostolico gradui succedentes, Christi corpus sacro ore conficiunt. God forbidde, that I shoulde D speake anie euell of them, whiche succeading the Apostolike degree, with their holie mouth do consecrate the bodie of Christe.
In the whiche sainge ye maie perceaue that sainct Hieroms faith was (being [Page]so taught of the churhe wherin he liued) that he preist doth consecrate the bodie of Christe. wherby also then yt ys most manifest, that Christes verie bodie E ys in the Sacrament.
And this also ys not to be ouerpassed, that the he saieth, the preistes doo Amb. de saor. lib. 4. cas. Euseb. Emise hō. pasch. Chry. de prod. Hom. 30. with their holie mouth consecrate the same bodie of Christ: For hereby ys reiected that foolish heresie, void aswell of reason, as of authoritie, which taught that the faith of the receauer made the presence of Christ in the Sacrament. for yt ys as S. Ambrose, Eusebius, and Chrysostom saie, the holie woord of Christ spoken, as sancte Hierom here saieth, by the mouth of the preist, that consecrateth the bodie of Christ. And thus also, if by the mouth of the preist the bodie of Christ be consecrated, then ys that bodie verilie present.
And further yt maie be learned of this great learned, and holie father, that the ordre of preisthoode ys not to be contemned, but reuerenced, who Preistes aught to be reuerēced. for their ordre and office. with a maner of speache of vehemencie, saieth: God forbidde, that I shoulde speake anie euell of them &c. By whiche maner of speache he noteth yt to be a greate crime to speake euell of them. The causes why he wolde not speake euell of them be: that they succeade the Apostles in office, whiche F ys an high degree, and that the worke of their ministraciō ys great, and that they do consecrate the bodie of Christe.
And nowe that this noble mā hath so plainlie opened the treuthe enacted Chrysostom his woorthinesse of learning, holinesse, constancie, and auncientie. and receaued of the one side of Christes Parliament house: we will also heare what one of the other side will saie. Whiche shall be golden mouthed Chrisostome, who ys wourthie so to be called for the golden sentences that proceade oute of his mouthe. Who also ys woorhie to be beleued, not onelie for his holinesse, and great learning: But also for his constancie of faith, and auncientie in time. Who being in the time of the heresie of the Arriās, aboute the yeare of Christe 350 and therfore aboute 1200 yeares a gone, gaue no place to yt, neither for Princes, neither for the losse of his Bishopperick, neither for banishment, neither for anie persecucion, that did come to him for his constancie in faithe, but stood immoueable, inflexible, and streight vpright by the right piller of trueth Wherfore we maie conceaue a good opinion of him that he will doo and hath doen the like in teachinge G vs the matter, that we nowe seke. Let vs therfore heare. Thus he saieth:
Sed per hoc etiam aliud maius beneficium monstrabatur, quòd ille agnus futuri agni fuit typus, & ille sanguis dominici sanguinis monstrabat aduentum, & ouis illa spiritalis ouis Omel. de prodi. Juda. fuit exemplū. Ille agnus vmbra fuit: Hic veritas. Sed postquam sol iusticia radiauit, vmbra soluitur luce. & ideò in ipsa mensa vtrūque Pascha, & typi, & veritatis celebratu est. Nā sicut pictores pingendam tabulam vestigijs quibusdam adumbrare solent, et sic colorū varietate perficere: ita & Christus fecit in mensa, & typū Paschae descripsit, et Pascha veritatis ostendit. Vbi vis paremus tibi comedere Pascha? Iudaicum Pascha erat, sed vmbralumini cedat, aduectata imago veritate superetur. But by that also an other great benefitte was shewed, that that lambe was a figure of the lambe to come, and that bloode declared the cominge of our Lordes bloode, and that shepe was an exāple of the spirituall shepe. That lābe was a shaddow: This lābe the trueth. But after that the Sūne of righteousnes shewed furth his beames, the The olde Paschal lambe a shaddowe, oure lambe the trueth. shadowe ys put awaie with the light. And therfor in that tablebothe the passeouers, both of the figure, ād of the trueth, were celebrated. For as the painters are wont to shaddowe the table, that ys to be paincted, with certain signes and lineamentes, and so with varietie of colours to make yt perfecte: H Euen so Christ did in the table. He did both describe the figure of the passouer, and also shewed the possouer of the truth. Wher willt thowe that we [Page 60]make readie for thee to eate the passouer? That was the Iudaicall Passouer. A But let the shadowe geue place to the light. And the ymage be ouercōmed of the truthe. Thus Chrisostom.
What neadeth me here to trauaill to open the Authours mening, where he himself vseth so plain speche, that he neadeth no interpretour? He hath not onelie made a iust comparison betwen the olde Paschall lambe and our Paschall lambe, but also by tearmes applied to them, he hathe declared the contentes of thē, and what they be. That lambe (saieth he) was, a shaddow: This lambe the trueth. That lambe a figuratiue passouer, this the true Passouer.
I wolde to God all that haue romed astraie in the matter of this blessed Sacrament, wolde open their eies and clerelie beholde, howe by these woordes (true, and trueth) whiche Chrisostom in this sentence so often hath vsed, the true faith, and the trueth of the faith of the Churche, the piller of trueth, ys taught, maintened, and aduaunced, and the falsed of the false prophetes, and preachers weakened, and conuinced. These preachers teache B that the Sacrament ys but a figure, a sign or token of Christes bodie: Chrisostom saieth that the olde Paschall lambe was but a figure, but our Paschall lambe caten in the Sacrament ys the trueth. That the shaddowe: This the light. Yf then the olde Paschall lambe were the figure and the shaddow, and our newe Paschall lambe the trueth and the light, thē are they moche more then bare figures and signes, for they are the verie thinges.
But to make an euasion from this argument, they will saie that Christ ys our true Paschall lābe, and ys truelie eaten in the receipte of the Sacrament. Heretiques euasion frō Chrysostō. And therfore we saie with Chrisostom, we haue the trueth, and the verie true Paschall lambe ys receaued of the faithfull, euen the very bodie of Christe. But if yowe procead to demaunde of them, yf the verie bodie of Christe be consecrated on the Altar, and deliuered by the preist to the hande or mouthe of the faithfull, and so receaued: here they starte backe, and can not abide this voice, that yt shoulde be on the Altar, but onelie in the heart of the godlie receauer.
But Chrisostome saieth, that his true Passeouer (wherbye he meneth the bodie of Christ) was on the table, where the olde passeouer was. In that C table (saieth he) both the Passeouer, of the figure and of the trueth were celebrated.
And that none occasion of misunderstanding or wresting of his woordes Figuratiue passouer ād true Passouer both in one table. shoulde be taken, he speaketh the same sentēce after warde in more plain woordes saing: Christ in the table did bothe describe the figure of the Passeouer, and shewed also the true Passeouer.
Note then, bothe that Christe did shewe the true Passeouer, And that he did shewe yt in the table. whiche bothe do importe a reall presence, For to shewe the true thing ys to shewe the verie thing yt self: to shewe the verie thing yt self, ys to shewe the reall presence of the thinge. To shewe yt in or vpon the table importeth a substanciall maner of beinge farre differente frō their spirituall maner of beinge, whiche ys onelie in the hearte. For yt ys outwardlie vpon the table, and therfore neadeth a presence reall.
And here somwat more to presse the Proclamer, yt wolde be learned of him, why S. Hierom, and S. Chrisostom call not the iudaicall Passouer the D light, the trueth, ād the veritie, as they do oure Paschall lambe, seing (as he and his likes do saie) they receaued Christ as well as we, and we in our Sacrament no more them they. for they spirituallie, and we spirituallie, and [Page]our Sacrament no better then theirs.
But vnderstand (Reader) that they so saing speak lies, and deceaue thee. E The holie Fathers calling the olde sacramētes figures and shaddowes, and ours the light, the trueth, and the thinges in dede, teache that those sacramentes had not the verie presence of Christ, and that our Sacrament hath.
And that ye maie the better perceaue that Chrisostom meneth, as here ys declared: ye shal heare him in an other place vttering his minde and faith, yea the faithe of the Churche in his time, in more plain and expresse woordes. Thus he writeth: Ipsa namque mensa animae nostrae vis est, nerui mentis, fiduciae vinculum, fundamentum, spes, salus, lux, vita nostra. Si hinc hocsacrificio muniti migrabimus, Homeli. in 10. 1. Corin. maxima cum fiducia sanctum ascendemus vestibulum, tanquam aureis quibusdam vestibus contecti. Et quid futura commemoro? Nam dum in hac vita sumus, vt terra nobis coelum sit, facit hoc mysteriū Ascende ad coeli portas, & diligenter attende, imò non coeli, sed coeli coelorum, & tunc quod dicimus intueberis. Etenim quod summo honore dignum est, id tibi in terra ostendam. Nam quemadmodum in regijs, non parietes, non tectum aureum, sed regium corpus in throno sedens omniū est praestantissimū: ita quoque in coelis regium corpus, quod nunc in terra videndum tibi proponitur. Neque Angelos, neque Archangelos, F non coelos, non coelos coelorum, sed ipsum horum tibi omnium Dominum ostendo. Animaduertis quónam pacto quod omnium maximū est, atque praecipuum, in terra non conspicaris tantum, sed tangis: neque tangis solùm, sed comedis, & co accepto domū redis. Absterge igitur ab omni sorde animā tuā, praepara mentē tuā ad horū mysteriorū susceptionem. Etenim si puerreguis purpura, & diademate ornatus tibi ferēdus traderetur, nónne omnibus humi abiectis cum susciperes? Verùm nunc, cum nō hominis regiū puerū, sed vnigenitū Dei filium accipias, dic quaeso, non horrescis, & omnium secularium rerūamorē abiicis?
That table ys the strenght of our soule, the Sinnewes of the minde, the bande of trust, the fundacion, hope, health, light, and our life. Yf we beinge defended with this sacrisice shall departe hence, with most great trust we shall, as couered with certain golden garmentes, ascend to the holie place. But what do I reherse thinges that be to come? For while we be in this life, this misterie causeth that the earth ys an heauen vnto vs. Go vppe therfor vnto the gates of heauen, but not of heauen, but of the heauen of heauens, and diligentlie marke, And then thowe shalt beholde what we saie. For G The thing woorthie of most honour ys in the Sacrament trulie that, that ys woorthie of most highest honour, that shall I shewe thee in earthe. For as in Kinges howses, not the walls, not the golden Rooffe, but the Kinges bodie sitting in Throne ys most cheif and woorthiest of all: Euen so also do I shewe thee, neither Angells, nor Archangells, not heauens, nor the heauen of heauens, but the Kinges bodie whiche ys in heauen, whiche nowe ys setfurth before thee in earth to be seen, the lorde of all theise doo I shewe thee. Doest thowe marke howe thowe doest not onelie beholde in earth that, that ys greatest and cheifest of all thinges, But thowe doest touche The verie bodie of Christ ys. set furth before vs in earth. yt, neither doest thowe onelie touche yt, but thowe doest eate yt, And that receaued thowe goest home? Wipe therfore and make clean thy soule from all filthinesse, prepare thy minde to the receipt of these misteries. For yf the Kinges childe, being deckt in purple, and Diadeame, were deliuered to thee to be caried, woldest thowe not cast all down vpon the grownde, and take him? But nowe when thowe takest, not the childe of a kinge being a man, but the onelie begotten Sonne of God, Saie (I beseche thee) arte thowe not The onlie begotten Sonne of God receiued in the Sacramēt. afraied? And doest thowe not cast awaie the loue of all worldelie thinges? H Thus moche Chrisost.
Among so manie goodlie notes, as this sentence dothe contein, let me (gentle Reader) with thy pacience note two or three, whiche be verilic [Page 41]woorthie of note and consideracion. A
The first shall be, that we obserue the notable titles that he geueth to the table: This note hathe two partes. For first he calleth ytlife &c. after in the sentēce next adioined he calleth yt a sacrifice. Wherfore we shall first speake of the titles in the first sentence, and then of the title in the next sentence.
In the first sentence he calleth yt the strength of our sowle, our fundacion, hope, Honorable and woorthie titles of the Sacrament. health, light, and life. Whiche thinges for that they can not be attributed to the materiall table, yt ys easie for euery man to perceaue that the Authour meneth them of the thing, that ys, of the meat or foode vpon the table, after the maner of our common speache, whiche saieth: Soche a man kepeth a good table, wherbie ys ment the good fare on the table.
Nowe then yf the thinge on the table be a thing of soche woorthinesse, that yt maie be called our strenght, health, hope, light, and life: yt can not be a peice of breade, but he that ys so in verie dede, Iesus Chryst our Sauiour God and mā. Yt ys he that ys our strēght, according to the Psalmist. Dominus fortitudo plebis suae. Owre Lorde ys the strenght of his people. He ys our health and Psalm. 27. Matth. 1. Joan. 1. B saluacion. for Ipse saluum faciet populum suum à peccatis eorum. He shall saue his people from ther sinnes. He ys our light. For he ys Lux vera, quae illuminat omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum. The verie light that lightneth euery Jbid. 14. man comminge into this worlde. He ys ourlife, For he ys Via, veritas, & vita the waie, the trueth, and the life.
Wherfore seing that these titles appropriated onelie to Christ, are by this Chryst yt verilie vpō the Altar. auncient father declared to be applied to the thing vpon the Altar or table, yt must of necessitie be concluded, that the thing vpon the Altar or table ys verilie Chryste.
The further proofe wherof appeareth in the sentence immediatelie folowing, whiche ys the seconde of the notes before mencioned, wher he saieth thus Yf we shall departe hence being defended with this sacrifice, we shall with most great trust go vppe to the holie place. In the whiche sainge, what he before called the table, he calleth yt nowe the sacrifice. Wherbie ys declared the first parte of the note that he ment not the materiall table, but the thing vpon the table. Secondarelie calling yt a sacrifice by the whiche with greate trust we go vppe to the holie place, he plainlie teacheth Heb. 9. C that the thing vpon the table ys Chryste, who ys our verie and most woorthie sacrifice, who by his oblacion founde eternall redemption, of the which more hereafter.
The seconde note ys, that he saieth: Trulie that, that ys wourthie of most high honour, that will I she we thee in earth. What thinge ys that, that ys woorthie of most high, honour, but that, that sainct Paule speaketh of when he saieth: Regi seculorum 1 Tim. 1. Honour due to God alone called Latria, wherin yt consisteth. immortali, inuisibili, soli Deo honor & gloria, Vnto God king euerlastinge, immortall, inuisible, be onlie honour and praise for euer? What ys the most highe honour, but that honour whiche the learned call Latriam, the honour due to God alone? whiche honour consisteth in faith, beleuinge that he ys the creatour, and conseruatour of all thinges: in hoope, trusting by him to be saued: in Charitie, louinge him aboue all thinges created, yea euen aboue our owne selues, through the whiche loue we are readie louinglie to obey his most holie commaundementes: in Sacrifice, as wherbie we exhibitte and testifie outwardlie our seruice to our onely D Lorde God, to be geuen, vsed, and frequented, whiche sacrifice, whether yt be of praise or thankes geuing, or of the offring vppe of our owne bodyes, Rom. 12. or anie other thing appoincted of God, ys (as sainct Paule testifieth) [Page]called our reasonable seruing of God.
Yf thē that, that ys shewed in earth, be woorthie of this most high honour, E The thing woorthie most high honoure ys in the Sacrament. and the shewing therof ys in the table, of the whiche Chrysostom spake in the beginning of the this fentence, what ells doth he meen, or what ells can yt be, but Chryst God and man verilie present in the Sacrament, who ys wourthie of this honour.
But what neadeth me to trauaill to expownde Chryfostome, and to declare what the thing ys, that he woulde shewe in earth, seing that he himself so clerelie expowndeth him self in his owne woordes that do folow? For as in kinges howses (saieth he) not the walls, not the golden Rooffe, but the Kinges bodie sitting in the Throne ys the cheifest and woorthist of all: Euen so also the Kinges bodie which ys in heauen, whiche ys nowe sett furth before thee to be seen in earth, not Angells, nor Archangells, not heauens, nor the heauens of heauens, but the verie Lorde of all these doo I shewe thee.
In whiche woordes ye maie clerelie perceaue, that the thing, whiche he saieth ys to be shewed in earthe, ys the kinges bodie, which ys in heauen, the verie lorde of Angells, and Archangells, the Lorde of heauens, and of the F heauen of heauens. Which ys not present in figure, and absent in dede: but ys verilie present in so true a maner, verie Chryst, verie God, and verie man, that he so being with vs in misterie here in earth, maketh the same earth (saieth Chrysostom) to be an heauen vnto vs, whiche coulde not so be, but by the presence of him, who ys Lorde of heauens, whose graciouse presence maketh heauen wher yt pleaseth the same graciouslie to be.
Yf this place of Chrysostome, with the notes of the same, be diligentlie weighed, yt shall easelie appeare to the reader, how vain the glose of Cantorburie Crāmer his glose vpon Chrysostome. Li. 4. ca. 8. vpon this and all the like saings of Chrysostom, ys, wherin of hys absolute authoritie without proofe, he saieth, that wher Chrysostome saieth, that we see Chryst with our eyes, we touche him with oure handes, we receaue him with our mouthes, be not to be vnderstanded of the verie flesh and blood of Chryste, but of the bread and wine, whiche be the signes of them. But for that this glose confowndeth the texte yt ys to be reiected for the woordes of Chrysostom can not beare yt. For he saieth not that G thowe seist bread and wine, but the kinges bodie whiche ys in heauē, which ys now sett furthe before thee in earth to be seen.
Yf we shoulde aske of Chrysostome, what we do see in the Sacrament here vpon earth, he aunswereth, the kinges bodie. Yf ye aske again which kinges What ys seen in the Sacrament bodie? He answereth the Kinges bodie whiche ys in heauen. Yf ye proceade asking, where do we see yt? he aunswereth, before thee. So that he maketh no mencion of bread or wine. Wherfore I wolde knowe, what warrant this Crāmer gloseth withoute warrant. man had, to geue soche a glose to Chrysostome. Yf Chrysostome ment as this man gloseth, straunge yt ys, that he wolde speake so plain contrary to his mening, as to saie, yt ys the kinges bodie and ment yt was not.
Yf the Aduersarie saie, the bodie of Chryst cānot be seē: No more (saie I) cā the substance of mā be seen. And yet wesaie we see soche a man, when we see but the outward accidentes of man, we saie we see the king. when we see no Obiection. Answer. parte of him, but the garment that he hath vpon him, and so of other thinkes, when we see ther outwarde formes, and consider ther substance, we saie, Cap. 62. Anignorāt obiection of the Aduersaries. and that truly, we see the thing. But I will speake of this, more in the second H booke.
But here the Aduersarie will further obiecte and saie: Yf that thing [Page 42]be in the Sacrament, that ys woorthie of most high honour (as Chrysostom A saieth, and one parte of that high honour ys to be sacrificed vnto, Then Chryste ys not in the Sacrament. For (as your selues saie) Chryst ys your sacrifice. Who being in the Sacrament, ye offer vnto that thing that ys in the Sacrament. And so foloweth this absurditie, that the Sacrifice, and he to whome the Sacrifice ys offred, ys all one.
This obiection conuinceth the obiectour of ignorance of the faith of the church, or ells of malice against the receaued faith of the same. For yf he had The answere. either red what S. Augustine writeth in this matter, or yf he haue red yt, he wolde not arrogantly and maliciouslie contemne the same, he wolde either not thus obiecte, or sooen be by sainct Augustine satisfied. To aunswer this thus saieth he: Christus vnus manet cum illo, cui offert, & vnum se facit cum illis, pro Li. 4. de trini ca. 14 quibus ipse se offert, & vnus est cum illis, qui offerunt, & vnum cum illo, quod offertur. Chryste (saieth he) abideth one with him to whome he offreth, and he maketh him self one with them, for whom he dothe offer, and he ys one with them which do offer, and one with that, that ys offred. Thus S. Augustine. B
Weighe with me) gētle Reader) eche parte of this sentēce. First he saieth, Christ doth both offre and ys offred vnto. that Chryste abideth one with him, to whom he offreth. In whiche sainge note that Chryste dothe both offer, and ys also he to whome he offreth. For Cbryste, as man, offreth hys owne bodie in sacrifice to him self as God. Et tamen Deus & homo vnus est Christus (as saieth Athanasius) And yet God and man ys one Chryste.
Wherby ys aunswered in fewe woordes the obiection of the Aduersarie. In Simbolo For Chryste ys bothe he to whome the sacrifice ys made, And he him self also ys the Sacrifice yt self, that ys made, as the latter parte of sainct Augustines sainge dothe shewe. Et vnum est cum illo, quod offertur. He ys one withyt, that ys offred. In the whiche saing yow maie perceaue, that Chryst ys the preist that offreth, he ys the Sacrifice that ys offred, and he ys he, to whome the sacrifice ys offred.
Obiectiō. Perchance the Aduersarie, who seketh by all meanes to impugne, And therbie to flee from the truth and his saluacion, will saie: that sainct Augustin speaketh this of the Sacrifice offred vpon the Crosse, and not of the Sacrifice C offred in the Masse.
Answer. In case yt so were, yet the former maliciouse obiection of him ys not onelie perceaued, but also soluted. For in dede Chryst making his sacrifice vpon the crosse, was bothe the preist, the sacrifice, and also he to whom the sacrifice was made. And therfor falleth that argument, that shoulde proue that Chryst ys not in the Sacrament, bicause he was the sacrifice that was offred to him self in the Sacrament, who (as Chrysostome saied) ys most woorthie of the highest honoure.
But that this was spoken of the Sacrifice offred in the Masse, the selfe same sentence of sainct Augustin, shall declare and proue. For first, yt ys manifest that no man did offer Chryst vpon the Crosse in consideracion of a sacrifice, but he himself. But here sainct Augustine speaketh not onelie of the sacrifice of Chryst by him self, but by other also, as yt ys euident when he saieth. Et vnus est cum illis qui offerunt. And he ys one withe them that doo offer.
Now ioining the whol sētēce together, ād not taking yt trūcatelie, or by peice D meall, as heretikes doo, to maintein there heresies, and to deceaue the simple, wher ys ther any sacrifice the which ys offred of manie, with the which, and them that offer, and with the Sacrifice offred, and with him to whom yt [Page]ys offred, Chryst ys one, but in the Sacrifice of the Masse, in the which the E Churche being they that doo offer, which Churche ys the bodie of Chryst, and Chryste beinge the heade of the same bodie, be one with yt? And therfore Christ is offered of his Church and the Churche of Christ. when the Churche dothe offer that sacrifice, Chryste as one with yt offreth also. And so by this wonderfull connexion of the head and the bodie yt cometh to passe, that bothe the Churche ys offred by Chryste, and Chryst by the Churche, as saincte Augustin doth saie, Sacerdos ipse est, ipse offerens, ipse oblatio. Cuius rei sacramentum, quotidianum voluit esse Ecclesiae sacrificium, cum ipsius corporis ipse sit caput, & ipsius capitis ipsa sit corpus, tam ipsa per ipsum, quàm ipse per ipsam consuetus De ciuit. Dei. li. 10. cap. 20. offerri. He ys the preist, he ys the offerer, and the oblaciō. The sacramēt of the which thinge, he willed the dailie Sacrifice of the Churche to be, forasmoche as of that bodie he ys the head, and of that head, she ys the bodie, being vsed or accustomed, aswell she by him, as he by her to be offred. Thus saincte Augustine. Christs bodie the dailie Sacrifice of the Church
Nowe yowe see, not onely their inuented obiections soluted, but also the trueth taught, and confirmed by auncient Authoritie, that ys, that Chrystes bodie, which ys in heauen, ys also in earth in the Sacrament, as Chrysostō teacheth) which F bodie ys so verilie present, that ys ys the dailie Sacrifice of the Churche, not a sacrifice of mans inuention, inuented to the derogacion of Christes blessed sacrifice vpō the Crosse (as the Aduersaries blaspheme) but a Sacrifice that Christ him self wolde haue dailie frequented in the Churche, as sainct Augustin teacheth as a sacrament of that blessed Sacrifice past and doen.
Although, christian Reader, the plentifullnesse of this matter, and the delectacion of the same, and the earnest desire that I haue, that all men wolde be obedient to Gods trueth, and bringe their imaginacions into captiuitie, to the obedience of Chryste, and specially my bretheren, and contriemen after the flesh, for whome I wolde wish my self accursed that they 2. Cor. 10. might be saued, doth carie me awaie, making me to forgett my self in long Roin. 9. tarieng vpon this one Author yet nowe I will staie my self, and breiflie note the thirde note of Chrysostom, and then procead to other.
The thirde note ys the similitude whiche Chrysostome vseth in exhortacion to moue vs to the woorthy receauing of so gloriouse a thinge. Yf the G kinges sonne (saieth he) deckt with purple and diademe, were deliuered to thee to be born, woldest thowe not cast all thinges down on the grounde ād receaue him? But nowe when thowe takest not the sonne of a king being a man, but the onelie begotten Sonne of God, saie, I praie thee, arte thowe not afraied.
Note then that ye receaue not in the Sacrament a bare peice of bread, but ye receaue the onelie begotten sonne of God, Iesus Chryst, God and man. At whose What we receiue in the Sacrament. presence we aught to tremble and feare, lest anie filthinesse shoulde remain in our consciences, wherwith the eyes of his maiestie shoulde be offended.
In the receipt of a peice of bread we nede not to trēble, or quake, neither in the receipt of the merite of Chrystes passion, which ys the spirituall receauing of Chryst. For in receauing of that, we receaue great comforth with al, Trembling at the receipt of the Sacr. prooueth the presence of Christ. and no feare, but raither we shoulde feare yf we receaue yt not. For then are we destitute of our saluacion whiche commeth to vs by the passiō of Chryste.
But Chrysostome asketh yf we tremble not, when we receaue the onelie begotten H Sonne of God, which must nedes be at the presence of so high a maiestie for consideracion aboue saied, as Peter did vpon the contemplacion of the [Page 43]powre of Chryste, in wourking the miracle of the taking ef the great nombre A Luc. 5. of fishes, who fell down at his feet and saied: Exi à me Domine, quia homo peccator sum. Lorde go from me, for I am a sinfull man. And Centurio likewise: Matth. 8. Domine, non sum dignus, vt intres sub tectum meum. I am not wourthie o Lorde, that thow shouldest enter into my house.
Mary Magdalen, though in the presence of Christe she humbled her self, Luc. 7. hauing (no doubte) both feare and sorowe for her sinnes committed: Yet, I dare saie, she trēbled neuer a whitte at this ioifull voice: Remittuntur tibi peccata tua. Thy sinnes be forgeuen thee, but she reioiced, and was gladde in God. So vndoubtedlie a man beinge certified by the Spirit of God, that he ys a partaker of the merittes of Chrystes passion, and therby through the receauing of the Sacramentes ys made a liuelie membre of Chryst, can not at the receipt of so high a benefit tremble and quake, but ioye, and be gladde, and praise God with manie other that receaued benefits at Chrystes hand, of whom the Gospell maketh mencion. Wherfor yt ys euident, that yt ys the the verie reall presence of Chrystes bodie, that we aught to tremble at, and feare when B we receaue yt, lest peraduenture anie sinne shoulde be in vs, which shoulde offende his blessed Maiestie, wherbie we might receaue him to our damnacion: And not at the receipt of the Chryste spirituallie.
THE NINGTENE CHAPITER CONTINVETH the proofe of the same matter by S. Augustin, and S. Cyrill.
IN the chapiter before ye hearde two famouse Fathers, not dissenting, but consenting, but consenting, not infirming but confirming the sainges of the other aunciēt elders before brought furth: Nowe will we likewise heare other two, whiche will plainlie declare, what was enacted ād receaued in the house of God, for the verie trueth of this matter.
The first shall be saincte Augustine, a miracle of chrystendom, passing S. Augustine cōmendded by this Authour. withoute controuersie all writers, that haue written, both Grekes, and Latines in profownde learninge, and in nombre of bookes, a man so famouse, that euery childe almost in christendom hath sainct Augustin in his mouthe. C A man of soche grauitie and authoritie, that all Chrysten men do reuerence him, and staie vpon the saing of him: A man of soche zeale to the trueth of Chrystes faith, that by his learned trauaill he pourged Affrick of the heresies of the Manicheis, the Donatistes, and the Pelagians. And with all he ys so aunciēt, being born aboute the yeare of our lorde 354. that he ys withoute suspicion of corruption in this matter, of our controuersie.
To declare what the trueth of this matter ys, he saieth thus: Aliudest Paschal, Cōt. literas Petiliani quod adhuc Iudaei celebrant de oue: Aliud autem, quod nos in corpore & sanguine Domini celebramus Yt ys an other Passouer, that the Iewes do yet celebrate with a shepe: an other that we doo celebrate in the bodie and bloode of Christe.
In the which sainge, ye do first perceaue, that he doth first declare a difference of the Iudaicall Passeouer, and the Chrystian Passeouer, yet comparing them together, as the figure to the thing figured, and by expresse woordes sheweth what they be. The Iudaicall Passeouer was a shepe: our Passeouer ys the D bodie and bloode of Chryste.
What more plain woordes wolde the Proclamer wish to be spokē for the Au obiection. determinacion of this controuersie? And yet yt maie be that the enemie [Page]will here delude the simple, and holde in the arrogant with one of hys common An obiection. aunswers, that Chryste spirituallie ys our spirituall Paschall Lambe, E but not Chryst reallie present in the Sacrament. For ther ys no soche, neither dothe saincte Augustine saye anye soche thinge here.
But to answere this, although the place yt self dothe sufficientlie The answer. teache the verie reall presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode in the Sacrament: Yet by openinge of the difference of the olde Passeouer, and our newe Passeouer, and by comparyson, of them eche to other, yt shall be more plain and easie to perceaue the same. For as Chryst verilie and corporallie dienge, did aunswere the dienge of the lambe: So he being verilie and corporallie eaten, as our true Paschall Lambe, dothe aunswer the eating of the Iewesh Passeouer, whiche was both for the dienge, and eatinge, the verie figure of Chryst.
But to ioin nearer with the Aduersarie, yf Chryste spirituallie receaued Yf wereceiue Christ but spirituallie, as the Iues did our Passeouers be all one. onelie, ys our Paschall Lambe, And the Iewes also (as before ys saied) did euen so receaue Chryste spirituallie in their Paschall feast, How standeth that difference which saincte Augustine here maketh betwen our Paschall F Lambe and theirs, yf yt be all one, that ys receaued in bothe? Yf saincte Augustine had saied yt ys an other Passeouer that the Iewes do kepe with a shepe, and an other that we do kepe with a peice of bread, and wine, though we had bothe receaued Chryst spirituallie: Yet the difference might haue stand in the outwarde signes. But sainge as he doth, yt must nedes be, that as the Iewes passeouer was a verie shepe in dede, So ys our passeouer the very bodie of Christe in dede. Christes reall bodie oure Passeouer.
And althoughe this might suffice for aunswere to the Aduersarie: Yet yt shal be by an other sētēce of the same S. Augustin made so plain, that he shal not be able to denie, but that S. Augustin taught a real presence in the Sacramēt. Hys sentēce ys this. Hebraei autem in victimis pecorum, quas offerebant Deo multis et varijs modis, sicut re tanta dignum erat, prophetiam celebrabant futurae victimae, Cot. Faust. Man. Li. 20. ca. 18. quam Christus obtulit. Vnde iam Christiani, peracti eiusdem sacrificij memoriam celebrant sacrosancta oblatione, et participatione corporis et sanguinis Christi. The Hebrues in the sacrifices of beastes, whiche they did offer vnto God manye Sacrifice the Christians in oblacio and participacion. and diuerse waies, as for so great a thing yt was meet, did openlie declare a G prophecie of the sacrifice to come, whiche Chryste did offer. Wherfor nowe the chrystians do celebrate the memorie of the same Sacrifice past, by the holie oblacion, and participacion of the bodie and blood of Chryste: Thus moche sainct Augustine.
Yf this woorde participacion had ben alone in this sencence, he shoulde haue had (spirituallie) on the backe of him immediatelie, and so by violence haue ben wrested to sownde to the euell tuned notes of the Aduersaries. But praised be the holie Spirit of God, the Spirit of consent, and agreement, who so kaied thys woorde, participacion, with the woorde, oblacion, that yt can not be wrested to sownde any other sounde, then the reall presence of Chrystes blessed bodie in the Sacrament. Which bodie the Chrystians (saieth S. Augustin) do offer in sacrifice in the remembrance of the Sacrifice of Chryst don vpon the Crosse.
By whiche maner of sainge of sainct Augustin, all the obiections of the aduersaries, whiche are made against the Sacrifice of the Masse, are clean wiped awaie, as more at large in the third booke, by the helpe of Godes grace, H yt shall be declared.
[Page 44]Yt ys well knowen to all men bothe true Chrystians, and Pseudochrystians, A that if Chrystes bodie be offred of vs in sacrifice or oblacion (as sainct Augustine doth here affime) ther must nedes be a reall presence of the same bodie so offred, or ells yt must nedes be a mathematicall sacrifice.
Ye haue nowe heard sainct Augustine reporting soche trueth, as was enacted and receaued in Chrystes Parliament house. Nowe will we heare an other of the other side of the same house reporte the same trueth, whiche Cyrillus comēded of the Authour. shall be the holie Father Cyrill, a man profowdlie seen in the statutes of the house of Chryste. Who for his excellent wourthinesse in holinesse, grauitie, and learning, was president in the great Councell Ephesine, whiche was one of the foure principall Councells of the whiche saincte Gregorie speaketh so moch praise, wherin the herefie of Nestorius was confownded, and condemned.
Whiche Cyrill also through cōstancie in faithe wrote against the Arrians both learnedlie and godlie, as his woorkes do testifie, he liued aboute the yeare of our lorde 420. And therfor for his auncientie woorthie to be beleued, B being after this supputacion 1136. yeares agon.
This man saieth after this sorte: Nec putet ex tarditate mentis suae Iudaeus, inaudita nobis li. 4. in. 6. Joan. cap. 14. ex cogitata esse mysteria. Videbit enim, si attentius quaerat, hoc ipsum à Moisis temporibus factitatum fuisse. Quid enim maiores eorum à morte, & pernitie Aegyptiaca liberauit, quando mors in primogenita Aegypti desaeuiebat? Nónne omnibus palam est, quia diuina institutione perdocti, agni carnes manducauerunt, ac postes, et superliminaria agni sanguine perunxerunt, propterea mortem ab eis diuertisse? Pernities namue, id est, mors huius carnis, aduersus humanum genus, propter primi hominis transgressionem furebat. Terra enim es, & in terram reuerteris, propter peccatum audiuimus. Verùm quoniam per carnem suam Christus atrocem hunc euersurus erat Tyrannum, proptereà id mysterio apud priscos obumbratur, & ouinis carnibus, & sanguine sancti ficati, Deo ita volente, pernitiem effugiebant. Quid igitur, Iudaee, turbaris, praefiguratam iam diu veritatem videns? Cur, inquam, turbaris, si Christus dicit: Nisi manducaueritis carnem filij hominis & biberitis eius sanguinē, non habebitis vitā in vobis, quum oporteret te Mosaicis legibus institutum, & priscis vmbris ad credendum perdoctū, ad intelligenda haec mysteria paratissimum esse? Vmbram, & figuram nosti, disce ergo ipsam rei veritatem. Caro (inquit) mea verè est cibus, & sanguis meus verè est potus. C Let not the Iewe, by slacknesse of minde thinke, that we haue inuented mysteries neuer heard of before. He shall see (yf he will with better heede seke) euen the same often doen from the time of Moises. For what did deliuer ther elders from death and destruction of Aegipte, when death raiged very sore vpon the first born of Aegipte? ys yt not knowen to all men that they being taught by the commaundemet of God, did eate the flesh of the lambe, and with the bloode of the lambe did anoincte the postes, and the vpper dore postes, and therfor death diuerted from them? Destruction, that ys tosaie, the deathe of this flesh, for the transgression of the first man, raiged sore against mankinde. For sinne we hearde: Thowe arte earth, and into earth thowe shalt retourn. But for asmoche as Chryst woolde ouerthrowe by his flesh this cruell Tyranne, therfore that was shadowed among the olde Fathers in a misterie, and they being sanctified withe the flesh and blood of a shepe (God so willing) did escape the plague ād destructiō. Wher for then, thowe Iewe art thow troubled, seing nowe the trueth long before D prefigurated? why, I saie, arte thowe troubled, yf Chryste do saie: Except ye cate the flesh of the sonne of man, and drink his bloode, ye shall haue no life in yowe: seing yt behoueth thee beinge instructed in Moises lawes, ād taught, by the olde [Page]shaddowes to beleue, to be most readie to vnderstād these misteries. Thowe haest knowen the shaddowe ād the figure: Learn therfor the veritie of the thing. E My flesh (saieth he) ys verilie meat, and my blood ys verilie drinke. Thus farre Cyrill.
Whome ye haue hearde at lenght declaring the figuratiue Paschall lābe, and the benefit that the Iewes had by the same. Likewise ye haue heard him declaring the true Paschall Lambe, and the benefite that commeth to vs therbie. And when he hath applied the figure to the thing figured, whiche ys the trueth of the figure as a matter sufficiētlie taught ther, to be beleued of the Iewes: He falleth into a wonder at the incredulitie of thē, and reprouinge them all in the person of one, saieth: Why arte thowe (o Iewe) troubled, seing nowe the verie veritie long before this prefigurated? Yt behoued thee being instructed by Moises Lawes, and verie well taught by the olde shadowes to beleue, to be most readie to vnderstande these misteries.
Yf Cyrill did so earnestlie reproue the Iewes for their incredulitie, being taught but by Moyses, and the figures, howe wolde he reproue our men F who well instructed, not by Moyses, but by Chryste: not by shaddowes, and figures, but by the gospell of treuth and veritie not moued (as the Iewes semed to be) to beleue a straunge noueltie, but an aunciente faithe receared of antiquitie. Yf the Iewes (I saie) be woorthie of reproche who knowe not the true faithe, whiche they neuer yet had by plain knowledge receaued: False Christians worthilie reproued for saking their faith. how moche more be our false Chrystians to be reproued, which, the faithe that they were brought vppe in, that they once embraced and receaued that they earnestlie beleued: nowe haue maliciouslie not onelie contemned, but also Reuiled, detested and abiected?
God that ys the verie light, lighten their heartes, that they maie see into howe depe damnacion they haue deiected and cast them selues, by their forsaking of the catholique faith, being nowe bare, and void of all excuse, forsomoche as they did once knowe the trueth, whiche nowe deuelishlie they blaspheme. Si non venissem, & locutus eis fuissem, peccatum non haberent, nūc autem excusationem non habent de peccato suo. Yf I had not commed (saied Chryst) Joan 15. and spokē to them, they shoulde not haue had sinne: but nowe they haue G none excuse of their sinne.
God, I saie, therfore haue mercie vpon them, whilest time of mercie for them endureth, and geue them grace dailie with the Prophett Dauid to crie and saie: Respice, & exaudi me Domine Deus meus. Illumina oculos meos ne vnquam obdormiam in morte, ne quando dicat inimicus meus, praeualui aduersus eum. Consider Psal. 12. and heare me, o Lorde, my God lighten mine eies that I sheape not in death, lest mine enemis saie, I haue preuailed against him.
What a preie and Spoill ys yt to our gostlie enemie, and howe moche dothe he reioice, when he deceaueth one that hath ben in the true faith, and be [...]ieueth him of the same, and so driueth him from God? No doubte he counteth yt a great Spoill, and reioiceth moch at yt, as the verse of the same psalme immediatelie folowing dothe saie: Qui tribulant me exultabunt, si motus fuero. They that trouble me, will reioice at yt, yf I becast down. Return therfor in time, and cleaue hard to the streight and strong piller of trueth. For if ye be cast downe ye shall fall verie lowe, and sinke depe.
Chryste sending his Apostles to preache, taught them thus: Into what H cittie soeuer ye shall come, enquire who ys worthie in yt, and ther abide Math. 10. till ye go thence, and whosoeuer shall not receaue yowe, nor will heare [Page 45]yowe preachinge, when ye departe oute of that house or cittie, shake of the A dust of yowe feete. Verilie I saie vnto yowe, yt shall be easier for the lande of Sodom, and Gomorre, in the daie of Iudgement, then for that citte.
Consider therfore and heauie hand of God vpon Sodom, and gomorre, which in soche terrible sorte being sonke, and destroied, with fire and Brimstone from heauen, argueth a more terrible damnacion to ensewe, and folowe, and yet yt shall be more easie to them in the daie of Iudgement, then to soche as will not receaue faith: Howe moche more greuouse then shall yt be to them which forsake that faith, that not onelie they them selues haue receaued, but the wholl Churche of Chryst throughoute all Chrystendom, whiche faithe, although yt hath diuerse times ben impugned (as nowe in theise daies yt ys) Yet, God be praised, yt was neuer ouerthowen, nor neuer shall be, and will cleaue to an heresie, whiche hath ben not onelie sundrie and diuerse times ympugned, but ouerthrowen, condemned, cursed, and extincted? Surelie as their reproche ys moche in this worlde, for their B so doing: So shall yt be moche more before the face of God and his electe, in the daie of his terrible iudgement.
But I will retourn from whence I haue digressed, and touche one note more of Cyrill and so passe to other. After he had thus rebuked the Iewes, for their hardnesse of beleue, he saied: Vmbram & figuram nosti, disce ergo ipsam rei veritatem. Thow hauest knowen the Shaddow and the figure, learn therfore the verie thinge.
Note here again, as before in Chrysostom ys noted, that the olde Paschall lambe was a figure, and owre Paschall Lambe the verie thinge. Then yt ys not a peice of bread, a bare sign or figure of Chryst, for then these sainges of the learned Fathers were not true, whiche saie plainlie, that yt ys the verie thinge.
And this Father, when he had willed the Iewes to learn the verie thing, he declared furthwith what the verie thing ys: Caro mea verè est cibus, & sanguis meus verè est potus. My flesh (saieth Chryst) ys verilie meat, and my bloode ys verilie drinke. This (saieth Cyrill) ys the verie thing of the figure C the verie flesh and bloode of Christ whiche be verilie meat and verilie drinke.
Howe this texte, and other apperteining to the same matter in the sixte of S. Iohn, haue ben wrested and wried, and violentliie drawen by the enemies of gods trueth from their natiue and true sense, yt shall be shewed more at large in the second booke.
But nowe that the Aduersarie ys pressed so sore, he ys driuen to his common refuge, of the woorde, Spirituallie, and will peraduenture, saie that the bread in the Sacrament ys not the verie thinge that aunswereth the figure of the Paschall lambe, but the flesh and bloode of Chryst (as Cyrill here alleageth) Spirituallie receaued.
But howe farre this their common glose dissenteth from the truthe, yt shall by Gods helpe streight waie euidentlie appeare.
First, this ys most certen, that the faithfull people of the olde Testament, 1. Cor. 10. whiche through faithe in Chryste to come, were the children of faithfull Abraham, did eate the flesh and drincke the bloode of Chryst spirituallie, as D saincte Paule wittnesseth: Omnes candem escam spiritualē manducauerunt, & omnes eundem potum spiritualem biberunt, bibebant autem de spirituali consequente eos petra. Petra autem erat Christus. All our Fathers did eate of one spirituall meat, and [Page]and did all drinke of one maner of spirituall drinke. For they drancke of E that spirituall Rocke that folowed them, whiche Rocke was Chryst.
Yf Chryst was then spirituallie eaten and dronken of the fathers, the Spirituall receauing of Christ was not sigured by the Pasechall lābe. spirituall eatinge and drinknige of Chryste, or Chryste spirituallie eaten and dronken was not figured by the Paschall lābe, neither can the Pascall Lābe be applied to Chryste spirituallie eatē as the propre figure to the thing figured. And this shall be proued: For all the Sacramentes and Ceremonies of the olde Lawe were figures of thinges to come, and to be doen, and fullfilled in the newe lawe. And if Chryst were receaued spirituallie of the Fathers in the olde lawe, then was the Paschall lambe no figure of Chryst to be spirituallie receaued in the newe lawe.
That the Sacrifices and Ceremonies of the law were figures of thinges to come, S. Paule testifieth: Vmbram habens lex futurorum bonorum &c. The lawe hauing the shaddowe of good thinges to come, and not the verie fashion Hebr. 10. of the thinges them selues &c.
And saincte Augustine also (as before ys alleaged) saieth that the sacrifices of the Hebrues were prophecies of the sacrifices to come, whiche Christ F did offer.
Wherunto Chryst him self, who came to fullfill the lawe, hauing regarde, saied: Iota vnum, aut vnus apex non praeteribit à lege, donec omnia fiant. One iotte Math. 5. or one title of the lawe shall not scape, till all be fullfilled. Whiche maner of speache shoulde not nede: yf the thinges that were figured, were doen allreadie. Wherfor seing the spirituall receauing of Chryst was not a thing to comme, but was in vse euen with the figuts in the time of the lawe: And also forsomoche as the Sacramentall bread (as they do terme yt) whiche ys but a sign or a figure of Chryst, ys not the thing that ys figured, For the thinge that ys figured must nedes be Chryst, and as yt ys nowe proued yt can not be Chryst spirituallie: therfor of necessitie yt must be verie Chryst reallie. And therfore to conclude, when Cirill saied in the ende of his sentence: Thowe hauest knowen the figure, learn therfor the verie thinge: And alleageth this Scripture: My flesh ys verilie meate, and my blood ys verilie drinke Bothe he and the Scripture meen the verie thinge, whiche ys the reall and substanciall slesh of Christ and his verie bloode, and not the spiritual flesh and blood G onely. Ioan. 6.
THE TWENTETH CHAPITER IOINETH sainct Gregorie, and Damascen to confirme the same matter.
YE haue all readie heard certain cooples of the two sides of the higher house of Parliament, whiche howe they agree within them selues, and howe Iustlie and trulie they reporte the enacted veritie of the same, and therwith howe mightilie they ouerthrowe the pestilent sectes of the wicked, I trust the gentle Reader dothe well perceaue.
Nowe though this great master of heresie will not accept the Authours that haue written within the compasse of theise nime hondreth yeares, whiche therfore I diuide from the other that did write within sixe hondreth years after Chryst calling them of the lower house, and theise of the higher house: yet for asmoche as I write as well for the comforth of the true beleuing H Chrystian, as for the confutacon of the false Chrystian: I will consult with an other coople, of the whiche the one ys last of the higher house, and the other one of the firste or cheifest of the lower house, and after with [Page 46]other of the lower house, that the trueth reported of manie, maye the more A ioifullie be embraced, and they that refuse them, and their authoritie, wourthilie defaced. For yf these of the lower house, do agree with them of the higher house, and haue all one tune and sownde with them in the trueth then both their prowde arrogancie, whiche haue so contemptuouslie reiected so manie verteuouse and learned mens authorities, ys condignelie to be rebuked, and also their falce imposture, teaching that the Churche hath swerued from the trueth and lien in erronr so manie yeares, to thentente that they getting estimacon as the Inuentours of trueth, might sell their lies vnder the colour of truth, maie the better be perceaued.
This Authour whom I called the last of the higher house ys sainct Gregorie, Sainct Gregorie hys cōmēdaciō. who somtime was cheif head vnder Chryst of the howse, a man both learned, and vertuouse, as appeareth not onclie by him that setteth oute his life in storie, but also by his own woorkes, sauouring as well of vertue and holinesse, as of learning and faithfull trueth.
This holie learned Father in a Paschall homelie, comparing the olde Paschall Lambe to the newe saieth thus: Quae videlices cuncta magnam nobis aedisicationem B Omil. 22. Pascha. pariunt, si fuerint mystica interpretatione discussa. Quid namue sit sanguis agni, non iam audiendo, sed bibendo didicistis. Qui sanguis super vtrunque postem ponitur, quādo non solùm ore corporis, sed etiam ore cordis hauritur. Nam qui sic redemptoris sui sangumē sumit, vt imitari passionem eius necdum velit, in vno poste sanguinem posuit. All whiche thinges do bring furth to vs great edificacion, yf they shall be with a misticall interpretacion discussed. What the bloode of the lābe ys, ye haue not onelie by hearing, but by drinking learned. Whiche blood ys put vpon bothe the postes, when not onelie with the mouthe of the bodie, but also with the mouthe of the heart yt ys receaued. For he that doth so receaue the bloode of his redemer, that he wolde not yet folowe his passion, he hath put the bloode but vpon one poste. Thus moche saincte Gregorie.
As in this saing he hath made mencion of the bloode of Chryst, So proceadinge vpon the same matter in the same homelie, he speaketh of the Chrystes bodie and blood receiued with mouth of bodie and soule both. eating of the olde Paschall Lambe, and of the eating of Chrystes bodie our true Paschall lambe. In nocte quippe (inquit) agnum comedimus, quia in sacramento C modò Dominicum corpus accipimus, quando adhucinuicem nostras conscientias non videmus. In the night (saieth he) do we eate the lambe, forsomoche as we do nowe receaue our lordes bodie in the Sacrament, when as yet we doe not see one an others conscience:
In this his sainge, ys not onelie perceaued the applicacion of the figuratiue Paschall Lambe, to the verie true Paschall Lambe, but to the full agreement with other holie Fathers before alleaged, he doth most plainlie testifie the reall presence, bothe by his woordes, terming yt the bloode of our Redemer and the bodie of our lorde, and also by the maner of the receauinge of yt. In the whiche note that he teacheth that the bodie and bloode of Chryst ys receaued by two distincted and diuerse maners of receauinge. One maner ys with the mouthe of the bodie, whiche argueth the reall presence: The other maner ys with the mouthe of the hearte, and that ys the spirituall maner of receauing.
So that the learned men in Chrystes faithe, doo teache the good Chrystian man to receaue Chrystes bodie both corporallie, and spirituallie. But the maliciouse learned man against Chrystes faith, teacheth that the good Chrystian D man receaueth Chryste but onelie spirituallie, and so robbeth him of the other, the contrarie of the whiche Doctrine ye see here auouched by [Page]sainct Gregorie as yt was also by other before alleaged, with whom he well E agreeth,
To this sainct Gregorie shall be yoined Damascen one of the other side of the Parliament house of Chryst, that ys, of the greke church, and of the lowe house, but one of the first and cheif in that place, as ys before saied, a man so excellentlie will seen in the statutes of Chrystes Parliament house, that ys to saie in the knowledge of the receaued trueth of Chrystes faithe, that he did write foure bookes of the same both learnedlie and godlie, and in the fourthe booke of his workes, emong other explicacions of matters of faith, he declareth also the faithe of the Churche in this matter of the Sacrament at large, wher as touching the same matter he saieth thus:
Natiuitas nobis per spiritum donata est, per sanctum dico baptismum. Cibus verò ipse Li. 4. de orthod. sid. c. 14. panis vitae Dominus noster Iesus Christus, qui de coelo descendit. Nam suscepturus voluntariam pro nobis mortem, in nocte qua seipsum obtulit, testamentum nouum disposuit sanctis Discipulis & Apostolis, & per ipsos omnibus alijs in ipsum credentibus. In coenaculo sanctae & gloriosae Sion antiquum Pascha cum Discipulis manducans, et implens instrumē tum antiquum, lauit pedes Discipulorum, signum sancti baptismatis praebens. Deinde frangens F panem dedit illis dicens: Accipite, & comedite, Hoc est corpus meum, quod pro vobis tradetur in remissionem peccatorum. Similiter accipiens calicem ex vino & aqua, tradidit illis dicens: Bibite ex eo omnes, hic est sanguis meus noui testamenti, qui pro vobis effunditur in remissionem peccatorum. Hoc facite in meam cōmemorationem. Quotiescunque enim manducabitis panem hunc, & calicem bibetis, mortem filij hominis annunciatis, & resurrectionem eius cōfitemini donec veniat. Si igitur verbum dei viuens est & efficax, & omnia quaecunque voluit Deus, fecit: Si dixit, Fiat lux, & facta est lux: Fiat firmamentum, & factum est: Si verbo Dei coeli firmati sunt, & spiritu oris eius omnis virtus eorum: Si coelum, terra, aqua, ignis, & aer, & omnis ornatus eorum verbo Dei perfecta sunt, & homo ipse vbique diuulgatum animal: Si volens ipse Deus Verbum, factus est homo, &c. Non potest panem suum ipsius corpus facere, & vinum cum aqua sanguinem? Dixit in principio Deus: Producat terra herbam virentem, & vsque nunc pluuia facta producit germina, diuino coädiuta & vigorata praecepto. Dixit Deus: Hoc est corpus meum, & hic est sanguis meus, & hoc facite in meam commemorationē, & omnipotentieius praecepto donec veniat, efficitur.
A newe birth ys geuen to vs, by the Spirit and the water, I saie, by holie G Baptisme, but the meat ys the verie bread of life our lorde Iesus Christ, who descended from heauen. For willing to take for vs a willing death, in the night, in the whiche he offred vppe him self, he disposed a newe testamēt to his holie Disciples and Apostles, and by them to all other beleuing in him. In the parlour Chrystes cuppe cōteined wine ād Water. therfore of holie gloriouse Sion, eating the olde Passeouer with his disciples, and fulfilling the olde lawe, he washed the feet of his disciples, geuing a sign of holie Baptisme. Afterwarde breaking bread he gaue yt to thē saing: Take eate, This ys my bodie, whiche shall be deliuered for yowe in the remission of sinnes. Likewise taking the cuppe of wine and water, he deliuered yt vnto them saing: Drinke ye all of this. This ys my bloode of the newe Testament, whiche shall be shedde for yowe in the remission of Sinnes, This do ye in my remembrāce. For as often times as ye shall eate this bread, ād drinke this cuppe, ye shew furth the death of the Sōne of mā, ād acknowledge his resurrectiō vntill he come. Yf then the woorde of God be liuing, ād mightie in operaciō, and al thinges, whatsoeuer he hath willed he hath doē, Yf he saied, The light be made, and the light was made: The firmament be H made, and yt was made: Yf by the woorde of God the heauens were made, and all the power of them, with the breath of his mouthe: Yf heauen, earth, [Page 47]water, fire and the Ayer, and al the furniture of them, by the woorde of God A were made perfect, and man himself, being euery where a knowen liuing creature: Yf God the Sonne himself being willing was made man, &c. Can not he make breade his owne bodie? and wine and water his bloode? God saied at the beginning: Let the earth bring furth green herbe, And vntill this daie, being holpen and made strong with Gods commaundement, the rain comming, Effect of Chrystes woordes of consecraciō yt bringeth furth fruicts. God saied: This ys my bodie, and this ys my blood and this do ye in the remembrance of me: And by hys allmightie commaundement yt ys so made and brought to effecte vntill he come. Thus farre Damascen.
Whose saing ys long, but as pithie and weightie as yt ys long. In the which he hath not onelie declared hys faith, but the faith of Chryst receaued in his Churche, which ys the wholl matter, and onelie argument of hys worke, as the title of the same doth purporte.
And to the matter, which we haue in hande, he geueth woorthie testimonie, declaring the accomplishment of the olde lawe, in eating the olde Paschall Lambe, and the beginning of the newe testament, with the newe Paschall B Lambe. Which Paschall Lambe, how yt was, and what yt was, and how yt ys wrought ād made, he leaueth yt not vndeclared. He tooke bread (saieth he, mening Chryst) and brake yt, and gaue yt to his disciples saing: Take, eate, This ys my bodie.
And that he might leaue no place to the enemies to misconstrue him, and to wrest him to their pourpose, he addeth the probacion of yt by the powre of God in other of hys workes, which ys also a most plain declaracion of hys faith, That as God by his woorde made heauen, and earth and all thinges in Chryst turned the bread into his bodie, and the wyne and water into his blood. them conteined: So by his woorde saing: Thys ys my bodie, yt ys euen so made in dede, as yt ys saied. For can not he (saieth Damascen) make the bread his bodie? and the wine and water his bloode? Which woordes being so plain nede no in terpretaciō. For he affirmeth that God by hys woord, and allmightie powre dothe make the bread his bodie, and the wine and water his bloode.
And wher the Aduersarie hath against this, saied: that he doubteth not of the power of God, but that he ys able to do yt, yf he will, or yf yt be his pleasure: C but we finde not (saieth he) in the scripture that his pleasure ys, that the preist pronouncing the woordes, shoulde by gods power consecrate the bodie of Chryste. This ys their ignoraunt scruple. But if they had, leuing all arrogancie, mekelie consulted with thys Damascē, they shoulde haue fownd yt in the scripture, that Gods pleasure ys, that the bodie of Chryste shoulde be consecrated by the poower of God, and by the preist as his mynister. For God) saieth Damascen) Chryst commaunded his bodie to be cōsecrated. saied at the beginning: Let the earth bring furth grene herbe, and vntill this time the earth being holpen with Godes commaundement doth bringe furth fruict. God saied: This ys my bodie, this ys my bloode, this doe ye in remembrance of me, And by his allmightie commaundement, yt ys so made.
Note then, that when Chryst by his powre had of bread made his bodie, for he saied yt was his bodie, and his saing ys making, Then he gaue commaundement to his mynistres saing: Hoc facite. This doo ye, by the whiche allmightie commaundement (saieth Damascen) yt ys doen.
But nowe when the scripture ys produced and laied before their face, hauing D no good will to accept the trueth, they procead to questioning, and aske: howe How the question of the faithlesse aūswered proue ye that Chryst by these woordes, commaunded the consecracion.
THE ONE AND TWENTETH CHAPITER CONcludeth E this matter of the figure of the paschall lambe by Haymo and Cabasila.
THe nombre ys great, that might be called oute of this lower house, whiche for that yt wolde make thys rude worke to growe into to great a volume, I will content my self and staie, after I haue brought furth one coople mo, and so leaue this figure.
The first of theise shall be Haymo, for that he ys the elder, being aboute the yeare of Chryst 734. and so aboue eight hundreth yeares agon, before the time of Berengarius, who was the first open and notable Aduersaire of this Sacrament, that laboured to take awaie the reall presence of Chryste. Therfor this learned Father maie wel be cōsulted with all, who being before this controuersie was moued, ys to be thought to speake vpprightlie, ād not parciallie. In his exposition therfore vpon S. Matthew, he saieth thus: Coenantibus Haymo in 26. Matt. autem eis, accepit Iesus panem, &c. Expletis solemnijs veteris Paschae, transit Dominus ad F sacramenta noui Paschae demonstranda. Postquam coenauit, dedit eis panem et vinum, in mysterio videlicet corporis et sanguinis sui. Quia enim panis cor hominis confirmat, vinum auget sanguinem in homine, meritò idem panis in carnem Domini mutatur, et idem vinum in sanguinem Domini transfertur, non per figuram, neque per vmbram, sed per veritatem. Credimus enim quia in veritate caro est Christi, similiter et sanguis. As they were eating at Supper, Iesus tooke bread, &c. When the Solemnities of the olde Passouer Bread and wine chaū ged into the bodie and blood of Chryst, not in figure, but in trueth. were fullfilled, our Lorde goeth to shewe furthe the Sacrament of the newe Passouer. After he hadde Supped he gaue them bread and wine, in mysterie of his bodie and bloode. For bicause bread doth strenghten the hearte of man, and wine encreaseth the bloode in man, the same bread ys woorthilie chaunged into the flesh of our Lorde, and that same wine transferred into the bloode of our Lorde, not by figure, nor by shaddowe, but by the verie trueth. For we beleue that in trueth yt ys the flesh of Cbryst, and likewise his bloode. Thus farre Haymo.
The two principall pointes here enquired, this holie Father hath agreablie bothe to the elders of the higher house, and also to them of the lower house, declared. First, hys comparing of the olde Passeouer to the newe G ys easie to be perceaued. And then, what the newe Passeouer ys, he doth most plainlie manifest. Yf he had left the matter of the newe Passeouer, when he had said: He deliuered bread and wine in mysterie of hys bodye and bloode, then the Aduersaries wolde haue vsed their accustomed violence to haue drawen him by force to be a wittnesse of their syde. I saie by force, bicause this Authour not mening as they do, as after yt shall appeare, yet they wolde with great boast haue saied that he had mened as they doo. Heretiques how they alleage the Fathers.
Which maner of doinge (Reader) ys their cōmō practise. For wher they in their workes alleage the holie Fathers, they alleadge thē in doubtful places, wher they vse the common termes of Sacrament, mysterie, and soch other, whiche, when controuersie and contencion ys raised by wicked men, maie Sacramētaries can not bring one Father teaching the Sacrament to be only a figure. be drawen to either parte, Albeit the Authours intended and ment, but the onelie one true waie, of Chrystes trueth and faith, as this Authour nowe alleaged did. H
But, gentle reader, yf thow perusest their bokes, and findest that they bring anie allowed Authour saing by expresse woordes, and plain sentence, that the Sacrament ys but a figure or a sign, or by plain deniall shall saie that [Page 49]Chrystes bodie ys not in the Sacrament reallie or in verie dede, we shall A yelde and geue them the victorie, for certen I am that they can not.
But on our syde, that ys on the parte of the catholique faithe of Chrystes Churche, ye shall heare a nombre that by expresse woordes shall affirme the verie presence of Chrystes bodie, of whiche nōbre ye haue allreadie heardsome, And by like expresse woordes shall denie that yt ys but a figure, as this Authour dothe. The contrarie wher of this Proclamer, and other Sacramentaries are not ashamed to teache, although they be (if ther were anie shame in them) ouercharged with nōbre of wittnesses, so that they maie be ashamed of theyr heresie.
Thys Authour (God be praysed) when he had saied, that Chryst gaue hys Apostles bread and wyne in mysterie of hys bodie and bloode: leest thys mysterie shoulde be made a mysterie of nothing (as the Sacramentaries make yt) he declareth yt to be a mysterie of somwhat. And saieth that the bread and wyne be chaunged into the bodie and blode of our lorde. And yet that none of the common hereticall gloses shoulde take place, he saieth Bread and wine chaunged not in figure but in trueth. B further by plain exclusion, that they be chaunged in to Christes flesh and bloode neither by figure, ner by shaddowe but by verie trueth.
Wolde to God that they that be yet deteined in this naughtie heresie, wolde well note, weigh, and remembre this sainge, and looke whether they haue anie soche plain, manifest, and expresse sentence, of anie Authour Autenticall to maintein their heresie, as this ys for the trueth.
And yet to knitte vppe the matter that this ys no singular opinion, or whispered inuention, but a sure and vndoubted faith commonlie, and generallie receaued, he concludeth, not in his owne person, but in the person of the beleuing Churche, and saieth: Credimus, &c. We beleue that yt ys in trueth and in verie dede the flesh of Chryst, and likewise his bloode.
As this Authour hath testified not onelie his owne faithe but the faith of the Churche: So wolde I that the Aduersarie shoulde regarde not hys Hereti (que)s haue no faith but opinions. priuate opinion (whiche he calleth a faith, and ys none in dede) But the faith of the Churche, whiche ys a sure faith in dede, builded vpon a sure rocke. C
Nowe to make vppe the coople we pourposed here to induce, we will heare this Authours iocke felow in faith, Cabasila, one of the same lower house of Parliament, but of the other side therof, that ys, of the greke churche, a man of singular learninge. Who expowndinge the Masse of the Grekes vsed in their churches, declareth why Chryste willed his memorie to be had, and the Masse to be doen in remembrance of him. Thus he saieth: Huius autem conseruundae memoriae homines multas rationes excogitarunt, sepulchra, Nicolaus. Cabasila. ca. 9. statuas, columnas, diesfestos & celebres, certamina, quorum omnium vnum est institutum, non sinere vt viri praeclari & praestanti virtute obliuioni mandentur. Tale est etiam quod dicit Seruator: Alij quidem alia obliuionis quaerunt remedia, vt recordentur eorum, qui ipsos beneficio affecerunt, vos autem in meam recordationem hoc facite. Et quemadmodum ciuitates, fortium virorum, per quos victoriam assecuti sunt, vel qui eis salutem attulerunt, aut res eorum rectè gesserunt, columnis inscribunt: ita etiam in ijs donis nos mortem Domini asscribimus, in qua vniuersa sita fuit aduersus malignum victoria Et per statuas quidem ciuitates solùm habent figuram corporis benefactorum: Nos autem D ab hac oblatione non habenius figuram corporis, sed ipsum corpus eius, qui se gessit fortissimè. Hoc ipsum etiam antiquis constituit, vt in figura facerent id, quod nunc est in rerum veritate. Id enim erat Bascha, & agni occisio, quae memoriam reuocat [Page] caedis illius ouis & sanguinis, qui seruauit Hebraeis in Aegypto primogenita. E
To conserue this memorie, men haue deuised manie waies or means, as Tumbes, ymages, pillers, feastfull and Solemne daies, exercises, of all whiche ther ys one pourpose, not to suffer, that noble men of excellent vertue shoulde be forgotten. Soche maner of thing yt ys, that our Sauioure saieth: Some seke other remedies against obliuion, that they maie remembre them, that haue doen them good: But in the remembrance of me, this doo ye. And as cities do write in pillers the noble actes of mightie men, by whom they haue gotten victorie, or that haue saued them, or haue doen their affaires or businesse wel: Euē so also do we in these giftes imprinte the death of our Lord, in the which was all the victorie against the wicked one had or gotten. Now the cities haue by their images but the onelie figure of the bodie of their benefactours: but we in this oblacion haue not the figure of the bodie, but the bodie yt self of We haue the verie bodie in the Sacramēt, not the figure. him, euen that same that ys nowe in veritie of thing. For that was the Passeouer, and the killing of the lambe which dothe call again the memorie of that shepe and bloode, whiche saued the first born of the Hebrues. Hither to Cabasila.
Of whom as we haue learned the faith of the greke churche, as yt was in F the time of the auncient Fathers, Chrysostom, Cyrill, Isychius, Damascen, Euthymius, and soche other, as touching the presence of Chrystes blessed bodie in the Sacrament: Euen so do we learn of him the same faith, and none other newlie inuented, but euen the same continued, euer approued vnto his time in all the greke churche.
This authour allthough minding to sett furth a cause why the memoriall Monumentes and memories of holie, ād woorthie men defaced. of Chrystes death shoulde be reteined and kept emong vs, by the bringing in examples of our elders, whiche by diuerse means cōtinued the memorie of noble, vertueouse, or other wourthie men, he doth therin geue good occasion to rebuke the insolencie of manie of this our time, which defacing howses, spoiling churches, ouerthrowing monumentes, disparsing the bones ād reliques of holie sainctes, and soche other a great sorte like, do most earnestlie labour to extinguish and clean put oute of all memorie the noble actes, the holie dedes, the godly liues of many vertueouse, and wourthie men, which to Gods honoure, to their praise, and to owre exāple of vertue, shoulde and ought to haue remained: Yet minding not to take euery soche occasiō, I will G leaue yt, and folowe my matter here principallie entended.
As heretofore I haue doen: So also wil I nowe both declare that the Paschall Lambe was a figure of Chryst, and also that the veritie or verie thing by that lambe figured, ys the bodie of Chryst reallie and substanciallie in the Sacrament.
As for the first, this Authour saieth, that God appoincted with the olde Olde lawe had the figure: the newe lawe hath the thing in trueth. fathers, that they shoulde haue a figure of Chryst. And that (saieth he) was the Passeouer, and the killing of the lambe. In which his sainge he nothing dissenteth, but moche and whollie agreeth as well with the grekes, as the latines before alleaged, and declared.
As for the seconde parte, that yt ys a figure of Chryste reallie in the Sacrament, this Authour also very plainlie teacheth. Marke therfore wel his woordes, thus he saieth: Hoc ipsum & antiquis constituit vt in figura facerent id, quod nunc est in rerum veritate. The same thing God appoincted the olde Fathers to doo in a figure, which thing ys nowe in trueth or verie dede.
Note I praie yow that he appointeth the figure of Chryst to the Fathers H of the lawe of Moyses, to vs that be nowe in the lawe of Chryst, he appointeth not the figure, but the thing yt self, euen verie Chrystes bodie.
[Page 50]But the serpent ys a wilie beast, and sekinge some litle holle or crannie A to slippe through, and to slide awaie from this sentence, that presseth him so sore, will, to delude the Simple, graunt that we, whiche be in the lawe of Chryst, haue verilie Chryst, euen that same that was born of the virgen Mary, that was curcified, that rose from death to life, that ascended into heauen.
These be gaie gloriouse woordes. But take heade, reader, ther ys a snake Crāmer his gloriouse woordes, to cloake euell meening. lib. 4. Iohn frith his heresie. vnder these fair flowres. Looke diligentlie vpon them, and aske him howe we haue him, that was born of the virgen &c. And thowe shalt see him by and by betraie him self, and runne to his olde and common shift, and saie that he ys ther sacramentallie. Which maner of being or presence (as Iohn Frith our contrie man, and many other masters of that heresie do teache) ys as moche as ys the presence of the wine in the Iuie garlande at the tauern doore, or the loue of the husbande in the ringe, whiche he geueth to his wife: Whiche maner of presence ys next doore to nothing, for all their gloriouse woordes. B
Yf ye porcead, and vrge him, saing, that after this sorte he was in all the figures of the lawe, that were figures of him: But this Authour appointing that maner of presence to the lawe: saieth, that his presence with vs ys in verie dede. whiche ys a maner of presence other, and more then they vnder the lawe had.
Nowe he must to his cheifest refuge, and saie that we haue him spirituallie. heretiquet refuges in reasoning. Here to mete with him again, ye maie saie, and that trulie as before ys saied, and proued in the xix capiter of this booke, that so the Iewes in the lawe receaued him and had him spirituallie in their Paschall lambe, so that by this maner of presence, ther ys no perrogatiue, nor difference, of our Sacrament and the presence of Chryst ther in aboue theirs, nor from theirs. The contrarie wherof all chatholique Fathers dooteache.
Nowe ys he commed to his last refuge, that ys that the Iewes receaued him spirituallie, as yet to come, but we receaue him spirituallie as allready comed.
Yf this be all, what neadeth this difference of speache, that this Authour vseth, saing: God appointed the Fathers of the lawe to do that thing in a figure, C that we do nowe in verie dede? Ys to doe a thinge in figure, and to doe a thing in dede all one maner of doinge? A verie babe will not graunt that.
Thus I suppose, yt ys easie to be perceaued, that the Aduersaries faith ys soche, that when he hath spoken the best of yt, yt will not, nor can ioin with the faith of the learned men of Chrystes Parliament house: But ys as farre distant from them and their faith, as falshood from trueth. Wherof ye shall haue yet better experience, and further prooff by an other parte of this Authours sentence, when yt ys noted to yowe, and the aduersaries doctrine conferred with yt.
That other parte ys this: Citties (saieth he) by the ymages of soche as haue doen them good, haue onelie but their figures: we haue by this oblacion, not the figure of Christes bodie, but the bodie yt self, whiche most stoutlie handled yt self.
Note well this conference: The citties had but the figures of soche wourthie D men, as had noblie doen for them: We haue, not the figure of Christ but the bodie yt self whiche wrought vs the great benefitt of our Redemption.
Remembre, I praie yowe, what the latin Authour before alleadged saied, [Page]that this man being of the greke churche, and conferred with him, yt maie E Not the figure, but verie bodie of Christ ys yn the Sacrament. appear what agreement in doctrine and faithe in this matter, ther ys yn both the churches.
The latin Authour saied thus: The bread ys chaunged into the flesh of our Lorde, and the wine into his bloode not by a figure, or in a shaddowe, but in verie dede: This greke Authour saieth, that we haue not the figure of Christ, but his verie bodie, euen that whiche so mightilie fought for vs.
See ye not a consonant agreement betwen these two? do thiey not both teache the verie presence of Christes bodie in the Sacramēt? and ther with by a plain negatiue denie the figure? Maie not our Proclamer, our newe Goliath well see, and trulie saie, that here be two plain sentences against him? Let them be conferred, and yt will planlie appeare.
These Authours saie that the Sacrament conteineth not a figure onelie: Doctrine of the Sacramētaries conferred with the Fathers. The Aduersarie saieth, that yt hath no more but a figure. These saie that the Sacrament conteineth the very bodie of Christe: The Aduersarie saieth that yt ys Iewesh so to thinke and that they be grosse Capharnaites, that saie that the bodie of Christ ys substanciallie in the Sacrament. F
In this conference ye maie see the stowte repugnance of the Aduersarie against catholique writers. In the same ye see the said writers by expresse woordes denie the doctrine of the Aduersarie, that wher he saieth, yt ys a figure, they saie, yt ys not a figure.
And here will I yoin an yssue withe the Proclamer that yf he cā bring any Issue ioined with the Proclamer touching the presēce. Scripture, anie catholique Councell, or anie one approued doctour, that by expresse and plain woordes doth denie the reall presēce of Chryste in the Sacrament, as these writers doo denie his figure, or figuratiue presence, then will I geue ouer, and subscribe to him.
But wher he vntrulie hath saied, that he was sure that we coulde bring furthe no one approued Authour to testifie the reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament: I will saie trulie, that I am sure that neither he, nor all the Aduersaries can bring anie one, teaching by expresse woordes the contrarie.
Obiection. Yf percase anie man will obiecte here to me, that though these men denie the figure, and teache that Chrystes verie bodie ys present in the Sacramēt: G yet they saie not so moche as your Aduersarie requireth, that his bodie ys substanciallie and reallie present.
Answer. The aunswer to this ys easie, whiche the Aduersarie will graunte, that yf the bodie of Chryst be in the Sacrament, not by a figure, but in verie dede, then yt must nedes be ther reallie and substāciallie. For the Aduersarie hathe Sacramentaries make two maner of presences of Chryst. two maner of beinges of Chryst, the one ys in the Sacrament, wher he saieth Chryste ys as in a sign, token, or figure, but not in veritie. The other maner of being ys not in the Sacramēt, but in the receauer of yt, in whom he saieth Chryst ys spirituallie.
As for this seconde maner of being euerie good Chrystian will graunte, that euerie wourthie receauer of the Sacrament, receaueth Chryste spirituallie, but not onelie spirituallie, as the Aduersarie teacheth, but he also receaueth Chrystes verie real ād substācial bodie. So that in this secōd maner, he dissenteth in part from the catholike faith: But in the first maner of beinge he dissenteth whollie. for ther he denieth Chrystes bodie to be verilie H in the Sacrament, which the catholique faith doth affirme and teache.
Nowe (gentle reader) thowe hauest hearde, this figure of the Paschall Lambe, both by great auncient Authours that were aboue a thousand yeyears [Page 51]agon, or within the compasse of sixe hundreth years after Chryst, A and also by Authours that were within the compasse of these nine hundreth years, applied to the thing figured. Whiche thing figured, by one consent, and by one mouth, as yt were, and by consonante and vniforme testimonie, they haue testified and taught, not onelie to be Chrystes bodie vpon the crosse, for that in that parte yt aunswereth the death and bloode sheding of the lambe: but also the bodie of Chryst being in the Sacrament, not as in a shaddowe, signe, or token, but verilie, substanciallie and reallie, and so not spirituallie onelie eaten and receaued, But of all good christians, both spirituallie with the mouth of the soule, and also reallie with the mouthe of the bodie, taken, eaten, and reccaued, herin also aunsweringe the figure, that as the lambe was eaten in the remembrance of the sauing of the first born, and of their deliuerance from the tirannie of Pharao, and of their passing oute of Aegipte by the mightie hand of God: So the true faithfull of Chryst shoulde eate the verie Paschall lambe of the newe Testament, whiche ys the verie bodie of that immaculate Lambe our Sauiour Iesus B Chryst reallie and substanciallie in the Sacrament, and so receaue yt in the remembrance of our deliueraunce from our cruell Pharao the Deuell, and from the miserable seruitude of Aegipt, whiche ys sinne. Whiche benefittes as they haue happened to vs by the death of that blessed Lambe, aught by the eating of him in the Sacramēt to be remēbred. And thus moche for the figure of the Paschall Lambe.
THE TWO AND TWENTETH CHAPITER BEginneth the applicacion of the shewe bread to the Sacrament, as of the figure to the veritie by sainct Hierom, and Damascen.
NOwe ther remaineth three other figures to be treacted of, which be Manna, the water flowing oute of the Rocke, and the shewe bread. But for somoche as sainct Paule maketh mencion of two of them, that ys of Manna, and of the water, and I wolde not gladlie grieue the reader with reading of one matter twice, C I shall disfer theise two, vntill we come to treacte of the sainges of sainct Paule, whiche shall be in the third booke.
Wherfore nowe I will passe them ouer, and treacte here of the figure of the shewe bread. Of this shewe bread we first read thus: Thowe shalt sett vpon the table shewe breade before me allwaie. These woordes Allmightie God spake vnto Moyses, after he had tolde him the maner and Exod. 25. fashion of the table, howe yt shoulde be made and granished, vpon the which table this shewe breades shoulde allway be sett.
But of the making of the breads, and the ordre of them we reade in Leuit. 24. Leuiticus thus: And thowe shalt take fine flowre, and bake twelue wassells therof, two tenth deals shall be in one wassell. And thowe shalt sett them in two rowes, that they maie be bread of remembrance, and an offring vnto thy Lord God euery Sabboth. He shall put them in rowes before thy Load God euermore. Of the children of Israël shall they be offred for an euerlasting couenante. And they shall be Aarons and his Sonnes, whiche shall eate them in the holie place. For they are most holie vnto him, of the offringes of the Lorde by a perpetuall statute. D
In the whiche saing of God, ye first perceaue the place of theise breades, whiche ys vpon the table in the tabernacle. Ye vnderstande also [Page]the continuance of them, whiche ys that they must be before the Lorde E allwaie.
Further, this bread was made of fine flowre, and yt was the bread of remembrance, and an offring vnto the Lord. Yt was no common bread, but an holie bread, wherof the preistes onelie might eate, and no defiled person.
Wherfore when Dauid and his men were verie hungrie, and came to Abimelech the preist, and desired him to geue them some bread, he 2. Reg. 21. aunswered him, that he hadd no common bread vnder his hand, but hallowed bread, neuerthelesse he considering their necessitie, asked Dauid if the men had kept them selues from vnclaen thinges especiallie from womē: And when Dauid had aunswered that they werie clean from womē aboute three daies, the preist gaue them of the bread.
Nowe all the Ceremonialls of the lawe of Moyses, were figures of Chryst, and his Churche, as by sainct Augustine before ys declared. And for so moche as the Shewe bread was a sollemne offring in the olde lawe: Yt must nedes be a figure of some thing in the newe lawe. For no iotte nor F title of the olde lawe shall escape (saieth Chryst) vntill yt be fullfilled in the newe lawe
Ther ys therfor something in the newe lawe, that aunswereth and fulfilleth this figure of the olde lawe. And that ys vndoubtedlie, that most blessed Shew bread a figure of the Sacrament. and heauenlie bread of life, the verie bodie of our Sauiour Christ in the Sacrament, vnder the forme of bread. Whiche blessed bread aunswereth the figure the Shewe bread verie aptelie and iustilie, as by comparison in discourse and applicacion of them we shall perceaue.
The Shewe bread was placed vpon the table in the tabernacle: This bread ys placed on the Altar in the Churche. That bread neuer failed, Shew bread applied to the Sacrament. but was allwaies reserued: This bread allwaies remaineth and ys reserued. That bread was a bread of remembrance: This bread ys a bread of remembrance, bothe of Chrystes death, and of the great benefett pourchased by the same death. That bread was an offringe to God:
This bread ys a most holie oblacion and sacrifice to God. That bread G might no defiled person eate: This bread maie no defiled sinner eate. For Quicunque manducauerit panem Domini, & biberit calicem indignè, reus erit corporis, & sanguinis Domini, &c. he that eateth the breade of our Lorde, and drinketh of his cuppe vnwourthilie, shalbe giltie of the bodie of our Lorde. 1. Cor. 11. Therfor let a man examin himself, and so let him eate of that bread, and drinke of that cuppe saieth sainct Paule.
Thus ye see howe well the thing figured aunswereth the figure. And albeit that no mā can bring anie other thing in the newe testamēt, that ys figured by the Shewe bread, but our heauēlie bread before saied: Yet, for that I will not chalēge to me any soche credite or Authoritie, that by cause I saie yt ys so, therfor yt ys so (as manie of our Pheudochrystians doe) I shall repair to the holie elders of Chrystes parliament house, and teache by them what was the enacted and receaued trueth in his matter.
And first, I will heare what sainct Hierom saieth: Siautem Laicis imperatur, vt propter orationem abstineant se ab vxorum coitu, quid de Episcopo sentiendum Hieron. ca. [...]. ad Titū. est, qui quotidie pro suis populiue peccatis, illibatas oblaturus est victimas? H Relegamus Regum libros, & inueniemus sacerdotem Abimelech de panibus propositionis noluisse dare Dauid, & pueris suis, nisi interrogaret vtrum mundi [Page 52] essent pueri à muliere, non vtique aliena, sed coniuge. Et nisi audisset eos ab heri A & nudiustertiùs vacasse ab opere coniugali, nequaquam panes, quos prius negauerat concessisset. Tantum interest inter propositionis panes, & corpus Christi, quantum inter, vmbram & corpora, inter imaginem, & veritatem, inter exemplaria futurorum, & ea ipsa, quae per exemplaria praefigurabantur. Quomodò itaque mansuetudo, patientia, sobrietas, moderatio, abstinentia lucri, hospitalitas quoque & benignitas praecipuè esse debent in Episcopo, & inter cunctos laicos eminentia: sic & castitas propria, & (vt ita dicam) pudicitia sacerdotalis, vt non solùm se ab immundo opere abstineat, sed etiam à iactu oculi, & cogitationis errore mens Christi corpus confectura sit libera.
Yf the laye men (saieth sainct Hierom be cōmanded that for praier they Laie men cōmaūded for praier times to abstein from their wieues. abstein frō the cōpanieng with their wiues, what ys to be thought of the Bishoppe, whiche dailie for his owne sinnes, and the peoples, shall offer vnto God vndefiled sacrifices? Let vs reade the bookes of the kīges and we shall finde that Abimelech the preist wolde not geue to Dauid and his seruātes the shewe breade, besore he asked, wether the seruātes were cleā, not frō a straunge womā, but frō their viues. And except he had heard, that frō yesteraie, and B the daie before they had absteined from the worke of matrimonie, he had not graunted them the bread, whiche before he had denied. Ther ys as great Difference betwixt the Shew bread and the bodie of Chryst. difference betwene the Shewe bread, and the bodie of Christe, as ys betwene the Shaddow and the bodies, betwene the ymage and the trueth: betwene the exemplars of the thinges to come, and the thinges themselues, that were perfigurated by the exemplars. Therfor as mekenesse, pacience, sobrietie, moderacion, abstinence frō lucre, hospitalitie also and benignitie shoulde be chieflie in a Bishoppe, and emōg all laie men a surmoūting eminēcie: So also a propre or peculiar chaistitie, Chastitie required in a preist. and (as I might saie) a preistlie shamefestnes, that not onelie he shoulde whith holde himself frō the vnclean worke, but also that the minde whiche shall consecrate the bodie of Christe maie from the casting of the eie, and from wandring of thought be free. Hither to saincte Hierom.
In whiche woordes cōcerning the thing which ys nowe principallie sought, wher as he saieth, ther ys as great differēce betwene the Shew bread and the bodie of Christ, as betwē the shaddow ād the bodies, betwen the ymage and the trueth, What ells dothe he geue vs to vnderstāde, but that the Shew C bread ys the figure, ād the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament the thing figured. Whiche thing figured (yf yt were also but a figure, as of late the people be taught) howe coulde ther be so great differēce betwne a figure, and a figure, as betwene the shaddowe and the bodie? betwene the ymage and the trueth?
Wherfore contrarie wise let euerie man perceaue, that (as this holie learned mā in the statutes of Chrystes enacted faithe, doth teache) as the Shewe bread was the shaddowe, So ys the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament a verie bodie, and as the Shewe breade was the ymage: So ys the thing represented the verie tueth.
Obiection But peraduēture some captiouse false Chrystā will saie: I adde more then my Authour speaketh of, and wrest him to my pourpose. For wher this Authour saieth, that ther ys as moche difference betwene the shewe bread, and the bodie of Chryst, I adde and saie: the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament Whiche sainct Hierom speaketh not.
Answer. I adde nothing to the Authours mening. For although he saieth the bodie of Chryst absolutelie withoute anie addicion of the maner of the D bodie here or ther, in plain vision or in mysterie (whiche maner whatsoeuer yt be, the substance ys all one) yet he meneth of the bodie of Chryst in mysterie, or in Sacrament. For by the example of the puripuritie [Page]of life, that was required to the eating of the Shewe breade in the E olde lawe, he moueth the Bishopps of the newe lawe to soche puritie and cleannesse of life, as to that lawe ys meet to be had.
And forsomoche as the office of a Bishoppe aboute the Sacrament, Preistes must consecrate, offre, ād receaue standeth in thre pointes, that ys, yn consecracion, oblacion, and reauing, he frameth an exhortaciō to this pourpose thus, that seing they in the olde lawe which shoulde eate of the Shew breade, must haue soche puritie, that they might not for a time knowe their one, vieues, moche more they that cōsecrate, offer, and receaue the bodie of Cryste, whiche as farre excelleth the Shew bread, as the bodie dothe he shaddowe, must excell them of the olde lawe in puritie and cleannesse of life. Nowe then, when saincte Hierom speaketh of the bodie of Chryste that ys cōsecrated by the Bishoppe, and so offred in sacrifice and receaued, dothe he not meen of the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament? And when he speaketh of the bodie consecrated, dothe he not meen the verie bodie of Chryst, reallie in the Sacrament, as the holie Churche doth teache and beleue? F
In this sentence also sainct Hierom doth not onelie impugne the heresie of the Sacramētaries, in that he teacheth the veritie of Chrystes bodie in the Wanton lustes of Bishoppes and preistes reproued. Sacrament: but he also reproueth the fleshlie wanttōnesse of our Bishoppes and preistes in these daies, who against all lawe and ordre being preistes take wieues (as they terme thē) and vnder the countenāce of pretensed matrimonie continewe their vnchaist, and viciouse life, who shoulde excell all the people in puritie and cleannesse of life, to thintent they might cōsecrate the bodie of Chryste, and dailie offer pure sacrifice to God for thē selues and for Cōsecraciō and sacrifice put awai for to kepe women. the people, as sainct Hierō saieth they should. But bicause these high fūctiōs, and the keping of womē cā notioin together, raither thē they will put awaie ther womē, they haue deuised to putte awaie the cōsecracion of the bodie of Chryst, and the sacrifice also whiche they shoulde offer. Of whiche matter, for that yt ys impertinente to my pourpose, I will not speake, but ouerpasse yt, and not medle withall.
Nowe haue ye here heard one wittnesse of the one side of the higher house of Parliament, reporting the trueth of this matter: We will heare one of the G other side and of the lower house to reporte the same trueth, who shall be Damascen. Thus he saieth: Hunc panem, panes figurabant propositionis. This Li. 4. c. 14. de orthodox. sid. bread (mening the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament) did the Shew bread figure. That he speake of the bodie of Chryst, the learned reader shall sooen perceaue, if he will peruse this place in Damascen, wher he shall finde, that after he moste plainly had affirmed the verie reall presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacramēt, by the woordes of our Sauiour Chryst in the vj. of Iohn, and in the other Euangelistes: he cometh to exhortacion for the wourthie receauing of the same, saing thus: Proinde cum omni timore, & conscientia pura, & indubitabili fide accedamus, & veneremur ipsum omni puritate animi & corporis. Accedamus ei desiderio ardenti, manus in modum crucis formantes, crucifixi corpus suscipiamus? Therfor let vs comme to yt with all feare, Dam. ibi. and pure conscience, and with a sure faith, and let vs woorshippe him whith all puritie of minde and bodie. Let vs go to him whith burning desire, fashioning our handes in maner of a crosse, let vs receaue the body of him that was crucified. H
And after a fewe scriptures alleaged, he speaketh the woordes whiche I before recited, that the Shewe bread did figure this bread. Wherby yt ys euident, that he meneth that he Shewe bread was a figure, not of a figure, [Page 53]but of Chryst him self, who promised that the bread, that he wolde geue, A shoulde be his flesh, whiche flesh he wolde geue for the life of the woorlde. Ioan. 6.
THE THREE AND TWENTHETH CHAPIT. ceadeth in the proof of the same by S. Augustine and Isychius.
ALthough the Authours alleaged might suffice for the declaracion and proof of this matter nowe entreacted of: yet for the ful contentacion of the reader, some mo shall be brought to make the thing more plain, and the truthe more certen.
The first of these shall be sainct Augustin, who saied thus: Dicit cessisse pani pecus, tanquam nesciens, & tunc in Domini mensa panes Propositionis poni solere, et nunc Ad Casulanum epist. [...]6. se de agni immaculati corpore partem accipere. Dicit cessisse poculo sanguine non cogitans et nuncse accipere in poculo sanguinē. Quanto ergo melius et congruentius vetera transisse, et noua in Christo facta esse sic diceret, vt cederet altare altari, gladius gladio, ignis igni, panis pani, pecus pecori, sanguis sanguini? Videmus in ijs omnibus carnalem vetustatem spiritali cedere nouitati. He saieth that the beast hath geuen place to the breade, as B though he knewe not that euen then the Shew breades were wounte to be putte vpon the table of our lorde, and that nowe he dothe take parte of the bodie of that vndefiled lambe. He saied that bloode hathe geuen place to the cuppe, not remembring that he also nowe doth receaue blood in the cuppe. Howe moche better therfor, and more agreablie shoulde he saie, that the olde are goen, and new be made in Chryst, so as the Altar gaue place to the Altar, the swoord to the swoorde, fire to fire, breade to breade, beast to beast, bloode to bloode? We doo see in all these, the carnall oldenesse to geue place, to the spirituall newenesse. Thus farre S. Augustin.
In these woordes S. Augustin correcting the euell saing of one that saied, that in the coming of the newe Testament, the Sacrifices of the olde lawe, whiche were doen in beastes, as sheepe, lābes, kiddes, heckfers, oxē, and soche other did geue place to breade (meening the Sacrament) dothe declare, that these proprelie did not geue place to yt. As though he should saie, that these beastes wer not figures of the Sacramēt, but of the blooddie Sacrifice of Chryst offred vppō the cross, after the maner of Aarō. But he saieth the shew breads C gaue place to our bread. And therfore he saieth that the Aduersarie saing, that the beastes gaue place to bread, he spake yt as though he knew not, that the Shewe breades, were wount to be putte vpon the table of our Lord, mening that the Shew breades were a figure of the Sacrament. And therfore when the truth came, those breades, as the figure, must nedes geue place to the true bread, which ys Chryst in the blessed Sacrament.
And therfore S. Augustin teaching this man, to make due applicacion of eche figure to the thing figured, saieth: that he should better haue saied, that the Altar gaue place to the Altar, signifieng that the Altar of the Iewes, was a figure of the Altar of the Chrystians: and that bread gaue place to breade, signifieng that the Shew bread was a figure of our blessed breade.
Obiection oute of S. Augustin. But here perchaunce the Aduersarie will saie, that sainct Augustin calleth the Sacrament but breade, mening that the Shew bread was a figure of the Sacramentall breade. I wolde to God the Aduersarie (who being aduersarie to Gods trueth, ys most aduersarie to D hys owne sowles health) wolde in soche sentences of holie Fathers, as narrowlie looke, and espie the trueth whiche they do teache, [Page]as he dothe for some one woorde to make some apparant shew to maintein E his heresie, and false doctrine.
Answer. Trueth yt ys that S. Augustin doth call yt bread, to shewe the iust applicacion of the figure to the thing figured. That bread was the figure of bread, for outwardlie yt appeareth bread, and inwardlie yt ys the true breade, that ys, the bread of life.
But marke sainct Augustin well, and ye shall haue nede of no expositour to knowe his faith, and mening in this saing. For in the beginning: he saieth that the beast hath geuen place to the bread, as though he knewe not, that the shewe breades were wount to be sett vpon the table of our Lorde, and that nowe he doth take parte of the bodie of the vndefiled lambe to whiche bodie and not to sacramentall bread, the Shewe bread gaue place.
Note well sainct Augustin therefor here, that speaking what thing he dothe receaue, doth saie, not sacramentall breade, but the bodie of the vndefiled lambe, which ys the lambe that tooke awaie the sinnes of the worlde. So that which he first called bread, nowe he calleth yt the bodie of the vnde filed lambe, who ys the bread of life. F
And that the Aduersarie shoulde not haue anie place to put in his glosing woorde (spirituallie) and to saie that he receaueth the bodie of the vndefiled lambe spirituallie: S. Augustin maketh a stoppe in the woordes that folowe, saing: he dothe saie (mening vibicus) that blood hath geuen place to the cuppe, not remēbring that he also nowe doth receaue blood in the cuppe. Which saing of saincte Augustin openeth the true faith of the catholique Churche, and wipeth oute the false faithe of the malignant Churche.
For they well vnderstande, that to receaue the bloode of Chryste in the cuppe teacheth a reall presence of the same. And as yt ys manifest by S. Augustin, that the bloode ys receaued reallie: So ys the flesh of the bodie of the immaculate lambe receaued reallie. For as the one ys receaued, so ys the other.
Thus ye haue hearde sainct Augustine his wittnesse of the trueth of this matter: Nowe shall be ioined to him Isychius, who beareth full testimonie of the same trueth. Thys man (as the learned knowe) applieng the leuiticall Sacrifices, and Ceremonies, to the thinges, which they figured in the euangelicall lawe, dothe at large expownd this place, and figure of the Shewe breads. G Whose exposition though yt be long, yet forasmoche as yt ys fructfull, my trust ys, that yt shall not be tediouse, but euen as I, for the readers commoditie, did with good will transcribe yt. So I trust that he wil, with like good wil reade yt.
And that the wholl matter maie be knowen to the Reader, I will alleadge ād bringe the wholl text of the scripture, as this Authour hath yt, ād then putto his expositiō, wherby yt shal be seen how euerie parte of the text ys applied. Thus alleageth he the text: Accipies quoque similam, & coques ex ea duodecim panes, qui singuli habebunt duas Decimas, quorum senos altrinsecus super mensam purissimam coram Domino statues, & pones super eos thus lucidissimum, vt sit Isychius li. 7. ca. 24. panis in monimentum oblationis Domini. Per singula Sabbata mutabuntur coram Domino, suscepti à filijs Israël foedere sempiterno. Eruntque Aaron et filiorum eius, vt comedant eos in loco sancto, quia Sanctum Sanctorum est de sacrificio Domini iure perpetuo. And thowe shalt take fine flowre and bake twelue loaues therof, two tenth deales shall be in one loaff. And thowe shallt sett them in two rowes, sixe on a rowe vpon the pure table of thy Lorde. And H putte pure frankencense vpon the rowes, that they maye be breades of remembrance, and an offring to thy Lorde. Euery Sabboth shall he putte [Page 54]them in rowes before thy Lorde for euermore. Of the children of Israell A shall they be offred, for an euerlasting couenaunte. And they be Aarons and his sonnes, whiche shall eate them in the holie place. For they are most holie to him of the offringes of thy Lorde, by a perpetuall statute.
Vpon this text thus writeth Isychius: Vocat ad contemplationem mandati nos ipse panum numeras, sed & propositio, & quia non & ipsos, quemadmodum ea quae su [...]t de sartagine, & craticula, & clibano, holocaustum fieri praecipit, sed poni quidem in mensa altrinsecus, & solis eos licere sacerdotibus, non & Leuitis edere, vt tamen & ab ipsis in loco sancto comedantur. Sed & quia Sanctū sanctorum appellati sunt (intellige quae dicuntur, dabit enim tibi Dominus intellectum) memento mysticae mensae, de qua nulli praesumere praeceptum est, excepto intelligibili Aaron, id est, Christo (Ipse enim eam primus initiauit) sed & filijs eius, qui ab eo facti sunt Christi, & induti sunt eo, quam tamen comedere in loco sancto iussi sunt. Est verò et Sanctum sanctorum, vt sanctificationem habeant praecipuam et indespicabilem. Illi panes ex duabus decimis (Dei enim et hominis sunt, eiusdem in vtroque perfecti) ponuntur seni altrinsecus. Mystica mensa ponitur quidem hic, ponitur etiam in futuro scculo. Sex autem panes propositio vna, quiae perfectus numerus, sicut & mysterium ipsum perfectum est, & perfectos B facit eos, qui hoc fruuntur. In sex autem diebus haec visibilis facta est creatura: sextaue die homo productus est, propter quem Christus mysticam praeparauit mensam. Veruntamen & omnes simul rectè duodecim panes sunt, quia primi dominicam coenauerunt Apostoli, qui erant duodecim numero.
The verie nombre of the loaues doth call vs to the contemplacion or deligent beholding of the commaundement. So doth also the setting furthe of them, and that he doth not commaunde them to be made a burnt sacrifice, as those thinges whiche be of the frieng panne, of the gridiron, and fornace, but that they shall be put vpon the table on the one parte, and to be laufull to the preistes alone, and not to the Leuites to eate them, and yet they maie not be eaten of them, but in the holie place. But also bicause they be called most holie, vnderstande these thinges that be saied, Owre Lorde shall geue thee vnderstanding. Remembre the mysticall table of whiche yt ys commaunded no man to eate, except the intelligible Aaron, that ys to saie Chryst, he first began this table, except also his children, whiche of him were made C Chrystes, and were cloathed with him, whiche table yet they were commaunded to eate in the holie place. Yt ys also most holie, that they shoulde haue a principall and reuerente holinesse. Those loaues are of two tenth deales, that ys of God and man, perfecte in both. Six loaues are sett on a rowe. For the mysticall table ys sett here, and ys sett also in the worlde to come. Sixe loaues ys one rowe, for yt ys a perfect nombre, as the mysterie ys also perfect, and maketh them perfecte, that do vse yt. In sixe daies the visible creature was made, the sixte daie also man was created, for whom Chryste prepared the mysticall table. And yet for all that, all the loaues together are verie well twelue. For the Apostoles, that first supped at the Supper of our Lorde, were in nombre twelue Thus moche Isychius.
Of whome we learne a full applicacion of the figure to the thing: of the Shew bread to Chryst. For beginning to open the figure, and to sett furthe Shewbread applied to the Sacrament. the thing figured by the Shew bread, he saieth: Memēto mysticae mensae Remēbre the mystical table. Wherbie he meeneth the blessed bread of the table of Christ which after he openeth with verie plain woordes, whē he saieth: The Shew breades were made of two tēths deales: Chryst the verie bread ys made of D the Godhead and the manhead, in both perfecte, perfect God and perfecte man.
[Page]Yf this applicacion were not plain enough I wolde tarie longer vpon yt. E But yt ys easie to perceaue that by the Shew bread ys figured that bread that ys made of two tenth deales, as that was, by which tenth deales he vnderstā deth the Godhead and manheade of Chryst. For (as Athanasius saieth) Sicut In Symbolo anima rationalis & caro vnus est homo: ita Deus & homo vnus est Christus. As the reasonable Soule, and the flesh ys one man: Euen so God and man ys one Chryste.
Nowe this loaf made of these two tenth deales, of the Godhead, and of the manhead, wher ys yt, but in mystica mensa, in the mysticall table? So that here ys taught, more plainlie then can be denied, that which the rude heretike with wonder somtime asketh, saing: What? ys Chryste God and man in the Sacrament, vnder the formes of so litle a peice of bread? Which rude man if he wolde leaue reasoning and questioning (which make him doutfullie to wonder at the workes of God) and wolde subdue his vnderstanding to the faithe of Chryst and harken to this Father and soche other of the Parliament house of Chryste as teache his enacted and receaued faith, he shoulde soone by the helpe of Gods grace ceasse with incredulitie to wonder, F and with reuerence to embrace this misterie.
And that ye maie the sooner so doo, note yet more, how this auncient Father expowndeth this figure: The loaues made of two tenth deales were set in two sondrie rowes: The blessed loaf Chryste, that ys of two tenth deales of his Godhead and of his manhead ys sett in two sondrie rowes, as thys Authour applieth yt: Seni ponuntur altrinsecus: Mystica mensa ponitur quidem hic, ponitur & in futuro seculo. The breades are putte sixe in a rowe. The mysticall table ys sett here, and ys sett in the woorld to come.
In which Applicacion note that as the Shew bread was sette in sondrie rowes: So Chryst figured by the same bread, ys sett both here and in heauen. And that the Aduersarie shall not delude thee by his common glose, saing: that Chryst by his godhead ys here in the worlde, but not by Godhead and manhead in Glose of the Sacramentaries for Chrystes presence. the Sacrament Remembre the wholl applicacion of the figure, that yt ys for the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, as yt dothe well appeare by that that foloweth immediatelie. G
In sixe daies (saieth he) this visible creature was made, and in the sixt daie man was created, for whom Chryst prepared this mysticall table. And yet all these breades together are verie well twelue. For the Apostles which first supped at our Lordes Supper were twelue. So that this figure ys cōtinuallie applied to the Sacrament.
Wherin to proue the presence of Chryste, if ye desire more plain and euident The table of Chryst pourgeth, &c. testimonie, note this that he saieth immediatelie: Haec munda est primùm quidem sicut mundans: deinde sicut nihil mendacij, nec infectionis, qualia sunt in mysterijs Paganorum, habens. This table ys clean, Firist, as clensing or making clean: secondlie as hauing no lie or vntrueth nor infection, as the mysteries of the Pagans haue.
In which sainge note well, that he saieth, that this table ys a table, that pourgeth clenseth, or maketh clean. What doth yt make clean but the soule? What ys yt to make the soule clean, but to remitte and wipe awaie sinnes, which be the vncleannesse, and filthinesse of the sowle? Who remitteth and taketh awaie sinne, but God, our Sauiour and Redemer Chryst Iesus? For (as the Iewes H saied) Quis potest peccata remittere nisi solus Deus? who can remitte sinne but God alone? Luc. 5.
Seing then in this table ys that, that clenseth vs, and taketh awaie our [Page 55]sinnes, we maie boldelie point with our fingar to this blessed table, wher A Chryst ys present in mysterie, and yet verilie, as Iohn the Baptist did point to him being in visible forme, and saie: Ecce agnus Dei, ecce qui tollit peccata mundi. Beholde the Lambe of God, beholde him, that taketh awaie the sinnes of Joan. 1. the woorlde. And humbling our selues before him ther present, with meke supplicacion of the catholique Churche, praie God, and saie. O Lambe of God that takest awaie the sinnes of the worlde, haue mercie vpon vs. This maie we boldelie doe, for (as yt foloweth in this Authour) in this table ys no lie or vntrueth, as in the mysteries of the Pagans, but here ys in verie dede Chryste, God and man, verilie and trulie, as ys before by this Authour testified.
In my iudgement this veritie of the blessed Sacramēt ys by this Authour allready both pithilie and plainlie testified: and the figure well and iustilie applied. But will ye yet see in the ende of the applicacion, a more plain sentence? Thus he saieth: Insuper eleuans eius gloriam, & mysterij dignitatem efferens in sublime, addit: Sanctum sanctorum est de sacrificio Domini iure perpetuo. Ergo sancta est B oratio, sancta scripturae diuinae lectio, & interpretationis auditio, sancta sunt (vt breuiter dicam) omnia quae in ecclesiis Deisecundùm legem eius dicuntur, & aguntur. Sancta autem sanctorum de sacrificio Domini, de omnibus videlicet quae offeruntur, & aguntur ad eius gloriam, mensa est, quam de sacrificio suo Christus proponit. Moreouer exalting the glorie of yt, and extolling the dignitie of the mystery vnto the Table of the Sacrifice most holie thing in the church height he addeth: Yt ys the most holie of the Sacrifice of the Lorde, by a perpetuall statute. Nowe praier ys holie, the reading of Gods scripture ys holie, and the hearing of the interpretacion of the scripture ys holie, and (breifly to saie) All thinges that according to his lawe, are either saied, or doen in the churches of God are holie. But of all thinges, whiche be either offred or doē to his glorie, the most holie of all ys the table, whiche Chryste hath sett furth of his sacrifice. Hitherto Isychius.
Doe ye not here see, whiche ys the holiest thing in all the church of God, aboue praier, aboue the reading of the scriptures, aboue the hearing of the interpretacion of the scriptures, yea generallie aboue all thinges that be doen or offred to the glorie of God? The blessed Shewe bread, the bodie of Chryste, which ys the bread of life ys the holiest of all. C
Thus, Reader, thowe maist see, how yt hath pleased God by the figure, to extoll and magnifie the thing figured, that ys the blessed bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament, with these great woordes, caling yt, the most holie of the offringes of God. A greablie wherunto ye see this Authour so moche esteme and repute the woorthines and holinesse of the Sacrament, that he declareth yt to Sourmounte and excell all the holie thinges, what soeuer they be, that be doen to the glorie of God in his Churche.
Iudge then what ells can atteign to soche holinesse in the Sacrament, but the bodie of Chryst. For the bread and wine (as the aduersaries saie) being dumme creatures are not able to take holinesse. Conclude then with this Authour, that the Shew bread was a figure of the blessed Sacrament, which for that yt ys holiest of all other, yt proueth yt well to be the verie bodie of Chryst.
This Authour by plain woordes conuinceth the wicked opinion of Oecolampadius, Oecolāpad conuinced by thautoritie of Isychius. who in his booke of the Supper of our lorde saieth, that the Sacramēt ys D no holier, nor otherwise sanctifieth then praiers doo. These be his woordes: Haec verò creatura panis ita sanctissimo vsui seruiens, vt & corpus [Page] Christi, quod repraesentat, appelletur, vtentesue sanctificat non suae quidem natura, sed vtentium sanctimonia, hoc est, fide, & affectu sancto. Non minùs enim verè hoc quis de Eucharistia affirmat, E quàm de precibus, quae vsu suo hominem sanctificant. This creature of bread ys so sanctified, seruing to a most holie vse, that yt maie also be called the bodie of Chryst, whiche yt dothe represent. And yt doth sanctifie them that vse yt, not of the owne nature: But by the sanctimonie of the vsers, that ys, by faith, and holie affection. Thus he.
In whose woordes ys plain contradiction. For sirst he saieth that the bread ys sanctified, And yet he saieth again, yt hath no holinesse in yt. Again he saieth, Oecolamp. his contradiction. yt sanctifieth the receauers: And after he saieth, yt doth not, but their own sanctimonie sanctifieth them. Thirdlie he saieth, yt sanctifieth as praiers do: and praiers, if theye be deuoute, pourchase sanctificacion but sanctifie not of them selues: but the bodie of Chryst sanctifieth of yt self.
Nowe yf he meen this of the bread as yt ys handled nowe a daies of men of this secte, I thinke he saieth trueth. For nether ys that holie of yt self, nether Comunion bread of the Sacramentaries sanctifieth not dothe yt sanctifie the receauers. For they by their corrupted faith, are rather defiled. But if he speake of the Sacrament, as yt ys vsed emōg the catholique F people, then he fowlie erreth. For that bread sanctifieth, and maketh vs clean, as this Authour before hath saied. And yt ys of yt self most holie, as this same Authour in his last sentence taught. And so against this wicked Oecolampadius, yt ys holier then praier, or anie other thing in the churche of God.
Nowe when we see this man, and Cantorburie and soch other so plainly repugnante to the olde auncient Fathers, what shoulde we ells do but reiect them, and vtterlie detest them as men framing them selfes a faith vpon their hereticall election, and not vpon the faithe of Chryst declared by the Auncient Fathers of the catholique Churche.
Although Isychius be right plain in this place alleaged: yet shall yow heare him hereafter speake more plainlie.
THE FOVRE AND TWENTETH CHAPITER APplieng the continuall reseruing of the Shewe bread to the reseruacion of the Sacrament, proueth the same reseruacion by the olde Fathers, and by the perpetuall G practise of the Church.
YT ys oute of all doubte by the testimonie of the Fathers before alleaged, that the Shewe bread was a figure of the holie Sacrament: Plain yt ys that the same Shewe bread was sett furth bicause yt shoulde be continuallie reserued in the temple, and to no vse more was yt appointed, then to be reserued. Wherfore God commaunded that euerie Sabboth, daie hott bread shoulde be sett furth vpō the table, and that Aaron and his Sonnes the preistes shoulde eate the stale bread. Shewe bread appoincted for three thinges.
Now the figure must be aunswered by the thing figured, speciallie in that parte, that ys the cheif and principall parte of the figure. The principall parte of the Shew bread and the chief cause of the appoinctement of yt was for three things. The first (as the text alleaged declareth) that yt should be alwais remaining in the temple vpon the table: The second, vt sit panis in monimentū oblationis Domini, that yt should be abread of remēbrance of the offring of the Lord: The third, that yt should be eaten onelie of Aaron, and his Sonnes. H
Seing then the Sacrament ys the thing figured yt must answer the figure in these poinctes, whiche be the principall parte of the figure. [Page 56]So then as the Shewe bread was reserued, So likewise maie the Sacrament A be reserued: As the Shewe bread was a bread of remenbrance of Shewe bread applied to the Sacramēt. the oblaciō or offring of the Lorde: So ys the Sacramēt the breade of remē brāce of the offring of Chryst our lorde. As the Shwe bread was to be eatē onely of Aron and his Sonnes: So ys the Sacrament of none to be receaued but of our spirituall Aron and his Sonnes, whiche folowe their father in holie faith, and like conuersation.
This goodlie agreement, and iust answering of the thing figured to the figure therof, doth very well proue the thing so to be.
The Aduersarie can not denie, but that the Shewe breade was a figure of the Sacrament. For that ys testified by the holie Fahers. And the reseruaciō of the Shew breade being a figure of some thing in the newe Testamēt (For all the Leuiticall sacrifices, and Ceremonies, were figures of thinges of the newe Testament) wherof can yt be a figure, but of the reseruacion of the Sacrament, as the bread yt self was a figure of the Sacrament yt self?
Let the aduersarie bring furth the thinge figured by the reseruaciō of the Shew bread yf he cā, yf he can not (as certē yt ys that he cā not) for somoche God appointed no vain figure. Math. 5. B as God appointed no vain figure, voide of all significaciō, and he hath ordeined also, that iota vnū, aut vnus apex non praeteribit a lege, donec omnia fiāt. one iotte or one title shall not scape till all be fullfilled: maugre of the Aduersaries hearte, this parte of the figure ys aunswered by the reseruacion of this blessed Sacrament, for the memoriall of the offring of Christ vpon the crosse, and to be eaten of his good faithfull children.
Now wher one of the membres of the proclamaciō of this Aduersarie ys against the reseruacion of the blessed Sacramēt: ye maie see that was made, One mēbre of master Juells proclamacion against Reseruaciō in [...] proued. more by self will then by lawe, for the lawe ys against him, as by that, that ys saied, yt dothe well appeare.
But to this further confusion, I shall declare and proue that this matter hathe ben putte in execucion in sundrie and diuerse ages, frō the beginning of Chrystes Churche. And for that this Aduersarie alleadgeth the epistle of sainct Clement, written to saincte Iames called the brother of Chryst: therfor shall I also alleadg the same epistle, and beginning with yt, descende to our daies. C
Sainct Clemēt the disciple of saincte Peter the Apostle, and an holie martir Phill. 4. Clemens Epist. 2. of Chryste, of whome saincte Paule maketh mencion, declaring the ordre aboute the blessed Sacrament vsed in his time, saith thus: Tribus gradibus cōmissa sunt sacramenta diuinorum secretorum: presbytero, Diacono, & ministro. Qui cum timore, & tremore reliquias corporis Domini debent custodire fragmentorum, ne qua putredo in sacrario inueniatur, ne cùm negligenter agitur, portioni corporis Domini grauis inferatur iniuria. The Sacramentes of the diuine secrettes are committed to three degrees: to the Preist, to the Deacon, and to the ministre. which aught with feare and trembling to kepe the leauinges of the peices of the bodie of our Lorde, leest anie corruption be fownde in the holie place, leest when any thinge ys necligentlie doen, great wrong be doen to the porcion of our Lordes bodie. Thus sainct Clement.
In whiche saing we haue not onelie to consider, that this ys the bare saing of saincte Clement but that yt ys soche learning as he had learned of his mastre, and of the Apostles, and was both in their times, and after, and ys D yet taught, and practised in the catholique Churche.
And secondarelie, we haue to note, that he calleth the Sacrament that ys left, the procion of owre Lordes bodie.
[Page]Thirdlie, he doth not onelie by so calling yt, teache vs that yt ys the bodie of Chryst, but also by the facte, that ys, by the cōmaundement of the reuerent E keping of yt, whiche ys that they to whome these mysteries are committed, shoulde kepe them with feare and tremblinge, which feare and trembling importeth the presence of an other maner of thing then of a peice of bread.
Fourtlie, ye perceaue, that the Sacrament was appointed to be kept, and that not for an howre or a daie, but for a lōger time, or ells they shoulde Reseruation of the Sacrament in the Apostles tyme. not be aduertised to be circūspecte, that no corruptiō shoulde be fownde in the holie place, or anie wrong thorough necligēce, shoulde be doē to the porciō of Christes bodie. So that by this yt ys manifestlie taught, that the Sacramēt ys not onelie the bodie of Chryst: but also that in the time of the Apostles yt was reserued ād kept with great reuerēce, diligēce, ād circūspectiō
But here perchaunce the aduersarie will obiecte, and saie that saincte Clement immediatelie maketh against me. For he saieth: Tāta in altario holocausta Obiection out of. S. Clement. offerātur, quāta populo sufficere debēt. Quòd si remāserint, in crastmū nō reseruētur, sed cū timore & tremore clericorum diligentia consumantur. Let ther be so many hostes offred on the Altar, as maie fussice the people: And yf anie of them remain F let them not be reserued till the morowe, but by the diligence of the clerkes, with feare and trembling spent.
I graunt that this ys in the epistle of saincte Clemēt, and that within a fewe lines after the former sainge by me alleaged. But the aduersarie can not reproue me of false allegacion. For certen I am, that yt ys euen in that epistle, as I haue alleaged.
But to answer the Aduersarie, thinketh he that saincte Clemēt was a foole, or so forgettfull, that within sixe lines he wolde against saie that he had Aunswer before saied? Yt can not be dinied, but that in the beginning of the Epistle he geueth an ordre for the reuerent keping of the Sacrament. Yt maie not then be thought that he wolde geue a contrarie ordre within so fewe lines, as ys saied. But geuing first an ordre for the reuerend kepinge of that, that ys reserued: in the second sentēce he geueth ordre, that S. Clement his saing opened. in the dailie Sacrifice reseruaciō shoulde not be made. For so ther shoulde be more thē neaded to be reserued, whiche were not meet. As euer in the catholique Churche, wher sufficiēt ys appointed for reseruaciō, the ministres G in ther quotidian ministracion do not put more to that, that ys reserued, but dailie as they cōsecrate, dailie receaue. And (as by ordre they be appointed) The church at this daie hath in vse that which S Clement cōmaūded. whē time requireth, they receaue that, that was reserued, ād put other in place
So that yt appeareth to me that the catholique churche at this daie hath that in vse, that saincte Clemēt in his epistle cōmaunded, both for the reseruaciō, and ordre of dailie Sacrifice withoute reseruacion.
That sainct Clement did not absolutelie forbidde reseruacion, but raither willed yt to be in vse, the practise of the primitiue church doth verie welproue. For wher ther was a varietie of obseruaciō of Easter, and fast, betwixt Ʋictor excōmunicated the churches os Asia. the latin churche and the greke churche, neither wolde the grekes cōforme thē selues to the maner receaued in the latin churche: Victor thē Pope being the xiij. after Peter, not bearing the cōtumacie of thē, being so oftē and lōg called on, to come to cōformitie, and euer resisting, did excommunicate the churches of Asia.
Whiche thinge as yt was misliked of manie Bishopps: So was yt for feare Ecclesiast. hist. li. 5. c. 14. of the losse of so manie churches misliked of Irenaeus. who therwith moued H wroted to Victor an epistle in that matter. In the whiche (as Eusebius wittnesseth) Irenaeus reporting howe Anicetus, Pius, Higinus, Telesphorus, and [Page 57] Xistus did beare with them, although they did not receaue that ordre, and A did communicate with them, saied: Nunquam tamen ob hoc repulsi sunt ab Ecclesiae societate, aut venientes ab illis partibus non sunt suscepti: imò potiùs & omnes presbyteri, qui fuerunt ante te, omnibus semper, qui non ita obseruabant, presbyteris ecclesiarum Eucharistiam solemniter transmittebant. Neuer for all that were they for this repulsed from the felowshippe of the Church, or ells cōming frō those parties were not receaued, but raither all Bishopps, that were before thee, to all Bishopps of the churches, whiche did not so obserue, they did allwaies solemnelie sende the Sacrament.
By this sentence yt doth appeare (as of the learned yt ys noted) that the Bishoppes of Rome accustometh, that yf anie Bishoppes came thither, that were catholique, they wolde in tokē of christiā vnitie, sende the Sacrament to them, that they might cōmunicate together, for that they were of one Cōmunion. Wherby yt ys euident, that the Sacrament was allwais reserued, to be readie for soche pourposes.
Tertulliā writing (as some thinke) to his owne wife, declareth the maner B of good chrystian people aboute the Sacrament in that time, saing thus: An arbitrare (ô vxor) ita gesturam te, vt clam viro sint, quae facis? Non sciet ille quid Lib. 2. secretò ante omnem cibum gustes? et si sciuerit, non panem illum credit esse, qui dicitur. Doest thowe thinke (o wife) so to handle thy self that those thinges, Tertullian with, one saing ouerthroweth three assertions of the Sacramentaties. that thowe doest, shall be vnknowen to thy housbande? Shal not he know, what before all meates thow doest secretly receaue? And yf he shall knowe yt, he beleueth not yt to be that bread, that yt ys saied to be. Hitherto Tertul. Whose litle sentence, although yt doth ouerthrowe three or foure assertions of the Auersaries in this matter of the Sacrament: Yet we shall here touche but two, that be to the pourpose here.
The first ys, that good deuoute godlie people had the Sacrament reserued in their houses, oftē to receaue, as their deuotiō to God moued thē, secretly by them selfs. For at that time the churche was not so settled, nor had The Sacrament reserued in priuate houses in the Primitiue church. soche peace, that the chrysten people might frelie come together, and receaue openlie. Wherfor for the excercising of their faith and deuociō, and doing of their duetie to God, they had the Sacrament home to their houses C and ther reserued yt to receaue when they thought good. And this maie ye verie well gather of this that Tertullian saieh: Shall not thy housband knowe what thowe secret he doest receaue, before all meat?
For the better vnderstāding of whiche saing, yowe must suppose and knowe that Tertulian writeth to this woman, as though she had an insidell to her housbande, and she a Chrystian. Vnto whom she wolde not haue her doinges knowē in this behalf, Nowe to couer this matter frō soche an ynfidel, good people wolde secretlie by thē selues receaue that they for soche pourpose reserued, and so yt appeareth, that for soche cause reseruacion of the Sacrament might be and was moche vsed in the primitiue churche.
The seconde note ys for the presence, whiche ys wher he saieth: And yf he knoweth yt yet he beleueth not yt to be the bread, that yt yssaid to be. Wherby Ioan. De lapsis serm. 5. A miracle wrought in the Sacrament reserued. we are taught, that yt ys an other maner of bread, then yt appeareth. For yt appeareth to be but earthlie bread, but in dede yt ys heauenly bread the bread of life, euen that bread yt self that saied: The bread which I will geue, ys my flesh, which I will geue for the life of the worlde. D
But to return to the matter of reseruacion, we haue plain testimonie ther os in sainct Cyprian, who reporteth thus: Cùm quaedam arcam suam, in qua Domini Sanctum erat, manibus indignis tentasset aperire, igne inde surgente deterrita est, [Page] ne auderet contingere. When a certain woman did attempte with vnwourthie E handes to open her coafer, in whiche was the holie thing of our Lorde, ther arose thence a fire, and so feared her, that she durst not touche yt. Thus sainct Ciprian.
Do ye not heare that this woman had the Sacrament kept in her coafer? Perceaue ye not the great power of yt, that wher she wolde but opē the coafer with vncleā handes, she was feared awaie with a fire that rose frō thence? Ys ther anie mean for the Aduersarie, to auoid this?
Perchaunce he will cauille and saie, that Ciprian speaketh not of the Sacrament, but of some other thing, whiche he calleth, the holie thing of our Lorde. But yf he wolde so seke to auoide, he shoulde shewe him self to vain. For Ciprian speaketh ther alltogether of the Sacrament, in somoche as he reporteth foure miracles together, which God had wrought aboute the Sacrament.
And albeit in this sentence, he dothe not by expresse woordes call yt the bodie of our Lorde, as he dothe in manie other places, yet he so termeth yt, F Oecolamp. and Cranmers doctrine reproued by S. Cipr. Ʋide sup. cap. 23. as he reproueth the doctrine of Oecolampadius, and Cranmer, and very likly of this Proclamer also, For he calleth yt the holie thing of our Lorde: and they saie ther ys no holinesse yn yt. For yt ys a dumme creature. Thus though in woordes they pretende tofolowe the olde Fathers: yet in very dede they slatlie against saie them.
But to proceade in the prooff of reseruaciō, yt maketh moche for yt, that sainct Ambrose reporteth of his bother Satyrus, who, as he saieth, being a singular mā in godlinesse, and affiānce toward God, and being in dānger vpō the Ambr. in oratione funebr, de obi tu sratris sui. sea yet not fearing death, but desierouse not to be destitute of that blessed Sacramēt (yf yt should so please God to call him) went to the christians that were ther in the shippe ād desired to haue that Godlie Sacramēt of the faith full, not that he wolde please his curiouse eies in loking vpō soche a mistery, Satyr. had part of the Sacrament reserued in the shippe and was saued ther by from drowning. but that by soche a Sacramēt, he might obtein the helpe of his faith. Whiche whē yt was geuē him, he caused yt to bownde in a stole, ād so hāged yt aboute his necke, ād whē shippwracke happened, he sought not for a loose boorde G of the shippe to swimme vpon, and so to helpe him self, but for that he had sought the armour of faith alone, he did so committe him self to the sea, and thinking him self safe enough by the helpe of the Sacrament, he desiered no other helpe, and (as sainct Ambrose saieth) his hope did not forsake him nor deceaue him. For he was the first that eschaped oute of the sea, ād came to the land. Thus moche in effect reporteth sainct Ambrose.
In whiche his reporte yt ys more thē manifest, that the Sacramēt was reserued, and as yt maie be supposed for a good time. Yf yt maie be reserued three or foure daies, why maie yt not be reserued longer?
As the wholl reporte (for that yt ys made by so holie, and woorthie a man) ys woorthie to be remembred: So be two or three things wourthie of speciall note.
The first ys, that this good man, the Brother of saincte Ambrose wēt to the chrystians in the shippe ād obteined of thē, to haue, ād to carie the Sacramēt with him. Yf to reserue the Sacrament had ben so heinouse a matter, as this Proclamer, and his complices make yt, wolde they (trowe ye) haue cōmitted soche an offēce as to haue yt reserued in the shippe, ād to deliuer yt H to Satirus to be so reserued? And further yf the reseruing of this Sacrament Sacrament reserued in the shippe. had ben against the ordre of the churche, wolde Saincte Ambrose to the praise of his Brother report yt as a thing well and Godlie doen? No trulie, [Page 58]yt ys not to be thought in so godlie and so learned a father: but raither yt ys A to be thought that the Brother of sainct Ambrose doing no other thing but that was by the same sainct Ambrose cōmended, did agreable to the maner of the Churche.
Therfor saincte Ambrose, to his Bothers praise, and to the example of S. Ambrose cōmēded the doing of his brothe Satyr. the posteritie to doo soche like vertuouse workes, did write this matter, and made a boke to remain to kepe the thing in memorie. By this then yt maie appeare, that the reseruacion of the Sacrament was in vse in the churche in those daies.
An other thing woorthie of note in this reporte of saincte Ambrose ys, that he with cōmēdaciō declareth the affiāce that his brother had in the Sacrament. Whiche was soche that seing imminēt perill, and remēbring what he had aboute him, did not seke earthlie or worldly helpe, but reposing his trust in the Sacramēt that he had aboute him, he perswaded him self to haue helpe enough, and nothing distrusting rested onelie vpon that helpe, and in that hope committed him self to the fearfull, and terrible vaiues of the sea. I praie thee (good Reader) weigh this well, ād iudge whether this good mā B the brother of sainct Ambrose, did thinke or beleue, the Sacramēt to be but a peice of bread, a figure or sign of Chryst onelie. Wolde he (thinke yowe) in that great daūger & perill, haue cōmitted the sauing of his life (all other helpes sett a parte) te a poour dūme creature, a litle peice of bread? And aboue this, wold that good mā in that agonie, so endaūgered his soule, as to cōmitte so horrible ydolatrie, in placing and putting that his great trust in a peice of bread, whiche aught onelie to haue ben reposed in God? No, yt ys not to be thought, but this raither, that he being a faithfull and godlie man folowed the example of faithfull Peter, who, being in a shippe, and hearing Chryst whom he sawe walking on the sea saing to them that were in the Matth. 14 shippe: be of good trust, yt ys I, be not afraied, saied to him: yf yt be thowe lorde cōmaunde me to come to thee vpon the waters. And he went out of the shippe and walked vpon the sea toward Chryst: Euen so this man by faith knowing his master Chryst to be at hand with him presentlie in the sacrament, he cōmitted him self with Peter to the sea, and was the first that was saued. C
Adde vnto this, that whiche ys an other thing to be noted, that sainct Ambrose cōmending this brother for the great faith, trust, and affiance that he had in the Sacrament, well declareth also his owne faithe, that he also beleued the verie presence of Chryst in the Sacrament. Holie men commēde not the misbeleif of mē to the worlde, no not by mouthe, moche lesse by bookes, whiche must remain.
For that then that sainct Ambrose hath written this, no dowbte aswell to our Imitaciō, as to the cōmendaciō of his brother: bothe the faith of the Churche beleuing Chrystes presence in the Sacrament, ys to be approued, and the reseruacion of the same Sacrament, for the comforth of vs, being seke or wholl, ys not to be dissalowed.
And yet ys ther a more euident testimonie of this matter of reseruacion in an epistle of Chrisostom to Innocentius, wherin he maketh complainte of the calamitie that happened in his churche of Constantinople by wicked Soldiers, and emong other thinges reporteth thus: Ipso magno Sabbato Chrysost. epist. ad Jnnocent. D collecta manus militum, ad vesperam diei in ecclesias ingressa, clerum omnem, qui nobiscum erat, vi eiecit, & armis gradum vndique muniuit. Mulieres quo (que) quae per illud tēpus se exuerant vt baptisarentur, metu grauiorum insidiarum nudae aufugerunt: [Page] neque enim concedebatur vt se velarent, sicut mulieres honestas decet, multae etiam E acceptis vulneribus eijciebanttur, & sanguine implebantur natatoria, & sancto cruore rubescebant sluenta. Neque hic rerum finis erat. Nam & sanctuaria ingressi sunt milites, quorum aliquos scimus nullis initiatos mysteris, & viderunt omnia, quae intus erant, quin & sanctissimus Christi sanguis, sicut in tali tumultu contingit, in praedictorum militum vestes effusus est. Euen vpon the great Sabboth daie (meaning Easter daie) at the euentide, an Armie of Soldiers entred the churche, and by violence cast oute all soche as were with vs of the cleargie. And kept with strēght the entrie. The womē also, whiche at that time had put of their cloathes to be baptised, for feare of more daūger, fled naked awaie. Nether were they suffred to couer thē selues, as becometh honest women, manie of them also being wounded were cast oute, and the fontes prepared to baptise them in, were full of bloode, and the waters of the fontes were made red with bloode. But this was not the ende of the businesse. For the Soldiers also went into the holie places, of the whiche, Chrystes blood in the Sacr. shed vpon the soldiers. cloathes. we knowe, some to haue receaued no parte of the chrystian religion, and F they sawe all the thinges that were within. And besides that the most holie bloode of Chryst (as yt doth happen in soche tumulte) was shedde vpon the garmēts of the Soldiers. Thus facre Chrisostom.
In this complaint, first note when these wycked soldiers entred vpon the churche, they entred in the euening. At whiche time they entring into the Sanctuarie, Ye perceaue they fownde the Sacrament ther, for he saieth that yt was shedde vpō the cloathes of the Soldiars. In the time of Chrisostō yt was not in vse to cōsecrate the Sacramēt in the after noone, but onely in the morning. This then being kept in the Sanctuarie, and shed vpon the garmēt of the Soldiers in the euening, yt proueth inuinciblie, and most plainly that the Sacrament was reserued. Presence of Chrystes blood in the Sacra. and reseruation auouched by Chrysost.
Yf ye will also knowe what the Sacrament was, whether yt was a figure onely or the thing yt self, Christostom by as plain woordes teacheth vs that yt was the bloode of Christ, And that we should perceaue yt was so in dede, he cōtented not him felf onelie to cal yt the blood of Chryst, but the most holie blood of Chryst. By Chrisostom then, the reseruacion of the G Sacrament ys so plainly wittnessed, that the Proclamer can not denie yt, & the very presence of Christes bloode in the same ys so auouched, that the Sacramentary ys confounded. Yt ys with moche reuerence termed and called the most holie blood of Chryst, wherby the vureuerent and spitefull railing and raiging of the blasphemer ys reproued and rebuked.
But let vs yet proceade further, maie we not finde the reseruacion of the Sacrament in S. Hieromes time? Yes verilie. For he wittnesseth yt Reseruatiō in S. Hieroms time. him self declaring to one Rusticus, the godlie life and great libertie of Exuperius Bishoppe of Tolosse, and signifieng the great contempt of worldelie thinges the same had, and his great pleasure in heauenly thinges, writeth thus. Nihil illo ditius, qui corpus Domini in canistro vimineo, sanguinem portat in vitro. Ther ys no man richer then he, who beareth the bodie of our Lorde in a wicker basket, and his bloode in a glasse. As who might saie: So litle regardeth this good Bisshoppe Exuperius the riches of the worlde, that geuing awaie all his substance, and bearing aboute him the bodie of our Lord but in a litle wicker baskett, and the blood of our Lord in a glasse, Hiero. ad Rusticum. H and so hauing these, he thinketh that no man vs richer then he, as I also thinke ther ys not.
In these woordes saincte Hierō ys a double helpe to vs, for he dothe not [Page 59]onelie testifie that this holy Bishoppe, reserued and caried the Sacrament in soche vessell, but also testifieth what yt ys, and that by as plain woordes Master Juell hath here a double blowe. A as can be spoken, calling yt the bodie and bloode of our lorde. Wherby the Proclamer hath a double blowe. bothe for the reseruacion, and also for the presence.
The Proclamer wolde haue plain woordes, yf these be not plain enough, to call yt the bodie and the bloode of our lorde. I can not tell what plainesse he A clear and plain sentē ce for Master Juell. wolde haue.
But as touching reseruacion, and the vse therof, we reade also in the Ecclesiasticall Historie, a practise whiche well proueth them, wher we finde yt written thus of one Serapion, that he lieng in extreamis and wishing to die saied: Quousque me detinetis? Quaeso vos, cito aliquis Presbyterum roget, vt possim aliquando dimitti, et cùm haec dixisset, rursum sine voce permansit. Abijt Euseb. li. 6. cap. 34. cursu puer ad presbyterum noclis tempore, infirmabatur presbyter, venire non potuit. Parum Eucharistiae puero, qui ad se venerat, dedit, quod infusum iussit sent praeberi. Howe long will yow detein me? I beseche yowe let one quickly desire the preist, that I maie be let departe. And when he had spoken these The Sacrament reserued sent to a sick man. B woordes, he remained again speche lesse. A seruant ranne to the preist in the night time, the preist was sicke and coulde not come. Wherfor he deliuered of the Sacrament to the seruant that came vnto him, whiche infused he commaunded to be geuen to the olde man. Thus moche the storie.
Consider nowe reader, that the Messenger came to the preist in the night time, considre also that the preist was sicke, and coulde not come, so that for vnsemelinesse of time, and speciallie for sickenesse he coulde not then celebrate that holie ministracion, and yet he sent of the Sacrament to the olde sicke man. Ys yt not plain enough by this historie, that the Sacrament was reserued, whiche in the night time was so readie to be sent?
As for the maner of the place wher yt was reserued I stand not in yt, as the Master Iuells trifling of a Canopie. Proclamer in his trifling maner, disdainfullie for so weightie a matter saieth: that yt can not be proued, that yt shoulde be hanged vppe vnder a canopie. The maner of the place ys diuerse, as he himself knoweth, in the contries wher he hath trauailed. But the substance of the matter, whiche ys the reseruacion of the C Sacrament, in all the catholique Churche ys one. But as yt ys in prouerbe: Simia semper simia. An ape ys allwais an ape. An hereticall contemner of blessed mysteries will allwaies so be, and shewe him self allwais like himself, whē he will trifle in the vtterance of soche matters, for the whiche so lamentable a diuision ys in the Churche. Yf he saie he trifeleth not, thē I saie he semeth either to graunt the reseruacion, or ells couertlie to impugne yt, as fearing openly to doo yt, for that he knoweth he coulde not so stand in yt, but soen be ouerthrowen.
But let the matter go on, and let vs see more of the vse of the reseruacion of the Sacrament. As yt maie be gathered, Satan the great enemie of the Reseruaciō spoken against in S. Cirills time, but refuted of hī as a madde doctrine. peace of Chrystes Churche, as a roring lion seking whom he might deuoure, at last fownde some, that did not, as strong men in faithe, resist him. Whō yet he durst not in that time of vertue, when so moche godlinesse, and so moche reuerēce to the Sacramēt floorished, incite and moue to speake directly against the presence of Chryste in the Sacramēt, as the doth in this time, but D onelie that the Sacrament was not of force, nor vertue yf yt were reserued but vntill the next daie. But note howe good this doctrine was. As soen as the holy father and Bishope Cyrill heard of yt, he wrote against yt, and with vehemencie impuged yt, as by his owne woordes ye shall well [Page]perceiue. Thus he writeth: Audio quod dicunt illi mysticam benedictionem, si ex ea Cyrill. ad Calosirium remanserint in sequentem diem reliquiae ad sanctificationem inutilem esse. Sed insaniunt E haec dicentes, non enim alius sit Christus, neque sanctum eius corpus mutabitur, sed benedictionis virtus & viuifica gratia perpetuò manent in illo. I do heare, that they saie, that the mysticall benediction, yf the leauinges therof remain vntill the next daie folowing, ys vnprofitable to sanctificacion. But they are madde saing these thinges. For ther ys not made an other Chryst, nether shall his holie bodie be chaunged, but the powre or vertue of the benediction and the liuelie grace doo perpetuallie abide in yt. Thus Cyrille.
As yt maie be thought, to make awaie reseruacion of the Sacrament frō the Churche, wherby the honour of God, and of our Sauiour Chryste was moche caused to be in the heartes of people, and wherby also sicke people had moche comforte, and manie were wonne from the Deuell, and their soules sent to God, which ells perchaūce had perished, the Deuell, as I saied, not bearing this did inuent this heresie against reseruacion of the Sacramēt, and breathed yt into some vessells of perdicion.
But this doctrine was so reasonable, and so agreable to the woorde of F God, that Cyrill saieth they be madde that affirme yt: Yf they were iustlie accompted madde, that taught soche doctrine in those daies, what be they, that teache the like nowe in these daies?
But holie Cyrill teacheth vs the holsome and sobre doctrine of the Churche, and saieth, yf the Sacrament be reserued vntill the next daie, yt ys of like force, power, & vertue as yt was when yt was consecrated.
This sentence of Cyrill doth also presuppose, that reseruacion of the Sacramēt Reseruaciō in vse before S. Cirills time. was in vse befooe he wrote, or ells why shoulde these naughtie men, of whom he maketh mencion, speake against yt? Men vse not to impugne a thing that ys not. Wherfore yt must nedes be, that reseruacion being impugned, was then in vse. Yt doth also teache that reseruacion ys not vnlawfull, and a thing that maie not be doen, but raither, saing the thing continueth of like force, power and vertue, teacheth that reseruacion ys to be vsed.
Ye haue nowe hearde of the practise and vse of the reseruacion of the Sacrament, G in the primitiue Churche, euē from the time of the Apostles to the time of Cyrill, for the space of more then foure hundreth yeares, whiche was the purest time of the Churche. Wherby we maie well conclude against the Aduersarie, that reseruacion ys laufull, and aught, by example of this that we haue hearde, to be vsed of all good chrystiā Churches, not withstanding the vain barking of heretikes against yt. To auoid tediousnesse, I do not tarie to note howe notablie he speaketh of the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament. But yet for so moche as yt ys so goodlie a place, and so euidentlie plain, I praie thee, Reader, cōsider yt, and well weigh yt. For I haue somwhat A plain place for Master Juell. more to saie for reseruacion.
THE FIVE AND TWENTETH CHAP. PROueth the same by Councells that haue ben nearer to our time.
FOrasmoche as the Proclamer more arrogantlie then semely, chargeth, H The church arrogantlie charged with erroure. the Churche with [...] errour these nine hondreth yeares and aboue, and chalengeth to him and his likes the restauring of the trueth, which during all these yeares hath ben lacking, as though Chryst were false of his promisse, who promised to lead his Church into all treuth, and taketh vpō him to reiecte all Fathers, to contēne all Coūcells, and [Page 60]breiflie to saie, to frustrate and adnihilate all that hath ben writen, decreed, E determined, or doen in matters of religion these ix. hondreth yeares, whiche ys a straung enterprise: I will therfore produce certain decrees made as well by some other of authoritie, as by Councells, to make a triall, howe the practise of the auncient Church will agree with the decrees and practise of the Church that hath folowed and continued, whiche he so moch reproueth.
Among the whiche I finde alleaged Iustinian the Emperour, who hauing a good zeale to godlie religion made a constitucion, that monasteries of virgens Justinian. const. 123. de Nouuel. shoule haue libertie to choose a preist, who shoulde bring vnto them the holie communion.
This constitucion appointeth not the preist, that shoulde be chosen by these virgens, to celebrate the holie mysterie, but that he shoulde bring them the holie communion, when they were disposed to communicate. And yf yt were brought, yt argueth for the time a reseruacion.
In the decrees also ys alleaged the Councell of worms, which was De cons. dist 2. cap. Presbyter. The preist must allwaies haue the Sacramēt readie for the sicke F holden a boute the time of Charles the great, in whiche soche a Canon was made: Presbyter Eucharistiam semper habeat paratam, vt si quis infirmatus fuerit, statim eum communicet, ne sine communione moriatur. Let the preist allwaies haue the Sacrament in a readinesse, that yf anie man be sicke he maie furthwith receaue the Sacrament, that he die not withoute the communion.
I nede not to make here any note to the reader for his better vnderstanding, for the decree ys plain enough for the confutacion of the Aduersarie.
But the Aduersarie that estemeth not the generall Councells, perchaunce will with moche more contempt reiecte this Councell, saing that yt was but a prouinciall Councell. Yt was but a prouinciall Councell in dede, and although a prouinciall Councell hath not authoritie to binde the wholl Churche by their priuate decrees: yet yt hath authoritie to sett furth a trueth. And that thys decree was not against the ordre receaued in the wholl G Churche this proueth yt inuinciblie, for that yt was neuer by any generall Councell condemned.
Ther was neuer prouinciall Councell that decreed anie thing contrary to Hereticall Councells allwaies suppressed. the generall receaued faith, but yt was noted, and by some generall Councell confuted.
The Arrians called manie Councells, besides that whiche they kept in Nicaea Thraciae, but they coulde neuer take place nor authoritie, neither did the Churche suffer them to be published, but suppressed, impugned, confuted, and conuinced them.
The seconde Ephesine Councell, although ther was ther a great assemblie: yet yt was ouerthrowen by the generall Councell of Calcedon.
What shall I nede to protracte this matter with mo examples? Certen yt ys, that yf this Councell had decreed any thing against the trueth of the catholique faith, or against the receaued ordre of the Churche in matters of Religion, yt shoulde haue ben impugned manie years, er this Aduersarie H had ben born. But for asmoche as yt hath continued somany yeares not confuted by anie generall Councell, nor impugned by anie cattholique learned man, and ys agreable aswell to the order receaued in the aunciente Churche (as by that that ys saied in the last chap. yt dothe well appeare) as to the order of the catoliq̄ Churche that hath bē and ys in this our time (for all [Page]these reasons and consideracions yt can not be but that the Decree of the A Councell before alleaged ys catholique, good and alowable.
And yf all this weigh not in the conceat of the Aduersarie: yet he can not denie, but that reseruacion was then in vse, whiche well appeareth also by the Councell called Concilium Remense, as yt ys alleaged in the same decrees, Concil. Remen. and same distinction. Whiche for the reuerence of the Sacrament, straictlie forbiddeth the preist to deliuer the same to anielaie man or woman, to carie yt to any sicke person, but straictlie commaundeth that the preist go himself, and minister to the sicke.
After these Councells was the generall Councell of Lateran, whiche was a notable and a great Coūcell, wherin were present besides a great nōbre of Bishoppes, the foure Patriarkes, as some writers testifie, and manie grecians aswell as latines. This Councell was celebrated vnder Innocentius the thirde, Concil. Lateran. the yeare of our lorde M. CC. XV. and so CCC. XLVI. years agone. In whiche great Councel this I finde ther Decreed: Statuimus in cunctis ecclesijs, vt Chrysma & Eucharistia, sub fideli custodia conseruentur. We doo ordein B Canon 20. that in all Churches, the holie oile, and the Sacrament be kept vnder faithfull custodie. Here ye see howe the reseruacion being in vse in the beginning, ys in this Councel appointed to be cōtinued, and that not in some Churches, but in all.
Howe so euer yt shall like the Proclamer to accepte or to reiect this Councell: yet the sobre chrystian considering howe great a Councell yt was, and that of the learned men as well of the greke Churche as of the latin Churche, whiche coulde, and did knowe as well as the Proclamer, and see what ys to be doen as well as he doth: And considering also that yt was holden more then three hondreth yeares agon, at whiche present time (althoug before and after) their was no publique or open controuersie in that point: and also that yt ys an ordinaunce agreable to the vse of the primitiue Churche, will regarde yt, and with humble maner obeie yt, or at the leest wish yt to be obeyed.
After this Councell in the time of Leo the tenth, Martyr Luther, a newe Heresiarke, or inuentour of heresie, rose vppe, who affirming the presence C Luther his fonde opinion of the presence. of Chryst in the Sacrament but verie fondlie without all authoritie of Scripture, Doctour, or Councell, taught that the presence of Chryst was in the Sacrament yf yt were receaued: Yf not, ther was no presence. And vpon this reseruacion of the Sacrament was of him denied.
Oute of this Luther sprang first Corolstadins, who impugned his masters doctrine, and taught, as our Proclamer teacheth, that ther ys no presence of Carolstad. Chryst in the Sacrament. With whom shortlie ioined Oecolampadius, and Zuinglius. Whiche first among all other wrote and sett oute their bookes Oecolamp. Zuinglius. against the Sacrament and denieng the wholl (as of consequence yt must be) they denied the parte also.
And for that the Lutherans, and the named Sacramentaries did pietifullie disturbe, rent, teare and diuide those contries of Saxonie, and Heluetia, with other in Getmanie with these rehersed heresies, and an infinite nombre mo, whiche dailie grewe vppe to the great endammaginge of manie chrysten Soules: Paule the thirde then Bishoppe of Rome, to represse D these heresies, called a Councell at Trident, wher emonge manie other good and godlie determinacions as touching the matter of the reseruacion whiche we haue nowe in hande, ys this Canon:
Consuetudo asseruandi in sacrario sanctam Eucharistiam, adeò antiqua est, vt eam Conci Trident. [Page 61] seculum etiam Niceni Concilij agnouerit. Porro deferri ipsam sacram Eucharistiam ad infirmos, E & in hunc vsum diligenter in ecclesijs conseruari, praeterquam quòd cum summa aequitate & ratione coniunctum est, tum multis in Concilijs praeceptum inuenitur, & vetustissimo catholicae Ecclesiae more obseruatum. Quare haec sancta Synodus retinendum omnino salutarem hunc, & necessarium morem statuit. The custome to kepe the holy Sacrament in the holie place ys of soche antiquitie, that the worlde Nycē Coū cell did agnise Reseruacion. in tyme of the Nicen Councell did agnise yt. Moreouer that the Sacrament shoulde be caried to them that are sicke, and for this pourpose to be diligentlie kept in Churches, be side that yt ys agreable to equitie and reason, yt ys also fownde to be commended in manie Councells, and in the most auncient maner of the catholique Churche obserued. Wherfor this holie Synode hath commaunded this holsom and necessarie maner to be reteined and kept still. Thus moche the Councell.
I wish that the reader taking these woordes as the woordes and saing of a Councell, and as the agreable saing of a great nombre of learned men, wolde marke and learn ther in, first, that the vse of the reseruacion F ys of great antiquitie. Secondly, that reseruacion, to the entent the Sacrament shoulde be allwais readie for the sicke, ys here testified to be commaunded by manie Councells. Thirdlie, that this Councell iudgeth meet and consonant to reason that yt shoulde be doen. Fourtly, that by the autoritie of a Councell they haue commaunded this vse of reseruacion to be reteined and continued. Yf all these be (as they ought to be) well weighed, why shoulde they not conteruaill, yea and so weightilie weigh down all contrarie sainges, as these shoule be as a light feather, in respecte of a thousande weight, when they be in lanceis to be weighed together.
Yf a Parlament of a Realme geue soche authoritie to the Actes and Statutes ther made, that the priuate talke of rebelliouse, and disobedient persons, Yf a Parlament be of force to binde, why not a Councell. though they be manie, can not dissolue them: Why ys not the like preeminence geuen to the Parlament of Chrystes catholique Churche. Wher G decrees are made not by the people of one Realme, but of manie, yea of all christian Realmes, that list to come, and theie not vulearned but learned. Yf the one doth binde, why not the other?
But not minding to enter into the disputacion of so large a matter, and ther by to make, to long digression from my pourpose, I will staie and yet wish the reader to consider what foloweth in the same Councell decreed against soche as shall contemptuouslie speake against this matter of reseruacion. Soche a Canon ther I finde. Si quis dixerit non licere sacram Eucharistiam Canon 7. in sacrario reseruari, sed statim post consecrationem astantibus necessariò distribuendam: aut non licere vt illa ad infirmos honorificè deferatur: Anathema sit. Yf Deniers of reseruacion accursed. anie man shall saie that yt ys not laufull to reserue the holie Sacrament but that streight waie after the consecracion yt ys of necessitie to be distributed to them that be present, and that yt ys not laufull reuerently to carie yt to them that be sicke, accursed be he.
Although (I knowe) the Aduersarie contemneth thys heauie sentence, forsamoche as he vilipēdeth and derideth the Councells: Yet (I thanke God H of that his grace) I regard them, I reuerence their sentence, I feare and dread the same, hauing in minde the sainge of our Sauiour Chryste: Qui non Math. 18. audiuerit Ecclesiam, sit tibi sicut Ethnicus, & publicanus. He that willnot heare the Churche, let him be to thee, as an ethnicke and publicane. And again. Qui Luc. 10. vos spernit, me spernit: et qui me spernit, spernit eū qui me misit. Hethat despiseth yow [Page]despiseth me: and he that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me. A
This being spoken and ment of the Apostles and their successours, the spirituall rulars of the Churche, the Proclamer and hys likes so doing, what doo they ells, but, as Chryst saieth, contemne him and hys Father? yf they saie they contemne not the rulars of the Churche, but obeie them: let them answere me. Whom did their great fathers Luther, Carolstadius, Oecolampadius, Obedience of the newe Churches how yt stā deth. Zuinglius, Bullinger, &c. obey in the Churche? yf ye wyll saie they coulde obeye none of all the wholl Churche that was then and before, for yt was no Churche: well let this your false aunswere stande. Yf then your Churche began with Luther, he being sole head, why did Carolstadius, Oecolampadius, and the rest disobeie him? Yf all they were the Churche, why did Thomas Monetarius, and Swēckfeldius disobey them, and not heare them: But to be shorte, good Reader, they obey none, neither will they heare anie, but onelie soche as saye as they saie. And this ys propre to euery secre of them, so that the Oecolampadians will not heare the Lutheraus, the Anabaptistes, will not heare the Oecolampadians, the Swenckfeldians will heare none of all these. B
Yet euery of these sectes saie, they be the Churche, and euery of them Euery sect of Protestātes chalenge to thē the woorde of God, and the name of the Churche. saie, they haue the very woorde os God, and therupon, they saie, they builde. And yet the woorde of God as yt ys one, so hath yt one trueth, whiche euery one of these for saking, do miserablie adulterate that holie and blesset woorde of God, and in stede of trueth sell vnto the people their hereticall lies, vnder the pretence of Gods woorde and his trueth.
I am lothe to entre any further in the opening of the rebelliouse diuisions, sectes, and factions that be emonge them. And they be so manie as wolde require a iust volume to sette them furth, soch ys the consent, agreemēt and obedience emong them selues. wiche ys euen the iust plague of God. For as man falling from the obedience of God, fownde by Gods permission, a merueillouse rebellion in his owne bodie and membres: So these men falling from the obedience of God in his Church, fall to continuall disobedience, and implacable rebellion among them selues.
But ther was a Churche before Luther began his malignant Churche. C whiche former Churche being fownded vpon Christe continueth, for that yt ys builded vpon à surestone. And this ys that Churche that must be hearde and obeied. Against thys Churche Berengarius, (as before ys saied) began B [...]rēgarius Wicleff. Hus. to be disobedient, but he humbled him self and desired to be restored again. Wiclefand Husse also rebelled, and moued warre, but they coulde not preuaill. And allthough for our sinnes God suffred the Philystines nowe to make warre against Israell, as he did against the carnall Israell: yet nothing mistrusting his mercie, and hauing sure affiance in his promesse that Portae inferi non Math. 16. praeualebunt aduersus eā, the gates of hell shall not preuaill against his Churche, I doubte not but he will at his mercifull pleasure looke vpon yt, and send peace to yt.
And nowe to return to that from which, I haue a litle digressed: I saie, I do regarde the sentence of the Churche for yt ys terrible to be cutte of from that mysticall bodie of Chryst, and to be made a dead membre, like vnto a rotten or dead sticke meit for no pourpose but to be cast in the fire and D burnt.
Perchaunce the aduersarie will saie, he feareth not to dissent from the Churche, wher the Church dissenteth from the Scripture, as yt doth in this Jssue ioined with the proclamer touching reseruacion. matter of reseruacion.
Yere will I again ioin yssue with the proclamer, that if he can bring any [Page 62]plain scripture, catholique Doctour, or Councell, that by expresse woordes E forbiddeth reseruacion, I will subscribe, and come to him. Yf he can bringe [...] one soche, what shamelesse rashnesse ys yt for him to calumniate the Churche for that thing, for the whiche he hath no good warrant. Ys he so imperiall ouer the Churche, that he maie and will haue yt to leaue of reseruacion of the Sacrament at his pleasure, which yt hath vsed from the beginning, an can shewe no scripture, no catholique Doctour, no auncient Councel that forbiddeth yt? Ys this woorde of the disciples of Pythagoras (ipse dixit, he saied yt) a sufficient warrant for vs? Shall we so lightlie cast awaie the orders, rites, Auncient and godlie customes, are not to be left for the bare saing of à Protestāt. customes, and maners of so long time receaued, vsed, and through all the Churche frequented for soche mens bare woorde? Yf he finde any thing amisse let him reforme yt by scriptures, Doctours, or Councells, and we shall heare: otherwise yt shall be more easey for the Churche, to repell his obiections, then yt shall be for him to proue them.
And methinke, nay I do not onelie thynk yt, but I saie yt ys a shame for him to enterprise soche prohibition, and to crie out vpon the Churche as though F she had committed most high treason against God, aswell in other thinges, as in the vse of reseruacio, whiche ye haue hearde to be cōmaunded by decrees with in these nine hondreth yeares made to be continued as yt was vsed in the primitiue Churche, and by the space of manie yeares after, and to bring no peice of lawe to charge her by, and iustlie to proue that she hathe offended.
THE SIXE AND TWENTETH CHApit. aunswereth the cheis obiection of the aduersaries.
YF anie thing maie be obiected against reseruacion of the Sacramēt this ys yt, whiche ys Achilles with them, and euen ther common argument aswell against reseruacion, as other rites, and orders of the Churche in the ministration of the Sacraments. In the institution of the Sacrament G ther ys no mencion made of reseruacion, wher for (saie they) yt aught not to be vsed.
Will ye see the great force of this argument: Ther ys no mencion made Protestāts argumēt es of negatiues eluded. of praier in the institution of the Sacrament of Baptisme, when Chryst was baptised, Ergo, ther aught to be no praier made in the ministration of yt nowe. Again ther ys no mencion made of the Baptising of children in the instituciō of Baptisme, Ergo, children aught not to be chrystened. Ther were no wittnesses as godfathers, or godmothers to Chryste, Ergo, ther aught none to be in the ministracion of Baptisme to children. Ther is no mencion made of this terme, Sacrament, as calling Babtisme or the Supper of our lorde a Sacrament, Ergo they ought not so to be called. Likwise, ther ys no mencion made of praiers in the institucion of the Supper of our lorde, Ergo, ther aught none to be said at the ministracion ther of. Ther is no mencion made that any women were at Chrystes Supper, Ergo ther aught no women to come to the communion. Ther is no mencion made in the institucion of the The proclaemer vseth the same maner of disputaciō. he denieth all and proueth nothing. H Sacrament that yt shoulde be done in the daie time, Ergo, yt ought not so to be doen. And a great nombre of soche might in this wise be inferred, wher by yt dothe well appeare howe fonde the argument ys.
And yet this ys a common and inuincible maner of argument with these people. For in other matters they vse yt thus: Ther is no mencion of purgatorie in the scripture, Ergo, ther ys none. Ther ys no mencion in the scripture [Page]to praie for the dead, Ergo they are not to be praied for. There ys no mencion A in scripture of the inuocacion of sainctes, Ergo, rhey are not to be praied vnto. Ther ys prescribed no daies of fasting in the scripture, Ergo, we are not bownde to fast. This ys the maner of disputacion of that Schoole.
But to ioine with thē in the soluciō of their argumēt. Ther be thre maner Three maner of doinges as touching the Scripture. of doinges as concerning the Scripture: One ys to do so moche as the Scriture biddeth. An other to do against that the Scripture biddeth. The thirde ys to do something besides that the Scripture biddeth.
1 As concerning the first, wher Chryst toke bread, and made yt his bodie, and wine and made yt his bloode, And commaunded them to be eaten, and dronken in the remembrance of his passion and death. Yf the true chrystian to whom Authoritie ys geuen, doth take the like matter of bread and wine, and doth consecrate yt according to Chrystes commaundement, Hoc facite: This daye, and so eate yt and drinke, yt in the remembrance of Chrystes passion and death: this man hath doen as moche as the scripture biddeth him, and therfor ys he blamelesse in this respect. B
An other maner of doinge ys when a man dothe contrarie to the scripture, 11. as when men will not vse soche matter as Chryst appointed of whiche sorte ther haue ben diuerse.
The Manyches hauing wicked opinions, among whiche one was that all August. li. de haresib. our foode ys vnclean, and therupon taking common bread to be vnclean, they vsed slower in the Sacrament, mingled with water and other lothsom matter. And so did contrarie to the scripture, not vsing pure bread, but other matter then Chryste appointed.
Other ther were, that for a singular sobrietie whiche they semed to professe, wolde not vse wine in the ministracion of the Sacrament, but onely water, whiche therfore saincte Augustine calleth Aquarios, watrie men. Against Jbid. ca. 64 these men did saincte Cyprian write, and Chrysostome also, and diuerse other.
The sixte generall Councell holden at Constantinople condemneth the Concil Cō stant. 6. ca. Armenians, whiche did vse wine alone in the ministracion with oute water. C For confut [...]ion of whiche erroure, they alleaged the Masse of saincte Iames, of Basill, the Decree of the Councell of Cartage, and Chrysostome.
Bothe these then, not vsing soche matter, as Chryst did vse in the Sacrament, are reproued and condemned, as doing contrarie to the institucion of Chryste. For to celebrate either with wine alone, or with water alone, ys a plain conrrarie doinge to the instituciō of Chryste. For as Alexander the sixte Alexand. primus. Not wine alone, not water alone in our lordes cuppe. Master Juellcalleth for exāples of the primitiue Church for Doctours, and Councells but he will beleue, and folowe none. Bishoppe of Rome after Peter, saieth: Non debet (vt à patribus accepimus, & ipsa ratio docet) in calice Domini aut vinū solum, aut aqua sola offerri, sed vtrumque permixtū, quia vtrumque ex latere eius in passione sua profluxisse legitur. As we haue receaued of our Fathers, and verie reason also teacheth, ther aught not to be offred in the cuppe of our lorde either wine alone, or water alone, but both mixed together. For yt ys redde, that in his passion both ranne oute of his side. Thus Alexander.
Note here that this Father saieth, that he receaued yt of his Fathers. Then he being the sixte, and as some accompte the fifte from Peter, who were his D Fathers but the Apostles? By this then yt maie be pereeaued, that euen from the beginning of Chrystes Churche yt hath ben vsed to mixte water with wine in the ministracion of the Sacrament.
Nowe this Proclamer calleth for examples of the primitiue Churche, for Doctours and Councells and all these be against him and his complices for [Page 63]that they vse but wine alone, and yet obstinately they perfist in ther erroure E and disobedience. Why do yow call for the examples of the primitiue Churche, for auncient Doctours, and Councells, as though yowe wolde be ruled by them, and yet in so euident a matterye spurn against them, and do what yowe list, and not what yowe are taught? yowe contemne the rules and orders of the auncient Churche in your dedes howe so euer glosinglie yow speake of them in woordes. In your owne traditions yow are verie straight.
I remembe the Somer before I wrote this rude woorke, I was nere vnto this man (whom I terme the Proclamer) within whose iurisdictiō one of his Ale geuen in stead of wine at a Cōmunion. ministres ministring the communion to a woman, gaue her to drinke a cuppe of ale in stead of wine. Whiche when this man vnderstoode, no entreatie, no desire, no letters of mē of woorshippe of the Same contrie might appease his displeasure, nor obtein pardon for the offender, but open penance must he do in diuerse places. And certen I am that he was so inioined, and did parte er I departed the contrie. I mislike not that an offender was punished, but I moche mislike that they so straictlie punishe the breach of their disordre, and they them selues breake the ordre of the catholique Churche. When I heard of this correction, ther came to my minde the straunge conscience F of the high preistes of the Iewes, who made no conscience in the compasing of the deathe of Chryst, and yet when Iudas brought the moneie Math. 25. again to them whiche they gaue him to betraie his master, here their consciences were spiced, and they saied, those pence might not be cast in the Threasurie, by cause yt ys the price of bloode. Their consciences suffred them to make awaie Chryste, whiche was incomparablie a more heinouse offence, and yet their consciences grudged that those plates shoulde be put in to the treasurie, whiche was but a small matter.
So to impugne the trueth of Chryst, to take awaie his bodie and bloode from vs in the Sacrament, and as yt were, to make Chryst awaie, to transgresse Sacramentaries take awaie the fatt and sweet of the Sacramēt. Mat. 23. They stōble at a strawe and leape ouer a block the ordre of the holie institucion of Chryste, contēptuouslie to leaue the order of the catholique Churche, yt ys easie ynough to their cōsciences. But when they haue taken the fatte and swete of the Sacrament awaie, and G left nothing but lean bread, and bare wine, yf then wine be not ministred howe greate an offence ys committed?
Thus ye streign oute a guatte, and swallowe (as Chryste saied) a Cammell. And as the prouerbe ys, ye stomble at a strawe, and leape ouer a blocke. Ye are curiouse in tithing minte, anise, and commin, but ye omitte the weightier matters of the lawe: ye are busie in bread and wine and leaue oute the bodie and bloode of Chryst, the weightier matters of the lawe of the Gospell. Ye cast awaie the kernell, and fight for the shale. And thus ye transgresse the Jbid. 15. commaundement of God for your traditions. And ye do not onelie transgresse the commaundement and order of Chryst, as ys saied, but also inexcusablie ye transgresse the ordre of our Seniours and elders of the primitiue Churche, in that ye vse wine alone in the ministracion of the Sacrament. And therfor leauing yowe amonge them, that be of this seconde sorte of doers mencioned in our distinction, I shall diuert me to speake of the thirde maner of doing, whiche ys to doo something beside the Scripture.
This maner of doing, for the readers better vnderstanding, maie be diuerse H 111. waies. One ys when the substauce of the institucion ys doen according to the scriptures, but the maner of the doing ys varied and altered. An other ys when, the institucion being accordinglie doen, some thing ys added for the more deuoute; and semelie doing of the same.
[Page]As touchinge the first waie, yt ys certen that the substance of the institucion A The Substance of a Sacrament must be obserued the maner of ministring maie be altered. Mat. 28. of a Sacrament being obserued, ther ys none offence comitted by the Churche to alter the maner of the ministracion therof. As for example.
Chryste in the institucion of Baptisme was baptised in the Riuer Iordain, and geuing commission to his Apostles to baptise, the matter of Baptisme nowe presupposed, whiche ys the one parte of the Substance of the Sacrament, he taught them the forme, which ys the other parte of the Substance of the Sacrament saing: Euntes, Baptisate eos, In nomine Patris, & Filij, et Spiritus sancti. Go ye and chrysten them in the name of the Father, and of the Sonne, and of the holie Goste. The one parte of Baptisme then ys water, the other ys the woorde: I baptise thee in the name of the Father and of the Sonne etc. These two thinges beinge the Substance of the Sacrament must neades be doen. But the maner of the doing of these maie be altered, as the practise of the primitiue Churche, as well as of the Churche euer synce wery well proueth.
For the maner of the institucion was to baptise in a Riuer, and that in the B Riuer of Iordan. This maner was altered by the Apostles. For Peter being at Hierusalem vpon the daie of the comming of the holie Goste in to the Apoles, called the daie of Pentecost, at one sermon the same daie cōuerted three thousand to Chryst, and baptised them furtwith, and nether went to Iordan, non other Riuer.
The Churche also nowe and of long time hath vsed no riuer, but semelie vessels with water, and so baptise them that are to be baptised. Yf we shoulde be streict obseruers of the maner, and ther in folowe our Master Chryst, the Authour of the Sacrament, then for that he was then a perfecte man, and thirtie yeares of age, none shoulde be baptised vntill they were of the same age.
Euen so the instituciō of the Sacramēt of the bodie and blood of Chryst, as yt had by him a Substance apoincted, as ys before saied: So he vsed also about yt soche maner as pleased him for that time to vse. This maner Chrysts maner in ministring the blessed Sacrament hath no cō maūdemēt. as yt had no commaundement for the obseruacion of yt from Chryst: So C hath yt no necessite to be obserued. Wherfor as ys saied of the maner of Baptisme: So the practise of the primitiue Churche proueth, that this also maie be altered.
Chrystes maner in the institucion of the Sacrament was, that he did distribute yt to twelue. This maner bindeth not, that yt must allwais be imparted to twelue, and to none other nombre. These twelue also were Apostles: this likewise bindeth not, that the disciples and other chrystians of inferioure sorte shoulde not communicate. So to come to the pourpose, Chryst distributed his bodie and bloode to his Apostles, and reserued nothing of that, that was consecrated: This also beinge a parte of the maner, and not of the Substance of the Sacrament, bindeth no more then these that folowe. Chryste ministred his bodie and bloode at night: yt bindeth not vs to do the like. For the Church vseth yt in the daie. The Sacrament was ministred when they had supped with the Paschall lambe, the Churche euen from the beginninge hath and doth yt fastinge.
And notwitstanding that yt was vsed certain yeares after Chryst to be D receaued after meat, as the Epistle to the Corynthians doth well proue: yet saincte Augustine asscribeth the chaunge of that maner to the holie Gost. Placuit enim Spiritui sancto, vt in honorem tanti Sacramenti in os christiani Ad Janua. epist. 118. prius Dominicum corpus intraret quàm exteri cibi. Yt hath pleased the holie Goste [Page 64](saieth he) that into the mouthe of a Chrysten man, first shoulde enter the bodie of owre lorde, then other outwarde meates. A
Seing then all these maners of the ministracion be altered, and the receauing of the Sacrament immediatelie vpon the consecracion, ys not of the substance of the Sacrament, but of the maner of yt, why maie yt not withoute perill be altered, as well as the other be?
Sainct Augustine geuing a cause of that maner of receauing declareth that the order of receauing was left to the Apostles to dispose. Saluator quò vehemē tius commendaret mysterij altitudinem, vltimum hoc voluit infigere cordibus, & memoriae Aug. ibi. Discipulorum, à quibus ad passionem digressurus erat. Et ideò non praecepit quo deinceps ordine sumeretur, vt Apostolis, per quos erat eclcesias dispositurus, seruaret bunc locum. Owre Sauiour, wherbie he might the more vehementlie commēdethe Chryst left the maner of ministracion of the Sacrament to be disposed by his Apostles. great excellencie of the mystery, wolde last of all fixe this in the heartes and memorie of his disciples, from whom he was aboute to departe to his passiō. And therfore he did not g [...]ue commaundement in, or after what ordre yt shoulde be after ward receaued, for that vnto his Apostles, by whome he wolde set his Churche in ordre he wolde reserue that place. Thus saiucte Augustin. B
In whiche sentence we are first taught, that Chryst did not geue his bodie and bloode to his Apostles after Supper, bycause yt shoulde so be doen still, nether bicause yt was streigt waie receaued after he consecrated yt, that yt shoulde be so still: but both these were doen than, bycause they shoulde be his last factes before his passion, doē to his disciples, that the mysterie might therby better remain in their memories.
Note again that saincte Augustine saieth: That he gaue no commaundement, in what maner yt shoulde afterwarde be receaued, So that the maner that Chryst Chrystes maner in ministring the blessed Sacrament hath no cō maūdemēt. vsed then was not as a commaundement to binde vs to euery thing preciselie and annswerablie as he did yt. But the substanciall parte being obserued, the maner was lefte to the disposition of his Churche.
Wherfore we maie conclude, that, notwithstanding the argument of the Aduersary, that reseruacion ys not mencioned in the Scripture, therfore yt aught not to be vsed, we maie celebrate the blessed mysterie in the morning, C though he did yt at night: We maie receaue yt fasting, though he gaue yt to his Apostles after supper: So maie we receaue yt long after the consecracion, though yt were ministred to the Apostles immediatelie after. For I saie, we are bownde to the substance of the Sacrament, and not to the maner.
And here will I ioin again with the Proclamer in this pointe, that yf he Issue ioined with the Proclamer touching reseruacion. Reseruaciō ys not against the institucion of Chryst. can vpon the institucion of the Sacrament proue, that we maie not as well reserue the same after yt ys consecrate, as we maie alter the time of ministracion and receauing therof, I will geue place to him in this controuersie.
And so in the mean time I dare conclude this, that to reserue the Sacrament ys not a thinge against the institucion of the same. Wherfore leauinge this as sufficientlie spoken of for this time, I will speake breislie of the other parte of this diuision.
The seconde parte was, that some thinges be added to the ministraciō, not altering, or chaunging the Substance of yt, but to cause and prouoke deuociō and semely behauiour towarde so woorthie an institucion. As for example: In the Baptisme of Chryst, ther were neither exorcismes, neither praiers, neither D geuing of name, neither anie like Ceremonies. In the Baptisme wher Peter baptised three thousāde, we reade of no Ceremonies vsed, neither praiers. Act. 2.
Likewise in the last supper, we finde not manny Ceremonies. This we reade that: Surgit à coena & ponit vestimenta sua, & cùm accepisset lin theum praecinxit se. Ioan. 13. [Page]He rose from supper, and laied a side his garmentes, and when he had taken E a towell, he girded him self, and putting water in to a basen he beganne to washe the feet of his Disciles. And after he had washed them, he puteth on his garmentes again, and satte down to the Supper of the institucion of the Sacrament. In the whiche we neither read that any praies were made, nor that Chryst had any other then his owne garmentes vpon him, when he ministred. Nowe the Churche hath in vse, not onelie that the minister hath some other garmentes vpon him, beside his vsuall garmentes, in the ministracion of these Sacramentes, but vseth also certain Ceremonies, and praiers not vsed in the institucion of them, whiche all are doen to helpe our infirmitie, imbecillitie, and weaknesse, and to lifte vs vppe to some higher cō sideracion, and estimacion of these Sacramētes, then we shulde atteing vnto, yf they were but barelie ministred.
Soche ys our grossenesse, that wher we see no difference in externe and outwarde cowntenance, we iudge the thinges internlie, or inwardlie to be of like condicion, or at the leest not moche better the one then the other. F Wher then these Ceremonies be added to the substance of the Sacrament for causes before saied, yt ys not therfor to be saied that Chrystes institucion ys altered, whiche in substance still remaineth wholl, neither ys the Churche to be exclamed vpon therfor with reproche, no more then yt ys for that yt ordeineth the Sacrament to be receaued fasting, for the whiche saincte Augustine saieth: Liquidè apparet, quando primum acceperunt Discipuli corpus & sanguinem Domini, non eos accepisse ieiunos. Nunquid tamen proptered Ad Ian calumniandum est vniuersae Ecclesiae, quòd à ieiunis semper accipitur? Yt doth plainlie appeare that whē the Apostles did first receaue the bodie and bloode of Chryst, they did not receaue thē fasting. Ys therfor the vniuersall Churche to be reproued bycause the same bodie and blod of Chryst ys nowe receaued fasting?
Yf the Churche, by the iudgement of saincte Austen, ys not to be reproued, though yt altered the maner of the receauing of the bodie and blood of Chryste: howe moche lesse ys yt to be reproued for the adding or putting to of certain godlie Ceremonies for the better, and more deuoute maner of G receauing?
Seing then the vniuersall Churche hath, putte to the ministracion of the Sacramētes aswell of Baptisme as of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, certain praiers, and garmētes, for the admoniciō of the people, that heauēlie thinges be in doinge, and so to stirre vppe their deuociō, and not therbie altering the substance of the Sacramentes: they be without all doubte to be accepted, regarded, and reuerenced, and the Church therfor not to be reproued.
THE SEVEN AND TWENTETH CHAP. AVNSWEring other argumentes, and obiections of the Proclamer.
I Haue, as me semeth, satisfied the request of the Proclamer. For in this matter I haue produced the examples of the primitiue Churche, the sainges of diuerse of the auncient Fathers: the decrees of sondrie Councells: Whiche be not obscure, or H doubefull sentences, but plain, and manifest.
And nowe that we haue proued the doinges of the Churche in this behalf to be laufull, and weldoē: let vs nowe heare what proof he bringeth against the Churche.
In his sermon, amonge other thinges conteined in the exclamaciō ther, he saied [Page 65]saieth thus: Yf anie learned man of all our Aduersaries, or yf all the learned men that be a liue, be hable to bringe anie one sufficient sentence, oute of any catholique doctour, or oute A of anie olde generall Councell, or oute of the holie scriptures of God, or anie one example of the primitiue churche, wherbie yt maie be clerelie and plainlie proued, that the Sacrament was then, or nowe aught to be hanged vppe vnder a Canopie, I promised then that I wolde geue ouer, and subscribe vnto him.
The office and callinge of him that spake these woordes, the place they were spoken in the weight of the matter, that was spoken of, will not suffer the man (as I suppose) to fauoure reseruacion couertlie, and with a gibing mocke onelie to inweigh against the maner of reseruacion. I neuer knewe anie of his opinion, and doctrine, denieng the presence, but he made clean worke, and denied all the rest, that apperteineth to the Sacrament. Yt ys then to be thought that this article of the proclamacion impugneth as well reseruacion yt self, as the maner of yt.
But this Proclamacion including a lawe, that no soche reseruacion shoulde be in the Churche, what prof, what grownde hath yt annexed? Yt ys no small matter to improue the ordre of the wholl Churche obserued nine hundret B yeares and aboue. Wherfor yt ys like that he hath made some great proof against yt, and specially his office and place withall considered.
I neuer sawe a man dispossessed, that had ben in possession time oute of minde, but he should, shewe good matter that wolde dispossesse him, and the The Proclamer impugned Reseruaciō without reasō or authoritie. other onelie to stande to his possession, and not be driuen to shewe his euidence. What sheweth this proclamer? trulie nothinge. what no scripture? no doctour? no Councell? that the Churche shoulde breake this ordre? None at all, but his bare proclamacion, and yet therwith driueth the Churche to shewe. An imperiouse maner. After this maner he maie breake mo good ordres in one daie, thē he will make while he liueth. Well, by cause yt ys to shamefull to break aunciēt orders of the Church, without some proof: I will applie one of his great proues made in his sermō to one pourpose, to serue this also.
In his saied sermon to improue priuate Masse (as he list to tearme yt) he alleageth this saing of Chryste, Hoc facite. Doo this: wherunto he addeth his Fol. 34. exposition saing: that ys to saie, practise this, that I haue here doen, and that in soche C forme and sorte, as ye haue seen me doo yt. Thus moch this Proclamer.
As by this his exposition, yf yt were aught wourth, he maie seem to proue, that forasmoche as Chryst did not receaue alone, but gaue also to the Apostles, the ministre maie not receaue alone, but must also geue to other: So likewise yt proueth aswell, that forasmoche as Chryste reserued no parte of the Sacrament, no more shoulde the Churche nowe.
Yt ys a great libertie that this man taketh vnto him self, to make soche expositions as liketh him self, and vpon his owne exposition to grownd an argument to condemne the practise of the wholl Church, as though yt were Locus Topycus, a sure grownded argument, when yt ys fownded but vpon his owne authoritie. I haue not redde this maner of exposition in anie catholike Authour, auncient, or of the later daies, that these woordes of Chryst (do this) shoulde be a charge and commaundement to celebrate the memoriall of Chrystes death in the same sorte and maner, that Chryst did: but raither that his bodie and blood shoulde be receaued in the Sacrament, as the Substance D whervpon the memoriall should be grownded, withoute anie charge geuen of the maner and forme. So doth Saincte Hierom expownde these woordes, referring the commaundement to the doing of the thing, and not to the doinge of the maner for the memoriall of Chryste. [Page]This ys his saing: Ideò hoc Saluator tradidit Sacramentum, vt per hoc semper commemoremus, quia pro nobis est mortuus. Nam & ideò cùm accipimus, à sacerdotibus commonemur In 11. cap. 1. Cor. E quia corpus & sanguis est Christi, vt beneficijs eius non existamus ingrati. Therfor our Sauiour deliuered this Sacrament, that by this we shoulde allwaies remembre that he died for vs. For therfore also, when we receaue, we are putte in minde by the preistes that yt ys the bodie and bloode of Chryste, that we shoulde not be vnthankfull for the benefittes receaued. Thus sainct Hierom.
Chrysostom also dissenteth not from this maner of exposition. For thus he saieth: Deinde de coena illa referens, praesentia his, quae tunc fuerant, copulat, vt quemadmodum in illa ipsa vespera, & mensa dispositi, ab ipso Christo hoc acceperunt Jn 11. 1. Co. sacrificium: it a & nunc disponerentur, & inquit: Quotiescunque comederitis panem hunc, & sanguinem hunc biberitis, mortem Domini annunciabitis donec veniat. Quemadmodum Christus & in pane, & in calice, in commemorationem hoc facite, dixit, causam nobis aperiens, quare mysterium daret, cum alijs hanc esse dicens sufficientem no [...]s ad pietatem. Nam cùm intelliges, quid propter te Dominus passus est, sapientior efficieris. Ita & ipse iterum inquit: Quotiescunque manducaueritis, mortem eius annunciabitis. F Et haec illa Coena est. Afterward speaking of that supper he coopleth thinges present, to those that then were, that as in the same euentide and table, they being disposed did receaue of Chryste him self this sacrifice: euen so nowe also they shoulde be disposed, and saied. As often as ye shall drinke this bloode, ye shall declare the death of our Lorde vntill he come. For as Chryst both at the bread, and at the cuppe saied: Do this in my remembrance, opening a cause why he wolde geue the mysterie among other, saied this to be sufficient to godlinesse. For when thowe shalt vnderstande what our Lorde hath suffred for thee, thowe shalt be made the wiser: Euen so he also saieth again: As often as ye shall eate, ye shall declare his death, and this ys euen the same Supper. Thus farre Chrysost.
In whose woordes, as well as in saincte Hieroms, we see this commaundement of Chryst ( Hocfacite, do this) to be referred to the Substance, that Chrystes woordes, This do ye, &c. Be referred to the substā ce, not to the maner. ys, to the bodie and bloode of Chryste to be receaued for his memoriall, G and not to the maner of receauing.
And by the waie (gentle reader) note and beare awaie these woordes of saincte Hierom, that he saieth, that when we receaue, we are admonished of the preistes that yt ys the bodie and bloode of Chryste, wherby we are taught both wherunto tendeth the commaundement of Chryste, and also what we receaue in that holie and honorable Sacrament.
I wishe also that Chrysostome might be noted, howe he vttereth the woordes of saincte Paule. Sainct Paule saieth thus: As often as ye shall eate What S. Paule calleth the cuppe Chrysost. calleth yt to bloode this bread, and drinke this cuppe: Chrysostom thus: As often as ye shall eate this bread, and drinke this bloode: not reporting euery wher the verie woordes of saincte Paule, but raither the sense, and vnderstanding. So wher saincte Paule calleth yt the cuppe of our Lorde, this mā expownding S. Paule calleth yt the blood of Chryst, wherby we are taught, what ys in the cuppe of our Lorde, euē the bloode of Chryste, and not bare wine, yf yt be so in that parte of the Sacramēt, thē in the other ys the bodie of Chryst, and not bare bread. H
But to return to our pourpose: Euthymius also expowndinge the saied woordes of Chryst, vnderstandeth them not of the maner, but of the Substā ce These be his woordes: Ait autem Lucas hoc quoque dixisse Christum: Hoc Euth. in 26 Matth. sacite in mei recordationem, hoc, inquit, nouum mysterium, & non illud vetus illud mysterium in recordationem inductum est salutis Hebraeorum primogenitorum in Aegypto, [Page 66] ac libertatis Hebraeorum: hoc autem in recordatiouem Domini. Per tale enim sacrificium reminiscimur, quòd corpus suum in mortem tradiderit, & sanguinem suum effuderit, A ac ita continuitate, memoriam renouamus. Luke saieth that our Lorde also saied: Do ye this in my remembrance. This newe mystery (saieth he) and not that olde. For trulie that olde mysterie was instituted in the remembrance of the sauing of the first born of the Hebrues, and of the deliuerance of the Hebrues. But this ys in the remembrance of our Lorde. By soche a sacrifice we remembre that he deliuered his bodie to death, and shed furth his bloode, and so by continuance we renewe memorie. Thus moche Euthymius. Who as the other Fathers aboue alleaged, vnderstandeth Chrystes commaundement of the substance of the Sacrament no mencion made of the maner.
After these to see some of the later writers, howe they vnderstood these woordes, yt shall not be amisse, that hauing the mindes of men of diuerse ages, what the true vnderstanding ys, yt maie the better appeare.
Sainct Thomas, among learned and holie men, that haue ben with in these foure hundreth yeares, a man right famouse saieth thus: Hoc facite &c. Iniungit vsum huius Sacramenti, dicens: Hoc facite, quotiescunque sumetis in meam Tho. Aqui. in 11. 1. Co. commemorationem, id est, in memoriam meae passionis. Do this &c. He commaundeth B the vse of the Sacramēt, saing: This do ye as often as ye shall receaue, in my commemoracion, that ys in the memorie of my passion.
And again he saieth: Mortem Domini annunciabitis repraesentando eam, per hoc Sacramentum. Ye shall shewe furth the death of our Lorde, representing yt by this Sacrament.
Hauing no regarde of the contempt of the Aduersarie contemning the learned men of the later age, I will among manie that maie be brought, for the auoiding of tediousnesse, and yet to shewe the conformitie of doctrine in this age, with the auncient age, bring the exposition of one named Hugo, whose saing ys this. Dixerat quòd sumerent corpus Domini, & sanguinem in commemorationem eius, hic determinat in quam: quia in Dominicae passionis. Hugo Car. in 11. 1. Co. He had saied, that they shoulde receaue the bodie and blood of oure Lorde in the remembrance of him. Here he determineth in what remembrance. C In the remembrance (saieth he) of our Lordes passion.
Nowe ye haue heard diuerse expownding these woordes, Hoc sacite (do this) all agreing that they are to be refered, and vnderstanded to and of the substance and vse of the Sacrament, that ys, that yt shoulde be receaued in the remembrance of Chrystes passion and deathe. But that we are by those woordes commaunded to obserue that maner and forme, that our Sauiour obserued in his ministracion, otherwise then ys saied both in the The Proclamer vseth his owne authoritie in expounding the scriptures for he hath none other. last chapiter, and in this also, ther ys no one title in these Authours.
By this then yt maie well be thought and supposed, that this man vsing his absolute authoritie, for lacke of other helpe, had iuuented and framed soche an exposition vpon this scripture, as was not knowen to the auncient expositours, nor yet to them of the later time, and so verie like neuer seen written, or heard spoken hefore this time. And yet with a pretense of simplicitie and synceritie, yt ys commended to the people, as the trew syncere woorde of God, when yt hath neither Gods woorde, nor aide of holie Fathers to bear yt, but ys a plain inuencion of his owne, D void of all trueth.
Thus moche being doen by authoritie, I shall also by good reason proue The Proclamer his exposition im pugned by reason. his exposition false. For he him self graunteth that for fiue or sixe hundreth yeares after Chryste, the Churche vsed the institucion of Chryst purelie [Page]and well, withoute the breach of Chrystes woorde or commaundement. E But for the most parte of that time they did not obserue the practise of Chrystes institucion in soche forme and sorte as he did him self. Wherfor to practise that, that Chryste did in his last supper in some other maner or sorte then he did, ys not the breach of his woorde. Yf yt be not the breach of his woorde, then ys this mans exposition false.
That the primitiue and auncient Church vsed an other forme and maner in the ministracion of the Sacramēt, then Chryst did in the institucion of the Masses in the primitiue church varied frē the forme and maner of Chrystes institucion. same, the Masse of saincte Iames, of the whiche this man maketh mencion, the Masse of saincte Basill, the Masse of Chrysostome, the Masse vsed in Millan by sainct Ambrose, with the wholl practise as well of the Apostles, as of other doth moste manifestlie testisie. And these Masses vsed in the primitiue and auncient Churche did all agree in the Substance of the Sacrament: But in the forme, maner, and sorte of ministracion, ther was great diuersitie, one moche varieng from an other, and euerie one of them varieng from the maner that Chryste vsed, and yet euery one godlie and good. We maie then F conclude that either the primitiue and auncient Churche, varieng from the forme and sorte of Chrystes ministracion, did offende, which ys not to be thought, or ells that this Proclamer so wresting the scripture to maintien his false Docttine, hath offended, which I dare auouche, maie well be saied.
We maie also impugne this exposition, by this mans owne practise, who Proclamer his reason impugned by his owne practise. being soche a precise reformer of the abuses of the Church (as he termeth yt) will not in his doinges committe anie notoriouse abuse, howe so euer he doth in his woordes. Yt ys notoriouse that he ministreth in other sorte and forme then Chryst did. Wherfor yf ther be no abuse in his doing, ther ys abuse in his sainge. For his saing, and doing in this matter be plainly contrarie. He saieth we must practise in soche sort and forme as Chryste did, but his doinges be not in soche sort and forme as Chryst did. That his forme ys not soche as Chryst vsed, yt ys more manifest then I neade to make rehersall. G
For Chryst ministred when the Apostles had eaten: this man when the people be fasting. Chryste in the euening: this man in the morning. Chryste I am not certen but J [...]udge the best. with vsuall vuleauened bread: this man withe wafer cakes. Chryste withoute any other straung garment then his owne vsuallie worn: this man in other garmentes appoincted to that pourpose. Chryst did sitte with the twelue: this man standeth with an vncertain nombre, with manie other like.
And here yf this expositour will haue his exposition streictly laied to all the forme & sorte of Chrystes doing in his supper: I wolde learn of him, whether I knowing a man to be farre vnworthie to receaue the blessed Sacrament, shall admitte him to the table, and ministre vnto him notwithstanding his vnwoorthinesse, bycause that Chryst did knowe Iudas to be vnwoorthie and yet ministred to him.
But to return, ye maie perceaue that the forme and sorte, which this man vseth in his communion, ys moche in many thinges discrepant from the doinges of Chryst in his supper. And yet I suppose, that he thinketh H Chrystes maner in ministraciō of the Sacramēt neuer since vsed. well of him self in his so doing. Yf then his doing be good: then ys his exposition naught.
And to cōclude, seing the Apostles, the Fathers of the primitiue Churche, the aunciēt doctours that were within three, foure, and fiue hundreth yeares [Page 67]of Chryst, obserued not the forme and sort that Chryste vsed in the ministracion of his Supper, nor any other age since that time, neither this A man himself hath or dothe practise the same, we maie boldelie saie, that yt ys no charge geuen of Chryste to do all thinges in the ministracion in soche sorte and forme as he did, but the substance doen, the other thinges be of no necessitie, but be at the libertie of the Churche to dispose and ordre, as yt hath doen. Then as manie thinges haue ben doen aboute the ministracion, whiche Chryst did not: So maie reseruacion be doen, though Chryste did yt not.
This argument then being, as I trust, fullie solued, I finde nothing in his sermon, that he obiecteth against this matter of reseruacion directlie. But I finde a prettie sleight that he vseth, as therby to make his audience beleue, that to reserue the Sacramēt ys an abuse, whiche sleight when I haue opened to the reader, he shall I trust perceaue, that vnder the pretence and cowntenance of synceritie, and simplicitie, he iugleth with craft and subtletie.
For the better perceiuing of this sleight, yf ye do not remembre what ys alleaged oute of Tertullian, and saincte Ciprian in the xxiiij. chapiter of this B booke, haue recourse thither, and reade them. This Proclamer being pressed with those places (for they make mightilie and directlie against him in this matter) enombring diuerse and sondrie abuses of the Sacramentes of Baptisme, & of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, yt liked him to putte that, that Tertullian and Ciprian spake of the Sacrament reserued and receaued of good women, among his abuses, wherin in dede he moche abuseth himself. His woordes be these:
A sleight of the Proclamer to abuse Tertul. and S. Cyprian. In the time of Tertullian and saincte Cyprian, whiche was a thousande and foure hundreth yeares agon, women commonly tooke the Sacrament home with them in their napkins, and laied yt in their chestes, and receaued a porcion of yt in the morning before other meates.
See ye not howe by this sleight, he wolde dasell the eyes and iudgement of the reader, that when he shoulde happe to read these places, he shoulde repute and esteem thē, not as good examples, but as abuses, and so shaddowe the matter of reseruacion whiche they proue. But dothe he finde this spoken C of Tertullian as an abuse? Dothe Tertullian so terme yt? Naie I am sure he doth not. Yf Tertulliā doo not so accōpt yt, whie dothe this newe maker of abuses so terme yt? Tertulian speaketh of yt as a thing well doen, what commission then aboue Tertullian had this man to saie yt ys euell doen.
As for saincte Ciprian the Aduersarie perhappe wolde glose yt a litle, and proue yt an abuse, bycause the woman, whē she opened her coafer, wher the holie Sacrament laie, ther sprang oute a fire that feared her, that she durst not touch yt. But let the Proclamer veiue that place of saincte Cyprian well, and he shall finde none other abuse mencioned ther of him, but that the woman wolde haue presumed to touche the holie thinge of our Lorde (as he termeth yt) with vnwoorthie hādes. This ys the abuse that S. Cyprian reherseth ther. But that she reserued yt, he accompteth yt no abuse. For ther ys no soche woorde in saincte Cyprian. Wherfore Reader, be ware of soche sleightes, and by this perceaue, that all ys not trewth, that this man so gloriouslie setteth furth. D
And yf he accompt yt an abuse, bycause they caried yt home, what will he saie to the vse of the Churche in the time of Iustinus Martyr? was not then the Sacrament caried home to soche as were absent? This holie man so testifieth saing thus: Cùm autem is qui praeest gratias egerit, & totus populus Just. in Apologia. [Page] approbauerit, hi, qui vocantur apud nos Diaconi, distribuunt vnicuique praesentium, vt E participent de pane, in quo gratiae actae sunt, et de vino et aqua, et ijs qui non sunt praessentes deferūt domū. Whē he that ys cheif hath geuē thankes, and all the people hath cōsented to yt, these, that with vs be called Deacons, do distribute of the cō secrated The Sacramēt caried home to thē that were absent. bread, and of the wine and water, to euery one that ys present to receaue, and to those that be absent they carie yt home. Thus Iustinus.
Sainct Basill also wittnesseth that holie men liuing in wildernesse did reserue the Sacrament in their Cells, and as deuocion moued them, receaued yt. Thus he saieth: Epist. ad Caesariam Patriciam. Omnes in eremis solitariam vitam agentes, vbi non est sacerdos Cōmunionem domi seruantes, à seipsis communicant, All that lead solitarie liues in the wildernesse, wher ther ys no preist, keping the Sacrament in their houses, receaue yt by them selues. Thus sainct Basill.
The Sacr. reserued in Rome. in S. Hieroms time.Saincte Hierom also in his Apologie against Iouinian, testifieth that the people of Rome in his time vsed to kepe the Sacrament in their houses, and receaued yt by them selues.
Nowe yf the Sacrament were caried to the houses of soche as were absent (as appareth by Iustinus) and of diuerse kept to be receaued as deuocion serued F (as ys wittnessed by saincte Basill and saincte Hierom) And so to doo was thē the vse of the Churche, yt doth well appeare that for soche godlie pourposes, to carie yt home and to reserue yt, ys no abuse. Wherfor in this that the Proclamer accompted yt an abuse bycause yt was caried from the Churche, and receaued at home (as before ys saied) in making that accompte he moche abuseth him self.
And here, Reader, beside that good vse to carie the Sacrament to soche as neaded yt, ys ther not in Iustine a good argument for reseruacion? was not the Sacrament, when all the Communion was doen in the Churche, reserued to be caried to them that were absent? Nowe yf yt maie be reserued but so long time, why maie yt not be kept a longer time? Yf not a longer time, let the Proclamer bring furthe the iust prescript time oute of the Scriptures, the Doctours, or Councells, and we shall regarde the prescription, yf he can not (as I am sure that he can not) let him ceasse with these his vain inuēted G trifles to vexe, disturbe, diuide, molest and slaunder the catholike Churche, and let him acknowledge that the Churche in these our daies, cariēg the Sacrament to soche as be sicke, and to soche as cā not come to the Church, offendeth not, neither abuseth the Sacrament in so doing, but foloweth the godlie example of the auncient catholique Churche, as nowe ye haue heard to the full testified.
And wher the Churchc kepeth and reserued the Sacrament on the altar, or ells wher, let him knowe by saincte Basill, and saincte Hierom, that so yt The church nowe reseruing the Sacr. and sending yt to the sick offendeth not was in their time, and from the beginning likewise reserued and kept, so that the Churche neither in sending the Sacrament to sicke folkes, or other absent in their necessitie, neither in keping yt in the churche, dothe other wise then was doen in the primitiue Churche.
Wherfor I wishe thee (gentle Reader) to staie thy self, and not to suffer thy self to be caried awaie with soche vain, diuerse, and straunge Doctrines, but consider well the practise of the Churche declared vnto thee in this matter. H Consider the vse of reseruacion through oute all the Churche vntill this time of Scisme and heresie, to be doen not onelie in Englonde, but in all Realms Chrystened, whiche being so vniuersallie receaued, maie not be thought to be euell doen, or anie abuse to be therin committed: but yt aught with all humblenesse to be obeied, receaued, and folowed.
[Page 68]For two thinges by the doctrine of saincte Augustine must we obserue: the one ys what so euer ys taught vs of the Scripture: the other, what we A finde obserued throughoute all the Churche. Soche rule gaue he to Ianuarius: Si quid diuinae scripturae praescribit autoritas, non est dubitandum, quin ita facere Ad Ianua. Epist. 118. What soeuer the Churche vseth throughout the worlde yt ys to be obserued. debeamus vt legimus. Similiter etiam si quid per orbem frequentat Ecclesia. Nam hoc quin ita faciendum sit, disputare, insolentissimae insaniae est. What soeuer the authoritie of the diuine scripture prescribeth vnto vs, ther ys no doubte but we aught euen so to doo as we read, likewise what soeuer the Churche vsith throughoute the worlde. For to dispute whether this shoulde be so doen or no, yt ys a most presumptuouse madnesse. Thus sainct Augustin,
Seing then reseruacion ys and hath ben vsed through oute all the Churche: And yet nowe this Proclamer withoute anie authoritie maketh his proclamacion against yt, ys not he conuinced by the sentence of saincte Augustine, to be a presumtuouse madde man, or presumptuouslie madde? For although the scripture geueth no cōmaundement for reseruacion, as yt doth not also for receauing in the morning, and before meate, yet the vse and custome of the people of God, and the commaundement of the elders are to be B holden for a lawe, as saincte Augustine saieth in an other place: In his rebus, Ad Casulanum Epist. 86. Oordinaunces of the elders to be holden for lawes, wher scripture prescribeth not. de quibus nihil certi statuit scriptura diuina, mos populi Dei, vel instituta maiorum prolege tenenda sunt. Et sicut praeuaricatores Diuinarnm legum: ita contemptores ecclesiasticarum consuetudinum coercendi sunt. Si quis autem videtur contentiosus esse, nos talem consuetudinem non habemus, neque Ecclesia Dei. In these thinges of the whiche the scripture of God hath determined nothing certen, the custome of the people of God, or the ordinances of the elders, are to be holden for a lawe. And as the breakers of the lawe of God: so the contemners of the ecclesiasticall ordinaunces, or customes of the Churche, are to be punished. But yf anie man seem to be contenciouse, we haue no soche custome, nor yet the Churche of God.
Thus ye see, what be saincte Augustines rules in soche matters, as be not expressedlie determined by the scriptures. Ye heare howe the decrees, commaundementes, and the customes of the people of God (howe soeuer yt liketh this newe reformer to mocke and skorn them) by the minde of saincte C Augustine, are to be holden for hawes, and the contemners of them are to be punished.
These matters with me seeme to haue weight, but with soche as can swallowe a Camell, and choke with a gnatte, perchaunce they seem light enough. But yet howe a priuate person maie breake a common ordre, vniuersalie receaued, whiche is not against the scriptures, I knowe not. But of this matter for aunswer to this Proclamer, I trust ther ys sufficientlie saied. Wherfore leauing yt, I will proceade further in the order of my matter cheifly pourposed and intended.
THE EIGHT AND TWENTETH CHAP. BEGINNETH to speake of the prophecies, and first of the prophecie of the preisthead of Chryst after the ordre of Melchisedech.
D NOwe after the figures, whiche in a darke maner did as yt were painte the mysteries of Chryste being applied to the same, by ordre folowe the prophecies, whiche also spake before of the same mysteries. Among the whiche that Prophecie shall be first spoken of, that aunswereth the first figure. Whiche figure was [Page]of Melchisedech, answerablie to whiche the Prophet Dauid prophecied thus: E Iurauit Dominus, & non poenitebit eum, tu es sacerdos in aeternum secundùm ordinem Melchisedech. Owre lorde hath sworn, and yt shall not forthinke him. Thowe Psal. 109. arte a preist for euer after the ordre of Melchisedech.
That this prophecie ys spoken of Chryste, he himself proueth in the Gospell, wher we read that the Phariseis being gathered to gether, Chryst asketh them a quiestion, saing: Quid vobis videtur de Christo? Cuius filius est? Dicunt ei Mat. 22. Dauid. Quomodò ergo Dauid in spiritu vocat eum Dominum, dicens: Dixit Dominus Domino meo, sede à dextris meis, &c. Si ergo Dauid in spiritu vocat eum Dominum, quomodo filius eius est? What thinke ye of Chryst? Whose Sonne ys he? They saied vnto him: The Sonne of Dauid. Howe then dothe Dauid in spirit call him Lorde, sainge: The Lord saied vnto my Lorde, sitte thowe on my right hand, &c. Yf then Dauid in spirit call him Lorde howe ys he then his Sonne?
By which allegacion of our sauiour Chryste yt ys manifest, that this psalme ys to be vnderstanded of him, whiche also hath some proofe of the Phariseis so to be. For when they heard Chryst alleadge this psalme, and F being learned in the lawe knewe that yt was prophecied of Messias, though they were so confounded, that they coulde not answer a woorde: yet they saied not that this psalme ys not vnderstand of Chryst, whiche they wolde not haue spared to doo, yf in the common opinion of learned men yt had ben so vnderstanded, raither then they wolde haue susteined soche confusion as to be put to silence. Wherfor by this yt maie appeare that the common opinion of the Iewes was also, that this psalme was a prophecie of Chryste. Among the whiche Iewes one Rabbi Ionathas a man of great authoritie among them, an Rabbi Barachias being writers bothe do expownd this Psalme of Christe.
But what neadeth me seke for proof so farre of, seing that saincte Peter in the Actes, and saincte Paule in his first epistle to the Corinthians, and to the Hebrues maie suffice to proue this matter.
Saincte Peter in the Actes doth alleage the same psalme vnderstanding G Act. 2. yt of Chryst. Sainct Paule to the Corinthians applieth the same psalme to Chryste saing. Oportes illum regnare, donec ponat omnes inimicos sub pedibus eius. 1. Cor. 15. He must reign, till he hath putte all his enemies vnder his feete.
But to the Hebrues he most fullie and plainlie teacheth the same, prouing first therby the excellency of Chryst aboue the Angells, and saieth: Ad quem autem Angelorum dixit aliquando: Sede à dextris meis, donec ponam inimicos Hebr. 1. tuos scabellum pedum tuorum? Vnto whiche of the Angels hath he saied at anie time, Sitt thowe on my right hand, till I make thy enemies thy footestoole? All these alleadged do well proue this psalme to be a prophecie of Chryste.
But yet sainct Paule proceading, commeth somwhat nearer to the pourpose, and applieth the verse of this psalme first aboue alleaged, vnto Chryste in mo places then one, prouinge therby the ceassing of the legall preisthead, for that Chryst was nowe commed the preiste after the order of Mechisedech. And first declaring that Chryst did not vsurpe his preistheade, H but that he was appointed to yt by God, he saied: Sic & Christus non semetipsum glorificauit vt Pontifex fieret, sed qui locutus est ad eum, &c. Tu es sacerdos Hebr. 5. in aeternum secundùm ordinem Melchisedech. Euen so Chryste also glorified not him self to be made the high pteist, but he that said vnto him, &c. Thowe arte a preist for euer after the order of Melchisedech.
[Page 69]And declaring the great benefitte, that came by him being the high preist A to all beleuers, he saieth again: Et consummatus factus est omnibus obtemperantibus sibi causa salutis aeternae, appellatus à Deo Pontifex iuxta ordinem Melchisedech. And Ibid. he being perfight, was the cause of eternall saluacion vnto all them that obeied him, and ys called of God an high preist after the ordre of Melchisedech.
Likewise he calleth him in the VI. chapiter. And the wholl VII. chap. he occupieth in applieng Melchisedech to Chryst, prouing by this prophecie, the abrogacion of the preisthead of the lawe, and so consequētlie of the lawe yt self. Wherfore he saied. Yf nowe therfore perfection came by the preistheade Hebr. 7. of the Leuites (for vnder that preisthead the people receaued the lawe) what neadeth further, that an other preist shoulde rise to be called after the ordre of Melchisedech, and not after the order of Aaron? For yf the preisthead be translated, then of necessitie must the lawe be translated also, &c. For after this maner dothe he testifie, Thowe arte a preist for euer after the order of Melchisedech. Then the commaundement that went before ys disanulled, bycause of weakenesse and vnprofitablenesse. B
And further declaring the excellencie of Chrystes preisthead aboue the preisthead of Aaron, he saieth: For these preistes were made withoute an othe, but this preist with an othe, by him that saied to him: The Lorde sware and will not repent him. Thowe art a preist for euer, after the order of Melchisedech.
Thus as the lawe of nature hath in Melchisedech figured Chryste, And the lawe of Moyses by prophecie forespoken yt: So hath the lawe of the Gospell (as ye haue nowe learned by sainct Paule) fullfilled the same, and most plainlie and euidentlie proued yt so to be.
Yf then Chryste be a preist after the order of Melchisedech, we must seke what the order of the preistheade of Melchisedech ys, and wherin yt consisteth, And therbie shall we knowe the preistheade of Chryste, & wherin yt consisteth.
Sainct Paule generallie declareth the order of a preist when he saieth: Omnis namque Pontifex ex hominibus assumptus, pro hominibus constituitur in ijs, Hebr. 5. C quae sunt ad Deum, vt offerat dona & sacrificia pro peccatis. Euery high preist, that ys taken from amonge men, ys ordeined for men in thinges perteining to God, to offer giftes and Sacrifices for sinne.
By whiche description of saincte Paule yt dothe appeare, that the order of preisthead standeth in two partes: The first he teacheth when he saieth: Ordre of preisthead standeth in two partes. Pro hominibus constituitur in ijs, quae sunt ad Deum. He ys ordeined for men in thinges perteining to God. Wherby ys ment, the preaching to the people, and teaching them the lawes of God, and ministring the Sacramentes to them, as yt was saied vnto Moyses: Esto tu populo in ijs quae ad Exod. 18. Deum pertinent, vt referas quae dicuntur ad eum, ostendasue populo ceremonias & ritum colendi, viam per quam ingredi debeant, & opus facere. Be thowe vnto the people to Godward, that thowe maist bringe the causes vnto God. And thowe shalt teache them ordinaunces and lawes, and shewe them the waie, wherin they must walke and the worke that they, must doo.
The seconde parte of the order of preistheade standeth in offring giftes, D and sacrifices for the sinnes of the people.
Then they that be called of God, as was Aaron, and doo preach and teache one faith of God vnto the people, and offer vnto God one maner of sacrifice, they be one order of preistheade. So that these two must concurre, or ells yt ys not a perfight order. For Elias the prophet of God, and the 3. Reg. 18. [Page]preistes of Baall did offer one maner of thinge in sacrifice (for they both offred E oxen) yet they differed in preisthead. For Helias was the preist of God, the other the preistes of Baall. And why was this difference? bycause they taught not one faithe in one God,
Melchisedech and Aaron taught one God, and were bothe preistes of Gen. 14. Leuit. 8. Heb, 5. God. For Melchisedech was the preist of the most high God, as the booke of Genesis wittnesseth, and Aaron was called of God, as the booke of Leuiticus, and saincte Paule to the Hebrues testifie. And yet they were not of one order of preisthead, bycause their sacrifices were not of one maner.
By this then yt maie be taken for a trueth, that Chryst, not being a preist after the order of Aaron, but after the order of Melchidech (whiche two orders differed not in faith, but in maner of sacrifice) ys so called a preist after the order of Melchisedech for the maner of the sacrifice. For he must agree with Melchisedech in that thing, that maketh the difference betwixt the order of Aaron, and the order of Melchisedech, and that was and F ys in the maner of sacrifice. For Aaron offred in blood, the other in bread and wine.
But here the Aduersarie will saie, that Chryst ys not likened to Melchisedech for anie sacrifice by all the processe of saincte Paule. But for Obiection. that Melchisedech was Rex Salem, kinge of Salem, and withall the preist of God, and for that he was with oute Father, withoute Mother, hauing neither beginning of daies nor ending, in these pointes he ys the figure of Chryste, who ys both king and preist, hauing no Father in earth, nor mother in heauen, neither as concerning his Godhead anie beginning, and as touching his Godhead and Manhead no endinge. And so ys he a preist for euer.
To this I saie, that the thing that saincte Paule principallie intended, ys to be considered. And then yt shall easilie be perceaued, why he did not Principall entent of S. Paule in his epist. to the Hebrues. make rehersall of the maner of the sacrifice of Melchisedech, nor mencion of the doing of the same in Chryste.
The principall entent of saincte Paule in this place was to proue and G make manifest the excellencie of Chryst and his preisthead, aboue Aaron and his preisthead. Whiche excellencie in nothing more appeared then in that, that Chryst was an euerlasting preist, and his preisthead euerlasting, and not in the maner of sacrifice. For yf he had alleaged that Melchisedech did sacrifice in bread and wine, The Hebrues wolde quickly haue saied, that their sacrifices in that respecte moche excelled, and had a moche more gloriouse shewe and cowntenance, then the sacrifice of Melchisedech, being but bread and wine. And therfor saincte Paule omitted to make mencion VVhie S. Paule spake nothing of she sacrifice of Melchisedech in his epist. to the Heb. of the sacrifice, and choose to speake of that, that moost manifestlie, and also inuinciblie proued the excellencie of Chryst and his preistheade aboue the preist and preisthead of the lawe. And therfor emong other pointes. declaring the excellencie of Chryst, as that he was made a preist with an othe, other withoute an othe, last as the cheifest he reherseth his eternitie saing: Among them (meening the preistes of Aaron) manie were made preistes bycause they were not suffred to endure by reason of deathe: But this man bycause H he endureth euer, he hath an euerlasting preistheade. Wherfore he ys able also euer Heb. 7. to saue them to the vttermost, that come vnto God by him. Seing he euer liueth to make intercession for vs. [Page 70]Thus nowe ye maie perceaue that the obiection of the Aduersarie ys aunswered, when saincte Paules principall entente ys once knowen. A
Yf by the sacrifice of Melchisedech, the excellencie of Chryst might as well haue appeared to the Hebrues (who as yet were soche, as Quibus lacte opus erat non solido cibo, whiche had neade of milke, not strong meate, and coulde not beare the mysteries of our faith) as by his eternitie, be you well assured, Saincte Paule wolde not haue omitted yt. But bycause in the conceit of the Hebrues, their sacrifices appeared to them more gloriouse, and more excellent then the sacrifice of Melchisedech: therfore saincte Paule did not speake of yt.
But yet the Aduersarie, who can not ceasse to impugne the trueth, when he seeth that he can not preuaill with his first obiection, he hathe inuented an other whiche ys soche one as men ouercommed with furie and malice do make. Whose reason and knowledge being obscured do speake they cannot tell what, and in that rage vtter as soen a falsehood as a trueth, and hauing no sownde Iudgemēt, saie good ys euell, and euell ys good, darkenesse light, and light darkenesse. Their obiection ys this. B
Melchisedech (saie they) did not offer bread and wine in sacrifice, but he Obiection of the Aduersaries. mett with Abrahā retourning from the slaugter of the Kinges, and brought furth bread and wine, as yt were to welcome Abraham homewarde from the battaill. For the scripture (saie they) hath not in that place of Genesis the woorde offerre, to offer but proferre, to bring furth. For the text ys: At verò Melchisedech Rex Salem proferens panem & vinum. And Melchisedech king of Salem brought furth bread and wine, and blessed him.
This obiection ys so vain that yt ys raither woorthy to be exploded, then Thanswere with penne to be remembred, raither to be laught and hissed at, of the children in the schooles, then to be answered and solued. Notwithstanding that the vanitie of the same maie the better appeare to the reader, and that he also maie be satisfied, yt shall be answered both by Scriptures, and also by the eldest and noblest learned men of Chrystes Parliament house.
Yt ys manifest by that, that ys aboue saied, that one of the partes of the C function of a preist ys to offer sacrifice. Nowe for asmoche as the Scripture, when yt saied that Melchisedech brought furth bread and wine, and immediatelie added: For he was the preist of the most high God, what dependance ys ther of this one parte of this scripture to the other, or why shoulde this that he was the preist of the most high God be added, as the cause why he brought furth bread and wine, but that he as the preist of God, had sacrificed that, that he brought furth? What direct cause ys yt, that Melchisedech, bycause he was the preist of the most high God, shoulde bring furth bread and wine? Yt ys nothing perteigning to the preistheade to bring furth bread and wine, in the absolute or bare respecte of bread Yt perteined not to Melchisedech his preisthead to bringfurth: but to offre bread and ctine. and wine, but in the respecte that bread and wine were the thinges, that he did vse in sacrifice, whiche he had at that time offred to God for a thankes geuing for the victorie of Abraham, so yt apperteineth to the preisthead. And this parte of the text (for he was the preist of the most hig God) maie very well be added as the cause, as in verie dede yt ys. Otherwise the bringing furth of bread and wine ys not apperteining D to the Preisthead, neither to be the preist of the most high God ys or can be the directe and propre cause of the bringing furth of bread and wine.
[Page]This vnderstanding the verie connexion of the scripture and dependēce of the same, enfortceth vs to take, and none other can be admitted. And thus E the scripture taken in his owne natiue sense, and then to saie, he brought furth bread and wine, doth nothing improue the sacrificing of Melchisedech in bread and wine, as more at large yt shall appeare to yowe, when we come to heare the Fathers.
Nowe for somoche as Melchisedech did sacrifice in bread and wine, and to sacrifice ys one of the essentiall and necessarie partes of preisthead, and Chryst ys a preist after the order of Melchisedech, of necessirie he must then doo sacrifice withe bread and wine. This necessitie sainct Paule affirmeth to the Hebrues. Omnis namque Pontifex ad offerenda munera & hostias constituitur, vnde necesse est & hunc habere, quod offerat. Euery high preist (saieth he) ys ordeined to offer giftes and sacrifices, wherfor yt ys of necessitie, that this man also haue somwhat to offer.
Chryste then beinge a preist after the ordre of Melchisedech, must nedes haue somwhat to offer after the maner of that order. But we neuer redde F that he made anie mo oblacions then two. The one was vpon the crosse, Chryst executed his preisthead after the ordre of Aaron upon the Crosse, but after the ordre of Melchisedech in his Last supper. when he offred his owne bodie to be slain, and that oblation was after the maner of Aaron. The other in his last supper, wher we must nedes confesse (except we will saie, that Chryst altogether neclected the preisthead appointed him of God, whiche ys not to be saied) that he did execute the office of his preisthead after the order of Melchisedech, when taking bread and wine, he said to his Apostles: Take eate, this ys my bodie: Take and drinke this ys my bloode. Yf not then: let the Aduersarie shewe, when and wher Chryst did sacrifice after the ordre of Melchisedech. Yf he did neuer sacrifice after that ordre, then ys yt not true that he was a preist after that order, for somoche as one cheif parte and office of preisthead standith in sacrificing. But vndoubtedlie he a was preist after that order, and in his last supper he shewed him self so to be. When vnder the formes of bread and wine he offred his owne bodie and blood, an vnbloodie sacrifice after the order of Melchisedech. And thus moche for the proof of this matter by the Scripture. G
THE NINE AND THIRTITH CHAP. PROCEAdeth to proue the same by sainct Ciprian and Isychius.
THat Chryste did Sacrifice at his last supper after the order of Melchisedech: and therby was as well likened to Melchisedech, as by the eternitie of his preisthead: and that Melchisedech him self offred bread and wine in sacrifice (whiche three thinges the Aduersaries denie) yt shall be, by the great famouse elders, that were nere to Chryste, and whiche liued in the time, that the Churche hadde most perfight knowledge of gods treuth, and therfore knewe the enacted and receaued trueth in the Parliament house of Chryste, made so plain and cuident, that the enemies shall be confounded, and the Reader, yf he will see, shall perceaue that the Aduersaries haue spoken against a most manifest H trueth.
And first we will heare the testimonie of the holie Martyr Sainct Cyprian. Who saieth thus: Significata olim à tempore Melchisedech prodeunt Serm. de Coena Domini. Sacramenta, & silijs Abrahae facientibus opera eius, summus sacerdos panem profert & [Page 71] vinum, Hoc est, inquit, corpus meum. Manducauerant, & biberant de eodem pane secundùm A formam visibilem, sed ante verba illa cibus ille communis tantùm nutriendo corpori commodus erat. Sed ex quo à Domino dictum est, Hoc facite in meam commemorationē, Haec est caro, & hic est sanguis meus. Quotiescunque his verbis, & hac fide actum est, panis ille substantialis, & calix benedictione solemni consecratus, ad totius hominis vi tam salutemue proficit, simul medicamentum & holocaustum ad sanandas infirmitates & purgandas iniquitates existens. Manifestata est etiam spiritualis, et corporalis cibi distā tia: Aliud fuisse quod prius est appositum, aliud quod à magistro datum est, et distributum. The Sacramentes signified long agon from the time of Melchisedech nowe doo come abroad. And the high preist to the children of Abraham doing his woorkes, dothe bring furth bread and wine: This (saieth he) ys my bodie. Cōsecraciō and sacrifice plainlie auouched by S. Cyp. They had eaten and dronken of the same breade after the visible forme. But before those woordes, that comō meate was onelie meate profitable to nourish the bodie, but after the time that yt was saied of owre lord: Thys do ye in the remēbrance of me, This ys my flesh, this ys my bloode. As often as yt ys doen withe these woordes, and this faith, that substanciall bread and cuppe consecrated by the B Solemne benediction dothe profitt and auaill to the health and life of the wholl man, being bothe a medicen and Sacrifice, to heale infirmities and to pourge iniquities. Ther ys also declared, the difference of the spirituall, and corporall meate. Yt was one thinge that first was sett before them and cōsumed, and an other thing that was geuen of our Master and distributed. Thus farre S. Cyprian.
Ye see here a clere testimonie, bothe of the thing that ys in this place speciallie inquired, that ys, of the applicacion of the bread and wine, whiche Melchisedech offred in figure, to the bread and wine whiche Chryst offred in veritie: and also of the thing that generallie ys inquired through oute the wholl booke, whiche ys of the reall presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament.
Of the first ther neadeth no note to be made, for he saieth manifestlie, Bread and wine offered by Melchisedech were figures of that, whiche Chryst offred in his last supper. that the Sacramentes signified from the time of Melchisedech in the last Supper of Chryst came abroad. What they were he openeth saing: And the high preist (meening Christ) bringing furth bread and wine, etc. Wherby yt must neades folowe, that the bread and wine whiche Melchisedech vsed, was the figure of the bread and wine with Chryste occupied. And thus wher the Aducrsaries C saie that Chryst ys likened to Melchisech for hys eternitie, and not for his sacrifice of bread and wine, howe moche therin they speake against the auncient faith of the Churche, thys holie Martir declareth, whiche thing also, not onelie by this Authour but by other herafter shall be most euident lie proued.
Nowe of the Reall presence also, saincte Cyprian speaketh verie plainlie. As touching the whiche although ther might be taken here diuerse notes: Two notes oute of S. Cipriā for the presece of Chrysts bodie in the Sacrament. yet I will at this present take but two. The one ys that he saieth, that before those woordes (meening the woordes of Chryst This his my bodie, whiche be a litle before spokē) that bread was onelie meat to nourish the bodie. But after yt was saied of Chryste. This do ye in remembrane of me: and, This ys my flesh, And this ys my bloode: that substanciall bread cōsecrated by the Solc̄ne benediction ys profitable to the health ād life of the wholl mā, that ys, both of bodie, ād of soule whcih both together make an wholl man. And howe yt doth profite he declareth. Yt ys (saieth he) both a medicē and a sacrifice, to heale infirmities and to pourge iniquities. D
Note well that he dothe not here in this place saie, that the faith onely to beleue that Chryst hath suffred for vs, or the benefittes and merittes of Chrystes passion, and death, whiche ys spirituall receauing, [Page]ys both a medicin to heale infirmities, and a sacrifice to pourge iniquities E (although neither he, ner we be ignorant of the vertue power, and efficacie of thē) But he here saieth that the substanciall bread being cōsecrated, ys the medicin and the sacrifice. Wherby what ells dothe he meen, or cā meen, but that that bread ys consecrated into his bodie, who ys our high Sacrifice, whiche hath pourged vs from our iniquities? Lauit nos à peccatis nostris in sanguine suo. He hath washed vs from our sinnes in hys bloode. For neither Apoc al. 1. The thing that the bread ys cō secrated into, ys the sacrifice that pourgeth oure iniquities. our faith in Chryst crucisied, neither the merite of hys passion ys that sacrifice, for the one ys the mean to atteign to be partaker of that sacrifice, the other the effect of the same sacrifice, So that neither of them ys the sacrifice yt self: But the thinge that the substanciall bread ys consecrate into, ys the sacrifice that pourgeth iniquities. Ther ys nothing that ys or can be that sacrifice, but the bodie of Chryst. Wherfor the thing into the which the bread ys consecrated ys the bodie of Chryst.
And for the confirmacion of this, take also the seconde note whiche ys Aliud in the neutre gendre signifieth a reall difference in thinges. wher he saieth: Aliud est, quòd prius est appositum et consumptum: Aliud quod à magistro datum, & distributum. Yt ys one thing that was first sett before them and F consumed: And an other thing that was geuē of our Master and distributed.
Yt ys well knowen to learned men, that this woorde (aliud) in the neutre gendre importeth a difference substanciall, from the thing that yt ys compared to, and so the two thinges that be compared together, be of two different substances. And therfore for somoche as the Father, the Sonne, and the holie Goste be three distincted persons, the catholique faithe teacheth vs to saie: Alius est Pater, alius Filius, alius Spiritus sanctus. The Father ys one, the Sonne ys an other, and the holie Goste ys an other. But formoche as they be not distincted in substāce we maie not saie: Aliud est Pater, aliud Filius, aliud Spiritus sanctus. The Father ys one thing, the Sonne an other thing and the holie Gost an other thinge. But cōtrarie wise bicause these three be one in substance, the Scripture teacheth vs thus: Tres sunt qui testimonium dant in coelo, Pater, Verbum, & Spiritus sanctus, & hi tres vnum sunt. Ther be three that beare wittnesse Ioan. 5. Ʋnum in the neutre gēdre signifieth vnitie of substāce. Ioan. 10. in heauen, the Father, the Sonne and the holie Gost, and these three be (Vnum) that ys one thing or substance not (Vnus) one person. So we reade in the Gospell: Ego & Pater vnum sumus. I and the Father be one, that ys in substance. G So here where sainct Cyprian saieth: Aliud est quod appositum, &c. Yt ys one thinge that was sett before them and cōsumed, and an other thing that the master did geue and distribute: he sheweth that these two thinges were thinges substanciallie distincted. For before yt was the substance of bread, of the whiche he spake in the beginning of the sentence whē he saied: Manducauerāt de eodem pane secundùm formam visibilem. They had eaten of the same bread after a visible forme.
But nowe after the solemne benediction yt ys an other substance, that ys, the substance of Chryste, whiche (as before ys saied) ys the medicin to heale our infirmities, and the sacrifice to pourge our iniquities. Yf ther were the same substance of bread still remaining after the consecracion by the solemne blessinge, as was before, so as ther were none other chaunge but an accidentall chaunge, that ys (as the Aduersaries saie) that the bread before the woordes of Chryst spoken ouer yt (For they abhorre to vse the woorde, consecracion, as saincte Cyprian dothe, and other holie Fathers) ys but comon bread, but after the woordes be spoken yt ys H a sacramentall bread, then this Authour wolde not saie: Aliud est yt ys an other thing. Whiche latin woord (Aliud) respecteth the difference of the substance [Page 72](as ys before saied) and ys as moch to saie, as an other thing in substance, or an other substance. A
Wherfore to conclude, this holie Martir of Chryste teacheth vs here, The bread, that before consecraciō serueth to nourish the bodie onelie, after cō secraciō ys an other thing, whiche nourisheth the soule. that the bread consecrated by the Solemne benediction, wher before yt was bread onelie to nourish the bodie, yt ys nowe after the consecracion a thing profitable for the healthe and life of the wholl man, that ys, both of the bodie and of the soule, being a medicin to beale infirmities, and a sacrifice to pourge iniquities. Which thing ys an other thing from the thing that yt was before, differing from that in substance. We must nedes therfore affir me and professe that yt ys the verie bodie of Chryst substanciall and Reall.
But that this maie appeare vnto yow to be the verie minde of saincte Cyprian, and not a sense of mine owne wresting, as the Aduersaries for the more parte will saie, when ells they coulde saie nothing, being put to scilēce by force of the trueth, ye shall heare an other place of the same Authour. At Melchisedech Rex Salem protulit panem & vinum (fuit enim sacerdos Li. 2. Epi. 3. ad Cicil. Dei summi) & benedixit Abraham. Quòd autem Melchisedech typum Christi B portaret, declarat Spiritus sanctus in psalmis ex persona Patris ad Filium, dicens: Ante luciferum genui te. Iurauit Dominus, & non poenitebit eum, tu es sacerdos in aeternum secundùm ordinem Melchisedech. Qui ordo vtique hic est de sacrificio illo veniens, & inde descendens, quòd Melchisedech sacerdos Dei summi fuit, quòd panem & vinum obtulit, quòd Abraham benedixit. Nam qui magis sacerdos Dei summi quàm Christus Iesus Dominus noster, qui sacrisicium Deo Patri obtulit, & obtulit hoc idem, quod Melchisedech obtulerat, id est, panem & vinum, suum scilicet corpus & sanguinem. And a litle after yt foloweth: Vt ergo in Genesiper Melchisedech Sacerdotem benedictio circa Abraham possit ritè celebrari, praecedit antè imago sacrificij in pane & vino scilicet constituta. Quam rem perficiens, & adimplens Dominus, panem & calicem mixtum vino obtulit, & qui est plenitudo veritatem praefiguratae imaginis adimpleuit.
And Melchisedech King of Salem (saieth holie Cyprian) brought furthe bread and wine (For he was the preist of the most high God) and he blessed Abraham. And that Melchisedech did beare the figure of Chryste, C the holie Gost in the person of the Father to the Sonne, dothe declare in the psalmes saing: Before the daie starre haue I begotten thee, Owre Lorde hath The ordre of Melchisedech came to Chryst, not onelie in that he was the high preist, but in that he offred bread and wine the like sacrifice. sworn, and yt shall not repent him, Thowe arte a preist for euer after the ordre of Melchisedech. Whiche ordre also ys this cominge from that Sacrifice, and from thence descendinge, that Melchisedech was the preist of the most high God, that he offred bread and wine, that he Blessed Abraham. For who ys more the preist of the most high God, then our Lorde Iesus Chryste, who did offer sacrifice to God the Father. And offred the verie same that Melchisedech had offred, that ys to saie, bread and wine, euen hys bodie and bloode. And after a fewe woordes, he proceadeth thus: That therfore the blessinge aboute Abraham might laufullie be celebrated by Melchisedech the preist in Genesis, the ymage of the sacrifice goeth before, appointed in bread and wine. Whiche thing owre Lorde perfecting and fullfillinge, hath offred the bread and the cuppe mixed with wine. And he that ys the fullnesse, hath fulfilled the trueth of the prefigurated ymage. Thus farre saincte Cyprian.
What neadeth me here to saie any thing wher euery parte of the sentence D ys so plain, that yt clerelie and plainlie openeth yt self? As touching the speciall matter of thys place, do ye not see, that he saieth, Melchisedech [Page]was the figure of Chryst? Do ye not perceaue that he also E saieth, that the holie Gost declareth the same in the psalme? Do ye not also see that Melchisedech was the figure of Chryst in three poincts, that ys, in that he was the preist of the most high God, in that he offred bread and wine, and in that he blessed Abrahā? Do ye not also see, that this Authour applieth these to Chryst, in that there was none more the high preist of God then our Lorde Iesus Chryst, who offred sacrifice vnto God the Father? And perceaue ye not that Chryst offred the verie same, that Melchisedech, whiche was bread and wine.
Wher (gentle reader) let me note by the waie for the satisfieng of my promesse, that wher the obiection of the Aduersarie ys, that S. Ciprian by expresse woordes saith Melchisedech offred. Melchisedech did not offer in sacrifice bread and wine, and for his proof he saied that the text in Genesis, had not obtulit, he offred, but Protulit, he brought furth: Nowe note yf this Father vseth not this woorde, obtulit, he offred, saing that Chryst offred the very same that Melchisedech did offer. And what he did offer, he also declareth saing: that yt was F bread and wine.
What impudencie then ys ther in the Aduersaries to improue that, that so auncient and so famouse a learned holie Martir so plainlie teacheth, and not he alone, but all the holie companie of the writers, of the which the testimonie of some mo shall be heard herafter.
As yow see that Melchisedech did offer bread and wine, whiche was the Christ offred bread and wine, in veritie, that ys, his bodie and bloode. figure: So did our Sauiour Chryst (saieth Cyprian) offer bread and wine in veritie, that ys, hys bodie and bloode.
And that the Aduersaries shall not cauille, and saie: Wher Cyprian saieth, Chryst offred his bodie and blood, yt ys not to be vnderstanded of any sacrifice offred in the last Supper, but of the sacrifice of his bodie and bloode offred vpon the crosse: The same sainct Cyprian stoppeth the mouth of the wicked in the other sentence before alleaged wher he saieth: The ymage of the Sacrifice went before appointed in bread and wine, whiche thinges our Lorde perfecting and fulfilling offred bread and the cuppe mixed with wine. And that we shoulde not take occasion to stomble with the Aduersaries, taking G yt but for bread and wine, he addeth: And he that ys the fulnesse hath fulfilled the veritie of the prefigurated image.
Do ye not heare that Chryst offred the sacrifice in his last supper, of the whiche the ymage went before in bread and wine? And doo ye not heare that he offring bread and wine, did offer in that sorte, that he fulfilled the veritie of the prefigurated ymage? Whiche veritie was (as sainct Cyprian saied be fore) that he offred bread and wine, that ys, hys bodie and bloode:
Learn then (thow Reader) of this substanciall piller, the substāciall faith of Chrysts catholique Churche. And suffer not thy self to be caried awaie with the Aduersaries painted reasons, and gloses, hauinge a shewe of trueth, and godlinesse aboue, but vnder ther lurketh falshead and Hypocrisie. But abhorre them as saincte Paule dothe aduertise. For as the fishe ys deceaued by the faire bait, whiche outwardlie sheweth to be a thing of commoditie, but inwardlie ys destruction and death, when she taketh yt: Euen so the reasons of the Pseudochristians maie appeare to thee most godlie and true, and H to haue the commoditie of eternall life, But inwardlie they contein destruction and death of the sowle, to the whiche they will drawe thee, except [Page 73]thowe shifte thy self of from that bait, whilest thowe arte yet in the wauing A water of this worlde. Therfore be warned and while thowe hauest time looke to thy self.
Nowe that we haue heard this noble learned Father of the one side of Chrystes Parliament house, we will heare an other of the other side, whiche shall be Isychius, who vpon Leuiticus toucheth this matter and saieth: Et quod hoc est sacrificium? Duae decimae similae conspersae oleo. Oportet enim scire persectam humanitatem, & perfectam diuinitatem contemperare, id est, in vnum conuenire in oleo, id est, In Leuitie. li. 6. ca. 23. per eam, quam circa nos habet, compassionem. Sic enim sacrificium odor suauitatis Domino inuenitur, sapientibus nobis de eo, quae digna sunt. In quibus autem sacrificium, & per quos agitur, quomodò celebratur intelligiblis agni oblatio, quod sequitur ostendit. Neque enim in sanguine, neque per irrationabilia animalia sacrificium à nobis Deus suscipit, secundùm quod sequentia demonstrant. Ait enim: Liba quoque vini quarta pars hyn, panem & polentam. Quia dubium futurum erat forsan, à quibus mysterium sacrificij, quod per Christum est, quod superiùs diximus, celebratur: habes ecce intelligibilis Melchisedech oblationem, quae in pane & vino perficitur, in qua quarta pars hyn in libis vini offertur, vt per quartam Euangelij traditionem, quae in libris quatuor est, per libationem verò Dominicum B sermonem significaret, quum ait: Hic est meus sanguis, qui pro vobis fundetur: sine imminutione enim significare legislatori visum est Christi mysterium. And what ys this sacrifice? Two tenth deales of fine flower sprinkled with oile. For we must knowe to contemper the perfect manhead, and perfect godhead, that ys to come together into one in oile, that ys, by that compassion, whiche he hath toward vs. For so the sacrifice ys fownde a swete sauoure to our Lorde, when we vnderstand of him thinges that be woorthie. In what thinges thys sacrifice, whiche ys the oblacion of the intelligible lambe, ys, and by whome yt ys doen, howe yt ys celebrated, that that foloweth, declareth. For neither by vnreasonable beastes doth God receaue sacrifice of vs, acording as the woordes that folowe de plainlie shewe. For he saieth: And the drinke offringe therof shal be of wine euen the fourte parte of an hyn, bread, and perched corne. Bicause perchaunce yt might haue comed in doubte hereafter Christ sacrificing in bread and wine was [...] the intelligible sacrifice. of whome the mysterie of the sacrifice whiche ys by Chryste, which we haue spoken of aboue, ys celebrated, beholde thowe hauest the sacrifice of the intelligible Melchisedech, whiche ys full doen in bread and wine, in C whiche sacrifice ys offred the fourth deale of the drinke offring of wine, that by the fourth deale the tradicion of the Gospell, whiche ys in foure bookes, and by the drinke offring he wolde signifie the woorde of our Lord when he saieth: This ys my bloode, whiche shall be shedde yowe for. And so yt pleased the Lawe geuer that yt shoulde fully signifie the mysterie of Chryst Thus farre Isycbius.
In the whiche sainge ye haue the wholl matter testisied that we seke for. For wher in Leuiticus God commaunded an he lambe to be offred, and that the meat offring therof shoulde be two tenth deales of fine flower mengled with oyle to make bread, and the drinke offring shoulde be the fourth deale of an hyn of wyne whiche thing thys Authour seking to Applie to the newe Testament, Thowe hauest (saieth he) the Melchisedech sacrificing in bread and wine was the figure of Christ, oblacion or sacrifice of Christ in the intelligle Melchisedech aunswering thys, whiche sacrifice was fullie and perfectlie doen in bread and wine Wherby he dothe not onely teache vs, that Melchisedech was a figure of Chryste absolutelie: D but that in sacrisicing bread and wine he was also the figure, and Chryst sacrificing in the like thinges was the intelligle Melchisedech, [Page]that ys to saie, he whome Melchisedech so doing did prefigurate.
In these fewe woordes then we maie first learn these two thinges, which E the Aduersaries do denie, that ys, that Melchisedech did not onelie bring furth, but did also offer bread and wine in sacrifice. And that Chryst the intelligible Melchisedech did also sacrifice in bread and wine.
But that none occasion shoulde be geuen, either to the Aduersaries to saie that Chryst gaue but bare bread and wine, or to the Reader to take scruple bicause he saieth, that Chryst did sacrifice in bread and wine, he openeth immediatelie what bread and wine yt was, saing: by the drinke offring whiche was in wine, he wolde signifie that of whiche Chryst saied: This ys my bloode, whiche Isychius acknowled geth the presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode in the Sacra. shall be shedde for yow. Wherby he deliuereth vs from that doubte, and teacheth plainlie the presence of Chrystes blood in the Sacrament. Wher yf we acknowledge that, and that this Authour so meneth that soche presence ys ther, we maie also confesse the presence of his bodie in the other kinde, for so the Authour also entendeth, as not onely in that, that ys aboue saied yt dothe appeare, but in that also, that foloweth yt ys manifest and euident. F
For thus he saieth: Oblatio enim praesentium donorum, quam esse mysterium Vnigeniti ostendimus, reconc [...]liauit nos Deo, & cibum nobis nouae polentae praestitit. The oblacion of these present giftes, whiche oblacion we haue declared to be the mysterie of the onelie begotten sonne of God, hath reconciled vs to God, and hath geuen vs meate, of newe dried corne.
This oblacion that Isychius speaketh of here, ys yt (as he saieth) which reconciled vs to God, whiche oblacion ys not an other from that he spake of before, but yt ys the same. The oblacion that he spake of before was the oblacion after the ordre of Melchisedech. Wherfore in the oblacion after the or dre of Melchisedech, was Chryst offred, who by his death reconciled vs to God.
Chryst then being sacrificed, and therfore present, ys now also sacrificed, and therfor present. For the table of Chryst that now ys (as Chrysostome saieth) being in no poincte inferiour to that, but being all one, As Chryst was ther in his sacrifice verilie present: So ys he here verilie present.
Thus Although Melchisedech (as the Aduersaries affirme) was a figure of G Chryst in the eternitie of his preisthead: yet was he also (as by these Fathers before alleaged ys taught) the figure of him in the verie office of the preisthead in offring bread and wine: Melchisedech in his maner, in earthly bread and wine: Chryste in his maner in heauenlie bread and wine, which ys hys verie flesh and bloode the bread and wine of euerlasting life.
THE THIRTITH CHAP. TREATETH OF THE same matter by sainct Hierom and Theodorete.
SAinct Hierō handeling the prophecie of Dauid speaking of the preisthead of Chryst after the ordre of Melchisedech, geueth vs a notable and most clear testimonie in this matter and saieth: Superfluū est nos de isto versiculo velle interpretari, cùm sanctus, Apostolus ad Hebraeos plenissimè disputauit. Ipse enim ait: Iste est Melchisedech, sine patre, sine matre, sine generatione. Et ab omnibus ecclesiasticis dictum est, quoniam sine patre dicitur secundùm carnem, sine matre dicitur secundùm Deum. Hoc solùm ergo interpretemur: Tues H Hieron. in Psal. 110. sacerdos in aeternum secundùm ordinem Melchisedech. Hoc solùm dicamus, quare dixerit, Secundùm ordinem. Secundùm ordinem: Nequaque sacerdos [Page 74] eris secundùm victimas Iudaicas, sed eris sacerdos secundùm ordinem Melchisedech. Quomodò A enim Melchisedech Rex Salem obtulit panem & vinum: sic & tu offeres corpus tuum, & sanguinem, verum panem, & verum vinum: Iste Melchisedech ista mysteria, quae habemus, dedit nobis. Ipse est, qui dixit: Qui manducauerit carnem, & biberit sanguinem meum &c. Secundùm ordinem Melchisedech, tradidit nobis sacramentum suum. Yt ys superfluouse for vs to go aboute to expownde this verse, seing the holie Apostle hath fullie vnto the Hebrues treacted of the same. For he saieth: This ys Melchisedech withoute father, withoute mother, withoute generaciō. And of all men of the churche yt ys saied, that he ys withoute father as concerning the fleshe: and withoute mother as concerninge his godhead. This onelie therfore let vs interprete: Thowe art a preist for euer after the ordre of Melchisedech. Let vs onelie saie, wherfore he saieth: after the ordre, After the ordre. that ys: Thowe shalt not be apreist according to the sacrifices of the Iewes: but thowe shalt be a preist after the ordre of Melchisedech, For as Melchisedech king of Salem did offre bread and wine: So thowe also shalt offre thy bodie and bloode, the true breade and true wine. This Melchisedech gaue vs these mysteries, whiche we haue. Yt ys he that hath saied: He that shall eate my flesh, and drinke my bloode B &c. He after the ordre of Meichisedech hath deliuered vnto vs his Sacramē te. Thus farre saincte Hierom.
Nowe wher the Aduersaries being sore pinched with this figure of Melchisedech laboure with might and main to cast mistes before the eies of mē, to make thē beleue that they see in Melchisedech but onelie the figure of the eternitie of Chryst, and not the figure of his preisthood and sacrifice, and for that pourpose alleage saincte Paule, treacting of the same to the Hebrues, and saie, that he doth ther onelie so applie it: I wishe yowe wolde well note saincte Hierom, howe as concerning the matter of the eternitie of Chryst he saieth, that yt ys supperfluouse to speake of yt, bicause saincte Paule euen to the full hath clerly opened that matter to be Hebrues.
But what then? Doth sainct Hierom saie nothing to the explicacion and applicacion of this figure? Yes, notwithstanding that full, and plain explicacion of sainct Paule, he addeth also an expositiō, not of that saincte Paule had expownded, but of that, that saincte Paule had left vnexpownded. And therfor he saeth: Hoc solùm interpretemur. Tu es sacerdos &c. Let vs onelie expowde C this: Thowe arte a preist for euer after the ordre of Melchisedech. Why? ys this the text that ys fully handeled of saincte Paule, and so clerlie expownded to the Hebrues? Yt ys the same. S. Paule tre acteth fullie of the eternitie of Chrysts preist head but not of the ordre after Melchisedech.
Wherfore note that yn this litle werse, twoo thinges being conteined: the one that Chryst ys a preist for euer, the other that he ys of the ordre of Melchisedech: The first ys at large expownded by saincte Paule: but the other, that ys, the order of Melchisedech ys not expownded by saincte Paule. Wherfor saincte Hierom saieth immediately: Hoc solùm dicamus, quare dixcrit secundùm ordinem. Let vs onelie declare this: Why he saieth after the ordre. As who might saie, Sainct Paule hath plentifullie saied of the eter nitie of the priestgood of Chryste. Wherfore yt were vain for me to speake of that: But I will onelie speake of the order of the preisthood of Chryst. for that hath not sainct Paule spoken of.
And entring to shewe of what ordre of presthoode Chryst ys, he speaketh in the persō of God the Father and saieth: Thowe shalt not be a preist after the or D dre of offrings of the Iewes sacrifices, but thowe shalt be a preist after the ordre of Melchisedech And howe he shoulde doo sacrifice after that ordre, he furtwith declareth. For as Melchisedech (saieth he) king of Salem did offer bread and wine: So shalt [Page] thowe also offer thy bodie and bloode, the true bread and true wine. A breif exposition, E but as plain, as yt ys breif.
Nowe as saincte Paule to the hebrues hath oponed the first parte for the eternitie of the prestheade of Chryste: So here saincte Hierom hath as touching this order, and sacrifice opened the second parte. wherin reader, first note, that wher the Aduersaries (as ys before said in the last chapter) to denie the sacrifice of Chryst after the ordre of Melchisedech, doo first denie that Melchisedech him self did offer breade and wine, saing, that in Genesis yt ys not readd of Melchisedech: Obtulit panem & vinum: he offred bread and wine, but protulit panem, & vinum he brought furth bread and wine: Yet Melchisedech offred bread and wine after S. Hierom. sainct Hierom knowinge the olde Testament, and well vnderstanding the hebrue toung saieth that Melchisedech did offer bread and wine, and vsith the latin woorde, obtulit, he offred, and not, protulit, he brought furth. wherby we are taught that this ys the true mening, and vnderstanding of the place.
Further also, as we are taught that Melchisedech did offer bread and wine: So also are we taught (whiche ys in the se cōd parte to be noted) bothe that F Chryst did offer, and what he did offer, he did offer after the ordre of Melchisedech bread and wine, not bare bread and bare wine, as Melchisedech did in the figure, but his verie bodie and blood, the true bread and true wine, as saincte Hierom expresseth, wherbie we are taught not onelie the verie presence of Chrystes bodie and blood in the sacrament: But also that he in his last Supper did offer the same bodie after the ordre of Melchisedech.
Whiche for somoche as yt ys so plainlie spoken, I shall not neade either to bring in anie other saing of the same saincte Hierom to declare his minde more plainlie in this: or I my self to tarie anie longer in opening of this his sainge, being all readie so plain, that yt can be made or spoken no plainer.
Onely this I shall desire thee (gentle Reader) to call to thy memorie the ende of the saing of saincte Ciprian last alleadged in the chapiter before, and compare yt to the ende of this saing, and I thinke verilie, yt will wonderfullie delight thee, to see the trueth not onely so painlie, but also with so goodlie consonannt agreement vttered and spoken. Sainct Ciprian saied: G who ys more proprelie the preist of the most highe God, thā our Lorde Iesus Christe, Who offred a sacrifice to God the Father, and offred the same that Melchisedech offred, that ys, bread and wine, euen his bodie, and bloode? Saincte Hierom saieth: As Melchisedech Aplain place for master Iuell. offred bread and wine: So shalt thowe offer thy bodie and blood, the true bread, and true wine. what goodlie consent ys this? what plain maner of speache ys this? what more neadeth to be saied in this matter? Ys yt not cōsessed that Chryst offred in his last Supper his bodie, and bloode? I trust the proclamer himself will graunt yt, and saie yt ys most plain. ffor who can doubt that these woordes be spoken of the sacrifice in the Supper, sainct Hierom saing, that this Melchisedech (meening Chryst) deliuered vs these misteries &c.
Wherfor leauing further explicacion of this Authour we will heare Theodorete, one of the other side of Chrystes parlament house, who as breiflie as plainlie openeth the trueth of the matter whiche we seke, as yt shall appeare in this his sainge: Antiquam genealogiam conscribens diuinus Moyses, docuit nos, quòd Adam, cùm tot annos natus esset genuit Seth. Ei cùm tot annis vixisset, finem vitae accepit. Ita etiam dixit de Seth & Enos, & alijs. Melchisedech et generationis H Theodoretus Dial 2. initium, et vitae finem silentio praeterijt: Ergo si historia spectetur, nec initium dicrum, nec vitae finem habet. Reuerà autem Dei filius nec esse coepit, nec finem accipiet. [Page 75] In ijs ergo maximis, et verè diuinis fuit Melchisedech figura Christi Domini. In sacerdotio autem, quod hominibus magis quàm Deo conuenit, Dominus Christus Pontifex fuit secundū A ordinem Melchisedech. Melchisedech enim fuit gentium Pontifex. Et Dominus Christus pro omnibus hominibus sactum et salutiferum sacrificium obtulit. The godlie Moyses writing the olde genealogie, hath taught vs, that Adam when he was thus manie years olde, he begatte Seth, And when he had liued so manie yeares he made an ende of his life. Euen so also he saieth of Seth, and Enos, with other. As for the beginning of the generacion of Melchisedeh, and the ende of his life he ouerpasseth yt with scilence. Wherfor if the historie be looked on, he hathe neither beginning of daies, nor the ende of life. So in verie dede the Sonne of God neither hathe beginning of his being, neither shall haue ending. In these great thinges then verie diuine, was Melchisedech a figure of our Lorde Chryst. In the preisthead also, whiche ys more mete or agreable for men then for God, our lorde Chryst was an high preist after the ordre of Melchisedech. For Melchisedech was the high preist of the gentiles. And our lorde Chryst offred for all men an holie and holsom sacrifice. Thus moche Theodorete. B
Whom ye do perceaue to testifie not onelie that Melchisedech was a sigure of Chryste as concerninge his eternitie, but also as concerning his Christes of fring of sacrifice after the ordre of Melchisedech ouerthroweth the heresie of Eutiches. preisthead, and Sacrifice, which did appertein to him as man. By whiche Applicacion he conuinceth the Eutichians, who forsaking the catholique faith, whiche teacheth that in Chryst be two natures, that ys to saie, the perfecte nature of God, and the perfecte nature of man, and so confesseth Chryst to be verie God, and verie Man, folowed their master Eutiches, and taught (as in the Chalcedon Councell yt ys testified) that Chryste before the adunacion, was of two natures, but after the adunacion he was but of one nature, whiche was God, and therfore denieng Chryste to be man, confessed him onelie to be God. Wherfor folowing Appollinaris, Valentinus, and Macedonius, they wolde not receaue this common article of ourfaith: Whiche was conceauedby the holie Goste, born of the virgen Mary.
Nowe as these confessed Chryst to be God: So this Theodorete labouring to proue him also to be man, bringeth in this figure of Melchisedech, C whiche as by eternitie yt proueth him to be God, For eternitie, that ys, to haue no beginning, nor ending, farre surmounteth the created nature of man, and apperteineth to the increated nature of God: So by the preisthead of Melchisedech whiche was in Chryst (whiche being to base an office for God, doth proprelie appertein to man) he proueth Chryst to be a very Man.
Yf then the Aduersaries shall denie Melchisedech to be a figure of Chryst, Aduersaries expositions maintein the heresie of Eutiches. as touching his preisthead and sacrifice, they shall take awaie the argument of this learned man, and helping the parte of the heretikes, shall weaken the parte of the catholiques. And so where by the full and true applicacion of the figure, Chryste ys proued to be both God and mā, by the onelie applicacion of the eternitie (whiche the Aduersaries wolde haue) he shall be proued onelie God.
Nowe not onelie the argument of the matter proueth that this Authour brought in this figure cheifly to proue the manhead of Chryste, whiche was the thing to be proued against Eutiches, and that by the preisthead of Melchisedech: But also his very plain woordes do proue the same. For whē D he saieth: In sacerdotio, quod hominibus magis quàm Deo conuenit, Dominus Christus secundùm ordinem Melchisedech Pontifex fuit. In the preisthead whiche more [Page]agreeth to mē, thē to God our Lorde, Chryste was an gigh preist after the ordre E of Melchisedech. Leauing the eternitie of the Godhead of Chryste, wherof Melchisedech was a figure in that he ys ouerpassed in the historie with oute mencion made either of his beginning or ending: He commeth to that parte, that proueth him a man, whiche was to be a preist after the ordre of Melchisedech.
What ys yt to be apreist, but to do the office of a preist? What ys the office of a preist? the office of a preist ys to offer Sacrifice to God for sinnes (as Office of a preist. saincte Paule wittnesseth, whiche also this authour alleaging for his pourpose bringeth in thus: Si est ergo sacerdotum proprium offerre munera, Christus autem, quod ad humanitatem attinet, sacerdos appellatus est, non aliam hostiā, quàm suum corpus obtulit. Yf then yt be solie apperteining to preistes to offer sacrifice, and Dial. 1. Chryste as cōcerninge his humanitie, was called a preist, he offred no other sacrifice but his own bodie.
Then maie we also conclude, that Chryst being a preist after the ordre of Melchisedech, and the office of a preist after the ordre of Melchisedech ys F to offer soche sacrifice as to that ordre apperteineth, therfor Chryst offred soche sacrifie as to that ordre apperteineth. Yt apperteineth to that ordre to offer bread and wine. Wherfore Chryst sacrisiced in bread and wine. In bread and wine I saie, a kinde of foode of more excellencie, then the bread and wine whiche did figure yt, I meen with Theodoret, and sainct Hierom, the bodie and blood of Chryst, the true bread, and true wine, whiche feadeth vs to liue the true life. the life, that endureth and faileth not: Qui manducat Ioan. 6. hunc panem viuet in aeternum. He that eateth this bread, shall liue foreuer.
What neadeth me anie more to saie here, seing that bothe sainct Hierom, and Theodorete do thus plainly and agreablie (as ye haue heard) declare, that Melchisehech was a figure, as well of the preisthead and sacrifice of Chryst, in that he offred sacrifice to God in bread and wine: as of his eternitie, for he ys accompted withoute ffather, without mother, without beginning, or ending.
But Reader, when thowe seest them so manifestlie, erre, and so maliciouslie G impugne that, whiche the holie Fathers doo teache, by so plain sentence and expresse woordes as can not but be seen and perceaued, except wher malice blindeth, thinke with thy self, that iust cause ys ministred vnto thee, to feare them and their sainges in other matters. Thus much for thy aduertisement by the waie, being saied, gentle Reader, I will for thy further instruction, and confirmacion of the matter bring yet mo wittnesses of the trueth herof.
THE ONE AND THIRTITH CHAPITER CONcludeth this matter of Melchisedech by saincte Augustin and Damascen.
AS ye haue allredie heard some auncient men of Chrystes Parliament howse agreablie testifieng the trueth of the figure of Melchisedech, euen as yt hath ben enacted, and receaued from the beginninge of the same howse: So shall ye heare one coople more of them doing the like, and so shall we ende the explicacion H of this prophecie of the psalmist as touching the preisthead of Chryste after the ordre of Melchisedech. Sainct Augustin writteh of the matter thus: Erant sacrificia antea Iudaeorum secundùm ordinem Aaron in victimis pecorum, & hoc in Iu Psa. 33. [Page 76] mysterio. Nondum erat sacrificium corporis & sanguinis Domini, quod fideles norunt, & A qui Euangelium legerunt, quod sacrificiū nunc diffusum est toto orbe. Proponite ergo vobis ante oculos duo sacrificia: & illud secundùm ordinem Aaron, et hoc secundùm ordinem Melchisedech. Scriptum est enim, turauit Dominus, et non poenitebit eum, Tu es sacerdos in aeternum secundùm ordinem Melchisedech. De quo dicitur, Tu es sacerdos in aeternum secundùm ordinem Melchisedech? De Domino nostro Iesu Christo. Quis enim erat Melchisedeh? Rex Salem. Saleni autem fuit Ciuitas illa, quae postea (sicut docti prodiderunt) Hierusalem dicta est. Ergo antequam ibi regnarent Iudaei, ibi erat ille sacerdos Melchisedech, qui scribitur in Genesi, sacerdos Dei excelsi. Ipse occurrit Abrahae, quando liberauit Loth de manu persequentium, et prostrauit illos, à quibus tenebatur, et liberauit fratrem. Et post liberationem fratris occurrit et Melchisedech, (Tantus erat Melchisedech à quo benediceretur Abraham) protulit panē et vinum, et benedixit Abraham, et dedit ei decimas Abraham. Videte quid protulit, et quem benedixit, et dictum est postea: Tu es sacerdos in aeternum secundùm ordinem Melchisedech. Dauid hoc in spiritu dixit, longè post Abraham. Temporibus autem Abrahae fuit Melchisedech. De quo alio loco dicit: Tu ès sacerdos in aeternum secundùm ordinem Melchisedech, nisi de illo cuius nostis sacrisicium?
Ther were before, the sacrifices of the Iewes after the ordre of Aaron in B the offringe of beastes, and that in mysterie. The Sacrifice of the body and blood Sacrifice after the ordre of Melchisedech ys nowe diffused troughout the worlde. of our Lorde, the whiche the faithfull, and they that haue red the gospell knowe, was not yet. Whiche Sacrifice ys nowe diffused throughoute all the woorlde. Sette before your eyes therfor the twoo sacrifices, both that after the order of Aarō, and this after the ordre of Melchisedech. For yt ys written: The Lord hathe sworne, and yt shall not repent him. Thowe arte a preist for euer after the ordre of Melchisedech. Of whom ys yt saied: Thowe arte a preist after the ordre of Melchisedech? Of our Lorde Iesus Chryste. who was this Melchisedech? King of Salem. Salem was before time, that same Cittie, which as the learned haue declared, was afterwarde called Hierusalem. Therfor before the Iewes reigned ther, the preist Melchisedech, who ys written in Genesis the preist of the high God, was ther. He mett with Abraham when he had deliuered Loth from the hand of them, that did persecute him, and he ouerthrewe them, of whom he was holden, and deliuered his brother. And after the deliuerance of his brother, Melchisedech mette him (So great a man was Melchisedech of whō Abrahā was blessed) he brought furth bread and wine, and blessed Abrahā, C and Abraham gaue him tithes. Beholde what he brought, and whom he blessed. And yt ys saied afterwarde, Thowe arte a preist for euer after the ordre of Melchisedech. Dauid spake this in spirit long after Abraham. Melchisedech was in the time of Abraham. Of whom in an other place saieth he, Thowe arte a preist For euer after the ordre of Melchisedech, But of him whose sacrisice ye knowe? Thus farre saincte Augustine.
Ye haue here heard the distinction of the two orders of preisthead, of Aaron, and of Melchisedech. Ye haue heard also the distinction of the two sacrifices. the one according to the order of Aaron, the other after the order of Melchisedech. What this sacrifice after the ordre of Melchisedech ys, sainct Augustin hathe declared wher he saied: The sacrifice of the bodie and Sacrifice auouched. blood of our Lorde was not yet, whiche sacrifice ys nowe diffused throughoute all the worlde.
What he meeneth when he saieth: as yet the sacrifice of the bodie and bloode of our Lord was not, and also whether this sacrifice be after the ordre of Melchisedech, D in a breif sentence of fewe woordes, he doth verie plainlie in an other place open and declare. Sublatum est sacrificium Aaron, & caepit esse sacrificium, secundùm ordinem Melchisedech The sacrifice of Aaron was taken awaie. And the sacrifice [Page] after the ordre of Melchisedcch beganne. By the which sentence yt ys manifest, that while the sacrifice of Aarō endured, this sacrifice was not vsed. But whē, E that was taken awaie, this sacrifice began.
Likewise he hath taught also that the sacrifice of the bodie and blood of Chryste ys the sacrifice after the ordre of Melchisedech. For wher before Sacrifice of the bodie and blood of Chryst in the Sacr. ys after the order of Melchisedech. he saied that the bodie and blood of our Lord was not yet, And nowe he saieth, that the sacrifice of Melchisedech began, when Aarons sacrifice was taken awaie: What doth he ells fignifie, but that they be all one thing? that ys, that the bodie and blood of Chryste be the sacrifice after the ordre of Melchisedech. And so conuertiblie that the sacrifice after the ordre of Melchisedech, ys the bodie and blood of Chryste. Which bodie and bloode be no wher ells offred in sacrifice after the ordre of Melchisedech, but in the sacrifice of the Altar, wher bread and wine be turned into the same bodie and bloode. For the bodie of Chryste vpon the crosse was a bloodie sacrifice, perfected with bloodshedding after the maner of Aarō. Therfore the holie sacrifice of the Altar, which (as sainct Austen saieth) ys nowe diffused and spredde through all the world ys the verie bodie and blood of Chryste. F
Although this, that ys alleaged oute of sainct Augustin, ys so plain, that the Aduersaries can not but see the trueth, and so strong, that they can not against saie yt: Yet that they maie see all this that ys spoken confirmed, and made more plain, and that so being confownded by the euident trueth, they maie geue ouer their erroure, and yelde vnto trueth, we will heare the sentence of the same saincte Augustine, treating of this same matter in an other place. Thus yt ys. Coram regno patris sui mutauit vultum suum, & dimisit eum, et abijt, quia erat ibi sacrificium secundùm ordinem Aaron, et postea ipse corpore et sanguine suo instituit sacrificium secundùm ordinem Melchisedech. Mutauit ergo vultum suum in In Psalm. 33. Cōcion. 3. sacerdotio, et dimisit gentem Iudaeorum, et venit ad gentes. Before the kingdom of his Father he hath chaunged his cowntennce, and lefte him and went awaie. bicause ther was ther the sacrifice after the ordre of Aaron. And after ward of his bodie and blood he instituted the sacrifice after the ordre of Melchisedech. He chaū ged therfor his contenaunce in preisthead, and left the people of the Iewes, and came to the Gentiles. Thus sainct Augustin.
Dooye marke what ys here saied? Yf ye doo, ye must nedes vnderstand G yt, yt ys so plain. For what can be more breiflie, and more plainlie saied, then that Chryste did institute a sacrifice of his bodie and blood after the ordre of Melchisedech? By this breif sentence manie thinges be aunswered: First, where the Aduersaries most slaunderouslie haue saied, to bring the thing in hatred emongethe people, that the Pope made the holie Sacrament a sacrifice to obscure the glorie of Chryste, and to diminish the woorthinesse and merit of Chrystes sacrifices vpon the crosse, and therwithall to bring the people into beleiff, that the Sacrifice of Chryste vpon the crosse was not sufficient withoute this: And that without authoritie (as this Proclamer saieth) we offer vppe Chryst vnto his Father: And thus with a nombre of like lies, The Pope and the Papistes were made Authours and founders of this sacrifice. Not the Pope nor the Papistes made the sacrament a sacrifice but Chryst himself after S. Augustin. But basshe and be ashamed thowe slaunderouse mā, thowe Enemie of the trueth, and open thine eies to see, and thine eares to heare what saincte Augustine that holie Father, and learned doctour here teacheth, that ys, that Chryste did of his owne bodie and blood institute a sacrifice after the ordre of Melchisedech. So that Chryst, euen by this bolie Fathers testimonie, ys the institutour and H founder of this blessed Sacrifice, and not the Pope, neither the papistes as thowe termest them. But they be the humble receauers of this same institucion of Chryst.
[Page 77]Secondarelie, wher the Aduersaties haue saied that Chryste did not offer his bodie in sacrifice in his last Supper, this sentence also confuteth them. Yt must of necessitie be graunted that Chryst did sacrifice in his last supper. A For saincte Augustine saithe here, that Chryst did institute a sacrifice after the order of Melchisedech. Nowe wher read we that Chryste did sacrifice after the ordre of Melchisedech, but onelie in his last Supper? Wherfore seing Chryst did institute a sacrifice after that ordre, and did neuer execute the office of a preist of that ordre in visible forme and maner (For other wise he dothe dailie) but in the last Supper: Then of necessitie yt must be, that in the last Supper he did sacrifice.
Thirdlie, for so moch as Chryst did institute this sacrifice in his bodie and blood, yt must necessarilie folowe that Chrystes bodie and blood be present in the Sacramēt. And as Chryste did verilie make his bodie and bloode present in that sacrifice in his last Supper instituted and offred: So dothe he verilie make his bodie and blood presēt in the sacrifice of the Altar, and that as often as the same ys duelie excuted and doen. For as he did in that Supper: So dothe he in euery ministracion of the blessed Sacrament duely B ministred. For the Sacrament ys of no lesse force, poour, wourthinesse and dignitie nowe in the Altar, that yt was in the table, wher Chryst himself visiblie present did sanctifie yt, as Chrysostome dothe testifie.
Non sunt haec humanae virtutis opera, quae tunc in illa coena confecit ipse quoque Chrys. in 26 Matth. nunc operatur, ipse perficit. Ministrorum nos ordinem tenemus, qui verò haec sanctificat & transmutat, ipse est. Cum Discipulis (inquit) meis, facio Pascha. Haec enim illa non alia mensa est: haec nulla re minor, quàm illa est. Non enim illam Christus, hanc homo quispiam facit, sed vtramque ipse. These woorkes be not of Chryst and not man doth consecrate. mans power, whiche he then did in that Supper, he doth nowe also woorke, he doth perfecte yt. we hold the ordre of ministres, but yt ys he, that doth sanctifie, trāsmute or chaūge these things. With my disciples (saieth he) do I kepe the Passouer. This ys euen the same, not an other table. This ys in nothing lesser thē that. For Chryst maketh not that table, and some other man this, but Chryste bothe. Thus Chrisostom.
Wherby we are taught, that as moche as was doen by Chryst in his last Supper, so moche ys doen nowe. So moche as the Apostles receaued, somoche C receaue we nowe. The reason ys (as Chrysostome saieth) that Chryste, who did sanctifie that table, doth also sanctifie this our table, and this table ys in nothing lesse, then that table was. In that table (as saincte Augustine in his last sentence did teache) Chrystes bodie was by himself sacrificed, and so verilie present in that sacrifice. Wherfor in this table likewise Chrystes bodie ys verilie sacrificed, and so verilie and Sacrifice auouched. realie present.
But somwhat to saie of that, that maie be gathered of this saing of Chrysostom: Yf nothing were geuen to the Apostles (as the Aduersaries teache) but a peice of Sacramentall bread, a figure of Chrystes bodie: what nead all these comparisons betwixt table, and table. For yf the doctrine of the aduersaries be true, we can haue no lesse, except we shoulde eate course bread, wheras the Apostles eate fine bread. we can haue nolesse I saie, then they had. A peice of bread eche of thē had: a peice of bread eche of vs hathe. Yf that bread were a figure, this bread ys a figure. What thing nowe then moued Chrysostom to trauaill so moche to sett furth the equalitie D of these two tables (so I terme thē for distinctiō of knowledge) seing ther cā be no inequalitie betwē them, eche of them hauing a peice of bread, and [Page]a cuppe of wine? Be yowe well assured, Chrysostom sawe moche E cause in the imperfection and weaknesse of the faith of men, whiche might thinke, that forsomoche as Chryst was then in visible maner present at the Supper, and so the Sacrament being of him self consecrated and distributed, that yt might be and was hys verie bodie: But nowe that he was ascended, and not in visible maner present, with hys owne mouthe speaking, and with hys owne hand deliuering, they might thinke that ther was no soche wonderfull worke wrought, he being nowe from visible seight absent, as then when he was in visible seight present.
And in dede soch an heresie did the Petrobrusians, and the Henricians Petrobrusians and Henriciās their heresies. Petr. Cluniacen. holde (as Petrus Cluniacensis testifieth, who in the beginning of his booke written against them, reherseth the sainges of those heretikes in this wise: Nolite, o populi, Episcopis & presbyteris ceu Clero vos seducenti credere, qui sicut in multis, sic in altaris sacrificio vos decipiunt, vbi corpus Christi se conficere, & vobis ad vestrarum animarum salutem se tradere mentiuntur: Mentiuntur planè. Corpus Christi semel tantùm ab ipso Christo in coena ante passionem factum est, & semel, hoc est, tunc tantùm Discipulis datum est. Exinde neque confectum ab aliquo, neque alicui datum est. Beleue F not (o people) saied those heretikes, the Byshoppes and preistes or the cleargie begilinge yow. Which as in manie thinges: so also they deceiue you in the office of the Altar, wher they lie vnto you, that they do consecrate the bodie of Chryst, and deliuer yt to you for your soules health. They lie plainlie. The bodie of Christe was once onelie made of Chryste in hys last Supper before hys passion, and once, that ys, then onelie was yt geuen to the Disciples. Since that time, was yt neither geuē to anie, neither made of anie. Thus they.
Nowe ye maie see, that the holie Gost did not withoute cause moue hys holie organs to speake soche thinges before hand, as wherby the Succession of the catholique Churche, shoulde finde the heresie aunswered, before the saied heresie were sett furth abroad (The holie Goste well knowing that soche euell wedes shoulde spring in the vineyarde of Chryste) And yet this maie ye marke that heresie the further yt goeth, yt ys allwaie the woorse as saincte Paule comparing yt to a Canker dothe verie well expresse the G Heresie furder yt goeth the woorse yt ys. 2. Tim. 2. condicion of yt, and by plain woordes sheweth the progresse of yt thus: Prophana autem & vaniloquia deuita. Multum enim proficient ad impietatem, & sermo eorum vt cancer serpit. As for vngodlie and vain talkes, auoide them. For they will encrease to further vngodlinesse. And their wordes shal crepe euen as dothe the disease of a Canker.
For the Petrobrusians being badde enough, yet they vpon the consideracion of Chrystes presence in the last Supper, graunted that he then made hys bodie, and that the Apostles receaued his bodie. But neuer after was yt geuen to anie.
This was a verie euell cankre, but yt hath encreased since to so moche vngodlinesse, and hath Cankrelike fretted so sore, that nowe in our time men haue denied the bodie of Chryst to be consecrated and geuen, either by the preistes or ministres of the churche, or yet by Chryst him self in the last Supper. For he gaue (saie they) but the figure of hys bodie to hys Apostles, as the ministres doo nowe to the people.
But as Chrysostome in hys sentence hath aunswered the Petrobrusians: So H hath he also aunswered the Oecolampadians, Caluinistes, and the rest of the vypers that brake oute of Luthers beallie (of the which generacion this chalenger [Page 78] ys one) who like vipers in dede, whiche gnawe and frette their dames beallie chryst doth sanctisie ād transmute the bread and wine. A to come from her, euen so these impugning the doctrine of ther Father, haue endeuoured, to destroye bothe him and his doctrin to be ridde therof. Qui verò haec sanctificat & transmutat ipse est. Yt ys euen he (saieth Chrysostom meening Chryst) that dothe sanctisie and transmute these thinges?
Owre heresiarke of Englande, Cranmer saieth in his booke, that the creatures of bread and wine can not be sanctified. But by Chrysostomes sentence they be sanctified in to some other thing. Which ys so in dede, and therfore Transubstanciaciō auouched. he addeth, & transmutat, and dothe transmute or chaunge them. For Chryste sanctifieng dothe chaunge the substance of the creatures of bread and wyne, into the substance of his bodie and bloode.
For (as Origen saieth) the bread ys made in to an holier bodie. Nos conditori rerum morem gerent̄es, pro eius in nos collatis beneficijs vbi & gratias diximus oblatis Orig. cont. Cels. li. 8. The bread ys turned into an holier bodie. panibus vescimur, qui vtique ex oratione & precibus in sanctius quoddam corpus conslantur, quod sanè sanctiores hos reddit, qui mente integriore hoc ipso vtuntur. We obeing (saieth Origen) the creatour of thinges, when we for the benefittes whiche he hath geuen vs, haue geuen him thankes, we eate the breades that B be offred, whiche by oracion and praiers, are made into a certain holier bodie, which maketh them holier, which with an wholl minde doo vse the same. Thus Origen.
Do ye not heare that the breades that be offred be made into a certain holier bodie? And what a bodie ys yt? Soche a bodie as maketh those holier, whiche receaue yt withe a pure and godlie minde. What bodie ys yt, that we receaue hauing power to make vs holier, but the holie bodie of him, who ys owre sanctificacion, iustificacion, and redemption?
Nowe here ys no place for the Aduersaries comon glose, to saie, that we receaue the bodie of Chryst spiritually, whiche maketh vs holier that receaue yt, and therby to seclude the receauing of Chrystes bodie reallie. For he saieth that the breades, whiche be offred, be made into an holier bodie. And Li. 4. de S [...] cramentis. that bodie that ys made of the bread (I vse saincte Ambrose hys phrase, Depane fit corpus Christi) maketh them holier, whiche receaue yt with a good and godly minde. Whiche bodie being soche that the bread ys turned or made into yt, must nedes be the reall and substanciall bodie of Chryst. C
Vnderstande me not here, that I reiecte the spirituall receauing of Chryst in the Sacrament. But I wishe bothe the receauinges to go together. He can not receaue Chryst spirituallie, whiche beleueth not that he receaueth him reallie For as the receauing of Chryst reallie profiteth not withoute the receauing of him spirituallie: So he can not receaue him spirituallie, that beleueth not him to be receaued reallie. And therfor when oportunitie serueth, as I wishe bothe the receauinges to go together, so must they in dede go together, yf the receauer will take and haue anie profitte therbie.
Albeit these might sussice, that be hertofore alleaged to testifie vnto vs, what ys the enacted and receaued trueth of Chrystes Parliament house as concerning the preisthead and sacrifice of Chryst after the ordre of Melchisedech: Li. 4. de de thod. side. Melchisedech and his sacrifice a sigure of Chryst ād his sacrifice yet that S. Augustine maie haue one of the other side of the house, that ys of the greke churche, ioined with him, I will bring yowe Damascen, who in fewe woordes saieth thus: Pane & vino suscepit Melchisedech Abrahā excaede alienigenarum reuertentē, qui erat sacerdos Dei altissimi. Illa mensa hanc mysticam D praefigurabat mensam, veluti & sacerdos ille Christi veri sacerdotis figurā praeferebat, & imaginc̄. Tu es (inquit) sacerdos in aeternū secundùm ordinē Melchisedech. With bread and wine did Melchisedech receaue Abraham returning from the slaughter of [Page]the straungers. That table did prefigurate this mysticall table, as also that preist did bear the figure and image of Chryst the verie preist. Thowe arte E (saieth he) a preist for euer after the order of Melchisedech. Thus Damascen.
In whiche sentence ye see the comparison & applicacion of table to table, Table signisieth sacrifice as in S. Paule. 1. Cor. 10. of preist to preist, Damascen teaching the one to be figure of the other. Wher I wolde that the Aduersarie did note that the table of Melchisedech, whiche all men of learning doo knowe, ys taken for the sacrifice, as in sainct Paule, ye can not be partakers of the table of God, and the table of Deuells also. In whiche saing what ells ment sainct Paule, but that the Corinthians coulde not be partakers of that, that was offred to God in sacrifice, and of that, that was offred in sacrifice to Deuells also? The table of Melchisedech (I saie) whiche ys the sacrifice of Melchisedech, did prefigurate the table, that ys, the sacrifice of Chryste. The sacrifice (I saie) which he offred after the ordre of Melchisedech.
Nowe see (o thowe Aduersarie) the concorde and plain testimonie of these right auncient elders, and famouse learned Fathers of Chrystes Parliament F house, howe all they, with one mouth as yt were, haue reported, what was the receaued trueth in the house of Chryst in their tymes, which tymes were the times of pure and sincere knowledge in this matter, a time whē ther was no heresie nor controuersie to moue thē to writte of yt, but quietly and godlie for the instruction of Gods people in the trueth of his faithe, and to leaue certain both monumentes and munimentes of the same to the posteritie, they haue expressed their faithe in this and other diuerse matters. And not onelie their priuate faith, but the vniuersall faith of Chrystes catholique Churche. And left the same in writing for the staie and confirmacion of them that remain in the faithe and for the calling home again of them that haue erred.
Therfore wher thowe erring from the true faith, hauest taught that Melchisedech did not offer bread and wine in sacrisice, beholde that these Fathers by expresse woordes auouche the contrarie. Wher thowe hauest also defended, that Melchisedech was not a figure of Chryste as concerning hys sacrifice, see howe constantlie and vniformlie thowe arte impugned, all these G teaching, that the sacrifice of Melchisedech, was a figure of Chrystes sacrifice, offred and doen by Chryste after the same ordre. And what that sacrifice ys, they haue not left vndeclared, but by plain woordes they haue taught that yt ys the bodie and blood of Chryste, whiche bodie and blood of Chryste being offred in sacrifice after the ordre of Melchisedech (as by them also yt ys affirmed) doth inuinciblie proue the verie reall presence of Chrystes blessed bodie in the Sacrament, whiche dailie ys offred after the ordre Aug. cōt. Iudaeos. The preist head of Chryst shal not be chaū ged. of Melchisedech, and shall be to the woorldes ende. Iurauit Dominus, & non poenitebit eum. Oure Lord hath sworn, and yt shall not repent him. Quid est (inquit Augustinus) iurauit Dominus, nisi inconcussa veritate firmauit? Et quid est non poenitebit eum, nisi hoc sacerdotium nulla ratione mutabitur? What ys yt (saieth sainct Augustin) that our Lorde hath Sworne, but that with a most certen trueth he hath made yt sure? And what ys that: Yt shall not repent him, but that this Preisthead by no meanes shall be chaunged? Yf then (as sainct Augustin saieth) this preisthead shall not be chaunged, howe shall yt be continued? H
Theophilacte one as yt were of the other side of Chrystes parliament [Page 79]house, being one of the greke Churche, ioineth with saincte Augustine and Theophila. in Epistolā ad Hebr. Chryst ys dailie offered by his ministers and shall be so continued for euer. A teacheth howe, expownding to the Hebrues these woordes: Thow arte a preist for euer, &c. In aeternum dicit, quia quotidiè offertur, vel in perpetuum offertur per Dei ministros oblatio, Christum Dominum & Pontificem habens & sacrificium, qui seipsum nostri ob gratiam sanctificat, frangit, & tribuit. He saieth for euer: bycause he ys dailie offred, or bycause by the ministres of God, ys for euer or continuallie offred the oblation hauing Chryst our lorde, being bothe the high preist, and the sacrifice, who doth for our sake continuallie sanctifie, breake, and geue him self.
Ceasse therfor to reuile and blaspheme this blessed mysterie. For heauen and earth shall passe awaie, but the woorde of God abydeth for euer. Whiche woorde of God saieth that this preisthead and sacrifice shall continue for euer. And therfore though yowe barke against yt, as do the dogges against the moone: Yet as the moone notwithstanding abideth in her heauē, and goeth her course, and shall continewe: So shall this blessed mysterie abide in his state, and shall go forwarde and cōtinewe vntil the worlde ende, what so euer ye saie or doo, yt shall not be impared. But ye shall for your B abominable doing, be not a litle decaied and afflicted.
I wolde bring certain of the lower house (I meen of them that were after sixe hondreth yeares after Chryste) to geue their testimonie in this matter, but that yt wolde make this rude worke growe to a greatter volume, then I wolde wishe. Therfor for this place I will omitte them, and ende this matter of the prophecie of Chrystes preistheade after the ordre of Melchisedech, whiche hathe aunswered the figure that did prefigurate the same. And proceade to speake of the prophecie that aunswereth the next figure.
THE TWO AND THIRTITH CHAPITER TO proue the sacrifice of our Shewe bread to be a continuall sacrifice, as the olde shewe bread was, alleageth the prophecie of Daniel and reiecteth the false expositions of the Aduersaries.
THe figure that folowed next after the figure of Melchisedech, was the figure of the Paschall lambe, the accomplissing of the whiche was doen (as yt was declared) in the last Supper, the which last Supper being doen after the ordre of Melchisedech, the prophecie, that aunswered the figure therto apperteining, aunswereth also the figure of the Paschall Lambe, forsomoche as the bodie of Chryste sacrificed after the ordre of Melchisedech, and eaten in that Supper, aunswereth also the eating of the Paschall Lambe in the olde testament, and ys our verie Paschall Lambe in the newe Testament.
And therfore being lothe to trooble the Reader, with the reading of that, of the which moche ys allreadie spoken, and (as I trust) fufficiently bothe in the handling of the figure of the Paschall Lambe, and also of the sacrifice of Chryst after the ordre of Melchisedech: Therfor I shall go to the next figure, which ys the Shewe bread, and therunto applie soche prophecies, as seme to aunswere the same, ād maie-wel beioined to yt, as I haue doē in the setting furth of the preisthead of Chryste, after the ordre of Melchisedech, D with the prophecies therto apperteining.
The Shew bread (if ye remembre what ys before saied) was a bread, that [Page]was both offred in sacrifice, and eaten, but so that none might eate of yt, but E the preistes, and soche as were clean, as by the storie of Dauid and Abimelech 1 Reg. 21. Shewe bread continuallie vpō the table of the Tabernacle applied to the Sacrament. yt did appeare. Whiche bread was not seldom offred, but as sooen as the olde was taken awaie, newe were offred, and putte in their place, so that the table might not be withoute shew bread: but yt was allwaies reserued, and their remained. Nowe as the reseruacion of that bread, was a figure of the reseruacion of our blessed bread (as ther yt was declared) So that bread being offred in sacrifice, was a figure of our bread offred in sacrifice. And as that bread was appointed to be a perpetuall sacrifice, allwaies to continewe: So this sacrifice ys appointed to be perpetuall, and to cōtinewe vntill Chrystes cōminge. Of the whiche Sacrifice, and of the continuance of yt, not onelie the Prophet Daniell, but also the Prophet Malachie hath prophecied.
Daniell (as the holie Fathers do expownde) speaking of the wickednesse of the time of Antichriste, amonge other euells that then shall be wrought, he saied that the dailie sacrifice shall be taken awaie. At whiche time what dailie sacrifice shall ther be to be taken awai, but the sacrifice of F the chrystians?
For (as Petrus Cluniacensis saieth) ther be in the worlde foure principall sectes: that ys, of the Iewes, the Sarazens, the paganes, and the Chrystians. Petrus Cluniacen. cōtra Petrobr. Foure principall sectes of religion in the worlde. The Iewes perseuering in the carnall obseruacion of their carnall lawe, for somoch as yt ys emong them receaued that onely in Hierusalem they must honour God, do sacrifice ther, and no wher ells. And nowe for somoche as they are dispersed among nacions, and had no temple this fiften hondreth years, and for that God hathe not, sence the deuastacion and subuersion of Hierusalem, suffred them yett ther to dwell, therfor they vse no sacrifice. wherin also ys fullfilled the prophecie of Daniel, whiche saieth, that after a certain time after Chryste ys slain, sacrifice and meate offring shall ceasse amonge the Iewes. And what soeuer was after doen in the temple (as sainct Daniel. 9. Hierom saieth) Non suit sacrificium Dei, sed cultus Diaboli. yt was not the sacrifice of God, but the woourshipping of the Deuell. And this desolacion (saieth Hieron in Daniel. cap. 9. Daniell) shall continewe to the ende. Wherby ys ment, that the abolishing G of the sacrifice of the Iewes, ys perpetuall and for euer.
The Sarazens being deluded by the shamefull imposture and deceipt of Mahomete, haue a certain mingled religion, vsing circumcision, and certain lotions of the Iewes. And so vse a parte of Moises lawe. They also confesse that Chryst was born of a virgen, and that he liued holilie, and preached truely, and wrought manie miracles: But externall and speciall sacrifice, wherbie their religion shoulde be discerned from other, they vse none, but that certain howres on the night, and certain howres on the daie, they geue them selues to praier, and speciallie after meate.
The Pagans being a rude, grosse, and barbarouse people, almost vnknowen to the worlde, and neither knowing God, neither almost theim selfes, dwelling farre of in the furthest parte of the northe, and not knowing the names of the Idolls of other Idolaters, nor religion, what thing so euer they first mete in the morning, be yt horse, hogge, Cowe, or calf, that same for that daie doo they take, and honour for their God. So that they haue Pagans haue daie Gods, and howre Gods, and no certen God. not Deos perpetuos, but Deos Diarios vel horarios. Gods for euer continuall, but H daie Gods, and howre Gods, vnto whom yet they do no sacrifice, but according to their ignoraunt educacion they liue withoute the knowledg of doing sacrifice.
[Page 80]The christians being called to the knowledg of the true liuing God, and of his sonne Iesus Chryste, instructed in his lawes, and taught the true maner A of honouring and seruing him: knowe that all that haue serued God frō the beginnig, haue not onelie serued him with the sacrifices of lawdes, praises, praiers and obedience, whiche be thinges comon: but haue vsed also this speciall sign of seruice, as to offer some extern sacrifice to testifie their duetie and right propre seruice to God. Whiche maner of seruice I call propre, for that yt can be don to none, but to God, or to some thing taken for god.
Call to minde all the Fathers in the beginning, the Patriarkes, the Prophetes, and all other holie men knowing God, and ye shall perceaue that all they besides lawdes, praises praiers and other, did also testifie their seruice to God, by their externall sacrificing of some of the fruictes of the earth. So did Abel, so did Noe, so did Iob, Abrahā, Isaac, and Iacob, and manie other, as the bookes of the olde Testament do testifie.
And Chryst him self did not onelie offer his blessed bodie a bloodie Sacrifice Chryst offred sacrifice in his supper, and cōmaūded yt to be cōtinued. vpon the Crosse to God his Father, which all that do but tast the name of B the religion of Chryst doo confesse: But he also as the authour of the newe Testament did first offer to God his hodie and blood an vnbloodie sacrifice in his last supper after the ordre of Melchisedech, ther and then instituting the same sacrifice, and commaunding yt to be doen and continued in his Church, as yt ys allreadie proued. And so (as Irenaeus saieth) he taught the newe oblacion of the newe Testament.
Nowe then seing that no sect in the worlde vseth anie dailie sacrifice, but we Chrystians: Yf we also had no dailie sacrifice (as the enemies of [...]od haue traueiled to compasse) howe then shoulde the prophecie of Daniel be fullfilled, that the dailie sacrifice shall be taken awaie? yf ther be none, none can be takē awaie. But the Prophet saieth, that one shall be takē awaie. wherfor ther must nedes be a dailie sacrifice, whiche for the fullsilling of the prophecie, must be taken awaie.
Of this prophecie ys sainct Hierom an expownder, who being more busied to refell the wicked expositions of Prophyrius, and breiflie to open the C true vnderstanding of the Prophete, then at large to sett furthe owre misteries in plain woordes, saieth yet that, that ys sufficient to satisfie anie man that ys not contenciouse, that this prophecie ys to be vnderstanded of the dailie sacrifice of the christians, although not in so expresse woordes, as this time of controuersie in this matter wolde require. Thus ys the text of the Prophecie Et à tempore quo ablatum fuerit iuge sacrificium, & posita fuerit abominatio in desolationem, dies mille ducenti nonaginta. And from the time that the dailie Daniel 12. or continuall Sacrifice shall be taken awaie or put down, and the abominable desolacion sett vppe, ther shall be a thousande daies two hundreth and nintie.
Vpon this texte Hierom saieth thus: Ho [...] mille ducentos nonaginta dies Prophyrius Hieron in Danielem. in tempore Antiochi & in desolatione templ [...], d [...]oit completos, quam & Iosephus, & Machabaeòrum ( [...]ut diximus) liber tribus tantùm annis fuisse commemorant. Ex quo perspicuum est tres istos & semis annos de Antichristi dici temporibus, qui tribus & semis annis, hoc est mille ducentis nonaginta diebus sanctos persecuturus est, et postea corruiturus in monte inclyto et sancto. A tempore igitur quod nos interpretati sumus iuge Sacrificium, quando Antichristus orbem obtinens, Dei cultuns interdixetit, vsque ad internitionem ciustres D et semis anni, id est, mille ducenti nonaginta dies complehuntur. These thousande two hundreth and ninetie daies, Porphyrius saieth, they were fullfilled in the [Page]time of Antiochus, and in the desolation of the temple, whiche bothe Iosephus, E and the booke of the Machabees (as we haue said) doo testifie to be don in Antichryst shall cause the dailie sacrifice to ceasse. three years onelie, Wherbie yt ys plain, these three yeares and a half to be spoken of the times of Antichryste, who by the space of three years and a half, that ys, a thousande two hundreth and ninetie daies, shall persecute the holie and faithfull chrystians, and after shall fall downe in the famouse and holie hill. From the time therfore that we haue interpreted the dailie sacrifice, when Antichryste shall for bidde the seruice of God, vnto his destructiō ther shall be fullfilled three years and a half, that ys to saie, a thousand two hundreth and ninetie daies. Thus moche S. Hierom.
Who yf we marke, interpreteth the greke woorde, and calleth yt the dailie sacrifice, and ther with remembre that (as before by him ys saied in the exposition of the prophecie of the preisthead of Chryst after the ordre of Melchisedech) Chryst our Melchisedech offred his bodie and bloode, the verie The dailie sacrifice ys the sacrifice of the bodie and blood of Chryst. true bread, and true wine, and deliuered vnto vs these misteries that we haue to vse in the remembrance of him vntill he come to iudgement. Wherto F yf we adde the exposition of this prophecie of Daniel that in the time of Antichrist the seruice of God shall be by him forbodden, what shall we ells vnderstand by the dailie sacrisice, but the sacrifice of our Melchisedech, left with vs to be vsed as our most high seruice to God.
Which thing Lyra by verie plain woordes dothe declare expownding this text of Daniell thus: Hic Angelus instruit Danielem de termino à quo incipiendi sunt praedicti tres anni cum dimidio, dicens: A tempore cùm ablatum fuerit iuge sacrificium, id est, à tempore quo sacrificium altaris cessabit celebrari solemniter. Here the Angell teacheth Daniell the tyme from the whiche the three-years and a half shall beginne, saing: from the time when the dailie Sacrifice shall be taken awaie, that ys, from the time in the whiche the sacrifice of the Altar shall ceasse solemnelie to be celebrated, Thus Lyra.
As by the exposition of these Fathers yt doth appeare that the dailie Sacrifice ys the sacrifice of the Altar, the Sacrifice of Chrystes bodie and bloode, So herunto reason also agreeth, and by yt we are also forced thus to vnderstand the prophete. For he can not be vnderstanded of the sacrifice G of lawde, and praise, of the which S. Paule speaketh, Per ipsum offeramus hostiā laudis semper Deo; id est, fructum labiorum confitentium nomini eius. By him (mening Hebr. 13. Chryst) let vs offer sacrifice of lawde allwais to God, that ys to saie, the fruicte of our lippes confessing his name. Of the whiche sacrifice the prophet Dauid speaketh, saing: Immola Deo sacrificium laudis. Ofer vppe vnto God Psal. 49. the sacrifice of lawde.
Neither can yt be vnderstande of the sacrifice of the mortificacion or affliction of our bodies, to the whiche S. Paule exhorteth vs, saing: Obsecro vos per misericordiam Dei, vt exhibeatis corpora vestrae hostiam viuentem, sanctam, De [...] placentem. I besech yowe by the mercie of God, that ye geue vppe your bodies as a liuelie and holie sacrifice vnto God, and pleasing to him,
Neither can yt be vnderstanded of the sacrifice of a contrite hearte, of the whiche Dauid speaketh: Sacrificium Deo spiritus contribulatus, A troobled spirit ys a sacrifice vnto God. For all theise sacrifices shall be in vse in the time of Psal. 50. Antichrist euen in the heat of his persecution. For the Angell saied: Eligentur, & dealbabuntur, & quasi ignis probabuntur multi. Many shall be chosen, H Daniel. 12 and purified, and shall be tried as yt were fire. In soche men ther ys no doubte but they will continuallie withe their humble praiers praise God, and confessing his faith, magnifie his holie name, and fo offer vnto God [Page 81]the sacrifice of lawde and praise as the fruictes of their lippes. They will also A not onely mortifie and crucifie their bodies with all the lustes and concupiscence: but they will also at that time geue vppe their bodies to suffer tormentes, yea and very deathe for the name of Chryst, and so offer them as pleasaunt sacrifices vnto God. Other some ther shall be, whiche seing the heauie, great, and violent persecucion that shall be vsed by Antichryst, and Psal. 105. his ministres will with Daniell confesse their sinnes, and the sinnes of the people, and humbly with Dauid saie: Peccauimus cum patribus nostris, iniustè egimus, iniquitatem fecimus. We haue sinned with our Fathers, we haue don vniustlie, we haue committed iniquitie.
Seing then that Antichrist neither shall nor can put downe or take awaie these sacrifices, but that they shall be vsed vnder his swoorde, and in the middest of his flammes and other tormentes: yt ys most euident, that none of these be that dailie sacrifice, that shall be put downe. For these sacrifices shall be openly offred, and that dailie.
Yt remaineth then that of necessitie this prophecie must be vnderstande of the dailie sacrifice of the bodie and blood of Chryste, whiche although Antichrist shall put down the daily sacrifice of the Altar. B some godlie disposed people maie percase secretlie vse (as Lyra saieth) vt shal for three years and a half ceasse openly and solemnely to be celebrated.
And further of congruence yt maie be reasoned, yf the Fathers that haue ben in all ages before Chryste, did knowe that yt was a thing acceptable and pleasing to God to offer extern sacrifice to him: shoulde not the Chrystiā know more, who liueth in the clear light, wher they liued in the shaddowe? Yf those sacrifices were a swete sauour to God (as no doubte but they were so for his sake whom they figured) howe moche sweter then ys our sacrifice vnto him, offringe (as we do) Chryst him self in sacrifice? Yf they gaue to God not onely the sacrifices of lawdes and thankes, but also an extern sacrifice of thankes, as yt were of an higher thanke for soche befittes as they receaued: shall not the chrystian, who hathe receaued greater benefittes, incomparablie passing thers, geue at the leest as great thankes as they? Yf we shall offre no other sacrifice, then the sacrifice of praise and thankes geuing and sochelike, the fathers did so as well as we, and ouer and besides that they offred an extern sacrifice of thākes: What ingratitude maie yt well C be thought then, that we receauing manie mo benefittes then they, shoulde geue fewer thankes then they? Yt ys an euell proporcion, the mo and greater benefittes, the fewer and lesse thankes: the fewer and smaller benefittes, the mo and greater thankes.
O lorde what obcecate, and blinde enemies of God were these, that coulde Chrystians vsing no external sacrifice are lesse thākfull then the Fathers of the lawe. not see these thinges, but wolde that we Chrystians hauing clerer knowledge then other, shoulde lesse do their duetie then other, and receauing mo benesittes, shoulde be lesse thankfull? And thus God shoulde be robbed of his honoure, and the Chrystians withdrawed from doing of ther due seruices. And then woulde yt shortly come to vs, as yt came to them, who knowing God, haue not glorified him as God, neither were thankfull, but waxed full of vanities in their ymaginacions, and their foolish hearte was blinded, when they cownted them selues wise, they became fooles. D
THE THREE AND THIRTITH CHAP. OPENETH the prophecie of Malachie. E
NOt onely the Prophete Daniel (as before ys saied) doth prophecie that ther shall be a sacrifice: but also Malachie, who plainlie declareth the reiecting of the sacrifice of the Iewes, and the placing of a common vsed sacrifice: Non est mibi voluntas in vobis, dicit Dominus Malac. 1 exercituum, & munus non suscipiam de manu vestra. Ab ortu enim solis vsque ad occasum magnum est nomen meum in gentibus, & in omni loco sacrificatur, & offertur nomini meo oblatio munda, quia magnum est nomen meum in gentibus, dicit Dominus exercituum. I haue no pleasure in yowe, saieth the Lorde of hostes, And as for meat offring, I will not accept yt as your handes. For from the rising vppe of the sunne vnto the going downe of the same, my name ys great emong the gentiles. yea in euery place shall ther be sacrifice doen, and a clean meat offring offred vppe vnto my name. For my name ys great emong the Gentiles, saeth the Lorde of hostes.
This prophecie hath moche tormented the Aduersaries, and therfore all F Protestantes tormented with the prophe [...] [...] howe [...]ey wrest yt. their ingines, hookes, and all their fetches haue be sett vpon this place to drawe yt to their sense and pourpose, but yt will not be, all will not serue that they can doo. for trueth will shewe yt self, and preuaill. This prophecie in dede inuinciblie proueth the Sacrifice of Chrystes Churche, as hereafter shall be shewed. But first let vs see, howe the Aduersaries wolde wrest this place, and let vs make yt plain to the reader, that the sence whiche they wolde haue the scripture vnderstanded in, ys not the right and full sence, but a distorted sence, a wrong sense, and soche a sense, as the place can not beare, a sense disagreing from the expositions of all the holie Fathers bothe of the latin churche, and of the greke churche.
Occolampadius in a booke that he did write of the Masse vnto the Senate of Basille, saieth that by this prophecie of the Prophet Malachie, was Prophecied, Occolamp. that the ministres of the newe testament shoulde make a faithfull people oute of all nacions, as a pure and an holie oblacion and sacrifice to God. And this (saieth he) ys the minde of the Prophet.
Martin Bucer not moche differing from him, in his aunswer that he made G to Latomus, saieh that hy this Prophecie ys cheiflie promised the preaching of the Gospell, by the whiche God shall be euery whear acknowleged, and Bucer. the fruicte also of the same preaching, that ys faithe, and the confessing of the same faithe. And he saieth also that by the incense and oblacion are to be vnderstanded the sacrifices of chrysten men, whiche be (saieth he) the praising and calling on the name of God, wherunto ys allwaies annexed the geuing vppe of our selues to the will of God, and the declaracion of our thākefull minde towardes God, by the doing, and shewing of loue and mercie to the poore. And thus dothe he expownde the Prophete.
Bullinger an other of the same secte and sorte, saieth that the lawde and prayse of God his name ys the pure sacrifice that the Prophete speaketh of. Bullinger, Ʋrbanus Rhegius.
But Vrbanus Rhegius writing against Eckius his master in his firstbooke saieth thus: The sacrifice that Malachias prophecied of, ys the mortificacion of the flesh, and the calling on the name of God, with godlie prayer. And this was his phantasie, whiche so I terme as I might the rest, for that eche of thē hath vnderstanded the prophecie as him listeth, and not as the full mening H of the same hathe required. And although other haue vttered their conceptes and coniecturs vpon this prophecie: Yet these being the standarde [Page 82]bearers of that wicked armie, that hath so maliciouslie fowght against Gods A truthe, maie fuffice to be rehersed for this time, presupposing that the rest do folowe their standerd bearers.
But let vs nowe examin, and weigh their expositions. Yf ye marke they do all agree in this, that this prophecie ys to be vnderstanded of the sacrifice of praise and thanks geuing, which thei call the pure sacrifice. Yt ys to be considered here that Allmightie God by his Prophet declaring, that the sacrifice of the Iewes, which was onelie doen in Hierusalem shoulde be reiected, abolished, and lefte, signified also, that an other sacrifice shoulde be substituted in the place of the same, whiche shoulde be a pure and clean sacrifice, whiche shoulde not be doen onlie in Hierusalem, as the other was, But in euery place.
Nowe as for the sacrifice of a contrite heart, of lawde, praise, and thankes geuing, who doubteh but that they were vsed and offred of diuerse holie Psal. 50. and vertuouse men in the olde lawe, and well accepted? whiche thing Dauid was not ignorant of, when he saied: Sacrificium Deo spiritus contribulatus, Psalm. 49. cor contritum & humiliatum, Deus, non despicies. A troobled spirit ys a sacrifice to B God, a contrite and humble heart (o God) shalt thowe not despice. Of the sacrifice of lawde Dauid also speaketh Immola Deo sacrificium laudis. Offer to God the sacrifie of lawde &c. praise. And in the same Psalm: Sacrificium laudis honorificabit me. Who so offreth me thankes and praise, he honoureth me. The hereticall expositions of the prophecie of Malachie cannot stand.
Therfore wher the Aduersarie wolde, that these kinde of Sacrifices shoulde be they, of the whiche the prophet Malachie spake, that shoulde come into the place of the sacrifice of the Iewes, whiche God wolde abolisshe, their exposition can not stande. For these can not nowe be placed as newe sacrifices, whiche were placed and vsed from the beginning of the first good man, that offred sacrifice to God, Abel, who withe the sacrifice of the fruictes of the earth, whiche he offred, offred also praise and thankes geuing to God, These sacrifices then be not newe placed, but being of olde time vsed, God wolde haue them so continued.
Neither doo I meen that these be separated from that sacrifice, that God wolde place in stead of the sacrifice of the Iewes. For their ys no extern sacrifice Sacrifice of laude separated from the extern sacrifice. but yf yt be rightlie, and duely offred, yt bringeth with yt the sacrifice C of lawde and praise, and of other also. But that the Prophet dothe meen of these onelie, and not raither of some extern sacrifice to be vsed, offred, and frequented among the Chrystians: and that he ment not cheiflie and principallie of an extern sacrifice, to be placed in the place of the Iewes extern sacrifices, that ys most vntrue. And that maie be perceaued by the difference of the newe sacrifice from the olde. What ys that? That yt shall be a pure sacrifice.
Why, were not theirs pure sacrifices before in the olde lawe? Was ther not a sacrifice of expiacion, and a daie of expiacion assigned, in the whiche the clensing sacrifice shoulde be offred? Read the xvi chapter of Leuiticus, and ther shall ye finde that Allmightie God saeth thus: In hac die expiatio vestri erit Leuit. 16. atque mundatio. ab omnibus peccatis vestris coram Domino mundabimini. In this daie shall be your expiacion and clēsing, and ye shall be made clean from all your sinnes before the Lorde.
Was not this then a pure sacrifice, that purified, and clensed the people from all their sinnes before God? Ys yt not a pure sacrifice that ys a swete sauoure D to God? were not the sacrifices of the olde lawe soche? Doth not Moises from Gods mouth so terme them? Yt can not be denied but the [Page]scripture doth so call them. But as Chryste saieth, Nemo bonus, nisi solus Deus. E Ther ys no man good but God alone. And yet again he saieth: Bonus homo de bono thesauro prosert bona. The good Man oute of good treasure bringeth Luc. 18. Matth. 12 God good by nature man by participacion. furth good thinges: So though God alone of him self, and of his diuine nature be onlie good: yet men be good also, not of them selues, nor of their owne natures, but by participacion of the goonesse of God. So ther ys one sacrifice whiche onely ys pure, for that yt ys pure of yt self, whiche sacrifice ys the bodie and bloode of our Sauiour Iesus Chryst. Other sacrifices that be called pure and clensing sacrifices, they be so called by participacion, that they doo please God, and purifie men by the vertue and merite, of that pure Sacrifice Iesus Chryst, who ys the lambe, that was slain from the beginning of the worlde, geuing vertue to all sacrifices that were yet offred from the beginninge of the worlde. And therfore when the Prophett putteth Apoc 13. this difference to this sacrifice, that shall succead the sacrifices of the Iewes, that yt shall be a pure sacrifice: Yf yt were pure but by vertue of other, as the sacrifices of the Iewes were, then were this woorde, pure, no woorde F of difference, but raither a superfluouse woorde making no distinction betwen the two sortes of sacrifices. But for so moche as the Prophet hath put yt as a difference, seing the other were pure by vertue of other, this must nedes be the sacrifice, that ys pure of yt self, whiche (as ys before said) ys the bodie and bloode of Chryst.
Neither maie this nowe be drawen to that most blessed Sacrifice of the bodie and blood of Chryst vpon the Crosse. For that Sacrifice in that maner was offred in one place onelie, that was, vpon the mounte Caluarie: But this Sacrifice (saieth God by the Prophet) ys offred in euery place. Wherfore of necessitie this must be vnderstanded of the pure Sacrifice of Chrystes bodie and blood offred on the Altar, which ys offred, not in Hierusalem, not on Sacrifice of the crosse and of the altar, al one in substāce, but diuerse in maner. Caluery, but in euery place, where Chryst ys knowē and receaued. Whiche sacrifice although in maner of offring, yt differeth from that offred vpon the Crosse: yet in substance yt ys all one.
Nowe ye maie perceaue, that the expositions of the stāderd bearers of the wicked armie of the enemies of gods trueth, ys but a violēt or a wrested exposition, G and will not be born of the text.
THE FOVRE AND THIRTITH CHAP. EXPOwndeth the Prophecie of Malachie by Martialis, and Irenaeus.
THat the Aduersaries shall not saie that I am iudge in mine owne cause, although I am certen that I builde vpon the rocke: Yet to the better contentacion of the Reader, and more manifest confutacion of these Aduersaries, I will reporte the Iugement of the right auncient Elders of Chrystes Parliamēt house, as touching the enacted trueth of this matter by their owne woordes.
Sanctus Martialis a great auncient in Chrystes house as being one of Chrystes disciples, and after the death of his and our master almost continuallie in the Companie of the Apostle Peter, ys a notable wittnesse of this trueth, and wourthie to be credited. This holie man maketh menciō of this prophecie of Malachie after this maner. S. Martialis Martyr epist. ad Burdegalē. cap. 3. H
Sacrificium Deo creatori offertur in ara, non homini, neque Angelo. Nec solùm in ara sanctificata, sed vbique offertur Deo oblatio munda, sicut restatus est, cuius corpus & sanguinem in vitam aternam offerimus, dicentes: Spiritus est Deus, & eos qui adorant eū, [Page 83] in spiritu & veritate oportet adorare. Ipse enim corpus habens immaculatum, & sine peccato A (quia conceptus est de Spiritu sancto, natus ex Maria virgine) ipsum in ara crucis permisit immolari. Quod autem Iudaei per inuidiam immolauerunt, putantes se nomen eius à terra abolere, nos causa salutis nostrae in ara sanctificata proponimus, scientes hoc solo remedio nobis vitam praestandam, & mortem effugandam. The sacrifice ys Chrystes bodie and blood ys offred euerie wher, a pure oblacion to euerlasting life. offred vnto God our creatour on the altar, not vnto men, nor vnto Angell, nor onelie on halowed altar, but euery wher ys offred to God a pure oblacion, as he hath wittnessed, whose bodie and blood we offer to euerlasting life, sainge: God ys a spirit, and they that adore him, must adore him in spiritte and trueth. For he hauing an immaculate bodie, and withoute Sinne (for he was conceaued by the holie Gost, born of the virgen Mary) he suffred that same bodie to be sacrificed on the altar of the Crosse. And that, that the Iewes did sacrifice by enuie, thinking to abolishe hys name from the earthe, we for cause of our health doo sett furth in the sanctified altar, knowing that by this onelie remedie life ys to be geuen, and death to be driuen awaie. Thus moche this holie Martyr Martialis. B
What a notable sentence ys this? Do ye not see that he maketh mencion of the saing of the Prophet Malachie saing: Euery wher ys offred the pure oblacion or sacrifice? And perceaue ye not that immediately he saieth, that we offer the bodie and blood of Chryst vnto euerlasting life? And that this his mening should not be wrested, nor mystaken, he declareth what bodie of Chryst we offer, and what bodie we offre, in what place and to what effect wher. The bodie of Chryste whiche we doo offer, ys that bodie, that the Iewes offred by enuie: The place that we offer yt on, ys the halowed altar. The effecte that the Iewes sought by the offring of Chrystes bodie, was to take life from him, and therby to abolish his name from the earth: The effect that we chrystians seke by the sacrificing of his bodie on the altar ys to magnifie hys name, and by that sacrifice, as by the only remedye, to gett vs life, and to driue awaie death.
Note well that this holie Martyr and auncient Father teacheth that pure doctrine, that the primitiue church of the Apostles did professe, and teache. And iudge yf the church that nowe ys, which the Aduersaries haue so vilely reuiled, and so maliciously railed on, hath taught anie other doctrine, then this holie disciple of Chryste hath taught. The Churche hath taught, and C doth nowe teache, that the bodie of Chryst ys in the Sacrament of the altar reallie: This holie man teacheth that the same whiche the Iewes crucified, we sett furth vpon the holowed altar. The Iewes crucified the reall bodie of Chryste, Wherfore we sett furth or sacrifice Chrystes reall bodie. The churche nowe teacheth that we offer the reall bodie of Chryst on the altar: This holy man teacheth, that we offre the bodie and blood of Chryst vnto euerlasting life. And that we shoulde knowe that this ys a sure doctrine grownded Chryst cō maunded his bodie and blood to be offred vpon a sure fundacion he endeth hys sentence thus: Hoc enim ipse Dominus Iesus iussit nos agere in sui commemorationem. Thys (saieth he) hath our Lorde Iesus commaunded vs to doo in the commemoracion or remembrance of him.
Weigh this saing with me, I besech thee, gentle Reader. Manie of the wicked teachers haue wounderfullie deceaued the simple people with this sentence A fond obiection of the Aduersaries, answered by the holie Martyr Martialis. of Chryste, which this Father here alleageth, saing that Chryst instituted this Sacrament for a memoriall or a remembrance of him. But a D memoriall (saie they) ys of a thing that ys absent, and not of a thing, that ys present, wherfore Chryste ys not present in the Sacrament.
Yf he were, what neadeth anie other memoriall, but hys presence? [Page]A more full aunswer shall be made to this, by the helpe of Gods grace, in the E thirde booke, wher this matter shall be treacted of more at large. But at this present, this holy man onely shall aunswer. Whose aunswer, his grauitie, Cap. 41. holinesse, and auncientie ys soche, that they that flee not from gods grace, to their owne singular affection, and opinion, shall perceaue that in yt ys soche pith and substance, that they maie well staie them selues vpon the same. For when the holie Father had declared the reall presence of Chryste in the Sacrament, and that he ys offred in sacrifice, then he added, that our Lorde Iesus commaunded vs so to doo. Wherby what ells dothe he meen, but that as our Lord Iesus did consecrate, and sacrifice his own bodie, and gaue the same also to hys Apostles to eate in his last Supper, as ys allreadie declared: So doo we nowe consecrate and offre the same bodie, and receaue yt according to his commaundement and that in the remembrancece of his death?
This I saie maie serue and suffice for an aunswer to a man that ys not contenciouse, nor listeth to make euery parte of his faith a doubte, and call yt Let master Iuell conferre this with hys priuate glose vpon the same text in his sermō fol. 34. into question. Thys man I saie, his auncientie in the Parliament house of F Chryst considered, ys of authoritie more sufficient, and better to be beleued, then Lutherus, Oecolampadius, Zuinglius, Caluimus or our owne contrie men Cranmer, Ridley, Latimer, or ther complices dead or liuing, whose saings hauing no grownde of auncient trueth, and so of congruence none authoritie, yet haue they ben (the more ys the pitie) to rashlie beleued, to the casting awaie of manie a soule, and to then crease of the damnacion of the speakers.
But further to proceade to learn the enacted trueth of this matter, I meen the true vnderstanding of the Prophet Malachie: we haue an other auncient elder of the same house, Irenaeus the disciple of Polycarpus, whiche Polycarpus was disciple of S. Iohn the Euangelist, as Eusebius wittnesseth in the ecclesiasticall historie. And therfore ys this auncient Father not to be suspected of hys trueth, nor distredited. Thus he writeth: Sed et suis Discipulis dans consilium primitias Deo offerre ex suis creaturis, non quasi indigenti, sed vt ipsi nec infructuosi, nec ingratisint: eum, qui ex creatura panis est, accepit, & gratias egit, dicens, Hoc est corpus meum. Et Li. 5. ca. 5. Irenaeus. Li 4. c. 32. calicem similiter, qui est ex ea creatura, quae est secundùm nos, suum sanguinem confessus est, G & noui testamenti, nouam docuit oblationem, quam Ecclesia ab Apostolis accipiens in vniuerso mundo offert Deo, ei, qui alimenta nobis praestat, primitias suorum munerum in nouo testamento, de quo in duodecim Prophetis Malachias sic praesignauit: Non est mihi voluntas in vobis dicit Dominus omnipotens, & sacrificium non accipiam de manibus vestris, &c. But also geuing instruction to hys disciples, to offre the first fruites of the creatures to God, not as to one hauing nede, but that they shoulde neither be vnfruictfull, nor vnthankfull, he tooke that bread whiche ys a creature, and gaue thankes, saing: Thys ys my bodie: And the cuppe likewise whiche ys a creature as we, he confessed to be hys bloode. And of the newe testament he taught the newe oblacion, the whiche the churche receauing of the Apostles, Chryst taught the newe sacrifice of the newe Testament, the Church receaued yt of the Apostles. offreth to God in all the woorlde, euen vnto him, who geueth vs foode, being the first fruictes of his sacrifices in the newe testament. Of the whiche emong the twelue Prophetes Malachie did this speake before hand: I haue no pleasure in yowe, saieth the Lorde omnipotent, and I will take no sacrifice of your handes. And so furth he reherseth the wholl sentence of the Prophet. H
In the saing of this holie Elder of Chrystes house, ye se a goodlie agreement, with the other Elder before recited. For thys Elder teacheth that Chryst of the creatures of bread and wine made hys bodie and bloode, and therwith [Page 84] all instituted and taught the newe sacrifice of the newe testament, the whiche sacrifice the Churche receauing of the Apostles, doth offre throughoute all the A worlde, of the whiche the Prophet Malachie (saieth he) spake before.
Make nowe then comparison betwen Martialis and Irenaeus. Martialis teacheth the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament: Irenaeus teacheth the S. Martialis and Irenaeus cōpared together in their doctrine of the Sacrament. same, saing that Chryst confessed the bread and cuppe to be hys bodie and bloode. The other saied that the bodie and bloode of Chryst were offred in sacrifice: Thys man saieth that Chryst confessing his bodie and blood to be present, taught a newe oblacion of the newe testament. The other saied that Chryst commaunded vs so to doo: This man saieth that Chryst taught the newe sacrifice of the newe testament to the Apostles and that the Church receauing the same of the Apostes dothe offre yt to God troughoute all the worlde. The other alleaging Malachie, treacteth of the sacrifice of Chrystes bodie and bloode: This man treating of the bodie and blood of Christ, the newe sacrifice of the newe testament offred of the Churche throughout all the worlde, alleageth Malachie, saing, that he spake of the same.
Aboue these goodlie notes of agreement betwē these two great aunciēt Two notable documentes out of Iren. wherby the gloses of the Aduersaries are reproued ād ouerthrowen. B Fathers, this ys in Irenaeus speciallie to be obserued, that in saing that Chryst taught the newe oblacion of the newe Testament, he geueth vs two goodly documentes for the mainteinaunce of the treuth of the catholique faithe, and the repression of the false errours of the Aduersaries, and maliciouse reproches.
And first, wher he saieth, that Chryst taught a newe oblacion, yt confowndeth all the expositions of the Aduersaries so plainlie, that anie childe maie see that they are confownded. For wher they saie that by the pure sacrifice that Malachie speaketh of, ys vnderstanded the sacrifice of praise and thankes geuing, mercy to the poor, obedience to gods will and soche other, this Authour sainge, that Chryst taught a newe oblacion, of the whiche Malachie did speake, doth clean ouerthrowe them. For these sacrifices of the whiche the Aduersaries make mencion, be not newe, but soche as haue ben vsed of godlie men from the beginning, as ys before touched. But Chryste taught a newe oblacion that was aunswerable to the newe testament, of the whiche C yt was by Chryst ordeined and appointed to be the oblacion. Nowe the newe Testament was so newe, that yt was neuer before in manifest form or maner. Wherfore the newe oblacion or sacrifice was so like wise, and in like sorte newe, that yt was newer before in verie dede, but in figure, as manie other thinges were.
The seconde document ys, wher he saieth that Chryst taught a newe oblacion of the newe testament. Wherin he dothe deliuer vs frō the maliouse slaunders of the Aduersaries, whiche saie that yt ys an Idoll, a mere inuencion of the papistes, to make merchandies to emptie poour mens purseis, and soche like railing slaunders. But nowe, reader, iudge thowe whether yt be so or no, nowe that thow hauest heard the sainges of these auncient holy Fathers, who saie that this newe sacrifice of the newe testament was of the doctrine of Chryste, was commaunded by him to be don, was receaued by the Church at the handes of the Apostles, and by and in the same Church ys offred throughout the wholl worlde. D
THE FIVE AND THIRTITH CHAP. PROceadeth E in the exposition of the same Prophet by sainct Augustin and Eusebius.
YE haue hearde one cople of the auncient Fathers of Chrystes Parliament house, reporting what the true vnderstanding of the Prophecie of Malachie ys: Yt shall not be, I trust, withoute profett to heare the reporte of an other coople, to the entente the reader maie see some plentie of good matter to be satisfied withall, forsomoche as the Aduersaries haue powred oute aboute this prophecie, so moche false and naughtie matter to deceaue him withall.
And therfore me will procead to sett oute the trueth, and heare sainct Augustine what he saieth therin. Dominus omnipotens dicit: Non est mihi voluntas in vobis, & sacrificium non suscipiam de manibus vestris. Certè hoc negare non Augustin li. aduersus Iudaeos. potestis, o Iudaei, non solùm non sacrificium non accipere de manibus vestris, locus enim vnus est loco Domini constitutus, vbi manibus vestris sacrificia iussit offerri, praeter quem F locum omnino prohibnit. Hunc ergo locum quoniam pro meritis vestris amisistis, etiam sacrificium, quod ibi tantùm licebat offerri, in locis offerre alijs non audetis. Et impletum est omnino, quod ait Propheta: Et sacrificium non accipiam de manibus vestris. Nam si in terrena Hierusalem maneret vobis templum & altare, possetis dicere in eis hoc esse completum, quorum iniquorum inter vos constitutorum sacrificia Dominus non acceptat. Aliorum verò ex vobis, atque in vobis acceptare sacrificia, qui Dei praecepta custodiunt, hoc non est cur possit dici, vbi nullus omnino vestrum est, qui secundùm legem, quae de monte Synai processit, manibus suis sacrificium posset offerre. Neque hoc itae praedictum, & impletum est, vt vos prophetica sententia respondere permittat, quiae manibus non offerimus carnem, corde & ore offerimus laudem, secundùm illud in psalmo: Immola Deo sacrificium laudis, etiam hinc contradicit vobis, qui dicit: Non est mihi voluntas in vobis, &c. Deinde ne existimetis, non offerentibus vobis, nec illo accipiente de manibus vestris, Deo sacrificium non offerri, quo quidem ille non eget, qui bonorum nostrorum nullius indiget, tamen quia sine sacrificio non est, quod non illi sed nobis vtile est, adiungit, & dicit: Quia ab oriente sole vsque in occidentem G nomen meum clarum factum est in omnibus gentibus, & in omni loco sacrificium offertur nomini meo, sacrificium mundum, quoniam magnum nomen meum in gentibus, dicit Dominus omnipotens. Quid ad haec respondetis? Aperite oculos tandem aliquando, & videte ab oriente sole, vsque in occidentem non in vno, sicut in vobis erat constitutum, sed in omni loco offerri sacrificium Christianorum, non cuilibet Deo, sed ei, qui ista praedixit, Deo Israël. Vnde & alibi dicit Ecclesiae suae: Et qui eruit te, ipse Deus Israël vniuersae terrae vocabitur. Scrutamini scripturas in quibus putatis vos vitam habere aeternam, & profectò haberetis, si Christum in eis intelligeretis & teneretis. Sed perscrutamini eas, & ipsae testimonium perhibent de hoc sacrificio mundo, quod offertur Deo Israël: non ab vna gente vestra, de cuius manibus non se suscepturum praedixit, sed ab omnibus gentibus, quae dicunt: Venite, ascendamus in montem Domini, nec in vno loco, sicut praeceptum erat in terrena Hierusalem, sed in omni loco vsque in ipsam Hierusalem, nec secundùm ordinem Aaron, sed secundùm ordinem Melchisedech. I haue no pleasure in yowe saieth the Almightie Lorde, And sacrifice I will none accepte at yow handes, Certenly this ye can not denie, o yowe Iewes, that not H onely he doth not take sacrifice of your handes (for ther ys one place, in the place of God appointed, wher he hath comaunded sacrifice to be offred with your handes, beside the which, he hath forbodden euery place. [Page 85]This place therfor for somoche as for your desertes ye haue lost, that which A was laufull ther onely to be offred, in other places ye dare not offre. Beholde yt ys fulfilled that the Prophet saied: And sacrisice I will not accept at your handes. Yf in the earthlie Hierusalem, ther were remaining a temple and an Altar for yow, ye might saie yt were fulfilled in wicked men. of the whiche wicked men being among yow God dothe not accept sacrifice. But of other whiche be of yow, and among yowe, whiche kepe the commaundementes of God, he accepteth the sacrifice. But this can not be saied, forasmoche as ther ys not one of yowe all whiche according to the lawe, that proceaded from mounte Synai, maye offre sacrifice with hys handes. Neither ys this so forespoken and fullsilled that the sentence of the Prophet will suffer yow to aunswer, that though with our handes we offre not fleshe, yet with our heart and mouthe we offer lawde and prayse, according to that in the psalme. Offre vnto God the sacrifice of lawde, From this place also he speaketh against yow, who saieth: I haue no pleasure in yowe. Yet further, that ye B shoulde not thinke, that forsomoche as ye offre not, nor that he taketh no sacrifice at your handes, that ther ys no sacrifice offred to God the which in dede he nedeth not, who nedeth not the goodes of anie of vs, yet bycause he ys not withoute sacrifice, the whiche ys profitable to vs, and not to him, he addeth and saieth: from the rising of the sunne to the going downe of the same my name ys made honourable among the gentiles. And in euery place ys offred sacrifice vnto my name, whiche ys a pure or clean sacrifice. For my name ys great amonge the gentiles saieth the lorde Allmightie. What do ye awnswer to these? Open yowr eyes once at the last, and see from the rising of the Sunne to the going down of the same, not in one place, as to yow yt was appointed, but in euery place the sacrifice of the Chrystians ys offred, not to euery God, but to him that spake these thinges before hande, euen the God of Israell? Wherfore in an other place he saieth to hys Church: And he that hath deliuered thee, that same God of Israell shall be called the God of the whol earth. Search ye the scriptures, for in them ye thinke ye haue eternall life. And truly ye shoulde haue yt, yf in them ye wolde vnderstand Chryste, and holde him. But searche C them through, and they doo beare wittnesse of this pure Sacrifice, whiche ys offred to the God of Israell, not of your owne nacion, of whose handes he hath saied before that he will take no sacrifice, but of all nacions whiche do saie: Come and let vs go vppe to the hill of our Lord neither in one place, as yt was commaunded in the earthlie Hierusalem: But in euery place, euen in Hierusalem yt self. Neither after the ordre of Aaron, but after the ordre of Melchisedech, Thus moche S. Augustine.
Whose sainge although yt be long: yet I thought yt good whollie to asscribe yt, both bicause yt ys a goodly, liuely, and pleasaunt exposition of the place of the Prophet Malachie, and also that the dependence of the sentence might be seen, wherby great light ys geuen to the vnderstanding of the matter that yt vs alleaged for.
Of the whiche long exposition to make a breif collection of thinges apperteining to the declaracion of the matter whiche we haue in hande, thys ys to be obserued, that saincte Augustine verie stronglie, and pithilie D prouing the reiection of the sacrifices of the Iewes, saieth yet that ther must be a sacrifice to be offred to God not for hys necessitie, [Page]who nedeth not our goodes: but for our owne vtilitie and profitte. And prouing E yt by the Prophet Malachie that in euery place, ther shall be sacrifice offred to the name of God, he saieth, that that Sacrifice ys the Sacrifice of The sacrifice of the chrystians ys a peculiar and speciall Sacrifice. the Chrystians, which Sacrifice of the Chrystians he willeth the Iewes to open their eies, and see yt doen, from the rising of the Sunne to the going down of the same. Whiche maner of sacrifice when he calleth yt the sacrifice of the Chrystians, he doth plainly shewe that he meneth a speciall maner of sacrifice, peculiar and propre to the Chrystians, wher withe the Iewes be not acquainted.
For yf he had here ment the sacrifice of lawde and thankes geuing, or soche like, the Iewes might haue saied that those be their sacrifices, but whē he saied the sacrifice of the Chrystians, he ment vndoubtedly their peculiar sacrifice, as when yt ys saied: the Sacrifice of the Iewes did ceasse at the coming of Chryste, what ells ys ment but these sacrifices, which were peculiar to the Iewes, then ceassed. But as for the spirituall sacrifices, as the sacrifice of a contrite heart, of a beleuing hearte ceasseth not. But as they were vsed of the faithfull Iewes beleuing Messias to come, so maie they be F vsed of the faithfull Iewes beleuing that he ys comed, wher as the other maie not, whiche be proprelie called the sacrifices of the Iewes.
But this scruple saincte Augustine dothe yet more plainlie dissolue, and so plainlie that the Aduersaries can not saie against yt, neither the true catholique, anye further doubte in yt. For S. Augustine saieth to the Iewe. Searche the scriptures through, whiche do beare wittnesse of this pure sacrisice, whiche (saieth he) ys offred not in one place of Hierusalem, but in euery place not of one nacion of the Iewes, but of all nacions. And at last touchinge the verye pithe: not (saieth he) after the ordre of Aarō, but after the ordre of Melchisedech. Note then the sacrifice whiche he first called the sacrifice of the Chrystians, and after the pure sacrifice, nowe he calleth yt the sacrifice after the ordre of Melchisedech.
Nowe then, Reader, thowe maist perceaue what sacrifice yt ys, that God spake of by hys Prophete Malachie, that shoulde be the pure sacrifice, whiche shoulde succead the sacrifice of the Iewes, and be the sacrifice of the Chrystians. Yt ys (saieth S. Augustin) the Sacrifice after the ordre of Melchisedech. G What the sacrifice after the ordre of Melchisedech ys, that our high preist after the ordre of Melchisedech did institute, yt ys before in the prophecie of Chrystes preist head declared and testified by graue and weightie authoritie, that yt ys the sacrifice of Chrystes verie bodie and blood, the verie true heauenly bread and wine.
Howe then standeth the expositions of the Aduersaries? Howe moche dothe their maliciouse falshead appeare, who by their voluntary gloses laboured to take awaie from the minde of the Prophet, that, that was principallie by him entended and spoken of, and onelie to place that was presupposed, and as yt were annexed. For those spirituall sacrifices before touched, with other like be presupposed as necessarilie required to concurre with extern sacrifice, yf yt be duely and acceptablie offred.
As notable a sainge as this hath saincte Augusten in an other place also. Who so listeth to reade, shall ther finde that, that shall not repent him of Li. 1. cont. Aduersarium leg. & Proph. the reading. H
Nowe must we haue an other wittnesse of the other side of the Parlament house agreable to sainct Augustine. This shall be Eusebius a [Page 86]great learned man, and an awncient of the house of God, who saieth thus: A Mosaicis reiectis sacrificijs, quod futurum erat, nostrum ipsorum institutum diuinitùs nunciat dicens: Quoniam ab ortu solis vsque ad occasum, nomen meum glorificatū est in gentibus, Li. 1. Euā gel Demōst. cato. & in omni loco incensum offertur nomini meo, & hostia munda. Sacrificamus igitur Deo altissimo sacrificium laudis, Sacrificamus Deo plenum, & horrorem adferens, & sacrosanctum sacrificium. Sacrificamus nouo modo, secundùm nouum testamentum hostiam mundam &c. The Mosaicall sacrifices being reiected, he doth by the reuelaciō of God shewe our ordeinaunce that was to come, saing: From the rising of the Sunne, to the going downe of the same, my name ys glorified among the gentiles, and in euery place incense ys offred vnto my name, and a pure Sacrifice of the Christians a full Sacrifice. and most holy. sacrifice. We doo sacrifice therfore vnto the high God, the sacrifice of lawde. We do sacrifice to God a full and most holie sacrifice bringing horroure. We doo sacrifice a pure sacrifice in a newe maner, after the newe testament. Thus Eusebius.
Do ye not see this aunciēt Father howe he expowndeth the Prophet, and declareth that we sacrifice to God a pure sacrifice in a newe maner after the newe testament? And declaring what sacrifice yt ys, he saieth, yt ys a full and most holie sacrifice B bringing horroure. What sacrifice ys that, that ys a full sacrifice, but the sacrifice of Chrystes bodie? that ys a full sacrifice in yt self. All other sacrifices, that euer were or shall be, are not full, but all they must take their fulnesse of this. And what sacrifice ys most holy but this, which maketh all other holie? In so moche as holie Dionyse the disciple of S. Paule, who was a man full of the spirit of God saeth Neque enim fermè fasest sacerdotalis muneris mysteriū aliquod peragi, nisi diuinum istud Eucharistiae augustissimumue sacramentum compleat. Dionys. Ecclesias. Hierar. parte. 1 ca. 3. Neither ys yt almost lawfull for anie misterie of the preistlie office to be doen, except this diuine and most noble Sacrament of Chryste do fullfill or ende yt.
And what sacrifice ys yt that bringeth horroure with yt, but the Sacrifice that conteineth the high Maiestie of Chryst, whiche ys to be feared of all Li. 6. de Sacerdocio. men? of the whiche speaketh Chrisostome, saing: Quando autem ille & Spiritū sanctum inuocauerit, sacrificiumue illud horrore, & reuerentia plenissimum perfecerit, communi omnium Domino a [...]siduè manibus pertractato, Quaero ex te, quorum illum in ordine collocabimus? When he hath called vpon the holie Gost (saieth Cbrisostom, speaking of the preist that consecrateth) and hath perfected that Sacrifice most full C of horroure and reuerence, the commune or vniuersall Lorde of all thinges being felt Sacrifice full of horrour bicause the Lord of all ys ther handled. with handes: I aske of thee, in the order of whome shall we place him? Thus Chrysostom.
Ye see here that he calleth the sacrifice of the Altar, the sacrifice most full of horroure and. Reuerence, and whie he dothe so, he geueth cause, for that the vniuersall Lorde being in the Sacrifice, ys so present, that he ys handeled with handes.
Who ys this Lorde in this sacrifice, in an other place he dothe expressedlie declare: Ad sanctum & terribile sacrificium properas, erubesce oblationis arcana. De prodition. Iudae. homil. 30. occisus propositus Christus est. Thowe comest (saieth Chrisostom) vnto an holie and terrible sacrifice: Basshe at the secrete thing of the oblaciō. Chryst that was slain ys set furth.
Marke (reader) that in both sainges he calleth yt a sacrifice: but in the first sainge, a sacrifice full of horrour and reuerence, in the second, an holie and a terrible sacrifice. The cause why yt ys full of horrour and reuerence ys D by cause the vniuersall Lord of all ys ther in handling: Who ys this Lorde in the second sentence he openeth, saing: Chryst that was slain ys sett furth in sacrifice. And therfor no meruaill though Eusebius did call yt a sacrifice [Page]bringing horroure, wher the maiestie of Chryste ys (as Chrisostom hath wittnessed) E
In that he saied, we sacrifice, after the newe maner of the newe Testamēt what dothe he saie, but as Irenaeus saied: that Chryst taught yt, that we doo sacrifice, to be the newe sacrifice of the newe Testament. And the sacrifice of the newe testament ys, that the high preist of the newe testament, being a preist after the ordre of Melchisedech doth sett furth, after that same ordre. Whiche sacrifice ys (as S. Hierom saieth) his bodie and blood, the verie true bread, and true wine.
Thus haue ye heard the wittnesse of S. Augustine and Eusebius cōsonnāt and agreeing both the one to the other, and also to those that were before them alleadged and brought for the declaraciō of the true meening of the prophecie of Malachie.
THE SIXT AND THIRTITH CHAP. ENDETH the exposition of Malachie by saincte Hierom and Damascen.
TO ende this processe in the exposition of the prophecie of Malachie F nowe in hande, leest I might be tediouse to the Reader, I will onelie adde the testimonie of S. Hierom and Damascen and of no mo at this present, trusting that these with thother before alleaged shall satisfie thee, gentle Reader, and fullie instructe thee in the trueth of this matter.
S. Hierom vpon the Prophet Malachie saieth thus: Propriè nunc ad sacerdotes Hieron. in Malach. Iudeorum sermo sit Domini, qui offerunt caecum & claudum, & languidum ad immolandum, vt sciant carnalibus victimis spirituales victimas successuras: Et nequaquam taurorum hircorumue sanguinem thyn. iama, hoc est, sanctorum orationes Domino offerendas, & non in vna orbis Prouincia Iudaea, nec in vna Iudeae vrbe Hierusalem, sed in omni loco offerri oblationem nequaqnam immandam, vt à populo Israel, sed mundam vt in ceremonus Christianorum. Nowe the woorde of our Lorde ys proprely spoken to the preistes of the Iewes, whiche bringe the blinde, the lame, and the sicke to be offred in sacrifice, that they shoulde knowe that spirituall sacrifices shall folowe their carnall sacrifices, and that not the blood of bulls and of goattes, but G insence or swete perfume, that ys, the praiers of the holie men shall be offred, and that not in Iewrie being one Prouince of the woorlde, neither in Hierusalem alone, the Cittie of Iewrie, but in euery place shall be offred, not an vnclean sacrifice, as of the people of Israell, but a clean oblacion as in the Ceremonies of the Chrystians. Thus moche of saincte Hierom in the exposition of the Prophecie of Malachie nowe in hand. In the whiche prophecie ye maie perceaue two thinges that shall be offred vnto God in euery place, that ys incense, and the meate offring.
Incense (saieth S. Hierom) ys the praiers of the holie, whiche shall not be offred to God in Hierusalem alone, but in euery place shall the faithfull offre that sacrifice as the sacrifice of thankes, lawdes, and praise. So that kinde of sacrifice by S. Hierom ys conteined vnder this woordo incense.
The other that ys meat offring, whiche ys the pure and clean sacrifice, shall be dō (as S. Hierom saieth) in the Ceremonies of the Chrystians. Whiche Ceremonies Sacrifice of the christians Chrystes bodie and blood. contain the rites and sacrifices of the Chrystians. Among theise Ceremonies H what ys ther that can be proprely called the pure or clean sacrifice, but the pure sacrifice of Chrystes bodie and blood, whiche (as befor ys [Page 87]saied) ys a pure sacrifice in yt self, ād of yt self, and ys able to purifie all other.
That the bodie and blood of Chryste be a sacrifice among the chrystians, A S. Hierom in this same chapiter declareth. who speaking to Bisshopps, Preistes, and Deacons, and other that necligentlie come to the Altar of God, saieth: Offertis (inquit) super altare meum panem pollutum. Polluimus panem, id est, corpus Christi, quando indigni accedimus ad altare, & sordidi mundum sanguinem bibimus. Ye offer (saieth Allmightie God) defiled bread vpon mine Altar. We defile the bread, that ys, the bodie of Chryste (saieth S. Hierom) when we being vnwourthie come to the Altar, and being filthie drinke the clean blood of Chryst. In this exposition of S. Hierom ys geuen vs to vnderstand not S. Hierom expowndeth the scriptures contrarie to the Sacrvmētries. onelie that the bodie and blood of Chryst be the sacrifice of vs that be chrystians, whiche we offer vpon the Altar: but also we are taught an other maner of exposition then the Aduersaries teache: yea euen a clean contrarie. For they, where in the scriptures or doctours they reade these woordes, the bodie of Chryst, they expownde yt to be bread a figure of the bodie of Chryste: contrarie S. Hierom declaring howe we offre defiled bread, and howe we defile yt, expowndeth the bread to be the bodie of Chryste. B
Neither can the Aduersarie shifte him self from this saing of S. Hierom, with the inuented glose of his owne head, that we defile and doo iniurie to the bodie of Chryste, when we take the Sacramēt of his bodie vnworthilie. For he doth not onelie saie that by the bread ys vnderstanded the bodie of Chryst: but he also by most plain woordes saieth, that we drinke his blood. He doth not saie that we defile the bloode of Chryste, when we drinke the Sacramentall wine: but he saieth we defile the bloode of Chryst, when we being defiled doo drinke the same. So that by sainct Hierō, we doo not take one thing, ād doo iniurie to an other, but receauing a pure thing whē we be defiled, we doo iniurie to the same. Wherfore receauing the bread that ys the bodie of Chryst, we doo iniurie to the same, receauing yt vnwourthilie, and drinking the pure blood of Chryst, we doo iniurie to the same, yf we receaue yt, being vnpure our vnclean our selues,
Yf ther were not the bodie and bloode of Chryste in the Sacramēt, wolde S. Hierom, who in this place taketh vpon him to be an expositour, which ys C to make thinges clear and plain, that be darke and lie hidden, wolde he (trowe ye) so handle the matter, that the thinges he speaketh of shoulde implie more difficultie, more darknesse, and harder maner of vnderstanding, then they had before? Yf ther were not the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament S. Hierom wolde haue saied, we defile the bread, when we take that bread whiche ys the Sacrament of Chrystes bodie vnwourthilie: And we defile his blood when we take the Sacrament of yt vnpurely. And this were the plain maner of an expositour to speake liuely, and plainlie to vtter the matter, with oute anie tropes or figures: but saing (as before ys saied) and speaking yt as an expositour, we must vnderstande, that he teacheth that the bread on the Altar ys the bodie of Chryste, and that ther ys also his very bloode, whiche two be the sacrifice of the Chrystians also after the minde of S. Hierom.
Damascen also breflie commeth to the point, and affirmeth all that ys saied by S. Hierom. For he speaking of the verie reall presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, and teaching that yt ys the sacrifice that Malachie spake of, saieth thus: Haec est pura illa hostia, & incruenta, quam ab ortu solis vsque Damasc. li. 4. ca. 14. D ad occasum ipsi offerri per prophetā Dominus loquitur, corpus videlicet & sanguis Christi, in stabilimentum animae nostrae & corporis, inconsumptū, & incorruptum, non in secessum [Page] abiens (absit enim huiusmodi imaginatio) sed in nostram sustentationem & conseruationē E omnimodo nocumenti reparatio, sordis omnis purgatio. This ys that pure sacrifice and vnbloodie, that our Lorde speaketh by the Prophet, to be offred to him from the rising of the sunne, to the going downe of the same, that ys to saie, the bodie and bloode of Chryste, vnto the inconsumed, and incorrupted stablishment of our bodie and Sowle, not going into secesse (God forbidde that any soche imaginacion shoulde be) but yt ys a purgacion of all maner of filth, and a reparation of all maner of hurte, vnto our sustentacion and conseruacion. Thus Damascen this saing nede no exposition yt ys so plain that euery childe maie perceaue, that the pure sacrifice, that the Prophet speaketh of, ys the bodie and blood of Chryst, which maie not be wrested to be saied, that the sacramentall Sacramētaries gloses ouerthrowen by Damascen. bread (as the Aduersaries terme yt) ys figuratiuely the bodie of Chryste. For this Authour excludeth all soche interpretacions, when he saieth, that the bodie and bloode, he speaketh of, goeth not into secesse, which can not be verified of their bread, whiche they saie and confesse that yt goeth into secesse. Wherbie ye maie perceiue that this Authoure, who ys an auncient F of Chrystes Parliament house not to be contemned, reported to vs that enacted trueth that Chrystes bodie and bloode be reallie in the Sacrament, and that that bodie and blood ys also the sacrifice, that was prphecied of the Prophet Malachie, to be the Sacrifice that should succeade the sacrifice of the Iewes, and to be offred vnto the God of the Chrystians, wherby his blessed name shoulde be glorified among them.
And thus this Authour agreing which the rest alleadged for the declaracion of this matter, whiche other be of the most auncient and famouse men of Chrystes Churche, men of holy life, of great learning, and withoute corruption of iudgement: methinke men shoulde raither appoint them selues to folowe their iudgements, then the light and rashe sainges of soche, as neither integritie of life, neither incorruption of iudgement, nor auncientie of time doth commende: but raither the contraries of these do them discommend.
Nowe as ye haue hearde this prophecie: So haue ye heard other Prophecies and figures, that did prophecie and figurate this blessed Sacrament of G Chrystes bodie and bloode, duely, iustlie, and truelie applied to the thing. In the doing wherof I claime not creditte to be geuen to me, as to my self, for so moche as I am in the wicked time, in the time of corruption, in the time of Controuersie: But I claim creditte to be geuen to me for the trueths sake whiche I folowe. Whiche trueth hath ben in auncient time, before this time of corruption and controuersie taught, beleued, and folowed. I claime also creditte to be geuen to the holie aunciēt Fathers, whom I haue alleaged, who being in that pure time, when faith was purely taught, do cōmunicate to vs soche doctrine as the Churche of God then had, whose doctrine howe moche yt ys different from the doctrine of this wicked teacher, that hathe thus exclamed, and howe repugnāte his doctrine ys to the teaching of these Fathers, yt ys as easie to discerne as darknesse frō light, or white frō blacke.
Wherfore, gentle Reader, nowe being by me aduertised after soche sorte as yt hath pleased my lorde God to imparte his grace vnto me, yf thowe hauest not erred reioice in God, and be confirmed: Yf thowe hauest erred repent before God, and be reduced. And thus moche of the scriptures of the H olde Testament.
THE SEVEN AND THIRTITH CHAP. MAKETH A a breif Recapitulacion of thinges before written, with thapplicacion of them to the Proclamacion of the aduersarie, and so concludeth this first booke.
ALthough I am not ignorante (gentle Reader) that in the Psalmes be diuerse other prophecies, whiche according to the minde of saincte Hierom do speake of this blessed Sacrament and sacrifice of Chrystes bodie and bloode, that shoulde be offred in the Churche of Chryst, and of the whiche the poour in spiritte shoulde eate and be satisfied, as in the xxi. xxij. lxxj. cx. psalmes: Yet for that the figures of this Sacrament be allreadie aunswered by prophecies to them aunswerable: And these that be lefte maie by iust occasion be spoken of hereafter, I shall for the Readers ease, disauauntage my self of the allegacion of them to the setting furth of the matter here taken in hand by me to be defended, and so cō clude this booke with a breif recapitulacion of some thinghes bfore saied to the entent they maie be applied to aunswere some one or mo mēbres of the B Aduersaries proclamacion not yet spoken of.
I did of pourpose omitte to applie that ys saied, as aunswer to that parte of his wicked proclamacion whiche yt doth fullie confute, by cause I wolde not to moche trouble my processe, but thought yt best to reserue yt to this place, as in other matters I haue also doen the like in this booke.
Wherfor that yt maie well be perceaued, that this that ys saied doth clean ouerthrowe this mans doctrine, vnderstand first what ys his doctrine, Thus in his proclamacion he crieth.
Yf any one of all our Aduersaries be able plainlie and clerely to proue by soch authoritie of the scriptures, the old Doctours, and Councells (as ys before saied) that the preist had then authoritie to offre vpp Chryst vnto his Father, &c. In which his proclamaciō he denieth the Sacrifice of the Churhe, which ys the bodie and blood of our sauiour Chryst which (he saieth) the Churche hath none authoritie to offre to God in sacrifice.
Against this his false doctrine, call to minde what ys in this booke saied speciallie in the setting furthe of the prophecies of the preisthood of Chryst The deuell hath bewitched the Proclamer C after the ordre of Melchisedech: of the prophecies of Daniel, and Malachie, wher (but that the deuell hath bewitched this man, and to his perdition hath cast a mist before his eies, that he shoulde not see the trueth) he coulde not ells but see, that the bodie and blood of Chryste were of him self offred in his last supper, and ther and then instituted and ordeined to be offred and continued in his Church as the memoriall of his passion and death.
S. Ciprian (as yt ys alleaged) saieth, that our Lorde Iesus offred the same Cyprian. that Melchisedech offred, that ys bread and wine, that ys to saie (saieth he) his bodie and blood.
Isychius saieth, that we haue the sacrifice of Chryst the intelligible Melchisedech, Isychius whiche sacrifice was perfectlie doen in bread and wine, when Chryste saied: This ys my bloode, that shalbe shedd for yowe.
S. Hierom saieth, that as Melchisedech offred bread and wine: so shall Chryste Hieron. offred his bodie and blood the true bread, and true wine.
S. Augustin saieth, Chryst did institute the sacrifice of his bodie and D blood according to the ordre of Melchisedech to succeade the sacrifice after Augustin. the ordre of Aaron.
Wher note that he saieth, Chryst did institute the sacrifice of his bodie [Page]and bloode after the ordre of Melchisedech Yf he did institute the sacrifice, then ys ther authoritie by the same institution geuen to the Church to offre E the same. Whiche well appeareth by the saing of Origen whiche foloweth in this processe.
We (saith Origen) being obedient to the Creatour of thinges, when we Origen. haue geuen thankes, we receaue the breades that were offred. whiche be turned into a certain holier bodie, whiche bodie trulie maketh them holier, that with a sownde and pure minde vse yt.
Note then that our obedience standeth not onely to eate the bread, but to eate the bread that ys offred, and therforre we must both offre and eate, The church must both offre and eate. yf we will be obedient. Yf yt be our obedience to offer, then ther ys commaundement geuen to offre. Yf commaundement be geuen, then Authoritie also.
Theophilact saieth, that the oblacion conteining Chryste our Lorde, Bishoppe, and Sacrifice, ys continuallie offred by the ministres of God. Seing that Chryste ys offred Theophila. (as Theophilact saieth) by the ministres of God, yt ys euident that yt ys doen with authoritie. For withoute authoritie can none offre him. F
Martialis one of the disciples of Chryste, saieth, that we for our health offre that vpon the holie Altar, that the Iewes did offre vpon the Crosse for enuie. And yf ye S. Martia. We offre ou the altar, that the Iewes offred on the crosse. Irenaeus. require by what authoritie we do it, he saieth that our Lord cōmaunded vs so to doo, in the remembrance of him.
And yf ye will vnderstande howe the authoritie cometh ordrely to vs, to offre the bodie of Chryste to God the Father. Irenaeus will teache you. For he saieth, that Chryste geuing instructions to his Apostles to offre sacrifice to God, tooke the creature of bread and gaue thankes, and saied: this ys my body. And the cuppe also he tooke, and confessed yt to be his bloode, and so of the newe Testament taught the newe oblacion, whiche the Churche taking of the Apostles, offreth yt yn all the worlde to God according to the prophecie of Malachie.
Can not nowe this Proclamer, or raither Blasphemer, see or perceaue what authoritie the preist hath to offre Chryst to God the Father? Yt ys deriued from Chryst to the Apostles, from the Apostles to the Church, and so vsed through out all the worlde. S. Augustine saieth, that the pure and clean sacrifice that Malachie speaketh of, that shall be offred in euery place, ys the sacrifice after G Augustin the ordre of Melchisedech. What the sacrifice after the ordre of Melchisedech ys, by the minde of S. Augustin yt ys aboue declared, wher he saieth that Chryst did institute the sacrifice of his bodie and blood after the ordre of Melchisedech. Eusebius saieth, that the Mosaicall sacrifices being reiected, Eusebius Caesarien. the Prophet Malachie by the reuelacion of God, sheweth what ys our ordeinaunce that was to come. And therfore we sacrifice nowe to the most high God the sacrifice of lawde, We sacrifice to God a full and a most holie sacrifice bringing horrour. We sacrifice a pure sacrifice, in a newe maner after the newe Testament.
What this most holie sacrifice ys bringing horrour with yt, yt ys declred by Chrysostom saing: Thowe commest to the holy and terrible sacrifice, Bashe at the Chrysost. secret thinge of the sacrifice, For Chryst that was slain ys ther setfurthe.
The cause then why this sacrifice ys called the most holie sacrifice, Why yt ys called terrible, Why yt ys saied to be full of horrour, ys, bicause Chryst that was slain, ys in the sacrifice sett furth before vs. Chryst then being settfurth in our sacrifice. Yt ys to be saied after the minde of these holie Fathers, that Chryst ys offred in our Sacrifice. H
Last of all to make the conclusion, Damascen saieth that the bodie and blood Damascē. of Chryst ys that pure and vnbloodie sacrifice that our Lord speaketh of by the Prophet [Page 89] to be offred from the east to the west. Yf our Lorde spake yt, mete yt ys that yt be A doen. And the doers haue good authoritie to do yt, seinge their Lorde hath so ordeined and commaunded.
Now Reader doest thow not see the great bragge of this yonge Goliath ouerthrowen. See yow not plain scriptures, and doctours, and those the grauest and eldest, withe their plain and weightie sentences presse and crushe this hys puffed bladder, and thrust oute in hys seight the vanitie therin conteined? Perceaue yow not by these holy Fathers that the preist hathe authoritie to offre vppe the bodie of Chryst to God the Father? whiche thing thys Proclamer in his stowt maner flattering him self, semed percase to manie of his auditorie by his Proclamacion to haue ouerthrowen: But what so euer he or anie other withe him phantasied, both he and they maie perceaue that this blast was not against a reed wauing and bowing with the winde: but yt was against the sure and substancial piller, and grownded faith of Chrystes Churche, and against that sure builded house the catholique Churche builded vpon the Rocke, and therfore shaketh yt not, neither with the waues of the trooblesome sea: nor yet with soche blastes as this B man bloweth.
Thus ye perceaue, here ys good matter shewed for that, that the catholique The Proclamer hath none authoritie to disproue the Sacrifice but hys bare Proclamacion. Churche teacheth: What bringeth he for that whiche he so stowtlie blowstereth? Yt ys with good authoritie nowe proued, that Chryst ys offred in the holie sacrifice: What proofe hath he that Chryst ys not so offred now but hys bare Proclamaciō? A meruailouse matter. He requireth scriptures, Doctours, and Councells, for that, that the catholique Church teacheth, and for that he teacheth and wolde haue receaued, he bringeth not one title And therin he doth but as he maie doo. For certē I am that he cā bring none
And here will I again ioin with him, that yf he can bring anie one sufficient authoritie, that shall directlie saie that the Churche maie not Issue ioined with the Proclamer for the Sacrifice. offer the bodie of Chryst in soche sorte as yt doth, I will geue hym the victorie. He requireth plain proof that the preist offreth Chryst: his request ys satified: the plain proof by expresse woordes ys made: Let him doo the like for hys doctrin yf he can. C
But let him not trust to proue yt by the wresting of sainct Paule to the Hebrues, folowing Caluine, and other of his Fathers: For that will not serue hys turne.
As for Doctours, ther ys not one that will fauour hym and hys Cranmer in his siste booke hath not one doctour nor Councell to make any shew for him. doctrine in thys poinct. For yf ther had ben anye, hys predecessour Cranmer, or he that was the authour of that booke, wolde in the fifte booke, wher he treacteth of the sacrifice, haue alleaged some one. But I saie, he had not one Doctour or Father, nor Councell by whom he impugneth the doctrine of the catholique Churche that Chryst ys offred in hys Churche. He wolde fayn Father hys doctrine vpon sainct Paules epistle to the Hebrues, but that scripture accepteth yt not as a laufull childe, but as a Bastarde begotten by some wicked parentes, and therfore refuseth yt. He ys moche encombred laboring to deliuer himself from Chrysostome and other, but all in vain.
Wherfore as this man, who sparing not stirreth ād moueth (as the prouer be saieth) euery stone to gett some helpe or finde some shifte for the mainteinaūce D of his doctrine, could not gette one whollie to go with him, although he semeth to alowe Lōbardus, ād Nycen Coūcell: yet he durst not so alleage thē as [Page]that he wolde stand throughlie with them: So I beleue verilie, that this Proclamer can no more doo but (leuing the holy Fathers) sing a litle E voluntarie false deskant vpon a scripture or two, as Cranmer did.
By this then thus moch maie be saied, that to saie that Chryst ys not offred in and of the Church, and the ministres therof, ys no catholique doctrine, for that yt ys not taught of anie catholique Father. But that the contrary ys a catholique doctrine, yt doth well appeare by a nombre of catholique Fathers before alleadged, and shall more appeare to yow by those that shall be yet alleaged. For God be praised this trueth ys not so slender that yt lacketh good wittnesses, nor yet so barren that nothing can be said of yt, but what I can inuent. But yt ys so full that to saie all yt wolde fill an wholl volume. Wherfor in this place I shall of manie produce but foure or fiue to be added in this recapitulacion, and so end this booke. Iustinus Martyr of the Sacrifice of the Chrystians saieth thus. Deus ipse Dialog. a duersus iudaeo. ait: In omni loco in gentibus hostias acceptas gratasue immolari. Neque verò à quoquā hostias Deus accipit, nisi à suis sacerdotibus. Ita (que) omnia sacrificia, quae suo nomine faciēda Iesus Christus tradidit, it est, in Eucharistia panis & poculi, quae in omni loco à Christianis fiunt, F praeoccupatione vsus Deus sibi grata esse testatur. God him self saieth, that of the gentills acceptable and pleasaunt Sacrifices in euery place shall be offred. Chryst instituted the Sacrifice of the Churche. Neither trulie doth God accept Sacrifices, but of hys owne preistes. Wherfor all the sacrifices whiche Iesus Chryst hath deliuered to be doen in hys name, that ys to saie, in the Sacrament of breade and the cuppe, whiche sacrifices are doen of the Christians in euery place, God vsing preoccupacion wittnesseth thē to be acceptable vnto him. Thus Iustinus, of whom we maie learn, that the Sacrifices of the Sacramēt are deliuered to vs by Iesus Chryst. So that the authoritie of this maner of sacrificing cometh frō him, ād ys not of our selues S. Hierom ouer and aboue that, that ys allreadie alleaged of him, saieth thus: Quòd autem ait, Tu es sacerdos in aeternum secundùm ordinem Melchisedech: mysterium in Li. quest. Hebraic. verbo ordinis significatur, nequaquam per Aaron irrationabilibus victimis immolandis, sed oblato pane & vino, id est, corpore & sanguine Domini Iesu. Wheras he saieth, Thow arte a preist for euer after the ordre of Melchisedech: our mystery in the woorde of order ys signified, not by Aaron in offring brutish sacrifices: But in offring bread and wine, that ys to saie, the bodie and bloode of our Lorde G Iesus. Thus sainct Hierom.
Of Iustinus we learned, that the sacrifices of the Chrystians wer deliuered vnto vs by Iesus Chryst.
Of S. Hierom we learn, that these sacrifices be the bodie and blood of our Lord Iesus. So by these two, in most manifest ād plain woords we be taught, that Iesus Chryst deliuered vnto vs the authoritie to offre in sacrifice hys bodie and bloode.
S. Ambrose also teacheth vs the same lesson saing thus: Ego enim, Domine, memor In prima oratione prepar. ad Missam. venerandae passionis tuae accedo ad altare tuum, licet peccator, vt offerā tibi sacrificium, quod tu instituisti, & offerri praecepisti in commemorationē tui pro salute nostra. For I, o Lord, being mindefull of thy passion, come vnto thine Altar, although I be a sinner, that I maie offre vnto thee, the sacrifice that thowe didest institute, and commaunde Chryst instituted and commaunded the Sacrifice of the Churche. to be offred in the remembrance of thee for our health.
Thus holie Ambrose, who maketh the matter oute of all cōtrouersie, that a preist hath authoritie to offre Chryste in sacrifice. And to declare what sacrifice, he saieth the same sacrifice, that Chryst did institute. And H to lett yow vnderstand by what authoritie he wolde offre yt, he saieth by that, that Chryst commaunded yt to be offred in the remembrance of [Page 90]him. As this maie well instructe the reader, what ys the plain and verie A trueth of this matter: So yt maie verie well compell the Proclamer, to confesse that this ys a plain sentence impugning his false doctrine, and acknowleging other his ignorance or malice, submitte him self to the trueth.
But yet let vs descend a degree lower towardes our time, and see what was then taught. Isidorus, who liued aboue nine hundreth years agon in Isydorus li. 1. de off. ca. 18. this matter geueth this testimonie: Sacrificium quod à Christianis offertur Deo primum Christus Dominus noster & magister instituit, quando commendauit Apostolis corpus & sanguinem suum priusquam traderetur, sicut legitur in Euangelio: Accepit Iesus panem & calicem & benedicens dedit eis. The sacrifice that ys offred of the Chrystians vnto God, first our Lord and master Iesus Chryst did institute, When he gaue his bodie and blood to his Apostles before he was betraied, as yt ys readde in the Gospell: Iesus tooke bread and the cuppe, and blessing them gaue the same vnto them.
In these fewe woordes of this Authour we maie learn that Chryst did institute the sacrifice of the christians. We maie learn that the thing that ys offred in sacrifice ys the bodie and bloode of Chryst. We maie learn to whō yt ys offred, that ys vnto God. We maie also learn what time yt was instituted: B euen at that time, when Chryst tooke the bread and the cuppe, and when he had blessed them gaue them to his Apostles. Whiche was in his last Supper. All these ioined to gether doo well beare the contrary proposition to this mans proclamacion, that ys, that Chryst gaue authoritie to offre his bodie and bloode vnto God.
A Consonante testimonie haue we also of Haymo, who as he ys of good auncientie: So ys he accompted a learned Authour. This man expownding Haymo in 5. ad Heb. the epistle of sainct Paule to the Hebrues, and declaring Chryst to be a preist after the ordre of Melchisedech, saieth thus: In cuius ordine sacerdotij Christus factus est sacerdos, non temporalis, sed aeternus, nec offerens victimas legales, sed instar illius panem & vinum, carnem videlicet & sanguinem suum, de quibus ipse dixir: Caro mea verè est cibus, & sanguis meus verè est potus. Ista quoque duo munera, panem videlicet & vinum commisit Ecclesiae suae in memoriam sui offerenda. Vnde patet sacrificium pecudum, perijsse quod fuit ordinis Aaron, & illud manere potius, quod fuit ordinis Melchisedech, quia & Christus illud corroborauit, & Ecclesiae suae tenendum reliquit. In the ordre of C the preisthead of Melchisedech. Chryst being made not a temporall but an euerlasting preist neither offring legall sacrifices, but like vnto him (meening Melchisedech) bread and wine, that ys to saie, his bodie and his bloode, of the whiche he saieth: My flesh ys verilie meat, and my bloode ys verilie drinke. These two giftes, that ys to saie, bread and wine he hath committed to this Churche to be offred in the remembrance of him. Thus Haimo.
Wherby yt yt manifest that the Sacr [...] of beastes ys vanished awaie, whiche was of the ordre of Aaron, and tha [...] [...]at raither remaineth, which ys of the ordre of Melchisedech, bycause Chryst also hath confirmed yt, and left yt to his Churche to be kept and vsed. From whence the authoritie comet that the Church offreth the sacrifice after the ordre of Melchisedech, this Authour, like as the other before alleaged hath declared that yt cōmeth from Chryste. And opening what the Churche doth offer, he saieth that Chryst did offre bread and wine, that ys (saieth he) his bodie and bloode, whiche bread and wine he committetd to the Churche to be offred in the remenbrance of him. Plain sentences for master Juell.
Eycept that the calling of a man, a man: or an oxe, an oxe, be no D plain speaches, these sentences of these Authours in this matter, be plain speaches, and plain sentēces. Yet to cōclude this matter, we will heare a greciā [Page]speaking as plain as anye of these, whiche ys Nicolaus Cabasila, who although E he be long: yet for hys plainesse he ys pleasaunt. And for that he ys a grecian we shall learn of him the faith that ys yet receaued in that Church, Nich. Cabasila c. 27 as before of long tyme yt hath ben. This authour shewing howe the blessed Sacrament ys consecrated, sacrificed, and ministred ther, saieth thus: Cùm venerandam illam coenam narrauit, & quomodò ante passionem ipsam dedit sanctis suis Discipulis, & quòd accepit calicem, & quòd accepit panem, & actis gratiis sanctificauit, & quòd dixit ea per quae significauit mysterium, & cùm ea ipsa verba dixit, deinde procidit, & orat, & supplicat, diuinas illas voces ipsius vnigeniti seruatoris nostri etiam in donis propositis applicans, vt suscepto eius sanctissimo & omnipotente Spiritu conuertatur quidem panis in ipsum preciosum & sanctum eius corpus: vinum autem in ipsum immaculatum, & sanctum eius sanguinem. Haec cùm orauit & dixit, vniuersum sacrificium peractum & perfectum est, & dona sunt sanctificata, & hostia integra & perfecta effecta est, & magna hostia & victima, quae pro mundo mactata est, supra sacram mensam sita cernitur. Panis enim non ampliùs figura Dominici corporis, neque donum ferens imaginem veri doni, neque ferens aliquam descriptionem ipsius seruatoris passionum tanquàm in tabula: F sed ipsum verum donum, ipsum sanctissimum corpus Domini, quod omnia illa verè suscepit probra, contumelias, vibices, quod crucifixum, quod interfectum, quod sub Pontio Pilato pulchrum testimonium confessum est, quod colaphis appetitum, quod contumelijs affectum, sputa passum est, & felgustauit. Similiter & vinum ipse sanguis, qui exilijt occiso corpore, hoc corpus et sanguis qui ex Spititu sancto constitutus est, natus ex Maria virgine, qui sepultus est, qui resurrexit tertio die, qui ascendit in coelos, & sedet ad dexterā Patris. When he hath declared that honourable Supper, and howe he gaue yt before hys passion to hys holie disciples, and that he tooke the bread, and tooke the cuppe, and geuing thankes sanctified them, and saied those woordes by the which he declared the mysterie. And when he hath spoken those woordes, then he falleth down and praieth, and maketh humble request, applieng those sainges of God the onely begotten Sonne our Sauiour, to the giftes The bread of the Sacrament ys turned into the verie bodie of Chryst, ād wine into his blood, and ys no figure of them. sett furth, that hys Almightie and most holie Spirit being receaued, the bread maie be turned into the self same preciouse and holie bodie of him, and the wine into the self same immaculate and holie bloode of him. When he hath praied and saied these thinges, all the whol sacrifice ys throughlie doē and perfected, and the giftes G are sanctified, and an wholl and perfecte host ys made. And the great host and sacrifice whiche was ssain for the worlde ys seen sett vpon the holie table. For the bread ys no more a figure of our Lordes bodie, neither ys yt the gifte bearing the image of the true gifte, neither as in a table, but the very gifte yt self, the verie most holie bodie of our Lord, whiche verilie suffred reproches, contume lies, beatinges, which was slain, whiche confessed a goodlie testimonie vnder Ponce Pilate, which being buffited and with contumelies affected, suffred spitting and tasted gall. Likewise the wine ys the self same blood that gusht oute of the ssain bodie. This ys the bodie and bloode that was made by the holie Gost, borne of the virgen Marie, which was buried, which rose again the thirde daie, whiche ascended into heauen, and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father. Thus moch this Authour, who as he hath verie plainly and fullie testified the sacrificing of Chrystes bodie in the holie table, So doth he immediately in the next chapiter declare the commaundement of Chryst vnto the Apostles Id [...]ca. 28. and the Church to doo the same, ād saieth thus: Ipse dixit, Hoc est corpus meum, hic est sanguis meus. Ipse etiam inssit Apostolis, & per Apostolos vniuersae Ecclesiae hoc facere. H Hoc enim (inquit) facite in meam recordationem. Non iussisset autem facere, nisi esset potestatem daturus vt possent hoc facere. He saied, this ys my bodie, this ys my blood. He also commaunded his Apostles, and by hys Apostles the vniuersall Churche [Page 91] this to doe. For do ye this (saieth he) in my remembrance. But he had not commaunded them to doo yt, except he wolde geue thē power that they might A doo yt. And in the end of this chapiter he saieth thus: Dominus autem videtur, & contrectatur per veneranda, & sacra mysteria, vt qui naturant nostram & susceperit, & ferat in aeternum. Haec est sacerdotij potestas: hic est sacerdos. Etenim qui seip sum semel obtulit, & sacrificauit, à sacerdotio non cessauit, sed perpetuum hoc sacrificij munus nobis obit: per quod etiam est aduocatus pro nobis ad Deum in aeternum. Owre Lorde ys seen and felt by the honourable and holie mysteries, as he who hathe bothe taken our Nature vpon him, and will beare yt for euer. Thys ys the power of the preisthead: This ys the preist. For be that hath once offred and sacrificed himself Chryst ceasseth not to execute his perpetuall preist hood and Sacrifice. ceaseth not from hys preisthead, but he dothe execute the perpetuall office of sacrifice in vs, by the which also he ys Aduocate for vs to God for euer.
Nowe this Authour (as other before haue don) hath taught vs both that Chrystes bodie ys sacrificed, and also that he hath commaunded hys Apostles, and by the Apostles all the Churche, to doo euen the same. And therto he hath also geuen power to hys Church to offre Chryst. For (as this Authour saieth) except he had geuen powre to doe yt, he wolde neuer haue commaunded yt B to be doen. And that the verie bodie and blood be sacrificed, and not onelie a peice of bread eaten in the remembrance of Chryst, this Authour so plainlie teacheth that this Proclamer can not auoid him: but as hys Father Luther did aunswer saincte Iames epistle in the matter of iustificacion reiecting the same epistle.
For first, to auoid the figures, tropes, and signes, whiche the Aduersaries comonlie cast vpon this matter, this Authour saieth, that by the Almightie powre of the Spirit of God, the bread ys turned into the very bodie of Chryst, and not into an image of Chryst: And the wine into hys immaculate bloode.
Secondarely, to auoyd their figures, by expresse woordes he saieth: that Note this master Juel ād see your hereticall doctrine directlie impugned. after the consecracion the bread ys no more a figure of our Lordes bodie, neither ys yt an image of the verie thing: neither an onely description of Chryst as a thing might be described in a table: but yt ys the thing yt self, euen the verie same bodie that was crucified, and the self same bloode that yshued out the same crucified bodie. What can we haue more? What more plainesse can be desiered? Ye see that the bodie of Chryst ys offred in sacrifice: ye see that powr, C authoritie and commaundement ys geuen to the Church so to doo.
And nowe I doubte not, but the reader seeth good, plain, and sufficient matter to approue the doing of the holie catholique Churche, in this matter. And will, I trust, iudge this Proclamer sufficientlie aunswered by the best learned Fathers, as well of the greke church, as of the latin, and will therfore thinke yt right, that wher this Proclamer required but one plain sentence, hauing nowe a nombre, that he doo perfourme hys promesse, and submitte him self to the trueth, and subscribe to the catholique Churche, and become her childe again, whiche God of hys mercie bring to passe in him.
For trulie the giftes that God hath placed in him considered, I cannot but loue him, and prayse God in him, and wish that I might ioin with him: But whē I remembre hys great fall into this wickednesse, I pietie him, and vtterly deuide my self from him, as my bownden duetie before fowre mē bres for the Proclamocion aunswereth. God ys. D
In this booke then as occasion hath serued, I haue aunswered foure peices or membres of hys proclamacion: The first, for the hauing of the scriptures in the vulgar toung: The second, for Reseruacion of the [Page]Sacrament: The thirde, for the authoritie of the offring of Chryst to hys Father. The fourth, for the presence of Chrystes bodie and blood in E the blessed Sacrament.
In the other bookes, by the helpe of God, shall be likewise aunswered some other partes of the same proclamacion as like occasion shall be ministred, whiche God graunt maye be to hys euerlasting prayse and honour. Amen.
THE SECOND BOOKE. A
THE FIRST CHAPITER DECLARETH THE OFFICES OF THE OLDE LAVVE, AND THE BENEFITTES OF the newe Lawe, with an exhortation to submitte our vnderstanding to the knowledge of faithe, and therwith to the beleif of the Sacrament.
LEX per Moysen data est, gratia & veritas per Iesum Christum facta est. The Lawe (saieth saincte Iohn) was geuen by Moises but grace and trueth came by Iesus Chryst.
The Lawe (as saincte Paule declareth) had two offices, for the Ioan. 1. The lawe hath two of fices. Rom. 3. Ibid. 7. which yt was geuen of God, by Moises to the people. The one was to geue them knowledge of finne, and to restreign them from yt. B
The first parte of this office S. Paule speaketh of to the Romans, saieng: Per legem cognitio peccati. By the lawe cometh the knowledge of sinne. For (saieth he in an other place) Peccatum non cognoui nisi per legem. Nam concupiscentiam nesciebā, nisi lex diceret: Non concupisces. I knewe not sinne but by the lawe. For I had not knowen what lust had ment, except the lawe had saied: Thowe shalt not lust.
The seconde parte he speaketh of to the Galathians, wher, when he had proued that the promisse of the blessing came not by the lawe, but by faith, as being made foure hundreth and thirtie years before the lawe was geuen, he moueth this question: Quid igitur lex? wherfor then serueth the Lawe? As who Galat. 3. shoulde saie, yf the lawe were not geuen, that by yt men shoulde atteign to iustification, wherto then serueth yt? what then ys the office of yt? He answereth: Propter trangressionem posita est. yt was added for transgression, that transgressours takinge with the lawe the spirit of seruitude in feare, might be witholden from the trangression of the same Lawe, although the outwarde obseruacion of yt, conferred not that iustificaciō to the obseruers therof, that auaileth before God. C
The other office of the Lawe was by liniamentes of figures and shaddowes to leade the people to Chryst, as S. Paul saieth: Lex poedagogus fuit in Christo. Jbid. The Lawe was oure schoolemaster to Chryste. Wherfore our Sauioure Chryste willed the Iewes, who were not willinge to receaue him as the Messias, being yet by the Lawe taught to knowe him, that they shoulde repair to Ioan. 5. the scriptures of the Lawe, as to their schoolmaster saieng: Scrutamini scripturas, in quibus putatis vos vitam habere aeternam, & illae sunt, quae testimonium perhibent de mè. Searche the scriptures, in the whiche ye thinke to haue eternall life, and they are they, whiche testifie of me. Whiche Lawe vndoubtedlie did so teache them Christe by promisses, figures, and prophecies, that they coulde not pretende ignorance, but they must nedes be fownde offendours of malice, wherof the chief ruler of the schoole Moyses wolde accuse them, as Chryste saieth to them: Nolite putare quòd ego accusaturus sum vos apud patrem Jbid. 5. meum, est qui accusat vos Moyses, in quo speratis, Si enim crederetis Moysi, crederetis forsitan & mihi. De me etenim ille scripsit. Do not thinke that I will accuse yowe to D my Father, ther ys one that accuseth yowe, euen Moises in whom ye trust. For had ye beleued Moises, ye wolde peraduenture haue beleued me, for he wrote of me.
[Page]Of this office of the Lawe, that ys of the schoole mastershippe of yt, Howe yt promised Chryste: Howe yt painted, and deschribed him by figures E and shaddowes. Howe yt spake of him by prophecies in the old testament: yt ys (as to the pourpose of the matter, whiche ys nowe in hand, apperteineth) treacted of in the first booke.
Nowe mindinge to seke the trueth of the same matter in the newe Testament, I am moche comforted and delighted, trusting with moche more facilitie and ease to atteign the same. And yet as not withoute pleasure mixed with trauaill, I haue doen the like in the firste booke, passinge through the thikkes (as yt were) and obscure places of the Law, not all vnlike vnto an Hū ter, who painfullie beating the busshes, and traueling through the Thickes, yet not withoute pleasure seking his game, and comming to the goodlie faire Lawnde, semeth to be moche eased, and as yt were, releiued of a great greif, and then with more delight and pleasure foloweth the same: Euē so nowe that I am comed to the beautifull Lawnd of the newe Testament, wher, for the sharpe priking busshes of the seuitute and bondage of sinne vnder the Lawe, and for the obscure and darke thickes of figures, and shadowes of F the same, finding the goodlie pleasaunt Lawnde of grace and veritie by Iesus Chryste, I forgett my former trauaills, and with freshe delight folowe on my gamme.
The Lawe had two offices not voide of incōmodities: The Gospell hath The Gospel hath two commodities. two benefittes, enriched with great cōmodities. The Lawe gaue knowledge of sinne: The Gospell geueth grace for remission of sinnes. the Lawe had figures: the Gospell hathe the veritie.
He then by whome came this grace and veritie, Iesus Christe, who ys the Ioan. 1. light of the worlde and lightneth euery man, that cometh into the same, geue the bright and clere beames of his knowledge vnto vs, both the writer, and the reader, that beinge led by his grace, we maie come persightlie to his trueth and veritie, and cominge to the same, we maie with all humilitie and mekenesse subdue our vnderstanding to the seruice of faith. And so learninge not to be wise in oure owne conceiptes, we maie embrace the trueth of yt, earnestlie and vnfeignedlie beleuinge the same trueth, and by beleuing also vnderstand yt. for Nisi credideritis non intelligetis, saieth the Prophete, G Except ye beleue, ye shall not vnderstande. And therfor let vs all call to the Esay. 7. Authour of grace, and geuer of faithe with the Apostles and saie: Domine adauge nobis sidem. Lord encrease our faithe, and I doubte not, but yf he see that Luc. 17. we come to him, he will haue compassion vpō vs, and renne and mete with vs, and fall one oure neckes, and kisse vs, and so receauinge vs with moche Luc. 15. ioie and gladnesse, walke with vs on the waie, and interprete the Scriptures vnto vs, and so open oure eyes whiche were holden before, that we shall Ibid. 24. knowe him in breaking of the bread.
And here be aduertised (Reader) that yf thowe be not with Chryste in the breaking of bread thy eies shall neuer be opened to knowe Chryste. For saincte Augustine shewing that the eies of the two disciples that went in Emaus were holden from the knowledge of Chryst, vntill the breaking of bread saieth Non enim incōgruenter accipimus hoc impedimentū in oculis eorū à Satana fuisse, ne agnosceretur Iesus, sed tantùm à Christo, propter eorum sidem ambiguam facta Agust. de. consensu Euāgelist. est permissio vsque ad sacramentum panis, vt vnitate corporis eius participata, remoueri intelligatur impedimentum inimici, vt Christus posset agnosci. We do not take yt incongruentlie, H that this impediment in their eies (mening the two disciples that went to Emaus) was of Satan, that Iesus shoulde not be knowen. But onelie yt Luc. 24. [Page 113]was permitted of Chryste for their doubtfull faith sake, vntill they came to A the sacramēt of breade, that the vnitie of Chrystes dodie beinge participated, yt might be perceaued, that the impediment of the Enemie was remoued, that Chryste might be knowen.
Agreablie to this also saieth Theophilact vpon Luk. Insinuatur & aliud quiddam, Theop. in Luc. ca. 24 nempe quod oculi eorum, qui benedictum panē assumunt, aperiuntur, vt agnoscant illum. Magnam enim & indicibilem vim habet CARO DOMINI. An other thinge also ys here insinuated, that ys, that the eies of them which do take the blessed breade, are opened that they maie knowe him (mening Christe) For the slesh of oure Lorde hathe a great and vnspeakable powre or strenght. Thus moche Theophilacte.
Thus although the two disciples were in the companie of Chryste, and hearde him interprete the scriptures vnto them: yet he was a straunger vnto Soche as haue not a sowndfaith in the veritie of the Sacrament are straungers to Chryst. them, for they knewe him not. And verie well. For as they for lake of perfecte and full faith in him, were straungers to him: So he agreablie as a straunger appeared vnto them. And euen so though manie haue hearde the interpretacion of scriptures, yea and can them selues interprete and vnderstande B manie of them, and can speake and talke of Chryste, as these disciples did: yet be they straungers to Chryste, they knowe not Chryste, for that they haue not a sownde faith in the veritie of the Sacrament, and so in diuerse other poinctes and matters of faithe. Whiche happeneth to all sohe as will not be with Chryste in the breaking of the breade.
For note well this (Reader) that whosoeuer he be, that erreth in the matter Who erreth in the Sacrament, erreth in many other matters of faithe. of the Sacrament, he erreth in manie mo. So did Luther the Raiser, and stirrer vppe of heresies in oure time. So did Oecolampadius, Zwinglius, Bullingerus, Bucerus, and Petrus Martir. So did our contrie men, Cranmer, Ridley, Latimer, and Taler. So dothe this Chalenger, as his owne confession in his sermō well prouethe. So do soche as yet liue conuertlie, cloaking, and dissemblinge their heresies. So that though some other heresie maie be alone in a mā: yet be well assured, the heresie against the blessed Sacrament ys neuer alone in anie man, but accompanied with so manie other heresies, as he that hath them becometh a straunger to Chryste, and for lacke of a sownde faithe C knoweth not Chryste.
Come therfore, and ioin with Chryste in the breaking of the breade, be partaker of the vnitie of Chrystes bodie, that (as saincte Augustine saieth) the impediment of the Enemie, whiche letteth thee to knowe Chryste, maie be remoued, and taken awaie. For the flesh of Chryste ( as Theophilacte saiethe) hath an vnspeakeable powre or strenght, soche power or strenght that after the receipt The ffesh of Chryst in the Sacrament hath an vnspeakable powr of yt in due maner of faithe, and sincere deuocion, yt will open thine eies, that thowe shalt knowe him trulie, whiche nowe, phantasieng that thowe doest knowe him, knowest him but phantasticall. Seing then this blessed Sacrament ys of soche great, and vnspeakable vertue and geueth so great a benefitt, let vs heare the Authour of veritie, and of the Sacrament also, commending to vs the veritie of the same.
THE SECONDE CHAPITER EXPOVNDETH THE E sixt of saincte Iohn according to the letter.
THe holie gospell teacheth vs, that the Authour of this blessed Sacramēt made two notable mencions therof at two sondrie Two notable menciōs made by Chryst of the Sacrament. times. The one was the promisse of the institution of yt, with a declaracion of the befitte, that shoulde ensewe to men therbie, whiche ys sett surth and declared in the sixt chapiter of saincte Iohn. The other was the plain and certen institutiō of yt in the last supper, accomplishing the promisse before made. Of these two by the helpe of the Authour of them, with thassistance, and direction of that his Spirit of trueth, whiche he hathe promised shoulde lead vs into all trueth, this booke shall tell the verie trueth.
And forasmoch as by ordre the promisse goeth before the accomplishment of the promisse, although saincte Iohn, who ys the writer of yt, did write yt manie years after the other Euāgelistes had written the last supper, F yet will I, as yt was spoken of Chryst first, before the other was doen, so first treacte of the same.
Oure Sauiour Chryst being God and man, and knowinge (for that nothing was hidden to him) all thinges, as well the present secrete thinges and thoughtes of man, as also the ordre and succession of thinges to come, foreseeing that the people wolde resorte vnto him, and that mete occasiō shoulde be geuen, and that the time wolde verie well serue for the preparinge of the mindes of soche as wolde beleue in him, to speake of the high misterie of the receauing of his bodie and bloode: he began with the great miracle of the multiplieng of fiue batlie loaues and two fishes. By the whiche miracle they being moued to consider his great power, might the more easilie be induced to the beleif of the greate miracle of the geuing of his blessed bodie and blood in the Sacrament, as Chrysostome saieth: Propterea id prius fecit miraculum, vt per illud non essent ampliùs increduli his, quae postmodum diceret, Therfore Chrysost. hom. 45 in Ioan. (saieth Chrysostom) did he woorke this miracle first, that by yt they shoulde be no more vnbeleuing in those thinges, whiche he wolde afterwarde G tell them. For as the same Chrysostom saieth, Ex eo, & haec credere oportuit ei facilia factu esse. By that miracle yt behoued them to beleue, that these thinges also were easie for him to do. Ibidem.
This miracle then beinge doen as a preparatiue or induction to the belief of that great miracle, that afterward he wolde tell them that he wolde do: manie people did folowe him, though drawen by diuerse Spirittes: Some by the heauenlie Spiritte mouinge the minde: Some by the fleshlie Spiritte, moued of the bellie. whiche our Sauiour Chryste did note when he saied: Sequimmi me, non quia vidistis signa, sed quia manducastis ex panibus, & saturati estis. Ioan. 6. Ye folowe me not bicause ye haue feen the miracles, but bicause ye haue eaten of the loaues, and were filled. And so proceding nearer to entre into the matter, whiche he chieflie entended, saied vnto them: Operamini non cibū qui perit, sed qui permanet in vitam aeternam, quem filius hominis daturus est vobis. Labour not for the meat whiche perisheth, but for that whiche endureth into euerlasting life, whiche meate the Sonne of man shall geue vnto yowe.
The Iewes nowe by this aduertised, perceaued that they were moued to H woorke for the heauenlie life, and therfore asking howe they shoulde woorke the worke of God, receaued aunswer, that yt was to beleue in him whō god had sent. Yet nowe forgetting the miracle so lately doen in feading so [Page 94]great a multitude with so feweloaues, for the whiche then they coulde saie: This ys the verie Prophete, whiche shoulde come into the worlde, and wolde A haue taken him and made him king: they saied nowe vnto him: Quod ergo facis signum, vt videamus, & credamus tibi &c. What sign shewest thowe nowe, that we maie see and beleue thee? What doest thowe woorke? Oure fathers did eate Manna in the desert (as yt ys written) he gaue them bread from heauen to eate: Here our Sauiour Three sundrie breades mencioned by Chryst. Joan. 6. Chryste hauing iust occasion, entreth into a large disputation with thē whiche continueth to the chapiters end. In the whiche he maketh mencion of three sundrie breades: that ys, of the bread Manna, of the bread the Sōne of God, and of the breade the flesh of Chryste. Whiche three breades, as they be distincted in nature: So dothe the Euangelist, distincte them, by the distinction of their times in the whiche they were geuen.
1 And therfore speaking of Manna, whiche was geuen long before, he dothe distincte yt by the time that ys past, saieng: Patres vestri manducauerunt Manna Ibid. 6. in deserto. yowre fathers haue eaten Manna in the wildernesse. By whiche saing ys declared not onelie a distinction and difference of the thing yt self, being Manna, but also of the time and place that yt was eaten of their B fathers.
2 The seconde bread ys the Godhead of Chryst, whiche as yt ys distincted from the first bread in substance: So ys yt distincted by the difference of the geuing of yt. And therfore our Sauiour Chryste vttereth yt in the present tence, as then presentlie geuen, saing: Non Moyses dedit vobis panem de caelo, sed Pater meus dat vobis panem de celo verum. Moyses gaue you not that bread from heauen: but my Father geueth yowe the true bread from heauen,
Where note that Chryst saieth: that his Father geueth the true bread. He did not saie, that he did geue, or will geue: but presentlie, geueth. And who ys this bread he declareth, saieng: Ego sum panis vitae. I am the bread of life. And whether this be spoken of his manhead, or of his god head, he immediatelie openeth: Qui venit ad me non esuriet, & qui credit in me, non sitiet in aeternum. He that cometh to me shall not hunger, and he that beleueth in me shall neuer Beleif ys directed to God alone. thirst. Beleif ys directed to none, as to beleue in them, but to God alone. We beleue in Iesus Chryst God and man, not by the consideracion of his manheade alone do we beleue in him, but in that his Godhead and C his māhead be ioined in vnitie of person, so as God and man ys one Chryst. Wherfore in this place he must be vnderstanded of necessitie to speake of his Godhead.
3 The thirde bread he beginnith to speake of when he saied: Et panis quem ego dabo, caro mea est, quam dabo pro mundi vita. And the bread whiche, I will geue ys my flesh. whiche I will geue for the life of the worlde. In the whiche woordes he teacheth a manifest diuersitie of this bread here spoken of, from the other spoken of before. For here by expresse woordes he nameth the bread his flesh. whiche yet more plainlie he teacheth to be his verie reall and substanciall flesh, when he saieth: that he will geue them that same flesh, whiche he will geue for the life of the worlde. He gaue not his flesh spirituallie to suffer death for the life of the worlde, But the verie reall flesh of his verie bodie.
Wher nowe note, that wher I saied before, that in this chapiter (besides the bread whiche our sauiour Chryst fedde the people then with, miraculouslie) therwere three breades spokē of by Chryst: These three breades be D distincted not onelie with difference of time, as ys before declared, but also with the differēce of substāce, as being three seuerall and diuerse substances, as in this sequele it shall appeare.
[Page]As for Manna, that yt was a diuerse substance from either of the other E two, ye will easilie graunt me. That these other two be different in substance also, yt ys partlie proued allreadie, for that the one of the same ys the God head of Chryst, the proof wherof ys, that he moued the Iewes to beleue in yt. The other ys his flesh. whiche he gaue for the worlde.
And here note that speaking of the bread of his Godhead he moueth the Chryst moued the Iewes to beleue in hys Godhead, and to eat the flesh of hismāhead Iewes more then once to beleue in him. But speaking of this other bread he neuer moued the Iewes to beleue in yt, but allwais to eate yt. Ther he saied: Ego sum panis vitae. I am the bread of life. Here (as yt were disseueringe his flesh, as being one of the substāciall partes of his person, from the wholl) he saieth, Panis &c. The bread whiche I will geue ys my flesh, whiche ys a different Substance from the substance of the Godhead of Chryst although bothe theise Substances in Chryst, be but one person.
As touching the difference of time in the geuing of these two breades: The first ys geuen presentlie, and therfore Chryst saied: Panis enim Dei est, qui de coelo descendit, & dat vitam mundo. For the breade of God ys he, which commeth F down from heauen, and geueth life vnto the worlde. Wher he allwais speaketh of the present time, saing: that he cometh and geueth life to the worlde.
Nowe speaking of the thirde breade, he spaketh of the time not present, but of the time to come, saing: The bread which I will geue. So that as ther ys two plain differēces of time, that ys the time present, and the time to come: So be the two breades, two different Substances, the one being expressed as the cheifer parte to be beleued on, the other as the inferiour parte, by the name of flesh to be eaten on.
This I dare auouche to be the verie natiue sense, and the true vnderstanding of this scripture, as ye maie perceaue the verie scripture yt self enforceth vs to take this sense, accordinge to the letter.
Neuer the lesse that ye maie perceaue, that I will not arrogate to my self soche authoritie to expownde this scripture, as the Aduersaries haue doen, who haue so impudentlie vpon their owne head and authoritie taught, that Chryst here spake no one woorde of his bodie and bloode in the Sacramēt, G but onelie of his woorde and our beleif in the same: for the confirmacion of that, which yt hath pleased god to be vttered by me, and the confutaciō of that, that Satan hath moued the Aduersaries to saie against the trueth, I wil as hertofore ys doen, consulte with certain of the elders of Chrystes Par liament house, and learn of them yf in that same house, ther ys acknowledged, and receaued any soche differences of breades in the sixte chapiter of saincte Iohn, as I haue declared or no. whiche differences when they shall be by them auouched, I will vse their testimonie and authoritie to expownde the rest of the chapiter, that toucheth my matter cheiflie intended, and not mine owne. Whose authoritie (Reader) yf thowe wilt not by thy affection so farre abase, that thowe wilte counteruaill the same with a bare saing of a light Newling, and preferre him before so manie graue Auncientes, I doubte not but thowe shalt se matter enough, to drawe thee to the aunciēt, and verie trueth, professed and receaued manie hundreth years in the Churche of Chryste. H
THE THIRDE CHAPITER PROVETH BY THE A doctours that the sixte of sainct Iohn speaketh as wel of the bread Chrystes slesh in the Sacrament, as of the bread his Godhead.
ANd first let vs see the distinction of breades. As for the breade whiche oure Sauiour Chryst multiplied and the breade Manna, which be manifestlie distincted in all mens knowledges, and of the whiche ther ys no Controuersie, I shall not nede to speake any more.
Of the other two breades, wher oure Sauiour Chryst began to enter disputacion of them, and in the beginning of the same saied: Ego sum panis vitae: Ioan. 6. Chrysost. homil. 44. in Ioan. Ther Chrysostom in expownding the same text, saieth: Iam in mysteriorum traditionem deuēturus est, et primùm de diuinitate sua sic disputat: Ego sum panis vitae. Neque enim de corpore, hoc dictum est, de quo circa finem inquit, Panis quem ego dabo, caro mea est: Sed adhucde diuinitate. Etenim ille propter Deum Verbū panis est, quemadmodum hic panis, propter aduenientem ei Spiritū, panis caelestis efficitur. Nowe will he (meening Chryste) come to the setting furth of the mysteries, and first of his Godhead, he saieth thus: I am the bread of life. For this was not spoken of hys bodie of the B which aboute the end he saieth: The bread which I will geue, ys my slesh: But as yet of his Godhead. For as that ys bread for God the Sonne: So ys thie breade made heauenlie bread, for the Spirit coming to yt. Thus moche Chrysostom Chrystes Godhead and manhead distincted as two breades. Ys not this a cler testimonie? Do ye not see here, a plain distinctiō of breads? This (saieth he) I am the bread of life, ys spoken of the Godhead, and cōtinueth disputacion of yt, till he come to this text: The bread that I wil geue ys my slesh. And this (saieth he) ys spoken of his bodie. And dothe not nowe the sixt of S. Iohn speake of the bodie of Chryste in the Sacrament?
Note further that he saieth, as the Godhead ys bread for God the Sonne (meening that the Godhead in Chrystys God the Sōne) So (saieth he) this bread (meening the slesh of Chryst) ys made the heauenlie breade for the spirit coming to yt.
But I will not trooble thee (Reader) with manie woords in so plain a matter. I will raither produce some other one of the other side of Chrystes Parliament house, to see yf their testimonie be agreable, and whether they be taught of one Spirit, one true exposition of Chrystes Gospell. C
S. Augusten expownding the same text (that Chrysostō saieth Chryst spake of his bodie) writeth thus: Determinat consequenter Dominus quomodò se panē dicat, non tantùm secundùm diuinitatē, quae pascit omnia, sed etiā secūdùm humanā naturā, quae est assumpta à Verbo Dei, cum subdit: Et panis quē ego dabo caro mea est. Owr Lord (saieth S. Augustine) determineth consequentlie how he calleth him self bread, not onelie after his Godhead, whiche fedeth all thinges, but also after his humane nature, which ys assumpted of the Sonne of God, whē he saied afterward: And the breade whiche I will geue ys my flesh, &c. Doth not here S. Augustin agreablie with Chrysostome, teach a plain difference of the bread of the Godhead of Chryst, and the bread of his Māhead? doth not he saie that Chryst in this text. The bread which I will geue, ys my flesh, dothe speake of his humane nature? Consider then (Reader) the authoritie and auncientie of these two great and famouse Fathers of Chrystes Churche, and accept their iudgementes before these newfangled Inuentours, in the exposition of the scriptures.
And now that ye haue heard these two of the higher house agreablie reporting how the Church in their times vnderstood the sixt chap. of S. Ihon D of the Sacramēt: We will also heare some of the lower house, ād some of thē not of the later daies, but of the aunciēts of that sorte being well toward a thousand years agone. Of the whiche we will first heare Theophilacte the folower [Page]of Chrysostome in manie thinges, whether he folowe him in this also or no. Thus he writeth vpon the same text. E
Manifestè autem nobis hoc loco, de communione corporis dicit. Nam panis (inquit) quem Theophilact. in 6. Ioan. ego dabo, caro mea est, quam ego dabo pro mundi vita. Porro potestatem suam indicans, quòd non vt seruus, & minor patre crucifigendus, sed voluntariè, inquit, Ego dabo carnem meam pro mundi vita. Manifestlie doth Chryst speake vnto vs of the mysticall communion of hys bodie. For the bread (saieth he) whiche I will geue yowe, ys my flesh, which I will geue for the life of the worlde. And shewing his power, that he should be crucified not as a seruaunt, and lesse then the Father, but willinglie he saieth: I will geue my flesh for the life of the worlde.
Note here that Theophilacte doth not onelie folowe, and agree with Chrysostome: but also he semeth to signifie, that yt was a clere matter, a plain matter, a matter receaued of all men of Chrystes Churche in his time withoute controuersie, when he saeth, that Chryst in that text spake manifestly of the communion of his bodie.
A merueilouse matter, that, that Chryst did speake so manifestlie, and of these Fathers was cōceaued so clerly: shoulde nowe a daies be taken of these F peruerters of Gods scripturs so obscurelie By this ye maie see that in the cler light they are blinde, and can not see. For blinde maliciouse ignorance hath vtterlie blinded them. Therfore an other daie, except in time they repente, Sap. 5. they shall saie, and lamentablie confesse, as in the booke of wisdom ys saied in the persons of soch: Errauimus à via veritatis, et iustitiae lumē nō illuxit nobis, &c. We haue erred from the waie of trueth, and the light of righteousnes hath not shined to vs, and the Sunne of vnderstanding rose not vppe vpon vs. We haue wearied our selues in the waie of wickednesse, and destruction. Tediouse waies haue we goen, but as for the waie of the Lorde we haue not knowen. Whiche maner of lamentacion God auerte from them, and geue them grace in time to repent, that the Sunne of vnderstanding maie rise vpon theme.
To procead, and therby to trie whether soch as haue writen of late years, I mene, whiche were within these three hundreth years or ther aboute (whiche haue ben so vilie estemed of these singular phantasied men of our time) did dissent from these elders in the exposition of this scripture: And whether the Church these two or three hundreth years last past, did otherwise G vnderstand the scriptures then the fathers did, by the hearing of someone we shall perceaue.
And to speake here what I thinke, verilie I thinke the subtle and craftie conueighance of the Aduersaries, and this Proclamer also, was and ys to contemne and despise these late authours, first, bicause they wer (as they saie) not cloquent, and therfore Erasmus moche inueigheth against Lyra. Then these are not auncient, and therfor not to be alleaged. Last they open thēselues a litle more, and saie these authours are not, to be alleaged, but reiected bicause their doctrine ys not sownd, but corrupted. And they haue corrupted (saie they) and peruerted, and destroied Gods woord with the inuentiōs of mē. And by this were al the learned writers, which were within these sixe or seuen hūdreth years defaced and reiected as. S. Tho. Aquinas, S. Bonauentura, Petrus Lombardus, Dionysius Carthusianus, Hugo Cardinalis, Holcot, and N. Lyra, Fathers in olde time spake of the mysteries couertlie. with a great nōbre mo of that age, which are not esteemed, nor accepted as of authoritie, nor none that haue writen within the compasse of these thousand years can be allowed by some of the Aduersaries. And why was this? H Bicause they wrote so plainlie, that they coulde not be wrested.
As for other Fathers, that were before a thousand years, though manye [Page 96]of them did writte verie plain, as occasion did serue, when they did write A to christen men. Yet oftentimes when they did preache to the people, or write to soche as were weake in faith, as in those daies the Churche was mingled with those that had not receaued the faithe, then bicause Perfectorū est solidus cibus, strong meat ys for them that be perfecte, and Paruulis in Christo lac dandum. To [...]onglinges in Christe milke ys to be geuen: therfore they oftentimes (as yt was necessarie, that the mysteries of our faithe, shoulde not be vttered to them that coulde not beare them) did speake of the same couertlie and closelie, and therfore they were fain oftentimes to knitte vppe ther talke of the Sacrament, with this or like saieng: Norunt fideles, the faithful do knowe. And by like occasion did in manie places write obscurelie in this matter, and did not so manifestlie and plainly vtter yt, bicause ther was no occasion geuen them by heresie in that matter, but all were of one minde in yt, hauing most godlie peace and quietnes in the same.
And therfore the Aduersarie more delighted with obscure places, which he thinketh better to drawe to his sence, then the plain places, whiche will Heretikes▪ how they alleage the fathers. not suffer them selues to be drawen, hath laboured to reiecte soche as did B write, since the Churche was well settled and staied, and might therfore write plainly, what their faith taught them in this mysterie. But cheiffie all them that did write since the time of Berengarius, whiche vpon occasion of heresie were enforced to write plainly in this matter. But God be praysed the eldest and auncientest Fathers, haue yet in diuerse places written so moche in plain maner, that yt ys able to conuince and ouerthrowe the heresies of the Aduersaries, as partelie ye haue heard allreadie.
And yet for all the pretensed auncientie they sought, refusing these learned men, that were within a thousand years, yet one of them wolde alleage Like to lik. Zuinglius slain in a rebelliō begō by himself. an other, as Bullinger alleaged Zuinglius in his exposition vpon sainct Paules epistles, whiche, Zuinglius was so holie and so auncient a father, that he was slain in a sedicion raised by him and his disciples, against the magistrates of hys contrie. And this ys as good a chaung, as the heretiks made in the beginning of this wicked time of heresie, when they putte the holy saincte and Polycarp. put out of the Kalēder Martyr Policarpus, that was saincte Iohn the Euangelistes disciple, oute of the C kalender, and putt in the heretike Thomas Hutten, that was bournt for heresie.
Nowe notwithstanding their craftie iniquitie in reiecting these good catholique authours, I will vse plain simplicitie in the accepting of them, that the trueth which they professe being auncient though the authours be of late daies, and the consonancie of these with the most auncient authours in teaching and vttering the same trueth; maie be perceaued.
For yf these of late yeares agree with them of the olde time in the truerh, Thautoritie of late writers approued by good reasons. and teache the same trueth that thother do, what shoulde lette vs to heare them, and accepte them? Yf none shoulde be receaued but soche as were a thousand years since, and soche also as be of this our time, shal be refused, thē preachers must ceasse. For of what more authoritie or credite ys he of, that teacheth in the pulpet by speaking, then he that teacheth by open writing? Yf ye will not beleue me writing, ye will not beleue me preaching. Yf ye wil beleue me preaching, for that I speake the trueth by the scriptures, and auncient fathers: Beleue me also writing the trueth by the scriptures ād aunciēt D fathers. And yf these alowed writers of these later daies teach the trueth by the scripturs, ād aunciēt fathers, thē must they neds be receaued. And ther for trulie yt ys necessarie that they be alleaged, to thētent the trueth maie [Page]be perceaued to be one throughout all, and that they being ioined with the E aunciētes, yt maie be seē that the same trueth is taught now, that was taught a thousand yeares agō before? And therfor haue I determined not to geue place to this refusall of Heretiques, but to alleage the Authours of these later yeares, that the cōsonancie and vnitie of the trueth maie be perceaued in all ages, and that ther ys no other trueth taught now, thē was taught in the Primitiue Church, and the time of the Apostles, yea, no other trueth, then was taught by oure Sauiour Chryst himself, and by his holie Spirit, the Authour of all trueth. Wherby the foule railinges, and slaunders, which bemost comō lie in the mouthes of the enemies maie be taken awaie, and they of their vntrueth and malice woorthilie confownded. Thus moche I thought good to saie, for that in this book I minde to vse the testimonies of these late writers for thentent aboue specified.
And nowe therfore to Theophilacte the Grecian, I shall ioin the learned doctour Nicolaus de Lyra a latin Authour who writing vpon the sixt of S. Iohn cometh to this text: Et panis, quem ego dabo, caro mea est. And the bread, whiche I will geue ys my flesh: and expowndeth yt thus: Postquam egit de pane spirituali, F qui est Verbum, hic consequenter agit de pane spirituali, qui est Sacramentum. After he hath don (saieth this Authour, of Chryst) with the spirituall bread, which ys Nico. Lira in. 6. Ioan. the woorde: here consequentlie he treacted of the spirituall breade, whiche ys the Sacrament. What dothe this authour dissent from the Fathers? dothe he not signifie that Chryste before the sentence so often alleaged, did speake of the spirituall bread hys Godhead, which he calleth the woord? And doth he not now saie, that in yt that foloweth Chryst speaketh of the Sacrament?
These be sufficient to declare the true vnderstāding of our Sauiour Chrystes processe, and ordre in the sixte of S. Iohn. And for that ye perceaue the same, aswell after the minde of Chryste, the verie texte so leading vs to vnderstand yt, as also after the minde of diuerse learned authours, I will nowe procead to see the vnderstāding of diuerse textes of the rest of this chapiter, that treacte of the blessed Sacrament.
THE FOVRTH CHAPITER BEGINNETH A G further proof of the former matter by S. Cyprian and Euthymius.
THis distinction of these two breades last before mencioned perceaued, and being withall remēbred, that at this text (The bread, which I shall geue, ys my [...]esh, whiche I will geue for the life of the world) Chryst began to speake of the Sacrament, and continueth the disputation therof to the ende of the chapiter: to proue the same more manifestlie to the Reader, and withall to make yt clere, that that processe ys not of a figuratiue flesh, but of Chrystes verie propre flesh and bodie I will beginne at the same text, and so descending to the last by a nombre of the most auncient Fathers of Chrystes Parliament house, open both the one and the other, I trust, to the full contentacion of the godlie Reader.
The firste that shall shewe hys minde of this matter shall be the holie Martyr Cyprian, who saieth thus: Panis vitae Christus est, & panis hic omnium non est, sed noster est. Et quomodò dicimus, Pater noster, quia intelligentium, & credentium pater est: sic & panē nostrū vocamus, quia Christus noster, qui eius corpus cōtingimus, panis est. H Hunc autem panē dari nobis quotidiè postulamus, ne qui in Christo sumus, & Eucharistiam quotidie ad cibū salutis accipimus, intercedente grauiore aliquo delicto, dum abstenti, & nō cōmunicantes, à caelesti pane prohibemur, à Christi corpore separemur, ipso praedicante, & [Page 97] monente: Ego sum panis vitae, qui de caelo descendi. Si quis ederit de hoc pane viuet in aeternum. Panis qutē quem ego dedero, caro mea est, pro seculi vita. The bread of life ys A Chryst, and this breade ys not the breade of all men, but yt ys ours. And as we do saie, Oure Father, because he ys the father of all that do beleue and vnderstande: Euen so also, oure bread, call we, whiche touche his bodie, bicause owre Chryste ys bread. This breade we dailie desire to be geuen vs, least we, which be in Chryst, and take the Sacrament dailie to oure meate of health, some greuouse offence coming betwene, while we being excōmunicated, and not receauing be forbidden from the heauenlie bread, maie be separated from the bodie of Chryste, he himself openly saing and teaching: I am the bread of life, whiche descended from heauen. Whosoeuer shal eate of this bread shall liue for euer. The bread, which I will geue, ys my flesh for the life of the worlde. Thus moch S. Cypriā
In this sentence, I doubte not but ye perceaue, that this holy Martyr applieth the sentences of the sixt of S. Iohn to the Sacramēt of Chrystes bodie and blood. According to whiche vnderstanding he calleth Chryst our bread, S. Cyprian aplieth the sixt of. S. Iohn to the Sacrament whom he so calleth, not onelie bicause of his Godhead, but also bicause he feadeth vs in the Sacrament with his bodie. For (saieth he) we being in Chryste, do receaue the Sacrament dailie to the meate of health. But yf by sinne we forbeare to B receaue the heauenlie bread, we be separated from the bodie of Chryste. Wherby we maie perceaue that not onelie the sixt of S. Iohn ys to be vnderstanded of the Sacrament, But also when S. Cyprian calleth the Sacrament the meat of health, the heauenly bread, and the bodie: we are taught that in the Sacramēt ys the verie presence of that bodie, to the which proprelie these goodlie titles maie be wourthilie applied. Whiche bodie can be none other but the bodie of Chryst God an man.
But forasmoch as the faith of this famouse Father and holie Martyr Cyprian in this poinct hath ben notablie and manifestlie declared in sentences before alleaged in the first booke, and more herafter shall be spoken, I will not nowe trooble the reader, with any longer declaracion of the same, but will ioin with Cyprian one of the other side of Chrystes Parliament house, euen Euthymius a grecian, whose sentence, Reader yt shall not repent thee to hear, yf thowe desire to knowe the trueth. Vpon the text of S. Iohn before treacted of he maketh this exposition. C
Duobus modis dicitur Christus esse panis, secundùm diuinitatem scilicet, & humanitatatem. Euthymins in 6. Ioan. Postquam ergo docuit de modo qui secundùm diuinitatem est, nunc etiam docet de modo, qui est secundùm humanitatem. Non autem dixit, quem do, sed quem dabo. Daturus namue erat in vltima coena, quando sumptum panem, actis gratijs fregit, deditue Discipulis, & ait, Accipitt, & comedite: Hoc est corpus meum. Chryste ys saied to be bread two waies: that ys, after his Godhead, and after his manhead. Therfore when he had taught the maner whiche ys after his Godhead: Nowe dothe he also teache the maner whiche ys after hys manhead. For he did not saie, which I do geue, but which I will geue. For he wolde geue yt in the last Supper, when thankes being geuen, he brake the bread which he had taken, and gaue yt to the disciples and saied: Take, eate, this ys my bodie.
What can the Aduersaries saie against so manifest, and so plain a sentence? Do not their chekes wa [...]e red for shame? Ys not blind ignorance, or deuelish malice to be laied vnto these men, that either do not know the learning of so manie great clerlees, or ells, yf they knowe, do so maliciouslie, so deuelish D lie preferre their owne arrogant phantasies and opinons, and presume to saie the contrarie to that, so manie, in soch sundrie ages, declaring also therby the wholcōsēt of the church through al âges in the same do affirme ād teach? [Page]whiche ys, that Chryst did treact of, and promisse in sixt of Iohn, the Sacrament of his bodie and bloode. E
Now (gentle Reader) wilt thow beleue them in their matters, when they be deprehended in soche notable falshead, as all the Church doth reprehende them for. And yet their falshead shall more appeare by other mo herafter. Wherby yt shall most clerely be perceaued, that they haue attempted against all trueth, to wrest the sixt chapiter of saincte Iohn, from the Sacrament. And so shalt thowe se howe farre they haue swarued, and doo swarue from the treuth.
THE FIFTH CHAPITER PROCEADETH VPON the same text, by saincte Augustin and Chrysostome.
THat ye maie see more of the vnderstāding of this text, an other coople shall be produced to shewe yow howe this place of Ihō ys vnderstanded. The first of them shall be famouse Augustine, who saieth thus: Mensa sponsi tui panem habet integrum, & poculum F sanctū, quem panē, etsi fractū, comminutumue vidimus, integrè tamen cum August. de cultura agri Dominici. ipso suo Patre manet in caelis. De quo pane dicit: Panis quem ego daho, caro mea est pro mun di vita. The table of thy spouse hath perfect or pure bread, and an holie cuppe. Whiche bread although we haue seen broken, and bruysed on the crosse: yet yt abydeth with that his Father wholl in heauen. Of the whiche bread he saieth: The bread that I will geue ys my flesh, whiche I will geue for the life of the worlde.
S. Augustine speaking here to the spouse of Chryste, saieth, that the table of her Spouse or husbande hath a perfect bread, The bread on the table of Chryste, what ys yt but the Sacrament? Of this bread whiche ys the Sacrament in the table of Chryste, the same Chryste (saieth S. Augustine) saieth: The bread whiche I will geue ys my flesh. By which woordes yt ys ineuitablie manifest that that sentence of S. Iohn ys spoken of the Sacrament.
But nowe whether yt be spoken of the Sacramēt, as of a bare signe, which signe (as the Aduersaries alleage) as other signes likewise, dothe but take the name of the thing, that yt ys the signe of, or no, let vs searche by sainct Augustine G here. Yt ys euident that saincte Augustine here teacheth, that yt ys spoken of the verie thing whiche ys signified, and not of the bare signe. For S. Augustine speaking of the bread, and that of one bread, dothe declare yt to All one bodie that was broken on the Crosse, ys with the Father in heauen, and on the altar. be, and to haue ben in three sundrie places, that ys, on the table, on the crosse, and in heauen with his Father. The Sacrament, that ys, the externe signe, was neither on the crosse, neither ys in heauen. Wherfore yt ys the verie bodie of Chryste which was vpon the crosse, and ys with the Father in heauen, that ys nowe on the table of Chryste. For note the saing well, and ye shall finde, that he speaketh but of one bread. For when he had spoken of yt, as being on the table, he speaketh again of the same by the relatiue, saing: which bread although we haue seen broken on the crosse.
A relatiue (as the grammarian knoweth) maketh rehersall of a thing spokē of before. Then when he saied, whiche, he speaketh of the bread on the table. So that by S. Augustine, that same bread, that ys on the table, ys yt whiche was broken on the crosse. And that that was broken on the crosse, ys yt, that ys wholle sitting in heauen with the Father. Wherbie yt ys consequent, that yt ys the same, and verie bodie H of Chryste that ys on the table, that was vpon the crosse, and ys at the right hande of God the Father. As saincte Augustine in fewe woordes [Page 98]hath pithilie touched that, that we here seke, namelie that this place of the sixt chapiter of saincte Iohn speaketh of the Sacrament, and yet not of the A Sacrament as of a bare signe, but of the verie bodie of Chryste, and of the same dodie by the name of bread spake the sentence, The Bread whiche I will geue, ys my flesh: So I breiflie haue touched and noted the same to yowe, hasting to heare the sainges, and expositions of Chrysostome vpon the same text.
Chrysostome, after he had in his learned maner declared in his 44 home lie, that Chryste spake this texte of S. Iohn, which we treact of nowe, of his bodie, when he cometh to the same in his owne place, after he had reprehē ded the Iewes for their incredulitie, and slacknes in the beleif of Chrystes woordes, saieth that they therfore tooke no profitte of them. Illi tunc temporis Chrysost. hom. 45. in Ioan. nihil ex ijs dictis, nos illius beneficij vtilitatem cepimus. Quare necessariò dicendum quàm admiranda misteria, & cur data sint, & quae eorum vtilitas. They at that time tooke nothing by those woordes, we haue taken the profitt of the benefitte, wherfore necessarilie yt ys to be saied, howe wonderfull the misteries be, and wherfore they be geuen, and what ys the profitt of them. These woordes B Chrysostome speaketh vpon the woordes of Chryste, The bread which I will geue, ys my flesh. In the whiche woordes forsomuche as Chryste saied he wolde geue his flesh, Chrysostom saieth, they be wonderfull mysteries, And therfore he wolde searche the cause why he gaue them, and what profitt cometh to vs by them.
And immediatelie as a cause whie Chryste gaue vnto vs this misterie, the bread whiche ys his flesh: the said Chrysostom adioineth this sentence of saincte Paule: Vnum corpus sumus & membra ex carne & ossibus eius. We are one bodie and membres of his flesh and of his bones. And that he wolde not be mistaken, but that these woordes be spoken of the receipt of that breade that Chryste gaue, whiche ys his flesh, he more plainlie vttereth his mening, expownding the former woordes thus: Vt autē non solùm per dilectionē, sed reipsa in illam carnem conuertamur, per cibum id efficitur, quem nobis largitus est. That we shoulde not onelie by loue, but in verie dede be turned into that flesh, that ys brought to passe by the meate whiche he hath graunted vs. Thus Chrysostome. C Chrystes flesh turneth vs into yt.
And what meate did he graunte vs? euen that, that he frelie promised to geue vs, a bread whiche ys his flesh. whiche flesh being oure heauenly and spirituall meat contrary to the ordre of carnall foode, whiche receaued ys turned into vs, and not we into yt, turneth vs into the flesh of Chryste, as yt was saied to saincte Augustine: Nec tu me mutabis in te, sicut cibum carnis tuae, sed tu mutaberis in me. Neither shalt thowe chaunge me into thee as the meate of thy flesh: but thowe shalt be chaunged into me. And this ys one cause why Chryste gaue vs this wonderfull misterie as Chrysostome right godlie termeth yt.
He addeth also an other cause of the geuing of this great mistery vnto vs, whiche ys this: Cùm enim suum in nos amorem indicare vellet, per corpus suum se The same flesh and blood that Chryst tooke of ourna ture, he geueth vt again. nobis commiscuit, & in vnum nobiscum redegit, vt corpus cum capite vniretur. When he wolde shewe furth his loue towardes vs, by his bodie he mingled him self with vs, and brought him self into one with vs, that the bodie might be vnited with the head, Thus muche Chrysost. Marke his woordes, that Chryste By D his bodie hath mingled himself with vs. whiche bodie ys not a phantasticall bodie, but his verie reall bodie, as the same Chrysostome after goodlie examples godlie setting furth the matter, speaketh in the person of Chryste. [Page] Vester ego frater esse volui, & communicaui carnem propter vos & sanguinem, & per quae vobis coiunctus sum, ea rursus vobis exhibui. I wolde be yowr brother, and for E yowr sakes I tooke flesh and bloode with yowe, and by what thinges I was conioined to yowe, those thinges again I haue geuen vnto yowe.
Weigh this golden sentence with me (gentle Reader) I beseche thee, weigh yt well, and see whether we receaue but a peice of bread in the holie Sacrament or not. Yt ys most certen, that Chryste tooke not a phantasticall bodie. as the Maniches here toforesaied, but a verie true bodie, of verie flesh and verie bloode, and was in all thinges fownde a verie mā, saue onelie that he lacked sinne, and hauinge soche flesh, and soche bloode, he must nedes A plain place of Chrysost. for the Proclamer beioined to vs as one of our nature and kinde, a verie man as we be. Yf thē he gaue vnto vs those thinges, by the whiche he was conioined to vs, he was conioined to vs by verie substanciall fleshe and bloode, wherfore he gaue vnto vs his verie substanciall flesh and bloode. Yf he gaue (as the aduersarie saieth) vnto vs his flesh but onelie in a sign, then he gaue not his verie flesh in dede: But he was not conioined to vs by flesh and bloode in a signe onelie. Wherfore he giueth vs not his flesh and bloode in a sign onelie. F
And again (as some other do saie) he geueth vs his flesh and bloode, that ys the benefitte, the merite and grace of his flesh and bloode, and not his verie reall flesh and bloode. I denie not but he geueth vs the merite of his passion, fuffred in his flesh, and shedinge of his most preciouse bloode, but that ys not imparted and geuē to vs onelie in the Sacrament of his blessed bodie and bloode: but also in other sacramentes. As in Baptisme we haue remissiō of sinnes, both originall and actuall, from the whiche we be washed in his bloode: Lauit nos à peccatis nostris in sanguine suo. He hath washed vs from Apocal. 1 Receipt of Chrystes merites not propre to one but cō mon to all sacramētes oure sinnes in his blood: So haue we also in the sacramēt of penaunce, wher also we haue remission of sinnes by the merite of Chrystes passion, And breif lie all the sacramentes haue their efficacie, power and strenght of the merites of Chrystes passion. So that to haue the meritie of Chrystes passion ys not the propre benefitt that cometh to vs by the receipt of this Sacrament of the bodie and bloode of Chryste, but ys a benefitt geuen to vs in the ministracion and due receauing of all other sacramentes. But the propre benefit of this sacrament, ys to receaue the verie bodie of Chryste, as a singular G pledge and token of his loue, who voucheth saif for the vnmeasurable loue that he beareth to vs, not onelie to be with vs by his sign or token: but (as vehement and perpetuall loue requireth) to be with vs by his verie presence, and that we receauing him shoulde be turned into his fleshe wherby (as S. Hilarie saieth) we are naturallie in him, as he ys naturallie In vs, being mebres of his hodie, of his flesh and of his bones, yea ād into that flesh, whiche (as Cyrill saieth) ys viuifica, that ys, geuing life or making to liue euerlastinglie, according to his owne promisse: Qui manducat me, viaet propter me, he that eateth me shall liue by means of me.
These be the benefittes propre vnto this Sacrament (as Chrysostome hath rehersed) who also proceading declareth the great and wonderfull excellencie of this Sacrament, and a nombre of other benefittes ensewing to vs by the receipt of the same. Whose processe although yt be somwhat long [...] yet for that yt declareth moste manifestlie the trueth of Chrystes presence in the Sacrament, and most godlie commending the same, teacheth vs not onelie to reuerence yt in our heartes, and also by mouthe reuerentlie to H speake of yt (whiche bothe two haue moche decaied in these daies) but also moueth spirituall delectacion in the heart of the true chrystian, I trust yt: [Page 99]shall not be tedious to the Reader in readinge. And therfore shall I more A gladlie take paines in the writing.
When Chrysostom had spoken moche of the flesh of Chryste, of whiche some parte ye haue nowe hearde. He cometh to speake of his bloode, of the which ye shall nowe heare. Thus he writeth: Hic sanguis sacit, vt imago in nobis regia storeat. Hic sanguis pulchritudinem, atque nobilitatem animae, quam semper irrigat Chrisost. ibid. & nutrit, languescere non sinit. Sanguis enim à eibo non fit [...] repentè, sed prius aliud quiddam. Hic quàm primùm irrigat animam, eamue vi quadam magna r [...]buit. Hic mysticus sanguis Daemones procul pellit, Angelos & Angelorum Dominum ad nos allicit. Daemones enim cùm Dominicum sanguinem in nobis vident, in fugam vertuntur, Angeli autē procurrunt. Hic sanguis effusus vniuersum ablu [...]e orbem terrarum, de quo multa Paulus ad Hebraeos prosecutus est. Hic sanguis abdita, & sancta sanctorum purgabat. Quòd si eius figura tantam habuit vim in templo Hebraeorum, in medio Aegypto limmibus aspersus, longe magis veritas. Hic sanguis aureum altare significauit. Sine hoc Princeps sacerdotum in penetralia ingredi non audebat. Hic sanguis sacerdotes faciebat. Hic sanguis in figura peccata purgabat, in qua si tantam habuit vim, si vmbram ita mors horruit, quantoperè quaeso, ipsam formidabit veritatem? Hic animarum nostrarum salus est, hoc lauatur, B hoc ornatur, hoc incenditur. Hic igne clariorem nostram mentem reddit, & auro splē didiorem. Huius sanguinis effusio coelum peruium fecit. Admiranda sanè Ecclesiae mysteria, admirabile sacrarium. Ex Paradiso fons scaturiit, à quo sensibiles stuuij emanarent. A mēsa hac prodiit, fons, qui flunios spirituales diffundit. This blood maketh that the kinges The great excellencie of the blood of Chryst in the Sacrament. image dothe florish in vs. This bloode dothe neuer suffer the beautie and nobilitie of the soule, whiche it dothe allwais water, and nourishe, to fade or waxe fainte. Bloode ys not made of meate furth with, but first yt ys some other thing. This bloode at the first do the water the soule, and indewe yt with a certain great strenght. This bloode driueth Deuells a farre of, and allureth vnto vs Angells, and the Lorde of Angells. When the Deuells see the blood of our Lorde in vs, they are turned to fleight, but the Angells runne furth to vs. This bloode bing shedde, did washe all the wholl worlde, of the whiche Paule hath made a great processe to the Hebrues. This bloode did pourge the secrete places, and the most holie place of all. Yf then the figure of yt had so great power in the temple of the Hebrues, and in Aegipte, C being sprinkeled vppon the vpper postes of the dores, moche more the veritie. This bloode did signifie the golden Altar. Withoute this bloode the cheif preist durst not go into the inwarde secrete places. This bloode made the preistes. This bloode in the figure pourged sinnes, in the whiche if yt had so great might and power, yf deathe so feared the shadow, how moche, I praie thee, wil yt feare the veritie it self. This blood ys the health of our soules. With this bloode our soule ys wasshed, with yt she ys decked, with yt she ys kindled. This bloode maketh our minde clerer then the fire, more shining then golde. The effusion of this bloode made heauen open. Trulie the misteries of the Churche are wonderfull, the holie treasour house ys wonderfull. From The misteries of the Churche be wonderfull. Paradise a spring did runne, from thence sensible waters did flowe: from this table commeth oute a spring whiche diffundeth and powreth oute spirituall floudes. Hether to Chrysostom.
In the whiche processe ye maie perceaue how moche this holic man estemed the blessed Sacrament. Euen so moche did he esteeme yt, so moche did he regard yt, so moche he reuerenced it, that after so moche praise and D magnifieng of it, as a man beholding the vnspeakable highnesse of it, he brake oute and saied Admiranda Ecclesiae mysteria. wonderfull be the misteries of the Churche.
Obiection But perchaunce the aduersarie will gladlie here seke a starting hole, as E commonlie he dothe, when he is charged with the ineuitable trueth, and will saie that all these great praises be not of the blood of Chryste, whiche we saie ys in the Sacrament: but of the blood of Chryste that was shed vpō the crosse.
Answere. To the whiche I aunswer, that trueth yt ys, that all this praise ys of the blood of Chryst whiche was shed vpon the Crosse. Bloode of Chryst on the crosse and in the Sacrament all one. For I vnderstand the blood of Chryste in the Sacrament, to be the same, and none other, that did flowe oute of Chrystes side vpon the Crosse. For as in the Sacrament ys the veraie same bodie in substance, that was crucified vpon the Crosse: so ys ther the self same blood in substance that was shed vppon the Crosse. But in maner diuerse. Ther the bodie and blood of a man mortall: Here of Chryst immortall. Ther passible here impassible: Ther visible: here inuisible Ther sensiblie perceaued: Here faithfullie beleued. Neuerthelesse I saie that Chrysostom spake all these praises of the blood of Chryste in the Sacrament, the praise of which ys the praise of the other, for that F they be all one.
But that my bare saing shall not be sufficient authoritie to answere the vntreu saing of the Aduersarie, and that I seke raither to satisfie then to contende: Chrysostom him self shal sufficiently aunswer this, by his authoritie. And that both by that, that ys alleaged of him allreadie, and also by that, that foloweth the same. Call therfore to remembrance the sentence of Chrysostō To proue that he spake of the Sacrament immediately preceading this long saing nowe last alleaged, and let them be ioined together, and then by the dependance of the one to the other, ye shall perceaue whether all this praise was directed. The sentence going before was this: I wolde be yowre brother, and for yowr sakes I tooke flesh and bloode with yowe. And by what thinges I was conioined to yowe; those same again haue I exhibited, And thē entreth into this long praise, wherby when he speaking of the geuing to vs of his flesh and blood (of the whiche also he made a long disputacion before, and of the whiche the wholl homelie treacted) ioined this saing to it: wherof shoulde he speake, but of that blood in this sentence, that he spake of before in the other, and in the wholl homelie? G
And also when he had so greatlie and highly magnified the bloode of Chryst: Yet he declareth wherto he looked when he exclamed and saied: Admiranda Ecclesiae mysteria. The misteries of the Church are wonderfull. and then proceading declareth him self manifestlie to speake of the Sacrament, by a similitude saing: From Paridise runneth a spring, from the which floweth sensible riuers: from this table goeth oute a wellspring, whiche diffundeth spirituall riuers. all whiche woordes do clerely showe, that all this his processe, tendeth to the blood of Chryste, as being in the Sacrament.
And although this aboue saied dothe sufficientlie proue this to be spoken of the Sacrament: yet this that foloweth doth more proue yt, and maketh it so clere, that yt can not be gainst said. Vt enim homo seruos suos emit, & ornat: ita nos sangume suo Christus. Qui huius sanguinis sunt participei, cum Angelis, & Archā gelis, & supernis virtutibus commorantur, ipsam regiam stolam Christi induti, spiritualibus armis muniti. Sed nihil dixi, ipsum induti sunt regem. Sed sunt purum est, & admirabile, ita si purè accesseris, ad salutem accessisti, siue praua conscientia, ad poenam & supplicium. Partakers of the blood of Chryst dwell with Angells. Qui enim manducat, & bibit indignè SANGVINEM Domini, indicium sibi H manducat & bibit. As a man (saieth Chrysostom) dothe both buie his seruauntes, and deck them: euen so dothe Chryst vs with his bloode. They that be partakers of this bloode, they dwell with Angells and Archaungells, and [Page 99]with the powers aboue, being cloathed with the kinglie garment of Chryste, are defended with spirituall armour. But I haue saied nothing. They haue A putte on the King himself. But as yt ys a great thing, and a wonderfull: euē Note here, that he speaketh of the Sacrament so if thowe come to it purelie, thowe hauest comed to health or saluacion: But if with an euell conscience, thowe hauest commed to pain and punishment. For he that eateth, and drinked the blood of our Lorde vnwourthelie, eateth and drinketh his owne damnation. Thus Chrysostom.
What can the enemie nowe saie? hath not nowe Chrysostome opened him self? and fullie, and plainly certified vs, that all this his communicacion was of the blessed Sacrament? Dothe not his allegacion of saincte Paule invinciblie proue yt? yf sainct Paule in the place alleaged spake of the Sacrament, then Chrysostom that alleaged him spake of the Sacrament. and vndoubtedlie he did so.
Wherfore (chrystian Reader) observe here and note that Chrysostom dothe not onely vnderstand the text of saincte Iohn of the Sacrament: But also that therwith, both by plain opening of the woordes of S. Paule by moste goodlie and high praise, he teacheth vs that in the same Sacrament ys B the verie presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode. And in his so doinge teacheth God plagueth vs for abuse of the Sacrament also all good chrystian men highlie to esteme, and greatlie to reuerence and magnifie this wonderfull misterie of Chrystes blessed bodie and bloode, cō sidering, and by faithe perceauing verie Chryste God and man ther to be present. And not so lightlie, so irreuerentlie, so vndeuoutlie to vse it, as heretofore, euen before the time of heresie, yt was vsed or raither abused. For the whiche abuse, I assure yowe, I earnestlie beleue, that as in yt we did sore offende: So by it God hath sore plagued vs. Let vs therfor be admonished, and learn to amend our selues.
And the like I wolde wish the Aduersarie to do, that wher he in this wicked time hath forsaken his faith, and with defiled mouthe hath railed in blaspheming this most holie Sacrament, and hath called the faitfull Chrystians, Idolaters, and robbers of God, robbing him of his honour, and geuing yt to a peice of bread, he wolde nowe learn that he hath gon astraie. and that not the Catholique Chrystians, but he and soche like haue ben Idolaters, and robbers of God his honour, not honouring him wher he was present, C but with all vile means dishonouring him, whiche he and they maie repent.
Wolde this famouse and noble clerke holie Chrysostom haue so extolled Honourable titles, and great effectes of the Sacrament proue the presence of Chryst therin. and magnified this Sacrament, so oftentimes calling it blood, and atributing to yt goddes power in fearing and driuing awaie of Deuells, in wasshing our sowles, in geuing remission of sinnes, in putting death to flight, in being our health, and saluacion, with a nombre of soche effectes, as ye haue heard, yf it were but wine? Can a cuppe of wine woorke soche wonderfull workes and effectes? ys yt of soch force and strength? if yt so be, the chamberlain of king Darius that tooke vpon him to proue, that forte est vinum, wine ys strong, wold not haue omitted so great praises of yt in his oracion, for it wolde haue made moche for his pourpose. But surelie this ys spoken by Chrysostome of the verie blood of Chryste, whiche in dede hath this great might and power, or ells this great Father wold neuer so haue magnified yt,
And nowe thow that wast once in Chrystes faith, and hauest runne astraic, D return again, and magnifie this diuine Sacrament with Chrysostom, and all other faithfull in Chryste. Return, I saie, while the time serueth thee, and while yt ys daie, for Venit nox, quando nemo potest operari. The night will [Page]come, when no man can woorke. Therfore I do aduertise thee with sainct E Paule, Cum metu et tremore salutē [...]nam operare, with feare and trembling woork thy saluacion. Return, and saie with the Prophet Dauid: Erraui sicut ouis quae Philip. 2. Psal. 118. periit, quaere seruum tuum Domine. I haue erred like the shepe that hath perished: seke thy seruannt o Lorde.
And nowe although I haue a litle digressed frō the right line of the proofe of the sixt chapiter of saincte Iohn, to be vnderstanded of the Sacrament: Yet I haue not digressed from charitie, nether from the principall pourpose of this booke, whiche ys to laboure to reduce them, that haue erred, to the trueth, and to confirme and comforth them that be in yt.
THE SIXT CHAPITER PROCEADETH IN THE opening of the vnderstāding of the same texte of saincte Iohn by Beda and Cyrillus,
THe trueth of this matter ys soch, that ytys testifiedād auouched by manie mo fathers, of the which we will heare first Beda, and Beda in 6. Ioan. Cirille. Beda expowndeth the forsaid text of S. Iohn thus. Hunc panē F Dominus dedit, quādo mysteriū corporis et sāguinis suis Discipulis tradidit et quādo semetipsum Deo patriobtulit in ara crucis. Quòd verò dicit, pro mū di vita, nō debemus intelligere pro elemētis, sed pro hominibus qui mūdi nomine designātur. This bread (saieth Beda) our lord gaue, when he deliuered the misterie of his bodie and blood to his disciples, and when he offered him self on the Altar of the Crosse to God the Father. And wher he saieth: for the life of the worlde, we maie not vnderstād it for the Elemētes, but for mē, whiche by the name of the worlde are signified. Thus haue ye Bedes expositiō, whiche al thoug yt be breif and shorte yet it ys plain and clere. As he text saeth that Chryst wolde geue twice a bread that shoulde be his flesh: So Bede declareth two sundrie maners, and times for the geuing of the same. First, wher Chryste saied, the bread which I shall geue, that (saied Bede) our Lorde gaue, whē he deliuered vnto his Disciples the misterie of his bodie ād blood. The secōd, wher Chryst saied, which I shall geue for the life of the world, that bread (saieth Bede) did our Lord geue whē he offred himself to God the Father on the G altar of the Crosse.
I nede not here to note that Bede expowndeth this text of the Sacramēt, wher the woordes are so plain. But this I note that he calleth the flesh of Chrystes bodie vpon the crosse called bread. Chryste offred vppon the Crosse, bread, as well as the same flesh deliuered to the disciples in the last supper. Wherby it appeareth, that wher the Aduersarie, when he findeth the Sacrament called bread, do the take occasion to maintein his errour, and saie that it ys but bread, yt ys no good argument. Neither doth it any more conclude, that the Sacrament ys but breade, bycause it ys called bread, then that Chrystes bodie on the crosse ys but bread bicause it ys called bread. Chryste calleth himself being whollie God and man (as Cirill saieth) bread. And therfor bothe the godhead and the manhead of Chryste maie be called bread, and be of Chryste him self in the sixt of S. Iohn so called. But yet therfore yt ys no good consequent that the bodie of Chryste shoulde be but materiall breade. So likewise ys yt no good consequent, that the manhead of Chryste shoulde be but materiall bread. Yf then these two in the person of Chryste be called breade, and yet be not H materiall breade, why shoulde not they being in the Sacrament be called bread, and yet be no materiall breade? But raither this ys to be saied, according to the sainge of Chryste in this place of S. Iohn, and also Bede expounding [Page 101]the same, that as the flesh of Chryste vpon the crosse ys called bread, ād A yet ys verie flesh: So ys the blessed flesh of Chryst in the Sacrament called bread, and yet ys yt verie flesh, Chryste so saing, that the breade whiche he wolde geue was his flesh. Thys his geuing, as ye haue heard Bede expownd, was vnto his disciples, vnto whom he gaue his flesh called breade.
As ye haue hitherto heard diuerse, whiche be of good authoritie, ād high estimacion in Chrystes Church, which all haue expownded this text of S. Iohn, to be spoken of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, not as in signe, but by reall presence: So God ayding, ye shall heare some other liuely and agreablie expownding the same, Therfor now shal Cyrill also, a Father of the Greke Churche, geue his testimonie. This man like himself, learnedly and godly expownding the sixt chapiter of S. Iohn saieth thus: Antiquus ille panis figura, Cyrill. in 6. Ioan. imago, vmbraue solummodò fuit nec quicquam praeter quàm quòd corruptibile nutrimentum, ad modicum tempus exibebat. Ego verò sum ille panis viuus, ac viuificans in aternum. Et panis quem ego dabo, caro mea est, quam ego dabo pro mundi vita. Vides vt paulatim magis magisue se aperiat, & explicet mirificum hoc mysterium. Dixit se pauem viuum, et B viuificantem, qui se manducantes faceret corruptionis expertes, & donaret immortalitate. Nunc dicit panem illum carnē suam esse, quam daturus erat pro mundi vita, & per quam nos illam participantes viuificaturus. Siquidem verbi viuificans natura illi ineffabili illo vnionis modo coniuncta, viuificantem eandem effecit, & propterea participantes viuificat ista caro, eijcit ab eis mortem, & interitum penitus expellit. That olde bread was onelie a figure, an image, a shadowe, neither did yt geuevnto the corruptible bodie any thinge els, but a corruptible nutrimēte for a litle time. But I (saieth Christ) am that liuing and quickning bread for euer. And the bread that I will geue ys my flesh, which I wil geue for the life of the worlde. Thow seiest, how by Chrystes flesh in the Sacrament geueth life to the receauers. litle ād litle, he more ād more openeth himself, ād doth declare thiswōderful mysterie. He hath saied that he ys the liuing, and quickning bread, whiche shoulde make the partakers of yt withoute corruption, and geue thē immortalitie. Now he saieth his flesh ys that bread, which he wolde geue for the life of the woorld. And by the which he wolde geue life to vs that do receaue the same. For truly that quickning nature of the Sonne of God conioined to that flesh, by that vnspeakable maner of vnion, hath made that flesh quickning, and therfore C doth this flesh quicken the partakers of yt. For yt doth cast oute death from them, and vtterly expelleth destruction.
I thinke yt not obscure to yow to perceaue that Cyrill in this saing dothe both expownde this sentence of Chryst so often allready spoken of, of the flesh of Chryste in the Sacrament: And also that he doth here, as he doth all most euery wher in this chapiter, teache the verie presence of Chryst in the same. For after he had alleaged the saieng of Chryste, note that he doth aduertise vs, how Chryste doth open him self, and dothe plainlie set furth this wonder full mysterie. For wher before he saied that he himself was the bread, Now he doth more open himself, and saie that bys stesh ys breade. And that he speaketh of the flesh of Chryste in the Sacrament he declareth by that, that he saieth, that yt geueth life to them that be partakers of yt. For the propre partakinge of Chrystes flesh ys in the receauing of this holie Sacrament.
This being plainlie declared by Cyril who draweth by the line cōcord with the rest of the aunciēt fathers, as ye do perceaue, yt maie be knowē that on both sides of the Parliament house, God hath euer remained with one receaued D truthe of this Sacrament.
THE SEVENTH CHAPITER ENDETH THE exposition of this text by Theophilacte, and Lyra. E
FOrasmoche as ther remaineth more matter to prosequute in the expounding of the rest of this sixt chapiter of saincte Iohn, for the proof of the veritie of Chrystes reall presence in the blessed Sacrament: I shall adde onelie two mo wittnesses to geue ther testimonie of this text nowe in hande, and so ending the exposition therof, proceade in my matter and pourpose entended by like exposition of other mo textes in the same chapiter.
The first of these shal be Theophilactus, who expownding this texte geueth Theophilact. in sextam Ioan. a plain testimonie of the trueth. Attende (saieth he) quòd panis, qui à nobis in myste rijs manducatur, non est tantùm figuratio quaedam corpo is Domini, sed ipsa caro Domini. Non enim dixit: Panis quem ego dabo, figura est carnis meae, sed caro mea est. Transsormatur enim arcanis verbis panis ille per mysticam benedictionem, & accessionem sancti Spiritus in carnem Domini. Et ne quem conturbet, quòd credendus sit panis caro, etenim in carne ambulante Domino, & ex pane alimoniā admittente, panis ille qui māducabatur in corpus eius mutabatur, & similis fiebat sanctae eius carni, & in augmentum & sustentationem F conferebat, iuxta humanum morem. Igitur & nunc panis in carnē Domini mutatur. Et quomodò (inquit) non apparet nobis caro, sect panis? Vt non abhorreamus ab eius esu. Nam si qui dem caro apparuisset, insuauiter affecti fuissemus erga communionem. Nanc autem condes [...]ēdēte domino nostrae infirmitati, talis apparet nobis mysticus cibus, qualibus aliquando asue Chrystes verie flesh in the Sacrament, not the figure. ti sumus. Take hede, that the bread whiche ys eaten of vs in the mysteries, ys not onelie a certain figuring of the bodie of our Lord, but the verie flesh of our Lord. For he did not saie: The bread which I wil geue ys a figure of my flesh but, yt ys my flesh. For the bread ys tranfoarmed, by the secret woords of the my sticall benedictiō, and coming of the holie Goste, into the slesh of our Lord. And let yt not trooble any mā that the bread ys to be beleued flesh. For our Lord walking in the flesh, ād receauing foode of bread, that bread which was eatē, was chaunged into his bodie, ād was made like to his holie flesh and yt went to the augmentaciō, and sustētaciō of him according to the maner of man. How the bread ys turned into sl [...]sh, and why flesh ys not seen in the Sacrament. Therfore also now the bread ys chaūged into the flesh of our Lord And how (saieth he) doth yt not appeare flesh, but bread▪ that we should not abhorre frō eating of yt. For yf yt had appeared flesh we should not haue ben well affected towards G the Cōmunion. But now our Lorde condescending to our infirmitie the mysticall meat appeareth soche to vs, as we haue ben otherwise accustomed vnto. Thus Theophilacte.
By whom yt ys moste manifest, that this texte of S. Iohn yet in hand ys vnderstanded of the blessed Sacrament. And further he most plainly auoucheth the reall presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, when he saieth, that the bread by the work of the holy goste ys transfourmed into the flesh of Chryste, wherby ye are not onelie taught withoute all obscuritie and darknesse of speache that the verie flesh of Chryste, ys verilie and reallie present in the Sacramēt: Transubstanciaciō auouched. But ye are also taught the maner how the flesh ys made present that ys by transubstanciation. which although he vtter by an other woorde, yet in effecte yt ys all one. For wher as he saieth yt ys transformed, and euery creature hath two formes, an outward forme, and an inwarde, and he affirmeth, and declareth that the outward forme remaineth, when he saieth: yt Forme nature, essēce substance all one. appeareth bread, whiche also our senses iudge and perceaue, then yt must nedes be, that this transformacion must be of the inwarde forme. whiche H inuarde forme (as learned men do knowe) for somoch as forma, natura, essentia, and substantia be all one, ys the nature and substance of the thing: [Page 102]whiche forme, nature, or substance being chaunged, that chaunge maie aswell A be called transubstanciacion for the chaunge of substance, as transformacion for the chaunge of forme, forme and substance being all one verie thing.
And that he ment of the chaunge of the verie substance of the bread into Bread in the Sacra. chaunged into flesh, aplain saīg for the Proclamer. the flesh of Chryst, he declareth by that he saieth: that as when our Sauiour walked here vpon the earth, and being a naturall man, did for his natural sustentacion eate hread, which bread was chaunged into the substance of hys flesh, ānd was so chaunged that yt was made like to his holie flesh, as Theophilactes woordes be: Euē so now (saieth he) the bread ys chaunged into his flesh. By which similitude he most plainlie teacheth, that as the substance of the bread which Chryste did eate, by natural dispositiō was substāciallie chaūged, into the substance of Chrystes flesh: So ys now the substance of bread by the operaciō of the holie Gost chaunged into the substāce of Chrystes flesh. And to proue this he vseth the woordes of scripture noting to vs that Chryst did not saie: The bread which I will geue ys a figure of my flesh: but my slesh. Yf then yt be not the figure of Chrystes flesh, and yet ys flesh, yt must nedes be hys verie naturall B and substanciall flesh.
Neither ys this to be ouerpassed, and left vnnoted to the reader, that thys Oecolampadius falsifieth Theophilacte. authour by a plain negatiue, denieth the false affirmatiue of the Aduersarie. For wher the Aduersarie saieth yt ys but a figure, This authour saieth, yt ys not onely a figure: And yet this woorde (onely) did Oecolāpadius put to of hys owne, in the trāslating. For the greke hath not that woorde, as the learned in that tounge haue noted. And wher the Aduersarie saieth by the negatiue, yt ys not flesh: This authour boldlie vsing the woorde and trueth of his master Chryst saieth the affirmatiue, that yt ys flesh. And thus (reader) thowe maist perceaue the great impudencie and shamelessnes of these Professours of heresie, that what the holie writers, and auncient authours do expressedly affirme, that do they denie, and that, that the auncient Fathers doo manifestlie denie, that doo they affirme, what now ys to be iudged of these I leaue to thee Reader.
The other whose testimonie shall finish the expositiō of this text, shall be C Lyra, one of the other side of Chrysts Parliamēt house, who albeit in time he be not aunciēt, yet in treuth he ys auncient, in the which he cōcordeth and agreeth euen with the most aunciēt, as yt shal appeare. Vpon this same text Nico Lyra in 6. Ioā of S Iohn so often repeated, without all maner of high speache, he writeth thus plainlie: Sciendum quòd in sacramento Eucharistiae continetur ipsum Verbum incarnatum. Et ideo ostendens qualitate huius sacramenti, quatuor tangit: Primum est illud, quod est ibi sacramentūtantùm, scilicet species panis, cùm dicit: Et panis, &c. Secundum est, author huius sacramenti, qui est ipse Christus summus sacerdos. Sacerdos autē, qui est minister huius sacramenti tantūmodo profert verba, non in propria persona, sed in persona Christi. In aliis autem sacramentis vtitur minister verbis suis, vel verbis Ecclesiae, quibus exprimitur actus quem facit, vt in Baptismo, cum dicitur: Ego baptisote, &c. Sed in Sacramento refert solùm verba Christi, cùm dicit: Qui pridie quàm pateretur &c. et sequūtur postea verba Christi cō secrationē efficientia, & hoc notatur cùm dicitur: Ego dabo, &c. Tertium est, res significata, & cōtenta, scilicet verum Christi corpus, cùm dicitur: Caro mea est. Quartū est, res signata, sed non contenta, scilicet corpus Christi mysticum, quod coniungitur capiti per charitatem. Hoc autem sacramentum dicitur sacramentum amoris. Thus moche Lyra. who although he speaketh plainlie (as ys saied) yet fullie and trulie, so fullie and D trulie, that he hath whollie set furth that faith that the whol Churche dothe professe, ād so plainlie as here ys no obscure maner of speach for the Aduersarie [Page]to lurke vnder, and by a wicked glose to drawe to his sense and pourpose. E
Yt ys to be knowen (saieth Lyra (that in the Sacrament of thankes geuing, ys cōteined the verie Sōne of God incarnate. And therfor shewing the qualitie of the Sacrament, he toucheth foure thinges: The first, that ther ys one thing, whiche ys a Sacrament onelie, and that ys the forme of bread, whē he saieth: And the bread, &c. The secondeys the Authour of this Sacrament, which ys Chryste himself the high preist. The preist whiche ys the mynistre of this Sacrament, doth onelie speake the woordes, not in his owne person, but in the person of Chryste. In other sacramentes the mynistre doth vse his owne woordes, or the woordes of the Churche, by the which the acte that he dothe ys expressed, as yt doth appeare in Baptisme, wher yt ys saied: I Baptise thee. But in the Sacrament he doth onelie reherse the wordes of Chryste, when he saieth. Who before the daie he suffred, &c. And after folowe the woordes of Chryste working the consecracion. And this ys noted when yt ys saied: whiche I shall geue to yowe. The thirde ys the thing signified, and conteined, that ys the verie bodie of Chryst, noted when yt ys saied: yt ys my flesh. The fourth ys the thing signified, ād not cōteined, ād that ys the mystical bodie F of Chryste, the which ys conioined to the head by charitie. For this Sacrament ys called the Sacrament of loue.
This ys the exposition of Lyra. In the whiche that he doth vnderstand this text of the Sacramēt yt ys more manifest then I nede to note yt to yow, That he also in the same Sacrament teacheth to be the verie reall presence of Chrystes bodie. For in the first entrie he affirmeth that the verie Sonne of God incarnate ys in the Sacrament. Whiche in the thirde note he groundeth vpon this Ʋerie Sōne of God incarnate in the Sacra. woord of Chryste (yt ys my stesh) whiche flesh of Chryste) saieth he) ys the thing signified, and conteined. Yt ys signified by the Sacrament, that ys, a signe of an holy thing, whiche ys the formes of bread, and wine, And ys conteined being reallie present, as the verie substance vnder the same formes. In these two partes this Authour dissenteth not from other, that haue ben hitherto alleaged. For they all teach one doctrin. One thing in dede he teacheth here whiche the other alleaged for the exposition of this texte haue not taught, which ys that he noteth in this texte, that Chryste dothe accompte himself G the Authour and geuer of this Sacrament. Which in my iudgement he doth verie well take of these woordes of Chryste, which I will geue &c. By whiche woordes Chryste signifieth vnto vs, that he himself ys the doer, the woorker, and the geuer of this Sacrament which thing this authour more at large opening saieth: Chryste ys the authour of this Sacrament, For he ys the heigh preist. The preist that ys the minister doth but onely speake the woordes, and vse hys ministerie.
By the which woordes the vain saing of vain mē, which do deceaue the simple, and haue not passed to Blaspheme this holie mysterie, and shamefullie to slaunder the Church of Chryste, are made openlie to be knowen in their owne sorte as they be. For wher to drawe the simple from Chrystes holie sacrament, and bringe the same most excellent mysterie in contempte to be derided of boies and Girlles, they wolde saie: doest thow beleue that God ys in Preists make God, Cauill of the Aduersaries opened the Sacrament? why? then the preist doth make him. And beleuest thow that the preist can make God? What? God made all the worlde, and he ys made of none. With these and soche like the simple astoined and not seing what to H aunswer, ys led awaie as the oxe to the slaughter.
THE EIGHT CHAPITER DECLARETH BY whose authoritie and power the Sacrament ys consecrate and Chrystes A bodie made present.
BVt that ye maie perceaue, that to saie the preist maketh God, ys the Preist maketh God, the doctrine of the Deuell. doctrine of the Deuel and hys disciples, who haue inuented soche lies, and slaunders to dishonour God, and his holy Sacrament, and to snare and entrappe the simple in heresie, and so finallie to cast thē headlong into perpetuall dānacion: I shall open, and declare vnto yow, what ys the verie true doctrine of Chrysts Churche in this matter.
The doctrine of Chrystes Church was declared vnto vs by the authour last alleaged in the chapiter before. Who saieth that Chryst ys the high preist and that he ys the authour and woorker of this Sacrament. This was the doctrine taught nowe in the latter daies, whiche vndoubtedlie was also taught in the auncient Churche, as yt shall appeare to yowe by the Fathers whiche shall be alleaged, which liued in diuerse ages.
Damascen an holie father and of good antiquitie, as touching this matter B Damasce. de orth. sid. lib. 4 ca. 14 saieth thus: Quemadmodum omnia quae fecit Deus, Spiritu sancto cooperante fecit: sic & nunc Spiritus sancti operatione haec supra naturam operatur, quae non potest cognoscere, nisi sola fides. Quomodò fiet istud, dixit sancta virgo, quoniam virum non cognosco? Respondit Gabriel Archangelus: Spiritus sanctus superueniet in te, & virtus Altissimi obum brabit tibi. Itaque si & nunc interrogas: Quomodò panis fit corpus Christi, vinum & aqua sanguis Christi: Respondeo & ego tibi, Spiritus sanctus obumbrat, & haec supra sermonem & intelligentiam operatur. Panis autem & vinum Transsumuntur. As all thinges that Howe the bread ys made the bodie of Chryst. God hath made, he hath made them by the holie Gost woorking with him: Euen so nowe he woorketh these thinges aboue nature, by the operacion of the holy Goste. Whiche thinges no man can knowe but onely faith. Howe shall this thing be doen (saieth the holy virgen) seing I knowe not a man? The Archangell Gabriell aunswered: The holie Goste shall come vpon thee, and the power of the moste highest shall ouershadow thee. Therfore yf thowe al so aske nowe, howe the bread ys made the bodie of Chryste, and the wine and water hys bloode, I also aunswer thee. The holie Gost ouershadoweth, and woorketh these thinges aboue speache and vnderstanding. The breade and the wine be transsumed. Thus moche C Damascen, who did write a booke of the faithe of the Church, in the which writing this saieng, that yowe haue now heard, he dothe sufficientlie geue yow knowledge what was taught to the faithfull people of hys time.
In the whiche saieng also ye perceaue how reuerentlie he frameth himself toward the worke of God in this blessed and wonderful mysterie. And certifieth vs, that yf ye aske him howe the bread and wine, be made the bodie and blood of Chryste: he will aunswer that the holie Goste aboue speache and vnderstanding woorketh these thinges. In the whiche woordes we are not onelie admonished by his example to speake reuerentlie of the mysteries of Chrystes Church, but we are also taught that yt ys not man, that woorketh this wonderfull worke, or to vse the maner of speache that the Deuell teacheth his disciples, yt ys not the preist that maketh God, but yt ys the holie Goste, who aboue that, that man can speake or conceaue woorketh this wonderfull A plain place for the presence and trā substanciation. worke.
And though this be the principall thing, that in this authour ys at thys D present to be sought: yet note also by the waie for the presence of Chryste in the Sacrament, that he bothe teacheth that the bread and wine be made the bodie and blood of Chryste, and also the mean howe that by the worke [Page]of the holy Gost ys brought to passe. For the bread and wine be transsumed (saieth he) that ys, turned, transmuted, chaunged, transelementated (as the fathers E saie) and as the Church nowe saieth, transubstanciated, which ys as moche to saie, as the substance of bread and wine, ys turned into the substance of the bodie and blood of Chryste.
Chrysostom (who liued long before Damascen, writeth also of this matter Chrysost. homil. 2. in 2. Tim. thus: Velo quiddam adijcere planè mirabile, & nolite mirari, neque turbemim. Quid verò est istud? Sacra ipsa oblatio, siue illam Petrus, siue illam Paulus, siue cujusuis meriti sacerdos offerat, eadem est, quam dedit Christus ipse Discipulis, quamue saccrdotes modò conficiunt. Nihil habet ista, quàm illa minus. Cur id? quia non hanc sanctificant homines, sed Christus, quiantè illam sacrauerat. Quemadmodum enim verba, quae locutus est Christus, eadem sunt, quae sacerdotes nunc quoque pronunciant: ita & oblatio. I will adde herevnto a certain thing plainlie wonderful, and meruail ye not, neither be troubled. And what ys that? The holie oblacion, whether Peter, or Paule, or a preist of anie Sacrifice of the Masse what preist soeuer offre yt, ys al one with that, whiche Christ did maner of life doo offer yt, yt ys euen the same that Chryste gaue vnto hys disciples, and that the preistes doo nowe consecrate: This hath nothing lesse then that, why so? Bicause men doo not sanctifie thys, but Chryste, who did consecrate that other F before. Euen as the woordes that Chryste spake, are the same whiche the preistes doo nowe pronounce: So also ys the oblacion. Thus moche Chrysostom. Whom ye haue heard not onelie teaching that Chryst dothe sanctifie the table nowe, who did hallowe the table in the last Super: but also with a plain negatiue denieng that men doo sanctisie yt.
Whiche Chrysostom also in an other place speaketh more plainly to thys matter. The woordes ther maie be an exposition of these woords here, and be after the phrase of speache that ys vsed nowe a daies. And therfore I thinke yt expedient, to asscribe them. Nunc ille praestò est, Christus, qui illam ornauit mensam, ipse istam quoque consecrat: Non enim homo est, qui proposita de consecratione mensae Domini corpus facit & sanguinem, sed ille qui pro Chrysost. homil. 30. de predu. nobis crucifixus est Christus. Sacerdotis ore verba proferuntur, sed Dei virtute consecrantur & gratia. Hoc est, ait, corpus meum, hoc verbo proposita consecrantur. The same Chryste ys nowe present, whiche did beautifie that table, he also dothe consecrate this. For yt ys not man which with the consecracion Not man but Chryst hiself doth consecrate. maketh the thinges of the table, that be sett furth, the bodie and blood of our G Lorde, but he that was crucified for vs, euen Chryste. The woordes are spoken by the mouthe of the preist, but they be consecrated by the power of God and grace. This ys (saieth he) my bodie, with this woorde the thinges sett furth are consecrated. Thus Chrysostome.
Do ye not see the doctrine of the Church yet euery wher like? Do ye not heare Chrysostō by directe woordes, aunswer these slaunderouse heretikes, saing that yt ys not man that doth make the bodie of our Lord, and blood, but he that was crucified for vs, euen Chryste. Of whose woordes also, as before of Damascē, learn not onelie who doth consecrate, but also what ys doē and consecrated. Thys ys doen (saieth Chrysostome) that Chryste maketh the bread A plain place for the Procl. and wine, which be the thinges sett furth, to be his bodie and blood. Here ys no mē cion of any figure or signe, but plain speache they be made hys bodie and blood, which thing all catholike fathers doo teache.
And that as well of the Latin Church, as of the Greke Church, we maie see the trueth with full consent and agreement testified, S. Ambrose shall also be brought furth as a wittnesse in thys matter. Who treacting of the blessinges H of the Patriarkes, and emong them of the blessing of Aser and of the mysterie of the same, for Aser by interpretacion ys riches, saieth thus: [Page 104] Quis igitur diues, nisi vbi altitudo diutiarum est sapientiae & scientiae? Hic ergo diues est, thesaurus huius pinguis panis, quem qui manducauerit, esurire non poterit. Hunc A panem dedit Apostolis vt diuiderent populo credentium. Hodieue dat nobis eum, Amb de Bened. Patriarch. c. 9 quem ipse quotidie sacerdos consecrat suis verbis. Hic ergo panis factus est esca sanctorum. Who ys then riche, but he in whom ys the great deapth of of wisdom and knowledge? This riche man then ys the treasure of this fatte bread, which who shall eate, he can not hungar. This bread he gaue to his Apostles, that they shoulde diuide yt to the beleuing people. Christ doth dailie consecrat with his owne woordes. And nowe he geueth the same to vs, whiche he being the preist [...], dothe dailie with his owne woordes consecrate. This bread then ys made the meat of the holie. In these woordes saincte Ambrose saieth that the preist doth consecrate, but what preist ys yt? the preist in whome ys the deapt of the riches of wisdom, and knowledge, of whom saincte Paule speaketh to the Collossians, whiche ys Chryste. For ther ys none that can consecrate, with his owne woordes but Chryste. And with his woordes the consecracion ys doen, as saincte Ambrose saieth in an other place: Hoc igitur astruamus, quomodò potest, qui panis est, corpus esse Christi? Consecratione. Consecratio Li. 4. de Sacra. cap. 4. B igitur quibus verbis est, et cuius sermonibus? Domini Iesu. Nam reliqua omnia, quae dicūtur, laus Deo defertur, oratione petitur pro populo, pro regibus, pro caeteris. Vbi venitur vt cōsiciatur venerabile Sacramētū, iā non suis sermonibus vtitur sacerdos, sed vtitur sermonibus Christi. Ergo sermo Christi hoc conficit Sacramentum. Let vs then teache this. How Cōsecraciō how yt ys doen: cā that, that ys bread be the bodie of Chryste? By consecraciō By what, ād whose woordes ys the consecracion? Of our Lord Iesus For all the other things that be saied laude ys geuē to God, peticiō ys made in praier for the people, for kinges and other. Whē the time ys comed that the honorable Sacrament shall be made, then the preist vseth not his owne woordes, but the woordes of Chryste. Therfor Yt ys the woorde of Christe that maketh this Sacrament. A plain place of S. Amb. for master Iuell.
Thus moche S. Ambrose whose woords are so plain that I nede not by notes vnto yow declare the same, ād his testimonie so cōsonaunt and agreable with the Fathers before alleaged for this matter her hādled, that ye maie euidētlie perceaue howe one trueth and the self same doctrine, hath bē cōstantly taught in the diuerse ages in the whiche these Fathers liued.
And to ascend a litle higher and nearer to the Apostles time, we will, C for the full declaracion of this treuth and doctrine allready auouched, heare Eusebius Emis. in homil. pasch. Christ doth consecrate his own bodie by turning the substance of bread &c. the testimonie of Eusebius Emissenus an auncient Father in Chrystes church, who saieth thus: Inuisibilis sacerdos visibiles creaturas, in substantiam corporis & sanguinis, verbo suo, secreta potestate conuertit. The inuisible preist, with his woord, by a secret power, turneth the visible creatures into the substance of his bodie and bloode. Thus Eusebius. Whome heare yowe here tomake the bodie of Chryste? dothe not the inuisible preist, which ys our Sauiour Iesus Chryste, and not the preist, who ys but the ministre? as the Auersaries maliciouslie blaspheme.
But leauing to thee (gentle reader) to weigh and consider, what maner of people they are, that haue feigned soche abhominable vntrueths, as to saie to deceaue with all, that the preist made God, and to iudge what credite aught to be geuen to soche, as with lies, slaunders, and blashemies go aboute to maintein their detestable heresies, I will ioin one more of like auncientie to this Eusebius, and then, I trust, this maie satisfie thee in this matter. D And this shall be Cyprian that holie martir, who speaking of euell receauers, Cypr. decoena Dom. saieth thus: Melius erat illis mola asinaria collo alligata mergi in pelagus, quàm illota conscientia de manu Domini accipere, qui vsque hodie hoc [Page] veracissimū & sanctissimū corpus suū creat, & sanctificat, et benedicit, & piè sumentibus diuidit. Yt were better for thē, a milstone tied to their neckes to be drowned E Christ doth create, sanctisie, and blesse his own bodie a plain saig of S. Cyp. in the sea, then with an vnwasshed consciēce to take the morsell at the hāde of our Lorde, who vntill this daie, doth create, and sanctifie, and blesse, and to the godlie receauers diuide, this his most true and most holie bodie. Thus Cipr.
Do ye not see, and learn by this holy martir, who doth make the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament? Oure Lord (saieth he) dothe euen till this tune create, sanctifie, and blesse this his most holie bodie.
Note also against these signe makers, and figure feigners, that he saieth not, he createth a bodie: But his bodie, Corpus suum. and not an imaginatiue bodie: but veracissimū, & sanctissimū corpus suū, his most true, ād most holie bodie. And he did not onelie so do in his last supper (as the Petrobrusiās saied) sed vs (que) hodie creat. vntil this daie he dothe create, sanctisie and blesse this his most true and most holie bodie. Wherbie ys taught that Chryste and none other dothe cōtinuallie create in that holie ministraciō, ād make his bodie.
Nowe ye haue heard, frō the latter daies vntill the time of this holie martir Cipriā and Eusebius before alleaged, who were nere to the primitiue churche, F what hath bē taught as cōcerning this matter, in diuerse ages, and that Supra. li. 1. cap. 31. aswell in the Greke Church, as in the Latin Churche, whiche ys, that Chryste himself doth woorke this wonderfull worke of consecracion, to make present in this blessed sacrament his verie bodie and bloode, and not the preist, who (as Chrysostom hath taught) speaketh the woordes, but the power and grace of God dothe consecrate the thinges.
Wherfore (Reader) take hede of this wicked sorte of people, who (as ye maie perceaue) haue not onelie, for the setting furthe of their wicked heresies wickedlie slaundered the wholle Churche, and the holie ministerie of the same. But also most impudētlie haue spoken the contrarie of that, that the famouse learned holie Fathers haue taught. What trueth maie be thought to be in thē in other matters, by this ye maie coniecture. But nowe leauing this matter as sufficientlie declared and proued against them: I will resume my entended pourpose to expownde the sixt of saincte Iohn, wherof ye haue heard one texte, and the testimonie of diuerse Fathers auouching the same to be vnderstanded of the blessed Sacrament, and of the reall G presence of Chrystes bodie in the same. Nowe will I proceade to other textes in the same chapiter touching this matter.
THE NINTH CHAPITER EXPOVNDETH THE next text that foloweth in sainct Iohn.
THe next text folowing in the sixt chapiter of saincte Iohn ys this: Litigabant ergo Iudaei adinuicem dicentes: Quomodò potest hic nobis carnem suam dare ad manducandum? The Iewes stroue emong them Ioan. 6. selues, sainge: How can this felowe geue vs his flesh to eate? The Iewes vnto whom (as saincte Paule saieth) vsque in hodiernum diem, cùm legitur Moyses, velamen positum est super cor eorum. Vntill this daie, when 2. Cor. 3. Moyses ys red, the veill ys putt vpon their heartes, their vnderstandinges being carnall, and couered with so grosse a veill, that they coulde not perceaue the spirituall talke of Chryste, they stroue together, and asked howe he coulde geue them his flesh to eate. They lacked H the right principle of the vnderstanding of his matter, whiche ys faith: Esay 7. For Nisi credideritis, non intelligetis. Vnlesse ye beleue, ye shall not vnderstaud [Page 105]They did not vnderstand yt, bicause they did not beleue yt. No more shall A they vnderstande, vntill they turne vnto God by true beleif, as saincte Paule saieth Cùm autem conuersi fuerint ad Dominum, auferetnr velamē de corde eorū. Neuerthelesse when they turne to our Lord, the veile shall be taken awaie frō their hearte. And then shall they not vse this woorde of incredulitie, and doubtfullnesse, whiche neuer passith from man, but in the wante of faithe, as saieth Chrysostom vpon this texte: Quando subit quaestio, quomodò aliquid fiat, simul subit & incredulitas. Itaque & Nicodemus perturbatus est inquiens, Chrys. homil. 45. in Ioan. Quomodò potest homo in vētrē matris suae iteratò introire et renasci? Itidē & hi nunc: Quomodò potest hic nobis dare carnē suā ad manducandū? Nam si hic inquiris, cur non idem in quinque panum miraculo dixisti, quomodò eos in tantum auxit? Quiae tunc tantùm saturari curabant, inquies, non considerare nuraculum. Sed res ipsa tunc docuit. Ergo ex eo & haec credere oportuit ei facilia factu esse. When the question, how, cometh, ther cometh also incredulitie. Euē so Nichodemus was troubled saing: How can a man enter into his mothers wombe again, Euen so these nowe, how can this man geue vs his flesh to eate, For yf thowe enquirest this, why doest thowe not saie the like in the miracle of the fiue loaues, howe he encreased B thē to so great a quantitie? By cause then (ye will saie) they did onelie care to be filled with meat, not to consider the miracle, but then the thing yt self taught them, that the bread was multiplied. Therfore by that then yt behoued to haue beleued these thinges to haue ben easie to him to doo. Thus moche Chrysostom.
In dede (as this authour saieth) the Iewes hauing experiēce of Chrystes power by that miracle wrought in bread for their bodilie sustenaūce, might verie well haue beleued, that by the like power he might woorke this miracle also in bread, to turne the substāce therof into the substāce of his bodie, in a maner cōueniēt to be receaued for their spirituall sustenaūce but Animalis homo nō percipit ea quae sunt Dei. The naturall or carnall man dothe not perceaue 1. Cor. 2. False Chrystiās worse then Jewes with their questioning howe. the thinges of God. No more do our Pseudochrystians, who be woorse thē the Iewes, for that they once beleued, and yet nowe be led awaie by diuerse and straūge doctrines, the cōtrarie wherof sainct Paule coūseileth thē in his epistle to the Hebrues. And for that they wolde not remain and continue in C that faith, whereunto God had once called them, he suffreth them to be as grosse and carnall in vnderstanding, as the Iewes, and to vse the like question that the Iewes did, and saie, Howe can the bodie of Chryste be in the Sacrament, vnder so litle a peice of bread? And howe can we receaue the bodie of Chryste in at our mouthes? And howe can Chryste be in the Sacrament, that ys at the right hande of the Father? And howe can the bodie of Chryste, being but one, be at once in so manie Altars? All whiche questions do plainlie declare a lacke The miraculouse worke of the Sacrament promissed by Chryst. of faith to and of Gods workes and power, that he ys able to do and doth these thinges. For vnto all these questiōs the aunswerys: that they be doē by the power, and miraculouse worke of God. Yf ye do proceade to aske, wher finde yowe that God did saie, that he wolde woorke soche a miraculouse worke by his diuine power? Ye heard yt euen nowe, that Chryste saied: The bread whiche I will geue ys my flesh, not a phantasticall flesh, not a Mathematicall, or a siguratiue flesh (as Theophilacte expowndeth that texte) but that same flesh, that I will (saieth Chryst) geue for the life of the worlde, I will geue yowe that same flesh to eate, that I will geue to be crucified vpon the crosse, for the redemption of the worlde, and none other but euen D the verie same.
Soche as beleued God, emonge the children of Israel, that they shoulde [Page]possesse the land of Canaan, when God had, saied they shoude so do, and not E withstāding the mightinesse of the people that did inhabit that land, whiche by the iudgemēt of mē were so mightie, that it was vnpossible for the childrē of Israel to vanquissh them, as by their owne arme, yet did not mistrust, but that God, that had saied yt, was able and wolde perfourme yt, these I saie, enioied that land according to their beleif, and their faith was not frustrated of her expectacion. But soche as had heard the saing of God, and considered how great a matter yt was, and howe farre exceading the power of the Israelites to compasse, and vpon this consideracion measured the power of God, according to the measure of man, and so hauing a litle faith, and moche doubte, began to question: howe can we debel this people so great, mightie, and strong? and wolde not by an assured faithe leaue the maner of the doinge and compasing of yt to God, assuredlie beleuing that no woorde of his shall fall to the grownde vnsulfilled, soche I saie, neuer came to vanquish the people, but vanished awaie in their vnbeleif, and procured Gods displeasure vpon them, and died in the wildernesse. F
Wherfore seinge Chryst hath saied, that he wolde geue vs that same flesh, Gods powr ys not to be measured by mans reason. whiche he wolde gue for the life of the worlde, let vs not measure his power by ours, to thinke that bicause we can not do yt, nor comprehende yt, or bicause yt misliketh our naturall reason, therfor he can not do yt. But hūblie let vs vnderstād yt by faith, and not aske howe cā he geue vs his flesh to eate? but by faith cōfesse yt: Quia omnia possibilia sunt credēti, & quae sunt impossibilia apud homines, possibilia sunt apud Deū. Quia nō est impossibile apud Deū omne verbū. All thinges Marc. 9. Luc. 18. Jbid. 1. are possible to the beleuer. And soche thinges as are vnpossible with mē, are possible with God. For with God nothing ys vnpossible. And so leauing to be a curiouse searchers of gods wōderfull works, praise God ād saie: Tu es Deus, qui facis mirabilia. Thowe art God that woourkest meruailouse thinges. But for so moche as this texte declareth the incredulitie of the Iewes onelie in this misterie, and teacheth not the faith of a chrysten man necessarilie to be had aboute the same, Therfore I haue decreed breiflie to ouerpasse yt, and by occasion therof som what to saie to the Aduersaries.
THE TENTH CHAPITER PROVING AGAINST G the Aduersaries, that the bodie of Chryste maie be and ys in mo places then one at once.
OCcasion being here geuen by the doubtfull how of the Iewes asking, Howe can this man geue vs this slesh to eate? to make mencion also of the doubtfull howe of faithelesse Chrystians, asking, howe Chryst, who ys at the right hand of the Father, can be in the Sacrament: And howe the bodie of Chryst being one, can be at one time on manie Altars: I haue thought good here a litle to staie, by faith theologicall to answere, not the faith, but the doctrine Philosophicall, both of the Proclamer, and also of his Complices. For this ys a membre of his proclamacion: whether the bodie of Chryst ys, or maie be in a thousand places or mo at one time. Whiche albeit in sense yt be coincident to the other before mencioned: yet in vtterance yt sheweth a more doubtfull countenance. For asking whether Chrystes bodie can H be in a thousand places at once, he doth both by the woorde, thousand, moche declare his incredulitie to the misteries of God, and by the same persuadeth to his hearers an impossibilitie, [Page 106]And for that this maner of questioninge ys a questiō on incredulitie, as the Iewes was, and spring bothe oute of vnbeleif, I haue thought good to ioin A them to gether, and after the handling of the one, to handle the other.
And to them bothe to saie: As the Iewe remaining with in the cōpasse of his carnall vnderstāding, coulde not atteign to the vnderstāding of this matter, which was by faith, and yet possible, So these mē measuring Chryste and his power by naturall knowledge, whiche ys but grosse dregges and suddes, to the pure knowledge of faithe, they come in doubte, and aske a questiō as of a thinge vnpossible, when yet yt ys very possible.
But perchaunce ye will saie to me, yf it be a thinge so verie possible, howe Obiection with answer. Faith iudgeth yt possible, that reason iudgeth impossible. dothe yt appeare to this mā and his likes vnpossible? I answere that yt appeareth to them vnpossible, bicause they leauing the knowledge of faith, are returned to the onelie knowledge naturall, and therby will they measure Chrystes doinges in this matter. And for so moche as this appeareth vnpossible to that knowledge, therfor they also saie that yt ys vnpossible. For allthough, bycause they wolde seme to builde vpon faith, they do sometime alleage the article of our faith, that Chryst ascended into heauen B an sitteth at the right hand of God to Father, yet the grounde of their disputacion, the force of their praclamacion, yea the shottanker of their refuge in this matter ys naturall reason, euen plain naturall philosophie. That thowe maist see this (gentle Reader) I will for example make one of their arguments, that Chrystes bodie can not be in the Sacrament. Thus they reason.
He ascended into heauē, and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father. Ergo he ys not in the Sacrament.
Yf the true chrystian saie, yt ys no good consequence. For though yt be true that Chryst beat the right hād of the Father: yet yt improueth not the presence of Chryst in the Sacramēt. For the catholique faith cōfesseth both that Chryst ys presēt with his Father in heauē, according to the article of the faithe, and also presēt in the Sacramēt according to his worde, whē he saied: This ys my bodie. This ys my bloode. This do ye in remēbrance of me. So that his presence in heauen, denieth not his presence in the Sacrament, but he ys present in bothe, in maner conuenient to bothe.
Against this they replie and saie: Euery naturall bodie can be but in one C place: Chryst hath a naturall bodie: Ergo yt can be but in one place. But yt ys in heauē as in a place. Ergo yt ys ther and in no other place, Marke ye nowe, howe they flie to naturall phisolophie as to their great strenght, to maintein Sacramentaries cheif growndes be naturall reasons. their faithe? ys yt not a sure peice of faith that ys builded vpon naturall philosophie, and naturall reason, and not vpon the scriptures, the auncient fathers, or the vniuersall receaued faith?
Perchaūce yt maie be saied, that I reason thus of my self to deface the validitie of their matter: Well, to auoide this ymaginaciō, I will bring in the verie argument of Oecolampadius, the great fownder, and prince of this schoole Oecolamp. De verbis coenae Domini. in our time, and the master of this Proclamer in this matter. Thus he reasoneth: Si dicas, panis continet corpus, vide quid sequitur. ergo panis locus erit, & vnum corpus erit in multis locis, & multa corpora in vno loco, & corpus in corpore etc. Yf thow saiest, the bread cōteineth the bodie, looke what foloweth, thē the bread shall be a place, ād one bodie shall be in many places, ād manie bodies in one place, and one bodie in an other. Thus Oecolampadius. Doo I nowe feign this maner D of reasoning? Dothe not Oecolampadius resorte to naturall phisolophie, to prooue his heresie, and impugne the faith catholique? Although in dede the argumēt proceadeth directlie against Luther, who taught the bread in the Sacrament [Page]to remain with the bodie of Chryste (soche ys the agrement of the E Father, ād the Sōne, of the master ād the scholer, of Luther, ād Oecolāpadius, ād so of one of thē with an other) yet yt ys also against the catholique faith, for yt impugneth the presēce of Chryste in the Sacramēt. But howe? as ys saied, by naturall reason. And shall I saie why they proue this their doctrin by natural reason? In dede bicause yt ys so farre vnknowen to the scriptures that I dare saie, they neuer were, nor shall be able to bring fruthe anie one scripture to proue yt, and so moche to diminish the omnipotencie or allmightie power of God.
But to aunswere O [...]colampadius for his naturall reason, I thinke the saing of saincte Ambrose to be a good answere. Quid hic quaeris naturae ordinē in Christi corpore, De initiād myst. cap. 9 cum praeter naturam sit ipse Dominus Iesus partus ex virgine? What sekest thowe (saieth saincte Ambrose) the ordre of nature in Chrystes bodie here, seing the self same our Lord Iesus besides nature was born of a virgen. And to adde to saincte Ambrose saiēg, not onelie his birthe was besides nature, but manie other his actes: as his great learning ād wisdome declared in his disputaciō F with the doctours in the tēple, whē he was but twelue yeares of age, his Naturall order had no place in many of Chrystes doinges, walking vpon the sea, his volūtarie death in geuing vppe his blessed sowle at his owne pleasure, withoute force or violēce, as yt were, to thrust yt oute and to cause vt to departe. His resurrection and his ascension withall be as moche against the ordre of nature, as his blessed bodie to be in diuerse places, and as good argumentes maie the Aduersarie finde in natural philosophie against them as against this. Whiche if he do or maie doo, shall we therfore denie Chrystes walking on the sea, his death, his resurrection, Mahomets patched religion and the Sacramentaries [...]och like. and his ascension as theie do his presence in the Sacrament. Then shall we make a mingled faith, as the Turkes do. For as they kepe parte of Moyses lawe, parte of Mohometes inuention: So we must haue a faith partelie grownded vpon the scriptures, partelie on naturall reason. But so, that whē we will scripture shall rule naturall reason, and when we list naturall reason shall commaunde and withstand both faith and scripture. This ys a madsetled faith. Wherfore thus moche to conclude with saincte Ambrose, let vs not seke the ordre of nature in Chrystes bodie, but let vs seke the ordre of faithe, and G cleaue to that.
But this proclamer wolde haue some one scripture doctour, or Councell, that shoulde declare that Chryststes bodie ys or maie be in a thousand places or mo at one time.
In dede to aūswer trulie, I must cōfesse I finde neither scripture, nor doctour nor Councell teaching this matter in soche maner. For ther ys not one of these that speaketh so fondlie, ād so vnreuerentlie, to prescribe the omnipotencie of God a certen limitacion, and a stinted nōbre ād that with soch a diffidencie vttered, as this Proclamer saieth, in a thousand places or mo: signifieng therby an impossibilitie, that yt ys vnpossible for Chryste to be in a thousand places at one time, so in dede I finde not. But I finde thē with reuerence and faith, withoute prescription of nombre of places (for that they leaue to Gods wil) saieng and teaching, that the bodie of Chryste ys in diuerse, or in manie places. And this (gentle reader) for thy satisfaction shall I, by the testimonie of diuerse and manie of the most auncient Fathers, laie before thee.
And here I confesse, that this matter, by learned Fathers hath ben so H well laboured, that I can not bring in moche more, then they haue before me gathered together. but that their confession of this treuth, and their faith therin maie not be vnknowen to thee, I will not sticke hitherto [Page 107]asscribe, that I find collected in other, raither then thowe shouldest be A defrauded of so moche good knowledge, and this fonde membre of this Proclamers proclamacion not fullie aunswered.
And first, to declare and proue this matter by the scripture, I saie that our sauiour Chryste taking the bread, and blessing yt, made yt his bodie Mat. 26. Mare. 14. Luc. 22. sainge: Hoc est corpus meum, This ys my bodie. Whiche being doen, his bodie was at that time present in diuerse places, as in his owne handes, in the handes also of euery of his Apostles.
That at that time he did beare or holde him self in his owne handes, saincte Augustin ys a notable wittnesse, speaking of king Dauid and applieng yt to Chryste, saing: Et ferebatur manibus suis. Hoc verò fratres, quomodò August. in Psalm. 33. possit fieri in homine quis intelligat? Quis enim portatur in manibus suis? Manibus altorum potest portari homo, manibus suis nemo portatur. Quomodò intelligatur in ipso Dauid secundùm literam non inuenimus, In Christo autem inuenimus. Ferebatur enim Christus in manibus suis, quando commendans ipsum corpus, ait: Hoc est corpus meum. And he was borne in his owne handes. But bretheren howe this maie be doen Chryst in his supper bare himself in his own handes in man, who can vnderstand? Who ys borne or caried in his owne handes? B A man maie be caried in the handes of other men, in his owne handes no man ys borne. Howe yt maie be vnderstanded in Dauid himself accordinge to the letter, we finde not: But that yt maie be vnderstanded in Chryste we finde. For Chryst was borne in his owne handes when he geuing furth the self same bodie, saied: This ys my bodie.
Ye haue here heard sainct Augustin affirming that Chryste caried him self in his owne handes. Then this must nedes folowe, that the self same bodie that did bear or carie, and the self same bodie that was born or caried, being but the verie one bodie of Chryste, was then at one time in diuerse places. And the same one bodie of Chryste being geuen furth to eche of his Apostles, and they sitting in diuerfe places, argueth that the same one bodie of Chryste, was at one time in twelue sundrie places at the least. And as yt was then in so manie: So maie yt be nowe in fewer or mo, according to the omnipotēt pleasure of him that ys Lorde of nature, and naturall ordre C and ys subiecte to neither of them, but ruleth and altereth them as to his wisdome semeth conuenient for the setting furth of his honour, and glorie.
This was so well knowen, and so firmelie beleued of Saincte Basill that holie Father, that hereunto agreablie he praieth in his Masse thus: Respice Domine Basil. in sua Liturgia. Plain places for the Proclamer. Iesu Christe, Deus noster, de sancto habitaculo tuo, & veni ad sanctificandum nos, qui sursum Patri consides, & hic nobiscum inuisibiliter coes. Dignare manu tua sorti dare nobis sanctum, & intaminatum corpus tuum, & preciosum sanguinem, & per nos peccatores populo tuo. Looke o Lorde Iesu Chryst our God, from thy holie tabernacle, and come to sanctifie vs. Which sittest aboue with thie Father, and arte with vs here inuisiblie, vouchesafe with thie mightie hand to geue vnto vs thy holie and vndefiled bodie, and preciouse bloode, and by vs sinners to thy people.
Chrysostome in his masse hath almost the same woordes, that he praieth Respice Domine Iesu Christe Deus noster de sancto habitaculo tuo, & de sede gloriae regnitui, Chrys [...]in sua Liturg. & veni ad sanctificandum nos qui sursum cum Patre sedes, & deorsum nobis inuisibiliter assistis, Dignare tua potenti manu tribuere nobis immaculatum corpus tuum, & preciosum sanguinem, & per nos omni populo. O Lord Iesu Chryste our God, looke D from thy holie tabernacle, and from the seat of the glorie of thy kingdom, and come to sanctifie vs, whiche sittest aboue with the Father, and standest by vs beneath inuisiblie, vouchsaif with thy mightie hande to geue vnto vs thy vndefiled bodie, and preciouse bloode and by vs to all thy people.
[Page]These two holie Fathers, what soeuer naturall reason or ordre wolde, not E withstanding they praied according to the ordre of faithe, and therunto according they confessed, and acknowledged Chryste both to be aboue with the Father, and also present with vs in the Sacrament.
Although Chrysostom dothe so plainlie with Basill testifie the presence of Chryste both with the Father in heauen, and with vs here in earth: yet more plainlie he dothe wittnesse the same in an other place, speaking of the sacrifice of Chrystes bodie offred in the Churche, and saieth: Hoc autem sacrificium Chrysost in 10. ad [...]c. hom. 17. exemplar est illius. Idipsum semper offerimus, nec nunc quidem alium agnum, crastma alium, sed semper eundem ipsum. Proinde vnum est hoc sacrificium hac ratione. Alioquin quoniam in multis locis offertur, multi Christi sunt. Nequaquam: Sed vnus vbique est Christus, & hic plenus existens, & illic plenus, vnum corpus. Sicut enim qui vbique offertur vnum corpus est, & non multa corpora: ita etiam & vnum sacrificium. This sacrifice ys an exemplar of that, that Chryste offred: Euen the self same do we allwaies offer. Neither do we nowe offer one lambe, and to morowe an other, but allwais euen the self same. Therfore ys this one sacrifice, by this reason. Otherwise for that F The sacrifice offred in manie places ys but one Chryst. yt ys offred in manie places, ther be manie Chrystes. Not so. But ther ys one Chryste euery wher, bothe here being full and ther full, euen one bodie. And as he, that ys euery wher offred, ys one bodie, and not manie bodies: Euen so also ys the sacrifice one.
Weigh well this testimonie of Chrysostom, gentle Reader, and first this that he saieth: That the sacrifice of Christes bodie ys but one. For otherwise bycause yt ys offred in manie places, ther shoulde be manie Christes. In whiche woordes howe plainlie dothe he saie that Chryste ys offered in manie places? and yet not manie Chrystes, but one Chryste. This Father teacheth not like a naturall Philosopher, but like a diuine Philosopher, a louer of the wisdom of Chrystes faith, according to the whiche, and contrarie to Philosophie, he confesseth Chrystes bodie to be in manie places at once, and that with reuerence, and not with doubtfull admiracion, and exclamacion (as this Proclamer doth) to be in a thousand places at once. Althouh in his reuerent woordes ther ys as moche implied, as the woordes folowing do well declare. Whiche also G good reader note. For he saieth: vbique offertur, he ys euery wher offred, and that ys more then in a thousand places. And although this mans heresie hath fretted, and eaten in manie places, moche like a deadlie cankre: yet I beleue Chryste ys not so forsaken, but he ys yet offred in mo then a thousand places, and shall be, except our sinnes shall deserue that he be taken awaie from vs. As for that that he saieth, that Chryste ys our sacrifice, and therfore present, I will leaue yt withoute note, to be considered in a place more conuenient.
As before ye haue heard S. Basill and Chrysostom vttering almost all one and the same woordes of this matter: So shall ye heare Saincte Ambrose speaking almost the same woordes that Chrysostome did. So be these good Fathers linked together in one trueth, that they oftentimes speake all one, and the same woordes in one and the same matter. Thus writeth saincte Ambrose: Proinde vnum est hoc sacrificium. Alioquin hac ratione, quoniam Ambr. in 10. Heb. multis in locis offertur, multi Christi sunt. Nequàquam: Sed vnus vbique est Christus, & hic plenus existens, & illic plenus, vnum corpus. Sicut enim qui vbique offertur, vnum H corpus est, & non multa corpora: ita etiam & vnum sacrificium. Therfore this sacrisice ys Chryst offred euerie wher ys but one bodie, and one sacrifice. one. or ells by this reason, for that yt ys offred in manie places, ther be manie Chrystes. Not so but euerie wher one Chryst, both here being full and ther full, euen onē bodie. For euen as he that ys offred euerie wher ys one bodie, and not manie bodies: Euen so also ys the sacrifice one.
[Page 108]I will not trouble yow with noting sainct Ambrose woordes, but what ys A geuen yow to note vpon Chrysostom, note the same euen here likewise, and I will hast me to heare an other place of S. Ambrose wher he saieth thus: Vidimus Principem sacerdotum ad nos venientem. Vidimus & audiuimus offerentem pro nobis sanguinem suum. Sequamur vt possumus sacerdotes, vt offeramus pro populo sacrificium, Amb. in Psalm. 38. etsi infirmi merito, honorabiles tamen sacrificio, quia etsi nunc Christus non videtur offerre, tamen ipse offertur in terris, quādo Christi corpus offertur. We haue seen the high preist coming to vs. We haue seen and heard him offring for vs his bloode. Let vs priestes, as we maie, folowe, that we maie offre sacrifice for the people, although by merite we are weake: yet are we by the sacrifice honorable. For although Chryste ys not nowe seen to offrer: Yet ys he offred in earth, when the bodie of Chryste ys offered.
Leuing all other thinges that maie be here noted, this ys not to be ouerpassed, that saincte Ambrose saieth, that Christe ys offred in earthe. But when Chryst ys offred in earth, whē his bodie ys offred. ys he offred? When his bodie ys offred. Wherbie yt ys manifest, that as we maie confesse Chryste verilie to be in glorie: So maie we also confesse that he ys verilie in earth, for somoche as he ys ther offred in sacrifice. And so B being verilie both in heauen and earth, that ys true, that we trauaill here to proue.
But that, that ys yet remaining to be saied in this matter, will not suffer me to tarie to note, and saie, what might be noted and saied here: For besides other thinges we haue yet to heare the goodly testimonie of S. Bernarde, who so plainlie teacheth this matter, and so godly, that yt were pitie the reader shoulde be defrauded of the reading of so notable a sentence.
Thus he writeth: Sed vnde hoc nobis pijssime Domine, vt nos vermiculi reptantes super faciem terrae, nos inquam, qui puluis & cinis sumus te praesentem habere mereamur Bernard. sermone de coena Dom. prae manibus, prae oculis, qui totus & integer sedes ad dextram Patris, qui etiam vnius horae momento, ab ortu solis vsque ad occasum, ab Aquilone vsque ad Austrum praestò es omnibus, vnus in multis, idem in diuersis locis, vnde hoc, inquam? Certè non ex debito, neque ex merito nostro: sed ex voluntate tua, & dulcedinis tuae beneplacito. But howe happeneth this vnto vs, O most mercifull Lorde: that we litle woormes creping C vpon the face of the earthe, maie haue thee present, before our handes, before our eyes, whiche all and wholle sittest at the right hand of the Father. Which also in the minute of an howre, from the East to the West, from the North to the South Chryst being one ys at one time in manie places. arte present to all. Thowe being one, arte in manie, and being the self same arte in diuerse places, from whence cometh this I saie? Trulie not of anie duetie, neither of our desert, but of thy will, and the pleasure of thy gentlenesse. Thus saincte Bernard.
See ye not howe this holie Bernard not with woordes of skoffes and doubtfullnesse, but with godlie simplicitie, and reuerence confessing the veritie of Christes presence, both at the right hand of God the Father, and also in the Sacrament before our handes, before our eyes, and therof nothing doubting, woundereth at the great goodnesse and mercie of our Sauiour Chryste, howe he doth vouchsaif so moche to do for vs poour litle woormes creping vpon the earth. Suche was the simplicitie of faith, the humblenesse of minde in good Fathers, that beleuing the thing, they did agnise the great benefitt of God, wher this Proclamer puffed vppe with pride, reiecteth the D simplicitie of faith, and contemneth the benefitt of God.
But contemning him that contempneth God, let vs heare more of this good Father, that honoured our Lord God. In the same sermon he hath also this saieng, speakinge to the Churche, whiche ys the Spouse of Chryst to stire [Page]her also to agnise this great benefitte of God, saing thus: Gratulare sponsa, gaude Bernard. serm. cod. E incomparabiliter. Praesidentem habes, & rectorem sponsum in praesentis exilij militia. Pignus habes, arrham tenes, quibus foeliciter vniaris sponso in patria, gloriosa & amabilis sponsa. In terra sponsum habes in sacramento: in coelis habitura es sine velamento, & hic & ibi veritas: sed hic palliata, ibi manifestata. Gene thankes, O spouse, reioice incomparablie. In the warrefare of this present bannishment, thowe hauest thy husband president, and ruler, thowe hauest the pledge, thowe hauest thy earnest money, by the whiche thowe maist as a gloriouse and beloued Chryst both in heauen and earth in veritie. Spouse be vnited and ioined to thy Spouse in heauen with felicitie. In earth thowe hauest thy Spouse in the Sacrament: In heauen thowe shalt haue him withoute anie couert. Bothe here, and ther ys the veritie. But here couered, ther openly shewed.
This ys a goodlie sentence, and woorthie well to be noted, but this for our purpose specialle, that the Churche hath her Spouse Chryst in earth in the Sacrament, whiche in heauen she shall haue in open vision. Here verilie Chryst, and ther verilie Chryst, all the difference ys, that here he ys vnder F couerture, ther manifestlie seen.
To conclude, that the aduersarie shall not reiecte sainct Bernard for his plain sainge: yt shall be confirmed by the like saing of Chrystom, who saieth Chrysost. li. 3. de sacer. thus: O miraculum, O Dei benignitatem, qui cum Patre sursum sedet, in illo ipso temporis articulo omnium manibus pertractatur, ac se ipse tradit volentibus ipsum accipere ac complecti. Chryst sitting aboue ys also in the handes of men. O miracle, O the gentle godnesse of God, he that sitteth aboue with God the Father, euen in that same poincte of time ys handeled with the handes of all, and he deliuereth him self to them that will receaue him, and embrace him. Thus moche Chrysostome.
Beholde nowe (good reader) howe Chrysostom agreablie to the speache of sainct Bernard, acknowlegeth the great goodnesse of God, that Chryst whiche sitteth at the right hand of the Father ys in that time, meening the time of ministracion, in the handes of men. In that he saieth, he ys in the handes of men, yt argueth a reall presence, for the spirituall presence can not be in handes, but in heart. G
To the proofe of this also yt maketh inuinciblie, that Chrysostome exclameth Chrystes being in the Sacr. ys miraculouse contrarie to the rules of philosophie. with reuerent wonder saing: O miracle. In this that he acknowlegeth yt a miracle, he dothe acknowlege more then the bread to be a figure of Chrystes bodie. For that ys no miracle to be wondered at. But he doth acknowledge the miracle to be, that Chryste that sitteth aboue with the Father, shoulde also be in the Sacrament in the handes of men. This ys the miracle. For this ys both aboue nature, and against nature, and doen by the onelie power of God, and therfore ys a miracle.
Thus then yt ys manifest by the humble lowlie, and faithfull confession of the faith of these holy fathers, that Chrystes bodie miraculouslie ys both in heauen, and in earth in the Sacrament, and so in manie places at one time notwithstandinge the contemptuouse exclamacion of this Proclamer, limiting the power of God by an impossiblitie, as yt appeareth to his vnbeleuing vnderstanding, that the bodie of Chryst shoulde be in a thousand places. Which his exclamacion was his best argument to bring the people from their fathe. H But yf he will acknowledge the miracle with Chrysostom, he shall perceaue howe foolish his argument ys.
THE ELEVENTH CHAPITER PROVETH THAT A as two bodies maie be in one place: so the bodie of Chryst being one maie be in diuerse places.
AS the Aduersaries to ouerthrow the worke of faith haue vsed naturall philosophie: So to maintein their naturall philosophie, they haue vtterlie denied the verie Gospell, the grownd of faithe. For wher the good catholique learned men of charitable pitie laboured to bring them, from this their wicked errour, persuading thē not to cleaue to naturall reason, as therwith to measure, and streicten that, which ys the bodie of the Sonne of God, exalted to be in vnitie of person with the Godhead, as they wolde doo our bodies which be but naturall, and earthlie bodies onelie, infinite degrees vnder the condicion of that blessed bodie of Chryste: but to consider, that as the bodie of Chryst, though yt be a naturall bodie, might be with an other bodie in one place at one time, whiche ys against naturall Philosophie and reason: So the same being B but one bodie, might be in diuerse places at one time, notwithstanding naturall reason and Philosophie.
To proue two bodies to be in one place at one time, the Gospell of saincte Joan. 20. Iohn was alleged, wher we read: Venit Iesus ianuis clausis, & stetit in medio eorum & dixit: Pax vobis. Iesus came the doors being shett, and stood in the middest of them and saied: Peace be with yowe. This beinge testified of saincte Iohn, for the miraculouse coming in of Chryste to his Apostles, proueth that he so coming in, passed through doore or wall as his pleasure was to do, and so doinge, ther was, contrarie to Oecolampadius saing, Corpus in corpore, & duo corpora simul. One bodie in an other, and two bodies together one place. Cranmer in his aunswer agaīst winch.
I remembre, that this scripture was obiected by master Smith against Cranmer: and for aunswere therunto thus saith Cranmer: But peraduenture Master Smith will aske me this question: Howe coulde Chryste come into the house, the doore beinge shett, except he came through the doore? To your wise question, master Smith, I will aunswer by an other question. Coulde not Chryste come aswell into the house, when the C doore was shette, as the Apostles coulde go oute of prison, the doore being shett? Coulde not Act. 5. God wourke this thing except the Apostles must go through the doore, and occupie the same place that the doore did? In this aunswere by Cranmer made by questions, as ther be two questions so ther be two partes. But by the aunswering of the first, the aunswering to the second shall be the easier.
The first questiō asketh: yf Chryst coulde not come as well into the house the doores being shett, as the Apostles coulde go oute of prison the doore being shett: whiche question I praie thee, Reader, well to weigh. Which yf thow doo thowe shalt perceaue that to auoid this argument, and to deceaue Cranmer falsifieth the scripture to maintien his heresie. the reader, he here vttereth a manifest and shamefull vntruthe, and abuseth the Scripture for the maintenaunce of his heresie to wickedlie. For he, to make the readers beleue that the coming in of Chryste into the house, and the goinge of the Apostles out of prison, was of one maner, saieth that the goinge oute of the Apostles, and the coming in of Chryste were bothe the doores being shett. Which ys verie false, and directlie against the truth of D the scripture. For as concerning the going oute of the Apostles out of prison, Looke the actes of the Apostles, and ye shall finde, that they went not oute the doors being shett, as this man vntrulie reporteth, but the doores being open. Whiche thing the holie Goste lefte not vndeclared. For [Page]thus shall ye reade ther: The cheif preist rose vppe, and all they that were with him, E which ys the secte of the Saduces, and were full of indignacion, and laied handes on the Apostles, and putt them in the common prison. But the Angell of our Lord by night opened the prison doors and brought them furth, and saied. Go and stande, and speake in the temple to the people all the woordes of life, When they heard that; they entred earlie in the morning and taught. But the cheif preist came, and they that were with him, and called a councell together, and all the elders of the children of Israell, and sent men to the prison to fetch them, when the ministers came, and fownde them not in prison they returned, and tolde, saing: The prison trulie we founde shette, with all diligence, and the kepers standing withoute, before the doores, but when we had opened, we fownd no man within.
In this scripture first note, that when the Apostles were committed to prison, the Angell of God came by night and opened the doores of the prison and not onelie opened the doores, but also brought the Apostles oute. Then ys yt false that this man saieth, that the Apostles went oute of the prison the doores being shett. Trueth yt ys that the doores were made fast again after their departure. For the messengers, that came in the morning to fetche the F Apostles reported that they fownd the doores shet with all diligence, and the kepers standing before the doore. And herin wolde the holie Goste the miracle to be noted, that the Angell opened the prison doores, and shett them again, and brought furth the Apostles, and the kepers standing at the doore perceaued not. But yet he wolde not this miracle of their going oute to be like the miracle of Chrystes Cominge in. For as touching the Apostles, the holie Goste plainly reporteth howe they went oute by the helpe of the Angell opening the doores: But in Chrystes coming in ther ys no meanes declared howe he came in, but yt ys absolutely spoken, Venit Iesus ianuis clausis, Iesus came, the doores being shette, signifieng that he came in Chryst entred in to his Apost. the doores being shett. more miraculouslie by the power of his Godhead, not requiring the aide of the opening of any dore.
But that ye maie perceaue that I do expownd and vnderstand this facte and miracle of Chryste as the holie fathers doo, and that ye maie the better credite the matter, ye shall heare howe they vnderstand this place of saincte G Iohan.
Chrysostom to proue the Mother of Chryste a virgen both before and after his birth, alleageth this place, and saieth thus: Sancta Maria, beata Maria, mater et Chrysost. homil. de Ioan. Bapt. virgo. Virgo fuit ante partum, virgo post partum. Ego hoc miror, quomodò de virgine virgo natus sit, & post nationem virginis mater virgo sit. Vultis scire quomodò de virgine natus sit, & post natiuitatem mater ipsa sit virgo? Clausa erant ostia, & ingressus est Iesus. Nulli dubiū quin clausa sint ostia: qui intrauit per ostia clausa, non erat phantasma, non erat spiritus, verè corpus erat. Quid enim dicit? Respicite & videte, quia spiritus carnem, & ossa non habet, sicut me videtis habere. Habebat carnes, habebat ossa, & clausa erant ostia. Quomodò clausis ostijs intrauerunt ossa, & caro? Clausa sunt ostia, & intrat, quem intrantem non vidimus. Vnde intrauit? omnia clausa sunt, locus non est per quem intret, & tamen intus est qui intrauit. Nescis quomodò factum sit, & das omnipotentiae Dei: Da potentiae Dei, quia de virgine natus sit. The holie Marie, the blessed Marie, mother and virgen, she was a virgen before birth, a virgen after birth. I merueil at this, howe of a virgen, a virgen shoulde be born, and after the birth of a virgen, H the mother shoulde be a virgen. Will ye knowe how he was born of a virgen, and after the birth, howe she was both mother and virgen? The doores were shett and Iesus entred in. No man doubteth but that the doores were shette, He that entred by the shett doors was no phantasie, he was no spirit, he was verilie a bodie. For what saied he? Looke and see that a spirit hath no flesh and bones, [Page 110]as ye see me haue. He had flesh, he had bones, and the doores were shette, Howe did A slesh and bones enter the doore being shette? The doores be shette, and he goeth in, whome we sawe not going in. How did he go in? all thinges are closse, ther ys no place, by the which he might go in, and yet he ys within, that went in, and yt doth not appeare howe he went in. Thowe knowest not, and doest referre yt to the omnipotencie of God. Geue this also to the omnipotencie of God, that he was born of a virgen.
Saincte Hierom vseth the same argumēt, to the same pourpose and saieth: Hieron. in Apologia, cont. Jouin. Respondeant mihi, quomodò Iesus ingressus est clausis ostijs, cùm palpandas manus, & latus considerandum, & ossacarnemue monstrauerit, ne veritas corporis phantasma putaretur: Et ego respondebo quomodò sancta Maria sit mater & virgo, virgo post partum, mater antequàm nupta. Let them aunswer me (saith saincte Hierom) howe Iesus entred in the doores being shette, when, leste his bodie shoulde be thought a phantasie, he shewed both flesh and bones, and his handes to be felt, and his side to be considered: And I will aunswer them, howe the holie Marie, maie be bothe a mother, and a yirgen. A virgen before birth, a mother before she was knowen of man.
In bothe these Autours, we maie perceaue not onelie by their woordes, B but also by the argument whiche they make, that the doores remained still shette, both at the entring in of Chryste in to the house, and after that he was entred in, wherbie they proue that the clausures of the virginitie in the virgen Marie, remained closse, both before the birth in the birth, and after the birth of Chryste. Nowe yf the doores did open at the going in of Chryste to his Apostles (as some haue wickedlie taught raither seking to shadow the miraculouse worke of Chryste, and to falsifie the scriptures, then they wolde forsake their erroure, or haue yt conuinced) then coulde yt not proue that the clausures of the virginitie of the mother of Chryste, notwithstanding his birth, remained allwais closed whiche (as ye maie perceaue) they intended to proue.
Yt maie be that the Aduersarie being pressed with the authoritie of these graue and learned fathers, will graunt that Chryste went in to this Apostles the doores being shett, But yet he went not (he will saie) through the doore, nor no other body, so as there shoulde be two bodies in one place at C one time. That he went in the doores being shett he will graunte: But howe he went in, he can not tell.
To make this matter plain to the Aduersarie and thee, Reader, we will heare Chrysostom in an other place, geuing some cause, how he might so go in. Dignū autem dubitatione est, quomodò corpus incorruptibile formam clauorum acceperit, Chrysost. homil. 86. in Joan. & mortali manu tangi potuerit. Sed hoc te non perturbet, hoc enim permissionis fuit. Corpus enim tam tenue & leue vt clausis ianuis ingrederetur, omni crassitudine earebat, sed vt resurrectio crederetur, talem se exhibuit. Et vt ipsum crucifixum fuisse, & neminem alium pro eo resurrexisse intelligas, proptered cum signis crucis resurrexit. Yt yt woorthie of doubte, howe the incorruptible bodie did take the forme of the nailes, and Chrystes bodie was so void of grossnesse that yt might enter the doorees being shett coulde be touched with mortall hand. But let not this trooble thee, For this was doen of permission. For that bodie, being so subtile and light, that yt might entre in, the doores being shett, was void of all grossnesse. But that the resurrectiō might beleleued, he shewed him self soche a one, and that thowe mightest vnderstād, that yt waseuē he that was crucified, and no mā ells did rise for him, therfore he rose with the figures and tokens of the crosse. Thus moche Chrysostome. D
The cause whiche ys geuen here to helpe vppe the weaknesse of oure faith the sooner to beleue that Chryste passed through the doore, ys, that he had after his resurrection, a pure, clear, and subtile bodie, void of all corruption, and grossnesse, euen a spirituall bodie, that might to oure own iudgement [Page]and reason the easelier so do: and yet was yt a perfecte bodie of a man in substance, and lineamentes. E
But that he came in to his Apostles through the doore, and howe, and by what means he so did, Chrysostom by expresse woordes in an other place declareth, speaking in the person of Chryste after this maner. Non est meum meos ludificare phantasinate, vanam imaginem visus si timet, veritatem corporis manus Chrys. de resarrect. sermon. 9. & digitus exploret. Potest fortassis aliqua oculos caligo decipere, palpatio corporalis verum corpus agnoscat. Spiritus (inquit) carnem, & ossa non habet, sicut me videtis habere. Quòd ostia clausa penetraui, sola est virtus diuini Spiritus, non sola carnis substantia. Yt ys not my propertie, myne to delude with a phantasie. Yf the seight feare a vain image, Chryst entred trough the doores that were shett. let the hand and fingar trie oute the veritie of the bodie. Perchaunce some mist maie deceaue the eyes, let the corporall feeling acknowledge a true bodie. A spirit (saied he) hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me to haue. That I entred through the doores, that were shett, yt ys onelie the powre of the diuine spirit not the onelie substance of the flesh. Thus Chrysostom.
As this place geueth goodlie instruction to the reader: so doth yt fullie, F and mighteilie stoppe the mouthes of thē that speake wicked thinges against God, in denienge the miraculouse workes of our Sauiour and master Chryste. That Chryst with his perfecte bodie entred in to his Apostles, Chrysostom proueth by Chrystes owen saieng being in the middest of them, when he saied: A spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me haue. Howe this bodie, being a perfecte bodie of a man entred, he declareth when he saieth in Howe Christes bodie, entred through the doores shett. Amb. in Luc. li. 10. cap. 14. the person of Chryste, that yt entred through the doores. Yf ye will learn by what mean, he saieth, yt was not by the substance of the flesh, but by the vertue or power of the Godhead,
Of this matter also s [...]inct Ambrose ys a goodlie wittnesse, who vpon the Gospell of sainct Luke saieth thus: Habuit admirandi causam Thomas, cum videret, clausis omnibus per inuia septa corporibus inoffensa compage Christi corpus insertum, & ideo mirum quomodò se natura corporea per impenetrabile corpus infuderit, inuisibili aditu, visibili conspectu, tangi facilis, difficilis aestimari. Thomas had a cause to merueill when he sawe (all thinges being shetvppe and closed) the bodie of Chryste G by clausures, without all waies for bodie to entre, the walls being vnbroken, to be entred in emong them. And therfore yt was wonder, howe the corporall nature passed through the impenetrable bodie, with an inuisible coming, but with uisible beholding, easie to be touched, hard to be iudged. Thus sainct Ambrose.
Yf ye note this testimonie, yt varieth not from Chrysostom: For yt testifieth that oure Sauiour Chryste came in to his Apostles, the doores being shett And that notwithstanding he went through the clausures of the house, they not being broken. And herevpon, saieth saincte Ambrose ys the great wonder, how his naturall bodie coulde entre through an impenetrable bodie. Wherby bothe these Fathers declare the trueth of the doctrine of the Churche, that Chryste thus entring, ther were two bodies in one place.
There be manie that beare verie plain testimonie in this matter. But we will heare but two mo onely. Whiche, I suppose, with these before alleaged, being all men of soche grauitie, holinesse, authoritie, and learning, maie suffice, H not onelie to counteruaill these fond bablers, void of like grauitie, holinesse or learning: but also with them, that haue any sparke of grace and wisdom, take soch effecte, as to cause them flee these leude teachers, and to hisse them oute of all chrystian companie, forasmoch as they teache soche learninge, as none of the holy Fathers doo teache, but soch raither as ys [Page 111]contrarie to them. But let vs heare saincte Augustine in this matter, thus A he saieth: Nec eos audiamus, qui negant tale corpus Domini resurrexisse, quale positum August. de agone Christi. cap. 24. est in monumēto. Nec nos moueat, quòd clausis ostijs subitò eum apparuisse Discipulis scriptū est, vt proptereà negemus illud fuisse corpus humanum, quin contra naturam huius corporis videmus illud per clausa ostia intrare, omnia enim possibilia sunt Deo. Si enim potuit ante passionem clarificare illud sicut splendorem Solis, quare non potuit & post passionem, ad quantam vellet subtilitatem in temporis momēto redigere, vt per clausa ostia posset intrare? Neither let vs geue eare to them, that denie the same bodie to haue risen, Christes bodie against the nature of a bodie entred through the shett doores that was putte in the graue. Neither let yt moue vs, that yt ys written, that sodenlie he appeared to his disciples, the doores being shett, that therfore we shoulde denie yt to be a mans bodie, bycause we see yt against the nature of this bodie to entre in through the shette doores. For all thinges are possible to God. For yf he coulde before his passion make yt as clear as the brightnesse of the Sunne, why might he not after his passion also in a moment of time, bring yt to asmoche a subtilitie as he wolde, that he might entre in through the shett doores?
Note here in saincte Augustine, that where the Aduersarie wolde not that B the bodie of Chryste shoulde be in diuerse places for offending the lawe of naturall ordre, he saieth, that Chryst against the nature of this bodie, entred in through the shett doores, so that the bodie of Chryste maie not be bownde to the lawe or ordre of nature, for that he ys the lord of nature, not an onelie man, but a person that ys God and man, as Cirill saieth: Clausis Cyrill. in Joan. li. 12. cap. 53. foribus repentè Dominus omnipotentia sua, natura rerum superata, ingressus ad Discipulos est. Nullus igitur querat, quomodò corpus Domini ianuis clausis penetrauit, cùm intelligat non de homine nudo, vt modò nos sumus, sed de omnipotente filio Dei, haec ab Euangelista describi. Nam cùm Deus verus sit, rerum naturae non subiacet; quod in caeteris quoque miraculis patuit. The gates being shett our lorde through his omnipotencie, the nature of thinges beinge ouercomed, sodenly went in to his disciples. Let no man therfore aske howe the bodie of our Lorde went through the gates beinge shett, forasmoche Chryst ys not subiect to lawe of nature. as he maie vnderstand, these thinges to be described of the Euangelist, not of a bare man, as we be nowe, but of the Allmightie Sonne of God. Who forasmoche as he ys verie God, ys not subiecte to the lawe of nature. C Whiche thing did appeare in other his miracles also. Thus Cyrill.
Nowe ye haue heard a sufficient nombre of holy learned Fathers, auouching this great miracle of Chryste, not as some of the Aduersaries saie, that he came into his disciples after the doores were shett, after the maner of other men: neither as some other of them do saie, that he caused the doores or walls to open, and so came in: neither that an Angell did open the doores to him, as to the Apostles, that were in prison: but that he being verie God, gaue vnto that his manhead that singular subtilitie aboue all other, that yt was not subiect to nature (as Cirill saieth) but aboue nature, so farre, and in soche excellent degree, that yt might passe through those doores, the doores not broken (as saincte Ambrose saied.
In this matter, thus moch haue I laboured, both that the miraculouse worke of Chryst might not be obscured, nor shadowed by the malignitie of men, and also that yt might be perceaued, that in the workes of Chryste we maie not so looke to the ordre of nature, to naturall reason, or naturall D philosophie, that for the mainteinaunce therof, we shall denie the worke of Chryste. Naturall philosophie, hath manie propositions, that will not stande with oure faith. For naturall philosophie teacheth that mundus est perpetuus, the worlde ys perpetuall or ouerlasting: Faith teacheth, that: In principio creauit Gen. 1. [Page] Deus coelum & terram. In the beginninge God created heauen and earth, and E Psal. 191. that therfore the worlde had a beginninge. And yt teacheth, also that yt shall haue an ende. For coelum & terra transibunt, heauen and earth shall passe awaie. Of the whiche both, the Prophete saieth: In principio Domine terram creasti, et opera manuum tuarum sunt coelitipsi peribunt, tu autem permanes, &c. Thowe in the beginning (O Lorde) didest laie the fundacion of the earthe, and the heauens are the workes of thy hand. They shall perish, but thowe doest abide. Of the whiche matter also saincte Peter maketh plain declaracion. Likewise naturall philosophie teacheth, quod vnum corpus non potest esse simul & semel in diuersis locis: that one bodie can not be at one time in diuerse places. But faith teacheth vs (as yt ys declared in the last chapiter) that Chrystes bodie ys and maie be in diuerse places. Naturall philosophie teacheth, that duo corpora non possunt simul esse in vno & eodem loco. Two bodies can not be together in one place: Yet the Scripture teacheth (as ye haue heard the holie learned Fathers vnderstand them) that Chrystes bodie entred in through the doore, and so ther were two bodies at one time in one place. F
Nowe therfore forasmoch as these two, that ys, that the bodie of Chryste ys in diuerse places, and that the bodie of Chryste and the doore that he entred through were in one place, be the workes of God, let vs in the consideracion of them, forgett naturall philosophie, and remembre faith. That these appertein to faith yt ys proued by a nombre of the holie Fathers, and both these be acknowledged of them to be miraculouse workes of Chryste aboue nature. And as these workes were verilie doen by Chryste: So ys the other mencioned in the chapiter before doen by Chryste.
Wherfore (chrystian reader) weigh well what in these two chapiters ys saied, howe many holie and learned Fathers be alleaged, howe plainlie they testifie the matter, and haue regarde to them, staie thy self by them, and be not caried awaie with them that haue nothing to confirme their doctrine but naturall philosophie. For as touching the matter spoken of in this chapiter let the Aduersatie bring anie one sufficient Authour, that shall by expresse woordes teache the contrarie, and I will ioin with him. G
THE TWELVETH CHAPITER AVNSWERETH certain obiections that seme to impugne the catholique doctrine of this matter.
THere ys nothing so true in all our holie faith, but some heresie Nothing so true but he resie maie impugne yt Deut. 6. Heresies against God, and euerie person in the trinitie maie be fownde to against saie yt, and argumētes deuised to impugne yt. Yt ys a most a certen trueth, that ther ys but one God the scripture saieng: Deus noster Deus vnus est. Owre God ys one God. Yet ther were that taught that ther̄ were two Gods, as Apelles, and Manichaeus. Who taught that ther was a good God, and an euell. And for the mainteinaunce of this their heresie, had their argumētes whiche apparantlie confirmed their sainges.
Yt ys a verie treuth that Chryst ys both God and man, and yet ther were H that saied he was not God, as Ebion and Cerynthus, and ther were that saied he was no man, as Eutyches, and Dioscorus. Yt ys a certen trueth, that God the Sonne ys God coequall, and consubstanciall to the Father, yet Arius saied that he was a creature not equall to the Father in deitie, power or maiestie. Yt ys an infallible trueth that the holie Goste ys God, yet Macedonius taught [Page 112]that he was a creature. Yt ys a certen trueth that Chryste suffred death for vs: yet ther were that saied that yt was Symon Cyrinensis, of whome ther ys A mencion made in the Gospell, that he bare Chrystes crosse.
These and an innumerable sorte mo haue all apparant argumentes, to make a cowntenance, that their doctrines be true, and do intermingle in August ho. All false doctrine hath some treuth admixed. dede some trueth with their falshead as sainct Augustine saieth: Nulla porrò doctri [...]a falsa, quae non aliqua vera intermisceat. Ther ys no false doctrine, that dothe not intermingle some treuth, therbie the better to vtter their heresie.
So of this matter of the presence of Chryste in heauen and in the Sacrament, apparant argumentes be made by other Aduersaries to deceaue the people, which well weighed and examined, haue no force nor weight, to proue that they intended.
As for this Aduersarie the Proclamer (as yt ys saied) made no argumente in his matter, for that he wolde haue the people receaue but his onelie bare proclamacion, wherfore to him the aunswere ys soen made.
But his great master Oecolampadius, heapeth vppe in dede a great nombre of Scriptures by quotacion onely, which (he saieth) he shall not nede to alleage B Scriptures alleaged against the presence by Oecolamp. at large bycause yt ys an article of our faithe, that Chryste sitteth at the right hande of the Father. Of the which scriptures I will alleadge some, that the reader maie both knowe them, and also perceaue that they be not against the doctrine of Chrystes Churche as touching the reall presence of Chrystes bodie and blood in the blessed Sacrament.
In saincte Iohn his gospell we finde written thus: Iesus knowinge that this howre was comed, that he shoulde go oute of this worlde to the Father &c. And in an Joan. 13. other place thus: A litle while (saieth Chryste) and ye shall not see me, and a litle Ibid. 16. while and ye shall see me. For I go to the Father. And in the same place: I went furth from the Father, and came into the worlde, again I leaue the worlde, and go to the Father. Jbid. Again in an other place: And nowe I am not in the worlde, and these be in the worlde and I come to thee. And in the Actes of the Apostles: This Iesus that ys taken from Act. 1. yow into heauen shall so come as ye haue seen him going into heauen.
These and all other like scriptures that teache vs of Chrystes going to his Father, of his exaltacion aboue all poures, and soche other, we reuerence thē Phil. 2. C we accept them, we beleue them, we embrace them. For they teache vs that, which we doo confesse, that Chryste ys God, that he ys ascended, Arsicle of the Ascension impugneth not Chrystes presence in the Sacr. that he ys in glorie, But when we confesse this, and beleue this,. doth this take awaie this treuth, that Chryste ys verilie present in the Sacrament? No in deed. For that standeth still as an vntouched truthe, neither impugning the other, neither impugned of the other. And therfore we consesse both to be true. For he that saied: Vado ad Patrem, I go to the Father: saied also. Hoc est corpus meum. Hoc facite. This ys my bodie. This do ye. Wherbie he bothe consecrated his bodie (for as Chrysostome saieth, Qui enim dixit Chrystome. 51. in Mat. I loc est corpus meum, & rem simul cum verbo confecit. He that saied, This ys my bodie, made the thing together with the woord) and also gaue authoritie to his preistes to do the like. Whiche thing Luther denieth not.
Then forasmoche as Chryste willed that this mysterie shall be continued, frequented, and vsed vntill his comminge, in the whiche mysterie by his power, ys his bodie, we maie not thinke anie contrarietie or repugnaunce D in his woordes, but beleue that as he ys the verie truthe: So ys yt all treu that he hath spoken. And as he ys allmightie: So ys he able to performe, and make good that he hath saied. And therfore aught [Page]we to beleue both that he ys in heauē, and also in the Sacrament, forasmoch E as by his woorde, we learn his presence in bothe.
Yf this our Sauiour Chryste, wher naturall knowledge saieth, Omne graue Exāples of manie thin ges doen by our Sauiour Chryst aboue and contrarie to nature. appetit deorsum, euerie heauie thinge ys inclined downward, coulde yet by his power make the earthlie bodie of Peter, whiche was a mere naturall bodie, and therfore heauie, contrarie to his nature to walke vpon the sea, and when yt pleased him to leaue him to his nature to suffer him to sinke, and beginne to drowne: can not he at his owne pleasure make that blessed bodie of his, which ys so excellentlie conceaued and born, and therwith vnited to the Godhead in vnitie of person, that although yt be a naturall bodie, yet yt doth surmounte, and ys aboue all nature, and naturall bodies: can not he, I saie, at his pleasure demise, lett downe, or abase that his bodie to the state and condicion of a verie naturall bodie? and again at his pleasure exalte and magnifie the same aboue the state of a naturall bodie?
He did fast fortie daies and fortie nightes and eate no meat, whiche F Matt. 4. was aboue naturall ordre: In the ende of that fast he was hungrie, and Jbid. 17. therin he subiected him self to naturall ordre.
He was transfigured in the Mounte where, as yt pleased him, he shewed Ioan. 4. his power, and made his face to shine as bright as the Sunne, and his garmentes white as snowe, whiche was aboue the state of a bare naturall man. An other time he was wearie of his iourneie, whiche was agreable to the nature of man.
The Iewes came to apprehend him, and with the voice of his mouthe Jbid. 18. Jbid. 19. Mat. 27. he threw them all to the grownde: Again he abased him self, and suffred him self not onelie to be taken of them, whom he had so easilie ouer throwē, but also to be buffited, and to be scourged, and finallie to be crucified. What shall I stand in the rehersall of these thinges, whiche be so plentifull in the Gospell? Therfore to conclude I will saie with Cyrille, we maie not thinke of the bodie of Chryste, as of the bodie of a bare naturall man: but we must thinke of that bodie, as of the bodie of the Sonne of God. G Whiche for that yt ys so, yt passeth by infinitie degrees the state and condicion of one of our bodies.
Wherfore methinke the Aduersaries be to streict, yea and cruell to the bodie of Chryste, that wher, for causes aboue saied, yt ys so excellent a bodie, and yet for our sakes he made himself obedient to death euen to the death of the crosse, they will for all this excellencie, geue vnto yt no more prerogatiue, nor preuilege, then they will do to an other bodie, whiche ys an iniurie to that blessed bodie. I wish that the Aduersaries should not onelie after the counsell of Cyrille thinke that yt ys the bodie of the Sonne of God, and leaue yt as a naturall bodie ioined to the Godhead: but also consider the singular prerogatiues that yt hathe by the same coniunction to the Godhead. And then shall they see howe that bodie maie, aboue the comon condicion of other bodies, through the power of the Godhead, be in sundrie places.
Although yt be not apperteining to the bodie of a man to geue life: yet H Cyrill saieth that the bodie of Chryste, for that yt ys ioined to that whiche Cyrill. in 6. foā ca. 14. ys life, yt geueth life. Thus he speaketh yt: Quoniā Saluatoris caro Verbo Dei, quod naturaliter vita est, coniūcta, viuifica effecta est, quādo eā comedimus tunc vitā habemus in nobis, illi coniūcti, quae vita effecta est. Bicause the flesh of our sauiour ioined to the [Page 113]Sonne of God, whiche ys naturallie life, ys made able to geue life: when we A eate that flesh, then haue we life in vs, being ioined to that flesh, whiche ys made life.
See this great prerogatiue that Cyrill geueth to the fleshe of Chryste, for that yt ys ioined to the Godliead. Yf yt haue prerogatiue to geue life to them that receaue yt: can not God geue a lesse prerogatiue to yt to be in diuerse places?
Obiection. Perchaunce yt maie be saied to me, that God can thus do: but we finde not that he doth yt.
Answer. To the former parte of this obiection I saie, that yf the Aduersaries thought that God coulde do yt, then the Proclamer was to blame, to speake of Chrystes being in a thousand places or mo, as therbie to signifie an impossibilitie. Again Oecolampadius wolde not laboure to bringe in so manie inconueniences vpon yt, yf yt appeared possible to him.
To the second parte I saie, that yt ys sufficientlie shewed allreadie, that Chryst caused his bodie to be in diuerse places at one time, and that the holie Fathers of Chrystes Churche, yea and that a good nombre teach, some B of them that he ys both in heauen with his Father, and also in earth in the Sacrament: some that he ys in manie places, as yt ys declared in the tenth chapiter.
And thus although the scriptures alleaged by Oecolampadius seem, yf a man will onelie lean to naturall philosophie, to be against the faith, that the catholique Churche teacheth: yet when those scriptures be compared to other scriptures, and the Fathers well weighed and vnderstanded: and the omnipotencie of God considered, and the excellencie of the bodie of Chryste remembred, yt shall be perceaued that the Scriptures be not against vs neither we against them. For they saie that Chryste ys in heauen and so saie we: and yet neuerthelesse we saie that he ys in the Sacrament, and so saie they. Yf the Scriptures, that be alleaged, had saied that Chryst ys in heauen onelie, and can be in no other place, then the Aduersarie might haue triumphed. But saing that he ys in heauen, withoute anie exclusiues or exceptiues, ther ys no deniall implied in that his being, to a chrystian C man, but that he maie be beleued, to be also in the Sacrament. And this, I trust, maie suffice to aunswer all the Scriptures that be, or can be produced of the being of Chryste in heauen, as therby to exclude and denie his presence in the Sacrament.
Ther ys made an other obiection oute of saincte Augustine, who writeth thus: Cauendum est, ne ita Diuinitatem astruamus hominis, vt veritatem auferamus August. ad Dardanum. corporis. Non est autem consequens, vt quod in Deo est, ita sit vbique vt Deus. We must beware that we do not so affirme the deitie of man, that we take awaie the veritie of the bodie. For yt ys no consequent, that that which ys in God, shoulde so be euery wher as God ys. Again in the same place. Iesus vbique per id quod Deus est: in coelo autem per id quod homo. Iesus by that that he ys God, ys euery where: by that that he ys man, he ys in heauen.
For aunswere to these places of Sainct Augustin first vnderstand that S. Augustin his place to Dardan. declared. one Dardanus wrote to Sainct Augustine to dissolue this question: whether Chrystes manhead, for that yt was vnited to the Godheade in vnitie of person, was euerie whear as his Godhead ys. For aunswere to whiche question, emong other thinges S. Augustin wrote the propositions, which Oecolampadius D alleageth against Chrystes being in the Sacrament, and in heauen, for that by his iudgement, his bodie can not be in two places at one time. [Page]Wherfore firste I wish yow to note, that S. Augustin in that epistle not speaking of the Sacrament, the sentences alleaged make not against the matter. E
And although thys might suffice: yet for the better vnderstanding of the matter, more shall be saied. Wherfore that a thing maie be at one time in manie places, vnderstand that yt maie be twoo waies. One thing in manie places at one time two waies. Hiere. 23. Esai. 66. The one ys by nature, the other by gifte. By nature to be in manie or all places at one time, yt apperteineth onelie to God, who by hys immensitie ys euery where, so that ther ys no place in heauen, in hel, in earth, or in the waters, in the which God ys not. And therfore he saieth. Ego coelum & terram impleo. I fill bothe heauen and earth. And again: Coelum mibi sedes est, terra autem scabellum pedum meorum. Heauen ys my seat, and the earth ys my foote stoole. After this sorte, that ys, by nature, no creature can be in all places, but onelie God. Wherfore Didymus by this did well make his argument to proue the holie Goste to be God, bicause of hys owne nature he ys euery wher, and so Didym. de Spiritu S. can no creature be.
The other waie that a thing maie be in manie places, not by nature, but by the gifte of God maie be in man. For nothing being vnpossible to God, F yt ys then possible to him, to geue hys gifte to hys creature, that yt maie be in manie and diuerse places at once which maner of being ys in the Manhead of Chryst, which man head hath yt not of the own nature to be in manie places at one time, but by the gifte of the Godhead. And therfore the argument of Oecolampadius ys nothing woorth. And yt semeth to me he did not vnderstand this difference of being in manie places at once, when he argued, that yf Chryste coulde be in manie places at one time, by the like he might be in al places, ād so should a creature become God, whiche somtime was no God, whiche ys a great absurditie.
By this argumente yf yt were good, yt mighte be proued that Chrystes flesh ys not quickning or geuing life, bicause yt apperteineth to God alone to geue life. And so shoulde Chrystes saieng be vntrue wher he saieth: Qui manducat meam carnem & bibit meum sanguinem, habet vitam aeternam. He that Ioan. 6. Cyril. in 6. Joan. ca. 14 eateth my flesh, and drinketh my bloode hath euerlasting life. And Cyrille saieth, as ye haue heard, that the flesh of Chryste being made the flesh of the Godhead, whiche ys life, ys made also able to geue life. G
But this ys verie true that the flesh of Chryste ys able to geue life. Whiche thing ys aswell onely perteining to God to do yt by nature, and of himself, as yt ys to be in manie or all places. And yet Chrystes flesh hauing this powre to geue life ys not for all that, when yt ys considered in yt self, thought that yt ys God, for yt hath yt not of yt self, but by the power of the Godhead, wherunto yt ys ioined in vnitie of Person. No more ys the bodie of Chryste thought to be a God. bicause yt maie be in manie places at one time, bicause yt ys not so of the owne nature, but by the power of the Godhead.
And this difference yt to be obserued in all thinges that be geuen of God to creatures, wherfore when Chryst saied: Nemo bonus, nisi vnus, Deus. No man God alone good by nature, creatures by participacion. Gen. 1. ys good but God alone. Yt ys not therfore to be thought that euerie creature that ys good, ys furth with also God, for then all the creatures of God be Gods, for they be all good, as the Scripture saeth: Vidit Deus cuncta, quae fecerat, & erant valdè bona. God sawe all thinges that he had made, and they were verie good: but yt ys to be considered that that, that ys good H of yt self ys God, and so ther ys none good but God alone. All creatures are good by participacion of the goodnesse of God, and therfor though they be [Page 114]good: yet be they no Gods. And by this ye maie perceaue that the Church A dothe according to the aduertisement of saincte Augustine. For yt dothe not so deifie the manhead of Chryste, that yt thinketh yt of the owne nature able to be in manie places, for then shoulde yt take awaie the veritie of the flesh or bodie of Chryste. But as touching that nature in yt self yt ys acknowledged to be in one place in heauen, but as touching the power of the godhead wherunto yt ys annexed, with the consideracion of the ordinaunce of the Sacrament, in the whiche ys appointed also the presence of the same bodie: yt ys beleued, that the same one bodie ys in diuerse and manie places at one time.
Vnto all this for the perceauing of a more difference betwene the nature of the God head, and the nature of the manhead in Chryste, Note Godheade of Chryst hath not possibilitie but to be euerie wher, his Manhead hath possibilitie to be somwher. that the nature of the Godhead of yt self ys so in euery place, that yt hath not possibilitie to be oute of anie place. The nature of the manhead of Chryste though by the power of the Godhead yt ys and maie be in diuerse places at one time: yet yt hath allwaies a possibilitie to be but in one place alone, and maie so be and ys. By this B also we maie see that ther ys moche difference betwene the Godhead, and manhead, wherby we maie easely, and clearlie perceaue, that though Chrystes bodie be in manie places, yet we cōfesse yt not to be the Godheade, but acknowledge yt to be the flesh of the Sonne of God, and one of the natures of the person of Chryste, and therfore an excellent bodie, and woorthie moche honour and estimacion. And thus moche for aunswer and vnderstanding of saincte Austen in that epistle to Dardanus.
And other obiection ther ys made oute of the same epistle, whiche doth raither declare the maliciouse ignorance of the Aduersarie, then make any thing against this trueth here defended. And if we shall here write yt, euē as Oecolāpadius did, then shall we also see his subtiltie and crafte. Thus yt ys to be fownde in his booke: Spacia locorū tolle corporibus, & nusquā erūt: & quia nusquam Augustin. ad Dardā. erūt, nec erūt. Tolle ipsa corpora qualitatibus corporū, non erit vbi sint, & ideò non alibi quā in coelo corpore fatemur Christū. Take the spaces of places from bodies, and they shall no wheare be. And bicause they shall no whear be, they shall not be. Take C those bodies from the qualities of bodies, ther shall no place be fownde Oecolamp. falsisieth S. August. by a subtile ad dicion. wher they maie be and therfore we cōfesse Chryste in bodie to be no whear ells but in heauē. thus Oecolāpadius. Ye heare all this alleaged, as the wholl wer of S. Augustine, but yt ys not. For Oecolāpadius hath wickedlie patched on a cōclusiō, as though it were saincte Augustines owne woordes, but yt ys not. He hath craftilie pciced yt, to deceaue the simple. For these woordes (And ther for we confesse Chryste in bodie to be no whear but in heauen) be the woordes of Oecolampadius and not of Sainct Augustin. Soche ys the sincereritie of these men, that they can not maintein ther euell and false matters, but with crafte and subtletie.
Nowe to aunswer saincte Augustines owne woordes, they be not spokē of the bodie of Chryste, but they be spokē of naturall bodies vpon the earth, whiche be subiect to earthlie qualities. Glorified bodies soch as Chrystes bodie ys, are deliuered from earthlie qualities. For they areneither hote, nor colde, weet nor drie, wherfore yt maketh nothing for the Aduersaries pourpose to alleadge saincte Augustine in this place, more then to declare, that blinde D malice wolde be saing somwhat, against the trueth, yt careth not what.
An other place ys produced oute of saincte Augustine and yt ys this: Augustin. 30. Tract. in Ioan. Sursū est Dominus, sed etiā hic est veritas Domini. Corpus enim Domini in quo resurrexit in [Page] vno loco esse potest, veritas eius vbique diffusa est. Owre Lorde ys aboue, but hys E veritie ys also here. The bodie of Chryste wherin he did rise maie be in one place, but his veritie ys diffused euerie wher. Thus farre sainct Augustine. That, that ys before saied doth fullie aunswere this. For we beleue that owre Lorde ys aboue with the Father, and withall we beleue that his Godhead ys euery wher. Yt ys not denied, but declared aboue also, that the bodie of Chryst in whiche he did rise, maie be in one place. So that we dissent not one title from sainct Augustin. For though the bodie of Christe maie be in one place: yet yt ys not enforced that yt must of necessitie be in one place. Nowe (gentle Reader) thowe hauest seen the trueth of this matter testified by wittnesses sufficient, thow hauest seen the obiections of the Aduersaries [...]ullie dissolued. I wish thee nowe soche faith as Abraham had, wherbie he was iustified. Who hearing the promisse of God that his seed shoulde be as the starres of heauen, and Sandes of the Sea, fainted not in faith nor yet considered Gen. 13. & 15. Rom. 4. hys owne bodie, whiche was nowe dead, euen when he was almost, an hondreth yeares olde, neither yet that Sara was past childe bearing, he staggered not at that promisse of F God through vnbelief, but became strong in faith, and gaue God the praise, being full certified, that he whiche had promised was also able to make yt good: that thow likewise knowing by faith whiche thowe hauest learned of the Fathers, as they haue learned the same of the verie woorde of God, that Chrystes blessed bodie ys in the Sacrament, and also in heauen, consider not nowe the naturall ordre of thinges, as Abraham did not, neither of hys owne bodie neither of hys wieues, but become strong in faith, and faint not, neither stagger at the promisse of God through vnbelief, But consider and be fullie certified that Chryste, who hath spoken and saied: This ys my bodie, ys able to make yt Naturall ordre had no place in manie of Chrystes doinges. good. And he that against the ordre of nature began ths life of man, for that he was born of a virgen, and against the same ordre withoute enforcement gaue vppe his owne soule, and died at his owne pleasure, and that crieng with a great voice, and likewise contrarie to the same nature rose from death the third daie, passing through the stone, for that hys monument was [...]ast closed: ād the eight daie after (as yt ys testified) passed through the doores into his disciples, and finallie ending hys a boade vpon earth besides nature G ascended into heauen, that he appointing hys bodie to be here in the Sacrament, and in heauen also, ys so to be beleued, though naturall ordre repeine. For seing he hath so appointed, yt ys so in verie dede.
THE THIRTENHT CHAPITER BEGINNETH THE exposition of an other text in the sixt of S. Iohn.
I Will nowe leaue this matter of Chrystes being in manie places as sufficientlie treacted of and proued, and return to the sixt chapiter of S. Iohn, and entre the exposition of the text ther ensewing, whiche ys this. Dixit ergo eis Iesus, Amen Amen dico vobis, nisi manducaueritis carnem filij hominis, & biberitis eius sanguinem, non habebitis vitam in vobis. Iesus therfor saied vnto them: Verilie, Verilie I saie vnto yowe, except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke hys blood H Ioan. 6. ye shall haue no life in yowe.
Wheras the Iews through vnbelief, thought yt an vnpossible thing for Christ to geue his flesh to be eaten, Chryst here aunswering thē, declareth yt to be [Page 115]possible, and necessarie to be doen, yea and so necessarie, that except we eate his flesh and drinke his bloode, we shal not haue life. For as man concerning A his naturall life must haue two thinges necessarie to life, that ys, birth to beginne and entre life, and then foode to nourish and maintein the same, with out the whiche yt can not be continued: So as concerning the spirituall life man must haue accordinglie his birth and foode: birth to be born and entre into that life, whiche birth ys baptisme, whiche ys of soche necessitie, that as he speaketh heare of the necessitie of the foode, so speaketh he of the necessitie of this birthe saing to Nicodemus: Amen, Amen dico tibi, nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua et Spiritu sancto non potest introire in regnū Dei. Verilie, verilie, Joan. 3. I saie vnto thee: Except a man be born again of water, and the holie Gost he can not entre into the kingdom of God. Nowe when man by Baptisme ys born in to the spirituall life, and hath begon yt, he must nedes haue foode to sustein the same, or ells he shall not continewe life, whiche foode ys the bodie, and blood of Chryste, a foode by Chryste himself appointed, whiche yf we take not, we can not liue. And therfore he saieth: Except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke hys bloode, ye shall not haue life in yowe. B
Hitherto the Aduersarie will agree with me, expownding all that ys saied in his sense of spirituall eating, and drinking of the flesh and blood of Chryste, with whō I will thus farre agree also, that soche as be of mature age, and Corporall eating with out the spiritual eating auaileth not. haue atteigned to the yeares of discrecion, except they eate the flesh of Chryst, and drinke hys bloode spirituallie they shall not liue. For the corporall eating withoute the spirituall eating, ys not auailable. But both these together nourishe life in man, and make him lustie and stronge in God. But that this texte extendeth not the necessitie therin mencioned, to the corporall eating and drinking of Chrystes flesh and blood also, which thys Aduersarie affirmeth, that ys vntrue. He wolde haue no other receauing of Chryste, but the spirituall receauing: bicause he wolde haue no other presence but the spirituall presence, but that this texte speaketh also of the corporall eating and receauing of the reall and substanciall bodie of Chryste in the Sacrament, the connexion and dependence of the Scriptures do proue. C
For the first sainge of Chryste, whiche we haue allready expownded, (that the bread whiche he wolde geue, ys hys flesh, &c. speaketh of Chrystes naturall flesh to be geuen in the Sacrament, as ys allready declared, and sufficientlie proued. And this texte speaketh of the same flesh, as the connexion well proueth. Wherfore Chryste here speaketh also of the corporall eatinge of hys flesh in the Sacrament. The necessitie of whiche eating ys soche, that yf we contemne that eating of yt, being (as ys saied) of mature age, and discrecion, we shall not haue life.
But that yt maie appeare, that the Church through oute all ages, hath euē thus vnderstanded this texte, as I do, I will conuerte me to the ordre that I haue prescribed to my self, to heare the great auncient men, and learned Fathers of both sides of Chrystes Parliament house, both of the greke and of the latin Churche. And although yt might suffice, for the vnderstanding D of all that ys here spoken of the Sacrament, for thatthey vnderstoode the first text of the same, to proue that therfore the rest whiche apperteineth to the same matter, must be euen so vnderstanded: Yet for the full satisfieng of the humble spirited reader, and the like confutacion of the arrogaunt, I will not refuse the paines to asscribe their [Page]iudgementes, both of this text, and of the rest that folowe.
The first of this companie that shall be brought furth to wittnesse, ys E sainct Cyprian, who alleaging this same text doth declare howe he vnderstandeth Cyprian. serm. de oratione. Do. yt, saing thus: Quando ergo dicit in aeternum viuere, si quis ederit de eius pane: vt manifestum est, eos viuere, qui corpus eius attingunt, & Eucharistiam iure communicationis accipiunt: ita contrà timendum est, & orandum ne dum quis abstentus separatur à corpore Christi, procul remaneat à salute, comminante illo & dicente: Nisi ederitis carnem filij hominis, & biberitis sanguinem eius, non babebitis vitam in vobis. Et ideò panem nostrum, id est, Christum dari nobis quotidie perimus, vt qui in Christo manemus, & viuimus, à sanctificatione, & corpore eius non recedamus. Therfore when he saieth him to liue for euer, whosoeuer shall eate of his breade: As yt ys manifest that they do liue, whiche do touche this bodie and according to the right of partaking do receaue the Sacrament: Euen so contrarie wise yt ys to be feared and praied for, lest while any man being accursed, ys separated frō the bodie of Chryst, he maie abide and remain farre from health, he threatninge, and sainge: Except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his bloode, ye shall haue no life in yowe. And therfore we dailie desire our bread, that ys to saie, Chryste, to be geuen to vs, F that we whiche do abide and liue in Chryste, maie not departe from his sanctification and bodie. Thus moche S. Cyprian?
In which sainge first he manifestlie sheweth that this text ys to be vnderstanded of the Sacrament. For by expresse woordes he saieth, that they haue life, whiche by right of partaking do receaue-the Eucharist, or Sacrament (as I terme yt) for that the english toung hath none apter terme for yt. And all men vse the woord (Sacrament) to that signification in comon speache. And as we do oftentimes by this tearm (the Sacrament) vnderstand both the Sacrament, and the thing signified by the Sacrament: So dothe saincte Cyprian likewise in this place vnderstand and meen both. For as when he had saied, that we shall haue life by partaking of the Sacrament. Euen so saieth he, yt ys to be feared, that when we be separated from the bodie of Chryste, that then we shall be farre frō health. Wherby yt ys plain that he speaketh not onelie of the Sacrament, as of the sacramentall signes: but he speaketh raither of the Sacrament, as of the thinge signified and conteined in and vnder the sacramentall signes, whiche by G expresse woordes he calleth the bodie of Chryste.
But that ye maie the better creditte the matter, not for my saing, but for his, ye shall heare him expownde him self, that by this woorde, Eucharistia, he Cyprian. Li. 3. Epist. 15 meneth the bodie of Chryste, Illi contra euangelij legè, vestrā quo (que) honorificā petitionem, ante actam poenitentiam, ante exomologesin grauissimi atque extremi delicti factam, ante manum ab Episcopo & Clero in poenitentiam impositam, offerre pro illis, & Eucharistiam dare, id est, sanctum Domini corpus prophanare audent. They against the lawe of the gospell, and also your honorable peticiō, before the penaunce Eucharist. called the holie bodie of our Lord by S. Ciprian. was doē, before the cōfessiō of the most greuouse, and extreme fawte made, before the hand was put on by the Bishoppe, and the cleargie vnto penannce, dare offer for them and geue the Sacrament, that ys, to prophane the holie bodie of our Lorde. Thus Ciprian. In these woordes he plainly interpreteth him self, and sheweth that he taketh this woorde. Eucharistia, for the bodie of Chryste, and therwithall teacheth the reall presence of Chrystes bodie to be in the Sacrament. for yf yt be not in the Sacrament, yt can not by receauinge of the Sacrament be prophaned. H
This then being preceaued, that saincte Ciprian vnderstandeth this texte of the Sacrament, I will also call one of the greke churche, to geue vs knowledge [Page 116]howe he expowndeth the same, who shalbe Theophilacte, thus he writeth: Iudaei cùm audiuissent de esu carnis illius discredunt. Ideò & verbum incredulitatis A dicunt, quomodò. Nam quando cogitationes incredulitatis ingrediuntur animam, ingreditur simul quomodò. Propterea iple volens ostendere quòd non sit impossibile, sed etiam The ophilact. in. 6. Joan. valde necessarium, & non potest haberi vita nisi eius carnem comedamus &c. Oportet igitur nos cùm audiuerimus: Nisi comederitis carnem filij hominis, non habebitis vitam: in sumptionibus diuinorum mysteriorum indubitatam retinere fidem, & non quaerere, quo pacto? The Iewes, when they had hearde of the eatinge of Chrystes flesh, they do not beleue. And therfor they saie the woorde of vnbeleif Howe. For Howe, the woorde of incredulitie. when the thoughtes of incredulitie do entre the soule, ther entreth withall Howe. Therfore he willing to shewe that yt was not impossible, but euen very necessarie, and that other wise life can not be had, except we eate his flesh &c. Therfore we must when we heare: Except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man ye shall haue no life: in the receauinge the Diuine misteries retein an vndoubted faith and not aske, Howe or by what mean. Thus moche Theophilacte. Capite 7.
Marke that he wolde, when we heare this texte: Except ye eate the flesh &c. we shoulde haue an vndoubted faith. what vndoubted faith he meneth, he opened in his saing alleaged for the text before declared, wher he saied that B the bread whiche Chryst wolde geue, ys not a figure of his flesh, but his verie flesh. For the bread (saieth he) yt transformed into the flesh of oure Lorde. This ys that vndoubted faithe, whiche Theophilacte wolde that we shoulde haue, when we heare these woordes, Except ye eate the flesh &c. to beleue that in the Sacrament, we must eate the flesh of Chryste, or ells we shall not haue life. Neuerthelesse this necessitie ys not soche, that all that doo not receaue the holie Sacrament actuallie, shall not haue life: but all that do not in acte or pourpose beinge of age agreable, or doo contemne the receipte of yt actuallie, they shall not haue life. But soche as be of mature age, and doe of good deuocion pourpose to receaue it, though they do not receaue yt actuallie, yet hauing a godlie faith, and not contemning the thing, they shall by Gods mercie haue life. As Baptisme ys a sacrament of great necessitie, yet al that haue obteined life (I meen life euerlasting) were not baptised in water according to Chrystes lawe, but some in bloode, and all in pourpose, none of them at the least contemning the Sacramēt, and therfore being so newe C born again they haue entred into the kingdom of God. But he that ys not born a newe, neither actuallie, nor in pourpose, he shall not entre into the kingdom of God.
Moche goodlie matter offreth ytself here, and diuerse other authours ther be of the auncient time, whose expositions be right plain in this matter. Wherby the diligent Reader maie perceaue that the Aduersaries haue not dealt sincerelie, whiche wolde go aboute to putte furth soche a false doctrine, and therwith so feircelie reproue other men for wresting of the scriptures, when they them selues most shamefullie wrest them, plaing the parte of an euell man, who will allwaies be accusing other men, and charging them with fautes, bicause he will seeme to be in no faute, but incupable, when he vs most viciouse, and most woorthie reprehension.
THE FOVRTENTH CHAPITER EXPOVNDETH the same texte by saincte Augustine, and Cyrill. E
OF eche side of Chrystes Parliament howse, ye haue heard testimonie, howe yt was ther determined and enacted, that this text shoulde be vnderstanded of Chrystes verie bodie and bloode. We will yet proceade to heare some mo of the same house, of the which saincte Augustinc shall be first. Who vpon the same texte saieth thus, speaking to the Iewes: Quomodò quidem detur, & quisnam modus sit manducandi istum panem ignoratis. Veruntamen nisi manducaueritis carnem filij hominis, et biberitis eius sanguinem, August. tract. 26. in Ioan. non habebitis vitam in vobis. Haec non cadaueribus, sed viuentibus loquebatur. Howe yt ys geuen, and what ys the maner of the eating of this breade ye do not knowe. Neuerthelesse except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his bloode ye shall haue no life in yowe. This did he speake not to dead Carkasies, but to liuing men. Thus saincte Augustine.
That the Iewes did not knowe the maner of the eating of Chrystes flesh in the Sacrament, saincte Augustine more plainlie, hadling this texte declareth. F Nisi quis manducauerit carneni meam, non habebit vitam aeternam. Acceperunt illud stultè, carnaliter cogitauerunt, et cogitauerunt quòd praecisurus esset Dominus particulas August in. in Psal. 98 quasdam de corpore suo, et daturus illis. Except a man eate my flesh, he shall haue no life. They tooke it, saieth saincte Augustine, foolishlie, carnallie they thought yt, and they thought that our lorde wolde cutte certen peices from his bodie and geue them. This he.
Nowe the Iewes thus grosselie vnderstanding Chryste had no pleasure in Chrystes doctrine: But yf they had vnderstanded that he by his diuine and allmightie powre might and wolde geue his flesh to be eaten verilie in the Sacrament, after an other maner, and not grosselie, as in that sorte or maner as he walked and liued vpon the earthe, then the woordes of Chryste wolde haue ben to them liuelie and pleasaunte, but they tooke them foolishlie (saieth saincte Augustine) and carnallie. So that he vnderstandeth this saing of Chryste, of the eating of the flesh of Chryst in the Sacrament, whiche ys one of the thinges, that we seke to proue, forasmoche as yt hath ben contrarilie taught of the Aduersaries. G
But they perchaunce will saie, that though saincte Augustine do vnderstād August. de Doct. Christ. li. 3 cap. 16. this text of the Sacrament, yet he doth not therby teache the reall presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament but raither the contrarie. For alleaging this text in a certain place he saieth that yt ys a figuratiue speache. Si autem slagitium, aut facinus iubere, aut vtilitatem & beneficentiam videtur vetare, figurata locutio est. Nisi manducaueritis carnem filij hominis, & biberitis eius sanguinem, non habebitis vitam in vobis, facinus, vel flagitium videtur iubere: figura ergo est, praecipiens passioni Domini esse communicandum, & suauiter, atque vtiliter in memoria recondendū, quòd pro nobis caro eius crucifixa & vulnerata sit. Yf the scripture seme to commaū de anie euell dede or great offence, or to forbidde any profitte or well doing, yt ys a figuratiue speache. Except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his bloode, ye shall not haue life in yowe, Yt semeth to commaunde an euell dede or offence, wherfore yt ys a figure, commaunding to communicate the passion of Chryste, and swetelie, and profitablie to kepe in memoric, that Chrystes flesshe was crucified and wounded for vs.
This ys saincte Augustines saing, who (as the Aduersaries saie) plainlie affirmeth H that this saing of Chryst: Except ye eate the flesh &c. ys a figuratiue speache, whiche so being, then the flesh of Chryst (saie they) ys but figuratiuelie eaten in the Sacrament
[Page 117]This argument haue the heretikes of our time borowed of Berengarius and Sacramentaries doctrine an old heresie new skoured. A his disciples, as also they did theresie yt self, which of a good time laie all rustie and vnknowen, vntill the Deuell raised vppe these his furbyshers, who haue newlie skoured this heresie, and the argumentes therto apperteininge, and haue sett them furth to deceaue the people withall.
But as the argument was inuēted and made by the heretikes of that time, so was yt aunswered and solued by the good catholike Fahers at that same time. Whose aunswers, and solucions be soche as they wipe awaie all the strenght that was thought to be in that argument. Among the whiche we will onelie for this present bring furthe the aunswer, whiche was made by Guitmundus. who liued in the yeare of our Lorde 1060, and solued this argumente Guitmūd. lib. 2. thus: Ait beatus Augustinus quòd Dominus videtur facinus, vel flagitium iubere, non quia facinus aut slagitium inberet, iubendo manducari carnem suam. Sed videtur (inquit) iubere: illis videlicet, qui putauerunt quòd hoc iubendo, necessariò etiam se iuberet occidi, & membratim conscindi, atque ita demūcarnē eius crudā, vel coctāmāducari. Proinde ergo figura est (inquit) in hac locutione. Hic iā adgaudet fortassis vmbraticus, hic iam obstrepit. Noli praeposterè vmbratice, noli praecipitāter gloriari. Cuius reifigura dicatur B hic esse patiēter & diligēter aduerte. Figura ergo est (ait August.) praecipiens. Quid praecipiens? quid figurans? hoc enim figurat quod praecipit. Passioni Domini (inquit) cōmunicandū, et suauiter at (que) vtiliter in memoria recōdendū, quòd pro nobis caro eius crucifixa, & vnlnerata sit. Deo gratias. Quicquid igitur illud est, quod Augustinus hic figurāappellat, (Nam quid figuram dicat, in his eius verbis agnosci non difficilè potest) non vtique corporis Domini, sed crucifixtonis eias, & vulnerationis, hoc est occisionis, nostraeue communicationis cum ea, id est vt imitemur Christum, & communicemus passioni eius compatiendo, manifestissimè figuram esse demonstrat: Paulo quoque Apostolo concordante, qui ait, Quotiescunque panem hunc manducabitis, & calicem Domini bibetis, mortem Domini annunciabitis donec veniat. Saincte Augustine saieth, that owre Lorde seemeth to bidde an eueldede, or a great offence, not that he bidding his flesh to be eaten, did bidde Obiectiō of the Sacramentaries. anie euell dede to be doen or great offence, but that he semed to bidde, that ys to saie, to them whiche thought that he bidding this, did necessarelie bidde his flesh to be slain, and to be cutte one membre from an other, and so at the last his fllesh either rawe or sodden to be eaten. Therfore (saieth he) ther C ys a figure in this saing. Here nowe peraduenture the shadowe Aunswer. man (meening the heretike) doth reioice, here nowe he maketh his noise. Reioice thow not, shadow teacher, oute of ordre, reioice not to hastilie. Of what thing yt ys saied to be a figure patientlie and diligentlie take hede. Yt ys a figure (saieth saincte Augustine) commaundinge, what commaunding? or what figuring? (For yt doth figure that, that yt doth commaund) that we, saieth he, shoulde partake the passion of oure Lorde, and swetelie and profitablie kepe in memorie, that his flesh was crucified and wounded for vs. God bethanked. What soeuer yt be then that saincte Augustine here calleth the Sacrament a figure not of Chrystes bodie but of his death. figure (for what he doth call the figure in these his woordes yt ys not so harde to be knowen) yt ys not the figure of the bodie of our Lorde, but of his crucifieng and wounding, that ys, of his death, and of owre communicating with the same, that ys to saie, that we shoulde folowe Chryst, and communicate his passion, suffring withe him, that doth he most manifestlie shewe to be a figure, Paule also the Apostle agreinge with him, who saieth, As often as ye shall eate this breade, and drinke ths cuppe, ye shall shewe furthe the death of our Lorde vntil he come. Thus farre Guitmundus. D
In this aunswer (which although yt be long, yet I thought yt necessarie to bring yt not truncatelie, but whollie to satisfie the Reader) ye maie perceane [Page]that this Authour manifestlie proueth that saincte Augustine saieth not that E the flesh and blood of Chryste be figuratiuely in the Sacrament (whiche the Aduersarie cheiflie pretendeth and seketh) But sainct Augustine saieth, that this sainge of Ghryste (Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man &c.) ys a figuratiue speache (For the eating and drinking of Chrystes flesh and blood in the Sacrament ys a figure of Chrystes passion and blood sheding for vs) and a signe for the continuance of the thinge in our memorie, and also for the mouing of vs to take our crosses, and to suffer with Chryste.
Whiche thinge yet this Authour both more plainlie, and breiflie dothe sett furth in that that foloweth, sainge: Quòd si quaeramus, quid hic figuram Augustinus dixerit, nihil hic vtique tam congruè videtur occurrere, quàm id quod paulò superius Guitmūd. Jbidem. Doctor idem iam dixerat, id est celebratio corporis, & sanguinis Domini. Quas obres stultè, & insipientissimè Berengariani librum de Doctrina Christiana nobis obijciūt, cùm cibus altaris Domini, nusquam ibi figura, nusquam ibi signum dicatur. Et quicquid illud sit, quod & signum ibi vel figura dicitur, non vtique figura corporis & sanguinis Domini, sed passionis Domini, & nostrae communicationis cum ea, certissimè demonstratur. Yf we aske what saincte Augustine here calleth the figure, ther ys nothinge here F that ys perceaued so agreable to occurre, as that whiche a litle before the Berengariās foolishlie obiected S. Aug. So do the Sacramentaries now. same doctour had nowe saied, that ys, the celebracion of the bodie and bloode of our Lorde. For which cause the Berengarians foolislie, and most vnwiselie do obiecte the booke of the chrystian doctrine to vs, seing that the meate of the Altar of our Lorde in no place ther ys called a figure, in no place ther ys called a signe. And what soeuer ther ys called a figure or a signe yt ys most certenlie shewed, not to be a figure of the bodie and blood of our Lorde, but of the passion of our Lorde, and of our communicating with the same. Thus moche Guitmundus.
I nede not to note here to yowe anie thinge, wher euerie thinge ys so plain, neither after my rude maner to trauaill to saie any more for aunswering this argument, where the aunswere of this learned man ys so full, that yt hath fullie and perfectelie aunswered the Aduersaries, and that by the same saincte Augustine whom they obiected, and oute of the same booke, oute of the whiche the obiection was taken. Yet raither to confirme the sainge G of this learned man, then to open and declare that the hath saied, and that the Aduersarie maie perceaue, that yt was not the minde of saincte Augustine, to make the Sacrament a bare figure voide of the reall presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode, I will asscribe a sainge of the same saincte Augustine, whiche semeth to allude to this his sainge here. This yt ys.
Quamuis horribilius videatur humanam carnem manducare, quàm perimere, & humae Aug. cont. aduers. legis & Prop. ca. 9 num sanguinem potare, quàm sundere: nos tamen mediatorem Dei & hominū hominem Iesum Christum carnem suam nobis manducandam, bibendumue sanguinem dantem, fideli corde, & ore suscipimus. Although yt maie seeme to be more horrible to eate the flesh of man, then to kill a man, and to drinke the bloode of man, then to shedde yt: yet we for all that do receaue the mediator of God and men Iesus Chryste, geuing vs his flesh to be eaten with a faithfull heart and mouth, and his bloode to be dronken. Thus saincte Augustine.
Remembre nowe (gentle Reader) the rule of saincte Augustine before geuen for the vnderstanding of the scriptures, and conferre this his sainge, H with that other, and ye shall perceaue, that the figuratiue speache, that he speaketh of ther, ys not soche as shoulde take awaie the presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode in the Sacrament, and leaue but a bare figure, a signe, or [Page 118]a token of that bodie and blood, as the Aduersarie wolde haue yt. For wher he saieth ther, that Chryst, willing vs to eate his flesh, and drinke his bloode, semeth A to commaunde an euell dede to be doen, and therfore to be a figuratiue speache: here he saieth, that though yt seme to be an horrible facte, to eate the flesh of man and drinke his bloode: yet do we with faithfull heart, and mouth eate the flesh and drinke the bloode of the mediatour of God and man, whiche ys the man Iesus Chryste.
Ye see that though yt seme to be an horrible facte so to do: yet saincte Augustine here maketh not the figuratiue speache soche, as to take awaie the reall presence of the bodie and bloode of Chryste from the Sacrament: but Chrystesbodie ād blood in the Sacr. to be receaued both with heart and mouth that we shoulde receaue the bodie and blood of Chryst, and that not onelie with a faithfull heart, whiche serueth for the spirituall receipt of Chrystes bodie and blood, but also with a faithfull mouthe, whiche argueth a corporall receipt of the bodie of Chryst, as the Proclamer knoweth right well. And therfor I dare saie, this saing of saincte Augustine pincheth him euen by the conscience. I saie then with Guitmundus, let not the Aduersarie triumphe to moche vpon his figuratiue speache, as once I heard master Horn do B in a sermon by him made in the Vniuersitie of Cambridge, wher after the Master Horns signracion. maner of soche his likes, he abused the figuratiue speache, and placed yt ther wher yt shoulde not be placed. For saincte Augustine did not so place this figuratiue speache, as therby to displace the bodie and blood of Chryste frō the Sacramente, whiche we must receaue with a faithfull hearte and mouthe: but he placed his figuratiue speache, as Guitmundus noted to yow, that ys, in the swete and dououte remembrance of Chrystes death and passion, and in the crucifieng, and mortifieng of our flesh with all his lust and concupiscence. Yf then the Aduersarie be desierouse to haue figures in the Sacrament, let him not diuise soche a figure as neither Chryste nor his holie membres did acknowlege: but let him take soche and in soche place as by them be appointed, whiche bicause the Aduersarie shall not lacke, let him vnderstand that ther be manie.
This holie Sacrament ys (as ys saied) a figure of Chrystes death and passion: The Sacrament ys a figure in diuerse respectes, but not onelie a figure. yt ys a figure teaching vs, that as Chryste was crucified for our sinnes, C so shoulde we crucifie sinne in our owne bodies. Yt ys a figure of the misticall bodie of Chryst, the Churche. The formes of bread and wine, be figures of Chrystes bodie and blood verilie being vnder the same formes. Finallie bicause the woordes of Chryste (Except ye eate my flesh, and drinke my bloode) in grosse vnderstanding after the sownde of the letter, as the Iewes did take yt, do importe that we shoulde (as S. Augustine saieth) eate his flesh rawe, sodden, or rosted by lumpes and peices, as we do flesh from the shambles, after whiche maner we do not, nor maie not eate yt, therfore yt ys a figuratiue speache, that we must eate yt, euen the same flesh, and the same bloode in substance, after a spirituall maner, that ys vnder the formes of the Sacrament inuisiblie, and thus yt ys a figure also. And bicause one thing ys receaued not in his owne forme in fensible maner, but in the forme of an otther thing, in this respecte yt ys figuratiuelie eaten.
Thus ye perceaue howe the sainge of Chryste ys a figuratiue speache, and D that by conference with S. Augustines own sainge. Ye see also that the Sacrament ys a figure of manie thinges, and yet so as the reall presence of Chrystes bodie ys not taken awaie from the same, But ys so ther that we must (as S. Augustine saieth) receaue yt with owre mouth, whiche can not be but verilie, and reallie.
[Page]And nowe I leaue this obiection as fullie aunswered, and turne me to E the processe of the matter, noting this to yowe for the same, that where yt ys declared, that S. Augustine saieth that the sainge of Chryste ys a figuratiue speache, he vnderstandeth this alleaged texte of the Sacrament, and of the verie reall presence of the same flesh and bloode, as the woordes of Chryste do pourporte, spirituallie (as ys before saied) vnderstanded.
Yt were not a litle to be meruailed, that so famouse a man, so highlie learned, so constante in faithe, who, as ye haue alreadie hearde, and more shall, hath so plainlie, so manifestlie, withoute all obscuritie, taught the verie reall presence of Chrystes blessed bodie and blood in the Sacrament, shoulde in this place forgette his faithe, forgette his learninge, leaue his constancie, and teache a contrarie doctrine, that Chryste should be there but as in a figugure or signe. No, God be praised, as he ys a strong piller of Chrystes Churche: So he will stand constantlie and stronglie in the same, and will not be drawen into the companie of the malignaunte Churche, whiche God hateth: but remain in the catholique Churche, whiche God loueth. F
S. Augustine thus being declared, for the better vnderstanding of this scripture, I will heare one other, who shall open vnto vs howe he also vnderstandeth the same. This shall be Cyrille, whose sainge ys this: Non poterat enim aliter corruptiblis haec naetura corporis ad incorruptibilitatem & vitam traduci, nisi Cyrill in. 15. Joan. naturalis vitae corpus ciconiungeretur. Non credis mihi haec dicenti? Christo te obsecro sidē praebe dicenti: Amen amen (in quit) dico vobis, nisi manducaueritis carnem filij hominis, & biberitis sanguinem eius, non habebitis vitam in vobis. Audis apertè clamantem non habituros nos vitam nisi sanguinem eius biberimus, & carnem manducauerimus. In vobis ipsis dicit, id est, in corpore vestro. vita autem iure ipsa vitae caro intelligi potest. The corruptible nature of this bodie, can not otherwise be brought to incorruptibilitie and life, excepte the bodie of naturall life should be conioined to yt. Doest The receipt of Chrystes bodie maketh oure bodies immortall. thowe not beleue me saing these thinges? I beseche thee beleue Chryst sainge. Verilie verilie I saie. vnto yowe, excepte ye eate the slesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his bloode, ye shall haue no life in yowe. Thowe hearest him plainlie sainge, that we shall not haue life except we drinke his bloode, and eate his flesh, He saieth in your selues, that ys, in your bodie. That same flesh of life by G right maie be vnderstanded life.
In this saieng Cyrill nedeth no expositour, who so plainlie teacheth, that this corruptible bodie coulde not atteign to incorruptibilitie and life, except the bodie of naturall life shoulde be conioined to yt. what ys the bodie of naturall life he teacheth afterwarde, when he saied: the flesh of Chryste maie Chrysts slesh called life, as being the flesh of God, who ys life. of right be called life, bicause yt ys the flesh of life, that ys, of God, who ys the verie life of his own nature, by whom all other thinges, in the which he hath putte a liuing soule, do liue. But he naturally liueth, that ys, of his owne nature, not by life powred into him, as by him yt ys powred into vs, but of him self. Therfore Cyrill calleth the bodie of Chryst, the bodie of naturall life, bicause yt ys the bodie of God, who ys naturall life. Nowe note that he saieth, that this bodie of naturall lif, whiche ys the bodie of Chryste, must be ioined to our corruptible nature, whiche ioining Chrystes bodie is ioined to vs by corparall receipt not by spirituall. ys not but by the corporall receipt of that bodie, and not by the spirituall receipt, whiche ioineth not the bodie of Chryst to our corruptible nature. Therfore Cyrill proueth by this texte, that of very necessitie we must receaue H the verie flesh and bloode of Chryste verilie, and reallie, as that yt maie be ioined to this our corruptible bodie, that yt by the other maie haue life and incorruptibilitie. Wherfor they that take awaie the one and leaue vs but the other, do vs wronge.
[Page 119]Heare therfor what the same Cyrill saieth in this same chapiter: Non negamus nos recta fide charitateue syncera Chrysto spiritualiter coniungi, sed nullam nobis A In 15. Joan A plain place of S. Cyrill for the proclamer. coniunctionis rationem secundùm carnem cum illo esse, id profectò pernegamus, idue à diuinis scripturis, omnino alienum dicimus. Quis enim dubitauit etiam sic Christum vitem esse, nos verò palmites, qui vitam inde nobis acquirimus? Audi Paulum dicentem, quia omnes vnum corpus sumus in Christo, quia etsi multi sumus, vnum tamen sumus in eo, omnes enim de vno pane participamus. An fortassis putat ignotam nobis mysticae benedictionis virtutem, quae cum in nobis fiat, nonne corporaliter quoque facit, communicatione carnis Christi, Christum in nobis habitare? Cur enim membra fidelium membra sunt Christi? Nescitis (in quit) quia mēbra fidelium, membra sunt Christi? Membraigitur Christi, meretricis faciam membra? Absit. We do not denie (saieth Cyrill) We are ioined to Chryst two waies corporallie ād spirituallie. that we, by right faithe, and sincere charitie, spirituallie be conioined to Chryst, but that we haue no maner of coniunction withe him after the flesh, that truly we vtterly denie, and saie that that ys altogether contrarie to the scriptures of God. For who hathe doubted Chryste euen so to be the vine, and vs to be the braunches, whiche from thence gett life. Heare Paule saing that we be all one bodie in Chryst. For although we be manie, B yet we be one in him. For all we do partake of one breade. Or peraduentuture doth he thinke that the power of the mysticall benediction ys vnknoto vs? the whiche when yt ys doen in vs, dothe yt not make, by the partaking of Chrystes flesh, Chryste corporallie to dwell in vs? Wherfore be the membres of the faithfull, the membres of Chryst? knowe ye not (saieth he) that your membres be the membres of Chryst? shall I then make the membres of Chryst the membres of an Harlotte? God forbidde. Thus moche Cyrill.
In the which saing, ye perceaue, he teacheth that we be ioined to Chryst bothe spirituallie and corporallie: Spirituallie, by faithe, and charitie: Corporallie by the partakinge of Chrystes flesh in the Sacrament, by the whiche (as Cyrill saieth) Chryste abideth in vs corporallie, by the which saing, the doctrine of the Aduersarie ys quite ouerthrowen, who wolde haue no other receipte of Chrystes bodie, but a spirituall receipt, and detesteth the corporall receipt. S. Cyrill de nieth that we receaue Chrysts bodie onelie spirituallie. But ye haue heard S. Cyrill earnestlie denieng yt and constantlie affirminge yt to be against the scriptures, that Chryst should not be ioined to vs corporallie, C which corporall coniunction ys by the partaking of Chrystes flesh, not in the mysterie of hys incarnacion (as some haue feigned) for thē Chryst tooke our flesh, but in the mysterie of the Sacramēt, which Cyrill calleth the mystical benediction, wher we take Chrystes flesh.
In the incarnaciō Chryst tooke our flesh, ād by yt was ioined to vs: in the Sacrament we take Chrystes flesh, and be ioined to him. In the incarnaciō he Chryst by his incarn. ioined to vs We by the Sacra. ioined to him. tooke our flesh, and the miseries of the same, sinne onelie excepted, in the Sacrament we take hys flesh, and the merites of the same, hys singular exaltaciō excepted. In the incarnacion he did take: in the Sacrament he doth geue. Which both, that ys, the taking of our flesh to him, ād the geuing of his flesh to vs, Chryfostome speaking in the person of Chryste verie well and breiflie declareth, saing: Vester ego frater esse volui, et cōmunicaui carnē propter vos, & sanguinē. Hom l. 45. in 6. Ioan. Et per quae vobis coniunctus sum, ea rursus vobis exhibui. I wolde be yow brother, and for yowe I tooke flesh and bloode, and by what thinges I was cōioined to yow, those haue I again geuen to yow. Thus Chrysostom. And thus ye maie perceaue the false doctrine of these naughtie men, and ther withe their bolde shamelessnes, that wher the saings of the learned fathers D so clerelie denie their onely spirituall maner of the conioining of Chryste to vs, and auouche the corporall ioining by the scriptures, and saie that these [Page]mens sainges be against the scriptures: yet they will peruersedlie and arrogantlie proceade to maintein their heresie, and geue no place eitherto the fathers, E or to the scriptures.
I can not ceasse to merueill that they will persist so obstinatelie against so plain a matter, so plainly vttered and taught by this holie and learned Father S. Cyrill. Wherfore, reader, weigh, and consider well this that ys here spoken, and yf thow hauest stand in faith perseuer, and geue thankes: yf thow hauest erred, return, and seke mercie. Chryste casteth none awaie that come to hym.
THE FIFTENTH CHAPITER CONTINVETH the exposition of the same texte by Leo and Euthymius.
THat right holie man Leo, the Pope, who was elected vnto that office, in the yeare of our Lord 443. so that he was aboue a thousand yeares a gone, whose vertue and holinesse was soche, that not onely of the Synode of Chalcedon, wher were gathered 630. Byshoppes, he was highlie commended: but also of Platina, who wolde speake no more F to the comendacion of popes, then trueth wolde beare him. This holie Father saieth thus: Hanc confessionem, Dilectissimi, toto corde promentes, impia baereticorum commenta respuite, vt ieiunia vestra, & eleemosinae nullius erroris contagio polluantur. Lee ser. 6. de i [...]iu. septmensis. Tunc enim & sacrificij munda est oblatio, & misericordiaesancta largitio, quando hi qui ista dependunt, quid operentur, intelligunt. Nam dicente Domino. Nisi manducaueritis carnem filij hominis, & biberitis cius sanguinem, non habebitis vitam in vobis. Sic sanctae mensae communicare debetis, vt nihil prorsus de veritate corporis Christi, & sanguinis ambigatis. Hoc enim ore sumitur, quod side creditur, & frustra ab illis Amen respondetur, à quibus contra id, quod accipitur, disputatur. Thys confession, most well beloued, vttering furth with all yowr heart, forsake the wicked cōmentes of heretikes, Aplain place of Leo for M. Iuell. that yowr fastinges and allmesses be not desiled with the contagion of erroure. For then ys bothe the oblacion of the sacrifice clean, and the geuing of almesse holie, when they that doo these thinges, vnderstand what they doe. For when our Lord saieth. Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man, and drink hys bloode, ye shall haue no lyfe in yowe. Ye shoulde so communicate of the holie table, that ye shoulde nothing at all doubte of the veritie of the bodie G and bloode of Chryst. For that ys taken and receaued by mouthe, which ys beleued in faithe. And in vain ys Amen aunswered of them, of whom, against that, that ys receaued, The mouthe receaueth, that faith beleueth. argument ys made. Thus moch Leo.
Who (as ye maie perceaue) so certenlie tooke this texte to be vnderstanded of the Sacrament, and of the verie presence of Chrystes bodie in the same, that he vseth yt for an authoritie to prooue the same, and saieth, that for asmoche as our Lord did saie yt, we shoulde nothing at all doubte of the veritie of Chrystes bodie and bloode.
Wherby this also maie be gathered, that he vsing this as an authoritie against heretiques, did vse yt as a scripture receaued, and so vnderstāded throughout all the catholique, Church, which I saie, he vsed against heretikes, not against them in the matter of the Sacrament (for ther were no soche in those times, but against Eutyches and hys disciples, whiche most pestilētlie taught, that the nature of man, which the Sonne of God did take of the virgen, was turned Eutiches his heresie. into that nature of God. And so destroyed the cōiunctiō of the two natures in that one persō of Chryst. Against the which heresie this holie mā brought H this sentence of scripture, as a sentence receaued of all men for the veritie of Chrystes flesh in the Sacrament, therwith to prooue, that forasmoche as the [Page 120]verie flesh of the manhead of Chryste was in the Sacrament, Chryste had still the verie nature of man in him. A
Thus ye maie perceaue, that the truthe of this matter of the Sacrament that ys to saie, that Chrystes verie bodie and blood be reallie in the Sacrament, Reall presence so certenlie beleued that aū ciēt fathers vsed yt for authoritie in cōfuting of heresies. was in those daies so clear withoute doubte and controuersie, so substanciallie beleued, that yt was reputed esteemed, and accompted an authoritie sufficient to confute the heresie of Eutyches, and to defende and maintein the true catholique faithe, that in Chryste was both the natures of God and man. Now yf the verie flesh and blood of Chryst were not trulie, verilie, and reallie in the Sacrament, the matter of the Sacrament, coulde proue nothing against this heresie, but raither make with yt. But forsomoche as ther ys the verie flesh of Chryste, yt proueth very well, that the verie nature of man ys in Chryst, directlie against the heresie of Eutyches.
This alone, in my opinion, might suffice to reduce men from erroure, considering that thys was a trueth thus receaued a thousand yeares agon, in the whiche time we be well assured that the Church was withoute errour in this matter, and men so zelouse in the trueth of the catholike faith, B that an heresie did not so soone appeare and shewe yt self, but yt was furthwith impugned, as to the learned yt ys well knowen. But this matter of the Sacrament was neuer yet impugned, of anie catholique writer, that hath liued since Chryst (as the learned also do knowe) wherfore yt ought to be taken as an vndoubted trueth.
But omitting to make any further prooff herof by thys authour, I will, according to my ordre prescribed, ioin vnto him Euthymius a greke authour, who in hys exposition of this texte geueth vs thus to vnderstand yt: saing: Nisi comederetis carnem filii hominis, & biberitis eius sanguinem, non habebitis Euth. in 6. Joan. vitam in vobis. Illi quidem hoc impossibile iudicabant, ipse verò omnino possibile ostendit, neque id tantùm, sed necessarium, quod etiam fecit ad Nicodemum. Addit autem & de sanguine, significans de pane ac poculo, quae, vt dictum est, daturus erat Discipulis in vltima coena. Except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke hys blood, ye shall not haue life in yowe. They (meening the Iewes) thought this vnpossible: but he (meening Chryste) declared yt alltogether C to be possible, and not that onelie, but also necessarie. Whiche thing he also did to Nicodemus. He speaketh also of hys blood, signifieng that he speaketh of the bread and the cuppe, whiche he wolde geue (as yt ys saied) to his Disciples in his last supper. Thus Euthymius.
I haue thought good in this exposition first to note to yow, that thys authour (notwithstanding the wicked wresting of the Aduersarie) vnderstandeth thys scripture with the other holie Fathers, of the Sacrament. For by plain woordes he saieth, that our Sauiour speaketh here of the bread and cuppe, that he wolde geue in the last supper. And signifieng that he forgatt not what he had saied in the same matter before, referreth himself to that, that he had before saied, saing Sicut dictum est, as yt ys allreadie saied.
For before he saied that Chryst ys called bread two waies, that ys, after hys deitie, and after hys humanitie. Therfore after he had spoken of the Chryst called bread two waies. bread whiche ys hys deitic, nowe in thys place he speaketh of the bread whiche ys hys humanitie, of the whiche bread he saied not: whiche I do geue yowe, but I will geue yowe: for he wolde geue yt in his last supper, but when? when he tooke the bread, and after thankes geuen, brake yt, and gaue yt to D his Disciples, saing. Take, eat, This ys my bodie. And therfor yt ys withoute al scruple or doubte, that seing Chryst speaketh here of the bread and [Page]cuppe, that he wolde geue in his last Supper, therfore these woordes be spoken E of the Sacrament.
Neither maie the Aduersarie here cauille vpon these woordes, bread and wine, that this authour doth meen that in the Sacrament ys nothing but bread and wine, as figurs of the bodie and blood of Chryst. For so farre wide was this from his meening, that he plainlie denieth the substance of the Sacrament to be a figure, signe or token of the bodie and blood of Chryst, but the verie bodie and blood of Chryst, as shall better and more at large appeare by this same authours exposition vpon the xxvi. of Matthew, in the lviii. chap. of this booke. Euthimius denieth that, which the Sacramentaries affirme, ād affirmeth, that they de nie.
So then thys ys first certen, that this sixt chapiter of S. Iohn ys by this authour vnderstanded of the Sacrament, which ys one thing that ys denied by the Aduersaries. So likewise this authour denieng the substance of the Sacrament to be a figure or signe of the bodie and blood of Chryst, but the verie reall and substanciall bodie and bloode of Chryst (for yf the signe or figure be taken awaie, the verie substance must nedes be in place) the other parte F that the Aduersaries denie, ys by this authour affirmed, and what by the Aduersaries ys affirmed, by this Authour yt ys denied.
Thus (gentle Reader) thow maist perceaue the doctrine of the Aduersaries to be directly contrarie to the doctrine of the holie Fathers. Whiche thing when I consider in the Proclamer, me semeth to see before me hym, vpon whom this curse of God ys fallen: Wo be vnto them, that call euell good, and good euell, which make darknesse light, and light darkenesse, which make sowre sweet, and sweet sowre. Wo be vnto them, that are wise in their own seight, Esay 5. and thinke them selues to haue vnderstanding. For the Proclamer and hys complices, teaching obedience to the catholique Church to be euell, and disobedience to the same to be good, trueth to be darknesse, and falshead to be light: penitent life to be sowre, and sensuall life to be swete, are they not vnder this curse? Dothe not the Proclamer take the seconde curse vpon hym also, thinking himself wise in hys owne conceat? Dothe not he thinke himself wise and to haue vnderstanding, that contemneth all the learned men that haue ben this thousand year? Standeth not he in hys owne conceat, G that stoutely derideth, skoffeth mocketh, and wickedlie abuseth the learning not of one or two, but of manie, not of soche as be obscure, but of soche as be famouse, and haue ben of the Chrystian church reputed and esteemed as learned? And finallie ys not he accursed that saieth heresie ys trueth, and trueth heresie? that trueth ys darknesse, and heresie light? hys owne phantasies truethes, and the truthes of the Fathers phantasies? that saieth yea, when they saie naie, and naie, when they saie yea. But whether go I. Though grief wolde yet again carie me awaie, I will staie here, and return to my matter.
THE SIXTENTH CHAPITER ENDETH THE EXposition of this text in hand by the Ephesine Councell.
HAuing sufficientlie proued by the sentences and iudgementes of diuerse learned and holie Fathers, that the saing of our Sauiour Chryst in the sixt chapiter of S. Iohn: Nisi manducauer. &c. Except ye eate the flesh, &c. ys to be vnderstanded of the Sacramēt: H nowe to knitte vppe and ende my processe of the same texte, I thought good to alleage the epistle of the Ephesine Councel sent to Nestorius, in the which this text being alleaged, yt maie be perceaued by the iudge [Page 121]ment of cc. By shoppes, both grekes and latines, how the saied text ys to be vnderstanded. Which as Leo did alleage against Eutiches, So do these Fathers A expownd the same against Nestorius. As Eutyches denied the nature of man to Nestorius and Eutiches, their heresies. remain in Chryst: So did Nestorius denie the nature of God to be incarnate. Eutyches saied that he was but one person, for that he was onelie God, and not man: Nestorius saied that both the natures of God and man remained distinctlie, as to seuerall persons, the Godhead not incarnated, the Manhead not deitated, as Gregorie Nazianzen termeth yt, and so implied he that Chryst born of the virgen, was onelie man and not God.
Against the whiche blasphemouse heresie, the Councell sent him the epistle before saied, and in the same they write thus: Necessariò & hoc adijcimus, annunciantes Exepist. Ephes. Concilijad Nestoriū. enim sicut secundùm carnem, mortem vnigeniti filii Dei, id est, Iesu Christi, & re surrectionem eius, & in coelis ascensionem pariter confitentes, incruentam pariter celebramus in ecclesiis sacrificij seruitutem: sic & ad mysticas benedictiones accedimus, & sanctificamur, participes sancti corporis, & preciosi sanguinis Christi, omnium nostrûm Redempto riseffecti: non vt communem carnem percipientes (quod absit) nec vt viri sanctificati, & verbo coniuncti secundùm dignitatis vnitatem, aut sicut diuinam possidentis habitationem, B sed verè viuificatricē, & ipsius verbi propriam factam, Vita enim naturaliter existens vt Deus, quia propriae carni vnitus est, viuificatricē eam professus est. Et ideò quamuis dicat ad nos, Nisi manducaueritis carnē filij hominis, & biberitis eius sanguinē, non habebitis vitā in vobis: non tamē eam vt hominis vnius ex nobis existimare debernus. Quomodò enim secundùm naturā suā, viuificatrix esse caro hominis poterit? Sed vt verè propriā eius sactā, qui propter nos et filius hominis factus est, & vocatus. Necessarelie therfore this also we putte to, shewing furth the death after the flesh of the onelie begottē Sō ne of God, that ys of Iesus Chryst, and confessing also the resurrection and ascension of him into the heauens, we do celebrate in the churches an vnbloodie seruice of Sacrifice. So also do we come vnto the mysticall benedictions, and be sanctified, being made partakers of the holie bodie and preciouse Ephesine Councellvn derstandeth this text: Except ye cate &c. of the Sacrament and so did Nestorius also. blood of Chryste the Redemer of vs all not taking yt as comō flesh (which God forbidde) neither as of a sanctified mā, and ioined to the Sōne of God, after the vnitie of dignitie, or as possessing the diuine habitacion, but truly quickning or geuing life, and made the propre flesh of the Sōne of God. For C being naturallie life as God, bicause he ys vnited to hys owne propre flesh, he hath professed yt to be geuing life. And therfor although he saieth to vs: Verilie verilie I saie to yow, except ye eate the flesh of the Sōne of mā, ād drinke bys blood ye shall haue no life in yow. Yet we should not esteem yt as of a mā that ys one of vs, for how can the flesh of man after hys owne nature be a quickning flesh, or geuing life, but as made hys own propre flesh, who for vs was made the Sonne of man, and so called. Thus the Councell.
Do ye not here see, howe that this holie Coūcel, which ys one of the four famouse generall Coūcells, wold that we should not take this text of S. Iohn, as Nestorius did, to be spokē of the flesh of Chryst, as of the flesh of a pure mā, but of the flesh of Chryste, as the verie owne propre flesh of God, and that yt so taken and eaten doth geue life, being able so to doe, not for that yt ys of the nature of man, but bicause yt ys the flesh of God.
Nowe maie yt not be saied that this ys to be vnderstanded spūallie. For Nestorius that saied that Chryst was but a verie man, and grownded hymself moch vpon this text: Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man. and cōcluded ther fore that he was but the Sonne of man, did not take the matter so finelie that D the flesh of Chryst was in the Sacramēt but merelie spirituallie, who had cō ceaued so grosse an opinion of Chryst, that he was but a bare man naturallie. [Page]And therfor the Councell, who tooke the same scriptures to improue that, that Nestorius semed, to himself to haue proued, must nedes vse the same sense E of the scripture, as touching the substance of the thing that ys in disputacion Reall presence auouched by the Ephesine Councell. or ells they shoulde nothing proue against him. For yf Nestorius spake of the verie flesh of Chryst, and the Councell of the spirituall flesh of Chryst, what coulde they conclude against him, not speaking of the same thing that the other spake of. And therfore vndoubtedliē they spake of the verie reall flesh of Chryst, which ys the own propre flesh of God. Whiche thing also the A plain saing of a Councell for M. Juel woordes of the Councell do proue wher yt ys saied: We come to the mysticall benedictions, being made partakers of the holie bodie and preciouse blood of Chryst the Redemer of vs all, receauing yt not as common flesh, but as the flesh truly geuing life.
Yt maketh also for this vnderstanding not a litle that Cyrill being president of the Councell, who (as before ye heard) doth plainlie affirme, that we do not onelie by faith and charitie, spirituallie receaue the flesh of Chryste, but also verilie and reallie, wolde not nowe, nor did not speake of the spirituall receauing onelie, which onelie receauing of Chryst spirituallie and not otherwise in the Sacramēt he did earnestlie denie, and stronglie improue by F the scriptures. And therfor yt ys most euident that this texte nowe in hand was vnderstanded by that Councell of the Sacrament, as being the very reall bodie and blood of Chryst, whiche yf we receaue not, we haue no life.
To this holie Councell I thinke yt vnsemlie to ioin anie one particular man. Wherfore to ende here the exposition of this said texte, I will onelie adde to yt being an holie multitude, the practise of an other holie multitude euen the auncient Church, who so streictlie, and yet directilie for the substance of the thing, did take this text to be vnderstanded of the verie reall and The church of Affrica vnderstanding the vi. of S. John of the Sacr. ministred yt to infantes. substanciall flesh and blood of Chryst in the Sacrament, that they thought yt a matter of necessitie to ministre the same to infantes, as withoute receipt wherof they thought they coulde not be saued. The practise wherof we finde to haue endured in the Affrican Church from the time of S. Cyprian vntill the tyme of S. Augustine at the least. By whiche yt ys manifest that the Churche then vnderstood thys scripture of the Sacrament, and yet not of the bare Sacrament onelie, but of the verie flesh and G bloode of Chryst ther reallie to be receaued, and not of yt spirituallie to be receaued, for that they well knewe, that ther lacked in those infantes that knowledg, whiche necessarilie ys required to the spirituall receauinge of Chrystes bodie, and therfor they did not receaue yt spirituallie, but sacramentallie.
And though this practise of the communicating of infantes grounded vpon this vnderstanding of this scripture, was ceassed, yet that the Churche did still retein that vnderstanding, this well proueth, that Petrus Dresensis perswading Iacobellus de Praga to minister the Sacrament vnder bothe kindes, vsed this texte here expownded, as being vnderstanded of the Sacrament, by the comon consent of the Churche, for hys argument, which text when Iacobellus had weighed, and considered howe yt hadde ben alwaies vnderstanded in the Churche, he began to perswade the people, that they aught of necessitie, yf they wolde haue euerlasting life, to receaue the Sacrament vnder both kindes, as vnder whiche they shoulde both eate hys flesh and drinke hys blood: of whiche matter more large disputacion shall be made H in the ende of this booke wherfor I think yt not mete here to trouble the reader with all, but to refer him thither, thinking yt sufficient for this place [Page 122]to aduertise him, that all the authours herto fore alleaged vpon this text, and all these holie fathers in the Ephesine Councell representing the Churche, A and the Chuch in the time of S. Cyprian, and so to S. Augustine, and from him to the time of Petrus Dresensis and Iacobellus, and after ther time, in the time of soche as haue written vpon the gospells, vntill the time of Luther did vnderstand this text, of the flesh and bloode of Chryst in the Sacrament, as their workes do well testifie.
But thus moche maie I here well saie, that yt pitieth me to see howe the people suffer them selues to be deluded of these newe inuentours of disordres, and by them both to be drawen from true faith, and also to breake the vsuall ordre of the Churche, that wher our Sauiour Chryst saied by plain woordes: Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man, and drinke his bloode, ye shall not haue life in yowe. Whiche text (as ye haue heard) ys fullie proued to be ment of Chrystes verie bodie and bloode in the Sacrament, yet being inueigled by Both flesh and blood was before vnder one kind, now neither of both vnder two kindes. thaduersaries doctrine hardlie beleue this mening of the Catholique Fathers to be true, and therfor wher the Aduersaries maliciouslie perswade thē, that the ministres of the Churche deceaued them, in geuing them the Sacrament B but vnder one kinde, they are contented to encline and yelde vnto them. And so wher before they did vnder one kinde, receaue the verie flesh and bloode of Chryste, they are nowe contented vnder two kindes to receaue neither flesh nor bloode.
THE SEVENTENTH CHAPITER EXPOVNDETH THE next text folowing in the sixte of S. Iohn by saincte Augustine and Cyrill.
NOwe will I proceade to the text folowing in S. Iohn, whiche, for asmoche as yt ys not moche discrepant from that before, but as yt were an affirmatiue sequele of the same, I will not troble the reader with long treacting vpon yt, but breiflie shewe the meninge therof, and haste me to other that contein more matter, not so plainlie spoken of before, as this hath ben. The text ys: Qui C manducat meam carnem, & bibit meum sanguinem, habet vitam aeternam. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath eternall life.
As the absteining from the eating of the flesh and blood of Chryste, causeth lacke Foode of Chrystes flesh cause of immortalitie. of life: So ys yt consequent that the feading on the flessh and blood of Chryst causeth the hauing of life. As the meat ys, soche ys the effecte and operacion of yt. Yf a man eate corruptible meate, yt will for a while maintein, but yt will not preserue from corruption. Yf a man feade on mortall thinges, yt can not preserue from mortalitie, but fuffer him to be mortall: So if a man feed on spirituall thinges, and digest them well, yt will make a man spirituall. Yf a man feed of immortall thinges, yt will bring the like effect, and make a man immortall. For euery foode leaueth his effect or operacion of nature in the thing that feadeth. Yf then we feede on Chryst, who ys life, he will leaue his effect in vs, which ys life. And for so moch as he ys the eternall and immortall life, he wil woork in vs according to his nature, that we shall haue eternall and immortall life. And therfor he saieth: Qui manducat meam carnem & bibit meum sanguinem habet vitam aeternam. He that Hom. 46. in Ioan. D eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternall life, he saieth not life onely, but eternall life. And (as Chrysostome saieth) Cùm dixisset si quis manducauerit [Page] ex hoc pane non morietur inaeternum, & credibile esset eos dicturos, quemadmodum superius, Abraham mortuus est, & Prophetae mortui sunt, & quomodò tu dicis, non E gustabit mortem inaeternum? Resurrectionem ponit, per quam soluit quaestionem, quòd non morietur in fine. When he had saied: whosoeuer shall eate of this bread he shall not die for euer: and yt was credible that they wolde haue saied, as they did before, Abraham ys dead and the Prophetes be dead, and howe doest thowe saie he shall not tast deathe? He putteth the resurrection by the whiche he solueth the question that he shall not die in the ende. And therfore he saieth: Et egoresuscitabo eum in nouissimo die. And I will raise him vppe in the last daie.
But I will leaue my exposition to see the mindes of the doctours vpon this scripture. S. Augustine writeth thus: Hanc non habet, qui istum panem non manducat, nec istum sanguinem bibit. Nam temporalem vitam sine illo habere homines Tract 26. in Ioan. possunt, aeternam verò non possunt. Qui ergo non manducat eius carnem, nec bibit eius sanguinem non habet in se vitam, & qui manducat eius carnem, & bibit eius sanguinem, habet vitam aeternam. Ad vtrunque autem respondit, quòd dixit vitam aeternam. Non ita est in hac esca, quam sustentādae huius corporis vitae causa sumimus. Nam qui eam non sumpserit, F non vinet. Nec tamen qui eam sumpserit, viuet. Fieri enim potest, vt senio vel morbo, vel ali quo casu, plurimi qui eam sumpserint moriantur: in hoc verò cibo & potu, id est, corpore & sanguine Domini non ita est. Nam & qui eum non sumit, non habet vitam: & qui eum sumit habet vitam, & hanc vtique aeternam. He hath not this life, that eateth not this bread, nor drinketh this bloode, For withoute that meat, men maie haue the temporall life, but the eternall life they can not haue. He therfor that dothe not eate his flesh, nor drinke his bloode, hath no life in him. And he that doth eate his fleshe and drinke his bloode, hath life euerlasting. He hath aunswered to both in that he hath saied (euerlasting) Yt ys not so in this meate, whiche we do take to sustein the life of this bodie. For he that doth not take yt shall not liue, neither for all that shall he liue that hath taken yt. For yt maie be that manie with age, disease or some other chaunce euen of them that haue taken yt maie die. In this meat and drinke, that ys to saie, in the bodie and blood of our Lorde, yt ys not so. For bothe he that doth not take yt, hath not life, and he that doth take yt hath life, yea and that eternall. This ys sainct Augustines minde vpon this text Whiche although yt doth speake G of the Sacrament, yet some perchaunce will obiecte and saie, that S. Augustine Ibidem. immediately expowndeth him self to speake of the misticall bodie of Chryste, whiche ys his Churche, and not of the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament. For thus he saieth: Hunc iraque cibum & potum societatem vult intelligi corporis & membrorum suorum, quod est Ecclesia in praedestinatis, & vocatis, & iustificatis, & glorificatis, sanctis & fidelibus eius. Quorum primum iam factum est: secundū & tertium, & factum est, & fit, id est, vocatio & iustificatio: quartum verò nunc in spe est, in re autem futurum est, id est, glorificatio. This meate and drinke therfor he will to be vnderstanded the societie or felowshippe of the bodie and his mē bres, whiche ys the holie Churhe in the predestinated, and called, and iustified, and glorified sainctes, and his faithfull. Of the whiche the first vs nowe doen, that ys to saie: predestinacion. The secōd and the thirde, ys both doē, and ys in doing, and shall be doen, that ys vocacion, and iustificacion: The fourth ys nowe in hope, but in deed to come, that ys glorificacion. This ys the sentence of S. Augustine, which in deed doth make plain mencion of the bodie misticall of Chryste, and expowndeth the meat that ys spoken H of to be the folowshippe of the bodie and the membres, whiche ys his Churche.
[Page 123]But what though S. Augustin in this place dothe expownde yt of the misticall bodie of Chryste, ys that a good argument that yt ys not to be expownded A of the holie Sacrament? and of the verie flesh ther in conteined? S. Paule saieth that Abraham had two Sonnes the one by a bond maiden, the other by a free woman, whiche thinges (saieth he) are spoken by an allegorie. For these are two testamentes. Nowe ys yt for me to saie that they were not two children in deed, but two Testamentes, or by cause S. Paule saieth they are spoken allegorycallie, therfor they are not spoken historicallie, or litterallie? Do ye not knowe that saincte Augustine him self saieth, that the scripture ys fertile and full of goodlie senseis? Therfore though S. Augustine here expowndeth yt thus: Yet in other places he expowndeth diuerse sentences of this same chapiter of the verie bodie, and reall flesh of Chryst in the Sacrament.
Wherfore this ys to be considered that S. Augustine in his treactises vpon the sixte of S. Iohn, knowing the people to whom he spake, then to be sownd S. Augustines cheif entent in hys treactises vpon the sixt of S. John. in the faith of the Sacrament, and that ther was no controuersie in all the Churche of that matter, by the whiche he was occasioned to speake directlie, B difinitiuelie, and more plainly of the same: he framed him self to speake of that, that neaded, as of the maners, conuersacion, and liuing of the people, and not of that, that neaded not, as to instructe them of the due faithe to be had aboute this misterie. For they knewe right well what yt was. And therfore he did not go aboute to instructe them quid sumerent, sed quàm bene sumerent, what they did receaue, but howe well they shoulde receaue yt. And therfor the most parte of his doing was here to moue them that as they did according to ther faith receaue the bodie of Chryste sacramentallie: So also according to their duetie with godlie deuocion, holie conuersation, and spirituall meditaciō they might receaue him spirituallie withoute the whiche maner of receipt, the other was nothing profitable, but raither hurtfull and damnable.
And therfore in the end of the sixt of S. Iohn shewing his pourpose to be (as I haue saied) and that the people shoulde perceaue, that as he knewe, that they did beleue well: so also they might receaue well, he concludeth C the wholl matter thus: Hoc ergo totum ad hoc nobis valeat, dilectissimi, vt carnem Christi & sanguinem Christi non edamus tantùm in sacramento (quod & multi mali) sed vsque ad spiritus participationem manducemus, & bibamus, vt in Domini corpore tanquam membra maneamus, vt eius spiritu vegetemur, & non scandalizemur, etiamsi multi modò nobiscum manducant & bibunt temporaliter sacramenta, qui habebunt in fine aeterna tormenta. All this therfor (most wellbeloued) let yt auaill to this ende, The flesh of Chryst eaten in the Sacr. of euel men. that we eate not the flessh and bloode of Chryst onelie in the Sacrament (whiche also manie euell men do) but let vs eate and drinke to the participacion or partaking of the spirit, that we maie abide in the bodie of our Lord as membres, that we maie be made lustie and strong by his spirite, and not be slaundered, though manie do eate and drinke with vs temporallie the Sacramentes, whiche in the ende shall haue eternall tormentes. Thus S. Augustin.
Here maie ye clerely perceaue the scope of S. Augustines treatises vpon S. August. doth acknowledge both spiritual and corporalreceauing. S. Iohn, that he wolde the people shoulde not onelie receaue the flesh and blood of Chryste in the Sacrament, sacramentallie: but also by the partaking of the spirit, spirituallie. In which his conclusion, as ye maie perceaue, D that he teacheth two maner of receauinges: so wolde he both to be vnderstanded in Chrystes woords, and neither of them to be banished as a thing [Page]not intended or ment by Chryste. Wherbye ye maie perceaue the great E folie of the Aduersaries, that bicause saint Augustine dothe exhorte vs to the spirituall receauing of Chrystes bodie and blood, therfore we must contempne the sacramentall receauing therof: And yet saincte Augustin wolde we shoulde do bothe, and teacheth aswell the one as the other.
But ther doing herin ys moche like to their doing in the matter of iustificatiō, that bicause sainct Paule did so moche extolle faithe to the Romans, therfore they contemned the woorkes of charitie sett furth to the Corinthians. The effecte wherof hath well appeared in their practise: For not onely Luther did cōdemne saincte Iames epistle for the fetting furth of workes: but also he and his sequaces haue maliciouslie separated, cutt of, and diuided Luther cō demned S. James epist them selues from the vnitie of Chrystes Churche, and felowshippe with yt. And then being so separated, haue withoute all measure and ende, blasphemed, railed at, and reuiled the same, and odiblie and cruellie persecuted yt, which was towardes them frendlie and blamelesse. But God kendle in them that be liuing the fire of his lowe, that by yt they maie returne F to vnitie, whiche by malice haue made lamētable diuision, not onelie among the people, but betwen God and manie a soule.
And, Reader, beholde thow the trueth nowe laied before thy face, and see that nowe taught of S. Augustin, that before thowe hauest seen taught by Chrysostom, and Cyryll. Chrysostome saied: Vt autem non solùm per dilectionem, sed reipsa in ipsam carnem conuertamur, per cibum id essicitur, quem nobis largitus est. That we should not onelie by loue, but in verie deed be turned in to that flesh that ys brought to passe by the meate, whiche he hathe graunted vs, Wher note bothe our turning into Chryst by loue, whiche ys the spirituall receauing, and our turning into his flesh in verie deed, whiche ys by the corporall receauing.
Cyrill saieth: Non negamus nos rectafide charitateue sincera Christo spiritualiter Iu. 15. Joā. Corporal receauing auouched aswel as spirituall. coniungi: Sed nullam nobis coniūctionis rationem secùndū carnem cum illo esse, id profectò pernegamus We do not denie, that we be conioined to Chryste spirituallie by right faith and sincere charitie: But that we hawe no maner of coniunction with him after the flesh, that we earnestly denie. Note here a spirituall G ioininge of vs to Chryste, whiche ys by spirituall receauing, and a carnall ioininge of vs to his flesh, which ys by corporall receauing.
Nowe compare S. Augustine here to these, who saieth that we maie not onely eate the flesh, and drinke the blood of Chryst in the Sacramēt (whiche ys the corporall receauing) but we must eate yt euen vnto the participacion of the spirit, which ys the spirituall receauing, And thus thow seest an vniforme doctrine, that we must bothe receaue Chryst in the Sacrament reallie, and also by faithe spirituallie. And therfor, thowe Chrystian, suffer not thy self to be robbed of the one, seing that the exceading loue of Chryste, as a pledge of the same, hath to thy endlesse comforte lefte thee bothe.
And nowe what S. Cyrill saieth agreablie to S. Augustin vpon this text let vs heare: Manet enim immaculata vtraque natura, & vnus ex vtrisque Christus est, sed inefabiliter, & vltrà quàm possit mens humana intelligere. Verbum humanitati In. 15. Ioan. coniunctum, totam in seipsum ita reduxit, vt indigentia vitae possit vinificare, Sic interitum à natura expulit, & mortem, quae peccato plurimum poterat, destruxit. Quare qui carnem Christi manducat, vitam habet aeternam. Habet enim haec caro Dei Verbum, quod naturaliter H vita est. Propterea dicit, & ego resuscitabo eum in nouissimo die. Ego enim dixit, id est, corpus meum quod comedetur, resuscitabo eum. Non enim alius ipse quàm caro sua. Nō id dico, quia natura non sit alius, sed quia post incarnationem in duos se diuidi filios minimè [Page 124] patitur. Ego igitur (inquit) qui homo factus sum per meam carnem in nouissimo die comedentes resuscitabo. Bothe the natures (saieth he) abide inuiolated, and of them A both ther ys one Chryst, but vnspeakeablie, and beionde, that mans minde can vnderstande. The Sonne of God conioined to the manheade hath so reduced yt whollie into him self, that yt ys able to geue life to thinges lacking Chrystes bodie receaued in the Sacr. shall raise our bodies to immortall life. life. So hath yt expelled destructiō from the nature of man, and death, whiche by sinne was very strong, yt hath destroied. Wherfore he that eateth the flesh of Chryste hath euerlasting life. For this flesh hath the Sonne of God, whiche ys naturallie life: Therfore he saiethe: and I will raise him vppe in the last daie. He saied I: that ys to saie, my bodie that shall be eaten will raise him vppe. He ys none other then his flesh. I do not saie that he ys none other in nature, but bycause after the incarnacion he suffreth not him self to be diuided into two sonnes. Therfor he saieth: I, whiche am made man by my flesh will raise them vppe in the last daie, whiche do eate me. Thus farre S. Cyrill.
Although yt be moche wourthie to be noted, howe he declareth the flesh of Chryste to be able to geue life, Yet bicause I wolde not digresse so B moche, to the greif of the reader, from the matter in hande, This onelie I note, that he maketh all this processe to proue that Chrystes flesh that was ioined to the Sonne of God in vnitie of person had power and did geue life (as in the fourtenth chapiter more at large appeareth) to the entent, that he wolde therby open the trueth of this saing of Chryste: He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood shall haue eternall life. Whiche saing of Chryst must be vnderstanded of the same flesh, whiche he hath proued to geue life, whiche ys the verie flesh of the Sonne of God, or ells all his processe were vain. For if the probacion be of the very naturall flesh of Chryst, and the scritpture be vnder standed of the spirituall flesh, what serueth the probacion, and all the processe of the naturall flesh? but that the scripture ys to be vnderstanded of the verie flesh of Chryst. he declareth in the next saing And I will raise him in the last daie, I, saieth he, that ys to saie, my bodie that shall be eaten will raise him vppe. Nowe the verie reall bodie of Chryste shall raise vppe the faithfull at the last daie, wherfore that same bodie ys eaten. For yt ys all one bodie that ys eaten of the faithfull, and that shall raise vppe the faithful. C
Why the bodie of Chryst shall raise vppe our bodies, he geueth a reason in the fourtenth chapiter vpon the sixt of S. Iohn. Oportuit enim certè, vt non solùm anima per spiritum sanctum, in beatam vitam ascenderet: verùm etiam vt rude Cirill. in. 6. Ioan ca. 14 Cause and maner of oure raising to immortalitie declared. hoc & terrestre corpus, cognato sibi gustu, tactu, & cibo, ad immortalitatem reduceretur. Trulie yt must so haue ben, that not onelie the soule, by the holie Gost shoulde asscend into the blessed life, but also that this rude and earthlie bodie by a like natured tast, touching, and meat, shoulde be reduced to immortalitie. Wher note that as our spirit ys brought to the blessed life by the Spirit of God: so ys our dodie reduced to immortallitie by his bodie. Note further howe yt ys doen (cognato cibo) with a like natured meate, and soche ther ys none, that ys of like nature to vs, that can reduce vs to immortallitie, but the verie bodie of Chryst Therfore yt ys the verie bodie of Chryste that ys this our meat, whiche meat who so doeth eate, as yt becometh him to eate, shall haue eternall life.
THE EIGHTENTH CHAPITER BEGINNETH E the exposition of the next text in the sixt chap. of S. Iohn by Origen and S. Ambrose.
NOW foloweth in S. Iohn the second determinatiue sentence of the substance of this matter of the Sacrament. Caro mea verè est cibus, & sanguis meus verè est potus. My flesh ys verilie meat, and my blood ys verily drinke.
Owre Sauiour Chryst speaking moche of the bread whiche his father gaue, as that: Non Moyses dedit vobis panem, sed Pater meus dat vobis Joan. 6. panem de coelo verum Not Moyses gaue yowe bread from heauen but my father geueth yowe from heauen the true bread. and that: Panis Dei est, qui de caelo descendit & dat vitam mundo. Yt ys the bread of God that cometh from heauen, and geueth life to the worlde: yet had he not determined, who was this bread, but at the last he determined saing: Ego sum panis viuus, qui de coelo descendi. I am the liuing bread, whiche descended from heauen. So that as here in these sainges he determined, speaking of the bread of his Godhead F that he was that bread whiche he hetherto spake of, whiche bread was allreadie presentlie geuen: So speaking of a bread that he wolde geue in the Sacrament, determined what yt was saing, that yt was his flesh, whiche flesh although he saied he wolde geue, and had spoken moche of the eating of yt: yet he determined not what that flesh was vntill nowe. But nowe he saieth yt ys venlie meate.
Wher note that our Sauiour determining this thing, hath chosen raither to saie. Caro mea vère est cibus. My flesh ys verilie meat, by the Aduerbe, then Thaeduerbe verè what force yt hathe and whie Chryst chose to speake by yt. to saie, Caro mea verus est cibus My flesh ys the verie meat: by the adiectiue, For the aduerbe hath a more force, and more fullie expresseth the thing that yt signifieth, than dothe the Adiectiue. As if I shoulde saie: Pium hoc opus operatus est. He hath wrought this godly worke. Yt hath not so full and perfecte sense, as yf I saie: Hoc opus piè operatus est. He hath wrought this worke godlie. For in the former sentence spoken by the Adiectiue, ther ys but one thing determined, that ys, that the worke was good, but not the doinge. G but in the other bothe the worke and the doing ys determined to be good. For if the worke be godlie doen, both the worke, and the doing of the worke ys godlie. But if I faie: he hath doen a godlie worke: though the worke be signified to be godlie: yet the doing maie be vngodlie. As, the Pharaseis did geue almesse, whiche was a godlie worke, but bicause yt was doen to ostentacion, the doing of yt was not godlie.
Ouer and aboue this, an Aduerbe put to a verbe doth fullfill the significacion of the verbe. Wherfore put to a verbe substātiue yt doth fullfil the significaciō of the same and more fullie doth signifie the substance of the thing that ys ruled by the verbe, as, Hic est verus homo, This ys a true man, doth not signifie so moche the substance, as to saie: Hic est verè homo. This ys trulie or verilie a man. This doth fully expresse the nature or substance of a man.
So likewise the Aduerbe here put to the verbe substantiue, dothe more fullie declare the Substance of the thing. As tho he might saie: My flesh ys meat not by a metaphor, similitude, or figure: but yt ys verylic meat, that ys, substanciallie meat, whiche so fedeth vs, that (as Chrysostom saieth) reipsa conuertimur H in carnem Christi. in verie dede we are turned into the flesh of Chryst.
But we will heare the auncientes of Chrystes house vpon this text also, whether yt be thus to be vnderstanded or no, And first Origen, who saieth [Page 125]thus: Lex Dei iam n̄on in figuris, & in imaginibus, sicut prius: sed in ipsa specie veritatls dgnoscitur. Et quae prius in aenigmate designabantur, nunc in specie & veritate complentus. A The Lawe of God ys not nowe knowen in figures, and ymages (as before, Jn Numer. homel. 7. but in plain trueth. And soche thinges as before were described or shewed in a dark maner, nowe are they fullfilled in plain maner and trueth.
And what the thinges be, he after rehearseth of the which some be these: Antea in aenigmate fuit Baptismus in nube, & in mari: nunc autem in specie regeneratio est in aqua & Spiritu sancto. Tunc in aenigmate erat Manna cibus: nunc autem in specie caro Verbi Dei est verus cibus, sicut ipse dicit: Caro mea verè est cibus, & sanguis meus verè est potus. Before baptisme was in a darke maner, in the cloud, and in the sea: Nowe regeneracion ys in plain maner, in the water and the holie Gost. Then Manna was meat in a darke maner, but nowe the flesh The flesh of Chryst meat in plain maner. of the Sonne of God ys verie meat in a plain maner, As he him self saieth: My flesh ys meat in dede, and my blood ys drinke in dede. Thus Origen.
Nowe weigh with me (gentle Reader) that Origen saieth that the Gospell hath not thinges in ymageis ād figures, ād shadowes, as the Lawe before had The Gospell hath not the figures but the verie thinges. B but soch thinges as were ther described by figures, in the time of the Gospell are knowen in plain trueth, So that the Gospell walketh not in figures, but in the trueth of thinges figured. Wherby Origen concludeth, that the flesh of Chryst figured by Manna, that was meat to the Iewes, ys nowe not figuratiuelie, but verilie the true meate of the Chrystians. And for his authoritie vseth owre text nowe in handling, saing thus: As he saieth (mening Chryste) My flesh ys meat &c. By which maner of his declaracion ys yt not most plain that this ys no figuratiue speache. But that he vnderstandeth Chrystes saing as a plain assertion of a trueth, withoute any figure, and that they be, the very thinges in dede, as the woordes do plainlie signifie? yt ys most certen.
Perchaunce the Aduersaries will saie we take the flesh of Chryst, as Chryst speaketh here to be verilie meat, spirituallie to be receaued in spirit, but not reallie to be receaceaued of the bodie. This aunswere conteineth two partes. one, that we do receaue Chryst but spiritually: the other, that we do not receaue him reallie, C and therfor we must receaue him in a figure. Whiche bothe be directlie against Origen.
For the first, Origen saieth, that the Iewes had baptisme spiritually, they also The Sacramentaries. onelie spirituull receauing impugned by Origen. did feed on Chryst spirituallie, and dranke his blood spirituallie, if we fede of Chryst none other wise, wherin then doth the newe lawe excell the olde? What hath the Sacramentes of the Chrystians, more then the figurs of the Iewes? But of this more at large in the thirde booke For the seconde, if we do not receaue Chryst reallie, then (as yt ys saied) we must nedes receaue him vnder a figure. But Origen saieth that the lawe of the Gospellys not knowen nowe by figurs and ymages, but by the verie trueth. In the lawe of Moyses Chryste was eaten in the figure Manna, Nowe (saieth he) the flesh of the Sonne of God ys eaten in very plain maner. What ys that, but that yt ys eaten, reallie, verilie, trulie, and not in figure? Yf the flesh of the Sonne of God, be eaten with vs in a figure, why doth he saie, yt ys eatē in plain and opē trueth, and make soche difference betwixt the Lawes? Why did he not raither saie, that yt ys in both lawes eaten in figure? But if ye marke him well, he appointeth figures to the olde lawe, and D denieth figurs in the newe lawe, and so teacheth that the flesh of Chryst ys verilie eaten in the Sacrament. Wherby ys reiected the wicked [Page]saing of this Aduersarie proclamer, that we receaue Chryst none other wise in the Sacrament then the Iewes did in Manna, sauing that they receaued E Manna as the figure of Chryst to come, and we our bread as the figure of Chryst that ys comed. For Origen saieth that we do not receaue Chryst in a figure. for the lame of God ys not nowe in figurs and images, but in veritie. And thus be the figures of the Auersaries denied.
Further if we haue not, and eate not Chryst reallie, but in a figure of bread: then was the Lawe of Moyses moche more excellent, then the newe in that respecte. For Manna whiche came from heauen so miraculouslie, and had so many woonders aboute yt, as the scripture doth declare, was by all means, and without all comparison more excellent figure then a poour litle morcell of artisiciall bread. Whiche hath no excellencie by miracle or wonder, but ys a plain comon vsuall thing. All whiche vain confideracions are nothing but vntreuths, wherby the lawe of the Gospell shoulde raither be abased, then duely magnified. Wherfor the singular inuencions of priuate men lefte, I will creditte the woorde of Chryste, and his holie inspired men declaring the same, that the flesh of Chryst ys very meat in F dede, feding our soules spiritullie. wherby we are not inferiour to the Iewes. And ys receaued also corpotallie for our incorporacion to Chryst, wherby we excell the Iewes.
And nowe that we haue heard this great auncient thus vnderstanding S. Ambrose cōmēded this text of the very flesh of Chryst, not figuratiuely but verilie and truly, we will nowe heare also holy S. Ambrose Bishoppe of Millan, the master of S. Augustin in Chrystes faith, whose fame, learning, and holinesse ys knowen to all chrystendom, whose auncientie ys great, for he liued aboute the year of our lorde 380. and therfor aboue eleuen hondreth years agon. Whom I thus now commend to thee, Reader, partlie for that he ys not in this ordre as yet alleaged, partelie that his sentēce maie the raither moue thee to creditte the trueth Thus he saieth: Sicut verus est Dei filius Dominus noster Iesus Christus, non quemadmodum homines per gratiam, sed quasi filius ex substantia Patris: Ita vera li. 9. de Sacra ca. 1. A plain place of S. Amb. for the Proclamer. caro (sicut ipse dixit) quam accipimus, & verus est potus. As our Lorde Iesus Chryst ys the verie Sonne of God, not as men by grace but as a Sonne of the substance of the Father: Euen so yt ys verie flesh (as he G him self saieth) which we do receaue, and very drinke. Thus he▪ Marke well this saing, and then shall ye well perceaue the vnderstanding and mening of this scripture, that yt neither suffreth yt self to be vnderstanded of the figure of the flesh of Chryst, neither of the spirituall As Chryst yt the verie Sōne of the Father, so ys his verie in flesh the Sacr. flesh of Chryst onely. But of the verie substanciall flesh of Chryst. For he maketh yt by similitude plain, that as Chryst ys the very Sonne of God, euen of the substance of the Father, Euen so ys yt verie flesh that we receaue. whiche ys thus moche to saie: As Chryst ys the very Sonne, of God: So ys this verilie flesh that we do receaue. And as he ys the Sonne of the substance of the Father: So ys this flesh whiche we receaue of the substance of Chrystes fleshe.
By whiche woordes of sainct Ambrose the fonde phansies of these phantasticall men be taken awaie. For here ys not alowed the figure of Chrystes flesh, but the thing in dede. not a spirituall receauing of Chryst onely, but a reall and spirituall receauing of the substanciall flesh of Chryste. And thus ye maie see the trueth of the faith to be had in this matter, vttered plainlie H withoute any darke maner of speache, and so stronglie set furth that yt can not be drawē to any other vnderstanding. And therfor I maie boldely [Page 126]chalenge this scripture from the heretikes, which so euidentlie refuseth the figure, and so plainly teacheth the reall and substanciall presence of Chryst A in the Sacrament.
THE NINETENTH CHAPITER PROCEAdeth vpon the same text by Eusebius Emis. and S. Augustine.
NOwe that ye haue heard two auncientes vnderstanding thys text nowe in hande, we will heare one other coople, of eche side of Chrystes Parliamēt house one, as the other were, ād these agreyng in one minde, as the other did, which shall be Eusebius Emisenus, and sainct Augustin. Of the which Eusebius being the elder shall shewe hys minde, who in hys time was a great learned man, as sainct Hierō witnesseth, and wrote many workes, as against the Iewes, ād also against the gentiles, and vpon the Gospells, and the epistles of S. Paul also. Thys mā being so profowndly learned, so auncient in time (as liuing aboute the yeare of our Lord. 344. so famouse in constancie of faith, and holy in liuing, ys woorthie of credit. In a certain homelie alleaging this text he sheweth the same to be vnderstanded B thus: Quia corpus assumptum ablaturus erat ab oculis, & illaturus sideribus, necessarium erat, vt in die coenae sacramentum nobis corporis & sanguinis consecraret, vt coleretur Euseb. Emisen. homil. spasch. iugiter per mysterium, quod semel offerebatur in precium, vt quia quotidiana & indesessa currebat pro omnium salute redemptio, perpetua esset redemptionis oblatio, & perennis victima illa viueret in memoria, & semper praesens esset in gratia, vera, vnica, & perfecta hostia, fide aestimanda, non specie, neque exteriori censenda visu sed interiori affectu. Vnde coelestis consirmat authoritas, quia caro mea verè est cibus, & sanguis meus verè est potus. Bicause he wolde take awaie hys assumpted bodie from our eyes, and bring yt vppe into the heauens, yt was necessarie, that in the daie of hys Supper he should consecrate vnto vs the Sacrament of hys bodie and of hys blood, that yt might continuallie be woorshiped in mysterie, that once for vs was offred in price, that bicause the dailie and incessaunt redemption did renne for the health of all men, the oblacion of the same redemption should be perpetuall, and that perpetual sacrifice should liue in memorie, and alway be present in grace. A true, one onelye, and perfect sacrisice, to be estemed by C faith, and not by outwarde forme, nor to be iudged by the outwarde seight, but by the inwarde affecte. Wherfor the heauenly authoritie consirmeth saing: that my flesh ys verilie meat, and my blood ys verilie drinke. Thus Eusebius.
In this sentence yt ys first to be considered, that this authour, declaring the cause of the instituciō of the Sacrament, and of the continuāce of the same: and also instructing vs how we shoulde esteme yt, beleuing ther to be another maner of thing, then ther doth appear in outward seight, teacheth vs by the allegaciō of this scripture, that yt ys the verie flesh ād blood of Christ which we must esteme by faith, and iudge by our inward affect. And therfor he saieth not, that Chryst doth saie, but that the authoritie of Chryst confirmeth yt so to be, wherfor thys ys without all controuersie, that this scripture now in hand ys by this authour vnderstanded of the Sacrament.
But here the Aduersaries do triumphe, as allwais they doo when any authour Obiection of the Sacramentaries oute of Eusebius. speaketh anie woord, that maie by any wresting be drawen to their vnderstanding, though in verie dede he ment nothing lesse. First, they saie, that this authour doth no affirme that Chryst did consecrate hys bodie D and blood, but did consecrate the Sacrament of his bodie and blood. And after saieth again, speaking of the sacrifice of Chrystes bodie [Page]vpon the Crosse, that the euerlasting sacrifice shoulde liue in memorie, and E allwaies be present in grace. But note (saie they) that he doth not saie that that he ys present in bodie, but in grace.
But staie a while (Reader) and be not troobled with these their notes. For ye shall see immediatelie that these notes shall be the notes of their cōfusiō, Aunswer. ād declaraciō of their false doctrin. For God be praised, though this authorment, yea and did set furth the true faith of Chryst by this that ys allreadie alleadged, whiche yet might be peruerted by mysvnderstanding of the maliciouse, who haue peruerted euen the very plain woordes of Chryst: Yet adioining immediatelie to this sentence more of this matter, he addeth woordes so plain, that they will neither suffer thēselues, neither the woords which the Aduersaries haue gone aboute to wrest, to be so vnderstanded as the Aduersaries wolde haue them. His woordes immediatelie adioined to the sentence of Chryst by him alleaged, be these. Recedat ergo omne infidelitatis ambiguū, quandoquidem, qui autor est muneris, ipse est testis veritatis. Nam inuisibilis sacerdos visibiles Eusebins ibid. creaturas in substantiā corporis & sanguinis sui verbo suo, secreta potestate conuertit. Let therfore al doubt of infidelitie go awaie, for truly he that ys the authour F of the gifte: he also ys the wittnesse of the trueth. For the inuisible preist by a secret power, with hys woorde doth conuert or turne the visible creaturs into the substance of bys bodie and blood: Thus he.
What can the Aduersaries now saie? Do ye not heare what this authourment by the sainges, whiche the Aduersaries wolde wrest and peruert to The presence plainlie au [...]ached by Euseb. against M. Iuell. their wicked vnderstanding? Did not he as well ther as here (though not with so plain woordes) teache the treuth of this matter, that Chrystes bodie and blood ys in the Sacrament? Do ye not nowe perceane that he allead ged the text of S. Iohn, to declare that the flesh of Chryst was to be estemed by faith.
But I wolde the Aduersaries, and all that be doubtful of the presence of Chrystes blessed bodie and blood in the Sacrament, wolde regarde and folowe the counsell of this auncient father, to let all doubte of infidelitie departe from them. Which counseill yf they wel weigh, was geuen for the beleuing of a weightier and greater matter of faith, then to beleue that the bread maye G be or ys the figure of Chrystes bodie. A chrystian man shall do no great matter to beleue soch a thing, which shall be no higher aboue reason nor no more repugnaunt therto then that ys. But the authour speaking these woordes vpon the saing of Chryst, which ys our text now in hand, ment a greater matter to be beleued, whiche reason can not atteign to, whiche ys, that the flesh and blood of Chryste in the Sacrament (which thinges are estemed by faith ther to be, though not so to be iudged by the outward seight) are verily meat and drinke.
And to shewe vs by whome this great matter ys wrought he addeth: Qui authour est muneris, ipse est testis veritatis. He that ys authour of the gift, he ys the wittnesse of the trueth. Chryst ys the wittnesse of the trueth, wherfore he ys Bread and wine turned not into Sacramentall bread and wine but in to the bodie and bloode of Chryst. the authour of the gift, that ys of the Sacrament. And yet that he wolde certifie the weake beleuer, he teacheth by what meās the authour doth woork this miraculouse gifte and worke, saing: Inuisibilis sacerdos, &c. The inuisible preist doth turne, the visible creaturs (of bread and wine) into the substance of hys bodie and bloode. Note that the bread and wine be turned, not to be a sacramentall H bread, as the Aduersaries wolde glose yt, but into the substance of the bodie and blood of Chryst.
O merueilouse God what be they that will sticke still in the filthie mire [Page 127]of detestable heresie, when they heare the trueth so plainly, so simplie, so expresly spoken and vttered, as they be not able to against saie yt, and that not A of one of this time, neither of the time since the heresie against thys Sacrament beganne, but of one being aboue a thousande years agon, when the Church was in most godly and quiet peace in thys matter. Open yowr eyes and see and beholde yowr filthinesse, and in time seke to gett oute of yt.
Now that this authour being on the one side of Chrystes Parliament house, hath so manifestly declared this our text to be vnderstanded of the very reall and substanciall flesh of our Sauiour Chryst in the Sacrament, to be our verie meat: we will heare the other, which ys S. Augustine, who vpon the same Tractatu 26. in Ioā. text saieth thus: Cùm enim cibo & potu id appetant homines, vt non esuriant, neque sitiant, hoc veraciter non praestat nisi iste cibus & potus, qui eos à quibus sumitur immortales & incorruptibiles facit, id est, societas ipsa sanctorum, vbi pax erit, & vnitas plena atque perfecta. Propterea quippe, sicut etiam ante nos intellexerunt homines Dei, Dominus Iesus Christus corpus & sanguinem suum in eis rebus commendauit, quae ad vnum aliquid rediguntur ex multis. Namue aliud in vnum ex multis granis conficitur & constat: Aliud in vnum ex multis acinis confluit. Forasmoche as by meat and drinke men B do this desire, that they shoulde neither hunger, neither thirst: this doth nothing truly geue, but that meat and drinke, which maketh them of whom yt ys receaued immortall and incorruptible, that ys, the feloshippe of saincts, wher shall be peace and vnitie full and perfight. Therfore truly (as also before vs the men of God haue vnderstanded this) our Lorde Iesus Chryst hathe commended hys bodie and blood in those thinges, which to one certen thing be brought of manie. For the one ys made into one of manie graines, and so consisteth: the other cometh into one of manie grapes. Thus he. Three thinges in the Sacrament to be considered.
Yf ye call to remembrance what was saied of a certain authour vpon this text: The bread whiche I will geue, &c. Yt will helpe yow well to vnderstand S. Augustin here. Yt was saied ther that in the Sacrament be three things: The first ys the sacrament onelie, which doth signifie or ys the sign of an holie thing, and that ys the forme of bread. The second ys that that ys signified ād cōteined, which ys the verie bodie of Chryst. The thirde ys signified but not cōteined, which ys the mysticall bodie of Chryst, that ys, the cōpanie of all hys electe ioined to Chryst the head by faith ād charitie, for the which thing C this sacramēt ys called the sacramēt of vnitie, bicause manie be made one, ād ioined in vnitie: So yt ys called the sacramēt of loue, bicause yt signieth that by loue this vnitie should be brought to passe.
Now forsomoch as these three thinges be in the Sacramēt, a mā maie speak of eche of thē seuerallie, and yet whē he speaketh but of one, he denieth not the other. So S. Augustin here speaking of the societie of Sainctes, speaketh of the thirde thing of the Sacramēt, but denieth not the other. For by the learning of the Aduersaries: the Sacramēt ys as wel a sacrament of Chrystes bodie brokē vpō the Crosse, as yt ys of the vnitie of Chrystes bodie mysticall. And that ye maie perceaue that S. Augustin excludeth not the bodie ād blood of Chryst frō the Sacrament but raither includeth yt, note, he saied that our Lord Iesus Chryst commended his bodie and blood in these thinges, which be made one of manie, that by the bread made of manie graines, nowe turned into one bodie of Chryst, and by the wine made of manie grapes, nowe turned into the bloode of Chryst, all we (as S. Paule saieth) eating of this one bread, and drinking of this one cuppe, might be one bodie in Chryste, and eche of vs D one an others membres.
That S. Augustin denieth not the very presence of Chryst in the Sacramēt [Page](though here vpon S. Iohn he speaketh moch of the effect of the same, the consideracion wherof we haue declared in the exposition of the last text E before this) yt doth appear in a great nombre of places, of the whiche manie haue ben allready alleaged, and mo by Gods helpe shall be. As this: Hoc est quod dicimus, quod modis omnibus approbare contendimus, sacrificium Ecclesiae August. lisentē. Pros. duobus modis confici, duobus constare: visibili elementorum specie, & inuisibili Domini nostri Iesu Christi carne & sanguine, & sacramento, & re sacramenti, id est, corpore Christi. Sicut Christi persona constat ex Deo & homine, cum ipse Christus verus sit Deus. & verus sit homo. quia omnis res illarum rerum naturam & veritatem in se continet ex quibus conficitur: Conficitur autem sacrificium Ecclesiae duobus, sacramento, & re sacramenti: id est, corpore Christi. Est ergo sacramentum, & res sacramenti. This ys yt, whiche we saie, whiche by all means we labour to Sacrifice of the Church consisteth of the visible formes of breadād wine and the inuisible flesh ād blood of Chryst. approue, that the Sacrifice of the Churche ys made by two means, and consistes of two thinges, of the visible forme of the Elementes, and the inuisible flesh and bloode of our Lorde Iesus Chryst, the Sacrament, and the thing of the Sacrament, that ys to saie, the bodie of Chryste. As the person of Chryst ys of God and man, for as moche as he ys very God and very man F For euery thing doth contein in yt the nature and trueth of those, thinges, of the whiche yt ys made. The Sacrifice of the Chruche ys made of two thinges: of the Sacramēt and the thing of the Sacrament, that ys, the bodie of Chryst. Thus farre S. Augustin.
Doth he not here in this sentence teache the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacramēt, yes, yf ye note wel, he teacheth three thinges by expresse wordes, S. August. teacheth three thiuges in one sentence against the Sacramentaries. whiche the Aduersaries deinie, that ys, that the Churche hath a Sacrifice, that therin ys a sacrament, whiche he expowndeth to be the formes of the Elementes, that ys, of bread and vine, that ther ys also present the verie bodie and blood of Chryst, which he calleth the thing of the Sacrament bicause yt ys the thing that the Sacrament doth signifie. And bycause men shoulde not cauille saing that the bodie and bloode of Chryst be not verilie present, but signified: He declareth by the similitude of Chrysts person, that as verilie as Chryst being God and man hath both the nature of God and the nature of mam: So verilie hath the sacrifice of the Sacrament, that ys, the outwarde formes of bread and wine, and the bodie and blood of Chryst. G
Nowe if the Aduersaries will saie, that in the Sacrifice of the Churche, ther ys not really either the formes of bread and wine or the verie bodie and blood of Chryst: then must they likewise saie that in the person of Chryst, ther ys not reallie, either the nature of man or the nature of God, whiche both are to detestable to be spokē of the mouthe of a Chrysten man. And so trulie ys the other also. And yet not cōtented with this similitude, which ys abundantlie sufficient, he proceadeth to proue the same by this saing Euery thing (saieth he) conteineth in yt the nature and trueth of the thinges that yt ys made of. The Sacrifice of the Churche ys made of the Sacrament and the bodie and blood of Chryst. Wherfore S. Augustine thus concludeth vpon this reason: Est igitur sacramentū, & res sacramenti corpus Christi. Ther ys therfor the Sacrament, and the thing of the Sacrament, the bodie of Chryste.
In these wordes I suppose S. Augustin hath so plainly expressed and declared his faith in this matter, that yt can not suffer any other opinion iustlie to be conceaued of him. For yf we that haue liued, and liue in this time of pestilent heresie, wolde against this heresie of the Sacrament, H studie to deuise, to speake or write the plainest woordes that might impugne this heresie, and declare fullie our faith, we can no more faie [Page 128]nor by better and plainer woordes do the same, then saincte Augustin hath here doen. Wherfore what so euer he did speake or write to any partie or A parties according to the disposition, and condicion of them, somtime speaking of the misticall bodie of Chryst signified by this sacrament, somtime onely of the spirituall receauing of Chryst, somtime darkely for the maner of the audience: yet be well assured his faith can not be otherwise for the presence then here ys declared, for somoch as these woordes can bear no other sense nor mening then they in the outwarde face do showe.
Therfore, Reader, be not caried awaie by the false cōmentes that naughtie men make of S. Augustins woordes. For though he speake somtime obscurelie, as yt maie appeare to haue a doubtfull vnderstanding, as before we ende this chapiter of S. Iohn thowe shalt heare: yet for somoche as saincte Augustin had but one faithe, whiche ys so plainly here professed and settfurth, be well assured that he neuer varieth or goeth from and against this. But I tarie to long vpon this, seing ther be diuerse cooples mo to be hearde vpon this text.
THE TWENTETH CHAP. PROCEADETH B vpon the same text by sainct Hilarie and Euthymius.
SAincte Hilarie ys a great auncient of Chrystes house liuinge aboute S. Hilarye cōmended. the 360 yeare after Chryste, and not onelie auncient, but also right excellent in learning, and famouslie constant in faithe. His excellencie in learning ys not onely testified by saincte Hierom, who saieth he wrote manie learned woorkes, but also by Rufinus, who saieth he was accompted the great light in his time to all Fraunce, and Italie. His constancie in faith ys well declared, that notwithstanding the Emperours and Princes, ad manie Bishopps were the fauourers of the heresie of the Arians: yet he neither moued with the fauour of mightie and great men, neither feared with their punishment, or banishment, did constantlie resist the saied heresie, and also wrote learned bookes against yt. This authour writteh thus: Li. 8. de Trinita [...]s. Quae scripta sunt legamus, & quae legerimus intelligamus, & tunc perfectae fidei fungemur officio. De naturali in nobis Christi veritate quae discimus, nisi ab eo discimus, stultè atque C impiè discimus. ipse enim ait: Caro mea verè est esca; & sanguis meus verè est potus. Qui edit carnem meam, & bibit sanguinem meum, in me manet, & ego in eo. De veritate carnis, & sanguinis non est relictus ambigendi locus. Nunc enim & ipsius Domini professione, & fide nostra verè caro est, et verè sanguis est. Et haec accepta atque bausta id efficiunt, vt et nos in Christo, et Christus in nobis sit. Let vs read those thinges that be written, and soche thinges as we read let vs vnderstand. and then shall we perfectelie do the office of our faith. Soche thinges as we learn of the naturall Of the veritie of Chrystes flesh and blood in the Sacr. ther ys no doubt veritie of Chryst in vs, except we learn of him, we learn foolishlie and vngodlie. For he doth saie: My flesh ys verilie meat, and my blood ys verilie drinke He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me, and I in him. Of the veritie of the flesh and bood ther ys no place left to doubte. For nowe both by the plain speaking of our Lorde him self: and by our faith yt ys verilie flesh, and verilie bloode. And these taken and dronken do bring it to passe, that both we be in Chryst, and Chryst in vs. Thus he.
Among many goodlie notes to be gathered in this saing, three thinges will I breifly note. The first ys, that this our text ys vnderstanded of the Sacrament, D but not of the Sacrament as of a bare figure, but as conteining the thing that yt dothe signifie, whiche thing ys the bodie and bloode of Chryst [Page]And this matter appeareth so plain, so euident and so certen to this great learned and holy man, that by the instruction that faithe gaue him to vnderstande E this scripture, he saied that of the veritie of Chrystis flesh and bloode ther A plain saing for M. Iuell. ys no place to doubte. And why was ther no place left to doubt? He sheweth the cause: For nowe (saieth he) by the suing of oure Lorde, and our faith, it ys verilie flesh and verilie bloode.
O this was a blessed simplicitie, a godlie obedience, that curiously wolde not aske with the Iewes, howe yt should be flesh and bloode, and howe his flesh and bloode shoulde be meate, but reuerently captiuating his vnderstanding to the obsequie of Chryst saieth: by cause Chryst did saie, that his flesh was verilie meate, ther ys no place of doubte lefte, but that yt ys flesh in dede, and bloode in dede.
And in this saing yt ys not to be ouer slipped, that he faith: that by the saing of our Lorde and our faith: So that he putteth our faith to the saing of Chryst, Faith how yt ys requisite in the Sacrament not that our faith ys a woorker with the saing of Chryst to woorke the substance of the thing: but that as by the saing of Chryst, the thing in yt self ys most certenly true: so by faith beleuing and accepting yt, yt ys certen F also to vs. For as Chryste hath died for the sinnes of the wholl worlde, whiche in yt self ys most certen: So yet to all yt ys not so certen, but to soche as by faith beleue and accepte yt. And so yt ys also certen to vs. Wherfor though to S. Hilary by the faith that he gaue to Chrystes woorde yt was very flesh and very blood: yet to heretikes that haue not soche faith as Hilary had, yt ys not the flesh and bloode of Chryst, not that yt ys not so in dede, but vnto them yt ys as though yt wer not so. How moch then maie they be abasshed at this saing of S. Hilary, who declareth that by his faith he beleued yt to be the very flesh and blood of Chryst, and they like shamelesse obstinate men leauing the faith that S. Hilary had, and cleauing to their owne inuented imaginacions and naturall reason, saie they can not beleue yt. But God geue them a better minde.
The second note ys, that this verie flesh and verie bloode ys taken of vs, and drokē Flesh and blood of Chryst verilie eaten and dronkē in the Sacr. of vs, whlche dothe teache vs the corporall receauing of Chryst in the Sacrament, corporall I saie in two respectes, that bothe we receaue his very reall and substācial dodie, and that we with our bodie and into our bodie receaue G that same self blessed bodie. So yt ys a corporall receipt in respecte of the thing receaued, and of the receauer also,
This thing the same S. Hilarie in the same booke dothe open more at large, when he saieth: Si enim verè verbum caro factum est, & nos verè verbum carnē Hilar ibid. cibo Dominico sumimus, quomodò non naturaliter in nobis manere existimandus est, qui & uaturam carnis nostrae iam inseparabilem sibi natus assumpsit, & naturam carnis: fuae, ad naturam aeternitatis sub sacramento nobis communicandae carnis admiscuit, Yf the worde were verilie made flesh, and we receaue the woorde made very flesh in our Chryst naturallie in vs by receipt of the Sacra. Lordes meat, howe ys yt to be thought that he doth not naturallie abide in vs, who being born man hathe bothe taken the nature of our flesh vpon him nowe inseparablie, and also vnder the Sacrament of his flesh to be cōmunicated vnto vs, hath admixed the nature of his flesh to the nature of the eternitie? Thus he.
In the whiche saing what wolde we wishe to be more plainly spoken, thā that the Sonne of God was made flesh, and that same Sonne of God A plain place of S. Hilar. for the Proclamer. being made flesh, we receaue in the Lordes meate? Neither maie that glose H here be hearde that we receaue him verilie in the Sacrament but spiritually, For that whiche foloweth in the text will not beare that glose. Whiche ys when [Page 129]he saieth: Howe ys he to be thought not naturallie to abide in vs? Marke well these woordes howe can Chryste naturallie abide in vs, but by the receipt of his A naturall flesh and bodie? The spirituall receauing woorketh not a naturall abiding, but eche of them agreablie, the spirituall receauing maketh a spirituall abiding, and the corporall receauing of his naturall bodie maketh a naturall abiding of Chryst in vs. Wherfor if he be naturally abiding in vs by the receipt of his flesh in the Sacrament, that receipt ys agreablie of his very naturall and reall flesh into our naturall bodies, and then yt must nedes be that we receaue Chrystes bodie really in the Sacrament.
The thirde note ys, that Chryste thus receaued woorketh in vs this effect, that we therby be in Chryste, and Chryst in vs, of the whiche maner of being, the text whiche foloweth in saincte Iohn, will geue vs occasiō to speake more. Wherfor we will diffre yt till we come thither.
And now wil we come to Euthymius who in fewe woordes saith thus: Caromea verè est cibus. verus est cibus siue aptissimus, vtpote animā, quae proprijssima hominis In. 6. Joan. My fleshys verilie meat: ys no parabolical or figuratiue speache. pars est, nutriēs. Et similiter de sanguine. Aut hoc dixit confirmans, quod nō enigmaticè ne (que) B parabolicè loqueretur. My flesh ys meat in dede. Yt ys the verie or most aptest meate, as whiche nourisheth the soule, whiche ys the most propriest or wourthiest parte of a man. And likewise of the blood, Orells he saied thus confirming that he did speake neither obscurelie, nor parabolicallie. Thus Euthymius. Doest thowe not perceaue (reader) that one spirit was in the mouthe of all these holie and auncient Fathers? do they not agree in sentence? Marke well howe this Auncient Father expowndeth this text, remouing and denieng the figure, wherby he declareth him self to vnderstand this text of the very reall flesh of Chryst, as Hilarie doth. yt ys (saieth he) no parabolicall speache: yt ys no figuratiue speache, but yt ys a plain speache signifieng no other waies then the woordes sownde, that ys the very flesh and the very bloode, not the figure of them. Whiche maner of exposition thowe shallt see (Reader) in other that do folowe, especiallie in Chrysostome and Theophilact. Wherfor comminge to them remembre this, and conferr thē to gether, and thowe shalt finde good matter, and agreable to the trueth of this assercion. C
THE ONE AND TVENTETH CHAPITER CONTInueth the same exposition by Chrysostome and Lira.
WHeras ye haue hitherto hearde the sentēces of the Fathers and auncientes of the higher house vpon this text nowe in hande: Herafter for the better declaracion of the consonāt doctrine of this trueth in all times, and for the more confusion of the Aduersaries who so maliciously haue depraued the writers of the later time: I will as before ys promised ioin to some of the elder sort, some of the yōger. Of the whiche the first coople shall be Chrysostome and Lira, the one a grecian Homil. 40. in Joan. Chryst in the sixt of S. John spake not para bolicallie or obscurelie. and of the higher house, the other a latin and of the lower howse (as ye haue heard) Chrysostome vpon this text saieth thus: Quid autem signat: Caro mea verè est cibus, & sanguis meus verè est potus? Aut quòd is est verus cibus, qui saluat animam: aut vt eos in praedictis confirmet, ne obscurè locutum in parabolis arbitrarentur. D What meneth this sainge: My flesh ys verilie meat, and my bloode ys verilie drinke Either that this ys the true meat that saueth the soule, or ells that he might confirme them least they shoulde thinke that he had spoken obscurelie in parables
[Page]Wher note that Chrysostome saieth, that Chryst did speake these woordes E in plain speache, and not darkelie in paraboles. Whiche saing wonderfully confuteth the Aduersaries. For yf Chryst did not speake parabolicallie, then he ment that the woordes shoulde signifie no other thing then in their propre significacion they do signifie, and then must yt nedes be that Chryst spake here of his very flesh and of his very blood with oute all obscuritie or darke maner of speache by figures, tropes, similitudes or paraboles, whiche the Aduersaries wolde here ensparse. My flesh is meate in dede, and my blood is drinke in dede, ys no obscure speache, nor no figuratiue speache (saieth Chrisostome) let the Aduersaries then wrest and wring, and peruert the scriptures as they list, I will creditt holy Chrysostom and the churche that he liued in before anie of the Aduersaries, and their malignāt church, whiche they liue A a plain saing of Chrysost. for M. Iuel. in. Yf the Proclamer will not saie that this ys a plain saing when ther ys no parbole in yt: I knowe not what he will saie ys plain, these woordes being of them selues so plain.
Nowe whether the exposition of Lira, who was of the latin Churche, and of the later daies, be consonant and agreable to Chrysostome or not let vs F heare. vpon the same text he saieth: Hic ostenditur buius Sacramenti veritas. Christus enim frequēter parabolicè Discipulis loquebatur. Et ideo, ne crederent quòd caro eius cotinere Lira in 6. Ioann. tur in hoc sacramento Eucharistiae tantummodò sicut in signo, ideo hoc remouet dicens: Caromea uerè est cibus, quia hic sumitur realiter, & non figuratiuè. Et eodem modo est de sanguine sub specie vini, & ideo subdit: Et sanguis meus verè est potus. Dicitur ctiam caro Christi verè cibus, & sanguis eius verè potus, quia reficiunt animam, quae est immortalis. Cibus autem corporalis tantùm reficit corpus quod est corruptibile. Here ys shewed (saieth Lira) the veritie of this Sacrament. For Chryst oftentimes did speake to his disciples parabolicallie. And therfor leest they shoulde beleue, that this flesh were conteined in this Sacrament onely as in a figure: he remoueth that, saing: my flesh ys verily meat. For yt ys here receaued really, and not The flesh of Chryst in the Saeaten reallie, not figurat. figuratiuely. And after the same maner ys yt of the bloode, vnder the forme of wine. The flesh of Chryst ys also called meat in dede and his bloode drink in dede, bicause they refresh the soule, whiche ys immortall. But corporall meat refresheth onelie the bodie, whiche ys corruptible. Thus he. G
Remembre. Reader, the exposition of Chrysostome, wherin he saied two thinges: The one that Chryst saieth, that his flesh ys verily meat, bicause yt faueth the soule: The other that Chryste so saied, bicause he wolde confirme them in the forsaied thinges that he did not speake in paraboles. And nowe conferr this authour to him, and see yf he speake anie other thing, but euen the same two thinges that Chrysostom did. For wher Chrysostome saieth, that yt ys the true meat that saueth the soule: This authour saieth, that the bodie of Chryst ys called verily meate, and his bloode verily drink, bicause they refresh the soule, whiche ys immortall. Chrysostome saieth, that Chryst wolde shewe him self not to speake nowe in paraboles: This authour more at large saieth, that bicause Chryst did oftē speake parabolicallie, leaste they shoulde thinke or beleue, that his flesh were conteined in the Sacrament, as in a signe onlie, therfor he remoueth that, saing, that this flesh ys verily meat, bicause yt ys receaued really, and not figuratiuely.
Thus ye see agreement betwen these authours, and one trueth spoken here amost by one maner of woordes of him that did write aboue a thousande H yeares agone, and of him that did write not fullie three hōdreth years agon. Wherby ye maie perceaue that the same doctrine hathe ben continued and taught in these latter years by writers of late time. whiche was [Page 130]receaued and taught in the churche in auncient time, as touching thexposition of this scripture we haue in hande. A
THE TVO AND TVENTETH CHAP. CONTInueth yet thexposition of the same text by S. Cyrill, and Dionise
AS in the chapter last before ye hearde one coople farre distant in time of ther lifes, but consonant in sownde of their faithe: So shall ye in this chapter heare an other coople, the one very auncient, the other of later time, likewise agreablie declaring their faith and opening the right sense of our text nowe yet in hande. This coople shall be Cyrill and Dionise the Carthusian. the one of the greke churche, the other of the latin churche, as they before alleadged were. S. Cyrill saieth thus: Vmbram & figuram nosti? Disce ipsam rei veritatem. Caro enim mea (inquit) verè est cibus, & sanguis meus verè est potus. Rursus distinguit inter Li. 4. ca. 16. in Joā. mysticam benedictionem, & Manna, aquarum fluenta ex lapide, & calicis sancti communicationem, ne magis Mannae miraculū admirentur, sed ipsum potius suscipiant, qui caelestis B panis est, & aeternae vitae largitor. Mannae namque alimentum non aeternam vitam, sed breue famis remedium attulit. Non erat ergo ille verus cibus. Sanctū verò Christi corpus ad immortalitatem, & vitam aeternam nutriens cibus est. Aqua etiam illa è petra ad momentum sitim corporalem leuabat, nec quicquam adferebat pretereà. Non erat ergo potus ille verus, sed verus potus est sanguis Christi quo radicitus mors euertitur, & destruitur. Non enim hominis simpliciter sanguis est, sed eius, qui naturali vitae coniunctus, vita effectus est. Hauest thowe knowen the shadowe and the figure? Learn the verie trueth of the thing My flesh (saieth he) ys meat in dede, and my bloode ys drinke in dede. He doth again make a distinction betwixt the misticall benediction, and Manna: the streames of waters oute of the rocke, and the partaking of the holy cuppe: leaste they shoulde more esteem the miracle of Manna, but Figures of the olde Lawe, and veritie of the newe, be as the shadow ād the thing shadowed. raither shoulde receaue him, the whiche ys the heauenly bread and the geuer of eternall life. For the foode Manna did not bringe eternall life: but a short remedie of hungar. but the holie boodie of Chryste ys a meat nourishinge to immortalitie and eternall life. That water also oute of the stone, did for a litle while ease the bodilie thrist: but the trae drinke ys the bloode of Iesus Chryst, by the whiche C death ys turned vppe by the rootes and destroied. Yt ys not the blood of a bare man, but of him, who beinge conioined to the naturall life ys made life. Thus farre sainct Cyrill.
Do ye not perceaue in these woordes that he speaketh as moch and the very same in sense, though not in woordes that Chrysostom did? He had treacted before of the paschall lambe, and therby moued the Iewes, to consider the Shadowes of Moyses lawe, wherby being instructed, they shoulde be the readier to vnderstande, these misteries of the newe testament, and therfor saieth: Hauest thowe knowen the figure, learn also the very trueth of the thing. what ys that? My flesh ys meat in, dede and my bloode ys drinke in dede.
Marke then (Reader) the figures were the Paschall lambe, Manna, and the water flowing oute of the stone: The veritie (saieth he) that these figures did prefigurate, ys that trueth that Chryst vttered, saing: My flesh ys meat in dede. Yf this be the veritie, then yt ys not a figure: yf yt be no figure, then Chryst speaking yt, spake neither parabole, nor figure, as the last coople D hath also taught. And in this ye perceaue again the confutacion of the Aduersaries, that this ys spokē of Chrystes very flesh in the Sacramēt, and that [Page]yt ys no figuratiue speache as they wolde feign yt to be: but a speache teaching E the thinge to be reallie and verilie present,
But that I be not to tediouse in tarieng to long vpō euery authour, I will saie no more of this mans testimonie at this present, both for the cause alleged, and also that through all the sixt chapiter of saincte Iohn, and allmost through all the gospell of saincte Iohn, he ys not onely plentifull inmaking mencion of this matter, but also as plain as he ys plentifull. And that knowe the aduersaries right well. Therfor we will heare what Dionise who ys ioined to him doth saie: Thus I teade ther: Caro mea verè est cibus, & sanguis meus verè est potus. Hoc ait Saluator, ne putaretur parabolicè loqui Dionys. Carthus in Ioan. 6. solito more, ita quòd carnem suam diceret panem; quia significaretur per panem, & esset sub forma panis solùm sicut in signo: vel propter aliquam proprietatem cum pane cibus diceretur, quomodò dicit Apostolus: Petra erat Christus, quoniam figurauit Christum. Et Esaias: Verè foenum est populus, propter conuenientiam quandam. Et infrà ait de seipso Saluator: Ego sum vitis vera. Ad insinuandum ergo quòd caro sua sit verè & substantialiter sub specie panis, veraciterue sumatur à communicante: Sanguis quoque ipsius verè sub specie vini contineatur, & F recipiatur, adiecit: Caro mea, id est, corpus (sumitur enim nunc earo, non prout ossa excludit, pro toto corpore, neruos, venas, & ossa habente) verè est cibus, animae non corporis, quia non visibiliter, nec corporaliter sumitur, quamuis verum corpus sumatur. My flesh ys verily meat, and my blood ys verilie drinke. Thus saied our Sauiour leest he shoulde be thought after his customable maner to speake parabolicallie, so that he shoulde call his flesh bread, bicause yt shoulde be signified by the bread, and shoulde be vnder the forme of bread onelie as in a signe. Or that yt should be called meat, for some propretie that yt hath with bread. Euen as the Apostle doth saie: The stone was Chryst, bicause yt figured Chryst. And Esaie: Truly the people The verie flesh of Chryst vnder the forme of bread, and his verie blood vnder the forme of vine. ys grasse, for a certain agrement to the same. And in the gospell our Sauiour saieth of him self: I am the true vine. To insinuate therfor vnto vs, that his flesh ys verilie and substāciallie vnder the forme of bread, and that yt ys truly receaued of the cōmunicant, and his bloode also ys conteined in dede vnder the forme of wine, and ys receaued, he added: My flesh: that ys to saie, my G bodie (For flesh ys nowe here taken, not as yt doth exclude the bones, but for the wholl dodie, hauing, sinewes, vaines and bones) ys verilie meat, of the soule, not of the bodie. For yt ys not taken or receaued visiblie, nor corporallie, although the verie bodie be receiued. Thus moche Dionise.
Although I nede not here to note anie thing, wher euery sentēce, and peice of the same ys so plainly laied furth to our vnderstanding: yet I haue thought yt good not to ouerpasse to aduertise thee (reader) that this authour, though he speake thus plain: yet he dissenteth not frō the aunciētes before alleaged, namelie Chrysostom and Cyrill. For as they saied that this saing of Chryst ys no parable, nor figure nor darke speache: but conteining the veritie, and the very thing in deed, that by figurs was perfigurated: So this authour drawing by the same line saieth, that wher Chryst was accustomed to speake parabolicallie: yet to geue vs to vnderstand that yt was neither figure nor parabole that he spake of here, but that yt was his flesh verilie and substanciallie, that ys vnder the forme of bread and his bloode in verie dede, that ys vnder the forme of wine. He saied, my flesh (whiche ys here taken H for the wholl bodie) this wholl bodie ys verilie meate.
Secondarely, where some of them saied, yt was verie meat bicause yt saued the soule: Some other saied yt was the meat of the soule, bicause yt brought [Page 131]to the soule immortalitie, and euerlasting life: so this Authour also saieth, A that yt ys the meate of the soule, not of the bodie. Thus in these pointes ye see no dissencion betwixt the Authours of auncient time, and the Authours of the later time.
Yf ye obiecte that Chrysostome did vse no soche woordes as this Authour dothe. For Chrysostome, though he saied that yt was the very meat that saued the soule: yet he did not saie that this very meat was vnder the formes of bread and wine, as this man doeth.
Ys this, trowe yow, abhorring from the sainges of the auncient Fathers, though Chrysostom dothe not here speake yt by expresse woordes as this Authour doth? Dothe not Chrysostome saie that this ys no parabolicall speache? wherby what dothe he ells insinuate, but that ther ys the thing euen as yt ys spoken of Chryst: whiche ys the verie flesh the very meat of the faithfull? Yf this flesh be verilie ther, as most certenly yt ys, and we do see but the forme of bread, then yt ys ther vnder the forme of bread.
But to declare vnto yow that this maner ofspeache and wordes ys not B of late vsage, or of late or newe inuencion, harke what sainct Augustin saieth. Caro eius est, quam forma panis opertam in Sacramento accipimus: & sanguis Lib. sente. Prosp. A plain place for M. Juell. eius est, quem sub vini specie & sapore potamus. Yt ys the flesh of him, whiche we receaue, couered in the Sacrament vnder forme of bread. And yt ys the blood of him, whiche we drinke vnder the forme and taste of wine.
Do ye not heare in these woordes of Saint Augustine, the same forme of woordes, vsed by Dionise? Do ye not heare the forme of bread and Formes of bread and wine a speache knowen to S. Augu. wine? Do ye not heare that Chrystes flesh ys vnder the one, and his bloode vnder the other? Why then do ye sticke still in the mire? Why do ye not frame your selues to be obedient to the faith of Crystes Churche? Or do ye thinke that ye alone haue the true faithe, whiche the Churche had not in the time of sainct Augustine? Why do ye perseuere, deceauing the simple, and vnlearned, feading them with lies in stead of trueth, with C heresie in stead of faith, and with Scisme in stead of vnitie of Gods religion. Saie not nowe (as yt hath ben your common slaunder) that these late writers were full of corrupte doctrine. For ye see yet that they teache no other doctrine in this matter then the auncient Fathers did.
And yet in this saing of sainct Augustine, ther ys one thing wourthie of note, that wher the Aduersaries trauailed to impugne this doctrine of Chrystes being in the Sacrament vnder the formes of bread and wine, by the alteracion or chaunge of the significacion of this woorde, species, Species and forma vsed both in one significaciō. saing that the woorde doth signifie the nature or kinde of a thinge, and not the outwaade forme: Let them here weigh well and consider saincte Augustines maner of speache, who taketh here this woorde, species, applied to the wine, in the same significacion that he taketh, forma, applied to the bread. But this woorde, forma, ys taken for the outwarde forme, wherfor this woorde, species, must nedes be so likewise.
And here also I wolde wish the vnlearned that haue erred in this matter that they wolde be aduertised by this good Father and learned man D Dionise, that they will not abuse these sentences of the scripture: Petra erat Christus. &, verè foenum est populus: The stone was Chryste. and, Truly the people ys grasse: to the maintenaunce of their errour, that bycause these be spoken figuratiuelie, therfor this also: Caro verè est cibus: My flesh ys [Page] meate in verie dede. Ys spoken figuratiuelie. For yf ye will so, then might ye make these sentences: Tu es Christus filius Dei viui. Thowe arte Chryst the E Sonne of the liuing God: Et verè filius Dei erat iste, And trulie this man was the Sonne of God: ye might, I saie, make these sentences, figuratiue speaches, and so consequentlie subuert the sense of holie scripture and all our faith.
Therfor vnderstand by this Authour, that they be figuratiue speaches, or speaches so vsed for some agreablenesse of the thinges compared together, and do not ouertwartly turn that to impugne the trueth, that ys brought in example for the declaracion of the trueth, as I hearde a Reader do in Cambridge, who being willing to please the worlde he liued in, began to impugne the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, and the Masse. Schoole argumentes made for the opening of trueth, produced of a Protestant to cō firme a false doctrine. And to make his matter good in apparaunce, he induced manie argumentes and delighted him self very moche in them, as by whiche his matter was moche confirmed and strengthed, as he thought. In the hearing of the argumentes, methought they were soche as I had readde, wherfor the lecture being ended, I repared to my studie, and supposing I had readde thē in Dunce, I tooke him in hande, and turned, and fownde them. Whiche as Dunce F had moued against the truthe, to be solued for the better declaracion and opening of the trueth: So did this man bring them in against the truth, to confirme his false doctrine. So that soche argument as Dunce framed for an argument of impugnacion: this reader vsed yt as an argument of confirmacion. And so I feare verilie, that manie seke good Authours, and what they finde in them to impugn falsheade, with that do they defende and fortifie the same. Wherfor, reader, do not the like here, that what this Authour bringeth in for a better and further declaracion of the trueth, thowe take yt to impugne the trueth.
I thought yt good also not to omitte that this Authour saieth that we receaue in the Sacrament the very reall, and wholl bodie of Chryst, with veines, sinnewes, and bones, for that I haue hearde some of the Iewish Capharnaites aske, what do we receaue Chrystes bodie bones and all? Howe can yt come wholl in to my mouthe? Ah thow man of litle faith, why doest thowe doubte, bicause thowe imaginest G with the Capharnaites no other presence, but after the grosse corporall The presence of Christes bodie in the Sac. no more impossible thē many other his workes, which some as impossible to naturall knowledge. maner But thowe errest fowllie. He ys ther spirituallie, and yet verilie, and really, and no more to be thought impossiblie to thee, than that that bodie was born of a virgen: then that yt walked vpon the sea: then that yt was transfigurated on the mount: then that yt rose from death life: then that yt passed oute of the graue the monument being still fast shett and close: then that yt entred into the Apostles the doores being shett: then that yt ascended into heauen: all whiche factes yf thowe measure by naturall knowledge, they will seme as vnpossible as the other. For naturall knowledge wondereth and saieth: howe coulde the bodie of Chryst being a perfect bodie. Hauing flesh and bones passe oute of the sepulchre, the sepulchre not being opened but still closed and shett? howe coulde that bodie hauing (as ys saied) flesh and bones, enter into the disciples the doores still being shett? So doth yt also saie: Howe can a man receaue the wholl bodie of Chryst with his mouth? But as these two former thinges be made possible to thee by faith, H let this third so be also. For yf thowe beleue them bicause the scripture teacheth thee: beleue the scripture and the holie Fathers also which teache thee, that this bodie of Chryst ys so present, and so receaued. And yf yt be present, yt must nedes be that same bodie that was born, that was crucified. But not as yt was born and crucified. [Page 132]That same bodie in substance, not the same in qualitie and condicion. But yet the verie same wholl bodie. So did Chrystome teache that we shoulde take A In 10. 1 Co. Hom. 24. yt saing thus: Et quando id propositum videris, dic tecum, propter hoc corpus non amplius terra & cinis ego sum, hoc corpus crucifixum, verberatum, morte victum non est. Hoc idem corpus cruentatum, lancea vulneratum, fontes sanguinis & aquae, vniuerso orbisalutares scaturiuit. When thowe (saieth Chrysostom speaking of the Sacrament) seist that thing sett furth, saie with thy self, for this bodie I am no more earth and ashes. This bodie crucified and beaten, was not ouercomed with death. This same verie bodie bloodied and wounded with a speare, hath lett runne oute fountains of water and bloode holsome to all the worlde. Thus he.
Note, Reader, that Chrysostom willeth yowe, when ye see the Sacrament The same bodie ys in the Sacr. that was crucisied. sett furth, to saie with your self. This bodie being crucified, was not ouercomed with death. This same verie bodie wounded with a speare, sent holsom streanies of water and bloode to the worlde. Wherby ye are taught, that the same bodie ys in the Sacrament, that was crucified. And therfor are ye not willed to saie at the seight of the Sacrament: This ys a signe, figure or token of the bodie, that was B crucified: but this ys the self same bodie, and none other. For Chryste hath but one bodie, and that same one bodie ys in the Sacrament substanciallie, whollie and perfectlie.
And therfor as that Chryste was incarnate we knowe, and by whose worke yt was doen we knowe, but the maner howe that flesh was wrought we knowe not: That Chryst did rise from deathe, and that his soule was in Hell we knowe, but howe yt came to his bodie again we knowe not, yet by whom yt was doen we knowe: So, that Chrystes bodie ys in the Sacrament we knowe, and by whom yt ys wrought that yt ys ther we knowe, but howe yt ys ther, more then ys saied, we knowe not. Nowe yf ye will not beleue his bodie to be in the Sacrament, bicause ye knowe not howe yt ys ther, howe will ye beleue that Chrystes soule returned to his bodie, seing ye knowe not howe, yt came ther.
Chryst made the water wine in Cana Galilaeae, But howe we knowe not. Joan. 2. For he spake no extern woord, neither did anie extern facte toward the turning C of yt appeare more thē that he did bid the ministers to drawe, and geue the stewarde. The fiue loanes, and two fishes the seuen loanes and the fewe fishes we knowe to be multiplied, and by whom, but howe, whether by Ibid. 6. Matt. 15. putting to of an other substance, or they thē selues were encreased, or otherwise, we knowe not. That Lazarus was dead, and so certēlie, that he being foure Joan. 11. daies in the graue did stinke, we knowe: but howe the soule came to that putrisieng bodie, and from whence, and howe that stinkinge bodie was made hole and swete, we knowe not, but by whome yt was doen we knowe.
Therfor the maner of these and manie mo being wrought by the diuine power, for somoche as the scripture saieth that they were doen (though the maner of the doinge be vnknowen) we beleue them: So forasmoche as the scripture saieth that the slesh of Chryst ys meate in deed and that we must eate yt, yf we will haue life: Let vs beleue yt, though we knowe not howe yt ys so made, nor can comprehende howe soche a bodie shoulde entre into a VVe maie not be curiouse in the workes of God. mans mouth. Let vs not be curiouse in searching the wonderfull workes of D God. Yf he did saie yt, yt ys knowledge enough for a Chrystian man to beleue that yt ys so. I tarie to long here, but the chrystian charitie I beare to them that haue erred, that they maie be reduced, and staied, hath thus caried me.
THE THREE AND TWENTETH CHAPITER E endeth the exposition of this text by Theophilact. and Beda.
THe last coople, whiche shall be brought furth for the expownding and vnderstanding of this text of S. Iohn, shall be Theophilact. and Beda. Whome I will breiflie, alleage bicause I wolde be gone from this to other in same chapiter. Theophilacte saieth thus: Non enim nudi hominis caro est quae manducatur, sed Dei, & quae deificare valet, vtpote contemperata Deitati. Ista etia vere est cibus, eò quòd non ad paruum tēpus duret, neque corrumpatur sicut corruptibilis cibus: sed aeternae vitae sit subsidium. Similiter et potus sanguinis Domini verè est potus quiae Jn 6. Joan. non ad tempus sufficit siti sed semper absque siti conseruat, nec indigere permittit bibentem sicut et ad Samaritanam dicebat: Qui bibit ex aqua, quam ego dabo, non sitiet. Nam quisquis grattam sancti Spiritus per sumptionem diuinorum mysteriorum susceperit, neque famem spiritualem, neque sitim patietur qualem incredult. Yt ys not the flesh of a bare man, whiche ys eaten, but of God, and whiche ys able to make vs as yt were F Goddes, as contemperated to the Godhead. This flesh also ys meat in very dede, bicause yt endureth not for a litle while, neither ys yt corrupted as the corruptible meat, but yt ys the helpe of eternall life, likwise also the drinke of the bloode of our Lorde ys drinke in dede, bicause yt sufficeth the thirst not for a time, but allwaies yt conserueth from thrist, and suffreth not the drinker to lacke, as he saied to the Samaritane: He that drinketh of the water whiche I shall geue him, he shall not thirst, so as do the vnbeleuers. Thus moche Theophilacte.
I shall not nede to trauaill here to shewe that he vnderstandeth this text of the Sacrament. For that ys all readie made so manifest, that yt can not be denied. And for the presence I will not trouble the reader to make any farther proofe or declaracion here, seing yt maie be well perceaued, by that that ys allreadie saied, what this Authours meening ys in this matter. I will therfor passe him thus ouer, and come to Beda, who breiflie writeth thus: Dixerat superiùs, Qui manducat meam carnem, & bibit meum sanguinem habet vitam G aeternam. Et vt ostenderet quanta distantia sit inter corporalem cibum, & spirituale In Joan. mysterinm corporis & sanguinis sui, adiecit: Caro mea verè est cibus, & sanguis meus verè est potus. He had saied before he that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my bloode, hath euerlasting life. And to the intent he might shewe howe great difference ys betwen the corporall meat, and the spirituall mystery of his bodie and bloode, he added: My flesh ys meate in dede and my blood ys drinke in dede. Thus Beda.
That this Authour vnderstandeth this text of the Sacrament, yt can not be obscure to anie man, seing that he so plainlie saieth, that Chryst to shewe the differēce of corporall meat, and spirituall mysterie of his bodie and blood added this saing: My flesh ys meat etc.
And let no man take occasion to maintein his erroure against the presence Howe the Sacr. ys a mysterte, and what a mysterte ys of Chryste in the Sacrament, bicause he calleth yt the mystery of Chrystes bodie and bloode. For a mysterie ys that couertlie conteineth a thing not by senseis or comon knowledge to be perceaued. So this mystery H conteineth the very bodie of Chryst as a thing secretly hidden from the senseis, as Eusebius saieth: Non exteriori censenda visu, sed interiori affectu. Not to be iudged by outwarde seight, but by inwarde affecte, that ys by faithe. Hom. 5. Pasch. Wherfor Wherfor yt ys very well called a misterie, for that yt conteineth the very bodie and Chryste, whiche the senseis can not perceaue.
eaten, and dronke, they becom Apostaties, and forsakers of Chrystes religion A do they abide in Chryst, or Chryst in them? But ther ys in dede a certain maner of eating that flesh, and of drinking that bloode, after the whiche maner he that eateth, and drinketh, dwelleth in Chryst, and Chryst in him. Thus farre S. Augustin.
Do ye not here see two maners of eatinge of the flesh of Chryst, and Two maners of eating the flesh of Chryst. drinking of his bloode, the one to eate and drinke them verilie, which yf yt be doen with a feigned heart, or when they haue so doen, they forsake Chrystes faith (as manie of late yeares haue doen and do in this matter of the Sacrament) they, though they haue receaued Chrystes very flesh and blood in the Sacrament: yet Chryst dothe not dwell in them. Then ther ys an other maner of eating Chrystes bodie (saieth S. Augustin) which ys a spirituall maner of receauing by true and right faith, and feruent charitie. And he that eateth Chrystes flesh after this maner, he hath Chryst dwelling in him. But (as yt ys before said) he that eateth Chrystes flesh spirituallie, hath Chryst dwelling in him spiritually: But he that eateth Chrystes very flesh in the Sacrament with perfect faith, and godly charitie, he hath Chryst B dwelling in him bothe naturallie (as S. Hilary saieth) and also spirituallie (as S. Augustin saieth) So that the one of these denieth not the other, neither ys anie of them by any catholique writers denied, but they be both raither wished, yea required, and commaunded. And bothe these maners of receuing iointlie vsed of the faitfull christian do augment the benefitt very moche.
And here I wish the Reader, diligently to note that S. Augustin saieth that euell men do eate the flesh of Chryst, whiche inuincible proueth the reall and substanciall flesh of Chryst in the Sacrament. For otherwise the euell man can not eate the flesh of Chryst.
Thus ye see to what pourpose I haue ioined these two holie learned Fathers together though they be both of the latin Churche, that ye maie Two waies of dwelling in Chryst, that ys spirituallie and naturallie. perceaue the abiding and dwelling of Chryst in vs to be not onelie spirituall by faith and charitie, but also natural by the receauing of Chrystes very flesh C in the Sacrament. And that thone of these maners ys not to be onlie affirmed as a treuth, and thother denied as an erroure, but bothe to be receaued and beleued as a treu catholike doctrine auouched and taught by holie Fathers, whiche expownde this text of sainct Iohn nowe in hande bothe to meen te naturall abiding of Chryst in vs, as sainct Hilary hath here doen, and also the spirituall abiding, as sainct Augustin expownded yt.
THE FIVE AND TWENTETH CHAPITER proceadeth in the exposition of the same by Chrysostom and sainct Gregorie.
CHrisostome very breiflie expowndeth this text on this wise. Qui manducat meam carnem, & bibit meum sanguinem, in me manet, & Hom. 45. in Joan. ego in eo. Quod dicit, vt cumipso se admisceri ostendat. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me and I in him. D Whiche he saieth, that he might shewe himself to be mingled with him.
What he meeneth by this (mingled) yf ye remembre what ys alleadged of him before, that shall ye soon perceaue, and vnderstande therwith that Chrisostom according to our two maners of receauing, maketh mencion of two [Page]maners of being in Chryst, saing thus: Vt autem non solùm per dilectionem, sed reipsa in illam carnem conuertamur, per cibum id efsicitur, quem nobis largitus est. That E Jbid. we shoulde (saieth Chrysostom) not onelie by loue, but in very dede be turned into his flesh, that ys doen by the meat whiche he hath graunted vs.
Wher note that he teacheth, that we be turned into Chryste two maner of waies: by loue, whiche ys the spirituall maner, by the whiche we be spiritually Two maners of being or dwelling in Chryst. in Chryst, euen dwelling in him (as saincte Iohn saieth) Deus charitas est & qui manet in charitate in Deo manet, & Deus in co. God ys charitie, and he that dwelleth in charitie, dwelleth in God, and God in him: And also in verie dede, when we woorthilie eate his flesh, whiche ys our hauenly meate, by whiche meate (saieth Chrysostom) yt ys brought to effect, and that not by an imaginacion, but in very dede.
Thus ye perceaue that these be two sondrie effectes, to dwell in Chryst spirituallie, and to dwell in him in very dede (as Chrysostom saieth) or naturallie (as S. Hilary saieth) whiche two sondrie effectes, haue two sondrie causes: whiche be to eate Chrystes flesh spirituallie, and to eate id reallie, or in F verie dede. So that ye maie perceaue, that this ys not an horrible matter, as the Proclamer with blasphemouse exclamacion pretendeth yt to be, when so manie auncient Fathers so plainly speake of yt.
But nowe come we to S. Gregorie ioined with Chrysostom who vpon Iob saieth thus: Natus Dominus in praesepi ponitur, vt significaretur, quòd sancta animalia, Greg. in Job cap. 6. quae ieiuna diu apud legem inuenta sunt, incarnationis eius foeno satiarentur. Praesepe natus impleuit, qui eibum semetipsum mortalium mentibus praebuit, dicens: Qui comedit carnem, & bibit sanguinem meum, in me manet, & ego in eo. Owre Lorde being born ys laied in the maunger that yt shoulde be signified, that the holie beastes, whiche long vnder the lawe were fownde fasting, shoulde be filled withe the heie of his incarnacion. Being borne he filled the maunger, who gaue him self meat to the mindes of the mortall, sainge: He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloode, dwelleth in me, and I in him. Thus S. Gregorie.
In this sentence ye heare that Chryst gaue himself meat to mortall men, and that according to our text: he that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my bloode G &c. Whiche text as ye haue hearde of other fathers before alleaged, ys to be vnderstanded of the eating of Chrystes flesh in the Sacrament.
But yf the Aduersarie reclame and saie, that S. Gregory saieth Chryst gaue Obiection oute of S. Gregorie aunswered. himself meat to the mindes of the faitfull, and that therfor he meneth not of anie corporall receipt for the minde taketh none soche. Therto I saie that trueth yt ys, that sainct Gregorie saieth that Chryst geueth himself meate, to the mindes of the mortall: but I praie you, howe take ye the minde here? do ye not take yt for the soule? and do not all the holie writers saie, that the flesh of Chryst in the Sacraēmt ys the meate of the soule? dothe not Chrysostom saie, that yt ys verus cibus qui saluat animam. Yt ys the very meat in dede that saueth the soule? Why then, what do ye winne by this that ye saie, yt ys the meat of the soule, seing that the holie Fathers haue so plainly testified, that the very substanciall bodie of Chryst being in very dede receaued in the blessed Sacrament ys the meat of the soule? What then doth S. Gregorie helpe your cause, seing he saieth none otherwise then they which haue H ouerthrowen your cause?
And that yow shall perceaue, that he agreeth with the rest acknowledging two maner of receiptes of Chrystes bodie and blood as they doo, ye shall heare him open himself. Quid namque sit sanguis agni, non iam audiendo; sed bibendo Greg. in Homil. Pasch. dedicistis, qui super vtrumque postem ponitur, quando non solùm ore corporis, sed etiam ore [Page 136] cordis hauritur. For what the bloode of the lambe ys, ye haue not onely learned by hearing, but also in drinking. Which blood ys putt on bothe the postes A when yt ys not onely dronken with the mouth of the bodie, but also with the mouth of the heart.
Se ye not here S. Gregorie when he saieth, the bloode of the lambe ys Chrystes blood drok with mouth of bodie and mouth of heart. dronke both with the mouth of the bodie and with the mouth of the heart? Doth he not plainlie distincte and disseuer, these two receiptes, as the receipt of the bloode of the lambe with the mouth of the bodie to be the corparall receipt, and with the mouthe of the heart to be the spirituall receipt, which although they be distincted receiptes: yet he wished them in this homelie to be ioined together, for then we shall be sure to haue the blood vpon both our postes to our more sauegarde against the destroier. Yt maie be but vpon one poste for as he saieth not moche after: Qui sic Redemptoris sui sanguinem sumit vt imitari passionem eius necdum velit, in vno poste sanguinem posuit. He that doth so receaue the blood of his Redemer, that as yet, he will not folowe his passion, he hath put the blood vpon one poste.
Thus we vnderstande by S. Gregorie not onely two maner of receiptes of Chrystes flesh and bloode, but also we be taught by him that they maie B concurre, and be both doen at once. And also that the corporall receipt maie be withoute the spirituall, as also the spiritual maie be without the corporal.
THE SIX AND TWENTETH CHAPITER CONTInueth this expositon by S. Cyrill and Lyra.
TO adde yet mo wittnesses howe this text ys to be taken, S. Cyrill expowndeth yt in this wise: Qui manducat meam carnem, & bibit meum Jn Ioan. cap. 15. sangumem, in me manet & ego in eo. Vnde considerandum est, quòd non habitudme solùm quae per charitat em intelligitur, Christum nobis inesse, verùm etiam participatione naturali. Nam quemadmodum si quis igne liquefactam ceram, alij cerae similiter liquefactae ita miscuerit, vt vnum quid ex vtrisque factum videatur: Sic communicatione corporis & sanguinis Christi, ipse in nobis est, & nos in ipso. Non poterat enim aliter corruptibilis haec natura corporis, ad incorruptibilitatem, & vitam traduci, nisi naturalis vitae corpus ei coniungeretur. Owre Sauiour Chryst saieth. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh C Two waies of Chrystes being in vs: that ys spirituallie, and naturallie. my bloode, dwelleth in me, and I in him. Whervpon (saieth Cyrill) yt ys to be considered, that not onelie by inwarde disposition, whiche ys vnderstanded by charitie, Chryst to be in vs: but also by naturall participation. For as yf anie man wolde mengle waxe that ys melted by the fire, with other waxe that ys likewise melted, so that of both ther maie be perceaued to be made one: So by the parta king of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, he ys in vs, and we in him. For this corruptible nature of the bodie, coulde not otherwise be brought to incorruptiblitie and life, except the bodie of naturall life shoulde be conioined to yt. Thus Cyrill.
What can the Aduersaries saie to this Authour? ys ther no other receipt of Chrysts bodie, but a spirituall receipt? yes, this auncient father, as the other auncient fathers haue doen before, saieth, that Chryst ys not in vs onely by charitie, wherbie he vnderstandeth the spirituall maner, but also by naturall participacion, that ys, by the eating and drinking of naturall flesh and bloode. And that this shoulde not be taken for a phantasie he saieth that Chrystes flesh ys so in vs, and we in him, as two waxes melted and put together be made one. So also D (as S. Hilarie saieth before) as God the Sone, and God the Father be one in substance: So we by this receipt of Chryst be one with him, and by him also ioined to the godheade. I nede not to note then to yow that Cyrill vnderstandeth this text of the blessed Sacramēt, wher the woordes whollie fownde A plain place of S. Cyrill for the procl. to that pourpose. The reall presence also ys sufficiētly taught, when he saieth [Page]that we do partake the naturall flesh and bloode of Chryst, whose naturall flesh ys not nor can be receaued, but wher yt ys reallie present. The effect of E of this also proueth the receipt, bicause we be not onely in minde affection, and soule ioined to Chryst: but also by our natural flesh, receauing his natural flesh. This sentence alone trulie, yf a mā hath not solde himself ouer to he Deuell, to be blinded, ys sufficiēt to moue and stirre anie heart to accept the the true catholike faith. But yf men wil not see what shal we saie? who ys blinder thē he that will not see? God yet illumine their heartes, that they cal not darknesse light, and light darknesse. To proceade in our matter, to this aunciēt Father of the higher house shal be ioined Lira ne of the lower house to shewe his vnderstāding of this text. Thus he saieth writing vpon yt: Hic probat quoddā suppositū. Dixerat enim, quòd māducatio dat vitā. Istud probat hic, quia illud, per qnod aliquis vniture principio viuificatiuo, illud dat vitā. Hoc patet in vita corporali etc. Here Lyra in 6. Ioan. he proueth a thing supposed. For he had saied, that the eating of this flesh geueth life. This he ꝓueth here. For that by the whiche a mā ys vnited to the principle that maketh thinges to liue, geueth life. This appeareth in the corporall F life. By this Sacramēt, a mā ys vnited to Chryst, who ys the beginning of the spūall life. And this ys yt that ys saied: He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloode, dwelleth in me and I in him. that ys to saie, he ys vnited to me. This Authour ꝓceadeth as yow haue hearde him beginne, wher he taught that Chrystes flesh was so verilie meat, that yt was in the Sacramēt not as in a sign, but reallie and in very dede. To the whiche flesh of Chryst (saieth he) we be vnited by the Sacramēt, that ys by the receauing of the Sacramēt wherin being reallie Chrystes verie flesh we be vnited to the same. For yf yt be not ther, we cannot be vnited to yt by the Sacramēt. For an vniō ys the making of two things or mo, one, whiche thinges must be present so to be vnited. Wherfor the bodie of Chryst ys reallie in the Sacramēt or ells ther can be no vniō. What maner of vnion ys wrought by the Sacramēt S. Hilary hath taught vs, that yt ys a natural vniō, that ys, an vniō of Chrystes natural flesh and substāce, and of our natural flesh and substāce, whiche both by this Sacrrmēt be made one, so that Chryst dwelleth in vs, and we in him. Yf anie of the Aduersaries wolde G take occasiō to obiect (as they wil doo as wel vpō a woorde, as a whol sentēce) that this Authour saieth, that Chryste ys the beginning of the spūal life, wherfor we be ioined to him spirituallie, for the hauing of that spūal life, and not corporal life: it ys very manifest, I saie, that we liue not corporally by the Sacramēt but this corporall life ys mainteined by other foode. But the life that we haue by the receipt of Chryst in the Sacramēt ys the eternal life, whiche ys called the spsial life, as distincted frō the corporal and temporal life. Temporalē vitā sine illo habere homines possūt, aeternā verò omnino nō possūt. Men maie haue (saieth S. Augu.) the tēporal life withoute the Sacramēt but the eternall life by no means can they haue. For this meat suffreth the tēporal death to come to vs, but (as Chrysostom saieth) yt expelleth death, meening the eternall death Of the whiche S. August. saieth. Quantū pertinet ad mortem istā visibilē et corporalē, nunquid nos nō morimur, qui māducamus panē de caelo de scendentē? Sic sunt mortui et illi, quemadmodū et nos sumus morituri. Quantū attinet, vt dixi, ad mortē huius corporis visibilē at (que) carnalē. Quantū attinet Aug. tract. n Joan. 26. ad mortē illā de qua terret Dn̄s quia mortui sunt patres istorum. Manducauit Manna H et Moyses, manducauit Manna et Aaron, māducauit Manna et Phinees, manducauerant ibi multi, qui Dn̄o placuerunt et mortui non sunt. For somoche as doth pertein to this visible and corporal death do not we die, which do eate the bread descending from heauen? So also be they dead, euen as we also shall die. for somoche as perteineth to the visible and corporall death of this bodie, as I haue saied, for somoche as perteineth to that death from the whiche our [Page 137]Lorde doth feare vs, that the fathers of these be dead, Moyses also did eate A Manna, and Aaron did eate Manna, and Phynees did eate Manna, manie did eate ther whiche haue pleased God and be not dead, Thus moche S. Augustine.
In all whiche sainges ye perceaue that by the receipt of Chryst in the Sacrament, we haue life, not corporall and temporall, but eternall. Neither by yt do we eschape temporall and corporall death but eternall death, So that yowe se the eternall life, set against visible, corporall, and temporall life, as a spirituall life, whiche spirituall and eternall life ys by faith and holy conuersacion answerablie begonne in this life, in owre inwarde man, and in our bodies by the receipt of Chrystes liuing flesh (as he himself saieth) Ego resuscitabo eum in nouissimo die. I will raise him in the last daie. Ego (saieth Cyrill) id est corpus meum quod comedetur, resuscitabo eum. I, that ys, my bodie, whiche shall be eaten, shall rayse him vppe in the last daie. And again he saieth: Ego ergo, qui homo factus sum, per meam carnem in nouissimo die comedentes resuscitabo, I therfor Chrystes bodie, shall raise our bodies, (saieth S. Cyrill in the person of Chryst) who am made man, by my slesh will B raise the eaters of the same in the last daie. So that Chryst ys he by whome, being vnited vnto him we shall haue that eternall and spirituall life, that knoweth neither corruption nor ende.
THE SEVEN AND TWENTETH CHAP. ABIdeth in the same exposition by Theophilact, and Rupertus Tuicien.
THeophilacte vpon the text nowe in hande saieth thus: Hoc loco discimus Sacramentum Communionis. Nam qui edit, & bibit carnem & sanguinem In 6. Joan. Domini, in ipso manet Domino, & Dominus in ipso. Contemperatioenim fit noua, & super rationem, ita vt sit Deus in nobis, & nos in Deo. Non audis terribilem auditum? Non Deum nudum manducamus, tangi enim nequit, & incorporeus est, & neque occulis, neque manibus apprehendi potest. Iterum nudi hominis caro nihil prodesse potest. Sed quia Deus vniuit sibi carnem secundùm ineffabilem contemperationem, viuisica est & caro, non quòd in Dei naturam transierit (absit) C sed ad similitudinem candentis ferri, quod & ferrum manet, & ignis ostendit operationem: sic ergo & Domini caro manens, caro viuisica est, sicut Dei caro. In this place we learn the Sacrament of Cōmunion. For he that eateth and drinketh the flesh and blood of our Lorde, dwelleth in the same our Lord, and our Lord in him. For ther ys a newe contemparacion Not God alone, spirituallie but the flesh of Christ verilie and also corporallie receaeued in the Sacr. made, and that aboue reason, so that God shoulde be in vs, and we in him. Doest thowe not heare a terrible hearing? We do not eate bare God, for he can not be touched, and ys withoute bodie, and can neither with eyes, nor with handes be apprehended. Again the flesh of a bare man nothing profiteth, but God hath vnited to himself this flesh after an vnspeakable contemperacion, yt ys flesh causing life, as the flesh of God, not that yt ys gone into the nature of God (God forbidde) but to the likenesse of fierie Iron, whiche still remaineth Iron, and sheweth the operacion of fier: So therfor the flesh of our Lorde also, remaining still flesh, ys quickning or causing to liue, as the flesh of God. Thus moche Theophil. The flesh of Chryst geueth life and yet remaineth still naturall flesh.
Who in the first front of his sentence testifieth by expresse woordes, that this text ys to be vnderstanded of the Sacrament. For he saieth: that in this place we learn the Sacrament of Cōmunion. In the rest he trauaileth to sett furth the D excellencie of Chrystes flesh, prouing that yt ys able to giue life, for that yt being vnspeakeably cōtemperated with the Godhead, as Iron ys with fier [Page]which hath the operacion of fire, and yet ys still very naturall Iron: So the flesh of Chryst hath the power to giue life as the flesh of God: and yet yt remaineth E still very naturall flesh.
All which processe why hath he made, but to declare to vs, that the flesh of Chryst being receaued of vs (for that therbie Chryst dwelleth in vs, and we in him) we haue that in vs, whiche ys able to giue vs life, bicause (being the flesh of God) yt hath soch powre. And so he doth not onely testifie, this scripture to speak of the Sacrament, but also he testifieth the very flesh of Chryst, that ys ioined to the Godhead, to be ther present, and so receaued and eaten to giue life. Of the which matter he hath so manifestly allreadie vpon the scriptures before alleaged spoken his faith that yt can not here be called in question whether yt be so vnderstanded of him in this place or no. Wherfor I leaue this authour as one most plainly shewing himself, and for the further exposition of the text I will heare the testimonie of Rupertus who making a conference betwixt the godlie assured and certen promesse of Chryst, and the wicked and false promesse of the serpent to our Mother Eue, saieth thus: Quāto enim suauior est haec vox (Qui mandacat meam carnem, & bibit meum sanguinem, F in me manet & ego in illo) illectione illa, qua Serpens susurrauit: Comedite, & eritis sicutdij? Rupertus Tuicien. qui vtique de suo non dabat, sed rapinam facere suadebat. Hic autem non qualecunque suum sed suam carnem, & suum sanguinem dat. In illis qui non credunt, & non credentes, ore tamen, Sacramentum percipiunt, cibus & potus iste operatur iudicium. Howe moch more pleasaunt ys this voice (He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me and I in him) then that enticement, whiche the serpent whispered. Eate and ye shall be as Goddes? Who yet gaue nothing of his owne, but moued them to do robberie. But this (mening Chryst) geueth not euery maner thing of his, but euen his flesh and his blood. In them that beleue not, and yet not beleuing, with their mouth receaue the Sacrament, this meat and drinke vnto them woorketh iudgement. Thus Rupertus.
As in other, so in this authour ye maie perceaue, that he vnderstandeth this scripture (as the rest do) of the Sacrament. For he saieth that they whiche withoute faith receaue the Sacrament, receaue yt to iudgement. Whiche saing as yt delighteth me, and reioiceth me, for that I see soche concorde, consent, and agreement among the Fathers, and Chrystes Parliament house, all affirming G and teaching, against the false perswasion of the Aduersarie, that this sixt chapiter of S. Iohn ys vnderstanded of the blessed Sacrament: So yt greueth me to see the why spering of the serpent so farre to haue preuailed vpon the Sonnes of Adam, that they crediting him in his ministers, and without due faith receauing the Sacrament, receaue their iudgement to condemnacion, as this authour also saieth.
As for the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, ther ys none that ys familiarely acquainted with this authour, but knoweth that the confesseth Rupertus most plainlie auoucheth the presence. and auoucheth the verie reall presence of Chryst in the Sacrament not onelie in this place, when he saieth, that Chryst geueth vs no small thing of his, but he geueth vs hys flesh and his blood: But also vpon this chapter in manie places. Of the whiche for the better creditt to be geuen by the reader, I will here bring in one, and hereafter diuerse other shall be brought furth. Thus he saieth: Proinde cunctis figurarum vel similitudinum Li. 6. coment. in Euang. Ioan. nebulis amotis, non corpus quodlibet, non corpus Christi quod est Ecclesia, sed illud corpus Domini, quod pro nobis traditum est, nos manducare, & illum sanguinem, qui pro H nobis fusus est in remissionem peccatorum, nos bibere, indubitanter credimus. Et quod fecit ipse, hoc idem in cōmemorationem ipsius scimus, et benè scimus nos facere, id est, carnē ipsius [Page 138] manducare, & sanguinem bibere. Therfor all clowdes of sigures and similitudes A remoued, we vndoubtedlie beleue that we receaue, not euerie bodie, not the bodie of Chryst (whiche ys the Churche) but the same bodie of our Lorde that was betraied for vs, and that same bloode that was shed for vs in the remission of Sinnes. And we knowe, and knowe well, that we do euen the same verie thing in the remembrance of him, that he himself did, that ys, that we do eate hys flesh, and drink hys bloode. Thus he.
Hath not this Authour taught the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament plainlie enough? I Suppose he hath spoken so plain that he shall be shent for his laboure, and gett litle good will of the Proclamer, but hatred ( For veritas odium parit, trueth causeth hatred) and so shall be cast oute as a man not woorthy to be heard, and yet a man aswell learned, and aswell estemed, as the Proclamer, ād not yesterdaie born, but one that liued almost fiue hūdreth years agone. Well in this hys plain maner of writing, ād testifieng of the faith that was in the Church in those daies let vs examin him, what he doth saie, that Rupertus his saing conserred with other more aūcient fathers other Fathers haue not saied before. First he saith that we must remoue, all B clowdes of figures and similitudes, as touching the substance of the Sacrament. So that the substance of the Sacrament ys not a figure or a similitude of the bodie of Chryst, but the verie bodie of Chryst yt self. Hath not Origen and Chrysostome saied as moche before, and diuerse other? And when thys Authour remoueth figures from the Sacrament, doth not he thē both impugn the clowdie doctrine, and the obscure shadowes of the Aduersaries figures, signes, and tokens, and teacheth that the verie substance of Chrystes bodie and blood ys present in the Sacrament? He saieth that we receaue no other bodie in the Sacrament, but that bodie of Chryst, that was betraied forvs, and that same blood that was shedd for vs: The like woordes speaketh Chrysostome, as before ys alleaged more then once or twice, and herafter more shall be. Thus then we maie conclude that this Authour both vnderstandeth the sixt of sainct Iohn of the Sacrament, and that also in yt he confesseth withoute figure the very bodie of Chryst.
THE EIGHT AND TVENTETH CHAP. ENdeth C the exposition of this text by Haymo, and Euthymius.
SVfficient testimonie being produced for the right and rtue vnderstanding of this text, I haue determined nowe to ende the same with this one onely coople mo, whom I will breiflie alleadg and ouerpasse. The first of these shall be Haymo, who alleaging this scripture declareth well howe yt ys to be vnderstanded. For speaking of the Haim. in. 10. 1. Cor. flesh and bodie of Chryst, he saieth thus: Sicut illa caro corpus Christi est, it a iste panis transit in corpus Christi. Nec sunt duo corpora, sed vnum corpus. Diuinitatis enim plemtudo, quae fuit in illo replet & istū panē, & ipsa diuinitas Verbi quae implet coelū et terram, & omnia quae in eis sunt, ipsa replet corpus Christi, quod à multis sacerdotibus per vniuersis The God head of the Sonne filleth the bodie of Chryst sanctisied by the preistes orbē sanctificatur. Et facit vnū Christi corpus esse. Et sicut ille panis & sanguis in corpus Christi trāseunt: ita omnes qui in Eccle sia dignè comedūt illud, vnū corpus Christi sunt, sicut & ipse dicit: Qui māducat carnē meam, & bibit sanguinē meū, in me manet, & ego in eo. As that flesh ys the bodie of Chryst; euen so this bread passeth in to the bodie of Chryst. Neither be they two bodies, but one bodie. For the plenitude D or fulnesse of the Godhead that was in him, doth also fil this bread, ād the sāe Godhead of the Sōne of God, which doth sil heauē ād earth ād al things that [Page]be in them, the same doth fill the bodie of Chryst, which ys sanctified of manie E preistes through all the worlde, and makety yt to be one bodie of Christ. And as that bread and blood do passe into the bodie of Chryst: Euen so all that do woorthilie in the Church eate yt, they are one bodie of Chryst, as he himself saieth: He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my bloode dwelleth in me, and I in him, Thus farre Haymo. I do merueill howe the Aduersarie could haue the face to denie this, the sixt of S. Iohn to be vnderstanded of the Sacrament, seing that soch a nombre with so great consent do not onely in generall woordes saie that yt ys vnderstanded of the Sacrament, but do also expownde euery sentence particularly, as hytherto (gētle Reader) thowe maist perceaue euen to this authour. Who when he had declared the wholl matter of the Sacrament, as first howe the bodie of Chryst shoulde be in the Sacrament, which, he saieth, ys by that that the bread passeth into the bodie of Chryst, which ys doen by the turning of the substance of the bread into the substance of the bodie of Chryst: vnto thys he addeth and teacheth by whom thys merueilouse worke ys wrought and doen, saing: that yt ys doen by the power of the Godhead, euen the same that was fullie F in Chryst: euen the same that filleth both heauen and earth, that same ys fullie, saieth he, in the bodie of Chryst, whiche ys sanctified of manie preistes.
And here note, Reader, against the carnall disputers that allthough he saie, that the bodie of Chryst be consecrated of manie preistes through the whol The bodie of Chryst consecrated of manie preistes ys but one bodie. worlde: yet he saieth not that they be manie bodies of Chryst, but onely one bodie. And sheweth also howe that ys brought to passe, and who ys the woorker of yt. The Godhead (saieth he) that ys fullie in Chryst, maketh thys to be one bodie. Thus when he had shewed howe great a thing the Sacrament ys in yt self, then he beginneth to shew what yt ys towarde vs, and what yt woorketh in vs yf we receaue yt woorthilie. As the bread (saieth he) ys become the bodie of Chryst: So all they that woorthilie eate the same are the bodie of Chryst. And to proue this, he alleageth the saing of Chryst, whiche we haue in hande: He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in hym. G
So then in this discourse yt ys easilie perceaued, that he teacheth the bread to be turned into the bodie of Chryst, that the bodie of Chryst ys in the Sacrament, and not alone, but with the Godhead in yt, and so perfect God and man: that though the bodie of Chryst be cōsecrated of manie preistes: yet by the powre of the Godhead yt ys wrought, to whom nothing ys vnpossible. Finallie that we receauing this bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament, according to Chrystes saing, we maie dwell in Chryst, and he in vs. And thus yt ys manifest that thys Authour vnderstandeth thys text of the Sacrament.
Now this being plain, we will breiflie heare hys yocke felowe, whom for thys time we make Euthymius. Thus writeth he. Si (inquit) de vno corpore, & Jn Matth. 26. sanguine omnes fideles participamus, omnes vnum sumus per ipsam horum mysteriorum participationem, & in Christo omnes, & Christus in omnibus. Qui edit (inquit) meam carnem, & bibit meum sangumem, in me manet, & ego in eo. Verbum siquidem per assumptionem The flesh that the Sō ne of God tooke by in carn. ys vnited to vs by the Sacra. carni vuitum est, haec rursus caro vnitur nobis per participationem. Yf all we (saieth Euthymius) do partake of one bodie, and one blood, all we are one by participacion H of these mysteries and we be all in Chryst, and Chryst in vs all. He (saieth Chryst) that eateth my bodie, and drinketh, my blood, dwelleth in me and I in him. For trulie the Sonne of God by taking of flesh vpon him, ys vnited [Page 139]to the flesh: Again this flesh ys vnited to vs by participacion. Thus Euthym.
This sentence ys but short, but yt ys effectuouse. But hasting to ende the A exposition of this text, I will note here but one thing, leauing the rest to the diligent reader to consider. The thing that I note, ys that this Authour saieth that the flesh, whiche the Sonne of God by assumption did vnite to Aplain proof of the presence against the proclamer: him, that flesh again ys vnited to vs by participacion. Wherin I note that the same flesh that was vnited to the Sonne of God, the very same and none other ys vnited to vs. The verie naturall flesh was vnited to the Godhead. Wherfor the verie naturall flesh of Chryst ys vnited to vs by participacion. That yt ys the same flesh, this Authour well sheweth when he speaking of the flesh vnited to the Godhead saieth: Haec rursus caro: This flesh again: not this flesh spirituallie, but this flesh that was vnited to the Godhead, which was naturall flesh. The mean how this flesh ys vnited to vs he saieth ys by participacion. Wher do we participate yt? in the Sacrament. Then this flesh ys in the Sacrament.
THE NINE AND TWENTETH CHAP. EXpowndeth B the next text that foloweth in the sixt of S. Iohn, by sainct Augustin and sainct Cyirill.
THe text that foloweth in the sixt of S. Iohn ys this: Sicut misit me viuens Pater, & ego vino propter Patrē. Et qui māducat me, & ipse viuet propter me. As the liuing Father sent me, and I liue for the Father: Euē so he Ioan. 6. that eateth me shall liue by the means of me. Not mindinge to tarie vpon this, as to declare how we eating Chryst do liue by him, for that this ys (I trust) sufficientlie declared allready, I will no more nowe trauaill but to shewe that, that yet was not declared, namelie howe Chryst liueth by the Father, Whiche matter S. Augustine dothe so well open that yt satisfieth me: and so, I trust, yt will do the Reader.
Thus he saieth vpon the same text: In qua sententia, si rectè accipiuntur haec verba, ita dixit: Sicut me misit viuens Pater, & ego viuo propter Patrem: & qui manducat me, & ipse viuet propter me. Ac si diceret vt ego viuam propter Patrem, id est, ad illum tanquam Aug. trāc. 26 in Ioan. ad maiorem vitam meam referam, exmanitio mea fecit, in qua me misit: vt autem C quisquam viuat propter me, participatio facit, qua manducat me. Ego it aque humiliatus viuo propter Patrem: ille erectus viuit propter me. Si autem ita dictum est, Viuo propter Patrem, quia ipse de illo, non ille de ipso est, sine detrimento aequalitatis dictum est: Nec tamen dicendo, Et qui manducat me, ipse viuet propter me, eandem suam, & nostram aequalitatem significauit, sed gratiam Mediatoris ostendit. In whiche sentence, if these woordes be rightlie taken, thus he saied: As the liuing Father sent me, and I liue for the Father: Euen so he that eatethme, liueth by the means of me. As though he should saie, that I liue for the Father, that ys, that I referre my life to him as to a greater, the abasing or demission of my selfmade yt, in the whiche he sent me. But that anie man liueth by me, the participacion maketh yt, in the which he eateth me. I therfore humbled do liue for the Father: and he exalted liueth by the means of me. Yf yt be so saied, I liue for the Father, bicause the Sonne ys of the Father, and not the Father of the Sonne: yt ys saied withoute detriment of the equalitie. Neither yet saing: and he that eateth me, liueth by the means of me, hath he signified hys equalitie and owrs to be all one, but he hath shewed the grace of the Mediatour. Thusfarre S. Augustin. D
In whose sentence ye see howe the saing of Chryst maie be vprightlie vnderstanded, either of his Godhead, or of his manhead. Of hys Godhead yt [Page]maie be saied, I liue for the Father, not that the Sonne, whoys born equal to the Father, and ys from euer with the Father, being one in nature and substance E with the Father, ys made better then he was by the Father, but he liueth for the Father, as being of the Father, born of the Father, and yet not after the Father in time, neither lesse or inferiour to the Father in deitie, who ys equall God with God the Father, born from euer before all times. Of his Manhead yt ys also vnderstanded, who being a creature, was inferiour to the Father, and therfor in that respect saied: Pater maior me est, The Father ys greater then I. who being so was bettered by the Father, and liued by the Father the fountain of all life in all liuing creatures.
And that I breake not the ordre that I haue hitherto obserued, I will ioin to saincte Augustine being of the one side of Chrystes Parliament house, saincte Cyrill an auncient of the other side of the house, who saieth thus: In 6. Joan. cap. 18. Sicut misit me Pater, & ego viuo propter Patrem, & qui manducat me, viuet propter me. Cùm missum se dicit Filius, nihil aliud quàm incarnatum se, vult significare. Consueuit autem Christus quae vim excedunt humanam, ea Patri tribue re. Humiliauit enim seipsum factus homo, & ideo conuenientem homini mensuram F non recusat. Pater (inquit) qui manet in me ipse facit opera. Patri ergo etiam incarnationis operationem, quae vim excedit humanam, vt solet, accommodat. Hoc ergo est quod dicit: Quemadmodum ego factus sum homo voluntate Patris, & viuo propter Patrem. quia scilicet è vita, quae secundùm essentiam est, naturaliter, emanaui, & genitoris naturam ad vngucm conseruo, vt & ego naturaliter vita sim: ita qui manducat meam carnem ipse viuet propter me, totus ad me reformatus, qui vitasum, & viuisicare possum. Se verò manducari dicit, cùm sua caro manducatur, quia Verbum caro factum est, non naturarum confusione, sed ineffabili illo vnionis modo. As the liuing Father hath sent me, and I liue for the Father: Euen so he that eateth me, shall liue by the means of me. When the Sonne saieth that he ys sent, he will nothing ells signifie, but himself to be incarnated Christ vseth to attribute to the Father saithe thinges as exce [...] mans power. For Chryst hath vsed to attribute soche thinges as exceade the power of man, to the Father. He hath humbled him self being made man, and therfor he doth not refuse the measure conuenient to man. Therfor the worke of the incarnacion, which passeth the powre of man, he doth (as he was woute) applie yt to the Father. This ys yt therfor that he saieth G Euen as I am made man by the will of the Father, and do liue for the Father, bicause I haue flowed oute naturally of that life, which ys of very nature, and I do conserue the nature of my Father in euery poincte. so that I am also naturallie life: Euen so he that eateth my flesh, he Chryst ys eaten when [...] ys eaten. shall liue by me alltogether reformed vnto me who am life, and am able to make to liue. He saieth himself to be eaten, when his flesh ys eaten. For the woorde ys made flesh not by confusion of natures, but by an vnspeakeable maner of vnion. Thus farre S. Cyrill.
As the text doth speake of two maner of liues, that ys of the life of Chryst by the Father, and of the life of vs by Chryst: So doth this authour declare, both that Chryst flowing from the nature of the Father, who ys life him self, and hauing and being the same very nature: ys life him self, and liueth by the Father, and also that we eating him, for somoche as he ys the very life, shall liue by him. Wher note that Cyrill saieth that Chryst saieth him self to be eaten, when his flesh ys eaten. wherby he signifieth to vs that the flesh of Chryst ys verilie eaten. For yf yt were spoken of the spirituall eating of beleife, he wolde not transferre H yt from the Godhead, to the whiche most proprely yt doth appertein, that we shoulde beleue in yt, and referre yt to the flesh of [Page 134]Chryste onelie, or so applie yt to yt, as by yt to come to whole Chryste. As a man maie saie, I am whole when either hand, or head or some membre, A or parte of the bodie ys made whole, whiche ys proprely made whole in dede, or as a man maie saie, I do see, I do heare, when proprelie the eie doth see, and the eare dothe heare, or the soule raither doth see and heare by the eie and eare: So Chryst (as Cyrill saieth) doth saie him self to be eaten, when his flesh ys eaten, to whom yt apperteineth proprely to be eaten, and not to the God head.
For (as Theophilacte saieth) Deum nudum non manducamus, tangi enim nequit, & In. 6. Ioan, incorporeus est, & neque oculis neque manibus apprehendi potest. We do not eate bare God, for he can not be touched, and he hath no bodie, neither can he be apprehended with eies nor handes, So then as the spiritull eating of As to the Godhead to be beleued: So to the flesh yt proprelie apperteineth to be, eaten. Chryst by beleife most proprely doth appertein to the Godhead, and by yt ys applied to the wholl person of Chryst: So to the flesh of Chryst yt apperteineth most proprely to be verily and really eaten, and by yt (for somoche as the Godhead ys inseparablie annexed to yt, (as Cyrill saieth (non enim abest Vnigenitus, the onely begotten sonne of God ys not absent frō yt) we do saie that wholl B Chryst ys eaten, euen as of Chryst we do learn, who (as Cyrill hath noted) doth saie: Qui manducat me, he that doth eate me, not diuiding the Godhead from the manheade, but me, that ys wholl Chryst.
Being thus then, made manifest, that by this text also Chryst taught vs the eating of his verie flesh, whiche can not otherwise be then in the Sacrament, wherbie yt ys consequent that this text ys to be vnderstanded of the Sacrament: I will procead to seke the vnderstanding of other textes folowing.
THE THIRTETH CHAP. BEGINNETH EXPOSITION of the next text by sainct Ambrose and Chrysostom.
YT foloweth in the sixte chapiter of saincte Iohn: Hic est panis qui de caelo descendit, non sicut manducauerunt patres vestri Manna in deserto, & mortui sunt. Qui manducat hunc panē viuet in aeternū. This ys the bread that camme down from heauen, not as yower C Fathers did eate Manna and are dead. He that eateth of this Ioan. 6. bread, shall liue euer. Owre sauiour Chryst, who began to declare this great mistery to the Iewes, and notwithstāding their murmuring, did open to them not onely, that yt was possible, that his flesh shoulde be eaten, but also necessarie, and nowe in the last sentence as in other before he had made mencion of the same, and had declared the benefit, and great commoditie that shoulde ensewe to them that wolde eate his flesh, namely that they shoulde haue life euerlasting: Nowe as yt were after a disputacion he maketh a conclusion or determinaciō of the matter, saing: This ys the bread that came from heauen.
The Iewes (as in the beginning of this sixt chapiter, yt doth appeare) although they had seen the great miracle of our Sauiour Chryst wrought in the multiplieng of the bread, and in feading so great a multitude whith so fewe loaues, that then they could saie, this ys the very Prophet, whiche should come into the worlde, wherby they ment Messias, and therfor wolde then haue made him a king: yet shortly after like an vnthankfull and vnmindefull people D of that notable fact doen in the presence of so manie, woorthy truly neuer to haue ben forgotten, forgetting this great woonder, required to see [Page]some notable sign at Chrystes hand, as though they had neuer seen anie, and therfor saied: Quod tu facis signum, vt videamus & credamus? What sign E shewest thowe, that we maie see and beleue? And then to make their bragge Joan 6. they saied: Patres nostri manducanerunt Māna in deserto, sicut scriptū est: Panem de caelo dedit eis. Owre fathers haue eaten Manna in the wildernesse, as yt ys written he gaue them bread from heauen to eate.
To determine directly against them, and that they shoulde perceaue, that Manna was but a figure of this very bread, that came from heauen (For Manna gaue not life to the eaters of yt, but this bread doth) therfor he saied Effect of the Sacrament euerlasting life. Not as yower fathers did eate Manna and be dead, but he that eateth of this bread shal liue sor euer. He wel declareth what death their fathers died, who did eat Manna, that ys the euerlasting death, not all that did eate Manna died that death but their fathers in vnbelief. And as they through vnbeleif died an euerlasting death: so they that shall eate this bread with true beleif shall liue an euerlasting life. But yt shall be to the pourpose to heare the holy Fathers how they vnderstād this text▪ of the which the first coople shall be sainct Ambrose and Chrysostom. Sainct Ambrose saieth thus: Reuera mirabile F li. 8. de initiand. est quòd Manna Deus plueret patribus, & quotidiano coeli pascebantur alimento. Vnde dictum est: Panem Angelorum manducauit homo. Sed tamen illum panem qui manducauerunt in deserto mortui sunt. Ista autem esca, quam accipis, iste panis viuus, qui de caelo descendit vitae aeternae substantiam administrat. Et quicunque panem hunc manducauerit, non morietur in aeternum. & corpus Christi est. Truly yt ys merueilouse that God did rain Manna to the fathers, and that they were fedde withe the dailie foode from heauen. Wherfor yt ys saied: Man hath eaten the bread of Angells. but for all that they that haue eaten that bread in desert, are dead. This meat that thowe takest, this bread of life, that came downe from heauen, doth ministre the substance of euerlasting life, and who soeuer shall eate this bread, he shall not die for euer, and yt ys he bodie of Chryst. Thus farre he.
What this bread ys that descended from heauen, and what the profit and benefitt of yt ys, sainct Ambrose hath in this his saing declared, the bread ys the bodie of Chryst (saieth he) whiche bodie ys the meat that the faithfull doth take, and the benefite of this so taken ys euerlasting life. G
Wherfor sainct Ambrose being so plain, I will bring in his yocke folowe Chrysostome, who hath (according to the counsell of sainct Paule) not caried the yocke with the vnfaithfull, but with the faithfull, whiche ys the yocke of Chryst, whiche, as he himself saieth, ys sweet. Thus he saieth: Dicit ergo: Qui manducat carnem meam in morte non peribit, neque damnabitur. Sed non de communi dicit resurrectione (siquidem omnes resurgent) sed de clara illa & gloriosa quae 2. Cor. 6. Math. 11. Homiti. 46 in Ioan. praemium meretur. Patres vestri manducauerunt Manna in deserto, & mortui sunt. Qui manducat hunc panem, viuet in aeternum. Frequenter idem repetit, vt auditorum animis imprimatur. Vltima enim haec erat doctrina, vt resurrectionis, & vitae aeternae fidem confirmaret. Quocirca post vitae aeternae promissionem resurrectionem proponit, postquam illā futuram ostendit, & hoc vnde constat? à scripturis, ad qua [...] eos semper relegat, vt inde erudiantur. Cùm autem dare vitam mundo dicit, in aemulationem eos adducit, vtsi aliorum bono mouentur, nolint ipsi excludi. Frequenter autem Mannae meminit, & differentiam conferendo ad fidem allicit. Nam si possibile fuit vt quadraginta annos sine messibus & frumento, & aliis ad victum necessarijs viuerent, longè magis nunc cùm ad mato [...] venerint. Nam si in illis figuris sine labore expositum colligebant: nunc profectò magis, vbi H nulla mors, & verae vitae fruitio. Vitae autem vbique meminit. Nam eius trahunur cupiditate, & nihil suauius quàm non mori. Etenim in veteri Testamento longa vita, & multi [Page 141] dies promittebantur: Nunc verò non simpliciter vitae longitudo, sed vita sine fine promittitur He saieth therfor, he that eateth my flesh, shall not perish in death, neither A shal be damned. But he doth not speake of the common resurrection (for all shall rise) but of that clere, and gloriouse, whiche deserueth rewarde. Yower fathers haue eaten Manna in the wildernesse, and be dead. He that eateth this bread shall liue for euer. he doth often repete the same, that yt might be ymprinted in the mindes of thearers. This was the last doctrine, that he might confirme the faith of the resurrection, and euerlasting life: wherfor after the promisse of eternall life, he proueth the resurrection, after he had shewed that yt was to come. And from whence doth his appeare? by the scriptures, vnto the whiche he doth allwaies send them, that from thēce they might be taught. When he saieth yt to geue life to the woorlde, he bringeth them to folow, that if they be moued with the profit or commoditie of other, they wolde not be excluded. Often he maketh mencion of Manna, and conferiring the difference, allureth them to faith. For if yt were We cometo greater thī ges in the Sacr▪ then the Jewes did in Mā na. possible that they shoulde liue fortie years withoute haruestes, and other necessares to their liuing: moch more nowe when they are comed to greater things. For B if in these figures they did gather withoute labour the thing settfurth, or made ready to their handes, nowe truly moche more, wher ys no death, and the fruicion of true life. Of life he maketh mencion euery where. For we be drawen with desire therof, and nothing ys more pleasaunt, then not to die. For in the olde Testament long life, and manie daies were promised: Nowe not simplie lenght of life, but life withoute ende ys promised: Thus he.
Albeit Chrysostom in this sentence maketh no great mencion of the Sacrament in open and expresse woordes: yet folowing the sense in the beginning of this part of this chapter, whiche by his iudgement ys of the Sacrament, if yt be well considered he saieth sufficiently: as also wher he saieth that yf yt were possible for the Iewes to liue fortie yeare without haruest or corne moche more nowe when we be commed to greater thinges. Manna was a great miracle as sainct Ambrose saieth, and if they did well receaue yt, they did Māna and the Sacrament compared. receaue spirituallie Chryst. Then if our Sacramēt be (as the Sacramentaries saie) C a peice of bread, whiche ys no like thing to Manna, the one being from heauen by miracle, the other by common course from the hand of the artificer withoute any miracle or wonder, and in the receipt of yt Chryst spiritually receaued, as in the receipt of Manna, howe then be we comed to greater thinges then the figure of Manna was, seing that in both Chryst ys receaued but spirituallie. And Manna ys from heauen by God, the bread from the earth by the baker.
Wherfor by these woordes of Chrysostome that we be comed to greater thinges, ys signified to vs that the Sacramēt cōteineth a woorthier thing, and a thing of greater miracle, then Manna was, whiche also was a miraculouse thing, which thing conteined in the Sacrament ys the very bodie of Chryst, of the whiche Manna was the figure, of the whiche more shall be saied in the thirde booke. But here to be short if the reall presence of Chrystes bodie be not in the Sacrament, then ys Manna a woorthier and greater thing then yt by al meanes, as by that, that ys allready saied yt maie appeare. And so shall Chrysostome be reproued of an vntrueth for that we are not D comed to greater thinges, But I shall sooner refuse the sainges of these aduersaries, then I will the sainges of Chrysostome, and so I trust, will the wise reader.
THE ONE AND THIRTITH CHAP. PROCEAdeth E in the the exposition of the same text by S. Hierom and S. Cyrill.
LEt vs heare the testimonie of an other coople for the vnderstanding of this text. S. Hierom saith: Si ergo panis, qui de coelo descendit, corpus Hieron. ad Hedibiq. 2 est Domini, & vinum qùod Discipulis dedit sanguis illius est noui Testamenti, qui pro multis effusus est, in remissionem peccatorum, iudaicas fabulas repellamus, & ascendamus cum Domino coenaculum magnum stratum, atque mundatum, & accipiamus ab eo sursum calicem noui Testamenti, ibiue cum eo Pascha celebrantes, inebriemur ab eo, vino sobrietatis. Non enim est regnum Dei esca, & potus, sed iusticia & gaudium, & pax in Spiritu sancto. Nec Moyses dedit nobis panem verum, sed Dominus Iesus, ipse conuiua, & conuiuium, ipse comedens, & qui comeditur. Yf therfor the bread that descended from heauen, be the bodie of our Lorde, and the wine that he gaue to his Disciples be his blood of the newe Testament, whiche was shed for The bread that descended from heauen ys the bodie of our Lorde. manie in remission of sinnes, let vs repell and cast from vs Iudaicall fables, and let vs ascende with our Lorde in to the great parlour paued and made F clean, and let vs from aboue take of him, the cuppe of the newe Testament, and ther celebrating with him the Passeouer, let vs be satisfied of him, with the wine of sobrietie. For the kingdom of God ys not meat, and drinke, but righteousnesse, and peace, and ioie in the holy Gost. Neither did Moyses geue vs the true bread, but our Lorde Iesus, he ys the feaster, and he ys the feast, he ys he that eateth, and ys eaten. Thus farre S. Hierom.
By these woordes we are after the vnderstandinge of S. Hierom, fullie Chryst ys the feast and the feester. enstructed what the bread ys, that our Sauiour Chryst speaketh of when he saied: This ys the bread that descended from heauē. Yt ys (saieth S. Hierom) the bodie of our Lorde, and the wine ys the bloode that was shed for manie in the remission of sinnes. By the which woordes he doth not onelie teache vs, that this scripture ys to be vnderstanded of the Sacrament, but by the same also he hath testified with other holie Fathers the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament. For in the beginning he saied, that the bread that descended from heauen ys the bodie of our Lorde, and to shewe vs wher he ment yt to be, in the G ende he saieth, that not Moyses did geue the true bread, but our Lorde Iesus, he ys the feaster and the feast, he ys he that doth eat, and ys eaten. Wherby he well sheweth that that bread ys the bodie of our Lorde, which ys in that holie feast, wher our sauiour Chryst ys the feaster, and he him self also ys the meat and drinke of the feast, and so the wholl feast. In the whiche as he doth in his membres, being the head of them, eate the blessed meat of that holie feast: So yt ys euen he, euen his very dodie, and bloode that ys ther eaten and dronken. Wherfor soch a noble feaster being present, and so holie meat being ther eaten, the Church right well with goodlie concorde, and consent singeth: O sacrum conuiuium, in quo Christus sumitur. O holie feast in the which Chryst ys receaued.
But the prolixitie of this matter, if yt shoulde be woorthilie folowed, calleth me backe, and moueth to staie and heare the other that ys ioined to saincte Hierom, whiche ys S. Cyrill, who saieth thus: Non enim prudenter, quae ad breue tempus sufficiunt, hoc nomine appellabuntur, nec panis erat ex Deo, quem maiores Iudaeorum comederunt, & mortui sunt. Nam side coelo & ex Deo fuisset, liberasset à H morte participantes. Contrà verò corpus Christi, panis de coelo est, quia aeternam comedentibus vitam largitur Those thinges which for a short time suffice shall not wisely be called by this name. Neither that bread, which the elders of the Iewes [Page 142]did eate, and be dead, was of God. For if yt had ben from heauen and of God, yt had deliuered the partakers of yt from death. Contrary wise the A bodie of Chryst ys the bread from heauen, For yt graunteth the eaters eternall life. As S. Hierom saied that the bodie of Chrystes ys the bread that descended from heauen: So by like woordes saieth S. Cyrill here. And that we shoulde knowe what he meneth, he applieth the figure of yt eaten by the elders of the Iewes, whiche did not giue life, whiche was Manna, vnto the bodie of Chryst, whiche being eaten doth giue life eternall. Wherfor Manna being a figure of Chrystes bodie eaten in the Sacramēt, yt must nedes folowe that he vnderstandeth this scripture of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, of the whiche no man that hath redde Cyrill can doubte, whose wholl processe ys so plain in the matter.
THE TWO AND THIRTETH CHAP. ENDETH THE exposition of this text by saincte Augustin and Theoph.
NOwe let vs heare as breifly one coople mo and then we shall B leaue this text. S. Augustin saieth thus: Hic est panis, qui de coelo descendit, vt illum man ducando viuamus, quia aeternam vitam ex nobis habere non possumus. Non sicut (inquit) manducauerunt patres vestri Tract. 26. in Joan. Manna & mortui sunt. Qui manducat hunc panem viuet in aetenum. Quòd ergo illi mortui sunt, ita vult intelligi, vt non viuant in aeternum. Nan temporaliter profectò, & hi moriuntur, qui Christum manducant, sed viuunt in aeternum, quia Christus est vita aeterna. This ys the bread that descended from heauen, that we eating him maie liue. For we can not of our selues haue eternall life. Not (saieth he) as yower Fathers haue eaten Manna, and are dead, he that eateth this bread, shall liue for euer. That they then be dead, thus he wolde yt shoulde be vnderstanded, that they liue not for euer. For tēporallie these truly shall also die, which do eate Chryst, but they liue for euer. For Chryst ys eternall life. Thus farre he.
What gloses the Aduersaries do here vpon S. Augustins saing inuent, I leaue them to their the same inuencion. But forsomoche as Chryste him self and S. Augustin expownding Chrystes saing, doth applie the figure of Manna C and the eating of yt to this bread that came from heauen, and Manna by all the Fathers iudgementes ys the figure of the holie Sacrament, yt ys manifest that therfor this scripture ys to be vnderstanded of the Sacrament.
Whiche Theophilact, who at this present ys ioined with S. Augustin, will Jn 6. Ioan. by expresse woordes declare. Patres vestri comederunt Manna in solitudine. Hoc saepe & multum versat in ore, vt persuadeat hominibus. Nan si possibile fuit quadraginta annis sine messe, & semente pasci homines, & conseruari illorum vitam, multòmagis nunc conseruabitnaturam spiritualem meliori pane Dominus, carne sua, quae absque semine viri ex virgine constituta est. Yower fathers haue eaten Manna in the wildernesse. Thys (saieth Theophilact) oftē and moche he speaketh, that he might perswade men. For yf yt were possible men to be fedde, and their liues to be conserued fortie yeares, withoute sowing or haruest, moche more nowe shall our lorde with a better bread, that ys, his flesh, which without the seed of man ys made of a virgen conserue our spirituall life. Thus he.
Obserue, as ys before noted, that the applicacion of the figure argueth D the thing figured here to be spoken of, which thing ys the Sacrament. And for the veritie of the same, yf this authour had nothing spoken here expresselie: [Page]yet that whiche he hath hitherto vpon this part of the sixt of S. Iohn E allreadie declared, wolde and maie sufficiently shewe his minde vpon this. But, God be praised, he doth verie plainlie here also open the matter. For Oure lord feadeth vs with a bread which ys his flesh. A plain saing for the Procla. when he had saied that our Lorde wolde feed vs with a better bread, expownding yt, that ys (saieth he) his flesh. And that he wolde not make yt an imaginarie flesh, he saieth that he feedeth vs with the same flesh, whiche withoute the seed of man was born of the Virgen, Whiche maner of speache ys so plain that I cā not but merueill that men will suffer them selues to be seduced, and led awaie by vain men, when soche auncient Fathers do teache them in soche sorte, that they haue nothing to kepe them selues from the trueth, but self will, and malice.
THE THREE AND THIRTETH CHAP. PROCEADETH to the next text in the sixt of saincte Iohn.
HItherto our SauiourChryst speaking of this great mistery of the F eatinge and drinking of his flesh and bloode, doth here nowe make an ende of the same. And therfor, saieth the Euangelist to declare the same: Hec dixit in Sinagoga docens in Cpharnaum. These thinges saied he in the Sinagog as he taught in Capharnaum. Joan. 6. But for asmoche as manie hearning this doctrine of Chryst were not edified, but offended therwith, as manie of our faint Chrystians are, whose maner of incredulitie, and hardnesse of beleif, with Chrystes proceading to Sacramētaries of oure time are Capharnaites. reforme the same, as the Euangelist setteth yt furth, our Capharnaites, through vnbeleif of that that Chryst spake to the better declaracion of his doctrine, haue taken to the more occasion of their doubte, eroure, and ruine, seing that they wolde so take his woordes to turne them against him self, and with them to impugne that trueth that he hath taught, and left in his Church to remain and continue vntill he come: we shall by his grace take these scriptures from them, and by like processe, as hertofore ys vsed shewe the true vnderstanding of them, that all men maie perceaue that these Aduersaries haue raither sought occasion to be raither enemies of Gods G trueth then fauourers of the same. whiche name they moche vsurpe, cloathing them selues with shepes cloathinge, but inwardlie they are very wolues. Heretikes call their. phantasies gods woord and their lies, trueth. outwardlie they euer crie Gods woorde, when in dede they vtter their inuencions grownded vpon affection, raither to please the peoples phantasies, then fullfill Gods pleasure. So they crie the trueth, the trueth, when they in very dede set furth lies, and heresie to impugn and destroie the trueth.
And as they that misliked the doctrine of Chryst were of his Disciples: So these nowe that mislike the same doctrine were of his Disciples, but nowe abierunt retro post Satanam, they are gone back after Satan. And as the disciples saied when they heard this doctrine: Durus est hic sermo, quis potest eum audire? This ys an hard saing, who can abide the hearing of yt: So these men saie that yt ys an hard saing, and they can not abide the hearing of yt.
But as sainct Augustin saied by the Disciples, which first spake these woordes: Aug in Psal. 98. So maie yt be saied by their disciples, who in these daies do folowe thē: H Ipsi erant duri non sermo. They were hard, and not the woorde. But as he saieth in an other place: Si Discipuli durum habuerunt istum sermonem, quid inimici? Yf the Disciples counted this woorde harde, what do the enemies? Yf those that [Page 143]did knowe and folow Chryst of late daies do accōpte yt an hard saing, that A we saie according to Chrystes doctrin, that we do eate his very flesh in the Sacrament, what maie the Iewes; and Infideles do? But yf Chryst did labour to abduce the Iewes from the figures and shaddowes, and adduce them to the very thing and trueth: moche more they that haue professed Chryst, should be brought from figures, and learn to knowe the trueth of figures, which ys nowe in the newe testament. Which was Chrystes pourpose, though they lept backe, as Theophilact saieth speaking of the processe of Chrystes doctrine as concerning this mysterie: Quod lucrum ex his verbis? imò plurimum, & maximū. Theophilact in 6. Joan. Nam quoniam memores erant subinde cibi corporalis, ostendens eis quia omnia illa figura erant, & vmbrai Quae autem ab ipso nunc introducuntur, veritas sunt. eius gratia haec dicit, & spiritualis cibi recordatur, vt faciat eos à sensibilibus aliquantum remergere, cōtemnereue figuras & vmbras, & accurrere ad veritatem. Sed illi cùm nibil possent intelligere, quod supra sensum est, meliores non fiunt, sed magis resiliunt, & dicunt: Durus est hic sermo, hoc est asper, & qui suscipi nequeat. Quis enin cùm carnalis sit, posset suscipere spiritualem cibum, & panem qui de coelo descenda, & carnem, quae comeditur, &c. Nam quia carnem B audierant, putabant quòd eos cogeret carnis & sanguinis fieri deuoratores: quia autem nos spiritualiter intelligimus, neque carnium voratores sumus, imò sanctificamur per talem cibum. What aduantage or gain of these woordes? very moche and great. For for that they were often mindefull of bodilie meat, Chryst shewing that all those thinges were but a figure, and a shaddowe: but soche things as by him were brought in were the trueth, for this cause he saied these thinges, and remembreth the spirituall meate, that he might make them somwhat return from sensible thinges, and to contemne figures, and shaddowes. But they Carnall mē vnderstanding nothing aboue thersensies leape backe from the vnderstanding of the Sacr. when they can vnderstand nothing that ys aboue the senseis they are made neuer the better, but they leape ād saie: This saing ys harde, that ys, vnpleasaunt to sensuall knowledge, and which can not be receaued For what ys he who when he ys carnall, can receaue spirituall meat and the bread, that descēded frō heauen, and the flesh which ys eatē? for bicause they had heard him saie (flesh) they thought that he wolde compell them to be deuourers of flesh ād blood. But bicause we vnderstand the spirituall meat, we are not the deuourers of flesh, but raither we are sanctified by soch meat. Thus moch Theoph. C
Who geuing a cause why this doctrine of Chryst semed hard to them saieth, yt was bicause they coulde not vnderstand anie thing, that was aboue Carnall vnderstāding the knowledge of the senseis: Euen so our sensuall and carnall men vnderstanding not howe Chrystes verie bodie should be in the Sacrament, vnlesse yt shoulde occupie the place of a bodie, neither be eaten vnlesse yt shoulde be felt with our teeth, as other flesh, and soch like after the grosse knowledg of the senseis, they leape backe and saie: yt can not be doen, yt ys a thing vnpossible, and who can abide to heare yt? But yf they wolde (as Theophilact saieth) vnderstand aboue the senses that ther ys the very reall body of Chryst, which ys yet a spirituall meat, and not take yt so grosslie and carnallie, but yet verilie and spiritually, they should not be grosse deuourers of flesh, but yet eate the verie flesh of Chryst, not with teeth percing and hurting that, which ys liuing impassiblie, and yet with the mouth receauing that flesh faithfullie.
THE FOVR AND THIRTETH CHAP. BEGINneth E the exposition of this text: Si ergo videritis, &c. by sainct Augusten and sainct Cyrill.
OWre Sauiour perceauing some of hys owne Disciples, and other who heard him so plainlie speaking of the eating and drinking of his flesh and bloode, to be offended, bicause thei phansied that he wolde haue them groslie to deuoure his flesh, ād drinke his blood, to lead and bring them from this ther grosse vnderstanding he saied: doth this offended yowe. Si ergo videritis filium hominis ascendentē vbi erat prius? What Joan. 6. and if ye shall see the Sōne of man ascēde vppe thither wher he was before?
Or we entre to shewe the exposition of this text, as to know to what pourpose, or wherfore Chryst spake these woords to the Iewes, and how he doth aunswer their in credulitie to his woordes, or dissolue their errour: this ys to be examined, how Chryst doth saie that the Sonne of man shall ascend wher he was before. Yt ys knowen to all that professe Chryst, being of discrecion, that Chryst as man was born of the Virgen in earth, and was neuer in heauen before he spake these woordes. Howe then doth he saie, that the Sonne of man shall ascende wher he was before?
As I haue learned of S. Augustine howe to dissolue this doubte: So do I Aug. tract 27. in Ioan thinke yt mete that ye do, for that his authoritie ys great, and his saings be weightie, In this matter thus he reasoneth. Illud non negligenter praetereundum est, quod ait: Si ergo videritis filium hominis ascendentem vbi erat prius? filius hominis Christus ex virgine Maria. Ergo filius hominis hic coepit esse in terra, vbi carnem assumpsit ex terra. vnde propheticè dictum erat: Veritas de terra orta est. Quid ergo sibi vult quod ait: Cùm videritis filium hominis ascendentem vbi erat prius? Nulla est quaestio si ita, dixisset: Si videritis filium Dei ascendentem vbi erat prius: Cum verò, filium hominis, dixit, ascendentem vbi erat prius, nunquid filius hominis in coelo erat, priusquàm in terra esse coepit? Hic quidem dixit vbi erat prius, quasi tūc non ibi esset quando haec loquebatur. Alio autem loco ait: Nemo ascendit in coelum, nisi qui descendit de coelo, filius hominis, qui est in coelo Non dixit (erat) sed filius (inquit) hominis, qui est in coelo. In terra loquebatur, & in coelo se esse dicebat. Quò pertinet nisi vt intelligamus, quod etiā pristino sermone commendaui charitati vestrae, vnam personā esse Christu, Deum & hominē, non duas, ne fides nostra non sit Trinitas G sed Quaternitas. Christus ergo vnus est. Verbum, anima & caro, vnus Christus, filius Dei, & filius hominis vnus Christus. filius Deisemper: filius hominis ex tempore. tamen vnus Christus secundùm vnitatem personae in coelo erat, quando in terra loquebatur. Sic erat filius hominis in coelo, quemadmodum filius Dei erat in terra, filius Dei in terra in suscepta carne: filius hominis in coelo in vnitate personae. That ys not necligently to be ouerpassed that he saieth: What and yf ye see the Sonne of man ascending wher he was before? The Sonne of man, Chryst of the Virgen Marie. Therfore the Sonne of man began How christ the Sone of man was in heauē whē he spake in earth. here in earth, wher he tooke flesh of the earth. Wherfor yt was spoken by the Prophet: Trueth shall spring oute of the earth. What meneth then that he saieth, when yow shal see the Sonne of man ascende wher he was before? Ther were no question yf he had saied: What yf yow shal see the Sōne of God ascēd vppe wher he was before? but when he saied the Sonne of man to ascende wher he was before, was the Sonne of man in heauen, before he begā to be in earth? Here he saied, where he was before, as though he were not then ther, when he spake these woordes. In an other place he saieth. No man ascendeth vppe to heauen, but he that came down from heauen, euen the Sonne of man H which ys in heauen. He did not saie (which was) but the Sonne (saieth he) of man which ys in heauen. He spake in the earth, and he saied he was in heauen. [Page 144]To what powrpose yt ys, but that we maie vnderstand, which I haue alreadie A declared to yowr charitie, that Chryst God and man ys one person, not two, least our faith be not a trinitie, but a quaternitie? Chryst therfor ys one. The Sonne of God, the soule, and the flesh one Chryst. The Sonne of God, and the Sonne of man one Chryst. Chryst the Sōne of God euer: the Sōne of mā in time: Yet for al that one Chryst after the vnitie of persō was in heauen, when he spake in earth. The Sonne of man was so in heauē, as the Sonne of God was in earth. The Sonne of God was in the earth in the receaued flesh: the Sonne of man was in heauen in the vnitie of person. Thus farre sainct Augustine.
Although this sentēce be somwhat lōg. yet if ye weigh yt wel, yt shall not repētyow of the reading of yt. For in yt ye maie see the doubt fullie dissolued for the being of Chryst the Sōne of mā in heauē, who thē presentlie spake in earth: and howe he was before in heauē, who was born in time in the earth.
Nowe this doubt being dissolued, let vs seke the vnderstanding of the scripture why Christ made mencion of hys ascension in the vi. of S. John. we haue to expownde, which in a great parte we shall do, yf we knowe B wherfor Chryst here made mencion of his ascension into heauen, seing he was now in setting furth howe his bodie should be eaten in earth. The cause why he maketh here mencion of hys ascension ys declared by the same S. Augustine, who vpon this text saieth thus: Quid est hoc? Hinc soluis illos, quos nouerat. Hinc aperuit vnde fuerant scandalizati, hinc planè si intelligerent. Illi enim putabant eum erogaturum corpus suum: Ille autem dixit ascensurum se in coelum vtique integrū. Cùm Tract. 27. in Ioan. videritis filiū hominis ascendentē vbi erat prius, certè vel tūe videbitis, quia nō eo modo quo putatis, erogat corpus suū. Certè vel tunc intelligetis, quia gratia eius non consumitur morsibus. What if yow see the Sōne of man ascend vppe wher he was before? what ys this (saieth S. Augustine.) By this he solued them, whom he had knowen. By this he hath opened wherby they were offended, by this plainly if theywold vnderstand. For they thought that he wolde deale furth hys bodie, but he saieth that he wolde ascende into heauen, and that wholl. When ye shall see the Sō ne of man ascende vppe wher he was before, certenlie euen then shall ye see, that not after that maner that ye thinke, he geueth oute his bodie, certenlie euen thē shall ye vnderstande, that his grace ys not consumed by morsels. C
Do ye not here see the cause, why Chryst spake of his ascension? S. Augustin hath opened yt vnto yow. They thought that Chryst wolde haue geuen his bodie in lumpes or peices among them. Therfor to plucke thē frō that grosse and carnal vnderstanding, he telleth them before that he wil leaue no part nor peice of his bodie behinde, but he will whollie ascende into heauen with an wholl bodie.
But let not now the Aduersarie, neither the weake man take anie occasiō of errour, wher none ys iustly geuen, that bicause S. Augustin saieth that the Disciples thought that he wolde geue his bodie emōg thē, and Chryst saied, he wolde ascend vppe wholl, that therfor by no means Chryst geueth hys bodie vnto vs in the Sacramēt. For if by no means, then he geueth yt not spirituallie neither, and so were the doctrine of the Aduersaries ouerthrowen. But that he geueth not his verie real bodie in the Sacramēt, although the Aduersaries wolde haue yt so onely to be vnderstanded: yet yt doth not so meē but, as S. Augustin saieth, non eo modo, quo putatis, erogat corpus suum, not after soch maner as yowe thinke he geueth oute his bodie. So that he denieth not the D geuing oute of Chrystes bodie, but the maner of the geuing oute of hys bodie. And what maner doth he denie? that maner that the grosse Disciples thought, which maner S. Augustin more plainly declareth in an other place [Page]saing: Tunc autem, quando Dominus hoc commendans, de carne sua locutus erat, & dixerat: E Nisi quis manducauerit carnem meam non habebit in se vitam aeternam, scandalizati Jn Psalm. 98. sunt quidam ex septuaginta, & dixerunt: Durus est hic sermo. Quis potest eum intelligere? & recesserunt ab eo, & ampliùs cum eo non ambulauerunt. Durum illis visum est quod ait: Nisi quis manducauerit carnem meam, non habebit vitam aeternam. Acceperunt illud stultè, carnaliter illud cogitauerunt, & putauerunt, quia praecisurus esset Dominus particulas quasdam de corpore suo, & daturus illis, & dixerunt: Durus est hic sermo. Then, saieth S. Augustin, when our Lord setting furth thys had spoken of his flesh, and had saied: Except a man eate my flesh, he shall not haue Capharnaites how thei vnderstood Chryst carnallie. in himself life euerlasting. Certain of the seuentie Disciples were offended and saied: This ys an hard saing. Who can vnderstand yt? And they went from him, and walked no more with him. Yt semed harde to them, that he saied: Except a man eate my slesh, he shall not haue in himself life euerlasting. They tooke yt foolishlie, carnallie they thought yt. And they thought that our Lord wolde cut certain peices from hys bodie and geue to them, and they saied: This an harde saing. Thus S Augustin.
Here ye perceaue after what maner the Disciples thought that Chryst F wolde geue them his bodie to eate, and this maner doth sainct Augustin denie, not the maner that the Chrystian faith teacheth but onely that maner, that the grosse Disciples thought, and therfor S. Augustin saith: Non co modo quo putatis, not after that maner, that yowe thinke, so that S. Augustine 2. Arg. detu [...] th not the geuing furth of Chryst [...] reallie but thegrosse maner conceaued of the Disciples. Obiection out of S. Aug. aunswered. in this place dothe neither denie the geuing oute of Chrystes bodie verilie, ād reallie, to be receaued: nor yet the maner cōuenient to the geuing oute of the same, which now the catholique Church throughout the world vseth: Wherfor let neither the weake man wauer for thys, neither the Aduersarie triumphe thinking his heresie to be confirmed, and himself to haue gotten the victorie. Ne ante victoriam canat triumphum, Least he make a triumphe before the victorie.
But yet the Aduersaries will saie that S. Augustin doth not teache here the presence of Chrystes bodie reallie, but spiritually, that ys by grace, for he saieth plainlie that then when the Sonne of man ys ascended vppe wher he was before, we shall perceaue that his grace ys not consumed G with morsells. Wher he teacheth the presence of Chryst by grace, not by reall presence.
This reason or argument ys as good here as yt ys in some other places of S. Augustins workes, wher bicause he speaketh of the spirituall receauing of Chryst, therfore ye will clean expell the reall receauing of hys bodie. And thus might some other Heretique contrarie, take some other place of S. Augustin, where he speaketh of the reall presence, and therby contend against yow that ther ys no spirituall presence. But an vppright reader shall, as ys before saied, finde in S. Augusten both maners of the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, that ys a reall presence, and a spirituall presence, and agreablie therunto, a reall receauing of the same bodie, and a spirituall.
But that the reader maie perceaue that this ys true that I haue saied, that S. Augustin teacheth the reall presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, harken howe sainct Augustin taught as yt were the yonge Aug. serm. ad Neoph. Aplain place of S. Aug for M. Juel. scholers in the faith of Chryst in this matter. Thus he taught them: H Hoc accipite in pane quod pependit in cruce. Hoc accipite in calice, quod effusum est de latere Christi. Erit enim illi mors, non vita, qui mendacem putauerit Christum. Take ye this in the bread, that did hang on the crosse. Take this in [Page 145]the chalice, that was shedde oute of the side of Chryst. He shall haue death not life that thinketh Chryst a Lyar. A
What ys ther to be thought here but that S. Augustine teaching yonge scholers wolde speake in plain woordes, and plain sentence, that the yong learners might perceaue the thing to be as yt ys spoken, and not vse to them obscure figures, and tropes? For in these do not they vnderstand what ys to be beleued. Yf therfor Chryst were in the Sacrament but as in a figure, then wolde sainct Augustin haue taught these yong ones thus: Take ye, this bread, as a sign, token or figure of Chrystes bodie, and when ye see yt broken, remembre that Chrystes bodie was broken vpon the Crosse for yowe. And likewise, take thys wine as a sign, or token of Chrystes bloode shedde for yowe vpon the Crosse. But vnderstande that yt ys not in verie dede the bodie and blood of Chryst, but signes and tokens of them. Thys were a maner of speache mete to teache yong ones, yf the trueth of the thing were agreable, but bicause the trueth ys not so, therfore S. Augustin taught them by soche plain speache, as the truth wolde beare, that ys, that they wolde take in the Sacrament that bodie that hanged vpon the Crosse, and in the cuppe that blood that was shedde oute B of Chrystes side.
Yea and that they shoulde so take he addeth a cōminaciō that they should Chryst ys made a liar when his woord ys not beleued take death and not life, which think Chryst a lyar. Why? What saied Chryst? Take eate, thys ys my bodie. He then that dothe not beleue Chryst herin, but saieth yt ys not his bodie, but a figure of hys bodie: he ys the Aduersarie of Chryst, the reprouer of Chryst. And he maketh Chryst a lyar, as S. Augustin saieth and therfor shall haue death and not life.
In time therfor take hede yf thow beest in errour, thow cannest not make Chryst a lyar, but thow thy self shalt be fownde a lyar. And therfore thowe shalt not be admitted to the blessed companie of the master of the trueth: but to the cursed and damnable companie of the Father of lyes. Repēt thee therfore of thine heresie, and embrace the trueth, that by yt thowe maist atteign to the true life.
Nowe to this learned Father shall be ioined S. Cyrill, who saieth thus: Ca. 22. sup. 6. Ioann. Ex imperitia multi qui Christum sequebantur, verba ipsius non capientes, pertur babantur. C Nam cùm audissent: Amen, amen dico vobis, Nisi comederitis carnem filij hominis, & biberitis eius sanguinem, non habebitis vitam in vobis: Ad immanes ferarum mores vocari se à Christo arbitrabantur, incitariue vt vellent crudas hominis carnes manducare, & sanguinem bibere, quae vel auditu horribilia sunt, nondum enim mysterij huius formam & dispensationem pulcherrimam cognouerant. Illud etiam adhoc cogitabant: Quomodò caro huius hominis, aternā nobis vitam largietur? aut quomodò ad immortalitatē adducere poterit? Quae cùm intelligeret is, cuius oculis omnia nuda sunt, atque aperta, alia eos re mirabili ad fidem impellit. Frustra (inquit) o vos, propter verba mea conturbamini. Quòd si credere non vultis vitam vobis à meo corpore dari, quid facietis, quando in coelum me volare conspicietis? Non enim ascensurum me solummodò profiteon, ne rursus quomodò id fieri possit quaeratis, sed oculis etiam ita fieri vestris cernetis. Quid ergo hoc videntes, dicetis: Annon erit hoc magnum Capharnaites howe thei vnderstood Chryst. Joan. 6. vestrae dementiae argumentum? Si enim putatis carnem meam vitam vobis afferre non posse, quomodò tanquam volucris in coelum ascendet? quomodò per aëra volabit: hoc enim similiter generi humano impossibile est. Quod si praeter naturam caro mea in coelum conscendet, quid probibet ne similiter praeter naturam D viuificet? For lacke of knowledg manie that did folowe Chryst not vnderstanding his woordes were troobled. For whē they heard: verily verelye [Page] Except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke hys blood, ye shall not haue life in yowe. They thought themselues to be called of Chryst to the cruell maners E of wilde beastes, and to be moued that they shoulde eate the rawe flesh of a man, and drinke hys bloode, whiche thinges are horrible euen to heare. They had not yet knowen the goodly forme and dispensacion of this mystery. Moreouer also they thought: Howe should the flesh of this man graunt vs eternall life? or howe can yt bring vs to immortalitie? Whiche thinges when he did vnderstand, vnto whose eyes all thinges are naked and open, with an other merueilouse thing he driueth them to the faith. O yowe (saieth he) vainlie are ye troobled for my woordes. For yf ye will Chrystes flesh besiae nature ascendedin to heauen: beside nature yt geueth life in the Sacra. not beleue life to be geuen yow of my bodie, what will ye do when ye shall see me flie vppe into heauen? I do not saie that I will onely ascende into heauen, least yow aske again howe that maie be doen: but ye shall euen so see yt with yowr eyes. What therfore wil ye saie seing this? shal yt not be a great argument of yowr madnesse? Yf ye thinke that my flesh can not bring life vnto yow, how shall yt as a slieng thing ascende into heauen? howe shall yt flie by the ayer, for this likewise ys vnpossible to mankinde? Then yf my flesh F shall go vppe into heauen beside nature, what dothe let that yt likewise beside nature maie not geue life. Thus moche S. Cyrill.
Yow maie in this goodlie and liuely expositiō perceaue two vain thoughtes, that the grosse Disciples had, one that they shoulde after the cruel maner of wildes beastes, eate the rawe flesh of Chryst, as yt were tearing yt, or cutting Two vain thoughtes of the Capharn. yt oute by peices, and so Chrystes blessed flesh, as other thinges that be eaten, to be consumed. The other vain thought was how that flesh, which they accompted but as the flesh of a naturall man onely, and not as the flesh of God ioined to the Godhead in vnitie of person, and therfor supposed yt to be a mortall, and a corruptible flesh, howe (I saie) that mortal and corruptible flesh coulde geue vnto them immortalitie, and incorruption.
Nowe to answer bothe these vain thoughtes, and to reforme thē, Chryst saied: what yfye see the Sonne of man ascende vppe wher he was before? By which one saing he answereth bothe their thoughtes, and teacheth as concerning the first, that wher they thought, that his bodie shoulde be cutte or torne in peices, that they had an euell vnderstanding. For yt shoulde ascende vppe into G heauen, and that wholl, as S. Augustine saied. And that they might the better beleue yt, they shoulde see yt, as S. Cyrill here saieth. The other vain thought ys also answered in that he saieth his bodie shall ascend vppe to heauen, which ascension ys aboue the order of nature. Therby instructing them, that as his bodie aboue the course of nature shoulde ascende: So yt aboue the course of nature shoulde geue life. How the flesh of Chryst shoulde geue life S. Cyrill heretofore hathe declared vpon the sainges of Chryst, that yt ys by the eating of Chrystes flesh. And therfor he saied of the power of Chrystes flesh: Non verbo solùm verumetiam tactu mortuos excitabat, vt ostenderet corpus quoque suum viuificare posse. Quodsi solo tactu suo corrupta redintegrantur: quomodo In 6. Joan cap. 14. non viuemus, qui carnem illam & gustamus & manducamus? Reformabit enim omnino adimmortalitatem suam participes sui. Ne velis iudaicè quomodò quaerere, sed recordare quamuis aqua naturaliter frigidior sit: aduentu tamen ignis frigiditatis suae oblita, aestuat. Chryst did not with his woorde onelie, but also with hys touching he did rase dead men, that he might shewe, that his bodie also coulde geue life. Yf then with his onely touching corrupted things are made sownde again, H how shall not we liue, which taste and eate that flesh? He will withoute all doubte reforme the partakers of him to this immortalitie. Neither do thowe [Page 146]after the Iewes maner aske, howe: but remembre that though the water naturallie be colde: yet by the coming of the fire to yt, hauing A forgotten her coldnesse, waxeth hote. So that by S. Cyrill here yowe maie perceaue that the flesh of Chryst, which the vnbeleuing Disciples did thinke coulde not geue life, doth geue life to them, that receaue and eate yt.
Let not the Aduersaries nowe cast in ther comon glose, that Cyrill speaketh of the spirituall receauing and eating of Chrystes flesh For he teacheth more then in one place, that we are ioined to Chryst not onely spirituallie, but also after the flesh, by the eating of the same verie flesh. And to this pourpose also tendeth this his disputacion in this sentence last alleadged, that he wolde proue the flesh of Chryst to geue life by the corporall touching of yt, and therfor yt geueth life to vs that corporallie do tast and eate the same. And therfor let not the Sacramentarie aske, howe, For as Chryst ascended aboue the course of nature of man: So he geueth him self in the Sacrament to be eaten aboue the order and course of the nature of man. B
And nowe ye maie perceaue, wher the Aduersaries haue abvsed this scripture to proue that ther ys no reall presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, by cause they saie that Chryst by this text minded onelie to pluck the Disciples from their grosse thought of the carnall eating of him, to a spirituall maner of eating, and therfor here ys no reall flesh to be eaten. Wherupon they The Sacramentaries sifte the Sacra. so fine that they leaue nothing but the brā for themselues. charge vs, not onely with the name, but also with the grosse erroure of the Cpharanaites, that we (like as they did) do go farre wide from the true mening of the scripture. But they are so busie in charging vs with the grosse carnalitie of the Capharnaites, and so curiouse in sifting of their spiritualytie, which they sifte so long and so finely, that they let all the fine flower of Chrystes heauenlie bread fall from them, and kepe nothing but the bare branne of the signifieng sign in their owne hande, which in dede ys the grosse bread they feed on.
For, as ye haue heard, neither S. Augustin, nor S. Cyrill do so expownde yt that ther ys no reall presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, but that Chrystes minde was onely to remoue the carnall and grosse maner of eating C whiche the Capharnaites had conceaued, of the whiche maner bothe these fathers haue made mencion. But as for the maner of our eating, ys no soche grosse and beastlie maner, as Chryst wolde remoue from the Capharnaites, but yt ys soche a maner as ys bothe reall, and yet spirituall, taught vnto vs by our Sauiour Chryst himiself, and testified by his holie Churche and set furth by the holie Fathers of the same, as yowe maie perceaue by S. Austen and S. Cyrill, who although they reproue the maner of the Capharnaites: yet they commende to vs the maner vsed and receaued in the Churche.
THE FIVE AND THIRTETH CHAP. PROCEADETH E in the exposition of the same text, and endeth yt by Euth. and Petrus Cliniacen.
NOwe hauing heard one coople of the elder house expownding this text: we will heare one coople mo onely, expownde the same, and Jn 6. Ioan. so ende yt, and passe to the next. Euthymius expownding this scriptute writeth thus: Si ergo videritis filium hominis ascendentem vbi erat prius, quid dicetis? Loquitur de futura sui in coelum assumptione. Ascendentem, quoad humanitatem: vbi prius erat, quoad diuinitatem. Qui enim potest hanc carnem reddere coelestem, potest vtique ipsam cibum hominum efficere. What yf ye see the Sonne of As easiefor Chryst to make his flesh meat in the Sa. as to make it to ascēd. man ascende vppe wher he was before, what will ye saie? saieth Enthymius He speaketh of the assumption of him self in to heauen, to come. what if ye see him ascending? Ascending vppe, as touching his humanitie, where he was before, as touching his deitie. For he that can make his flesh heauenly, can also make the same meate of men. Note I praie yowe, that this authour by the possibilitie of F the worke of Chryst to make his flesh heauenly concludeth the possibilitie to make the same the meat of men, not grosslie after the rude phantasie of the Capharnaites, but verilie and reallie after the pleasure of Chryst.
And that this authour meneth of the reall flesh of Chryst to be the meat Argument of the ascē sion vsed by Chryst Jo. vi ys vain to proue the spirituall eating, but good to proue the reall eating of his flesh. of men, yt do the most euidenlie appeare by his argument deduced wpon the possibilitie of Chryst in making his flesh heauenlie. For yf he had spoken of Chrystes flesh to be eaten spirituallie, ther neded no soche argument vpō possibilitie to be made vpon his verie reall flesh. For the flesh of Chryst was spirituallie the meate of the holie fathers in the olde lawe. Wherfor that neded not to be proued possible, which so manie yeares had ben in vse: but that was nedefull to be proued to be possible, which before was not in vse, whiche was that the verie flesh of Chryst shoulde be eaten of men reallie.
Yf the saing and mening of Chryst had ben, that the Iewes shoulde haue eaten his flesh spiritually onelie, as the Aduersaries wolde haue yt, this argument of his ascension shoulde not haue neaded, but he might haue saied to G them: As I gaue yower fathers Manna from heauen, that they eating yt shoulde also spiritually eate me in a figure that I was then to come: So nowe ye shall eate a peice of bread, and drinke a cuppe of wine, in a figure, and for the remembrance of me, that I am comed, and haue suffred for yowe. This maner of eating of Chrystes flesh as yt was vsed of the good and beleuing Iewes, and well knowen to them both in Manna, and in the Paschall lambe: So if Chrystes mening had bē to no further matter of eating his flesh but in soche sort, they wolde neuer haue staied, and sticked so moche at yt. But he ment the receipt of his flesh in dede. And therfor he verie well bringheth the possibilitie of two workes vpon one thing, namely that yt ys as possible for Chryst to make his flesh the meate of men, as yt was to make the flesh whiche was earthlie nowe to be hauenly, And so this Authour concludeth that the flesh of Chryst ys as reallie eaten of men, as yt ys made heauenlie of Chryst: But Chryst hath made yt heauenly. wherfore he maketh yt to be eaten reallie.
Of this scripture Petrus Cluniacensis maketh a verie goodlie exposition paraphrasticallie: H Si videritis filium hominis ascendentem vbi erat prius. Spiritus est qui viuificat, caro non prodest quicquam, hoc est, quia me hominem, inter homines videtis, Petrus Cluniacen. [Page 147] nihil de me adhuc, quod ad hoc Sacramentum spectat, plusquam de alio homine sentire potestis. A Et i leò carnaliter sapientes velut per frusta concisam carnem meam me vobis velle dare creditis. Sed postquam in coelum ascendero, postquam hanc carnem, de qua agitur, adhuc mortalem, in Deum glorificauero, tunc intelligetis, quia Spiritus est qui viuificat, hoc est spiritualliter intellecta, accepta viuificant. Caro autem non prodest quicquam, quia carnaliter intellecta mortificant. Dabo enim carnem meam hominibus, non more cadauerum detruncandam, minuendam, consumendam, quia sic accepta caro mea non prodesset quicquā, sed dabo eam absque dolore diuidendam, absque imminutione partiendam, absque consumptione comedendam, quia Spiritus est. qui viuificat, & quia sic accepta, & intellecta caro mea vitam non mortalem, sed aeternam percipientibus donat. What if ye see the Sonne of man ascende vppe where he was before? Yt ys the Spirit that quickneth, the flesh profiteth nothing, that ys, bicause ye see me a man among men, ye can nothing more vnderstand of me (for somoche as apperteineth to the Sacrament) then ye can of an other man. And therfore vnderstanding This ys the maner of our Sacrament aries. carnally, ye beleue that I will geue my flesh to yowe, as cutt in lumpes or peices, but after that I ascende into heauen, after that I shall glorifie this B flesh, of the whiche we nowe speake, being yet mortall, into God: then ye shall vnderstand, that yt ys the Siprit that quickneth, that ys, that these my woordes spiritually taken do quicken, but the flesh prositteh nothing. For This ys the faith of all catholikes carnally vnderstanded they kill. I will geue my flesh vnto men, not after the maner of dead karkases to be cutt in peices one from an other, to be diminished, to be consumed, For my flesh so taken should not profitt anie thing, But I will geue yt withoute greif to be diuided, without diminucion to be parted, withoute consumption to be eaten. For yt ys the Spirit that quickneth. And my flesh so taken and vnderstanded, yt geueth to the receauers, not mortall life, but eternall. Thus farre Petrus Cluniacen.
In this Authour as in the other before, ye see that expowndeh he not this why Christ made mencion of hys ascension John. vi. saing of Chryst of his ascension into heauen, that the reall presence of his bodie shoulde not be in the Sacrament: but onely Chryst made mencion of his ascension to pull them from that grosse maner of eating of his flesh, that they thought he wolde geue them lumpes or peices of that his visible flesh in carnall and grosse maner, as a man wolde geue a peice of beof or mutton C to one to eate. And that his bodie so eaten shoulde be dead, and so finally consumed, and therfor, yt self as they thought being mortall, they merueiled howe yt shoulde make the eaters of yt ymmortall, and howe yt being eaten and so consumed, and ended shoulde make the eaters of yt continue for euer and to haue none ende. To reforme this their vain and grosse ymagination, he tolde them of his ascension. But for his presence in the Sacrament, as the holie Churche beleueth and teacheth, his verie bodie in visible forme ys ascended, and yet the same verie bodie in substance ys present inuisiblie in the Sacrament, and ys wholly receaued of euery receauer. Whiche maner this authour dothe very well seetfurth when he saied in the person of Chryste: I will geue my flesh to men not after the maner of dead karkases to be cutt in peices, to be diminished, to be consumed (for my flesh so taken shoulde nothing profitt) but I will geue my flesh withoute greif to be diuided, withoute diminucion to be parte, dwith oute consumption to be eaten. Thus ye maie perceaue that though the grosse maner of the vnbeleuing disciples be reprehended: yet the faithfull maner of the beleuing Chrystians ys approued, and therby also as the wresting D of this scripture ys espied: So ys their heresie by the same (truly nowe declared and expownded) reiected and refused. Wherfore I will nowe leaue this scripture and go to the next.
THE SIX AND THIRTTETH CHAP. TREACTETH E of the next text by S. Austen and Chrysostom.
SPiritus est qui viuificat, caro non prodest quicquā. yt ys the spirit that quickneth, the flesh profitteth nothing. This text the Aduersaries haue not a litle Joan. 6. triumphed on, and haue made yt so familiar, that boies and girles, coulde blatter this against Chrystes presence in the Sacrament. The flesh profiteth nothing. My saing therfor left aparte, I will laie the sainges and expositions of the Fathers before the reader, and then shall ye see whether these wicked schoolemasters haue not well taught their wicked scholers, and yonge ympes, to blaspheme Chrystes blessed flesh, saing that yt profiteth nothing, and also howe well they wrest the scripture, and violentlie plucke yt and teare yt, as yt were, from the natiue sense. The first coople to shewe vs the exposition of this text, shall be S. Augustine and Chrysostom.
S. Augustine saieth thus: Quid est quod adiungit: Spiritus est qui viuificat, caro non prodest quicquam? Dicamus ei (patitur enim nos non contradicentes, sed nosce cupientes) F Tract. 27. in Joan. O Domine magister bone, quomodò caro non prodest quicquam, cùm tu dixeris, Nisi quis manducauerit carnem meam, & biberit sanguinem meum, non habebit in se vitam? An vita non prodest quicquam? & propter quid sumus, quod sumus, nisi vt habeamus vitam aeternam, quam tua carne promittis? Quid est ergo, Non prodest quicquam? Caro non prodest quicquam, sed quomodò illi intellexerunt. Carnem quippe sic intellexerunt, quomodò in cadauere dilaniatur, aut in macello venditur, non quomodò spiritu vegetatur. Prōptè sic dictum est: Caro non prodest quicquam, quomodò dictum est: Scientia inflat. I am ergo debemus odisse scientiam? Absit. Et quid est, Scientia inslat? sola sine charitate. Ideo adtunxit: Charitas verò aedificat. Adde ergo scientiae charitatem, & vtilis erit scientia, non per se, sed per charitatem. Sic & nunc, Caro non prodest quicquam, sed sola caro. Accedat Spiritus ad carnem quomodò accedit charitas ad scientiam, & prodest plurimùm. Namsi caro nihil prodesset, Verbum caro non fieret, vt habitaret in nobis. Si per carnem multu nobis profuit Christus, quomodò caro nihil prodet? Sed per carnem spiritus aliquid pro salute nostra egit. Caro vas suit, quod habebat attende, non quod erat. Apostoli missi sunt, nunquid caro ipsorum nihil nobis prosuit? Si caro Apostolorū nobis profuit, caro Domini nihil potuit prodesse? G Vnde enim ad nos sonus verbi, nisi per vocem carnis? Vnde filius? Vnde conscriptio? Ista omnia opera carnis sunt, sed agitante Spiritu tanquam organum suum. Spiritus ergo est qui viuificat. Caro non prodest quicqua. Sicut illi intellexerunt carnem: non sic ego do ad manducandum carnem meam.
A long sentence of S. Augustine, but as profittable and pleasaunt, as yt ys long, whiche I bring whollie that the reader shoulde not be defrauded of the right meninge of S. Augustine vpon this scripture, and that the Aduersaries shoulde not haue occasion to reprehende that in vs, that so often they haue offended in, namelie to bring in a sentence of an Authour truncately so moch as apparantly wolde serue for their poupose, but not so moche as wolde trulie open the right mening of the Authour in that matter. In this sentence thus alleaged ye shall perceaue the full minde of S. Augustin, for so moche as he thought necessarie to be saied for the explicacion of Chrystes minde in this scripture. Thus maie S. Augustines woordes Spirit how yt quickneth, and flesh howe yt profiteth nothing. be englished:
What ys yt then that he adioineth: Yt ys the Spirit that quickneth, the flesh prositeth H nothing? Let vs saie vnto him, he suffreth vs, not against saing, but desiering to knowe: O Lorde, good master, howe doth the flesh profitt nothing, seing thowe hauest saied: Except a man eate my flesh, and drinke my bloode, he shall [Page 148] haue no life in him? Doth not life profitte anie thing? And for what be we, that we be, but that we maie haue eternall life, which thowe promisest by thy A flesh? What ys yt then that the flesh profiteth nothing? The flesh profitteth nothing, but as they vnderstoode yt. They did so vnderstande the flesh, as yt ys torne in the dead karkas, or as yt ys solde in the shambles, not as yt ys quickned withe the spiritt. Therfore yt ys so saied: the flesh profitteth nothing, as yt ys saied: that science doth puff vppe or make prowde. Shall we nowe therfore hate science? God forbidde. And what ys yt: Science doth puff vppe? Alone withoute charitie. Therfore he adioined: Charitie edifieth. Adde therfore to science charitie, and science shall be profitable, not by yt self, but by charitie. So also nowe the flesh profitteth nothing, but the flesh alone, let the spirit come to the flesh, as charitie cometh to science, and yt profiteth very moche. For if the flesh should profitt nothing, the woorde shoulde not haue ben made flesh, that he might dwell among vs. Yf Chryst by the flessh hath profitted vs moche, howe doth the flesh profitt nothing? But the spirit by the flesh hath doen somwhat for our healthe. The flesh was the vessell, what yt had attend, not what yt was: The Apostles were sent, did not their flesh B profitt? yf the flesh of the Apostles did profitt vs, coulde the flesh of our Lord nothing profitt? Frō whence came the sownde of the worde to vs, but by the voice of the flesh: from whence the stile? from whence the writing? All these workes be of the flesh, but the Spirit mouing yt as his organ. Therfore yt ys the Spirit that doth quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing. As they do vnderstande the flesh: So do not I geue my flesh to be eaten. Thus farre S. Augustine.
Nowe weigh, gentle Reader. whether the flesh of Chryst doth profitte anie thing or no. Nowe weigh also whether this scripture doth any one iotte The presence of Christs flesh in the Sacr. after the catholique faith. speake or make against Chrystes blessed flesh in the Sacrament. The catholique faith teacheth not that the flesh of Chryst ys geuen in the Sacramēt as peices or lumpes of flesh betorn oute of a dead karkas, neither that the flesh of Chryst ys there as yt ys in the shambles, nor that yt ys a pure naturall flesh without the spiritte, not the flesh of a person that ys onelie man, for so vnderstanded as they did vnderstand yt, saith S. Augustine, yt profiteth nothing. But the flesh of Chryst of the good catholiques ys beleued to be in C the Sacrament, not as the flesh of a pure man, but as the flesh of God: not diuided from the Godhead, but inseparablie euermore conioined to the same, not grossly as in the shambles but spirituallie, and yet verilie and reallie, as a diuine flesh in misterie, not torn as oute of a dead karkas by peices to be geuē abroade to the people, but (as Petrus Cluniacensis saieth) yt ys parted, euery mā without diminuciō euerie one receauing whol Chryst. Neither yt ys eatē, that therby yt ys cōsumed, but yt ys eatē and yet euer remaineth (as the Church saieth) Nec sumptus, absumitur. neither being receaued yt ys cōsumed.
This ys the catholique faith against the whiche this scripture doth nothing The flesh of Chryst receaued as the flesh of God profiteth moch. speake, but raither with yt, For as S. Augustine saieth: The flesh of Chryste taken as yt ys quickned with the Spirit, that ys, with the Godhead, and as the flesh of God, yt profiteth moche, which flesh ys so taken of the faithfull. And therfor the Sacramentaries maie be ashamed and moche repent of ther wicked blasphemie, wherwith they haue blasphemed the true catholique faith of Chryste, calling yt the grosse and vain imaginacions of the Capharnaites, with soche like impieties: seing that the faith ys pure, D perfect and agreable to godds woorde, and nothinge agreeing with the vanities of these grosse men. After whose grosse maner as the flesh prositeth [Page]nothing: So after that maner Chryst doth not geue his flesh, as S. Augustine E Chryst geueth his flesh in substance verilie, but not in rude maner grosselie. in the person of Chryst concludeth his exposition, sainge: Sicut illi intellexerunt carnem, non sic ego do ad manducandum carnem meam. As they did vnderstande the flesh, so do not I geue my flesh to be eaten. In the whiche wordes sainct Augustin dothe insinuate to vs that Chryst dothe geue vs the same his flesh to eate, but not after that maner For the substance ys not here denied of the thing that ys geuen, but the maner, whiche he signifieth plainlie when saieth: As they did vnderstande flesh: so do I not geue my flesh. of the whiche this foloweth well: I do geue my flesh, but not as they vnderstande yt.
The like we yse in common speache, as whē we saie: we be no soch men as yowe take vs to be: we graunt the substance of the thing, that we be men: but saing (no soche men) we denie but the condiciō or maner of the thing, and not the thing yt self. So he saing: I do not geue my flesh as they did vnderstand, the maner onely ys denied, but the thing ys raither admitted, and affirmed.
I am compelled to leaue S. Augustine, least I shoulde be to tediouse to F the reader, and turne, me to his yockfelowe in this place, Chrysostom, who handling this scripture saieth thus: Quid igitur caro non prodest quicquam? Chrysost. hom. 46. in Joannem. Non de ipsa carne dicit, absit, sed de his qui carnaliter accipiunt, quae dicuntur. Quid dutē est carnaliter intelligere? simpliciter vt res dicuntur, neque aliud quippiam excogitare. Non enim ita iudicanda sunt quae videntur, sed mysteria omnia interioribus oculis consideranda, hoc est, spiritualiter. Qui non manducat meam carnem, & bibit meum sanguinem, non habet vitam in semetispo. Quomodò nihil prodest caro, sine qua nemo potest viuere? Vide quòd ea particula, Caro non prodest quicquam, non de ipsa carne, sed de carnali auditione dictum est. What then? Doth the flesh profitt nothing? He speaketh yt not of that flesh (God forbidde) but of these that carnally take these thinges, Caro non prod. ys not spoken of the flesh of Chryst, as being the flesh of God. that be spoken. But what ys yt to vnderstande carnallie? Plainlie as the thinges be spoken, neither to thinke anie other thing. Not so are thinges that be seen to be iudged: But all misteries are to be considered with the inwarde eies. that ys spirituallie He that doth not eate my flesh, and drinke my bloode, hath no life in him self. Howe dothe the flesh profitte nothing G withoute the whiche no man can liue? See, that that particle (the flesh profiteth nothing) ys not spoken of that flesh, but of the carnall hearinge. Thus Chrysostom,
He needeth no expositour to open and expownd his exposition. For at the first seight he maketh yt manifest, that this saing of Chryst: The flesh profiteth nothing, ys not to be vnderstanded of the flesh of Chryst. Non de ipsa carne dictum est. yt ys not spoken of that flesh of Chryst, saieh he. And in the ende of his saing again he saieth: Vide quòd ipsa particula, Caro non prodest quicquam, non de ipsa carne dictum est. See that, that particle (the flesh profiteth nothing) ys not spoken of that flesh, mening the flesh of Chryst. What vngodly schoolemasters and impudent be these that teache their vngodly disciples so to vnderstand this scripture, as two of the most famouse Fathers of Chrystes Church vnderstand yt (as ye heare) to the plain contrarie. Thei saie the flesh of Chryst ys not in the Sacrament, for the flesh profiteth nothing: But that the flesh of Chryst ys in the Sacrament, and so being receaued doth profitte bothe these Fathers and other also, haue, and shall hereafter testifie against H them. Therfor I will not trooble thee, Reader, with anie longer inueighing against them, more then ordinarie processe by me intended shall inueigh. Whiche I trust shall be soche, that euery authour that shall be brought, shall [Page 149]impugn their wicked doctrine, and maintein the true faith of Chrysts catholique A Churche, I will therfore proceade to induce mo wittnesses.
THE SEVEN AND THIRTETH CHAP. PROceadeth vpon the same text by Theophilact and S. Bernard.
THeophilact geueth a breif testimonie of hys vnderstanding of this text, writing thus: Spiritus est qui viuificat: Caro non prodest quicquam. Quoniam (vt saepe diximus) carnaliter exponentes ea quae dicebantur à Christo, offendebatur, dicit quia spiritualiter intelligenda sunt, quae dicūtur à me, hoc est prodesse. Caro autē, hoc est, carnaliterilla exponere, nihil prodest. Sed offendiculi occasio fit. Sic ergo illi qui carnaliter audiebāt, quae à Christo dicebantur, offendebantur. Yt ys the Spirit that quickneth, the flesh profiteth nothing. For that (as we haue oftē saied) that they expownding those things carnallie which were saied of Chryst, were offended, he saied that they are spiritually B to be vnderstanded, that be saied of me, that ys to profitte. But the flesh, that ys carnallie to expownde, doth nothing profitte, but ys made occasion of offence or flaunder. So they that carnallie did heare those thinges, whiche were spoken of Chryst were offended. Thus Theophilact.
In whiche woordes ye se nothing spoken against the flesh of Chryst in the Sacrament. He bendeth not himself to expownde this scripture against yt, as Chrystes enemies haue doen: but he bendeth himself to expownde yt So as Chrystes very minde maie be opened vnto vs. Which was to teache the Capharnaites spirituallie to vnderstande Chrystes woordes, which he spake of the eating and drinking of hys flesh and bloode. Whiche woordes yf they were vnderstanded spirituallie they did profit. Yf they were vnderstanded carnallie, they did not profitte. But he doth not saie that Chrystes Obiectiō of the Sacramentaries for the spirituall eating. flesh in the Sacrament profiteth nothing. But here will the Sacramentaries obiect and saie, this ys the thing that we wolde, that Chrystes woordes shoulde be taken spirituallie, that the eating whiche Chryst speaketh of, C shoulde be taken not for a corporall ot carnall eating, but for a spirituall eating, which ys (beleuing) ād his flesh not for that carnall flesh of hys naturall bodie, but for hys spirituall flesh, that ys for the meritte, benefitt, vertue or grace that cometh to vs by hys naturall flesh. And therfor the papistes (as they terme them) vnderstanding these woordes of Chryst carnally, as to saie, that they do eate Chrystes very flesh really in the Sacrament, are verie Capharnaites, and the flesh profiteth them nothing.
Ye saie very well, and ye seem in yowr owne conceit to haue madea strōg argument. But weigh well the authour that ye haue grownded yowr Thāswer to the former obiect. argument vpon. Yt ys Theophilact, who saieth that Chrystes woordes must be vnderstanded spiritually. And euen so saie all the Catholiques, whom yt liketh yow to call Papistes and Capharnaites. And what ys the spirituall vnderstanding of Chrystes woordes by Theophilact? that we should onely beleue Chryst to haue died, and shedde hys bloode for vs? and that we be partakers of the meritte of the same? Call to minde howe he expownded these woordes of Chryst: Panis quem ego dabo caro mea est. D The bread that I will geue ys my flesh: and ther shall ye perceaue the vnderstanding of Chrystes woordes, that he meneth of. He saieth ther these woordes. Take heed that the bread whiche ys eaten of vs in the mysteries ys not onely a [Page] figure of our Lordes bodie, but the very flesh of our Lorde. For he did not saie, The bread that I will geue ys a figure of my flesh, but yt ys my flesh. And howe yt cometh E to passe that this bread shoulde be the very flesh of Chryst, and by whom yt ys so compased and wrought, the same Theophilact furthwith Spirituall vnderctanding what yt ys. declareth. That bread (saieth he) ys transformed with the secrett woordes by the mysticall benediction, and the coming of the holy Gost, into the flesh of our Lorde. Thys ys the spirituall vnderstanding of Theophilact, which ys in dede a spirituall vnderstanding. For yf that be spirituall that ys wrought hy the worke of the Spiritt of God, and that ys aboue the reason of man, and ys not with in the compasse of sensuall knowledge, but ys apprehended and knowen onely by faith, then ys this a spirituall vnderstanding. That yt ys wrought by the Spiritt of God, this Authour doth testifie, that yt ys aboue naturall reason, yt ys manifest. For ther ys no naturall mean vsed in the doing of yt. That yt ys not within the compasse and the knowledge of the senseis, this Authour also doth ther shewe. And howe (saieth he) ys yt, that yt doth not appeare flesh to vs, but bread? That we shoulde not (saieth he) abhorre from the eating of yt. For yf yt shoulde haue appeared flesh, we F shoulde haue had no pleasure to the Communion. But nowe our Lorde condescending to our infirmitie, the mysticall meat appeareth soche, as we haue ben otherwise accustonmed withall.
This flesh then of Chryst ys not seen of vs. And so trulie ys yt not perceaued of anie sense. And therfor for somoch as yt ys perceaued by no sēse, but that faith ys of hearing, in that respect yt maie also be called spirituall. What Serm. adin fances. ys knowen in the Sacrament by senses and what aught to be knowen by faith S. Augustin also teacheth saing: Quod videtis in altari panis & calix est, quod etiam oculi vestri renuntiant. Quod autem fides postulat instruenda, panis est corpus, calix est sanguis. Potest animo cuiuspiam cogitatio talis suboriri. Dominus Iesus Christus nouimus vnde carnem acceperit, de Virgine Maria scilicet, nutritus est, creuit, sepultus est, resurrexit, coelum ascendit, illuc leuauit corpus suum, vnde venturus est iudicare viuos & mortuos. Ibi est modò sedens ad dextram Patris, quomodò ergo panis corpus eius? vel quod habet calix, quomodò est sanguis eius? Ista ideo, fratres, dicuntur sacramenta, quia in eis aliud videtur, aliud intelligitur. Quod videtur speciem habet corporalem, quod intelligitur sructum habet spiritualem. That ye do see in the aultar, yt ys bread and the cuppe, G which also yowr eyes do she we yowe, but that faith requireth to be instructed, the bread ys the bodie, and the cuppe ys the bloode. But in the minde of som A plain saing of S. August. for the Proclamer. bodie soch a thought maie ryse. We knowe from whence our Lorde Iesus Chryste hath taken flesh, that ys, of the virgen Marie, he was nourished, he did growe, he was buried, he did rise, he hath ascended into heauen, thither he hath lifted vppe hys bodie from whence yt shall come to iudge the quicke and the dead. Ther ys he nowe sitting at the right hande of the Father. Howe then ys the bread hys bodie? or that the chalice hath, howe ys yt hys bloode? Bretheren, therfore these thinges be called Sacramentes, bicause ther ys one thing seen in them, and an other vnderstanded. That whiche ys seen hath a corporall forme that which ys vnderstanded hath a spirituall fruit or profyt. Thus farre sainct Augustine.
In the whiche woordes S. Augustin doth plainly open what ys iudged to be in the Sacrament by the iudgement of the senseis, and what by Senses and faith iudge diuer selse. the iudgement of faith. The eyes iudge yt bread, and a cuppe of wine, but H faith iudgeth that, that the eyes haue iudged bread, to be the hodie of Christ and that, that by the senseis ys iudged wine, to be the blood of Chryst. [Page 150]Then yf the bodie of Chryst be not knowen in the Sacrament by anye other A knowledge, then by the knowledg of the faith, then yt ys no carnall knowledge, but a spirituall knowledg: yf so, then we vnderstande Chrystes woordes spiritually and not as the Capharnaites carnallie (as the Sacramētaries do slanderously charge vs) but like lowlie subiectes vnto our master Chryst, striuing against our naturall knowledge, and though euen by faith we cannot comprehende the wholl mysterie: yet for that he hath saied yt we beleue yt so to be, as Algerus werie well to this pourpose saieth.
Dum in mysterio, quod non est apparet, quod est occultatur, fidei lucta proponitur, vt meritum augeatur. Dum contra hoc quod videtur, credens quod non videtur, de credita intus veritate, de suprata exteriùs falsitate, duplicem assequitur gratiam. Algerus li. 2 ca. 3. Caetera enim Christi miracula, cùm sint infidelibus in signum vt conuertantur, hoc solùm sidelibus datur ad meritum, vt illo erudiantur, In illis enim quae Deus in extrinseca materia secit, roboratur fides. In hoc autem solo quod ex seipso facit, fides exercitatur, vt victa, et inuicta faciliùs coronetur. Victa, inquam, ne comprehendat, sed inuicta, ne diffidat, dum exteriores quidem sensus obiecta panis, B & vini speciem, colore, odore, & sapore, ipsum quod fuerat mentiendo, panem & vinum quod non est nituntur instruere. Interior autem intellectus ipsum quod est, corpus scilicet Christi contemplans uec comprehendere sufficiens, non tamen desistit credere. While in the my sterie that that ys not appeareth, that that ys, ys hidden, battaill vnto faith ys propownded, that meritte maie be encreased, while that against yt that ys seen, beleuing yt that ys not seen of the beleued inwardly veritie, of the ouercomed outward falsitie, she getteth duble grace. For other miracles of Chryst, wher they be to the vnfaithfull for a sign, that they maie conuerte, this alone ys geuen to the faithfull to merite, that by yt thei maie be taught. In those miracles, that God did make in an owtwarde matter, faith ys strenghtned. In this alone that he maketh of himself, faith ys exercised, Faith ouer cōmed and not ouer comed in the misterie of the Sacr. that being ouercomed, and vnouercomed, she maie be more easilie crowned. I saie ouercomed that she can not comprehende, vnouercomed, that she distrust not, while the outward senseis by the formes of bread and wine obiected, the coloure, the sauour and the taste, falsly saing to be yt that yt was, doo laboure to affirme yt bread and wine, which yt ys not. But the C inwarde vnderstanding, beholding yt, that yt ys, that ys to saie, the bodie of Chryste, neither being able to comprehende yt, ceasseth not yet to beleue. Thus farre Algerus.
Thus farre be we from the Capharnaites that wher they rested within the cōpasse of carnall knowledg ād vnderstanding, we flie to the height of faiths crudicion, and so leauing carnall knowledge, mete for the senseis, we accept, and cleaue to that ys spirituall, according to the instruction of faith. Therfore seing that nothing ys taught of the catholique Church, or beleued, as cōcerning Chrysts very bodie in the Sacrament, that cometh vnder natural knowlege, either of reason, or of the senseis: what blinde malice ys ther in the Aduersaries to call vs carnall Capharnaites, who iudged of Chryst no otherwise then by naturall reason and senseis? Yf they will saie, that we be carnall, bicause we beleue Chrystes diuine flesh miraculouslie by the diuine Cpharnaites iudged only by reason and senses. power to be in the Sacrament, and verilie to be receaued of the faithfull: then maie they call vs carnall bicause we beleue the same flesh to be vnited to the Godhead in vnitie of person, and nowe to be exalted aboue all creatures, and to be at the right hande of God the Father. For what more D carnalitie ys yt to beleue the bodie of Chryst to the in the Sacrament, then to beleue the same bodie, to be at the right hand of God the Father? [Page]For as the power of God woorketh the one: So yt woorketh the other. And as by the scriptures we be certified of the one: So be we therby also certified E To beleue Chrystes flesh to be in the Sacr. ys a spirituall faith. of the other. And therfor as all faith concerning Chrystes bodie, as hys incarnacion, passion, resurrection, and ascension, ys spirituall and not carnall, though yt be aboute Chrystes flesh: So ys the faith beleuing the same flesh to be in the Sacrament, a spirituall faith. And the beleuers in that respect, be like wise spirituall, and not carnall.
And Albeit yt were necessarie of this to haue saied more, for that the Aduersaries haue moch delighted themselues with their spiritualitie, and haue moche slattered themselues to be by this their heresie right spirituall, when in dede they be therby verie carnall (heresie being a worke of the stesh) and haue thought themselues with this alone clean to abolish the name of the catholique Church, and the memorie of the same from the earth, the contrary effect wherof they haue seen: yet for that I see the matter so to fall oute that this rude booke will excead the quantitie and proporcion by me intended to the more trooble of the reader, and for that I haue ben longer vpon Theophilact then I minded. I will breiflie touche his yockefelowe S. Bernarde and F so ende this chapter.
Thus writeth S. Bernarde. Quis non illic vehementer cupiat pasci, & propter pacem, & propter adipem, & propter satietatem? Nihil ibi sormidatur, nihil fastiditur, nihil deficit. Bernard. serm. 33 in Cant. Tuta habitatio Paradisus: dulce pabulum, verbum: opulentia multa, nimis aeternitas. Habeo & ego verbum, sed in carne: & mihi apponitur veritas, sed in Sacramento. Angelus ex adipe frumenti saginatur, & nudo saturatur grano: me oportet interim quodam sacramenti cortice esse contentum, carnis fursure, literae palea, velamine fidei. Et haec talia sunt, quae gustata adferunt mortem, si non primitijs Spiritus quantulumcunque accipiant condimentum. Prorsus mors mihi in olla, nisi ex prophetae farinula dulcoretur. Denique absque Spiritu, & Sacramentum ad in dicium sumitur, & caro non prodest quicquam, & litera occidit, & fides mortua est: sed Spiritus est qui viuificat, vt viuam in eis. Who desiereth not earnestlie ther to be fedde, both for peace, and for the fatte, and for satietie? Ther ys nothing feared, nothing loathed, nothing lacking. Ther ys Paradise a saif habitacion: the woorde, a swete foode: eternitie, great abundance. I also haue the woorde, but in the flesh: and the veritie ys sett before me, but G The veritie of Christes flesh ys set furth before vs in the Sacr. in the Sacrament. The Angell ys fedde of the fatte of the qwheat, and ys filled or satisfied with the open corne in seight. In the mean while I must be contented with a certain barke of the Sacrament, with the branne of the flesh, with the chaffe of the letter, with the veil or couering of faith, and these thinges be soche that being tasted they bring death, yf of the first fruites of the Spiritte thei take not some maner of seasoning, my death ys surely in the potte except yt be made sweete with the Prophetes meall. Lastly withoute the Spirit the Sacrament also ys taken to condemnacion: and the flesh profiteth nothing at all: and the letter killeth: and faith ys dead: but yt ys the Spiritte, that geueth life, that I maie liue in them. Thus moche S. Bernarde.
Who in this chapiter, shewing the great difference betwixt this present life and the blessed life to come, openeth the commodities of the one, and the incommodities of the other: the perfection of the one, and the imperfection of the other, among which to our pourpose he saieth: that Paradise ys a saif habitacion, Ther the Sonne of God ys the sweete foode. Wherunto comparing H the state of this life, he saieth: I also haue the woorde the Sonne of God, but in the flesh: the veritie ys settfurth before me, but in the Sacrament.
[Page 151]Here first note that the veritie ys settfurth in the Sacrament, and not a bare figure: and yet this Sacrament, though yt hath the veritie yet yf yt be A receaued withoute the Spirit, yt ys (saieth sainct Bernard) receaued to condemnacion. Spirit takē two maner of waies. For the flesh prositeth nothing. But yt ys the Spiritt that geueth life. The spirit, as before ye haue ben taught of Chrysostom and Cyrill, ys taken two maner of waies: either for a spirituall vnderstanding in beleuing, and therbie vnderstanding the verie flesh of Chryst to be verilie in the Sacrament, not after a grosse maner to be cutte oute to vs in Lumpes (as the Capharnaites vnderstood yt) but spirituallie, and yet verilie, vnspeakeablie, and yet crediblie by the worke of Gods powre euen verie wholl Chryst: orells for the flesh of Chryst as a diuine or godlie flesh vnited to the spirit, whiche ys the Godhead, and so becomed nowe spirituall, and quickning, able to geue life, for that yt ys the flesh not of a sole man, but the flesh of God.
Nowe, saieth S. Bernard, the veritie ys in the Sacrament, the verie flesh of Chryst ys ther receaued, but yf yt be receaued withoute the spirit (as ys declared) the flesh alone profiteth nothing, yf ye ioin the spirit to the flesh (as sainct B Augustin willeth yow) the flesh prositeth moche. For to take the flesh alone, and so to vnderstand carnallie, the flesh profiteth nothing. Thus maie ye perceaue howe holie Bernarde with the rest agreeth, that he placeth not so the spiritte, that he expelleth the flesh of Chryst from the Sacrament, as the Aduersarie doth, but he ioineth the veritie of the flesh and the spirit together, and so stand they in moche amitie, and do greatly profit the beleuers.
THE EIGHT AND THIRTETH CAAP. ENdeth the exposition of this text by Euthymius and Lyra.
NOwe fearing with prolixitie to be tediouse, I will breiflie heare the testimonie of one coople mo expownding this text nowe in hand, and so end the same. Euthymius writeth thus: Spiritus est qui viuificat. Spiritum nunc vocat intellectum spiritualem eorum quae dicta sunt. Similiter & carnem, C Euthy. in [...] Ioan. Intelligere ea carnaliter. Non enim de carne ipsius quae viuificat, nunc sermo est. Ait ergo: Haec spiritualiter intelligere vitam prabet, quam suprà dixi: carnaliter verò intelligere, non prodest quicquam. Yt ys the Spiritte that quickneth. He calleth the Spirit nowe the spirituall vnderstanding of those thinges that be spoken. Likewise the flesh carnallie to vnderstande. For nowe he speaketh not of hys flesh that quickneth. He saieth therfore to vnderstand these thinges spirituallie, yt geueth life, whiche I spoke of before. But carnallie to vnderstand them yt profiteth nothing.
I shall not nede to note the woordes of this Authour, for all the authours yet alleadged drawe so iustly by one line, that allmost they speake all one maner of woordes, euen from the first to the last, aswell the later writers, as the most auncient. For this man with Chrysostom and Augustine saieth: that this scripture: the flesh profiteth nothing: ys not spoken of the flesh of Chryst, which doth quicken: but of carnall vnderstanding, of the whiche ye haue not a fewe times hearde. He saieth also that these woordes, the Spirits dothe quicken: are to be vnderstanded of spirituall vnderstanding D of the woordes of Chryste spoken of this mysterie, what the spirituall vnderstanding of Chrystes woordes be, this authour hath shewed throuhoute [Page]this processe. But breiflie vpon these woordes of Chryste: My flesh ys meat indede: This (saieth he) Chryst saied, confirming that he neither spake in darke E maner of speache, neither in parables. Then (as ther was delared, aswel vpon Chryst as also vpon this Authour) yf ther be no darke maner of speache nor parable in those woordes of Chryst: then we eate Chrystes very flesh reallie, and not in a figure, which yet so taken and vnderstanded, ys spirituallie taken and vnderstanded after this Authour, and other, which likewise haue vnderstanded yt, as before appeareth. And the like shall yow perceaue in the Authour that foloweth, who ys Lyra, who for an exposition of this scripture writeth thus:
Spiritus est qui viuificat. Quia dixerat carnem suam esse cibum necessarium ad salutem, & ipsi intelligebant hoc, acsi daretur in propria specie, sicut laniatur, vel vēditur in macello, quod est horribile, ideo tollit hunc intellectū, dicens: Spiritus est qui viuificat, quasi dicat: Lyra in 6. Ioan. Verba quae dixi spiritualē habent sensum, & sic viuificant. Caro autē non prodest quicquam, quia caro Christi manducata eo modo quo intelligebant, non esset vtilis, sed magis horribilis. Yt ys the spiritte that quickneth, the flesh profiteth, nothing. For bicause he had saied, that hys flesh ys a necessarie meat to saluacion, and they did vnderstande yt, as though yt shoulde be geuen in his owne forme, as yt ys cut and F solde in the Shambles, which ys horrible, therfore he taketh awaie that vnderstanding, saing: Yt ys the spiritte that quickneth, as who shoulde saie: The woordes that I haue spoken haue a spirituall sense, and so they quicken, but flesh profiteth nothing, for the flesh of Chryst eatē after that maner, that they did vnderstand, should not be profitable, but raither horrible. Thus Lyra.
In this exposition ye doe also see the grosse maner of the Capharnaites, who (as ye haue hearde) thought the flesh of Chryst should be geuen vnto thē, as yt ys cutt or solde in the shambles, in his own propre forme and maner, that ys as verie peices of flesh both in seight and substance, to be refused. For this maner of vnderstanding ys grosse and carnal, and therfore these woords must haue saieth this Authour a spiritual sense. What spiritual sence also this Authour vnderstandeth of Chrystes woordes, yt appeareth well in the exposition of these woordes of Chryst: My flesh ys meat in dede, &c. Wher this Authour saieth, as before ys alleadged that by this text was shewed the veritie of the Sacrament. For Chryst did often speake to hys Disciples in Parables, ād G therfor least yt should be beleued that hys flesh shoulde be conteined in the Sacrament onely as in a signe, therfore to remoue this, he saieth: My flesh ys meat in dede, for here yt ys taken reallie, and not figuratiuelye. Marke that he saieth reallie, and yet he accompteth this a spirituall vndetstanding, as yt ys in dede, as before ys declared, though the Aduersaries sifting yt so finely vntill they make yt nothing, saie that we be carnall, carnallie vnderstanding the woordes of Chryst. But God bring them from ther carnall heresie.
THE NINE AND THIRTETH CHAP. BEginneth the exposition of the next text by sainct Augustin, and Cyrill.
NOwe we come to the last scripture that treacteth of this matter in the sixt of sainct Iohn, which being appendent, hath almost the same vnderstanding that the last scripture before hath. Verba quae ego locutus sum vobis, spiritus & vita sunt. The woordes that I haue spoken to yow are spirit and life. I will not detein the reader, but euen furthwith heare H the Fathers expownd this scripture.
[Page 152]And first S. Augustin, who writeth thus: Quid est spiritus & vita sunt? Spiritualliter intelligenda sunt. Intellexisti spiritualliter? Spiritus & vita sunt. Intellexisti A carnaliter? etiam sic illa spiritus & vita sunt, sed tibi non sunt. What ys yt: The woordes that I haue spoken to yowe, are spirit and life? They are spiritually to be vnderstanded. Hauest thowe vnderstanded them spirituallie? They are spiritt and life. Hauest thowe vnderstanded them carnally? Euen so also are they spiritt and life, but to thee they be not. Thus he.
What S. Augustine meneth by carnall vnderstanding ye haue hearde more then once by his owne woordes alleaged. that ys, to vnderstand that we shoulde eate the flesh of Chryst in the verie forme and maner of flesh cutt oute to vs in morselles or peices, as flesh ys cutte oute and solde in the shambles. And not onely so, but to take yt as the flesh of an onely naturall man and not as the flesh of the Sonne of God, and to be of that weake and base degree, that yt shoulde be mortall, and consumptible, not able to geue life euerlasting to them that shoulde woorthilie eate yt, neither for euer to endure, and continue and neuer to haue ende. This (if yowe haue marked the sainges of S. Augustine, Chrysostom, and Cyrill) ys to B vnderstand Chryst carnallie Which maner of vnderstāding ther ys no good chrystian hath. But these woordes of them are vnderstanded spirituallie.
And what ys the spirituall vnderstanding of this processe of Chryst, for the eating of his flesh, yt hath ben by manie places of S. Augustin alledged, Sup. ca. 22 declared. But at this present to be short, these his woordes maie declare. Caro eius est &c. Yt ys his flesh, whiche we take couered vnder the forme of bread, and his bloode, whiche we do drinke vnder the forme, and taste of wine. This ys the spirituall vnderstanding of S. Augustin, Spirituall vnderstanding of the Sacrament as concerning the substance of the Sacrament, although ther be an other maner of spirituall vnderstanding, whiche both he and all the holie Fathers, and all good catholique men doo beleue, receaue, and approue, and do not denie this spirituall maner, but both must be ioined, and concurre in euery good chrystian man, yf time and condicion will serue, as before ys saied.
Nowe what S. Cyrill saieth, whom here we place with S. Augustine, Let vs heare: Verba quae ego locutus sum vobis, spiritus & vita sunt. C Totum corpus suum viuifica spiritus virtute plenum esse ostendit. Spiritum enim hic ipsam carnem suam nuncupauit, non quia carnis naturam amiserit, & in spiritum Ca. 24. in 6. Joan. mutata sit. sed quia summè cum eo coniuncta, totam viuificandi vim hausit. Nec indecenter hoc dictum quisquam existimet. Nam qui Domino conglutinatur, vnus cum eo spiritus est. Quomodò igitur caro sua vna cum eo non appllabitur? Huiusmodi ergo est, quod dicitur: Putatis me dixisse viuificum natura sui esse terrestre, & mortale hoc corpus, ego verò de spiritu & vita locutus sum. Non enim natura carnis secundùm se viuificare potest, sed virtus ipsius spiritus, viuificantem carnem reddidit. Verba ergo quae locutus sum, id est, èa quae locutus sum vobis, suntspiritus & vita, qua ipsa etiam caro mea viuit, & viuifica est. The woordes, which I haue spokē vnto yowe are spiritt and life. He sheweth all his whol bodie to be full of the quickning The verie flesh of Chryst called spirit. power of the spiritte. For he calleth here the spiritte his verie flesh, not that yt hath leftof the nature of flesh, and ys chaunged into a spirit: but bicause being excellently conioined with him, yt hath taken the wholl power to quickē. Neither let anie man thinke this, to be spokē vndecētlie. For he that ys surely ioined to our Lorde, ys one spirit with him, howe then shall not his D flesh be called one with our Lord? Yt ys therfor after this sashiō that ys saied: ye thinke me to haue saied, this mortall and earthlie bodie of the owne nature [Page]to be quicking or geuing life. but I haue spoken of spiritt and life. For the nature of the flesh yt self cā not geue life. But the power of the Spiritt, E hath made the flesh geuing life. The woordes therfor that I haue spokē, that ys, the thinges that I haue spokē vnto yowe, are spiritt and life, by the which the same my flesh also doth liue, and ys quickning. Thus farre S. Cyrill.
In whiche woordes, yt ys easie to be perceaued that wher S. Augustine before expownding these woords of Chryst, saied, that they are to be vnderstanded spirituallie, this authour, as yt were expownding him and the woordes of Chryst, saieth, that so they are to be expownded spirituallie, not by an expositiō of a singular imagined spirituall maner of vnderstanding, that shall be so spirituall that yt shall vtterly denie Chrystes flesh, but the verie reall and naturall slesh of Chryst, for that yt ys so inteirlie ioined to the God head, which Cyrill here calleth the Spirit, yt ys soche a spirituall flesh that yt maie be called also the Spirit, as S. Hierom also for like consideracion, and for that yt ys so exalted, calleth yt the diuine flesh. So that S. Cyrill vnderstādeth Chryst, that wher he saied, the woordes that I haue spoken to yowe are spirit and life: yt ys thus to be vnderstāded, that the flesh of Chryst ys spirit and life. And therfor the Aduersaies seme to be carnall and grosse, that wher the F Sacramentaries are Capharnaites. se holie Fathers vnderstāde the verie flesh of Chryst to be a spirituall flesh for cōsideracions aboue specified, they maliciouslie and despitefullie to the great derogacion of so high a misterie, call vs Capharnaites, as though we shoulde receaue nothing but carnall flesh, the flesh of an onelie bare naturall man, and not the flesh of Chryst, whiche being inseparablie ioined to the God head, and therfore the very flesh of God, ende wed with the power of the same Godhead to geue life, ys called both Spirit ād life, and so ys bothe very The flesh of Chryst ys both naturall and spirituall. naturall, and yet spirituall flesh. And therfor the catholique people receaue Chrystes verie reall flesh spirituallie, bicause yt ys a spirituall flesh, and also by cause yt ys knowen with a spirituall knowledg, not with the knowledg of naturall reason, nor with the knowledge of carnall senseis, but with the spiritual knowledge of faith, which beleueth that in the Sacrament, that reason can not comprehende, nor the senses perceaue.
And so as, Algerus saieth. Etsi sciri non potest: credi potest, quia quod videtur non materiale corpus panis est, sed species corporalis. Quod autem intelligitur Alger li. 2. cap. 3. Christus est, qui omnia quaecunque vult in coelo & in terra potest. Sicue dum exteriorum G sensuum testimonio non acquiescit, nec interiori inquisitione comprehendens, de veritate tamen non titubat, fit per Dei gratiam vt in tali suo agone fides nostra exerceatur, exercendo augeatur, augendo perficiatur, perfecta coronetur. Although yt can not be knowen: yet yt maie be beleued, for that that ys seen ys not the materiall bodie of bread, but the forme of bread, but that that ys vnderstanded ys Chryst, who can doe all thinges that he will in heauen and in earth, and so Conflict of faith with reason and senses. while man doth not agree to the wittnesse of the outwarde senses, neither by the inwarde inquisition cōprehending, doth not yet doubte of the trueth yt ys doen by the grace of God that faith in soche her conflicte ys exercised, in exercising ys encreased, in encreasing ys perfected, and being perfect ys crowned. Thus Algerus.
So farre wide then ys the catholique faithe from carnalitie in beleuing and recauing Chrystes very bodie in the Sacramēt vnder the forme of breade (as this authour saieth) that our faith hath a great battaill and conflicte with reason and the knowledg of senseis, whiche conflicte if we proceade to continue, our faith by soche exercise shall be perfected, and in the ende by Gods H mercie for this trauaill crowned. Therfor that this crown maie be obteined God [Page 153]graunt all catholique people stronglie to cōtinue the fight of this battaill, ād A all Sacramētaries to leaue their carnall heresies, and to come to this spiritual faith and battaill therof, that they also with vs maie be crowned.
THE FOVRTETH CHAP. ENDETH THE EXPOsition of this text and so of the processe of the sixt of S. Iohn by Euthymius and Lira.
NOwe one coople mo and then we end this scripture, and this processe of the sixt of sainct Iohn. The coople shall be Euthymius, and Lyra. Euthymius saieth thus: Verba quae ego loquor In. 6. Joan. vobis spiritus & vita sunt, Spiritualia & viuifica sunt. Oportet namque non simpliciter ea intueri, id est carnaliter intelligere, sed aliud quippiā imaginari, & interrioribus oculis ea aspicere tanqā misteria. Nā hoc est spiritualiter intelligere. The woordes that I haue spokē to yowe, are spirit and life, that ys, they are Spirituall vnderstanding what yt ys. spirituall and quickning. For we must not simplie heholde thē, that ys, carnallie B to vnderstande, but ymagen some other thinge, and with the inwarde eies beholde these thinges as misteries. For this ys spirituallie to vnderstand. Thus he.
Ye maie perceaue thys authour still to proceade and continue in one maner of vnderstanding and allwaies declaring one spirituall maner of Chrystes flesh in misterie, wher thinges maie not be taken, as they appeare simplie, but considering that they be misteries, ther must be considered some other thing ther to be present, which ys to be beholden not with the outwarde eye, but with the inwarde eie, whiche thing ys the verie bodie of our Sauiour Iesus Chryst by faith ther in verie dede, as verilie to be beleued, as the outwarde forme be by the senseis verilie to be seen.
All violent mocions (saieth he Philosopher) be slacke or slowe in the beginning, and quicke in the ending, so man violētly moued to vertuouse and godlie, dedes goeth slacklie and slowlie in the beginning, but whē he approcheth to the end, he maketh moche spede to come to yt. And euē so I miself drawing to the ende of the exposition of the matter of the Sacramēt by the C sixt chapter of S. Iohn, make hast to the ende, as though bothe I in the writing ād the reader in the reading were violēly caried in this verteuouse worke ād businesse, ād nowe as yt were with a natural desire runne hastilie to the ende.
Wherfor as I haue breiflie ouerpassed this last authour, so will I his yockelowe, which in this place ys Lira. who saieth thus: Verba quae ego locutus sum vobis, Jn 6. Joan. de carne mea māducāda, spiritus & vita sunt. quia spiritualē habēt intellectū. nec mirū, quia sunt à Spiritu sancto. Ista tamē spiritualitas non est sic accipiēda, quia caro Christi sit in sacramēto Eucharistiae tantū modò sicut in signo, vt dixerūt aliqui haeretici, quia est ibi realiter, vt dictū est, sed quia māducatur caro Christi in hoc Sacramēto quodd spiritualli modo, in quantū species visibiles atterūtur, & comeduntur, & spiritus ex virtute Dei carni vnita reficitur. The woordes whiche I haue spokē vnto yow, of my flesh to be eaten, they are spirit and life, for they haue a spirituall vnderstanding. And no merueill. For, they be of the holie Gost. This spiritualitie for all that, ys not so to be taken that the flesh of Chryst ys onely in the Sacrament as in a signe, as certain heretiques did saie, for yt ys ther reallie, as yt ys saied, but bycause the flesh of Chryst ys eaten after a certain spirituall maner, forsomoche as D the visible formes are bruised and eaten, and the spirit by the power of God vnited to the flesh ys refreshed.
In this sentence of this authour ye see the spiritual maner of the flesh of [Page]Chryst in the Sacrament whiche the Sacramentaries had diuised, plainlie reiected, Reall presence called spirituall for diuerse causes. as hereticall, and the right spirituall maner taught, which ys, that the E flesh of Chryst ys reallie vnder the formes of bread and wine, ād so receaued. Whiche maner of presence, and receipt ys called spirituall for diuerse causes, of the whiche this authour reciteth diuerse. One ys, that this presence of Chryst ys wrought by the holy Spirit of God. And therfore as workes doen .1. by Gods Spiritt are called spirituall of the woorker: so ys this being wrought by the holie Spirit, called spirituall. An other cause ys, that the bodie of .2. Chryst, although yt be verilie present, yet yt ys not perceaued by anie corporall knowelege, but onelie by the spirituall knowledg of faith. Wherfore as all thinges not atteigned vnto by corporall knowledge but by spirituall, are spirituall: So ys this whiche (as before ys saied) ys by faith beleued, but not of naturall knowledge comprehended, An other cause this authour rehearseth. .3. Whiche ys, that our spirit by the vertue and power of God, vnited to the slesh ys refreshed. As the refection wher with the bodie ys refreshed ys a corporall refection: so the refection of the spirit ys a spirituall refectiō. Forasmoche then as our spirit ys by this meat refreshed, yt ys a spirituall refection. And in his last cause this authour toucheth an other cause whie yt ys spiritual, F though he do not so expresse yt. And that ys, by cause the powre and spirit of God, (whiche ys the Godhead) ys vnited to this flesh, which diuine Spirit so being vnited, and made one with the flesh in the vnitie of person, not in the vnitie of nature, maketh this flesh a spirituall flesh, though neuer the lesse yt be also the verie naturall flesh of man.
Nowe, gentle Reader, wher the Aduersaries wolde haue wrested, and peruerted this chapter of S. Iohn, to haue not ben vnderstāded of the Sacramēt whether they were obcecated, and blinded through malice, nowe iudge. Heretiques maliciouse, arrogant and impudent. Whether also they were not arrogant, whiche contemning the authoritie of so manie noble famouse, and auncient Fathers, as ye haue hearde nowe faith fullie alleaged, wolde seke and procead most arrogantly to preferre their owne vain and false Commentes and gloses, before the others expositions. Whether also they were not impudent, shamelesse, yea and clean past shame that so boldie wolde commēd their lies to the people, not onelie, by their sermons, but also to their continuall shame with their pennes in their G bookes, as a most substanciall and godlie trueth, when so manie godlie and auncient wittnesses reclamed by their testimonies, and conuinced them to be lies.
Wherfor nowe, Reader, being aduertised beware of them, and learn, as ye Doctrine flieng the comon receaued vnderstāding of the script. ys to be suspectd. haue iust cause, to mistrust them, and flie from them. And cleaue to that cō panie wher ye see the auncient trueth taught by auncient fathers as here ye haue doen, And not by prowde arrogant will, as the other haue doen, flie from the trueth. Their doctrine ys to be suspected that flie from the common vnderstanding of the scripture receaued in the Churche, as yt ys nowe to be perceaued that these singular men haue doen by their single sigularitie. As our Sauiour Chryst saied to the Iewes: Si non venissē, & locutus eis non fuissē, peccatū non haberent. Nunc autem excusationem non habent de peccato suo. Yf I had not Ioan. ca 15. comed and not spoken vnto them, they shoulde haue had no sinne but nowe they haue no excuse of their sinne. Yf then soche as haue heard the woorde of Chryste teaching thē his promesse of the geuing furth of his verie bodie and bloode, and do not beleue yt, haue no excuse to saue them frō eternall H dānacion: moche more when they haue the same woorde expownded and declared by the holie Churche, of the whiche the holie Gost ys the master, [Page 154]the guide, and leader in to all trueth, and yet wil persist in peruerting the scriptures, and through arrogancie will credit none but them selues, they be not A onely voide of all excuse, but their damnacion ys greatlie encreased.
Wherfore ye that haue erred, staie, and looke vppe in time, beholde all the chrystiā worlde professing Gods true faith and religiō, and come to the same. Lurke not in the corners of darkenesse, whiche will bring yowe to extreā darknesse, but com to the light, which Chryst hath lefte in his Churche, which shall lighten yowe the waie to that light, that euer hath shewed and shined, and neuer was darkned nor shadowed.
THE ONE AND FOVRTETH CHAP. BEGINneth the exposition of these woordes of Chryst: This ys my bodie, after the minde of the Aduersaries.
GReate and manifolde are the maliciouse inuencions and deuiseis of the graund enemie of mankind against the same. Whiche enemie perceauing man to be in that state to come and enioie the glory and felicitie that he was fallē frō, enuied him, and subtellie vnder the countenāce or pretēte of a cōmodtie, brought him to a most miserable B incōmoditie: vnder the colour of their aduaūcemēt, dignitie, and great exaltaciō, he wrought vnto thē their deiectiō, ouerthrowe, and dānacion. Ye shall not die (saieth the enemie to the womā) but God doth knowe, that the same daie that ye eate therof yower eies shall be opened, and ye shal [...] be as Gods knowing good and euel. To whiche his perswasiō and false assertiō the womā geuing place by to light Gen. 3. creditte, seing also the fruit of the tree to be delectable and pleasaunt to the eies, not regarding the certē and most true woorde of her Lorde God, who before had saied, that in what daie they did eate of the tree of the knowledge of good and Jbid. 2. euell, that they shoulde die the death, she tooke of the forbidden fruit, and did eate therof, and gaue to her husbande, who did eate of yt also, and so not beleuing the woorde of their Lorde God, but transgressing his commaundemēt they were not onely expelled oute of that pleasaunt garden of Paradise, but also being fallen vnder the heauie burden of gods wrathe and iustice, were nowe banished from the eternall felicitie, and glorie of heauen, and made bonde to hell and euerlasting damnacion.
Euen so the same enemie seing the chrystiā people redemed with Chrystes C most preciouse bloode and restored to that felicitie and ioie, whiche by his Temptaciō of our first parentes, and of Christians in these daies compared. meās he had once caused thē to lose, ād that they were nowe quiet, ād in godlie order in the eartlie Paradise of Chrysts Church, he not bearing their happinesse in the vnitie of faith and godlie cōuersaciō, hath vsed his like subtletie and craft to make vs trāsgresse the cōmaundemēt of our lorde God, as he did our first Parētes, to the entēt he wolde cause vs to be banished frō the inheritāce of the glorie of God, wherunto by Chrystes bloode we are made free. And will ye see howe like his subtilties be: Owre first Parentes had an order appointed to thē what meat they shoolde eate in the Paradise wher they liued: The builder of our Paradise hath appoincted vs what the meat shall be that we shall eate, saing: Take, eate, this ys my bodie. The enemie tempted them to breake their order about their meat and foode: he tempteth vs to breake our order about our meat and foode. Their meat was the fruit of euerie tree in Paradise, sauing the tree of knowledge of good and euell, God saing: Of euerie tree that ys in the gardē thowe shalt eate, but as touching the Gen. 2. tree of knowledg of good and euell thowe shalt not eate of yt: Owre meat in the Paradise D of Chrystes Churche, ys his verie bodie and bloode he him self saing: Take eate, this ys my bodie. Take, drinke, this my blood. The enemie not withstāding gods [Page]owne saing to our Paretes: In what daie soeuer ye eate of that tree, ye shall die the death, he directlie cōtrary saied: Ye shall not die. The same enemie notwithstāding E Chrystes owne saing: This ys my bodie This ys my blode: directlie cōtrarie saieth: yt ys not his bodie, yt ys not his bloode: yt ys but a peice of bread, but a cuppe of wine, figures, signes, or tokēs of his bodie, and his bloode, and to cōpasse that this his perswasion and assertiō maie be receaued, as to our first parētes he saied: that yf there did eate of that fruict they shoulde be as Gods knowing both good and euell, pretēding a great cōmoditie: so nowe he saied: Esteem this no better thē a peice of bread, ād a cuppe of wine, and not as the bodie and bloode, of Chryst. For so (foramoch as Chrystes bodie ys in heauen and therfor can not be here) ye shall not cōmitte idolatrie whych ys yower great commoditie.
And as to the furtherance of the temtacion of owre Parētes the pleasing of their senseis in seing the fruict fair and pleasaunt, and not regarding the woorde of their Lorde God, did moche prouoke thē: so in this our tēptaciō he willeth vs, not regarding the woorde of Chryst our Lorde God, to folowe the pleasant iudgemēt of our sensies. And for somoche as we see nothing but bread and wine, we tast nothing but bread and wine, we feell nothing but bread and wine: Therfore we must beleue nothing to be ther but bread F and wine. By whiche maner of iudgement, we are moche prouoked the sooner to assent to his temptacion.
Nowe if we so assent, and eate of the meate, which the enemie perswadeth vs to eate of, and not of the meat whiche our Lorde and God hath appoincted, we shall not onely be expelled oute of this Paradise, of Chrystes Church by the Angell of God: but also being disherited frō the inheritāce of heauē, which Chryst our Sauiour by his blod hath bought vs to, we shall be cōdēpned to that pain that we were once redemed frō, ād so eternallie become miserable with him, vnto whoose wordes we wolde geue credditte before the woordes of our Lorde God. As nowe ye perceaue howe like the tēptacions be: so maie ye perceaue howe like the rewarde of the assēting or agreing to the tēptaciō of the enemie ys. Yf therfor ye will auoide the rewarde, which ys pain eternal, withstād the temptacion, whiche beginneth the thrall.
A mong manie other, two thinges (methinketh) shoulde with the assistēce of Two thinges which aught to moue vs to resist the temptatiōs of the Sacramentaries. gods grace, moche moue yowe to withstād his wicked tēptacions in this be G half the one ys, that as in the first tēptaciō to our first parentes he spake the plain cōtrarie of that God had spokē: so in this his tēptacon he speaketh the verie contrarie to that that Chryst our Lorde God hath spoken. For Chryst saied: This ys my bodie: But Sathā saieth: yt ys not his bodie. Now whē anie thing ys taught, that ys manifestlie repugnant to the woorde of our Lorde God (who cā speak nothing but trueth) except we be woorse bewitched them the Galathians were, we must nedes deme and iudge that doctrine to be false coming from Sathan the father of lies, vntrueth and falshod. And being false, what ells ys to be doen but to withstande and reiecte yt?
The other thing that aught to moue vs to withstād this tēptaciō, ys, that Sectes of Sacramentaries. Bereng. Wicleff Io. Hus. the woordes of his doctrine be not consonant nor agreable. For besides his diuerse and cōtrarie spirit, which he breathed into Berengarius, the first publique and open impugner of this blessed misterie (as yt ys saied in the preface of this book) into Wiceff, and Hus: he hath in this our time poured oute manie contrarie spitites, and meruelouslie shewed himself the authour of dissē tion, and repugnant doctrine in the same misterie. But for that I might be iudged partiall in the report of this diuerse doctrine, I will not vse mie owne H woordes but the woordes of Luther, Satans cheif and first Commissionar in this maner of proceading, and of Melancthon his right ofspring, and defendour of his doctrine.
[Page 155]Luther in his breif confession, noting the diuerse, and repugnant spirittes, A that reigned amongest the Sacramentaries, saieth in this maner: At the first Eight disaegreing spirittes amōg the Sacramentaries nombred by Luther. Carolstad. Zwinglius. Oecolamp. Swenckfel. these men were well warned of the holie Gost; when that vpon that one text they diuided them selues into seuen spirits, eche one differing allwaies from the other. First Carolstadius wold haue the text so, that this ys my bodie, should signifie: here sitteth my bodie. Then Zwinglius saieth, that that coulde not be well saied, no, though the Father of heauen had reueiled yt. Therfor being moued with an other holie spirit of his own thus he turned the text: Take, eate, this signifieth my bodie. The thirde, Oecolampadius, brought furth his third holie spirit, which turned that text into an other hew, as thus: Take, eate, this ys the token of my bodie. The fourth, Swenckfeldius, thinking to make his stench to smell as muske brought vs furth of his holie spirit this rule: These woordes, this ys my bodie, must be remoued from oure seight. For they do let vs of the spirituall vnderstanding. The fifth holie spirit, being but excrementes of that other, doth thus read that text. Take and eate, that which ys deliuered for yowe in this my bodie. The sixt holie spirit saieth, Take and eate, this ys my bodie in remembrance, as though Chryst had saied: Take and eate, this ys the monument of my bodie. The B seuenth holie spirit, Ioannes Campanus, bringeth this exposition: Take and eate this ys my breadie bodie, or bodie of bread. Beside all these, an other spirit flieth Ioan. Cam aboute (For the Deuell ys an holie, and great spirit) whiche persuadeth men that herein ys no article of oure faith, and therfor we aught not to contend of this matter, but leaue yt free to euery man to beleue herein what he list. Thus farre Luther.
See ye not by Luthers one woordes seuen, and in thend of his collection one mo to make eight dissonant, and disagreable doctrines vpon these woordes of Chryst: This ys my bodie? See ye not Sathan diuided against Sathan? See ye not his ministres plaing at crosse wasters for the victorie? Be persuaded then, that wher soche contencion, soche strife, soche Battaill ys amongest men, springing all oute of one Gospell, that in that Gospell ys no treuth. But we haue not yet seen the ende.
Melanchton the right of spring, and heire of the Lutheran doctrine, C was not onelie intoxicated with a diuerse spirit from his Father, and Fiue sectes of Sacramē taries amōg the Lutherans nombred by Melanct. master Martin Luther, in the ende of his life, but also reporteth that among the Lutherans them selues, ther were fiue Sacramentaries sectes, or heresies. For some (saieth he) be of Helhusius minde some of Sarcerius minde: some other folowe the ministers of Breme: and some Ioachimus Morlinus: other also he alleageth, whose opinion ys, that Chrystes bodie maie be in euery place. Whiche sectes being fiue in nombre, yf ye put them to the eight enombred by Luther, they make thirtene.
Thus by their own report yt ys to be perceaued that the woordes of Sathans doctrine be not of one sownde, of one agreeement, but his spirit Chrystes woordes wrested to sixtene diuerse senses by the Protestants. hath breathed into his disciples vpon these fewe woordes of Chryst diuerse and and plain repugnant expositions and doctrines.
To these thirtene diuerse doctrines, yf we adde and putto the expositions of Luther himself, Melanchton and Caluine, whiche esteemed them selues as the lightes of the worlde, we shall make vppe sixtene D diuerse expositions, and doctrines of this matter fettfurth by Sathans disciples.
As for Luther, yt ys euindent that he expounded Chrystes woordes farre vnlike to Zuinglius, Oecolāpadius, or anie of that line, yea vnto Berengarius himself [Page]For he saieth they must be thus vnderstāded: This ys my bodie, that ys, this bread ys my bodie. E
Melanchton in his later daies (as yt ys common to heretiques to growe worse and worse) forsooke Luthers spirit, and tasted of Zwinglius spirit, Melancth. His mutabilitie. but so as he wolde in soch wise correct him, that he wolde make him a newe spirit. And therfor he wolde haue this sense vpon Chrystes woordes, This ys my bodie, that ys, This ys a participacion of my bodie, whiche newe interpretacion (saieth Staphilus) ys plainlie a newe Sacramentaries heresie.
Last of all the doctrine of Caluine swarueth from all these, teaching that Chryst ys geuen to vs reallie, but not corporallie, as though the sense of Io. Caluine Chrystes woordes might be: This ys my bodie, that ys, This ys the verie substance of my bodie, but it ys not my bodilie substance.
Thus aboute the sense of Chrystes woordes ye haue among these Egyptians seen a merueillouse varietie, who creping and groping in their palpable darknesse tooke that for trueth, that Sathan suffred to come first to their hand, by which mean euerie one of them vttered that for trueth, that in his darknesse he had lighted on. But among all note howe by Swenckfeldius, Sathā F wolde haue berieued yowe not onelie of this Sacrament, but of all other, and not onelie of them, but of the scriptures also. This ys a miserable progresse, this ys the right building of Babell, wher the tounges of men be confownded, that a man can not vnderstand his neighbour, neither can the catholike vnderstand the protestant, nor the protestant, the protestant.
But nowe returning to my pourpose again, I wish that to be perceaued in this processe whiche before I spake of to be noted, the better to withstand Sathan in his temptacions against the true doctrine and faith, namelie that his doctrine ys not consonant, nor agreable in yt self, but dissonant and repugnant, some of his disciples teaching that the bodie of Chryst ys in the Sament with the bread, some that the bodie of Chryst ys in the Sacrament in and vnder the bread: other some that the bread ys the bodie of Chryst: other of the contrarie maner denieng the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, but yet diuerslie, some of them teaching that the Sacrament ys but a signe of the bodie of Chryst: other some that the bread ys a figure of the bodie of G Chryst: other that it ys the powre vertue, or efficacie of the bodie of Chryst: other that Chryst ys reallie exhibited vnto vs, but not bounde nor exclosed in the bread: other (whiche be the worste sort) teaching that ther ys neither bodie nor Sacrament.
In which diuersitie, and contrarietie of doctrines, yt ys easelie to be perceaued not onely how moche dissonant they are frō the doctrine and woordes of Chryst: but also howe farre disagreing they are among them selues. Whiche faut perceaued, I thinke him more then bewitched that will geue credittte to anie of them, forsomoche as ther ys no man but knoweth that in the doctrine of God ys concorde agreement. And forsomoch as in these other doctrins ther ys none agreement, but repugnance and contrarities, yt ys certen that they be not of God.
Besides this what proof haue anie of all these either in the scriptures or holie Fathers, that this saing of Chryst: This ys my bodie, shoulde be vnderstanded as eche of them stowtly seeme to auouche, and that after their sondrie maners? H They be contrarie one to an other, yet eche of them perswade their disciples that they teache the true woorde of God. And yet the scriptures of God beare no soche contrarie sense is.
Nowe therfor, Reader, staie thie self, and choose raither to beleue Chryst, then [Page 156]Sathan who goeth aboute to deceaue thee, as he did thie first parentes, who A through light creditte neclecting what God had saied, and beleuing what the serpent saied, fell into preuaricacion and were condemned. Thus moche then being saied of Sathans maner of temtacion to abduce and lead awaie men from the faith of Chryst, and of his sondrie and manie inuented false expositions disagreeng and clean repugnant euen amongest them selues, of these woordes of Chryst, This ys my bodie: I shall nowe addresse my self, first somewhat to saie of thinges apperteining to the true vnderstanding of those woordes, and afterwarde open to youe he right vnderstanding of the same woordes by the most auncient and holie Fathers of Chrystes Church, wher ye shall perceaue not a repugnance, as in Sathans schoole, but concorde and agrement meit for Chrystes schoole.
THE TWO AND FOVRTETH CHAP. BEGINNETH the exposition of the woordes of Chryst after the catholike maner with certain proofes of the same.
AS ye haue hearde Sathā teaching his scholers with moche contrarietie, B strife, and repugnance, to expownd or raither to expuncte the woordes of Chryst and to peruert them, as yt hath pleased the same ther master to moue them, some one waie, some another, but neuer one of them the right waie: so shall ye nowe heare the disciples and scolers of Chryst, and of his holie spirit, with all agremēt, concorand peace expownde yowe the same woordes of Chryst, after the learning of their master, not some one waie, and some an other waie: but all one waie, as yt were with one mouthe spoken. Yt shall moche cōmende this goodlie amitie and concorde of this schoole, yf we first in the entrie of this declaracion shall heare howe the cheif, and highest scholers of this schoole do agree in the reporte of these woordes of Chryst whose exposition we seke.
The cheifest scholers reporters of these woordes be the three Euangelistes, Matthew, Marke and Luke, and the Apostle Paule. S. Matthew reporteth C yt thus: Iesus tooke bread and when he had blessed it, he breake it, and gaue it to the disciples, Mat. 26. and saied: Take, eate, this ys my bodie. And he tooke the cuppe, and thanked, and gaue it them, saing: Drinke ye all of this. This ys my bloode whiche ys of the newe testament, whiche ys shedde for manie for the remission of sinnes.
S. Marke agreablie testifieth the same thus: Iesus tooke breade, and blessing Mar. 14. he brake it, and gaue to them and saied. Take, eate, this ys my bodie, and he tooke the cuppe, and when he had geuen thankes, he tooke it to them. And they all dranke of it, and he saied to them: This ys my bloode of the newe testament, whiche ys shedde for manie.
S. Luke reporteth yt after this maner. And whē he had takē bread he gaue thākes and brake it, and gaue it vnto them saing: This ys my bodie, whiche ys geuen for yow. Likewise Luc. 22. also when he had supped he tooke the cuppe saing. This cuppe ys the newe Testament in my bloode, whiche ys shedde for yowe.
With this testimonie of S. Luke agreeth S. Paule thus: Owre Lorde Iesus, the same night that he was betraied toke bread, and when he had geuen thankes he brake 1. Cor. 11. it and saied: Take ye and eate, this ys my bodie, whiche ys broken for yow. This do in remembrance of me. After the same maner also he tooke the cuppe when supper was doen saing: D This cuppe ys the newe testament in my bloode. This do as often as ye drinke yt in the remembraunce of me.
Thus ye see first these foure highe scholers of Chrystes schoole consonātlie and agreablie reporting the doctrine of their master namelie that he tooke [Page] bread and after he had geuē thankes or blessed yt gaue yt to them, saing take, eate, this ye my Tropes and figures patched to Chrystes woordes excluded. bodie. Of the whiche ye see not one making anie one title or mencion of tropes E figures, or fignificacions, whiche the Aduersurie wolde patche vnto this text to cōfownde the saing, and mening of Chryste, and to shadowe his great mercie and loue toward vs, in leauing vnto vs so high a mysterie, us a pledge of his great loue to owre endlesse consolacion and comforte. Wher thē haue they these their tropes, what grounde haue they for them? In dede they haue none. But nowe to cōfirme this doctrine of these scholers of Chryste, S. Iohn a great scholer of the same schoole dothe make an inuincible proofe. For he reporting the promisse of Chryste, that he wolde geue vnto his Apostles a bread that shoulde be his flesh, euē the same flesh that he wolde geue for the life of the worlde, vttereth the same simplie and plainlie. Whiche promisse was fullsilled no ells wher, but in the last supper whē he saied. Take, eate, this ys my bodie, wherfore these woordes, this ys my bodie, are simplie ād plainlie whith oute tropes and figure so to be vnderstāded, as they maie answer the pmesse.
As for the vnderstanding of these woordes of the promisse and the rest The sixte of S. John being vnderstanded of the bodie and blood of Chryst, the woordes of the supper must of necessitie be so likewise. adioined to the same in the sixt of S. Iohn, yt ys allready made euident, that F theye are to be vnderstanded of Chrystes verie bodie and bloode. And for that, that processe must and ys necessarilie so vnderstanded, of like necessitie must these woordes of Chryst be so vnderstanded. For S. Augustine, Chrysostome and diuerse other testifie one thing to be spoken of in the sixte of S. Iohn, and in the last supper. Wherfore as the sixt of S. Iohn speaketh without tropes and signes, of the verie bodie and bloode of Chryst: So also do these woordes of the supper of Chryst.
Yt maketh also an euident proofe for this pourpose that S. Paule, who taught the Corinthians the vse of the supper of our Lorde, did neuer teache them that yt was but a figure of the bodie of our Lorde, but simplie that yt was the bodie of our Lorde. The proof of this ys easie, for he taught thē none otherwise thē he wrote to thē, He wrote none other meeninge or vnderstanding of the woordes of Chryste, but euen as they were of Chryste, spokē, whiche was withoute trope or figure, wherfor S. Paule taught them without G trope or figure. Yt ys not like that so woorthie an Apostle and teacher wolde in so perilouse a matter (wher on the one side, yf Chrystes presence be not there, Idolatrie might by occasion of the woordes sownding as they do, sooē be cōmitted, and on ther side, yf the presence of Chrystes bodie as the woordes do sownde, be verilie ther, necligence in omittinge of duetie might be admitted, yt ys not like (I saie) that he wolde leaue a matter of weight and perill vndeclared and not opened. Wherfore sithen he so taught and wrote the woordes of Chryste in no other sense then they were of Chryst spoken, yt doth well folowe that they must be so vnderstanded. Theie were spoken of Chryst withoute any trope or figure, wherfore yt appeareth that of S. Paule they were vnderstand whithoute trope or figure.
That the woordes of Chryst are to be vnderstanded withoute trope or figure The fame among insidests of the christiā religiō in the primitiue Church, proueth the presence. not onelie the faith of Chrystes Churche, whiche shall be hereafter declared, but also the fame grounded vpon the same faith spred thoroughout among the infidells and heathen in the primitiue Churche dothe well H prooue yt. Yt ys not vnknowen to soche as haue trauailed in the histories that the Chrystians were moche hated and abhorred, for that they were famouslie reported to eate the flesh of men, and of children. And being so reputed, were with more cruelltie sought, and drawen to tormentes, and Martyrdome. Among the whiche the holie [Page 157]woman and constant Martyr Blandina, saied to them that were aboute her: A Multū erratis, o viri, quòd putatis infantum vsceribus vesci eos, qui ne brutorum quidē animaliü Euseb. li. 5. cap. 2. Blandina. carnibus vtuntur. Ye are deceiued, o ye mē, that ye thinke thē to eate the bowells of children, which vse not to eate the flesh of brute beastes. Attalus also heing sore tormented, when he sawe the people delighted with the smel Jbid. cap. 3. Attalus. of his flesh being rosted, saied vnto them. Ecce, hoc est hommes comedere, quod vos facitis, quod à nobis velut occult [...] inqniritis facinus, quod vos aperta luce committius. This Lo that you do, ys to eate men, whiche as a secret wickednesse ye enquiere amonge vs, whiche ye committe in the open light. Lib. de passione eius quem scripserunt presbyteri & Diacones Achaia.
The heathen, as yt ys supposed, knowing the chrystians to assemble, and hearing that in those assembles they did eate the flesh of a man, and not knowing the mysterie, suspected that they killed either men or children for that pourpose, when in dede they eate the flesh of Chryst. Who (as sainct Androwe saied) when his veryflesh ys eaten of the people, and his blood dronke: yet doth he still remain wholl and sownde vndefiled, and aliue.
Yt prooneth well also this fame, that Auerrois the Philosopher saieth of the Chrystians: Mundum peragraui, varias sectas inueni, & runquam tam fatuam repperi sectam, B sicut est secta Christianorū. Quoniam Deum suum, quem colunt, deuorant dentibus. I haue walked ouer the worlde, I haue fownde diuerse sectes, and yet did I neuer finde so foolish a secte as the sect of the Chrystians. For they deuoure with their teeth, whom they honoure as God. Yt was knowen to all the worlde, that the Chrystiās honoured Chryst as their God. Wherfor yt ys easie to perceaue, that the fame was that they receaued and eate Chryst. And forasmoche as the heathen reputed Chryst but as a verie man, and were ignoraunt of that great mysterie of the coniunction of the Godhead and manhead in vnitie of person in Chryst, they saied that the Chrystians did eate the flesh of man. By whiche voice other some, as in a multude yt often happeneth, mysvnderstanding yt, and taking yt absolutelie, reported the Chrystians as before ys saied, that they did eat secretlie the flesh of men and children.
With this suspicion yt ys not vnlike that the Iewe was ledde of whom S. Amphilochius maketh mencion: who being desierouse to searche and knowe C S. Amphil. in vita Basilij. the secrett mysteries of the chrystians, at the time that S. Basille shoulde go to the holie ministracion, feigning himself a chrystian, entred among the Chrystians, and when the Sacrament was broken by the handes of S. Basill, A iewe induced to be a Chrystiā by a miracle of the Sacramit. he sawe thē a childe diuided, and whē with other he came to the cōmunion, the Sacrament deliuered vnto him was made flesh, and the cuppe was full of bloode, of whiche bothe reseruing some token, he went home and shewed yt to his wief, and for declaracion tolde her what he had seen with his eyes. Whervpon belcuing the mysteries of the Chrystians to be merueillouse and wonderfull, the next daie he came to S. Basill, and desired to be baptised, and made a chrystian.
Thus we maie perceaue, that the workes of God be great and merueillouse, who vnto this Iewe but suspecting the chrystians to eate flesh and drinke bloode in their mysteries made yt soch to him as he suspected yt to be and to appeare soche to his seight as yt was couertlie to other in verie dede. But he sawe yt with his bodilie eye for his instruction, that the true Chrystian D seeth with his faithfull eye to his saluacion.
But to return to our first matter, so great was the fame that the Chrystians did eate mānes flesh in their mysteries, that to deliuer thē frō the enuie that was cōceaued, against thē for the same Iustinus the holie martyr was enforced [Page]in his Apollogie made vnto Antonius Pius to reueil and declare vnto him all the wholl order of the mysteries of the chrystians, and what was their faith E therin, whiche thing was not vsed in those daies to be declared to anie prophane man and infidel, but allwaies kept secrette, so moche as yt might be. And yet vpon this enforcemēt this Iustinus declared the matter so plainlie, as no man of his auncientie to soche men more plainlie, as shortlie here after ye shall perceaue.
As these thinges then hitherto saied do proue by the same that Chryst ys present in the Sacrament, and so consequentlie that the woordes of Chryst, haue ben and so ought to be vnderstanded in their propre sense withoute trope or figure: So wolde I wish them of all chrystians in these daies to be receaued. And as by these thinges we maie be moued. So by other reasons we maie from the contrarie vnderstanding be disswaded. Among manie of whiche I wil bring but one or two, that Rupertus doth make and the first ys this. Nonne Ioannes Euangelista dicit in Apocalipsi: Si quis apposuerit ad haec, apponet super illū Rupert. li. 6. in Joan. Apoca. 22. Deus plagas scriptas in libro isto. Et si quis diminuerit de verbis prophetiae libri huius, auferet Deus partem eius de ligno vitae, & de ciuitate sancta, & de ijs quae scripta sunt in libro F isto? Nunquid minùs timenda est hic illa maledictio, vt non detrahamus, vel apponamus quidquam verbis dicentis, Hoc est corpus meum, quod pro vobis tradetur: Hic est sanguis meus noui testamenti, qui pro multis effundetur, in remissionem peccatorum? Cùm enim illo dicente: Hoc est corpus meum, nos subauditionem apposuerimus dicentes, figuratiuum, vel per similitudinem dictum: Cùm inquam illo dicente: Hoc est corpus meum, nos dixerimus, hoc signisicat corpus meum, nonne multum est quod apponimus, vel praua demutatione detrahimus, & sensum generamus, quem tantus Author Deus & homo nusquā est locutus, nec ascendit vnquam in cor eius? Dothe not the Euangelist Iohn saie in the Apocalipse: Yf anie man shall adde vnto these thinges, God shal adde vnto him the plagues, that are written in this booke. And yf anie man shall minishe of the woordes of the booke of this prophecie, God shall take awaie his parte oute of the booke of life and oute of the holie To the woordes of God maie nothing be added nor diminished citte, and the thinges whiche are written in this booke? Ys this maledictiō or curse lesse to be feared here, that we diminish not or putte any thing to the woordes of him that saied: This ys my bodie, whiche shall be deliuered for yow. This ys my bloode of the newe testament, whiche shall be shedde for manie in the remissiō of sinnes? For when G he saieth: This ys my bodie: we shall putto an vnderstanding, saing a figuratiue bodie, or that yt ys spoken by a similitude, when I saie, he saieth. This ys my bodie: we shall saie this signifieth my bodie, ys yt not moche that we putto his woordes, or by an euell chaunge take from them, and make a sense, whiche so great an Authour God and man, in no place hath spoken, neither at anie time did yt ascende in to his heart? Thus Rupertus.
This ys the first reason of this Authour, whiche yf yt be well weighed, and the thing well considered, howe moche we by figures, tropes, and significacions, do alter and chaunge, howe moche we putto in woordes and diminish in substance, howe the exposition denieth, that the text affirmeth: we haue good cause to feare the malediction of God spoken by S. Iohn, who beareth not soche expositions denieng what he hath saied, nor soche gloses confownding his text. Wherfore we maie well be dissuaded from soche expositions, or rather deprauacions, and the rather that their ys no warrant to beare vs so to expownde these woordes of Chryst, as of the circumstance of the place H maie be perceaued, whiche this Authour vseth as an other reason to moue vs not so to vnderstande Chrystes woordes of his supper as the Aduersarie dothe expownde them. And thus he saieth.
Cùm obijcit quis suisue scriptitat in sedulis, quod itidem dixerit eadem veritas. Ego sum [Page 158] vitis, tam audacter, quā imperitè in argumentum mendosum illud attrahit, cum statim subsequentia verba dicentist Sicut palmes non potest ferre fructum à semetipso nisi manserit in A vite: sic nec vos nisi in me manseritis, manifestè per similitudinem compellant intelligi, praesertim cùm non signanter dixerit: Ego sum haec vitis: sicut signanter dixit, Hoc est corpus meum, hic est sanguis meus, apposita protinus descriptione verae proprietatis, de corpore inquiens, quod pro vobis tradetur, de san guine autem, qui pro multis effundetur. Igitur ne veniant super nos plagae nouissimae, neque apponimus, neque diminuimus quicquam diuinae definitioni, vel descriptioni, quam incarnatum Verbum ore proprio deproinpsit. Imo quia perfecta charitas foras mittit timorem, non tam plagarum timore, qunm veritatis amore, confitemur, quia panis iste corporeus, postquam signauerit eum Pater, & vinum hoc expressum acinis praesentibus mox vt eodem signo signatum est per manus ecclesiae dicentis: vt nobis corpus & sanguis fiat dilectissimi filij tui, Domini nostri Iesu Christi, etc. vsque in memoriā mei facietis: corpus & sanguis eius, qui huius traditionis author est, & hoc sacrisicium ipse Christus est, cuius passione vt sacrificium fieret à Deo Patre in veritate signatum est. Whē one obiecteth, and writeth yt also in his bookes euen as boldlie as vnlearned These woordes J am a vine. Ioan. 15. are proued by the circūstance to be a similitudi. lie that the same trueth (mening Chryst) saieth also, I am a vine: he draweth yt into a false argument, seing that the woordes immediately folowing of him B saing thus: As the braunche can beare no fruit of him self, except he abide in the vine: So neither can yowe except ye abide in me: Do manifestlie enforce that saing to be vnde by a similitude, speciallie for that he did not with a singular demonstraciō sate: I am this vine: as with a singular demonstracion he saied: This ys my bodie, this ys my bloode: Wherunto furthwith he put the description of the true propertie of eche of them, of the bodie saing: whiche shall be deliuered for yowe, of the blood also, whiche shall be shedde for manie. Therfor that these later plagues come not vpon vs, we neither diminish, nor put to any thing to the diuine definition or discription, whiche the Sonne of God incarnate hath spoken or vttered with his owne mouthe. But raither, bycause perfecte charitie casteth oure feare, not so moche for the feare, as for loue of trueth we do confesse, that this bodilie breade, after the Father hath blessed it, and this wine pressed oute of these present grapes, as sooen as yt ys blessed by the handes of the churche saing: that yt maie be made to vs the bodie and bloode of thy most beloued some Iesus Chryst, and so furth vntill ye come to these woordes, ye C shall do yt in the remembrance of me, that yt ys the bodie and bloode of him, who ys the Author of this tradicion, and that this sacrifice ys Chryst him self, by whose passion yt was blessed of God the Father in verie dede, that yt might be made a sacrifice. Thus farre he.
Two thinges I thinke, good gētle Reader, in this reason of this Authour to note to thee: The one ys that where the Aduersarie bringeth furth certain places of the scripture, whiche be vnderstand by tropes: as wher Chryste saieth: I am a vine, I am the dore, and soche like, therby to prooue that these woordes of Chryst. This ys my bodie: shoulde so be vnderstande also (whiche in dede proueth nothing) this Authour declareth that the circumstance of these places, doth compell vs so to vnderstand them, as in the opening of this text: I am a vine, he hath declared. So this scripture also: I am the doore, the woordes of Chryste immediately folowing teache vs that they are to be vnderstande by Joan. 10. a similitude, for streight waie he saieth: By me who soeuer entreth he shall be saued, and shall go in, and go oute, and finde foode. So that we haue Chrystes owne warrant D Willfull or naturall reason ys no sufficient warrant allwaies in the court of faith. so to vnderstand them. But to vnderstande the woordes of Chrystes supper in like maner, vieue the place, ye shall finde no title in the texte, to cause yt to beare the Aduersaries sense. So that they haue no other warrāt but wilfull and naturall reason, whiche warrant ys not allwaies sufficient and aloweable [Page]in the courte of faith. Wherfore as these scriptures be to be vnderstanded E by a trope, bicause the circumstance ther so teacheth: So are the other woordes in their propre sense to be vnderstanded, bicause the circumstance so teacheth.
For declaracion of whiche matter, I maie deuide the seconde note into two partes. The one ys, to note the enunciacion of bothe scriptures. For though Chryst saied, I am a vine: yet he did not particularly take a braunche of a vine, and saie, I am this vine, or this vine ys my bodie: but vsed the generall woorde, and saied I am a vine. But speaking of the mysterie of his bodie, he did not vse that maner of speache, saing, I am bread, whiche maner of phrase maie seeme well to beare a trope, yf anie circumstāce had ben adioined to declare and open the same: But leauing the generall woorde of bread, and particularlie taking a peice of bread in his handes, and blessing, and geuing thankes, saied with a particular and speciall demonstracion: This ys my bodie. As these two propositions spoken of an olde man. I am a childe, and by speciall demonstracion to this childe saing: This ys my childe: haue a great difference. The first F I am a vine: and this ys my bodie be no like speaches. being spoken by a similitude, for that reason witte vnderstanding and senseis being decaied in him, he maie saie. I am a childe, that ys, like a childe, The other being spoken of his owne childe, and importing not a similitude, but a naturall substance of him in the childe: So these propositions: I am a vine, and this ys my bodie: haue great difference: The one being spoken by a similitude bicause Chryst ys like a vine: The other by certen demonstracion of substance, for that that Chryst made demonstracion vnto was his verie substance.
The second parte of the note ys that the circumstance of the scripture reiecting figures, and tropes dothe mightilie prooue the sense of that place to be propre, and not figuratiue or tropicall. For the propretie (saieth he) apper tein [...]ng to the bodie (whiche can not be applied to the figure) ys furthwith added, whiche ys that the thing ys there, whiche shāll be deliuered for manie. And that ys in the cuppe, whiche shall shed in the remission of sinnes, whiche can be nothing ells, but the bodie and bloode of Chryste. Who onelie gaue his bodie to be crucified, and his bloode to be shed for owre redemption. G
Thus then ye perceaue that these woordes of Chryst: This ys my bodie: were spoken of him withoute the putting to of anie trope, figure or signe. They This ys my bodie no figuratiue speache. are left to vs written by the three holie Euangelistes, whithoute any menciō of trope or figure. They were so taught by S. Paule to the Corinthians, and afterwarde so writtē. The promisse of Chryst, wherin he saied: The bread, which I will geue ys my flesh, which I will geue for the life of the worlde, was plainlie whithoute any trope spoken. Yt ys so reported of the Euangelist S. Iohn. Yt ys so expownded of all the auncient doctours, and so shewed what the woordes be, teaching the perfourmance of that promisse.
Ye perceaue also the fame of the communion of the Chrystians emong the infidels to be not by a figure of flesh, but by verie flesh in dede. Ye perceaue emong Chrystians the beleif of the Sacrament, to be the flesh of Chryst, to be so commonlie receaued and beleued, that younge babes in those daies coulde speake yt. Ye perceaue that yt ys not laufull for vs to putte to, or to take awaie from the woorde of Chryst. For yf we do, we fall into the H daunger of Gods malediction, and other plagues. All these consideracions, and manie mo shewe vnto vs that we shoulde take the woordes of Chryste, as they be of him spoken: yf ye put to anie of these woordes, Signum or figura, Token or figure, ys not that put to that Chryst spake not? and do ye not so fall into the daunger of Gods plagues? Ouer and besides this ye perceaue [Page 159]that the circumstance of the scripture refuseth tropes and figures and enforceth A to accept the propre sense onelie.
Wherfore chrystian Reader, beware of that flattering contenaunce and deceiptfull lieng of the olde serpent Sathan: flie the hissing of the vipers: be not caried awaie with light creditte, as our first parentes were therby to creditte the deuel, and discreditte God. But knowe the one to be thie enemie, and feare him: knowe the other to be thy Lorde God, thy Sauiour and Redemer, and embrace him,
Of the which matter harke farder to the godlie saing of Rupertus: Accipe, inquit, & comedite, Hoc est corpus meum. Et alibi Qui manducat carnem meam, & bibit sanguinem meum, in me manet & ego in eo. Cùm haec dicit agnus Dei, oportunè nobis ad memoriam recurrit illud: quod dixit serpens, imo per serpentem Diabolus, hostis bumani generis. Accipite & comedite, & eritis sicut dij. Optimae, & spectabiles valdè propositiones. Ille serpens erat: iste agnus est. Ille vetus peccator, iste antiquut creator. Ille spiritu Diaboli falsum sibilans. iste spiritu Dei verum euangelizaus. Ille de ligno non suo raptor optulit: Iste de corpore & sanguine suo largitor dedit. Ille quod non habebat mendaciter promisit, eritis (inquiens) sicut dij: Iste quod habebat, quod semper naturaliter habet, fideliter dedit vt simus B dij, dum manet ipse in nobis: Illi tandem nephandissimè creditum est plusquam Deo: Credatur è contrario buic Deo, si non plus, at saltem quantum creditum est illi Diabolo, Creditum est enim, quod illi pomo inesset, quod non videbatur, scilicet vis deos efficiendi: Credatur buic Sacramento inesse quod non videtur, videlicet, veritas carnis & sanguinis, valens efficere nos corporales Vnigenito filio Dei. Hoc enim ratio vel ordo, iustitiae exposcit. Accipite ergo (inquit) & comedite. Accipere est fideliter credere, cum gratiarum actione diligere, compatienti affectu corporis huius traditionem, & sanguinis huius effusionem respicere. Hoc fieri non potest, nisi priùs reijciaturid, quod ab illo malè acceptum est. Illud igitur mendacium execrantes, hanc veritatem accipite, approbate, amplectimini, & contra cibum mortis, panē comedite vitae eternae & calicem bibite salutis perpetuae. He saieth (mening Chryst) take Conference of Chrystes woordes and the serpents. and eate, this ys my bodie, and in an other place: He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloode, dwelleth in me and I in him. When the lambe of God saieth these thinges yt cometh in due time to our memorie, that the serpent saied, or raither by the serpent, the Deuell, the enemie of man kinde: Take and eate, and C ye shall be as Gods. Goodlie and verie notable propositions. He was a serpent: this ys a lambe. He an olde offender: this an auncient creatour. He by the spirit of the Deuel hissing oute an vntrueth: this by the spirit of God preaching a trueth. He a theeif gaue of the fruit that was not his: This a right geuer, gaue of his owne bodie and bloode. He falsely promised that that he had not, ye shall (saieth he) be as Gods: This trulie gaue that he had, whiche allwaies naturallie he hathe, that ys, that we maie be Gods, forsomoche as he dwelleth in vs. Vnto him neuer the lesse most wickedly was geuen more credit then to God: Vnto this cōtrarie wise let credit be geuen being God, yf not more, yet at the least as moche creditte as was geuē to the Deuell. For yt was beleued, that to be in that apple whiche was not sein, that ys to saie, power to make Gods: Let yt be beleued to be in the Sacrament, that ys not seen, that ys to saie, the veritie of the flesh and bloode of Chryst, able to incorporate vs to the onely begottē Sonne of God. Thus moche reason, or ordre of iustice dothe require. Take therfore, saieth he, and eate. To take ys faithfully to beleue, with thankes geuing To take Chrystes bodie, what yt ys. to loue, with a compatient affection to beholde the deliuerance of this bloode. D This cā not be doen, except that be reiected, that of the enemie was euel receaued. Detesting therfor that lie, receaue, approue, and ēbrace this trueth, and against the meat of death, eate ye the bread of euerlasting life, and drinke the cuppe of euerlasting saluacion.
[Page]Thus being by this good Father admonished of the true vnderstanding E of Chrystes woordes, I will nowe make the same plain before thine eyes by the testimonie of a nombre of holie Fathers, to the whiche, good Reader, I praie thee geue good heede.
THE THREE AND FOVRTETH CHAP. BEGINNETH to prooue the vnderstanding of Chrystes forsaied woordes not to be figuratiue by the anthoritie of the Fathers. And first by Alexander and Instinus.
FOrsomoche as the misunderstanding of the woordes of the supper of Chryst hath and doth maintein great and lamētable contencion among soche as professe Chrystes name, and the right vnderstāding of the same ought to be the occasion of the restitucion of peace, and concorde: Let yt not greiue thee (gentle Reader) though I tarie somwhat long vpon this text, in producing manie holie Fathers of Chrysts schoole. who shal teache vs howe these woordes, This ys my bodie, were ther taught to be vnderstanded, F and therby shall do vs to witte, what ys the enacted trueth of Chrystes Parliament house, as touching this matter nowe among chrystian men in controuerfie. For the plain declaracion wherof I shall produce manie of the eldest Fathers, and fewe I trust, that do treact of these woordes, being of any fame or authoritie shall be omitted. And for a speciall note to discerne the trueth from falsheade, the scholers of Chryst from the scholers of Sathan, and the graue and constant staied Senatours of Chrystes Parliament house, from the light, and vauering whisperers of the Conciliables of Sathan: Marke and note well that as in the one and fourteth chap. ye haue pceaued, the sectes of Sathan are merueillouslie dissected, and by great and fowle contencion amōg them selues diuided: So shall ye perceaue that Chrystes disciples are vnited all of one minde all of one vnderstanding, all speaking one thing in full peace and perfect concorde: Remembre that the high scholers and cheif noble men of Chrystes Parliament honse (I meen the foure Euāgelistes and S. Paule) so agree that among them there ys no one title spoken of the Aduersaries G tropes and figures: but euery one of them testifie the matrer plainlie, leauing the woordes in their propre sense. So shall ye see all this noble companie of Fathers doo. Let vs then in Chrystes name heare them vtter, what ys the enacted trueth of the vnderstanding of Chrystes woordes.
Although ther are right auncient Fathers, that doo verie no tablie declare, and testifie the presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode in the Sacrament, as Martialis the disciple of Chryst: Ignatius the disciple of S. Iohn the euangelist, Dionysius Arcopagita, the disciple of S. Paule, with diuerse other: yet the eldest that I finde after the Euangelistes and S. Panle, treacting of the woordes of Chryst are Alexander and Iustinus, of the whiche although Alexander be the elder: yet for that by him occasion ys geuen to speake of some matter more at large, I shall first produce Iustinus.
This holie martyr, for answer and defence of the Chrystians, who were slaundered, that they shoulde eate mans flesh, wrote to the Emperour Antonius Pius, and among other thinges declareth what ys the religion of the christians H aboute the Sacrament, and what faith they were taught to haue of yt and saieth thus: Cùm autem is qui preest gratias egerit, & totus populus approbauerit hi qui vocantur apud nos Diacom distribuunt vnicuique praesentium, vt participent de pane Justin. Apolog. 2. in quo gratiae actae sunt, & de vino & aqua, & ijs qui non sunt presentes deferunt. Atque hoc alimentum apud nos vocatur Eucharistia. De quo nulli alij participare licitum est, nisi qui [Page 160] credit vera esse, quae docentur à nobis, et qui lauacro in remissionem peccatorū & in regenerationem A lotus est. & sic viuit, sicut Christus tradidit. Neque vt communē panem & commune poculū haec suscipimus: sed quemadmodum per verbum Dei incarnatus Iesus Christus, Seruator noster, & carnem & sanguinem habuit: Sic & verbi sui oratione, consecratum gratiarum actione alimentum, ex quo caro nostra, & sanguis per transmutationem aluntur, ipsius incarnati Iesu Christi & carnem, & sanguinem esse edocti sumus. Apostoli enim in commentarijs suis quae Euangelia vocantur, sic ipsis praecipisse tradiderunt. Cùm accepisset panem, gratijs actis, dixisse: Hoc facite in mei commemorationem, Hoc est corpus meum. Et poculum similirer cum accepisset, & gratias egisset, dixisse: Hic est sanguis meus, & solis ipsis impartisse. When the preist hath ended his thankes geuing, and all the people haue saied Amen, they whom we call Deacons distribute to euery one then present to be partakers of the bread, wine, and water consecrated, Bread, wine and water consecrated in the primitiue churche and carie part to them that be absent. And this ys the foode whiche among vs ys called Eucharistia. Wherof yt ys laufull for no man to be partaker, except he beleue those thinges to be true, that be taught vs: And be baptised in the water of regeneracion in remission of sinnes, and so liueth as Chryst hath taught. For we do not take these as common bread and wine: but like as Iesus B Chryst our Sauiour incarnated by the woorde of God had flesh and blood for our saluacion, Euen so we be taught that the foode (wherwith our flesh and bloode be nourished by alteracion) when yt ys consecrated by the praier of his Bread and wine after consecraciō be the bodie and blood of Chryst. woorde to be the flesh and bloode of the same Iesus incarnated. For the Apostles in those their bookes, whiche be called Gospells, teache that Iesus did so commaunde them, when he had takē bread, and geuen thankes saied, Do this in my remē brance, This ys my bodie, And likewise taking the cuppe when he had geuen thank [...]s, saied: This ys my bloode, and gaue them to his Apostles onelie. Thus moche holy Iustine.
In this Authour be many thinges woorthie note. But omitting them all I shall onely note that, that he ys at this time alleaged for, namely for the right vnderstanding of Chrystes woordes in their propre sense, withoute figure or trope. For the which, note well that he saieth, that we be taught that the foode (mening the bread, wine and water) after the consecracion ys the flesh C and bloode of Iesus incarnate. He saieth not that they were taught, that they were signes, tokens or figures of the flesh of Iesus, neither that they be onely called the flesh of Iesus. Ye maie then perceaue what the teaching and doctrine of the primitiue church was: ye maie well see, that they were plainly taught that the bread wine and water, be the flesh and bloode of our Sauiour Iesus.
And herwith all note howe certen this doctrine was. Yt was as certen, and sure, as the mysterie of the incarnacion of Chryst. For (saieth this Authour) Doctrine of the reall presence as certen as the incarnacion to the primitiue church. Like as Iesus Chryst our Sauiour incarnated by the woorde of God, had flesh and bloode for our saluacion: Euen so we be taught, the breade wine and water, after the consecracion, to be the flesh and bloode of the same Iesus.
Weigh this (gentle Reader) and marke these woordes well that euen as we be taught as a principle of our faith, to beleue that Iesus Chryst in his incarnacion had flesh and bloode: euen so we be taught the foode of the holie Sacrament to be the flesh and bloode of the same Iesus. But howe doth this Authour proue that this doctrine was so taught? By this proof. For the Apostles (saieth he) in their workes, whiche they call Gospells do teache, that our D Lorde Iesus so commaunded them, saing (when he had taken breade and geuen thankes) doe this in the remembrance of me. This ys my bodie. And likewise taking the cuppe, when he had geuen thankes saied: This ys my bloode.
In this proof of this Authour ther be two thinges to be noted. The one [Page]against the blasphemouse reproche of the Aduersaries and this Proclamer, E Reall presence plainlie auouched by Justinus. whiche saie that yt ys an inuencion of the papistes to teache Chrystes flesh and bloode to be in the Sacramēt. But this Authour saieth, that the Apostles taught that our Sauiour Iesus did commaunde them so to doe. So thar yt ys his commaundement and tradicion, an not the papistes inuencion, but yf they will accompt Iesus Chryst for this his so doing to be a papist, Then in dede they maie saie, yt ys the inuencion of a papist.
The other note ys for the applicacion of the woordes of Chryst to the Sacramēt. Ye haue perceaued that we be taught, that the foode of the Sacrament ys the flesh of Iesus Chryst. Yeperceaue also that the same Iesus Chryst so cōmaūded, as the Apostles haue taught in their Gospells. But wher ys that cōmaundement in the Gospells? This ys the commaundement. Doe this in the remembrance of me. This ys my bodie, this my bloode. By these woordes we are commaunded to doe the thing. By these woordes we are taught what the thing ys. The thing (as this authour saieth) ys the flesh and bloode of Iesus Chryst incarnated. And this thing also he saieth, we are taught by these woordes. Wherfore these woordes are to be vnderstanded of the flesh and bloode of F Iesus Chryst.
Nowe looke well vpon the doctrine of Chryst and his primitiue Church: compare them to the doctrines of the catholike Church that nowe ys, and see yf they be not agreable: Trie yf they be not all one. Chryst saieth, after Doctrine of the primitiue churche, and the churche since and nowe compared. he had blessed the bread and the wine: This ys my bodie, This ys my bloode. This Authour saieth, that they were taught in the primitiue Churche, that the bread and wine with water, after cōsecraciō be the flesh and bloode of Iesus incarnated: The catholike Churche, that hath ben, and nowe ys, teacheth that the bread and wine on the Altar after the consecracion be the bodie and bloode of Chryst. Wolde ye desire anie more agreement? wolde ye desire anie better concorde?
And wher the Proclamer requireth anie one auncient Authour that teacheth plainlie Chrystes verie reall presence, wolde he haue anie plainer speache, A plain place for M. Juell. then that whiche he impugneth in vs? This Authour saieth that, that we G saie, and speaketh as plainlie as we speake, as by the conference of both a childe maie perceaue. Let the Proclaimer then be a shamed of his rash proclamacion, and with mature and sobre beliberacion and iudgement let him agnise the doctrine of the primitiue Churche, and so shall he confesse with vs the reall presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, whiche nowe wickedlie he hathe impugned.
But here ys not be ouerpassed the exceading crafte and vntrueth of Cranmer, one of the Fathers of this Proclamer in the corrupting, falsieng, and Cranmer falsifieth and abuseth Iustin. abusing of this Authour Iustinus. And that yt shall not be laied to my charge that I misreporte him. I will faithfullie asscribe his, woordes as they be written in his booke. Thus he writeth. Iustinus a great learned man, and an holie Martyr the eldest Authour that this daie ys knowen to write anie treactice vpon the Sacramentes, and wrote not moche after one hundreth yeares after Chrystes ascension. He writeth in his Lib. 2. ca. 5 seconde Apologie, that the bread, water and wine in this Sacrament are not to be taken as other common meates and drinkes be, but they be meates ordeined pourposely to geue thankes H to God, and therfore be called Eucharistia, and be called also the bodie and bloode of Chryst, and that yt ys laufull for none to eate or drinke of them, but that professe Chryste, and hue according to the same, And yet the same meate and drinke (saieth he) ys chaunged into our flesh and bloode and nourisheth our bodies.
These be his verie woordes, and in this maner dothe he report Iustinus. [Page 161]Whiche reporte howe yt agreeth with Iustinus owne woordes, the reader by conserence shall easilie perceaue. And therfor omitting manie falsheades Two false sleights of Crāmer noted in thallegacion of Iustin. A and other fawtes by him here admitted, I wil nowe touche but two, whiche be intollerable, and doen with to moche impudencie. The one ys that he reporteth this Authour as though he shoulde saie, that the Sacrament ys but called the bodie of Chryst, wher this Authour saieth no soche woordes But saieth plainly, that the bread and wine after the consecracion be the flesh and blood of Iesus incarnate, and that the people were in his daies so taught. The other ys, the misplacing of the sentences of the authour, to make them serue his pourpose. For wher Iustine saieth that the foode of bread, wine and water, werwith our bodies be nourished, when they be consecrated by the praier of his woorde be the flesh and bloode of Iesus. And so before the consecracion of them, he teacheth, that they be creatures meet to nourish our bodies and to that vnderstanding doth so place them. Cranmer, or the Authour of that booke pleaceth them as creatures meet to nourish vs after the consecracion, therby signifieng, that they be but creatures of bread, wine and water after the consecracion as they were before. But B howe falsely that ys doen, not onely this translacion, but also the translaciō of Petrus Nannius declareth, whiche for the better opening of the trueth I will here also ascribe: Thus he translateth that parte of Iustinus. Non enim vt quemuis panem, neque vt quemuis potum, ista omnia accipimus, sed quemadmodum per Petrus Nannius verbum Dei incarnatus est Iesus Christus saluator noster, & carnem & sanguinem pro nostra salute assumpsu: ita quoque per preces verbi illius, cibū ex quo caro nostra et sanguis per immutationē aluntur cū bedictus fuerit, Iesu ipsius incarnati, carnē et sangumēdicimus esse.
Neither do we take all these thinges, as euery other bread, neither as euery other drinke. But euē as Iesus Chryst our sauiour by the woorde of God was incarnated, ād for our health tooke flesh and bloode: euē so haue we learned that foode of the whiche our flesh and bloode by immutaciō are nourished, whē yt ys blessed by the praiers of his woordes, to be fleshe and bloodo Iesus incarnate. In whiche translacion, as in the other ye see, that the nourishmēt of the foode, of breade, wine and water, ys put before the consecracion, which Cranmer vntrulie wolde place after the consecracion, for the pourpose before saied and therby also to denie transubstanciacion. But Iustine to declare C the great worke of God, wrought in and by the consecracion, saieth, that yt ys soche foode before the consecracion as we be nourished with, but when yt ys consecrated, yt ys the flesh of Iesus incarnated.
The like maner of speache vseth both S. Ambrose and S. Augustine, saing: Amb. li. 4. de Sac. ca. 5 Plain samges for M. Juell. Antequam consecretur panis est, vbi autem verba Christi accesserint, corpus est Christi. Before yt be consecrated yt ys bread, but when the woordes of Chryst haue comed to yt, yt ys the bodie of Chryst. S. Augustine thus: Ante verba Christi quod offertur panis dicitur: vbi Christi verba deprompta fuerint, iam non panis dicitur, sed corpus appellatur. Before the woordes of Chryst, that whiche ys offred ys Augu. de verbis Do. serm. 8, called bread: but when the woordes of Chryst are spoken, yt ys not nowe called bread, but yt ys called the bodie.
Thus Reader, thowe maist see, the sleight of Cranmer and his falsifieng of the holie doctours, by him. The like in diuerse places of this booke shalt thowe finde prooued in Oecolampadius, whom Cranmer folowed, and also in this Proclamer who foloweth Cranmer. Soche and soo good ys the quarrell D that they maintein, that withoute falsifieng, wresting, or truncating of the holie Fathers their doctrine can haue no good shewe, Wherof thowe nowe being aduertised, and in them the matter being well prooued, trusting [Page]that yt will geue thee occasion to looke er thowe leape: I will leaue Iustine, and call in Aleander an holy martyr, who liued not long after Chryst euen in E the time of Ignatius and Polycarpus.
Thus writeth Alexander. In sacramentorum oblationibus, quae inter missarum solemnia Domino offeruntur, passio Domini miscenda est, vt eius, cuius corpus & sanguis consicitur, passio celebretur, ita vt repulsis opinionibus superstitionum, panis tantùm & Alexand. 1 epist. 1. vinum aqua permixtum in sacrificio offerantur. Non debet enim vt à patribus accepimus & ipsa ratio docet, in calice Domini aut vinum solum, aut aqua sola offerri, Sed vtrumque permixtum, quia vtrumque ex latere eius in passione sua profluxisse legitur. Ipsa verò veritas nos instruit, calicem & panem in sacramento offerre, quando ait: Accepit Iesus panem, & benedixit, deditue Discipulis suis, dicens (Accipite & manducate: Hoe est enim corpus meum, quod pro vobis tradetur. Similiter postquam coenauit accepit calicem, deditue Discipulis suis, dicens: Accipite & bibite exco omnes. Hic est calix sanguinis mei. qui pro vobis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum. Crimina atque peccata, oblatis ijs Domino sacrificijs delentur. Idcirco & passio eius in iis commemoranda est, qua redempti sumus, & saepius recitanda, & haec Domino offerenda. Talibus hostijs delectabitur, & placabitur Dominus, & peccata dimittet ingentia. Nihil enim in sacrificijs maius esse potest F quàm corpus & sanguis Domini. Nec vlla oblatio hac potior est, sed haec omnes praecellit Quae pura conscientia Domino offerenda est, & pura mente sumenda, atque ab omnibus veneranda. Et sicut potior est caeteris, it a potiùs excoli & venerari debet.
In the oblacions of the Sacramentes, whiche in the solemne doinges of the Masses be offred, the passion of our Lorde ys to be intermedled, that the Masse. passion of him, whose bodie and bloode ys consecrated, maie be celebrated, so that, the supersticions of opinions repelled, onely bread and wine mixed with water maie be offred. For ther aught not (as we haue receaued of our Fathers, Neither wine alone nor water alone aught to be offred in the sacrifice and also reason yt self dothe teache) either wine alone, or water alone to be offred in the cuppe of our Lorde: but bothe mixed together, bycause yt ys redde that both in the time of his passion did flowe oute of his side. The verie trueth yt self doth teache vs to offer bread and wine in the Sacrament, when he taking the bread, and blessing yt saied: Take ye and eat, This ys my bodie, whiche shall be deliuered for you. Likewise when he had supped, he tooke the cuppe, and gaue yt to his disciples, saing: Take ye, and drinke ye all of this: For this ys the cuppe of my G bloode, whiche shall be shedde for yow in remission of sinnes. These sacrifices being offred to our Lorde, crimes and offences are wiped awaie. Therfor his passion also by the whiche we are redemed, ys in these to be remembred, and often to be recited, and yt also ys to be offred to our Lorde. For with soche sacrifices Among all sacrifices none of more estimacion then the bodie and bloode of our Lorde. our Lorde will be delighted, and appeaced, and will forgeue great sinnes. Among all sacrifices nothing can be of more estimacion then the bodie and bloode of Chryst. Neither ys ther any oblacion more woorthie. But this doth precell all. Whiche ys to be offred to our Lorde with a pure consciēce, and with a pure minde to be receaued of al, and woourshipped. And as yt ys more woorthie then other: Euen so yt aught more woorthilie to be honoured and woourshipped. Thus farre Alexander.
Who alleaging the woordes of Chryst: This ys my body. And this ys my bloode, doth by other his woordes therwith declare that they are not to be vnderstanded by figure or trope: but in their propre sense. And among manie notes, that maie here be made, I will take, but three to prooue the H same. Threenetes plainite unp [...]gning three articles of the Proclamer.
The first ys that he confesseth the presence of Chrystes bodie, and bloode in the Sacrament, for that he agreablie to holie Iustine, who saied [Page 162] that the bread and wine after the consecracion be the bodie and bloode of Iesus incarnated: A He, I saie, agreablie saieth, that the bodie and bloode of him ys in the Masse consecrated. Whose passion ys ther celebrated. The passion of Chryst Reall presence auouched. ys in the Masse celebrated wherfore his bodie and bloode be ther consecrated: Who soeuer confesseth Chrystes bodie to be consecrated on the aultar, confesseth that consecracion to be doen by these woordes of Chryst: This ys my bodie, &c. Wherfore who soeuer confesseth soch consecracion, confesseth the woordes to be vnderdanded withoute figure and trope. This Authour confesseth soche consecracion. Wherfor he confesseth soche vnderstanding.
And here by the waie note, that this auncient olde Authour hath that maner of phrase and speache that the catholike Churche at this daie vseth, namehe when he saieth: that the bodie and bloode of Crhyst be consecrated in the Masse, and not the maner of speache of the Aduersarie, saing that yt ys made a sacramentall bread, a figure, signe, or token of Chrystes bodie. He hath no soche woorde, no more hath anie one of all these fathers, and holy doctours, that shall be alleaged in that sense and vnderstanding, that the B Aduersarie most vntruly blustereth abroade. And yet euery learned catholike man confesseth the Sacramēt to be a figure but soche a figure as denieth not the reall presence of Chryst.
The second note to prooue the woordes of Chryste to be vnderstād withoute figure, ys that alleaging these wooordes, This ys my bodie, This ys my bloode: Sacrifice propiciatorie auouched. immediatelie he saieth: By these sacrifices offred offences and sinnes be wiped awaie, by whiche woordes calling those thinges, whiche Chryste before spake of in the woordes of the Supper, sacrifices, and that soche sacrifices, as put awaie sinnes, and we haue no sacrifice to put awaie sinnes, but the Sacrifice of Chrystes bodie and bloode. Yt ys more then manifest, that the vnderstandeth the woordes of Chryst in theirpropre sense of the bodie and blood of Chryste, and not of the figure of his bodie, for that ys no sacrifice to putte awaie sinnes.
That he calleth the bodie and bloode of Chryste in the Sacrament of the aultar, sacrifices, the woordes folowing in the same processe do well prooue and declare, when he saieth: Nihil in sacrificijs maius esse potest, quàm corpus & C sanguis Domini. Among the sacrifices ther ys nothing greater, then the bodie and bloode of our Lorde, And that he speaketh this of the sacrifice and oblacion of Chrystes bodie and bloode in the Sacrament of the aultar, yt ys made certen by the woordes that do folowe, whiche be these: Nulla oblatio potior est, sed haec omnes praecellit, quae pura Domino conscientia offerenda est, & puramente Sacrament of the aultar ys a sacrifice. sumenda. There ys no oblacion woorthier then this, but this excelleth all other, whiche ys to be offred to our Lorde with a pure conscience, and to be receaued with a pure minde. Among the Chrystians ther ys no sacrifice to be offred, and with pure minde to be receaued, but the sacrifice offred on the aultar. And thus of necessitie yt foloweth, that this Authour graunteth the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, and that yt ys a sacrifice, and that the woordes of Chrystes supper are to be vnderstanded without figure.
The thirde note ys, that when he had taught that the sacrifice must be of Adoracion of the Sacrament auouched. fred with a pure cōscience, and receaued with a pure minde, he teacheth also D that yt must be woourshipped and honoured, and that with no lowe degree of woorshippe and honour, but as this sacrifice (saieth he) doth precel al: so it ys aboue all to be honoured. By whiche doctrine yt maie appeare, that yf the [Page]thinge of the sacrifice dothe excell all other, and ysaboue all other to be honoured, and the onely sacrifice of Chrystes bodie and blood excelleth all E other ys to be honoured: that then that blessed bodie and blode are there present to be honoured, wher they be offred. They be offred wher they be receaued, they be receaued in the Sacrament, wherfore they are to be honoured in the Sacrament.
Now when all this disputacion of this holie Father ys graunted vpō these woordes of Chryst: This ys my bodie, this ys my bloode: yt can not be but that these woordes of Chryst, must be vnderstanded simplie and plainly in their propre sense with oute figure or trope. And thus to conclude for these two great Seniours of Chrystes schoole and Parliament house: ye perceaue that they vse Chrystes woordes in ther propre sense. And also thervpon testifie to vs the enacted trueth of Chrystes very presence in the holy Sacrament, whiche ys the cheifest matter here sought.
THE FOVRE AND FOVRTETH CHAP. BY occasion of the woordes of Alexander treacteth of the adoracion F and honouring of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament.
BVt occasion being geuen by this holie Father Alexander to speake of the adoracion of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament: I can not ouerpasse somewhat more to saie of yt, to the confutacion of the most impudent and blasphemouse vntrueth spoken and vttered by this Proclamers woordes against adoracion recited and cō futed. Proclamer, for thus he saieth: Chryst that best knewe, what aught to be doen herein, when he ordeined, and deliuered the Sacrament of his bodie and bloode, gaue no commaundement, that anie man should fall dowen to it, or woourshippe it. S. Paule that tooke the Sacrament at Chrystes hande, and as he had taken it, deliuered it to the Corynthians, neuer willed adoracion or godlie honour to be geuen vnto it. The olde doctours and holie Fathers of the Churche S. Cyprian, S. Chrysostom, S. Ambrose, S. Hierom, S. Augustine, and others that receaued the Sacrament at the Apostles hands, and as it maie be thought, continued the same in soche sorte, as they receaued it, neuer make mencion, in any of all their bookes of adoring or woourshipping of the Sacrament. Yt ys a verie newe deuise, and as it ys well knowen, came but lately into the Churche, oboute three hundreth yeares past, Honorius G then being Bishoppe of Rome, commaunded the Sacrament to be lifted vppe, and the people reuerentlie ta bowe downe vnto yt. After him Vrbanus the fourth appoincted an holie feast of Corpus Christi. And graunted oute large pardons to the kepers of it, that the people shoulde with the better will resorte to the Churche and kepe it holie. This ys the greatest antiquitie of the wholl matter, aboute three hundreth yeares ago it was first fownde oute, and putte in practise. But Chryst and his Apostles the holie Fathers in the primitiue Churche, the Doctours that folowed them, and other godly and learned men what soeuer for the space of a thousand and two hundreth yeares after Chrystes ascension into heauen, this woourshipping of the Sacrament, was neuer knowen nor practised in any place within the wholl catholike Churche throughout the wholl worlde. Thus moche the Proclamer.
Whē I readde these his woordes, I staied as one astoined, considering that they coulde not proceade from anie man, but either by ignorance, or ells by peruerse malice, that wittinglie wolde, al shame set apparte, vtter soche an vntrueth as the meā learned, I suppose, of all the catholike Churche knoweth it so to be. And the more did I merueill that it was so impudētly setfurth with a repeticiō, as therbie with moch boldnesse to auouche the matter. Nowe for H that the Authour of the woordes ys not vnlearned, I coulde not asscribe thē to ignorance. And considering his callinge ther shoulde be in him no soche [Page 163]peruerse malice. But remembring howe Macedonius, Nestorius, and diuerse A soche other leauing the doctrine of the catholike Church and the mociou of the spirit of God in the same, and folowing the doctrine of priuate men, according to the mocion of the spirit of Sathan did forget their calling, and peruersedlie vsed them selues: So likwise I perceaue this man doth, the more ys the pittie.
But that we maie perceaue howe farre wide he ys from the trueth, we will examen his woordes. His first argument ys that Chryst neuer gaue commaundement to woourshippe the Sacrament. Ergo: yt ys not to be doen. To this, first I saie to him, as to one exercised in schooles that an argument of negatiues concludeth The ngatiue argumēt of the Proclamer concludeth nothing. nothing. But for more large declaracion, to the vnderstanding of the Reader: yt ys not redde in the Gospell, that Chryst commaunded anie bodie to adore him while he here liued in the earth: yt ys therfore a good argument that he was not to be adored? The three wise men of the east came with their giftes, and offringe them, adored the babe Chryst. They had no cōmaundement of Chryst so to do, shoulde they not therfore haue doen yt? or did they offende in so doing? Diuerse that were cured of Chryst came B and adored him, but not commaunded of Chryst so to do. Yt ys not redde in the Gospells that the Apostles during their familiare conuersacion withe Chryste before his passion, that they fell down and adored him. Shall we therfore frame an argument that Chryst in his mortall state was not to be adored, by cause the Apostles be not readde to haue adored him? And that Mary Magdalen, the woman of Canaan, and the Leeper that did adore him, did offende? Yt ys a faint kinde of argumentacion. I will in like maner reason with this disputer in his owne kinde of disputacion: Chryst gaue the Sacrament of his bodie to his Apostles onelie, and gaue no commaundement that all people indifferentlie shoulde receaue the same, as nowe they doe, Wherfor yt aught not to be doen.
Yf this argument be good, then ys his good. But the trueth ys, this argument ys naught, and so ys his, but this disputer knewe well what schoole he was in, he was certen that ther was no respondent, that presentlie wolde C return his argument into his lappe. I beleue, he wolde not for shame haue made soche argument in a schoole, except yt had ben to haue occupied the time, while he might haue studied a better, or ells for lacke of other kinde of argumentes, in the matter that he impugneth, as I dare saie he do the here, as yt well appeareth in the processe of his disputacion. For the next argument ys of like force, but of more vntrueth, this yt ys: S. Paule that tooke the Sacrament at Chrysts hand, an as he had taken yt deliuered yt to the Corynthians neuer willed adoracion or godly honour to be geuen to yt.
Leauing this argument, as a thinge of no force to conclude that the Authour The proclamers argumēt oute of S. Paule faileth for wāt of trueth. therof intendeth, let vs examen the trueth of yt. This Proclamer first alleaging Chrystes institucion, wherin he saieth, Chryst made no mencion of adoracion, ioineth S, Paule to yt, as one receauing of Chryst no other order then in the ministracion of Chryst was vsed, and deliuered also to the Corynthians no other, nor no more then Chryst did, whiche thing howe false and vntrue yt ys S. Paule him self shall declare. S. Paule deliuered to the D Corynthians, that the vnwoorthie receauer shall be giltie of the bodie and bloode of our Lorde: Chryst who to vse the woordes of this Proclamer, knewe best what aught to be doen when he instituted this Sacrament, gaue no soche lawe. Sainct Paule geueth a rule or commaundement that, a man must examine him self, and so eate of that bread: Chryst in the [Page]institucion gaue no soche commaundement, but raither admitting Iudas to the receipt of the holie mysteries whose wicked intentes and pourposes were E not vnknowen (neither was he ignorant, that he nothing examined himself) semed to practise the contrarie of that S. Paule setteth furthe to be obserued. Wherfor this disputer referring the maner and all other circumstances of the deliuerie of the Sacrament by Sainct Paule to the Corinthians, to the maner and circumstances of the deliuery of the Sacrament by Chryst in his supper, ys foulie deceaued in his argument: taking therin, as yt dothe appeare, an vntrueth for a trueth, and so deceauing his Auditorie, geueth them chaffe for good corne.
Thus ye maie perceaue that S. Paule deliuered diuerse doctrines to the Corynthians concerning the receipt of the holy Sacrament, which Chryst ys not fownde by the testimonie of anie of the Euangelistes to haue deliuered to his Apostles, and yet who being a chrystian doubteth that yt ys the doctrine of God, and of our Sauiour Chryst? In this argument this disputer also saieth, that S. Paule neuer willed adoracion, or godlie honour to be geuen F S. Paule willed adoracion to be geuē to the Sacramēt. to the Sacrament, yf he speake of the woorde adoracion, I consent vnto him, for trueth yt ys that S. Paule hathe not these woordes: Adore the Sacrament. But yf he speake of the thing? I dissent from him. For that I iudge to be vntrue. Manie thinges are spoken of in verie dede, when the propre vocable appropriated to the same thing to signifie yt to a mans vnderstanding ys not spoken or vttered. As yf I saie: Plato was a reasonable liuing creature. Though I applie not the propre vocable of a man to Plato: yet to the vnderstandinge I signifie as moche in deed, as yf I had called him a man: So though S. Paule speake not in the deliuerie of the Sacrament to the Corynthians, of these woordes, adoracion or honour: yet he speaketh of the thing in deed. For when he geueth this rule: Probet seipsum homo. Let a man examen him self, and so let him Yt ys great honour to the Sacramēt to examen our selues er we presume to receaue yt. eate of that bread, and drinke of that cuppe: Dothe he not will vs to geue moste singular honour to the Sacrament? What more honour can be doen, then to fee that our faith towarde the Sacrament, be firme and stable, voide of all sinistre opinions, thinking nothing of so great a mysterie, but that, that ys semelie? G Howe great an honour do we to the Sacrament also, that to receaue yt, we examen and search our consciences, and what we finde filthie, and fowle we purifie, clense and make clean by earnest contricion, by pure confession and humble penaunce.
S. Augustine saieth: Placuit enim Spiritui sancto, vt in honorem tanti Sacramenti in os Christiani prius Dominicum corpus intraret, quam exteri cibi. Yt hath pleased the holie Ad Jan. Epist. 118. Gost, that in the honour of so great a Sacrament the bodie of our Lorde shoulde entre the mouth of a chrystian before worldlie meates. Yf the holīe Gost doeth esteme yt as doen to the honour of the Sacrament, to receaue yt Yf corporal abstinence be to Gods honour, moch more spirituall abstinence. fasting before al meats: how moch more ys it to the honour of the Sacramēt, that we fasting from all vices, from all horrible sinnes and crimes come with pure conscience hongring and thirsting righteousnesse, to receaue in the Sacrament the Lorde and geuer of righteousnesse? Yf any honour be doen to God by corporall abstinence or fasting, howe moche more ys doen, by spirituall abstinence from sinne? H
But the Aduersarie will saie, that this honour ys not doen to the Sacrament, but to God, and to his grace receaued in the receipt of the Sacrament. Wherunto I saie, that the verie woordes of S. Paule ouerthroweth this saing: For S. Paule by expresse woordes speaketh of the Sacrament saing: Let a man examen himself, and so let him eate of that bread, and drinke of that cuppe. [Page 164]He saieth not: Let him examen himself, and so he shall receaue the grace of God, and A the vertue of the meritte of Chrystes passion and deathe. whiche ys a matter moche and almost generallie taught thorowoute all the Gospell. For what ys more taught then remission of sinnes to true penitentes by the vertue of Chrystes passion? But here S. Paule speaketh of the Sacrament by a speciall maner, and therfor saieth: And so let him eat of that b [...]ead, and drinke of that cuppe.
For more manifest proof of this, note, that S. Paule referreth the honour or dishonour, that ys doen by woorthie or vnwoorthie receauing, not 1. Cor. 11. Honour or dishonour doen by the receauer ys referred to the Sacrament by expresse woordes of S. Paule. immediately to the grace of God, or meritte of Chrystes passion: But to the Sacrament, and therfor saieth: Itaque quicunque manducauerit panem & biberit calicem Domini indignè, reus erit corporis & sanguinis Domini. Who soeuer therfore shall eate the bread, and drinke the cuppe of our Lorde vnwoorthilie, he shall be giltie of the bodie and bloode of our Lorde, so that the vnwoorthie receauing ys referred to the bread and the cuppe of our Lorde. Wherfore yt ys manifest, that as the woorthie or vnwoorthie receauing ys referred to the Sacrament: so ys the honour or dishonour doen by the same referred B also to the Sacrament. Wherfor then S. Paule teaching the chrystian people to examen them selues, and to prepare them selues that they maie be woorthie receauers of so woorthie a Sacrament, taught them in that to honoure the Sacrament.
Vnto all this, this maie be added, that forasmoch as S. Paule, taught the Corynthians and by them all Chrystian people; the presende of Chryst in the Sacrament, that he might well teache them to honour him in the Sacrament. For wher Chryst ys verilie present, ther ys no daunger but the chrystian maie their honoure him. That S. Paule teacheth the presence yt shall be made manifest to yow in the thirde booke, wher the scriptures of S. Paule shall be more at large handled. Wherfor to auoide prolixitie I leaue to speake anie more of them here. But this maie be saied here, that forasmoche as the woordes of Chryste, whiche we haue nowe in hande do teache vs the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, that we maie also honour Chryst in C the Sacrament. And to conclude against this Proclamer, ye maie perceaue by that, that ys saied, that S. Paule taught vs to honoure the Sacrament.
THE FIVE AND FOVRTETH CHAP. PROVETH BY the same doctours that the Proclamer nameth, that the Sacrament ys to be honoured.
AFter this man had abused the scriptures to makesome shewe of his wicked pourpose, he vsed his like synceritie in naming certain doctours, whiche doctours (as he saieth) neuer make mencion in anie of their bookes of adoring or woourshipping of the Sacrament.
To declare the trueth of this man, we will first produce them, whome he hath named as making for him, and afterwarde some other. Among those D whome he nameth Chrysostom ys one. A merueillouse thing to see the impudencie or ignorance of this man. He nameth Chrysostome as one who in his bookes maketh no mencion of the honouring of Chryst in the Sacrament, and yet among all the learned Fathers that writte, ther ys none that maketh more often and more plain mencion of that matter then he doth [Page]To bring manie of his testimonies the condicion of this rude booke will not suffer, for yt wolde therby growe to great▪ Wherfore one or two places E shal be brought, whiche shal so clerelie opē this matter that I beleue, Reader, thowe wilt merueill, that this Proclamer durst for shame name Chrysostome as one that maketh no mencion of the honouring of Chryst in the Sacrament. In one place thus he saieth. Cùm autem ille & Spiritum sanctum inuocauerit, Chrys. de sacerd. li. 6. sacrisiciumue illud horrore ac reuerentia plenissimum perfecerit, communi omnium Domino manibus assiduè pertractato: quaero ex te, quorum illum in ordine collocabimus? Quantam verò ab co integritatem exigemus? quantam religionem? Consideraenim quales manus illas administrantes esse oporteat, qualem linguam, quae verba illa effandat. Denique quae anima, non puriorem, sanctioremue conueniat esse animam, quae tantum illum, tamue dignum spiritum reoeperit. Per id tempus, & Angeli sacerdoti assident, & caelestium potestatum vniuersus ordo elamores excitat, & locus Altari vicinus in illius honorem qui immolatur, Angelorum choris plenus est. Id quod credere abundè licet, vel ex tanto illo sacrificio, quod tum peragitur. Ego verò & commemorantem olim quendam audiui, qui diceret senem quendam virum admirabilem, ac cui reuelationum mysteria multa diuinitus fuissent detecta, sibi narrasse, se tali olim visione dignum a Deo habitum esse, ac per illud F quidem tempus derepentè Angelorum multitudinem conspexisse, quatenus aspectus humanus ferre poterat, fulgentibus vestibus indutorum Altare ipsum circundantium. Denique sic capitc inclinatorum, vt si quis milites, praesente Rege stantes videat, id quod mihi ipse facilè persuadeo. When he (mening the preist) hath called vpon the holie Gost, and hath perfected that sacrifice, most full of horrour and reuerēce, when the vniuersall Lorde of all thinges ys in his handes handeled, I aske of thee, in what order of men shall we place him? howe great integritie shall we require of him? howe great religion or godlinesse? Consider also what hands those aught to be, that doe ministre: What maner of tounge, that speaketh those woordes (mening the woordes of consecraciō) last of al that it ys meet that that soule be purer and holier then anie other soule, that receaueth him so great, Angells attende vpon the preist in the time of oblacion, and a visiō therof shewed to an olde man. and so woorthie a spirit. At that time the Angells also geue attendance to the preist, and all the wholl order of the heauenlie powers singpraises, and the place nighe to the Aultar, in the honour of him, that ys then offred in G sacrifice ys full of Angells; which thing a man maie fullie beleue, for that great sacrifice that then ys doen. Trulie I also did once heare a certain man reporting that an olde woorshippefull man, vnto whome manie secretes were by Gods pleasure reueiled, declared vnto him, that God did vouchefaif to shewe him soche a vision, and that, at that time, as farre as the sieght of man might beare yt, he sawe sodenlie a multitude of Angells cloathed in bright garmentes compassing the Aultar aboute, and afterwarde so bowing downe their heads, as yf a man shoulde see soldiours stand when the king ys present. Whiche thing I easely beleue. Thus Chrysostome.
In this saing easie yt ys to perceaue, howe honorably he thinketh of the Sacrament, and what honoure he thinketh yt of. For that the Sacrament, ys so honourable, he knoweth not wher to place the preist that dothe consecrate yt. He questioned, what hands they aught to be, that handle the vniuersall The vniuersall Lorde of all handled by the preist. Lorde of all thinges: What toung that aught to be, that speaketh the mightie woordes of consecracion: howe pure that soule aught to be, that H receaueth so woorthie a thing, yea he acknowlegeth the Sacrament to be so honourable, that he saieth that the Angells in the time of the ministracion of yt, doe assist the preist, and attend, and for confirmacion of this, he bringeth in a vision of an holie man, who sawe Angells in bright garmentes Angells honoure the Sacram. stand aboute the Aultar, and bowing downe their heades to honour the Sacrament. [Page 165]Whiche thing Chrysostom saieth, he did beleue. Yf man for the ministracion of the Sacrament be so honourable, yf yt be soche as Angells A do honour yt, howe moche aught man to honoure yt?
That man aught to honour yt, the same Chrysostome in the ordre of the Masse by him sethfurth, by his owne practise declareth, wher we finde his praier, and after his praier, his rule for the honouring of this Sacrament. Thus we read ther: Qni supra vnà cum Patre sedes, & hic vnà nobiscum inuisibiliter Chrys [...]an Liturg. versaris: Dignare potenti manu tua nobis impartiri impolutum corpus tuum & preciosum sangninem tuum, & per nos toti populo. Deinde sacerdos adorat, & Diaconus in eo, in quo est loco, ter secretò dicentes: Deus propitius esto mihi peccatori. Et populus similiter. Omnes cum pietate & reuerentia adorant. Thowe that sittest aboue with the Father, and also arte with vs here inuisiblie, vouchesaif with thy Preist deacon and all the people adored the Sacr. in Chrysaime mightie hand to geue vnto vs thy vndefiled bodie, and thy preciouse blood, and by vs to all the people. This ys his praier. After this praier he geueth this rule: Then the preist adoreth, and the Deacon also in the place, that he ys in thrice, saing: God be mercifull vnto me sinner: And all the people likewise with godlinesse and reuerence doo adore. B
Perceaue ye not in this saing, Chryst both to be aboue with his Father, and also here with vs? See ye not the rule of Chrysostome, that the preist, the Deacon, and all the people did adore before they receaued the Sacrament? These places might suffice to anie man, that ys not contenciouse. But that the Reader maie see plentie of matter, to staie him, and to confounde the Proclaimer, that so vntreuly reporteth of the holie Fathers we will heare one place more of Chrysostom whiche ys this: Christus suam carnem dedit Homi l. 24 10. 1. Cor. vobis, vt ea saturemur, quo nos in sui amorem plurimum allexit. Ad eum igitur cum feruore accedamus, & dilectione quàm vehementissima ne grauius subeamus supplicium. Quanto enim maius beneficiū accipimus, tanto magis puniemur, quādo eo indigni apparebimus. Hoc corpus in praesepireueriti sunt Magi, & viri impij, & barbari, longo itenere confecto, cum timore et tremore plurimo adorauerunt. Imitemur igitur barbaros, nos qui caelorū ciues sumus. Illi enim, cùm id praesepe, & tugurium tantùm, neque eorum quidquam, quae tu nunc intueris, viderent, summa accesserunt reuerentia & horrore. Tu verò non in praesepi id, sed in Altari, non mulierem, quae in vlnis teneat, sed sacerdotem praesentem, & Spiritum per abundè super proposito diffusum sacrificio vides. Nec simplex, vt illi, corpus vides, sed et C eius potentiam & omnem agnoscis administrationem, & nihil eorum quae per ipsum facta suntignoras, & diligenter initiatus es in omnibus. Excitemur, horrescamsque, & maiorem quam barbari illi prae nobis feramus pietatem. Chryst gaue vnto vs his flesh, that with yt we might be fedde, wherby he moche alleured vs into his loue. Let vs therfor with feruencie, and most vehement loue, come vnto him, leest we suffre a more greuouse condemnacion. The greater benefit we take, the Chryst hath geuen vs his flesh to feede vpō more shall we be punished yf we be fownde vnwoorthie of yt. This bodie did the wise men, and men without God, and barbarouse, reuerence, and woourshippe. And after they had ended a long iourneie with moche feare and tremblinge, did adore yt. Let vs therfor at the leest folowe the example of these barbarouse, we that be the cittizens of the heauens, for they when they sawe that maunger and cottage onelie, and did not see anie of these thinges whiche thowe doest nowe beholde, they came with great reuerence and horrour. But thowe seest not that bodie in the maunger, but in the aultar, thowe seest not a woman that holdeth yt in her armes, but thowe seest the preist present That same body on the aultar that was in the maunger. and the Spirit plentifullie powred vpon the proposed sacrifice. Neither doest thowe D see a bare bodie, as they did, but thowe knowest all his power and rule, and thowe art ignoraunt of nothing that ys doen by him. But thowe art [Page]diligently instructed in all poinctes. Let vs be stirred vppe and feare, and E let vs declare a more godlinesse then those barbarouse men. Thus moche Chrysostom.
Nowe haue we hearde three testimonies of Chrysostom. In the first, we were taught his faith as touching the honouring of the Sacrament, whiche he saieth to be so honourable, that not onely men, But also Angells doo honoure yt. In the second, he declared the practise or execution of the honouring of the Sacrament, by him self, his ministers, and his people before the receipt of the same Sacrament. In the thirde he geueth generall exhortacion to all men to do the same. And therunto prouoketh by the example of the three wise men that came to honour Chryst at his birth, teaching vs that we honour the same bodie in the aultar, that they did in the maunger. These places being plain enough let vs leaue them and heare Sainct Ambrose who saieth thus, evpownding a verse of the Prophet Dauid. Per seabellum terra intelligitur, per terram autem caro Christi, quam bodie quoque in mysterijs adoramus, quàm Apostoli in Domino Iesu, vt suprà diximus, adorarunt: Neque Amb. despiritu S. li. 3. ca. 12. We adore the flesh of Chryst in the mysteries. enim diuisas est Christus, sed vnus. By the footestoole ys vnderstanded the F earth: by the earth ys vnderstanded the flesh of Chryst, whiche nowe also we adore in the mysteries, whiche the Apostles (as before we haue saied) did adore in our Lorde Iesus: Neither ys Chryst diuided, but one.
what thinke you (gentle Reader) doth not Sainct Ambrose plainlie enough testifie, and teache the adoracion of Chryst? who, that ye shall not be caried awaie with the wicked gloses of heretiques, which to robbe Chryste of his honoure in the most holie and blessed Sacrament, saie that thowe must adore Chryst in heauen, teacheth you by expresse woordes that the flesh of Chryst ys to be adored and honoured in the Sacrament, whiche he calleth the mysteries, wher he affirmeth the same flesh to be, that the Apostles did adore in our Lorde Iesus.
Nowe after S. Ambrose, we will heare S. Augustine, who in diuerse places teacheth vs to adore Chryst in the Sacrament. But yt shall be best first to laie before you that place of Sainct Augustine at the lenght whollie: and plainly, whiche this Proclamer with sleight doth truncately, and by peice meale touche, that yt might appeare to his readers, and heares G that that place of Sainct Augustine nothing impugned his doctrine, whiche in deed doth plainlie ouerthrowe yt. This ys the wholl place of Sainct Augustine. Adorate scabellum pedum eius, quomam sanctum est. Sed videte fratres, quid nos iubeat adorare. Alio loco scriptura dicit: Coelum mihi sedes est, terra Aug. in Isal. 98. autem scabellum pedum meorum. Ergo terram iubet nos adorare, quia dixit alto loco quod sit scabellum Dei. Et quomodò adorabimus terram, cùm dicat apertè scriptura: Dominum Deum tuum adorabis. Et hic dicit: Adorate scabellum pedum eius? Exponens autem mihi, quid sit scabellum pedum eius, dicit: Terra autem scabellum pedum meorum. Anceps factus fam, timeo adorare terram, ne damnet me qui fecit coelmi & terram. Rursum timeo non adorare scabellum pedum Domini mei, quia Psalmus mihi dicit: Adorate scabellum pedum eius. Quaro quid sit scabellum pedum eius, & dicit mihi scriptura.: Terra scabellum pedum meorum. Fluctuans conuerto me ad Christum, quia ipsum quaero hic, & inuenio, quomodò sine impietate adoretur terra, sine impietate adoretur scabellum pedum eius. Suscepit eium de terrae terram, quia caro de terra est, & de carne Mariae carnem assumpsis. Et quia in ipsa carne hic ambulauit, & ipsam carnem nobis manducandam ad salutem dedi [...]. Nemo autem carnem illam manducat, nisi priùs adorauerit, inuentum est, quemadmodum adoretur tale scabellum H pedum Domini, & non solùm non peccemus adorando, sed peccemus non adorando.
[Page 166]Adore ye the footestoole of his feete, for yt ys holie. But marke ye bretheren what he commaundeth vs to adore? In an other place the scripture saieth: A Heauen ys my seat, and the earth ys my footestoole. Then he commaundeth vs to adore the earth. For he hath saied in an other place, that yt ys the footestoole of God. And howe shall we adore the earth. seing the scripture openlie saieth: Thowe shalt adore thy Lorde God. And here saieth: Adore his footestoole? And expowdding to me what ys his footestoole, he saieth: The earth ys my footestoole. I am doubtfull, I feare to adore the earth leest he damne me that made heauen and earthe. Again I feare not to adore the footstoole of my Lorde, bycause the Psalme saieth to me: Adore his footestoole. Thus wauing vppe and downe, I turne me vnto Chryst (for I seke him here) and I finde howe withoute impietie the earth maie be adored: howe withoute The flesh born of the Ʋirgen ys geuen vs to eate, whiche we must also adore or ells we do offende. impietie his footestoole maie be adored. For he tooke earth of earth, for flesh ys of the earth, and he tooke flesh of the flesh of Marie. And bicause he liued here in the same flesh, and the same flesh he gaue vs to eate to our saluacion, and no man eateth that flesh, eycept he first adore yt, yt ys perceaued howe soche a footestoole of our Lorde maie be adored. And B we shall not onely not sinne in adoring yt, but we shall offende in not adoring yt. Thus haue ye hearde S. Augustine at lenght.
Yf ye haue marked, ye maie perceiue a goodlie and pleasaunt discurse, howe he trieth oute the footestoole of God, and howe yt maie be adored. The footestoole of God at the last he findeth to be the flesh of Chryst the same flesh that he here liued in, the same flesh also that he geueth vs to eate: This flesh then ys the footestoole of God. This footestoole ys to be adored (saieth Sainct Augusten) that in heauen yt aught to be adored at all times no man doubteth. But forasmoche as the same footstoole, the same flesh of Chryst ys geuen vs to be eaten, we must also remembre our duetie before we receaue yt, that we adore yt, and honourelyt. For yf we do not honour yt, omitting then our duetie we offende saieth Sainct Augustine. This flesh we receaue in the Sacrament, wherfore we must honour yt in the Sacrament. C
Yf Sainct Augustin ment not this adoracion to be doen to the Sacrament, he wolde neuer haue spoken of this slesh of Chryst as eaten in the Sacrament, but as exalted in glorie, and sitting at the right hande of the Father. Yt ys an easier waie to induce vs to honour a thing for that yt ys in heauen glorified, then for that yt ys here in earth receaued. But bicause this adoracion of the Sacrament, was in vse among chrystians, and gaue him light to vnderstande the Prophet Dauid, Therfor he spake of yt. That the adoracion was in vse, yt appeareth in sondrie places of the whiche I shall bring furth one or two.
Sainct Augustine declaring the godlinesse of his mother, lieng in her Li. 9. confe. cap. 13. death bedde, saieth thus of her. Illa imminente die resolutionis suae non cogitauit corpus sunm sumptuosè contegi, aut condiri aromatibus, aut monumentum electum concupiuit aut curauit sepulchrum paternum. Non ista mandauit nobis, sed tantummodò memoriam sui ad altare tuum fieri desiderauit, cui nullius diei praetermissione seruierat, vnde sciret dispensari victimam sanctam, qua deletum est Chirographum, D quod erat contrarium nobis, qua triumphatus est hostis. She when she perceaued the daie of her departinge to be at hand, she had no care to haue her bodie sumptuouslie buried, or to be spiced with swete spices, neither did she couet a speciall monument, or cared to be buried in [Page]her owne contrie. She did not charge vs with those thinges, but she desiered, that her memorie might be made at thie aultar, which she E withoute anie daies missing had serued, from whence she knewe that The mother of S. Augu. serued the aultar dailie. holie sacrifice to be dispensed, by the which the obligacion that was against vs was cancelled, wherbye the enemie also was ouercomed. Thus he.
In this that Sainct Augustine to the comendacion of his mother before God and the woorlde, saieth, that she dailie did serue the aultar, I Aultar. wolde learn of the Proclamer, what seruice yt was that she did, was yt not the seruice of Chryst her Lorde God, and redemer that she did: yea trulie: And why did she yt at the aultar, and not in heauen, as the Proclamer wolde that we shoulde onely dooe? Bicause she knewe (as Sainct Augustine S. August. plain against the Proclamer. witnesseth) that Chryst owre sacrifice was from thence dispensed and ministred: So wher this Proclamer denieth the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, Sainct Augustine confesseth that same Chryste to be there that cancelled the writing that was against vs, and so made vs free. And wher the Proclamer discommendeth them and crieth oute against F them that honour Chryst in the Sacrament, Sainct Augustine writeth yt to the perpetuall commendacion and praise of his Godlie mother. The Proclamer wolde yt shoulde neuer be vsed. Sainct Augustin declareth that his mother dailie did vse yt. And as she, so likewise her doinge argueth the vse of the like honowringe and seruing of Chryst amonge and chrystian people.
Besides this the opnion that manie had of the chrystian people, who, not knowing the hidden mysterie of Chrystes presence in the Sacrament, The fame that the Chrystiās did honour Ceres and Bacchus, Proueth their adoracio of the Sacr. in the Primitiue Church. Cont. Fau. li. 2. cap. 13 saied that they did honour Ceres and Bacchus, Gods, among the gentiles, dothe prooue the vse of the honouring of Chryst in the Sacrament. For yf the chrystians had doen no more but eate their bread and drinke their wine, soche reporte had not risen of them. But bicause they were perceaued to honoure the Sacrament therfore they were so reported.
Of this same opinion, fame and reporte, speaketh Sainct Augustin, writing against Faustus, sainge: Quomodò ergo comparas panem, & calicem nostrum & parem Religionem dicis errorem longè à veritate discretum: peius desipiens quàm G nonnulli, qui nos propter panem & calicem, Cererem & Liberum colere existimant? Howe doest thowe compare our bread and wine, and saest errour farre diuided from the trueth to be like religion, plaing the foole woorse then manie, whiche for the bread, and the cuppe thinke vs to honour Ceres and Bacchus.
And again in the same place he saieth: Sicut a Cerere & Libero Paganorum Dijs longè absumus, quamuis panis & calicis Sacramentum, quod ita laudastis, vt in eo pares nobis esse volueritis, nostro ritu amplectamur: ita patres nostri longè fu [...]runt à Saturniacis catenis, &c. As we are farre from Ceres and Bacchus, the After the maner of oure religiō we honoure the Sacr. saieth S. August. Gods of the Pagans, although after the maner of our religion we honoure the Sacrament of bread and wine, whiche ye haue so praised, as in yt, ye wolde be equall to vs: Euen so our Fathers were farre from the bondes of Saturn, although for the time of the Prophecie, they haue obserued the vacacion of the Sabboth. Thus the vse of the honouring of the Sacrament in and before the time of Sainct Augustine being perceaued, we will heare one place more of him, and so for this matter H ende him.
[Page 168]Thus he writeth: Edent pauperes, & saturabuntur. Quid edunt? Quod sciunt fideles. Quomodò saturabuntur? Imitando passiones Domini sui, & non sine A causa accipiendo precium suum, &c. Diuites quid? Etiam ipsi edunt, sed quomodò Jn psal. 4 [...]. edunt? Manducauerunt, & adorauerunt omnes diuites terrae. Non dixit manducauerunt, & saturati sunt: sed manducauerunt, & adorauerunt. Adorant quidem Deum, sed humanitatem nolunt exhibere fraternam. Manducant illi, & adorant: Manducant isti et saturantur, tamen omnes manducant. The poour shall eate and be satisfied. What eate they? That the faithfull do knowe. Howe shall they be satisfied? In folowing the passions of their Lorde, and taking their price not in vain. What do the riche? They also eate, but howe do they eate? All the riche of the earth haue eaten, and haue adored. He saied not, they haue eaten, and be satisfied. But they haue eaten and haue adored. They doe in deed adore God, but they will not shewe furth brotherlie humanitie. They doo eate, and adore, these doe eate and be satisfied: yet all doo eate, hitherto he.
As the scripture ioineth eating and adoring together, saing: They haue Eating and adoring both referred to the Sacrament eaten, and adored: So Sainct Augustine, expownding the scripture, and declaring that the thing that ys eaten, ys our price, a thing knowen to the B faithfull (which our price, and thing knowen to the faithfull ys the bodie of Chryst) he ioineth also adoracion to the same. And so bothe by the Scripture, and by Sainct Augustine, eating and adoring be referred to the Sacrament.
Whiche thing although he dothe plainlie enough here setfurth: yet handling the same scripture in an other place, he doth more plainly open the matter, saing: Neque enim frustra it a distincts sunt, vt de pauperibus suprà diceretur: Ad Honorae tū Epi. 129. Edent pauperes, et saturabuntur. Hic verò: Manducauerunt, et adorauerunt omnes diuites terrae. Et ipsi quippe adducts sunt ad mensam Christi, et accipiunt de corpore et sanguine etus: sed adorant tantùm, non etiam saturantur, quoniam non imitantur. Manducantes enim pauperem, dedignantur esse pauperes, quia Christus pronobis The poore eat and are satisfied the riche eat and adore onlie. passus est, relinqnens nobis exemplum, vt sequamur vestigia euis. Neither are they withoute pourpose so distincted, that before of the poour yt shoulde be saied: The poore shall eate, and shall be satisfied. And here: All the riche of the C earth haue eaten, and haue adored. For they also are brought to the table of Chryst, and they receaue of his bodie, and his bloode. But they doe adore onelie, they are not also satisfied for that they folowe not. For they eating the poour man (meaning Chryst) they disdein to be poour. For Chryst suffred for vs leauing vs an example, that we shoulde folowe his steppes.
Among Chrystian people Sainct Augustin findeth two sortes: Some Two sortes of chrystiā people. that be riche, that ys, not leauing worldely affections, but riche in heart, not humble in spirit, not submitting them selues to the sweet yocke of Chryst, and yet beleuinge, and therfor when they eat poour Chryste, when they receaue of his bodie and blood they knowe by faithe what they receaue, and they adore and honoure Chryste, whom they receaue. But they are not satisfied. An other sorte ther be, whiche be called poour and they contemning, at the leest labouriug to suppresse wordly affections not being riche in desire of heart, but poour and humble in spiritte, taking their crosse and so folowing Chryst, do walke vnder his holie yocke. These D receauing poour Chryst, eating of his bodie and drinking of his bloode, they doe not onelie adore, but also they be satisfied, they are filled. For they folowe Chryste, and their conuersacion declareth that the iuice of this foode, the grace and vertue of that blessed meate appeareth in their [Page]actes, in their deedes, in their liuinges, that they haue well fedde and be satisfied. In which twoo sortes of men, who seith not howe Sainct Augustine E teacheth both the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, and the adoracion of the same when the chrystian people receaue him.
Thus nowe ye maie perceaue, that euen of those Authours, whiche the The authours named by the Proclamer make against him. Proclamer did name, as making no mencion of adoracion or woourshipping of the Sacrament in their bookes, ye maie perceaue, I saie, that they make soche plain mencion of yt, as yt not onely ouerthroweth his pestilent doctrine, but also geueth him iust occasion to rubbe his forehead for verie shame that he shoulde so vntruely bothe speake and write.
THE SIXT AND FOVRTETH CHAPITER, prooueth by other Doctours, that the Sacrament ys to be adored.
I Haue first in his matter of adoracion produced some of these Authours, whiche the Proclamer named. Nowe for somoche as F after the naming of them, by a generall terme, he spake the like of other doctours, I shall also alleadge some of these other, that by them yt maie appeare, that he spake as vntrulie of these comprised vnder his generall tearme, as he did of them, whom he rehersed by speciall names. And yet merueill yt ys that almost anie one of them shoulde speake of the adoracion of Chryst in the Sacrament, forasmoche as all they vniuersallie and constantlie beleuing Chryst verily and reallie to be in the Sacrament, did presuppose, that he shoulde ther be adored, they well vnderstanding the scripture geuinge this commaundement. Dominum Deum tuum adorabis. Thy Lorde God shalt thowe adore. By the whiche as we be commaunded to Deut. 6. honour him for that he ys God: So haue we commaundement in the psalme 10 adore his wholl person God and man, as Sainct Paule to the Hebrues teacheth vs to vnderstand yt. Adorate eū omnes Angeli eius. Adore him al ye his Psal. 96. Heb. 1. Mat. 2. Ioan. 9. Mat. 15. Luc. 24. Angells. Thus they being taught, and by the doctrine of the Gospell perceauing the same by the three wise mē of the east, that came from farre contries, to Bethleem, by diuerse also that were cured of Chryst, more ouer also by G the Apostles them selues being with Chryst in Galilee, to be practised, and put in vse, they coulde not otherwise take yt, But wher soeuer by faith they were taught Chryst to be, their to adore him. For Chryst ys Chryst whersoeuer, or after what maner so euer he be in heauen, or in earthe, visible or inuisible. Wherfor all the chrystian worlde certenly beleuing Chryst to be verilie in the Sacrament, did withoute all scruple adore and honoure him in the Sacrament.
That the Chrystian orbe did so beleue, yt shall appeare to yow by the testimonie of diuerse in diuerse ages. To beginne at our age and so to ascend we will first heare Erasmus a man of most fame in this age. Who saieth thus. Hactenus cum omnibus Christianis adorani Christum pro me passum, in Euchristia. Nec Frasmus ad Cōradū Pellicanu. adli [...]c video quicquam cur debeam ab hac opinione recedere. Nullis humanis rationibus abduci potero, à concordi sententia Christiani orbis. Plus enim apud me valent illa quinque verba: In principio creauit Deus coelum, & terram: quàm omnia Aristotelis, caeteroruniue Philosophorum argumenta, quibus docent mundum carere iniiio. Quid autem adferunt isti, cur tan impiam tamuè seditiosam sententiam profitear? Rationes H stupeae sunt: Semel sustulit carnem ne esset offendiculo. Non admirati sunt, non adorauerunt Apostoli: Iubemur esse spirituales, quasi caro sit exhibita officiat spiritui. [Page 168] Caro est sed nullis obnoxia sensibus, & tamen hoc ipsum pignus est diuinae erga nos charitatis, solatium est expectationis. Hitherto with all chrysten men I haue in the Erasmus Rot his sentence of adoracion. Sacrament adored Chryst that suffred for me. Neither do I yet see anie thing, why I shoulde go from this opinion. With no humane reasons can I be sedde awaie from the full agreement of the chrystian orbe. For those fiue woordes: In the beginning God created heauen and earth: are of more weight with me, then all Aristotles and other Philosophers argumentes, with whiche they teache the worlde to haue no beginning. What doe these men bring, why I shoulde professe so wicked and so sediciouse a doctrine? Their reasons are friuolouse. He tooke awaie his flesh that yt shoulde not be an hinderance to vs: The Apostles did not woonder at yt, they did not adore yt: we are commaunded to be spirituall, as though the flesh so geuen to vs, as yt ys, shoulde hinder vs to be spirituall. Yt ys flesh in deed, but not subiecte to the senseis. And yet the same verie thing ys the pledge of the loue of God towardes vs, and the comforte of oure expectacion. Thus Erasmus.
Ye see nowe this mans profession, he adored Chryst in the Sacrament. Ye heare him saie that all chrysten people did the like. Ye see that yt was B not a priuate opinion of some one contrie. But yt was the faith and religion of the wholl Chrysten worlde, whiche can not be deceaued in so weightie a matter. Ye see in this Authour a constancie (which I wish to be, and wolde God yt were in all chrysten men) that he wolde not by mens reasons be led awaie from that, that was fullie agreed vpon thoroughout all and so receaued. Note with all on the other side what iudgment he hath of the Eras. Rot. his iudgment of the Sacramentarie doctrine against adoracion. contrarie doctrine, whiche this Proclamer setteth furthe in this behalf. First he saieth that he seieth nothing, why he shoulde go from the faith of the catholique Churche, as not to adore Chryst in the Sacrament. Secondlie he accompteth the doctrine of the Aduersarie, contrarie to this, to be wicked and sediciouse. The reasons also (saieth he) whiche they make to maintein their doctrine are but vain and friuolouse: So that as ye see the doctrine of the Aduersarie wicked and sediciouse, not pithie, and weightie, neuer of all chrystian people agreed vpon, and receaued: So maie ye see the catholique C doctrine godlie and of one sort, so substanciall, and well grownded that all the chrystian orbe hath rested vpon yt, and at all times, vntill the time of Luther and Oecolampadius, hath in all places with great consent and concorde accepted yt, and approoued yt,
A good nombre of yeares, more then foure hondreth before Erasmus, was Algerus, who also testifieth that the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, was receaued of all the catholique Churche, and so beleued. Thus writeth he: Idem quod Christus de veritate corporis sui testatur, & Petrus Algerus. & (quia pro alijs loquebatur) cum eo & alij Apostoli. Quid ergo de veritate corporis & sanguinis Christi in Sacramento dici potest certiùs, nisi fortè eam ipsam oculis videre velimus? In quo tamen nec ipse Dominus nobis deesse voluit, sed modicae fidei nostrae per omnia consuluit. Quamuis enim ipsius Christi & tot sanctorum testimonijs & vniuersalis etiam Ecclesiae catholica fide, quae ab initio conuersionis suae ita credidit, & ita saluata est, sufficienter astructum sit, quòd vera Christi caro verusue sanguis in mensa Dominica immmoletur, ne quis tamen peruersor aliter intelligeret, aut exponeret, facta sunt à Deo congrua huic nostrae fidei miracula quando, vel vbi, D vel quibus reuelare dignatus est, huius mysterij secreta. Qnae nimirum facta esse non ignorabit, quisquis studiosiùs sanctorum patrum gesta legerit, quae testantur sacramentum corporis & sanguinis Domini, oblata panis & vini specie, carnem & sanguinem naturali sua specie, sicut esse soles, exhibuisse. Cùm ergo praeteriti & [Page] praesentes fideles vbique terrarum hoc credant, & astruant, si haec vniuersalis Ecclesiae fides vera ad salutem non extitit: aut nunquam catholica fuit, aut perijt. Sed aut non E fuisse, aut perijsse Ecclesiam, nemo catholicus consenserit. Nam cùm Ecclesia, & Prophetia, & Euangelijs instituta sit, vbi est quod Abrahe veritas promisit: In semine tuo benedicentur omnes gentes? Itemue vbi est, quòd eadem veritas Apostolis ait: Docete omnes gentes, qui crediderit, saluus erit? Cùm enim onmes gentes ita se credere glorientur, si salutis benedictione carent, vtrobique veritas Dei, & in prophena, & in Euangelio perichtatur. Euen the same that Chryst did testifie of the veritie of his bodie, did Peter testifie also, and hicause he spake for the other Apostles, the other Apostles testifie with him. What then can more assuredlie be saied of the veritie of the bodie and bloode of Chryst in the Sacrament, except we wolde see the verie same flesh with our eies? In whiche thing yet our Lorde hath not left vs, but hath in all poinctes holpen our litle faith. For although by the testimonies of Chryst him self, and so manie holie men, and also by the catholique faith of the vninersall Churche, which from the beginning of her conuersion hath so beleued and ys so saued, yt be sufficiently taught or auouched that the verie F flesh of Chryst, and his verie bloode be sacrificed in our Lordes table: The vniuersal Church from the beginning of her conuersion hathe euer beleued the presence and sacrisice. leest yet anie ouerwhart man shoulde otherwise vnderstande or expownde yt, ther haue ben doen of God certain miracles agreable to this our faith when, or wher, or to whom he hath vouchesaif to reuele the mysterie. Which truly to be doen no man shall be ignorant, that shall read the workes of the holie Fathers, whiche do testifie, that the Sacrament of the bodie and bloode of Chryst (the formes of bread and wine taken awaie) to haue shewed yt self flesh and blood in his naturall forme, as yt ys wont to be. Seing then the faithfull that be past and goen, and they also that be nowe liuing in euery place of the worlde do this beleue, and this teache: Yf this faith of the vniuersall Churche be not a true faithe to saluacion, then either the Church was neuer catholique, or ells yt hath or ys perished. But that the Church hath not ben, or that yt hath decaied or perished, no man that ys The church neuer yet perished. catholique will consent. For, forsomoche as the Churche was sette vppe bothe with Prophecies and Gospells, wher ys that that the trueth promised to Abraham: In thy seed shall all nacrons be blessed? Likewise also wher ys that G that the same trueth saieth to the Apostles: Teach all nacions, he that shall beleue shall be saued? Forasmoch then as all nacions glorie, that they so beleue, yf they arteign not the blessing of saluacion, the trueth of God in both partes, both in prophecie, and in the Gospell ys in daunger. Thus farre Algerus.
By whose testimonie ye see that the vniuersall Church professed this faithe of the presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode in the Sacrament, which faith was good to saluacion, or ells we must saie that ther was neuer anie catholique Church, or ells yf ther were anie, that yt ys decaied, perished and goen. Which maie not be saied. For Chrystes Churche abideth for euer. And as all the Churche beleued Chryst in the Sacrament to be present: so no doubte they adored him ther, whom they knewe ther to be present.
Before this Authour was Paschasius more then twoo hundreth yeares. Who reporteth the same faith vniuersallie to be professed in the Churche of Chryst vntill his time of all that trulie beleued in Chryst. Thus H he writeth. Discant diuinis verbis in omnibus acquiescere, & in nullo de ijs dubitare, quia vsque in praesens, nemo in [...]ijs errasse legitur, nisi qui de Christo errauerit. [Page 169] Quin potiùs admiremur profundissimum Dei consilium, quòd magni consilij Argelus instituit, qui vult omnes saluos fieri homines. Admiremur, & saudemus atque m [...]elligamus A in his, quòd beatus Hilarius intellexit, quo artificio (vt ita loquar) nos Christus in se collegit, vel quo mysterio vnum in se nos esse naturaliter voluit, non per concordiam solummodò voluntatis, sed & per naturam carnis suae, & sanguinis. Ideo verum est, quod Ambrosius ait sanctissimus: Quia ipsa eademue caro est, & sanguis quam accipimus & communicamus, quae nata est de Maria, & quae pro nobis pependit in cruce. Vnde si quis negat hoc ita esse, quia Sacramentum vocatur, erit ei, sicut sanclus Augustmus testatur, mors non vita, qui mendacem putauerit vitam. Et quia Christus suum dicit esse corpus, suumue sangumem, non oportet, etsi carneis non videmus oculis, quod credimus mente dubitare in aliquo. Audiuimus quid sanctus Cyrillus cum vniuersis coepiscopis in Epheso congregatis sentiat, Quid Graecia cum ijsdem, quid Aegyptus, & sanctus Hieronymus presbiter. Et ideo quamuis ex hoc quidam ex ignorantia errent: nemo tamen adhuc est in aperto, qui hoc ita esse contradicat, quòd totus orbis credit & confitetur. Quapropter charissime, nihil in hoc dubites mysterio quod veritas-Christus de se largitus est nohis, quia etsi sedet in dextra Patris in caelis, non dedignatur suo sacramento, quotidiè per manus sacerdotis, vt vera hostia non infidèliter sed fideliter immolari. B
Let them learn to agree to the woorde of God in all thinges, and in no one poinct to doubte. For vnto this present, no man ys redde to haue erred, but he that hath erred aboute the person of Chryste. But raither let vs reuerence the depe secrettes of God, whiche the Angell of great secret hath instituted, who will all men to be saued. Let vs honoure, and praise, and also vnderstand in these thinges, that Sainct Hilarie hath vnderstanded, by what workmanshippe or cunning (yf I maie so spcake) Chryst hath gathered vs into him, or by whatmysterie he wolde vs naturally to be one in him, not onely by concorde of will: but also by the nature of his flesh and bloode. Therfor yt ys true that the most holie Ambrose saied, that yt ys the same Notable proues of the reall presence. verie flesh and bloode, whiche we receaue and communicate, whiche was born of Marie, and which hanged for vs vpon the Crosse. Wherfore who soeuer denieth this so to be bicause yt ys called a Sacrament, yt shall be to him, as Sainct Augustine dothe testifie, death and not life, that will thinke life to be a liar. And bicause C Chryst doth saie yt to be his bodie and bloode, although we doe not see yt with our fleshlie eies, that we beleue with owre minde, we maie not doubte of yt in anie point. We haue hearde what S. Cyrill with all his felowbishoppes gathered together in Ephesus, dothe beleue: what Grece doth with them: What Aegipt, and also Sainct Hierom the preist. And therfore although some maie erre of ignorance: ther ys no man yet hitherto that openlie against saieth this so to be, whiche the worlde dothe beleue and confesse. Wherfore, derely beloued, doubte nothing in this mystery, which Chryst the trueth hath of him self graunted vnto vs. For although Chryst sitteth in heauē, and yet ys dailie sacrificed by the preist. he sitteth at the right hande of his Father in heauen, he disd meth not dathe by the handes of the preist in the Sacrament, as a true sacrifice, not vntrulie to be sacrificed. Thus farre Paschasius.
See ye not the faith of the presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode in the Sacrament stande vntouched, and not shaken with anie heresie against saing yt openlie vntill the time of this writer? Perceaue ye not Sainct Hilarie, D Sainct Ambrose, Sainct Augustine, Sainct Cyrill, with all the Bishopps in the Councell at Ephesus, whiche were foure hundreth and eightene, Sainct Hierom also, all Grece and Aegipt, and finallie that the wholl worlde in this writers time did so beleue, and so confesse? The [Page]cause why the Proclamer denieth the Sacrament to be adored, ys that he E The Proclamer impugneth adoraciō of the Sacr. bicause he beleueth not reall presence. denieth also Chrystes bodie and bloode to be ther. But yf that blindenesse of heresie taken from his heart, he coulde by pure and clere faith see that blessed bodie ther, ther ys no doubte but he wolde adore yt, Euen so forasmoche as all the worlde with godlie confession acknowledged Chrystes presence in the Sacrament, euen the same that was born of Marie, as Sainct Ambrose saieth, whiche Chryst ys of all Chrystians humblie to be adored, and honoured, who can doubte but that they, wher they beleued him to be, ther they honoured him?
Before this Authour was Leo, more then foure hundreth yeares. For he liued aboute the yeare of owre Lorde 452. and so more then eleuen hundreth yeares agone: in whose time what the faith of Chrystes Churche was in the matter of the blessed Sacrament, ye shall heare him reporte. Separentur buiu smodi a sanctis membris corporis Christi, neque sibi catholica libertas infidelium Leo Epi. 22 ad Costant. iugum patiatur imponi. Extra enim domum diumae gratiae, & extra Sacramentum habendi sunt salutis humanae, qui negantes naturam nostrae carnis in Christo, & Euangelio F contradicunt & Symbolo reluctantur. Nec sentiunt se in hoc praeruptum sua obcaecatione deduci, vt nec in passionis Dominicae nec in resurrectionis veritate consistant, quiae vtrumque in saluatore vacuatur, si in eo nostri generiscaro non creditur? In quibus isti ignorantiae tenehris, in quo hactenus desidiae torpore iacuere, vt nec auditu descerene, nec lectione agnoscerent, quod in Ecclesia Dei in omnium ore tam consonum est? vt nec ab insantium linguis veritas corporis & sanguinis Christi, inter communis Sacramenta fidei taceatur? quia in illa mystica distributione spiritualis alimontae hoc impertitur, hoc sumitur, vt accipientes virtutem caelestis cibi, in caruem ipsius, qui caro nostra factus est, transeamus.
Let soche maner of men be diuided from the holie membres of Chrystes bodie, neither let the catholique libertie suffre the yocke of infidelitie to be Eutyches and Diose. their heres. putte vpon yt. Theie are to be accompted oute of the house of Gods grace, and oute of the Sacrament of mans health, whiche denieng the nature of our flesh in Chryst, do bothe speake against the Gospell, and striue against the Symboll. Neither do they perceaue them selues through their blindenesse G to be brought into soche daunger, that they can not abide in the veritie, neither of our Lordes passion, neither of his resurrection. For both these be voide in our Sauiour, yf the flesh of our kinde be not beleued in him. In what darkenesse of ignorance, in what sluggishnes of sloothe hath these men hitherto lien in, that neither by hearing they coulde learn, neither by reading they coulde knowe, that in the Churche of God, in the mouthe of all men ys so agreablie spoken, that not asmoche as of the tounges of infantes, the veritie of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, among the Sacramentes of the common faithe, ys vnspoken of? For in that mysticall distribution of the spirituall foode, this bodie ys geuen furth, this bodie ys receaued, that receauing the vertue of that heauenly meate, we maie be made his flesh, who was made our flesh, Thus Leo.
Of this Authour also being both auncient and holy ye perceaue yt testified Ʋeritie of the bodie and bloode of Chryst st [...]en of by the tounges of babes that the veritie of the bodie and bloode of Chryst in the Sacrament was so certenly beleued, and so commonlie receaued, that yt was not H onelie confested by the mouthes of all men, but also yt was spoken by the mouthes of babes. And here with all note that this Authour doth merueill at Eutyches and Dioscorus and their adherentes, howe they coulde denie Chryst to be a verie man, seing that all Chrystian people confessed [Page 170]the naturall bodie of Chryst God and man to be in the Sacrament. For A confessing the veritie of his bodie and bloode, which thinges be not of the nature of the godhead, yt must nedes folowe that they confesse the nature and bodie of his manheade, and so Chryst to be very man.
Thus ye maie perceaue that the prefence of Chrystes verie bodie and The reall presence so certenlie beleued that auncient Fathers made argumēt therof to cō fute heresies. bloode in those daies was reputed, esteemed, and beleued, so certen, so sure, and so vndoubted a matter of faith, that learned men did vse yt as a stronge argument to confute and conuince diuerse heresies. For as this Authour did vse yt against the heretikes of his time: So did Irenaeus and Hylarius (whiche were long before him) against the heretiques of their times. Whiche they wolde neuer haue doen, yf in their times also the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament had not ben a clere matter oute of all controuersie, and receaued of all, aswell heretiques, as catholiques as a substanciall poinct of their faithe, whervpon an argument might be well grownded.
Nowe ye haue hearde the presence of Chrystes bodie testified to haue ben receaued of all the chrystian Churche, from this our time to the time B of Leo and before his time (as by Paschasius yt ys aboue reported) to the time of Sainct Hilary. And so to the time of Irenaeus, who was the Jn catolog. script. disciple of Polycarpus (as Sainct Hierom witnesseth) which Polycarpus was disciple of Sainct Iohn the Euangelist, so neare was this man to the Apostles time.
This discourse haue I made ascending from our time to the primitiue Churche, to prooue by consent of the wholl Churche the presence of Reall presence proued, adoracion must nedes folowe. Chrystes verie bodie and bloode in the Sacrament. Whiche proof being made, yt ys easie to prooue the adoracion of Chryst in the Sacrament. For Chryst being verilie ther, adoracion must nedes folowe.
Nowe let this Proclamer who so blasphemouslie hath denieth Chryst to be adored in the Sacrament (which his deniall ys for that he also denieth Chryst to be in the Sacrament) Let him, I saie, bring soche a C discourse, to prooue by soche plain testimony that Chryst ys not in the Sacrament, and I will not onelie denie to adore the Sacrament, but I will subscribe to him, to denie also the presence, which I knowe for all his bragges he can neuer doe. Wherfore he vseth in that kinde of wisdome himself wishelie. For what he listeth to denie, he doth denie, and prouing nothing of that he shoulde affirme, he driueth the catholique Churche to prooue that that she affirmeth. A sleight he vseth some time (as partely ys declared and more hereafter shalle) to touche a woorde or twoo of an Authour wrestinge them to his pourpose, but plain proof, as this ys, he maketh none, neither dothe he to my remembrance, bringe furth three authorities of the doctours in all his sermon wholl and full, but mutilated and truncated. D
THE SEVEN AND FOVRTETH CHAPITER E proceadeth in the proofe of the adoracion of the Sacrament by doctours.
AS in the last chapiter I haue prooued the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, therby to inferre the adoracion of the same: So will I here prooue adoracion, therby to inferre the presence. For as the presence prooued, yt ys but foolerie to denie adoracion: So adoracion prooued, yt ys but vain to denie the presence. Ye haue hearde yt sufficientlie prooued by soche as the Proclamer named not to haue spoken of yt: nowe we shall bring other, of the whiche Sainct Dionyse the disciple of Sainct Paule, as of manie learned men he ys thought, whome also this Proclamer alleageth, shall be first. Who declaring the order of the ministracion of the holie Sacrament, maketh this praier to the same. O diuinum penitus, sanctumue mysterium, obducta tibi significantium operimenta Dion. Are. Ecclesiast. Hiera 3. parte. ca 3. S. Dionyse adored the Sacram. signorum dignanter aperiens, nobis palàm atque apertè lucesce, nostrosque spirituales F oculos singulari & aperto tuae lucis fulgore imple. O verie godly and holie mysterie, opening fauourablie the coueringes of fignifieng figures, wherwith thowe arte couered, shewe thy self to vs openlie and apertlie, and fill our spirituall eies, with the singular, and clere brightnesse of thy light.
The peticions that be here made well weighed and considered; as to desire our spirituall eies, owre vnderstanding, our minde to be illumined, well clerely and perfectlie to see, to beleue and vnderstand, the wholl secret mysterie of the Sacrament: what ys yt but an adoracion, and acknowleging of that thing to be God of whome we desire soche thinges (for soche thinges can no creature geue nor graum) and a plain submission of our selfs as to God to obtein that we desire, as onely of him, whiche ys one of the cheifest partes of adoracion? These kinde of peticions made this holie Dionyse vnto the Sacrament. For vnto yt he directed his woordes, sainge: O verie godlie and holie mysterie. Yt doth verie well appeare then that he adored G the holie Sacrament not as a bare signe figure or token, but as conteininge very Chryst God and man vnder those signes and tokens: Neither can the Proclamer drawe this praier to Chryst in heauen. For he ys not ther in a mysterie, but in clere and open vision. But this ys directed to Chryste very present in mysterie, whiche maner ys not ells where but in the Sacrament. Wherfore this praier and honour was made and doen to the Sacrament.
As in Dionyse we finde adoracion of the Sacrament practised and lefte to vs as an example to folowe: So a moche like thing finde we reported of Gregorie Nazianzen. And this yt ys: Quid igitur magna, & maximis dignae faciebat anima, & quodnam aduersus infirmitatem remedium habebat? Iam enim occultum Greg. Naz in epitaph. Gorgoniae sororis: Gorgonia prostrate before the aultar calleth on him whom the woourshipped on the aultar proditur, quum iam de omnibus alijs desperasset, ad omnium consugit medicum, noctisue captata solitudine, quum illi morbus paruas concessit inducias, ante altare cum side procubutt, ac illum quem super altare venerabatur, magna voce, ac omni inuocauit conanime, etue miracula cuncta, quae olim secerat in memoriam reduxit. H What then did the soule, both great and woorthie of great thinges: what remedie had she against the sicknesse? Nowe the secrete thinge ys opened. When she had dispared of all other, she flieth to him that ys the physition of all men, and hauinge the solitarinesse of the night, when the disease had geuen her a litle respitte, she prostrated her self with faith before the [Page 168]aultar, and with a great voice and all her might she called vpon him whome she woourshipped vpon the aultar, and vnto him she rehersed A all the miracles, that of olde time he had doen. Thus Nazianzen,
In whome beside other thinges, this maie ye note, that this holie woman laie prostrated before the aultar, and called vpon him, whom she woourshipped vpon the aultar. This maketh mightilie against the Aduersarie, who denieth Chryst anie other wher, or in anie other place to be honoured but in heauen. For his woman did honour him vpon the aultar, wher she laie prostrated as before, Chryst her Lorde God ther present.
This also ys not to be ouerpassed, that this holie and auncient Authour reporteth this facte of this holie womā to her perpetuall praise, as did S. Ambrose the facte of his brother Satyrus for the hanging of the Sacramentat his necke, in the whiche he reposed his hope of his saiftie, whiche according to his trust was not frustrated, but had good effecte.
By the reporte of Nazianzen we maie perceaue two thinges: The one that he being a great learned man, an auncient and catholique Father wolde praise nothing that was against the true honour of God, and the vpprightnesse of the catholique faithe. Wherfor we maie be assured that B to lie prostrate before the aultar, and ther to call and praie vnto him that ys woourshipped vpon the aultar, ys no idolatrie, nor against the true honour of God (as this Proclamer, moche to Gods dishonour teacheth) but ys right good and acceptable honour.
The other ys that we compare the doctrine and doing of this holy man and of the Proclamer together: Sainct Gregorie teacheth Chryst to be Gre. Nazi. and the Proclamer cō pared in their doctrines. honoured vpon the aultar: This Proclamer no wher but in heauen. Sainct Gregorie with grauitie praised his sister for so honouring of Chryst: This Proclamer with mocking and taunting derideth and dispraiseth them that do so honoure Chryst. Sainct Gregorie by all mens iudgementes as he was auncient: so ys he iudged to be catholique and to fauoure Chryste, and the catholique Churche: This Proclamer as he ys of these daies, and but younge of age, so dissentinge from this holie Father maie well be iudgd the enemie of Chryst, and his catholique Churche. And as we haue saied of Sainct Gregorie: So maie we saie of Sainct Ambrose, who commendeth C in his brother the great faith, affiance, and trust that he had in the holie Sacrament. For what more honour, what higher honour, can we do to God, then to setle our faith, our hope and our trust in God, acknowledging him one not onely able and of power to helpe vs, to deliuer and saue vs from all perills and daungers, that maie happen to vs, but also assuredly trust that he will so doe? Thus Sainct Ambrose to the praise of his brother reporteth that he did to the Sacrament, as before ys at large declared. Seinge then this Proclamer dispraiseth that that holy Ambrose did praise yt ys easie to perceaue, what ys to be thought of him, and which of their doctrins ys to be embraced, and whiche of them ys to be folowed euerie good chrystian will soen determine.
In this matter also ys Eusebius Emisenus a goodlie witnesse writing thus. Quia corpus assumptum ablaturus erat ab oculis nostris, & sideribus illaturus necessarium Eus. Emis. Hom. pas. erat, vt nobis in hoc die Sacramentum corporis, & sanguinis consecraret, vt coleretur iugiter per mysterium, quod semel offerebatur in precium. For that he wolde take awaie his assumpted bodie from our eyes and carie yt into D the heauens, yt was necessarie that in this daie he shoulde consecrate the Sacrament of his bodie and bloode, that yt might continuallie [Page]be honoured by mysterie, that once was offred for our price. Thus he. E
Nowe wher the Proclamer saieth, that Chryst did institute the Sacrament onely that yt shoulde be receaued in the remembrance of his death: Eus [...]b. Em. directlie against the Proclamer. This Authour saieth that bicause the visible presence of his bodie shoulde be taken from vs, he did institute the Sacrament that the same his bodie might continuallie be honoured by mysterie. And forsomoch as yt ys so, he exhorteth vs so to doe, sainge: Cùm reuerendo altari caelestibus cibis satiandus accedis, sacrum Dei tui corpus & sanguinem fide respice, honora, mirare, mente continge, cordis manu suscipe, & maximè haustu interiori assume. When thowe comest Euseb. ibi. to the reuerend aultar to be satisfied with heauenly meates, looke with faith vpon the bodie and bloode of thy God: Honoure yt, woonder at yt, touche yt with thy minde, receaue yt with the hand of thy heart, and cheiflie receaue Euseb. biddeth vs honour the Sacrament. yt with the inwarde draught. This Authour in this his exhortacion, first teacheth vs what we shall beholde by faithe, when we come to the reuerende aultar, the bodie (saieth he) of our God. Wherby he teacheth the presence of our Lordes bodie in the Sacrament, whiche in dede by F faith onely ys ther to be seen, and not by senseis, except yt please God by miracle to some so to reuele yt, as we reade that sundrie times he hath so doen.
But let not the Proclamer walkinge in his darke mistes of his figures, saie that Chryst ys in the Sacrament, as in a figure, bicause this Authour saieth, that we by faith must beholde him, and thervpon triumphe that this Authour ys on his side. For this cauille ys auoided by the woordes that shortlie after folowe, whiche be these: Sicut autem quicunque ad fidem Christi veniens ante verba Baptismi, adhuc est in vinculo veteris debiti, ijs verò memoratis mox exuitur omni fece peccati: ita quando benedicendae verbis caelestibus creaturae sacris a taribus imponuntur, antequam inuocatione summi nominis consecrentur, substantia est illic panis & vini, pòst verba autem Christi, corpus & sanguis Christi. As anie man cominge to the faith of Chryst before the wooordes of Baptisme, ys yet in the bands of the olde debte, but when the woordes be spoken ys furthwith deliuered from all the dregges of sinne: Euen so G when the creatures that are to be blessed with the heauenly woordes are putte vpon the holie aultars, before they be consecrated by the inuocacion A plain place for M. Juell. of the most high name, ther ys the substance of bread and wine: but after the woordes of Chryst, the bodie and bloode of Chryste. Thus Eusebius. This his sainge clean dissolueth the cauill of the Aduersarie. For though before the woordes of Chryste yt be bread and wine: yet after the woordes yt ys the bodie and bloode of Chryste.
Thus the minde of Eusebius being declared that Chrystes bodie and bloode be in the Sacrament after the consecracion, yt foloweth in his exhortacion Reall presence and adoracion plainlie auouched by Euso. Emis. (as meit ys we shoulde doe) Honora, honoure yt. When by soche an auncient holie Father we be moued and aduertised to honour the bodie of our God, and that not onelie in heauen, but when we come to the reuerende aultar, wher after the woords of Chryste ys the bodie and bloode of Chryst, ys yt meit (suppose ye) to leaue so auncient doctrine, and to cleaue to the newfangled inuencion of this Proclamer? After this he H saieth: mirare, that ys merueill or woonder. As who might saie, that the bodie of thy Lorde God ys in the Sacrament, the senseis of man can not perceaue yt, his imaginacion can not compasse yt, his might and power can not woorke yt: his reason can not comprehende yt, therfore with reuerence and honour merueill and wonder at yt. Remembre that to God nothing ys [Page 172]vnpossiblie. Remembre the workes of God be merueillouse: And therfor reuerentlie woonder and saie: Tu es Deus qui facis mirabilia. Thowe arte the God A whiche doest merueillouse thinges.
Nowe yf ther were but a figure, but bread and wine, signes and tokens of Figures of thinges be not merueillouse but the blessed Sacram. ys merueilouse the bodie of Chryst, what neaded this Authour to aduertise euery chrystian man, and saie: Mirare, merueill. Ther was neuer man that bidde the Iewes merueill at the Paschall lambe, bycause yt was a figure of Chryste, ther was neuer man bidde wonder at Isaac, at Ioseph, at Ionas, at the brasen serpent, and soche other bicause they were figures of Chryste: but the merueill ys here at the ineffable and vnspeakeable worke of God, who aboue all mans deuise maketh present by his allmightie power the bodie and bloode of his Sonne our Sauiour Chryst.
This therfore toucheth the wicked saing of Oecolampadius, who thinking verie basely of this Sacrament, denieth anie miracle to be wrought in yt: whose saing howe false yt ys, this Authour who willeth vs to merueill at yt doth declare, for no wise man willeth men to merueill wher no thinge ys to merueilled at. Wherfore in this Sacramēt something ys wrought wher at B we maie iustlie merueill, whiche ys in dede the merueillouse worke of God to make present the bodie of Chryste our Sauiour.
But I see, I stande to long in the alleadging of the Fathers, wherfor leauing theise auncientes, whiche haue taught vs the practise of the primitiue Churche in the adoracion of the holie Sacrament, we will among manie of the later time, heare but holie Bernardo, to see the agreement of the two times. Christus enim pridie quàm pateretur, Discipulis suis huius sacramenti formam praescripsit, efficaciam exhibuit. Cùm adhuc caenaretur surrexit à caena: Discipulorum pedes Dominus Bernar. de dign. sacer. vniuersorum lauit: Dehinc ad mensam regressus ordinat sacrificium corporis & sanguinis sui. Christus in coena illa munerans & munus, cibans & cibus, conuiua & conuiuium, offerens & oblatio. Obstupescentes admiramtui, nulli Angelorum, nullis spiritibus supernis, sed hominibus, nec tamen omnibus: sed ordini vestro tantùm mandatam esse tanti sacramenti celebrationem in altari, quod Christus fecit manibus suis in coena Paschali. Quid facis indigne? quid facis homo ingrate? Adora deuotiùs, & recole frequentiùs in Sacramento altaris salutem mundi pro te passam. Chryste the daie before that he wolde suffer prescribed to his disciples the forme of C this Sacrament: he declared the efficacie of yt. When they were yet at supper, he rose from the same and being the Lorde of all washed the feete of his disciples. After that being returned to the table he ordeined the sacrifice Chryst in his supper, the geuer and the gifte, the feeder and the foode, the seaster and the feast, the offerer and the offering. of his bodie and bloode. In that supper Chryst was the geuer and the gifte: the feede: and the foode: the feaster and the feast, the offerer and the offeringe. Wonder ye therfor and merueill, for to none of the Angells, to none of the heauenly spirittes: but to men, neither yet to all men, but onely to your order was appoincted the celebracion of so great a Sacrament in the aultar, which Sacrament Chryst made with his handes in the Paschall supper, what doest thowe, thowe vnwoorthie man? What doest thowe, thowe vnthankfull man? In the Sacrament of the aultar, adore deuoutely, remembre often the health of the worlde, that suffred for thee.
Of this Sainct Bernarde we maie first learn (as he did of the Euangelist Sainct Iohn) Chrystes order both in the preparacion of his Apostles towarde Washing of the Apostles feet what yt signifieth. the institucion of the holie Sacrament, and also what he himself did in the D same institucion. He prepared his Apostles towarde the institucion not onely signifieng to them by the washing of their feet, that they and [Page]all chrystians, that will come to this holie mysterie, must be pure and clean E from all wordlie, vnclenlie, and eartlie affections: and also humble meke and lowly, not onely to God with all submission, being readie to obey his holie commaundements, but also by penance for the transgression of anie of them, and therwith meke and lowly one to an other. Yf I (saieth he) haue washed your feete being your Lorde and master, yowe also aught to wash Joan. 13 one an others feet. For I haue geuen yowe an example, that as I haue doen, ye shoulde so doe.
Thus moch doen for the preparacion of his Apostles and all Chrystians: he returneth to the institucion of the Sacrament. In the which what he did S. Bernarde also declareth. He did (saieth he) ther institute the sacrifice of his bodie and bloode, and of his bodie and bloode ther ys no other sacrifice, but the same his bodie and bloode. And that he so did S. Bernarde teacheth by the woordes immediatelie folowing. For he saieth, that in that supper. Chryst was the geuer and the giste: The feeder and the foode: The feaster and the feast: The offerer, and the offering. F
Marke well, gentle Reader, these propre speaches. For as they contein a notable declaracion of the trueth: So also be they not spoken withoute imitacion of holie auncient doctours. For the first, yf Chryst him self were in his supper, the geuer, the feader, the feaster, and the offerer (as most certenlie he was) then was he also the thing that was geuen, he was the foode or meat that was eaten, he was the wholl feast, he was the oblacion. What ys Chryst him self but God and man? Then was Chryst God and man so geuen of him self in the last supper. These maner of speaches be vsed of S. Hierom, S. Ambrose, and S. Augustine.
S. Hierom saieth thus: Dominus Iesus ipse conuiua & conuiuium, ipse comedens, Hieron. ad Hedib. q 2 Amo orat. Prapar. ad missam. [...]. in psal. 33. conc. 1. & qui comeditur. Owre Lorde Iesus he ys bothe the feaster, and the feast, he ys the eater, and that which ys eaten. Sainct Ambrose praing to Chryst saieth: Tu es sacerdos & sacrificium, mirabiliter & ineffabiliter constitutus. Thowe arte the preist and the sacrifice, wonderfullie and vnspeakeablie appoincted. Sainct Augustin speaking of Chryst, saieth. Ferebatur manibus suis. He was born G in his owne handes. Then Chryste bearing him self in his owne handes, was bothe the bearer, and that was born.
These I hauebroughtin, that the Reader might perceaue that S. Bernarde hath not framed soche maner of speaches of his owne inuencion, but hath taken thē of the Farhers by imitacion, Whiche maner of speaches I haue the more willingly setfurth at large, bicause they doe verie well, and godly declare the true catholique faithe, they mightilie ouerthrowe the heresie of the Aduersarie they also confirme and comfort the true chrystian, notablie prouinge vnto vs the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament.
This presence of Chryst by S. Bernarde so setfurth, then he putteth vs in Chryst in the Sac. denoathe to be adored. minde of our duetie sainge: Adore in the Sacrament, the health of the worlde that suffred for thee. Obserue diligently that he willeth thee to adore Chryst in the Sacrament, whiche woordes be directlie against the woordes of the Proclamer, who willeth thee not to adore Chryst in the Sacrament, but onely in heauen. H
Nowe Reader, wher the Proclamer saied, that Sainct Ambrose, Sainct Augustine, Sainct Chrysostome made no mencion of the adoracion of Chryst in the Sacrament, thowe hauest hearde them plentifullie testifieng the contrarie. Wher also he saied that no other doctours made mencion of yt, thowe hauest hearde diuerse declaring the contrarie. And not [Page 173]onelie these doctours: but also thowe hauest heard S. Paule theaching vs to A honoure Chryst in the Sacrament. Thus thowe feest a nombre of wittnesses produced for the declaracion of the catholique faith: for the wicked doctrine of the Proclamer thowe feest not one. As I haue redde this Proclainer in this matter: so haue I redde Occolampadius the great fownder of this doctrine in this our time, and I assure yow that neither in the one or the other of thē did I finde anie authoritie of scripture or doctour fullie and trulie alleaged for the maintenaunce of their doctrine. Trisling argumentes of negatiues and vntrueths they haue a sewe: other haue they none.
And here in this matter to conclude I will ioin this yssue withe the Proclamer [...] let him bringe but one auncient catholique doctour that by expresse Jssue ioined with the Proclamer vpon adoracion. woordes, shall saie as he saieth, that Chryst ys not to be adored in the Sacrament, and I will subscribe to him. But I am verie sure that he can bring not one. Yf he can bring none what madnesse ys ther in him that so Goliath like reuileth the holie catholique Churche, and willeth her childeren to forsake her, not to creditte her, not withstanding that she hath moche and B good authoritie that she buildeth vpon, but to cleaue to him, to folowe his phantasies, to creditte his bare sainges without al authoritie? But how moch more madde shall these be, that neclecting the godly order of the Church, cō temning the religion therin by long times and manie hondreth yeares continued: not weghing the graue ād weightie autoritie of so manie holie learned Fathers, shall rashlie committee their saithe to soche one, as bringeth nothing to grownde a faith vpon, but as ys saied, negatiues, and vntrueths. For this ys the sleight of this man he crieth oute vpon the Churche for the proose of her doctrine, and in the mean while he bloweth oute his doctrine withoute all authoritie.
God opē the eies of all chrystiā mē well to see yt, and so to consider yt, that they maie eschewe yt. Great occasion ys geuē thē so to doe when they seing him auochinge soche an vntrueth as this ys, that none of the doctours make mencion of the honouring of Chryste in the Sacrament, shall see so manie as nowe be alleaged, make plain mencion of yt beside manie other not here alleaged. Yf ther were no mo vntreuthesin him butthis (as ther be to manie) C yt were enough to aduertise one that had regarde to God, and to the health of his soule, to looke twice er he leape once. Thus moch being saied for the admoniciō of the reader, I wil addresse me to examine the rest of his woords.
THE EIGHT AND FOVRTETH CHAP. CONsuteth the rest of the Proclamers woordes before rehersed against the honouring of Chryst in the Sacrament.
AS the twoo wicked iudges when they had once by their carnall lustes corrpted their iudgement, did not spare to testifie a wicked vntrueth against the innocent and godlie Suzanna, and that before all the people, and being so entred into shamelesnesse proceaded to auouche the same before the holie prophet Daniell: So this Proclamer, whē he had corrupted his iudgement in the matters of faithe, and vttered an vntrueth against the innocent and godlie Suzanna D the Churche the spouse of Chryst, and that before a famouse people, he so entered into shamelesnesse, that he proceaded to auouche the same before God bi writing to his more cōdemnacion. And nowe being malicioulie sett [Page]passeth from vntrueth to vntrueth euen by yonde measure. For to these E vntreuthes allreadie confuted thus he addeth speaking still against the adoracion of Chryst in the Sacrament. Yt ys (sateth he) a verie newe deuise, and as yt ys M. Juell. well knowen, came but late into the Church. Aboute three hundreth yeares past, Honorius then being Bishoppe of Rome, commaunded the Sacrament to be lifted vppe, and the people reuerently to bowe downe to yt.
Yt ys (saieth he) a verie new deuise. Yf he had spoken of the doctrine, whiche Luther ād Oecolamp. First deniers of adoracion of the Sacr. he himself teacheth, that we should not adore Chryst in the Sacrament, be had spoken a trueth: For among all that confessed Chryst to be God ād mā, and Chrystes bodie to be present in the Sacrament, Luther was the first that fondlie erred in that poinct. And among them that denied Chryst to beverilie and really in the Sacrament, Oecolampadius ys the first, that (by the reporte of the learned) hath in writing setfurth, with trifling perswasions, and vain argumentes of negatiues, the impugnacion of the adoracion of Chryst in the Sacrament. Wherfore this hys vntrue saing against Chrystes honoure, and the doctrine and doing of the catholique Church, maie trulie be turned into hys owne lappe against him and soch like blaspemers and deprauers, that this his and their doctrine, that Chryst shoulde not be woorshipped F in the Sacrament, ys a verie newe deuise, and ys (as yt ys well knowen) but lately comed in. For in dede yt came in by Luther and Oecolampadius, who were both late enough and sooen enough, yea to soone, but that they were the instrumentes of Sathan, soche as God permitted for the punishmet of the sinnes of the people.
But to our pourpose, that hys saing against the adoracion of Chryst in the Sacrament ys vntrue, not onely the Fathers of the primitiue Church before alleaged doe prooue: but also the practise and doing of the thinge: As Chrysostome in his Masse, Gregory Nazianzen of his sister, S. Ambrose of hys brother, S. Augustine of his mother do declare. All which are before alleaged, and were aboue a thousand years agone, so true ys this mans saing that yt ys but a new deuise. Wherunto yf ye adde the commaundement of God, to adore Chryst: and the rule of S. Paule for our examinacion before we receaue, ye shal perceaue howe farre wide this man ys from all trueth in thys matter, and how auncient the adoracion of the Sacrament ys, and how new the denial of the same ys. Yt ys so newe I saie, that before Luther and Oecolampadius G ther ys none fownde to haue written yt: although some infected with the heresie of Berengarius and Wicleff maie be thought in corners to haue whispered yt, as by Ioannes Rokizana yt maie be gathered, who writeth thus: Joan. Rokizanatract. de 7. Sacr. cap. 12. Sacerdotes debent verbo & exemplo docere populū vt contremiscant, adorando & colendo, & summum ac viuacem respectum habendo circa haec diuinissima, & ineffabilia mysteria. Ex quo patet error dicentium quod corpus Christi, vel Sacramentum, solùm sit nobis datum ad manducandum, & sanguis in calice solùm ad bibendum, & non ad colendum siue adorandum. Sed patet quod inanis & fatua sit irrisio eoram, qui luminum accensionem corā Dominico corpore in sacramento derident, dicentes: quia Deus est lux, & non egent lumme. Nam in veteri lege etiam Domini mandato lucernae sine luminaria in candelabro disposita coram panibus propositionis, qui fuerunt figura tantùm corporis in Sacramento, exardebant, multo magis decens est vt hoc in praesentia tanti sacramenti fiat. Sinempe decens est & honestum (teste Hieronimo ad Riparium) vt lumina ardeant coram corporibus & os [...]ibus sanctorum; Etsi decens fuit temporibus primorum sanctorum, vt lampades mortuis christianis fidelibus accendantur, vt haec describit Chrysostomus sermone quarto super epistolam ad Hebraeos: multo magis decens honestū, & sanctū est, vt lumina corā tā deifico, et diuino corpore H Christiaccēdātur: The preistes aught to teach the people both with exāple [Page 174]and woorde, that they in adoring and woorshipping and hauing an high ād, A liuelie respect aboute these most godlie and vnspeakable mysteries, doe feare and tremble. Wherby ys manifest the errour of thē that wickedlie saie, that the bodie of Chryst or the Sacrament was onely geuen to be eaten, and the blood in the cuppe onelie to be drunkē, and not to be woorshipped or adored. But yt ys manifest that their skorning ys vain and foolish, which doe mock the lighting of lightes before the bodie of our Lord in the Sacramēt saing: that God ys light himself, and neadeth no other light. For in the olde lawe euen by the cōmaundement of our Lord lightes that were sett in the cādlesticke did burn before the shew breades, which were onelie a figure of our Lordes bodie in the Sacramēt: moch more ys yt comely that this be doē in the presence of so great a Sacrament. For trulie if yt be comelie ād honest (S. Hierom being wittnesse vnto Riparius) that lightes doe burn before the bodies or bones of saincts: And if yt were comely in the time of the cheif holie mē, that lampes should burn before the faithful Chrystians that were dead, as Chrysostō describeth these thinges in his fourth sermon vpon the epistle to B the Hebrues, moch more ys yt comely, honest, ād holie that lights should be lighted before so diuine ād godly bodie of Christ. Thus moch this Authour.
Who although he were otherwaies naught himself, yet vnderstanding so me soch secrett talke against the honouring of the blessed Sacrament he hath earnestly laboured and learnedly, to extinct the same. So (as before ys saied) though some haue in their corners murmured against the honouring of Greatest antiquitie of denial of adoraciō of the Sacr ys but fourtie years. the Sacrament: yet sure I am that none beleuing Chryst, God and man, did openly write that Chryst was not to be adored in the Sacrament, vntill the times of Luther and Oecolampadius, none neither catholique nor heretique. And therfor I shall returne the woordes of this Proclamer trulie to him, whiche he vntrulie hath published to the worlde, that this ys the greatest antiquitie of the wholl matter: About fortie yeares agon yt was first fownd oute, and putt in practise by Luther, and Oecolampadius, that the Sacrament might not be honoured. But Chryst and his Apostles, the holy Fathers in in the primitiue Church, the doctours that folowed them, and other learned and godly men, whatsoeuer for the space of xv. hondreth years and C and odde after Chrystes ascension into hcauen, neuer taught this doctrine, that the holie and blessed bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament shoulde not be honoured, neither was yt practised within anie place within the catholique Church of Chryst throughoute the wholl worlde. And thus nowe be these woordes true, whiche before vttered by the Proclamer, were verie false.
And nowe wher he saieth that Honorius was the first that commaunded the Sacrament to be honoured, in case yt were true, as yt ys allready proued Honouring of the Sacr. vniuersaly receaued but neuer yet vniuersallie denied in the Church. to be false: yet ys the doctrine of the honouring of the Sacrament moche more auncient then this his doctrine, that wickedly denieth yt. For that by hys owne confession was begon by Honorius three hondreth years agon: This doctrine but aboute fortie years agon. Honorius was neuer diffamed of heresie: Luther and Oecolampadius, diffamed and condemned for heretiques. The honouring of the Sacrament was receaued, of the wholl Churche, and quietly continued those three hondreth years at the least euen by this mans owne rekning: The contrarie doctrine was neuer D yet receaued of the wholl Churche, and therfore neuer one howre quietlie continued. Thus moch aduantage haue we vpon the woordes of his owne confession.
[Page]But he saieth that Honorius commaunded the adoracion of the Sacramēt, E A fond argument of the Proclamer I graunt he did: But what of that? Will he therbie inferre, that bicause he commaunded yt, that yt was neuer in vse before? A verie fond kinde of argument, And yet, as fonde as yt ys, moch vsed in the Schoole of the doctrine of thys Proclamer, from whence no doubte he hath learned so to dispute. For euen in like maner the fleshlie sorte of them dispute to maintein their shamefull aboade with their women. Yt ys (saie they as this Proclamer saieth) a new deuise, yt ys as new fownd holie daie, that preistes shoulde not marrie For yt was but of late daies inuented by Vrban and Gregorie.
Nowe trueth yt ys, that these Popes made decrees that preistes shoulde not marrie, but doth this proue that yt was neuer forbidden before? No trulie. Decrees against mariage of Preistes For Siluester long before them made a decree that yf a preist did marrie after he had receaued holy orders he should be depriued of his office ten years, but yf he disobediently kept his woman, and wolde not submitte himself to the lawe, he should be condempned for euer: shall we yet nowe here rest, and saie that Siluester was first fownder of this matter, bicause yt ys fownd that he made soche a decree? Naie. Calixtus was before him, who made a like F decree. Presbyteris, Diaconis, Subdiaconis, & Monachis concubinas habere, seu matrimonium contrahere poenitus interdicimus. Contracta quoque matrimonia ab buiusmodi personis Calixtus. disiungi, & personas ipsas ad poenitentiam debere redigi, iuxta sacrorum Canonum defuntionem iudicamus. We vtterly forbidde: preistes, Deacons, Subdeacons and monkes to haue concubines, or to marrie. We iudge also the matrimonies contracted of soch persons to be dissolued or vndoen, and the persons themselues to be sett to penaunce, according to the definition of the holy Canons.
For this decree some haue ben angrie with Calixtus, and haue fathered the prohibition of preistes mariages vpon him, but yet they haue erred. For they might haue perceaued that he in this his decree referreth the penaunce of the married preistes, Deacons and other, to the holy Canons. So that ther was an other decree for that pourpose before Calixtus, and that Canon Apost 17. was the decree of the Canon of the Apostles. For soche a Canon haue they made, which ys thus: Ex bis qui coelibes in clerum peruenerunt, iubemus, vt lectores G tantùm, & cantores, si velint, nuptias contrahant. Of them that becomed single into the cleargie, we commaunde that readers onely, and the singing men, yf they will, doe marrie. And an other like, which ys this. Qui duxit viduam, aut diuortio separatam à viro, aut meretricem, aut ancillam, aut aliquam quae publicis sit mancipata spectaculis, Episcopus, presbyter Canon 18. aut Diaconus, aut demque ex consortio sacerdotali esse non potest. He that hath, married a widowe, or a woman diuorced from her husbande, or an harlott, or a bond maiden, or a anie that ys accustomed to plaie in enterludes, can neitherbe Bishoppe, preist, nor Deacō, nor be of the cōpanie of the preistes.
By this breif discourse ye maie perceaue the Fathers of the later times made decrees of that was in vse in the Apostles time, wher vnto they were enforced, by the wickednesse, and licenciouse life of men in their times, not to make newe deuises, but to cause the olde auncient lawes to be obserued and kept.
Ther be decrees made in these later daies for the fasting of Lent, bothe Lent fast commaunded. by Councells and Popes. As for example to produce one. In the eight H Councell of Tolett, thus we finde declared: Illis qui ausu temerario quadragesimae dies contemnunt, nec voracitatis ingluuiem frenant, & (quod peius est) Paschalia festa, Concilium Toletā. 1. illicitorum esuum perceptione profanant, ex hoc adeò acerrimè interdicitur, vt [Page 175] quisquis sine ineuitabili necessitate atque fragilitate, & euidenter languore seu etiam impossibilitate A aetatis diebus quadragesimae esuin carnium praesumpserit attentare. non solùmreus erit resurrectionis Dominicae, verumetiam alienus ab eiusdem diei sancta communione. Et hoc illi cumuletur ad poenam, vt ipsius anni tempore ab omni esu carnium abstineat, quia sacris diebus abstinentiae oblitus est disciplinam. Vnto them that presumptuouslie contemne the daies of Lent, neither do refrein the excesse of their greadinesse, and that which ys woorst of all, do prophane the Easter solemnities, with the eating of vnlaufull meates: from hencefurth we straightlie commaunde, that whosoeuer withoute ineuitable necessitie and weaknesse, and euident sicknesse, great weakensse of age, shall presume in the daies of Lent to eate flesh, he shall not onely be giltie of the resurrection of our Lorde, but shall be also excommunicated from the holie Communion of that same daie. And thys shal be added to his farther pain, that that yeare he shall abstain from all eating of flesh, bicause in the holy time of Lent, he forgotte the discipline of abstinence. Thus the Councell.
In the which Councell the fast of Lent ys commaunded, as ye perceaue, but this proueth not that yt was but then begonne, and that yt ys B a newe deuise. For S. Hierom, who liued moch aboue twoo hūdreth years Hieron. aduersus Mō tan. before that Councell saieth thus: Nos quadragesimam secundùm traditionē Apostolorum ieiunamus. We fast the Lent according to the tradition of the Apostles.
But this fast of Lent (not withstanding that yt ys the tradicion of the Apostles) hath ben in diuerse Councels since the Apostles, and long after their The queen that nowe ys commaū ded Lent to be fasted and yet yt was in vse before. time commaunded, bicause in processe of time the deuociō of the people decaied, as yt doth to moch in these our daies, Wherbie the decrees of the Apostles being contēned (as nowe also they be) yt was necessarie by a newe cōmaundement to reuiue and confirme the same, and so cause them to be continued which ells had ben omitted. Euen so Honorius perceauing the deuociō of the people to be decaied, and their regard of the blessed Sacrament, through the wicked doctrine of Berengarius ( which yet, as yt maie be thought, late smoldering in putrified and rotten postes and stickes) to be moche abated, to reuiue that that so long had continued, he gaue commaundement to honoure the Sacramēt as the like maie be doē, whē the catholique faith shal be resumed in Englōd. C Thus ye maie perceaue both how fōd and weake the argument of the Proclamerys, and therwith howe false and vntrue.
After this yt liketh him to dallie and solace himself in alleadging certain scholastical doctours, as S. Thomas. Dunce, Durande, Holkot and other, not in reprouing Mocking and skorning easie kindes of confutacion. their learning by learning (which he can not doe) but reprouing yt with mocking and skorning (which ys in deed easie to doe) The Summe of all that long disputacion ys onely to make the matter appeare to the worlde, that yt ys a daungerouse thinge to honour the Sacrament, for that the people can not discerne the accidentes or the outwarde formes of the Sacrament, from the bodie of Chryste, and therfore maie soen committe idolatrie in honouring the outward formes in the stead of Chrystes bodie.
Yt ys a woorld to see thys man, that when he hath no substācial argument to make against the matter derectlie, he seketh oute daūgers to bring himself ād the people into more daūger. For wher yt ys our duetie to honour our sauiour Chryst, whersoeuer we know him by faith to be. to auoide his inuēted daunger, he wold haue vs, by omissiō of owr duetie, to rūne into a certē daū ger, D ād to auoide soch abuse as he imagineth, to take away the thing yt self, as Licurgus did, who seing wine to be abused, for that mē took excessiuelie of yt, [Page]caused all the vines in the contrie to be cutte dowen, that ther shoulde be no wine. So this man for an abuse that he phantasieth, he wolde take awaie E the thing.
By like phantasie he might also moue vs not to honoure Chryst in heauen. Like Phantasie ioined with auarice pulled down all Abbeis in England. But moche more yt might seem to haue moued the Apostles and other that were conuersaunt with Chryst in the flesh, and beleuing in him honoured him. What daunger were they in that seing the humane bodie of Christ, and percase not sufficientlie discerning the humanitie from the deitie, nor fully perceauing the vnition of these two natures in the vnitie of person, neither yet well vnderstanding how the bodie of Chryst ys to be adored, and howe yt ys not, howe the deitie was in that person of Chryst, and howe to be considered, and yet did adore him? Al these poinctes, as yt maie be gathered by the peticion of Philippe, were not well vnderstanded of the Apostles themselues. For when he saied: Domine, ostende nobis Patrem, et sufficit nobis, Lord shewe vs the Father, and yt ys enough for vs: yt semeth that he had not that consideracion of the Deitie, that faith required.
And further by the aunswer of Chryste, yt semeth that the Apostles didnot F yet knowe Chryst. For he saied: Tanto tempore vobiscum sum, & non cognouistis me? Haue I ben so long time with yowe, and haue ye not knowen me? Yf they that had ben so long conuersaunt withe Chryst, and so long traded in the schoole of Chryste did not know Chryst, how did the three wise men of the east, the woman of Chananie, the man born blind restored to his seight, with other which did adore Chryst without reproche? Did they (trowe ye) know Chryst, seing the Apostles did not know him? Did they (trowe ye) vnder stand this quidditie of faith, how the flesh and bodie of Chryst was to be adored, and howe yt was not to be adored? And yet were not they in the simplicitie of their faith well accepted?
And to come nearer to answer this man, do all Chrystian people, which at this present daie adore Chryst in heauen, vnderstand this quidditie, how the flesh of Chryst being a creature, maie be adored with Godlie honoure? To adore the Godhead of Chryst with godlie honour, yt ys a plain matter, but to adore the manhead, to adore the naturall flesh of a natural man, to adore a verie man with God, I thinke the Disciples of this Proclamer, who not vnderstanding G howe the accidentes be fownded in the Sacrament, nor how to discern them frō the bodie of Chryst, that ys couered with these accidentes, therfor flie from the honouring of Chryst in the Sacrament, for feare of cō mitting Idolatrie, were neuer so well taught by ther master, well to vnderstand these quiddities aboue mencioned. Will he also therfore, that they not vnderstanding these thinges, should also flie the honour of Chryst in heauē? I thinke verilie yt will therto growe at the last as yt doth allreadie break out among the Caluinistes. For doth not Richerus forbidde to praye to Chryst, least we shoulde honour hys humanitie with godly honoure? Hath he Richerus a Calumist forbiddeth to praie to Chryst. not saied that he ys to be accompted an heretique that saieth that Chryst must necessarely be praied vnto? See yowe not howe Satthan goeth aboute by prettie means to take awaie Chryst from yowe? Among the Caluinistes, as nowe among yowe, he began to take awaie the adoracion of Chryst in the Sacrament, but nowe he taketh awaie the adoracion of Chryst in heauen. Take heed therfor Sathan ys subtle.
He saieth that the schoolemen make a doubte of the adoracion of the Sacrament, H bicause the vnlearned maie cōmitte Idolatrie, yf they happen to Damascen li 4. ra. 3. woorshippe the outward formes or shewes of bread, ād geue honour to that [Page 176]in stead of Chrystes bodie. Damasen saieth, that the flesh of Chryst, the humanitie of Chryst ys not in some consideracion to be adored, and if they Phanticall daungers maie not drawe vs from oure saith and duetie doing. A so adore and honore yt they committe Idolatrie. shall all the vnlearned christians therfore, bicause they maie committe Idolatrie in adoring Chrystes flesh and bodie, geue ouer their dueties, and ceasse to honour Chrystes bodie in heauen? Yf daungers maie withdrawe vs from the matters of our faith, and the doing of our duetie in the same, forsomoche as in manie matters of faithe, manie daungers maie happen, manie matters of our faith must be omitted and forsaking.
Among the daungers that maie happen in matters of faith, this man to disswade his hearers and readers from the faith, bringeth in one other, aboute the consecracion of the holy Sacrament. what (saieth he) if yt happned the preist not to consecrate? what if he leaue oute the woordes of consecracion and neuer speake them? or what if the preist haue no minde or intencion to consecrate?
As this man goeth aboute to shake the fundacion and building of this Sacrament, which ys (as S. Dionise saieth) the perfection all other Sacramentes: So his bothers and likes haue goen aboute to shake the fundacion of B the sacrament of Baptisme. For Brentius saieth that baptisme ys good and maie be ministred withoute the forme of the woordes of Baptisme. But yt shall be best, that I asscribe his owne woords, that I be not thought to misreport him. Thus he writeth: Christus non collocauit fundamentum Baptismi super certis literis, sillabis, aut dictionibus, nec alligauit nos ad certa verba (non enim instituit magiam, quae ad certam verborum formam, aut ritus alligata est) sed instituit coelestia sacramenta, Brentius in explicatione Baptismi. quae constant sua ipsius sententia & voluntate, his vel illis verbis significata. Itaque si quis post recitationem Symboli Apostolici in Baptismo diceret ad baptisandū haec verba: Audiui iam ex te confessionem fidei tuae, quòd credas in Deum Patrem omnipotentem creatorem coeli & terrae. Et in Vnigemtum Filium eius Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum, & in Spiritum sanctum. In hanc igitur confessionem, & sidem, intingo te in aquam seu perfundo te aqud, vt hoc signaculo certus fias, te insertum esse in Iesum Christum, & communionem omnium bonorum. Vade ergo in pace: Hic certè Baptismus verè esset Baptismus.
Chryste hathe not settled the fundacion of Baptisme vpon certen letters Berentius impugneth the forme of Baptisme. sillables, or woordes. For he hath not instituted magike, that ys to saie, incantacion, C sorcerie or witchcrafte, which ys bownden to certen form of woordes or ceremonies: but he hath instituted heauenly sacramentes, whiche are established by his owne will and sentence, signified by these or these woordes. Therfor if anie man after the rehersall of the Symbole or Creed of the Apostles in Baptisme shoulde saie these woordes to him that ys to be baptized: I haue now heard of thee, the confession of thy faith, that thowe beleuest in God the Father allmightie maker of heauen and earth: And in his onely begotten Sonne our Lord Iesus Chryst: And in the holie Gost. Vpon this consession therfor and faith, I dippe thee in the water, or I washe thee with water, that by this signe thowe maist be made certen, that thowe arte inserted or engraffed into Iesus Chryst and into the cōmunion of all good thinges &c. Therfor go thie waie in peace. Certenly this Baptisme shoulde be verilie Baptisme.
Ye see here howe this man reiected the woordes of Baptisme, and accounted yt sorcerie and supersticion to be bownde to a certen forme of woordes in the ministracion not onely of this but of other sacramentes. Yt ys lamentable to see the wickednesse of these men, howe they labour to D weaken all the fundacion of our faithe, and wolde make vs viode of all certentie in the ministracion of Chrystes Sacramentes.
[Page]But to returne to our Proclamer and to aunswer him with his owne learning E (for Brentius and he be of one religion and doctrine, or ells Sathan ys diuided in him self) seinge that to vse a prescript forme of woordes in the Sacrament ys supersticion, and Magicke, what nedeth he to make any doubte whether those formes (whiche the holy auncient Fathers call the woordes of consecracion) be vsed or no? as shough ther were daunger if they were omitted, where by the learning of his schoolefelowe Brentius, to omitte them ys raither religion, then daunger. For if the woordes of the forme of Baptisme maie withoute daunger be omitted, why maie not the woordes of consecracion withoute daunger be omitted?
Thus hitherto I haue aunswered this Proclamer with the doctrine of his owne schoole, that yt maie appeare to the reader, howe wicked and detestable the doctrine ys, and howe yt confowndeth all order, and all certentie of the ministracion of sacramentes in Chrystes Church, leauing a man so receauing these Sacramentes vncerten and doudtfull, whether he hath receaued either the one Sacrament or the other.
I wolde here reherse mo daungers that might likewise happen in the ministracion Protestantes admitt some two Sacramentes, some three some foure some neuer one. of the other sacramentes if I knewe of what religion this man F were. For some of them admitte but two Sacramātes, some three, some foure some neuer one, so diuerse be they in their opinions, so vnstable ys the profession of their religion. But contenting my self with these that be rehersed, fearing that he will admitte no mo, though the catholike church admitte seuen: I will nowe open the doctrine of the catholique Church in these two, for asmoch as ys here to be saide.
And first for the Sacrament of Baptisme, thus teacheth the holy catholique churche, that the inuocacion of the holie Trinitie, maie not be omitted, as wittnesseth S. Basill: Neminem impellat ad errorem, illud Apostoli, quòd nomen Patris, ac sancti Spiritus in baptismatis mentione saepe omittit. Neque ob id puter nominum nomenclaturam non necesse esse obseruari. Quicunque (inquit) in Christum baptisati estis, Christum induistis. That the Apostle in the mencion of baptime doth often omitte the name of the Father, and the holy Gost, let yt driue no man to erroure. Neither for that let him thinke, that yt ys not necessarie the naming of their names to be obserued.
And again he saieth: Oportet immortalem manere traditionem in viuifica gratia datum. G Qui enim liberauit vitam nostram ex corruptione, potestatem renouationis nobis dedit. Quae potestas inexplicabilem causam habet, & in mysterio abstrusam, verùm magnam Basill. de spiritu. sāct ca. 12. Forme of Baptisme necessarilie required in that Sacra. animis salutem adferentem. Quare addere quid, aut detrahere, palàm est elapsus à vitae aeterna. Si igitur separaetio Spiritus in Baptismate à Patre & Filio, periculosa est baptizanti, & inutilis Baptisinum suscipienti, quomodò nobis tutum est à Patre & Filio diuellere Spiritum sanctum? Fides & Baptisma duo salutis modi sunt inter se cohaerentes, & inseparabiles. Fides enim perficitur per baptisinum: baptismus verò fundatur per fidem & per eadem nomina vtraque res impletur. Sicut enim credimus in patrem, & Filium, & Spiritum sanctum: sic etiam baptizamur in nomine Patris, & Filij & Spiritus sancti.
The tradition geuen in the quickning gracemust abide vnmoued. He that deliuered our life from corruption, gaue vs the power of renouacion, which power hathe an inexplicable cause, and hidden in misterie, but yet bringing Jbidem. great health to our soules. Wherfore to putt to, anie thing, or to pluck awaie Faith and baptisme two insepaerable meanes of saluacion. aniething, yt ys an open fall from euerlasting life. Yf therfor the separacion of the holie Goste in Baptisme from the Father and the Sonne, ys peri-Louse to the baptizer, and vnprofitable to him that receaueth baptisme, H howe can we safelie from the Father and the Sonne diuide the holy Gost? [Page 177]Faith and Baptisme be twoo meanes of healthe conioined together, and inseparable. For faith ys perfected by Baptisme, and Baptisme ys founded A by faith and by the same names bothe these thinges be fullfilled. As we beleue in the Father, and the Sonne, and the holy Gost: so are we baptised in the name of the Father, and the Sonne, and the holie Gost Thus farre S. Basill. Damascē. li. 4 ca. 10.
Damnascen also saieth: Quemadmodum semel completa est Domini mors: sic semel oportet Baptizari iuxta Domini verbum: In nomnie Patris, & Filij, & Spiritus sancti, instructos confessionem, Patris, & Filij, & Spiritus sancti. As the deathe of our Lorde was once doen: So must they, that be taught the confession of the Father, the Sonne, and the holie Goste, be once baptised according to the woorde of our Lorde: In the name of the Father, the Sonne, and the holie Gste. Thus Damascen.
Manie other Fathers maie be brought, but theise two maie at this time suffice, which both do declare that not onely the confession of the Father, and the Sōne, and the holy Gost must be had in Baptisme: but also ouer and B beside the partie to be baptized must be baptized in the name of the Father, and the Sonne, and the holy Goste, as by the well weighing of their sainges yt shall be easie to perceaue.
But nowe by cause Brentius teacheth that the woordes of the forme of Baptisme be not necessarie, and yt maie be that this Proclamer thinketh euē This perill I fear falleth vpon manye in Englond in these daies. the same, and herein some light heades leauinge the doctrine of the auncient church will folowe Berentius his doctrine, and will not baptise in the name of the Father, and of the Sonne, and of the holie Goste, which (as S. Basill saieth) ys perilouse to the baptizer, and vnprofitable to the baptised, shall we therfore reiect and cast awaie the Sacrament of Baptisme, bicause soch perills and daungers maie happen in the ministracion of yt, as this man wolde that we shoulde Chrystes bodie and bloode in the blessed Sacramēt bicause daungers maie happen in the honouring of the same? As for the consecracion of the Sacrament, yt ys taught vs also hy the catholique Church, that yt ys doen by the power of God woorkinge at the due pronunciacion of the woordes of Chryst, as wittnesse Eusebius Emisenus, Chrysostome, and Ambrose C with a nombre of other, What daū ger to the preist, and what to the people if the woodes of Consecracion be left vnsaied.
But this Proclamer saieth, that yt ys knowen that some preistes haue manie yeares lefte oute the woordes of consecracion. Yt ys plain then (saie I) that the bodie of Chryst ys not presēt in the Sacramēt, bicause the instituciō ys not obserued. Then yt foloweth (as the proclamer saieth) that ther ys daunger. Ther ys daunger in dede to the wicked preist, who pretending in outwarde face to do that, that Chryst hath appoincted, and dothe yt not indeed. But to the people simplie beleuing the ministre to doe that, that to his ministerie apperteineth, and perceauing nothinge to the contrarie, ther ys no daunger to them in doing their duetie, though the naughtie man the preist doe not his duetie. And wher the Proclamer saieth that yt ys knowen that preistes haue so doen: I thinke if yt be so, yt ys knowen to him of him self and of his likes, who of peruerse mindes being corrupted in their faith haue committed soche impietie in dede to their greater and more greuouse damnacion, but not to the hurte of the people if they knewe yt not. And here also to saie, I beleue that if any catholique preist had ben knowen to D this man, so to haue doen (as he saieth) he wolde without all dowbte to the helpe of his cause (wher vnto he hath none) haue named him. But forasmoche as he speaketh yt of him self, and his conspired complices, which secretly [Page] Conuenerunt in vnum adnersus Dominum, & aduersus Christum eius, haue conspired E against our Lorde, and against his annoincted, when they durst not vtter, what they had wickedly conceaued: he ys a shamed to name him self to haue committed so heinouse a facte. Yf yt be not so, yt ys like to be a feigned matter to supplie, when certen and true matter lacketh.
But to returne to the matter, and to moue the same scruple to him, that he moueth against the catholique Churche: What if some that ministre the communion after the sorte that ys nowe receaued, do neither speake the woordes of Chryst vpon the bread (For Richerus a Caluinist reiecteth the woordes of consecracion, as not nedefull to be spoken, or munbled, as his terme ys, vpon insensible creatures) neither entende to make anie sacramentall bread: what then do your people receaue? Yf they receaue no sacramēt (as yt ys none, if bothe woordes and intencion be lacking) then they receaue no promisse, they receaue no remission of sinnes, nor soch other benefittes (for the promisses be annexed to the sacramentes) howe are they then deceaued? Howe then ys the Sacrament of Chrystes bodie and bloode in F due forme ministred? Howe ys the death of Chryst shewed furthe according to Chrystes minde, whiche must be shewed furth, when we eate that bread and drinke that cuppe, as S. Paule teacheth vs: As often as ye shall eate of this breade, and drinke of the cuppe: he saieth not bread generallie, but this breade, mening the bread of the Sacrament? Thus if men shall improue the great matters of religion, withe why, what, and howe, and inuented daungers and abuses, your owne religion, whiche yowe magnifie as most sure and good, maie be proued vnsure and weake. To be short, all his argumentes grownded vpon (if and and) are to no pourpose. For if maketh no certen argument. Wherfore leauing them as sufficiently touched, I shall reuert to matter of more substance, and proceade in the allegacion of the fathers for the exposition of Chrystes woordes nowe in hande.
THE NINE AND FOVRTETH CHAP. PROCEAdeth in the vnderstanding of Chrystes woordes by Irenaeus, and Tertullian. G
ALlthough betwen Iustine and Irenaeus, ther were some holy Fathers, that haue left behinde them goodly testimonies, for the proofe of Chrystes very presence in the Sacrament: Yet I finde Irenaeus li. 4. cap. 32. cont. heres. none that doe alleage Chrystes woordes, and therby geue vs light to vnderstand them, vntill we come to Ireneus, who writeth thus: Sed & Discipulis suis dans consilium primitias Deo offerre ex suis creaturis, non quasi indigenti, sed vt nec ipsi infructuosi, nec ingrati sint, eum qui ex creatura panis est accepit, & gratias egit dicens: Hoc est corpus meum. Et calicem similiter, qui est ex ea creatura quae est secundum nos, suum sanguinem confessus est, & noui testamenti nouam docuit oblationem, quam Ecclesia ab Apostolis accipiens in vniuerso mundo offert Deo. Geuing also instruction to his disciples (the authour speakethe of Chryste) Sacrifice of the new Testament instituted ād taught by Chryst in consecraciō of his bodie and blood. to offre to God the first fruictes of his creatures, not as to one hauing nede, but that they shoulde be neither vnfruictfull, neither vnthankfull, he tooke that breade, whiche ys a creature, and gaue thankes saing: This ys my bodie. And the cuppe likewise, whiche ys a creature as we be, he confessed to be his bloode, and of the newe Testament, taught a newe oblacion, H whiche the Churche receauing of the Apostles offreth to God in all the worlde. Thus Irenaeus.
who when he had declared howe allmightie God instituted and appoincted [Page 178]sacrifices and oblacions in the olde testament, as thinges to be geuen to him not as to one that neaded soche thinges or giftes, but for the exercising A of their obedience and faithe, in the whiche God ys delighted, not yet that God had anie profitt, or aduantage therbie, but that they doing these thinges, profitt and aduantaie might ensewe to them from, God, for whose commodities sake God did institute them. So he declareth that in the newe Testament also, the people of the same might exercise their faith and obedience, New sacrifice of the new Testament, what yt ys. and therbie pourchase gain and profitte, and for benefittes receaued be fownde thankfull, Chryst also taught his Apostles to offre sacrifice. And what the sacrifice ys he teacheth saing that yt ys his bodie made of the creature of bread, and his bloode, made of the creature of wine. Howe this thinge ys brought to passe he sheweth when he saieth: that Chryst tooke the bread, whiche ys a creature and gaue thankes saing: This ys my bodie: And likewise the cuppe, which also ys a creature, and confessed yt to be his bloode. In whiche woordes, wher he hath expressedly saied, that Chryst confessed yt to be his bloode, and the like ys ment of the bread to be his bodie: what more plain speache wolde we desire of anie authoure? Yf Chryst confessed yt to be his bodie, Li. 4. de Sacramēt c. 6 and his confession ys allwaies true, howe then standeth the sainge of the B Aduersarie that yt ys not his bodie? Shall we doubte of the trueth of Chryste? as S. Ambrose saieth: Ipse Dominus Iesus testificatur nobis, quod corpus suum accipiamus & sanguinem: Nunquid debemus de eius fide, & testificatione dubitare? Owre Lorde Iesus testifieth vnto vs, that we receaue his bodie and bloode: ought we to doubte of his treuth and testimonie?
Seing then this authour saieth, that Chryst confessed his bodie and bloode Jrenaeus auoucheth both reall presence ād sacrifice. to be present and that by these woordes: This ys my bodie. This ys my bloode: yt ys plain that he vnderstandeth them in their propre sense, withoute figure or trope, and so acknowledgeth the very reall presence of Chrystes bodie ād blood in the Sacramēt. For farder proof wherof, the woordes that immediately in the same authour doe folowe do make very moch, wher he saieth, Et noui Testamenti, nouam docuit oblacionem: And of the newe Testament he taught a newe oblacion. This newe oblacion of the newe Testament, ys the bodie and bloode of Chryste, as before in the first booke ys declared and prooued. And here to the pourpose farder to saie, yf the sacrifice that C Chryst instituted to be the newe oblacion of the newe testament, were but a peice of Sacramentall breade, yt were no newe oblacion. For then yt were the same that Melchisedech offred, who offred bread and wine in sacrifice as a figure. Wherfore if this sacrifice be but bread and wine, a bare figure, then yt ys no newe oblacion.
In the leuiticall lawe also we finde bread and wine offred in the sacrifice. The shewe bread also was offred in sacrifice. Wherfor of necessitie yt must be vnderstand of an oblacion and sacrifice not hertofore accustomed to be offred, whiche by that reason maie be called a newe oblacion, which ys none other but the verie bodie and bloode our Sauiour Chryste. Which although yt were figuratiuelie offred before of Melchisedech in materiall breade and wine: yet nowe in the newe testament, yt ys offred as neuer before, not in figure but in verie dede, the verie bodie and blood of Chryst him self, the heauenly breade, and heauenlie wine answering the bread and wine of Melchisedech, as the thing the figure. And so yt ys a newe oblaciō instituted to be offred in the newe Testamēt. Wherfor also Chryst to shewe D the adaptaciō of the figure to the thing, and the figure therin to be fullfilled, tooke bread and wine, and consecrating them into his bodie and bloode, [Page]confessed them (as this authour saieth) to be his bodie and bloode, that the E figure might be manifestlie shewed ther to be termined in that heauenly bread and wine, the verie thing figurated by that figure.
Yf the malice of the aduersarie will go aboute to peruerte this plain sainge and testimonie of his authour: sainge: that allthough Chryst did confesse the bread and wine to be his bodie and bloode, yet yt foloweth not that they were so in dede. This were a merueilouse saing, that Chryst shoulde confesse a thing to be in plain maner of speache withoute anie circunstance, leading vs to an other sense: and yet in deed not to be so. But that he shall not so wickedly auoide the trueth vttered here by this authour, he shal heare an other testimonie of the same, in the whiche, as before he saied that Chryst confessed the bread and wine to be his body and bloode: so here the authour affirmeth them to be the bodie and blode: Thus he saieth Quomodò constabit cum panem in quo gratiae actae sunt, corpus esse Domini sui, & calicē sanguinis eius, si non ipsum fabricatoris mundi filium dicant? &c. Quomodò autem rursum Irenaus li. 5. cont. Heresie. dicunt carnem in corruptionem deuenire, & non percipere vitam, quae à corpore Domini & sanguine alitur? Howe shall yt be manifest, that bread in the whiche than F kes be geuen, to be the bodie of their Lorde, and the cuppe of his bloode, yf A plain saing of Irenaeus for the Proclamer they saie that he ys not the sonne of the maker of the worlde? &c. And again, howe saie they the flesh to come into corruption, and not to receaue life, whiche ys nourished of the bodie and bloode of our Lorde?
Ther be here in this testimonie twoo notes, wherby as the aduersarie ys aunswered and conuinced: so ys the trueth notablie settfurth and confirmed.
The first ys, that he saieth that the bread, in the whiche thankes are geuen, ys the bodie of our Lorde, and the cuppe ys the cuppe of his bloode. The bread in the which Chryst gaue thinkes, was the bread which the Euangelistes saie that Chryst tooke in his handes, and gaue thankes saing: This ys my bodie. Chryst then might verie well confeffe yt to be his bodie, seing (as Irenaeus saieth) yt ys his bodie. So that of this authour we learn yt not onely to be called and confessed the bodie of Chryst, but also to be, and that not in obscure woordes, but in plain and euident G sentence.
The other note ys, that our flesh ys nourished of the bodie and bloode of Oure flesh ys nourished of the bodie and blood of our Lord. our Lorde. Wherby the erroure of the Aduersarie teaching that Chryst ys onely spiritually and not reallie receaued in the Sacramēt ys ouerthrowen and fownde false. For by that spirituall maner our flesh ys not nourished, wherfor of necessitie the other maner, that ys, Chrystes verie reall bodie must be in the Sacrament receaued. Yt shal helpe yowe the better to perceaue the minde of this authour as concerning the reall presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, if ye doe vnderstande wherfore he wrote this, that ys here alleaged.
Vnderstand therfore that by this place last alleaged he impugneth two heresies: the one was that Chryst was not the Sonne of God that made the worlde, but that he was a man liuing in Iewrie, who did not onelie dissolue Two heresies cōfuted by one argument grownded vpon the Sacr. the lawe and the Prophetes, but also all the workes of that God, that made the worlde. The other taught that the soule onely shall be saued, and liue euerlastinglie, and not the bodie, for that yt being a grosse thing, made of H the earth, yt ys not possible, that yt shoulde atteing to euerlasting life. To confute these two heresies Irenaeus growndeth him self vpon the Sacrament, as a matter certen, euident, plain, and knowen aswell of the heretiques, [Page 179]against whom he disputed, as of the true catholique Chrystians. A
Nowe against the first heresie, he proueth Chryst to be the Sonne of God by that that they confessed the bodie of their Lorde, to be in the Sacrament. For yf he whose bodie ys in the Sacrament were not the Sonne of him that made the worlde, but a bare naturall man, howe coulde a man of hys owne powre compasse that his bodie should so be? and howe coulde yt be the bodie of their Lorde, yf he were not the Sonne of God? So all the weight of this argument standeth and resteth vpon the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament. Nowe denie the presence with thys Proclamer, and then the argument maketh nothing against the heresie, and so the argument which this holie Father thought to be stronge shall be but weake. But who can doubte of the true knowledge of this auncient Father? When he grownded hys argument vpon the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, he was sure that hys grownde was fast and good. Yf the Sacrament were nothing but a figure, what more proofe coulde be grownded vpon yt then vpon anie other figure of the olde lawe? B
The second heresie he also impugneth by the receipt of the bodie and bloode of Chryst in the Sacrament. For wher that heresie denied the bodie of man to be able or like to atteign to life euerlasting, this holie man proueth that yt shall. For howe can yt (saieth he) but receaue life, seing yt ys nourished by the bodie and bloode of Chryst? as though he might Cyrill in 6. Ioan. ca 14 haue saied, as sainct Cyrill saieth: Quoniam Saluatoris caro Verbo Dei, quod naturaliter vita est, coniuncta, viuifica effecta est, quando eam comedimus tunc vitam habemus in nobis illi coniuncti, quae viuifica effecta est. Bycause the flesh of our Sauiour ioined to the Sonne of God, whiche ys naturally life ys made quickning or geuing life, when we eate that flesh, then Jn 15. Ioan Our corruptible bodie can not atteign to incorrup. and life, except the bodie of Chryst be ioined to yt haue we life in vs. For (as he saieth in an other place: Non poterat aliter corruptibilis haec natura corporis ad incorruptibilitatem & vitam traduci, nisi naturalis vitae corpus ei coniungeretur. This corruptible nature of our bodie coulde not otherwise be brought to incorruptibilitie and life, except the bodie of naturall life should be ioined to yt.
So then ye maie nowe likewise perceaue the force of this argumente C of Irenaeus to consist vpon the corporall receipt of the bodye of Chryst in the Sacrament, whiche (as Cyrill saieth) being the flesh of life, and incorruption when yt ys ioined to our corruptible and mortall flesh (whiche maner of coniunction ys by none other mean doen, but by the Sacrament) yt maketh this naturall bodie of our to be apte to incorruption and life. Yf in the Sacrament we doe not receaue the verie reall bodie of Chryste, but a figure of the bodie, whiche geueth not life to our bodies, howe standeth the argument of Irenaeus? what trueth ys ther in the saing of Cyrillus? howe shall these our mortall and coruptible bodies be made immortall and incorruptible, yf the flesh of life, the flesh of our Lorde Chryst be not ioined to our flesh? The nourishing of our slesh to incorruptibilitie by the flesh of Chryst proueth inuinciblie the reall presence.
And here note, Reader, that these maner of speaches of these two authours improue the phantasie and erroure of the Sacramentaries, and inuinciblie proue the true catholique doctrine of the Churche. As touching the false doctrine of the Sacramentaries, wher yt teacheth that we onely receaue Chrystes bodie spirituallie, that ys, the meritte and vertue of D Chrystes passiō ād death, this receipt toucheth not our bodies, this spirituall Chryst ys not ioined to our flesh, but this receipt toucheth our soules, thys [Page]spirituall Chryst ys ioined to spirittes. But these authours saie that the flesh and bodie of Chryst ys receaued and so ioined to our flesh and bodies. E Which receipt and coniunction proueth inuinciblie that for as moch, as the spirituall receipt ys ioined onely to the soule that ther must nedes be an other receipt of the reall and substanciall flesh and bodie of Chryste, whiche maie be ioined to our substanciall flesh and bodies. And so shall the argument of Irenaeus be of great force and strenght, against the heretiques, against whome he disputed: So ys the testimonie of Cyrill true: So ys the doctrine of the catholique Church fownd auncient substanciall and well grownded: So ys the doctrin of the Sacramentaries improued and fownd false as yt ys in dede.
And wher the Proclamer required but one plain place of anie one auncient Plain places and argumentes against M. Iuell. doctour, he hath nowe one, not onely plain, but also strong and mightie, so ouerthrowing the green wrought walls of hys late inuented heresie, that well he maie hang vppe some painted cloathes, paincted like strong walls, whiche maie deceaue simple eies, and weake seightes, but they shall be in dede but painted cloutes. This Irenaeus ys not onely taken of the catholiques to be (as I haue saied) plain and strong, but also F of heretiques. For Melancthon against Oecolampadius this proclamers late fownder, alleageth the same Irenaeus as one most plain and auncient, and ther for not to be against saied.
Thus hauing brought furth an auncient scholer of Chrystes schoole, and a graue counseilour in Chrystes Parliament house, who hath declared vnto vs the true doctrine of Chrystes schoole, and the enacted and receaued trueth of his Parliament house, that the woordes of Chryst teache vs the presence of his verie bodie in the Sacrament, and that they are to be vnderstanded in their propre sense: Now foloweth Tertullian a man verie nere the time of Irenaeus, whome the Aduersaries seme to make the patrone of their figuratiue doctrine, but yt shall be well perceaued, that he ys against them and fauoreth them not. Thus he writeth. Professus itaque Tertullian li. 4. cont. Marc. se concupiscentia concupiscere edere Pascha, vt suum (indignum quippe vt quid alienum concupisceret Deus) acceptum panem, & distributum Discipulis, corpus suum illum fecit, dicens: Hoc est corpus meum id est, figura corporis mei. Figura autem non fuisset, nisi veritatis esset corpus. When Chryst therfore had saied, that G with desire he desired to eat the Passouer, as his owen (for yt was Chryst made the bread his bodie, saieth Tertull. vnsemelye that God should desire anie straunge thing) the bread that was taken and distributed to hys disciples, he made yt his bodie, sainge: This ys my bodie, that ys to saie, a figure of my bodie. But yt had not ben a figure, except yt were a bodie of trueth.
As Irenaeus against Valentinus: So Tertullian against Marcion vsed hys argument taken of the Sacrament. Marcion the disciple of Cerdon (whose heresies S. Augustine reherseth) wickedlie taught as hys master did, that Chryst had no August. li. Aduers. Heres. c. 28 Heresie of Marcion very true bodie, when he was here conuersant vpon the earth, but a phantasticall bodie. Nowe Tertullian to proue that he had a verie true bodie, bringeth in the institucion of the Sacrament, sainge, that Chryst made the breade that he tooke and distributed to hys disciples, hys bodie, saing: This ys my bodie. Wherbie as he stronglie proueth by Chrystes owne facte, who made the breade hys bodie, and by his owne woorde (who saied of the same that he had so made: This ys my bodie) that Chryst had a verie bodie, Whiche coulde not well haue H proued the pourpose of Tertullian, yf that, that he made hys bodie, [Page 180]and saied to be hys bodie, had not ben a verie bodie. Euen so saing that A Chryst made the bread hys bodie, when he saied: Thys ys my bodie, prooueth against the Sacramentaries bothe the presence of Chrystes verie bodie in the Sacrament, and also that the woordes of Chryst are to be taken in their propre sense.
But here reclaimeth the Aduersarie, and saieth that not withstanding this that ys saied, Tertullian addeth and saieth that yt ys a figure of hys bodie. I wishe that the Aduersarie wolde here ioin with me, as I will with him, that both of vs accept the wholle saing of Tertullian, as yt ys here alleaged, and that he whose doctrine repugneth against anie parte of yt, to confesse that hys doctrine ys not good, and he that confesseth the whol, that hys doctrine be accepted as sownde and good. Let ys then open the partes of Tertullian his saing.
Ther be in yt twoo partes: The one ys that he saieth, that Chryst made Tertullian opened and deliuered from the Sacramentaries. the bread that he tooke in hys handes hys bodie: The other that he saieth: This ys my bodie, that yt ys to saie, a figure of mi bodie. I nowe require of the B Aduersarie, whether he will receaue the first parte of Tertulians saing, that Chryst made the breade his bodie? Certen I am that neither he, nor anie other Sacramentarie doth graunt that. For if Chryst made the breade hys bodie (as by the testimonie of this authour yt ys most certen that he did) then ys hys very bodie certenlie and verilie in the Sacrament. Which they all denie, as by declaracion of the sainges of some of their capitans yt shall appeare. Zuinglius ad illutris. Germ. principes.
Zuinglius writeth thus: Cùm panis & vinum illius amititiae symbolum sint, qua Deus humano generi per filium suum reconciliatus est, illa non aestimamus pro materiae praecio, sed iuxta significate rei magnitudinem, vt iam non sit vulgaris panis, sed sacer, nec panis tantùm nomen habeat, sed corporis Christi quoque, imo sit corpus Christi sed appellatione, & significatione, quod recentiores vocant sacramentaliter. Forasmoche as bread and wine be the token of the frendshippe, by the which God by hys Sonne was reconciled to mankinde, we weigh not these thinges for the woorthinesse of their matter, but according to the greatnesse of the thing signified: that nowe yt be not cōmon bread, but holie, neither that yt haue onelie the name of bread, but also of the bodie of Chryst: yea that yt be the C bodie of Chryst, but by name onely, and significacion, whiche the youngermen call sacramentallie. Thus he.
Ye see that this Sacramentarie, wolde not haue the Sacrament to be estemed for the substance of yt, wherbie he denieth the presence of the substance of Chrystes bodie. In the ende he also saieth that yt ys the bodie of Christ but he correcteth or raither corrupteth himself saing: that yt ys so by name and significacion onelie, and not by trueth, and substance.
Oecolāpadius also saieth thus Barbaries plus quàm Scythica, vel Diomedaea est, in panis in Jn exposit. verborū coenae. Dom. volucroceu in aenigmate ipsam hospitis carnē quaerere. Rusticitas est non obseruare nec cognoscere in quo hospes beneuolentiā suam doceat, & pro spirituali carnalem requirere coenam. Yt ys more then scythicall or diomedicall Barbarousnesse, in the couering of breade to seke the flesh of Chryste, yt ys grosse inciuilitie not to regarde and knowe wherin Chryst teacheth hys beneuolence, and for a spirituall to require a carnall supper. And here Oecolampadius also denieth that Tertullan affirmeth. For he saieth yt ys a barbarousnesse or rudenesse to seke the flesh of Chryst in the Sacrament: but Tertullian (whom I often repete) saing that Chryst made the bread hys bodie geueth vs not a rude, but a godlie doctrine D to seke the flesh of Chryst in the Sacrament.
[Page] Bullinger also saieth thus: Commemoratio ac symbolum est corporis veri, non ipsum E corpus. Yt ys a remembrance and a token of the verie bodie, not the verie bodie Bullingerus in 2. Act. yt self. What nede I trouble the reader with the sainges of anie moe of them, seing yt ys certen, that the wholl rable of them, and this Proclamer also denieth that, that Tertullian saieth, and abhorreth to saie as he saieth, that the breade ys made the bodie of Chryst. And note well that Tertullian saieth not, that yt ys named or called the bodie of Chryst, but in plain expresse Chryst named not onelie, but made the bread hys bodie. woordes saieth, that yt ys made the bodie of Chryste. And nowe yt ys plain that the aduersarie receaueth not this parte of Tertullian hys saing: but al the catholique church euer hath and doeth receaue yt, confessing yt with thys man and S. Cyprian, who folowed him, and highlie embraced him, and S. Ambrose, which both vse the like woordes, that the breade ys made the bodie of Chryste. Cyprian in this maner: Panis quem Dominus Discipulis edendum porrigebat non essigic, sed natura mutatus omnipotentia verbi factus est Caro. The bread Cypriā. de coena Dom. that our Lord gaue vnto hys disciples, chaunged not in outwarde forme, but in nature, by the omnipotencie of the woorde ys made flesh. S. Ambrose in this sorte: Panis iste, panis est ante verba sacramentorum, vbi accesserit consecratio de pane Amb. li. 4. de Sacr. c. 4 Bread ys made the flesh of Chryst. F sit caro Christi. This bread ys breade before the woordes of the Sacramentes: but when the consecracion ys comed to yt, of the bread ys made the flesh of Chryste. In all these ye see this maner of speache, that bread ys made the flesh or bodie of Chryst. Which maner fullie excludeth the onelie figure and includeth the verie substanciall presence of Chrystes bodie.
Thus moch being saied of the first parte of Tertullians saing: Let vs also haue a fewe woordes aboute the seconde parte. The second parte (yf yowe remembrer) ys that calleth yt a figure of Chrystes bodie. This parte the Aduersarie (ther ys no doubte) receaueth though he receaue yt not well, according to the minde of the authour. The catholique also receaueth yt, and receaueth yt well. For he receaueth yt according to the minde of the authour. Howe shall the reader perceaue that? Thus shall he perceaue yt.
He that so vnderstandeth a catholique authour, that he make him not repugnant to himself, nor to other his likes, he vnderstandeth the authour well, The right waie to vnderstand a catholique authour. and receaueth him well. But he that so vnderstandeth an authour that he maketh him contrarie, and repugnant to himself, and other learned authours which be his likes, he vnderstandeth the authour euell, and receaueth him euell. The catholique receaueth this parte of Tertullian, wher he saieth yt ys a figure of Chrystes bodie, and graunteth yt, and also folowing Tertullian, teacheth that yt ys a figure, but so that the presence of Chrystes bodie be not denied, which the first parte (as aboue ys saied) teacheth. And therfor though yt be a figure: yet not onely a figure, but also the bodie with yt. The Aduersarie receaueth this parte of the authour vnderstanding yt as Oecolampadius The Sacr. a figure but not onlie a figure. dothe. quod panis assumitur in signum tantùm, that the bread ys taken for a signe onlie, denieng therbie the presence of the bodie. And so maketh the authour not onelie repugnante to himself, but also to other holie writers. To himself thus: For wher he saied, that Chryst made the bread his bodie, nowe vnderstanding by the figure, the Sacrament to be onely a figure or signe of Chrystes bodie and not the bodie yt self, the bread ys not made hys bodie. Oecol. de verbiscoen. And so shall the authour denie in the second parte of his saing, that he thaught in the first, which maie not be allowed, and therfor he receaueth H and vnderstandeth the authour euell. And so to other whiche be auncient as he ys, that authour shoulde be repugnant, as to S. Ambrose. S. Cyprian, to Irenaeus, Iustinus, and Alexander which all teache (as before ys declared) that [Page 181]the Sacrament of Chrystes bodie and blood conteineth the very bodie of A Chryst, and ys not a bare figure or signe onely.
For the better vnderstāding of this matter, I wish thee, reader, to perceaue that for somoch as to our pourpose apperteineth, a figure maie be taken two maner of waies. One waie as yt ys a signe or token of a thing absent in dede, A figure maie be taken two waies. but present in figure or sign. As a ring geuen of a man to his louing spouse, ys a signe or token of remembrance of him being absent. An other waie a figure maie be taken as of a thing absent in maner and condicion soche as somtime yt hath ben in, but present in verie deed and substance. As the spouse beholding her verie husbande, and seing the skars and tokens of wounds that he suffred for her defence and sauegarde, and of his children an hers: ys A figure maie be of a thing present in substance. brought in remembrance of his louing kindnesse, and of the daungers susteined for hir sake. In which case although the substāce of the man be present: yet to his wife he ys a figure and token of remembrance of himself absent in condicion of a man nowe in fight, and daungered with sore and depe woondes. For nowe he ys no soch mā, but whol ād sownd, and a perfect mā.
Nowe wher Tertullian saieth that the Sacrament ys a figure of Chrystes B bodie, yt ys true after the second maner of acception of a figure. For Chrystes The Sacr. ys a figure of a thing present. bodie nowe present in the Sacrament, and ther by faith certenlie and assuredlye seen and beholden, ys a figure and a token of remembrance to hys spouse the Church of his afflictions, passions, and woundes suffred vpon the Crosse for her sauegarde and deliuerie, which bodie although yt be substanciallie present: yet in that maner of a passible, and suffring bodie yt ys not nowe present. Caro carnis, & sanguis sacramentum est sanguiuis. vtroque inuisibiliter August. il. sentē. Pros. spirituali & intelligibili signatur Domini Iesu Christi corpus visibile & palpabile, plenum gratia omnium virtutum, & diuina maiestate. The flesh, saieth S. Augustin, ys a Sacrament of the flesh, and the blood ys a sacrament of the bloode. By both which being inuisiblie spirituall and intelligle ys signified the visible and palpable The inuisible bodie of Chryst in the Sacr. ae figure of the same visible, &c. bodie of our Lord Iesus Chryst, full of grace and all vertues, and diuine maiestie. Thus moche he. Here do we learn of S. Augustine that the bodie of Chryste and blood in the Sacrament being vnder the formes of bread and wine inuisible, spirituall, and intelligible, be figures of the same bodie visible and palpable. C
Let not this then seme incredible to thee (gentle Reader) seing S. Augustine testifieth yt by so plain woordes, and the scriptures also testifie vnto vs that Chryst was made in the likenesse of men: and yet was he neuerthelesse Philip. 2. a very naturall and substancial man, and that he ys the very image of the Father, and yet he ys of the substāce of the Father also. So that as we are taught, that Chryst ys made to the likenesse of men, and ys also a verie man, and ys the image of the substance of the Father, and yet of the verie substance of the Father also: So we be taught that the Sacrament ys a figure and the thing yt self also. For we saie the bodie of Chryst vnder the forme of breade, and his bloode vnder the forme of wine, to be a figure of that bodie that suffred vpon the Crosse, and of the blood ther yssuing oute of the same bodie, and diuided from yt. And yet neuerthelesse to be the same very bodie in substance that hanged vpon the Crosse, and the same blood in substance that ranne oute of that blessed bodie. And therfor Tertullian might verie well call yt a figure as before he called yt the bodie of Chryst, for yt ys both. D
This shall farder appeare by two places of S. Augustin, in the which speaking of one thing, he calleth the Sacrament in one the figure of [Page]the bodie of Chryste: in the other he calleth yt or price or Redemption, E which ys as moche to saie as the bodie of Chryst. Thus he saieth speaking of Iudas the traditour. Cùm Christus eius cogitationes non ignoraret, eum tamen adhibuit and conuiuium, in quo sui corporis & sanguinis figuram Discipulis commendauit. When Chryst was not ignorant of the thoughtes of Iudas: yet he had him Aug. in Psalm. 3. present at the feast, in the which he commended to hys Disciples the figure of hys bodie and blood. Here ye perceaue that sainct Augustine calleth the Sacrament the figure of Chrystes bodie and bloode. In an other place he saieth thus: Tollerat ipse Dominus Iudam, Diabolum, furem, & venditorem suum. Sinit Epist. 162. Judas receaued the bodie of christ which ys our price. accipere inter innocentes Discipulos, quod norunt fideles, precium nostrum. Owre Lorde himself doth suffre Iudas, a deuell, a theef, and his seller, he suffreth him to take among the innocent Disciples, that the faithfull knowe, our price or redemption.
Nowe marke that what in the other sentence he called the figure of Chrystes bodie, here he calleth yt our price or redemption, which ys Chryst him self as sainct Paule testifieth: Qui factus est nobis sapientia, & iustitia, & sanctificatio & redemptio. Who ys made to vs wisdom, and righteousnesse, and sanctificacion, and redemption. Yf the Sacrament be but a bare figure: yf yt be but F bread and wine, yt ys not then our price, yt ys not then our redempcion as S. Augustine saieth yt ys. By this then yt ys manifest that the bodie and blood of Chryst in the Sacrament being our price and redempcion, be the figures of the same bodie and blood of Chryst crucified for our redemptiō. And therfor yt maie rightly be called both the bodie of Chryst, and the figure of the bodie of Chryste.
Wherunto agreably saieth Theophilact: Attende quòd panis qui à nobis in mysterijs manducatur, non est tantùm figuratio quaedam carnis Domini, sed ipsa caro Domini. Note or take head that the bread, whiche ys eaten of vs in the mysteries, Jn 6. Joan. Bread of the Sacra. verie flesh A plain saing for M. Juell. ys not onely a certain figure of the flesh of our Lorde, but the flesh yt self of our Lorde. Thus by this declaracion of sainct Augustine and Theophilact ye maie clerely see and perceaue, the right and true vnderstanding of Tertullian, who according to the Chrystian and catholique faith taught that Chryste made the bread hys bodie wherby he conuinceth hys Aduersarie Marcion. And after to his farder confutacion (for that a figure, must nedes be a figure os a bodie) he saieth also that yt ys the figure of Chrystes bodie, G and so confesseth bothe the verie bodie, and the figure of the bodie.
This vnderstanding of Tertullian must nedes be good and vpright. For Li. de resur. carnis. A plain saing for the Proclamer after this maner he agreeth with himself both in this place and other, as wher he saieth: Caro corpore & sanguine Christi vescitur, vt anima de Deo saginetur. The flesh eateth the bodie and bloode of Chryst, that the soule maie be made fatte with God. Wher in plain woordes he saieth that man, not by spiritte, but by his flesh eateth, not a peice of bread a signe or figure onely of Chrystes bodie, but yt eateth Chrystes verie bodie and bloode yt self. After this vnderstanding also he agreeth with sainct Augustine, and Theophilact, and other holy Fathers, as partely ye haue before hearde, and shall herafter plentifullie heare. And thus vnderstanded he agreeth to be shorte with the wholl catholique Churche, which alwaies hath and doth teache the bodie of Chryst both to be a figure, and the thing yt self in veritie. Wherfore neither Tertullian, neither sainct Augustine in these places alleaged neither against Amantus, be either refused or denied but accepted and embraced. For the Churche doth acknoledge as moche as they saie, and they with the H Churche doe acknowledge the Sacrament to be bothe.
[Page 182]But let the Aduersarie bringe but one auncient authour that saieth as he A doeth, that yt ys figura tantùm. onely a figure, and therwith saieth as he dothe that the reall and verie bodie of Chryst ys not in the Sacrament, and then I will saie he hath doen somwhat. Hetherto all they haue doen nothing to effecte to prooue their matter, but onely made some cowntenance and apparance No catholike authour saieth that the Sacr. ys onelie a figure. in woordes to deceaue the people, and to plucke them from the catholique faith. For wher their doctrine ys that the Sacrament ys a figure onelie, when they reade this woorde (figura) in Tertullian, S. Angustine, or anie other authour they runne awaie with yt, and violentlie wrest yt making their auditorie beleue, that the authour saie as they saie. And that ys false. For the authours saie no not one of them that yt ys onely a figure, which ys the thing that the Aduersarie must prooue, and that shal he neuer doe.
Wherfor Reader, looke to thy self, and be not deceaued, marke well whiche parte saieth as Tertullian saieth, and folowe that parte. Tertullian saieth, that the breade ys made the bodie of Chryst, so saieth the cathoiique, so saieth the holie Churche, but that denieth the Aduersarie. Tertullian saieth B that yt ys a figure of the bodie of Chryst, so saieth the catholique, so saieth the holie Churche, so after a maner saieth the Aduersarie, but the maner ys soche, that though in the woorde (Figure) yt seemeth so to saie, and to haue agreemēt with Tertullian: yet in sense yt denieth the wholl. For neither dothe the Aduersarie agree vpon the thing that ys the figure, neither dothe he saie as Tertullian dothe saie, that yt ys a figure, but with an exclusuie, that yt ys a figure onely, which as yt ys more then Tertullian saieth: so yt ys more then ys true and thus trusting ye clerely, and fullie perceaue, who agreeth and who dissenteth from this auncient Father of the primitiue Church, I ende with him, and proceade to heare other,
THE FIFTETH CHAP. ABIDETH IN THE EXposition of the same woordes by S. Cyprian, and Athanasius.
NOt long after Tertullian was S. Cyprian, who being a senior in Chrystes schoole, and an auncient in his Parliament house, C will shewe vs the faith taught and continued in that schoole, and the trueth enacted and receaued in that Parliament house: Cypry. de coena Dom. vide sup. li. 1. cap. 29. Thus he writeth: Significata olim à tempore Melchisedech prodeunt sacramenta, & filiis Abrahae, facientibus opera eius, summus sacerdos panē profert & vinū Hoc est (inquit) corpus meum &c. The sacramentes signified long agon frō the time of Melchisedech come nowe abroade, and the high preist to the childe ren of Abraham doinge his workes, bringeth furth bread and wine. This (saieth he) ys my bodie. They had eaten of the same bread after the visible forme, but before those woordes, that cōmon meate was onely meate to nourishe the bodie, and ministred the helpe of the corporall life. But after that our Lorde had saied: Doe this in my remembrance, This ys my flesh, and this ys my bloode: As often as yt ys doen with these woordes, and this faith, that substanciall bread and cuppe consecrated by the solemne benediction doth profitte to the health and life of the wholl man, being both a medicen and a sacrifice, to heall infirmities, and to pourge iniquities. Thus he.
What sense the woordes of Chrystes supper haue, this holy Ciprian D dothe manifestlie declare, who rehersing them saieth: but after that our Lorde had saied: This doe in the remembrance of me: This ys my flesh, and this ys my bloode, [Page] that substanciall bread and cuppe consecrated doth profitte the wholl man, that ys, both the bodie and soule of man, for so moche as yt ys a medicen to heale the infirmities of them, E and a sacrifice to pourge their iniquities. In the Sacrament after the woordes of S. Cyprian saing that the bread and cuppe after the cō sccraciō, ys a medicine to heal insir. and a sacrifice to pourge iniquit. proueth inuincible the reall presence of Chrysts bodie. Chryst spoken what can be saied to be, that profiteth both bodie and soule, and ys a medicen and also a sacrifice, what I saie, can ther ells be that shoulde be these great workes but the bodie and blode of Chryste? Yt ys that bodie that ys our medicen: yt ys that bodie that ys our sacrifice. Wherfore S. Cyprian mening that after the woordes of our Lorde, that bodie and blode ys in the Sacramēt, inuinciblie proueth against the proclamer the presence of Chrystes bodie and that the woordes of our Lorde be not to be vnderstand figuratiuely, but proprely in their owne sense.
And this ys not to be ouerpassed, what differēce this authour maketh betwixt the cōdicion of the bread before the woords of Chryst spokē, ād after the woords. Before the woordes (saieth he) yt ys cōmon meate meet onelie to nourish the bodie, but after the woordes yt ys, as ye haue hearde, profitable both for bodie and soule:
This also ys to be noted that this authour speaking of these great benefittes doth not attribute thē to faithe, nor to the vertue of the passiō of Chryste, Benefites at tributed to the Sacra. nor to the spirituall bodie of Chryst, or receipt of that (although all these F be necessarie for that withoute thē the befittes before mēcioned cā not be obteined) but dothe attribute thē to the same meat nowe in the Sacrament after consecraciō, which before the consecracion was corporal meate. Owre faith, the vertue, grace, or meritte of Chrystes passiō were neuer corporall meate, wherfore this authour speaketh not of thē. And therfore we maie conclude, that yt ys the bodie of Chryst into whose substance, the substāce of breade that before Christes woordes was able onelie to sustein the bodie nowe after the wordes ys turned into the substāce of Chryst, whiche ys able to comforte both bodie and soule, and ys become the substanciall breade, geuing and mainteining our substāciall life, whiche ys the euerlasting life.
Of this place of S. Ciprian, forasmoche as I haue more at large spoken in the opening of the figure of Melchisedech, I shall desire the reader, if he wolde In the first booke c. 29. see what maie be more saied vpon yt, to resort thither, wher, I turst, he shall finde matter to the better opening of this place.
But yet that yt maie be fullie perceaued that S. Cyprian in this place meneth as ys saied, that the verie bodie of Chryst ys in the Sacrament, and that G soche was his faith, and that Chryst so taught, and his schoole so learned: we will heare an other testimonie of the same S. Cyprian in the same treactice, Cypr. de cae na. Dom. A plain place for M. Iuell. that this sentēce before alleaged ys in, which ys this. Nouae est buius Sacramēti doctrina, & scholae cuangelicae hoc primū magisteriū portulerunt, & doctore Christo primū haec mūdo innotuit disciplina, vt biberēt sanguinē christiani, cuius esum legis antiquae authoritas districtissimē interdicit. Lex quippe esū sanguinis probibet: Euangeliū praecipit vt bibatur. In quibus mādatis hoc maximè discernere debet christiana Religio, quòd sanguis animaliū, à sanguine Chricti per omnia differens, tēporalis tantū habet viuificationis effectū, & vita corum finem habet sine reuocacione constitutū. The doctrine of this Sacrament The lawe dyd forbidde the eating of blood, the Gospell cō maundeth yt. ys newe, and the euangelicall schooles first brought furth this maner of teaching, and Chryst being the teacher this learning first was knowen to the worlde, that chrystian men shoulde drinke bloode, the eating wherof the authoritie of the olde lawe did most strictlie forbidde. The Lawe forbiddeth the eating of bloode: The Gospell commaundeth that yt be dronke. In whiche commaundementes this most cheiflie aught the chrystian religion to discerne that the bloode of beastes by all means differinge H from the blode of Chryst hath onely the effect of temporall releif, and [Page 183]the life of them hath an ende appoincted withoute reuocacion. Thus he. A
I wishe the (gentle reader) against the blasphemies of the Aduersaries, to weigh well euery parte of this saing of S. Cyprian. The Aduersarie saieth that the doctrine of the Sacrament, ys the Papistes diuise, and their inuencion: But S. Cyprian teacheth vs first that yt ys a newe doctrine, he teacheth vs in what schoole yt was first, taught. In the schoole (saieth he) of the Gospell, he teacheth vs who was the schoole master, who was the first teacher of yt, Chryst (faieth he) was the first teacher of yt, he first did notifie yt to the worlde. But if ye aske what ys this newe doctrine: He saieth that yt ys a newe doctrine of the Sacrament that chrystian men shoulde drinke bloode. Yf ye proceade Doctrine of the real presence howe yt ys called newe. and aske whether they must drinke verie blood: He saieth verie blood. For yt ys soche bloode as the lawe did forbidde to be eaten. And that assuredlie was verie bloode. Wherfore this ys verie bloode. Yf ye question farder, if the chrystians must drinke verie bloode, whose bloode must they drinke? He answereth, Chrystes bloode, as in the comparison of the commaundementes of the two lawes (the olde lawe forbidding bloode, the B newe lawe commaunding bloode) yt ys euident to be seen, that he saieth newe lawe commaundeth the bloode of Chryst to be dronke.
In this then ye maie perceaue that the doctrine of the presence of Chrystes bodie and blood in the Sacrament ād the real receipt of the same ys not the inuencion or deuise of the Papistes, but yt ys as this holie Father and martir of Chryste, and therfore a good scholer of Chryst, saieth, who knewe Doctrin of the real presence ys no new īnuention of the Papistes. the learning of his master wel, yt ys saieth he, the doctrine of Chryste, yt ys his ordeinance, yt ys his inuencion, diuise, and institucion. Wherfore they maie bashe, and be a shamed, yea they maie tremble for feare to see themselues fallen into that impietie, that the Iewes were, who seinge Chryste casting oute the dumbe spiritte oute of a man, maliciouselie and wickedlie ascribed the miraculouse worke to Belzebub, whiche was doen by the power of God in Chryst: So they wickedly ascribe this institucion of the Sacramēt this doctrine of the presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode in the same Luc. 11. (whiche ys the miraculouse worke of God) to the Papistes, at yt pleaseth them to terme them. But here maie ye learn that Chryst ys the first teacher C of this doctrine. And this shall we make more euidentlie to appeare to yowe by the woordes of this authour.
And first where he saieth, that the doctrine of the Sacrament ys newe This doth plainly and stronglie reiecte the figure and Tropes of the Aduersaties from the Sacrament. For if the Sacrament be but the figure and not the thing: howe ys yt, or howe can yt be a newe doctrine? To offre bread and wine as figures of Chryste, we finde Melchisedech in the lawe of nature Gen. 14. Exod. 16. 1. Cor. 10. to haue so doen. That the people of the Iewes did eate Manna, and breade from heauen, and dranke the water of the rocke, as figures of Chrystes bodie and blood, yt ys more manifest, then can be denied. The two tenth deales of fine flower made in cakes, and the wine also that was offred for a drinke offring, stinted in Leuiticus by the measure of a fourt deale of an hyn were offred as figures of Chrysts bodie and bloode, as Isichius witnesseth, so Li. 6. ca. 23 that to haue bread and wine, or to eate and drinke soche thinges as figures of Chrystes bodie and bloode, yt ys no newe doctrine. Yt was in the lawe of nature, yt was in the lawe of Moises. Wherfore yt can not be a newe D doctrine. The newe doctrine then ys to receaue the verie thing of these figures verilie, reallie, and presentlie, whiche in dede ys a newe doctrine, neuer taught to be vsed and parctised, before Chryst taught yt, yea and commaunded [Page]yt. When and wher did he teache yt? Before his passion at his E last supper, and (as Cyprian termeth yt) in the schoole of the Gospell. Wher in the Gospell then finde we this new doctrine or commaundement? The doctrine we finde (as before ys declared) in the sixt of S. Iohn. Panis quem ego dabo, caro mea est, quam dabo pro mundi vita. The breade, that I will geue yowe, ys my flesh, whiche I will geue for the life of the worlde. And that which foloweth in the same chapter concerning the Sacrament.
The commaundement we finde in the three other Euangelistes and in S. Paule. Accipite, & comedite, hoc est corpus meum. Bibite ex hoc omnes. Hic est calix sanguinis mei. Take and eate. This ys my bodie, drinke ye all of this, This ys the Matth. 26 Mar. 14. Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11. cuppe of my bloode. Cyprian saieth that Chryst first taught that men shoulde drinke bloode, and that the schoole of the Gospell did first sett yt furth, and also the Gospell did commaunde yt. But in all the Gospell we finde no soche cōmaundement, but this that ys nowe saied. Wherfor these woordes doe commaunde vs to drinke the verie bloode of Chryst, and not the onely figure of yt. Whiche being so yt prooueth the verie reall presence of Chrystes F bodie and bloode in the Sacrament, and these commaundements in the woordes of Chrystes supper, to be literall and not tropicall.
Nowe foloweth Athanasius, whome for that he was not long after Cyprian, I haue coopled with the same, as a famouse auncient father of the greke churche, with an holie famouse martir of the Latin church. Thus writeth Athanasius. Corpus est ergo cui dicit: Sede à dextris meis. Cuius etiam fuit inimicus Diabolus, Athanasius li. de fide vt [...]ītatur à Theodoret. Dialogo 2. Inconfusus. cum malis potestatibus, & Iudaei, & Greci, per quod corpus Pontifex & Apostolus fuit & dictus est, per id quod tradidit nobis mysterium dicens: Hoc est corpus meum, quod pro Vobis frangitur. Et sanguis noui testamenti non veteris, qui pro vobis effunditur &c. Yt ys therfore a bodie to the which he saied: Sitte on my right hande, whose enemie was the Deuell, with the euell powers and the Iewes, and the grekes. By whiche bodie he both was in dede, and was called an high preist, and an Apostle, by that misterie that he deliuered vs saing: This ys my bodie, which ys broken for yowe, and the bloode of the newe Testament, not of the olde, whiche ys shed for yowe. The Godheade hath neither bodie nor bloode, but man, which he did take of the virgen Mary. G
Theodorete, who in his second dialoge laboureth to prooue two distincted natures without confufion, that ys, the nature of God and the nature of man, eche of them full and perfight ioined, but not commixed in vnitie of person in Chryst owre sauiour, alleageth this saing of Athanasius, wher in Athanasius touching both natures, doth most abide to prooue the nature of man to remain in Chryst. And to prooue that, he proueth that Chryst had a verie mans bodie, and that by two argumentes: The first ys that where Dauid in the psalme prophecied that Chryst shoulde be exalted to sitte on the right hand of God the Father, and therfor saied: The Lorde saied to my Lorde, sute thowe on my right hand. This coulde not be saied but to a bodie. But Chryst as God, had neither bodie nor bloode. Wherfore yt ys spoken to Chryst as man. The other argument ys after this sorte Chryst by that that he deliuered vnto vs the misterie of his bodie and bloode, was in dede, and so also was called an high preist. But in the deliuering of this misterie he saied This ys my bodie, This ys my bloode. And the Godhead of Chryst hath neither bodie nor bloode: Wherfor he spake hy his verie māheade which had both H bodie and bloode) This ys my bodie: This ys my bloode.
In both these argumentes, this ys principallie entended, to prooue Chryst a verie man by that that he had a verie bodie. Nowe to our pourpose [Page 184]in the seconde argument to proue that he had a bodie, by that that Chryst A saied: This ys my bodie: doth yt not proue that this authour vnderstādeth Chryste to haue spoken this by his very bodie? yf the shoulde not so doe, what shoulde yt helpe his matter that he entendeth to prooue, to bring in this saing of Chryst: This ys my bodie, yf yt be not spoken of his bodie?
To prooue that this auhour, dothe so vnderstande this place of Chryst, as spoken of his verie bodie this maketh yt most certen, and yt maie not be against Scriptures must be alleaged in their literal sense in matters of faith saied. S. Augustine saieth, and yt ys a rule among all the learned diuines, that in the disputacion of matters of faithe all scriptures must be alleaged in their literall sense. Forasmoche then as this scripture ys alleaged in the disputacion of an highe matter of faithe (as ye haue hearde) yt must be taken ād vnderstāded in the literal sense. The woords are takē to prooue that Chryst had a verie bodie. Wherfore in the literall sense they are spoken, and vnderstand of his verie bodie. Thus ye maie perceaue that figures signes, tokens, and tropes, are not admitted by this authour to geue vs the true sense and mening of these woordes.
And thus moche maie we here note (as I haue before touched) that the B beleif of the presence of Chrystes verie bodie in the Sacrament was in the auncient churche of Chryste so faithfullie receaued, so generallie accepted, so highlie esteemed, that the learned Fathers grownded their argumetes against heretikes vpon the matter of the Sacrament, as vpon a principle of faith. This haue yowe seen in Irenaeus: This haue yowe seen in Tertullian: This same ye see in Athanasius. Whiche as yt aught to be an occasion of an assured staie, and confirmacion of our faithe in the same matter in the Sacrament: so wishe I that yt maie be a reuocacion of the Proclamer, and all other walking in erroure with him to the verie faith of the Sacrament, that Chryst maie by the mouthe of all that professe his name, be in his Sacramentes praised and magnified, euen according to his holie will and pleasure.
THE ONE AND FITITETH CHAP. SHEWETH the minde of Iuuencus, and Euseb. Emisen vpon the woordes of Chryst. C
AMonge the Latines that doe open vnto vs the vnderstanding of the woordes of Chrystes supper, the next that I finde to S. Ciprian ys Juuencus lib. 4. Euangelice histor. Iuuencus the preist, a chrystian Poete in Spain, who in Verse geueth a notable and a plain vnderstandinge of Chrystes woordes. He ys verie auncient, he did write a good nombre of yeares aboue xii hundreth yeares agone. Thus saieth he.
Chryst deliuered to his Apostles his own bodie.Of these verseis, this maie be the sense in english. When Chryste had D thus saied, he tooke bread in his handes, and when he had geuen thankes, he diuided yt to his Disciples, and taught them, that he deliuered vnto thē [Page]his owne bodie. And after that our Lorde tooke the cuppe filled with wine E he sanctifieth yt with thankes geuing, and geueth yt to them to drinke, and teacheth them that he hath geuen them his blood, and saieth: This bloode shall remitte the Sinnes of the people. Drinke ye this my bloode &c.
This Authour setting furth the historie of the Gospell in verse, and therwith oftentimes geuing vs with the historie the sense and vnderstanding of yt, dothe euen so here. For he dothe not onely saie that Chryst saied, Thys ys my bodie, but geueth the vnderstanding of yt, saing, that Chryst taught his Apostles that he deliuered vnto them his owne bodie. In whiche maner of speache note this also, that he saieth not onelie, that Chryst deliuered them his bodie: But addeth this woorde (owne) and saieth that he taught them, that he deliuered to them his owne bodie. Whiche maner of speach hath soche force and strenght with yt, that as yt declareth the catholique saith and geueth great testimonie of the same: so yt beateth and driueth awaie the wicked glose of onely figures and signes, inuented by the Aduersaries to peruert the trueth. For what more plain testimonie wolde we desire for the vnderstanding of Chrystes woordes, then to saie, that when Chryst saieth: Take F eate, this ys my bodie, that he taught his Apostles, that he gaue them his owne bodie? A plain saing for the Procla. Thus maie yow see that for the catholique faith yow haue plain testimonie, for the heresie of the Aduersarie, yow haue not one woorde. For I assure yowe of this, as partlie before ys saied, ther ys not one catholique writer, neither olde nor yong, from Chryst to Berengarius that euer taught or wrote that the Sacrament ys onely a figure or signe of the bodie of Chryst. And therfor (Reader) looke to thie self, be not caried awaie from Chrystes faith with onely bragges and glosing woordes voide of all good proofe. But raither settle thy self wher thowe findest the trueth sett furth to thee with simplicitie and plainnesse commended with moche proofe and authoritie.
But hauing yet manie mo wittnesses let me hast me to bring him, that ys appoincted to be this authours yockfelowe, to declare the continuance of the vnderstanding of Chrystes woordes in the greke churche, as the other hath doen in the latin churche. This ys Eusebius Emisenus, who by the supptacion of learned men, liued in the same time that Iuuencus did. He writeth G thus: Recedat omne infidelitatis ambiguum, quoniam quidem qui author est muneris, ipse est etiam testis veritatis. Nam inuisibilis sacerdos visibiles creaturas in substantiam corporis & sanguinis sui verbo suo, secreta potestate conuertit, ita dicens: Hoc est corpus meū. Et sanctificatione repetita, Accipite, & bibite, ait, Hic est sangnis meus. Let all doubte Euseb. Emis. Homil. 5. Pa. Visible bread and wine turned into the substance of the bodie and blood of Chryst of insidelitie or vnbeleif departe. For truly he that ys the authour of the gifte, he also ys the wittnesse of the trueth. For the inuisible preist by his secret power, dothe with his woorde conuert or turne the visible creatures into the substance of his bodie and bloode, saing thus: Take and eate, This ys my bodie. and the sanctificacion repeted: Take and drinke (saieth he) this ys my bloode,
In this saing of Eusebius ther ys no soche darke maner of speache that the reader nede to doubte of the true presence of Chryste in the Sacrament, or howe to vnderstand the woordes of Chrystes supper, seing that he so plainlie saieth, that Chryste (whom he calleth the inuinsible preist) with his power and woorde, saing This ys my bodie, This ys my bloode, turneth the visible Reall presence and transubstā tiaciō plainlie auouched by Euseb. Emis. creatures of bread and wine into the substance of his bodie and bloode. Yf they be turned into the substance of his bodie and bloode, as by the testimonie H of this authour they trulie be, then these woordes Corpus, & sangnis, bodie and blode, in the sainges of Chryst doe not signifie the figures of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, but the substance of the bodie and bloode of [Page 185]Chryste, into which substance to make the bodie and blood verilie present, A the creatures of bread and wine be turned, and so Chryst saing, This ys my bodie, this ys my blood: yt ys asmoch as he had saied, This ys the substāce of my bodie, this ys the substance of my blood. This doctrine ys so certen, so sure, and so true, that this authour gaue exhortacion and admoniciō in the beginning of his saing, that in this matter ther should be no doubte, all vnbeleife should departe, and so faithfullie to beleue Chrystes woordes, that forasmoch as he ys the authour of all trueth, and saieth: This ys my bodie, This ys my blood, vndoubtedly so to take yt.
Beside this doctrine of faith of the presence of Chrystes verie substanciall bodie and blood in the Sacrament, this authour also teacheth the meā how Transubstantiacion treacted of. God woorketh yt, and saieth, that yt ys doen by turning the creatures of bread and wine into the substance of the bodie and blood of Chryst, which turning or chaunging of one substance into an other, as the holy Fathers do diuersly terme, some of thē calling yt a conuersion or turning, some of thē mutaciō or chaū ging, some communicacion or translacion, some transelementaciō: some trāsmutacion: B so the Church fullie and liuelie to expresse the thing that ys doen, and therby the better to repell the heresies that haue risen and encōbred the Church since the time of Berengarius, hath tearmed yt Transubstanciatōn, which terme importeth no more in this matter, then transmutacion, or transelementacion, but yt sowndeth and openeth the thing that yt signifieth more liuelie, and suffreth notthe heretiques to wrest yt as they doe the other. Which ys the cause that manie be so greuouslie offēded with the terme. But bicause the Proclamer doth lightlie ouerpasse yt I will not tarie lōg vpō yt. But in the allegaciō of the Fathers, as thei shal make mēciō ofit, so shal I breleiflie not it.
And yet that the reader shall not thinke that that matter ys so barren, that nothing can be saied of yt, or being desielrouse to learn should be frustrate of his desire, ād expectaciō. I shall somewhat here saie of yt, desiering withal that as they do read the doctours that shall be hereafter alleaged, they will note in them what they shall finde, as therunto I shall geue thē occasion in euerie one that doth speake of this matter. And for that we haue taken occasiō of this authours woordes to speake of yt, we wil first heare what he saieth C farder of yt, that yt maie fullie appeare to the reader, that yt ys not reputed of him as a doubtful matter, but as a certen and substācial sure matter. Wherfore let him vnderstand that to the more full declaracion of this that ys before Euseb. Emiss. ibid. saied, the authour immediatelie addeth this that foloweth: Ergo vt ad nutū Domini praecipientis, repentè ex nihilo substiterint alta coelorum, profunda sluctuū, vasta terrarum: ita pari potentia in spirituall [...] Sacramentis, verbo praebetur virtus & reiseruit effectus. Quanta itaque, & quàm celebranda vis diuinae benedictionis operetur, & quomodò tibi nouū & impossibile videri non debeat, quòd in Christi substantiam terrena & mortalia cōmutantur, teipsum, qui iam in Christo es regeneratus, interroga. Therfor as at the will of our Lord cōmaunding, sodenlie of nothing, the heightes of the heauens, the deapths of the waters, the greatnesse of the earth were in substā ciall being: Euen so in the spirituall Sacramentes vnto the woorde ys geuen vertue or power, and the effect ys brought to passe. Therfore how great and How the bread and wine beturned into the bodie ād blood, &c. notable things, the power of the diuine benediction maie woork, and howe yt should not seme to thee as newe or impossible that earthlie and mortall things are cōmuted or chaūged into the substāce of Chryst, aske of thy self, D who art now regenerate in Chryst. Thus Eusebius. Who, to proue that, which he had before saied, that the visible creaturs of bread ād wine are turned into the substāce of the bodie ād blood ofChryst, bringeth this argumēt: that asat [Page]as the cōmaundement of God hys onelie woord, sodēlie the heauēs, the waters, E and the wholl worlde was made of nothing: So by like power he woorketh in the Sacrament, to make the substance of his bodie and blood of the substance of the bread and wine.
An other argument he bringeth by the chaunge that God maketh of a man in Baptisme, that he that was a straunger and a banished mā from God, yea and dead before God, sodenly ys reuiued, and of a banished man ys made a frende, and of a straunger ys made an adoptiue Sonne of God. Wherby he wolde not haue yt thought impossible, but that earthlie and mortal thinges, as the bread and wine in the Sacrament, maie be and are chaunged into the substance of Chryst.
In the same homelie to this pourpose also he maketh this perswasion: Nec dubitet quispiam primarias creaturas nutu diuinae potētiae, praesentia summae maiestatis in domiaici Euseb. ibid corporis posse transire naturā, cùm ipsum hominem videat artificio coelestis misericordiae Christi corpus effectum. Neither let anie man doubte that by the commaundement of the diuine power by the presence of his high maiestie, the former creatures (mening bread and wine) can passe or be chaunged into the nature of [...] of [...] [...] and [...]me the bodie &c ys not to be doubted of the bodie of our Lordes bodie, seing that he maie see man himself by the F workmanshippe of the heauenlie mercie, made the bodie of Chryst.
And ther again yt foloweth immediatelie: Sicut autē quicunque ad fidē Christi [...] eniens ante verba Baptismi adhuc in vinculo est veteris debiti, ijs verò memoratis, mox exaitur omni fece peccati [...]ta quādo benedicendae verbis coelestibus creaturae sacris altaribus imponuntur, antequàm inuocacione summi nominis consecrentur, substantia est illic panis & vun, post verba autē Christi, corpus & sanguis Christi. Quid autē mirū est, si ea quae po [...]t Eused ibid. verbo creare, verbo possit creata conuertere? As anie mā coming to the faith of Chryst, before the woords of Baptisme ys yet in the bād of the old debt, but as soen as they be spokē furthwith he ys deliuered frō al filth of sinne: Euen so when the creatures are sett vpō the holie altars to be blessed with the heauēly Before the woordes of Chryst ther ys the substance of br [...]ad after, the bodie of Chryst, a plain sam [...] for M. Juel woords, before they be cōsecrated with the inuocaciō of the most high name, ther ys the substāce of bread ād wine: but after the woords of Chryst, the bodie ād blood of Chryst. What woōder ys yt, if he that could create these things with his woord, cā now being created turn thē with his woord.
And he addeth: Imo iā videtur minoris esse miraculi, stid quod ex nihilo agnoscitur cō di lisse, [...]am conditū in melius valeat cōmutare. Yea raither yt semeth to be a lesse miracle, G if that, that he ys knowen to haue made of nothing, he can now when yt ys made chaunge yt into a better thing. Thus moch Eusebius. Whome ye see by diuerse goodly examples, and meās teaching the presence of Chrysts bodie in the Sacrament, by the turning or chaunging of the bread and wine into the substance and nature of the bodie and blood of Chryst.
But yt shall doo well to heare some other besides him, what testimonie they geue in this matter, that therbie the reader maie haue morefull instruction, Among these we wil first heare Gregory Nissen the brother of. Basil, who saieth [...] Nis [...] [...], thus: Sicut autē qui panē videt, quodāmodò corpus videt humanū, quoniā panis incorpore existens corpus euadit: ita diuinū illud corpus, panis nutrimentū accipiēs, idē quodammcdò erat cum illo cibo (vt diximus) in eius naturā immutato. Quod enim cuiusque carnis propr [...]im est, id etiam illi conuenisse confitemur. Nam & corpus illud pane sustentabatur, corpus autem, proptereaquod Deus Verbum in illo habitauit, diuinam obtinuit dignitatem. Quamobrē rectè nunc etiam Dei verbo sanctificatum panē, in Dei Verbi corpus, credimus immutari. As he that seeth bread, in a maner seeth the bodie of a mā, for bread being H in the bodie becometh a bodie: Euen so that bodie of God taking the nutriment of bread, was in a maner all one with the same meat that was (as [Page 186]we haue saied) chaunged into the nature of his bodie. For that that ys propre A to euery man, that same do we confesse to haue apperteined to him. For that bodie also was susteined with bread, but that bodie, for that God the Sonne did abide in him, yt obteined the dignitie of God, wherfore nowe also doo we very well beleue the bread sanctified by the woord of God, to be chaunged into the bodie of the Sonne of God. Thus he.
Let not this eschape thee, reader, without diligent note, that this authour Transubst. beleued of the aunciēt fathers. doth not onelie saie that the sāctified bread ys chaūged into the bodie, of the Sōne of God, but he saieth also (as yt were in the persō of the wholChurch) that we beleue yt so to be. Wherbie we be aduertised that yt ys a matter offaith, and not a matter of opiniō. Yt ys not lauful for euery mā to think what he list in yt, but yf he will be amōg the faithfull he must without disceptacion humblie accept and embrace what faith commaūdeth to be beleued. But let vs also heare S. Ambrose, who writeth thus. Fortè dicas: Aliud video, quo modò tu mihi asseris, quòd Christi corpus accipiam? & hoc superest, vt probemus. Quantis Ambr. de his qui initian. ca. 9. igitur vtimur exemplis, vt probemus hoc non esse quod natura formauit sed quod benedictio B consecrauit, maioremue vim esse benedictionis, quàm naturae, quiae benedictione natura ipsa mutatur? Virgam tenebat Moyses, proiecit eam, & facta est serpens. Rursus apprehendit caudam serpentis, & in virgae naturā reuertitur. Vides igitur prophetica gratia bis mutatā esse naturam serpentis, & virgae. Peraduenture thow maist saie: I see an other thing, how doest thow assure me that I take the bodie of Christ? And this remaineth for vs to Benedictiō what powr yt hath. prooue. How manie examples therfore doe we vse, that we maie prooue that this ys not yt that nature hath formed, but that the benediction hath consecrated, and that greater ys the power of benediction then of nature. For by benediction nature yt self ys chaunged. Moyses did hold a Rodde, he cast yt down, ād it was mad a serpēt. Again he taketh the tail of the serpēt ād yt returneth into the nature of the rod. Thow seest thē by the grace of the prophet the nature of the Serpētād the rod twice to be chaūged. Hetherto S. Ambr.
After which woordes and diuerse other examples brought in to prooue nature in the Sacrament by the benediction to be clean chaunged, he maketh this argument. Quodsi tantum valuit humana benedictio vt naturam conuerteret, quid dicimus de ipsa consecratione diuina, vbi verbae ipsa Domini saluatoris operantur? Nam C sacramentū istud quod accipis Christi sermone conficitur. Yf then the benedictiō of mā Amb. ibid. was of so great power, that yt chaunged nature, what saie we of the verie consecracion of God, wher the verie woordes of owre Lord and Sauiour doe woorke? For this Sacrament which thow receauest, ys consecrated by the woorde of Chryst.
Yt were to long to reherse all the exāples and argumentes that S. Ambrose maketh to prooue this mutacion or chaunge that we speak of. Wherfore but one more of him, and then we will heare some other one. Thus he maketh an other argument. De totius mundi operibus legisti, Quiae ipse dixit & facta Amb. ibi. sunt, ipse mandauit & creata sunt. Sermo ergo Christi qui potuit ex nihilo facere, quod non erat, non potest ea quae sunt in id mutare, quod non erant? Thow hauest readde of he workes of all the world: that he saied, and they were made, he comaūded ād they were created. The woorde of Chryst then that could of nothing make that that was not, can yt not chaunge these things that be into that, that they were not? Non enim minus est nouas rebus dare, quàm mutare naturas. Yt ys no lesse thing to geue newe natures to thinges, then to chaunge natures. D Thus farre S. Ambrose Whome for that yt ys manifest to what pourpose he tendeth, namelie to proue the nature of bread and wine after the consecracion to be chaūged into the nature of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, [Page]I will not trauaill to open him, but leaue him to the consideracion of the reader, E and heare some other.
Chrysostome saieth thus: Non sunt humanae virtutis haec opera. Qui tunc ista in illa caena confecit, ipse nunc quoque operatur, ipse perficit. Ministrorum nos ordinem tenemus Homil 83. in Matth. Qui verò haec sanctificat, & transmutat ipse est. These workes be not the workes of mans power. He that then in that supper made or consecrated these thinges, he now also woorketh, he perfecteth yt, we are in the place of mynisters, but yt ys he that doth sanctifie and transmute these thinges. Thus of Chrysostom we learn also that in the Supper of Chryst the bread and wine are sanctified and transmuted, and that by the power of Chryst, who sanctified and transmuted them in that supper, which he did celebrate and kepe for the institucion of this, forsomoch as he ys the dooer of this, as he was of that, he ys the woorker of both.
After Chrysostome foloweth Cyril, and teacheth vs the same lesson, saing thus. Viuificatiuum Dei Verbum vniens seipsum propriae carni, fecit eam viuificatiuā. Nunquid Cyrill. ad Calosirium igitur, & cùm in nobis vita Dei est, Dei Verbo in nobis existente, viuificatiuum erit nostrum corpus? Sed aliud est secundùm participationis habitudinem nos habere in nobis Dei F filium: aliud ipsum fuisse factum carnem, id est, corpus sumptum ex alma Virgine proprium corpus effecisse. Decebat ergo eum nostris quodammodò vniri corporibus, per sacram eius carnem, & preciosum sanguinem, quae accipimus in benedictione viuificatiua in pane, & vino. Ne enim horreremus carnem & sanguinem apposita sacris altaribus, condescendens Deus nostris fragilitatibus, insluit oblatis vim vitae, connertens ea in veritatem propriae carnis, vt corpus vitae quasi quoddam semen viuificatiuum inueniatur in nobis. The liuing Sonne of God vniting himself to his owne flesh, made yt also liuing. Nowe then forasmoche as the life of God ys in vs (the Sonne of God being in vs) shall our bodie also be able to geue life? But yt ys an other thing for vs to haue the Sonne of God in vs, according to the ordre of participacion: And another thing the same Sonne of God to haue ben made flesh, that ys to saie, to haue made the bodie taken of the pure Virgen, his own bodie. Yt was nede full that he should be vnited to our bodies by his holie flesh, and preciouse blood, whiche we take in the liuely benediction in bread ad wine. For leste we should abhorre flesh and blood put vpon the holy altars, God condescending G to our fragilities, he putteth into the thinges offred the power or strēgt of life, turning them into hys very flesh, that the bodie of life maie be fownd in vs as a quickning seed, able to make vs to liue. Thus moche S. Cyrill.
As of other we haue learned that God by his power doth chaunge the substance of the bread and wine into the substance of hys bodie and blood: so do we learn of this holie father the cause whie yt pleaseth God so todooe. Yt ys (saieth he) that God condescending to our weaknesse, forasmoche as we abhorre to eate flesh and drinke blood, yet that he wolde be vnited vnto vs by hys flesh, and therbie imparte life to vs in maner conuenient for vs, as yt hath by that yt ys vnited to the Sonne of God, he by hys power woorketh in the bread and wine so, that he turneth them into hys very flesh and bloode, that in that maner takinge hys verie flesh and blood, we might haue them as the seedes of life, and so growe to life. Thus breiflie vnderstanding the minde Euthym, in 26. Matth of Cyril, we go on to Euthymius, who saieth in this matter thus: Quemadmodum super naturaliter assumptam carnem deificauit (si ita loqui liceat) ita & haec ineffabiliter transmutat in ipsum viuificum corpus suum, & in ipsum preciosum sanguinem suum, & in gratiam ipsorum. As he supernaturallie did deifie (yf yt be leefull so to speak) H hys assumpted flesh: Euen so vnspeakablie doeth he transmute or chaunge those things (mening the bread and wine) into hys very liuing bodie, and into hys verie preciouse blood, and into the grace of them. Thus ye here also in this [Page 187]authour ye see a transmutacion of the bread ād wine into the verie bodie ād A verie blood of Chryst, and that as adsuredlie as he deified the flesh that he tooke of the Virgen. Remig. in. 1. Cor. cap. 10.
A moch like testimonie geueth Remigius saing: Caro quam Verbum Dei Patris assumpsit in vtero virginali in vnitate suae personae, & panis, qui consecratur in Ecclesia, vnū corpus Christi sunt. Sicut enim illa caro corpus Christi est: ita iste panis transit in corpus Christi, nec sunt duo corpora, sed vnū corpus. The flesh which the Sōne of God the Father flesh of the Sonne of God and the cōsecrated bread one bodie. tooke in the virgens wombe in the vnitie of hys person, and the bread which ys cōsecrated in the Church are one bodie of Chryst. For as that flesh ys the bodie of Chryste: so this bread passeth or ys chaunged into the bodie of Chryst, and yet they are not two bodies, but one bodie. Ye see yt also in this authour testified, that the bread consecrated in the church ys the bodie of Chryste, ye see also how yt ys doen. For (saieth Remigius) the bread goeth, Plain sainges for M. Juell. passeth or ys chaunged into the bodie of Chryste, and that as adsuredlie as the flesh which he tooke of the virgen was hys verie bodie: so ys this bread made hys verie bodie. Yf men wolde haue plain speach and plain asseueracion of matters of faith, I iudge this to be so plainly spokē, that they will not B leaue anie man in doubte, but him that will not be resolued.
The like plainesse shall ye find in Damascen, who saieth thus: Corpus secundùm Damasc. li. 4. ca. 14. veritatē coniunctū est diumitati, quod ex sancta virgine corpus est, non quòd ipsum corpus assumptū ex coelo descenderit, sed quòd ipse panis & vinū transmutantur in corpus & sanguinē Dei. Si autē modū requiris, quo pacto id fiat, sat sit tibi audire, quoniā per Spiritū sanctū, quemadmodū ex sancta Deipara, seipso, & in seipso Dominus carnē sustentauit, & nihil amplius cognoscimus, quàm quod verbū Dei verū est, & efficax & omnipotens, modus autē inscrutabilis. That bodie that ys a bodie born of the holie virgē, ys in verie dede ioined to the Godhead, not that that assūpted bodie cometh down Bread and wine transmuted into the bodie and bloode fo God. frō heauē, but that that bread and wine be transmuted into the bodie and blood of God. Yf thow require the maner how yt ys doen, let yt suffice thee to heare that by the holie Goste, euen as of the holie mother of God our Lorde by himself, and in himself did make vppe a flesh, and we know no more then that the woorde of God ys trewe, and effectuouse, and the maner ys inscrutable. Thus moch Damascen.
This authour doth not onelie testifie to vs that the verie bodie ād blood C of Chryst be in the Sacramēt, but also opening the maner how yt ys doen, Thinges spokē of God must be beleued though the maner of doing be vnknowen. declareth that yt should be sufficient for vs to vnderstand that the bread and wine be transmuted into the bodie and blood of Chryst by the operacion of the holie Goste, and that as adsuredly as the same bodie was by him framed in the virgens wōbe. And with this (saieth he) should we be contented, knowing that the woorde of God ys true, and omnipotent, ād therfor effectuouse, adsuredly woorking that that yt saieth, though the maner of the doing of yt be inscrutable.
A testimonie not moch vnlike to this geueth also Theophilact, saing in this maner. Theoph. in 6. Joan. Non enim dixit Dominus: Panis quē ego dabo figura est carnis meae, sed caro mea est. Transformatur enim arcanis verbis panis ille per mysticā benedictionē, & accessionē sancti Spiritus in carnē Domini. Et ne quē conturbet, quòd credendus sit panis caro. Etenim & in carne ambulante Domino, & ex pane alimoniā admittente, panis ille qui manducabatur, in corpus eius mutabatur, & similis fiebat sanctae eius carni, & in augmentū & sustentationē Bread. which Chryst gaue no figure but flesh. cōferebat iuxta humanū morē. Igitur & nunc panis in carnē Domini mutatur. Owr Lord did not saie, the bread that I will geue ys a figure of my flesh, but yt ys my D flesh. For yt ys transformed with the secret woords by the mystical benedictiō, ād the coming to of the holie Gost into the flesh of our lord, ād let yt not [Page]trooble anie man that the bread ys to be beleued flesh. For when owre Lord walked in the flesh, and tooke sustenaunce of bread, that bread that he tooke was E chaunged into hys bodie, and was made like to his holie flesh, and A plain saing for M. Juell. yt gaue encrease and sustentacion according to the maner of mans nature. Thersor now also ys the bread chaunged into the slesh of our Lord.
Agreablie writeth Paschasius, with whome we will ende, being certen by the supputacion of learned men, that he was an hondreth yeares before Berengarius, and therfore before anie publique controuersie in this matter of the Sacrament, thus he writeth: Spiritus sanctus, qui hominem Christum in vtero Paschasius li. de corp. & sang. Dom. virginis sine semine creauit, etiam ipse panis ac vini substantiam carnem Christi & sanguinem inuisibili potentia per sacramenti sui sanctificationem operatur, quamuis nec visu exteriùs, nec gustu saporis comprehendatur. Sed quia spiritualia sunt, fide & intellectu pro certo, sicut veritas praedixit, plenissimè sumuntur. Quòd in veritate corpus & sanguis fiat consecratione mysterij, nemo qui verbis diuinis credit, dubitat. The holie Gost who withoute seed created the man Chryst in the wombe of the Virgen, he also No man that beleueth the woordes of God doubteth of the bodie of Chryst in the Sacr. with his inuisible powre by the sanctisicacion of his Sacrament, woorketh the Substance of bread and wine into the flesh and bloode of Chryste, although neither by the seight outwardlie, neither by the tast of the sauoure F they can be comprehended, but bicause they be spirituall thinges, they are by faith and vnderstanding most fullie of a suertie receaued, as the trueth did before saie yt. That in verie dede the bodie and blood ys made by consecracion of the mysterie, non man that beleueth the woordes of God doubteth.
Hauing now alleaged a good nōbre to testifie that the substāce of bread ād wine be chaūged or turned into the substāce of the bodie ād blood of Christ (whiche turning of substance into substance the Church calleth Transubstanciacōn) forasmoche Transubstantiaciō what yt ys. as they are plain and euident testimonies, not encombred with dark speaches, as I content my self to produce no mo: so, I trust, these maie suffice anie man, considering howe auncient they be, to cause him to setle and fixe his faith in the matter of the Sacrament, and not to wauer or doubte.
In these doctours and authours this ys to be considered, that Eusebius, S. Howthe Fathers proue Transubstantiacion to be a miraculouse work of God Eusc. Emis. Gregorie, and sainct Ambrose, whiche be the first, doe proue this turning of substances by the great workes of Gods might and power. As Eusebius by the creacion of the high heauens, the huge and depe waters or sloudes, the great and vast earth, and by the great worke of God in chaunging a man G that was detestable and filthie in sinne, that was bonde to the wofull and miserable bond of damnacion, that was a straunger to God, and an enemie, that God maketh him pure and clean from all that filthinesse, and setteth him in the state of innocencie, deliuereth him from the bond, and maketh him free to the kingdom of heauen, and of a straunger and an enemie maketh him a domestical, and a sonne adoptiue.
S. Gregorie by that worke of God that he caused bread and other naturall foode to be chaunged into that merueilouse bodie conceaued by the S. Gregorie holie Gost, and ioined to the Godhead in vnitie of person, whiche was not a common bodie, but the bodie of God. And for that yt hath God abiding in yt, yt ys exalted to the dignitie of God, which in dede well weighed ys a merueilouse worke of God.
S. Ambrose by the chaunging of the nature of a rodde into a Serpēt, and of the nature of the serpent into the rodde again, ād by a great nōbre of other S. Ambrese works of God. which their maner of teaching geueth vs to vnderstād, that this turning or chaūging wrought by God in the Sacr. ys no small work, but soch H a worke, as ys and maie be accompted amonge the great workes of God, [Page 188]among those workes that be myraculouse, that be wonderfull, soche as A mans witte and vnderstanding can not atteign vnto but by faith, And ther fore in the Sacrament ys an other maner of worke wrought by God, then to make the bread and wine to be signes and tokens of remembrance that Chryst hath suffred an died for vs, for that ys not among the miraculouse and wonderfull workes of God.
S. Cyrill in sitting furth this matter findeth, (as yt were) a necessitie, S. Cyrill. that this chaunge a fore saied shoulde be bicause the flesh of Chryst, whiche ys hable to geue life to our naturall flesh, might by the receipt of the same in the Sacrament, make owre mortall bodies to liue, being once raised vppe to liue euerlastinglie.
Remigius ioineth the worke of the incarnacion with the worke of God in transubstanciacōn. Damascen doth the like, and with all teacheth S. Remig. Damascen. that as the holie Gost wrought in the wombe os the virgen the incarnacion of Chryst, by turning her substance into the substance of Chryst: so in the Sacrament he woorketh the transubstanciacion by turning the substance of the bread and wine into the substance of Chrystes bodie Theophil. Paschas. B and bloode. Theophilact and Paschasius do the like, with other good and necessarie instructions.
Thus ye maie see that as they teache the thing certenlie to be doen: so doe they asscribe yt to the power of God, to the woorke of the holie Gost, they so esteem yt, so magnifie yt, that they accompt yt and enombre yt among the great and miraculouse workes of God. As merueilouse and miraculouse yt ys in dede, that the substances of bread and wine shoulde be turned into the substance of the bodie and bloode of the Sonne of God.
But to appoint a thing to be a figure, to be a sign or token of remembrāce Appointing of figures ys nospeciall miraculouse worke of God. ther neadeth not soch speciall power of God, nor soch special worke of the holie Gost. For manie thinges haue ben appoincted to be signes and tokens of remembrance of Gods benefittes, whiche the writers and learned men did neuer accōpte among the miraculouse and wonderfull workes of God. As the twelue stones whiche God commaunded Iosue that people shoulde laie in an heape in remembrance that the twelue Tribes passed vnder Iosue C through Iordane with drie foote to go to Hiericho. Though this were a tokē of the remembrence of a miraculouse and a wonderfull worke and benefitt Iosue. 4. of God doē to the people of Israell: yet the laing together of the xii stones was neuer accompted as a miraculouse worke of God.
To come to thinges that were figures of Chryste, as to the Brasen Serpēt, Num. 21. Ioan. 3. whiche Chryst applieth to him self, as a figure of him self to be crucified, though yt were both a token of the great benefitt of God to the people of Israell in releiuing them of the plague that he had sent amonge them, and also a sigure of Christ to be crucified, wherbie the faithfull shoulde be released of the plague of euerlasting damnacion: yet this serpent was not of learned men in Chrystes Churche magnified and exalted among the great miraculouse workes of God.
The Paschall Lambe that was both a token of remembrance to the Iewes of the benefittes that they receaued in their passage oute of Aegipt, and also Exod. 12. a sigure of Chryst, and that a notable liuelie figure: yet ys ther no christian writer that accompteth the killing or eating of that lambe as a miraculouse D worke of God in yt self.
To come nearer to the maner, the Catechumeni that ys, the newlie instructed [Page]in christes faithe, but not baptised, of the whiche ther were a great nombre in the primitiue Church, they receaued a bread whiche S. Augustine E calleth a Sacrament, and accompteth yt an holie meate, yea holier then August. de peccatormerit. & remiss. holie bread vsed in the primitiue Churche. other meates, although yt be not (saieth he) the bodie of Chryst. And yet this bread accompteth he not (though yt be a Sacrament to them and an holie signe) amonge the miraculouse workes of God no more then the Church did the holie bread, whiche the people receaued on certain daies. Wherfor if the Sacrament were but a sign or token onelie (as Oecolampadius saieth yt ys) then yt should be but as the bread of the Catechumeni the newe conuerted to Chryst, and as the holie bread of Christian people, whiche S. Augustine accompteth but as an holie thing, and yet referred yt not into the nombre of the miraculouse workes of God. No more wolde these holie and auncient Fathers, which I haue alleaged, so haue esteemed the Sacrament and set yt furth by the great workes of God as a miraculouse worke requiring faith, to be beleued to contein more than reason can conceaue or Figures cō tein what, reason can conceaue, the Sacr. what faith must beleue. senseis iudge. And therfor the holie fathers haue traueiled to staie and confirme the faith of the Chrystians by examples of workes doen miraculouslie by Gods power, accompting this as one of the same kinde or sorte. F
This being well weighed and considered by the Fathers in the Lateran Councell, wher were assembled no small nombre of learned men as well of the greke church, as of the latin, as the Patriarkes of Hierusalem and Constantynople, Archebishoppes 70. Bishoppes 400. of other Fathers 92. with the Ambassadours of the Grecian and Romain Empire, and the Oratours of Hierusalem, Fraunce, Spain, Englonde, and Cypres, for the declaracion and confirmacion of the faith in this matteir accordinge to the doctrine of the holie Fathers, and to the confutacion of the wicked doctrine of Berengarius at that time yet lurking in corners, this Canon was ther agreed vpon and set Concil. Lateran. cap. 1. de fide cathol. furth. Verum Christi corpus & sanguis in sacramento Altaris sub speciebus panis & vini veraciter continentur, transubstantiatis pane in corpus, & vino in sanguinem potestate diuina. The verie bodie and blood of Chryste are verilie and trulie conteined vnder the formes of bread and wine in the Sacrament of the aultar, the bread and wine being transubstanciated into the bodie and bloode by the power of God, Thus the Councell, whiche was celebrated aboue thre hondreth yeares agone. G
Nowe Reader thowe seest the learning and faith of Chrystes Church in this matter of transubstantiacion. not onelie nowe in these daies professed, taught and beleued through oute all Chrystendome, but also aboue three hondreth yeares agon in the great and generall Councell Lateran. and so by Fathers testified before and vppewarde vntill ye come to the primitiue church. Wherfor minding here after to touche yt more as occasion shall be ministred, I think this for this time sufficient to moue anie man to haue a regarde to his faith, that hath not solde him self ouer to liue vnder heresie disobedience and sinne. Nowe therfor I returne to my pourpose.
THE TWO AND FIFTETH CHAP. OPENETH A the mindes of Sainct Basill and Sainct Ambrose vpon the woordes of Chryst
THinke not (gentle reader) but that ther be manie lefte not here alleaged, as Optatus, Dionisius Alexandrius, Hilarius, Origen, and other, which geue goodlie testimonie for the veritie of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament. But here we alleadge none but soche as treacting of these woordes of Chryst, This ys my bodie, This ys my bloode, doe geue vs their doctrine, for the true vnderstanding of them. wherfor the other omitted, this ordre hath brought vs to S. Basill in the greke churche, and to S. Ambrose in the latin church.
S. Basill, to whom this question was moued: with what feare, what maner Basil. quaest compend. explic. qu. 172. of faith or assured certentie, and with what affection the bodie and blod of Chryst shoulde be receaued, made this aunswer: Timorem docet nos Apostolus dicens: Qui edit & bibit indigné iudicium sibiipsi edit ac bibit. At verò certitudinis perfectionē B inducit fides verborū Domini, qui dixit: Hoc est corpus meum, quod pro vohis datur: Hoc facite in meàm cōmemorationē. The Apostle teachethvs the feare, saing: He tht eateth and drinketh vnwoorthilie, he eateth ād drinketh vnto himself iudgement. But the perfection of certitude induceth the faith of the woords of our Lorde, who saied: This ys my bodie, whiche ys geuen for yowe. Doe this in the remembrance of me. Thus moch S. Basill for aunswer to the question.
For the better vnderstanding of which aunswer, consider that this question ys propownded as of them that were vnlearned, and wolde be simplie S. Basill how he taught the simple to beleue of the Sacrament instructed in the faithe of Chryst, to the instruction of whiche kinde of people S. Basill appointed him self in the solucion of this question, and other. Wherfor yt ys to be thought that in this solucion he taught the simple and plain trueth. Nowe then teaching them that these woordes: This ys my bodie, doe instruct them what faith they shoulde haue in the receipt of the Sacrament, what dothe he but teach that these woordes must be taken as they sownde, and so by them to haue this faith, that Chrystes verie bodie ys in the Sacrament, according as the woordes doe sownde? For consider, wolde C this holie man, trowe ye, teache the people to grownde their faith vpō these woordes, if their faith shoulde not be grownded ypon them as they lie, but vpon this sense: this ys a figure of my bodie? Yf the faith of the people of the Sacrament aught to be none other, but that yt ys but a figure of the bodie, and not the bodie yt self, wolde he haue moued them to beleue the woordes as they be spoken, and not haue taught the true sense, that they aught to grownde their faith vpon in dede? No chrystian will so thinke of so woorthie a man, as this was. And therfor ye maie perceaue that this holieman Ca. 25. 37. 44. vnderstoode Chrystes woordes simplie in propre sense, and taught therbie the very presence of Chrystes blessed bodie and bloode in the Sacrament, as before ys saied, and shall be plentifullie declared in the thirde booke. S. Ambr. booke of Sacr. reiected of Oecolāp. as S. lames epistle by Luther, for their plaintrueth
Nowe foloweth S. Ambrose, in whome I finde soche copie, and soche plentie of plain and euident places to open and declare the right and true, vnderstanding of this scripture. This ys my bodie: that as a man comming into a goodlie garden garnished, adorned, and pleasantlie furnished with all delectable and swete flowres, can not tell which flower to take first. Euen so D I beholding S. Ambrose and the plentie of goodlie liuely places in him, I knowe not whiche to take first But bicause he ys so plain in gods treuth, [Page]and Veritas odium parit, trueth causeth hatred: he gotte himself so moche E hatred for this his plain treuth, that had not the catholique Churche stande his good Mother, he had ben cast oute of the doores by Oecolampadius, as S. Iames, epistle had ben by Luther, for his plain speaking for god workes. But God be praised, as by her bothe these were approued: so (God aiding) by her they are conserued.
A mong soche plentie therfor as I haue saied, and as yt ys well knowen to them that be learned we will gather a flower or twoo, for the mainteinā ce of the cōfortable sinell of the trueth, of the which this shall be the first: Ambr. li. 4 de Sacr. cap. 5. Antequam consecretur panis est, vbi autem verba Christi accesserint, corpus est Christi. Denique audi dicentem: Accipite, & edite ex eo omnes, Hoc est corpus meum. Et ante verba Christi calix est vini & aquae plenus, vbi verba Christi operata fuerint, ibi sanguis efficicitur, qui plebem redemit. Before yt ys consecrate yt ys bread, but when the woordes of Chryste haue comed to yt, yt ys the bodie of Chryst, Heare him sainge: Plain saīgs of S. Amb. for the Procla. Take and eate, this ys my bodie. And before the woordes of Chryst, yt ys a cuppe full of wine and water, but when the woordes of Chryste haue wrought, ther ys made the bloode that redemed the people. F
What can the Aduersaries saie to this place of S. Ambrose? What can the Proclamer saie, yf he folowe not his Father Oecolampadius and reiect S. Ambrose? Can they for shame saie that the woordes of Chryst are spoken by a figure, wher they be so plainlie expownded by this notable Father of the verie thing? Doe ye not heare that after the woordes of Chryste be spoken vpon the bread, yt ys the bodie of Chryst, and again that after the woorking of the woordes of Chryste, ther ys made in the cuppe the bloode that redemed the people? Here ys no figure spoken of. He saieth not, that yt ys a figure of the bodie, and a figure of the bloode, but he saied, they be the bodie and the bloode, yea and that so verilie, that he saieth, yt ys the bloode that redemed the people.
As yt ys woonderfull, so ys yt pittifull, that men will still remain in blinde heresie, when the trueth ys so simplie and plainlie vttered, and that of so excellent a Father, that they can not denie yt, but maliciouslie to contein them selues in that miserable state, will refuse the worke, and saie yt ys not G S. Ambrose worke, and yet they knowe that S. Augustin himself wittnesseth that S. Ambrose wrote soche bookes of the Sacramentes, and ther be none but these. But yt ys but a bare shifte when they be ouercomed of the trueth to denie the authour, and be not hable to prooue that they doe.
But lett vs returne to S. Ambrose, and gather an other of his flowers. Thus he saieth in an other place: Tu fortè dicis, meus panis est visitatus. Sed panis Ambros. ibid. li. 4. cap. 4. iste, panis est ante verba sacramentorum, vbi accesserit consecratio, de pane fit caro Christi. Thowe peraduenture saiest, my bread ys vsuall or common bread. But this bread before the woordes of consecracion ys bread, but when the consecracion hath comed vnto yt, of the bread ys made the flesh of Chryst. And Amb. ibid again he saieth in the same chapiter. Sed audi dicentem: Ipse dixit, & facta sunt, ipse mandauit & creata sunt. Ergo tibi vt respondeam, Non erat corpus Christi ante consecrationem. Sed post consecrationem, dico tibï, quòd iam est corpus Christi. Ipse dixit & factum est, ipse mandauit, & creatum est. But heare one saing: He hath saied and they were made, he hath cōmaunded and they were created. Therfor that What plainer woords cā the Proclamer require. I maie aunswer thee. Yt was not the bodie of Chryst before the consecracion, but after H the consecracion (I saie vnto thee) that nowe yt ys the bodie of Chryst. He hath saied, and yt ys made, he hath commaunded and yt ys created.
I nede not explane S. Ambrose in this place neither. For as the parentes [Page 190]of the blinde born sonne saied of him: Aetatem habet, ipse pro se loquatur. He A hath age, let him speake for himself, so S. Ambrose hath soche grace, soche learning, and withall soche plain speache, that he speaketh sufficently for him self, and for Gods cause, whiche he openeth, and that ther ys nothing here to be desired but an humble reader. And if ye will not beleue him, yet beleue him, to whom he referreth yowe, that ys Chryst. For he saieth: Ipse Ambr. ibid. ca. 5. Dominus Iesus testificatur nobis, quòd corpus suum accipiamus & sanguinem. Nunquid debemus de eius fide & testificatione dubitare? Owre Lorde Iesus him self testifieth vnto vs, that we receaue his bodie and bloode, shall we doubte of his trueth and testificacion?
Nowe let vs compare the doctrine of S. Ambrose, with the doctrine of the Aduersaries. S. Ambrose saieth that Chryst himself doeth testifie that we S. Ambr. doctrine and the Sacramentaries cōpared together. receaue his bodie and bloode: The Aduersaries saieth that we doe not receaue the bodie and bloode of Chryst, But breade and wine the figures of the bodie and blood of Chryst. whom shall we here beleue? Chryst and S. Ambrose, or the Aduersaries? The choise aught soen to be made. And therfor yt ys lamentable to see howe Sathan hath preuailed, and caused the Aduersaries B to call that in question and doubt, which Chryst himself testifieth to be the verie trueth. Yf yt were not the trueth, S. Ambrose, be ye well assured, wolde not so haue reported yt. But yf Chryst had testified to vs, that we in the Sacrament receaue but a figure, S. Ambrose wolde not haue reported that we receaue Chrystes bodie. For as ther ys great difference betwen these two thinges: so be the doctrines greatlie different. And S. Ambrose who in these his bookes laboured to teache the thrueth, and to deliuer men from doubte, was not of soche grosse iudgement nor so rude in vtterance, but he coulde well iudge betwene the thing and the figure, and so vtter his iudgement, that his speache shoulde not sownde one thing, and hismening shoulde be an other. for that were not the waie to deliuer from doubte but raither to bring into doubte, not a waie of instruction, but raither a waie of destruction.
But here to conclude this parte, for as moch as S. Ambrose saieth, that Figure of the Sacrmē taries excluded frō Chrystes woordes. Chryst hath testified by these woordes, This ys my bodie, that we in the Sacramēt after the woords spokē receaue his verie bodie, thei are not to be vnderstāded C withe anie figure or trope, but simplie, ād plainlie in that sense that theie are spoken. Wherfore yt maie be by this perceaued that the Aduersaries figuratiue speache hath no place, as they vnderstande yt, in this saing of Chryste. But this ys raither to be saied that his interprise in so wresting and abusing of Chrystes woordes ys wicked and detestabele. For yf that sense might haue ben here vpon these woordes placed, who can doubte that S. Ambrose so often rehersing them, wolde not in one place or other, haue reported the true sense, and saied yt had ben but a signe. But forasmoche as in no place he so doeth, but continuallie and constantlie saieth, yt ys the bodie of Chryst, let no man doubte of the trueth of that that he teacheth, Consecracion the terme of the Papistes vsed of S. Ambr. serious [...]ie. but embracing that let him flie the feigned figures.
In these sainges also of S. Ambrose, this ys breiflie to be touched with a note, that wher the Aduersarie in skorne, when he happeneth to speake of this woorde (consecracion) for the most parte addeth (as the Papistes teare yt) yet ye perceaue that yt ys vsed of S. Ambrose, and not sknorned. And howe so euer yt liketh him to dallie and trifle withe that woorde, yet S. Ambrose D in so weightie a matter dothe vse the woorde seriouslie. And if for that he vseth this woorde, the Aduersarie will also accompte him for a papist, I had [Page]leuer be a Papist wiht the one, then an heretique with the other. But yt ys E time to call in an other coople.
THE THREE AND FIFTETH CHAP. CONTINVeth in the exposition of Chrystes woordes by Gregorie Nissen. and S. Hierom.
AS a man permitted to come into a councell chambre, and admitted, through speciall fauoure, to talke withe eche of the counselours, and haue their senerall aduertisementes howe he shall safelie beare him self in the state that he ys called vnto: or as a man desierouse to be resolued in a matter of learning, entreth an assembley of learned men, and gentlie receaued heareth their seuerall iudgementes vttered with great and full agreement, to his full resolucion, and contentacion, can not be but therwith moche delighted: so I trust, the reader being as yt were in Godes counsell chambre, or in Gods Schoole, and hearing the aduertisementes and iudgementes of Gods counselours F and learned men so seuerallie, and yet so agreablie vttered to his full and perfect resolucion, I trust, I saie, he ys delighted, and the more for that all these with whiche he hath conference (and yet for a good nombre shall haue) be all verie auncient, and with in the compasse of sixe hondreth yeares after Chryst. Wherfor let vs in Gods name proceade with delight and pleasure to heare the other that remain to be conferred with all for they be (as ys saied) a good nombre of thē bothe auncient, and learned, and though all be not auncient, yet all learned and approued.
Of these auncientes that remain the first ys Gregorie Nissen. the brother of S. Basill and therfor in the greke church meet next to folowe him. This ys his iudgement in this matter. Thus he writeth. Qua ex cause panis in co corpore mutatus in diuinam virtutem transiit, eadem de causa idem nunc fit. Vt enim illic verbi Greg. Nissen anserm. catathetico de diuinis sacram. Dei gratia sanctum efficit illud corpus, cuius firmamentum ex pane constabat, & ipsum etiam quodammodò panis erat: sic panis, vt ait Apostolus, per verbum Dei, & orationem sanctificatur, non quia comeditur, eo progrediens, vt Verbi corpus euadat, sed statim G per verbum in corpus mutatur, vt dictum est à Verbo. Hoc est corpus meum. By what cause bread in that bodie chaunged passed into the diuine vertue, by the same cause that same thinge ys nowe doen. For as ther the grace of the Sonne of God made that bodie, whose substanciall nutriment was of bread, and yt also in a maner was bread, so also this bread (as the Apostle saieth) ys sanctisied by the woorde of God and praier, not tending to this poinct that bicause yt ys eaten yt ys the bodie of the Sonne of God, but that furthwith by the woorde yt ys chaunged into the bodie, as yt was saied of the Sonne, This ys my bodie
By this authour, who vndoubtedlie geueth a notable testimonie for the veritie of the Sacrament, be ouerthrowen three heresies in the same matter. Three heresies ouerthrowen by one saing of Gregor. Nissen. Of the whiche, Luther or at the least the Lutherans did settfurth one, which was that the Sacrament was the bodie of Chryst if yt were receaued, and to him that receaued yt, yt was the bodie of Chryst, otherwise yt was not. Another ys sett furth bothe by Luther, and all the Lutherans, and by Oecolampadius and all the Oecolampadians, and by this Proclamer, whiche ys that the bread H and wine be not chaunged into the substance of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, of the whiche we haue somwhat at large spoken before. The thirde ys settfurth by Carolstadius, Oecolampadius and their disciples, and also by this [Page 191]Proclamer, whiche ys that Chrystes substanciall bodie ys not verilie present in the Sacrament. Against these three, this authour teacheth A vs very good documentes according to that, that the catholique Churche now teacheth.
And nowe for the first that the Lutherans doo teache, wher they saie that in the Sacrament ys the bodie of Chryst to him that receaueth the Sacrament, otherwise yt ys not the bodie of Chryst, this authour hath direct What warrant haue the Lutherās for this woordes to the contrarie, wher he saieth. Hic panis sanctificatur per verbum Dei, & orationem, non quia comeditur eo progrediens vt verbi corpus euadat. This bread ys sanctified by the woorde of God and praier, not tending to this poinct that bicause yt ys eaten, therfore yt ys the bodie of the Sonne of God. So that yt ys not receauing, or not receauing, eating or not eating that causeth the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, Receauing or notreceauing causeth nor presence, nor absence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacr. but the power of God with the woorde of Chryst, as before ys saied. The cause of so great a worke as to make present the bodie of Chryst, dependeth not of so simple and weake cause as the will of man, whiche yt should dooe if yt should depende vpon the receipte. For yf the B man wolde receaue yt, then were yt the bodie of Chryste: yf he wolde not receaue, yt were not the bodie of Chryst, so willing and not willing shoulde make bodie or no bodie after that fonde opinion.
But to adde somwhat beside the authoritie of this auncient Father, which ys more then sufficient to conuince so vain and foolish an heresie, what apparance haue they of anie scripture or holie writer (For substanciall grownde in ame of them both they haue none) to make some shewe or counteinance, for the maintenance of their heresie? yt ys certen that they haue none. Nowe then shall we not condemne them by their owne iudgement, Lutherans doctrine hauing no apparāt scripture ys ouer throwen by ther owne argument. wherwith they haue trauailed in manie thinges to condemne the catholique Church? What ys defined, decreed or determined by the Churche, if ther be not manifest scripture for the same, yt ys condemned of them, as a tradicion of man, and a doctrine of Sathan. But this their doctrine hath no manifest scriptures. Wherfore yt ys a tradicion of man, and a doctrine of Sathan. Thus as Aman was hanged vpon the same Galowes C that he had made for innocent Mardochaeus: So ys their wicked doctrine ouerthrowen with their owne iudgement, and vanquissed with their owne swoorde.
But what shall I occupie the time, and trooble the reader in refelling this fonde heresie, seing (as a litle before ys declared by Eusebius) that the inuisible preist, Chryst, by his power with his woorde doeth turne the visible creatures into the substance of his bodie and bloode. Chrysostome also saieth, that the preistes be in the place of the mynisters of God, but yt ys Chryst that doeth sanctifie, and chaunge the substances of bread and wine. And breiflie to saie, sainct Ambrose in the last chapiter, Euthymius, Damascen, and Theophilact in the chapter before, doe testisie that the worke of consecracion ys doen by the power of God, by the accession of the holie Gost, and by the woorde of Chryst spoken by the preist in the person of Chryste. As yt ys also testified in the Florentine Concilium. Florent. Councell wher yt ys thus declared: Forma huius sacramenti sunt verba D Saluatoris, quibus hoc conficit Sacramentum. Sacerdos enim in persona Christi loquens hoc conficit Sacramentum. Nam ipsorum verborum virtute substantia panis in corpus Christi, & substantia vini in sanguinem conuertuntur. The forme of this Sacrament be the woordes of our Sauiour by the whiche he [Page]consecrateth this Sacrament. For the preist speaking in the person of Chryst E doeth consecrate this Sacrament. For by the vertue of those woordes, the substance of bread, ys turned into the bodie of Christ, and the substance of wine Trāsubstā tiacion. into hys bloode. Thus the Councell. By whiche woordes, as by the woordes of them also before alleaged, yt ys manifestly declared that the power of the consecracion of the bodie of Chryst, ys not depending of the will of the receauer, but of the power of God, of the worke of the holie Gost, and of the vertue of the woordes of Chryst, spoken by the preist in the person of Chryste.
And as this fonde heresie semeth to be mother of that heresie that impugneth reseruacion: so that, that ys before saied for the defence of reseruacion, will also impugne this heresie here nowe spoken of. Wherfore I referre the reader to that place, wher he findinge plentie of proofe that the Sacrament maie be reserued, and being reserued, that yt still remaineth the bodie of Chryst, this wicked doctrine that teacheth, that yt ys but the bodie of Chryst when yt ys in vse, shalbe ouerthrowen, and prooued (as it is) a false and a deuellish F doctrine.
The other heresie which ys settfurth both by the Lutherans and the Oecolampadians, ys that the substance of bread and wine be still remaining in the Sacrament, and not chaunged into the bodie and bloode of Chryst.
And yet here by the waie vnderstand this, that though they agree in this poinct, yet here Sathan ys deuided against Sathan, and his kingdom also, Diuision among the Protestantes. as kingdom against kingdom. For Luther graunteth the presence of Chrystes bodie: Oecolampadius denieth the presence of Chrystes bodie, and in this they are more then enemies. But in the other (as ys saied) they doe agree. And as in this they agree amonge themselues: So in the same they disagree, from the true faith, from the catholike Church, and from Gregorie Nissen, whom we haue nowe in hand. For by expresse woordes he affirmeth that the substance of the bread ys chaunged into the bodie of Chryst. These be his woordes speaking of the bread before the consecracion. Hic panis statim per verbum in corpus mutatur. This bread ys by the woorde furthwith G Greg. Niss. in vita Moiseos. chaūged into the bodie. Who so listeth maie read the like saing of the same authour in his booke of the life of Moyses.
Neither doeth he here meen of soche a chaunge as the Aduersarie dreameth of, that yt ys chaunged to be called the bodie of Chryste, whiche proprely ys no chaunge, but raither an addicion. But this authour meeneth of a substanciall chaunge as hys woords doe most plainlie declare, which he vseth to proue this chaunge. For thus he saieth: Qua ex causa panis in eo corpore mutatus in diuinam virtutem transiit, eadem de causa idem nunc fit. By what cause bread in that bodie chaunged, passed into the diuine vertue: euen so by the same cause the verie same thing ys now doen.
For the better weighing of this saing of the authour, consider first, that Chryste was and ys bothe God and man, consider that the bodie of man was so ioined to the Godhead in vnitie of person, that Chryst God and man was one person, one Chryste. Consider then that this bodie by this merueilouse coniunction ys the bodie of God. Nowe this bodie liuing here vpon H the earth, although as yt liued fortie daies and fortie nightes wihout foode: so yt might haue liued fortie wekes, and fortie moneths, yet as yt was a naturall bodie: So yt liued in natural order, and did eate foode. This foode which by a generall terme ys called bread, allthough yt were but comon meate, euen soche as the Apostles, and other did eate, yet this comon bread eatē of [Page 192]Chryst, was chaunged in the bodie of Chryst into the substance of the bodie A of Chryst, and became now the substance of his bodie, and being so yt came to be the substance of the bodie of God.
Nowe saieth Gregbrie Nissen by what cause the bread was chaunged into the bodie of Chryste, and became the substance of the bodie of God, As bread while Chryst liued was turned into his diuine flesh: so nowe in the Sacr. which (as I take yt) he meneth by these woordes (diuine vertue) euen by the same cause, the same thing ys nowe doen. Yf the same thing be doen nowe then the bread ys chaunged into the substance of the bodie of God for that ys the thing that was doen then. Wherfor good reader, note this wel, that he saieth, the same thing ys doen nowe, wherbie the dreame of the Aduersarie ys dissolued, that the bread ys chaunged but in name. For that was but a cauill, and in dede but a bare shifte to auoide the force of the trueth. And what the thing ys that nowe ys doen, thys authour tolde when he saied: Panis mutatur in corpus per verbum. The bread by the worde ys chaunged into the bodie.
Seing then this auncient Father teacheth vs, that in Chrystes bodie the B substance of bread was chaunged into the substance of that diuine bodie, Trāsubstā tiacion a nouched and what yt ys. and by example of that, teacheth the like to be nowe doen in the Sacrament that as in the one ther was a chaunge of one substance into an other: so in this ther ys a chaunge of one substance into an other, that ys, once again to saie, of the substance of bread and wine, into the substance of Chrystes bodie and blood: why maie not this turning, chaunging or transmuting of substances into substances be called transubstantiacōn, seinge yt ys so in dede? Whie, I saie, maie not the same terme by the Church be vsed liuelie to expresse a treuth, and to auoide an heresie, as in the time of the Arrians, the Church for the confutacion of that heresie, was enforced to vse this terme (consubstantialitie) therby to declare that God the Sonne was and ys of one substance with God the Father? A newe mischeif must haue a newe remedie As the woord Constātialitie in the time of Arius: so Trāsubstā tiacion in the time of Berēg. was taught by the holie Goste and for a newe sore, a newe salue must be fownde. So as for the Arrians, whiche was then a newe mischeif and a newe sore in the Churche, these tearmes (consubstanciall and consubstancialitie) were by the holie Gost deuised in the same: So when Berengarius began this newe mischeif and sore against C the Sacrament, teaching that ther was no chaunge of the substance of bread into the substance of the bodie of Chryste, which sore the Church had not felt before, the same Churche perceauing that all the termes: that the holie Fathers had vsed to expresse this chaunge (as turning, chaunging, mutacion, transmutacion, transumption, transelementacion) did not suffice, but the Deuell wolde by his ministers dallie with them to deceaue Chrystian soules, and impugne the holie Chrystian faith the Church I saie, by the holie Gost deuised to vse this tearme (transubstanciacion) to declare fullie the thing that ys doen, whiche ys the chaunge of one substance into an other, and so to open the true faith, by the same to defende the faith, and to sett yt for a salue and a remedie against that sore, and mischeif, that the Deuell had newely caused to springe.
And as in the time of the Arrians, ther was no newe thinge deuised in faith, though a newe tearme was set furth: so nowe no thing ys newlie deuised but onelie the tearme, fullie to declare, and make vs vnderstand that thing that was before. Wherfore the newnesse of the tearme D shoulde not offende, speciallie being fetfurth by no particular man, but by a generall consent, so that yt be not a prophane noueltie, prophanelie, [Page]abducinge men from an auncient trueth to a newe inuented falsheade and E so by a newe terme, newely commended to vs, to supplant vs. But a newe tearme to expresse an olde trueth hath ben in the beginning of the Churche, and maie also nowe be well vsed, as S. Augustine saieth: Audite Apostolum salubriter admonentem. Prophanas, inquit, verborum A newe tearm to expresse anold treuth vsed in the primitiue church and maie so be nowe. nouitates deuita, Multum enim proficiunt ad impietatem, & sermo eorum, vt cancer serpit. Et non ait solùm verborum nouitates, sed addit, Prophanas. Sunt eium & doctrinae religionis congruentes verborum nouitates. Sicut ipsum nomen Christia [...]orum, quando dict caeperat, sicut scriptum est (In Antiochia enim primam post ascensionem Domini sic appellati sunt Discipuli, Sicut legitur in Actibus Apostolorum) Et Xenodochia, & Monasteria, postea appellata sunt nouis nominibus, res tamen ipsae & ante nomina sua erant, & religionis veritate sirmantur quae etiam contra improbos defenduntur. Aduersus quoque impietatem Arrianorum haereticorum nouum nomen patres (Homousion) condiderunt, sed non rem nouam tali nomine signauerunt, Hoc enim vocatur Homousion, quod est ego Aug. tract. 96. in Ioan. & Pater vnum sumus, vnius videlicet eiusdemque substantiae. Nam si omnis nouitas prophana esset, nec à Domino diceretur: mandatum nouum do vobis, nec testamentum appellaret F nouum, nec cantaret vniuersa terra canticum nouum. Heare the Apostle holsomlie admonishing: Prophane nouelties of woordes (saieth he) auoide. They doe moche aduaunce impietie, and their woorde fretteth like a kanker. And he doeth not Some newe woordes be agreable to good religiō saie onely nouelties of woordes: but he addeth: Prophane. For ther be nouelties of woordes also agreable to the doctrine of religion as the name of Chrystians, when yt first began to be spoken of, as yt ys written (For so first in Antioche after the ascension of our Lorde were the Disciples called, at yt ys redd in the Actes of the Apostles) And Hospitals and Monasteries after ward were called with newe names, the thinges them selues for all that were before these their names, and are established with the veritie of religion, and are also defended against wicked men. Against the impietie or wickednesse also of the Heretiques the Arrians, the Fathers made the newe tearme (Homousion) but by that name they did Homousion what yt signisieth. not signifie a newe thing. For Homousion ys called the same that this ys: I and my Father be one: that ys to saie, of one and the very same substance. For G if euery noueltie were euell yt shoulde not be saied of our Lorde: I geue yow a newe commaundement, neither shoulde his testament be called newe, neither shoulde the wholl earth sing a newe song. Thus moch S. Augustin. Wherfor this tearm of transubstanciation, which the Aduersarie calleth newe, although yt hath bē in vse more then three hondreth years, by the minde of S. Augustine ys not to be reiected. But for somoche as the thing whiche yt signisieth ys auncient, as Homousion against the Arrians: so this against the Sacramentaries ys of all faithfull people to be accepted. But what doe I tarie so long vpon this matter seing moche ys saied of yt allreadie, and more shall by waie of note as occasion shall be geuen.
The thirde heresie ys also by this authour refelled, in that he teaching the bread to be chaunged by these woordes of Chryst: This ys my bodie. teacheth both the reall presence, and also the woordes to be vnderstand withoute figure or trope, as the Aduersaries wolde haue them vnderstanded. That he so doeth yt ys easie to be perceaued by his owne wordes, whiche he vttereth in this maner. Panis statim mutatur in corpus, vt dictum est à Verbo: hoc est corpus meum. H The bread ys furth with chaunged by the woorde into the bodie, as yt ys saied of the Sonne of God. This ys my bodie.
But what neadeth to tarie anie lōger to saie more for the opening of this authour, [Page 193]where euerie parte of yt ys so opē of yt self, that a childe maie see yt? A I will therfor leaue him, and heare the minde of his yocke felowe, whom we Hieron. ad He did. q. 2. haue in this place appointed to be. S. Hierō, who writeth thus: Nos autem audiamus panē, quem Dominus fregit, deditue Discipulis suis esse corpus Domini saluatoris, ipso dicente ad eos: Accipite, & comedite, Hoc est corpus meū: & calicē illū esse, de quo iterum locutus est. Bibite ex hoc omnes: Hic est sanguis meus noui testamenti, qui pro multis effundetur. Iste est calix, de quo in Propheta legimus: Calicē salutaris accipia: & alibi: Calixtuus The bread which our Lord gaue was his bodie, ād the cuppe hys blood. inebrians quàm praeclarus est. Si ergo panis qui de coelo descendit, corpus est Domini, & vinum quod Discipulis dedit sanguis illius est noui testamēti, iudaicas fabulas repellamus, &c. But let vs heare that bread which our Lord brake and gaue to hys Disciples to be the bodie of our Lord our Sauiour, forasmoch as he saied vnto thē Take and eate, This ys my bodie. And the cuppe to be that of the which again he saied: Drinke ye all of this. This ys my blood of the newe Testament, which shall be shedd for manie This ys the cuppe of the which we read in the Prophete: I wil receaue the cuppe of saluacion. And in an other place. Thy cuppe inebriating ys verie noble. Yf therfore the bread that descended frō heauen ys the bodie of our Lord, and the wine which he gaue to his Disciples ys his blood of the newe Testament, let vs B repell the Iewish fables. Thus moch S. Hierom.
For the better vnderstanding of this saing, yt ys to be considered that a certain vertuouse woman named Hedibia sent to sainct Hierom to be resolued in certain questions. Among the which she desiered to be instructed how the saing of Chryst in S. Matthew, was to be vnderstanded, wher he saied: I will not from hencefurth drinke of this generacion of the vine, vntill that daie in whiche I shall drinke yt newe with yow in the kingdome of my Father. To the answeringe wherof he declareth vnto her, first, the fond opinion of some that vpon that place inuented a fable, that Chryst shoulde reign a thousand yeares corporally in which time of his reign, he shoulde drinke wine and so shoulde be fullfilled hys saing, that he wolde drinke no more wine Heresie of the Millenaries. vntill he dranke yt in the kingdom of his Father, in the whiche he shoulde then reign. But sainct Hierom well vnderstanding howe great and howe weightie a matter was spoken of in the place, wher from these woordes were taken, namely of the bodie and blood of Chryst, and being greued that yt being so great a worke of God, so great a benefitt to man, shoulde be intermengled C and obscured, with soche vain inuentions of soche fables, he openeth the true sense of the place and moueth the good woman Hedibia that all soche phantasies reiected and forsaken, she shoulde regarde the woordes of Chryst and credit them and that the bread and wine that Chryst spake of in that place were no soch thinges as vpon which soch vain fables should be grownded, but they were the bodie and bloode of Chryst, forasmoch as he that can speake but trueth saied: Thys ys my bodie. Thys ys my bloode.
Now cōsider with me yf Chryst had geuē to hys Apostles but Bread ād wine, S. Hierom his woordes weighed ād conferred with the doctrine of the Protestātes as figures of hys bodie and blood, wolde S. Hierō being required to geue the true vnderstāding of the scriprure, ād he taking vpō him so to doe, wold he (trowe ye) haue saied, Let vs vnderstād that the bread which our Lord gaue to his Disciples was his bodie, ād that the wine which he gaue was hys blood except we should beleue ād vnderstād thē, so to be in dede? Were this an opening of the true vnderstanding of the scriptures? Were yt not raither an hiding or a darkning of the scriptures, to bid vs to beleue one thing, ād the scripture biddeth an other? He biddeth vs beleue that yt ys the bodie ād blood D of Chryst, that Chryst gaue to his Apostles, ād the scriptur (as the Aduers. saieth) biddeth vs beleue that they be but figurs. Wold S. Hierō, being alwaies [Page]an enemie to heresie, teache soche an heresie? Wolde not he raither (if the trueth had ben so) haue taught this vertuouse woman the trueth of the E matter that she sought at his hand, and saied vnto her: This vnderstand, that the bread and wine, which Chryst gaue to his Apostles, were but figurs of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, and not the thinges themselues? And alleaging Chrystes woordes: This ys my bodie, This ys my bloode, wolde he not (if they had ben so to be vnderstanded) haue saied, these woordes are spoken by a figure, they be figuratiue speaches, and are thus to be vnderstanded: this ys a figure of my bodie, this ys a figure of my bloode? To instructe thē that Nomenciō of figuratiue speache in S. Hierōs woordes. wolde learn the true vnderstāding of this scripture (if yt were so to be vnderstanded) this were the right waie of teaching. But here ys no soche woorde: here ys no soche maner of teaching. And yt ys to be thought, that S. Hierō was not ignorant howe to teache, neither was he ignorāt of the trueth, that in this place shoulde be taught. Wherfor seing he knewe the trueth, and knewe howe to teache yt, and nowe he was in place to teache and had good occasion, being (as ys saied) therunto required, for somoche as he willeth vs to vnderstande that the bread and wine, whiche Chryst gaue to this Apostles, were his bodie and bloode, and the cause why we shoulde so vnderstāde thē F ys the woorde of Chryst, saing: This ys my bodie, This ys my bloode: Let vs thinke and beleue that the trueth of this matter ys, that his bodie and bloode be present verilie in the Sacramēt, and that the woordes of Chryste are to be vnderstanded withoute figure simplie and plainlie as they lie.
And that yt ys the bodie of Chryst, the woordes which S. Hierom vseth as the conclusiō of the matter, dothe also prooue. For thus he concludeth: Si ergo panis, qui de caelo descendit &c. Yf then the bread that descended from heauen be the bodie of our Lorde, and the wine that he gaue to his Disciples be his bloode of the newe testamēt, let vs cast awaie Iewish fables, As who might saie, forasmoche as these woordes of Chryst speake of no cheering nor banquetting, that the Iewes doe dreame shall be in Chrystes worldlie kingdom, but they speake of the bread which Chryst gaue to his Apostles, which they saie to be his bodie, and of the wine, which they saie to be his bloode, therfor let vs cast awaie soche vain fables, and cleaue to the true vnderstanding of Chrystes woordes, and beleue that the bread and wine be Chrystes bodie and bloode. And therfor looking for no soche worldlie kingdom, nor kinglie palace of G Chryst here vpon the earth: Ascendamus cum Domino caenaculum magnum strastum, atque mundatum, & accipiamus ab eo sursum calicem noui testamenti, ibiue cum eo Pascha celebrantes, inebriemur ab eo vino sobrietatis: Let vs (saieth S. Hierom) go vppe with our Lorde into the great dining chambre allreadie prepared and made clean, and ther let vs receaue of him aboue, the cuppe of the newe testament, and ther with him celebrating the Passouer, let vs be satisfied with the wine of sobrietie.
I can not here withoute sorowe and greif passe these last woordes of S. Hierom, but note to thee (gentle reader) the maliciouse doing of the Proclamer, who impugning the presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode The Proclaemer cutteth of the woordes of Sain. Hierom, to deceaue his auditorie. in the Sacrament, trauaileth to prooue that his wicked doctrine by some of the holie fathers, whome he wolde wrest to make them saie, that Chryst ys onelie to be adored and honoured in heauen, as wherbie yt might appeare, that his presence were onelie ther. Among the whiche, full euell fauoredlie he bringeth in these last woordes of S. Hierom, cuttinge H them of from the middest of the sentence, and leauing oute that that goeth before, whiche (as ye haue heard) maketh alltogether against him, [Page 194]and also that that soloweth, whiche (as ye shall heare) doeth make against A him likewise. And suatcheth truncatelie these fewe woordes, and maketh a false shew with them as well as he can to deceaue his Auditorie. Thus yt foloweth in S. Hierom ymmediately woorde for woorde, Non enim est regnū Dei, cibus & potus, sed iusticia, & gaudium, & pax in Spiritu sancto. Nec Moyses dedit Hierō ibid nobis panē verū, sed Dominus Iesus, ipse conuiua & conuinium. ipse comedens & qui comeditur. Illius bibimus sanguinem, & sine ipso potare non possumus. & quotidie in sacrificiis eius de genimine vitis verae, & viueae Sorec, quae interpretatur electa, rubentia musta calcamus, & nouum ex iis vinum bibimus de regno Patris, ne quaquam in vetustate literae, sed in nouitate spiritus cantantes canticum nouum, quod nemo potest cantare nisi in regno Ecclesiae, quod regnum Patris est. For the kingdom of God ys not meat and Chryst ys the feaster ād the feast whose blood we drinke in his sacrifices. drinke, but righteousnesse ād ioie, and peace in the holie Gost. Neither did Moyses geue vs the true bread, but our lorde Iesus, for he ys both the feaster; and the feast, he ys he that eateth and ys eaten. His bloode drinke we, and withoute him we can not drinke, and dailie in his sacrifices of the generacion of the true Vine, and of the wine of Sorec, whiche by interpretacion ys called chosen, doe we presse ruddie newe wines, and oute of these we drinke B the newe wine of the kingdom of the Father, not in the oldenesse of the letter, but in the newenesse of the spiritte singing a newe song, which no mā can singe, but in the kingdom of the church, which ys the kingdom of the Father. Thus moche S. Hierom.
Who in refelling of the Iewish fables declareth that in the kingdom of Chryst shall be no matter of wordlie cheering. For (saieth he) the kingdom of God ys not meate and drinke. And returning to the right cheer of Chrystes kingdom, he compareth yt with the cheer of Moyses, and saieth that Moyses gaue vs not the true bread, but our Lorde Iesus. Whie did not Moyses geue the true bread, seing that the bread that he gaue was a miraculouse bread, a bread that came from heauen, and the bread that Chryst gaue was no miraculouse bread, but yt was common vsuall bread, made here by the hand of man vpon earth? Yf ye saie that the bread of Chryst was a figure of Chryst: so was the other also, and more liuely thē this for manie causes, whiche in the thirde booke shall be declared. C
But if ye will learn the true cause, why our Lorde Chryst gaue the true breade, and Moyses did not, learn of S. Hierom, who teacheth vs that yt ys Cap. 12. bicause Chryst geueth vnto vs not an onelie figure of him self, but bothe the figure and him self also. For in the feast that Chryst maketh, he ys he, that both maketh the feast (as S. Hierom saieth) and also the meat of the feast. So thē he geueth him self who in dede ys the verie bread of life, he geueth vs the true bread that Moyses coulde not geue. For Moyses gaue the figure of yt, but he gaue not the thing, And therfore he gaue not the true bread.
Note then that Chryste ys the feaster, for he biddeth vs to the feast, and saieth: Take and eate. He ys the meate also of the feast, for appoincting the A saing of S. Hierom. opened. meat he saieth, This ys my bodie. And thus ye maie perceaue that S. Hierom ioineth with the woords of Chryst: And farder he saieth by expresse woordes, comminge to the poinct of the drinking of Chrystes wine in the kingdome of his Father: Illius bibimus sanguinem: We drinke his bloode But where drinke we yt? In sacrificiis eius: In his sacrifices. Howe come we by this wine Joan. 15. of his, whiche ys his bloode? In sacrificiis eius de geminine vitis verae rubentia musta calcamus, In his sacrifices we presse oute of the true vine the ruddie new wine. D Who ys the true vine? Chryst, who saied: Ego sum vitis vera. I am the true wine. Howe presse we oute this newe ruddie wine oute of the generacion [Page]of this true wine? By speaking the woordes of Chryst, as he hath cōmaunded, by which (as S. Ambrose saieth) that, that ys in the cuppe, ys made the bloode E that redemed the people. But in what place muste we drinke this newe wine? Amb. li. 4 de Sa. ca. 5 Nouum bibimus vinum in regno Patris: We drinke this newe wine in the kingdom of the Father. For soche as be in this kingdom maie be partakers of Chrystes wine dronken in his sacrifices. Other maie not. Habemus altare, de quo edere non habent potestatem, qui tabernaculo deseruiunt. We haue an aultar of whiche they maie not eate that serue the tabernacle. For they singe not a newe song, but remain in the olde letter. None can sing this newe sōg but they that be in the kingdom of the Churche, whiche ys the kingdom of Hcb. 13. the Father, saieth S. Hierom.
By this then ye maie perceaue not onelie the answer of S. Hierom to the questiō of Hedibia: but also his assertion for the presēce of Chryst in the Sacrament. For he saieth not in all this discourse that Chryst geueth vs a figure of the true bread, but the true bread yt self. We haue not a figure of the meat of Chryst, but the meat yt self: we drinke not a figure of Chrystes bloode, but we drinke his blood, saieth S. Hierom. And therfore this Proclamer did seke to doe to moche violence to S. Hierom to cutt of a peice of F him, and shewing yt to his audience, to make them beleue, that S. Hieom was on his side, as he saied, when al that ys before saied, and all that cometh after in S. Hierom reclameth, yea and fighteth against him. Thus ye haue hearde twoo great clerkes of Chrystes schoole, and the same also two great Seniours of Chrystes Parliament house testifieng the enacted trueth of the prescnce of Chryst in the Sacrament, and the vnderstanding of the woordes of his supper. Weigh them well, and consider them throughlie.
THE FOVR AND FIFTETH CHAP. TESTIFIETH the vnderstanding of the same woordes by Isichius and S. Augustin.
ALthough Isichius be in the phrase of woordes somwhat darke: yet I wolde not omitte him, both for that he ys graue, auncient and learned, and his testimonie also verie effectuouse G and good. Vpon Leuiticus writing on this text: Qui Leuit. 22. comederit de sanctificatis per ignorantiam, addet quintam partem cum eo, quod comedit, & dabit sacerdoti in sanctuarium. He that eateth of the holie thinges vnwittinglie, he shall put the fifte parte therunto, and geue vnto the preist, the halowed thing, thus he saieth: Sancta sanctorum sunt propriè Christi mysteria, quia ipsius est corpus de quo Gabriel ad virginem dicebat: Spiritus sanctus superueniet in te, & virtus Altissimi obumbrabit tibi, ideo quod nascetur Isych. in Leuit. li. 6. ca. 22. ex te sanctum, vocabitur filius Dei. Sed & Esaias, sanctus Dominus, & in altis habitat, in sinu videlicet Patris. Ab hoc enim non solùm alienigenas, & inquilinos, & mercenarios, sacrificio prohibuit, sed nec per ignorantiam percipere praecepit. Per ignorantiam autem percipit, qui virtutem eius, & dignitatem ignorat, qui nescit quia corpus hoc, & sanguis est secundàm veritatem, sed mysteria quidem percipit, nescit autem mysteriorum virtutem. Ad quem Salamon dicit, vel magis Spiritus, qui in eo est: Quando sederis vt comedas cum principe, diligenter attende quae posita sunt ante te. Apertè & ipse cōpellens, & cogens eum, qui ignorat addere quintā partē. Haec enim quinta H addita, intelligere nos intellgibiliter diuina mysteria facit. Quid sit autem quinta pars, ipse te verba legis latoris docere possunt, ait enim: Addet quintam partem cum eo, quod [Page 195] comedit. Et quomodò eius quod iam comedit, & cōsumpsit addere quis quintā potest? Ne (que) A enim aliud, aut aliunde, sed de ipso, & cum eo, vel sicut lxx, super ipsum iubet addi quintam. Ergo quinta eius super ipsum, sermo est, qui prolatus est ab ipso Christo super Dominicum mysterium. Ipse enim liberat nos ab ignorantia, remouetue nos additus, carnale quip piam & terrenum de sanctis arbitrari: sed diuinè ea & spiritualiter accipi sancit, quod quinta propriè nominatur, quia qui in nobis est diuinus spiritus, & sermo quem tradidit, qui in vobis sunt componit sensus, & non solùm nostrum gustum producit ad mysterium, sed & auditum, & visum, & tactum, & odoratum, ita vt nil in eis minori rationi, & infirnae menti proximum, de ijs videlicet, quae valdè superna sunt, suspicemur. The most holie thinges proprelie are the mysteries of Chryste. For yt ys his bodie, of Receauing of the Sacr. by ignorāce what yt ys. the whiche Gabriel saied to the Virgen: The holie Gost shall come vpon thee, and the power of the highest shall ouershadowe thee. Therfore that holie thinge, that shall be born of thee shall be called the Sonne of God. And Esaias also: the Lorde ys holie and dwelleth on the heightes, that ys to saie, in the bosome of the Father. From this Sacrifice he doeth not onely forbidde straungers, and hired seruantes but he commaunded also B that yt be not receaued by ignorance. He receaueth yt by ignorance, that knoweth not the power and dignitie of yt, that knoweth not that yt ys the bodie and bloode in verie dede, but receaueth the misteries, and knoweth not the power of the misteries. Vnto whō Salomon saieth or raither the holie Goste that ys in him: When thowe sittest to eate with a Prince, diligentlie attende what thinges are sett before thee: He also compelling and constreigning him that ys ignorant to putto the fifte parte. This fifte part putto maketh vs easilie to vnderstand, the diuine and mystical thinges. What that fifte parte ys, the woordes of the Lawgeuer can teache thee for he saieth: he shall putto a fifte part with that that he hath eaten. Howe can a man putto a fifte parte that that he hath eaten and consumed? Neither maie he putto anie other thing, or had from anie other wher, but he commaundeth a fifte parte to be putto, of that, and with yt, or (as the seuentie interpretours saie) vpon yt. Then the fifte part of him vpon him, ys the woorde whiche was spoken of Chryst him self vpon our Lords mysterie. That woorde deliuereth vs from ignorance, and being putto, causeth vs to thinke no earthlie or carnallthing of the holie thinges, but maketh them to C be taken diuinely and spirituallie. Whiche thinge proprelie ys called the fift part, bicause the spirit of God that ys in vs, and the woorde whiche he deliuered, settleth the wittes that be in vs, and bringeth stirth to the mysterie not onelie our taste, but also our hearing and seeing and feeling and smell ling, so that of these thinges whiche be verie high, we can not surmise anie base or grosse matter. Hitherto Isichius.
In whome I finde manie thinges woorthie to be noted, of the whiche some I shal breiflie touche, leauing other to be weighed of the reader. First yt The Sacramēt a most holie thing and a sacrifice. ys certen, that he speaketh here of the bodie of Chryste in the Sacrament, whiche he calleth the most holie thing, and also a sacrifice. As of the holie thinges sacrificed in the Leuicall lawe, straungers and hirelinges might not receaue: no more maie they that be straungers to Chryste receaue of this holie thing. Besides this, no man might eate of that sacrifice vnwittinglie or ignorantlie: no more aught anie to eate of this owre sacrifice ignorantlie. Who doeth eate of this holie thing ignorātlie? He (saieth Isichius) that knoweth not the power and dignitie of that, that he receaueth, who knowerh not yt to be a verie bodie, and D blood in verie deede.
Note well then these woordes, that the misteries of Chryst the Sacramēt of Chryst, ys his verie bodie and blood in dede. Yf yt be the bodie and blood in [Page]of Chryst in dede, wher ys nowe the bread and wine that the Aduersarie so E moche talketh of? wher be the onely figures and signes? As signes oftentimes be tokens of thinges that be not in dede: so these sainges of the Aduersaries be signes of a thing that they wold haue brought to passe, and yet yt ys not in dede, For all their talke in this sorte of this matter, ys but vain, A plain place for the Proclamer and issue ioined with him thervpon. fond, and withoute grownde. Here ye see in this auncient authour that we haue good grownd. For he saieth yt ys the bodie ād blood in verie deed. Let the Proclamer bring one of like aunciētie saing that yt ys not the bodie and bloode in dede, and as before I haue ioined with him, so will I nowe again that I will subscribe, Yf he can not, let him performe his promesse and subscribe to the catholique Churche. For here ys one that by expresse woordes saieth that the Sacrament ys the bodie and blloode in verie deed. wherbie the onelie figure of the Aduersaries ys excluded.
And here maie the Proclamer and all that ioine with him in this matter see their state, whiche ys the state of ignorance. For he (saieth this authour) that receaueth thys Sacrament, and knoweth not the power and dignitie of yt, and that yt ys Protestantes not taking the Sacr. to be the bodie and blood of Chryst in verie dede, receaue yt by ignorance. the dodie and bloode in deed (as the Proclamer and his complices doe) he receaueth F yt in ignorance. I wish yt maie please our mercifull Lorde God to haue mercie vpon them, and to open their eies that they maie see their owne ignorance, and with humilitie mollifie their stonie hartes, that vain singularitie and pride forsaken, they maie humblie receaue the commaundement of God figuratiuelie spoken, and plainlie expownded by this authour, that their ignorance maie be remoued from them. What ys the commaundement of God that they shoulde doe? They must (saieth allmightie God) putto a fifte parte vpon the holie thing, and that will make them clerelie to vnderstand Gods misteries. This sifte part (saieth Isichius) ys the woorde that was spoken of Chryst himself vpon the mysterie of God. What woorde that was, yt ys doubted of neither partie, neither of the catholiques, neither of the aduersaries to be this: This ys my bodie: This ys my blood. Ipse liberat nos ab ignoratia: That woorde (saieth Isichius) deliuereth vs from ignorance.
Nowe remembre that the ignorance ys, that a man receaueth the Sacrament, Ignorance of the Sacrament what yt ys, and howe yt ys remoued. and knoweth not the power and dignitie of yt, whiche power and G dignitie ys, that in yt ys the bodie and bloode of Chryst in verie dede. This ignorance ys remoued by this woorde: This ys my bodie This ys my bloode. bicause this woorde simplie without any trope or figure, teacheth that in the Sacrament ys the bodie and blood. Ioin then the woordes of this authour to gother. He saied before that the bodie and bloode be in the Sacrament in verie deed, and he saieth that these woordes of Chryst doe make vs clerely to vnderstand yt, wherfor these woordes are to be vnderstanded as spoken of the bodie and blood of Chryst in deed, and not of the figure of them.
Yf ye will yet heare more, and be more fullie certified of the trueth of this matter, this authour, as other did that be allreadie alleaged teacheth who ys the woorker of yt, and by what mean yt ys brought to passe. For proceading in the exposition of the text, he saieth thus: Quicunque ergo sanctificata per ignorantiam comederit, ignorans eorum virtutem (sicut diximus) addet quintam eius super eo, & dabit sacerdoti in sanctnarium. Sanctificationem enim mystici sacrificij, & à sensibilibus ad intelligibilia, translationem siue commutationem, ei, qui verus H est sacerdos, videlicet Christo oportet dari, id est, ipsi de eis miraculum cedere, & imputare. quia pen eius virtutem, & prolatum ab eo verbum, qua videntur, tam sanctificata sunt, quàm cunctum carnis excedunt sensum. Whosouer therfor shall eate the holie [Page 196]thinges by ignorance, not knowing their power (as we haue saied) he shall putto a fifte parte of yt vppon yt, and shall geue yt vnto the preist into the Chaunge of sēsible thinges to intelligible in the Sacr. must begeuē to Christ A sanctuarie. For the sanctificacion of the misticall sacrifice, and the translaciō or commutacion from sensible to intelligible thinges, must be geuen to him that ys the true preist, that ys to saie, to Chryste, that ys to geue and impute the miracle wrought in these thinges to him, bicause by his power, and the woorde spokē of him the things that are seen, are so sanctified as they passe al the witte of man. Thus he.
See ye not here who ys the dooer of this matter? perceaue ye not who woorketh this miracle? The dooing of all this (saieth Isichius) must be referred, and imputed to Chryste. For he by his power, and the woorde spoken of Bread and wine so sanctisied in the blessed Sacr. as yt passeth mās witte. him, sanctifieth the visible bread and wine as yt passeth mans witte to knowe. Let vs here then first vnderstand, that if the bread and wine were but made figures of Chrystes bodie and bloode, signifienge to vs that as these feed the bodie: so Chryst feedeth the soule, yt were not a matter passing mans witte. But mans witte maie well atteign to perceaue that in soch sorte, they maie be figures. Wherfor ther ys a greater matter wrought in the bread B and wine then that, whiche we maie perceaue by that he saieth, that they be sainctified. By which woorde ys not onelie refelled the wicked saing of Cramner, that bread and wine can not be sanctified, but also ther ys geuen a farder matter to consider in the worke of Chryste. Wherfor vnderstand again that this sanctificacion declareth the mean howe this worke ys brought to passe that ys wrought. For by this sanctificacion ther ys wrought (as Transubstantiacion proued by Isych. the termes of this authour be) a translacion or a commutacion from sensible thinges to intelligible, that ys ftom breade, which ys perceaued by senseis, to the bodie of Chryst, which ys in this maner not perceaued by senseis. Which tearmes importe that, that the Churche calleth Transubstantiacion For when ther ys a translacion commutacion or chaunging of thinges sensible to thinges not sensible (which ys a chaunge of one thing of one nature or substance, into an other thing of an other nature or substance) what shoulde let that yt maie not be called Transubstantiacion? C
But what doe I tarrie in these thinges fullie and esfectuouslie testified by this authour. For he hath thaught vs that Chrystes bodie and bloode be in the Sacrament in verie deed: he hath taught vs that to be wrought by the trāslacion or commutacion of the bread and wine into the same bodie and blood of Chryste, he hathe taught vs that Chryst ys the woorker of yt by his power, and by the woorde spoken of him. Finallie he teacheth that by the woordes of Chryst we are clearlie taught the presence of his bodie in the Sacrament, and so by consequent we are taught, that they be no figuratiue speaches.
Thus moche being saied of Isichius, and testified by him: let vs also heare August in Psal. 33 concion. S. Augustine, who at this time ys ioined with him. Thus writeth he in this matter vpon the 33 psalme, treacting a storie of king Dauid, and applieng yt to Chryst. Et ferebatur in manibus suis. Hoc verò, fratres, quomodò posset fieri in homine, quis intelligat? quis enim portatur manibus suis? manibus aliorum potest portari Chryst bare his bodie in his owne hādes, whē he saied: This ys my bodie. homo, manibus suis nemo portatur. Quomodò intelligatur in ipso Dauid, secùndum literam non inuenimus: In Christo autem inuenimus, ferebatur Christus in manibus suis, quando D commendans ipsum corpus suum ait: Hoc est corpus meum, ferebat enim illud corpus in manibus suis. And he was caried in his owne handes. Bretheren howe this can be doen in a man, who can vnderstande? Who ys born is his owne handes In the handes of an other, a man maie be born: in his owne handes no man [Page]ys born. howe yt maie be vnderstand in Dauid himself according to the letter we finde not: but in Chryst we finde yt. He was born in his owne E handes, when geuing furth the same his bodie, he saied: This ys my bodie. For he did beare that bodie in his handes, Thus farre he,
For asmoch as S. Augustiye by discussion did finde that the woordes, whiche he treacted of coulde not be vnderstanded literallie in Dauid, euen so as yt coulde not be perfourmed in him, that he being but a man shoulde beare his own bodie in his owne handes, no more coulde yt, or can yt be perfourmed in anie other pure naturall man. Therfor enforced to make a farder searche he had recourse to Chryst, who was more then a naturall man, and in him at no other time dothe he finde yt perfourmed and fullfilled according to the letter, but when he gaue furth his bodie to his Disciples, saing: This ys my bodie. Yf then yt was at that time fulfilled in him according to the letter, when he saied. This ys my bodie. and if then he caried his owne bodie in his handes, then this scripture also must so be vnderstanded, or ells what shoulde yt make to the pourpose? For Chryst did not carie his bodie F in his owne hands, yf he caried but the figure of his bodie-
Wherfor the wresting that Oecolampadius maketh vpon these woordes of S. Augustine: Ipse se portabat quodā modo cùm diceret: Hoc est corpus meū. He did beare him self after a certain maner, when he saied: This ys my bodie: will not Oecolamp. his wresting of S. Augustin wil not stād serue to prooue that he did beare him self onely in a figure. For if S. Augustine had vnderstand the woordes of bearing of a mans bodie in his owne handes, to be to bear the figure of his bodie, he wolde not haue saied that he coulde not finde yt in Dauid. For who doubteth but that Dauid might haue born a figure of himself in his owne hand, and so maie anie other naturall man. And Chryst bare his owne figure in his hand when he had the Paschall lābe in his hand. And therfor in that maner of vnderstanding, yt might be fownde to be doē in Dauid, and in other mē. But this maner of bearing was soche as coulde not be doen in Dauid, or anie other being onely a naturall man, but onely in Chryst God and man. Who aboue the power of man by his great diuine power coulde cōpasse that, that man by no meanes can G reach vnto. Wherfor hauing the bread in his handes, and by his allmightie The true vnderstanding of S. Augustine power, and woorde saing: This ys my bodie: he turned that bread into his bodie, and so in that certein maner after S. Augustines woords and mening, he did beare his owne bodie in his owne handes. And so was this fullfilled in Chryst according to the letter. And therfor as to the verifieng of the letter, yt must nedes be that Chryst caried verilie him selfin his owne handes: so to the verifieng of that acte yt must nedes be, that these woords: This ys my bodie: must be vnderstanded in their propre and literall sense.
Thus then yt ys euident, that forsomoche as Chryst bare him felf in his owne handes in geuing furth the Sacrament to his Apostles, that this verie bodie ys born also of his ministres nowe in the Sacrament geuē furth to his faithfull beleuers. For (as Chrysostome saieth) this table of Chryst nowe vsed Chrysost. in 26. Mathom. 83. according to his instituciō, ys nothing inferiour to the table that Chryst him self satte personallie at. For as Christ did sanctifie that table: so doeth he this. And therfor we must otherwise thinke of this Sacramēt, thē we doe of other thinges, whiche doe shew furth Chryst to vs, to the which the aduersarie of H tētimes doth compare this Sacrament, to abase and diminish the dignitie of the same.
For although the Apostles by their woorde and epistles did shewe furth Chryst: yet neither the one nor the, other ys called the bodie of Chryst but [Page 197]onelie that that ys consecrated by the woordes of Chryst in the aultar as A S. Augustine saieth. Potuit Paulus significando praedicare Dominum Iesum Christum, aliter per linguam suam, aliter per epistolam, aliter per sacramentum corporis & sanguinis August. de Trin. li. 3. cap. 4. eius. Nec linguam quippe eius, nec membranas, nec atramentum, nec significantes sonos lingua editos, nec signa literarum conscripta pelliculis, corpus Christi & sanguinem dicimus, sed illud tantùm, quod ex fructibus terrae acceptum, & prece mystica consecratum; ritè sumimus ad salutem spiritualem in memoriam pronobis Dominicae passionis, quod cùm per manus hominum ad illam visibilem speciem, producitur, non sanctificatur vt sit tam magnum sacramentum, nisi operante inuisibiliter Spiritu Dei. Paule might by signifieng preache our Lorde Iesus Chryst, or ells by his tonge, or ells by epistle, or ells Bread and winearenos sanctified to be so great a Sacramēt but by the inuisible worke of God. by the Sacrament of his bodie and blood, yet doe we call neither his toung, nor his parchement, nor inke, nor the signifieng sowndes settfurth by the tounge, nor the markes of the letters written together in skinnes, the bodie and bloode of Chryst, but onely that, whiche being taken of the fruictes of the earth, and by the mysticall praier consecrated, we receaue to our spiritual healthe in the remembrance of our Lordes passion suffred for vs. Whiche thing when yt ys brought by the handes of men to that visible forme, yt ys B not sanctified that yt maie be so great a Sacrament, but by the Spirite of God woorking inuisiblie. Hitherto sainct Augustin.
Of whome ye see that we are taught, that thoug Chryst be by diuerse meanes settfurth and preached, as by scriptures, preachinges, and by the Sacrament: yet these thinges be not all of like degree. For ther ys none of these called the bodie of Chryst, but onelie the bread that ys consecrated by the mysticall praier, that ys, by the woordes of Chryst: Thys ys my bodie: that onelie ys called the bodie of Chryste. Oecolamp. craftilie abuseth S. Augustin.
Nowe Oecolampadius wolde, that bicause sainct Augustin saieth, that Chryst ys preached by scripture, woorde, and Sacrament, that these three be of one sorte, no more being in the Sacrament, then in the other two. But note I praie thee (gentle reader) howe he abuseth sainct Augustin to proue that hys wicked sainge. Of this place of sainct Augustin nowe alleadged he taketh onely thus moche: Paule might by signifieng preache our Lorde Iesus Chryst, otherwise by hys toung, otherwise by epistle, otherwise by the Sacrament of his bodie and blood. And vpon thys C he growndeth hys argument, and wolde be seen well to haue confirmed Not toung nor writing nor soche other shewing furth Chryst be called his bodie but bread and wine consetrated. hys doctrine. But all the rest of sainct Augustines woordes whiche folowe, whiche ouerthrowe all his building he craftelie lefte oute. For yt foloweth: Yet doe we call neither his toung, neither his epistle, nor his writinges the bodie of Chryste: but onely we call that the bodie of Chryste, that ys taken of the fruictes of the earth, and ys by the mysticall prayer consecrated, that doe we call the bodie of Chryst. All thys doth he leaue oute. Soche was the synceritie of the man in alleaging the holie Fathers. So good ys the cause that he defended, that the doctours muste be mutilated and brought oute in peice meall, or ells yt coulde not stand.
Ys yt not merueilouse, that he coulde bring this place of sainct Augustin, whiche although the first peice taken alone seemeth somwhat to sownde to his pourpose: yet the wholl taken together ys alltogether against him? Alas that euer anie man wolde so deceaue the people of God, and by soche frawde and abuse of the holie writers make them to embrace erroure in stead of trueth, weigh the place throughlie, and yowe shall perceaue D howe yt mainteineth the catholique trueth of the presence of Chrystes boin the Sacrament verie moch. Ye haue nowe heard, that neither the worde [Page]written, nor the woorde spoken, though Chryst be preached by them, be called the bodie of Chryst, but onely the Sacrament ys called the bodie of E Chryst. And why yt ys called the bodie of Chryste, he declareth: Not bicause (saieth he) by the handes of man yt ys brought to be a visible forme, but bicause yt ys sanctified and made so great a Sacrament by the inuisible woorking of the holie Goste.
Note these two poinctes, that S. Augustine saieth that the bread ys sanctified, and made so great a Sacrament. And again that he saieth yt ys so sanctified and made by the inuisible worke of the holie Goste. Ther ys great difference betwixt the sanctificacion of the Sacrament yt self, and the soule of man, that receaueth the Sacrament.
Now Oecolampadius and Cranmer saie that the Sacramentes being dumbe Oecolamp. and Cranmer their heresies. creatures receaue no sanctificacion, but onely the sowles of men. They saie also that the holie Gost woorketh not in the thinges that be the Sacramentes, but in the men that receaue the Sacramētes. Thys they saie bicause they wolde auoid the presence of Chryste in the Sacrament, which ys made ther present by sanctificacion of the bread. But against these their saings S. Augustin saieth: that the same bread that ys made by the handes of men ys sanctified, S. Augustin plain against Oecolamp. ād Cranmer. F and receauing sanctitie, ys made so great a Sacrament. Against them also he saieth, that the holie Goste woorketh inuisiblie in the bread. I wolde now learn of the Aduersaries, what S. Augustine meneth by calling the Sacramēt so great a Sacrament, and what worke yt ys that the holie Goste woorketh inuisiblie in the bread? The woorkes of the holy Gost be no trifles. Yt ys great and miraculouse that he woorketh. And what he woorketh S. Iames in his Masse, S. Basill also and Chrysostom in their Masses, by their humble praiers doe declare.
S. Iames thus: Spiritum tuum sanctissimum demitte nunc Domine in nos, & in haec sancta dona proposita, vt superueniens sancta, & bona, & gloriosa sua praesentia sanctificet, Diuus Iac. in Missa. & efficiat hunc panem corpus sanctum Christi tui, & calicem hunc preciosum sanguinem Christi tui. Sende downe now (o Lord) thy most holie Spirit vpon vs, and vpon these holie giftes settfurth, that he coming ouer them, maie with his holy good, and gloriouse presence, sanctifie, and make this bread the holie bodie of thy Chryst, ād this cuppe the preciouse blood of thy Chryst. Thus S. Iames. S. Basill and Chrysostome haue the like woordes. G
See ye not nowe then howe the bread ys sancti [...]ied? See ye not what ys the worke of the holie Goste? Perceaue ye not howe that S. Augustine vpō good cause called the Sacrament, so great a Sacrament? ys yt not a great Sacrament Bread sanctified contrarie to Cranmers assertion ād Oecolamp. in which by worke of the holie Gost ys made present the bodie of Chryst? To haue hidden this trueth Oecolampadius by peice meall brought in S. Augustine. But now ye haue seen the catholique faith well testified, the falshead of the Aduersaries detected, and (to return to oure matter, and to conclude) ye perceaue this Sacrament by mystical praier, which ys by Chrystes woordes, to be consecrated, the effecte of which consecracion being the bodie of Chryste (as ys saied) the woordes must nedes be taken without figuratiue sense.
Thus, if my iudgement faill me not, ye haue hearde two other noble men of Chrystes schoole, and Parliament house, very plainlie testifieng the enacted trueth of the vnderstanding of Chrystes wordes, yea so plainly that yt cā not but moch confirme the good Chrystian, and confute the Pheudochristian. H But to go forwarde, I will ende with these two, and call other two.
THE FIVE AND FIFTETH CHAPITER A tarieth in the exposition of the same woordes by Chrysostom and Sedulius.
NOw among the learned Fathers of the greke church, we are descended to Chrysostome, of whome I maie saie, as besore ys saied of S. Ambrose, that he ys so full of godlie testimonies, testisieng to vs the true vnderstanding of Chrystes woordes, that as I knowe not whiche of them first to take: so doe I merueill that they being so manie, the Proclamer coulde for shame saie, that ther ys not one auncient doctour that maketh for the catholique faith of the Sacrament. Thus Chrysostō expownding these woordes of owre Sauiour Chryst in the xxvi of Matthew, saieth. Credamus vbique Deo, nec repugnemus ei, etiamsi sensui, & cogitationi nostrae absurdum esse videatur, quod dicitur, superet & sensum, & rationem Chrys. in. 26 Math. hom. 83. nostram sermo, quaeso, ipsius, quod in omnibus, & praecipuè in mysterus faciamus, non illa quae ante nos iacent solummodò aspicientes, sed verba quoque eius tenentes. Nam B verbis eius defraudari non possumus, sensus verò noster deceptu facillimus est. Illa falsa esse non possunt, hic soepius ac soepius fallitur. Quoniam ergo ille dixit. Hoc est corpus meum: nulla teneamur ambiguitate, sed credamus, & oculis intellectus id perspiciamus. Let vs in Gods word euen cōtrarie to senses must be beleued. euerie place beleue God, and let vs not striue against him, although that that he saieth, seem to our sense and thought vnlikely. Let hys woorde (I beseche yowe) ouercome bothe our wittes and reason, which thing let vs doe in all thinges, but cheiflie in the mysteries, not onely loking on those things, whiche lie before vs, but also regarding hys woords. For by hys woords we cannot be deceaued our sense ys easie to be deceaued: they can not be false: this our sense ys often and often deceaued. Forasmoche them as he hath saied: This ys my bodie: Let vs be holden with no ambiguitie or doubte, but let vs beleue, and with the eies of our vnderstanding, let vs verilie see yt. Thus farre Chrysostom.
In this saing yt ys to be perceaued howe he laboureth, that in this matter of the Sacramēt we should discredit our senseis, ād creditte Chrysts woords. And sorasmoche as he saied. This ys my bodie: thouh yt passe our reason to comprehend C the worke of God in making present the bodie of Chryst, and our senseis can not of themselues atteign to perceaue the same bodie: for neither But yt passeth not reason tomake present a figure of his bodie. our eies doe see yt, neither our tast discern yt, neither our feeling or other senses perceaue yt: yet (saieth Chrysostome) we maie not doubte of yt, but beleue yt to be the bodie of Chryst bicause he saied yt was so.
Nowe consider with me, if the woordes of Chryst had an other sense, thē they doe outwardlie purporte, as that they shoulde teache vs, that yt ys but a figure of Chrystes bodie, and not the bodie yt self, wolde Chrysostom (trow ye) in this his open sermon wil the people to beleue, and not to doubt of the trueth of the woords, as they be spokē, and wold not raither first vtter the true sense and vnderstanding of them yf anie other were, and then perswade the people of that sense not to doubt? Yt ys an euel maner of teaching to will the people to beleue the woordes of scripture as they lie, and are not so to be vnderstanded, but in a sense moche different from that. Yt ys not the Chryso. willeth Chrystes woordes to be vnderstāded as they be spoken. maner of Chrysostom so to teache, wherfore for so moche as he willeth them not to doubte, but to beleue the woordes as they be spoken (whiche he D dothe in that, that he teacheth no other sense) yt ys manifest that these woordes are to be vnderstanded in their propre sense withoute the Aduersaries figure.
[Page]And that Chrysostome himself did so vnderstand them, thys proueth E that he in sondrie and manie places of his workes, treating of these woords Reall presence auouched by Chryso. of Chryst: Thys ys my bodie: he neuer addeth this sense: Thys ys a figure of my bodie: But euer leaueth them in the sense that they be spoken, and in some place by expresse woordes, in some place by plain circumstance, he dcclareth the verie presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament. By expresse woordes, as wher he saieth: Qui dixit: Hoc est corpus meum, & rem simul cum verbo consecit. Jn 14. Marc. hō. 51. He that saied: Thys ys my bodie: He with hys woorde made the the thing also.
I wishe these fewe woordes of Chrysostom to be well marked, that they Chryst saing. This ys my bodie. with the woorde made the thing. neuer fall from memorie, but maie allwaies be reteined as a rule to vnderstand him in all places wher he speaketh of the Sacrament of Chrystes bodie and blood. For yf Chryst with hys woorde made the thing also that he spake of, and the thing that he spake of was hys bodie, then with the speaking of hys woorde he made hys bodie. This then being trueth (as Chrysostome here teacheth) yt can not be denied, but that by expresse woordes he teacheth the presence of Chrystes verie bodie in the Sacrament. F
And thus by Chrysostome ys clerely wiped awaie the hereticall figuratiue Figure of the Sacramentaries wiped awaie by Chrysost. vnderstanding of these woordes of Chryst: Thys ys my bodie. For the Aduersaries wolde haue yt so a figure as of a thing absent. But Chryst (as Chrysostome saieth) made the thing together with the woorde. Wherfore as the woorde was present: so was the thing present. Yf the thing be present, then the figure of the Aduersaries can not here be admitted.
Vpon the certentie of which presence, the same Chrysostome in the same homelie thus taught hys people. Quando igitur sacerdotem corpus tibi prebere Plain places of Chrysost for the Pooclamer Chrys. ibi. videris, noli sacerdotis, sed Christi manum ad te porrigiarbitrari. Therfore when thow seest the preist geue thee the bodie, thinke not the hand of the preist, but the hand of Chryst to be put furth to thee. And that the people shoulde geue full creditte to this trueth, he vseth this perswasion in the same homelie: Qui enim maius, idest, animam suam prote posuit, quare dedignabitur suum tibi tradere corpus? Audiamus igitur tam sacerdotes quàm alij, quàm magna, quàm admirabilis res nobis concessa est. Audiamus, oro, & perhorrescamus, carnes suas nobis tradidit, seipsum G immolatum nobis proposuit. Quam igitur satisfactionem offeremus, cum tali pabulo nutriti peccemus? cum Agnum comedentes in lupos conuertamur? cum ouinis carnibus refecti, vt leones rapiamus? He that hath geuen a greater thing for thee, that ys to saie, his life, why will he disdein to deliuer hys bodie to thee? Let vs therfore heare, bothe preistes and other, howe great and wonderfull a thing ys graunted vnto vs. Let vs heare (I praye yowe) and let vs feare. He hath deliuered vnto vs hys flesh: himself offred hath he putte before vs. What satisfaction then shall we offre, that being nourished with soch foode, doe sinne? When eating the lambe, we are turned into wolues? when satisfied with shepes flesh, we rauine as lions? Thus farre Chrysostom.
Note well this perswasion of his. Yf Chryst hath vouched saif to geue his life for thee, will he not vouche safe to geue his bodie? he hath geuen his life for thee, whiche ys a great matter, will he not geue thee his bodie, whiche ys not so great a matter? After that we haue considered this perswasion, let vs somwhat more depelie weigh this place of Chrysostom, and we shall finde yt so euident in declaring the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, that Sathan himself H Tearmes to plain for figuratiue speaches. can not well open hys mouthe against yt, moche lesse hys mynisters. For if they will glose this place of Chrysostom, they must bestowe a great nombre of figures vpon yt. For here be manie plain woordes and tearmes, [Page 199] as his bodie, his flesh a great and a woonderfull thinge, himself offred A settfurth before vs: soche foode, the lambe, the flesh of the shepe, whiche doe declare vnto vs the presence of Chrystes bodie. And therfore as ys saied, they must be darkened with manie figures and mystie gloses, yf they shall be peruerted to the Aduersaries corruption of the trueth. And trulie yt were wonderfull that Chrysostom preaching to the people wolde vse so manie plain tearmes, and leaue them as sownding in their owne significacion, when in verie dede (as the Aduersaries saie, and wolde bear vs in hand) they doe all signifie figuratiuelie.
But let vs yet a litle deapelier consider the wholl place, and tearmes of the same. And first as touching the perswasion, let vs weigh the comparison that ys made in the same by this authour to declare the great loue, and mercie of Chryst towardes vs, wherin he compareth the life of Chryste, whiche he gaue for vs, to his bodie which he geueth to vs. Nowe if the Aduersarie by the bodie, will vnderstand a figure of the bodie, howe vnmeet a comparison will he cause Chrysostom to make, as to compare a bare figure to the life of Chryst? Or who will thinke that Chrysostome B Figures be no wonderfull things. wolde vse soche a great matter as the life of Chryst geuen for vs, to perswade vs to beleue so small a matter, as that Chryst geueth vs a peice of bread a figure of his bodie after the sense of the Sacramentarie? But that yt can not beare that sense, the woordes that folowe doe well prooue. For he saieth, that the thing that ys geuen vnto vs, ys a great and a wonderfull thing. Yf yt be but a figure yt ys no great thing. For figures haue ben since the beginning, and for the most parte not esteemed as great thinges in the respect that they were figures.
Yf the Aduersarie will saie that Chrysostom speaketh of the bodie of Chryst spirituallie receaued, whiche ys a great thing: Yet yt will not helpe wonderfull what ys proprelie. him to wrest Chrysostom to him. For albeit the bodie of Chryst spirituallie receaued be a great thing: yet yt ys not proprelie woonderfull. For that ys proprely woonderfull that ys not in vse, but rare, seldom, and almost not seen (as saieth) sainct Augustine. Nowe to receaue the bodie of Chryst spirituallie ys no rare matter, for yt hath ben in vse from the beginning Spūall receipt onelie of Chryst ys not wonderfull. of the worlde, yt was comon to the holie Fathers and Patriarches C in the lawe of nature. Yt was in vse among the faithfull Iewes, and so among the faithfull Chrystians (though not among the false Chrystians) yt ys no straunge matter, and therfore not a woonderfull thing, though a greate thing. But to receaue Chrystes bodie bothe spirituallie and reallie, that ys both a great thing and a woonderfull thing, woonderfull I saie, for that yt was neuer in vse the bodie of Chryst reallie to be receaued before Chryst saied: Take, eate, this ys my bodie, at whiche time he did institute and ordein yt so to be receaued. Before Chryst did so by his woorde instite, the worlde neuer knewe this maner of receipt, yt was neuer in vse, neuer in practise. And therfore yt ys a wonderfull thing, not onelie for that yt exceadeth the compasse of reason, and passeth the reache of the senseis that a naturall bodie shoulde in soche maner be receaued, but also for that before Chrystes institucion yt was neuer in vse.
But what needeth me to trauaill so moche in declaring this, when the Spūall and real receipt together of Chrystes bodie ys wonderfull. authour himself openeth what the great and wonderfull thing ys that he speaketh of heare, saing in the same place: Audiamus oro & perhorrescamus, D carnes suas nobis tradidit, seipsum immolatum nobis proposuit. Let vs heare, I beseche yow, and let vs feare, He hath deliuered to vs his flesh, himself offred [Page] hath he sett before vs. Thys ys the great thing that he spake of, this ys the woonderfull thing that ys geuen to vs, which he meneth of, the slesh of Chryste, E Chryst himself sett before vs. Which thing that we shoulde well geue heed vnto, and perceaue the greatnesse and wonderfullnesse of yt, he preuenteth vs with hys aduertisement saing: Let vs heare and feare, whiche kinde of aduertisement neaded not, if yt were but a peice of breade.
And note here that Chrysostome to the entent the thing might fullie be perceaued according to the trueth, and his mening in the same, he did not content himself onelie to saie that Chryst hath deliuered vnto vs his flesh: but he addeth, that Chryst sett himself offred before vs, wherbie are remoued all the Sathās seales can not be hanged to Chrysostomes woordes. figures and tropes, whiche the Aduersaries to the corruption of the trueth, wolde here haue putto. For yf Chrysostome had saied no more, But that Chryst hath geuen to vs his flesh, then wolde Sathan by his ministers hanged on one of his comon seales, as this woorde, figuratiuelie, or spirituallie, and so made yt to haue appeared, that yt ys his euidence. But the holie Gost, being a good schoolemaster, hath taught hys scholer Chrysostom so to frame his woordes, that if the enemie wolde go aboute to falsifie them by putting to, one of his comon seales, yet his falhead shoulde needes appeare. F For when Chrysostome had saied, that Chryst had deliuered vnto vs hys flesh, he immediately added, as an exposition of those woordes, himself hath he setfurth before vs. By whiche woordes the matter ys made plain for yf Chryst himself be sett before vs, then ys the bare figure taken awaie and denied. Yf he be sett before vs, then ys he not onely spiritually receaued. For spirituall receipt ys in vs, and not before vs. Chryst by the doctrine of the Aduersarie ys within vs, and not in the Sacrament before vs: but Chrysostom saieth that he ys before vs, and speaketh of the being of Chryst in the Sacrament. Wherfore he himself ys in the Sacrament before vs, and so ys excluded the onely spirituall maner, whiche ys the other seale of the Aduersarie, and the reall presence ys proued whiche ys the doctrine catholique.
The farder certentie also of this matter ys added when he saieth, that we eate the lambe, wherby he meneth the Lambe, that taketh awaie the sinnes of the worlde, Iesus Chryst, that innocent Lambe figured by the olde Paschall lambe. Likewise saing, that we eat the flesh of the shepe, he meneth the flesh of G Chryst, who ys he, Qui tanquam ouis ad occisionem ducebatur, & tanquam agnus coram se tondente obmutescebat, & non aperiebat os suum, who as a shepe was ledde to Esay. 53. be slain, and as a lambe before the sherer did holde his peace, and did not open his mouthe.
Finallie that in this discourse he speaketh of the verie reall presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, and that we verilie and substanciallie receaue yt, and be nourished with yt, his last woordes doe inuinciblie prooue. Sinners receaue the bodie of Chryst in the Sacr. not spirituallie, but yet reallie. In whiche mouing a question vpon the woordes before saied, he saieth: Quam satisfact. &c. what maner of amendes, or satisfaction shall we make to him, that being in sinne, doe receaue soche foode? that being wolues doe eate the lambe? that being lions, doe rauine the flesh of the shepe? Nowe certen yt ys both by the doctrine of the Catholique, and the Protestant, that the sinner eateth not the bodie of Chryst spirituallie, wherfore yt must needes be, that soche as being wolues and lions in wickednesse of life, and doe yet by the doctrine of Chrysostom eate the flesh of the lambe, and deuoure the H flesh of the shepe, forasmoch (as ys saied) that they doe not eate the flesh of Chryst spirituallie, that they eate yt in the Sacrament reallie and substanciallie, [Page 200]For this ys well knowen to the Aduersarie that the euell man A can not receaue Chrystes bodie but in the Sacrament. But Chrysostom saieth that the euell man receaueth the bodie of Chryst, Wherfor in the Sacrament.
Thus, if my iudgement fail me not, Chrysostom hath by expresse woordes taught vs the reall presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, Nowe we shall Reall presence auonched of Chrysost, bi circunstāce heare him teach the same by circunstance, but so plainlie and euidently that yt can not be against saied. The circunstance consisteth in the comparison of the Paschall Lambe, and in the woordes of Chryste the sixt of S. Iohn by whiche both he prooueth these woordes of Chryst: This ys my bodie: to be spoken in their propre sense, and to teach vs the reall presence of Chryst in the Sacrament. The woordes be these: Praecipuam eorum solemnitatem dissoluit, & ad aliam mensam horroris plenam eos conuocat, dicens: Accipite, & comedite, Chrys. homil. 83. in 16. Math. Hoc est corpus meum. Quomodò igitur turbati non sunt hoc audientes? quia multa & magna de hoc antea audierant. He dissolueth their cheif Solemnitie, and to an other table full of terriblenesse he calleth them, saing: This ys my bodie. Howe then B were they not troobled hearing this? bicause he had spoken manie and great thinges of this before. Thus he.
In this saing two thinges breiflie noted, I passe to the next place. The first ys, that the other table wherunto Chryst did call his Apostles was full of terriblenesse or trembling, whiche sheweth that ther was in that table, aboue the table of the Paschall lambe, from the whiche they were called, some thing that was of soche maiestie, that yt was to be feared, whiche thing was Table of the old Paschal lambe not terrible as onelie but a figure the table of Chryst ys terrible ād therfor more then a figure. not in the other table. In the other table was the Paschall lambe a liuelie figure of Chryst our Paschall lambe, and in yt Chryst was figuratiuely eaten. And although yt were their cheifest solemnitic: yet Chrysostom doth not call yt a fearfull table. Yf then in that solemne table ther was the figure of Chryst, and Chryst was ther figuratiuely eaten, and yet that table was not terrible or ful of horroure: then in the table of Chryst ys not onelie a figure of Chryst, and Chryst figuratiuelie eaten, but ther ys a great matter ther that maketh this table to be fearfull. What ys that? Hoc est corpus meum. This ys my bodie. For Chrysostom saieth, that when Chryst called them to this table he C saied: This ys my bodie. Yf these woordes This ys my bodie, did no more but cause the figure of Chrystes bodie to be in the table of Chryst, and so Chryste to be eaten in a figure as he was in the table of the Paschall Lambe, thē this table had ben no more full of horroure then the other. But for so moche as by that sainge of Chryst, the table was full of horroure, yt argueth (as before yt ys alleaged oute of Chrysostome) that he so saing with the woorde made also the thing. so that as he spake the woorde presentlie, so the thing, that ys, his bodie was ther presentlie. For the saing of the woorde, and the making of the thing went iointlie togeather. Wherby then as yt doth plainly appeare that the bodie of Chryst was present in that table: so also dothe yt appeare that the bodie being made present at the saing of these woordes: This ys my bodie: that these woordes are to be taken and vnderstanded in their propose sense.
The second note ys, that wher Chrysostome moueth a question, saing: how were not the Apostles troobled when they heard Chryst saie, Take, eate, This ys my bodie? He aunswereth that they were not troobled bycause they had heard D him speake manie and great thinges of this thing before. Wher this vs to be noted that Chryst did not speake moche of this matter but onely in the sixt of sainct Iohns Gospell. Nowe yt ys allready prooued that ther, Chryst spake [Page]of his flesh and his bloode. Then if he speaketh here of that, he spake of ther, then he saing: This ys my bodie, this ys bloode, speaketh here of his E verie flesh and verie bloode. And so these woordes must be vnderstanded in their propre sense.
And here ys to be remēbred that the author of Cranmers booke growndeth Crāmers argument agunst the Sacrament an argument (as he supposeth, vpon a good grownde, but in verie dede yt ys vpō the sande) against the Sacrament, saing: that if Chryst had made his bodie in the Sacrament yt being so great a woorke, so great a misterie, yt shoulde haue ben declared either by Chryst himself shewing the verie thing so to be, or by the Euangelistes in processe of the storie, or of the cirumstance: But for somoche as the Gospell saieth no more but Sacramentaries denie the vi. of S. Iohn tospeake of the Sacr. that yt should appeare a matter of no weight. breiflie without all preuiall disposition to the doing of the thinge, and without all circumstance, that he tooke bread and gaue thankes and brake yt, and gaue yt to his Disciples, saing: Take, eate, This ys my bodie &c. Therfor (saieth he) ther ys no soche thing of beleife ther. for aboute other thinges to be beleued, either Chryst him self, or the Euangelistes doe stand in the declaracion, as in the matter of the incarnacion and birth of Chryste, of his baptisme, of his passion and death, of his resurrection of F his ascension and soche other. Wherfor (saieth he) their ys no soche great worke of faith wrought in the Sacrament.
But see howe the spirit of erroure blinded this man, and whether he Crammers spirit and Chryso stomes compared. led him. Yf he had ben led by the same spirit that Chrysostom was led by, he shoulde haue seen that, that Chrysostom did sec. Chrysome (as ye haue hearde) saied, that Chryst had spoken manie and great thinges of this Sacrament before to the Apostles, and therfor nowe when Chryst went to the perfourmance of his promisse made before, and in fewe woordes saied: Take, cate, This ys my bodie: Theie were mindefull of his promisse made before, and of his great instruction geuen vnto them for their beleif in that behalf. so that being sufficientlie instructed, and therfor redilie prepared, when Chryst spake the woorde, and commaunded them to eate his bodie, they were not troubled, for their saith was staied. So that Chrysostom coulde see manie and great thinges that Chryst had spoken of this matter: But this other man blinded with the great mist of heresie, coulde se nothing, wher Chrysostom G sawe manie thinges, and great thinges.
Therfor yowe that be yet, or haue ben seduced, here by this great piller of that sect be aduertised, that if he being a learned man, and yet the wicked spirit so blinded him that wher Chrysostome saied, that Chryst did speake manie and great thinges of this Sacrament, whiche yet this learned man coulde not see one of them, yowe that be learned see one of yowr best learned mē blinded, and beware in time. But yowe that be vnlearned, of this moche more doe yowe be ware. Foryf the learned be deceaued by the Deuell and blinded, and led oute of the waie of trueth, moche more the vnlearned maie be deceaued and blinded, as was yowr first fownder in this our time, Luther by name, who saied that the sixt chapiter of S. Iohn, was whollie to be set a part, as in whiche ther was no sillable that spake of the Sacrament. Yet Chrysost. saieth Chryst spake manie and great thinges of the Sacramēt. And in all the Gospell ther ys noplace that speaketh of yt before the supper, but the sixt chapter of S. Iohn. H Wherfor Luther gropeth also in the darke and can not see one sillable of S. Iohns sixt chapter speaking of the Sacrament, which speaketh moche of yt. [Page 201]whiche thing also ys by expresse woordes testified of S. Augustine, who A saieth thus speaking of the supper of Chryst. Ioannes de corpore & sanguine Domini Aug. li. 3▪ de Conseuse Euang. Chryst spake of his bodie and blood plentisullie in the sixt of S. Iohn. hoc loco nibil dixit, sed planè alibi multo vberiùs de iis Dominum locutum esse testatur. Iohn spake nothing in this place of the bodie and bloode of our Lorde, But in an other place he plainly testifieth that our lorde verie plentifullie spake of these thinges. Wher note breiflie by the waie that S. augustine saieth not, that S. Iohn spake of the Sacrament of Chrystes bodie and bloode, but of the bodie and bloode of our Lorde by expresse and plain woordes, and ther with fignifieth the same bodie and blood to be spoken of both in the sixt of S. Iohn, and in the other Euangelistes, wher they treacte of the last supper of Chryst. And thus ye haue perceaued the authour of that booke not onely blinded, but also directlie saing contrarie to Chrysostome in these two places iointly alleaged, and also to S. Augustine, And therfor once again I wish yow to be warned, that seing the sainges of your cheif masters be clean contrarie to the sainges of the cheif masters of Chrystes Church, beware of them, suspect them, flie farre from them. Ye haue B good cause so to doe yf yowe consider the matter well.
And now to yowr farder instruction in this poinct, and to the more confutacion of the aduersaie and declaracion of the trueth, I will craue yowr pacience to heare one other place of the same Chrysostom, wherin ye shall both more plainly perccaue both that the vi of Iohn, and also the woordes of the supper doe manifestlie speake of the bodie and bloode of Chryst in the Sacrament. Thus he writeth: Hac de causa desiderio desideraui hoc Pascha vobiscum Chris. homil. 83. in. 26. Math. comedere, qno vos spirituales faciam. Ipsequoque bibit ex [...]; ne auditis verbis illis dicerent: Quid igitur sanguinem bibimus, & carnem comedimus? ac ideo perturbarentur. Nam & quando prius de iis verba fecit multi solummodò propter verba scandalum passi sunt. Ne igitur tunc quoque id accideret, primus ipse hoc fecit, vt tranquillo animo ad commumcationem mysterioram induceret. For this cause with desire haue I desiered to eate this passeouer with yowe, by the whiche I maie make yowe spiritual. He also dranke of yt, lest when they had heard these woordes they shoulde saie, what therfor doe we drinke bloode, and cate flesh? And ther for they shoulde be troobled. for when he did first speake of these thinges also, manie C alonlie for his woordes were offended. Lest therfor that also shoulde then happen, he himself first did this thing, that with quiett minde he might induce them to the partaking or communicacion of the mysteries. Thus moche Chrysostome.
In whiche saing I will first note to yowe for the sixt of S. Iohn, that after I maie the more at large open his minde to yowe for the presence: That Chryst spake of his bodie and blood in the Sacramēt Ioā. 6. Chryst spake of his bodie and bloode in the sixt of S. Iohn, these woordes of this authour doe teach vs wher he saieth: Quando de iis prius verba fecit, multi solummodò propter verba scandalum pasi sunt. When he first spake of these thinges manie euen alonely for the woordes were offended. Wherby yowe maie perceaue that Chrysostome sheweth here that Chryst spake before of this mysterie of his bodie and bloode in that place, wher manie onelie were offended for the woordes. Wher that was yt ys clere to all men that can read the Gospell, that yt was ther, wher they saied, Durus est est hic sermo, quis potest eum audire? This ys an harde saing, who can abide yt? wher yt ys manifest Joan. 6. that they were (according to Chrysostoms saing) offended onely for the D woordes of Chryst, whiche made them to saie that yt was an hard saing. So that wher Chrysostom in the other sentence saied that Chryst had spoken great thinges of this mysterie, but opened not in what place, here by circumstance [Page]he sheweth the certen place.
This I thought good first to note, that being ioinctlie spoken of after the E other, the first might be corfirmed by this, in that that this openeth the place of the speaking of yt. And this by that manie somwhat be explained in that yt declareth, that Chryst spake ther manie and great thinges which in this place be not so farre reported.
Ther seemeth betwixpt these two places of Chrysostom to be a contradiction, the dissolucion of whiche shall bringfurth some good matter meit for Two sainges of Chrysost. conferred and conciled. this place. The contradiction ys this: in the first sentence saing: Quomodò igitur turbati non sunt discipuli hoc audientes? howe were the disciples not troobled hearing this? he geueth vs to vnderstand, that the Apostles were so staied and confirmed, that when Chryst spake to them comaunding them to eate his bodie, they were not, neither coulde be troobled. In this sentence he saieth thatChryst did first drinke of his bloode lest they shoulde saie: Wherfor then doe we drinke blood and eate slesh? and therfor shoulde be troobled. Wherby contrariwise he semeth to insinuate that they were not perfect, but wolde haue ben troobled. F
But these two sainges well weighed, ther shall be fownde no contradiction, but raither strong euident matter for the opening of the trueth nowe declared. Wherfor this ys to be noted, that in the sirst sentence Chrysostom spake of the faith of the Apostles as concerning this misterie. And as touching their saith they were not troobled at the straunge sownde of Chrystes woordes, who bid them take and eate his bodie and drinke his blode, who otherwise if they had not ben staied in faith, being fullie instructed, and fullie perswaded, they wolde haue ben troobled at the hearing of soche woordes, but they were resolued, and therfor wolde not depart and go backe from Chryste, as other disciples did, but when Chryst asked them: will yowe also go awaie? They answered: Domine ad quem ibimus? verba vitae aeternae habes. Lorde to whom shall we go? Thowe hauest the woordes of euerlasting life. They had taken a good tast in the woordes of Chryst, though they were repugnaunt to their naturall knowledge. Wherfor they subdewed their naturall The Apostles hearing Chystes woordes: Take, eate, this ys my bodie were not troobled in faith, knowledge to the heauenly and spirituall knowledge, and so perceaued G euerlasting life in his woordes. Therfore hearing this newe and straunge voice, Take, eate, This ys my bodie. Drinke, this ys my blood, that yt was so in dede, as Chrvst spake they beleued most certenlie. And therfor in faith they were not troobled. For if they had, they wolde haue vttered their doubte with a (Quomodò) howe, as they did that were troobled and saied: Quomodò potest hic nobis dare carnem suam ad manducandum? Howe can this felowe geue vs his flesh to eate? And as our men in these daies trobled likewise in faith doe shewe their doubte with a (Quomodò) with an howe, asking howe can Chryst be in the Sacrament? with manie soche like questions. But the Apostles were deliuered from this trooble. and therfor (saieth Chrysostom) they were not trobled, that ys, they were not troobled in faith. That he meneth they were not troobled in faith, his woordes doe declare, when he asketh, howe were not the Apostles troobled hearing these woordes? So that their troble shoulde be vpon the hearing of Chrystes woordes. But forasmoche as faith ys of hearing, and by hearing Chryst before they had conceaued faith, therfor faith by the hearing of these woordes, which before by hearing were beleued, H was not nowe troobled. Whiche also this Chrysostome saieth in his answer geuing a cause why they were not trobled. Quia multa & magna de hoc antè disseruerat. Bicause he had spoken manie and great thinges of this before. so [Page 202]that by the hearing of these manie and great thinges they were nowe quieted A in faith.
In the seconde sentence wher he sheweth a thing to be doen by Chryst lest they shoulde be troobled, he doth not speake of their trooble in faith, but of their trooble that mighthaue happened in the execuciō of their faith, that ys, in the receauing of that bodie and bloode whiche they beleued ther to be reallie present, and as verie flesh and verie bloode to be receaued. The Apostles beleued the real presence of Chrystes bodie and blood in the Sacr. Wherfor yt ys to be noted that the Apostles beleued in the Sacrament to be not a bare figure, as of thing absent, but they beleued the verie bodie and bloode of Chryst really present. The proofe of this by Chrysostom ys this: Yf they had beleued yt to be but a figure, and in very dede bread and wine, then in the receipt of yt they wolde not haue ben troobled. For vnto bread and wine they were accustomed as their vsuall foode. But forasmoch as they beleued yt to be the verie flesh and verie blood of Chryst, the receipt wher of being both straunge, and to oure nature lothsome, and speciallie the flesh and blood of a man (as Theophilact saieth) therfor as they were not troobled in the beleuing: so that they shoulde not be trobled in Chryst to induce his Apost. without lothsomnesse to eat his flesh, and drinke his blood, did first eat ād drinke thē himself. B the receauing of yt, Chryst, to induce them by his example, and to remoue the lothsomnesse of nature abhorring to eate the flesh of man, and to drinke his bloode, did drinke first, vt tranquillo animo (saieth Chrysostom) ad communicationem mysteriorū induceret. That he might induce them with a quiet minde to receaue the misteries. Cōsider with yowr self, if they had beleued yt to be but bread, whie should thei not receaue yt with quiet mind? yf yt were wine why shoulde they not drinke yt quietlie. And if they were soche thinges, what needed Chryst to drinke before them, to induce them, and to quiet them? Did they neuer eate bread before? Did they neuer drinke wine before?
Perchaunce the Aduersaries will saie that they neuer eate bread, and drā ke wine in that sort before. For nowe they did eate bread, and drinke wine as the figures of Chrystes bodie and bloode. Ys this a sufficient cause to trooble them? Had they neuer before eaten any thing as the figure of Chryst? Had they not euen a litle before eaten the Paschall lambe, a verie liuely figure of Chryst? Had they not hearde, that Melchisedech did eate and drinke C bread and wine in the figure of Chryste? Had they not heard that Manna was eaten, and the water of the rocke dronken in the figure of Chryst? Was this matter so straunge to them, that they shoulde be trobled? No, yt was not this. but yt was for the eating of the flesh, and drinking of the blood of Chryst, whiche for that that yt was neuer in vse before yt was very straunge to them, and for that yt was against nature yt was lothsome, and therfor they might verie well haue ben troobled. That this ys the cause Chrysostome by plain woordes declareth saing: Chryst did drinke first of yt lest, when they had heard the woordes of Chryste, which were these: Eate, This ys my bodie. Drinke, This ys my bloode: they shoulde saie, what doe we eate flesh and drinke bloode? and therfor they shoulde be troobled.
Note that he saieth, that the Apostles wolde haue saied, whi doe we eat flesh Trooble of the Apost. shoulde haue ben bicause they knewe they should eate verie flesh. and drinke bloode? In the whiche woordes he doth plainlie expresse their faith that they beleued yt to be flesh and bloode. And bicause they did certenlie beleue yt to be flesh and bloode, and that they shoulde so haue receaued yt, yt might haue ben a cause to trooble them. Therfor Chrysostom addeth: Ac D ideo perturbarentur. And therfor they shoulde be troobled. Therfor, that ys, bicause they shoulde eate the flesh, and drinke the blood of a man. [Page]Fot that ys the cause that Chrysostom doeth assign, of their trooble.
That whiche foloweth also moche helpeth the declaracion of this matter, E that when Chryst (saieth Chysostom) did speake of these thinges before manie for the woordes alonelie were offēded. In that he saieth that they were offēded for the wordes alone, he geueth vs to vnderstād, that the Apostles shoulde not nowe haue bē offended so, but for the doing, that where Chryst before did speake of the geuing of his flesh, nowe he did both speake of yt, and geue yt in dede. And so in the receipt of yt in dede, they shoulde haue ben offended. But (saieth Chrysostom) that that might not happen, he dranke first, that they animated, and comforted by his example, might with a quiett minde, neither thinking yt straunge neither lothsome, receaue the misteries, in the whiche (as a mistery requireth) was hidden a thinge not open to senseis, whiche was the bodie of Iesus Chryste. Nowe ye haue heard the minde of Chrysostom vpon the woordes of Chryst, and howe he vnderstandeth them yowe maie perceaue, and by the same also yowe maie knowe both howe he did beleue, and howe also the Apostles, who first tooke this misterie at Chrystes hand, did beleue.
And nowe forasmoche as I haue taried long vpon Chrysostom (but not F without profitt to the reader, as I trust) I will with the more expedition breislie, ouerpasse the breif saing of Sedulius, who at this time ys ioined to Chrysostom, Sedul. in 11 prim. Cor. as his yockefelowe, to testifie the true vnderstāding of Chrystes wordes in the latin churche, as Chrysostome hath doen in the greke churche. Thus he saieth Accipite, hoc est corpus meū. quasi dixisset Paulus: Cauete ne illud corpus A plain place for M. Iuell. indignè comedatis, dū corpus Chisti est. Take, this ys my bodie, as though Paule had saied, Beware that ye eate not that bodie vnworthilie, forasmohe as yt ys the bodie of Chryste. Thus mochehe.
Who expownding the woordes of Chryst vttered by S. Paule to the Corinthians dothe by expresse woordes geue vs to vnderstande thē in their propre sense, as speaking of the verie bodie, and of no figure or trope. For if they were so to be vnderstāded, this learned man taking vpon him the office of an expositoure, and so to expownde the woordes of Chryst, and the mening of S. Paule, in the alleaging of them, wolde haue taught nowe that theie are to be vnderstāded by a figure, as an expositour aught to doe. But forasmohe as he teacheth that they are vndestanded of Chrystes bodie, as in opening S. G Paules minde yt doeth wel appeare, yt can not otherwise be but the woordes Sedulius cō mended. of Chryste are to be taken simplie, as teaching vs that Cryste and S. Paule spake of the very bodie and not of the bare figure of yt. This mā was both learned and auncient, not moche aboue foure hondreth years after Chryste who as by learning he was not voide of good knowledg: so by auncientie he was not voide of true faith. Wherfor we must nedes confesse, that this doctrine ys according to the true faith, and so consequentlie acknowledge that yt ys the true faith to beleue Chrystes verie bodie in the Sacrament.
Thus, Reader, thowe hauest heard these twoo noble men of Chrystes Parliament The Proclāer must subscribe to the catholique doctrin of the Church if he will kepe promesse. howse openinge to vs the enacted trueth of the vnderstanding of Chrystes woordes, bothe of them testifieng the presence of Chrystes bodie by the same woordes, and no one title of the Aduersaries figures and signes, and that so plainlie and euidentlie, that methinke the Proclamer shall doe me wronge if he subscribe not to this trueth, for somoche as he hath promised so to doe vpon the seight of anie one plain place in scripture, Councell H or doctoure. Chrysostom, I am sure, ys so plain and with all so euident, and strong against the wicked assertion of the Proclamer, that he shall neuer be [Page 203]able with all his engins, and false shiftes that he had to withstand his force. A But yf hys mouthe will not for pride confesse the trueth, his conscience, I doubte not, accuseth him as confownded.
THE SIX AND FIFTETH CHAP. ABIDETH, in the exposition of the same woordes by Theophilus and Leo.
NOw (gentle Reader) coming towardes the ende of these famouse and noble men of Chrystes higher house, of Parliament, I meen of soche as were within sixe hondreth years after Chryst, I trust thowe wilt not fainte to proceade and see the ende. And to thy more ease, I also, as a man trauailing in iourneie and coming towarde the ende, being desierouse of the same taketh courage to him, and maketh the more hast to atteign his desire: Euen so I nowe drawing to the ende, will be shorter then I haue ben, and so make hast that I maie obtein that, that I desire. B
And nowe of those fathers that remain Theoplnlus Archibishoppe of Alexandria, Origen his heresic. shall be the first that in our matter shall geue his testimonie. This man writing against Origen, for that he saied that the deuells shall be saued at Theop. Alexand. li. 2. pasch. the last, saieth thus. Consequens est, vt qui priora susceperit, suscipiat & quae sequuntur. Et qui pro Doemonibus Christum dixerit crucifigi, ad ipsos quoque dicendum suscipiat, Hoc est corpus meum, & accipite, Hic est sanguis meus. Si enim pro Daemonibus crucifigitur (vt nouorum dogmatum assertor affirmat) quod erit priuilegium, aut quae ratio, vt soli homines corpori eius sanguiniue communicent, & non Daemones quoque proquibus in passione sanguinem fuderit: Yt ys consequent, that he that receaueth the first thinges, shoulde also receaue those thinges that folowe. And he that doeth saie Chryst to be cruicified for Deuels, alow also to be saied vnto thē: This ys my bodie, and Take, this ys my bloode. For yf Chryst shall be crucified also for Deuells, as the auoucher of newe doctrines doeth affirme, what shall be the priuilege, or what reason that onely men shoulde communicate the bodie and bloode of him, and not Deuells also for the whiche in his passion he did shedde his bloode? hitherto Theoph. C
Who improuing the opinion of Origen before mencioned, saieth that if the bodie of Chryst shoulde suffre for Deuells, and his blood shoulde be shedde for thē, then vnto thē he shoulde haue saied, as he hath to his Apostles, and all faithfull men: Take, eate, This ys my bodie, Take and drinke, This ys my blood. Whiche argumēt, as yt doth confute the errour of Origen, for that yt ys meit that all they that be partakers of the redemption purchaced by the bodie and blood of Chryst, should also be soche, as to whō in time conuenient, yt Deuells be not redemed by Chrystes passion, but if they might receaue him spirituallie they shoulde be partakers of his merittes. might be saied: Take eat, This ys my bodie. Take drinke, This ys my blood. Whiche thing to Deuells ys not saied: so also yt doeth impugn the errour of our Aduersarie in that that no mencion being made of figures and tropes, the wordes of Chryst be left in their owne propre sense, teaching vs that we must take and eate, his verie bodie, and drinke his verie bloode.
And that they doe so teache vs by the minde of this authour, the woordes that folowe in his second argumēt doo well prooue. For the better perceaving wherof, vnderstād first (as the trueth of the catholique faith ys) that Deuells be not redemed by the passion of Chryst, neither be they, nor can be partakers of the vertue and benefitt of the same. Nowe to receaue Chryst D spirituallie, ys to receaue the grace and fruict of this passion. When then in his second argument this authour saieth that the Deuells be not parone [Page]bloode excludeth an other, and the legall solemnitie, when yt ys chaunged, E ys fulfilled. Thus Leo.
For the better vnderstanding of this saing of the authour, yt ys to be obserued that he doth compare the solemnitie of the olde iudaicall Passouer to the newe Passouer solemnely begonne by Chryst in his last supper. Whiche thing maie well be perceaued by the last woordes of the authour, wher he saieth as the conclusion of all that he had before spoken: & legalis festiuitas, dum mutatur, impletur: And the legall solemnitie, when yt ys chaunged, ys fulfilled. The legall solemnitie, was the feast of the Paschall lambe. This feast was chaunged and then fullfilled, when Chryst in stead of that lambe being the figure, made his solemne feast, and gaue his owne bodie and bloode, the bodie and blood of the right, and verie true lambe of God, that taketh awaie the sinnes of the worlde, of which matter more ys saied in the first booke. In the whiche feast (saieth the authour) that the shadowes shoulde geue place to the bodie, and the images shoulde ceasse in the presence of the trueth, the olde obseruance ys taken awaie with a newe sacrament. Marke then, in the legall solemnitie was the shadowe: in Chrystes supper the bodie, in the legall solemnitie were the Images: in Chrystes feast was the presence of the trueth, that ys, F the verie thing signified by the image, which ys the bodie and bloode of Chryst, not nowe in figure, but in verie deed.
See ye not nowe then what ys in Chrystes supper? Ys ther not the bodie of the shadowe, and not the onelie shadowe? Ys ther not the verie thing and not the image? Ys not the bodie of the shadowe In Chrystes supper ys the verie bodie and not the shadow. and the verie thing of the image the bodie and blooode of Chrysts Then the verie bodie and bloode of Chryst be in hys supper. Thus maie ye perceaue what he ment, when he saied that Chryst did ordein the Sacrament of hys bodie and bloode, not a Sacrament voyde of hys bodie and bloode, but a Sacrament conteining hys bodie and bloode.
Will ye see this again plainlie taught? This authour saieth, that the olde obseruance ys taken awaie with a newe Sacrament. But what ys thys Sacrament? Yt ys a sacrament, that ys a sacrifice remouing and ending the sacrifice of the Paschall lambe, and others of that nature. Yt ys a Sacrament wherin ys bloode excluding the bloode of legall sacrifices. G Hostia in hostiam transit, sanguis sanguinem excludit, one sacrifice passeth into an other sacrifice: one bloode excludeth an other bloode. The sacrifice of the olde lawe passeth into the sacrifice of Chrystes bodie and ther endeth, and the bloode of Chryst excludeth and putteth awaie the bloode of the sacrifice of the olde lawe, and so ys the sacrifice of that bloode ended. Chryste in his supper did not institute a bare Sacrament onelie
Thus maie yowe perceaue, that when this authour saied, that Chryst ordeined the Sacrament of hys bodie and bloode, that he ment not onely the institucion of a bare Sacrament, but also the consecracion of the bodie and bloode of Chryst lieng hidden vnder the formes of bread and wine in the same Sacrament. Whiche ordeinance and consecracion was doen by the woordes of Chryst, when he saied: Take, eate, This ys ys my bodie. And Take, drinke, this ys my bloode. And so the woordes teache the verie presence of Chrystes bodie and blood in the Sacrament, and not a naked figure.
Yf thus moch satissie not the reader forsomoch as ys here saied of and vpō H this authour, as I trust yt maie anie that ys not contenciouse, yf he desire to see more of this authour, let him reparie to the sixt of sainct Iohn, and [Page 205]to the beginning of this processe vpon the woordes of the Supper, and he A shall see more, wherfore remitting the reader to those places, I staie to saie anie more vpon this coople, but hast me, according to my promesse to heare an other coople.
THE SEVEN AND FIFTETH CHAP. PROceadeth in the exposition of the same woordes by sainct Cyrill and sainct Gregorie.
THough yt be moche that ys allready saied vpon these sewe woordes of Chryst, and maie well suffice to teache the trueth of this matter: yet that the arrogancie of the Proclamer maie be beaten down, and his vntrueth against gods trueth well perceaued, we shall yet bring in one or twoo cooples mo of the higher house of Chrystes Parliament, and then descend to other of the lower house. B
Of the higher house ther yet remaineth holy Cyrill, whose faith in the Sacrament, although yt maie well be knowen to vs by hys manie and sondrie sentences both in the first booke, and in this vpō the vi. of S. Iohn alleadged: yet that the faith of the catholique Church maie be discerned from errour and heresie, with which titles some heretiques wold defame the same, we wil heare him teache vs the faith that ought to be had and geuen to the woordes of Chryst, and howe we shall vnderstand them, euen as he taught Calosyrius, to whom he wrote vpon the woords of Chryst in this maner: Non dubites, an hoc verum sit, eo manifestè dicente. Hoc est corpus meum: sed potius suscipe verbum Cirill ad Calosyriū. Chrystes woordes manifest and without doubt. saluatoris in side. Cùm enim sit veritas, non mentitur. Doubt not whether this be true or no, seing that he manifestlie saieth: This ys my bodie: But raither receaue the woord of our Sauiour in faith. For lie forasmoch as he ys tureth, he lieth not.
Weigh these fewe woordes of S. Cyrill well (gentle Reader) and first that he willeth Calosirius not to doubte whether this that Christ manifestlie saied: This ys my bodie: be true or no. For in that he willed him and by him all chrystians not to doubte, what clls willeth he but that al errour, heresie, opinion, C wandering, wauering and colde faith shoulde be remoued, and firme, suro, and fast faith should be geuen to the woordes of Chryst: This ys my bodie, S. Cyrill she weth the Proclamer plain woordes. whiche woordes he saieth be manifest. Yf they be manifest, then they haue no obscure sense: then they must be taken in the sense that manifestlie lieth open before vs. That sense ys the grāmaticall sense. Then the figuratiue sense ys taken awaie. For that sense, as the woordes be nowe spoken, ys not manifest, but obscure. Then also must the Proclamer subscribe. For by the iudgemente of S. Cyrill the woordes of Chryst be manifest. Yf they be manifest, as vndoubtedlie they be, then ther ys one scripture that manifestly teacheth the presence of Chrystes bodie.
Again sainct Cyrill saieth, that forasmoche as Chryst ys the trueth, he lieth not: but he taking the bread and wine, saied: This ys my bodie. Therfore he being the trueth and lieng not, the thinges were as he saied, then were they his bodie and bloode. For so saied he that they were. Yf the bread and wine, he saing, Thys ys my bodie. This ys my bloode: were not made by his allmightie power and woorde the bodie and blood of Chryst (these woords being spoken by demōstraciō of certain singular things in nature D without anie circūstance to declare anie other sense vpō these woordes, then in the first hearing they sownde to haue) Yf, I saie, these creatures [Page]remain still in their nature and substances, and be but figures of Chrystes E bodie and blood, then I saie, that Chrystes woordes were not true. For he saied that they were his bodie and bloode. And by the opinion of the Aduersarie, they be not so, but bread and wine figures of Chrystes bodie and blood.
Forasmoche as my cheef pourpose ys to helpe and staie them in their faith that be vnlearned, to whome quiddities in learning be raither trooblesom then pleasaunt or profitable, I haue determined not to dispute with the Proclamer in anie quidditie, or ells I wolde somwhat haue saied to him, for The Proclamer to disgrace our faith plaieth with indiuidū vagum. that yt liketh him to dallie, and to aske where we finde that this woord (hoc) in english (this) poincteth not the bread, but indiuiduum vagum. For if yt shall be his phantasie to disgrace the trueth before the comon people by plaing with some quidditie, that they can not vnderstand, he maie so soen disgrace our faith in the holie and blessed Trinitie. For if he lyst so to plaie, he might moue matter of the distinction and relacion of the persons, and by soche toieng bring the people to stagger in their faith in the blessed Trinitie, as by this mockerie of the demonstracion, he wolde make them fall from their F faith of the blessed Sacrament. Yt were conuenient that as the people should be taught simplie, to beleue in God the Father, God the Sonne, and God the holie Gost, and not to be troobled with the learned quiddities of the generacion of the Sonne, of the spiracion as touching the holie Goste, of the procession of the same from the Father and the Sonne, and with the distinction and relacion of the persons: so shoulde they be taught simplie to beleue as the scripturs doe teache, and the holie fathers doe declare and expownde the same, that the bodie and bloode of our Sauiour Chryst, euen People are simplie to be taught not with Quiddities. full Chryst, God and man, after the consecracion, which (as before ys declared) ys doen by the secrett power of God, by the worke of the holy Goste at the pronunciacion of Chrystes woordes by his sufficient mynister, ys verilie, reallie, substanciallie, and naturally present in the Sacrament, and not to be troobled with demonstracions with accidentes, with substances, with placing of that bodie circumscriptiuelie, definitiuelie, by the maner of substance, or by the maner of quantitie. For these matters are for learned men to G dispute, not for good Chrystian vnlearned people to call in question of beleue. In the schooles yt had ben a meit matter to dispute: in the pulpitie yt was no matter to teache to edifie. But yt liked him to talke of soche quiddities, bicause by their obscuritie and darkenesse, they being vnpleasaunt vnto the people shoulde the more myslike them, and by that means haue the redier waie to deface the catholique faith, and to sett vppe his heresie: But I minding for that litle that in me ys, to maintein that holie faith of Chryst my Sauiour that ys taught in his catholique Churche, I will leaue these quiddities, and simplie treact of the thing, that we haue in hande. And therfore nowe returning to Cyrill, from whom I haue a litle digressed, I saie with him, that Chryst being trueth, and saing: This ys my bodie, yt must nedes be as he saied, and so simplie we must beleue the bodie and blood of Chryst, according Cyrillus ibidem. to his woorde to be present in the Sacrament.
Whiche thing, as he saied here that Chryst manifestlie saied: Thys ys my bodie: So he manifestlie in the same epistle after a fewe lines, doth open and Chryst turneth the bread into his owne verie flesh. declare to be true, wher he thus writeth: Ne horreremus carnē et sanguinē apposita H sacris altaribus, cōdescendēs Deus nostris fragilitatibus, instuit oblatis vim vitae, cōuertēs ea in veritatē propriae carnis, vt corpus vitae quasi quoddā semē viuificatiuū inueniatur in nobis That we shoulde not loath flesh and bloode sett vpon the holie aultars, God [Page 206]condescending to our fragilities hath powred into the thinges offred the A power of life conuerting or turning them into his verie owne flesh, that the bodie of life maie be fownde in vs, as a certain quickning seede.
For that I haue vpon this place of Cyrill saied somthing allreadie, I will nowe no more but note vnto yowe, howe manifestlie, howe apertlie, and howe plainlie he teacheth vs not onely that the bodie of Chryst ys in the Sacrament: but also the meanes howe yt ys ther, which ys that God turneth the bread sett vpon the holie aulanrs into his verie flesh. After this he rendreth to vs two Two causes whie the substā ce in the Sacr. being flesh appeareth not. causes of the goodnesse of God towarde vs, and shewed in this Sacrament the one ys, that though yt be flesh in dede: yet (as Euthymius, and Theophilact also doe saie) God considering or condescending to our infirmities, maketh yt not to appeare vnto vs that that yt ys in dede, but yt appeareth still to vs as yt was before, as bread and wine. The other cause whie we receaue the verie flesh of Chryst (though not in the forme of flesh) ys, saieth Cyrill, that the bodie of Chryst, whiche in an other place he calleth the bodie of life, might be in our bodies, as the seede of life, to communicate life vnto vs, and B so make vs by vertue therof, to liue euerlastinglie.
Nowe if the Sacrament were but a figure, and not the bodie of Chryst, as the Aduersarie saieth, howe coulde Cyrills saing be true, that God turneth the offred thinges into his flesh? Again if in the Sacrament we receaue The flesh of Chryst receaued in the Sacr. ys the seed of euerlasting life. not the bodie of Chryste, howe then standeth Cyrills sainge, that the bodie of Chryst, to the intent yt maie be the seed of life ys fownde in vs? Yt maie then well be perceaued, that the doctrine of the Aduersarie teaching that Chrystes bodie and bloode be not in the Sacrament, ys pestilent, perniciouse and vntrue, not onely in that yt ys repugnant to the doctrine of this holie Father, and others before alleadged, but also to the verie woorde of Chryst, who plainlie saieth: This ys my bodie, and the Aduersarie saieth, yt ys not his bodie But a figure of his bodie.
But yt ys time that we heare S. Grogorie whom we haue appoincted to ioin with S. Cyrill, to declare what was the faith of the latin church in his daies. Thus he writeth: Debemus itaque praesens seculum, vel quia iam conspicimus de fluxisse, tota mente contemnere, quotidiana Deo lachrimarum sacrisicia, quotidianas carnis Grog. li. 4 dialog. ca. 58. C & sanguinis eius hostias immolare. Haec namque singulariter victima ab aeterno interitu animam saluat, quae illam nobis mortem Vnigeniti per mysterium reparat. Qui licet resurgēs ex mortuis iam non moritur, & mors ei vltrà non dominabitur: tamen in seipso immortaliter, atque incorruptibiliter viuens, pro nobis iterum in boc mysterio sacrae oblationis immolatur, Eius quippe ibi corpus sumitur, eius caro in populi salutem partitur, eius sanguis non iam in manus infidelium, sed in ora fidelium funditur. Hinc ergo pensemus, quale sit pro nobis hoc sacrificium, quod pro absolutionè nostra passionem Vnigeniti filii sui imitatur. Quis enim fidelium haberè dubium possit in ipsa immolationis hora ad sacerdotis vocem caelos aperiri? Dailie sacrifice of Chrystes bodie and blode ys to be ofred. in illo Iesu Christi mysterio Angelorum Choros adesse? summis ima sociari: terrena coele stibus iungi? vnum quoque ex visibilibus, & inuisibilibus fieri? We aught therfor, forasmoche as we see this present worlde to haue comed to nothing, with all owre minde to contemne yt, and to offre vnto God the dailie sacrifices of teares, the dailie sacrifices of his flesh, and bloode. This singular sacrifice saueth the soule from euerlasting destruction, whiche reneweth vnto vs by misterie the death of the onelie begotten Sonne. Who allthough rising from death, dieth no more, and death shall neuer D more haue lord shippe ouer him: yet in himself liuing immortallie, and in corruptiblie, he ys offred again in this misterie of the holie oblacion for vs. Ther trulie his bodie ys receaued, his flesh to the health of the people ys geuen abroede: his not [Page] bloode ys nowe shedde, not into the handes of the vnfaithfull: but into the mouthes of the E faithfull. By this thē let vs weigh what maner of sacrifice this ys for vs, whiche for our deliuerance dothe allwais folowe the passion of the onely begotten Sonne. What faith full man can doubte in the time of that sacrificing, at the woorde of the preist, the heauens to be opened, in that misterie of Iesus Chryste? companies of Angells to be present? vnto high thinges lowe thinges to be coopled? to heauenlie thinges earthlie thinges to be ioined? one thing also of inuisible and visible thinges to be made? Thus moche S. Gregorie.
Yt maie perchaunce be saied, that though this place of S. Gregorie doeth moche prooue the verie presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, yet yt teacheth not the vnderstanding of Chrystes woordes: This ys my body: whiche ys the matter that I nowe take in hande to declare, Trueth yt ys, that the woordes of Chryst be not here recited by expresse woordes, but they are heare vnderstanded and the true vnderstanding of them ys also here settfurth for the vnderstanding wherof I first note vnto yowe this sentence F of Gregories authoritie: What faithfull man (saieth he) can doubte in that time of immolacion at the voice of the preist the heauens to be opened &c. what voice of the preist yt ys at whiche the heauens be opened, the companies of angells be present: high thinges are coopled to lowe thinges: but that voice of the woordes of Chryst spoken by the preist, in the person of Chryst: This ys my bodie, This ys my blood? For vnto that time (saieth S. Ambrose) the preist vseth The heauē lie bodie of Christ ys io [...]ned to the earthlie formes of bread and wire at the pronouincing of the woordes of Chryst his owne woordes, but then he vseth not his owne woordes but the woordes of Chryst. at the whiche voice all these wonderfull thinges are doen. S. Gregorie then by this voice of the preist vnderstandeth these woordes of Chryst vttered by the preist. The true vnderstanding of whiche woordes he teacheth when he saieth: that at the speaking and pronunciacion of them, vnto high thinges, lowe thinges are coopled: vnto heauenly thinges, earthlie thinges are ioined What be these high thinges and heauenly thinges coopled and ioined to lowe thinges and eartlie thinges, but the heauenly and gloriouse hodie and bloode of our Sauiour Chryst? whiche by his diuine power turning the substances of bread and wine into the substance of the same his bodie and G bloode and being in the Sacrament vnder the earthlie formes of bread and wine, he being high and heauenly ys ioined and coopled to lowe and earth lie thinges. Jrenaeus li. 4. ca. 34.
After this maner the holie martir Irenaeus did settfurth the holie Sacramēt for he saieth: Qui est à terra panis precipiens vocationem Dei iam non communis panis est, sed Eucharistia, ex duabus constans rebus, terrena, & coelesti. The bread, whiche ys of the earth, receauing the vocacion of God (that ys the woordes of consecracion) ys nowe not common bread, but (Eucharistia) a good grace of God being Amb. ora. prepar. ad Missam. compact of two thinges, earthlie and heauenlie. S. Ambrose also hath euen the same woordes, that S. Ghregorie hath, saing: vbi summa imis iungūtur. Wher high thinges be ioined to lowe thinges. Heauenlie and earthlie thinges os the Sacr. discussed what they be, by conferēce of thaduersar. doctrine,
Yt shall moche helpe the setting furth of the trueth, if we maie, conferring with the doctrine of the aduersaries, discusse what ys this heauenlie or high thinge that ys ioined in the Sacrament, with the eartly thinge, And here we must according to the doctrine of Irenaeus, first confesse and agree, that these twoo thinges, of the whiche the Sacrament ys made, are twoo permanent H thinges, twoo thinges standing and abiding.
Nowe the aduersaries doctrine seking by all means to displace and remoue Chryst from the Sacrament feigneth manie thinges to be the heauenlie [Page 207]parte of the Sacrament, which in dede will not stand with the doctrine of A Irenaeus. In some place yt saieth that the grace of God which cometh to the Grace ys not one of the partes of the Sacr. but the effecte. receauers of the Sacrament, ys the heauenly parte of the Sacrament. This can not stand as part, for grace ys the effect of the Sacrament, and not the parte. And grace therfor must be and ys in the receauer and not in the Sacrament, as a part therof. For if grace were in the Sacrament as a part of the Sacrament, then either vnwoorthie men receauing the Sacramēt, receaue grace also, (which ys not to be saied) or ells yt must be saied, that forasmoche as they receaue not grace, they receaue no Sacrament: for a thing ys receaued when yt ys whollie receaued. And thus shall they be vncerten when the Sacrament ys ministred.
Of some yt maie be saied that bicause the Sacrament ys called the bread of thankes geuing, that thankes to God ys the heauenly parte of the Sacrament. Thankes geuing ys not thone parte of the Sacr. This also can not be. For this ys well knowen to all men that haue but reason, that thankes geuing ys either in him that geueth them, or in him that receaueth them, and not in the bread, for yt neither geueth nor receaueth thankes. B
Yf they saie, bicause, S. August. saieth, Accedit verbū ad elementū, et fit Sacramentū, that ys, the woorde cometh to the element, and yt ys made a Sacrament: The worde ys not that one part of the Sacrament. that therfore the woorde ys the heauenly part of the Sacrament. That also can not be saied of the Sacrament allreadie consecrated for the woorde ys raither the cause of the Sacrament, then the part, bicause the woorde ys not a permanent thing but these partes of the Sacrament must be twoo permanent or constant thinges as Irenaeus saieth,
Yf they will flee to this shifte and saie, that though the woorde be not a Sanctificacion of the creaturs cā not be the heauenlie part of the Sacram. by the doctrine of the aduer. permanent thing: yet the sanctrification that ys doen in the bread by the woorde remaineth, and that ys the heauenly part of the Sacrament. This also euen by their owne learning can not stande. For Oecolampadius and Cranmer, and all the rable of that Sect teache constantlie that dumbe thinges be not partakers of sanctificacion.
Nowe what ells they can feign to maintein their euell matter I can not deuise but of these no one will serue. Wherfor leauing them, we will hearewhat the catholique faith teacheth to be the heauenly part of the Sacramēt C whiche thing we maie easilie doe, trauailing no farder then to S. Gregorie whom we haue nowe in hande. For we haue heard him saie that Iesus Chryst liuing in himself immortallie, and incorruptiblie, ys offred for vs in the holie mysterie, wher The heauē lie part of the blessed Sacrament what yt ys his bodie ys receaued, wher his flesh ys geuen abroade to the people, wher the bloode ys not shedde vpon the hādes of the vnfaithfull, but into the mouthes of the faithfull. Here maie yowe see the heauenly parte of the Sacrament what yt ys. Yt ys verie bodie and bloode of Chryst that ys geuen in the holie misterie to the people yt ys the high thing coopled to lowe thinges: yt ys the heauenlie thing ioined to earthlie thinges: yt ys that one inuisible thing that ys made one with visible thinges.
And here note that this place of S. Gregorie can not be wrested to the onely spirituall receauing of Chrystes bodie, but yt must be vnderstande of the corporall receipt. For he saieth, that the blood of Chryst in the Sacramen Corporall receauing of the bodie and blood of Chryste auouched by S. Greg. ys powred into the mouthes of the faitfull, whiche maner of receipt ys corporall, euen the receipt of Chrystes verie reall and substanciall bloode. The other receipt ys onely in the soule, and can not be receaued of D the bodie. Wherfor we maie conclude that he speaketh here of the corporal receipt of Chrystes bloode, whiche thing also ys confirmed by that he accompteth [Page]all one bloode that was shed vpon the handes of the vnfaithfull, and into the mouthes of the faithfull. That, that was shed vpon the F handes of the vnfaithfull Iewes in the passion of Chryst, was Chrystes verie reall and substanciall bloode, wherfor that, that ys receaued by the mouthes of the faithfull, ys Chrystes verie substanciall bloode. Thus by S. Gregorie we are taught that Chrystes verie bodie and bloode, be verilie in the Sacrament, whiche so being the catholique doctrine ys, that Chrystes bodie and bloode be the heauenly parte of the Sacrament.
But of both partes distinctlie sainct Bernarde, whom onely at this time I will produce, dothe verie learnedly speake, treacting of the Sacrament in this maner Quemadmodum species ibi videntur, quorumres, vel substantiae ibi esse non creduntur: sic res veraciter, & substantialiter creditur, cuius species non cernitur. videntur enim species panis & vini, & sabstantia panis & vini non creditur. Creditur autem substantia Bernar. de Coen. Dom. corporis, & sanguinis Christi, & tamen species non cernitur. As the formes be ther seen whose thinges or substances be not beleued, ther to be: so a thing ys verilie and substanciallie beleued, whose forme ys not seen. For the forme of bread and wine ys seen, and the substance of bread and wine ys not beleued: Forme of bread seen, the substance not beleued substā ce of Christs bodie beleued, the for me not seē. the substance of the bodie and bloode of Chryst ys beleued, and yet F the forme ys not seen. Again in the same sermon he writeth thus: Quod autē videmus species est panis & vim, quod autem sub specie illa credimus, verum corpus est, & verus Christi sanguis. quod pependit in cruce, & qui fluxit de latere. That that we see ys the forme of bread and wine: but that we beleue vnder the forme ys the verie bodie and verie bloode of Chryst, that did hang vpon the crosse and that slowed oute of his side. Thus he,
Nowe ye haue seen the twoo partes of the Sacrament so plainly expressed, as nothing can be desired more plain. In the Sacrament (saieth S. Bernarde) be the formes of bread and wine, and the substance of the bodie and The bodie and blood of Christ the heauē lie part, the formes of bread and wine the earthlie part of the Sacr. bloode. These twoo thinges be the twoo partes of the Sacrament. The bodie and blode of Chryst be the heauenly parte: the formes of bread and wine be the earthlie part. The bodie and bloode of Chryst be the high thinges the formes of bread and wine be the lowe thinges. These heauenlie and high thinges of Chrystes bodie and bloode, and the lowe and earthlie thinges of the formes of bread and wine ioined together make the Sacrament according to the sainges of the holie martir Irenaeus, of S. Ambrose, and G S. Gregorie.
And nowe supposing that the mindes of these two noble men of Chrystes Parliament house, I meen S. Cyrill and S. Gregorie, be fullie opened, and declared as touching the vnderstanding of the woordes of Chrystes supper, whiche in all poinctes agreeth with the rest, I will leaue them, and call in the last coople of this companie of the higher house.
THE EIGHT AND FIFTETH CHAP. ENDETH the exposition among the eldest Fathers by Euthymius, and Isidorus.
THough yt hath ben a painfull worke for me to gather so manie authours of the eldest Fathers of Chrystes Churche, vpon this one text of Chryst: yet yt comforteth me and releiueth me of my paines to see and beholde the mercie and goodnesse H of God towardes his Churche, who by his foreknoweledge foreseing that the childeren of Ismaell wolde persecute, and vexe the childeren [Page 208]of Sara and Isaac, did in time of peace prouide weapons, and in time of A plentie laied vppe store, that the children of Sara the children of the Church might haue plentie of weapons, and prouision to withstande the aduersaries and defende their mother.
In the time of peace as concerning the matter of the holy Sacrament, when no cōtrouersie was moued vppō yt, his holie Spiritt directed the pennes of a nombre of holie men then to write that, that nowe (as ye haue perceaued and yet more shall) defendeth the holie faith of Chryst and his spouse the Church. of the which ther yet remaineth one named Euthimius, a famouse man in the Greke Churche, who as he ys auncient, learned and holie: so ys his weapon verie sharpe against the Aduersarie, yt will in dede perce the false patched coate of Chrystes enemie in this matter of the Sacrament Euthym. in 26. Math. Thus he writteh: Sicut vetus testamentum hostias & sanguinem habebat: ita sanè & nouum, corpus videlicet et sanguinē Domini. Non dixit autem: Haec sunt signa corporis mei, & sanguinis mei: sed, Haec sunt corpus meum, & sanguis meus. Oportet ergo non ad naturam eorum quae proponuntur respicere, sed ad virtutem eorum. Quemadmodū B enim supernaturaliter assumptam carnem deificauit (si ita loqui liceat) ita & haec inessabiliter transmutat in ipsum vinificum corpus suum, & in gratiam ipsorum. Habent autem similitudmem quandam, panis ad corpus, & vinum ad sanguinem. Nam & panis & corpus terrea sunt: vinum autem & sanguis aerea sunt & calida. Et quemadmodum panis confortat: ita & Christi corpus hoc facit, ac magis etiam, corpus & animam sanctificat. Et sicut vinum Laetificat: ita & sanguis Christi hoc facit, & insuper praesidium efficitur. As the olde testament had sacrifices and blood: so trulie hath the newe testament also, that ys, the bodie and bloode of our Lorde. He did not saie: These be signes Plain sainges for the Proclamer of my bodie and bloode, but these thinges be my bodie and bloode. We must therfor not looke to the nature of those thinges that be settfurth but to the vertue of them. For as he did supernaturallie deifie (if a man maie so speake) the slesh that he tooke vpon him: Euen so doeth he vnspeakeablie transmute these thinges into the same his quickning bodie, and into his owne preciouse bloode, and into the grace of them. The bread hath a certain similitude to the bodie, and the wine to the bloode. For bothe the bread and the bodie be of the earth. But the wine and bloode be of the aier and hotte. And C as bread doeth comfort: so doeth the bodie of Chryst also, and moreouer also yt doeth sanctifie both bodie and soule. And as wine doeth make glad de: so doeth the blood of Chryst also, and aboue that yt ys made a defence. Thus farre Euthym.
I will not nowe trooble yowe with manie notes here, the authour ys so plain of himself that he neadeth not to be noted. And yet euery sentence ys woorthie to be noted. But for that that ys to the pourpose of our processe here, namelie for the hauing of the true vnderstanding of Chrystes woordes I can not passe, but wish thee (good reader) if thowe hauest noted yt, yet to turne backe and note yt again, that the wicked exposition of the Aduersarie ys by expresse and direct woordes denied and reiected. So sownd and good Figuratiue glose of the Sacramentaries flatlie demed. ys that doctrine that an holie father writing aboue a thousande yeares past by the computacion of some doeth flatlie denie yt. The Aduersarie confowndeth the text of Chryste, and saieth this ys a figure of my bodie: This learned Father expowndeth the woordes of Chyst, and saieth: Chryst saieth not these be signes of my bodie and bloode, but these be my bodie and blode. And to remoue all cauills D he doeth immediatelie shewe howe these thinges become his bodie ād blood. As Chryste (saieth this authour) did supernaturally deifie the flesh that he tooke vpon him: euen so vnspeakeablie doeth he transmute these thinges [Page]into his owne verie bodie, and into his owne verie preciouse boode. E
O mercifull God what ys the maliciouse blindnesse of these men, that see their doctrin confuted a thousand years agon, and yet arrogantlie persist in yt, and to the encrease of their damnacion, laboure to drawe manie soules with them to withstande so manifest a trueth. Yf the Proclamer will not Enthymius with a plain negatiue denieth the proclamers assirmatiut. saie that this ys a plain sentence, whiche by a plain negatiue denieth his affirmatiue, and teacheth that the sacrament ys not a signe or a figure of Chrystes bodie, but the bodie yt self, wher the Aduersarie saieth yt ys a figure and not the bodie: I can not but saie that his seight faileth him, being corrupted with a verie euell humoure, so that he can not iudge betwixt rough and plain, crooked and streight.
And here again consider that this holy father Euthymius writeth these wordes vpon the woordes of Chyrst, expownding them to geue vs the true mening, sense and vnderstanding of them. Wherfor we maie verie well conclude, that the woordes of Chryst are to be vnderstanded withoute figure or trope, accordinglie as this learned auncient hath taught. F
Perchaunche the Proclamer will saie that although this authour denieth a figure in Chrystes woordes: yet he doeth not as by him ys requested in his proclamacion, saie plainlie by expresse woordes that Chrystes naturall bodie ys in the Sacrament. To see the vanitie of this shift, let vs searche howe manie thinges be called Chrystes bodie, and by applicacion we shall perceaue, that yt can not otherwise be but that this authour speaketh of the naturall bodie of Chryst.
Ther be foure thinges that be called the bodie of Chryste: The figure, the Churche, the meritt, fruit, or vertue of his passion, and his bodie naturall.
- 1 The figure ys called the bodie of Chryst. For S. Augustine saith: that figures oftentimes haue the names of the thinges of the whiche they are figures, This maner of bodie ys not here to be vnderstanded, for yt ys by expresse woordes denied, of this authour.
- 2 Yt ys not the Churche, which S. Paule calleth the bodie of Chryst. For to all men yt ys euident, that the Sacrament ys not the Churche, other wise then bicause the Sacrament ys a figure of the Churche.
- 3 Yt ys not the spirituall bodie of Chryst, I meen the G meritte, vertue, and grace of Chrystes passion. For the bread and wine cannot be transmuted into yt, as the Aduersarie him self doth graunt.
- 4 Yt remaineth then that yt must nedes be spoken of the naturall bodie of Chryst. And wher of necessitie one thing must be vnderstanded, and none other can ther be vnderstanded, that place must nedes be called plain.
To be short, wher a thing ys spoken of and if yt can not be applied to the figure of the thing, yt must nedes be applied to the thing yt self, speciallie Plain tearmes for proof of reall presc̄ce. when the circumstance shall also fully prooue the same, as here yt doeth. For the transmutacion of the bread and wine into the thing, and these terms: his owne verie bodie, and his own verie bloode, with the comparisons of the propreties of the breade and wine to the propreties of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, maketh the matter so plain, that yt can not be but confessed so to be but as a man in a bringht Sunne shining daie will maliciouslie saie that the Sunne shineth nott.
But what doe I stande so long vpon so clere a place? Yt ys time that the other that shall declare the faith of the latin Churche be produced, who shall H be Isidore. This Isidore, although he be not with in six hondreth yeares of Jsidorus cō mended. Chryst: yet he ys verie neare, For he liued the yeare of our Lorde 626, I haue yet produced him to make vppe the coople with Euthymius, both that he [Page 209]ys the eldest of the latin Church of them that remain, and treact of the A woordes of Chryst, and also that he ys one that liued before anie controuersie Isydor. de offic. eccle. cap. 18. was risen in the matter of the holie Sacrament. Wherfore I might produce him as a sufficient and a meet wittnesse in this matter. this ys his testimonie. Sacrificium quod à Christianis Deo offertur primum Christus Deus noster & magister instituit, quando commendauit Apostolis corpus & sanguinem suum priusquam traderetur Chryst instituted the sacrifice of fred of the Chrystiās. sicut legiturin Euangelio: Accepit Iesus panem & calicem, & benedicens dedit eis. The sacrifice that ys offred of the chrystians vnto God, Chryst our Lorde and Master did first institute, when he gaue to his Apostles his bodie and bloode, before he shoulde be betraied, as yt ys redd in the gospell: Iesus tooke the bread and the cuppe, and blessing them gaue them vnto them. Thus Isidor.
In this breif saing of this authour ye learn not that Chryst gaue vnto his Apostles a figure of his bodie and bloode, but that he gaue them his bodie The blessing of Chryst of great force and power. and bloode. We be here also aduertised of the time, that yt was before he shoulde be betraied (as yt ys readde in the Gospell) whiche was in his last supper, at which time (as this authour maketh mencion) he tooke the bread and the cuppe, and blessing them, gaue them to this Disciples. Great B ys the prowe of the blessing of Chryst. And as the power ys great, so ys the Matth. 14 Ioan. 6. Matth. 15 effect answerablie great. He blessed the fiue loaues, ād two fishes and by that blessing they so multiplied as they fedde fiue thousande people. And when they were satisfied ther were gathered vppe twelue baskettes full of the fragmētes that they had lefte. He blessed vii loaues and a fewe fishes, and by the Effect of Chrystes blessing of the breade power of his blessing they were sufficient not onely to feede and satisfie foure thousande people, but also to fill seuen baskettes after they had doen. Great therfor, I saie, ys the power of Chrystes blessing. Wherfor taking in his last supper the breade and the cuppe and blessing them, he wrought ther by soche and so great an effect, the he saied: This ys my bodie: This ys my bloooe. This great effect ys aunswerable to so great a power. Yf by this blessing he had made the bread and wine onelie figures of his bodie and blode, and not his verie bodie and bloode, the effecte in respect had ben very small. For manie Ioan. 3. To saie Chryst made but a figure of hys bodie by blessing the bread ys a derogacion of his power and honour thinges were figures without the expresse blessing of God: The lambes the calues, the oxen that were slain in the lawe of Moyses. The brasen Serpent, as Chryst him self testifieth, was a figure of himself exalted vpon the C Crosse. And yet we read not that yt was blessed to be made a figure, yt ys therfor but a vain dreame of the aduersarie and an abasing of Goddes power, and a derogacion to his honour, to saie that Chryst blessing the breade and wine did no more but make thē figures of his bodie and bloode. Therfor acknowleadging the great power of Chrystes blessing with this holie Bishopp Isidore, let vs saie as he saieth, that Chryst gaue to his Apostles after he had blessed the bread and wine, not nowe bread and wine in substance, but the bodie and bloode of himself, according to the trueth of his owne saing: This ys my bloode. As who might saie, before I blessed yt, yt was bread Amb. li. 4 de Sac. c. 4 Ang. de verbis Do. serm. 28. Consent of doctrine among the holie and auncient sathers. and wine: but nowe that I haue blessed yt, and by my blessing chaunged yt nowe I saie to yowe: Take and eate: This ys my bodie: Take and drinke this ys my bloode.
This like maner of vnderstanding (as ys before declared) hath both S. Ambrose, and S. Augustin, when they saied: Non eraet corpus Christi ante consecrationem, sed post consecrationem dico tibi, quòd iam corpus est Christi. Yt was not the bodie of Chryst before the cosecracion: but after the consecracion, I sai to D thee, that nowe yt ys the bodie of Chryst.
Thus nowe ye see the consonant testimonie of this Father of the latin [Page]Church, with Euthymius of the greke Church, and of these twoo with all the rest, and of all among them selues, which all as yt were with one mouth, as E yt becometh soche auncient fathers, and noble men of Chrystes high Parliament house, and right scholers also of his blessed schoole, though they were in diuerse places, half of the greke Churche, and half of the latine Churche, and diuerse times, some in the verie beginning of the Churche, some two hundreth, some three hundreth, some foure hundreth years after other, and yet in faith and in agreement in the same, in the vnderstanding also of the woordes of Chrystes supper, they speake as they were but one mouthe, and in one time and place, all confessing vpon these woordes of Chryst the verie presence of his reall bodie, and not one confessing yt to be a figure, Tertullian onely excepted, who yet so doeth not after the maner of the Aduersaries doctrine, but after the maner of the catholique doctrine, which (as ther at large ys declared) teacheth that the Sacrament ys bothe the figure and the thing yt self.
Nowe therfore (Reader) seing thowe seest so great consent and agreement of so manie auncient learned Fathers, euen of the eldest of the Church of the whiche diuerse haue testified their faith by their bloodes, and be holie F Martirs of Chryst, diuerse holie confessours and sainctes in heauen, and all vertuouse and good, vpon whose authoritie, next vnto the scripturs, the Canons of the holie Apostles, and the holie generall Councells, the Church doeth fownde and buill their faith and religion in all poinctes of the same, honouring and reuerencing them, and submitting themselues to them and their iudgementes as children to fathers and scholers to masters: submitte also thy self to them, consent to them, agree with them, and beleue with thē, that thowe maist be saued with them. Remembre whether thowe be English Let all the Protestātes bring furth if they can, when anie contrie did whollie opē lie and quiethe professe soche religon as they nowe preache. man, or Frenche man, Germain, Flemming or Saxon. that when thie contrie first receaued Chryst, yt receaued this faith, in this yt hath continued, in this thy fathers were baptised, in this they liued, in this the most parte of them died, and in this, hope ys, that they be saued. Bringe furth yf thow can, yf euer (till nowe of late daies) thy contrie professed soche faith (yf yt maie be called faith) yf euer yt vsed soche maner of religion, yf euer they did so often chaunge their profession. Yf no soche president can be shewed, yf this waie be a waie G that thowe neuer sawest before, why wilt thowe vpon the phantasie of nouelties be caried awaie? Call to thy minde the good aduertisement of sainct Paule, who saieth: Be not caried awaie with diuerse and straunge doctrines. Forgett not that when Luther first began hys pestilent heresie, he acknowleged the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, so did his disciples Heb. 13 Diuersities of religiō in these daies howe they began. also, till within fewe daies hys Disciples Carolstadius, Zuinglius, and Oecolampadius, fell from him, and began a newe waie, and taught that Chrystes bodie was not in the Sacrament. Besides these, oute of Luther came the Anabaptistes, and a nombre moo of other sectes so that in diuerse contries, so manie free cities: so manie Dukedomes, so manie lordships, almost so manie faithes, or raither opinions, and so manie diuerse countenances of religions. In Englonde in the time of King Henrie the eight, ther began a newe countenance of religion: In the first yeare of the reign of Mutacions of religion in Englōd. his Sonne King Edwarde, an other countenance: within twoo yeares after ter euen in the time of the same king hys reign, an other countenaunce. H And that ys nowe in thys same Realme varieth from them all.
Perceaue then that the doctrines that be nowe settfurth by the Proclamer, [Page 210]as they be straung, so be they diuerse, so be they variable, so be they A chaungeable. The doctrine, that was before this kinde of people troubled the Church, was not diuerse but one, not straunge, but of auncient continuance, not causing warre, debate, tumultes, and insurrections in Realmes: diuisions, dissentions and contencions betwixt neighbours: But as touching religion great quietnesse, ioifull peace, and amiable concorde, not onely in Citties and townes: but also in all free cities, Lordshipps, Dukedomes and realmes of Europe. Remembre again that (as S. Paule saieth) God ys not the God 1. Cor. 14. of dissention but of peace. Wher then thow seist peace, thither diuerte, ther setle thy self: ther abyde: among these holie Fathers thow seist peace in this matter of the Sacrament: among the other, ther ys discord as thow hauest perceaued in the xli. chapiter of this booke, leaue the one and cleaue to the other, and the God of peace be withe thee.
THE NINE AND FIFTETH CHAPITER beginneth the exposition of the same text by the fathers of the later B daies, and first by Damascen, and Haymo.
I Haue hitherto vsed the testimonies of the auncientes and Fathers of Chrystes Churche, naming them noble men of the higher house of Chrystes Parliament, for that they be all within or verie neare sixt hundreth years of Chryst, whiche the Proclamer, can not refuse, except he will saie, as the great heresiark Luther Luthers prowde contempt of holie fathers. saied. Non curo mille Cyprianos, nec mille Augustmos: I care not for a thousand Cyprians, nor a thousand Augustines. By the testimonie of all whiche the woordes of Chryst are deliuered from the mystie and clowdie figures of the aduersaries and are placed and adourned with the auouching of the bright and clere presence of Chrystes blessed bodie and blood. And so ys the Proclamer plentifullie confuted by soche holie fathers as he himself can not refuse. And the faith of the catholique Church by the same ys as fullie mainteined and declared. C
And although the Proclamer by Luciferance pride, semeth (as yt ys in the english prouerbe) to correct magnificat, I meen, to correct the Church, and the faith of the same, and to be a iudge vpon all the learned men, that haue ben these nine hundreth years, and by his iudgement withoute anie sufficient Commission to condemne them, to deface them, and not to esteem their sainges, learning or authoritie, wherin he foloweth the Manichees and other, which for the mainteinaunce of their heresieswolde accept soche scriptures as they liked, and soche as they liked not they wolde refuse. Yet forasmoche as the Church hath allowed them, and their doctrine ys agreable to the elder Fathers: I will call a companie of them, both that their doctrine maie be conferred with the elders before alleadged, and so to be approued and also that by them we maie know the enacted trueth of the true vnderstanding of The Proclamer mocketh holie ād learned fathers. Chrystes woordes, in the lower house of Chrystes Parliament, wherby the Aduersarles heresie maie be more manifestlie confuted, and the faith of the good Chrystian more confirmed and staied. And although yt liked the Proclamer in his high pride to solace himself with the mocking of the learning D of Siluester, Isidore, Innocentius the thirde, Gerson, Durand, Holkot, S. Thomas, Dunce, Fisher, and other, and made their argumentes as foolishlie as he listed, therbie to commende himself and his doctrine to soche as were [Page]light, whiche yet was and ys discommendable to them that be graue, sobre, E and wise, yet in the ende ye shall see that these men shall confute him, and ouerthrowe him in the iudgement of them whome gods grace hath not A lamentable time to see preachers in pulpittes mocke Sainctes in heauen. forsaken. For who ys he that ys wise, and, as the wiseman saieth, hath his eies in his heade, that seith not to moche arrogancie in that man, that taketh vpon him in open audience to deride mocke and skorne holie auncient learned men? of which some of them be Sainctes in heauen, some of them liued with great fame of learning aboue a thousand yeares agon, some eight or nine hundreth years agon, some three hundreth years agon or ther aboute. All which are but babes and punies in his seight.
But I will not intermedle this worke of the heigh and great matter of the Sacrament, with soche vain toies of mockeries, but they shall be reserued to some other more meit place, as either to a Christenmasse skaffold, and so a plaier by a plaier, or ells to the Paruise in Oxforde, a paruise toie, by a paruise boie to be aunswered. Wherfore conuerting my self to the matter, I wil produce Damascen, as the first and eldest of this companie of the lower house, F whiche I haue selected and chosen among all other to expownde vnto vs Chrystes woordes. This Damascen although he be placed in the lower house, as in consideracion that the aduersarie doeth not accept or regarde hys authoritie: yet he liued more then eight hundreth yeares agon, and therfore ys woorthie to be hearde. Thus he writeth vpon the woordes of Chryst: Propositionis panis, vinum & aqua per inuocationem, & aduentum sancti Spiritus, supernaturaliter Damascen li. 4 ca. 14. transmutantur in corpus & sanguinem Christi, & non sunt duo, sed vnum, & idem. The shewe bread, the wine and the water by the innocacion and the coming of the holie Gost are supernaturallie transmuted into the bodie and bloode of Chryst, and they be not twoo, but one and the verie same.
And after a fewe woordes of exhortacion in the same matter, he saieth thus of the same breade and wine. Non est figura panis & vinum corporis Bread and wine not a sigure of the bodie and blood of Chryste & sanguinis Christi (absit enim hoc credere) sed ipsum corpus Domini deificatum, ipso dicente, Hoc est meum (non mei corporis figura) sed corpus, non figura sanguinis, sed sanguis. Et ante hoc, ipsis Iudaeis: Quoniam nisi manducaueritis carnem filij hominis, & G biberitis eius sanguinem, non habebitis vitam in vobis. Caro mea verè est cibus, & sanguis meus verè est potus. Proinde omni cum timore & conscientia pura, & indubitabili fide accedamus. The bread and wine ys not a figure of the bodie and blood of Chryst (God forbidde we shoulde beleue that) but yt ys the verie bodie of our Lorde deified, himself saing: This ys, not a figure of my bodie, but my bodie, not a figure of my bloode, but my bloode. And before this he saied to the Iewes, that except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his bloode, ye shall haue no life in yowe. My flesh ys verilie meat, and my bloode ys verilie drinke. Therfore with all feare and pure conscience, and vndoubted faith let vs come vnto yt.
In these fewe woordes of Damascen ye see foure thinges taught: The transubstanciacion: The presence of Chrystes verie bodie and bloode, with a plain deniall of the aduersaries figure: The applicacion of the sixt chap. of sainct Iohn to these woordes of Chryst: And finallie an exhortacion for owre due coming to the receipt of the same bodie and blode. Of transubstanciacōn we haue allreadie spoken, and that by the authoritie H also of this man amonge other Fathers. wherfore I will not tarie vpon yt, onely I wolde that the reader shoulde be aduertised, that though the Aduersarie doe so moche exclame against the thing: [Page 211]yet the learned Fathers according to the catholique faith of Chrystes A Church, doe plainlie and agreablie teache the same, and therfore, I wolde wish that by repeticion of the same, yt maie remain in memorie, wherbie, as meit yt ys, their authouritie declaring the trueth with great agreement and consent, maie be regarded and esteemed, and the arrogant falsheade of the Aduersarie teaching vntrueths and heresie, maie be vtterlie condemned and forsaken, and thus ouerpassing this matter as not principallie here sought, I will come to that, that ys here cheislie intended.
For the whiche I wish yt to be well noted, that this Authour expownding the woordes of Chryst: This ys my bodie (the seking of the exposition of Figuratine expositions of the Sacr. slatlie denied. whiche woordes ys our trauaill) doeth plainlie by expresse woordes denie, refuse and reiect, the fonde exposition of the Aduersarie, and teacheth that these woordes are to be vnderstanded in their propresense. And therfore saieth, that yt ys not a figure, mening that yt ys not a bare figure of a thing absent in substance, and onelie present in figure, but yt ys (saieth he) the verie bodie. And this ys not to be ouerpassed, that to this exposition he B addeth these woordes: God forbidde that anie man shoulde so beleue, whiche maner of woordes we vse in matters that be perilouse, daungerouse, and horrible, and matters to godwarde, wher the thing ys moche offending God, and prouoking his heauie displeasure, yre and indignaciō. Wherbie maie be perceaued the great daunger that ys ensewing to them that so beleue, and the great necessitie of the right beleif, that ys, to beleue that the Sacrament ys not a bare figure, but the verie bodie of Chryst.
Thus once again to aduertise yowe, ye see that wher the Aduersarie saieth, This ys my bodie, that ys (saieth he) a figure of my bodie: This learned authour saieth, God for bidde yowe should so beleue. Yt ys not (saieth he) a figure of the bodie of Chryst, but his bodie: not a figure of the blood of Chryst but his blood in deed. This exposition as yt ys dissonaunte and repugnaunte to the exposition of the Aduersaries: so ys yt consonaunte and agreable to the doctrine and exposition of the elders.
In the next chapter before this, yowe sawe the exposition of Euthymius vpō these woordes of Chryst, not vnlike vnto this, but altogether like Euth. in 26. Matt. Doctrine of the Sacramentarie contrarie to the sathers. C bothe in woordes and sentence, yt ys not (saieth he) a figure of Chrystes bodie, but his bodie, not a figure of hys bloode, but his bloode. Wherfore Reader, when thowe seeist the authours agree, and agreyng saie the contrarie of that, that the Aduersarie teacheth, thowe maist be well adsured, that the doctrine of the Aduersarie ys false. Wherfore seing yt plain before thine eyes, flee the falhead, and cleaue to the trueth.
The third note also maketh for the declaracion of this matter that he alleaging the sixt of sainct Iohn, referreth yt to the Sacrament in the same sense that he vnderstoode Chrystes other woordes, which ys, as Theophilact also vpon the same sixt of sainct Iohn saieth, Non figura carnis, sed caro med est. Not a figure of my flesh but yt ys my flesh. So that by these authours the sixt of S. Iohn perteineth to the Sacrament, notwithstanding the contrarie saing of Luther and Oecolampadius, and other of that rable. In which chapter ys promised the geuing not of a figure of his flesh, but his verie flesh, And as yt was ther promised verilie to be geuen: so was the same to the accomplishment of D the same promesse in verie dede deliuered and receaued, euen the verie flesh and verie blood of Iesus Chryst, and not the onelie figure of them.
[Page]The fourte note also, whiche ys for the due receauing of the Sacrament, geueth also light to the vnderstanding of the presence of Chrystes E verie bodie in the Sacrament. But for that the conuenient place to speake of this matter ys in the thirde booke, we shall not here trooble the reader with all.
We haue nowe seen a goodlie, and an euident testimonie testifieng howe Chrystes woordes were vnderstanded in the greke Church: we will likewise heare one that shall declare the vnderstanding of them in the latin Church. Who shall be Haymo, who vpon these woordes of Chryst writeth thus: Expletis solemnijs veteris Paschae, transit Dominus ad sacramenta noui Paschae demonstranda, Haymo in 26. Matth Postquam coenauit dedit eis panem, & vinum in mysterio videlicet corporis, & sanguinis sui: Quia enim panis cor hominis confirmat, & vinum anget sanguinem in homine, meritò idem panis in carnem Domini mutatur, & idem vinum in sanguinem Domini transfertur, non per figuram, neque per vmbram, sed per veritatem. Credimus enim quia in veritate caro est Christi, similiter & sanguis. The Solemnities of the olde passeouer being fullfilled, our Lord goeth to shewe the sacramentes of the newe Passouer. After he had supped he gaue them breade and wine in mysterie, Breadchaū ged into the bodie, and wine into the blood of Chryst not in figur but in trueth. that ys of his bodie and bloode. Bicause bread doeth make strong the F heart of man, and wine encreaseth blood in man, therfor the same bread ys verie well chaunged into the flesh of Chryst, and the same wine ys transferred into the blood of our Lorde, not by figure, nor by shadowe, but by trueth. For we beleue that in verie dede yt ys the flesh of Christe, and likewise that yt ys hys bloode. Thus moch Haymo.
Yowe see nowe here in the latin Church, also a goodlie testimonie, and a clere exposition of Chrystes woordes, so clere and plain, that I shall not nede to trauaill to open the same, but onely I haue thought good to note to thee, Reader, the goodlie order that this authour obserueth in his exposition. First he ioneth our newe Passouer to the olde, as the verie trueth to the figure, whiche being in place the figure vanisheth awaie. Wherbie yt ys consequent, that yf the Passouer whiche Chryst did institute were the trueth, whiche the olde passouer did prefigurate, that the newe Passeouer was a true thing in dede, and not a bare figure. For otherwise shoulde the figure be the figure of a figure, and not of a trueth, which ys against the nature of a figure. G
And when he had thus ioined the trueth to the figure, he declareth whē yt was doen, saing that after he had supped he gaue them bread and wine in the mysterie of his bodie and bloode. Then proceading he geueth a cause whie Chryst vsed bread and wine in this mysterie of his bodie and blood bicause (saieth he) the materiall bread comforteth the heart, and the materiall wine encreaseth the blood, therfor to signifie that as these twoo things doe A chaunge in the Sacr. in trueth not in figure. woorke ther effectes in our material bodies: so thy being transmuted and chaunged into heauenlie bread and wine of Chrystes bodie and blood the bread of the life, they woorke the like effect spirituallie in our soules. And forasmoche as he had saied that the bread and wine be turned and chaunged into the bodie and bloode of Chryst, he immediatelie teacheth howe yt ys chaunged. They are chaunged (saieth he) not by figure, nor by shadowe, sed per veritatem, but in verie dede, whiche ys asmoche to saie, as yt ys chaunged or turned into the verie flesh and blood of Chryst in verie dede, and not into a bare Sacramentall bread as the Aduersarie tearmeth ys. H
Now as I haue doen with Damascē, so will I with this authour first cōferr this dictrine with the doctrine of the elders to see howe they agree, and [Page 212]after, the doctrine of the aduersarie, both that yt maie appeare which of thē A best agree with the auncient Churhe, and whether ther be anie iust cause why the Aduersarie shoulde reiect this authour or his likes. This authour Greg. Nissen. serm. cathec. de diuinis Sacramen. saieth that the bread ys chaunged into the bodie of our Lorde, and the wine into his bloode, doeth not among the elders, the great elder Gregorie Nissen vse the like woordes? Quamobrem (saieth he) rectè nunc etiam Dei verbo sanctificatum panem, in Dei Verbi corpus credimus immutari. Wherfor we doe nowe also verie well beleue the bread that ys sanctified by the woorde of God, to be chaunged into the bodie of the sonne of God.
See ye not then that the doctrine which Haymo here teacheth of the transmutacion, chaunging, or turning of the bread into the bodie of Chryst Trāsubstā ciacōn, that ys, chaunge of bread ād wine into the bodie and bloode of Chryst, a matter of faith. which nowe the Church tearmeth, Transubstantiacion, ys an auncient doctrine and if yowe will conferre them diligentlie, ye shall haue occasion to thinke that this authour Haymo did in this matter folowe Gregorie Nissen, their sainges be so like. For as Gregorie maketh this matter of the chaunging of the bread into the bodie of Chryst no matter of doubte, or an opinion, but a sure and certen matter of faith and beleif. for he saieth, Credimus immutari, we B beleue yt to be chaunged into the bodie of our lorde: so Haymo, when he had saied that the bread ys chaunged into the flesh of Chryst, and the wine into his bloode, saieth, Credimus quia in veritate caro est Christi, similiter & sanguis, we beleue that in verie dede yt ys the flesh of Chryst, and likewise his blode. So that ye maie perceaue not onely a concorde and consent of doctrine betwixt them, but also an imitacion.
And here I wish these wooordes well to be noted, that the vnstablenesse Faith howe yt ys decaied in these daies. of men in their faith might be takē awaie. For the more ys the pitie, so moch hath the Deuell gotten by the worke of his ministres, that diuerse men in these daies be not ashamed to saie, we can not tell what to beleue. Other some will saie, I will beleue none of them all, vntill they agree better. as though yt were sufficient for them to liue withoute faith, and that they might be saued, without the profession of their faith, forgetting the saing of S. Paule: Sine fide imposibile est placere Deo. withoute faith yt ys not possible to please God. And again: Corde creditur ad iusticiam, ore autem confessio fit ad salutem. The hearte beleueth vnto righteousnes, but the confession of faith by Hebr. 11. Rom. 10. C mouthe ys doen to saluacion. Let them vnderstande that this time ys a time of probacion, a time of triall, who will abide by their faith and who will be caried awaie from yt. But although yowr teachers in this time saie: Non credimus immutari, This time a time of probacion. we beleue not the bread and wine by the woorde of God to be chaunged into the bodie and bloode of Chryste, yet turne yowr eies to the olde auncient churche, haue yowe recourse thither, and see Gregorie Nis sen and after him Haymo saing: Credimus immutari, We beleue that the bread and wine be chaunged into the bodie and bloode of Chryst, and they be nowe in verie dede the flesh of Chryst, and likewise his bloode. and so abide in the faith of the auncient churche, what soeuer ys nowe taught yowe to the contrarie.
By this conference ye maie perceaue, that Haymo agreeth with the auncient elders, as concerning the chaunging of the bread and wine into the Sacramentaries denie that the fathers affirme and affirme that they denie. bodie and bloode of Chryst. Yf ye will conferre him in that he saieth, that this chaunge ys not doen by figure, or shaddow, but in verie dede: yowe haue Euthymius and Damascen at hand, which both denie the Sacrament to be D onely a figure. Yf ye will conferre the doctrine of the Aduersarie to the do-doctrine of these Fathers ye shall perceaue that what the Fathers affirme, [Page]the Aduersarie denieth, and what the Fathers denie, the Aduersarie affirmeth. The holie Fathers affirme that the bread and wine be chaunged. the E Aduersarie denieth yt. The holie Fathers denie that the Sacrament ys onlie a figure, the Aduersarie saieth that yt ys a figure onely. See yowe not then that the Aduersarie ys directlie contrarie to the holie Fathers? What hope of true learning then ys ther to be had, wher and of whome the fathers of trueth are denied, contraried and against saied.
But to conclude for the matter that ys here sought, this authour speaking these woordes as an exposition vpon the woordes of Chryst and teaching vs, that the bread and wine be chaunged into the bodie and bloode of Cryste, and that by no figure, nor shadowe, but in verie dede, yt ys manifest that these woordes of Chryste, be to be vnderstanded withoute figure, and that they teache vs that in the Sacramēt ys the verie bodie, and the verie bloode of Chryste in verie dede. Wherfor leauing this as a most plain matter, we will call an other coople.
THE SIXTETH CHAP. PROCEADETP IN the exposition of the same text by Theophilact, F and Paschasius.
OF this coople that shall nowe geue ther testimonie for the true vnderstanding of Chrystes woords, Theophilact, as he ys the seniour so shall he be the first that geueth testimonie Expownding the woordes Theoph. in 26. Math. of Chryst, thus he writeth vpō the same woords: Dicens: Hoc est corpus meum, ostendit quod ipsum corpus Domini est panis, qui sanctificatur in altari & non respondens figura. Non enim dixit. Hoc est figura, sed hoc est corpus meum. Ineffabili enim operationc transformatur, etiāsi nobis videatur panis. Quonia infirmi, sumus & abhoremus The bread sanctified on the aultar ys the verie bodie of Chrystād not onelie a figure. crudas carnes comedere, maximè hominis carnem, ideo panis quidem apparet, sed caro est. Saing: This ys my bodie, he doeth declare that the bread which ys sanctified in the aultar ys the verie boodie of our Lorde, and not a figure answering to yt. For he did not saie, This ys a figure of my bodie: but this ys my bodie, For yt ys transformed by an vnspeakeable operacion, although yt appeare bread. For asmoche as we be weake, and doe abhorre to eate rawe flesh speciallie the flesh of a man, therfor yt appeareth bread, but yt ys flesh. G Thus Theophilct.
As they that be obstinate in this heresie against the blessed Sacrament when they reade this exposition, their consciences be, I dare saie, touched Foure thinges plainlie auouched by Theoph. against the Sacram. and pressed with the same to their great greif: euen so doe I merueill that they be so solde ouer to voluntarie and maliciouse blindenesse in heresie, that seing not onelie the true faith and exposition taught so clerelie and euidentlie, that they be not able with any good apparant answere to auoide, will yet stubburnlie to their greuouse damnacion, persist and abide still in their heresie. But let vs veiue the saing of Theophilact. In him we finde these foure thinges taught: First the presence of Chrystes verie bodie in the Sacrament. For he saieth that the bread that ys sanctified in the aultar, ys the very 1. Reall presence affirmed. bodie of our Lorde.
The second ys a flatt and a plain deniall of the figuratiue speache, that the Aduersarie wolde haue in the woordes of Chryste. For this authour saieth 2. Figure denied. that Chryst did not saie: This ys a figure of my bodie: but my bodie. and so H the figure ys denied, that so stoutlie and with violence shoulde be here thrust in.
[Page 213]Thirdelie here ys taught howe the sanctified breade ys made the body A of Chryst: yt ys transformed (saieth he) by an ineffable operacion, although Trāsubstā tiacion anouched. yt appeare bread vnto vs. In these fewe woordes he teacheth vs three thinges: first that the bread ys trasformed, whiche ys all one as if he had saied transubstanciated. for in the bread ther be two formes, the in warde forme, and the outwarde forme. Nowe this authour saieth that the outwarde forme of bread remaineth still. For he saieth that yt appeareth vnto vs as bread. Yt ys consequent then that seing here ys a transformacion, which ys a chaunge of a forme, that the inwarde forme of breade ys chaunged. The inward forme of the bread ys the substance of yt ( Substantia and forma being all one) wherfor he saing that yt ys transformed, saieth that the Church saieth, that yt ys transubstanciated. The secōd that he teacheth The work of the Sacr. ys miraculouse. ys that transformacion or transubstanciacion ys doen, ineffabili operatione with an vnspeakable maner of woorking, by which he doeth both teach that this chaunge of the bread into the bodie of Chryst ys against Oecolampadius, a woonderfull and a miraculouse worke, so miraculouse that though we beleue B yt to be doen, yet not being able to comprehende yt, how yt ys doen, we are not able to saie how yt ys doen, ād therfor vnspeakable. For nothing can well be spoken that ys not knowen: and also that this chaunge against the Aduersarie ys not a sacramentall chaunge, for that trāsformaciō or chaū geys not vnspeakable. For we both comprehende the doing of yt, and we are also able to speake yt, and therfor not vnspeakeable. And if then this trāsformacion be vnspeakeable, yt ys a moche greater and higher chaunge, then to chaunge the vse of a peice of common breade, to the vse of Sacramentall bread.
The fourth that ys here taught, ys why the bread being transformed, yt Forme of bread why yt remaineth. doeth yet still appeare breade, as though yt were still bread in substance. yt ys (saieth the authour) bicause we are weake, and doe abhorre to eate rawe flesh, cheislie of a man, therfor yt appeareth bread. So that by this we are warned of the great goodnesse of God and mercie towardes vs, in that he so mercifullie considereth our weake state and condescendeth to oure infirmitie, and yet as touching the Sacrament, though for gods mercifull C consideracions yt appeareth breade, yt in verie dede (as this authour saieth) yt ys slesh.
Nowe to kepe our order, for that Theophilact ys of the lower house, and with in the compasse of the time, that the Aduersarie prescribeth against, Let vs also conferre his doctrine with the doctrine of the Fathers, whiche ca. 55. be of the higher house to make proofihowe they agree. Wher he saieth that ca. 57. the bread which ys sanctified in the aultar ys not a figure, but the verie bodie of Chryst, although the Aduersarie him self maie confesse that Chrysostom, by that that ys alleaged oute of him in this booke and in manie other places, doeth likewise plainlie and fullie confesse the same presence of Chryste in Cyrill. ad Calosir. the Sacramunt: yet that I maie he short and with one authour shewe yowe all that Theophilact saieth, I wil conferrehim with S. Cytill. whom ye hear de but late alleaged, who vseth almost the lame woords that S. Cyrill did, so near that in this place I maie raither call him the imitatour of Cyrill, then of Chrysostom. Thus ye haue him ther alleaged: Ne horreremus carnem & Janguinem apposita sacris altaribus, cōdescendens Deus nostris fragilitatibus, insluit oblatis vim D vitae, conuertens ea in veritatem propriae carnis. That we shoulde not adhorre flesh sett vpon the holie aultars, God cōdescending to our fragilities powreth into the thinges offred the powre of life, turning thē into his verie owne flesh. Thus Cyrill.
[Page]Nowe if yowe wil conferre them, wher Theophilact saieth that the bodie E of Chryst ys in the altar, Cyrill saieth that flesh and bloode ys on the holie Theophilact, and S. Cyrill, compared in their doctrine of the Sacr. altars. wher Theophilast saieth that the bread ys transformed by the vnspeakea ble worke of God: Cyrill saieth that God turneth yt into his verie owne flesh. Theophilact saieth that bicause we are weake, God considering our weaknesse sussreth the outwarde formes of breade to remain: Cyrill saieth that leest we shoulde abhorre flesh and blod vpon the holie aultars, he put into the bread and wine which be the thinges offred. the power of life, whiche ys the flesh of Chryste, whiche he calleth the flesh that hath power to geue life. Thus ye see a goodlie agrement, be twixt Theophilact and Cyrill. Soche was the constāt faith of this learned authour that not onelie vpon the sixt of S. Iohn, and the x x v i of S. Matthewe, as ye haue nowe hearde, he doeth teache the presence, and denie the Sacrament to be a figure, and cōfesseth the transformacion of the bread into the flesh of Chryst, but also he doeth the like vpon S. Marke, Whose saing I will asscribe, not onelie for that yt maketh for the matter of the Sacrament as the other doe: but also that soche cauill as the F Aduersarie wolde make ther vpon maie be remoued. Thus he writeth ther. Quum benedixisset, hoc est gracias egisset, fregit panem, id quod etiam nos facimus preces Theophil. in 14. Matth. adiungendo, Hoc est corpus meum, hoc (inquam) quod sumitis. Non enim figura tantùm & exemplar Dominici corporis panis est, sed in ipsum cōuertitur corpus Christi, Dominus enim dieit: Panis, quem ego dabo, caro mea est, non dixit figura carnis mea est, sed caro mea est. Et iterum: Nisi ederitis carnemfilii hominis. Et quomodò (inquis) caro non videtur? O honio, propter nostram infirmitatem istud fit, quia enim panis & vinum ex iis sunt quibus assueuinius, ea non abhorremus. Idcirco misericors Deus nostrae infirmitati condescendens speciem quidem panis & vini seruat, in virtutem autem carnis & sanguinis transelementar. When he had blessed, that ys, when he had geuen thankes, he brake the breade, whiche thing also we doe, adioining praiers: This ys my bodie, this I saie, that yowe receaue. For the breade ys not onelie a figure and Figure of of the Sacr. slatlie deuied. an exemplar of owre Lordes bodie, but yt ys turned into the verie bodie of Chryste. For our Lode saied: The bread that I will geue yowe ys my flesh. He did not saie, yt ys a figure of my flesh, but yt ys my flesh. And again except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man &c. But thowe saiest, howe ys not the G flesh seen? O man, this ys doen for our weaknesse. For bicause bread and wine be of these thinges whiche we be accustomed vnto, we doe not adhorre them, therfor oure mercifull God condescending to our weaknesse, he kepeth the forme of bread and wine, but he doeth transelementate them into the vertue of his flesh and bloode. Thus Theoph.
Yt were superfluouse, to make anie notes vpon this place, sith euerie parte ys so plain, and therwith so like the other before alleaged, that what ys saied ther, maie be applied to this, and soche notes as be ther maie be referred also to this. Onelie I shall remoue the cauill of the Aduersarie, whiche Cauille of the Sacramentaries vpon the woord (vertue) he wolde grownde vpon these woordes of Theophilact, wher he saieth, that God trāselementated the bread ād wine into the vertue of his flesh ād bloode. By this sentence, and speciallie by this woorde (vertue) wolde the Ad uersarie wrest all the sainges of this Authour, that wher he saieth, that God transmuteth, transformeth, turneth or chaungeth the bread and wine into his flesh and bloode, they are (saieth the Aduersarie) to be vnderstanded of the vertue of his flesh and bloode, and not of the flesh and bloode them selues. H Oecol. de verb. coena Dom. For this ys his saing: Panem & vinum conuertuntur dignè comedentibus non in corporalem presentiam, sed in virtutem carnis & sanguinis Christi. The bread and wine are turned, to them that woorthilie eate, not into the corporall presence, but [Page 214]into the vertue of the flesh and bloode of Chryste. A
Let vs nowe weigh this their violent exposition. They saie that the bread and wine be turned into the vertue of the flesh and bloode of Chryste. yt Sacramētaries teache cōtrarie to their owne rules. ys a pretensed rule among them, that nothing maie be taught withoute scriptures. What scripture haue they to proue this their saing? Wher finde they in all the scripture that the bread ys turned into the vertue of Chrystes flesh? Certen I am, they haue no one title. and yet they teache nothing, they saie, but the sincere woorde of God. but vnder soche coolour of sinceritie they vtter manie vntrueths, as we shall prooue this to be one. First their owne doctrine ys (as before ys saied) that these dumbe and insensate creatures are not partakers of sanctificacion or holinesse. But the vertue of Chrystes flesh ys not onelie an holie thing, but also the cause of sanctificacion and holinesse. wherfor bread and wine being insensate creatures, are not partakers of yt muche lesse can they be turned into yt.
To prooue this we will open someparte of the vertue of Chrystes flesh. for yt ys great and large, and hath manie partes, But the bread and wine cā Vertue▪ of Chrysts flesh be turned into none of them. The vertue of Chrystes slesh ys to vnite vs to B the same his flesh, as S. Hilarie saieth. The vertue of the same flesh ys to make Chryst naturallie to abide in vs, as he also saieth. The vertue of the same flesh Hilar. li. 8. de Irini. maketh vs membres of Chrystes bodie, as saieth Irenaeus. The vertue of the same flesh, which ys quickning and making to liue, or geuing power of life, maketh our flesh after the resurrectiō to liue euerlastinglie, as saieth S. Cyrill. Iren. li. 5. aduers heres. Chrysostom rehersing the vertues of Chrystes bloode, amonge a great nombre, which were to long to reherse, saieth thus: Hic sanguis facit vt imago in nobis regia sloreat: hic animarum nostrarum salus: hoc lauatur, hoc ornatnr, hoc incenditur, hic igne clariorem mentem nostram reddit, & auro splendidiorem. This bloode causeth Cyrill in 15. Ioan. the Kinges ymage to florish in vs: this bloode ys the saluacion of our soules, with this she ys wasshed, with this she ys beautified: with this she ys enkindled: Chriso. hō. 45 in Ioan. this bloode maketh our minde more clear, and more glistering then golde. To be shorte the vertue of the flesh and bloode of Chryste ys our redemption, iustificacion, and saluacion. Be the bread and wine turned into these vertues, or into anie one of thē? yf the breade and wine can receaue no holinesse, can they receaue these vertues? C
As by this ye maie perceaue that their doctrine ys neither consonant and agreeable within yt self, nor yet sownde and good: so shall yt be made plain Sacramentaries doctrine conferred with Theophilact. to yowe that yt will not agree with Theophilact. whom they labour to wrest. They saie that the bread and wine be turned into the vertue of Chrystes flesh and blood, and not into the flesh and blood yt self: yf the bread be turned into the vertue, and not into the flesh, then standeth this proposicion of theirs, that the bread and wine be still but figures. But howe standeth that their saing with the sainge of Theophilact, who by expresse woordes saieth: Non est figura. Yt ys not a figure? Again, saing that the bread ys not turned into the flesh: howe agree they with Theophilacte, who saieth also by expresse woordes: Panis conuertitur in ipsum corpus Christi. The bread ys turned into the verie bodie of Chryste. or into the bodie of Chryst yt self? Whiche woordes haue great force, and limite this turning of the breade solie and onelie into the flesh of Chryste. I meen wholl Chryste him self, and no other thing for him. Again, yf the breade be not turned into the flesh of Chryst, howe agreeth yt, with that Theophilacte saieth, that although yt appeare bread: yet D yt ys flesh?
Tus then ys maie perceaue that this Authour by expresse woordes denied [Page]the breade to be a figure, and also affirmed the same bread to be turned into the bodie of Chryst yt self, and that the Sacrament ys flesh, though yt appeare E breade. What impudencie than, What shamelesnes ys ther in these men, that after so plain and manifest asseueracion of the turning of the bread, and wine into the bodie and bloode of Chryst, made by this authour not in one place as a thing vnaduisedly spoken, or sodenlie fallen from him, but with good deliberacion both vpon S. Matthew, and vpon the sixt chap. of S. Iohn, and ther also more then once, and here likewise vpon S. Marke, denieth the figure, and affirmeth the turning of the bread to be into the verie bodie of Chryst. yet nowe they wolde vpon one woorde drawe him violentlie to theeir wicked pourpose, and make him (as yt werewith one breath) to saie yea and naie to one thing, and in one sentence to denie and again to affirme the same.
But that we maie once ende this matter, and let yowe perceaue the true vnderstanding of this woorde of Theophilact. which the Aduersarie abuseth: ye shall vnderstand that the woorde (Vertue) in that place ys taken for the flesh of Chryst, and not for the vertue as diuided from the flesh of Chryst. Which thing first the processe of Theophilact doeth well prooue, and among F other this that he saieth, that although yt appeare bread: yet yt ys slesh. which maner of speach prooueth inuinciblie the presence of Chrystes flesh. which presence ys no otherwise there but by turning of the substance of bread into yt.
Besides this the holie doctours vse this woorde ( Virtus, vertue) and this Vertue and power takē for the flesh of Chryste Tractatu 26. in Joan. woorde (Vis power) for the flesh of Chryst in the Sacrament. As for the first yt appeareth in S. Augustin, and the other in Cyrill. S. Augustyn saieth thus: Aliud est sacramentum, aliud virtus sacramenti, quam multi de altari accipiunt, & moriuntur, & accipiendo moriuntur. The Sacrament ys one thing: the vertue of the Sacrament ys an other which vertue manie doe receaue from the aultar and doe die, and in receauing doe die. By the death that S. Augustine here speaketh of he meneth dānacion euerlasting. For immediatelie he saieth: vnde dicit Apostolus: Iudicium sibi manducat & bibit. Wherfore the Apostle saieth: he eateth and drinketh his owne damnacion.
In which his woordes this partickle (the Vertue of the Sacrament) ys not taken for the vertue of Chrystes flesh as distincted and diuided from the flesh of G Chryst, but yt ys taken for the verie flesh of Chryst yt felf, which we knowe and beleue allwaies to be full of vertue whersoeuer yt be. Yf the Aduersarie will take here the woorde (Vertue) in S. Augustine, as not signifieng the flesh of Chryst, but onelie the merittes and benefittes of Chrystes flesh, which be grace, remission of sinnes, iustificacion and saluacion, then yt shall folowe that a man maie at one time receaue grace and displeasure, iustificacion and condemnacion. saluacion and damnacion. For S. Augustine saieth: that manie in receauing the vertue of the Sacrament doe die. that ys be damned. Nowe if in receauing the vertue of Chrystes flesh, which ys saluacion they also receaue death which ys damnacion, then they receaue at one time both saluacion and damnacion, which ys vnpossible. Wherfor (Vertue) in this place neither ys nor can be taken as the aduersarie wolde haue yt, but for the flesh of Chryst, whiche being vnwoorthilie taken and receaued causeth in dede damnacion, as the text of S. Paule by S. Augustin alleaged doth teache. of the which we shall treact more at large in his owne place in the thirde H booke.
The other also vsed by S. Cyrill signifieth not the power of life, as separated [Page 215]from the flesh of Chryst, whiche ys (as S. Cyril saieth) Caro vitae, the flesh A of life: and Corpus vitae, the bodie of life: but yt signifieth that liuelie flesh yt self. For when sainct Cyrill (as a litle before ye haue heard) had saied that God powreth into the offred thinges (mening the bread and wine) the power of life, howe that ys doen, or what he meneth by that, he immediatelie declareth saing: turning those thinges into his owne verie slesh and bloode: As who might haue saied: He powreth into the offred thinges the power of life, whē he turneth them into his owne flesh and bloode.
Thus trusting that Theophilact ys fullie deliuered from the wresting of the the Aduersarie, and that the falhead of the same Aduersarie, ys here detected Plain places of Paschasius against the Sacramentaries. and the catholique trueth opened and defended: I will ende with him, and call in Paschasius, who ys of the other side of Chrystes Parliament house, who will verie aptelie come in this place to aunswer the Aduersarie, who wolde in steade of Chrystes bodie place the vertue of his bodie. For he vpon Chrystes woordes saieth thus: Coenantibus autem illis, accepit Iesus panem, benedixit ac fregit, deditue Discipulis suis & ait: Accipite & comedite, Hoc est corpus meum. Audiant B qui volunt extenuare hoc verbum (corpus) quòd non sit vera caro Christi, quae nunc in sacramento celebratur in Ecclesia Christi, neque verus eius sanguis. When they were at Paschasiut li. de corp. et sang. Dom. supper Iesus tooke bread, he blessed yt and brake yt, and gaue yt to his Disciples and saied: Take and eate, this ys my bodie. Let them heare that will extenuate or abase this worde (bodie) that yt ys not the verie flesh of Chryst, that ys nowe celebrated in the Sacrament in the Church of Chryst, neither that yt ys verie bloode,
And a litle before he saieth vpon the same text: Nec ita dixit, cùm fregit & dedit eis panem: Haec est, vel in hoc mysterio est quaedam virtus, vel figura corporis mei, sed ait non fitè: Hoc est corpus meum. Et ideo hoc est, quod dixit, & non quod quisque fingit. Neither did he saie, when he brake the bread, and gaue yt them: This ys, or in this mysterie ys a certain vertue or figure of my bodie: but he saieth plainlie, This ys my bodie. And therfore yt ys yt, that he saied, and not that that euery man feigneth.
And yet again after a fewe lines he saieth: Vnde miror quid velint nunc quidam dicere non in re esse veritatem carnis Christi & sanguinis, sed in sacramento, C virtutem quandam carnis, & non carnem: virtutem sanguinis, & non sanguinem: figuram, & non veritatem: vmbram, & non corpus. Wherfore I woonder what some men doe meen to saie that ther ys not in dede the veritie of the flesh and bloode of Chryste: but in the Sacrament, to be a certain vertue of the flesh and not the flesh, the vertue of the bloode and not the bloode, a figure and not the veritie, a shadowe and not the bodie.
What shall I trooble the reader with doing of that, that ys allreadie doen? As Euthymius, Damascen, Haymo, and Theophilact, doe auouche the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, and as yowe haue hearde them denie the Sacrament to be onelie a figure: so doth this authour agree with them, and denieng with them the Sacrament to be a figure, shadowe or vertue or Chrystes bodie, teacheth as they doe, the verie presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, and that by vertue of Chrystes woordes, Paschas. ibid. who saied (This ys my bodie) Wherupon again he saieth: Hoc est corpus meum, & non aliud quàm quod pro vobis tradetur. Et cùm calicem porrigeret: Hic est (inquit) D calix noui Testamenti, qui pro vobis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum. Nec dum itaque erat fusus, & tamen ipse porrigitur in calice sanguis, qui fundendus erat. Erat quidem iam in calice, qui adhuc tamen fundendus erat in precium. [Page] Et ideo ipse idemue sanguis iam erat in calice, qui & in corpore, sicut & caro, vel corpus E in pane. This ys my bodie, and none other but euen the same that shall be deliuered for yowe. And when he gaue them the cuppe, he saied: This ys the cuppe of the newe Testament, whiche shall be shed for yowe in the remission of sinnes. Yt was not yet shed, and yet the same bloode was geuen in the cuppe, that was to be The same blood in the cuppe, that was to be shedd. shed. Yt was trulie nowe in the cuppe, that was to be shed in redemption. And therfore euen the verie same blood was nowe in the cuppe, that was in the bodie, euen as yt was the same flesh or bodie that was vnder the bread. Thus farre Paschasius.
As this authour agreeth with other aboue named, for that he ther saied: so for this that he here saieth he agreeth with sainct Augustine. For as this man saieth that the bodie and blood, which was geuen to the Apostles, was euen the same that was to be deliuered to death, and to be shed for the remission of sinne, and so all one with his owne bodie sitting among them in visible forme: so (as ye haue heard) sainct Augustine saied, that Chryst caried himself in his owne handes, when he gaue furth his bodie to his disciples, F and saied, Take eate, this ys my bodie. And so the bodie that did carie, and the Aug in Psal. 33. conc. 1. bodie that was caried, was all one bodie of Chryste. So nowe to conclude, yt ys manifest, that as sainct Augustine in that place taught the verie presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, and the woordes of Chryste to be vnderstanded withoute figure in their propre sense: so doth this authour also. Wherfor this being plain I ende, and go to an other coople.
THE ONE AND SIXTETH CHAP. CONTInueth the exposition of the same woordes by Oecumenius, and Anselmus.
NOwe of the lower house we haue hearde two cooples, whiche although they be so placed, yet are they both of good antiquitie (the yongest of them, which ys Paschasius, being almost seuen hundreth yeares agon) and also soche as aught to be receaued for that they G were a good time before Berengarius began the controuersie of the blessed Sacrament. These that folowe be soche as were after the controuersie was moued by Berengarius: yet soche as haue ben in estimacion, price and reuerence both in the greke Church and in the latin Churche, and soche, whose doctrine the Churche hath approued, and receaued. Wherfore reason and good order wold (notwithstanding the arrogancie of the Aduersaries, who haue appointed them selues iudges vpon the Churche, to which they aught to be subiectes, and so refuse soche as they list) that they that loue the Church of Chryst, and wish to be, or be membres of the same, shoulde accept, whome the Church accepteth, and approue, whom the Churche approoueth, The testimonie then of these we will heare, that to the confutaciō of the enemie, yt maie appeare that they are vniustlie reiected of thē, whē they teache as the fathers doe. And therwithall we shall see the trueth of the Sacrament setfurth and commended vnto vs, to the great comfort (I trust) of soche as loue the catholique faith, and the honoure of that blessed Sacrament. Oecum in [...] Prim. Corr. H
Among these therfore that yet remain, Oecumenius, one of the greke church, who ys accompted to haue liued aboute foure hondreth and seuentie years agon, writeth thus vpon Chrystes woordes: Erant quoque in veters testamento pocula [Page 216] in quibus libabant vbi etiam, postquàm victimas immolassent, sangulnem irrationabilium A excipientes poculis libabant. Pro sanguine igitur irrationabilium, Dommus proprium Our Lorde geueth his owne blood in a cuppe. sanguinem dat, & bene in poculo, vt ostendat vetus Testamentum anteà hoc delineasse. Ther were also in the olde Testament cuppes in the whiche they did sacrifice, wherin also after they had offred their sacrifices, receauing the bloode of vnreasonable beastes, they did sacrifice yt in cuppes. Therfore for the bloode of vnreasonable beastes, our Lord geueth his owne blood. And well in a cuppe, that he might shewe the olde Testament to haue delined this before. Thus Oecumen.
Besides the aptacion and applieng of the thing figurated to the figure, in the whiche this authour meneth, that as verilie as the bloode of vnreasonable beastes was receaued in cuppes, so verilie also haue we the bloode of Chryst in cuppes, besides this I saie, his speache and maner of woordes are to be weighed. The figure of Chrystes bloode ys not his owne bloode. Wherfore sainge that Chryst geueth vs his owne bloode, he remoueth the aduersaries figure. For the one importeth proprely the thing yt self: the other a figure or token of the same. B
And yet farder to consider the verie woordes of this authour, wher geueth Chrystes blood ysnot conteined. in cuppes spirituallie Chryst his owne bloode vnto vs He saieth: In poculo. In the cuppe. Yf then yt be geuen vs in the cuppe, yt ys not the bloode of Chryst spirituallie, for that ys not receaued in cuppes, but in the soule of man. Being than Chrystes own bloode, and receaued in a cuppe, yt must nedes be the bloode of Chryst reallie, to the which yt well apperteineth, for so moche as Chryst hath so appointed yt, to be receaued in a reall cuppe, for that yt self ys a reall thing. Besides this, the authour saieth that yt aunswereth the figure verie well, that the bloode of Chryst ys in a cuppe, bicause the figure had so, as yt were foresaied that yt shoulde so be, in that that the bloode of beastes was offred in cuppes. Then Chryst geuing his own bloode in the cuppe to hys Disciples, and saing: Drinke ye all of this. This ys my blood: did speake these woordes in their propre sense. And as he did them, so did he vndoubtedlie these, This ys my bodie. And thus by this authour we haue like testimonie, as by other before alleaged.
We shall nowe likewise see what agreable testimonie Anselmus will geue, C who ys appointed to geue the same for the latin Church, as Oecumenius hath Ansel. li. de of sic. dini. doen for the greke church. Thus he writeth: Sic enim habemus in euangeliis. Accepit Iesus panem, benedixit, fregit, deditue Discipulis suis dicens: Accipite, & manducate ex hoc omnes. Hoc est enim corpus meum, quod pro vobis tradetur. Quando in manus accepit panis erat, sic enim dixit: Accepit panem, & per illam benedictionem panis factus est corpus Christi, non tantùm significatiuè, sed etiam substantiuè. Neque enim ab hoc sacramento figuram omnino excludimus, neque figuram solam admittimns. Veritas est, quiae corpus Christi est: figura est, quiae immolatur, quod incorruptibile habetur. Consideremus ver ba Domini. Manducate (inquit) ex hoc omnes. Hoc enim, quod vobis trado ad manducandum est corpus meum. Et vt certi essent, quod reuera esset corpus Christi, signa expressit, quibus hoc dignoscerent. Hoc est, inquit, corpus meum, quod pro vobis tradetur. Si hoc corpus, corpus Christi non substantiuè, sed significatiuè tantùm fieret, hoc figura corporis Christi tantùm existeret. Nihil ad figuram, quod sequitur: Quod pro vobis tradetur. Nec panem nominauit postquam panem benedixit, sed corpus: nec vinum nominauit postquam vinum benedixit, sed sangumem. Igitur, sicut fides catholica credit, panis qui offertur sacerdoti ad ad consecrandum, per sacerdotalem consecrationem fit corpus Christi non significatiuè tantùm D sed substantiuè.
Thus haue we in the Gospells: Iesus tooke bread, he blessed yt, he brak yt, [Page]and gaue yt to his Disciples, sainge: Take and eate of this all. For this ys my bodie, which shall be deliuered for yowe. When he tooke yt into his handes E yt was bread. For so the Euāgelist saieth he tooke bread, and by that blessing Bread how yt ys made the bodie of Chryst. the bread ys made the bodie of Chryst, not onelie significatiuelie, but also substantiuelie. Neither doe we from the Sacrament alltogether exclude the figure, neither doe we admitte the sole figure. Yt ys the veritie, bicause yt ys the bodie of Chryste: Yt ys a figure bicause yt ys offred in sacrifice, that ys incorruptible. Let vs consider the woordes of our Lorde: He saieth: Eate ye all of this. For this, whiche I deliuer yowe to eate, ys my bodie. And that they shoulde be certen, that in verie dede yt was the bodie of Chryst, he declared certen tokens, by which they shoulde perceaue yt. This ys my bodie (saieth he) that Circumstā ces in Christes woords declaring the Bles. Sacr. to be his verie bodie. shall be deliuered for yowe. Yf this bodie shoulde be made the bodie of Chryst figuratiuelie and not substanciallie, yt shoulde be onelie a figure of the bodie of Chryst, that that foloweth, perteineth nothing to a figure, which ys this, that shall be deliuered for yowe. Neither did he name yt bread, after that he had blessed the bread, but his bodie: neither did he after he had blessed the wine, name yt wine, but his bloode. Therfor, as the catholique faith doeth beleue, the bread that ys offred to the preist to be consecrated by the preistlie F consecracion ys made the bodie of Chryst, not significatiuelie, but substā tiuelie. Thus moch Anselmus.
Whome ye see to drawe by the same line, that all the rest of the fathers haue doen. Ye see in this exposition, as yt shoulde be among soche as be of the house of God, an vniformitie, a consent, and a goodlie agreement in the vtterance of this one trueth, being a weightie matter of our faith. Ye see not here as among them that haue separated them selues frō the house of God, as the Lutherans, the Zuinglians or Oecolampadians and Caluinistes, who so contend striue and dissent among them selues, that that the one side affirmeth the other side denieth. So amonge these ther ys yea and naie, yt ys, and yt ys not. Sacramentaries dissent among them selues tholse fathers agree in one doctrine. But among all them that be produced oute of Gods Parliament house, among these that learned their lessons in Chrystes schoole, ther ys no soche dissention. What one affirmeth, the other denieth not. And what one denieth, the other affirmeth not. For wher other before haue taught, that in the Sacrament after consecracion, ther ys the bodie and blood of Chryst, as sainct Ambrose, and sainct Augustine so doeth this authour saie, that by the G consecracion ys made the bodie and bloode of Chryst. And wher by a nombre yt was before taught, as by Euthymius, Damascen, Haymo, Theophilact, and Paschasius; that the Sacrament ys not a figure onely. This authour teacheth vs euen so, and withall geueth vs the plain catholique vnderstanding of these fathers (whiche thing ys also declared vpon the place of Tertullian) that the Sacrament conteineth both the bodie of Chryst verilie, reallie, and substanciallie and also the figure of the same bodie.
Wherunto to adde also somthing at this present, sainct Augustine geueth a goodlie, and a most plain testimonie therof, saing: Corpus Christi & veritas & figura est: Veritas dum corpus Christi & sanguis in virtute Spiritus De consec. dist. 2. ca. vtrum sancti ex panis & vini substantia efficitur: figura verò est, quod exteriùs sentitur. The bodie of Chryst ys bothe the veritie and the figure. Yt ys the veritie for that the bodie and bloode of Chryst, by the power of the holie Goste, ys made of the substance of bread and wine: but that ys the figure, that Both figure and veritie in the Sacr. ys outwardlie perceaued. H
Agreablie to this saieth Hilarius, Bishoppe of Rome next vnto Leo the first. Corpus Christi quod sumitur de altare figura est, dum panis & vinum videntur extrà, [Page 217] veritas autem, dum corpus & sanguis Christi intorius creditur. The bodie of Chryst A that ys receaued of the aultar ys a sigure, for that the bread and wine be seen outwardlie: But yt ys the trueth, for that the bodie and bloode of Chryst be beleued inwardlie.
Wher then these fathers saie that the Sacrament ys not a figure of the bodie of Chryst but the bodie yt self: they vnderstand that yt ys not onelie a sigure. A figure yt ys, but yt ys the bodie also, whiche thing this authour Anselm, dothe verie well in fewe woordes vtter when he saieth: Neque ab hoc sacramento siguram omnino excludimus, neque figuram solam admittimus. We doe not from this Sacrament exclude alltogether a figure: neither doe we admitte onelie a figure. This then ys the catholique faith, that the holie Sacramēt ys both a figure, and also the verie bodie of Chryst.
By this authour also, who doeth expownde Chrystes woordes ys the trifling M. Pilkintons sophisticall argument in thopen disput actō holden in Cambridgie against the blessed Sac. sophisticall argument solued, whiche an Aduersarie made against Chrystes presence in the Sacrament, vpon these woordes of Chryst. The argument was this: Chryst tooke bread, he blessed bread, he brake bread. Wherfore B he gaue to his Disciples bread. Yf he gaue them bread, then he gaue them not his bodie.
In this argument the Aduersarie vseth the woordes, as though by the actes, whiche the verbes expresse, nothing had ben doen. He saieth Chryst did take bread, and blessed bread. By that that Chryst did take bread, ys declared one acte, and when he did blesse the bread, he did an other acte, whiche the Aduersarie passeth ouer, as though Chryst in blessing had done nothing. By whiche Sophisine he maie aswell prooue Chryst to haue deliuered no sacrament, as no bodie. For (as they saie) he deliuered that, whiche he took: but he tooke bread no sacrament: therfore he deliuered bread no sacrament. But what did Chryst when he blessed the bread? Though the Aduersarie wolde so ouerpasse yt: yet this authour telleth vs what he did. For he saieth: Accepit panem, & per illam benedictionem panis, fit corpus Christi. He tooke bread, and by that benediction the bread ys made the bodie of Chryst. Nowe then Effect of Chrystes blessing of the bread. wher the Aduersarie reasoneth and saieth: Chryst tooke bread, and blessed bread, and brake bread, and therfore gaue bread, he hideth what acte Chryst C did when he blessed the bread. For by that blessing the bread was made the bodie of Chryst. So that he might and did truely saie, take and eate, This ys my bodie. Therfore the argument ys nothing but a false Sophisme. For indede he tooke bread into his handes but after he had once blessed yt, and saied, this ys my bodie, he deliuered no breade, but his bodie, according to the trueth of his woorde. Other thinges woorthie of note ther be in this authour, but hauing declared that, that sufficeth to the pourpose for the expownding of Chrystes woordes, I leaue the rest to be considered by the reader, and will hast me to bring in an other coople.
THE TVO AND SIXTETH CHAP. ABIDETH E in the exposition of the same woordes by Rupertus, and Nicolaus Methonen.
WIshing that the reader should fullie perceaue the descent of the faith of the Sacrament, howe yt ys deduced frō Chryst to the Fathers, and so from age to age, and from time to time, euen vnto this our time, and therwith howe the woordes of Chryst are to be vnderstanded, euen from Chrystes time of the speaking of thē vntill this our time: forsomoch as I haue passed so neare to our time, I will with thy pacience (gentle reader) go on, vntil I bring the within a verie litle of this our time. In Gods name then let vs proceade and go to the time of Rupertus, who ys thought to haue liued the year of our Lord MCCXXiiii. ād so about CCCCXXXViii. agon, of whome we shall learn what faith was in the latin Churche in his time F as concerning the blessed Sacrament, and howe the woordes of Chryst were vnderstanded. Thus he writeth: Coenantibus, id est, sedentibus adhuc in coena Rup de operib. lib. 3. qua manducauerant carnes agni, carnes Paschae veteris, accepit panem, & benedixit. Panem communem accepit, sed benedicendo longè in aliud quàm suerat transmutauit, vt veraciter diceret sic: Hoc est corpus meum, quod pro vobis tradetur. Item vini substantiam accepit, sed itidem gratias agendo, vel benedicendo sic in aliud vertit, vt diceret veritas, quae non mentitur: Hic est sanguis meus noui Testamenti, qui pro multis effundetur. Sed non videtur oculis carnis, non sentitur gustu oris, quòd panis ille caro factus sit: quòd vinum illud in sanguinem versum sit. Nimirum si videretur color, aut sentiretur sapor carnis, & sanguinis humani, homini non plus salutis, sed plurimum adferret horroris. Being at supper, that ys, sitting yet at supper in the whiche they had eaten the flesh of the Yf Chryst blessing the bread transmuted yt into a better thing, M. Pilkintons argument healteth. lambe, the flesh of the olde Passouer, he tooke bread and blessed yt, he tooke comon bread, but blessing yt, he did transmute yt into a farre other thing, than yt was, that he might trulie saie: This ys my bodie, which shall be deliuered for yowe. He did also take the substance of wine, but likewise geuing thankes or blessing, he did so turne yt into an other G thinge, that the trueth which lieth not, might saie: This ys my bloode of the newe Testament, whiche shall be shedde for manie. But yt ys not seen with the eies of the bodie: yt ys not perceaued by the taste of the mouthe, that, that bread ys made the flesh of Chryst, that that wine ys turned into bloode. For trulie yf the cooloure of the flesh and bloode of man should be seen, or the taste shoulde be perceaued, yt shoulde bring no more health to a man, but yt shoulde bring moch loathsomnesse. Thus moche Rupertus.
In this authour as in Anselmus, who went last before him in the last chapter, ys declared the vertue and power of the benediction of Chryst when he Effect of Chrystes blessing of the bread. blessed the bread and wine in his holie supper. For as Anselmus saied, that by the blessing of the bread and wine, they were made the bodie and bloode of Chryst: So this authour saieth, that Chryst blessing the bread, did transmute or chaunge yt into a farre better thing, Whiche thing was soche that Chryst might trulie saie by yt: This ys my bodie, whiche ys geuen for yowe. Neither let this seem straunge to the Aduersarie, that these two authours saie, that by the blessing of Chryst the bread and wine be chaunged or turned into the H bodie and blood of Chryst. For yt ys not a sainge yesterdaie inuented, but yt ys a sainge, of the great Fathers, the auncientes and pillers of the Church. Howe moche doeth sainct Ambrose speake of this [Page 218]thing? how large a discourse doeth he make of yt? treacting of the blessed A Sacrament, and prouing by examples of the scripture, howe the grace and blessing of God doeth chaunge the nature of one thing into an other thing. Amb. li. de imit. myst. cap. 9. He saieth thus. Quantis igitur vtimur exemplis, vt probemus non hoc esse, quod natura formauit, sed quod benedictio consecrauit, maioremue vim esse benedictionis, quam naturae, quia benedictione etiam natura ipsa mutatur? Howe manie examples haue we to proove, that this ys not yt that nature formed, but yt that the blessing hath consecrated, and that the power of the blessing ys greater then the power Power of blessing greater thē power of nature. of nature. Bicause that by the blessing nature yt self ys chaunged. And after manie examples ther produced to that pourpose, he maketh this conclusion Quodsi tātum valuit humanabenedictio, vt naturā cōuerteret, quid dicimusde ipsa cōsecratione diuina, vbi verba ipsa Domini saluatoris operātur? Yf thē the blessing of mā were of so great force that yt might turn or chaunge nature: what saie we of the diuine consecracion, wher the verie woordes of owre sauiour doe woorke them selues? Thus S. Amb.
And thus maie we perceaue the great power of Chrystes blessing to be B soche, that not onelie yt maie, but yt doeth also chaunge the nature of one thing into an other, as the nature of bread and wine in the Sacrament, into Transubstanciacion auouched. the verie nature of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, verilie and substanciallie. And therfor this chaunge wrought and doen by the blessing of Chryst for somoche as yt ys a turning or chaunging of one nature or substance into an other nature or substance, yt maie verie well beare the name of Transubstanciacion. For that name doeth liuelie declare the acte that ther ys doen.
Holie Cyrill also considering that the great worke of God, whiche maketh present in the Sacrament the bodie and bloode of Chryst, ys doen by the denediction of God, doeth commonlie in his workes call the blessed Sacrament the misticall benedictiō. As then this authour hath taught no other wise then he heard his Fathers speake before him, of the power of Chrystes blessing: no more doeth he in teaching the presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode, although our senseis can not perceaue the same presence. For (saieth he) though the bread be made the flesh of Chryst, and the wine be turned C into his bloode: yet neither doe we see yt, neither tast yt so to be. By whiche his teaching he doeth well aduertise vs of the office of faith that aught to be in vs, which grownded vpon the woorde of God, beleueth what yt teacheth, though no one of our senses geue vs anie aide ther vnto. And here ys Cranmers grosse sensuall heresie improued. rebuked the grosse maner of Cranmer, who saieth that faith teacheth nothing against the senseis, and therfor for somoche as we see no flesh nor bloode, nor tast none in the Sacrament, ther ys none in the Sacrament. But I will not nowe tarie to refell that grosse and sensuall erroure of the senseis, forasmoche as I doe more at large speake of yt in an other place. Therfor I will no more doe here, but by conferring of the doctrine of this authour, with the doctrine of the Fathers, so by that waie improoue the doctrine of Cranmer. Yt ys not saieth this authour, seē with our eies, nor tasted by our mouthes, that the bread ys made flesh, nor that the wine ys turned into bloode, for yf yt shoulde so be, yt shoulde nothing encreace our saluacion, Cyrill. ad Calosyr. Chrystes owne verie flesh in the Sacrament but yt shoulde bring moch loathsomnesse. And therfor yt ys so the flesh and blood of Chryst. as yt maie be meit for our vse, and sufficient also for D our saluacion. Agreablie to this ye haue heard declared oute of S. Cyrill. Leest we should loath flesh and blood sett vpon the holie altars, God condescending vnto our weaknesse, powred into the offred thinges the power of [Page]life, turning the same into the treuth of his owne flesh. Here ye see Chrystes owne E flesh taught to be in the sacrament, but so as no sense perceaue the same, least we shoulde loath yt, if she shoulde see yt or tast ys as verie flesh. Damascen also hath the like sainge, and Theophilact in diuerse places. but one of thē Theophil. shall suffice for all. Bycause we are weake and loath to eate rawe flesh, speciallie the flesh of man, therfor yt appeareth bread, but yt ys flesh Note this last part of Theophilactes saing, yt appeareth bread but yt ys flesh. Are we not taught by this that faith teacheth vs one thing, and the senseis teache vs an other thing? Yt Faith teacheth one thing and senses an other. appeareth bread: What ys that? Owre seight iudgeth yt to be breade, owre tast iudgeth yt to be breade, owre tast iudgeth yt to be breade and so furth of other senseis, But yt ys flesh. For owre faith grownded vpon the certen and infallible truthe of Chrystes woorde, beleueth and knoweth yt (bicause he saieth: This ys my bodie) to be his flesh. Nowe our senseis teache yt to be that, that yt ys not. For they teach that yt ys bread, wher faith teacheth that yt ys flesh in dede. Vain therfor ys Cranmers sainge, vain also be they that saie bicause they see not, nor tast no flesh nor bloode, they will beleue none to F be ther. As they be sensuall men: so they frame to themselues a sensuall faith. But God make them once rightlie spirituall.
And nowe to our pourpose yowe haue seen a conference and a plain agreement, betwixt this authour and other in these two poinctes. Finallie he expowndeth the woordes of Chryst of the verie presence. for (saieth he) the bread ys chaunged into that thing, that Chryst maie trulie saie: This ys my bodie. And so the wine ys turned into that thing, that he maie trulie saie by yt: This ys my bloode. These woordes with that that ys aboue saied, prooue most sufficientlie that the woordes of Chryst are to be vnderstanded withoute figure metaphor, or trope.
This being thus plain we will see what his felowe will doe. who ys Nicolaus Methanensis. Thus he writeth: Quis ille qui conculcat filium Dei? Nonne qui sanguinem Nicolaus Methan. eius ingratus abrogat, nec admittit? & veracis ab omniue mendacio alieni oris trrditionem & mandatum nihili facit, Hoc est corpus meum dicentis, & hic est sanguis meus, &, nisi manducetis carnem filii hominis, & bibatis eius sanguinem, non habetis vitam in vobis? Quid haesitas? Quid omnipotenti impotentiam attribuis? Nonne ipse est, qui G ex nihilo omnia vt essent fecit? Vnus trium personarum diuinitatis, qui postremis incarnatus est, & panem in suum corpus transmutari iussit. Quid requiris causam & ordinem naturae panis transmutationis in Christi corpus, & aquae viniue in sanguinem cùm supra naturā, rationem mentem & cogitationem ex virgine sit natus? Non credes itaque nec mortuorum resurrectionem, nec in caelos eius assumptionem, & alia Christi miracula supra naturam mē tem, & cogitationem eminentia. Who ys he that treadeth vnder foote the Sonne he treadeth vnder foot the Sonne of God, that beleueth not his bodie and blood to be in the Sacr. of God? ys yt not he that as an ingrate and vnkinde man, dothe abrogate his bloode and will not alowe yt? and setteth nothing by the commaundement and tradicion of that true mouthe, which ys all wide from all vntrueth, saing: This ys my bodie: And, this ys my bloode, And except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his bloode, ye haue no life in yowe? What doest thowe doubte? What doest thowe attribute impotencie to the omnipotent? Ys yt not he that made all thinges of nothing? one of the three persons in god head, who in these last times was incarnated, and commaunded the bread to be transmuted into his bodie. What doest thow require the cause ād order of the transmutacion of the natuae of bread into Chrystes bodie, and of H the water and the wine into the bloode, sithen that he aboue nature, reasō, vnderstanding and thought was born of a virgen? Thowe wilt not then beleue neither the resurrection of the dead, nor the assumption of him into [Page 219]heauen, nor other miracles of Chryst being aboue the reach of nature, vnderstanding A and thought. Thus farre he.
Ye haue nowe hearde an other wittnesse, but not telling yowe an other tale diuerse from him that he ys coopled with, or frō anie here before alleaged. In the maner of the vtterance of his testimonie he doeth somwhat, like vnto Chrisostome, speake with wonder and admiraciō that men shoulde doubte of the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, seing that Chrystes owne mouth hath spoken yt. Wherin he wel declareth that this faith in this matter was so firme, so sure, and so stable, that yt was a matter of wonder to him, that anie man coulde not beleue yt, that had ben brought vppe in Chryst, in somoche that he reputeth the misbeleuers of this Sacrament, of the nombre of those that treade Chryst vnder foote, vpon whome, as S. Paule saieth, shal come heauie and greuouse punishmentes.
He teacheth vs, as Gregorie Nissen, Chrysostom and manie mo haue taught that the bread ys transmuted or chaunged into the bodie of Chryst. In the setting furth wherof he vseth almost S. Ambrose sentence and woordes. S. Ambr. li. de myst. c. 9. Ambrose saieth: Quid hic queris naturae ordinem in Christi corpore, cùm preter naturam B sit ipse Dominus Iesus partus & virgine? What doest thowe here seke the order of nature in the bodie of Chryst, sith the same Lorde Iesus Chryste was beside nature conceaued of a virgen? This authour saieth, what doest thowe seke the cause or ordre of the transmutacion of the nature of breade, into the bodie of Chryst, and of the wine and water into his bloode, sith he aboue nature, and reason was born of a virgen? So farre wide was yt from the mening of this authour to varie from the mindes of the auncient fathers, that he vseth their woordes. To end, yt ys easie to perceaue that this man teaching transmutacion, or transubstancion, and soche creditte to be geuen to the plain woorde of Chryst for the verie presence of his bodie in the Sacrament, vnderstandeth Chrystes woordes withoute figure, as also Rupertus did?
THE THREE AND SIXTITH CHAP. TARIETH IN the exposition of the same wordes by Innocentius, and Germanus. C
IN this proceasse we are descended to Innocētius the thirde, who liued the yeare of our Lorde. 1300. and therfor about 362 years agon. In this matter he writeth thus: Agnus Paschalis siue dubio figurabat Jnnocen. de offic. Miss. Dominicum corpus: sed panis azimus sincerum opus. Sicut autem Ioannes Baptista qui dixerat: Eccè agnus Dei, per adiunctum determinauit: Ecce qui tollit peccata mundi: Sic & Christus qui dixerat, Hoc est corpus meum, per adiunctum determinauit: quod pro vobis tradetur. Sicut ergo corpus Christi veraciter tradebatur: sic verè demonstrabatur, non in figura, quaeiam cessauerat, sed in veritate quae iam aduenerat. The paschall lambe without doubte, was a figure of our Lordes bodie, but the vnleauened breade signified a sincere worke As Iohn the Baptist The bodie of Chryst both deliuered and demonstrated not in figur but in trueth. who saied: Behold the lambe of God, by a clause adioined did determine yt saing: Behold him that taketh awaie the sinnes of the worlde: So Chryste, who had saied, This ys my bodie: by a clause adioned determined the same, saing: which shall be deliuered for yowe. Therfor as the bodie of Chryst was verilie deliuered: so was yt verilie demonstrated, not in a figure, whiche nowe had ceassed, D but in trueth which nowe was comed.
This authour minding to expownde Chrystes woodes, doeth first declare [Page]that the Paschall lambe, wherof we haue at large spoaken in the first booke, was vndoubtedlie a figure of Chrystes bodie wherbie the geueth vs to E vnderstand, that nowe the figure being taken awaie (which can not other wise be ceassed but by the cominge of the veritie) that nowe the bodie of Chryst ys not onelie as in a figure, as yt was in the paschall lambe, but yt ys nowe in veritie. He prooueth yt by Chrystes owne woorde, who saied and spake nothing but trueth: This ys my bodie. That he spake yt by his owne naturall and substanciall bodie, he prooueth by the determinacion that he put to yt, which was this: Which shall be deliuered for yowe. This particle added determineth his sainge to be of his naturall bodie. For he deliuered not his siguratiue bodie, neither his spirituall bodie, nor his misticall bodie. Wherfor yt was spoaken of that bodie, whiche might be deliuered for the sinnes of the worlde, whiche was onelie his owne naturall bodie.
Then he concludeth vpon these two partes, that as Chrystes bodie was verilie deliuered to deathe: so was yt verilie spokē of Chryst in the supper not in a figure, which ys nowe past and hoen, but in veritie, which ys comed. To be shorte, as he breislie concludeth the trueth: so with asmoche breuitie F Figure of the Sacramentaries flatlie denied. he excludeth the vntrueth. He sendeth the emptie figure, to the olde Lawe: he appointeth the fullnesse of the veritie in the newe Lawe. Thus the Aduersaries figure being also denied by this authour, as yt hath ben by manie other, the conclusion maie be made, that Chrystes woordes are to be vnderstanded not figuratiuely, but in their propre sense simplie and literallie.
Nowe on the other side shall geue testimonie the holie man Germanus, Germanus epis. Constantin. Bishoppe of Constantinople, who did write an exposition vpon the Masse of the greke church, wher in he writeth thus: Ipse dixit: Hoc est corpus meum: hic est sanguis meus. Ipse & Apostolis iussit, & illos vniuersae Ecclesiae, hoc facere. Hoc enim ait, facite in meam commemorationem. Non sanè id facere iussisset, nisi vim inditurus fuisset, vt id facere liceret. He saieth, This ys my bodie: this ys my blood: He also commaunded the Apostles, and by them the wholl Church, this to doe. For saieth he, This doe ye in the remembrance of me. Trulie he wolde not haue commaunded them so to doe, except he had geuen them powr that thei might doe yt.
What ys their power afterwarde he declareth saing: Spiritus sanctus, qui semel egressus est, G & in posterum non dereliquit nos, sed est nobiscum & erit in perpetuum aeuum, haec per manum sacerdotum & linguam mysteria conficit. Ac non sanctum Spiritum dumtaxat misit Dominus noster vt maneat nobiscum, sed & ipse policitus est se mansurum nobiscum vsque ad consummationem seculi. At Paracletus inconspicuus adest, quia ipse corpus non gestauit: Dominus verò, & conspicitur, & tangi se patitur per tremenda & sacra mysteria, vt quinostrā naturā acceperit, eamue gestet in secula. The holie Gost, The holie Gost consccrateth the Sacr. by the hand and toung of the preistes. who once came furth to vs, and neuer hereafter doeth forsake vs, but shal be with vs for euer to the worldes ende, dothe consecrate these misteries by the hand and tounge of the preistes. And our Lorde hath not sent his holie Spiritte, that he onelie shoulde abide with vs: But he himself also hath promised to dwell with vs, vnto the ende of the worlde. The holie Gost ys with vs, but not seen, bicause he had no bodie. But our Lord ys both seen, and suffreth himself by the fearfull and holie misteries to be touched, as one that hath taken our nature vpon him, and will beare yt for euer.
The power thē of the ministres of Chryst ys that they be the instrumētes of H holie Gost by whose hād ād toung these mysteries be cōsecrated. In that he saieth the holie Gost doeth woork this great work by the toūg of the preist, [Page 220]he meneth at the pronunciacion of Chrystes woordes by the mouthe of A the preistes, at the whiche the holie God inuisiblie woorketh the presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode agreablie to the woordes of Chryst Li. 4. de Sacr. spoken by the preist in the person of Chryst, saing: This ys my bodie. For vntill that time (saieth S. Ambrose) the preist vseth his owne woordes, but nowe (saieth he) he vseth not his owne woordes, but the woordes of Chryst,
That the holie Goste woorketh this consecracion of the bodie and bloode of Chryst yt ys not a fewe times testified before. But Damascen by most plain woordes declareth the matter, saing: Quemadmodum quaecunque fecit Deus, Spiritu sancto cooperante fecit: sic & nunc Spiritus sancti operatione, haec super naturam operatur, quae non potest capere nisi sola fides. Quomodò fiet mihi istud, dicit sancta virgo, quoniam virnm non cognosco? Respondit Gabriel Archangelus Spiritus sanctus superueniet in te, & virtus Altissimi obumbrabit tibi. Et nunc interrogas, quomodò panis sit corpus Christi, & vinum & aqua sanguis Christi. Respondeo tibi & ego: Spiritus sanctus obumbrat, & haec operatur super sermonem & intelligentiam. As all that god hath B made, he hath made them the holie gost woorking with him: euen so now The woork of the holie Gost in the Sacr ys aboue nature, and vnderstāding by the worke of the holie Goste he woorketh these thinges (mening the cō secracion of the bodie and blood of Chryst) aboue nature, which thinges nothing can perceaue but onelie faith. Howe shall this be doen to me (saieth the holy Virgen) for I knowe not a man? The Archangell Gabriell answereth: The holy Gost shall come vpon thee, and the power of the hieghest shall ouershadowe thee. And nowe thowe askest howe the bread ys made the bodie of Chryst, and the wine and water the bloode of Chryst. And I also aunswer vnto thee, The holie Gost ouershaddoeth and woorketh these thinges aboue that can be spoken, and aboue all vnderstanding.
Agreablie to this S. Augustine also speaking of the Sacrament, and of the worke of the holie Gost therin saieth: Quod cùm per manus hominum ad illam vibilem August. li. 3. de Trin. cap. 4. speciem perducitur, non sanctificatur vt sit tam magnum sacramētum, nisi operante inuisibiliter Spiritu Dei. Whiche thing (mening bread) when by the handes of men yt ys brought to that visible forme, yt ys not yet sanctified that yt maie be so great a Sacrament but by the inuisible worke of the Spiritte C of God?
In this then that this authour saieth that these misteries of the bodie and bloode of Chryst be wrought by the holie Gost, ye perceaue that he teacheth none otherwise then the other holie Fathers of the Church. And by this also by the waie maie we learn reuerentlie to speake of this blessed Sacrament, for somoche as yt ys no trifeling toie of mans inuencion, but yt ys the worke of the holie Goste, who woorketh no trifles but matters of weight agreable to his maiestie. Whiche thing this authour also after the maner of Chrysostome doeth verie well teache in the later parte of his saing, The Sacramentes of Chrystes bodie ād blodbe holie ād fearfull my steries. when he calleth the Sacramentes of Chrystes bodie and blood, Tremenda & sacra mysteria. fearfull and holie misteries. They are not fearfull and holie, except somthing be in them that ys of yt self fearfull and holie. Bread and wine being figures of Chrystes bodie and bloode, be no more fearfull, then the bread and wine of Melchisedech, or the shewe bread in the temple, whiche was eaten of Dauid and his men without anie feare. Ther ys therfor in this holie misterie more then a figure, whiche ells can be nothing but the D verie thing that ys figured, which ys Chryst our Lorde and God, who ys to be feared of all sainctes, the psalme sainge: Timete Dominum omnes sancti eius. Feare yowr Lorde all ye Sainctes.
[Page]In the ende this authour declaringe the difference of the being and abidinge E of Chryst and the holie Goste withe vs maketh this difference. The holie Gost (saieth he) for that he had no bodie, for he was not incarnated, ther Difference of the being of Chryst with vs ād of the holie Goste. for though he be with vs, yet he ys not seen: Chryst for that by his incarnacion he tooke a bodie vpon him, he ys bothe seen, and also suffreth himself to be touched, but howe? By the holie and fearsull misteries. Then by the bolie and fearfull misteries Chryste ys bothe seen and touched. Yt ys so, For so saieth Chrysostome: Ipsum vides, Ipsum tangis, Ipsum comedis. Thowe seist him, thowe touchest him: thowe eatest him, thowe desierest to see his garmētes, but he deliuereth himself to thee, not that thowe shouldest onelie see him: but also that thowe maist touche him and also haue him with thee.
But here laboureth the Aduersarie to laie a snare to entrappe the reader, and to make him mistake Chrysostome. For (saieth the Aduersarie) we touche A Cauill of the Sacramentaries and eate Chryst in the Sacrament as we see him. But wet see him onelie by faith, wherfor we touche and eate him but by faithe. And so ys the presence of Chryst merelie spirituall and not corporall. F
Yf this argument were good, he might proue by the same that there were no creature. And thus he might, frame his argument. Euerie creature as An answer concerning his beinge ys as yt ys seen. But no creature ys seen to haue corporall Substance, wherfor no creature hath corporall Substance. Or thus, to come nearer to him in his owne termes: We touche and eate our meat at the table as we see yt: But we see no substance of meate. Wherfor we eate no substance of meat. Thus one fond argument maie be perceaued by an other. And so perceaued to be fond, to let yt so go as sufficientlie aunswered.
But for the contentacion of the reader this shall be saied: As naturall knowledge teacheth that euerie creature hath a substance: so yt teacheth that that substance ys inuisible. Therfor though we see no substance, but the A thing p [...]saied to brseen, whē the outuard formes are onelie seen, bicause the substāce ys inuisible outwarde formes of creatures: yet being assured by this knowledge, that ther ys vnder those formes a substance, we saie that we did see or touche this or that creature, and the saing ys true: Euen so when spirituall knowledge, which ys faithe, teacheth vs that the holie Sacrament hath a substance, and G that substance ys inuisible. And therfor though we see but outwarde formes of bread and wine. yet being assured by this spirituall knowledge that ther ys vnder those formes the substance of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, we saie verie well, that we see Chrystes bodie, and touche his bodie, and eate his bodie, when we see, touch, and eate these formes in due Spirituall knowledge teacheth the substance of Christs bodie and blood to be vnder ther formes of bread and wine as wel as naturall knowledge the substances of naturall thinges vnder their formes. maner after that the consecracion ys doen, faith geuing vs certen and assured knowledge of the being of Chrystes substance vnder those formes as naturall knowledge doeth for the substances of naturall creatures vnder their formes. And therfor nowe wher the Aduersarie saieth, that we eate Chryst as we see him, though in naturall thinges yt be not proprely true, for their we eate both the substāce and the outward formes, yet see but the out warde formes, in maner aboue saied: yet for that the substance ys certenly vnder those formes, by a mean yt ys truly saied, that we see and eate soche a thing: so in this heauenlie matter of the Sacrament, we both eat and see presentlie the verie presence of Chrystes bodie in substance, our senseis subiecting them selues as well to the knowledge of faith, as they doe to the knowledge of nature, and truely saie that we see and eate the substance of the body H of Chryst. And by this was the comon sainge of the faithfull people vsed generallie in the church, when they had seen the Sacrament: I haue seen my Sauiour, I haue seen my redemer, and soche like, as in naturall thinges we [Page 221]saie we haue seen a man, a woman, a beast, a tree, an herbe, when we haue A neither seen the substance of man, woman, beast, tree, nor herbe, but onelie the outwarde formes of them.
But to protracte this disputacion no lōger, I wil ende yt with the argument of this authour, which maie be vttered in this maner. Chryst ys continuallie Difference of the being of Chryst with vs, ād of the holie Goste. with vs, and so ys the holie Gost, but they be after diuerse maners, the one to be seen, the other not to be seen, wherfore the one corporallie, the other spiritually. The proofe maie be this: Yf Chryst be with vs but spirituallie in the Sacrament, then ys he with vs no otherwise, than the holie Gost ys. But Chryst ys with vs in an other diuerse maner then the holie Gost ys, in soche a maner as he maie by his fearfull and holie mysteries be seen, whiche diuerse maner to spirituall maner must be the corporall maner. Wherfore he ys with vs corporallie. And this most vndoubtedlie was the mening of this authour. For ther ys no doubte of the spirituall presence of the holie Gost in the mynistracion of the Sacramentes neither yet of Chryst. But ther must be an other maner of B Chrystes being with vs besides that maner, or ells the being of the holie Gost and Chryst must be all one, and not different. The contrarie wherof this authour teacheth. Wherby also, as by that, that ys before saied, yt maie be perceaued, that the woordes of Chryst be of him vnderstanded in their propre sense.
THE FOVR AND SIXTETH CHAPITER Sheweth the exposition of Petrus Cluniacen. and Bessarion vpon the same.
NOwe that our processe ys comed so near to our time we will ende with this coople, that shall be produced of the whiche the first ys the good and vertuouse learned man Petrus Cluniacensis, of whose vertue and learning not onelie his writing ys a good wittnesse, but also holie sainct Bernarde in sondrie epistles C written doeth verie well testifie the same. This man thus expowndeth the woordes of Chryst: Dic Domine testator noui & aeterni Testamenti, vtrum Testamentum hoc vnius diei (sicut isti dicunt) esse volueris, an potius aeternum esse decreueris. Petr. Cluniacen. contra. Petrobrufianos. Audiant isti, non me, sed te, vt conuertantur non ad me, sed ad te. Quid ergo? In coena vltima, quam cum Discipulis tuis votus Pascha nouo commutans celebrasti, accepisti panem, gratias egisti, fregisti, dedisti Discipulis tuis. Sed quid dixisti? Accipite, hoc est corpus meum, quod pro vobis tradetur. Et quid addidisti? Hoc facite in meam commemorationem. Similiter & calicem postquam coenasti: Hic est sanguit meus noui Testamenti, qui pro vobis & pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum. Audistis? Nolite fieri simulachra quae oculos habent & non vident, aures habent, & non audiunt. Audistis hoc non à quolibet doctore, sed ab illo, de quo Pater clamans praecipit: Ipsum audite. Audistis eum dantem corpus, sed quod corpus? Sunt enim corpora coelestia, & terrestria. Et quicquid visui, auditui, olfactui, gustui, hic subiacet, corpus est. Vnde ne putaret quis animalis cuiuslibet hoc esse corpus, aut hominis cuiuslibet, ad excludendum omne aliud sensibile vel insensibile corpus, postquam dixit: Accipite, hoc est corpus, adiunxit, meum. Suum ergo non alterius corpus Discipulis dedit. D Rursus ne alicui cogitatio occulta subreperet, potuisse creare in mambus suis, corpus, quod suum quidem esset, sed tamen, quod ipse erat, non esset, addidit. Quod pro vobis tradetur. Ac si diceret, nolite dubitare, nolite hoc vel illud vobis fingere, [Page] nolite, nolite aliud & aliud cogitare, quia hoc est corpus, non alteruns, aut alterius sed meum, non permutatum vel nouiter creatum, sed quod pro vobit tradetur, pro vobis crucifigetur, E pro vobis morietur. Sic & de calice: Hic est ait sanguis, non bouis, aut arietis, non agni aut cuiuslibet hominis, sed meus, non alius, aut noua creatione productus, sed qui pro vobis fundetur, stagellis prouocatus, clauis extortus, lancea excussus. Saie therfore, o Lorde, the testatour of the newe and euerlasting testament, whether this testament be of one daie, as these men saie, thowe woldest yt to be, or whether thowe hauest decreed yt to be an euerlasting Testament. Let these men heare, not me, but thee, that they maie be turned not to me, but to thee, what then was doen? In the last supper whiche thowe didest celebrate, with the Disciples, chaunging the old passouer for the new, thow thookest bread, thowe gauest thankes, thowe brakest yt, and gaue yt to the disciples. But what saidest thowe? Take this ys my bodie, which shall be deliuered Chryste gaue to hys Apost. not the bodie of an other, or his bodie newlie createdbutthat same bodie that should be deliuered. for yowe. And what didest thowe adde vnto yt? This doe ye in my remembrance. Likewise the cuppe also after thowe haddest supped, saing: This ys my bloode of the newe Testament which shall be shedde for yowe, and for manie in the remission of sinnes. Haue yowe hearde? Be not made dead images, which haue eies and see not, eares and heare not. Ye haue heard this not of euery teacher, F but of him, of whome the Father sainge commaunded: Heare him. Ye haue heard him geuinge a bodie, but what bodie? Ther be heauenlie bodies, and carthlie bodies, and what soeuer ys here subiect to the seight, hearing, smelling, tasting or touching, ys a bodie. Wherfore least anie man shoulde thinke this to be a bodie of anie comon man, or anie other naturall creature, to exclude all other bodies sensible or insensible, after he had saied: Take this yt a bodie, he adioined this worde (mine) he gaue then his owne bodie to his Disciples, and not the bodie of anie other. Again least anie priuie thought shoulde come to anie man, that he might haue created in his handes a bodie that shoulde be his in deed, but not that shoulde be yt that he was himself: he added: Whiche shall be deliuered for yowe As who shoulde saie: doubte yowe not, feign yowe not this or that to yowr self, thinke not an other thing, and an other thinge. For thisys the bodie, not an other, or of an other, but mine, not permuted, or newlie created, but that which shall be deliuered for yowe, shall be crucified for yowe: shall die for yowe. So like wise also of the cuppe: This ys, saieth he, G bloode, not of an oxe, nor of a Ramme, nor of a lambe, or of anie man, but mine, not an other, or produced by a newe creation, but which shall be shedde for yowe, prouoked by skoorges, extorted with nailes, thrust oute with a speer. Thus moch this authour.
To this exposition to adde anie thing as therbie to make yt plain to the reader, I thinke yt superfluouse. Yt ys allreadie so plain as no man in my iudgement, can make a more plain exposition. Onelie I will open the cause, why he wrote this. Ther was afect of heretiquesbegonne by one Peter de Bruys, ād one Hēricus, whose disciples were called Petrobrusions and Hēricians. These had inuented a newe phantasticall heresie, as yt ys propre to all soche men, to make Phansies of Heretiques called the woorde of the Lorde. their phantasies matters of faith, and cuerie of their phantasies ys the pure, and sincere woorde of the lord. These had (I saie) inuented this phantasie that Christ alone at his last supper did cōsecrate his bodie and blood, ād gaue yt to ys disciples, ād they al receaued his bodie ād blood. But since that time was yt neuer, nor yet ys receaued of anie man. Against these men did thys holie father write, against whome taking the sword of the Spiritte, which ys the woorde of God, he fought with them with yt, and ouerthrew rhē by the [Page 222]the woorde of Chryst that saied: that the blood which he gaue in the cuppe A to his disciples, was the bloode of the euerlasting Testament, wherupon taking an argument, he saieth in the beginninge: Saie, o Lord, the restatour of the newe testament, whether this testament be of one daie, as these men saie thow woldest yt to be, or whether thow hauest decreed yt, to be an euerlasting testament.
An other argument he maketh also of the commaundement of Chryste, who saied: This doe ye in the remembrance of me. Wherby Chryst geuing them commaundement to doe that that he had doen, and he by their owne confession consecrated his bodie (wherin theye are more gentle to Chryste, thē the Aduersaries and the Proclamer) The argument ys good that soche, to whom the authoritie ys deriued doe that that Chryst did, that ys, doo consecrate his blessed bodie and bloode. I write thus moche, that ye maie perceaue into what varietie and diuersitie of phantasies men doe fall in, that beginne to withstande Gods holie faith, of which varietie I haue allreadie spoken in the xli. chapiter of this booke, wherunto yf ye add this phantasie, then shal B yowe perceauc howe manie contrarie phantasies Sathan can deuise vpon these foure woordes of Chryst: This ys my bodie. And can, as ys saied, vtter thē all to the people for the pure woorde of God.
But to return to this authour, as by these argumentes he hath ouerthrowen the heresie of the Petrobrusians: so with these and the plain exposition of Chrystes woordes, he conuinceth all the other wicked phantasies, and leaueth Chrystes woordes in their propre and natiue sense, figures and tropes not remembred. I shall not nede to conferre him, with the auncient and elder Fathers, the conference of other saing as he doeth, maketh good that he hath saied, as yt did theirs which were cōferred with him. Wherfor omitting that cōference with his seniours, I shall bring in his iuniour to be conferred with him, who ys Bessarion Patriarch of Constantinople and Cardinall, who liued the yeare of our Lorde. 1471. Wherfore not fullie one hondreth yeares agon. And yet (as his disputacion in the Florentine Councell against the grekes, and his booke against Marcus Ephesinus doe proue) he was an excellent learned man, in this matter thus he writeth: Nemo est quem lateat, quemadmodum C panis & vini in corpus & sangumem Christin instanti facta transubstautialitas, humanam Bessarion li. de Sacr. Euchar. omnem excedit facultatem, ingensue opus est & certè diuinum: it a etiam huius Sacramenti efficientia verba instar ipsius Sacramenti, eximiae cuiusdam virtutis esse debere. Christs verò dtuints verbis nihil esse potentius, nihil ess [...] acius esse posse manfestum est. Quamobrem fateri necesse est, Dominicis illis verbis, & nullis aliis dtuinum hoc sacramentum confict posse. Nec enim diuinissima per diuinam potentiam confict negauerit quispiam, nec verbis Christi nihil effiacius esse, cùm non modò homo, verumetiam Deus sit, creatorue omnium, qui solo nutu cuncta produxit, qui verbo aegros curauit, mortuos suscitauit, caeteraue miracula fecit, quae in Euangelio recitantur. Ther ys no man but knoweth how that the trāsubstanciacion of the bread and wine, doen in an instant into the bodie and bloode of Chryst, doeth excede all power of man, and ys a great and verie worke of God: Euen The Sacrament maie be consecrated by noother woords then with these: Hoc est cor. etc. so also the efficient woordes of this Sacrament shoulde be of some great power, like as the Sacrament ys. Nowe yt ys manifest that nothinge can be more mightie, more effectuouse then the diuine woordes of Chryst. Wherfor we must nedes cōfesse, that this diuine Sacram. maie with no other woords be cōsecrated, thē with those woords of our Lord, Neither will anie D man denie these most holie thinges to be cōsecrated by the diuine power, [Page]neither that anie thing ys more mightie in woorke then the woordes of E Chryste, sithen he ys not onely man, but also God the creatour of al things, who at his onelie pleasure produced all thinges of nothing, who with his woorde healed the sicke, raised the dead, and did other miracles, whiche be written in the Gospell. Not the merites of man, but the power of God consecrateth the Sacr.
And within a fewe woordes he saieth thus: Panis & vini in corpus & sanguinem transmutatio non petentium meritis, sed eius potentia, qui ex nihilo cuncta produxit, per sacerdotem tanquam per instrumentum quoddam efficitur. The transmutacion of the bread and wine into the bodie and bloode ys doen not through the merittes of the peticioners, but by the preist as by a certain instrument, through the power of him that brought oute all of nothing.
Of this authour, as of all the rest, we learn the power and mightie worke of Chrystes woordes, God and man, by which the bread and wine be transmuted and chaunged into the bodie and blood of the same owre master ād Sauiour Iesus Chryst. And wher transmutacion and transubstanciacion ys confessed and taught (as this authour confesseth bothe) ther ys the Aduersaries F figure denied, and the propre sense of Chrystes woordes, and not the figuratiue sense admitted and alowed.
But we shall heare him with his owne woordes declare himself. Thus he saieth: Corpus est duplex: Verum alterum, alterum mysticum. Et verum quidem est, quod in hoc diuino Eucharistiae sacramento consecratur, atque conficitur, sub visibili specie panis The true bodie of Chryste vnder the forme of bread. ac vini. Hoc idem est cum eo corpore, quod fuit ex beata Virgine Spiritus sancti obumbratione conceptum. De quo ipse Dominus in exhibitione sacramenti, cum nobis sensibilē panem vinum (que) ostendisset, ait, Hoc est corpus meū: & hic est sanguis meus. Deinde addidit: Quod pro vobis traditur, & qui pro vobis effunditur in remissionē peccatorū. Mysticū autē eius corpus est Ecclesia, & congregatio fideliū. Chryst hath two bodies. A true bodie, and a mysticall bodie. The true bodie ys yt, that ys cōsecrated and made in this diuine Sacrament, vnder the visible forme of bread and wine. This ys all one with that bodie, that was by the ouershadowing of the holie Goste, conceaued of the blessed virgen. Of which bodie our Lorde himself in the geuing furth of the Sacrament, when he had shewed to vs sensible bread and wine, saied. This ys my bodie, and this ys my blood. Then G he added: which ys deliuered for yowe, and whiche ys shed for yowe in the remission of sinnes. But his mysticall bodie ys the Church, and the congregacion of the faithfull.
And afterward by expresse woordes denieng the Aduersaries figure, saieth thus: Cauendum autem, ne quis propterea quòd Eucharistiae mysterium figura esse dicitur, A great blasphemie to saie or thinke the Sacr. ys not the bodie of our Lord. dicere aut omnino suspicari audeat, non esse verum Domini corpus. Absit tanta blasphemia à fidelium mentibus. Yt ys diligentlie to be taken heed vnto, that no man, bicause the Sacrament ys called a figure, be so bolde to saie, or by anie meanes to thinke that yt ys not the verie bodie of our Lorde. God forbidde so great a blasphemie, from the mindes of the faithfull. Thus farre he. In whiche saing (as before diuerse times ys saied) the authour according to the catholique faith, teacheth that the Sacrament ys both a figure, and the bodie of Chryst. But bicause yt ys a figure therfore (as the Aduersarie saieth) yt ys not the bodie of Chryste? That blasphemie (saieth this good man) God kepe from the mindes of the faithfull. Beholde Chrystian reader) that to saie, that the Sacrament ys a figure, and not the verie bodie of Chryst, H yt ys a blasphemie. O mercifull Lord, howe moche blasphemie then ys ther nowe committed? God of his mercie preserue soche as yet haue not, that they neuer speake blasphemie against ther Lorde God in this [Page 223]matter, and call again soche as haue, that his heauie indignacion fall not A vpon vs.
I see I haue taried long vpon these fewe woordes of Chryst. And therfore although I might haue brought furth manie moo of the lower house (as the learned knowe ther be manie) yet I haue of them takē but sixe cooples, remembring that I had a good nombre of the higher howse, and they mynistred moche occasion of matter, vpon which I had better will to tarie, bicause the Proclamer aloweth their authoritie. Who in dede, if he will looke well vpon himself, and will thinke no more of himself then ys meet, nor take more vpon him then becometh him, shoulde not with skorn and contumelie reiect anie of these of the lower house, nor disalowe soch learned men, as he doeth, and soche a nombre and of so long time, and so manie yeares, except Misunderstāding of Chrystes woordes mother of all the heresies of the Sacramentaries. he doeth yt vpon like policie, as some men doe, who mystrusting their cause, refuse manie to go vpon their questes, bicause they shall be fownde giltie. I haue, I saie, taried long vpon this short text, and fewe woordes of Chryst, bicause the misunderstanding of them (whiche ys the mainteinance of their heresie, and the mother and damme of all the wicked opinions in B this matter) maie be taken awaie and the true vnderstanding, whiche ys the grownde of true faithe, and the verie fowntain and liuelie well spring of whollsom doctrine, maie be staied, settled, and with like mindes of men to be receaued. For he that hath the true vnderstanding of the woordes of Chryst can not lightlie erre in the matters of the Sacrament. And he that misunderstandeth them, for the most parte erreth in all matters, that be moued by euell men against the blessed Sacrament.
Nowe ye haue heard, first the three holie Euangelistes and S. Paule reporting in one maner those woordes of Chryst: ye haue heard eleuen cooples of Chrystes higher house of parliament of eche side, that ys, both of the greke Churche, and latine Church, men not obscure, but most famouse among all writers that haue written vpon these woordes of Chryst, not onelie in learning, but in auncientie, Catholiques howe they vnderstand Chrystes woordes in holinesse, and in grauitie: ye haue heard sixe cooples of Chrystes lower howse of Parliament, chosen also of both sides of the howse, men also in their times famouse both in learning, in C holinesse of life, and in my iudgement most woorthie men. I saie amonge those that I coulde finde that did treact of the woordes of Chryst, by waie of exposition. In the processe also ye haue hearde the propositions or saynges of the catholiques and of the aduersarye as touching the vnderstanding of these woordes of Chryst, wherin standeth the controuersie. The catholiques haue twoo saynges: The one that the woordes of Chryst are to be vnderstanded withoute figure: The other Sacramentaries howe they vnderstād them. whiche foloweth vpon that, that Chryst spake of his verie bodie. The Aduersaries contrarie wise haue two sainges: the one that Chrystes woordes are to be vnderstanded with a figure: The other that Chryst did not speake these woordes of his verie bodie. The catholique, vpō his sainges growndeth this trueth, that Chrystes verie bodie, and verie bloode after the cō secracion, be reallie and substanciallie in the Sacrament, and so geuen to the receauers. The aduersarie vpon his sainges growndeth his erroure, that Chrystes verie bodie and blood be not reallie and substanciallie in the Sacramēt, but in the Sacramēt ys onelie a figure of the bodie, and ys geuē to the receauers D as a signe or tokē of Chryst. As cōcerning which cōtrouersie yt ys nowe [Page]easie to be saied: first for the first parte of yt that neither the holie Euangelistes, neither sainct Paule, nor anie of all the holie Fathers of the higher house, E hathe taught or saied as the Aduersarie dothe teache and saie, that Chrystes An Epiloge of authours denieng the Sacramentaries figure. woordes are to be vnderstanded figuratiuelie, I meen, that the Sacramēt ys onelie a figure, I saie not one. But contrarie wise a nombre of them by expresse woordes denie that Chrystes woordes are so to be vnderstanded, and that the Sacrament ys a figure onelie. And for the better memorie to be had of them, I shall make a breif epiloge of their sainges: Chrysostom vpon the the sixt of sainct Iohn saieth that Chryst did not speake these woordes: My Chrysost. in 6. Joan. flesh ys verilie meat: obscurelie or in parables. Yf not so: thē plainlie and withoute figure. Euthymius vpon Chrystes woordes saied: He did not saie, these be signes of my bodie and bloode, but these thinges be my bodie and bloode. Damascen saied: The bread and wine ys not a figure of the bodie and blood of Chryst. God Euthy. in 26. Math. forbidde that anie man shoulde so beleue. Haymo saied: That same bread ys chaunged into the flesh of our Lorde, and the wine ys transferred into the bloode of our Lorde, not by a figure, nor by a shadowe, but by trueth or in Damascen li 4. cap. 14 verie dede. Theophilact saied, that the bread that ys sanctified on the aultar ys the verie bodie of our Lord, and not an aunswering figure. For Chryst did F Haim. in 26. Math. not saie, this ys a figure, but thys ys my bodie. The like saieth he vpon sainct Iohn, that yt ys not a figure but the bodie. Paschasius saied, that he meruciled what they ment that saied, that in the Sacrament was not in verie dede the Theophilact in 26. Math. flesh of Chryst and his blood, but the vertue, the figure and not the veritie, the shadowe, and not the bodie. Anselmus saied, Chryst tooke bread, and by his blessing of yt, the bread was made the bodie of Chryst, not onelie significatiuelie, or by significacion, but substantiuelie or in substance. Neither doe Paschasius lib. de corp & sang. Domini. we (saieth he) from this Sacrament, alltogether exclude the figure, neither doe we admitte the onelie figure. Innocentius saied: As the bodie of Chryst was verilie deliuered: so was yt verilie demonstrated, nor in a figure, whiche nowe had ceassed: but in trueth which was nowe comed. Bessarion saied: that we be not so bolde, that bicause the Sacrament ys called a figure, that we either Ansel. li. de offic. diui. saie or thinke that yt ys not the verie bodie of Chryst. God kepe (saieth he) so great a blasphemie from the mindes of men, by which woordes he denieth Innocēt. 3. li de offi. Miss. the onelie figure to be in the Sacrament without the presence. All these stād directlie against the Aduersarie. For wher he saieth, that the Sacrament ys a G figure onely, they saie yt ys not onely a figure by plain woordes. And forasmoche as S. Augustin and Hillarie doe teach that the Sacrament ys both the Bessariō. li de sacra. Eucha. figure, and the veritie, maie they not be adnombred to this companie, as denienge the onelie figure, for asmoch as with the other they affirme as well the presence as the figure. And in that they doe so, they denie the onely figure. August. Hilar.
Thus ye see the first proposition of the Aduersarie by so manie wittnesses denied, and the proposition of the catholique Church affirmed. Yf the Aduersarie for all these can bring anie one catholique writer that ys auncient, and approued, that doeth saie, as he saieth, that the Sacrament ys onely a figure, I for my part shall confesse the trueth to be on hys side. Yf he can not bring one, as I am sure he can not, and the catholique Church for the trueth An Epiloge of authours assirming the reall presence. that she teacheth bringeth so manie, what madnesse ys ther in him that will still persist in his phantasie, for the maintenance wherof he hath no authoritie. H
But let vs gather as breif an epiloge for the proposition of the catholiques which ys, that Chryst in these woords: This ys my bodie: spake of his verie bodie. [Page 224]Although yt be allreadie sufficientlie prooued and declared by that yt ys A not a figure onelie, and so importeth that Chryst spake of his bodie: yet that Just. apolog 2. the matter maie be plentifullie plain before yowr face, I shall take the like pain in this, as I haue doen in the other. Iustinus, who ys the first, saied: that as Iesus Chryst our Sauiour had flesh and bloode for our saluacion: euen so we are taught, the foode, wher with our flesh and blood be nourished by alteracion, when yt ys consecrated by the praier of his woode, to be the flesh Iren. cōtrahaeres. li. 4. ca. 32. and blood of the same Iesus incarnated. Irenaeus saied, that Chryst tooke bread, whiche ys a creature, and gaue thankes sainge: This ys my bodie. and the cuppe likewise, whiche ys a creature as we be, he confessed to be his bloode, and of the newe Testament taught a newe oblacion. Tertullian saied, that the bread which Chryst did take and geue to his disciples, he made yt his bodie. Tertulli. 4 cont. Marcion. Cypr. de caena Dom. Cyprian saied: after our Lorde had saied, This doe in the remembance of me. This ys my flesh and this ys my bloode, that substanciall bread and cuppe, as often as yt ys doē with these woords, and this faith, that substancial bread and cuppe consecrated by the solemne benediction doth profitt to the health and life of the wholl man, being also a medicin and a sacrifice to heale infirmities and B to pourge iniquities. Iuuencus saied, when Chryst tooke bread in his handes and had geuen thankes, he diuided yt to his Disciples, and taught them, that Juuenc. li. 4 bisto, euāg. he deliuered vnto them his owne bodie. And that he tooke the cuppe and sanctified yt, and gaue yt to them to drinke, and taught them, that he gaue them his bloode, and saieth drinke this bloode. Eusebius Emisenus saied, The inuisible preist turneth the visible creatures into the substance of his bodie Eusebius Emis. hom. 5. Pasch. and blood, by his secret power with his woorde, saing: This ys my bodie. And the sanctificacion repeted, take and drinke (saieth he) This ys my bloode. Again he saieth: when the creatures are sett vpon the holie aultars to be blessed with the heauenlie woordes, before they be consecrated with the inuocaciō of the most high name ther ys the substance of bread and wine, but after the Amb li. 4 de sacr. ca 5 woordes of Chryst the bodie and bloode of Chryste. S. Ambrose saied, before yt ys consecrated yt ys bread, but when the woordes of Chryst haue cō med to yt, yt ys the bodie of Chryst. And before the woordes of Chryst yt ys a cuppe full of water and wine, but when the woordes of Chryst haue wrought, ther ys made the bloode that redemed the people. Gregorie nissen C saied: the bread by the woorde ys chaunged into the bodie, as yt was saied of the woorde (mening Chryst) This ys my bodie. And again he saieth: we doe beleue that the bread sanctified by the woorde of God, ys chaunged into Greg. Niss. ser. cathec. Hier. ad Hed. qn. 2 Isich. in Leuit li. 6. ca. 22. the bodie of the Sonne of God. S. Hierom saied: Let vs vnderstand that the bread which our Lorde gaue vnto his Disciples, ys the bodie of our Lorde and Sauionre, forasmoch as he saied: This ys my bodie. ād that the cuppe ys that, of the whiche again he saied: Drinke ye all of this, This ys my blood of the newe Testament. Isichius saied: he receaueth the sacrifice by ignorance, that knoweth not the power and dignitie of yt, that knoweth not that yt ys his bodie and Ang. in Psalm. 33. con. 1. Chrysosthom. 83. in 26 Math. hom. 51. in 14 Marc Cyrill. ad Calosyriū. bloode in verie dede, but receaueth the misteries, and knoweth not the power of thē. S. Augustine saied: that Chryst was born in his owne handes, when geuing furth that same his bodie he saied: This ys my bodie. For he did beare that bodie in his handes. Chrysostome saied: Forasmoche as he hath saied: this ys my bodie, let vs be holden with no doubte, but let vs beleue, and with the eies of our vderstanding let vs verilie see yt. Again he saied: He that saied: This ys my bodie, alltogether with his woorde, he made the thing D also. S. Cyrill saied: Doubte not whether this be true or no, sith he manifestlie saieth: this ys my bodie, but raither receaue the woorde of our Saiouur [Page]in faith. For he forasmoche as he ys the trueth, he lieth not. S. Gregorie saied: Chryst ys offred for vs in this misterie of the holie sacrifice. Ther trulie his E bodie ys receaued, his flesh to the health of the people ys geuen abroade, his Grego. li. 4. Dial. ca 58 blood ys nowe shedde, not vpon the handes of the vnfaithfull, but into the mouthes of the faithfull. And again: whiche of the faithfull can doubte in that time of the sacrifice, at the woorde of the preist the heauens to be opened in that misterie of Iesu Chryst cōpanies of Angells to be presēt, vnto high thinges lowe thinges to be coopled, vnto heauenly thinges earthlie thinges to be ioined, one thing also of inuisible and visible thinges to be made. Isidor saied: The sacrifice that ys offred of the Chrystians vnto God, Chryst our Lorde and master did first institute, when he gaue to his Apostles his bodie and bloode before he wolde be betraied, as yt ys redde in the Gospell: Jsidorus de [...]ffi. [...]ccl. ca 1 [...]. Iesus tooke bread and the cuppe, and blessing them gaue, them to them.
Thus haue I breissie tocuhed so moche as maie serue to prooue the second proposition of the catholiques: Yf anie desire to see anie more of these authours, let him repair to their chapters and ther shall he see them at large. And nowe ye see that as by manie wittnesses the figure in the first proposition was denied: so by all these, that Chryst in his woordes spake of his verie F bodie, yt ys here affirmed. And yet all these notwithstanding, yf the Aduersarie can bringe furth but one auncient Father that by expresse woordes saieth, as he saieth that Chryst in his supper did not speake of his bodie or that his bodie after cōsecraciō duelie doē, ys not in the Sacrament, I will ioine with him. The Proclaimer more arrogantlie thē trulie, saieth of the catholique Churche, and that with repeticiō, saing: once again I saie (as therby with The bragge of the proclamer. boldecountenance to beare oute his fal shood and vntrueth) that of all the woordes of the holie scriptures: of all the examples of the primitiue Churche: of all the olde fathers, of all the anncient doctours in these causes, they haue not one,
Nowe iudge whether he be true or no, and what credditte ys to be geuē vnto him in other matters, that so shameleslie speaketh in this. To the farder proofe of the trueth of Chrystes substanciall presence in the Sacrament also, beside that that ys saied of manie of the authours seuerallie, I haue treacted of tansubstancion, wherfor I remitte the reader thither, and nowe hauing but one scripture in the Euangelistes to speake of, I will breiflie touche yt, and so finish this second booke. G
THE FIVE AND SIXTETH CHAP. TREACTETH of the bread blessed and geuen by Chryst to the two disciples in Emaus, and prooueth by Theophilact and Bede that yt was the Sacrament.
IN the gospell after sainct Luke we read that Chryst ioining him self to two of his Disciples goinge to Emaus, whē he cam thither Luc. 24. he satte downe with them, And tooke bread and blessed, and brake yt, and gaue yt to them, and their eies were opened and they knewe him. And these Disciples returned with ioie to Hierusalem, and tolde the The bread geuen to the Disciples in Emaus was Chrystes blessed bodie. Apostles, what was doen in the waie, and howe they knewe him in the breaking of bread. This bread that was here blessed, and broke, and geuen to the Disciples, the holie learned men do testifie not to be common bread, but to be by the blessing of Chryst made the bread of life, euen his owne bodie. H Wherfor seinge yt ys so vnderstāded, I thought yt apperteining to that pourpose that I haue taken in hande, to see the mindes of the holie fathers in yt.
[Page 225]And at this time to ascende, I will beginne with Theophilact, who writeth A thus vpon the same scripture: Insinuatur autem & aliud quiddam, nempe quod oculi corum, qui benedictum panem assumunt, aperiuntur, vt agnoscant illum. Magnam enim Theophil. in 24. Luc. & indicibilem vim habet caro Domini. An other thing also ys geuen vs to vnderstande, that ys, that the eies of thē, which doe take the blessed bread, are opened, that they maie knowe him (mening Chryst) For the flesh of Chryst hath a great and vnspeable power. Thus he.
By this authour yt doeth not onely appeare that Chryst gaue vnto the two disciples his bodie, but yt ys also euident. For when he had first saied that their eies were opened that receaued the blessed bread, so well that they might knowe Iesus, immediatelie opening what this blessed bread was, he saieth: For the slesh of Chryst hath an vnspeakeable power. The blessed bread then blessed of Chryste to be geuen to the Disciples was so of him blessed by the testimonie of Theophilact that yt was made the flesh of Chryst. Whiche he prooueth by the effecte. For although Chryst had walked with them somoche waie, and had conferred with them, and had rebuked their slacknesse B of faith, and finallie had interpreted the scriptures vnto them, beginning at Moises, and so passing through all the Prophetes, that had written of him: yet all this blessed and holie taulke, his liuely interpretacion of the scripturs, The Disciplis in Emans kuewe not Chryst vntill they had eatē of the blessed bread. his blessed and mightie voice, whiche sownding in the eares of the Iewes, that came with Iudas to apprehende him, did throwe them downe to the grownde, did not make these Disciples to knowe him as Chryst, vntill they had eaten of the blessed bread, whiche he blessed for them and gaue to thē, and their eies were opened, and they knewe him. By this great effect then yt ys manifest, that yt was a greate thinge, that was geuen them, a thing of moche power and vertue, euen that same flesh in substance, that anoincted the eies of him that was born blinde, and gaue him his seight. That same flesh nowe opened their eies, that nowe they might knowe him, whom before by other diuerse meanes (as ys saied) they did knowe.
To this grecian we shall ioin Bede, one of the latin Churche, who vpon Beda in 24 Luc. the same place saieth thus: Certi mysterij causa factum est, vt eis in illo alia ostenderetur effigies, & sic eum non nisi in fractione panis agnoscerent, ne quisquam se Christum agnouisse C arbitretur, si eius corporis particeps non est, id est, Ecclesiae, cuius vnitatem in sacramento panis commendat Apostolus, dicens: Vnus panis, vnum corpus multi sumus, vt cùm eis benedictum panem porrigeret, aperirentur oculi eorum, vt agnoscerent eum. Bicause No mā knoweth Chryste except he be a mē bre of his bodie, that ys, of his Churche. of a certain misterie yt was doen that an other likenesse or forme shoulde be shewed to them in him and so they shoulde not knowe him but in the breaking of breade, leest anie man might thinke him self to haue knowen Chryst yf he be not partaker of his bodie, that ys, of his Churche. The vnitie wherof the Apostle setteth furth in the Sacrament of bread, saing: All we being manie are one bread, and one bodie: that when he gaue to them the blessed bread, their eies shoulde be open, that they might knowe him. Thusfarre Bede.
Of whome we learn that yt was not doen as a matter to no pourpose, that Chryst shewed him self vnto them in a straunge likenesse, but to open a misterie, which ys, that no man can knowe Chryst, except he be a membre of his Churche, and be in the vnitie therof. And that they might be in that vnitie, he gaue them the blessed bread, whiche ys the Sacrament of vnitie, and then were their eies opened, and they knewe him. Thus as Theophilact saied by expresse woordes, that Chryst gaue them his flesh wherbie to open their D eies, so Bede saieth, that he gaue them the blessed bread, whiche ys the Sacrament of vnitie, mening that blessed bread that Theophilact calleth the flesh [Page]of Chryst, whiche (saieth he) he gaue them and then their eies were opened. Of bothe these then we are taught, that Chryst gaue vnto the two Disciples E in Emaus not comon and bare bread, but the Sacrament.
THE SIX AND SIXTITH CHAP. PROOVETH the same by sainct Augustine and Chrysost.
AS Theophilact ys the folower of Chrysostome so ys Bede of S. Augustine. Wherfor as we haue heard the mindes of these two as disciples: so will we heare the mindes of the other as masters. S. Augustine writing of the consent and agremēt of the Euangelistes August. de consens. Euang. li. 3. cap. 25. saieth thus of this matter: Non enim incongruenter accipimus hoc impedimentum in oculis eorum à Sathana fuisse ne agnosceretur Iesus, sed tantùm à Christo propter eorum sidem ambiguam facta permissio vsque ad sacramentum panis, vt vnitate corporis eius participata, remoueri intelligatur impedimentum inimici vt Christus posset agnosci. We doe not incongruentlie take this impediment in their eies to haue F The bread that Christ blessed and deliuered to the disciples in Emaus was the B. Sacram. ben doen by Sathan, that Iesus shoulde not be knowen. But of Chryst yt was onelie permitted for their doubtfull faith vntill they came to the Sacrament of bread, that the vnitie of his bodie being participated, yt might be perceaued that the impediment of the enemie was remoued, that Chryst might be knowen. Thus moch S. Aug.
Of whome this ys without difficultie to be learned that the bread that Chryst blessed, and gaue to the Disciples was the Sacrament. For so by that name doeth he call yt. Wherunto when he addeth the effect, that after the receipt of that Sacrament, the impediment of Sathan was remoued, their sight was illumined, and Chryst before vnknowen, was then well knowen: he doeth signifie vnto vs that they ther receaued him that ys the true light, that lighneth euery man that cometh into the worlde. Whiche thing more plainlie Chrisostom doeth opē, vpon Mathew thus saing: Quia de sanctis coepimus dicere, non est tacendum, quin aliud est sanctificatio, aliud sanctificatum. Sanctificatio Chrysost. hom. 17. in Matth. enim est quod alterum sanctificat. Sanctificatum autem alterum sanctificare non potest, quāuis ipsum sit sanctisicatum. vt puta signas panem tuum quem manducas, sicut ait Paulus, G Sanctificatur enim per verbum Dei & orationem. Sancttificasti eum, non fecisti sanctificacionem. Quòd autem sacerdos de manu sua dat, non solùm sanstificatum est, sed etiam sanctificatio est, quoniam hoc solùm non datur quod videtur, sed etiam illud quod intelligitur. De sanctificato ergo pane licet animalibus iactare, & infidelibus dare, quia non sanctisicat accipientem. Si autem tale esset, quod de manu sacerdotis accipitur, quale est quod de mensa manducatur, omnes de mensa manducarent, & nemo de manu sacerdotis acciperet. Vnde Dominus non solùm in via benedixit panem, sed de manu sua dedit Cleophae & socio eius. Et paulus nauigans non solùm benedixit panem, sed de manu sua porrexit Lucae & caeteris Discipulis suis. Bicause we haue begon to speak of holie thinges, yt ys not Sanctificaciō and the thing sanctified be diuerse. to be left vnspoken, but that sanctificacion ys one thinge, and the thing sanctified ys an other. Sanctificacion ys that sanctifieth an other thing, but the thing sanctified can not sanctifie an other thing, allthough yt be sanctified, as for example, thowe makest a crosse vpon thy bread, whiche thowe eatest, as S. Paule saieth, Yt ys sanctified by the woorde of God and praier: Towe hauest The blessed Sacr. a sanctified thing and sanctificaciō also. sanctisied yt, but thow hauest not made sanctificaciō. But that the preist geueth frō his hāde, yt ys not onely a sanctified thing, but also yt ys sanctificacion. For not onelie H that ys geuē that ys seen, but also that that ys vnderstanded. Then yt ys laufull to cast of the sanctified bread to beastes, and to geue of yt to infidels, bicause yt doth not sanctifie the receauer. But if that which ys taken of the [Page 226]hand of the preist were soche a thing as that, that ys eaten of the boorde, all A wolde eate of the boorde, and no man wolde receaue of the preistes hand. Wherfor our Lorde also, did not onelie blesse the breade in the waie but gaue with his owne hand to Cleophas and his felowe. And Paule sailing did not onelie blesse the bread, but also with his hand gaue to Luke and his other Disciples. Thus farre he.
In this place of Chrysostome three thinges are, as concerning the matter of the Sacrament to be noted. The first ys, that he saieth, that yt that the preist A plin place for reall presence against M. Iuell. geueth with his hand ys not onelie a sanctified thing, but also sanctificacion yt self, that ys, both a thing made holie, and also the thing yt self that doeth make holie. In that he saieth that the thing that the preist geueth with his hand, ys yt that sanctifieth other thinges, or maketh other thinges holie, what ells can be vnderstanded but Chrystes blessed bodie, who ys our sanctificacion, iustificacion and redemption, as saieth S. Paule, who being ther, sanctifieth the woorthie receruers? Forasmoche nowe as Chrysostome saieth that this sanctificacion, this thing, that maketh other thinges holie ys geuen by the preistes handes and yt can not be vnderstanded of Chryst spirituallie receaued, B for that ys not geuen by the preistes hand, I wolde the Aduersarie wolde answere directlie, wher this sanctificacion resteth? wher yt ys, whether yt be in the bread or in the preist. For sith he saieth that yt ys geuen by the hand of the preist, yt must be either in the preist, that geueth yt, or in the thing that ys geuen. No man will saie that that great power to sanctifie other ys in the preist. for yt ys the propre acte of God, as he himself withnesseth, Exod. 31. saing: Ego Dominus qui sanctifico vos. Yt ys I yower Lord, whiche doe sanctisie yowe. So that the preist doeth not the acte, he sanctifieth not, but he deliuereth the sanctificacion. Yf in the Sacrament were nothing but bread (as the aduersarie teacheth) this sanctificacion coulde not by his owne doctrine be in yt. For the bread beinge a dumbe creature ys not apte to receaue sanctificacion, as he saieth. Then yt remaineth that the Aduersarie must of force confesse, that sith ther ys a thing geuen by the hand of the preist, in whiche resteth this sanctificacion, and yt ys prooued that yt neither can be the preiste, nor the bread, yt can be none other but the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament, whiche neuer being separated from the God head C ys euen he, that sanctifieth vs.
And this ys not to be ouerpassed that Chrisostom saieth that that, whiche the preist geueth ys both a sanctified thing, and the sanctificacion also, wherby Bothe partes of the▪ Sacr. opened. he doth fullie open both partes of the Sacrament, namely what yt was as bread and wine, whiche nowe being sanctified, are therby turned into sanctificacion yt self, that ys, into the bodie and blood of Chryste, Of the whiche thing in effect S. Augustine saieth: Qui cùm per manus hominum ad illam visibilem speciem perducïtur, non sanctificatur vt fiat tam magnum sacramentum, nisi in visibiliter operante Spiritu Dei. Whē the bread by the handes of men ys brought to that visibile forme, yt ys not sanctified, that yt maie be made so great a Sacrament, but by the inuisible worke of the holie Gost.
In that he saieth yt ys sanctified, he openeth the first woorde of Chrysostom, who calleth yt sanctificatum, a thinge made holie. In that he saieth that yt ys made so great a Sacrament by the inuisible worke of the holie Gost: he openeeh the other woorde of Chrysostome calling yt sanctificacion. For by the worke of the holie Gost yt ys sanctified to be the bodie of Chryste, D who (as ys saied) ys our sanctificacion, that ys, he that sanctifieth vs. And for affirmacion of the geuing of this sanctifieng thing by the hand of the
[Page]But yf yt be laufull for vs to folowe euerie acte of Chryst doen for our example and instruction, then we maie receaue vnder both kindes, and we E maie lausullie receaue vnder one kinde, but diuersely. For as Chryst when he did institute yt, did yt as a solemne action of or for the memoriall of his passion and death, whiche by his ministers shoulde be srequented in his Churche, vntill he came again, and therfor though the nombre that beleued Preistes doing the solemne action of the memoriall of Chrystes passion in their masses aught to receaue vnder both kindes. both men and women was great, yet he called none to this maner of ministracion but the XII. Apostles who were preistes, signifieng therby that all preistes, that shoulde in his Church doe this solemne action before his people for the memoriall of his passion and death, shoulde doe yt vnder both kindes, as therby to signifie vnto the faithfull, that in the passion of Chryst, the blood of that blessed bodie was separated and diuided from that bodie, and ran oute plentifull to wash awaie our filthie sinnes: Euen so they that be preistes, and accordinge to the office of preistes, doe this publike ministerie in the setting furth of this memoriall of Chrystes death, must according to Chrystes institucion haue and receaue the blessed Sacramentes F vnder both kindes. Whiche thing the catholique Churche neuer hath nor doeth pretermitte, but inuiolablie obserueth, hauing ther in, as yt ys meit a speciall re [...]arde to Chrystes institucion.
In the other time of Chrystes ministracion of the Sacrament of his bodie to the twoo disciples, as the Gospell maketh no mencion that yt was doen as a solemne action of or for the remembrance of Chrystes passion or death, but raither as a mean to woorke them a benefit, to remoue the impediment of Sathan, whiche letteth them to knowe Chryst, and so to open their eies that they might knowe him, and therfor receaued the Sacrament but vnder Priuate psons sor their spirituall cosort maie laufullie receaue vnder one kinde as the disciples did in Emans. Bishoppes preistes and all of the clergie not doing the publique action, receaue vnder one kinde. one kinde: Euen so priuate persons that for their spirituall cōforte in Chryst, for the enkendling of the fire of Gods loue in them, for the godlie exercise of their faith, for their incorporacion into Chryst, for their strenght and defence against the assaultes and temptacions of the enemie, or in extreames for their voiage meate the better to walke ther iourneie, doe receaue the blessed Sacrament, maie verie well, according to Chrystes example receaue G yt vnder one kinde, as those disciples did. Wherfor all Bishoppes, all preistes, and all other of the cleargie, whensoeuer they receaue as priuate persons, that ys, when they doe not that publique ministracion and solemne action of Chrystes memoriall for and before the Churche, then doe they, as all other doe, receaue vnder one kinde, contenting them selues in their so doinge by the example of Chryste as ys afore saied.
As Chryst by his doinges hath left vs an example what we maie laufullie doe as concerninge the receipt of the blessed Sacrament, by whiche the Proclamer ys answered, for that part of his obiection, that obiecteth Chrystes institucion: So shall we nowe answere for that he obiected of Sainct Paule, He saieth that the woordes of Sainct Paule are sufficient also to prooue that the Sacrament aught to be receaued of all men vnder both kindes. Yt ys a plain matter that Sainct Paule maketh no speciall institucion of the Sacrament, but onely maketh a Proclamers [...] of S. Paule for receauing vnder both kindes anuswered. rehersall of Chrystes institucion, then this parte of his obiection maie be H aunswered with that that ys saied to his obiection of Chrystes institucion, forsomoche as this ys but a rehersall of that. But yet shal we to the furtherance of the trueth make a farder aunswere.
Wherfor vnderstand that although S. Paule did deliuer to the Corynthians the institucion of Chryst as then deliuered vnder both kindes: yet [Page 228]S. Paule teacheth not, that of necessitie yt must allwaies be vsed in both A kindes and no other. For yf he had taught yt with an exclusiue excluding all other maner but this, yt had some force. But so he doeth not. The scope of S. Paules doctrine resteth in these two poinctes: that the Sacrament be receaued The scope of S. Paule touching the Sacra. 1. Cor. 11. in the remembrance of Chrystes death: And that yt be receaued woorthilie. Wherfor I saie, that so farre wide yt was from the minde of S. Paule, by his doctrine there taught to forbidde the receipt of the Sacrament vnder one kinde, that as Chryst did to his two disciples in Emaus, so did S. Paule to Luke and his felowes in the shippe (as Chrysostome witnesseth) geue the Sacrament vnder the one kinde of bread. Although these actes of Chryst, and Sainct Paule are sufficient to prooue that the receipt of the Sacrament vnder one kinde ys laufull and good, in maner aboue saied: yet the same maie also appeare by the other place of the actes alleaged in the last chapiter. Wher also mencion ys made that the Sacrament was ministred vnder one kinde, namely of bread, no title of mencion made of the other kinde. And beside the good catholique men that doe vnderstand this place of the Sacrament, the Waldenses also did so vnderstand yt. B
Then sith the multitude of the faithfull euen immediatelie after the coming Acto. 2. of the holie Gost, did receaue the Sacrament vnder one kinde, yt ys manifest that yt maie without offence be doen and vsed nowe in Chrystes Churche, and maie not be reputed, as yt ys of the Proclamer, for an vnlaufull facte. For he that impugneth the Churche for doing of that, that the scripture sheweth the example, and saieth that the acte of the Churche ys vnlaufull, impugneth the scriptures, and importeth that they be vnlaufull.
These actes of Chryst and Sainct Paule, and the doinge of the multitude in the seconde of the actes, doe not abbridge the first institucion of Chryst, or take yt awaie, as his seconde ordeinance in sending his Apostles to preache Acto. 2. taketh awaie the first: but they doe raither teache, that oute of the solemne action of Chrystes memoriall, whiche must be doen vnder both kindes of him that doeth that action, other maie verie well receaue the Sacrament vnder one kinde. And as yt maie be doen bycause the scriptures saie, yt hath C ben doen: so shall yt appeare to euerie faithfull man that yt ys well doen, yf he trulie conceaue and vnderstand what ys doen.
In the catholique faith yt ys taught, that after the consecracion, as by manie yt ys allreadie testified, in the Sacrament vnder the forme of bread ys the verie bodie of Chryst, and vnder the forme of wine the verie bloode of Chryst, not in this, bloode withoute a bodie: nor in that, a bodie withoute bloode. For Chryst, as Sainct Paule saieth, rising from the dead, nowe dieth not, death shall no more haue lordshippe ouer him. Nowe yf the bodie were withoute bloode, yt coulde not be liuinge and so shoulde death be in the bodie of Chryst again, wherfor yt ys a bodie with bloode, and so a liuing and a perfight bodie, as the holie Martyr Cyprian testisieth yt to be, sainge: Panis iste communis in carnem & sanguinem Domini mutatus procurat vitam This Cypr. de coena Dom, Vnder forme of bread both fleshe and bloode of Chryst. Iren lib. 5. Ʋnder forme of wine the bodie of Chryste. comon bread chaunged into the flesh and blood of our Lorde procureth life. The bread then chaunged into the flesh and blood of Chryst, teacheth vs that yt ys not flesh alone, but yt ys both flesh and bloode: So likewise vnder the forme of wine ys not the bloode of Chryst onelie but the bodie D also. Wherof we haue the testimonie of the auncient Martyr Irenaeus, who saieth thus: Calicem qui est creatura, suum corpus consirmauit. He affirmed the cuppe, whiche ys a creature to be his bodie. So that vnder eche of the kindes ys verilie and substanciallie the bodie and bloode of Chryste: For where a [Page]liuelie bodie ys, ther must be bloode also: And where bloode ys, ther must be slesh and veines also, as Irenaeus saieth: Sanguis non est nisi a venis, & carnibus, E & à reliqua, quae est secundum hominem, substantia. Bloode ys not but of the veines and slesh, and the other substance, whiche ys as man. Wherfor I saie that Iren. ihid. vnder eche of these kindes ys the bodie of Chryst.
Whiche thing also S. Bernarde teacheth by expresse woordes in his sermon of the supper of our Lorde, sainge: Idipsum, o Christiane, de vino sentias, id Bern. serm. de coen. honores in vino, quod scilicet de panis specie sensisti, & in ea honorasti. Vnderstande euen the same (o chrystian) of the wine honour that in the wine, that thowe didest vnderstand of the forme of bread, and didest honoure in yt.
And wher Melancton saieth, that this necessitie that where the bodie ys, there must be bloode, and where the blood ys, ther of necessitie must be the bodie: ys but mens inuencions and tradicions hauing a contenance of trueth, but not the thing: Thowe seest (Reader) that we stand not vpon phantasies, but we stande and staie vpon the authoritie of the great auncient Fathers, and holie Martyrs. Sainct Irenaeus, S. Cyprian, and S. Bernarde, who teache what in this poinct ys to be saied. And therfor Melancton, and his F likes sainge that the one kinde ys but half the Sacrament, and diuiding Chryste confesse him not to be whollie vnder eche kinde cleaueth to his phantasies, and singular deuises, and foloweth not the doctrine of the Fathers.
But we sainge Vale to Melancton and his inuencion we cleaue to the substanciall, and auncient doctrine of the Fathers, and by that we conclude, Wholl Christe being vnder eche kinde, the people be not defrauded receauing but one kinde. that the bodie and bloode of Chryst ys necessarelie vnder eche kinde, as whollie and perfectlie vnder the one as vnder the other. And forasmoche as the Godhead ioined to Chryst in vnitie of person ys inseparable from the manhead, therfor yt foloweth of necessitie also that the bodie being vnder eche kinde the godhead that hath taken to yt self the same bodie, ys with the same bodie vnder eche kinde, and so vnder eche kinde ys wholl Chryst God and man. And being so, he ys there with all his giftes, graces, merittes, and vertues. Wherfor he that receaueth the Sacrament vnder one kinde, receaueth woll Chryst, God and man. And yf he receaue yt woorthilie, receaueth G him with his giftes and graces, according to the measure of the gift of Chryst.
Nowe then perceauing what ys doen in the receipt of the Sacrament, vnder one kinde, namelie that ther ys receaued wholl Chryst God and man with all his giftes and graces as fullie and perfectlie, as yf both kindes were receaued, so that the receauer ys nothing defrauded of the effect of the Sacrament: yt maie be perceaued that so to receaue ys well doen and laufullie doen. Yf yt be then asked, whie Chryst did institute the Sacrament vnder both kindes, yf yt be sufficient to receaue the one: the aunswer ys made whie Christ instituted the Sacr. vnder bothe kindes before, that he did institute the Sacrament vnder bothe kindes to be frequented as the solemne memoriall of his passion, and death, in the presence of his Churche yet he himself ministred vnder one kinde to declare that to priuate men he leaueth yt indifferent to receaue vnder one or bothe. Thus H moche ys saied vpon the scripture for the receauing of the blessed Sacrament vnder one kinde.
THE EIGHT AND SIXTETH CHAPITER, A prooueth the same receipt vnder one kinde to be laufull by the auncient practise of the Churche.
AS the enemies of Chrystes Churche in the subuersion of Boemia, reioiced that they had sownde oute (as they thought) some notable errour in the Churche, whiche ys (as they wolde haue yt vnderstanded) directlie against the scriptures, namelie the receauing of the Sacrament vnder one kinde, against this sainge of Chryst in Sainct Iohn. Except ye eate the slesh of the Sonne of man, and drink his blood, ye shall not haue life in yowe. So the Aduersaries of Chrystes Church in these our daies likewise reioice, and in their owne conceipt triumphe against the same, saing that yt erreth, and doeth directly both against the plain institucion of Chryst, who did institute the same Sacrament vnder two kindes, and so gaue yt furth to be receaued: and also against the vse and example of the B primitiue Churche, which did minister the same manie hundreth yeares after Chryst vnder both kindes.
Among these the Proclamer singeth a part, and saieth, that the Communion vnder both kindes was vsed throughoute the wholl Churche sixe hundreth yeares Proclamers obiection of the practise of the primitiue churche. after Chrystes ascension without exception. But for the proofe of this his sainge he bringeth in but a litle fragment of Gelasius an olde Father of the Churche, and a Bishoppe of Rome, whiche ys this: Diuisio vnius eiusdemue mysterij sine grandi sacrilegio non potest peruenire. The diuision of one verie mysterie, can not be doen withoute great sacriledge.
But as the one parte of their wicked slaunder ys allreadie declared to be vntrue, for that to receaue the Sacrament vnder one kinde, as ys saied, ys not against the scriptures: So shall yt be made as plain that the other ys as vntrue, for that ye shall euidentlie see the practise and examples of the primitiue Churche in diuerse ages to haue vsed the Sacrament vnder one kinde. C
But first we shall aunswere the obiection, that the Proclamer maketh by Gelasius. For the whiche yt ys to be vnderstanded, that the heresie Gelasius his meening opened. of the Manicheis, whiche began in the time of Belix the fiue and twenteth Bishop of Rome after Sainct Peter, in the yeare of our Lorde two hundreth, seuenteth and two: continued to the time of Gelasius, who ruled the Church of Rome, the yeare of our Lorde four hundreth, neinteth and foure whiche heresie, as Sainct Augustine did with great labour, and like learning impugne: so did diuerse holie Fathers, and rulers of Chrystes Church trauail, for yt did moche vexe the Church, to represse and vtterlie to extinguish yt.
Nowe in the time of Gelasius, ther were manie of them in Rome, who vsinge dissimulacion to cloake their heresie, came among the Chrystian Manicheis howe they dissimuled in receauīg the Saer. people to the receipt of the Sacrament. But for that they beleued that Chryst had no verie naturall bodie of man born of the Virgen Marie, but a phantasticall bodie, therfor they contented them selues to receaue the D Sacrament vnder the forme of bread, they wickedlie phantasieng yt, as a memoriall of the phantasticall bodie of Chryst. But when they shoulde come to receaue the Sacrament vnder the forme of wine, they conueighed [Page]them selues awaie, bicause, they beleued that the bodie of Chryst, which as ys saied, they did take to be phantasticall, had no bloode. And therfor E they wolde receaue no Sacrament of his blood. The Eutychians also Eutychians their heresi denieng the humane nature to abide in Chryste, and therfor to haue anie perfect naturall bodie in the Sacrament, ioined at that time with the Manicheis, and with like dissimulacion contenting them selues to receaue the Sacrament vnder the forme of bread, as the Sacrament of a certain diuine, and heauenlie bodie, they, as the other did, sledd from the receipt of the other kinde, phantasieng no blood to be in soche a bodie.
Of whiche their wicked doinges, Gelasius hauing intelligence to the intent they might be discerned and well knowen from the true Chrystians, and so to be deprehended, he made a like decree, as before him, for the same pourpose, and against the same men, did the holie Father Leo the first, Bishopp of Rome not manie yeares before Gelasius. The verie woordes of which Leo to the better vnderstanding of the matter, I thinke verie necessarie to asscribe, and they be these: Abducant se Sacramento salutis humanae & Christum Dominum nostrum, sicut in veritate carnis nostrae denegant natum, F Leoser. 4. de quadr. ita mortuum verè, & resurrexisse non credunt, & ob hoc diem salutis nostrae, & laetitiae nostrae sui ieiunij moerore condemnant. Cumue ad tegendum infidelitatem suam nostris audeant interesse mysterijs, ita in Sacramentorum communione se temperant, vt interdum tutius lateant. Ore indigno Christi corpus accipiunt sanguinem autem redemptionis nostrae haurire omnino declinant. Quod ideo vestram volumus scire sanctitatem, vt vobis huiusmodi homines & ijs manisestentur indicijs, & quorum depraehensa fuerit sacrilega simulatio, notati & proditi, à sanctorum societate, sacerdotali authoritate pellantur. They with drawe them selues from the Sacrament of the health of man. And as they denie Chryst our Lorde to be borne in the veritie of our nature: So doe they not beleue him to haue ben verilie dead, and risen again. And therfor doe they condemne the daie of our health and gladnesse, with the sadnesse of their fasting. Manichies fasted on the sundaie And when to couer their infidelitie, they are so bolde to be at the ministracion of our mysteries, to the entent they maie be the longer vnknowen, they tempre themselues so in the communion of the Sacramentes, G That with vnwoorthie mouthe they receaue the bodie of Chryst, but to drinke A plain place for reall presence against the Proclamer the bloode of our redemption they vtterlie refuse. Whiche thing we will your holinesse to vnderstande, that these maner of men by these tokens maie be knowen, and whose sacrilegall dissimulacion ys perceaued being disclosed, and noted they maie be by the preistlie authoritie banished from the so cietie or felowshippe of true Chrystian people.
In these woordes ye maie learn the heresies of the Manicheis, ye maie perceaue their wicked dissimulacion, ye maie vnderstand the verie cause whie they wolde not receaue the Sacrament vnder the forme of wine, finallie ye maie perceaue to what pourpose bothe kindes were commaunded to be receaued, namely that soche cloaked heretiques might by soche means be disclosed and knowen.
Nowe Gelasius succeading this man, and finding this of springe of vipers H not yet destroied, he folowed him in pronowncing against them, as he did folowe him in time and gouernement, and saied thus: Comperimus Gelasius. autem, quòd quidam sumpta tantùm sacri corporis portione, à calice sacrati cruoris abstineant, qui procul dubiò (quoniam nescio qua superstitione docentur astringi) aut integra Sacramenta percipiant, aut ab integris arceantur, quia diuisio [Page 230] vnius eiusdemue mysterij sine grandi facrilegio non potest peruenire. We certenlie finde, that certain men, when they haue receaued the porcion of the A holie bodie, they doe abstein from the cuppe of the holie bloode, who forasmoche as I knowe not by what supersticion they are taught so to be Porcion of the holie bodie and cuppe of the holie blood. witholden, let them without all doubte either receaue the wholl Sacramentes, or ells let them be forbidden from the wholl. For the diuision of one verie mysterie can not be doen withoute great sacriledge. Thus he,
Nowe yf ye will referre this sentence of Gelasius to the sentence of Leo, ye shall perceaue that Gelasius writeth not against the doing of the catholique Churche receauing the Sacrament vnder one kinde. But against the Manychies, who by their heresie diuided the blessed mysterie of Chryst, and teaching that he had but a phantasticall bodie, denied anie verie blood to be in yt, And therfor in their dissembling maner receauing one kinde as a Sacrament of soche phantasticall bodie, as they phantasied him to haue, they refused the other kinde as a Sacrament of his bloode, and so in their conceat they diuided the bloode from the bodie, and so diuided the mysterie, whiche (as Gelasius saieth) can not be doen withoute great sacrilege, which thing euery good catholique affirmeth and B embraceth.
For yf ye will call to remembrance, yt ys declared in the last chapiter that the catholique Churche teacheth that the verie bodie and bloode of Chryst, euen wholl Chryst, God and man ys vnder eche kinde, so that we Doctrine of the catholike churche touching eche kinde of the Sacr. make no diuision of the bodie from the bloode, or of the bloode from the bodie: or of the godhead from the manheade, or of the manhead from the godhead, but we teache the wholl verie bodie, and the wholl verie bloode, whol God, and wholl man iointelie to be in these Sacramentes of Chrystes bodie and bloode, albeit the one ys more principallie the Sacrament of his bodie, and the other more principallie the Sacrament of his bloode.
Weigh then therfor that these sainges were not spoken against Catholiques, but against heretiques, that by their wicked heresie diuided the bloode of Chryst from his bodie, phantasieng him a bodie withoute bloode, whiche in dede ys a great sacriledge: Seing then yt ys spoken against C soche maner of heretiques, whie doeth this Proclamer so wrest and wring this Authour to make him appeare to the vnlearned that he spake against the catholique vse of one kinde in the Churche, when the Authour hath not one title against yt? Bothe kindes were commaunded to be vsed. But whie? Not that one kinde were not sufficient, but that those heretiques (as Leo saieth) might therby be knowen, and therfor was yt expedient at that time to be commaunded to the confutacion of that heresie, as in the Councells of constance, and Basill yt was expedient to be doen vnder one kinde for the confutacion of soche heresies, as Wycleff, and Husse, had raised. And as these thinges haue ben altered as yt hath ben thought good to the Churche for the wealth of Gods people, and the confutacion of his enemies: So ys this commaunded but for a time, and maie be altered as occasion shall serue, but not by euerie priuate man, but by the Church onelie. D
But will ye besides all this wresting of this Authour see also the synceritie or raither the false sleight of this Proclamer, who to deceaue his audience, wolde not faithfullie bring in the whol saing of the Authour, as I haue nowe doen. But brought in half a skore of the last [Page]woordes, and left oute (I thinke I maie saie) of verie pourpose an wholl skore that go before, bycause they made so moche against him, that he durst E not for shame bring them whollie in.
For in the former woordes be two thinges verie plainlie taught against Gelasius truncatlie alleaged by the Proclamer auoucheth two thinges against him, whiche he concealed. him. The first ys the verie reall presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode, in that he so reuerentlie calleth the Sacrament vnder one kinde the porcion of the holie bodie, and the other he calleth, the cuppe of the holie bloode. As this ys spoken reuerentlie: So ys yt spoken plainlie. For when he saieth that they abstein from the cuppe of the holie bloode, he plainlie teacheth that the content of the cuppe ys holie bloode, which holie blood ys not mere spirituall. For that, as yt ys diuerse times saied, ys not conteined in extern or outwarde materiall vessells, but in the inwarde spirituall vessells.
And although this one parte of the Authours sainge, whiche the Proclamer left oute, doeth prooue the reall presence: Yet marke an other as affectuall as this, whiche ys, that he saieth, that these wicked men, these Manychies, against whome he pronownced this sentence, did receaue the holie bodie. Of the whiche men also Leo saied: Ore indigno Christi F corpus accipiunt. They with vnwoorthie mouthe, receaue the bodie of Chryst. Yf they receaued the holie bodie, forsomoche as they did not, being euell men, receaue the holie bodie spirituallie, yt argueth inuinciblie that they receaued the holie bodie corporallie.
The seconde thing, that he teacheth ys, the he calleth not these two kindes, Sacramentum, a Sacrament: But Sacramenta, Sacramentes, in the Eche kinde an wholl Sacram. plorall nombre: Signifieng therbie that eche of them ys an wholle Sacrament. And by this be aunswered the fonde sainges of the Aduersarie, whiche he vseth against the catholique Church sainge, that her preistes geue vnto the people but half a Sacrament, or a peice of a Sacrament, a truncate Sacrament, and soche like. Wher by this Proclamers Authour, at the least by him produced, yt ys manifest that the people receauing one kinde receaue an wholl Sacrament, and not a peice: They receaue wholl Chryst and not half, or a peice of Chryst. G
By this then yt maie be perceaued that the Authour whiche the Proclamer hath truncatelie alleaged against the catholique Churche, beinge whollie produced and trulie vnderstanded maketh all together against him. Soche ys the synceretie of the man in the handling of the doctours, that bringing in ten woordes that semed, but in dede made nothing for him, he left oute thirtie that directlie made so moche, and so plainlie against him, that I dare saie, he was ashamed, and his conscience moche rebuked to bring them in. But why shoulde not he vse his false shelft in them nowe as well as Melanchton did his false corrupcion before?
He than being thus fullie aunswered: we will nowe see the practise of the Churche for the receauing vnder one kinde, that his trueth maie as well be perceiued in this, as his falsheade ys in the other. For introduction people in the primitiue church earned home the Sacr. to receaue yt in their houses secretlie. wher vnto yt ys to be vnderstanded, that in the primitiue Churche were manie, and great persecucions moued against the Chrystians, H by reason of whiche they coulde not but seldome come together to common praier, and ministracion of the Sacramentes, wherfor the preist at soche time as they might meet deliuered them of the Sacrament wrapped in fair limen cloathes to carie home with them, that where they coulde not when they wolde receaue the Sacrament at the hand of the preist in [Page 231]their common assemblies, yet they might secretlie at home receaue yt by their owne handes. And this coulde be none other, but the Sacrament vnder A the forme of breade.
The plain practise wherof we finde declared by Tertullian, who writing to his wief, and disswading her from the marriage of anie infidell after his deceasse, vseth her priuate receipt of the Sacrament, as a thing to disswade her bie, saing: Non sciet maritus, quid secretò ante omnem cibum gusles? & si sciuerit, Li 2. ad vxorcia. Practises of the primitiue churche prouing aswell reall presence, as reseruacion and priuate or sole receipt of the blessed Sac. panem, non illum credit esse qui dicitur. Shall not thy husbande, knowe what thowe doest eate secretlie before all meat? and yf he doe knowe yt, he will not beleue yt to be that bread, that yt ys saied to be. As who might saie. wher ye vse in the morninges secretie, and fasting to receaue the Sacrament, whiche I being a chrystian man, and your husband ye maie verie well doe, but yf I die either by naturall death or by persecucion for my faith, which in this time ys like, yf after my deceasse, ye marrie with an infidell, will not he (thinke yow) perceaue what yow doe secretlie receaue when ye be fasting, and so perchaunce forbidde ye so to doe, or yf he suffre yow: yet this incommoditie and greif ye shall haue, that where ye take yt, and beleue yt (as yt ys in dede) a great mysterie, he wil not regarde yt, neither B will he beleue yt to be anie other thing then breade. By this then yt ys manifest, that this was a practise of the primitiue Churche to receaue the Sacrament vnder one kinde, that was vnder the forme of breade, whiche might best be reserued, and that they did yt secretlie alone withoute anie nombre of Communicantes, as hereafter also more at large shall be snewed.
For this priuate maner of the receipt of the Sacrament Sainct Basill geueth a notable testimome. Who writing to a godlie woman, that for the reuerence that she bare to the blessed Sacrament feared to receaue the same into her handes, as then the vse was, and to carie yt home (as yt ys saied) in a fair linnen cloathe, and to reserue yt to receaue when deuocion should moue her, withoute the ministracion of the preist, saieth thus. Illud autem in persecutionis temporibus necessitate cogi quempiam, non praesente sacerdote, aut ministro Communionem proprta manu sumere, nequaquam esse graue superuacaneum Bas Epist. ad Cas pat. C est demonstrare. Proptereà quòd longa consuetudine hoc ipso rerum vsu confirmatum est. Omnes enim in eremis solitariam vitam agentes, vbi non est sacerdos, Communionem domi seruantes, à seipsis communicant. In Alexandria verò & in Aegypto vnusquisque eorum, qui sunt de populo, plurimùm habet Communionem in domo sua, Semel enim sacerdote sacrificium consecrante, & distribuente, meritò participare, & suscipere, credere oportet. Etenim & in Ecclesia sacerdos dat partem, & accipit eam is, qui suscipit cum omni libertate, & ipsam admouet ori propria manu. Idem igitur est virtute siue vnam partem quis accipiet à sacerdote, siue p'ures partes simul. As for that not to be a greuouse thing in the times of persecucion, anie In Alexandria and Egypt people had the Sac. in their priuate houses reserued man to be enforced, with his owne hande to receaue the Communion, the preist or Deacon not being present, yt ys more then neadeth to prooue, for bicause the same thing ys by along custome, and by the verie vse of thinges established and confirmed. For all they that in the wildernesse Lead a solitarie life, reseruing the Communion in their houses, wher ther ys no preist, they communicate them selues. In Alexandria D and in Egypt euerie one of the people for the most parte haue the Sacrament in their houses. When the preist hath once consecrated the sacrifice, and distributed yt, we must beleue that we doe receaue, and [Page]participate the same. For in the Churche also the preist geueth parte, and he that receaueth yt, taketh yt with all libertie, and with his owne hand E putting yt to his mouthe. Yt ys therfor all one thing in vertue of power, whether a man take one parte of the preiste or manie partes together. Thus moche he.
Omitting to note vnto yow here in Sainct Basill. howe the Sacrament was reserued in the houses of the Chrystian people to receaue as their deuocion moued them, which inuinciblie and most plainlie affirmeth and prooueth that the Aduersarie denieth, namelie that the Sacrament ought to be reserued: I wish yow to note for that that ys before saied, that Sainct Basill saieth, that in the times of persecucion the people receaued the Sacrament at home by them selues, when they had once receaued yt at the preistes handes. And this Sainct Basill wisheth to be taken as no straunge thing, for that they in Alexandria and Egypt, yea and all soche as liued solitarelie in wildernesse had the Sacrament at home with them, and did communicate them selues. Which thing was not latelie practised, but yt ys a thing established and confirmed by auncient vse and custome long before the time of F Sainct Basill. And being long before Sainct Basill I trust the Aduersarie will graunt that yt was an accustomed practise of the primitine Churche to reserue the Sacrament, and to receaue yt vnder one kinde, for that in those whotte contries soche small porcions of wine will not be kept conuenientlie in their owne kinde soch long time, as they were forced to reserue the Sacrament in the wildernesse and ells wher.
Yf yow desire a more plain testimonie for this receipt vnder one kinde harken to Sainct Cyprian, who writeth thus: Praesente ac teste meipso, accipite quid euenerit. Parentes fortè fugientes, dum trepidi minus consulunt sub nutricis alimento Cypr ser. 5. de lapsis. par [...]ulam siliam reliquerunt. Relictam nutrix detulit ad magistratus. Illi ei apud idolum quò populus consoluebat, quòd carnem necdum posset edere per aetatem, panem mero mixtum (quod tamen & ipsum de immolatione pereuntium superat) tradiderunt. Recepit siliam postmodum mater. Sed facinus puella commissum tam loqui & indicare non potuit, quam nec intelligere prius potuit, nec arcere. Ignoratione igitur obreptum est, vt sacrificantibus nobis, eam secum mater inferret. Sed enim puella mixta cum sanctis, G precis nostrae & orationis impatiens, nunc ploratu concuti, nunc mentis estu sluctuabunda iactari, velut tortore cogente, quibus poterat indicijs conscientiam sacti in simplicibus adhuc annis, rudis anima fatebatur. Vbi verò solemnibus adimpletis calicem Diaconus offerre praesentibus coepit, & accipientibus caeteris, locus eius aduenit, faciem suam paruulainstinctu maiestatis diuinae auertertere, os labijs obturantibus premere, calicem recusare. Perstitit tamen Diaconus, & reluctanti licet, de Sacramento calicis infudit. Tunc sequitur singultus, in corpore atque ore violato Eucharistia permanere non potuit. Sanctisicatus in Domini sanguine potus de pollutis visceribus erupit. Heare what happened my self being present and witnesse. The parentes of a childe flienge Of a child that receaued of the wine offred to idolls, ād afterward the B. Sac. by chaunce, while in their feare they tooke not good adwisement, lefte their litle daughter at nourcing. The nource brought the litle one so left vnto the officers. They before an idolle, wher the people were gathered, did deliuer vnto the same litle one, bicause yt coulde not as yet for lacke H of age eate fleshe, a soppe dipped in the wine, whiche remaineth of the immolacion or sacrifice of the idolaters. Afterward the mother receaued her daughter. But the girle coulde not speake, and declare the offence comitted. euen as before she coulde not vnderstand yt, nor withstand and let yt, yt fell oute therfor by ignorance, that while we were doing sacrifice, the [Page 232]mother brought her in with her. But trulie the girle being among holie people, and not able to abide our supplicacions and praiers, sometime was A constreigned to crie oute, somtime with vehement greifes of minde tossed here and there, and euen as the tortoure had forced her, the ignorant soule by soche tokens as she coulde, did knowleg or confesse the conscience of the facte in these her tender yeares. And when the solemne seruice was fullfilled the deacon began to offre the cuppe to them that were present, and other receauing yt, her place came to receaue. The litle one euen by the mocion The Sacr. was ministred to this childe vnder one kinde. of the diuine maiestie, turned awaie her face, stopped her mouthe with holding her lippes together, and refused the cuppe. The deacon notwithstanding persisted, and euen against her wil powred in to her of the Sacramēt of the cuppe. Then ensewed boakinge and vomit. The Sacrament coulde not abide in that desiled bodie and mouth, The sanctified drinke in the bloode of our Lorde, brust oute of the polluted bowells. Thus farre he.
For the better vnderstāding of S. Cyprian obserue that in his time, and so to the time of S. August. yt was in vse to ministre the Sacramēt vnto infantes being chrystened, as to other of perfight age? And yet yt was to this childe ministred not vnder both kindes, but vnder the forme of wine onelie. For yf B yt had ben ministred before vnder the forme of bread, the like effect shoulde haue folowed in the childe that folowed vpon that other kinde, bothe kindes being of one vertue might and power. Wherfor yt was ministred vnder one kinde, that was vnder the forme of wine,
Of this maner of ministraciō vnder one kinde we finde a goodlie testimonie also of the practise of the Churche in the time of Chrysostome, reported in the historie of Sozomenus in this maner. Ioanne Constantmopolitanam Ecclesiam optimè gubernante, vir quidam è Macedoniana haeresi, vxorem eiusdem opinionis habebat. Eccl. hist. li. 8. cap. 5. Hic, cùm Ioannem quomodò de Deo sentiendum esset, docentem audisset, dogma illius laudabat, & vxorem quoque vt secum sentiret hortabatur. Cùm verò illa magis nobilium mulierum sermonibus, quam illius consuetudini obtemperaret, & post frequentes admonitiones vir illius nihil effecisset: Nisi (inquit) in diuinis consors fueris, neque in vitae communione posthac eris. Mulier hoc audito, & consensum simulatè policita, rem eam famulae cuidam communicat, quam fidam sibi esse iudicabat, illiusue opera ad fallendum virum vritur. C Circa tempus autem mysteriorum (sciunt initiati quid sit quod dico) illa quod accepit continens, quasi oratura procumbit. Famula astans clanculum illi dat, quod secum in manu attulerat. Hoc cùm dentibus admoueretur in lapidem congelascit. Mulier perterrefacta, metuens ne quid sibi mali propter eam rem, quae diuinitus acciderat, contingeret, ad Episcopum cursu contendit, ac seipsam prodens lapidem ostendit, adhuc morsi vestigia habentem & materiam incognitam, coloremue admirabilem ostendentem, simulue veniam cum lachrimis petens, viro suo consensuram se policetur. Quodsi hoc cuipiam incredibile videtur lapis iste testis est, qui etiamnum inter clinodia Ecclesiae Constantinopolitanae asseruatur. In the time of the good gouernement of the church of Constantinople by The historie of a woman that for the Sac. receaued a stone. Iohn Chrysostome, a certain man of the heresie of the Macedonians had a wief of the same opinion. This man when he had hearde Iohn Chrysostom teaching what was to be thought of God, he commended his doctrine, and exhorted his wief, that she also shoulde be of his minde. But when she did more regarde the woordes of noble women, then his conuersacion or maner in saithe, and after manie admonicions her husbande had doen no D good in her, he saied vnto her: Except in the matters of God thowe be a companion withe me, thowe shalt not hereafter be a partaker of liuing with me. The woman when she had heard this, and had dissimulatelie promised to consent vnto [Page]him she tolde the matter to a certain woman seruant whom she iudged to E be trustie vnto her, whose helpe she vsed to begile her husbande. Aboute the time of the mysteries (they that be taught the faith, knowe what I saie) she keping still that she had taken, falleth downe, as though she wolde praie. This womā recaaued vnder one kinde onelie Her woman seruant standing by her geueth vnto her priueily, that she had brought in her hande: which thing when she had putte to her teeth yt congealed into a stone. The woman being astoined, fearing least some euell shoulde happen her for that thing, which by Gods power had chaunced, she goeth with spede to the Bishoppe, and accusing her self, she sheweth the stone, hauinge yet the markes or printes of her bitinge, and shewing an vnknowen matter and a merueillouse coloure, and withall desiering with teares forgeuenesse she promiseth to agree to her husbande. Yf this thing seeme to anie man incredible, this stone ys witnesse of the matter, whiche vntill this daie ys kept in the Churche of Constantinople.
As this historie ys notable: so for the pourpose yt ys euident that the Sacrament was ministred vnder one kinde, that was vnder the forme of breade. F For the woman takinge that in her hand, and not minding to receaue yt kept that still and tooke some other thing of her seruant to eate, and so thought to haue begiled her husbande, so their was but one kinde receaued.
To be short, as of the learned yt ys testifieth, the maner of receauing vnder one kinde, whiche ys vsed in all the latin Churche vpon good fridaie, on The maner of receauīg vnder one kinde vpon good fridaie vsed in the primitiue Churche. whiche daie the preist receaueth the host consecrated vpon Mawndie Thursdaie, hath ben so vsed from the primitiue Churche. Wherbie as by that that ys before saied also, yt doeth well appeare, that the receauing vnder one kinde, hath ben practised in the primitiue Churche, notwithstanding the false reporte of the Proclamer. Wherfore, Reader, be not deceaued with soche bragges of vntrueth. For though he hath saied yt, he neither doeth nor can prooue yt, but stand thowe to the doctrine of the catholique Churche, who what she teacheth, she prooued to be true, as by this matter thowe doest perceaue. G
Thus hauing nowe ended the scriptures of the Gospell, with thankes to God, we ende this seconde booke, praing that yt maie be to his honour, and to the profitte of the Readers. Amen.
THE THIRDE BOOK. A
THE FIRST CHAPITER ENTRETH BY PREface into the first text of saincte Paule that toucheth the Sacrament and expwndeth yt according to the letter.
DIdymus, of whome, for that he was a famouse learned man, sainct Hierom desiered to be taught and instructed, in his firste booke of the holie Gost (whiche worke ys translated by sainct Hierom) considering howe great a matter yt was to treacte of li. 1. de Spiritu sancto. Diuine thinges are with reuerence anc diligence to be hādled. diuine thinges, and that therfor they aught with reuerence to be vsed, he saieth thus: Omnibus quidem, quae diuina sunt, cum reuerentia, & vehementi B cura oportet intendere. We must with reuerence and great care, diligentlie looke vnto all thinges that be diuine. Wherfore mindinge by Gods ayde, to proceade in treacting of the blessed Sacrament of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, and of the presence of the same our Sauiour Iesus Chryst, werie God and verie man in that Sacrament, with other matters therunto apperteining, whiche be in deed diuine matters, I wish not onelie vnto my self in the writing, but also to the reader in the reading, that reuerence, that to eche of vs apperteineth. Before in the beginning of the first booke.
And for my parte considering what I haue allreadie writen as concerning the holie scriptures, that they be harde and darke, so that (as sainct Hierom saieth) Sine praeuio & monstrante semitam ingredi non possumus, withoute a fore guyde and a shewer, we can not entre the right path of them. And for somoche also as ther ys (the more pitie) so great controuersie of the matter to be treacted of: I will not be so rashe and irreuerent to the scriptures, Jrē. li. 3. ca 4. to handle them, wrest them, and abuse them after mine owne phantasie, but I will (as Irenaeus aduertiseth) haue recouerse to the eldest churches, and learn of them the truth, and true mening of soche scriptures, as be called C in question aboute the matter of the said Sacrament, of the whiche I Doubtes in controuersies wher to be dissolued. shall nowe treacte. Quid enim? & si quando de aliqua quaestione modica deceptatio esset, nonne in antiquissimas oportet recurrere ecclesias, in quibus Apostoli conuersati sunt, & ab eis de praesenti quaestione sumere, quod certum, & rei liquidum est. What? yf at anie time ther be a deceptacion of a litle matter, must we not runne or haue recourse to the eldest churches in the whiche the Apostles were conuersant, and of them to take that that ys certen and plain? Thys Ibidem. holie Father geueth so moche vnto the auncient Fathers, that yf ther were no scriptures he saieth, we shoulde folowe the ordre of tradicion, whiche the Apostles haue deliuered vnto them. Quid autem si neque Apostoli quidem scripturas reliquissent nobis, nonne oportebat ordinem sequi traditionis, quem tradiderunt his quibus committebant ecclesias? What (saith Irenaeus) yf neither the Apostles had lefte vs scriptures, did yt not behoue vs to folowe the order of Tradicion yt to be folowed. tradition, whiche they deliuered vnto those, to whome they committed the churches? Thus Irenaeus.
In whiche sentence of this holie Martyr we are not onelie taught, D that we aught to repare to the Fathers to haue our doubtes dissolued, and so to learn of them howe the Scriptures are to be vnderstanded but also for tradicions that be not written in the scriptures, [Page]for the reporte of whiche, as wel as for soche as be in the scriptures, we must creditt the Fathers. So that yt ys of this holie martyr to be learned, howe E moche the elders are to be esteemed, howe moche to be credited, and howe Which fathers are to be cōsulted with in controuersies. for certen knowledge of thinges that be in doubte and controuersie they must be consulted with, which were in the auncient church before the controuersie was euer moued. Of the whiche matter we reade a like counsell in the tripartite historie. Therfore as heretofore I haue not vsed mine owne iudgement or phantasie in the exposition of soche scriptures as Li. 9. ca. 19 do speake of this mysterie by me treacted of: No more will I hereafter in soche as shall be brought oute of S. Paule for the proof and confirmacion of the trueth of the matter of the blessed Sacrament and the mynistracion therof.
And first, to take the places and sentences here to be handled, in order as they are written by sainct Paule, we will beginne with this: Nolo enim vos 1. Cor. 10. ignorare fratres, quontam patres nostri omnes sub nube fuerunt, & omnes mare transierūt, & omnes in Moyse baptizati sunt in nube & in mari, & omnes eandem escam spiritualem F manducauerunt, & omnes cundem potum spiritualem biberunt, bibebant autem de spirituali consequente cos petra, Petra autem erat Christus. Brethren I wolde not that ye shoulde be ignorant how that our fathers were all vnder the clowde, and all passed through the Sea, and were all baptised vnder Moyses in the clowde and in the sea, and did all eate of one spirituall meate, and did all drinke of one spirituall drinke, and they dranke of that spirituall rocke that folowed them, whiche rocke was Chryst.
Yt shall not be without profit, for the better vnderstanding of this scripture, yf we do search the cause why sainct Paule maketh rehersall of soche benefittes, as the Iewes receaued at the hand of God, at their departure oute of Egypte, and in the desert. The cause ys bothe breiflie and clerelie Homel. in dictū Apostli Nolo vos ignor. declared by Chrysostom, who asketh the question, and solueth yt thus: Quare, & vnde incidit in hanc historiam? Increpabat eos qui temerè, & non requisiti ad Idola ingrediuntur, pollutam comedentes mensam, & tangentes Idolothyta. Et cùm ostendisset, quòd duplex damnum illi inde sustinerent, nam & insirmiores offendebant, & ipsi Daemoniorum participes erant, & cùm per praedicta G satis spiritus corum humilasset, & docuisset: ostendit fidelem spectare, non solùm quae sua sunt, debre, sed & quae multorum. Volens eis incutere timorem, veterem historiam eis recenset. Siquidem & illi magna de se sentiebant, quasi sideles, & ab errore liberati, & scientiam assecuti, ineffabilium sacramentorum participes effecti, necnon & ad regnum coelorum vocati. Volens ergo declarare quòd illorum nulla sit vtilitas, nisi adsit vita tantae gratiae respondens, ex veteri historia ipsos erudit. Wherfore, Why S. Paule reherseth the benefittes that the Iewes receaued, 1. Cor. 10. and from whence fell he into this storie? He did rebuke them whiche rashlie, and not being required, did enter in to the Idolls, eatinge the defiled table, and touchinge thinges offred to Idolls: And when he had shewed that they by yt did suffer double harme. For they bothe offended the weak, and thy themselues wer partakers of Deuells. And when by the forsaied thinges he had sufficientlie humbled their spirittes, and had taught them. He declareth that the faithfull aught not onely to looke to those thinges that appertein to himself: but also to thinges that appertain to other manie. Nowe willing to strike feare into them, he reherseth good religiō without good life not auaiable. the olde historie vnto them. For they also did thinke moche of themselues, H as that they were become faithful and deliuered from errour, ād had obteined the knowledge of the vnspeakeable sacramentes, and made partakers of the same, and also that they were called to the kingdom of heauen. [Page 234]Willing therfore to declare, that of these thinges ther ys no prositte A except ther be a life aunswering to so great grace he doth teache them oute of the olde historie. Thus moch Chrysostom.
In whiche sentence ye perceaue the cause of the rehersall of the benefittes geuen to the Iewes, and so in that place recited by sainct Paule to be to put the Corinthians in feare, and to diswarde them from euell by the example of the Iewes, who notwithstanding the receipt of so manie benefittes, for that they were ingrate and disobedient, not seking by an aunswerable life to please their Lord God, as he by soche benefites did pleasure Benefites of the Jewesas they were figures of our benefites, so their plagues of our plagues. them, God in them had no pleasure, but plagued them, and ouerthrewe them in the desert. Euen so the Corinthians, who had receaued the verie thinges and true benefittes, as the Sacrament of Baptisme, the holie Gost, and had eaten the bodie of Chryst, and dronken hys bloode. Whiche benefittes were figured by the benefittes geuen to the Iewes, that yf they wolde be prowde, vnthankfull, and disobedient, and wolde not lead a life wourthie their vocacion, that God wolde after the gift of so manie benefittes and so great, as their demerittes required, haue no pleasure in them, but plague B them and ouerthrowe them, as he did the Iewes. For as their benefittes were figures of our benefittes: So their plagues and punishmentes, we figures In 10. 1. Cor. hom 23. of our plagues and punishmentes, as Chrysostom saieth: Quemadmodnm enim dona figurae sunt, ita & supplicia. Wherfore sainct Paule saieth: Haec autem infigura facta sunt nostri, vt non simus concupiscentes malorum sicut & illi concupierunt. These are figurs or examples vnto vs, that we shoulde not lust after euell thinges as they lusted. Faith with out woorks sufficethnot in persons of discretiō.
Here by the waie to note, by these scriptures ys ouerthrowen the wicked heresie of them whiche haue taught, that yf a man beleue in Chryst, and haue receaued hys sacramentes, howe wicked so euer hys life be, he shall be saued. For here ye perceaue that though the Corinthians had receaued the faith and the sacrament annexed to the same: yet yf ther life and conuersacion were not agreable and aunswerable, that they shoulde fall into Gods displeasure, and neither faith, neither sacramentes shoulde auaill them as Chrysostome doth expownde. C
The cause thus knowen why sainct Paule recited these thinges, yt were Foure benefites of the Jewes nombred. not amisse to knowe what thinges they were, and what commoditie or benefitt happened vnto the Iewes by these. These thinges in nombre be foure: The clowde, the Sea, Manna, and the water that flowed oute of the rocke. Of these foure Esdras, reciting vnto God hys benefittes shewed and doen, saieth thus: And the readde Sea didest thowe diuide before them 2. Esd. 9. in sundre, so that they went through the middest of the Sea drie shooed, and their persecutours threwest thowe in to the depth as a stone in mightie waters, and leddest them on the daie time in a clowdie piller, and on the night season in a piller of fire, to shewe them light in the waie that they went. Thowe gauest them bread from heauen when they were hongrie, and broughtest furth water for them oute of the rocke, when they were thirstie.
The diuision of the read sea, wherof Esdras first maketh mencion, The read Sea. shall be perceaued to be a great wonderfull worke of God, and a great benefitt to the Israelites, yf the historie of the same be considered. In the booke of Exodus we read, that when Pharao king of Egypt, Exod. 14. had, according to gods commaundement sent vnto him by Moyses, D permitted the children of Israell to departe oute of Egypte: he being a man of wicked heart, when they were goen, with might and force [Page]prepared to folowe them, and to persecute them. Whose mighttie armie, and great nombre of horses and chariettes, when the Israelites sawe poursewing E them: and with all considering the great strait that they were in, hauing Pharao and his hoste behind them at their backe, and the readd sea before them: So that ther appeared vnto them nothing but wofull distresse, and ineuitable perill of death, they were sore afraied and caried oute to God. And Moyses stretched oute his hand ouer the read Sea, and God caried awaie the Sea, by a verie strong east winde all that night, and made the Sea drie land, so that the children of Israell went through the middest of the Sea with drie feet, hauing the waters as a wall vnto them, bothe on the right hand, and on the leste. And the Egyptians folowed after them into the middest of the Sea, and God caused the waters to return vpon them, and drowned them with their horses, and chariettes. For whiche great wonder Moyses sange in prayse to God: Flauit spiritus tuus, & operuit cos mare, submersi sunt quasi Exod. 15. plumbum in aquis vehementibus. The winde blewe, and the Sea couered them, they sanke like lead in the mightie waters. Filij autem Israell ambulauerunt per siccum in medio [...]eius. But the children of Israell went on drie land in the myddest therof. F
As ye maie perceaue by this, what a great worke of God, and howe great a benefitt to the Iewes yt was that sainct Paule in these fewe woordes spake The clowde. (that all passed through the redde Sea) So was yt likewise that he saied, that all the Fathers were vnder the cloude. Of the beginning of this clowd we read also in Exodus that when the children of Israell departed oute of Egypt, that theyr iourney should not be vncerten, and they wander without Exod. 13. & 14. ordre, the Lord went before them by daie in a piller of a clowde to lead them the waie, and by night in a piller of the fire to geue them light, that they might go both by daie and by night. The piller of the clowde departed not by daie, nor the piller of sire by night oute of the sight of the people. Benefites of the Clowde. This clowdie piller was not onelie a guide and a leader vnto the people: but yt was also a bullwarke of defence. For when Pharao with hys armie did persecute the children of Israell, the aungell of God, whiche went before the hoste of Israell, remoued and began to go behinde them. And the clowdie piller, that was before the face of them began to stand behind thē, and came betwen the host of the Egyptians, and the hoste of Israell. Yt was G also a darke clowde, and gaue light by night, and all night long the one came Num. 9. not at the other. Thys clowde did not onely nowe serue for the commoditie of the Israelites: but further on their iourney in the wildernesse, yt was a great benefitt vnto them, as we read in the booke of Nombres, wher we learn that yt couered the Tabernacle allwaie by daie, and the similitude of fire by night. And yt happened that when the clowde abode vpon the tabernacle from euen vnto the morning, and was taken vppe in that morning then they iourneied. Or yf the clowde taried two daies, or a moneth, or a long season vpon the tabernacle, and remained theron, the children of Israell aboad still and iourneied not. And as sooen as the clowde was taken vppe they iourneied. Of thys clowde also speaketh the Prophet Dauid in the psalme, reck ninge yt amonge other as a great benefitte of God geuen to the Israelites, Expandit nubem in protectionem eorum, & ignem vt luceret eis per noctem. Manna. He spred oute a clowde to be a couering, and fire to geue them light in the night season. Exd. 16. H
Thus this goodlie benefitt somwhat opened and declared, we shal do the like aboute the next, which ys Manna. Of the whiche we read, that the [Page 235]xv. daie of the seconde moneth, after the departing of the children of Israell A oute of the lande of Egypte, the wholl multitude of the children of Israell murmured against Moyses and Aaron in the wildernesse, and the children of Israell saied vnto them: wolde to God we had died by the hande of the Lorde in the lande of Egypte, when we sett by the flesh pottes, and when we did eate bread our bellies full. For ye haue brought vs out into this wildernesse to kill this wholl multitude with honger. Then saied the Lorde vnto Moyses: Be holde, I will rain breade from heauen to yowe, and the people shall go oute and gather daie by daie.
And in the same chapiter yt foloweth: And in the morning the dewe laie rownde aboute the host, And when the dewe was fallen, beholde yt laie vpon the grownde in the wildernesse small and rownde, and when the children of Israell sawe yt, they saied euery one to his neighbour: yt ys Manna. For they wist not what yt was. And Moyses saied vnto them this ys the bread, which the Lord hath geuen yowe to eate.
Thus God fedde the children of Israell in the wildernesse, wher they did neither sowe ne reape with this bread from heauen, of the whiche they had no lacke. This ys the meate that sainct Paule speaketh of that all the B fathers did eate of. This ys yt that ys spoken of in the Psalme. Et Psalm. 77. pluit illis Manna ad manducandum, & panem caeli dedit eis. He rained downe Manna also vpon them for to eate, and gaue them foode from heauen. Of the wounders of this bread more shall be saied in the next chapiter.
The last benefitt recited of sainct Paule in this place ys, that they all dranke Mater of the Rocke. of one drinke that came oute of the rocke. Of this miraculouse drinke we read, that when the children of Israell were in Raphadim wher was no water, the people thirsted, and therupon murmured against Moyses and saied: Exod. 17 Num. 20. Why hauest thowe brought vs oute of Egypt, to kill vs, and our children, and our cattell with thyrst? And Moyses and Aaron at the commaundement of God gathering the people together, Moyses tooke the rodde wher with he smote the riuer in Egypt and the redd Sea, and smott the rocke twice, and the water came oute of the rocke abundantly, and the multitude dranke, and their beastes also. And this was a miraculouse worke of God, and a great benefitt to the Iewes. Dauid the Prophet enombreth yt so among other the benefittes of God, doen for hys C people saing: Interrupit petram in eremo, & adaquauit eos velut in abysso multa. Psalm. 77. Et eduxit aquam de petra, & eduxit tanquam flumina aquas. He claue the harde rocke in the wildernes, and gaue them drinke therof as yt had ben oute of the great deapth, he brought waters oute of the stonie rocke, so that yt gushed oute like the riuers. Nowe these foure thinges conteined in sainct Paules sentence being opened and knowen what they be, and howe they were miraculously wrought for the commoditie and benefitt of the children of Israell, and wherfor sainct Paule did enombre them: the letter of the saied sentence maye be perceaued.
THE SECONDE CHAPITER SHEWETH what these foure thinges doen in the olde lawe did figure in E the newe lawe.
AS these foure thinges before rehersed, were verilie doen in the olde lawe: So are they figurs of thinges verily doe in the newe lawe. The figure must be like the thing figured in some poincts, but not in all. Neither must yt be in all poinctes vnlike, For then yt can not be a sigure, as Chrysostom saieth: Neque omnino alienum oportet esse typum à veritate. Alioqui non esset typus: Neque omnino adaequari veritati, quia alioqui & ipsa veritas foret, sed oportet manere in suo modo, & neque comprehendere Homilia indictū Apost Nolo vos ignor. omnem veritatem: neque omni veritate destitui. Nam si totum contingat, iterum ipsa est veritas: Si autem à toto destituatur, & nulla sit similitudo consequenter non potest esse figura. Neither must the figure altogeter be vnlike or not agreable to the trueth, or ells yt should not be a figure. Neither maie yt altogether be like vnto the trueth, for then yt shoulde be the trueth yt self. But yt must abide in his own maner, and neither in all thinges aunswer the trueth, neither in all things be A figure what a thīg yt must be. vnlike the trueth. For yf it aunswer al, yt ys again, the trueth yt self: but yf yt F be destitute of al, ād ther be no similitude of cōsequēce yt cā not be a figure.
In seking therfore of what thinges in the newe Testament, these thinges be the figures: yt shall be necessary to obserue, with what thinges they will most aptlie agree in similitude, and yet not in all partes. This shall be the better doen, if we first laie before vs soche thinges as be in the figure. And for somoche as sainct Paule in the rehersall of these figures, maketh first mencion of the clowde saing that all our Fathers were vnder the clowde, we also shall first speake of that.
As touching the whiche, I wish that yowe call to yowr remembrāce that Commodities of the Clowde. that was spoken in the last chapter, yt was ther declared, that the clowd was a leader of the people in their iourney, so that they wandred not in vncertē waies but folowing the clowde they walked the right waie, euen both in their flight oute of Egypt, and also in the wildernesse. Yt also defended them from the tyrannie of Pharao, and his host, standing betwixt them and their enemies, so that their enemies might not come to them to hurte them. A clowde also defendeth from the violent heat of the sunne, and mitigateth the G rage of the same, moch also refresheth the laboring man with the shadow of yt. A clowde also geueth dewes ād rain to moyst the earth wherby the goodlie and pleasant fruites of the earth are brought furth. These being the properties, let vs searche to what thing they maie be most aptlie applied vnto in the newe Testament.
Among all to no one thing maie they better agree, than to the holie Gost, as a learned writer saieth, expownding this place of sainct Paule: Quod enim illis nubes protegens, conducens, ac refrigerans: id nobis Spiritus sanctus, actionum nostrarum Dux, & protector, libidinumue moderator, & extinctor. That that the clowde defending, conducting, and refreshing was vnto them, that vnto vs ys the holie Gost, the guide and protectour of our doinges and the temperer and extinguisher The clowd applied to the holie Gost, as the sigure to the thing sigured. of our vnlaufull lustes.
By the clowde the children of Israell were ledde in their waie oute of Egypt through the wildernes to the land of promisse: By the holie Gost we are guided oute of the seruitude of the Deuell, and sinne, H through the desert of this worlde and life, to the land of euerlasting blesse. By the clowde they were defended from the Egyptians: By the [Page 236]holie gost we are preserued and defended, from the armie of sinnes and wickednesse. A Vnder the clowde they rested refreshed, and comforted them selues after their labours and trauaills in ther iourney, and otherwise in battaill: vnder the holie Gost, after we haue somwhat trauailed in the iourney of this life, and after conflictes and battaills had against the assaultes of the great Pharao the Deuell, the tentacions of sinnes, we rest and be refresshed and comforted by his grace, and made strong by his blessed helpe to trauaill again and fight a newe fight. Oute of the clowde cometh swete and pleasant dewes, and goodlie shoures of rain, wherby the earht ys moisted, and made lustie to bring furth good fruicts: From the holie Gost, cometh the swete and pleasaunt dewes of grace, and goodly shoures of godlie inspiracion, wherby man ys made lustie to bring furth good and godlie workes, and vertueouse exercises to the glorie of God, and good example of his neighbour. The clowd defendeth frō the heat of the Sūne ād mitigateth the raige of the same: The holie Gost defendeth from the heat of filthie concupiscence and lust, and mitigateth the raig of them. In this cōparison then yt maie be perceaued, howe aptlie the one answereth the other: so that we maie B very well call the cloude the figure of the holie Gost, of the whiche yet more shall be saied, wherbie the matter shall more clerely appeare to the reader, hereafter.
The seconde benefitt that S. Paule reherseth ys that the fathers, did passe Tract. 45. in Joan. through the redde sea. The redde Sea (as S. Augustine declareth) signifieth Baptisme: Mare rubrum signficat baptismum. Moyses ductor per mare rubrum, significat Christū. Populus transiens, significat fideles. Mors Aegyptiorum significat abolitionem pectorum. The reade Sea a figure of Baptism. The redde sea signifieth Baptisme. Moyses the leader through the redde sea signifieth Chryst. The people passing through yt signifieth the faithfull. The death of the Egiptians signifieth the abolishing of sinnes. Thus he.
In whiche saing of S. Augustin, we perceauing the thinges doen in the olde Testament to signifie thinges doen in the newe Testament, maie also by applicacion of the one to the other, perceaue howe answerable the one ys to the other, Whiche yet in some parte S. Augustine more clerely openeth in an other place: Rubet mare rubrum: Baptismus vtique Christi sangnine consecratus. C Hostes sequentes à tergo moriuntur: peccata praeterita. Ducitur populus per desertum: Cōt. Faust. baptisati omnes nondum perfruentes promissa patria, sed quod non vident, sperando & per patientiā expectando tanquam, in deserto sunt. The redde Sea ys redd, likewise Baptisme consecrated with the bloode of Chryst. The enemies folowing die be hinde their backe: the sinnes past are destroied. The people ys ledde through the desert: all the baptised not yet enioieng the promissed contrie, but hopping, and through pacience looking for that they see not, they are as in the desert. Thus moche S. Augustin.
Chrysostome also most manifestly setteth furth this figure, applieng yt to baptisme, as to the thinge by yt figured. And first he diligentlie noteth howe S. Paule to euery of these figurs, whiche the fathers receaued addeth this woorde (all) saing: all our fathers were vnder the cloude, and all did passe the Sea, and all were baptised vnder Moyses, and all did eat of one spiritual meate, and all did drink of one spiritual drink: In the which he noteth a In dictum Apost. N [...]olo vos ignor. great similitude ād answearablenesse of the things figured to the figures, and afterapplieng yt to the pourpose saieth: Volens enim declarare, quod sicut in Ecclesianō D est discrime serui & liberi, neque ciuis & aduenae, neque senis & adolescentis, neque insipientis & saptentis, neque priuati & principis, neque mulieris & viri, sed omnis aetas [Page] omnis dignitas, & vnaquaeque natura in Baptismum descendit, etiam Rex & pauper eadem purificatione vtuntur id quod maximum nostrae praesertim nobilitatis est argumentum. E Nam similiter & mendicus, & purpuram gestans ad mysteria admittuntur. neque in sacramentis maior istius quam illius est respectus. sic & in veteri conuenienter, omnes posuit. Neque enim dicere potes quòd Moyses per aridā, Iudaei per mare transierunt, neque quòd abundantes per vnam, & indigi per aliam viam, neque mulieres sub sereno, viri sub nube fuerunt, sed & sub mari omnes, & sub nube omnes, & in Moysen omnes,. Nam transitus ille futuri Baptismi tipus erat. Oportebat igitur primum figuram illam benè omnia figurare, quò omnes ipsam tenerent, sicut & hic omnes ex aequo participes sunt. He willing to declare, that as in the Churche ther ys no difference of bond man and free man, neither of contrie man and straungerneither of olde man, and young man, neither of vnwise man, and wise man, neither of priuate man and prince, neither of woman and man: but euery age, euerie dignitie, and euery nature equallie descendeth into the font: both king also and poour mā vse one purificacion, The whiche thing ys a great argument cheiflie of our nobilitie. Baptisme ys receaued of all in different he both rich and power. For bothe the begger and he that weareth purple be in like sorte admitted F to the misteries neither in the sacramentes ys ther any more respecte of this, then of the other. So in the olde he hath conuenientlie vsed the woord (al) for neither canst thowe saie that Moyses did passe by the drie land, and the Iewes by the sea, nether that they which were riche passed by one waie and the neady by an other, neither the wemen vnder the clere, and the men vnder the clowde: but that they were all vnder the sea, and all vnder the clowde, and all vnder Moises, for that passage was a figure of Baptisme to come. Yt behoued therfor that the figure shoulde figurate all thinges well, that all shoulde be vnder the lawe, euē as here all be equallie partakers. Hetherto Chrysostom.
Whom as ye perceaue to affirme that the passage through the red Sea was a figure of baptisme: so haue ye also perceaued the one very liuely applied to the other, for that parte, and for so moche as they were compared together. For whiche afterward coming to the very poincte of the thing, he directly applieth the figurs to the things figured in thēselfs. Et poterimus te docere quomodò vetus ad nouum Testamentum habeat cognationem, & ille transitus ad G nostrum baptisma. Nam ibi aqua: & hic aqua. Lauachrum hic: & ibi pelagus. Omnes hic in aquam ingrediuntur, & ibi omnes. Iuxta hoc similitudo est. Postea vis cognoscere colorum veritatem? ibi quidem liberati sunt ex AEgipto per mare: hic autem ab Idololatria. & ibi quidem Pharao submersus est: hic autem Diabolus. Ibi AEgyptii submersi: hic autem vètus homo peccatis defoditur. And we can teache thee (saieth Chrysostom) howe the olde Testament agreeth to the newe, and that passage with our baptisme. For ther was water and here ys water. Here a wishing place, and Baptisme ād the read Sea compared together. ther the Sea: All here entre into the water, and all ther. According to this here ys similitude. Wilt thowe afterwarde knowe the trueth of the colours? Ther they were deliuered oute of Egipt by the Sea, here frō Idolatrie. Ther Pharao was drowned, here the Deuell. Their Egiptians were drowned, here the olde man with his sinnes ys buried.
In this although Chrysostom hath sufficientlie shewed the agreement and similitude of the figure of Baptisme with Baptisme yt self: Yet he staieth not, but proceadeth by like applicacion to shewe the excellencie of the effecte or operacion of the one aboue the other, sainge thus: Vide cognationem H figurae ad veritatem, & veritatis excellentiam. Vbi igitur est affinitas figurae ad veritatem? Omnes ibi, hic omnes. Per aquam sunt ibi, & hic per aquam. A seruitute liberati sunt illi, & nos à seruitute liberati sumus, sed non ab eadem omnes. Nam illi quidem à seruitute [Page 237] Aegytiorum, nos vero à seruitnte Daemonum. Illi quidem à seruitute Barbarorum, nos verò à A seruitute peccati. ad libertatem venerunt illi, & nos, sed non ad eandem. Nam nos ad The goodlie effectes of Baptisme. multo clariorem. Beholde (saieth he) the likelihood of the figure to the trueth and the excellencie of the trueth. Wher then ys the affinitie of the figure to the trueth? All ther, and all here. By water ther, by water here. They are deliuered from seruitude, and we are deliuered from seruitude, but not all frō one or the same seruitude. For they were deliuered from the seruitude of the Egiptians: but we from the seruitude of Deuells. They from the seruitude of barbarouse people, but we from the seruitude of sinnes. They came to libertie, and we also, but not to all one. For we came to a moche more honourable libertie. Thus farre Chrysostom.
Nowe that ye haue hearde him speaking so moche and so plainly declaring this figure of Baptisme, I thinke yt for me vain and superfluouse to adde anie thinge to his sainges as to make the matter more clere and plain, wher all ys allready so manifest, except I wolde attempt to putte some more light to the bright sunnie beames, whiche were mere folie. B
Wherfor leauing this figure sufficientlie opened and declared we shall do our endeuour to make that plain that foloweth in S. Paule, wher he saieth: Et omnes in Moyse baptisati sunt in nube, & in mari. And all were baptised vnder Doubtes that maie rise of S. Paules wordes. Moyses in the clowde and in the Sea. These woordes be somwhat obscure and dobtfull. For yf the clowde (as before ys saied) were a figure of the holy Gost, and the redde Sea of Baptisme, and Moyses of Chryst: Howe then be they baptised in all these three? Again, seing that the redde Sea onely in this scripture ys appointed as the figure of Baptisme, why nowe dothe he seem to ioin all three as the figure of baptisme? Moreouer if this be but a figure of Baptisme, why dothe he teache, that the childeren of Israell were baptised, as though yt were very baptisme in dede, and not the figure? Yt semeth also to haue some scruple that he saieth they were baptised in Moyses, as though that Moyses were the institutour of Baptisme.
These doubtes will be solued, if yt be remembred that to baptisme, besides The same doubtes solued. Three thinges necessarelie to be had in Baptisme. the partie to be baptised and the vertues in him requisite, ther be three principall thinges necessarilie to be had: that ys, Chryst the institutour and C authour of the sacrament, or his ministre for him, or other depute in time of necessitie to pronounce the prescribed forme of woordes of baptisme: The holie Gost, the woorker of grace in the ministracion of the sacrament: And the water for the matter of the sacrament. That Chryst ys the institutour yt ys manifest, for he was first baptised him self in the floode of Iordan of Iohn the Baptiste. Yfanie obiecte that not Chryste but Iohn did institute baptisme. for he did baptise in the wildernesse before Chryste was baptised or shewed him self openly to the worlde. For yt ys written: Exibat ad eum Hierosolima, Math. 3. & omnis Iudaea, & omnis regio circa Iordanem, & baptisabantur ab eo in Iordane. Hierusalem and all Iewrie and all the contrie aboute Iordane, went oute to him, and were baptised of him in Iordan. Yt ys true that Iohn did baptise before Chryste, but he baptised not then with the baptisme of Chryste of the whiche Chryst was the institutour: but he baptised with the baptisme which was called the baptisme of Iohn, as yt ys in the Actes of the Apostles. So that Act. 19. there were two Baptismes: the Baptisme of Iohn, and the Baptisme of Chryst The distinction of the whiche the saied Iohn maketh sainge: Venit fortior me D post me, cuius non sum dignus procumbens soluere corrigiam calceamentorum eius. Ego Mar. 1. baptiso vos aqua, ille baptisabit vos Spiritu sancto. There commeth one stronger [Page]then I am after me, whose shooe latchett I am not woourthie to stoupe downe and vnloose. I haue baptised yowe with water, but he shall baptise yowe E with the holie Gost.
This distinction appeareth also in the Actes of the Apostles: wher we reade that Paule came to Ephesus, and fownde certain disciples and saied vnto Act. 19. The baptisme of Christ and of Iohn distincted. them: Haue ye receaued the holie Gost, since ye beleued? And they saied vnto him, we haue not heard of the holie Gost, whether their be anie or not. Wherwith then were ye baptised? And they saied, with Iohns Baptisme. Then saide Paule, Iohn verilie baptised with the baptisme of penaunce, saing vnto the people that they shoulde beleue on him, whiche shoulde come after him, that ys on Chryste Iesus, when they heard this they were baptised in the name of our Lorde Iesus,
Thus then yt doth manifestlie appeare that the Baptisme of Iohn was not the verie Baptisme, but raither a figure or a preparacion to the verie baptisme whiche ys the Baptisme of Chryst (as Chrysostome saieth) Vide igitur quàm diligenter Homil. 12. in Matth. haec expresserit. Cùm enim dixisset, quia venerit praedicare Baptisma poenitentiae, intulit: in remissionem peccatorum, quasi diceret: Ego illis confiteri peccata sua, & poenitentiam agere persuasi, non vt castigarentur omnino, sed vt dignius postea remissionis dona susciperent. Nisi enim se ipsos ante damnassent, neque sanè gratiā requisissent. Non quarentes F verò gratiam, neque remissionē profectò assecuti fuissent. Ita istud Baptisma alterius, id est, Christi Baptismatis praeparatio est, & idcirco dicebat vt crederent in adueniētem post eum. See therfore howe diligently he hathe expressed these thinges, When The Baptisme of John preached remission of sinnes, and prepared men to the baptisme of Chryst. he had saied, that he came to preache the Baptisme ofpenance, he inferred: in remission of sinnes. As who shoulde saie: I haue perswaded them to confesse their sinnes, and to do penance, not that they shoulde be all together amended but that they might more wourthilie afterwarde receaue the giftes of remission. For except they had before condemned them selues they had neuer sought for grace, and not seking for grace, truly they had neuer obteined remission. so this Baptisme was the preparacion of an other Baptisme, that ys of the Baptisme of Chryst. And therfor he saied that they shoulde beleue in him, that was coming after him. Thus he.
In this saing of Chrysostome two thinges are to be obserued: first that he saith that the Baptisme of Iohn was a preparaciō to the Baptisme of Chryste. The seconde (whiche ys a proofe that yt was not very Baptisme, but a figure or a preparacion) that yt did not remitt sinnes, Whiche thing although G Chrysostome doth here saie, yet more expressedlie he saith yt in the same homelie: Qua verò de causa ad baptisandi est missus officium? Et hoc nobis idem Baptista declarat, dicens: quoniam venerit in regione Iordanis praedicans Baptisma poenitentiae in remissionem peccatorum. Et certè remissionem peccatorum non habebat. Hoc enim munus illius baptismatis erat, quod postea Christus instituit. in hoc enim vetus noster homo crucisixus est, ac sepultus. & ante crucem nunquam prorsus extitit remissio peccatorum. siquidem vbique ipsius hoc sanguini deputatur. Idem enim istud Paulus affirmat: Sed mundati The baptisme of Christ gaue remissiō of sinnes the baptisme of Iohn not so, which ouer throweth the doctrin of Caluine. estis, inquit, sed sanctisicati estis, non per Baptisma Ioannis sed in nomine Domini nostri Iesu Christi, & spiritu Dei nostri. Et alibi ipse dicit: Ioannes quidem praedicauit baptismum poenitentiae, & non ait remissionis, sed vt crederent in aduenientem post cum. For what cause was Iohn sent to the office of baptising? Thus also the same Baptist declareth, saing: that he came in the region of Iordane preaching the Baptisme of penaunce in remission of sinnes. And truly this Baptisme had not remission. For this gifte apperteineth to the baptisme, whiche Chryst afterward did institute. In this baptisme our olde man was crucified H and buried. and before the crosse, ther was vtterly no remissiō. For trulie this euery wher ys deputed to his bloode. For euen the same dothe Paule [Page 238]affirme: But ye are clensed: but ye are sanctified, not by the baptisme of Iohn, But in the A name of our Lorde Iesus Christ, and by the Spirit of our God. And in an other place he saieth: Iohn did preache the baptisme of penaunce, and he doth not saie of remission: but that they shoulde beleue in him, that was comming after him. Thus farre Chrysostom.
By all this that ys saied of Chrysostome yt ys easie to be perceaued that Chryst ys the institutour of Baptisme, that ys auailable before God for the remission of sinnes. And that Iohn Baptised to penaunce, therby to prepare men, that they baptised with the Baptisme of Chryste, might receaue remission Differēces of the Baptisme of John, ād of Chryste. of their sinnes, for somoche as they were penitent. Of these woourdes maie be gathered these differences of these two baptismes. The baptisme of Iohn was a figure and preparacion of and to the very effectuall Baptisme of Chryst: The baptisme of Chryst the thing prepared for, and the true thing by figure signified. The Baptisme of Iohn was in water: The Baptisme of Chryst in water and the holie Goste. The Baptisme of Iohn was in water to penaunce: The baptisme of Chryste in water and the holie Gost to the remission B of sinnes. The Baptisme of Iohn was included in the Baptisme of Chryst, as the lesser thing in the greater: The Baptisme of Chryst conteined the Baptisme of Iohn, as the woorthier thing maie conteine the vn woorthier, and can neithier be included nor conteined of yt.
Chryste then the institutour of this Sacrament who leadeth vs from the Tirannie of the Satanicall Pharao, and the seruitude of sinfull Egipte, and bringeth vs through the miraculouse fowntain, to walke through the desert of this worlde to the heauenly lande of promisse ys as necessarilie required as Moyses was to lead the people oute of Egipt through the sea into the deserte, to iourney to the earthlie land of promesse, who was the figure of Chryste, as S. Austen hath testified. Wherfor the thing figured must nedes aunswer the figure.
As Chryst the institutour ys necessarilie required: so also ys the holy Gost, and the water, Chryst him self testifieng: Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua & Spiritu sancto, non potest introire in regnum Dei. Except a man be born a newe of the Ioan 3. water and the holy Gost, he can not entre into the kingdom of God. Nowe C then these three, that ys Chryst the holy Gost, and the water, being necessarilie required to the effectuall Baptisme, whiche ys the thing figured: The other three also, as Moyses, the clowde, and the sea, must nedes concurre in the figure, fullie to signifie, that ys here fullie required.
The Iewes vnder Moyses were baptised in the clowde and the sea in the darke maner of a figure: The Chrystians in the holie Gost and the water in the clere maner of the trueth, as Origen saieth. Antea in enigmate fuit Baptismus Homil. 7. in Numer. in nube, & in Mari: Nunc autem in specie regeneratio est in aqua & Spiritu sancto. Before Baptisme was in a darke maner, in the clowde and in the Sea: But nowe in clere maner regeneracion ys in the water and in the holie Gost. This thē that ys saied wel weeghed and considered the doubtes before moued are clerely solued, and the text thus farre expounded.
THE THIRD CHAPITER EXPOWNDETH the resideu of the text: Et omnes eandem escam E spiritual &c.
IT ys to be reteined in memorie, that (as in the first chapter ys saied) S. Paule in this sentence did reherse certain benefittes of God bestowed vpon the Iewes, as figures of greater benefittes, that God hath and dothe bestowe vpon the chrystians. What the clowde and the sea did to the commoditie of the Iewes, yt ys ther declared: Likewise what Manna, and the water flowing oute of the rocke.
The seconde chapiter began to declare what these great workes and wonders of God in the olde lawe, did figure in the newe lawe, and finished three of them, that ys, what Moses, and what the clowde, and what the read sea did signifie. Nowe ther remaineth to be declared what Manna and the water of the rocke did signifie, and of what thinges in the newe Testament F they be figurs.
In this declaracion yt apperteineth to me to mēbre, that in the first booke in the 22 chapter, wher by ordre these two shoulde haue ben declared, vpon consideracion that S. Paule did make mencion of them, and that I wolde not be greuouse to the reader with the reading of one matter twice: I differed yt, and reserued yt to this place. Wherfor I must, I saie, remēbre in the declaraciō of these two, to kepe soche ordre, as I wolde haue doen ther, and as I did with the rest of the figures ther declared. The ordre was by scriptures of the newe Testament and doctours to declare what thinges the figures did prefigurate. That doen, to declare what prophecies were of the same, and them according to the minde of the holie Fathers to applie to the thing prophecied.
Omnes (saieth S. Paule) eandem escam spiritualem manducauerunt. All did eat of one spirituall meat. What this one meate was, of the whiche they did all eate, yt ys before declared, that yt was Manna. Whiche thing also Chrysostome doeth testifie: Quia dixit de mari, et de nube, & de Moise: Adiecit preterea: G Et omnes eundem spiritualem cibum comederunt. Sicut tu (inquit) à lauachro aquarum ascendens, ad mensam curris: sic & illi à mari ascendentes, ad mensam venere nouam, & admirabilem. De Manna loquor. By cause he had spoken of the clowde, and of Moyses: He also added: And they haue all eaten of one spirituall meate. As thowe (saieth he) cominge vppe frō the wasshing place of the waters, doest hast the to the table: so they also cominge vppe from the sea, came to a newe and a woonderfull table, I speake of Manna.
In these woordes ye perceaue Chrysostome to expownde this same one meate, whiche all the Fathers did eate of after they had passed through the red Sea, to be Manna. Agreablie wherunto S. Augustin also speaking of this text of S. Paule, whiche we haue nowe in hande saieth thus: Quando autē manducauit Manna populus Israel? Cùm transisset mare rubrum. When did the people of Tract. 11. in Ioan. Israell eate Manna? When they had passed through the red sea. And a litle after he saieth: Si ergo figura maris tantum valuit, species Baptismi quantum valebit? Si quod gestum est in figura, traiectum populum ad Manna perduxit, quid exhibebit Christus in veritate Baptismi sui traiecto per eum populo suo? Yf then the figure of the H Sea was of so great force: of what force shall the veritie of the Baptisme be? Yf that was doen in figure did bring the people that was ledde ouer vnto Manna: what will Chryst in the veritie of his baptisme geue vnto his people [Page 240]led and cōducted by him? Manna then, as by the holy Fathers we are taught A was the meate that all the Fathers did eate of. Tho. Aqui Jn. 10. 1 Cor.
But yt ys to be considered whie sainct Paule did call yt spirituall meat, seing yt was sensible and corporall, and did corporallie feade: He dothe so call yt, bicause yt was miraculouslie geuen vnto them, as sainct Thomas in the exposition of this same text saieth: Vocat cam spiritualem, cùm esset corporalis, & miraculosè fuit data. He calleth that meat spirituall, when yet yt was corporall, bicause yt was miraculouslie geuen. The like cause why yt was called spirituall, Jn. 10. 1. Cor. doth Chrysostome also assign: Quamuis quae dabantur in sensu perciperentur, spiritualiter tamen dabantur, non secundùm naturam consequentium, sed secundùm muneris gratiam. Although those thinges whiche were geuen were perceaued in sense or sensiblie: yet they were geuen spirituallie, not according to the course Manna why it was called a spirituall meat. of nature, but after the gifte of grace: For although Manna were a corporall thinge: yet yt was made by God in the cloudes by his especiall worke causing yt to fall, as yt were dewe vpon the earth, whiche thing we see not to be doen by common course of nature, for that the like ys not nowe B done. So that yt maie well be called a spirituall, meat bicause yt had no naturall cause.
As their meat whiche God sent them in the desert was spirituall: so was also ther drinke in the desert spirituall. Wherfore sainct Paule saieth: Et omnes eundem potum spititualem biberunt. And all drank of one spirituall drinke. Thys Water of the rock. why yt was called spirituall drinke. drinke ys called spirituall, bicause yt was miraculouslie geuen them oute of the rocke, by the powre and worke of the spirituall rocke which was Chryst, as S. Paule immediatelie declareth: Bibebant despirituali consequente eos petra: Petra autem erat Christus. They dranke of that spirituall Rocke that folowed them. The Rocke was Chryste. Yt ys moch against nature that an harde and a drie stone shoulde bring furth streames of water, that ys both soste and moist. So ys yt against nature, that the great rocke, whiche once gaue them water shoulde folowe them, through the desert, and geue them drinke sufficient for so great a multitude of people, at all times and places. But as the spirituall Rocke Chryste by his great powre and work gaue them gusshing streames of water in great plentie to serue their necessitie in that place oute of a C materiall stone or rocke: So did that spirituall rocke also, and not that materiall rocke, folowe them in their iourneie through the desert, and gaue them drinke sufficient to satisfie their necessitie. Whiche thing sainct Paule very plainly by expresse woordes saieth: Bibebant de spirituali consequente eos petra. They dranke of the spirituall rocke that folowed them, Petra autem erat Christus, but that Rocke was Chryst. Note that sainct Paule saieth not, they dranke of that materiall rocke: but they dranke of a spirituall rocke, whiche folowed them, which spirituall Rocke was Chryst.
I wishe this to be well noted here bicause Oecolampadius the Archenemie Oecolāp. abuseth S. Paules wordes: The rock was Chryste of the Sacrament of the bodie and blood of Chryst, affirmeth this text of sainct Paule (the rocke was Chryst) to be a figuratiue speache. And vseth yt for his probaciō to proue the saing of Chryst (This ys my bodie) to be also a figuratiue speache. Nowe forsomoche as this text ys here to be expownded being nowe in handling, yt ys meet that yt be not onelie expownded in the natiue sense, but also deliuered from all adulterine and violent expositions Oecolamp. in Expsitiō Hoc est. Corpus whiche the saied Oecolāpadius wolde wrest yt vnto, for a further mischeif. Let D vs therfor heare his woordes, and examin his expositiō and see yf the text of the scripture will beare yt. His woordes be these: Tēpus est vt probemus verba caenae Dominicae eodē tropo dicta, quo illa quae Apostolus dixit: Petra autē erat Christus, hoc est [Page] petra significabat Christum, vel erat figura Christi. Yt ys time (saieth he) that we proue the woordes of the Lordes supper, to be spoken by the same figure, by the E whiche the woordes which the Apostle saied are spoken: The rocke was Chryste, that ys to saie, the rock fignified Chryste: or the rocke was a figure of Christ. Thus he.
Yf Oecolampadius will haue the woords of Chryst, This ys my bodie, vnderstanded with the same sense that these woordes of S. Paule, The rocke was Chryst, are to be vnderstanded, I shall ioin with him. For the woordes of S. Paule are to be vnderstanded withoute trope. And by that parte of his argument, so are These wordes: The rocke was Chryste cā not be expownded by a Trope. the woordes of the Lordes supper (as he termeth them) wherin I saie, I shall ioin with him. That the woordes of S. Paule are to be vnderstanded without trope, yt ys manifest, for he calleth not Chryste the materiall rock, but the spirituall rock, saing, that they dranke all of the spirituall rocke, which ys Chryst. So that this sentence: Chryst ys the spirituall rocke, of the whiche the Iewes did drinke neadeth no tropicall or figuratiue sense to be expownded by. Neither in this place and maner as S. Paule speaketh yt, can yt beare a figuratiue F sense, as Oecolampaduis wolde patche and peice one to yt, but the plain literall sense.
To this vnderstanding of this text, as the scripture yt self enforceth vs, so ys also Chrysostome a wittnesse, writing vpon this text thus: Cùm dixisset Chryso. in 10. 1. Cor. quòd potum spiritualem bibebant, addidit: Bibebant enim de spirituali consequente eos petra, & adiunxit: Petra autem erat Christus. Non enim ipsius petrae natura aqua (inquit) scaturiebat. Siquidem anie etiam scaturiisset, sed alia quaedam spiritalis petra, omnia operata est, hoc est Christus, qui praesens vbique omnia fecit miracula. Ideo dixit, consequente. When he had saied that they dranke spirituall drinke, he added: They dranke of the spirituall rocke, that folowed them, and ioined to yt: That rocke was Chryste. For not the nature of that stone (saieth he) flowed oute water, for then yt wolde haue flowed oute before that time, but an other certain spirituall Chryste was the spirituall not the materiall rock. ād therfor no figure ys in S. Paules saing. stone wrought all these thinges, that ys, Chryst being present euery wher did all the miracles, and therfore he saied, that folowed. Hitherto Chrysostome Whose woordes geue plain testimonie to the woordes of sainct Paule: Chryst was the roke, not the materiall rocke, for than Oecolampadius trope must G nedes haue taken place. But he saieth that Chryste was that spirituall rocke of the whiche they dranke, and therfore no trope can be admitted here. And to proue that sainct Paule ment that Chryst was that spirituall rocke, Chrysostome noteth sainge: Ideo dixit, Consequente: Therfor saied Paule, whiche folowed:: as who might saie, for so moche as sainct Paule saieth that the Iewes dranke of a spirituall rocke, whiche spirituall rocke was soche one as did folowe them. But no other rocke did folowe them saue Chryst: wherfore Chryste was the spirituall rocke, so that we maie conclude that this proposition ys to be vnderstanded grammaticallie or literallie, and not tropicallie or figuratiuelie. Yf then Oecolampadius laie his fundacion of his building to proue the woordes of the Lordes supper to be figuratiue vpon a wrong vnderstanding Scriptures alleaged by Oecolāp. to proue his figuratiue speache. of the scriptures: will he not (trowe ye) make his building of the same nature, that ys, that these woordes of Chryst shal be wrong vnderstanded also? Which thing (I doubte not) but ye will credite, when ye shall perceaue how wel he frameth other scriptures to his building.
Proceading in his profe he saieth: that yt ys comō in the scriptures that the H figures of thinges shall be named with the names of the thinges of whiche they be figures. To proue this he bringeth in the fierie tounges, which appeared vpon the Disciples: The doue whiche appeared vpon Chryst at hys [Page 240]Baptism. The breathing of Chryst vpon his Apostles: and the saing of Chryst A that Iohn was Helias, al whiche he saieth, be figures, as the fierie tounges, the doue, and the breathing of Chryst were tokens or figurs of the holy Gost: and Iohn a figure of Helyas.
Wher first note howe he abuseth the scripturs, and laboureth to blinde Oecolamp. his abusing of the scriptures opened. and deceaue the reader. For wher he, pretending to proue this saing of Chryste (This ys my bodie) to be figuratiuely spoken, bringeth in these rehersed places: ther ys not one of them that hath the like enunciacion or maner of speache, as the saing of Chryst hath. Neither ys the fiery tounges, the doue, or the breathing of Chryst named in the scriptures to be the holie Gost, as the other thing ys named to be the bodie of Chryst. And that this maie manifestlie appeare, I will simplie bring in euery of the scriptures of these places
The first ys in the Actes of the Apostles where we reade thus: Factus est repentè de coelo sonus tanquam aduenientis spiritus vehementis, & repleuit totam domum Act. 2. vbierant sedentes, & apparuerunt illis dispartitae linguae, tanquam igms, seditue super singulos eorum. And sodenly ther came a sownde from heauen, as yt had ben the cominge of a mightie winde, and yt filled all the house wher they satte. And B ther appeared vnto them cloauē tounges, like as they had ben of fire, and yt satte vpon eche of them. This ys the text. Note nowe what Chrysostome shall saie vpon this this text Visae sunt (inquit) illis dispartitae linguae, velut igneae. Rectè vbique Jn. 2. Act. additum est, velut, ne quid sensibile de Spiritu suspicareris, velut igneae (inquit) & velut flatus. Nec enim ventus erat simpliciter per aerem diffusus. Ac tamen cum Ioanni deberet innotescere Spiritus velut columbae specie in caput Christi venit. Nunc verò cum tota Fierie tounges are not saied to be the bolie Gost. multitudo conuertenda esset ad fidem, venit in specie ignis. And ther were seen (saieth he) to them cloauē tounges as fiery. Yt ys in euery place added (as) that thow shouldest suspecte nothing sensible of the spirit. As fiery (saieth he) and as a winde. Neither was yt the winde simplie diffused by the aier. And also when the holy Gost wolde be knowen to Iohn, he came in the forme of a doue vpon the headde of Chryste, but nowe when all the multitude was to be conuerted to the faith, he cam in the shape or forme of fire. Thus Chrysost.
Now albeit he hath in the ende of his sentence resolued vs for the maner of the coming down of the holie Goste in the likenesse of a doue: yet will we heare the scripture, that the agrement of the doctour and the scipture C manie appeare together. S. Luke saieth Iesu baptisato, & orante apertum est coelum, & descendit Spiritus sanctus corporali specie sicut columba in ipsum. When Iesus was Luc. 3. baptised, and did praie, the heauē was opened, ād the holie Gost came down in a bodilie shape like a doue vpon him. In this text, as ye perceaue that the holie Gost came downe like a doue, but neither that the doue was the holie The doueys not saied to be the holie Gost. Gost, neither the holie Gost the doue: so ye perceaue that Chrysostome agreeth, ād saieth nothing cōtrario to the scripture. But as the scripture saieth that the holie Gost came down like a doue: ād that the sownd was, as yt had bē the coming of a mightie winde, ād the cloauē toūges as thei had bē of fire: So Chrysostom noteth in euery place to be this woord (as) wherbie ys taught raither the likelihead of the thinges ther to be, then the very things thēselus.
The thirde thing that Oecolampadius reherseth ys the breathing of Chryst: vpon his Apostles: In the Gospel of S. Iohn we read that Chryst thus saied to Joan. 23. his Apostles. As my Father sent me, euen so I sende yowe also. And when he had saied those wordes, he breathed on them, and saied vnto them: Receaue ye the holie Goste. In whiche facte of Chryst, although the holie Gost to the fullnesse of his giftes D were not geuen, for that Chryst saied: Nisi abiero Paracletus non Ibid. 16. veniet ad vos, si autem abiero mittam eum ad vos. Except I go the [Page]comforter shall not come to yowe: but yf I go awaie I will sende him to yowe. At the whiche coming he promised them saing: Accipietis virtutem superuementis E Spiritus sancti in vos. Ye shall receaue powre after the holie Goste Acto. 1. ys comed vpon yowe: yet nowe they receaued certain giftes of the holie Goste as Chrysostom wittnesseth: Non erraret quispiam si tunc eos potestatem quandam & gratiam spiritualem accipisse diceret, non tamen vt mortuos suscitarent, & virtutes In. 20. Joā. ostenderent, sed vt peccata dimitterent. Differentes enim sunt gratiae Spiritus. Quare addidit: Quorum remiseratis peccata remissa sunt, ostendens quod virtutis genus largiatur. A man shoulde not erre yf he saied, that they did receaue a certain power The holie Gost was geuen by Chrystes breathing. and spirituall grace, not yet that they shoulde rayse the dead, and shewe wonders, but that they shoulde forgeue sinnes. The graces of the Spirit are different wherfore he added: Whose sinnes ye remitte, they are remitted, declaring that he graunted a kinde of power. Thus Chrysostome. By this then yt ys manifest that at that breathing Chryst gaue vnto his Apostles the holy gost.
Let vs nowe examin the fourth scripture, which Oecolampadius alleageth to proue a trope in Chrystes woordes, whiche ys that Chryst saied of Iohn the Baptist, that he was Helias. The woordes be these: Omnes Prophetae ac ipsa F lex vsque ad Ioannem prophetauerunt, & si vultis recipere, ipse est Helias, Iqui venturus erat. All the Prophetes and the lawe yt self hath prophecied vnto Iohn. And Math 11 yf ye will receaue yt: This ys Helias whiche was for to come: For the better vnderstanding of this text yt ys to be noted that the Iewes vpon the prophecie Opinion of the Iewes of the coming of Helias. of Malachie, which prophecieth that Helias shal come before the Iudgement of Chryst, mistaking and mysvnderstanding the same, that he shoulde come before his coming into flesh, were in doubte whether Iohn the Baptist were Helias, and therfore sent Messengers vnto him asking, whether that he was Helias or no. Wher in dede the prophecie speaketh of the coming of Helias before the seconde coming of Chryste, whiche shall be to iudgement, as the woordes do declare. Beholde (saieth allmightie God by the Prophet) I will sende yowe Helias the prophet before the coming of the great and fearful daie of the Lorde. He shall turne the heartes of the fathers to their children, and of the children to ther fathers Mala. 4. that I come not and smite the earth with cursing.
Two things in this prophecie ther be, which do teache vs, that Helias shal be the percursour of the iudgement of Chryste, and not of his natiuitie. The G one ys that he shall come before the daie of the great and fearfull Lorde. Chryste at his natiuitie came, as Rex pacificus, a king a peacemaker: he came as Zacha. [...]. Rex mansuetus, as a lowlie kinge, as Zacharie prophecied that he shoulde do: Reioice (saieth he) greatlie, thowe daughter of Syon, be glad o daughter Hierusalem. Forlo, Math. 21. Mar. 11. Luc. 19. Jbid. 2. thy king cometh vnto thee, euen the righteouse and sauiour, lowlie and simple ys be, he rideth vpon an asse, and vpon the fole of an asse. This to be fulfilled in Chryste the holie Euangelists do wittnesse. At his birth also, as the prophet willeth Syon, ād Hierusalē to reioice: so the Angell appearing to the sheperds, saied. Beholde I bring yow tidinges of great ioie, that shall come to all people. And streit waie ther was with the Angel a multitude of heauenlie soldiers pray sing God and saing. Glorie to God on hight and peace on the earth, and vnto men a good will. By this yt doth well appeare that the first coming of Chryst ys not fearful but peaceable, lowlie, and Ioyfull. The first coming of Chryste was ioifull. the second shall be terrible.
The seconde thing be noted ys that the Prophet, shall come to turn the heartes of the fathers to the Sonnes, &c. Lest when that Lorde cometh he smite the earthe with cursing. Chryst at hys first coming, came H not to smite punish and curse, as he himself not a fewe times doth testifie: Non veni vt iudicem mundum, sed vt saluificem mundum. I came [Page 241]not to iudge the worlde, but to saue, the world. Again: Venit filius hominis quaerere, A & saluum facere, quod perierat. The Sonne of man came to seke and saue that that had perished. In so moch that when his Disciples moued him, that Luc. 19. fire might descende from heauen to consume the Samaritanes, that wolde not receaue him, he saied: The Sonne of man came not to destroye, but to saue mens lifes. All whiche places declare, that Chryst at hys first coming, came not to Luc. 9. iudge, nor to punish, but to seke, and saue.
But hys seconde coming in dede shall be fearfull and terrible. For then he shall come to iudgement, at which time yf the heartes of the people be not turned, he shall then be a seuere iudge, and shall greuouslie smite the wicked nesse of men, and shall pronunce the sentence of cursing vpon earthlie men saing: Go ye cursed into the euerlasting fire, whiche ys prepared for the Deuell and hys Matth. 25 Angells. Of thys iudgement ye maie read in sainct Matthew more at large. Forsomoche then as Chryst at that his seconde coming shall be a fearfull Lorde, and shall smite the earth with cursing: yt must nedes be that Helias must be a precursour of that coming and not of the first. Nowe for that the B Iewes where in that errour that they loked that Healias shoulde come before that Messias shoulde come in to the worlde, Chryst saied vnto them: Si vultis recipere ipse est Helyas, qui venturus erat. Yf ye will receaue yt, this ys Helias which was for to come. Whiche woordes. Euthymius expowndeth thus: Si vultis recipere, quod futurum esse dictum est, de boc tempore, ipse est Helias, Jn 1. Math qui venturus erat, vtpote ipsum illius ministerium perficiens. Yf ye will receaue that that ys spoken to be doen hereafter, to be of this time present: He ys Helyas whiche was for to come, as one perfourming euen his very mynisterie and office. As who might saie, Wher as ye thinke that Helyas (who shall be the percursour of my seconde cominge to prepare the heartes of the people, that they maie eschape my terrible iudgement) ys the precursour of this my first cominge, to prepare the heartes of the people to receaue me and my faith, as touchinge that office, yf ye will so take yt, Iohn ys Helias. For to that office ys he by the prophetes appointed, as Helyas ys to the other.
So that in this maner of speache Chryst did but answer the opinion of C the Iewes, and therfore did not assertiuelie saie, that Iohn was Helias, but Chryst did not assertiuelie saie that Iohn was Helias with a circumstance: yf ye will receaue yt. whiche thing also ys noted of Chrysostome: Significauit autem Ioannem Heliam esse, & Heliam Ioannem. Vtrique enim vnam administrationem susceperunt, & praecursores ambo constituti sunt▪ Quare non dixit: hic est profectò Helias: sed si vultis suscipere, hie est. He signified Iohn to be Helias, and Helias Iohn. For bothe they haue taken one administracion, and both be made percursours. Wherfor he did not saie this ys verilie Helias. But yf ye will so take yt, this ys he. Thus Chrysost.
Neither ys yt the propre sense or vnderstanding of this proposition, that Iohn ys a figure of Helias, or Iohn ys a signe or token of Helias: as by this he wolde proue the other saing of Chryst: This ys my bodie to be vnderstanded, for that this ys spoken with a circumstance, and as yt were with a condicion, and not simplie as Chryst saied: This ys my bodie.
Now to applie all these other scriptures, which Oecolampadius hath brought in: Marke diligētlie, I beseche thee, good Reader, yf anie of them all be of like speach as these woordes: This ys my bodie. The scripture saieth not: The doue ys D the holie Goste: neither dothe yt saie that either the breathing into the Apostles, or the fierie tounges be the holie Gost, But farre otherwise, as ys allreadie saied, and farre vnlike to this maner of speache: Thys ys my bodie: [Page]For the one ys spoken by a liklihead, and therfore vsed with this terme, as, the other by the very substance, and therfore expressed with this woorde, ys. E And yet withall note howe yt pleaseth God, that as he made Balaams Asse Occolāp. likned to balaams asse. to speake to the reproche of her master: so yt pleaseth him to woorke in this man, who, through malice made dumbe to speake the trueth, willinglie, but yet vnwittinglie hath broughtin these scriptures, whiche being considered and weighed make nothing against the trueth, but moche for the trueth.
And first wher he began his building with our text. Petra erat Christus. The rocke was Chryst: whiche he saied was a figuratiue speache: yt ys proued that ther ys none but a plain speache, for the spirituall rocke was Chryste. Therfore yt standeth well to be applied to the catholique trueth, that as the rocke was not figuratiuelie, but verilie Chryst: so the substance of the Sacrament of the aultar ys not figuratiuely, but verilie the bodie of Chryst. And as the holie Gost was verilie vnder a corporall forme like a doue, and verilie present with the fierie tounges: and also verilie geuen to the Apostles with the breathing of Chryste: so ys the bodie of Chryst verilie, and trulie vnder the corporall formes of bread and wine, F Presence of the holie Gost vnder the forme of the doue with the fierie tounges and breath of Chryst, conferred with the presēce of Chryst in the Sacr. as the holie Goste vnder the forme of a doue: and verily also geuen to the faithfull, as the holie Goste to the multitude. And vnder that corporall forme as trulie receaued of the Chrystians, as the holy Gost was by the breathing of Chryst, receaued of the Apostles. So that ther ys a conformitie and great likelihead betwixt these scriptures, and moueth the Chrystian very stronglie to beleue the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament. For as we are taught to beleue that the holie Goste was vnder a corporall forme, bicause the scripture saieth, that the holy Gost descended in a corporall forme: so are we taught to beleue, that Chrystes bodie ys vnder the forme of bread, bicause the scripture saieth, that Chryst blessing the bread saied: Thys ys my bodie, and so of the rest. And as the scripture saieth not that the doue, or the tounges were the holie Goste: No more dothe yt saie that the forme of bread ys the bodie of Chryst. But as the scripture teacheth that with these formes the verie thinges be geuen, and not the bare signes onelie: so are we taught that with the the forme of bread ys geuen the very thinge sanctified whiche ys the G verie bodie of Chryst himself sainge: Take, eate, This ys my bodie.
Thus maie ye perceaue, howe goodlie God hath sett furth hys mysteries, that one maie aptlie be conferred with an other, as that therby the faith of the weake maie be moche holpen, and the faith of the strong moche comforted and delighted, and the more when they maie see howe God turneth the weapons of the enemies vpon them selues, and so withe their weapons defendeth vs.
THE FOVRTH CHAP. BEGINNETH TO DEclare A by the holie fathers of what thinges Manna and the water be figures.
NOwe this text of S. Paule being truly expownded, according to the mindes of the holie catholique fathers, and deliuered from the violent wresting of the Aduersarie: yt ys time and place conuenient, that we seke of what things these two yet not applied that ys Manna, and the water, be figures of. That they be figures yt ys most certen: but of what thinges yt ys in controuersie. The Aduersarie affirmeth Manna to be onely of the woorde of God a figure, as wherby the soule of man ys fedde, as the Iewes were in desert: But the good catholique teacheth that yt ys not onely a figure of the woorde of God, but also of the bodie of Chryste in the Sacrament, wherwith man ys fedde to euerlasting life, and made strong to walke through the desert of this worlde, to the heauenlie lande of promisse. And for further openinge B of this matter, vnderstand that one Irenaeus wrote an epistle to S. Ambrose asking whie God did not rain Manna from heauen as he did to the Iewes. S. Ambrose answering him, treacteth not onelie of Māna yt self, but also of that whiche was figured by yt. And so in that processe, declareth, that not onelie Ad Jrenaeum epla 62 the worde of God ys a spiritual Māna, but also the bodie of Chryst in the Sament ys Manna. Thus writeth S. Ambrose: Quaeris à me cur Dominus Deus Mannapluerit populo patrum & nunc non pluat. Si cognoscis, pluit. & quotidiè pluit de coelo Manna seruientibus sibi. Et corporeum quidem illud Manna hodie plerisque in locis Quāto praestantiora sunt haec superioribus. iuuenitur. Sed nunc non est res tanti miraculi quia venit quod perfectum est. Perfectum autem panis de coelo, corpus ex virgine, de quo satis Euangelium te docet. Quanto praestā tiorà sunt haec superioribus: Illud enim Manna, hoc est, panem illum, qui manducauerunt, mortui sunt. Hunc autem panem qui manducauerit, viuet in aeternum. sed est spirituale Manna, hoc est plumia spiritualis sapientiae, quae ingeniosis & quaerentibus de coelo infunditur, & irrorat mentes piorum, & obdulcat fauces corum. Thowe askest me, why the Lord God did rain Manna to the people of the Fathers, and nowe he doth not rain. Yf thow knowest, he raineth now, and dailie he raineth Manna frō C heauen vnto them that serue him. And in diuerse places the same corporall Manna ys nowe fownde, but yt ys not nowe a thing of so great miracle for that ys comed that ys perfecte. But that perfecte ys the bread from heauē, Howe moche more excellent are these then the other aboue rehersed? whiche ys the bodie born of the virgen, of the whiche the gospell sufficient lie teacheth. Howe moche more excellent are these, then the other aboue rehersed? Who soeuer did eate that Manna, that ys, that bread, they are dead. But this bread whosoeuer eateth, shal liue for euer. But this ys a spiritual Manna, that ys the spirituall rain of wisdom, whiche ys powred into them from heauen that be wittie, and do seke yt, and yt dothe dewe the mindes of the Godlie, and maketh swete their Iawes. hitherto S. Ambrose.
Of whom we maie learn as ys before saied, that not onelie the woord and Oecolap. his shāful abusing of the aunciēt Fathers, namelie of S. Ambr. wisdom of God ys called Manna, but also the bodie of Chryste whiche was born of the virgen, whiche he calleth perfecte Manna. And here yt ys not to be ouerpassed that Oecolampadius the enemie of this Sacrament, who of indurate malice, wrote a booke against the same, in the whiche to the entent he D might more easilie deceaue the vnlearned and simple, as to make them beleue that the holie fathers were of his side, he vseth to alleage diuerse of thē, [Page]but so that somtime he doth wrest them shamefullie, some time he falfifieth them, somtime he corrupteth them: somtime he truncateth them: somtime E alleaging them and taking vpon him trulie to reporte them, he doth mutylate them in the middest of their sainge, as impudenilie and wickedlie he doth vse S. Ambrose here in this place last alleaged, of the whiche, for that he perceaued yt made against him, he left oute a sentence, whiche I haue noted in the margen both the latin and the english, to the entent ye shoulde perceaue the sentence alone, and with all see howe that wicked man ioined the rest of the sentence to gether, mutilating and cutting this awaie. This ys the sinceritie of heretikes in handling of matters of faith and religion. And thus maie ye see what credite they be wourthie of. By this ye maie perceaue also whether they offende of ignorance, of simplicitie, or ells of deuelish malice. Ys not this deuelish malice, that seing a sentence in the middest, that impugneth his heresie, he cutteth yt of, and peiceth yt together again, as though ther were nothing lacking? Did not his conscience (trowe ye) reprehend him whē he did yt? Ys not he the childe of his father Sathan, that seeth F and perceiueth that this waie ys naught and wicked, and yet by gile and crafte will trauaill to induce men into yt, and bringing manie to damnaciō, aggrauate his owne, euen as his father doth.
I haue thought good (reader) here to aduertise thee of their impostures, that though they sett oute their doctrine with neuer, so good a countenance of holinesse, learning, and consent, or testimonie of holie Fathers: yet be well assured that vnder the faire countenaunce of the enemie of mankinde tempting our mother Eue ther was a mortiferouse serpent, vnder his swete woordes, which to well liked the hearer, was most bitter falshood and vntrueth. Vnder the sweet woordes of Heretiques lieth bitter poisō of falshead In that goodlie pleasaunt and delctable aple was cruell and horrible death and damnacion: so in their faire countennance ye shall finde serpentine infection, in their woordes falshead, errour, and heresie, and in the taking of their doctrine or consenting to yt plain damnacion. But nowe that ye maie perceaue howe moche this sentence whiche denelishlie he cutt of, dothe impugne his doctrine, and make for the trueth, I will somwhat open the same, and so shall ye perceaue that of sett pourpose, and of very malice G he left yt oute.
S. Ambrose answering Irenaeus, saieth, that Manna nowe a daies, though yt be fownde in many places, at this present time yt ys not a thing of so great miracle. He addeth the cause: bicause (saieth be) that ys nowe comed that ys perfect. as who might saie: The figures of the lawe, though manie of thē, when they were in vse, were great thinges, and semed to be merueilouse: yet when the thinges came, of the whiche they were figures, they were not so merueilouse: like as the light of a torche in the night time, semeth to be a great light a very perfect light: yet in the daie the brigth beames of the Sunne shining, and glistering, yt ys but an vnperfecte and almost no light: so the figures of the olde lawe compared to the thinges figured in the newe lawe. Wherfor Manna being but a figure of that perfect thing the bodie of Chryst: when that once came in place Manna appeared to be but an vnperfect thinge.
When S. Ambrose had made this comparison of the figure to the thing figured, and sawe the perfectiō of the one, and the impefection of the other H the excellencie of the one, and the weaknesse or basenesse of the other, he brought in this sentēce which, Oecolāpadius left oute: Quanto sunt praestātiora haec superioribus: Howe moche more excellent are these then the other aboue rehersed? [Page 243]howe moche more excellent ys the bodie born of the virgen, our verie A true Manna, and the right bread of heauen, whiche we feade vpon in the Sacrament, then Manna whiche the Iewes did eate? And here note Sacramētaries to maintein their heresie denie the excellencie of the Sacramentes of the newe lawe. again (gentle reader) that this wicked man, and other his complices, who denie (as ye perceaue) the presence of Chryst in the blessed Sacrament do also as wickedly teache, that the Sacramentes of the newe lawe geue no grace. And to maintain these two euell and wicked opinions, they take the third against the trueth, that all Chrystes Churche receaued, whiche ys that the Sacramentes of the newe lawe are of no more excellencie, then the Sacramentes of the olde lawe. For yf they shoulde graunt that they were more excellent, then must they nedes also admitte the Sacrament of Chrystes bodie and bloode to be more thē a bare sign, figure or token of his bodie. And so must be enforced to graunt the presence. Nowe by cause, Oecolampadius impugneth that presence, and fowde in S. Ambrose, that he taught, that the Oecolamp. his best soli [...] cion to S. Amb. argumet. thinges of the newe testament, are more excellent, then thinges of the olde, and sawe that he was pressed with the weight of S. Ambrose his argument, he had no better solucion then clean to leaue yt oute, and so to shippe B yt ouer.
I trust ye perceaue, that this litle sentence of S. Ambrose, left oute by Oecolampadius, dothe not a litle impugn his pestilent doctrine, whiche he mainteined against the presence of Chrystes bodie in the blessed Sacrament, and also ouerthroweth by plain woordes his heresie against the excellencie of the Sacramentes of Chrystes Churche, wherbie I think yt maie wel appeare of what wicked pourpose he left yt oute. And as in this he ys deprehended to be a falsarie: so I doubte not but he shall be fownde the like herafter in the sentences, and sainges of other holie fathers.
Nowe to proceade with S. Ambrose, yt ys euident, that he calling the bodie of Chryste born of a virgen the perfect thing in comparison of Manna, Manna, a figure of the bodie of Chryst. whiche he meneth to be the vnperfect thing, (as euery figure ys, in respecte of the thinge figured) that he doth vnderstande Manna, to be the figure of our true Manna, the bodie of Chryst, our heauenly foode, and verie bread geuē frō heauen: whiche ys not ment of the bodie of Chryste absolutely, as the bodie onelie born of the virgen, but of the bodie born of the virgen, and geuē C vs in sacrament to fede on, to our spirituall comforth. which thing S. Ambrose signifieth in that same epistle, wherwith also Oecolampadius wolde not medle, but coulde ouerpasse yt as yt were a thing in a mist which he coulde not see. Oriente autem iusticiae Sole, & plendidioribus Christicorporis & sanguinis sacramentis refulgentibus cessarent inferiora, & perfecta illa sumenda populo forent. The Sunne of rightwisnesse appearing, and the bright Sacramentes of Chrystes bodie and bloode shininge, the inferiour thinges shoulde ceasse, and those perfect thinges shoulde be taken of the people. Thus S. Ambrose.
By whiche he dothe not onelie teache vs, that the sacramentes of Crystes S. Ambro. his magnifieng of the blessed Sa. argueth it to be more thē a figure bodie and blood are the perfect things, and the figures therof inferiour thinges: but also that the bodie and blood of Chryst, as in Sacramentes (whiche Sacramentes for the presence of that bodie and bloode are bright and shining Sacramentes) ys the clere light, of the whiche Manna, was the figure and the shadowe. In whiche maner of speache yt ys notable howe S. Ambrose doth magnifie this most wrouthie and excellent Sacrament, I wish yt of the Reader to be cōsidered. Yf that blessed Sacrament were but a bare sign or figure D (as they terme yt) why shoulde yt be called of S. Ambrose the bright and shining Sacrament aboue Manna? wher as yf yt were not for the presence of [Page]him that ys the light of the worlde Manna in and hundreth partes were more wonderfull more excellent and farre surmounting the figure or signe E of Chrystes bodie, as here after shall most clerelie appeare vnto yowe. Wherfore we are not onely taught by S. Ambrose that Manna was the figure of the bodie of Chryst: but also that the same bodie ys present in the Sacramēt of his bodie and bloode wherby yt ys made a wonderfull an excellent, and a bringt shining Sacrament.
Neuer the lesse the same S. Ambrose teacheth vs that the woorde of God, whiche he calleth the rain of spirituall wisdom, ys also a spirituall Manna, whiche vndoubtedlie well and dewlie taken feadeth the soule. Non in solo pane viuit homo, sed in omni verbo, quod procedit de ore Dei. Man liueth not by bread onely, but by euery woorde whiche proceadeth from the mouth of God. Dent. 8. Matth. 4. Thre kinds of Manna. So that of S. Ambrose yt maie be learned, that ther be three kindes of Māna. Manna whiche God rained frō heauen to the people in the deserte, whiche ys the figure: Manna the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament, which duely taken feadeth both bodie and soule to euerlasting life. And Manna the worde of God. whiche illumineth, nourisheth and feadeth the soule, and moysteth yt with the dewe of gods wisdom, and maketh man wise in God. This F doctrine ys not dissonant from the Gospell for in the sixte of S. Iohn, we are taught that Manna the figure was geuē to the Iewes, and that yt figured not onelie the woord, and the Godhead of Chryst, but also his manheade whiche both are called the breades of life, as in the seconde booke ys declared. The declaracion of the figure, and applicacion of yt to the thinge figured ys plainlie settfurth by Chryste when the Iewes saied vnto him: Patres nostri Ioan. 6. manducauerunt Manna in deserto. Owre Fathers haue eaten Manna in the desert. To whom Chryste, minding to bring them frō the bread Manna whiche did but nourish the bodie to the mainteinance of the corporall life, whiche bread and life in respect of the heauenly bread and euerlastinge life, be no true bread and true life, to him self the true bread, and geuer of true life, saied: Non Moises dedit vobis panem de coelo, sed Pater meus dat vobis panem de coelo verū. Moyses did not geue yowe breade from heauen: but my father geueth yowe the true bread from heauen. This text Euthymius verie liuely and plainlie expowdeth: Quia putabant Manna esse panem ab eo, quod coelum propriè appellatur, eò quòd scriptum esset, Panem de coelo dedit eis, corrigit erroneam eorum opinionem. Nam ibi G scriptura impropriè aerem vocauit coelum. Quemadmodum etiam dicuntur, volucres coeli In. 6. Ioan. Et rursum: Intonuit de coelo Dominus. Ait ergo: Non Moyses dedit tunc nationi vestrae panem, qui de coelo propriè sit: sed Pater meus nunc dat vobis panem ab eo quod propriè coelum appellatur. Nam sicut Pater propriè dicitur coelestis: ita & filius coelestis, & propriè panis, vtpote cor hominis confirmans. Bicause they thought Manna to be Heauen taken for the aier. bread from that that ys proprelie called heauē, bicause yt ys written: He hath geuen them bread from heauen: He doth correcte ther erroniouse opinion. For the scripture ther called the aier vnproprelie heauen. as also the birdes be called the birdes of heauen. And again: The Lorde thondered oute of heauen. He saieth therfore, Moyses did not geue then vnto yower nacion bread whiche ys from that whiche ys proprelie called heauen: but my Father geueth yowe nowe bread from that ys proprely called heauen. Eor as the Father ys called heauēly: euē so the Sonne ys heauēly, and called breade as cōfirming the heart of Man. Thus Euthymius. In whiche expositiō this ys first taugh, that wher the scripture saieth, that God gaue the Iewes bread frō heauē yt ys not H ment that he gaue thē that breade or foorde of Manna frō heauē in dede, but frō the aire, whiche in diuerse places of the scriptures ys called heauen, as in [Page 244]the exāples yt ys shewed, ād diuerse other places maie likewise be produced. A A gain, vpon this ys taught the excellencie of Chryst the thing figured aboue Manna was frō the aier Christe our bread ys from heauen. the figure. For wher the bread of the Iewes was but frō the aier, our bread Christe ys from heauen in dede, and not from heauen as a comon heauenlie thing, but from heauen as a thing heauenlie, as the Father ys heauenly and withall not as a cōmon bread, but as a bread that ys proprelie called. and ys heauenlie bread in verie dede, bicause yt confirmeth and maketh strong the heart of man. And yet immediatelie by expresse woordes this authour declareth as a cause why that Māna was not the trewe bread, and speaketh yt in the person of Chryst: Siquidem panis ille siguratiuus erat, me (inquit) praesigurans, Manna a figure of Chryste oure bread. In 6. Joan. hom. 44. qui sum ipsa veritas. For that bread was a figuratiue bread, prefigurating me (saieth Chryst) whiche am the treuth yt self. Here vnto agreablie also saieth Chrysostome: Panem autem simpliciter, & non verum illum appellat, non quòd falsus esset in Manna miraculum, sed quòd figura esset, non veritas. He calleth yt onelie bread and not the true bread, not that in Manna was a false miracle, but bicause yt was a figure and not the veritie. Nowe then as in the woordes B of Chryst comparing and also preferring him self before and aboue the bread that the Iewes had vnder Moises in the desert, he declareth him self to be the thing figured by that breade, and that bread to be the figure: so haue ye hearde these learned men expownding this scripture to teache the like or raither the verie same.
Yf nowe the aduersarie will obiecte and saie, that Manna was a figure of the Godhead, but not of his Manhead, and so consequentlie not of his bodie, for that these textes and scriptures speake of the deitie or God head of John. 6. Euthim. ibidem. Chryst, and not yet of his humanitie, as Euthimius, whom we haue alleaged, doeth also testifie, expownding this saing of Chryst: Ego sum panis vitae. I am the bread of life. Panis viuificans, & qui, vt dictū est, dat vitā aeternā. Nā ea proprie dicitur vita quae aeterna est. Quae enim ad tēpus durat, nō vita est, sed vitae imago. Panem autē vitae suā vocat diuinitatē. Siquidē ipsa panis est, quae de caelo descendit. I am the bread of life, the bread that maketh to liue, ād which (as yt ys saied) geueth eternal lif. For that proprelie ys called life, which ys euerlasting. That that endureth but for a time yt ys not life but an image of life. The bread of life he calleth his C Godhead. For yt ys the bread that descended from heauen. Thus Euthim.
Yt ys true that all that Chryste hath spoken of him self hitherto, sithen he began to speake of Manna, ys spoken of his Godhead. For so dothe Chrysostome also wittnesse. And therfor we accept that that Euthimius saieth, and graunt the same. But then I wold ye wēt to the next line of Euthymius, ād read Euthim. what he addeth to this sentence, that ys nowe oute of him alleaged. Yt foloweth ther immediatelie: Tandem verò etiam corpus panem vocat. Afterwarde also he calleth his dodie bread. Whiche he doth when he saieth: And the bread Chryste called bread two waies. whiche I will geue ys my flesh, whiche I will geue for the life of the worlde. vpō the which text he saieth: Duobus modis Christus dicitur esse panis, secundùm diuinitatem scilicet & bumanitatem. Postquam ergo docuit de modo, qui secundùm Diuinitatem est, nunc etiā docet de modo, qui est secundùm humanitatē. Two maner of waies Chryste ys saied to be bread, that ys to saie, after his Godhead and after his Manheade. Therfore after he hath taught of the maner whiche ys after his Godhead, nowe also he teacheth of that maner whiche ys after his Manhead.
Thus then yt ys manifest, Chryste him self teaching, and Euthimius, Chrysostom, D with diuerse other so declaring as ye maie see in the second booke, wher the sixt chapter of S. Iohn ys by a nombre of learned Fathers expownded, that Chrystes bodie ys called bread, and yerie well, both for that by [Page]that name yt aunfwereth the figure: And also as Manna fedde the Iewes so in a more excellent maner the bodie of Chryste feadeth the Chrystians E he him self witnessing and speaking of his owne bodie thus: Qui manducat Joan. 6. hunc panen, viuet in aeternum. He that eathe this bread shall liue for euer.
And here I can but merueill at the maliciouse blindnesse of Oecolampadius, who trauaileth by all means to proue that the bodie of Chryst feadeth not the soule, and so wolde make Chryst contrarie to him self bothe in this sentence last alleaged, and also in this sentence wher he faieth: Caro mea verè est Jbid. [...] cibus, & sanguis meus verè est potus. My flesh ys meat in dede, and my bloode ys drinke in dede. But Oecolam. wolde haue that the soule ys fedde onely whith the worde of God, and faith and therfor speaking of the flesh of Chryste, he saith: Neque opus est carnem in ipsam ingredi animam. Quod ne imaginaremur satis cauerat Dominus, dicens: Caro non prodest quicquam. Neither yt ys nedefull that the flesh entre into the soule. whiche thing that we shoulde not imagen the lord did diligently prouide sainge: The flesh profitetb nothinge: And yet Chryste saieth: Except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his blood, ye haue F no life in yowe.
I am loath (as in the prouerbe yt ys saied) Actum agere. to doo that thing In the xxxvi. chap. &c. that ys doen all readie, and so with prolixitie and tediousnes to greue the readie. Wherfor all these scriptures of the sixt chap. of S. Iohn being sufficiently declared in the second booke, and among other, this text whiche Oecolampadius bringeth, inwhiche ys (The flesh profiteth nothing) ther truly by S. Augustine. Chrysostom Theophilact and other expownded and declared to be of an other maner of sense, then he deuilishlie wolde wrest yt to: and ther also being shewed howe the flesh of Chryst feadeth and profiteth the soule very moche: I shall referr the reader thither, wher he shall finde Oecolampadius fullie aunswered, and matter sufficient, I trust, wherwith he him self shall be satisfied. Wherfor nowe I will but touche a woorde of Oecolampadius wher he saieth: that the inwarde man ys fedde by faithe. Yt ys a maner of feede that I haue not redd in anie autentike authour. But this maie be, and ys red that Chryst and his woorde receaued by faith, doth feed the soule, but not faithe yt self. Neither haue I red anie catholique authour that G Jnward mā ys fedde by [...]aith the glose of Oecolāp. touched. teacheth that the flesh of Chryst entreth in to the soule, as yt liketh Oecolampadius whith his feigned speache to dallie, or raither as a man in darknesse goeth he can not tell whether: so he in this darknesse of heresie speaketh he can not tel what, and wandereth he can not tell whether.
But to conclude this parte that the sixt chapter of S. Iohn, or raither Chryste in that chapter teacheth, that Manna ys a figure of his bodie in the Sacramēt, as before yt ys taught to be a figure of his God head, Marke what Chryst saieth in that parte, wher (Chrysostom saieth) he speaketh of his bodie: Joan. 6. He that eateth me, shall liue by the means of me, This ys that bread, which came down frō heauen. Not as yowr fathers did eate Manna and are dead. He that eateth this bread shall liue euer. In whiche woordes of Chryste ys made a iust comparison of him self the thing figured to Manna the figure. of the whiche (as Chrysostom saieth) he often maketh mencion, as yt were by yt to allure them to the faith. Homil. 46. in Ioan. This ys his sentence: Frequenter autem Mannae meminit, & differentiam conferendo ad fidem allicit. Nam si possibile fuit, vt quadraginta annos, sine messibus, & frumento, & aliis ad victum necessariis viuerent. longè magis nunc cùm ad maiora venerint. Nam H si in illis figuris sine labore expositum colligebant, nunc profectòmagis, vbi nulla mors, sed vaere vitae fruitio. Often he maketh mencion of Manna and conferring the difference, allureth them to faith. For yf yt were possible that they shoulde liue [Page 245]fourtie years, without haruest, and corne and other necessaries to their liuing: A moche more nowe when they are come to greater thinges. For yf in those figures they did gather withoute labour the thing made readie to ther handes: nowe truly moch more, wher ys no death, but the fruycion of the true life. Thus moche Chrysostome. Why Chryste made so often mencion of Mā na 90. 6.
In whose saing as yt first offreth yt self▪ so yt ys first to be noted, that Christ often maketh mencion of Manna, but to what pourpose? that by conferring of himself and Manna, as the thing, and the figure, he might allure thē to the faith of him, vnto whom the lawe, and all the figurs of yt did lead them. Another that Chrysostome by expresse woordes calleth yt a figure. For (saieth he) yf in those figurs they withoute laboure did gather that, that was readie laied before them: moch more now, &c. By which he meneth Manna, which God raining from heauen, and so being prepared withoute their laboure, they did but gather yt, and had sufficiēt to serue their necessitie. Thus, I trust, yt ys manifest that Manna ys a figure of the bodie of Chryst, bothe by the woordes of Chryst himself in the sixt of S. Iohn, and also by holie learned B men in the exposition of the same chapiter so teaching vs, wherfore nowe leauing yt we will repair to our text of S. Paule, and seke howe yt ys taken their of the auncient Fathers. Likewise what the water that flowed oute of the stone, whiche for the most parte are ioined together, did signifie.
THE FIFTE CHAP. TEACHING THAT MANna and the water of the stone were figures of the bodie and blood of Chryst by Origen, and S. Ambrose.
AS our Sauiour Chryst hath taught, that Manna was a figure of his bodie: And as he laboured with the Iewes by yt to make thē to vnderstande him, and from yt the sign and figure of him, to lead and bring thē to him the thing signified and figured: so S. Paule trauaileth with his Corinthians by figures to vnderstand the verities as well of verie benefites by figurs of benefites, as of verie plagues by the figurs of plagues, that they should not be puffed vppe with pride, C neither led with a negligēce of holie life, now that they be vnder Chryst, and haue receaued the great gift of the newe byrthe by baptisme, and haue ben fedde with the bodie and blood of Chryst. For yf they did, these great giftes notwithstanding, God wolde haue no pleasure in them, no more then he had in manie of the Iewes, whiche were vnder Moyses, and were baptised in the clowde and in the sea, and did eate of one spirituall meat, and drink of one spirituall drinke, whiche were figures of these benefittes, but he wolde cast them of as he did the Iewes. For they were ouerthrowen in the wildernesse, of the which more at large was spoken in the first chapter. Wherfore I will not now detein the reader but entre to the pourpose, and heare the mindes of the fathers what they thinke of these figures, and whether they be figurs of figures, and signs of signes, or ells figures of verie things, and signes of thinges now present, and not absent.
In this processe Origen for that he ys right auncient shall first be heard: Modo Origen. homil 7s in Num. enim cum Moyses venit ad nos & coniunctus est nostrae Aethyopissae, lex Dei iam non in figuris, & in imaginibus sicut priùs sed in ipsa specie veritatis agnoscitur. Et quae D priùs in aenigmate designabantur, nunc in specie & veritate complentur. Et ideo ille qui species figurarum, & anigmatum disserebat, dicit: Scimus quoniā patres nostri omnes sub nube erant, & omnes mare transierunt, & omnes in Moyse baptisati sunt, in Nube, & [Page] in mari, & omnes eandem escam spiritualem manducauerunt, & omnes eundem potum spiritualem biberunt, biberunt autem de spiritali consequente eos petra, Petra autem erat Christus. E Vides quomodò aenigmata legis absoluit Paulus, & species aenigmatum docet. Nowe when Moyses came vnto vs, and was ioined to this owre Ethyopisse, the law of God ys not nowe knowen in figurs and images as before yt was, but in the If Chryst be nowe receaued in figure, he ys receaued as in Moyses lawe in darke maner. plain forme of trueth. And soche things as before were appoincted in a dark maner, now they are fulfilled in plain formād trueth. And therfor he, who declared the plain formes of darke thinges, saieth: We knowe that all our Fathers were vnder the clowde, and all passed through the Sea, and all were baptised vnder Moyses in the clowde and in the Sea, and all haue eaten one spirituall meat, and all haue dronke one spirituall drinke. They dranke of that spirituall rocke that folowed them. The rocke was Chryst. Thowe seest howe Paule openeth the darke thinges of the lawe, and teacheth the plain formes of the darke thinges. And after he had shewed of the rocke, the clowde and the sea, he cometh to Manna and saieth. Tunc in Acnigmate erat Manna cibus: nunc autem in specie caro Verbi Dei est verus cibus, sicut ipse dicit: Caro mea verè est cibus, & sanguis meus verè est potus. Then in a darke maner F Manna was meat: but nowe in plain and open maner, the flesh of the Sonne of God ys the true meat, as he himself saieth: My flesh ys meat in dede, and my bloode ys drinke in dede. Thus farre Origen.
In the whiche saing of Origen ther ys nothing (as me thinketh) to be desiered, either for the expresse maner of affirming Manna to be a figure of the bodie of Chryst, or ells for the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament. For yf the Iewes in eating Manna did figuratiuelie receaue Chryste, that ys, did eate Manna as a figure of Chryst, whiche Origen calleth the darke maner, then yt must nedes be that the Chrystians, who receaue Chryst in plain maner (as Origen termeth yt) must receaue Chryst verilie, that ys, not figuratiuelie onelie, Chryste ys not nowe receaued of the chrystians as he was of the Iewes: for then in figure nowe in veritie. which ys the dark maner, but verilie, that ys, substanciallie, and reallie, which ys the true and very maner, or ells yt were all one to Origen, and ther were no difference betwixt a clere maner and a darke maner, which were to moche absurditie to affirme. Yt can not therfor by the minde of Origen be saied that the Chrystians in receauing the Sacrament receaue but a sign or a figure of Chryst. For they shoulde them receaue him in a darke maner onely, and so G shoulde Chryst be all one waie, meat to the Iewes, and to vs. Whiche ys not true, for he was meate vnto them figuratiuely, but to vs verilie, according to his owne sainge, which Origen alleageth: My flesh ys meat in dede, and my bloode ys drinke in dede. And so ys yt true that the very flesh and blood of Chryste ys reallie and verilie receaued in the Sacrament.
To Origen shall be ioined that the holie reuerend Father sainct Ambrose, who declaring howe the Chrystian people reioice and glorie in the excellency and honour of the table of Chryste, geueth to this matter a goodlie testimonie. Ille ergo antè despectus, iam praeferor, iam anteponor electis. Ille ego antè despectus populus peccatorum, iam babeo coelestium sacramentorum veneranda consortia, Ambro. in psal. 1 10. iam mensae coelestis honore suscipior. Epulis meis non pluuia vndatur, non terrae partus laborat, non arborum fructus. Potui meo non flumina quaerenda, non fontes. Christus mihi cibus est: Christus mihi potus. Caro Dei cibus mihi, & Dei sanguis est potus. Non iam ad satietatem mei annuos expecto prouentus: Christus mihi quotidie ministratur. Non verebor ne quae mihi coeli intemperies, aut sterilitas ruris immineat, si pij cultus diligentia perseuerat. Non iam coturnicum pluuias mihi opto descendere, H quas antè mirabar. Non Manna, quod antè cibis omnibus praferebant, quia qui Manna manducauerunt patres, esurierūt. Meus cibus est, quem qui manducauerit, non esuriet. Meus cibus est, qui non corpus impinguat, sed confirmat cor hominis, fuerat mihi antè mirandus [Page 256] panis de coelo. Scriptum est enim: Panem de coelo dedit eis manducare, sed non erat verus ille A panis, sed futuri vmbra. Panem de coelo illum verum, mihi seruauit pater. Euen I (saieth S. Ambrose in the person of the newe become faithfull Chrystians) before despised now I am preferred, nowe I am sett before the chosen. Euen I before a despised people of sinners, now I haue the woorshippefull companies of the heauenlie sacramentes. Now I am aduaunced to the honour of the heauenlie table. The raign ys not powred downe for my meat, the spring of the earth laboureth not, neither the fruicts of the trees. To my drinke neither riuers are to Plain sainges of S. Ambrose for the Proclamer. be sought, nor wells. Chryst ys my meat, Chryst ys my drinke. The flesh of God ys my meate, the bloode of God ys my drinke. Now for my satietie, I looke not for yearlie profittes. Chryst ys euery daie mynistred vnto me. I will not feare leest anie waie the vntemperatnesse of the heauē, or the barennesse of the earth come vpō me, yf the diligence of Godlie tillage do continue. I desire not now the raynes of quaills to descende vnto me, the whiche before I wondred at: Not Manna, which before they preferred before all other meates. For the fathers whiche haue eaten Manna, haue hungred. My meate ys which fatteth not the bodie, but yt maketh stronge the heart of man. Before the bread from heauen B was merueilouse to me, for yt ys written: he hath geuen them bread frō heauen to eate, but the bread which was not the true bread, but the shadowe of the bread to come. The Father hath kept for me that true bread from heauē. Hitherto S. Ambrose.
Of whome first, that ys here to our pourpose we maie learn, that Māna was Māna was a figure of Chrystes bodie in the B. Sacram. a figure of Chrystes bodie in the Sacramēt, for he saieth, that yt was a shadow of the true bread, which true bread the Father of heauen hath kept for him. What this true bread ys he also sheweth, saing: Chryst ys my meate, Chryst ys my drink. And that these hys woords should not be misvnderstāded by the simple, or wrested by the wicked, he addeth as yt were an expositiō what he meneth by Chryste, and saieth: The flesh of God ys my meat, the blood of God ys my drinke. And yet for that yt was forseen by the holie Gost, that the Aduersarie wold wrest these woordes, though they were thus plainly spoken, to eschew yt he addeth where the flesh of the Sonne of God, and the bloode of the The fleshof God oure meat, the blood of God oure drink, and that on the table. Sonne of God, be hys meat and drinke, saing: Iam habeo coelestium sacramentorum veneranda consortia. Iam mensae coelestis honore suscipior. Nowe (saieth he) haue C I the worshippefull companies of the heauenly Sacramentes. Nowe am I aduanced to the honoure of the heauenlie table. In the heauenly table then, wher he hath the woorshippefull companies of the heauenly Sacramentes, ther receaueth he the true bread, that the father hath kept for him: ther receaueth he his meat, which ys the flesh of God, ther receaueth he his drinke, which ys the bloode of God. Which woordes do most euidentlie proue vnto vs, that in the heauenly Sacramentes of Chrystes bodie and bloode mynistred in that heauenly table, ys this wourthie and excellent meat Chryst, euen hys verie flesh, and hys verie bloode.
In this breif opening of S. Ambrose woords (which maie as well be perceaued of the vnlearned Chrystiā, as of the learned) I haue not, Iam sure, dissentet frō the minde of S. Ambrose, no more haue I gone frō his woords, that the trueth might as yt ys appeare. Oecolāpadius, Whose cōscience was cawtherised hauing a pretēce of sinceritie in handling, of the scripturs, ād the Fathers, but not in dede, as ye perceaued before: so shal ye nowe again, perceaue how wickedlie he Oecol. hys wresting of S. Ambrose opened. hath abused S. Ambrose in wresting him to his wicked pourpose. D
In this fame sermon wher these woordes be written, which as yeperceaue be very plain, and of that force, that they coulde not well be wrested by [Page]the craftie engines of Oecolampadius, immediatelie after folowe other woords, whiche he perceauing that he might wrest, left oute all this that ys before alleadged, E and tooke onely this that foloweth, whiche when yt ys applied to this that ys before rehersed, then iudge (Reader) whether yt be not violentlie wrested from the true mening of sainct Ambrose or no. Thus he alleadgeth: Mihi ille panis Dei descendat de coelo, qui dat vitam huic mundo. Non Iudaeis, non Synagogae descendit, sed Ecclesiae descendit, sed populo minori. Nam quomodò Iudaeis descendit Ambr. ibid. panis, cùm omnes qui illum manducarunt, hoc est, quem Iudaei putarunt Manna, in deserto mortui sunt? Quomodò Synagogae descendit, cùm omnis Synagoga interierit, & aeterno ieiunio fidei defecerit? Denique si accipissent panem verum, non dixissent: Domine, semper da nobis panem hunc. Quid petis Iudaee vt tribuat tibi? Panem, quem dat quotidie, dat semper, in teipso est vt accipias hunc panem. Accede hunc panem, & accipies eum. De hoc pane dictum est: Omnes qui se elogant à te peribunt. Si elongaris ab eo peribis. Si appropinquaris viues. Hic est panis vitae. Qui vitam manducat, mori non potest. Quomodò enim moritur, cui vita cibus est? Quomodò deficiet, qui habet vitalem substantiam? Accedite ad eum, & satiemini, quia panis est. Accedite ad eum & potate, quia fons est. Accedite ad eum & illuminemini, quia Lux est. Accedite ad eum & liberemini, quia vbi Spiritus F Domini, ibi libertas. Accedite ad eum & absoluimini, quia est remissio peccatorum. Qui sit iste quaeritis? Audite ipsum dicentem: Ego sum panis vitae, qui venit ad me non esur [...]et, & qui credit in me non sitiet vnquam. Audistis eum, & vidistis eum, & non credidistis ei ideo mortui estis. That bread of God descend vnto me from heauen whiche geueth life to the worlde. He hath not descended to the Iewes, not to the Synagoge: but he hath descended to the Church: he hath descended to the inferiour people. For howe hath that bread descended to the Iewes, seing that all that haue eaten yt, that ys, whome the Iewes thought to be Manna in the wildernesse, are dead? Howe hath he descended to the Synagog, seing that all the Synagog hath perished, and with the hungar or fast of faith hath failed or decaied? Yf they had receaued the trewe bread, they had not saied: Lorde geue vs allwaie this bread. What doest thowe aske, O Iewe, that he shoulde geue vnto thee? The bread whiche he geueth to all, whiche he geueth dailie, whiche, he geueth alwaies, yt ys in thy self, that thow maist take that bread Come vnto this bread, and thowe shall receaue yt. Of this bread yt ys saied: All that make themselues farre from thee, shal perish. Yf thow make G thy self farre from him, thow shalt perish: yf thow drawe neer to him, thowe shalt liue. This bread ys the the bread of life. He that eateth life, can not die Howe can he die vnto whome life ys meate? Howe shall he faill that hath that liuelie substāce? Come vnto him ād be filled, for he ys the foode. Come vnto him and drinke, for he ys the well. Come vnto him and be lightned, for he ys the light. Come vnto him and be made free. For wher the Spirit of God ys, ther ys fredome. Come vnto him and be absolued, for he ys the remission of sinnes. Who thys ys do ye aske? Heare him saing: I am the bread of life, he that cometh to me shall not bungar, and he that beleueth in me shall not thirst at anie time. Ye haue heard him, ye haue seē him, ād haue not beleued him. Therfor ye are dead
Thus moche of S. Ambrose ys alleaged of Oecolampadius, whiche for that yt hath none of those expresse woordes, which be in the rest of S. Ambrose, which I haue before alleadged. Therfor he tooke this part of S. Ambrose, that he might the better wrest yt, and left that whiche I haue alleaged, bicause he could not so well blind the eie of his reader with the wresting of yt. H
Nowe what wolde ye thinke of a man that so vseth anie holie authour, as to bring him against a matter, or raither as seming to speake against a [Page 247]matter, who in dede speaketh nothing against yt, but in the next line speaketh A so manifestlie, and so plainlie with yt, that the wrester ys ashamed, and dare not bring him furth, and reporte that, that there he saieth, but knowing that he ys for the trueth, will bring him furth as though he were against the trueth? There ys no other thing but that he ys an Angell of Sathan transforming himself into the Angell of light, and by swete woordes entrappeth the heartes of the simple, and of soche as be not ware and circumspecte. And therfore yowe must thinke that yt ys necessarie to be vigilant, and by earnest prayer to desire the Lord of all Spirittes to geue yowe grace to discern betwixt spirittes, I meen, betwixt the spirit of trueth, and the spirit of errour, and so to flie the euell and cleaue to the good. And when ye see soche wicked wresters so to abuse the authours, thinke as ye haue iust cause, that their matter ys naught, who seke by soche naughtie meanes to maintein yt.
Nowe I wish that yf the reader be learned he wolde read these two allegacions in sainct Ambrose: yf he be not learned reade them as they be here B alleaged. For so moche as Oecolampadius alleadgeth foloweth in sainct Ambrose immediately after that, that I alleadged, euen as yt doth here. Nowe ioin them together as one (as they be in dede) and then iudge yf they teach not the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, and Manna to be a figure of the same, howe soeuer Oecolampadius wolde wrest yt to the contrarie.
This also by the waie ys to be noted, that where this and the rest of the Aduersaries of Gods trueth, teache that ther ys no difference betwxit the Difference betwene Manna ād the blessed Sacrament Sacramentes of the olde lawe and the newe, as touching anie more excellencie or woorthinesse in the one then in the other, but that the one signified Chryst to come, the other as comed: that sainct Ambrose here noteth a more difference, saing that Manna was not the true bread, but our bread ys the true bread, that was a shadowe, our the very thing: that gaue not life, our geueth life. Be not these differences shewing the one more excellent then the other? Did not Origen also in his saing signifie moche difference whē he saied that Manna was meate in darke maner, and nowe the flesh of the Sonne of God ys true meat in a plain maner? Yf the balance be in a true mans hand, C the one will weigh moch more then the other, euen as moche as the bodie more then the shadowe.
Thus ye haue heard the minde of Origen and S. Ambrose in these three pointes, that ys, that Manna ys a figure of the bodie of Chryste: that the bodie of Chryste ys present in the Sacrament: and that the thinges of the new Testament are of more excellencie, then the thinges of the olde Testament. In particular, I meen of that thing that they haue spoken of. A place shall be had that they shall be spoken of vniuersallie. In the mean while as I do passe through the Authours, as they do touche yt, so yt shall be noted, and so likewise of the other two.
THE SIXTH CHAPITER DECLARETH THAT Manna was a figure by the testimonie of saincte Cyprian, E and Chrysostom.
THe holy Martyr S. Cyprian, whose faithe ys well to be perceaued in the matter of the Sacrament by hys plain and manifold godlie sainges in the first and second booke alleaged, wil also be a notable wittnesse for the same here. In the first booke he hath most clerely declared vnto vs, the figures that were there spokē of, as of Melchisedech and the Paschal lābe: so here also as plainly as breiflie he toucheth this figure saing: Huius panis figura fuit Manna, quod in deserto pluit. Sicvbi ad verum panem in terra promissionis ventum est, cibus ille defecit. Of this bread, Māna was a figure, which rained in the desert. So when we came to the true bread Cyprian. de caena. Do. in the land of promesse, that meat ceassed. That the bread which he speaketh of here, of the which he saieth that Manna was the figure, ys the holie bread of the blessed Sacrament, yt ys more manifest, than that yt can be denied. For this his Sermon, wherin these woordes be written, being of the supper of our Lorde, he onely treacteth of yt.
This will also be proued not onely by the sentence on the whiche this dependeth Ibid. F and hangeth: but also very manifestlie, where he openeth himself in the ende of the sermon by expresse woordes, saing: Sed & nos ipsi corpus effecti. Sacramento & re Sacramenti capiti nostro connectimur, & vnimur. Singuli alter alterius membra ministerium dilectionis proinuicc̄ exhibentes, communicamus charitate, participamur The one meate and drinke that we fead on ys our Lord Iesus Chryste. solicitudine, eundem cibum manducantes, & eundem potum bibentes, qui de spiritali prosluit petra, & emanauit. Qui cibus & potus est Dominus noster Iesus Christus. But we our selues also (saieth Cyprian) being made his bodie by the Sacrament and the thing of the Sacrament, we are connected and vnited to our head, euery one being membres one of an other, we communicate in charitie, we are partakers of one care, eating of one meate, and drinking of one drinke, whiche did flowe oute of the spirituall stone. Which meat and drinke ys ower Lord Iesus Chryst. Thus moche S. Cyprian. In this saing yt ys manifest that he alludeth to the same text of S. Paul, that we haue in hand, for he vseth the very woordes of S. Paule saing: that we eate all of one meat, and drinke all of one drink, whiche drinke did flowe oute of the spirituall stone. I nede not to conferre the one to the other, for he that knoweth the one dothe well perceaue the G other. But what this one meat ys that we all eate of, and what this drinke ys that flowed oute of the spirituall stone, of the whiche we all drinke, he furth A plain saing for the Procla. with expowndeth and saieth: Which meat, and drinke ys our Lord Iesus Chryst. A more plain speache can not be desired.
As the Iewes did eate of one Manna, and dranke of one water flowing out of the stone: so all we Chrystians eate one meate, and drinke one drinke the bodie and blood of Chryst. The bodie of Chryst being the one meat figurated by the one meat of the Iewes, whiche was Manna. The blood of Chryst being the one drinke of the Chrystians, figurated by the one drinke of the Ioan. 19. Iewes, whiche did flowe oute of the stone, as the bloode flowed oute of the spirituall stone, the bodie of our Lord and Sauiour Chryst Iesus. For as the Euangelist saieth, vnus militum lancea latus eius aperuit, & continuò exiuit sanguis & aqua. One Sacramentaries glose of spiritual lie impugned. of the soldiers with a spere thrust him into the side and furthwith there came oute blood and water.
This clere testimonie of S. Cyprian can not be darkned with the comon H obscure glose of the Aduersaries, as to saie that our Lorde Iesus Chryst ys our meat spirituallie. We confesse (as before) that Chryst ys our spirituall [Page 248]meat, and that we fede vpon him spirituallie, and we wish and praie that all A chrystians will so frame their liues, and conuersacions, that they maie dailie fede on him spirituallie. But with all we confesse and beleue, that we recea him reallie, and substanciallie in the Sacrament, as S. Cyrill saieth, whose phrase ys not vnlike this that we haue nowe saied. Thus he writeth: Non negamus Cyrill. in 15 Joan. Chrystes bodie ys receaued both spirituallie and reallie. nos recta fide, charitateue sincera Christo spiritualiter coniungi: sed nullam nobis coniunctionis rationem secumdùm carnem cum illo esse, id profectò pernegamus, idue à diuinis scripturis omnino alienum dicimus. We denie not but that we are ioined to Chryst spirituallie by right faith, and sincere charitie: But that we haue no maner of coniunction with him after the fleshe, that in verie dede we vtterlie denie, and saie yt to be farre wide from the scriptures. And a litle after: An fortassis putat ignotam nobis misticae benedictionis virtutem esse? quae cùm in nobis fiat nonne corporalliter quoque facit cōmunicatione carnis Christi, Christum in nobis habitare? Dothe he thinke peraduenture that the vertue of the misticall benediction ys vnknowen to vs? whiche when yt ys doen in vs, dothe yt not make also by the cōmunicacion or receauing of Chrystes flesh, Chryst corporallie to dwell in vs?
Nowe therfor with S. Cyrill confessing both maners of receauing and feading B of Chryst, we do not with the Aduersaries so confesse the one, that we denie the other. wherfor not denieng, but affirming with the holy martir Ciprian, we saie that we receaue Chryst verilie, and that our lorde Iesus Chryst, as Cyprian speaketh yt, ys our meate, and his bloode our drinke reallie, and substanciallie.
And that S. Cyprian so meneth yt will withoute all scruple appeare manifestlie to the reader, yf he will consider, and vnderstande, where he speaketh these woordes. They are spoken in a sermon that he made of the supper of our lorde, whiche sermon being made to setfurth that thing that yt was made for, must, and doth seth yt furthe as yt ys. And so by the figure of the Paschall lambe, and by the figure of Melchisedech he declareth the veritie A short solucion of the Sacramentaries. of Chryst in the Sacrament, of the whiche moche ys saied before, both in the first booke, and in the seconde, whereinuinciblie by S. Cyprian ys proued the presence of Chryste in the Sacrament. In the whiche matter S. Cyprian ys so plain in this sermon that the Aduersarie hath no better euasion C then of his owne authoritie to saie that yt ys not S. Cyprians sermon, as he doth for the like cause make a like solucion to the bookes of S. Ambrose of the sacramentes, saing they be none of his. And therfor weigh well the rest of the sermon, and what ys saied of him in the other bookes here before and ye shall see what faith he professeth as concerning the Sacrament, and howe he wolde be vnderstanded here.
But that the vnlearned reader maie not be referred to a place vnknowen Effectes of the blessed Sacr. and the means to atteing them. to him, or enforced to suspend his iudgement in this matter, yt shall vpon this present sentence of S. Cyprian be manifested and declared vnto him. This ys in this saing of S. Cyprian to be considered, that he teacheth the effecte and comoditie of the Sacrament, and by what mean we atteing to yt. The effecte ys that we be made the bodie misticall of Chryste, we be knitte and vnited to him, as to our head, we be made membres one of an other in this misticall bodie. These effectes whiche happen vnto vs by the receipt of the Sacrament, yf they be well considered and weighed, they be verie excellent and great. The mean to atteign to them S. Cyprian D also here declareth when he saieth: by the Sacrament, and the thing of the Sacrament, what the Sacrament ys, and what the thing of the [Page]Sacrament ys, and what ys the difference betwixt them both, S. Augustin teacheth vs saing: Hoc est quod dicimus, quod modis omnibus approbare contendimus, E sacrificium Ecclesiae duobus modis confici, duobus constare, visibili elementorum specie, & Li. senten. Prosper. vide sup. cap. 19. inuisibili Domini nostri Iesu Christi carne, & sanguine, & sacramēto, & re sacramēti, id est, corpore Christi &c. This ys yt (saieth S. Augustine) that we saie, that by all means we labour to proue, the sacrifice of the Churche to be made two waies, to be of two thinges: of the visible forme of the elementes, and the inuisible Aplain place for the Proclamer flesh and blood of our Lorde Iesus Chryst: both the Sacrament, and the thing of the Sacrament, that ys to saie, the bodie of Chryste. Euen as the person of Chryst ys of God and man, for as moch as he ys very God, ād verie man. For euery thing conteineth the nature and veritie of those thinges, of whiche yt ys made. The sacrifice of the Churche ys made of two thinges, of the Sacrament and the thing of the Sacrament, that ys to saie, of the bodie of Chryst. Yt ys therfor the Sacrament and the thing of the Sacrament, the bodie of Chryst. Thus moche S. Augustin.
Of whome ye haue heard (except my iudgement faill me) a verie plain F declaracion of the sacrifice of the Churche, and of the Sacrament and of the thinge of the Sacrament. But leauing here to speake of the Sacrifice, and referuing Sacrifice of the Church auouched. yt to some other more mete place, we will onelie speake of that that this place requireth, that ys, for so muche as S. Cyprian saieth, that we be connected, knitt, and vnited to Chryste our head by the Sacrament, and the thing of the Sacrament, to marke and learn by S. Augustin, what ys ment therby. The sentence of S. Augustin ys plain therin, that the Sacrament ys the visible forme of the elementes. As for example: Euen as the visible forme of the element of water, when the woorde cometh to yt, ys the sacrament of Baptisme: So be the visible formes of bread and wine, when the worde ys Sacrament and thing of the Sacr. what they be. comed to them, the Sacramentes of the bodie and blood of Chryste. Beside this there ys also the thing of the Sacrament. Whiche S. Augustine saieth, ys the bodie and blood of Chryste. Nowe when S. Cyprian saieth that we be knitte and vnited to Chryst our head by the Sacrament, and the thing of the Sacramēt: What ys yt ells, but we are vnited (as S. Cyrill saieth) by the Sacrament and the bodie and bloode of Chryste, and that (as ye G heard S. Cyrill saie before) not onelie spirituallie, but also corporallie, receauing his very flesh?
Yf of S. Cyprian we aske howe we are knitte to Chryst our head by his bodie and bloode, whiche ys the thing of the Sacrament: He also aunswereth like vnto S. Cyrill, sainge: Edentes, & bibentes, eundem cibum & potum, qui cibus & potus est Dominus noster Iesus Christus. Eating, and drinking the same meat, and drinke, whiche meat and drinke ys our lorde Iesus Cryste. Nowe then ye perceaue that S. Cyprian taketh the meat and drinke, that S. Paule speaketh of, not for the figures of the bodie and blood of Chryst, of the whiche we haue the very presence in the Sacrament. whiche as yt ys declared by him very plainly: So I doubt not but Chrysostom will as plainlie declare yt, so that there shall be no place for the enemie to lurke in. Chrysostom Homil. in dictum. Apost. Nolo vos ignor. making a speciall homelie vpon the woordes of S. Paule, whiche be nowe in hande, declareth both the figures and the thinges figured by expresse woordes, saing thus: Dixi enim quod oportet veritatem habere excellentiam quandā supra figuram. Vidisti de baptismate quae figura, & quae veritas. Age, ostendam tibi & H mensas, & sacramentorum communionem ibi delineari, si non iterum petis à me totum, sed sic requiris, quae facta sunt, sicut par est in adumbratione & figuris videre. Igitur quia dixit de mari, & de nube, & de Moyse, adiecit preterea: Et omnes eundum spiritualem cibum [Page 249] comederunt. Sicut tu (inquit) à lauachro aquarum ascendens ad mensam curris: sic & illi A à mari ascendentes ad mensam venere nouam, & admirabilem, de Manna loquor. Et iterum The trueth must haue an excellencie aboue the figure. sicut tu admirabilem habes potum salutarem sanguinem: sic & illi admirabilem habuerunt poculi naturam. I haue saied (saieth Chrisostom) that the trueth must haue a certain excellencie aboue the figure. Thowe hauest seē of Baptisme, whiche ys the figure and whiche ys the veritie. Go on I shall shewe thee the tables and the cōmunion of the sacramentes there to be in a darke maner set furth, yf thowe do not again aske all of me, but so requirest those thinges that be doen, as yt ys mete in the shadowing and figures to see. Therfor bicause he had saied of the Sea, and of the clowde and of moyses, he added fardermore: And all haue eaten one spirituall meate. as thowe (saieth he) ascending from the bathe or washing of waters doest runne to the table. So they also going vppe from the sea, came to a newe, and a merueilouse table, I speake of Māna, and again as thow hauest a wonderfull drinke, the wholsome bloode: so they also had a wonderfull nature of drinke. Hitherto Chrysostome. Who hath declared euery part of these matters, that here are to be sett furth.
In the beginning of his saing he confowndeth the Aduersarie in that he B so plainlie saieth, that the veritie must haue a certain excellencie aboue the figure. Thē forasmoche as Baptisme ys the veritie, and the sea the figure, Baptisme ys more excellent then the sea: Likewise Manna and the water being the figure of the Sacrament of the bodie of Chryst, and of his bloode. then the Sacrament of the bodie and blood of Chryste ys more excellent then Manna, for the veritie ys more excellent then the figure. That Manna and the water be figures of the Sacrament, he dothe most manifestlie declare when he Oure drinke the wholsome blood of Chryste. saieth: I will shewe thee the tables, and the cōmunion of the Sacramentes ther to be in figurs sett furth. And proceading to shewe what Sacramentes be settfurth there, he dothe applie the one to the other saing: As thowe coming vppe (saieth he) from the fonte of baptisme, runnest to the table. So they from the sea to Manna. As thowe hauest a wonderfull drinke, whiche ys the wholsom bloode of Chryst: so they the water of the stone.
In this ys plainly taught, whiche be the figures, whiche be the verities. The Sea, Manna, and the waters be the figures: Baptisme, Chrystes bodie and Chrystes bloode be the verities. For although Chrysostom in the applicacion C of Manna doth but put the table as the veritie. what he ment by the table he well declareth in the applicacion of the water to the veritie where he saieth: As thowe drinkest wonderfull drinke the wholsome bloode, So they the water. Wherby as in this by expresse woordes he declareth the bloode to be the veritie of the water being the figure: so by the table wherin that holie Sacrament ys ministred, he ment the bodie of Chryst, whiche after a fewe lines he opēly speaketh saing: Sicut autem dixit, quòd omnes per mare transierunt: Sic nobilitatem Ecclesiae praefigurauit cùm dixit: Eundem cibum spiritualem comederunt. Hoc idem rursus insinuauit: Sic enim in Ecclesia, nou aliud corpus diues, aliud verò pauper, ne (que) alium quidem sanguinem ille, alium autem iste. Sic & Itunc non aliud quidem accipiebat Riche and poore eate all one bodie, and drinke all one blood. diues Manna, alium verò pauper, neque alterius fontis iste particeps erat, alterius verò in digentioris ille. As he hath saied that all haue goen through the sea: so he hath perfigurated the nobilitie of the churche when he saied: They haue eaten all one spirituall meat. he hath insinuated the same again, for so yt ys in the Church For the riche man receaueth not one bodie, and the, poore man an other, neither he one maner of blood and this an other. So also then the riche mā D did not take of one Manna, and the poore man of an other, neither was this man partaker of one fountain, and he of a woorse.
[Page]In this saing Chrysostome making an other comparison betwixt the figure and the veritie, he sheweth what he ment by the table in the place first alleaged. E For here he calleth yt the bodie, saing, that the riche man doth not receaue one bodie, and the poore man an other: no more then the riche man did receaue one Manna, and the poore man an other: but as all eate one Manna in the figure: So all indifferentlie eate one bodie in veritie. For the poore lazar receaueth that same bodie of Chryst that the kinge dothe. Whiche by the waie to note, I wish all men of power and honour to remē bre and consider that God contemneth not the miserable and wretched, but receaueth all, and dispiseth none but the wicked. And as he ys no acceptour of persons in the receipt of his Sacramentes, no more ys he in the receauing to his glorie. For poour Lazarus was in the bosom of Abraham when the great riche man was in tormentes.
But to return to our matter. Chrysostome yet in the same homelie declaring why S. Paule maketh mencion of these thinges. saieth: Sed cuius gratia horum memoriam adsert beatus Paulus? Ob causam quam principio Chry. Jbid. vobis dixi, vt discas, quòd neque Baptisma, neque peccatorum remissio, neque scientia, neque sacramentorum Communio, neque sacra mensa, neque fruitio F corporis, neque participatio fanguinis, neque aliud horum prodesse nobis poterit, nisi vitam rectam, & admirabilem, & omni peccato liberam habeamus. Neither the fruitiō of Chrystes bodie nor the partaking of hys blood auaileth without good lif But wherfor doeth S. Paule make mencion of these thinges? for the cause whiche I tolde yowe in the beginninge, that thowe shouldest learn, that neither Baptisme, neither remission of sinnes, neither knowledge, neither the cōmunion of the sacramentes, neither the holie table, neither the fruicion of the bodie, neither the partaking of the blood, neither anie thing of these can auaill vs, except we haue a life right and comē dable, and free from all sinne. Thus Chrysostom.
In whiche his saing ye perceaue how plainlie he teacheth the receipt of the bodie and bloode of Chryst in the Sacrament reallie and in very dede and not figuratiuelie or spirituallie. And this ys the proofe of yt. Chrystes bodie maie be [...]. For he saieth that the receipt of the bodie and blood of Chryst profiteth nothing, except we haue a godlie life withal. Nowe the spirituall receauing of Chryst includeth a godlie life with all. For to receaue Chryst spirituallie ys hauing the remembrance of Chrystes passion and death to receaue him G by faith and charitie, whiche can not be withoute a godlie life. For where perfect faith, and perfecte charitie ys, ther ys a man of perfecte and holie life, and he that ys of that sorte receaueth Chryst spirituallie. But here Chrysostom speaketh of the receipt of the bodie of Chryst withoute holie life. whiche must nedes be spoken and ment of the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament. Whiche as yt was receaued by Iudas, he being then a wicked man: so maie yt be receaued of other that be wicked, and not of holie life, but then (as Chrysostome saieth) yt profiteth nothing, but yt raither hurteth moche, as here after shall be saied. In 10. 1. Cor. hom. 23. Chrystians eate the bodie of Christ as the Iewes did Manna.
All though ye haue had here clere testimonie of Chrysostome in this matter: yet he ys more plain in an other place, expownding the same scripture and applieng yt to the veritie, thus: Quae autem sequntur sacram mensam significant. Nam quemadmodum tu corpus Dominicum manducas: ita & illi Manna manducauerunt. Et sicut tu sanguinem bibis: ita illi aquam H de petra biberunt. These thinges that do folowe do signifie the holie table. For as thowe doest eate the bodie of our Lorde: so they also haue eaten Manna [Page 250]and as thowe drinkest bloode: so they haue dronke the water of the stone. A And again in the same homelie, speaking of the benefittes, whiche God gaue to the Iewes, as Manna, and the water in figures of the benefittes of his bodie and bloode, whiche he geueth vnto vs, and shewing him to be the geuer of them bothe, saieth in the person of S. Paule. Qui enim illa illis prebuit (inquit) hic & hanc praeparauit mensam. Et ipse idem, & illos per mare, & te per baptisma adduxit. Et illis Manna, & aquam: & tibi corpus & sanguinem dedit. He that prepared (saieth he) those thinges to thē, to these hath he also prepared this table. And euen the very same hath brought them through the Sea: and the through Baptisme. And vnto them he gaue Manna and the water: and vnto thee, the bodie and bloode.
What can the Aduersarie once saie against these so clere and manifest testimonies for the trueth? What blinde glose or maliciouse interpretacion can he bring to make these sainges anie thing looke towarde him? Yf the Iewes receaued the figure, and we the veritie: what baser or lower thing ys yt thē the bodie of Chryst? Yf the Aduersarie saie, that we receaue Chryst spirituallie, B so did they in the receipt of Manna also: I meen all they that receaued Yf the christiā receaue Chryste but in figure spirituallie, as the Iewe did wher ys thē the veritie. well. What then receaue we more nowe in, or with the veritie vnder Chryst in the Gospell, then they did with their figures vnder Moyses in the lawe? Yf they proceade and saie that we receaue the Sacramentall bread as a figure of Chryst: so receaued the Iewes Manna as a figure of Chryst. Yf in euery place the figure, wher ys the veritie? Yf ther a figure and here a figure, yf ther Chryst spiritually, and here spirituallie, and no more in the one, then in the other, what then fignifieth the veritie? and wher ys the veritie?
Farder (as ye hearde Chrysostome before saie) the veritie must haue excellencie aboue the figure, yf then we haue the veritie (as Chrysostom also saieth) then of necessitie yt must folowe, that yf the Iewes had the figure of Chryst in Manna, and yf the goode receauers with the figure Manna, receaued also Chryst spirituallie, that we must haue a certen excellencie with our veritie, whiche be none other, but the presence of him that ys the veritie in dede, whiche ys Chryst. For we haue a figure with the Iewes, and a spirituall C receauing, with the Iewes, and in these we be equall, and on our parte ther ys no excellencie. This therfore ys the excellencie, that where they had the figure: we haue both figure and the thing figurated, whiche ys the bodie and bloode of Chryste.
Of these two authours then, as of the other, ye perceaue these three thinges auouched, whiche were before mencioned, that ys Manna, and the water, to befigures of Chrystes bodie and blood, and that same bodie and bloode be in the Sacrament, and that ther ys an excellencie in the thinges prefigured aboue the figures. as to the veritie yt apperteineth aboue the figure.
THE SEVENTH CHAP. PROCEADETH TO DEclareth the same by saincte Hierom and sainct Cyrill. E
WHen I consider with my self, howe long the veritie of the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament hath ben receaued and beleued: howe not in one corner of the chrystian orbe (as nowe the Aduersaries of this trueth do occupie) but throughoute in all places, where Chryste was professed, as well in the east Chruch, as the west churche, in the greke churche, as in the latin Churche, this trueth was embraced, the Sacrament moch reuerenced, Chryst God and man there truly and highlie honoured: the same also by the greatest, grauest, and holiest learned men taught and preached, and in their bookes by the testimonie of their handes testified, and to all the worlde comended: I can not ceasse to merueill howe men of this our time be bewitched and infatuated to leaue so sure an anker, while they be in the trooblesom sea of this worlde, and take F holde of a feather, in the whiche there ys no suertie nor staie, but raither great occasion of present perill and destruction. They be not alltogether vnlike the dogge in the fable, who swimming through the water, and hauing a good bone in his mouthe sawe the shadowe of the same in the water, and Protestanres compared to the dogge in the fable. soddenlie withoute consideracion leauing his good bone, snatched at the shadowe to haue caught yt, and so lost for the shadowe, the substancial thing: So these men swimming through the trooblesome water of his worlde, and hauing in their mouthes the substanciall woorde of trueth that was able to feed them, seing the shadowe of this vain doctrine, whiche like a shadowe appeareth to be somwhat, but ys nothing in dede, they let the catholique and substanciall doctrine fall from their mouthes and catche the shadowe. But as long as they haue but the shadowe their feeding will be so bare, or raither nothing, that their soules which shoulde be fedde withe the true woorde of God, shall perish with famine, yt encreaseth my merueilling and woondering, that they seing these graue fathers, and learned writers so manifestlie teaching the trueth, yet as men addicted to swear to the G woordes of their wicked masters, they moue not from their phantasies. What then? Shall we ceasse to call vpon them? Naie, God forbidde. S. Paule although he well sawe the stif neckes of the Iewes, that they wolde not bowe to the faith, yet he saied: Quamdiu sum gentium Apostolus, ministerium meum Rom. 11. honorificabo, si quomodò ad aemulandum prouocem carnem meam, & saluosfaciam aliquos exillis. As long as I am the Apostle of the gentiles I will magnifie mine office yf by anie mean I maie prouoke them whiche are my flesh, and might saue some of them. God graunte the charitie of S. Paule to all, whom God hath called to the office of teachers, that they maie magnifie their office, and call vpon the people continuallie, that some maie be saued, though damnacion to them that be called, and will not heare be the more greuouse. Wherfor although these two coople in the chapiters before alleaged, might suffice to certifie vs of the true vnderstanding of this scripture of S. Paule, and of the matters depending vpon the same: yet to the entent I maie by a nombre of woorthie wittnesses, all with one consent, and as yt were with one mowthe testifieng the auncient receaued treuthe, prouoke some to folowe: I will by H gods helpe produce three or foure cooples mo that shall teache al one trueth though they were not all in one time, but some fiue hundreth yeares after the other, and some more and some lesse.
[Page 251]The first coople of these shall be S. Hierom and S. Cyrill, whose fame and auncientie, I nede not nowe to sett furth. For I haue of yt allready saied A and they are also well knowen. But for that Sainct Hierom ys the elder, his sentence shall be first hearde. Expownding this scripture he saieth thus: Et omnes eandem spiritualem escam manducauerunt &c. Manna figura corporis Christi Hieron. in 10. 1. Cor. [...] fuit. And all did eate of one spirituall meate. Manna was a figure of the bodie of Chryste. Although these woordes be full enough and teache that that ys here sought, for saing that Manna was a figure of the bodie of Chryst they teache, that as the Iewes did eate Manna as the figure: So nowe the figure being gon we eate the bodie of Chryst as the veritie of that figure, yet more at large he openeth the wholl matter somwhat after saing: Omnia enim quae in populo Israel illo tempore facta sunt in figura, nunc in nobis in veritate celebrantur. Sicut enim illi per Moysen ex Aegipto liberati sunt: Sic nos per quemlibet sacerdotem vel doctorem de seculo liberamur. Deinde christiani facti, ducimur per deserta, vt per exercitium contemptus mundi & abstinentiae in obliuionem nobis eant Aegypti voluptates, ita vt nesciamus ad seculum repedare. Cùm verò Baptismi mare transimus; tunc nobis Diabolus cum suo exercitu tanquam Pharao demergitur. Deinde Manna cibamur, & potum accipimus de Christi latere emanantem. Claritas quoque scientiae tanquam columna B ignis in nocte seculi demonstratur, & in tribulationis aestu, diuinae consolationis nube protegimur. All thinges (saieth S. Hierom) whiche in that time were doen in the people of Israell in figure, nowe they are celebrated in vs in veritie. As they by Moyses were deliuered oute of Egypte: So we by euery preist and doctour are deliuered from the worlde. Then being made Chrystians we are ledde through the desertes, that by the exercise of the contempt of the worlde, and of abstenence, the sleshlie pleasures of Egypt maie be of vs forgotten so that we shall not knowe to go backe again into the worlde. When we passe through the sea of Baptisme then the Deuell with all his armie, euen like as Pharao was, ys drowned. Thē we are fedde with Manna, and take drinke flowing oute of the side of Chryste. The brightnesse also of knowledge ys shewed in We drink [...] drinke flowing oute of the side of Chryst. the night of the worlde, as the piller of fire, and in the heat of tribulaciō, we are defended with the clowde of diuine consolaciō, Thus moche S. Hierom. C
In whom we see the wholl applicacion of the figurs mencioned in Sainct Paule to the thinges figured, whiche thinges as by other before, so by him they are called, veritates, the verities. And therfore he saieth in the beginning of his sentence thal all thinges doen in the Iewes in figures, are fulfilled in vs in veritie. So that soche thinges as we haue, whiche were prefigured in the Iewes, As we haue not nowe Moyses but Chryste in dede, not a figure of Baptisme, but Baptisme in dede, not the holie Goste in figure but in dede. So not the figure of Chrystes bodie, but his bodie in dede. Hiero. ibi. they be not with vs bare signes or figures as they were with them. But although they be figures in some respecte: yet they are also verities, and the very thinges in dede. Wherfor as Moyses was a figure of Chryst, and nowe again we haue not a figure of Chryst, but Chryst himself as the veritie, or verie thing of the figure: and as the sea was the figure of Baptisme, and nowe we haue not an other figure of Baptisme, but Baptisme yt self in very dede: And as the clowde was a figure of the holie Gost, and nowe we haue not an other figure of the holie Gost, but the holie Gost in very dede: so Māna, as S. Hierō saieth here, being the figure of the bodie of Chryst, of like consequēce yt must folowe, that nowe we hauing the veritie of the figure, haue not an D other figure of the bodie of Chryste, but the very bodie of Chryste in dede, that as the Iewes did verilie eate Māna, and drinke verilie the water as the figures of the bodie and bloode of Chryst. So as Chrysost. saied in the last chap. thowe doest verilie eate his bodie and drinke his bloode. Wherfore also S. Hierom, in this applicacion of the figures to the verities, coming to Manna, saieth: Cibamur Manna, et potum accipimus de latere Christi emanantem. [Page]We are sedde (saieth he) with Manna, but that ye shoulde vnderstand him of E the true Manna the bodie of Chryste, he addeth: And we take drinke slowing oute of the side of Chryst.
What drinke slowed oute of that blessed side? yt ys well knowen to be the preciouse bloode of our Sauiour Chryst. So that ye see that Sainct Hierom, as he dothe yt godlie, and learnedlie: So also simplie and plainlie, and faithfullie confesseth and teacheth, that as the Iewes did eate Manna, and dranke the water of the stone: So we eate the veritie of that figure, and drinke the veritie of that figuratiue water, whiche be the verie bodie and bloode of the spirituall stone Iesus Chryst. And note that the masters of figures can not place their figure in Sainct Hieroms woordes. For he contented not himself to saie onelie the bloode, but to declare the realitie and substance in dede, he saied: the bloode that flowed oute of Chrystes side, not a figure, but that bloode in dede.
But peraduenture the Aduersarie will reiecte this authoritie, bicause yt ys doubted of some, whether yt be Sainct Hieroms worke or no, that this authoritie ys taken oute of. Whether yt be or no, two thinges moue me F to regarde and esteem the authoritie. The first and the cheifest, bicause yt ys a catholique saing, not disagreing from the like sainges of the good catholique and auncient Fathers. The second, bicause yt ys no newe worke, but of soche auncientie, that yt might, as yt appeareth, be ascribed to Sainct Hierom, yf yt be not his in dede.
But that the Aduersarie shall not cauill that we alleadge Sainct Hierom, where in dede yt ys not Sainct Hierom: we will alleadge Sainct Hierom, that he shall not refuse to be Sainct Hierom. And this ys his saing: Si panis, Hieron. ad Hedibiam. quest. 2. qui de caelo descendit, corpus est Domini, & vinum, quod Discipulis dedit, sanguis illius est noui Testamenti, qui pro multis effusus est in remissionem peccatorum, Iudaicas fabulas repellamus. Yf the bread that descended from heauen be the bodie of our Lorde, and the wine, that he gaue to his disciples, be his bloode of the newe Testament, whiche was shedde for manie in remission of sinnes: let vs cast awaie Iewishe fables. And again a litle after: Nec Moyses dedit nobis panem verum, sed Dominus Iesus, ipse conuiua, & conuiuium, ipse comedens &, qui G comeditur. Illius bibimus sanguinem, & sine ipso potare non possumus. Neither hath Moyses geuen vs the treu bread, but our Lorde Iesus. He ys bothe the feaster and the feast: He ys bothe the eater, and he that ys eaten. We drinke his bloode, and withoute him we can not drinke. Thus S. Hierome.
For that both these places do applie the figure to the thing figured, that ys, Manna to the bodie of Chryst the true bread, whiche Manna in the sixth of Sainct Iohn ys called the bread from heauen, and likewise in diuerse places, therfor I thought them meet for this place. In the first vnder a condicionall tearme, he teacheth a plain assercion, that the bread that descended from heauen ys the bodie of our Lorde, and the wine that he gaue to his Disciples ys his bloode, whiche ys a plain maner of speache affirming the presence of Chryst, and not a figuratiue speache signifieng his absence. In that he saieth that our Lorde Iesus bodie ys the bread that descended H from heauen, he declareth the veritie of Manna the figure to be the bodie of Chryst. For when the Iewes had saied to Chryst: Owre Fathers did eate Manna in the desert, in whiche woordes they spake of the figure: Chryst answering, ioined them both together and saied: Non Moyses dedit vobis panem de coelo, sed pater meus dat vobis panem de coelo verū. Moyses hath not geuē Ioan. 6. you bread frō heauē. But my Father geueth you the true bread frō heauē. [Page 252]And after speaking of the bread whiche ys his bodie, and applieng yt to A the figure he saieth: Hic est panis qui de caelo descendit. Non sicut manducauerunt patres vestri Manna, & mortui sunt. Qui manducat hunc panem viuet in aeternum. This ys the bread that descended from heauen, Not as your Fathers haue eaten Manna in the desert and be dead. He that eateth this bread shall liue for euer.
Nowe then Sainct Hierom saing that the bread that descended from heauen, ys the bodie of owre Lorde Iesus: He teacheth against the Aduersarie, that the sixt of Sainct Iohn speaketh of the Sacrament, and also auoucheth that the veritie of the figure Manna, ys the bodie of Chryst.
The like also he doth in the next sentence, saing, That not Moyses, but our Lorde Iesus gaue vs the true bread. And that by this true bread, whiche Chryst gaue vs, he meneth his bodie in the blessed Sacrament, yt ys inuinciblie proued by that that he adioined: He ys the feaster and the feast, yt ys he that eateth and ys eaten. As Chryst in his last supper was bothe he that prepared the feast (as Cyprian saied) Et consumpto agno quem antiqua traditio proponebat, inconsumptibilem De caena Domini. cibum magister apponit Discipulis. And when the lambe was consumed whiche the olde tradicion did set furth, the master set before his disciples B inconsumptible meate: and one that did partake of the feast, as among diuerse other Chrysostome saieth speaking of the cuppe of his bloode, Ipse In 26. Ma. Hom. 83. quoque bibit ex eo, ne auditis verbis illis, dicerent: Quid igitur sanguinem bibimus, & carnem comedimus? ac ideo perturbarentur. He also dranke of yt himself, leste when they had heard those woordes, they shoulde saie: What then do we drinke bloode and eate slesh? and therfor shoulde be troubled. So was he the feast himself, I meen the meat of the feast, whiche as he then gaue yt sitting at his last supper with his Apostles: So geueth he yt nowe. For, as Chrystome Hom. 30. de prodit. saieth, he ys nowe present, and sanctifieth. So that this table that ys dailie ministred ys in nothing inferiour to that table of his last supper: Haec enim illa, non alia mensa est: haec nulla re minor quam illa est. This ys euen the same table Hom. 83 in Matty. and not an other: this ys in nothing lesse then that.
And as Sainct Augustin saieth, that he ys the preist that doth offre, and De ciu. Dei li. 10. ca. 20 the offring, or oblacion that ys offred: So ys he, he that eateth, as Sainct C Hierom saieth, and he that ys eaten.
Thus Reader, thowe doest not onelie perceaue the euident and strong testimonie of Sainct Hierom against the Aduersarie: But also thowe perceauest the goodlie concorde and agreement of the Fathers together, so mightilie knit together in the plain confession of Gods trueth, that yf a legion of enemies were conspired together they coulde not by all their pulling and wresting drawe them into their parte.
And yet to fortifie this trueth, not for yt self, but for the Reader, we will nowe heare Sainct Cyrill, whome we promissed to ioin with S. Hierom. Cyr. ca, 19, in 6. Joan, Thus he saieth: Non enim prudenter quae ad breue tempus sufficiunt hoc nomine appella buntur, nec panis erat ex Deo, quem maiores Iudaeorum comederunt, & mortui sunt. Nam si de coelo, & ex Deo fuisset, liberasset à morte participantes. Contrà verò corpus Christi panis de coelo est, quia aeternam comedentibus vitam largitur. Those thinges whiche suffice but for a short time, shall not well be called by this name. Neither was yt bread from God, whiche the elders D of the Iewes haue eaten and be dead. For yf yt had ben from heauen and of God, yt had deliuered the partakers of yt from deathe. But contrary wise the bodie of Chryste ys the bread from heauen, for yt graunteth euerlasting life of the eaters. Thus he.
[Page]Thisys a breif and a plain testimonie, in the whiche mencion ys made of the figure, that ys, of the bread whiche the elders of the Iewes did eate, whiche E bread was Manna: and of the thing figured, whiche ys the veritie, whiche by expresse woordes he calleth the bodie of Chryst. So that agreablie to all that before hath bē spokē, he teacheth, that the thing figured by Māna was not a sigure or a signe of the bodie of Chryste, but the verie bodie of Chryst in dede. For as in diuerse places before alleadged oute of the same Cyrill, yt dothe well appeare that he ys no figurer, but a plain a auoucher of the presence of Chrystes bodie in the blessed Sacrament, and that we receaue the same bodie reallie and substanciallie, as amonge a great nombre this maie be one: Quoniam saluatoris caro Verbo Dei, quod naturaliter vita est coniuncta, Cyr. ca. 14 in 6. Ioan. When we eate the flesh of Chryste we haue life in vs. viuifica effecta est, quando cam comedimus, tunc vitam habemus in nobis, illi coniuncti, quae vita effecta est. Forasmoche as the flesh of our Sauiour being ioined to the Sonne of God, who naturally ys life, ys made hable to geue life. When we eate the same flesh, then we haue life in vs being ioined to yt that ys made able to geue life. Thus S. Cyrill.
In this saing ye perceaue that the flesh of Chryst ys hable to geue life, F bycause yt ys ioined to the Sonne of God in vnitie of person, whiche ys naturally of yt self very life, he him self testifieng: Ego sum via, veritas, & vita. Ioan. 14. I am the waie, the trueth and the life. Therfor we eating the same flesh that hath life, we also haue life.
In this here ys no voide woorde of figure, he saieth not that we shall haue life, yf we eate the figure of his flesh, for the figure hath no life in yt, but yf we eate the flesh. And yf ye will weigh yt, ye shall perceaue no consecucion nor dependence to be in the saing of S. Cyrill, yf prouing the flesh of Chryst to geue life, he shoulde will vs to eate the figure of his flesh, and so by yt to haue life, for that ys not proued. For what consequence ys this, the flesh of Chryst geueth life, ergo we eating the figure of yt haue life? Naie, the consequence of Cyrill, as he speaketh and meneth yt, hath a good consecucion after this sorte. The flesh of Chryste ys quickninge, or making to liue, therfore he that eateth yt shall be made to liue: So that yt can not be denied, The flesh not the figure g [...]eth [...]ife, wherfor we eate the verie flesh to haue life but he speaketh of the verie reall flesh of Chryst to be eaten, and not of the G figure of yt. And thus Cyrill speaking of the bread whiche was the figure addeth thervnto the veritie of the figure, whiche ys the verie bodie of Chryste, and not an onely figure of the bodie. And nowe this coople thus being hearde to agree with the rest before them, we shall make like triall of another coople.
THE EIGTH CHAP. PROCEADETH IN DECLAracion of the same by Saincte Augustin & Oecumenius.
SAincte Augustin whom all good chrystians haue in great reuerence for his singular gifte of knowledge, whiche God by his holie spiritte had exceadinglie powred into him, as by the same gifte of H knowledge he ys in all matters of the chrystian faith copiouse and plentiful: so ys he in this matter, nowe in hand. But of manie places to bring some let vs first see howe he speaking of the younglinges or nouices in the faith, doth compare Manna the figure to the bodie of Chryste the thing sigured. Thus he saieth. Cathecumeni iam credunt in nomine Christi, sed Iesus non se credit eis, id est, non eis impertit corpus & sanguinem [Page 253] suum. Erubescant ergo quia nesciunt. Transeant per mare rubrum. Manducent Manna A vt quomodò crediderunt in nomine Iesu, sic se ipsis credat Iesus. The learners of Chrystes faith nowe beleue in the name of Chryste, but Iesus committeth not himself to them, he doth not impart or geue to them his bodie and blood. Let them be ashamed therfore bicause they knowe not. Let them go through the read sea. Let them eate Manna, that as they haue beleued in the name of Iesus, so Iesus maie committe him self to them. Thus moche Sainct Augustine.
For the better vnderstanding of whose saing, yt ys to be knowen, that in the primitiue Churche, soche, whose heartes god had touched to receaue the holie faith of Chryst, were for a time vnder the handes of teachers to be instructed in the principles of faith. During whiche time, as they were not baptised vntill they had sufficient knowlege of faith, and beleued according to their knowledge: no more did they receaue the blessed bodie and blood of Chryste. Nowe (as yt maie appeare) some of these learners, that beleued in Chryste, did not encreace and profitte so well in faith that they might be admitted to be baptised, and to receaue the bodie of Chryste. Of the which S, Augustin therfor to quicken them, saied that they beleued in Iesus Chryste, B but Iesus did not yet committe him self to them. What he ment by that he saied, that Iesus did not committe him self to them, he immediatelie openeth when he saieth: That ys (saieth he) he geueth not them his bodie and bloode. Wherfor rebuking them he saieth: Let them be ashamed that as yet they be no better learned in Chryste. Let them so beleue that they maie passe through the read sea, and maie eate Manna.
Nowe to applie this saing directlie to our pourpose, this ys without al doubt that S, Augustine in the ende willing the Cathecumeni to passe through the read sea, and to eate Manna, moued them to be baptised, and to receaue the holie Sacrament. Wherbie yt ys euident that he by Manna vnderstanding the blessed Sacrament accompteth Manna the figure of yt. For yt ys common by the name of the figure to vnderstand the thing figured. As Chryste ys called the lambe that ys slain from the beginning of the worlde and so yt ys in other figures. But yf yowe will knowe what oure Manna ys C in verie dede, S. Augustine opened yt in expresse woordes, when he saied, that Iesus gaue them not his bodie and blood. See then the comparaison of the figure to the thing figured, see the thing figured to be the bodie of Chryste. But of this place of S. Paule S. Augustine more at large treacteth in another place.
When he had shewed howe Sainct Paule, expownded the stone to be Chryst, he proceadeth to enquire what the other thinges did signifie. Iam ergo lumine illato, quaeramus quid coetera significent. Quid sibi voluit mare, nubes Manna, August. de vtilit. paen. haec enim non exposuit. Sed Petra quid ostendit. Per mare transitus, Baptismus est. Sed quia Baptismus, id est salutis aqua, non est salutis, nisi Christi nomine consecrata, qui pro nobis sanguinem fudit, cruce ipsius aqua signatur, & vt hoc significaret, ille Baptismus mare rubrum fuit. Manna de coelo apertè ab ipso Domino exponitur. Patres vestri (inquit) manducauerunt Manna in Eremo, & mortui sunt. Quando enim viuerent? Figura enim pronuntiare vitam posset, vita esse non posset. Manducauerunt (inquit) Manna & mortui sunt, id est, Manna, quod manducauerunt, non illos potuit de morte liberare, non quia Manna mors eis fuit, sed D quia à morte non liberauit. Ille enim à morte liberaturus erat, qui per Manna figurabatur, de coelo certè Manna veniebat. Attende quem figurabat. Ego sum (inquit) panis vinus qui de caelo descēdi. Nowe, saieth S. August. the light being brought in, let vs seke what the other thinges do signifie. What the clowde the sea, and Manna do meen. [Page]For these thinges he hath not expownded. But what the stone was he hath shewed. The passing through the sea ys Baptisme. But bicause Baptisme, E that ys to saie, the water of health ys not of healthe excepte yt be consecrated in Chrystes name, who shed his blood for vs, the water ys blessed with his crosse, and that Manna from heauen ys plainlie expownded of our A figure geueth not life, but the blessed Sac. geueth life. ergo, yt ys more then a figure. Lorde himself: Your Fathers (saieth he) haue eaten Manna in the Wildernesse, and they be dead. When shoulde they liue? A figure maie prenunciate life, but yt can not be life. They haue eaten (saieth he) Manna and be dead, that ys to saie, Manna, that they did eate, coulde not deliuer them from death, not that Manna was death vnto them, but bicause yt deliuered not from death. He shoulde deliuer from death, who was figurated by Manna. The Manna trulie came from heauen. Marke whom yt figured: I am (saieth [...]e) the liuing bread whiche came downe from heauen. Thus farre S. Augustine:
In whose woordes ye see a goodlie applicacion of the figures to the thinges figured. Howe well and aptelie the redde sea figured Baptisme, whiche ys made redde in vertue by the bloode of Chryst, Sainct Augustine most godlie hathe declared. And he hath doen no lesse in the applicacion of Manna F to Chryste in the Sacrament. Marke (saieth he) whom Manna did figure. Yt figured him, who saied: I am the bread of life, whiche came downe from heauen.
That Chryst spake these woordes ther ys no doubte. But whether he spake them of his bodie in the Sacrament the Sacramentarie will make a doubte. But that S. Augustine meent that the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament ys the thing figured by Manna, he himself doth so plainlie open in an other place, that we are deliuered from doubte therof. Thus he saieth.
Manna typus est escae spiritualis, quae resurrectione Domint veritas facta est in Eucharistiae mysterio. Manna ys a figure of that spirituall meat, whiche in the resurrection Lib. quest. [...]. test quest. 65. of our Lorde, was made the veritie in the Sacrament. In whiche woordes ye see the iust applicacion of the figure to the thinge sigured. Manna ys the figure: the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament ys the thing figured and the veritie.
Let yt not trooble the Reader, that he calleth yt the spirituall meat, as though therby were not affirmed the verie reall presence. But remembre that G Māna howe yt was called a spiritual meat and the water of the rock a spiritual drinke S. Paule calleth Manna a spirituall meat, although yt were corporall, and the water also he calleth spirituall, althoug yt were likewise corporall, not that he wolde so teache them to be spirituall, that they were not in very dede corporall, but bicause they were miraculouslie and wonderfullie, not by the ordinarie power and worke of God, whiche he dailie worketh in the producing and conseruing of his creatures, but by a speciall, and vnwonted maner, geuen to the people of Israell. Wherfore yt liked S. Augustin, as he might very well, to call yt, beinge the veritie, a spirituall meate, as Manna the figure was called spirituall meat. Wherby the one better answereth the other. And in dede as Manna was sent to the Iewes beside the course of nature: So was Chryst sent to vs beside the course of nature. And as yt was made meat to them merueillouslie: So ys the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament made meat for vs merueillously. And thus both these be spirituall H The bodie of Chryst in the Sacr. howe yt ys called a spirituall meat. meates, although the bodie of Chryst more spirituall, both for that after his resurrection his bodie was glorified and indewed with the giftes of immortalitie, agilitie, impassibilitie, subtilitie, and claritie: and also for that in the Sacrament yt ys beholden by faith, and not by senses whiche ys a spirituall maner. Thus then yt appeareth very manifestly, that the bodie of Chryst ys and maie be called for diuerse consideracions a spirituall [Page 254]meat, and yet be neuer the lesse a corporall substance. A
That thus in this place, yt ys to be vnderstanded to be a spirituall meate and not after the maner that the Aduersarie wolde haue yt wrested, the very woordes of Sainct Augustin enforce: For he saied that this spirituall meat ys in the mystery or Sacrament. The spirituall maner that the Aduersarie wolde here violentlie intrude and thrust in, ys not, nor can not be in the Sacrament, but in the receauer, who by faithe and charitie receaueth after that spirituall maner, whiche faith and charitie be not in the Sacramentall bread (as they tearme yt) but in the man the receauer of yt. Of the whiche spirituall meat the bread ys a signe or a figure as they teache, saing, that as they receaue that bread to nourish the bodie: So they spiritually receaue Chryst to nourish the soule: So that that spirituall meat of the whiche they speake, ys not in the Sacrament. Therfor yt ys to be concluded, that he speaketh of the naturall meat of Chrystes bodie, whiche ys, according to the minde of this holy Father, and the doctrine of the catholique Churche verilie, really, substanciallie in the Sacrament and yet neuer the lesse spirituallie, in maner aboue declared. B
In this matter diuerse other places might be brought in, but for that I wolde not wearie the Reader, but raither delight him with the hearing of some other, and that conuenient place might be had for Oecumnnius, we shall ceasse with thus moche of Sainct Augustine, and heare the said Oecumenius Oecumen. 1. Cor 10. vpon the same text of Sainct Paule. Thus he writeth. Comederunt nempe Manna, sicut nos corpus Christi. Potum spiritualem, hoc est, aquam è rupe siue petra seaturientem biberunt, quemadmodum nos sanguinem Christ. They haue (saieth A plain saing for the Procla. Oecumenius) eaten Manna, as we the bodie of Chryst: They heaue dronke a spirituall drinke, that ys, water running oute of a rocke or a stone, as we the bloode of Chryste. Thus he.
This ys but a breif exposition, but yet wonderfull weightie, and mightie to ouerthrowe the enemie. Methinke I shoulde nothing saie here to opē the matter, wher all ys so plain, but to declare that I wonder that men will or can be so deluded in a matter so clerely taught, as yt ys here. I merueill also howe malice can preuaill; or howe yt self against so manie fast C a trueth by soche expresse woords vttered, that no mistes or clowdes of wicked glose can wrest, but in soche wise as yt maie very well be perceaued.
But to come to the pourpose, this ys first to be noted in this Authour, that he applieth the figure to the veritie in both partes, that ys Manna to the bodie of Chryst, and the water to the bloode of Chryst. In the whiche ye maie perceaue howe well he agreeth with Sainct Augustin, with whom he ys here ioined, and howe both they agree with them, that be before alleadged, whiche all haue taught that Manna and the water be figures of the bodie and bloode of Chryste, and that not of the bodie and bloode of Chryst absolutelie withoute respecte, but of the bodie and bloode of Chryste as eaten and dronken, whiche ys onely in the Sacrament, as touching the corporall eating of his bodie. Obserue also for the presence of Reall presence and corporall receipt of Chrystes bodie anouched. Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, howe this Authour speaketh withoute tropes, withoute figures, or anie soche like speach, and in most plain maner saieth. That they did eate Manna, as we the bodie of Chryste: they dranke D of the water of the rocke, as we the bloode of Chryst.
In the whiche comparaison I wolde learn of the Aduersarie howe this aduerbe of similitude shoulde agree with his spirituall maner, as concerning the eatinge of yt, as this Authour speaketh yt, taking as they be in dede [Page]Manna for the figure, and the bodie of Chryst for the veritie. Yf the bodie of Chryste the veritie be eaten but spiritually, then Manna was not eaten E corporallie but spirituallie, whiche ys to wide from the trueth. For they did eate Manna, as we the bodie of Chryst, then yt foloweth that we eate the bodie of Chryst corporallie. For they did eate Manna corporallie. What folie wolde these masters of most folie, laie in these holie Fathers, that wher (yf the hereticall assertion be true) we receaue not Chrystes very bodie, but the figure of yt or signe, they as Chrysostom, Sainct Hierom, and this Authour expownding, and by their expositions taking vpon them to settfurth to vs the true mening, and right vnderstanding of this scripture of Sainct Paule geue vs no light of vnderstanding, but raither darkenesse, no true mening but a wrong mening, no right vnderstandinge, but a misvnderstanding, and that so perilouse, as therbie they bring vs into the daunger of Idolatrie? For they shoulde teache vs (as the heretikes wolde haue yt) and saie, that as the children of Israell did eate Manna a figure of Chryst: So we eate the Sacramentall bread as a figure of Chryst. As they the good Iewes receauing the figure, receaued Chryst by faith spiritually: So we receauing F the Sacramentall bread as a figure, receaue likewise by faith Chryst spirituallie. As they receaued Manna corporally, but not Chryst corporallie, but onely spirituallie: So we receaue the bread corporallie, but Chryst not corporallie, but onely spirituallie,
This ys the hereticall pure, and syncere doctrine, and yet this maner and No catholique doctour teacheth the Sacr. to be onelie a figure. forme of doctrine, yf yt be fownde in anie one of all the holie Fathers, that haue taught synce Chryst in anie time or age, I will lese my credite and geue the victorie. So pure ys ther doctrine and spirituall that yt cometh not vnder our senseis, either to be seen, or hearde, as the doctrine of the Fathers. But the Fathers teache that we receaue the very bodie of Chryst, and they putte no trope nor figure to yt, Wherfore they expownding the Scriptures are to be vnderstanded as they speake.
When Chrysostome expowndeth this text of Sainct Paule, he vseth no other maner or phrase of woordes in his exposition, but this: Ille illis Manna & aquam, & tibi corpus & sanguinem dedit. He (mening God) gaue vnto G them Manna and water, and vnto thee his bodie and bloode.
Yf God geueth not vnto vs the bodie and bloode of Chryst verilie, as the woordes in their true significacion do purporte, why dothe he not by plain woordes so saie vnto vs, in an exposition, whiche shoulde be all cleare and plain?
Sainct Hierom also saied not, we are fedde with the figure of Chrystes Note well these plain sentēces, reader for thy state. bloode, whiche yf yt had ben none other, ther ys no doubte but in his exposition of the scripture he wolde so haue spoken yt. But he saied: Et potum accipimus de latere Christi manantem. And we receaue drinke flowing oute of the side of Chryst. Wherby what ells can be ment, but that we receaue the very bloode of Chryst that flowed oute of his side, and not the bare figure? Whiche might moche better haue ben expressed by other woordes, then by so plain liuelie woordes as these be, whiche vttereth the very H thing mightilie, and not the figure.
So also this Authour expownding the scripture therby to geue vs the true vnderstanding, doth not teache that we take but a figure. Whiche he shoulde haue doen yf the trueth were so. But by plain woordes signifieng the verie thing he saieth, that the Iewes did eate Māna, as we the bodie of Chryst. And they dranke water of the stone as we the bloode of Chryst. What shall we nowe [Page 255]then doubte of the matter? Coulde not these holie men and learned Fathers A as well knowe to speake as Oecolampadius, Zwinglius, Bullinger, Bucer, Peter Martyr, Cranmer or Iuell? Were yt not to straunge that yf yt were but a figure, that none emong so manie shoulde so expownde yt, and declare yt? Yf ther were no more but this yt might sufficientlie staie anie man not destitute of grace to beleue that the Sacrament ys not onely a figure, but yt conteineth also the very bodie and bloode of Chryst, as the woordes of these Authours be, whiche bodie and bloode be the verities of ther figures Manna, and the water of the rocke.
THE NINTH CHAP. PROCEADETH IN the declaracion of the same by Haimo, and Theophilact.
HItherto we haue ben busied in the testimonies of soche as be of the most auncient. Nowe we will descend to some of later time: and yet not yester daie born, but soche as were well towarde B a thousand yeares agon, and therfore before Berengarius time, before the time of controuersie in the Sacrament. Whom as their time doth nothing discommend: So their learning ioined with holie life hath gotten them moche estimacion. The coople we meen here to produce be Haimo, and Theophilact. whiche both haue trauailed to expownde the epistles of Sainct Paule. Wherfore we can not mistrust, but that they will geue vs that exposition, and vnderstanding of them, that the holie Churche had in their times, as the other auncient Fathers before alleadged haue doen. For howe soeuer yt be in this our time, yt was reputed and accompted with the holie men, a great and an horrible offence to dissent or depart from anie thing, that the Churche had receaued, accepted, approued or allowed. And therfor they wolde not by anie meanes, admitte that, wherby they shoulde be fownde to varie from the faithe of the Churche.
Nowe then being sure that they report to vs the faith of the Churche, as C yt was receaued then, and comparing it to the auncient Church, the faith of whiche we haue hearde by soche as hetherto haue ben alleaged, ye shall be sure that ye shall not be deceaued of the very true auncient faith. Nowe therfore let vs heare these two, and first Haimo.
He expowndeth the text of Sainct Paule nowe in hande, on this wise: Haimo 1. Cor. 10. Et omnes eandem spiritualem escam manducauerunt. Et omne eundem potum &c. Manna, quod de caelo, id est, de isto aere eis datum est: Et aquam, quae de Petra sluxit, dicit spiritualia esse, vel quia spiritualiter intelligenda sunt, significabant enim corpus & sanguinem Domini, quod modò consecratur, & percipitur in Ecclesia, vel quia non mundana lege, & consuetudine parata sunt. Manna whiche was geuen The bodie and bloode of our Lorde are cōsetrated in the church them from heauen, that ys from this aier, and the water whiche flowed from the stone he saieth to be spirituall, either bicause they are spirituallie to be vnderstanded. For they signifie the bodie and blood of our Lorde, whiche ys nowe consecrated, and receaued in the Churche: Or ells bicause they were prepared not after the lawe and custome of worldlie thinges. Hitherto Haimo. D
In whose exposition ye haue to perceaue two causes whiche he assigneth wherfor the Apostles called Manna and the water spirituall meat, and spirituall drinke. The one was, that they be spiritually to be vnderstanded. What the spirituall vnderstanding of them ys he declareth. They did signifie [Page](saieth he) the bodie and blood of Chryst. In the whiche he agreeth with the rest before alleaged, that Manna and the water were figures of the E bodie and blooode of Chryst.
But nowe to come to the poinct of the controuersie, of what bodie of Chryst were they figures, of his bodie corporall, or spirituall? Attend, and marke well what he saieth. They signified (saieth he) the bodie and bloode of our Lorde, whiche ys nowe consecrated, and receaued in the churche. In this saing the doubte ys dissolued, and the matter ys opened. For yt ys the very bodie of of Chryst reallie and substanciallie in the Sacrament, that was figured by Manna. And this ys proued by the woorde Consecrated, whiche he vseth saing the bodie and blood of Chryste, be consecrated in the blessed Sacrament.
Although this woorde (Consecracion) be a woorde that the Aduersaries can not abide: yet yt ys more manifest then that they can denie, that yt ys a woorde from whose vse the graue and auncient Authours did not alhorre, but did vse yt, as yt ys beforesaied, and declared oute Consecraciō what yt ys. of Chrysostome, Sainct Ambrose and other, wher also yt ys taught by Chrysostome, what consecracion ys, whiche (to vse his tearmes) ys F to make the bodie and blood of Chryst of the thinges sett furth vpon the table. Wherby he meneth the bread and wine, where also he declareth, who doth consecrate, and by what woordes the consecracion ys doen.
As touching him that doth consecrate, he saieth yt ys not man, but Chryste himself, who was crucified for vs. By what woordes consecracion ys doen he sheweth thus. Hoc est, ait, corpus meum. Hoc verbo proposita consecrantur. De pro. Iu. Hom. 30. This ys (saieth he, mening Chryst) my bodie. With this woorde (saieth Chrysostom) the thinges settfurth, that ys the bread and wine are consecrated. But where vnto are they consecrated? into the bodie and bloode of Chryst, as Chrysostom hath saied.
And herevnto also Sainct Ambrose ys a witnesse who saieth. Non erat Lib. 4. de Sac. cap. 4. corpus Christi ante consecrationem, sed post consecrationem, dico tibi, quod iam corpus est Christi. Ipse dixit, & factum est, ipse mandauit & creatum est Yt was not the bodie of Chryst before the consecracion. But after the consecracion, G I saie to thee, that nowe yt ys the bodie of Chryste: He hath saied, and yt was made, he hath commaunded and yt was created.
And leest the Aduersarie shoulde cauille, and saie, that the bread after The cauill of sacramē tall bread impugned. the woordes come to yt, ys Sacramentall bread, and therfore yt maie take vpon yt the name of the thing, of whiche yt ys a Sacrament, and so meneth Sainct Ambrose. To this maie be saied, that that glose ys to violent for so plain woordes. For yt ys to be thought that Sainct Ambrose wolde not haue saied with soche a vehement maner of speache, that yt ys the bodie, yf yt shoulde be but called the hodie, and not be the bodie in dede. For this maner of speache (I saie vnto thee, that nowe yt ys the bodie of Chryst) importeth an other maner of force of the thing that ys spoken of to be so in dede, then to be so called.
And that he ment no lesse then he saied, his owne woordes in the same H chapiter proue, where obiecting against him self in the person of a weake man, at the seight of the Sacrament he saieth thus. Tu fortè dicis, meus panis Amb. ibid. est vsitatus: Sed panis iste, panis est ante verba Sacramentorum, vbi accesserit consecratio, de pane fit caro Christi. Thowe perchaunce saiest: Yt ys my vsuall bread, But this bread before the woordes of the Sacramentes ys bread, but when the consecracion cometh to yt, of the breade ys made the flesh of Chryst. [Page 256]In these woordes of Sainct Ambrose, yt maie well be perceaued, that he A meneth that the bodie of Chryst ys in the Sacrament substanciallie, and not that the Sacramentall bread (as they tearme yt) ys onely so called. For the flesh of Chryst ys made of the bread, the substance of the bread being turned into the substance of the flesh of Chryst by the Almightie power of God thorough the worke of the holie Gost, as Sainct Cyprian testifieth. Panis quem Dominus Discipulis edendum porrigebat, non effigie sed natura De coena Domini. The bread chaunged in nature ys made flesh. mutatus, omnipotentia Verbi factus est caro. The bread whiche our Lorde gaue to his disciples to eate being chaunged notin outwarde forme, but in nature, by almightinesse of the woorde ys made flesh. Sainct Ambrose saieth the flesh of Chryste ys made of the bread: Sainct Cyprian saieth, that the bread by the allmightinesse of the woorde ys made flesh.
And that this shoulde not seme vnpossible, though yt be wonderfull. Theophilacte maketh a very apte similitude: sainge: Et ne quem conturbet quod credendus sit panis caro. Etenim & in carne ambulante Domino, & ex pane alimoniam admittente, panis ille qui manducabatur, in corpus eius mutabatur, &c. And let yt not trooble anie man, that the bread ys to be beleued flesh. B For when our Lorde walked in the flesh, and receaued the foode of bread, the same bread whiche was eaten, was chaunged into his bodie, and was made Whie ther appeareth not flesh in the Sacr. like vnto his holie flesh, and yt auailed to his augmentacion, and sustentacion, after the maner of man. Therfor nowe also the bread ys chaunged into the flesh of our Lorde. And howe, saieth he, dothe yt not appeare flesh, but bread? That we shoulde not abhorre from the eating of yt.
What can be saied against these so manifest and so plain testimonies? Maie we not, or raither aught we not to saie as these holie famouse, and learned men do, raither then to saie as a fewe phantasticall heretiques, and Apostaties do? Let vs beleue these pillers of Chrystes Churche, and beleuing them, seke to be saued as they be.
Thus haue ye hearde enough, I suppose, to declare vnto yowe, that by consecracion, whiche Haimo spake of, the bodie of Chryst ys in the Sacrament. And therfor Manna, as he saied, signifieng the bodie of Chryst consecrated, C signifieth the very reall and substanciall bodie of Chryst. And thus hauing opened the minde of this authour, who as he ys agreable to the holie auncient Fathers before alleadged: So ys he plain and pithie to the readers and strong, and mightie to debell the Aduersaries, I will come to heare Theophilacte expownde the same place of Sainct Paule. Thus he writeth, Vt enim nos aqua Baptismi perfusi corpus dominicum manducamus: Sic & Manna illi mari traiecto, in esum sunt vsi: Et quemadmodum ipsi Domini sanguinem bibimus; Sic illi erumpentem è percusso lapide aquam biberunt. As we washed A plain saing for M. Iuell. with the water of Baptisme, do eate our Lordes bodie: So they hauing passed through the sea, vsed Manna for their foode. And as we drinke the bloode of our Lorde: So they dranke the water that gushed out of the smitten Rocke. Thus Theophilacte.
These two testimonies be so like in sense and phrase, that they might raither be iudged to come oute of one minde, and oute of one mouthe them from two men, different in time, distant in place, and contrie. But God, who ys not, as Sainct Paule saieth: Dissentionis Deus, sed pacis, & 1. Cor. 14. The spirit of vnitie among catholiques. D vnitatis. The God of dissention: but of peace and vnitie: who by his holie spirit wrought that Multitudinis credentium erat cor vnum, & anima vna. The multitude that beleued were of one heart, and of one soule, made them being of one faith to speake one thing, as he did his foure holy Euangelistes [Page]Who although they did write in diuerse times and places: yet they agreed E in vnitie of one trueth.
But they that can not content them selues with that ordre and condicion that God hath placed them in, but being puffed vppe with the spirit of pride, go aboute to buyll the tower of Babell to get them a name, The spirit of diuision among Protestantes. God by his spirit of humilitie and vnitie not working withe them, their tounges are diuided, and dissention ys among them, they agree not, they speake not of one thing: as yt ys easie to see in the schoole of confusion, euen an other Babell the Tower of the wicked name of Luther. Among whose disciples was nor ys the spirit of vnitie, neither were nor be yet that multitude of one heart, nor of one soule, but of diuerse. Luther he spake with one toung, and saied, the verie bodie of Chryst was in the Sacrament reallie and substanciallie: Oecolampadius he spake in an other toung contrarie to his Master, and saied that Chrystes bodie was not ther, but as in a sign. Some other of Luthers disciples saied that Magistrates and rulers must be obeied: Some of them had other tounges and saied that we are called to libertie, and therfor we be all equall, and owe no obedience to F Man. Some tounges saied that children must be chrystned again. Some other tounges saied naie. Some tounges saied that ther were but two Sacramentes: Some saied their were three: Some otherwise with a nombre of diuisions not onely among the multitude: but among them selues. I meen that one of them in all places, and at all times did not agree with him self, but here saied this, in an other place clean contrarie, as hereafter by the helpe of Gods grace, more at large shall be shewed.
But God ( qui facit habitare vnius moris in domo. Who maketh men to Psal. 67. be of one minde in the house) maketh men that dwell in his house of his holie Churche to be of one toung, of one minde, to beleue one thing, and to saie one thing. Therfor let these men of Babell go, these men of confused tounges, and let vs heare the people of agreement.
Ye see I saie, howe Theophilacte agreeth with Haimo, and yf ye ascende to Oecumenius, to Chrysostome and other, ye shall see soche agrement in sense, soche liknesse in woordes that a man might saie, that they were all G spoken, not of diuerse men, but of one man. Conferre them together, Reader and trie my ttueth:
I shall not nede to trooble thee with many woordes to open the saing The Iewes eate Māna we our Lordes bodie. They dranke water: we the bloode of Christ of Theophilacte, for yt ys so euident and plain that yt nede no expositour. Onelie I wish, that for the pourpose that he ys alleadged, that ye note first, that he compareth Manna, and the water to the bodie and bloode of Chryst as the figures to the verities, in that he saieth: As we eate our Lordes bodie. So they Manna. As we drinke the blood of our Lorde. So they drinke the water of the Rocke.
That by the bodie and blood of Chryst, he meneth the bodie and bloode in the Sacrament, whiche he most manifestlie affirmeth, and by expresse woordes denieth the onelie figure of the Aduersarie so wickedlie auouched, Cap. lx. yt appeareth in his exposition of this saing of Chryst, This ys my H bodie, in the six and twenteth of Sainct Matthew, and in the fourtenth of Sainct Marke, whiche bothe be alleageth in the seconde booke in the exposition of the same saing of Chryst.
Likewise also dothe he vpon the vj. of Sainct Iohn wher he saieth thus. Theoph. in 6. Ioan. Marke that the bread, which ys eaten of vs in the mysteries ys not onelie a figure of the bodie of our Lorde but the flesh yt self of our Lorde. For he [Page 257]did not saie the bread, whiche I will geue, ys a figure of my flesh. But yt ys my flesh. A
In this sentence yt perceaue Theophilacte not onelie auouching the verie substanciall presence of Chrystes flesh in the Sacrament, whiche ys the Reall presence auouched, and the hereticall figure denied. catholique doctrine: but also denieng the figure whiche ys the hereticall doctrine. What wicked obstinacie ys this, that wher this Authour denieth yt to be a figure, they affirme the contrarie: and wher he affirmeth the substanciall presence of Chrystes flesh, they denie yt? Yf the Aduersaries had, but one soche place to denie the presence (as certen I am they haue none) they wolde triumphe moche against the trueth. But hauing none to denie that, that they denie, but manie to denie that they do affime, yt ys most deuellish arrogancie to stand in yt.
But let vs heare Theophilact in an other place, treacting of Manna, and the Sacrament. Patres vestri comederunt Manna in solitudine. Hoc saepe & multùm In 6. Joan. versat in ore, vt persuadeat hominibus. Nam si possibile fuit quadraginta annis sine messe & semente pasci homines, & conseruari illorum vitam, multo magis nunc nostram spiritualem meliori pane Dominus carne sua, quae absque semine viri, ex virgine constituta est. Your Fathers haue eaten Manna in the Wildernesse. This B (saieth Theophilact speaking of Chryst) he hath moche and often in his mouthe, that he might persuade men. For yf yt were possible men to be sedde fortie yeares without haruest and sowing, and their life to be conserued: moche more nowe he shall conserue our spirituall life with that better bread his flesh, which withoute seed of man was born of the virgen.
In this ye perceaue the comparaison of the figure to the thing figured, which thing figured ys not a peice of bread, of no better sorte, condicion or dignitie then Manna. But yt ys a better bread saieth Theophilacte, that ys the thing figured, which ys not an onelie figure of the flesh, as the Aduersary wolde glose yt, but yt ys the flesh of Chryst in very dede. For yt ys the same flesh that was born of the virgen withoute seed of man. Albeit more might be saied oute of Theophilacte, who ys both plain and plentifull in in this matter: yet trusting that this maie suffice a Chrysten reader, I will C ceasse, and come to the last coople vpon this texte.
THE TENTH CHAP. PROCEADETH vpon the same text by Rupertus, and Rich. Holkot, and endeth with Gagneius.
PErceauing that in these former allegacions, I haue ben somwhat long, being desierouse that the Reader shoulde well perceaue the faith of these auncientes, and learn the trueth of them to the condemnacion and vanquishing of the falshead of heresie, in the opening of these three, for that they be not of great auncientie, but yet of most substanciall trueth, I shall to ende this text make with them a short conclusion. D
Rupertus, who ys a learned writer, and so reputed and accepted of learned men, writing vpon Exodus, and treacting of Manna saieth thus vpon Rupert. in Exod. this text. Nec qui plus collegerat habuit amplius, nec qui minus parauerat reperit minus. Hoc pro virtute cibi & spiritualis potus, id est, corporis & sanguinis Christi sciendum & firmiter tenendum est, quia non pro quantitate portionis, quam ore percipit [Page] secundùm visibilem speciem panis & vini, alius plus, alius minus consequitur de gratia E spiritus viuificantis: sed singuli iuxta id quod possunt edere congregant, id est, quod possunt credere, remissionem peccatorum percipiunt, & vitam aeternam. Sicut enim pater qui primus peccauit, cuius nos iniquitatem portauimus, non pro quantitate morsus sui, siue pomi quod momordit, sententiam, vel damnationem instam accepit, tantumue illi valuit pomum vnum momordisse, quantum quicquid pomorum in arbore illa fuit deuorasse, ad condemnationem infidelitatis, & inobedientiae: Sic è contrario quisque nostrum, non pro quantitate portiunculae viuisici panis quae frangitur illi, quam ore sumit, aut dentibus terit, gratiam vel vitam accipit, sed tantùm illi valet ad consequutionem Iustitiae exiguum quid percipisse, quàm valeret, si totum quod oblatum est, proprio solus ore perciperet. Rectè ergo sancta Christi Ecclesia panes non valdè grandes, sed exiguas ad consiciendum corpus Christi componit similas & valdè tenues. Neque vini multum sed exiguum quid insundit, quia sicut iam dictum est, nec qui plus collegit habuit amplius, nec qui minus parauerat repperit minus. Vnto him that had gathered moche ther remained nothing ouer: and to him that had gathered litle, ther was no lacke. This ys to be knowen and firmely to be holden for the vertue of the spirituall meate, and drinke, that ys to saie, F of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, that not for the quantitie of the porcion which anie man taketh with his mouthe according to the visible forme of bread and wine one getteth more, an other lesse of the grace of the quickning spirit: but euery one acording to that, that they can eate, do gather, that ys, according as they can beleue, they receaue remission of their sinnes, and life euerlasting. As our Father which first offended, whose iniquitie we haue borne, not for the quantitie of his bitte or morsell, or ells of the apple whiche he bitte, hathe he receaued sentence, or iust damnacion. For yt had ben as moche for him to haue bitten one apple to the condemnacion of his infidelitie and disobedience, as to haue deuoured all the apples on that tree: So contrary wise euerie one of vs receaueth grace or: life, not for the quantitie of the litle porcion of the quickninge bread whiche ys broken vnto him whiche he receaueth with his mouthe, or bruseth with his teeth. But asmoche yt shall auaill him to the obteining of righteousnes to haue receaued a litle porcion, as yt shoulde G auaill him yf he alone shoulde receaue with his owne mouthe, all that ys offred. Therfore the holie Churche of Chryst doth well, whiche maketh not great loanes to consecrate the bodie of Chryst, But small cakes, and thinne. Neither dothe she occupie moche wine but a litle. For as yt ys saied, vnto him that had gathered moche, remained nothing ouer, and to him that had gathered litle, ther was no lacke. Thus farre Rupertus.
Who expownding the sixtenth Chapiter of Exodus, in the whiche ys declared the feding of the children of Israell with Manna, expowndeth in the same the miraculouse worke of God, which Moyses declareth to be doen in the gathering of the same Manna, whiche was that where they were commaunded, that they shoulde euery Man gather a certain measure called a Gomer, whiche shoulde suffice a man, yf anie gathered for H gredinesse or otherwise, anie more then his measure, whiche God apappoincted him, yet he had no more, yf he gathered lesse then the measure yet he had ynough.
This Authour applieng this worke and miracle of God in Manna to the Sacrament, as to the thing figured, he declareth howe answerablie, God woorketh nowe in the thing figured, to the figure, teaching as great a miracle [Page 258]in the one, as in the other in that respect of hauing more or lesse. Allthough as touching the substance of them, the one so farre exceadeth the A other, that ther ys no comparaison. By whiche yt ys most manifest, that he taketh Manna to be a figure of Chryst in the Sacrament.
That he beleued Chryst to be in the Sacrament he doth well open in this his applicacion where he saieth, that the receipt of the vertue of the spirituall meat, and drinke, whiche ys the bodie and bloode of Chryst, ys not to be proporcioned, according to the quantitie of the visible formes of bread and wine. In the whiche woordes, he plainlie declareth, that the meate of the Sacrament figured by Manna, ys the bodie and bloode of Chryst.
But here the Aduersaries will saie that this Authour ys on ther parte. For he calleth yt spirituall meate and drinke, wherby he meeneth the spirituall Obiection of spirituall meat and drinke answered. receipt of Chrystes bodie spirituallie, and not corporallie. Call to remembrance, what ys saied of this in the eighte chapiter of this booke wher ther be causes assigned vpon the saing of S. Augustin, why the bodie of Chryste ys called spirituall meat, and yt shall answer the Aduersarie B fullie.
And yet I shall adde the saing of Sainct Ambrose to the vtter discomfiting of the Aduersarie, whiche teacheth the bodie of Chryst to be in the Sacrament. For he declaring Manna to be the figure of yt, proueth by that, and by an other excellent reason, that the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament ys a spirituall bodie: In Sacramento Christus est, quia corpus est Christi: Auibr. de myst. ca. 9. Non ergo corporalis esca, sed spiritualis est. Vnde Apostolus de typo eius ait: quia patres nostri escam spiritualem manducauerunt, & potum spiritualem biberunt. Corpus enim Dei, corpus est spirituale. Corpus Christi, corpus est diuini spiritus. In the Sacrament ys Chryst, for yt ys the bodie of Chryst, yt ys not therfor corporall meat. Wherfor the Apostle also saieth of the figure of yt, that our Fathers haue eaten spirituall meat, and dronken spirituall drinke? The bodie of God ys a spirituall bodie. The bodie of Chryste, ys the bodie of the diuine spirit. Thus moche Sainct Ambrose. C
First teaching the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, he contenteth not himself so to saie, but to preuent the obiection of the Aduersarie, who Chryste ys the substance of the blessed Sac. will elude this, and saie that Chryst ys in the Sacrament as in a sign, he saieth not onely that Chryst ys in the Sacrament, but he saieth also that the bodie of Chryst ys the Sacrament, the substance of bread and wine being chaunged into the substance of the bodie and bloode of Chryste, the onely formes of bread and wine remaining. And after he hath thus taught, he inferreth, that therfor yt ys no corporall meat, but spirituall meate. And to proue this, he maketh as yt were two argumentes: The first ys that forasmoche as the figures of yt were by Sainct Paule called spirituall meate, and spirituall drinke, moche more maie yt be called spirituall meat, and spirituall drinke. The seconde argument ys that the bodie of God ys spirituall, and the bodie of Chryst ys the bodie of God, wherfor the bodie of Chryst ys spirituall.
Thus ye see that as Sainct Augustin (as yt ys before in the eight Chapiter alleadged) calleth the very reall and substanciall bodie of Chryst in D the Sacrament spirituall. So also doth Sainct Ambrose, not that yt ys not a very bodie, but bicause in diuerse respectes yt ys spirituall, as Sainct Cyrill also saieth: Totum corpus viuifica spiritus virtute, plenum esse ostendit. In 6. Joan. Spiritum enim ipsam carnem nuncùpauit, non quia naturam carnis amiserit, & in spiritum [Page] mutata sit: sed quia summè cum eo coniuncta, totam viuificandi vim hausit. E Nec turbari propter hoc decet. Nam qui Domino conglutinatur, vnus cum eo spiritus est, quomodò igitur caro sua vna cum eo non appellabitur? He sheweth that all his bodie ys full of the quickning power. For he calleth his flesh the The flesh of Chryste called a spirit, and so a spirituall flesh. spirit, not that yt had lost the nature of flesh, and ys chaunged into the spirit, but bicause yt ys so nerelie ioined with him, yt hath taken into yt all power to make to liue. Neither ys yt decent any man to be troubled for this. For he that ys fast ioined with God, ys one spirit whithe him. Howe then shall not his flesh be called one with him? Thus moche Sainct Cyrill.
Of whome we maie learn that Chryst him self called his flesh a spirit, and therfore yt maie well be called spirituall, and yet saieth Sainct Cyrill, though yt be so called, yt hath not lost the nature of flesh, but ys both flesh and spirit. And therfor well called of these Authours a spirituall flesh, a spirituall bodie, a spirituall meate, and yet allwaies being a very substanciall bodie, and a naturall flesh.
By these Authours yt ys made manifest to you, that when they or other do call the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament, a spirituall bodie, or a spirituall F flesh, or as Rupertus doth, a spiritual meate: yt ys not furthwith after the Aduersaries minde, to be made so spirituall, that ther shall remain neither bodie, nor meat, but that by a spirituall vnderstanding by faith we must vnderstand yt a verie bodie, verie flesh, and yet spirituall for manie causes here and before declared. And that this Authour ment euen so yt appeareth well. For when he had called yt spirituall meat, he furthwith expownded yt and saied, that ys to saie, the bodie and bloode of Chryst. whiche bodie and bloode he wolde so to be spirituall, not that yt shoulde be absent from the Sacrament, but raither to be the substance of the Sacrament, whiche he doth well insinuate, when he saieth, that we receaue not the spirituall meat of the bodie and bloode of Chryst according to the quantitie of the visible forme of bread and wine. He saieth not according to the quantitie of bread and wine, whiche woordes might include their substances, but saieth after the maner of the speache of the catholique faith, according to the quantitie of the visible formes of bread and wine signifieng the substāces G of thē to be absent bicause they be chaunged and maketh mencion onely of the formes. And that this was his faith, he by most plain woordes declareth, in his exposition vpon the same booke of Exodus, saing thus: Quomodò verbum à summo demissum caro factum est, non mutatum in carnem, sed assumendo carnem. Sic Rupert. in Exo. ca. 10 panis & vinum, vtrumque ab imo subleuatum fit corpus Christi & sanguis non mutatum in carnis saporem, sed assumendo inuisibiliter vtriusque diuinae scilicet & humanae, quae in Christo est immortalis substantiae, veritatem. Proinde sicut hominem qui de virgine sumptus in cruce pependit, rectè & catholicè Deum confitemur: Sic veraciter hoc quod sumimus de sancto altari Christum dicimus, agnum Dei praedicamus. As the Sonne of God coming down from the high was made flesh, not being chaunged into flesh, but by taking flesh vpon him, So bread and As rightlie as we cōfesse Chryste to haue ben crucified, so rightlie we cōfesse him to be in the Sacr. wine both lifte vppe from the lowest ys made the bodie and bloode of Chryste not chaunged into the taste of flesh, or into the horriblenesse of H bloode, but inuisiblie taking the veritie of bothe the immortall substances, whiche be in Chryst, that ys to saie both of God and man. Therfor as we rightly and catholikely confesse the man whiche being born of the Virgen hanged on the crosse to be God: So this that we receaue at the holie aultar, we trulie saie to be Chryst, we openly confesse yt to be the lambe of God. Thus Rupertus.
[Page 259]This saing nedeth no commentarie. Wherfor breifly note, gentle Reader, that he saieth, that the bread and wine be made the bodie and bloode A of Chryst. Note that the bread and wine haue the veritie of the substances of both natures of Chryst. Note that as catholikely as we confesse Chryst, to be God: So catholikely do we confesse yt that we receaue at the Aultars holie. holy aultar to be Chryst, and the lambe of God. Also yf the aultars be holie, as this Authour saieth they be. Yt can be no holie dede to pull them down with despite as Germanie and Englond haue doen.
This I trust, sufficeth to open this Authours faith as concerning the presence of Chryst in the holie Sacrament. Wherfor nowe leauing him, his folowe shall be hearde, who ys Holkot an english man, who writing vpon the booke of wisdom saieth thus. Per Manna in sacra scriptura figuratur signanter Holkot in li sap. cap. 16 Eucharistiae Sacramentum. Sicut enim filij Israel transeuntes per desertum versus terram à Domino promissam cibi refocillabantur alimento, ita nos per mundum ad coelum pergentes corporis & sanguinis Christi quotidiano viatico recreamur. By Manna in the holie scripture, the Sacrament ys notablie figured. For as the Manna a notable figure of the Sacrament children of Israell going through the desert towarde the land promised vnto them of God they were recreated with the foode of that meat: Euen so we B going through the worlde to heauen, are recreated with the dailie iourneing meat of the bodie and bloode of Chryst.
Of this Authour though he be of the later daies, we learn no other thing in this matter, but euen the verie same that the great auncientes haue before taught and auouched. So that I can not perceaue why the masters of wickednesse, shoulde reiect him and soche other, but onely of malice for there plain testimonie. As all that before be alleaged haue taught Manna to be a figure of the Sacrament: So doth this Authour likewise. As they haue auouched the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament. So doth this Authour also. For he saieththat we are fedde in this worlde in our iourneie to heauen warde with the bodie and bloode of Chryst.
Nowe ye haue hadde these matters reported and testified to yowe by twelue witnesses, whiche be sufficient by the lawes yf were in matter of life and death, as in dede this ys, for they that beleue this, as they haue C testified, maie haue life: but they whiche do not shall die the death. They haue testified that Manna ys a figure of the Sacrament, they haue testified that in the same Sacrament ys Chryst verilie, and therwithall some of them by expresse woordes haue testified the excellencie of this Sacrament, aboue the Sacramentes of the olde lawe, and in effecte so haue they euery one. For sainge that we haue the veritie, wher they hadde but the figure, yt declareth as moch excellencie in owres ahoue theirs, as ys of the bodie aboue the shadowe. These be not twelue bare witnesses, but they are substanciall witnesses, all being of Chrystes Parliament house, and most of them of the higher house, I meen of them that were aboue nine hundreth yeares agon, who testific vnto vs no other, but that trueth and faithe, whiche then was receaued as an enacted trueth. Wherfor Reader, contemne not their testimonie, contemne not their aunciencie, and with all neclect not thy saluacion, but yf thowe will yt obtein, heare these witnesses reuerently, beleue them faithfullie, abide in that beleif constantly, and yf D all other poinctes of life and faith be in thee agreablie, thowe shalt, no doubte, liue perpetually.
Nowe finallie to conclude and shet vppe the exposition of this text: I haue thought good to adde the thirtenth witnesse, who shall be Gagneius [Page]a mān of the later daies, but not to be contemned but woorthilie for his E learning to be receaued. Whom for that he breiflie expowndeth the wholl text of Sainct Paule here treacted of, I haue placed him in the last place, for the Readers better remembrance. Thus he writeth. Admonet hoc capite Paulus Corinthios, ne de donis à Deo perceptis efferantur. Futurum enim vt per elationem Gagneius in Paulum 1. Cor. 10. hanc atque alia peccata, ijs donis excidant, & à Christo eijciantur idue exemplo Iudaeorum docet. Quos, licet in figura, similibus tamen donis ab eo affectos probat, sed hinc tamen ob sua delicta excidisse. Sicut enim Corinthij in spiritu sanclo & aqua baptisati, veri Pharaonis seruitutem excusserunt, Christi carne pasti, & eius sanguine potati sunt: It a patres Iudaei excussa Pharaonis seruitute, & transgresso marirubro, quodam modo in mari & nube baptisati sunt, similitudinariè scilicet: Quod enim illis nubes protegens, conducens, ac refrigerans, id nobis spiritus sanctus actionum nostrarum dux & ptotector, libidinumue moderator & extinctor. Quod illis mare, hoc Corinthijs aquae Baptismatis. Corinthij Christi carnem manducabant: illi figuram eius Manna, quam spiritualem vocat escam, quod miraculosè coelitus descenderit. Corinthij Christi sanguinem bibebant. Iudaei spiritualem potum, quem miraculosè petra sudit, biberunt, neque tame ntot affecti beneficijs praeter duos tantùm, in terram promissionis peruenerunt, sed in deserto F prostrati sunt ac mortui. Qua in re sigura nostri fuere, vi scilicet à vitijs illorum abstineamus, alioquin in deserto perpetuae vastitudinis perituri, neque veram promissionis terram ingressuri. Paule doth admonish the Corynthians in this chapiter that they be not prowde of the giftes whiche they haue receaued of God. For yt maie come, that by this pride and other sinnes, they maie fall from these giftes, and be cast oute from Chryst. And that he teacheth by the A notable conference, of the figures and the thirges figured. and of the benefittes of bothe example of the lewes, whom he proueth to haue had the like benefittes although in figure: and yet by their sinnes to haue fallen from them. For as the Corynthians baptised in the holie Gost and water brake of the seruitude of the verie Pharao after they were fedde with the flesh of Chryst, and had dronken this bloode: Euen so the Fathers the Iewes, hauing broken the seruitude of Pharao, and passed through the read sea, after a certain maner they were baptised in the sea and the cloud, that ys to saie, similitudinarelie. For what the clowde was vnto them, defending, conducting, and refreshing them: that vnto vs ys the holy Cost, the guide of our doinges G and protectour, and of our euell lustes the moderatour and destroyer. What the sea was vnto them: that vnto the Corynthians was the water of Baptisme. The Corynthians did eate the flesh of Chryste: they did eate Manna the figure of yt which he calleth spirituall meat, bicause yt miraculously descended from heauen. The Corynthians dranke the bloode of Chryst: the Iewes dranke the spirituall drinke, whiche the Rocke miraculouslie powred owte. And yet for all that being indued with so manie benefittes, they came not into the lande of promesse, two onely excepted, but they were ouerthrowen in the desert, and dead. In the whiche they were a figure of vs that we shoulde abstein from their vices, or ells we shall perish in the Wildernesse of euerlasting vastitie, and not entre the true land of promisse. Thus moche Gagneius.
Whom ye see not onely applieng Manna and the water of the Rocke as figures of Chrystes bodie and bloode, and affirming the verie presence of thē H bothe, but also fullie and throughly expownding the text to the perfect vnderstanding of S. Paule, and in nothing dissenting, but consenting to the enacted trueth of Chrystes Parliament house, with the other before alleaged. And nowe thus moche of the figure Manna, and of the exposition of the text of S. Paule conteining the same.
THE ELEVENTH CHAPITER, DECLAreth A the prophecies of the Sacrament vnder the names of Manna and the water of the Rocke.
ALthough of this blessed Sacrament ther be manie prophecies, as in the first booke yt ys declared yet of yt, as aunswerable vnto this figure there be not manie. The prophet Dauid in the psalme maketh mencion of yt saing: Et mandauit nubibus desuper, & ianuas caeli aperuit. Et pluit illis Psalm. 77. Manna ad manducandum, & panem caeli dedit eis. Panem Angelorum manducauit homo. He commaunded the clowdes aboue, and opened the doores of heauen. He rained down Manna also vpon them for to eate, and gaue them foode from heauen. So man did eate Angels foode. Of this also he speaketh again: Et pane celi saturauit eos. Dirupit petram, et sluxerunt aquae, abierunt in sicco flumina. And he filled thē with the bread of heauen. He opened the Rocke of stone, and the waters flowed oute, so that riuers ran oute of drie places. These wonderfull factes doen by the hand of God for his people the Applicaciō of Manna and the water to the blessed Sac. B children of Israell, the Prophet Dauid reherseth not as an historiographer vpon onely respect that they were doen, as they be reported, but that they shall be doen spirituallievpon his people the faithfull Chrystians, whiche be his verie children of Israell, as Sainct Paule saieth to the Romains. And for this cause ys he called a prophet, For he wrote all his Psalmes and Prophecies of Chryst, and his Churche, as Sainct Augustin saieth, So that by this he prophecieth, that as the children of Israell were fedde in the desert with Manna a foode from heauen: So the children of Israell the Christians shall be fedde with the verie Manna from heauen, euen the bodie of Chryst. Rom. 4. And as vnto them water flowed oute of the Rocke: So vnto the Chrystians oute of that stone, vpon whome the Churche ys buylded, whiche stone God did strike for our sinnes, as Sainct Paule saieth, flowed water and bloode, of the whicch ther ys soche plentie, that yt sufficeth for all the worlde to drinke of yt, yf they will. C
Vpon this text S. Hierom saieth: Sed & fontem Baptismi, atque martyrij eadem In psai. 77. petra ostendit. De latere enim eius cùm percussus est, sanguis & aqua processit. Quod Baptismum & martyrium, figurauit, But the same stone also sheweth oute the fountain of Baptisme, and of martyrdome. For oute of his side, when he was striken, came furth bloode and water, whiche did figure Baptisme and martyrdome. And vpon the other text of Dauid, applieng that as a prophecie, he saieth Panem caeli dedit eis, panem Angelorum manducauit homo. Ipse homini Psal. 77. Hier. ibid. cibum praebuit, qui dixit: Ego sum panis vitae, qui de caelo descendi, qui manducauerit ex hoc viuet in aeternum. He gaue them foode from heauen, so hath man eaten the foode of Angells. He himself hath geuen meat to man who saied: I am the bread of life, whiche came down from heauen. He that shall eate of that breade shall liue for euer.
In the whiche woordes S. Hierō expownding the Prophet declareth to what ende the woordes of the Prophet did tende, namely that ther shoulde be an heauenly Manna geuen to the spirituall children of Israell, whiche Manna was Chryst the bread of life, whiche thing S. Hierom vpon the Prophet D in an other place, more plainlie doth opē. The Prophet saieth: Pane caeli saturauit eos. Psal. 104. With the bread of heauē he filled thē: And S. Hierom saieth. Sicut enim illi de coelis fluēte Māna refecti sunt: Ita nos hodie in ecclesia corpore agni accepto reficimur. Disrupit Petram & fluxerunt aquae, etc. Percussus est enim lapis ille pretiosus angularis, [Page] & immensos nobis protulit fontes, qui nostros errores abluunt, & ariditates E irrigant, As they were fedde with Manna flowing from heauen: So we nowe in the Churche, are fedde with the bodie of the lambe being receaued. We be sed with the bodie of the lambe. He brake the stone, and the waters flowed oute. For that preciouse corner stone was smitten, and he brought furth to vs vnmeasurable fowntaines, which wash awaie our errours, and water our drinesse.
Sainct Augustin also vpon the same psalme geueth a moch like exposicion. August. in psal. 77. Qui enim mandauit nubibus desuper, & ianuas coeli aperuit, & pluit illis Manna ad manducandum, & panem coeli dedit eis, vt panem Angelorum manducaret homo. Qui cibaria misit eis in abundantia, vt satiaret incredulos, non est inefsicax dare credentibus verum ipsum de coelo panem, quem Manna significabat, qui verè cibus est Angelorum, quod Dei Verbum corruptibiles, incorruptibiliter pascit, quòd vt manducaret homo, caro factum est, & habitauit in nobis. He that commaunded the clowdes aboue and opened the doores of heauen, and rained down Manna to them to eate and gaue them bread from heauen, that man might eate the bread of Angells, who sent to them meat in abundance, to fill the vnbeleuers, he ys not vnable to geue vnto the beleuers the true bread F from heauen, whiche Manna did signifie, which ys the meat of Angells in dede, whiche Sonne of God feedeth the corruptible incorruptiblie, who, that man might eate, was made flesh, and dwelled among vs.
As Sainct Hierom and Sainct Augustin be well agreing in the exposition of the sainges of the Prophet Dauid: So also Cassiodorus, a man well towarde their time, in nothing dissenteth from them, expownding the same psalme of Dauid. Et pluit illis Manna ad manducandum. Pluit dixit, vt Cassiod. in Psal. 77. ostenderet escae mmiam largitatem, quae tanquam pluuia de caelo descendit. Et ne dubitares, quae fuerit illa pluuia, sequitur. Manna manducare. Manna interpretatur, quid est hoc? quod sanctae communioni decenter aptamus quia dum admirando cibus iste perquiritur, corporis dominici munera declarantur. Addidit: Panem coeli dedit eis. Quis est alter panis coeli, nisiChristus Dominus, vnde coelestia spiritualem escam capiunt, & deleclatione inestimabili perfruuntur? Denique sic sequitur: Panem Angelorum manducauit homo. Panis ergo Angelorum bene dicitur Christus, quia aeterna ipsius laude pascuntur. Neque enim corporalen: panem Angeli manducare credendi G sunt, Sed illa contemplatione Domini, quia sublimis creatura reficitur, verim hic panis in coeloreplet Angelos, nos pascit in terris. And he rained down Manna vnto them to eate. He saied (rained) that he might shewe the great plentie of the meat which like vnto rain came down from heauen. And that thowe shouldest not doubte, what that rain was, yt foloweth. To eate Manna. Manna ys interpreted, what ys this? Whiche we verie well Manna what yt ys by interpretacion. applie to the holie communion. For while this meat ys gotten with woondering, the giftes of our Lordes bodie be declared. He added: He gaue them bread from heauen. Who ys the other bread from heauen, but Chryst our Lorde, of whome heauenly thinges do receaue spirituall meat, and ioifullie vse inestimable delectacion. Then yt foloweth thus: Man hath eaten the bread of Angells: Chryst than ys well called the bread of Angells, bycause they are fedde with his euerlasting lawde and praise. Neither are Angells H to be thought to eate corporall meat, but with that contemplacion of our Lorde, with the whiche the high creature ys fedde they are fedde. But this bread filleth Angells in heauen, yt feadeth vs in the earth. Thus farre Cassiod.
The testimonies of these Authours, whiche here be produced vpon the Prophet Dauid, are so consonant and agreable that I dissere to make anie note of them vntill we heare one mo, who shall be Titelman, a writer vpon [Page 261]the Psalmes not to be contemned, though he be of the later daies. Whom I ioin with the better will to these auncientes, that yt maie well appeare A to the Reader, that these later writers, being agreable and nothing dissenting from them, the false slaunders of the Aduersaries be but vain, and without cause moued. This Authour in his annotacions for the Hebrue and Caldeie toung saieth that the bread, whiche in our communion text ys called Panis Angelorum, the bread of Angells, in the Hebrue, as Sainct Titell in annot super Psal. 77. Hierom, and other do translate yt, ys called Panis fortium & robustorum. the bread of strong and mightie men. And giuing two causes why yt ys so called, he putteth this for one: Aut fortè propter significationem panis viui illius tempore gratiae mundo descensuri desuper, cuius non dubium est, Manna corporeum fuisse figuram, panis fortium aut robustorum dictus intelligatur, quia is, cuius typum gerebat, panis viuus de coelo mittendus, confortaturus erat corda sumentium in vitam aeternam, inxta quod apud Ioannem Saluator testatur, dicens: Qui manducat hunc panem viuet in aeternum, & qui manducat me, & ipse viuet propter me. Or ells this bread maie be vnderstanded to be called the bread of the strong and mightie, for the significacion of that liuely bread that shoulde descend from aboue to the worlde, of the whiche bread without doubte B that corporall Manna was a figure, for that liuing bread to be sent from heauen, of the whiche the other was the figure, shoulde make strong the heartes of the receauers to euerlasting life, according to that our Sauiour testifieth in Sainct Iohn, saing: He that eateth this bread shall liue for euer. And he that eateth me, shall liue through me. Thus moche this Authour.
Nowe ye haue hearde these Authours with great concorde expownding the Prophet Dauid. And forsomoche as their sainges, here, be euen like to them that before are saied vpon Sainct Augustine, to auoide prolixitie, I shall raither geue a breif note vpon their sainges then long to stand vpon them This ys to be obserued in them all, that they applie this Prophecie to Chryst, as the foode of heauen, the very liuing bread, that geueth soche strengh to them, that duely eate therof, that they liue for euer, which foode ys receaued in the Sacrament of his bodie and bloode. For Sainct Hierom applieng yt to Chryst, as the foode of mans soule, alleageth the C sixt Chapiter of Sainct Iohn, which Chapiter, as yt ys inuinciblie proued in the second booke, treacteth of the Sacrament. Wherof also Sainct Hierom ys ther a witnesse, as a great nombre mo be. And for the more plain proofe of this in the exposition of the hundreth and fourth Psalme he saieth by expresse woordes, that we be fedd with the bodie of the lambe, as they were with Manna, whiche plain maner of speache leaueth vs in no doubte what faith Sainct Hierom was of, and howe he vnderstandeth the Prophet Dauid.
And thus considering howe long, I haue ben vpon this one text of Sainct Paule, and remembring howe manie mo ther remain likwise to be expownded, I shall leaue the rest of the Authours here alleaged, to be weighed by the Reader and in the next chapiter make an ende of that that vpon this scripture ys to be saied. D
THE TWELTH CHAPITER, PROVETH BY E occasion of that that ys saied, with farder Authoritie that the Sacramentes of the newe lawe are more excellent, then the Sacraments of the olde lawe.
FOrasmoche as all the Anthours alleaged for the exposition of the text of Sainct Pāule nowe last handled and treacted of, doo all together conspire and agree in this trueth, that Manna was the figure, and the bodie of Chryst, whiche we receaue in the Sacramēt, the veritie: and the veritie allwais ys more excellent in good thinges then ys the figure, euē as moche more excellent, as the bodie of a man ys aboue the shadowe: Yt must nedes then of necessitie folowe, that the Sacraments of the newe lawe, whiche be the thinges figured by the figures of the olde lawe, must as farre excel them, as the veritie doth the figure, and as the bodie doth the shadowe. For further proof of this consider, as yt ys declared at large in the first booke and yt ys S. Augustins rule also, that all euell thinges figured by figures of Good thinges figured better then the figures. the olde lawe, are moche woorse, then the figures by the whiche they are F figured, Soo all good thinges figured, are moche better, and more excellent then the figures. Yf then the Sacramentes and sacrifices of the olde lawe be figures of the Sacramentes and sacrifices of the newe, as in dede they be, then must the Sacramentes, and sacrifices of the newe lawe be moch better then the Sacramentes or sacrifices of the olde lawe. Yf moche better, then more excellent. And nowe note that yf yt were so (as the Aduersaries falslie doe teache) that the bodie of Chryst were not present verilie in the Sacramēt and that the other Sacramentes of Chrystes Churche (as the constant and true doctrine of the same Churche ys to the contrary) did not geue grace, then were the Sacramentes of the olde lawe not onely as excellent as the Sacramentes of the newe lawe, but by all means passing and excelling them.
And bicause this shall not be declared, and proued by examples, that be straunge to our matter, we will bring furth an example with in the limites of our matter, euen of Manna yt self, the figure of our Sacrament. What great miracles and wonders were in that Māna, the booke of Exodus doth declare, G whiche for the better vnderstāding of thē, that are not exercised in the scriptures, are collected and set furth by Roffensis, and they be in nombre twelue. Twelue wō ders in Mā na declared Roff. lib. 1. cap. 12.
- 1 The first ys, that howe moche soeuer anie hadde gathered, yet he had no whit more then the measure, that God had appoincted them to gather.
- 2 The secōd, that he that gathered lesse thē the measure appoincted, he had asmoche when he caried yt home, as he that had gathered the iust measure.
- 3 The thirde, yf they had kept any porcion vntill the next daie, yf yt were not the Sabboth daie, yt wolde haue putrified.
- 4 The fourth, although yt might so quickly and shortly putrifie: yet yt was kept in the Arcke a great nombre of yeares, and putrified not.
- 5 The fift, yf yt were laied in the Sunne, yt wolde melt, yf before the fire, yt wolde be very harde.
- 6 The sixte, although yt did euerie other daie orderly fall from heauen, H yet vpon the Sabboth daie ther fell none.
- 7 The seuenth, although other daies in the weke, whether they gathered more or lesse, yet they had but one measurefull called Gomer: vpon the daie next before the Sabboth to serue them two daies, bicause they were forbidden to gather vpon the Sabboth daie, they had home with them two measures full.
- [Page 262] 8 The eight, he that that daie gathered more or lesse, had no more nor lesse then his two measures, when he came home. A
- 9 The ninthe, although in so great a multitude, ther were of diuerse stomackes, diuerse appetites, some eating more, some lesse: yet that measure sufficed the strong stomaked, and was not to moche for the weake stomacke.
- 10 The tenth vnto them that were good yt tasted to euery one according to his desire.
- 11 The eleuenth, although to the godly yt was a most pleasaunt taste: yet to the vngodly yt was lothsom.
- 12 The twelth, the children of Israell were fedde fourtie yeares with this Manna in the Wildernesse.
As these miracles be conteined in the scriptures, as in Exodus, Numeri, and in the booke of wisdom: So they are also setfurth by holy writers, to Exod. 16. Num. 11. Sap. 16. Chrysost. indictum Apost. Nolo vos ignor. the settingfurth of Gods glorie in his wonderfull workes. Of diuerse of these Chrysostome maketh mencion saing: Et hoc vtique mirabile: Tentauerunt tunc aliqui per tempus illud, plus quàm opus fuerat, colligere, & nullum auaritiae suae fructum accipiebant. Et quamdiu aequalitatem colebant mansit Manna, quod Manna B erat. Postquam autem auari plus habere desiderauerunt, auaritia mutauit Manna in vermem. Quamuis hoc non cum detrimento aliorum faciebant. Non enim rapiebant exalimento proximi, cùm plus colligerent, attamen cùm plus desiderarent condemnati sunt. Nam tametsi neminem alium iniuria affecerunt, tamen sibi ipsis maximè nocuerunt, hoc colligendi modo auaritiae studentes, atque sic simul erat cibus, & diuinae agnitionis instructio, simul & pascebat corpora & erudiebat animam. Neque pascebat solùm, sed à laboribus liberabat, non enim opus eratiungere bones, neque trahere aratrum, neque sulcos secare, neque ad annum expectare: sed mensam habebant subitò appositam, semper recentem, & quotidie nouam, rebusue ipsis discebant Euangelicum illud praeceptum, non debere solicitum esse in crastinum. Nulla enim vtilitas ipsis ab hac solicitudine proueniebat. Nam qui plus colligerat corrumpebatur & peribat, & auaritiae argumentum solùm dabat. Insuper ne putarent illum imbrem iuxta naturae consuetudinem esse, nihil talium in die Sabbati fiebat, Deo duo illa ipsos docente, quòd prioribus diebus ipse mirabilem, & priorem pluuiam operabatur, & per diem illum abstinebat, vt inuiti etiam discerent illo die feriari. And this also was merueilouse. C Some proued in that time to gather more then was nede, and of their couetousnesse they tooke no profit. And as long as they tooke their equall proporcion, that that was Manna did abide Manna. But after the couetouse desiered to haue more, auarice turned Manna into a woorme, although they did this withoute hurte of other, when they wolde gather more they did not violentlie take awaie any parte of their neighbours foode, and yet for all that whē they desiered more they were condemned, For although they did not wrong an other man: yet after this maner of gathering geuing their mindes to auarice, they did moche hurte them selues. And so yt was both meat, and also an instruction of the knowlege of God. Yt did bothe feed the, bodie and teache the soule. Neither did yt onely feede, but yt also deliuered them from labours. For they had no nede to yocke their oxen, to drawe their plough, nor to cutte oute furrowes, neither to tarie a yeare, for the croppe, But they had a table quicklie sett furth and made readie, fresh and dailie newe. And by the same thinges D they did learn the Euangelicall commaundement, that they shoulde not be carefull for to morowe. For of this carefullnesse ther came no profet to them. For he that gathered more, yt was corrupted, and perished, and gaue onely a rebuke of their greadinesse or couetousnesse. Moreouer, [Page]that they shoulde not thinke that shower or rain to be according to E Manna githered, more [...] was n [...]ede corrupted. the custome of nature, vpon the Sabboth daie ther was none soche. God teaching them these two thinges, who was the worker of that merueilouse rain in the other daies, and that he vpon that daie absteined, that they shoulde learn whether they wolde or no to kepe holy daie. Thus farre Chrysostome.
In this he hath declared that Manna was no naturall effect of naturall custome and ordre, but by the speciall worke of God, who caused yt, as yt pleased him to rain down from the clowdes to them. He saieth also that vpō the Sabboth daie, God rained not Manna to the people, signifieng that euery other daie he did. For the maner of the gathering of yt he teacheth that they that gathered more then was nede, they had no profitte af their couetousnesse, whiche ys, as the text of Exodus saieth, that he that gathered moch to him their remained nothing, howe moche so euer through gredie desire he gathered, he had no more but his measure. As touching the ordre of the keping of yt, yf they kept yt as yt shoulde be kept, as vpon the Sabboth daie Māna kept vpon the Sabboth daie remained good, vpon other dates not. they might kepe yt, then as Chrysostome saieth, Manna did abide Manna. F But yf anie other daie of couetousnesse they wolde kepe of yt vntill the next daie, then Manna wolde not abide Manna, but Manna was turned into woormes,
S. Augustin also, to omitte the rest, speaketh in one place, of one miracle of yt mencioned aboue, that ys, that yt tasted to them according to their desire: In primo populo vnicuique Manna secundùm propriam voluntatem in ore sapiehat. August▪ ad Januar. In the first people Manna tasted in euery mans mouth according to his owne will.
By this ye perceiue howe manie miracles God wrought in Manna, so that yt might verie well be called a merueilouse thing. And truly for the great workes that God wrought in yt, and for the nombre, whiche also ys great, as being doen in one thing, yt maie well be reputed and esteemed an excellent thing.
Cōpare nowe our Sacrament with this figure, as the Aduersarie doth cal yt a Sacrament, whiche then ys but bread taken to signifie or to be a token G Manna farre excelleth the Sacramentaries Ceramētal bread or figure of Chrystes bodie, and thē what ys yt? ys yt anie more then a plain peice of artificall bread made by mans hande? ys yt in any respecte wonderfull? ys ther anie one miraculouse worke of God in yt like as in Māna? ys not Manna by all means more excellent, and farre exceadinge this Sacrament? Certenly yt farre excelleth, and exceadeth yt, wher the catholique faith teacheth that the lawe had but shadowes, and the Gospell the verie thinges. Yf the highest, the cheifest, the excellentest Sacrament that ys in the Gospell whiche as Sainct Dionyse Areopagita saith, ys the Sacrament of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, be so base and bare and maie no better compare with his figure, than that yt ys a signe or token of Chrystes bodie: then must Sainct Paule his doctrine to the Hebrues, and the doctrine of the catholique Churche be turned into the contrarie saing, that ys, that the Gospell hath the shadowes, and the lawe the very thinges. For as our Sacramēt ys H a figure of Chrystes bodie, so was Māna. As we receauing that peice of bread maie receaue Chryst spirituallie: So did the Iewes receauing Manna, receaue Chryst also spirituallie. And aboue this, Manna hath a nōbre of excellences, and our bread hath none. So that yf we receaue this doctrine of the Aduersarie that our Sacramētes be of no more excellēcie thā the Sacramētes of the olde lawe: we also admitte this that the Sacramēts and figures of the olde lawe [Page 263]farre excell owers. For the excellencie of a sacrament or a figure stādeth speciallie A Thexcellē cie of Sacr. standeth in three poinctes. in three poinctes, in the excellencie of the thing that yt signifieth or figureth: In the fulnesse and liuelinesse of the significacion: And in the work of God aboute the same figure.
As touching the first, yt ys very plain that king Pharao was a figure of the Deuel the Egyptians his people were figures of sinnes: the seruitude that the children of Israell were in vnder this king and his people, was a figure of the seruitude of man vnder the Deuell and sinne. These three, although they be figures, and iustlie do figure the thinges by them figured: yet they be not accompted excellent figures, bicause the thinges by them figured be not excellent▪ Contrariwise Melchisedech for that he ys a figure of Chryst, as S. Paule declareth to the Hebrues, ys accompted and reputed an excellent figure, bycause the thing figured ys excellent. A figure ys as the image of a thing. An image (as comon experience teacheth) ys regarded and estemed according as the thing ys, whose image yt ys. As the image of a king, of the subiectes of the same King ys moche regarded, for that yt ys the image of their King. B And is they honour and loue their Kinge: So will they vse his image. So like wise Melchisedech being the figure and image of Chryst, ys an excellent, figure bicause Chryst ys excellent.
The second poinct moche commendeth the excellencie of the figure also. For although Isaac were a goodlie figure of the passion of Chryst: yet the Paschall lambe ys reputed the more excellent figure, for that yt more liuelie dothe declare the thing therbie signified, then thother did. For altho Isaac was the onely Sonne of his Father, as Chryst of his Father, and bare the wodde to the place of sacrifice, as Chryst his crosse to the place of hys death: yet the lambe bicause yt was slain in dede, and the bloode of yt cast vpon the postes of the doores defended the inhabitantes from the hand of the Angell that strooke the Egyptians, and for that, vpon the death of the lambe the people departed oute of Egypte, and were deliuered from the seruitude of King Pharao, and his people, which figured the death of Chryst in dede, and the effectes of the same. For as the innocent lambe died and shedde his blood without gilt or offence: so the innocent lambe Chryst died C and shedde his bloode without gilt or offence. As the blood defended the Israelites from the striker: so the blood of Chryst being cast vpon vs, defendoth vs from the wrathe of God, vnder the whiche we were born, ād apeaceth the same, that yt striketh vs not to death, as the Egyptians were of the Angell. As the Israelites vpon the death of the lambe were deliuered from the seruitude of Pharao, and his Egyptians so we Chrystians vpon the death of our lambe Chryst were furthwith deliuered from the seruitude of the Deuell and sinne. Therfore, I saie, the lambe so liuely and so fullie signifieng Chryst, who suffred for vs and pourchased owre redemption, ys more excellent figure than Isaac.
The thirde poinct also must of necessitie be admitted. For where the workes of God be and specially miraculouse workes, the mo they be, and the more miraculouse, the more excellent the thing ys about the which soche workes be doen. Yt was a miraculouse worke that Elisabeth being an olde woman, and past childe birth, in her age shoulde conceaue and bring furth Iohn the Baptist: but yt was more miraculouse, D that a maide withoute man shoulde conceaue and bring furth a childe. And therfore this conception ys more excellent than the other, but thys increaseth the excellēcie, that here be mo miracles thā in the other. For in this [Page]cōceptiō was cōceaued God ād mā: in the other mā onelie. But that this excellēcie maie appeare betwixt two figures, I shall bring exāple of two figures E of the Sacramēt. As yt ys sufficiētly proued in the first book, the Shew bread was a figure of the Sacramēt. And as yt ys here proued, Manna ys a figure of the same. The Shew bread was but plain artificiall bread, about the whiche was no speciall work of God, but soch as ys aboute all other thinges, formed and made to the conseruacion of man: Aboute Manna ther was no artificial worke, but a speciall worke of God, and that beside the naturall custome and Cōparison of the B. Sacr. to the figure Manna. ordre. Wherfore Manna ys the more excellent figure in that respect. For the one was made by man, the other was wrought by God. Aboute the one also was no miracle, aboute the other were manie miracles, and therfor in that respect yet more excellent.
In these three poincts yf cōparison be made betwixt our Sacramēt and Mā na, yf our Sacramēt haue not the presence of Chrystes bodie, then Manna farre excelleth. For first our Sacrament being a figure of Chryst, and not conteining Chryst, as the Aduersarie saieth, nothing exceadeth Manna: For Manna F was a figure of Chryst also. So that as touching the thing figured ther ys no excellencie. For they be figures of one thing.
In the second poinct, which ys the liuely significacion and ful figuracion of the thing signified, and figured, Manna moche excelleth the Sacrament. For as Chryst was a bread frō heauen: so was Manna a bread from heauen. As Chryst descended frō heauen that his people might feed vpon him to euerlasting life: so Manna descended frō heauen, that the people might feed vpon yt, to the mainteinance of their life. As Chryst ys aboue naturall ordre sent vnto vs by God the Father: so was Manna aboue naturall ordre sent to the Israelites from God, as by Chrysostome yt ys before testified.
Now yt cōparison be made betwixt the Sacrament and Chryst, the Sacrament ys nothing so liuely a figure so fullie figuring Chryst, as Manna hath doen. For Chryst ys a bread frō heauen: the Sacrament a bread frō the earth as Irenaeus saieth, and as oure cōmon knowledge testifieth. Chryst ys our food to euerlasting life the Sacrament (in respect that yt ys a Sacrament) feedeth vs not to the sufficiēt mainteinaunce of this life, as Manna did the Israelites. G Chryst was sent to vs aboue naturall ordre, as also Manna was: the Sacramēt by natural and artificiall ordre. Who then seith not that Māna in all respects more liuely and more fullie signifieth and figureth Chryst, then our Sacrament doth. Wherfor yt maie then well be saied, that Manna ys the more excellent figure.
As touching the third poinct, ther can be no controuersie, but that Māna was alltogether miraculouse our Sacrament in no poincte miraculouse, yf yt contein not the presence of Chrystes bodie and blood. About Manna were manie miraculous woorkes of God, aboute our Sacrament not one. Manna was frō heauen: our Sacramēt frō the earth. Manna wrought by the especial worke of God: our Sacrament by the cōmon work of man. Manna besides naturall order: our Sacrament, by naturall and artificiall ordre. Manna tasted in euery mans mouth as he listed: our Sacrament but as bread and wine. Māna although yt putrified being kept more then one daie in the weke daies: yet yt remained vnputrified vpō the Sabboth daie. And although being reserued after the Sabboth daie yt wolde putrifie: yet of the same reserued in the goldē H pott in the Arke, ther remained manie years vnputrified, swete ād good. Owre bread and wine neither putrifieth sooner, neither remaineth lōger thē other bread, and wine after the comon ordre doth.
[Page 264]Yt ys then a most plain matter, that yf our Sacramēt be robbed of the real A presence of Chrystes bodie and blood that yt ys in nothing more excellent thē the figure of yt. But contrariwise the figure in all respects ys moch more Yf our Sa. haue not the reall presence of Chrystes bodie and blood, yt ys moche baser figure then Māna excellent then yt, as by that that ys saied, yt doth manifestly appeare. Wherfore the Aduersarie must of necessitie graunt one of these two: that either in the Sacrament ys the presence of Chrystes bodie, and so ys yt more excellēt then the figure Manna: or ells denieng the presence, graunt that our Sacrament ys not equall but a baser and inferiour Sacrament, to Manna. But to graunt that a Sacrament of the newe lawe ys inferiour or baser, then a Sacrament of the olde lawe, ys a plain absurditie: wherfore so ys that likewise, that yt floweth oute of: that ys, that ther ys no presence of Chryst in the Sacrament. Yt must then of very necessitie be concluded, that Chrystes bodie ys verilie in the Sacrament.
THE THIRTENTH CHAP. PROVETH THE the same by scriptures and doctours.
SOche hath ben the malice of Sathan against God and hys Chryst, B and against his beloued church, that to hinder the honoure of God, to shadowe or abase the woorthinesse of the mediacion of Chryst, and to drawe men from saluacion he ceasseth not hys laboure and industrie, he sleapeth not frō his inuencions and deuises, he spareth not hys engines and waies: but bussier ys he to impair and destroie, then we be to repair and saue. Wherfore as before the coming of Chryst, he drewe mē from the true honour of God to Idolatrie, and therin deceaued the very Iewes, whiche were speciallie called to the true knowledge of God. So to abase the woorthinesse of his annointed after his coming, he stirred vppe diuerse wicked membres, as Cerinthus, Ebion, Sabellius, Paulus Samosatenus. Marcion, Arrius, Ne storius, Eutiches, and a great nombre mo of like rable. By some of the which he impugned his Godhead, and by other some he impugned his manhead, and Luther allowed two sacramētes Melācthō three The Saxons foure. Postellus six Suenckfeldiut neuer one. withall miserablie tormented and diuided hys church, to the losse of many a soule: So nowe in these daies he hath inuented some other engins: as wher Chryst had instituted sacramentes by the which as by certain instrumētes or conductes the merit of his passion in sondrie sortes shoulde come and be applied C vnto his people, and by the whiche the people should haue moch comforte: he hath to sett furth his engins stirred vppe other disciples and wicked mēbres, as Luther, Oecolampadius, Caluine. Zuinglius, Bucer, Brentius Cranmer, Radley, Iuel, and a filthy nōbre of soch like, by the which he hath not onelie by some of thē laboured to take awaie three of thē, by other some foure of them, by other some fiue of thē, by other some all of thē: but also soch sinall nombre as some of thē do suffer to remain, they be by thē so robbed, and so spoiled, that neither are they greatlie to the honour of God and Chryst, neither to the profect or comfort of his people. For when generallie they teach that the sacramentes geue no grace to the receauers of thē, litle ys God honoured in his sacramentes, litle ys his people holpen by receapt of thē. As when speciallie they saie, Baptisme wasiheth not or taketh not awaie originall sinne, and that the Sacrament conteineth not the verie substanciall bodie of Chryst, but onely a bare sign or token of yt, what commoditie, or aduantage can come to vs oute of soch spoiled sacramentes left so bare and so poore that Luther. in assert. art. 2. they can geue a man nothing. But yet though these sacramentes be so D spoiled, they are not in very dede spoiled to the faithfull catholique, but vnto him they are riche, and plentifull geuing that measure of grace, that God [Page]through the merite of Chrystes death, hath appointed to be geuen to them that faithfullie, and woorthilie receaue them. For as Manna tasted in euery E mans mouth according to his desire: so the Sacramēt sauoureth to life according to the faith of the receauer. But vnto these wicked: robbers and spoilers of sacramentes, which through vnbelief esteme them no better then S. Paul did the sacramentes and Ceremonies of the olde lawe, which he called: weak and vnprofitable ordinaunces, to them they are as though they were poore, for that they lacking faith robbe and spoile thēselues of soch benefit ād grace as might come vnto them by the sacramentes, which now through their vnbeleif ys not geuen vnto them.
Of the high and most noble Sacrament of Chrystes bodie and bloode, I merueill that the Aduersaries feared not so blasphemously to abase yt, as to saie that yt ys a Sacrament no more excellent thē the Sacramentes of the old lawe. In so saing note with me I praie thee, gātle reader, what opiniō or estimaciō he hath of Chrystiā religion. As before ys saied, S. Paule calleth the ceremonies of the olde lawe, weake ād vnprofitable ordinaūces. Yf then the ordinances of the Chrystian religiō be of no more excellencie, then the ordinances of the Mosaycall religion, then wher no difference of excellencie ys, F the things maie equallie be estemed. And so by this estimaciō and iudgemēt all the sacramētes and ordeinances of the new lawe, for that they are no better, then the ordeinances of the olde lawe, are weake, ād vnprofitable ordeinances. For wher equalitie of condicion and state ys, ther maie well be equalitie in denominacion. What then ys our Chrystian religion, yf yt be no better adorned and magnified, then with weak and vnprofitable ordeinances?
Yf they will saie that as long as the thinges were not cōmed which they figured, so lōg they were not vnprofitable: but whē Chryst was once cōmed Oiection. and they ceassed any longer to figure or signifie, thē their office being doen and expired, they were vain and vnprofitable, and so S. Paule ment of them: But as for our sacramentes they do their office still, for they figure and signifie thinges doen by Chryst that ys comed, as the other did of Chryst to come. And therfore they be not vnprofitable ordeinances.
Although this solucion hath some coloure, yet yf the Aduersarie will look in S. Paule to the Hebrues he shall finde him calling the lawe, and the ordeinances of the same weake and vnprofitable euen when they did their office, G ād figured Chryst to come, bicause they brought not the obseruers of the same Hebrae. 7. to perfection. The commaundement that went before (saieth S. Paule) ys disalowed, bicause of weaknesse, ād vnprofitablenesse, for the law brought nothing to perfectiō. To the which pourpose he saieth again. The lawe hauing the shadowe of good thinges to come, and not the very facion of the Ibid. 10. thinges thēselues, can neuer with these sacrifices which they offre, make the cōmers therunto perfect. So then the cause why S. Paule calleth the ordeinances of the lawe weak and vnprofitable was bicause they brought not the obseruers of thē to perfectiō and not bicause they ceassed to signifie and to figure. And what difference betwixt weake and vnprofitable, as here S. Paule calleth thē: and weake and beggarly as he termeth thē to the Galathians? Thē yf these ordeinances in the time of their vse, before the coming of Chryst were weake and vnprofitable, or weake and beggarlie, and our sacramentes be no better then they, then our sacramentes be as they be weake and vnprofitable or weake and beggarly. H
That our Sacrament of Chrystes bodie and blood ys no better then the Paschall lābe Oecolamp. by expresse woords doth cōfesse, saing: Panis autē nosteragno [Page 265] illorum spiritualium est praeciosior. Propterea non magis praedicandus. Owre bread ys not A more preciouse then the lambe of those spirituall, therfor no more to be praised. Oecolamp. in Exposi verbor. Cana Dom. This then being the wicked doctrine of the Aduersarie, this wicked conclusion ys deduced out of the same that our Sacramentes of the new lawe, be but weake and vnprofitable, as the Sacramentes and ordeinances of the olde lawe were. O wicked blasphemie, o detestable saing, geuing occasion of contempt of the wholl religion of Chryst. A saing more like to ouerthrowe the honour of God, the deuociō of mā, the cōforte and hope of all Chrystiās and so consequently all the whol religion, then to edifie anie one of these.
Yf the Aduersaries had not minded the plain subuersion and destruction of the Chrystian religion, though they had robbed the holie sacramentes of their efficacie, ād made thē (as they do) as bare as the ordinances of the lawe: yet they might haue cōmended thē iustly and truly aboue the other, bicause these did signifie Chryst present, and were instituted by Chryst himself.
Esaie was an holie Prophet, and an holie martyr, who so liuely, so plainlie and clerely preacheth of Chrystes natiuitie, and passion that of some he ys B thought more mete to be called an Euangelist, then a prophet. Hierimie also was an holie prophet, so holy that he was sanctisied in his mothers wombe, who also excellently prophicied of Chryst. Daniel ys knowen of all men to be an notable holy prophet, who as certenly appointed the time of Chryst as a man wold haue appoincted to a thing with his fingar: And yet Iohn the Baptised ys called of Chryst not onelie a Prophet, but more then a Prophet, and why? bicause the other did prophecie certenly of Chryst, but this man did pointe to him with his fingar saing: Ecce agnus Dei, ecce qui tollit, &c. Behold Ioan. 1. the lambe of God, behold him, which taketh awaie the sinnes of the world.
Chrysostome also assigneth an other cause, why Chryst called S. Iohn more then a Prophet: Quum dixisset Prophetis illum esse maiorem, quare maior sit ostēdit. In Matth. homil. 38. Cur igitur maior Prophetis Ioannes? quoniam propinquior erat Christo venturo. Mittā enim (inquit) Angelū meū ante faciē tuā. Qui autem ante faciem est, is proximus est. Nam quemadmodum maiori dignitate hi sunt, qui proximè Regibus deambulantibus ordinantur: sic & Ioānes in ipso aduentu constitutus, maiore gratia fulsit. When he had saied that he was more then a Prophet, he sheweth why he ys more. Therfor then ys Iohn more C then a prophet? Bicause he was nearer to Chryst to come. For I shall send (saieth he) my Angell before thy face. He that ys before the face, ys nearest. For as these are in greater dignitie, which are nearest placed to kinges when they walke: so also Iohn appoincted in the coming of Chryst, ys more honorable.
Oecumenius treating the same text saieth moch like, adding also an other cause: Sed quid existis videre? Prophetam? vtique dico vobis, & excellentiorem propheta excellentiorem, hoc est, maiorem. Deinde dicit in quo maiorem, videlicet in eo quòd venerit circa Christi aduentum. Nam maiores aliis inter praecones sunt hi, qui prope Regem praecedunt. Potest etiam dici excellentior propheta, quia eum quem vidit prophetabat, quod nulli contigit prophetarum. Nec vidit tantùm verùm etiam baptisabat. But what went ye furth to see? a Prophet? yea I saie vnto yowe, and one more excellēt thē a Prophet, more excellēt, that ys greater. Then he saieth in what he ys greater, that ys, in that, that he came aboute the coming of Chryst. For among the foregoers these be the greater, which go next before the King. He maie also be called the more excellent Prophet, bicause he prophecied him, whome he sawe. Whiche happened to none other of the Prophetes. Neither did he D onely see him, but he also baptised him. Thus he. So the Sacramentes and figures of the lawe, for that they figured Chryst to come, they are woorthie of the name of figures of Chryst, but the Sacramentes of the newe [Page]lawe, forsomoche as some of them, were figures of Chryst present, and other of them figures of his benefites wrought by his passion and blood shedding E nowe allreadie purchased and doen, and were also all by him instituted and ordeined, as the Councell of Trydent, and other haue before that defined, they must nedes for these respectes, and consideracions be more excellent then the Sacramentes of the olde lawe. The Sacrament of Chrystes bodie and blood, as no Chrystiā dowbteth but that yt was immediately instituted of Chryst himself: and figured and signified him in substance their present, though yt had a farder respect, and significacion to the maner, as to be a figure of Chryst crucified: so yt can not be denied but yt must be more excellent Sacrament then the Paschall lambe, wherunto Oecolampadius compareth yt, and saieth that yt ys no more preciouse, neither more to be praised then yt, whiche figure was immediately instituted by Moyses, allthough mediately by God, and figured Chryst to come, wheras this Sacrament figured Chryst present, and was immediately of him instituted.
Nowe yf Iohn the Baptist was counted more then a prophet, bicause (as Chrysostome saieth) he was nearer to Chryst then other prophetes, then by that respect, this Sacrament must be more excellent then the Sacramentes of the F olde lawe, bicause yt ys nearer to Chryst, then other of the olde lawe. And if Iohn were the more excellent prophet ( as Oecumenius saieth) bicause he sawe Chryst present whom he prophecied then likewise this Sacrament must be a more excellent sacrament, bicause he was present whom yt figured.
Chryst saieth to the Iewes: Abraham pater vester exultauit vt videret diem meum, vidit, & gauisus est. Abrahā yowr father reioiced that he might see my daie he sawe yt and was gladde. Exultauit (saieth Oecumenius) sine concupiuit, he reioiced Ioan. 8. or desiered to see the daie of Chryst. The daie of Chryst that Abraham desiered In Joan ca. 8. to see, was the daie of his passion (as Chrysostome saieth) in the which he reioiced to see the redemption of mankind. He sawe yt in the oblacion of the ramme that supplied the place of his onelie Sonne Isaac, and he was gladde. For (as Oecumenius saieth) Didicit quod sicut ipse non pepercit In Ioāca 8. filio suo dilecto propter Deum: ita neque Deus parciturus esset filio suo dilecto propter hominem. Et quemadmodum ille portauit ligna holocausti sui: ita & ipse portaturus esset lignum mortis suae. Vernntamen sicut illo non passo suppositus est aries: ita & hoc manente impassibili, humanitas eius occisa est. He learned, that as he did not spare his G beloued Sōne for god sake: euē so neither wolde God spare his sonne for mās sake. And as he bare the woodde of his sacrifice: so also he shoulde beare the woodde of his passion. But as he not suffring a ramme was put in his stead: so this (mening his Godhead) abiding impassible his manhead was slain.
As Abraham did see Chryst: so no doubte manie other holy fathers and Math. 13. prophetes did see him, and yet thinking themselues more happie and blessed yf they might haue seen Chryst in the flesh, did earnestly desire the same, as Chryst saieth: Multi prophetae & iusti eupierunt videre, quae videtis, & non viderunt, & audire quae auditis, & non audierunt. Manie prophetes and righteouse men haue desiered to see those thinges which ye see, and haue not seen them, and to heare those thinges which ye heare, and haue not hearde them. But aboue them all. Vestri beati oeuli, quia vident, & aures vestri, quia audiunt. Blessed are yowr eies, for they see, and yowr eares, for they heare.
In these woordes Chryst declareth the beleuers in him, and the seers of In 13. Math. homil. 46. him, to be more happie, then they that onely beleued, and sawe him not, H with the bodilie eie, as Chrysostome saieth, expownding these woordes of Chryst. Multi prophetae & iusti cup. &c. Aduentū scilicet meū, praesentiā, miracula, vocē. [Page 266] Hic enim non solùm perditis illis eos anteponit, verùm etiam prophetis ac iustis praestantiores A eos asserit, atque beatiores. Quare ita? Quoniam non solùm ista aspiciunt, quae illi non viderunt, verùm etiam quae illi videre cupierunt isti oculis cernunt. Nam fide illi etiam intuiti haec fuerunt, sed isti multo clarius omnia perspexerunt. Manie prophetes and righteouse men haue desiered to see those thinges whiche ye see, and haue not seen them, and to heare those thinges whiche ye heare, and haue not hearde them, that ys to saie (saieth he in the person of Chryst) my coming, my presence, my miracles, my preaching Here he doth not onely preferre them before those lost or damned men, but also he affirmeth them to be more excellent and blessed then the prophetes, and the righteouse men. And why so? for that they do not onely see those thinges whiche thother sawe not, but also those thinges which they desiered to see, these men sawe with their eies. For they also by faith did beholde these thinges, but these moche more clerely did see all thinges. Thus Chrysost.
Yf then they that sawe Chryst in the flesh, were moch more blessed, and excellent, then the prophetes which sawe him onely by faith: howe then shoulde not the Sacramentes instituted by Chryst in the flesh, and vsed of B him in the flesh, and signifieng him, and his merites being presēt in the flesh, be more excellent then the sacramentes of the olde lawe, which in a darke maner and a farre of signified him onely to come. And again, if they that sawe Chryst in the flesh were more blessed by the sentence of Chryst, then the prophetes, and righteouse men, whiche desiering to see him, did not see him: howe than standeth the saing of Oecalampadius, who wickedly trauailed In expas. verborum Caenae. almost in all pointes to make the olde lawe and the Sacramentes therof, nothing inferiour to the newe lawe, and the sacramentes therof, saing: Absit vt spirituales, qui sub lege erāt Messiamue expectabant, fide pauperiores nobis fuerint, quibus manifestatus est. God for bidde, that they which were spirituall vnder the lawe, and did looke for Messias in faith, shoulde be poorer then we, vnto whom he ys manifested? And howe again standeth this saieng of Oecolampadius, whiche within a fewe lines foloweth, with the saing of Chryst before mencioned? Neque Patriarchis fideles nostri beatiores sunt, quos aequauit fides, non reddunt inferiores sacramenta. Neither be our faithfull more blessed then the Patriarches, for those whom faith maketh equall, sacramentes can not C make inferiour.
Chryste saieth they are more blessed: Oecolampadius by expresse contrarie Oecolāp. denieth that Chryst affirmeth. woordes saieth naie. What hereticall impudencie ys this, to denie that that Chryst affirmeth? That the holie Patriarches were excellent in faith, and as constantly beleued that Messias shoulde come, as they that sawe him in the flesh beleued that he was comed, no man of sownd minde will denie And yet although in that part they might be equall: yet yt ys no good argument, that in other thinges and respectes the faithfull Chrystian shoulde not excell. For as Chryst hath taught, that they that beleued in him, and bodilie sawe him, were more blessed, then they that onely beleued him to come: so they that receaue the sacramētes in faith presentlie, which Chryst hath instituted, are in that respect more blessed then they, which in faith onelie beleued that soche shoulde be instituted and neuer sawe them, nor receaued.
But see howe this matter carieth me awaie? by this yet yt maie be perceaued, that though the sacramentes of the newe lawe did not conferre grace (as the Aduersaries wolde haue yt) but were bare signes, and that the fathers D of the olde lawe were equall in faith with the Chrystians in the newe lawe: yet if Sathan the master of vntrueth and heresie had not with malice [Page]blinded the fight of this his scholer, and other his likes, he and they might well haue seen, that both the sacramentes of the newe lawe excell the sacramentes E of the olde lawe: and that the faithfull of the newe lawe excell the faithfull of the olde lawe, though not in all, yet in diuerse respectes, as yt ys saied.
THE FOVRTENTH CHAP. PROCEADETH IN the proof of the same by the scriptures and doctours.
ANd nowe that the sacramentes of the newe lawe do excell the sacramentes of the olde lawe, yt shall by most manifest testimonie be proued. And first for that our speciall disputacion ys of the blessed sacrament of Chrystes bodie and bloode we shall first deliuer that from the maliciouse blasphemie of the Aduersaries, and proue the excellencie of yt aboue other of the olde lawe. And so generalie proue the excellencie of all our sacramentes. For the fundacion of F the proof of the excellencie of the sacrament of Christes bodie and blood, I will take the woord of him, who ys the fundaciō of all Chrystians, vpō whō they must all builde, which ys Chryst. who most plainly declareth the excellencie of this Sacrament in the sixt of S. Iohn. And to the fortifieng of this matter, for that the Aduersarie most arrogantly saieth (but he proueth yt not) that the sixt chap. of S. Iohn ys not to be vnderstanded of the Sacrament, before I produce the authoritie of Chryst in that place, vnderstand (gentle Reader) that I do not onely saie yt, but in the seconde booke, yt ys auouched, and inuinciblie proued by the testimonie of a nombre, namely by Origen, Cyprian. Eusebius Emiss. Hierom, Chrysostom, Hilarie, Ambrose, Damascen, Augustin, Cyrille, Euthimius, Gregory, Theophilact, Petrus Cluniacen. Guitmundus, Dionisius Carthusian. Lira, and in fewe woordes to comprehende a greater nombre then all these, by the Ephesine Councell, in the whiche were two hondreth learned Fathers. By the testimonie of these yt ys ther proued that in the sixt of S. Iohn Chryst speaketh of the Sacrament of his bodie and bloode. G
To this also maie be added the cōmon and vniforme consent of the chrystian Church, before this scissure was made in the time of Luther, and Oecolampadius, and the other like Angells of Sathan, whiche with one mouthe as yt were, taught that chapiter to be vnderstanded of the Sacrament. This also maketh good proof of the same, that when the heresie of the Comunion vnder both kindes was first raised in Bohemia, they grownded the necessitie Joan. 6. of that matter vpon this text of that chapiter: Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man, and drinke his bloode, ye shall haue no life in yowe. For the repression of whiche heresie, as the heritiques vnderstoode that chap. of the Sacrament: so did no Catholique impugn the same, but graunted and accepted yt as a true vnderstanding. Whiche then they wolde not haue doen if yt had ben otherwise to be taken: yf yt had, as that heresie was condempned De consensu Eunngelist. li. 3. c. 1 The vi. of S. Iohn speaketh of the bodie and blood of Chryste. by a generall Councell: so shoulde that vnderstanding haue ben condemned likewise.
To ende this proof, that the reader maie see some authoritie, in this place presentlie, and not to seke farre for yt, we shall heare S. Augustin, who speaking H of the maundie of Chryst, saieth: Ioannes de corpore & sanguine Domini hoc loco nihil dixit. Sed planè alibi multo vberius de iis Dominū locutum fuisse testatur. Iohn saied nothing in this place of the bodie and blood of our lorde. But plainly [Page 267]in an other place, he testifieth that our lorde hath spoken of yt very plentifullie. A Ye heare S. Augustin plainlie saing, that though S. Iohn speaketh nothing in that place of the Sacrament, yet in an other place (saieth he) he speaketh plentifullie of yt, We read in no place of S. Iohns Gospell that he speaketh plentifullie of Chrystes bodie and blood in the Sacrament but in the sixt chapiter, Wherfor S. Augustine vnderstandeth the sixt chapter of S. Iohn to speake of the bodie and bloode of Chryst.
In these woordes also of S. Augustin yt ys not to be ouerpassed, but by the waie to be noted, that he saieth not that S. Iohn speaketh of the Sacrament, figure or sign of the bodie of Chryst, but plainlie he calleth yt the bodie and bloode of Chryst, and saieth that S. Iohn speaketh of them in the sixt chap. This then being certen, and euident, that the woordes of Chryst in the sixt of S. Iohn, as by Chrysostom and Euthymius, by S. Augustin and Teophilact they are distincted, be spoken, and vnderstanded of his bodie and blood, according to the distinction: we shall bring in the woordes of Chryst, for the proof of this that ys here to be prooued.
Thus Chryst saieth: Non sicut manducauerunt patres vestri Manna, & mortui sunt. B Qui manducat hunc panem, viuet in aeternum. Not as yowr Fathers did eat Ioan. 6. Manna, and be dead, he that eateth this bread shall liue for euer. In the whiche saing of Chryst we are taught two thinges. The first that Manna ys a figure of our heauenly Manna (I meen of Chryst in the Sacrament our most pleasant foode) as the comparison of the one to the other made by Chryst him self doth well proue, and as at large yt ys testified by the testimonie of manie Fathers in the. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. and tenth chapiters of this booke. Thexcellē cie of the B Sacr. aboue Manna. The second thing ys the excellencie of our Manna the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament, the thing figured by the other Manna. Whiche excellencie Chryst very manifestlie declareth when he saieth that the eaters of Manna are dead: but the eaters of this Manna in the Sacrament, shall not onely liue, but they shall liue for euer.
As life in naturall thinges ys moch more excellent then death: so that which geueth naturall life ys moche more excellent, then that whiche geueth yt not life. As betwixt life and death ther ys no iust cōparison, both for that inter ens, & non ens nulla est comparatio, betwixt some thing and nothing C ys no comparison, and also for that no comparison can be grownded wher ys no positiue: so betwixt temporall life and eternall life ys no comparision, for that, as S. Gregory saieth, Temporalis vita aeternae vitae comparata mors est potius dicenda, quàm vita. The temporall life compared to the eternall life ys raither Gregorius. to be called death them life. Then the eternall life so farre passing the temporall life, as life doth death: how moch then surmounteth the Manna Māna the figure gaue but tēporal life: Māna the thing eternall life of the chrystians the Manna of the Iewes, wher as this geueth but temporall life, the other eternall, as saieth S. Augustin: Manna de coelo apertè ab ipso Domino exponitur. Patres vestri (inquit) manducauerunt Manna in deserto & mortui sunt. Quā do enim viuerent? Figura vitam praenunciare posset, vita esse non posset. Manducauerunt (inquit) Manna & mortui sunt, id est, Manna quod manducauerunt, non illos potuit de morte liberare, non quia ipsum Manna mors eis fuit, sed quia à morte non liberauit. Ille enim liberaturus erat á morte, qui per Manna figurabatur. De coelo certè Manna veniebat. Attende A figure maie fore the we life but yt can not be life. quem figurabat: Ego sum (inquit) panis vinus, qui de coelo descendi. Manna from heauen ys plainly expownded of our lorde himself. Yowr fathers (saieh he) haue eaten Manna in the wildernesse and are dead. for when shoulde they D liue? A figure maie foreshewe life: but yt can not be life. They haue (saieth he) eaten Manna and are dead, that ys to saie, Manna which they haue eaten could [Page]not deliuer them from death not that, that Manna was death vnto them, but bycause yt deliuered them not from death. He shoulde deliuer them from E death, who was figured by Manna. Certenlie that Manna came frō heauen: Take hede whom yt did figure. I am (saiethe he) the liuing bread, whiche descended from heauen, Thus farre S. Augustin.
Seing then that Manna the figure, whiche rained to the Iewes coulde not deliuer from death, as here yowe haue heard S. Augustin testifie: and Manna the bodie of Chryst, the thing figured, and conteined in our Sacramēt doth Our Sacr. geuing lise sarre excelteth Māna that gaue got life. deliuer from death, and therfor of consequent geueth eternall life, as Chryst him self also auoucheth in the text alleaged: yt can not otherwise be concluded, but that our Sacrament of Chrystes bodie and bloode ys incomparablie excelling Manna and anie other sacrament that in the olde lawe did figure Chryst. As here by the comparison which Chryst hath made betwixt Manna and his bodie, the excellencie of the one aboue the other ys easie to be discerned: so nowe shall we see the like handling of the figure, and the veritie by the holy fathers.
Holy Cyprian sheweing the meting and applicacion of the olde Paschall lābe which was a figure of our new Paschall lābe declareth most plainlie the F excellencie of the one aboue the other. Caena disposita inter sacramentales epulas obuiarunt sibi instituta noua, & antiqua. Et consumpto agno, quem antiqua traditio proponebat, Cyprian de cana Do. inconsumptibilem cibum magister apponit Discipulis. Nec iam ad elaborata impensis & arte conuiuia populi inuitantur, sed immortalitatis alimoniae datur, à comunibus cibis differens, corporalis substantiae retinens speciem, sed virtutis diuinae invisibili efficien tia probans adesse praesentiam. The supper being ordined, emong the Sacramentall The inconsumptible [...] geuē to the Apostles both conteined the presēce of diuine power, and also reteined the forme of corporall substance. meates, ther mett together the newe and the olde ordinances, and the lambe which the olde tradiciō did sett furth being consumed, the master sett before his disciples inconsumptible meate. Neither are the people bidden to feastes prepared with charges and conning: but the foode of imortalitie ys geuen, differing from comon meates, reteining the forme of corporall substance but prouing by inuisible woorking, the presence of the diuine power to be present. Thus S. Cyprian.
As in this sentēce ye see the applicaciō of the ordinaūces of the old law to the newe: so maie ye easilie perceaue that the one farre excelleth the other. The meat whiche was geuen according to the olde ordeinaunce was consumed: G but the meat whiche was geuen according to the new ordeinance, was inconsumptible. That, that ys of a limited power, and finite, yt maie haue a certain degree of excellencie, cōpared to thinges of like condiciō but whē yt ys cōpared to a thing that ys insinite, yt maie not stād in comparison, for Finiti ad infinitum nulla est comparatio, of a thing finite to a thing infinite ther ys no comparison. Wherfore the inconsumptible meat of our lambe in our Sacrament so farre excelleth (being infinite) that the consumptible meat of the olde lawe (being finite) maie not stande with yt in comparison.
Again S. Cyprian calleth our Sacramēt the foode of immortalitie, the Paschall lambe of the Iewes was none soche. Wherfore our Sacrament by all meanes excelleth that sacramēt of the Iewes. S. Cyprian also applieng our Sacrament to the figure of the same vsed by Melchisedech, doth most plainlie Cyprian ibidē vide sup. li. 1. cap. 39. declare the excellencie of yt: Significata olim à tempore Melchisedec prodeunt sacramenta, & filiis Abrahae facientibus opera eius summus sacerdos panē profert, & vinum: H Hoc est (inquit) corpus meum. Manducauerant, & biberant de eodem pane secun dùm formam visibilem. &c. The sacramentes signified in the olde time, from [Page 268]the time of Melchisedech come nowe furth, and the high preist to the children A of Abraham doing his woorkes, bringeth furth breade and wine. This ys (saieth he) my bodie. They had eaten, and dronken after the visible forme of the same bread. But before those woordes that cōmon meat was profitable onely to nourish the bodie, and did ministre helpe to the corporall life. Sacrifice propitiatorie. But after yt was saied of our lorde. This do ye in the in the remembrance of me. This ys my flesh, and this ys my bloode, as often as yt ys don with these woordes, and this faith, this substanciall bread and cuppe consecrated with the solemne benediction, yt doth auail to the health and life of the wholl man, and ys both a medicin and sacrifice, to heale infirmities and to pourge iniquities. Thus moche S. Cyprian.
But forasmoch as these two sainges are handled in the first booke, wher the figure and the thing figured be at large opened: I thinke yt not meete anie more of them here to saie, then toucheth this present matter, whiche they do wonderfullie set furth. Yt ys more then manifest that the sacrifices Hebr. 10. The blood of bulls and goates in the olde lawe did not take awaie sinnes: but the sacrifice of the newe lawe pourgeth iniquities. of the olde lawe were not of that force, power, and vertue to pourge or take awaie B sinnes, S. Paule saing: Impossibile est sanguine taurorum, aut hircorum auferri peccata. Yt ys vnpossible sinnes to be taken awaie with the bloode of bulls and goates. But this owre sacrifice of the newe lawe, whiche ys the flesh and blood of Chryste, ys auailable to the wholl mā, that ys to the health both of the bodie and soule of man. For yt ys a medicin to heale infirmities and a sacrisice to pourge iniquities. Yf this then be not a notable excellencie, whiche the holie martir Cyprian geueth vnto this gloriouse and blessed Sacrament aboue the excellencie of these figures, I knowe not what excellencie ys. But the matter requireth to haue other holy Fathers to speake what they thinke in this matter.
S Ambrose, for that he speaking of this matter, affirmeth the like operacion and effect of this Sacrament, as S. Cyprian did, he shall be ioined vnto him. Thus he saieth: Ipse Dominus Iesus testificatur nobis, quod corpus suum accipiamus & sanguinem. Nunquid debemus de eius fide & testificatione dubitare? Iam redi me cum ad propositionem meam. Magnum quidem & venerabile quod Manna Iudaeis pluit Li. 4. de sacram cap. 5 è coelo. Sed intellige quid est amplius, Manna de coelo, an corpus, Christi? Corpus Christi C vtique, qui author est coeli. Deinde Manna qui manducauerit, mortuus est, qui manducauerit hoc corpus fiet ei remissio peccatorum, & non morietur in aeternum. The Lorde Iesus him self (saieth S. Ambrose) testifieth vnto vs that we receaue his bodie and bloode, awght we of his testificacion and trueth to doubte? Nowe come again with me to my proposition. Yt ys a great thing trulie, and venerable Manna ae creature frō heauen moche inferiour to Christe the authour of heauen. that he rained Manna to the Iewes from heauen. But vnderstand, whiche ys the greater, Manna from heauen, or the bodie of Chryst. The bodie of Chryst trulie, who ys the authour of heauē. Farder he that hath eatē Manna hath died: he that eateth this bodie, he shall haue remission of sinnes, and shall not die for euer. Thus farre S. Ambrose.
Doest thowe not, Reader, in this goodly saing see the great excellencie of the Sacrament aboue Manna, as thow didest in S. Cyprian aboue the Paschall lambe, and the sacrifice of Melchisedec? Doest thowe not also note the goodly argrement, of these two, in cōmending vnto vs the great and woorthie Effectes of the S. Sacr. prouing the excellencie of yt. effectes of this Sacrament? by the whiche yt doth withoute all controuersie, woonderfully excell all the sacramātes and sacrifices of the olde lawe. D As S. Cyprian applieng the bodie of Chryst to the Paschall lambe, called yt the inconsumptible meat, wherby yt excelleth the figure whiche was consumed: So S. Ambrose, applieng the bodie of Chryst to Manna as to his figure, [Page]saieh, that though Manna came from heauen, Yet Chryst who ys the authour of heauen ys more excellent. As S. Cyprian called the bodie the E foode of imortalitie: So S. Ambrose saieth that he that eateth this bodie, he shall newer die As S. Cyprian saieth that yt ys a sacrisice to pourge iniquites: So S. Ambrose saieth, that he that eateth this bodie, his sinnes shall be remitted. These goodly effectes were not in the sacramentes and sacrifices of the olde lawe. Wherfore they being in this Sacrament, yt excelleth them all.
Yf thowe aske why, or howe these effectes be in this Sacrament: I answere, bicause he ys ther verily substancially, and reallie in quo inhabitat omnis plenitudo diuinitatis corporaliter, in whom dwelleth all the fullnesse of the deitie corporally: Colloss. 2. and vnto whom Non ad mensuram dat Deus Spiritum. God geueth not his Spirit by measure: Et cui data est omnis potestas in coelo, & in terra. And to whō Joan. 3. ys geuen all power in heauen, and in earth, whose flesh coniuncta ei, quae naturaliter Math. 28. vita est, viuifica effecta est, being ioined vnto that, whiche naturally ys life, ys made also able to giue life, as S. Cyrill saieth. Cyrillus. F
Of this his presence in the Sacrament, for that that Chryst him self saieth, and testifieth vnto vs that we do receaue his bodie, we sholde not, neither we aught (as S. Ambrose saieth) to doubt of his wittnesse and trueth. Of the whiche, as also of farder testimonie to the proof of the excellencie of the Sacrament, he saieth in an other place: Considera nunc, vtrum prestantior sit panis Angelorum, an caro Christi, quae vtique est corpus vitae. Manna illud è coelo: hoc supra coelum. Ambrosius De initiand myst ca. 9. Illud coeli: hoc Domini coelorum. Illud corruptioni obnoxium, si in diem alterum seruaretur: hoc alienum ab omni corruptione, Quod quicunque religiosè gustauerit, corruptionem sentire non poterit. Illos ad horam satiauit aqua: te sanguis diluit in aeternum. Iudaeus bibit, & sitit: tu cùm biberis, sitire non poteris. Et illud in vmbra: hoc in veritate. Et post pauca. Cognouisti praestātiora: potior enim lux, quàm vmbra, veritas, quàm figura, corpus authoris, quàm Manna de coelo. Consider nowe whether the bread of Angells ys more excellent or the flesh of Chryst, whiche ys also the bodie of life. That Manna was from heauen: this aboue heauen. That of heauen: this of the lorde of heauens. That subiect to corruptiō, yf yt were kept till the next daie: this free from all corruption, whiche whosoeuer shall tast deuoutely shall G not be able to feele corruption. Vnto them water did flowe oute of the rock Manna proued moche inferiour to the B. Sacr. by S. Amb. his cōparison. vnto thee bloode oute of Chryst. Them did water satisfie for a litle time: thee doth blood wash for euer. The Iewe dranke, and thirsteth: thowe, when thowe hauest dronke, canst not thirst. And that was in shadowe: this in treuth. And after a fewe wordes he saieth: Hauest thowe knowen the more excellent? The light ys more excellent thē the shadow. The veritie, then the figure. The bodie of the authour, then Manna from heauen. Thus S. Ambrose. Nede we anie plainer testimonie, for the proof of this our matter in hande? I thinke the holy Gost directed the penne of S. Ambrose, to answere and confute the wicked assertion of Oecolampadius. for this so ouerthroweth his heresie, as though yt had ben nowe written in these daies to confute him.
But perchaunce the Aduersarie will saie, that this maketh nothing against him, for here S. Ambrose speaketh not of the Sacrament, but of the bodie of Chryst, as suffring for vs, to woorke our redemption. To this ther maie be manifolde answers made. First that Manna ys not proprely a figure of Chryst as suffring, but of Chryst as feeding vs. For Manna descended from heauen H Obiection. to feed the Israelites, and not to suffer for them. so Manna being the foode from heauen of the people of God, ys a figure of owre heauenly foode Thanswer Chryst in the Sacrament. Farder also yt ys well knowen that S. Ambrose in [Page 269]that booke treacteth of mysteries and sacramentes, wherfore in this place yt A ys most like, that he treacteth of the Sacrament. Finallie the plain woordes of S. Ambrose inuincible proue the same. For immediatelie, and iointlie to this sentence last alleadged he obiecteth to himself as nowe the Aduersarie doth in these daies vnto vs, and saieth. Fortè dicasialiud video, quomodò tu mihi asseris, quòd Christi corpus accipiam? Et hoc nobis superest adhuc vt probemus, quantis Ambr. ibid. vide sup. li. 2. ca 51. igitur vtimur exemplis, &c. Perchaunce thowe maist saie: I see an other thing, howe doest thowe saie vnto me, that I receaue the bodie of Chryst? And this remaineth yet vnto vs to proue. Howe manie examples maie we therfore vse? Let vs prooue this not to be that thing, whiche nature hath formed: but that the blessing hath consecrated, and the power of the blessing, to be greater then of nature. For by the blessing nature yt self ys chaunged. Moyses did holde a rodde, he cast yt down, and yt was made a serpent. Again, he tooke the taill of the serpent, and yt returned into the nature of the rodde. Thowe seest therfore euen by the propheticall grace, The B. Sa. ys not that, that nature hath formed, but that the blessing hath consecrated. nature to be twice chaunged, both of the serpent, and of the rodde. The B riuers of Egypt did runne with a pure course, and sodenly oute of the veines of the fountaines ther began blood to breake oute, so that ther was no drinke in the riuers. Again, at the praiers of the Prophet the bloode of the floodes ceassed, and the nature of the water returned. The people of Israell were compased aboute on euerie side, on this side with the Egyptians, on the other side with the sea. Moyses lift vppe the rodde, the water deuided yt self, and congealed in maner of walls, and so betwen the waters ther appeared a foote path. Iordan turned backward against hys nature, he returned into his well spring. Ys yt not clere then that the nature either of the waueis of the sea or of the course of the riuer hath ben chaunged? The people of the fathers did thirst. Moyses touched the stone, and water flowed oute of yt. Did not grace woorke besides nature, that a stone shoulde powre oute water, whiche nature had not? and after other mo examples he concludeth thus: we perceaue therfore grace to be of greater Consecracion of the B. Sacr. of what force yt ys. power then nature. And yf mans blessing was of soche force that yt might turne nature, what shall we saie of the diuine consecracion, wher the verie C woordes of our Lord and sauiour do woorke? For this Sacrament whiche thowe receauest ys made by the woorde of Chryst. Yf then the woorde of Helias was of so great power, that yt might putt down fire from heauen: shall not the woorde of Chryst be able to chaunge the natures of the elementes? Thowe hauest readde of the workes of all the worlde, that he hath saied, and they were made: he hath commaunded, and they were created. The woorde of Chryst then, which coulde of nothing make that that was not, can yt not chaunge those thinges that be into that they were not? Yt ys nolesse matter to geue vnto thinges newe natures, then to chaunge natures. Thus moch S. Ambrose.
In this answer as pithie and plain, as yt ys long, the Aduersary ys not one Three notes out of S. Ambr. ly fullie aunswered, but we are also instructed in three thinges: The first that concerneth this matter ys, that in the applicacion of the veritie to the figure, he vnderstandeth the veritie of the figure Manna to be the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament, by the which he taketh the Sacrament to be moche more excellent then the figure, which although in euery parte of D his sentēce he toucheth, yet in this he most plainly declareth yt, whē he saith The light ys more excellent then the shadowe: the veritie, then the figure. And expownding [Page]which ys the light and veritie, which ys the shadowe and figure, he addeth: The bodie of the authour, than Manna from heauen. E
The seconde thing that he teacheth, ys howe, and by what meanes the bodie of Chryst ys in the Sacrament, which he declareth to be in two poinctes: The one ys that yt ys doen by consecracion, which ys doen by the woord of Chryst. Wherfor he saieth: We perceaue grace to be of greater power then nature. For In the consecracion of the B. Sac. the woordes of our Sauiour do woorke. yf the benediction of a man was of so great power, that yt might turne nature: what shall we saie of the diuine consecracion yt self, wher the verie woordes of our Lord and Sauiour do woorke? As who might saie. Yf Moyses did cast downe the rodde, and yt was turned into a serpent, and tooke yt vppe again and yt was turned into a rodde: and soch like. Yf Helyseus did make the axe against his nature to swimme aboue the water: Yf Helyas by his woorde caused fire to descend from heauen. Yf the woorde of these men but seruantes did woork soch wonders: how moch more maie the woorde of the Lord and master of these men woorke? The second poinct ys, that he sheweth by what means the woord of Chryst woorketh the presence of his bodie in the F Sacrament, that ys (saieth he) by the chaunging of the natures of the creatures, into the nature of his bodie ād blood, which he signifieth when he saieth Yf the woorde of Helyas was of soch power, that yt might bring down fire frō heauen, shall not the woorde of Chryst be of soch power, that yt maie chaunge the natures of the elementes? And again: the woorde of Chryst that coulde of nothing make that that was not: can yt not chaunge those thinges that be, in to that thing that they were not? The meā then by the which the woorde of Chryst maketh the bodie of Chryst present in the Sacrament ys by chaunging the natures of bread and wine into the nature of his bodie ād blood, which bicause the chaunging of natures, ys the chaunge of substances, Transubstanciation what yt ys. therfor the Church doth call yt Transubstanciacion, forsomoch as the nature or substance of one thing ys chaunged by Gods power into the nature or substance of an other thing.
The thirde thing that we are taught of S. Ambrose (which also ys diduced of these two) ys the verie presence of Chryst in the Sacrament. Which so being (as most certenly yt ys) we maie conclude, that this ys in comparablie G a more excellent Sacrament, then either Manna or the Paschall lambe, notwithstanding the saing of the Aduersarie.
And although S. Augustin saieth, that Sacramenta in signis diuersa, in re tamen quae significatur paria sunt, Sacramentes in signes being diuerse: in the thing yet that ys signified they are like: Yet that taketh not awaie the excellencie of Difference betwē Mā na and the blessed Sac. this Sacrament. For although Manna and the Paschall lambe did signifie the same Chryst that our Sacrament doth, and so in that respect of significacion be like: yet for that the other sacramentes did but signifie, and this Sacramēt doth both contein and geue that yt doth signifie, therfor yt doth farre excell them.
To this that ys saied, although yt be sufficient to proue that that ys here entended: yet yf the reader will adde the saing of S. Ambrose in the eight chapter of the booke last; alleaged (whiche to auoide tediousnesse I ouerpasse) and wil remembre what the saied S. Ambrose saieth in the fourth chapter of this booke, and Chrysostom in the sixth chapter, and Theophilact and Haymo in the ninth chap: and other treacting of Manna and the bodie of H Chryst, of which he shall find diuerso from the fourth chapter to the eleuēth chapiter of this booke, I doubte not but he shall see so moche, that he will merueill that euer anie heretike could so shamelesly teach soch wicked doctrine, [Page 270]so repugnant to the catholique faith, and so direct contratie to the sainges A of so manie holy Fathers being wittnesses of this trueth, but aboue all that they shoulde so blasphemously dishonour the sacramentes of God, and his Chryst. Who for the setting furth of his honour, and sor owre helpe and comfort in the perigrinacion of this life, that we maie haue strength against owre enemies, whiche cruelly lie in wait for vs, and our assured hope of the mercie of God in the ende of our iourney, hath instituted these sacramē tes and by them woorthilie vsed and receaued hath geuen vs manie benefittes, of all which, as also of Gods honour, they wolde robbe both him and vs. But, Reader, beware of them, and be not led awaie with soch doctrines, as were born but yesterdaie. But cleaue to that ys tried, receaued, approued, and testified manie hondreth years, of the whiche thowe shalt learn that the Sacramentes of Chryst and of the newe lawe are moch more excellent, then the sacramentes of the olde lawe.
THE FYFTENTH CHAPITER PROVING B all our Sacramentes generallie to be more excellent then the sacramentes of Moyses.
AS ye haue heard by sufficient testimonie, that the blessed Sacrament of Chrystes bodie and bloode ys more excellent, then Manna and the Paschall lambe, the figures of the same, of the which I haue speciallie treacted, bicause this wholl rude woork ys cheifly settfurth for the commendacion of the trueth of the same Sacrament: Nowe that the other sacramentes be not left in the handes of the enemies, and by them spoiled ād ouer moche wronged, somwhat also shall be breiflie saied, wherby they maie be knowen as they be, and be deliuered from the handes of their enemies, who falselie report of them, and deuellislie trauaill to dishonour them.
Among all the sacramentes next vnto this blessed and most honorable Sacrament of Chrystes bodie and blood, yt ys to be merueiled that they could Baptisme instituted by Chryste and commē ded by the wholl Trinitie. C so vnreuerentlie speake of the sacrament of Baptisme; which was so instituted and commended to the Chrystian worlde, as no sacrament more solemnelie. At the setting furth of this Sacrament Chryst himself being present, and baptised, the voice of the Father was heard saing: This ys my wel beloued Sonne, in whom I am well pleased: heauen was opened, and the holy Gost was seen in the forme of a doue descending from heauen and abyding vpon Chryst. So that in the ministracion of this sacrament was present the Father, the Sonne and the holie Gost. Which noble presence semeth to bring with yt some more noble gift than a bare sign, or token, as the wicked saie that yt ys. But what shall I nede to stand to declare the woorthinesse of this sacrament against these enemies of God, seing that heauen and the wholl Trintie, testifieth against them.
Wherfore leauing to speake any more of this sacrament speciallie, or of the other particularlie for feare of prolixitie, and for that yt ys spoken of here but by occasion, we shall heare sainct Augustin speaking of Aug. cōt. Faustū li. 19 cap. 13. them generallie: Prima sacramenta quae obseruabantur, & celebrabantur ex lege, D praenunciatiua erant Christi venturi, quae cùm suo aduentu Christus impleuisset, ablata sunt, & ideo ablata sunt, quia impleta. Non enim venit legem soluere, sed adimplere. [Page] Et alia sunt instituta, virtute maiora, vtilitate meliora, actu faciliora, numero pauciora. The first sacramentes, which were obserued and celebrated of the olde lawe E were foreshewers of Chryst to come, the whiche when in his coming he Sacramentes of the newe lawe be greater in power, better in profitte, easier to be doen then the sacr. of the olde lawe. had fulfilled, they were taken awaie, and therfore taken awaie bicause they were fullfilled. For he came not to breake the lawe, but to fullfill yt. And other were instituted greater in power, better in profitt, easier to be done, and fewer in nombre. Thus S. Augustin.
Obserue gentle reader, these woordes. He saieth that after the sacramentes of the olde lawe were taken awaie, ther were other instituted, which were greater in power, and better in profitte. Wher in be they greater in power, but in this that the sacramentes of the olde lawe had no power but to signifie onely: our sacramentes haue power not onely to signisie, but also to geue that that they signifie? As the Sacrament of Chrystes bodie signifieth the same bodie, and yt geueth also to the receauer the same bodie that yt signifieth. And as Baptisme signifieth by the washing of the bodie, the clensing of the soule: so yt geueth remission of sinnes both originall, and actuall, by taking awaie of of which, the soule ys pourged, clensed, and washed from all her filthinesse. And so in other Sacramentes, what they signifie, that they geue, yf ther be F no stoppe nor let in the receauer. And therfor as they in geuing that they do signifie, be in power greater then the Sacramentes of the olde lawe, for they coulde but signifie, but to geue that that they signified they had no power: So to vs warde in that they geue vs soche benefittes as they signifie they are more profitable. The Aduersarie maketh no more difference betwixt the Sacramentes of the olde lawe and newe, but that they signified Chryst to come, and owers Chryst that ys comed, in the whiche ther appeareth to me no difference either in power or in profit. But S. Augustine maketh a great difference. For he saieth that our Sacramentes are greater in power, and better in profit. Howe so euer the Aduersarie will vnderstande S. Augustin, yf he will anie other waie make our Sacramentes better and profitablier then the Sacramētes of the olde lawe, he must nedes also graunt that they be more excellent then those. Nowe therfor he must either denie S. Augustin, or ells graunt that he hath before denied, and saie that our Sacramentes be more excellent. G
To the confirmacion also of this matter maketh moche the common consent of learned men vpon the difinition of a Sacrament. Thus do they define yt: Sacramentum est sacrae rei signum, ita vt imaginem gerat, & causa existat. A Sacrament what yt ys. Sacrament ys a signe of an holy thing in soche maner that yt maie beare the image, and be the cause. In the which definition are put the two offices of a Sacrament of the newe lawe. The one office ys to be a signe, but not onelie a signe, but an euident, or a liuely sign, hauing some properties or condicions like to the thing that yt signisieth, so that yt maie signifie yt euidentlie as the Two offices of a sacrament. image of a man signifieth a man. The other office ys that yt be the cause of the thing that yt signifieth not a cause of the being of yt, but a cause of the effectuall woorking of yt, in him that receaueth the Sacrament. As for example. Baptisme ys an euident sign of the washing of the soule, and beinge ministred ys a cause that the washing of the soule ys effectuallie wrought and doen. For yf Baptisme be not either in facte, or in vowe, howe moche soeuer otherwise the partie beleueth, the soule ys not clensed from sinne. Wherby yt ys euident that Baptisme ys a cause effectuall. H
But here ys to be noted, ther be (as to the pourpose sufficeth) two causes effectuall, one principall, the other instrumentall. As for example. [Page 271]The soule ys the principall cause efficient of the seight of man: The eye ys Two effectuall causes one principal, the other instrumentall. A the organ or instrumentall cause efficient of the seight. So bothe be causes, but the soule the principall, the eye the instrumētall, so called, bicause yt ys the orgā or instrumēt, by which the soule doth see. So in the geuing of grace which cometh to man by the sacramentes. God ys the principall cause efficient of that benefitt or gist or grace, for he ys the geuer, he ys the doer: the sacrament ys his instrument or organ, by the whiche yt hath pleased him to take ordre to woorke his graciouse pleasure and to giue his gift of grace to men. So that as the soule (yf the eie be not altered from his due ordre that nature hath appointed) infalliblie, and most assuredlie dothe see by the eie: so God yf the sacramentes be ministred in that ordre that he hath appointed them, infalliblie, and most certenly he woorketh and geueth his grace to the receauers by them yf the receauers put no stoppe nor lette to the entrie of the grace of God into them.
Nowe wher the Aduersaries make exclamacion for that we saie, that the sacramentes of Chryst geue grace, and saie that we robbe Chryst of hys Sacramentes of the newe law how they geue grace. B honour, and committe Idolatrie in geuing the same to dumbe creatures, as to bread and wine, water, oyle, and soch other, ye maie perceaue howe litle they see or vnderstand, or ells blinded by malice, will not see or vnderstand. For although yt be so saied and trulie saied, what catholike learned man yet saieth not with all, that God geueth grace by hys sacramentes? And who ys ignoraunt of this saing, that the sacramentes are effectual by the merit of Chrystes passiō, ād blood sheding? And who being learned and catholike saith not that Baptisme of yt self hath no soch power to geue grace, but the power of Chryst which assisteth his sacramentes geueth yt according to his pact or promesse made in the institucion of the sacramentes. So that when soeuer the sacramentes be duely mynistred to woorthie receauers, vndoubtedlie the grace, which they signifie ys also geuen. In the whiche they geue the principalitie to God Chryst our Sauiour, to whom they geue their due honour, and yet withall confessing and acknowleging Gods ordeinance, that he by his sacramentes hath taken order to geue his grace, saie, that the sacramentes as gods organs, do geue C grace.
And this maner of speach ys common, to asscribe the effecte of the cause principall, to the cause instrumentall. For Chryst himself abhorreth not from yt, but vseth yt. As when he saieth: Vestri beati oculi, quia vident, & aures, quia audiunt. But blessed be yowr eyes, for they see, and your eares for they heare. Chryst was not ignorant, that their soules did see and heare, as the cause principall, and yet he asscribeth the effect to the eye and to the eare, by the which as by her organs, she doth see and heare.
The scripture also vseth both these maner of speaches. Sainct Paule saieth: Secundùm suam misericordiam saluos nos fecit per lauacrum regenerationis & renouationis spiritus sancti. According to his mercie he hath saued vs by Tit. 3. the fowntain of regeneracion, and the renouacion of the holie Gost. In the whiche maner of sainge, sainct Paule declareth that our saluacion commeth from God, as from the cause principall, and by Baptisme, as the cause instrumentall. Sainct Peter speaking of the Arke of Noe, in the whiche Noe and his children were saued, as the figure of Baptisme D by the which we are saued saieth: Nunc similis formae saluos vos facit Baptisma. Nowe in like maner baptisme saueth yowe. In which maner of speach doth 1. Pet. 3. not sainct Peter asscribe saluacion to Baptisme? Yet was not he ignorant [Page]who was, the principall cause of our saluacion. Nowe what ys yt to saie that baptisme saueth vs, but that baptisme geueth vs grace of remission of our E sinnes? what then do we offende to speake as the scripture doth, and to saie that the sacramentes geue grace? Doth S. Peter robbe God and Chryst of his honour, bicause he doth asscribe saluacion to baptisme? No: no more dothe the Churche in saing that sacramentes geue grace. Both be vprightlie spoken, and Gods honour vprightlie saued.
Yf then (as S. Paule saieth) we be saued by Baptisme, and (as S. Peter saieth) Baptisme saueth vs: and by the sacramentes of the old lawe no man was saued, neither did they saue anie man ( Nam neminem ad perfectum adduxit Lex, for the lawe brought no man to perfection) then yt maie be concluded, that our sacramentes are more excellent, then the sacramentes of the olde lawe.
Neither can Oecolampadius hys wicked glose stand to peruert the true definicion Oecolāp. his wicked glose of the woord cause cōfuted. of a sacrament. Causa non ad efficientiam, sed ad significantiae euidentiam referri debet. Cause (saieth he) ought to be referred not to the efficiencie, or woorking of the effect, but to the euidence of significacion. For as Roffensis both well and learnedlie saith against him. This woorde cause ys not referred to F the euidence of significacion, but to the efficacie, or ells (saieth he) this particle of the definicion (& causa existit, and ys the cause) were superfluouse. For by that particle that the definicion hath (vt imaginem gerat, that yt beare the image) the euidence of significacion ys sufficientlie expressed. To haue anie thing superfluouse in a definicion ys a great inconuenience among learned men. R [...]ss [...]n. li. 2 adversus Oecolāp. cap. 29. Wherfore nothing in this definicion being superfluouse, yt must nedes stand that the sacramentes be causes effectuall, and being so they excell the sacramentes of the olde lawe. For wher they were but onelie signifieng, owre are (as the definicion teacheth) both signifieng and effectuall. Nam efficiunt quod significant, For they bring that to effecte which they signifie. Aug. in prolog. psal. 73
But let vs heare sainct Augustine teaching the difference of these sacramentes, for he nothing dissenteth from this that ys saied, but moche consirmeth yt. Thus he saieth Oportunè non ex nostra, sed Dei dispensatione factū est, vt modò audiremus ex euangelio, quia lex per Moysen data est, gratia & veritas per Iesum Christum facta est. Si enim discernimus duo Testamenta, nec eadem promissa, eadem tamen pleraque praecepta. Nam non occides. Non moechaheris. Non furaberis. Honora patrem & G matrem. Non falsum testimonium dixeris. Non concupisces res proximi tui, & non concupisces vxorem proximi tui, & nobis praeceptum est, et quisquis ea non obseruanerit, deuiat, nec omnino dignus est qui accipere mereatur montem sanctum Dei, de quo dictum est: Quis babitabit in tabernaculo tuo, aut quis requiescet in monte sancto tuo? Innocens manibus & mundo corde. Haec dicimus, fratres charissimi, vt omnes de nouo testamento discatis, non inhaerere terrenis, sed coelestia adipisci. Discussa ergo praecepta, aut omnia Cōparison of the lawe and the gospell and of their sacramentes. eadem inueniuntur, aut vix aliqua in euangelio quae non dicta sunt à prophetis. Praecepta eadem, Sacramenta non eadem, promissa non eadem. Videamus quare praecepta eadem: quia secundùm haec Deo seruive debemus. Sacramenta non eadem, quia alia sunt sacramenta dantia salutem, alia promittentia saluatorem. Sacramenta noui Testamenti dant salutem: sacramenta veteris testamenti promiserunt saluatorem. Quando ergo iam teneas promissa, quid quaeris promittentia saluatorem iam habens? Haec dico teneas promissa, non quòd iam accepimus vitam aeternam, sed quia iam venit Christus, qui per Prophetas praenunciabatur. Mutata sunt sacramenta, facta sunt faciliora, pauciora, salubriora. In good season yt ys doen, not of owre, but of the dispensacion of God, that nowe we H shoulde heare oute of the Gospell that the lawe was geuen by Moyses, but grace and veritie was doen by Iesus Chryste: Yf we discern the two [Page 272]testamentes, ther be not the same promisses, but there be manie of the same A cōmaundementes. Forthowe shalt not kill. Thowe shall not cōmitte adulterie. Thowe shalt not steale. Honour thy father and thy mother. Thowe shal not speake false wittnesse. Thow shalt not desire thy neighbours goods. And thowe shalt not desire the wief of thy neighbour: yt ys to vs also cōmaunded. And whosoeuer shall not obserue them, he goeth oute of the waie, neither by anie meanes ys he woorthie to take the holie hill of God, of the which yt ys saied: Who shall dwell in thie tabernacle, or who shall rest in thy holie hill? He that ys innocent of his handes, and of a clean heart: These thinges we saie (derely beloued brethered) that all yowe that be of the newe testament maie learn not to cleaue to earthly thinges: but to gett heauenly thinges. The cōmaundentes therfor discussed, either they are all fownde to be the same or ells scarce anie in the Gospell, whiche were not spoken of the Prophetes. The cōmaundementes be all one: The sacramentes be not all one. The promesses be not all one. Let vs see why the cōmaundementes be all Sacramentes of the newe lawe geue saluacion. one. bicause according to these we aught to serue God. The sacramentes be not all one. For they be other sacramentes geuing saluacion, and other promising B a Sauiour. The sacramentes of the newe Testament geue saluacion: The sacramentes of the olde testament haue promised a Sauiour. Forasmoch then as thowe nowe holdest the promisses, what sekest thowe nowe, hauing the Sauiour, the thinges that do promesse? I saie (holdest the promesses) not bicause we haue nowe receaued eternall life: but that nowe Chryst ys comed, whiche was spoken of before by the Prophetes, the sacramentes are chaunged, they are made easier, fewer, holsomer, and better. Hitherto S. Augustin.
Ys yt not woonderfull that euer men can be so impudent, so shamelesse to speake the contrarie of so manifest a matter, so clerely, and so plainly vttered and spoken by soche an notable father, as S. Augustin ys? He hath vsed no circumlocution, no figures, no darke maner of speache, but as yt ys learnedly, so ys yt truly and plainlie cōmended vnto vs. Let me, I beseche thee gentle reader, with thy pacience, (although yt be as I saied, so plainly spokē Assertion of the Aduersarie touching the Sacramētes cōferred with S. Aug. his indgement of them. of S. Augustin, that except a man will be a trunke, he can not but perceaue yt) a litle more to the confusion of the Aduersarie, weigh the partes of this C saing, that touch our matter. wher as S. Augustin saieth that the sacramentes be not all one of the newe and olde testament: the Aduersaries will agree with him and vs. But they saie that although they be diuerse in their matters of the sacramentes: yet in this they be like for they do all but signifie, the one sorte Chryst to come, the other Chryst allreadie comed, so that ther ys no difference betwixt them, neither ys the one sorte better then the other, more then ys spoken. This ys the assertion of the Aduersarie. Let ys nowe heare the assertion of S. Augustine. he saieth that the sacramentes be diuerse. Ther be some geuing saluacion: other some but promising the Sauiour, and opening eche sort, he saieth: The sacramentes of the newe Testament geue saluacion: The sacramentes of the olde Testament haue promised the Sauiour.
O mercifull God ys ther no difference betwixt these sacramentes, more then the Aduersarie hath saied? Ys the one sorte no better then the other? Among scholers, a pettite, yf he be asked, will answer that ther ys great difference. Yt ys a great difference betwixt geuing and not geuing, And that that geueth saluacion ys in manie degrees better then yt that doth but figure D or signifie yt to come. S. Augustine saieth that our sacramentes geue saluacion, wheras the other of the olde Testament by figures did but promisse. [Page]Wherfore our sacramentes be better. Yf better, then more excellent. That they be better S. Augustin by expresse woordes affirmeth afterwarde saing: E The sacramentes are chaunged, they are made easier, fewer, holsomer, and better.
What nowe can the Aduersarie saie? Ys ther no difference, wher the sacramentes of the newe lawe are holsomer, and better then the other sacramentes? Ys ther, I saie, no difference betwixt these sacramentes but Oecolampadius difference? Yes, they are better and holesomer then the other, and therfor more excellent, yea so moche our sacramentes excell the other, that S. Augustin in that same prologe, comparing the sacramentes together, calleth the sacramentes of the olde lawe childrens plaies or games in respect Aug. ibid of our sacramentes. For this ys his saing: Numquid quoniam puero dantur quaedā puerilia ludicra, quibus puerilis animus auocetur, propterea grandescenti non excutiuntur ē manibus, vt aliquid iam vtilius tractet quod grandem decet? Non ergo quia illa quasi ludicra puerorum Deus per nouum testamentum excussit de manibus filiorum vt aliquid vtilius daret grandescentibuus, propterea priora illa non ipse dedisse putandus est. For so moch Sacramentes of the olde lawe compared to childrens t [...]ifles: Sacramentes of the newe lawe to things of profit. as vnto a childe ther be geuen certain childesh plaies or trifles, by the which F the childish minde maie be called awaie, are they not therfor taken oute of his handes when he waxeth bigger, that he maie handle some other thing more profitable, as yt becometh a bigger: No more therfor God bycause he hath taken the thinges as childrens plaies oute of the handes of his sonnes by the newe testament, that he might geue thē somthing more profitable nowe being waxen greater, ys he to be thought not to hauegeuen those former thinges.
In this saing S. Augustin likeneth the sacramentes of the olde lawe in respect of the sacramentes of the newe lawe vnto childrens games, and our sacramentes he likeneth to the thinges of more profett, which are to be geuen to the sonnes of God, when they waxe of more age, knowledge, and ripenesse. And ys not this a great difference? Are not then the sacramentes of Chryst moch better and more excellent, then the sacramentes of Moyses?
Nowe being testified that they be better, yt ys to be inquired in what thing, howe, or by what mean they be better: as before yt ys saied, they are G the better for that they geue that, that they signifie, As the Sacrament of Chrystes bodie and blood signifieth the bodie and blood, and conteining the same geueth yt also. For in this that yt conteineth the very presence of the bodie of Chryst standeth the excellencie of the Sacrament. for ells howe can a bare, peice of bread, hauing no other office but that yt ys a sign of Chrystes bodie, be better or excell ether the paschall lambe, or Manna, the one being so liuely a figure, the other so beautified with many miracles? Wherfor we must nedes graunt the presence of Chrystes bodie to be in the Sacrament, wherby the Sacrament excelleth those other two of the olde lawe be they neuer so gloriouse, or also so miraculouse. For the glorie of this blessed bodie passeth the glorie of the other, and the miracles of this presence, passeth all the miracles of Manna. And so the rest, for that they geue that they signisie, and the olde sacramētes did but signifie and not geue, therfore they be better and profitabler, and more excellent.
I will nowe oute of this that ys saied, gather the condicion of bothe these kindes of sacramentes, and laie them before thy face (Reader) and so H end this matter, leauing the iudgement of yt to thee. The sacramētes of the olde lawe did but signifie: the sacramentes of the newe lawe, do both signifie and also geue that, that they signifie. The olde sacramentes did promesse [Page 273]saluacion: the newe sacramentes do geue saluacion. The olde sacramentes A were but childrens plaies, thinges vnprofitable, but for children to dallie withall: The newe sacramentes be profitable thinges not meet to be in the handling of children, but of soche as be well waxen and of knowledge and discrecion. Finally if ther were anie health, vertue or goodnesse in the olde sacramentes: yet the sacramentes of the newe lawe are (to vse the woordes of S. Augustine) virtute maiora, vtilitate meliora, salubriora, faeliciora, greater in power, better in profett, holsomer, and better. And nowe as of a matter treacted of beside my pourspose this maie suffice.
THE SIXTENTH CHAP. PROCEADETH TO the next text of sainct Paule whiche ys. Calix cui Bened.
HAuinge intended to sett furth in this booke the exposition of soche scriptures as be in the epistles of S. Paule, which speake of the Sacrament of Chrystes bodie and bloode, to searche oute the vnderstanding B of the fathers, whether they speake of yt as taking yt for a bare signe, or figure of the bodie and bloode of Chryst: orells as a Sacrament conteining the thing that yt signifieth: I haue thought good, if anie scriptures do come betwixte soche, not to trooble the Reader with the exposition of them, for that they be impertinent to owre matter, but ouerpassing them to go to the next text to our matter apperteining. Wherfor hauing now doen the scriptures in the beginning of the tenth chapiter, I passe ouer to this text: Calix benedictionis, cui benedicimus, nonne cōmunicatio sanguinis Christi est? Et panis, quem frangimus, nonne participatio corporis Domini est? ys not the cuppe of blessing which we blesse partaking of the bloode of Chryst? ys not the breade whiche we breake partaking of the bodie of Chryst.
For the better vnderstāding of this text yt ys to be obserued, that S. Paule trauailing to abduce the Corinthians from certain vices and euells, whiche he hath remēbred vnto them, to haue ben in the Iewes, and for the whiche Sacrifice of the church proued by S. Paule. they were punished of God, enombring thē particularly, and among other, noting Idolatrie, dehorteth them from yt sainge: Fugite ab Idolorum cultura. C Flie frō the honouring of Idolls: And for that the Corinthians were moche defiled, and moche offended other by their resorting to the banquettes of Idolls, and partaking of the Idolathites, they thinking that for asmoche as they had learned that vnto the chrystian all meates are clean, that they might do so, S. Paule doth not onely dehorte them from yt, but also by argument taken of the sacrifices of the Iewes, and of the partaking of the same, whiche might not stand with the partaking of Idolathites, proueth that they maie not be partakers of the sacrifice of the chrystians, and of the sacrifice of Idolaters.
And here entring to speake of an high misterie of the chrystian religion, whiche ys not to be spoken to the weake and the carnall, but to the wise and spirituall, as in this epistle he testifieth saing: Animalis homo non percipit [...]ea quae sunt Spiritus Dei. The naturall man perceaueth not the thinges that belong to the spiritt of God. Wher of the one he saieth thus: Et ego fratres, non potui 1. Cor. 2. loqui vobis, quasi spiritualibus, sed quasi carnalibus, tanquam paruulis in Christo, lac vobis potum dedi, non escam. Nondum enim poteratis. And I coulde not speake vnto D yowe, bretheren, as vnto spirituall, but as vnto carnall. Euen as vnto babes in Jbibid. 3. Chryst, I gaue yowe milke to drinke, and not meat for ye were not thē strōg [Page]And of the other he speakith thus: sapientiam loquimur inter perfectos. We speake wisdome among them that are perfect. Euen so nowe entending to speake E of an high wisdome he warneth them with this saing: vt prudentibus loquor. vos ipsi iudicate quod dico. I speake vnto them that are wise, or haue discrecion. Iudge ye yowr selues what I saie. Ys not the cuppe of blessing, whiche we blesse, she partaking of the bloode of Chryst? Ys not the breade, whiche we breake partaking of the bodie of our Lorde. As who might saie: For as moch as ye are called to the chrystian religion, and be made partakers of the misteries of the same, and are nowe becomed wise in Chryst Iudge ye as wise men, what I saie: do not ye, drinking of our Lordes cuppe in our sacrisices, partake of the blood of our Lorde Chryste, and eating of that bread of the chrystian sacrifice do ye not partake of the bodie of our Lorde? yt must nedes so be. For all that be partakers of sacrifices, are partakers of yt, to whom the sacrifice ys offred.
This I proue vnto yowe: Consider and remembre the sacrifice of the carnall Israelites: Aare not they whiche eate of the sacrifices, whiche were offred emong them partakers of the aultars? euen so yowe partaking of the sacrisices of Idolls, which sacrifices are offred to deuells. But I wolde not F that ye shoulde be ioined in felowshippe with Deuells. for if ye so be, ye sustein great dammage and losse, and what ys that? Ye can not be partakers of Chryst. For ye can not drinke of the cuppe of oure Lorde, and of the cuppe of Deuells. Ye can not be partakers of the table of the sacrifice of our Lorde, and of the sacrifice of Deuells. Wherfore if ye desire to be partakers of our Lordes bodie and bloode, in eating of his bread, and drinking his cuppe in his sacrifice, leaue to be partakers of the sacrifices ofred to Idolls, Wherby ye are made partakers, and be ioined to Deuells. For as ther ys no companie betwixt light and darknesse: so ys ther no agreement betwixt our Lorde God, and the Deuell neither maie God and Beliall dwell together. And as he that beleueth hath no part with the infidel, neither righteousnes felowshippe with vnrighteousnesse, no more dothe the temple of God agree with Idolls,
As in this maner of periphrasis the wholl minde of S. Paule in this place ys settfurth and made clere and plain, howe and by what perswasiō he laboured to diswade the Corinthians from Idolothites: So also yt ys manifest that in G his sentences in the processe of this chapiter, whiche he vseth as argumentes grownded vpon the Sacrament, that he vnderstandeth no trope or figure of the bodie and blood of Chryst, but the very thinges thē selues in very dede. And as he by that the carnall Israelites eating of their sacrifices were partakers of the same, proueth that eaters either at our lordes table, or at the table of Deuells be partakers of the same: So doth he as well accompt that, that ys vpon the table of our Lorde to be a sacrifice, as either the sacrifice of the Israelites offred to God: or of the gentiles offred to Deuells.
Yf yt be not so, what awaileth, or of what force ys the argument, diduced from the sacrifices of the Iewes? For if the eating of the sacrifice of the Iewes maketh them partakers of the aultar, what proueth that that either Idolothites of the table of Idolls, or the cuppe and bread of our Lorde his table doth make either the receauers of the one, or of the other partakers of thē if that bothe the one, and the other be not sacrifices, as that ys, frō the whiche the argument ys diduced, and vpon the whiche yt ys grownded? yt ys an euell H maner of disputacion to go aboute to proue like effectes of vnlike causes: but of like causes to proue like effectes yt ys a good maner of disputacion, if due ordre and circumstance be obserued.
[Page 274]To make the matter plain, what ys the cause that the Israelites were made A partakers of the aultar? the answer ys bicause they did eate of the sacrifice. Again, to applie to the other: what ys the cause that the christians be partakers of the bodie and bloode of Chryst? shall the answer be bicause they eate a peice of bread? and drinke a cuppe of wine? no: the causes be not like, and that cause can not make vs partakers of the bodie and bloode of our Lorde. As the Israelites and infidels had their sacrifices, so the chrystians haue their sacrifice euē the bread and cuppe of blessing. What ys the cause then? That, that ys like the other whiche ys this: Bicause the chrystians do eate of the sacrifice, therfore they be partakers of the sacrifice, whiche ys the verie bodie and bloode of Chryst. For so sainge, ther ys a good argument to be made from the liklihood of the causes in eche of thē to the like effectes of eche of them. As thus to saie: The Israelites, bicause they did eate of the sacrifice, they were partakers of the Aultar: So the Corinthians bicause they did eate of Idolathites whiche were sacrifices of Idolls, they were partakers of Idolls. Of like maner the christians bicause they eat of the sacrifice of Chryst, they be partakers of the bodie and blood of Chryst And thus the disputacion of S. Paule ys of force, and prouerh well his entēt. B And that S. Paule did aswell take the bread of our Lorde, and his cuppe to be a sacrisice of the chrystians, as the, Idolathites, of the Corinthians to be the sacrifice of the Infidells, euen this doth strongly proue yt. that he setteth the table and the cuppe of our Lorde, against the table and cuppe of deuells. Ye can not (saieth he) drinke of the cuppe of our Lorde, and the cuppe of Deuells. Ye can not be partakers of the table of our Lorde, and of the table of Deuells. In the whiche maner of speache as by the cuppe, and table of Deuells he vnderstandeth the sacrifice doen to Deuells: so must yt nedes be, that by the table and cuppe of our Lorde, he vnderstandeth the sacrifice doen to our lorde. As yt might in plain maner thus haue ben saied: Ye can not eate and drinke of the sacrifice that ys offred vnto God, and of the sacrifice that ys offred to Deuells. For except they were both sacrifices, the setting of the one against the other were of no great force.
And again, yf S. Paule did not aswell take the cuppe and table of our The cuppe and table of oure Lorde takē for the sacrifice of oure Lorde Lorde to be a sacrifice, as the cuppe and table of Deuells to be a sacrifice, he wolde not haue vsed like termes to them bothe, but as he had vnderstāded C a difference or diuersitie in the thinges: so wolde he haue vsed a diuersitie in woordes and tearmes, to expresse and declare the same. But for somoche as he vnderstanding therby the sacrifice of deuells called the same the cuppe and table of Deuells, yt ys manifest that he calling the meat of our Lorde by the like terms vnderstood the thing also to be like, that ys to be a sacrifice.
In this opening of the text (gentle Reader) thowe perceauest two thinges Reall presence and sacrifice proued by S. Paule. to be here learned of S. Paule. The one ys the presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode in the Sacrament: the other ys that the same bodie and blood be a sacrifice.
But that yt maie appeare to yowe that this ys not my owne dreame, or phantasie in thus vnderstanding S. Paule, but the comō sentence of the Fathers of Chrystes Parliament house, we shall for triall therof, and for better setting furth of Gods trueth and the faith catholique heare the sainges of a In, 10. 1. Cor. good nombre of them, And first of the auncient Father Chrysostom. who expownding this text saieth thus: Maximè his sibi verbis, & fidem facit, & horrorem. D Eorum autem huiusmodi est sententia. Quod est in calice, id est, quod à latere fluxit, & illius sumu [...] participes. Calicem autem benedictionis appellauit, quoniam cùm prae manibus cum habemus, cum admiratione, & horrore quodam inenarrabilis doni, laudamus [Page] benedicentes, quia sanguinem effudit, ne in errore permaneremus. Neque tantùm effudit, sed nos omnes eius participes effecit. Itaque si sanguinem cupis (inquit) noli Idolorum aram E brutorum animalium coede, sed meum altare, meo sanguine aspergere. Quid hoc admirabilius? Dic quaeso, quid amabilius? Hoc & amantes faciunt, cum amatos intuentur, alienorū cupiditate allectos propriis elargitis suadent vt ab illis abstineant. Sed amantes quidem in pecuniis, vestibus, possessionibus hanc ostendunt cupiditatem: in proprio sanguine nemo vnquam. Christus autem & in hoc curam & vehementem in nos dilectionem ostendit. With these woordes he doth gette greatly vnto him self both creditte and feare. Of those woordes this ys the mening: That, that ys in the chalice ys yt, that flowed from the side, and we are partakers of yt. But he hath called yt the cuppe of blessing. For when we haue yt before our handes, with admiracion, and certein A plain saing of Chrysostō for the Proclamer. horrour of the vnspeakeable gift, we laude blessing, that he hath shedde his bloode, that we shoulde not abide in errour. Neither hath he onely shedde yt, but he hath made vs all partakers of yt. Therfore if (saieth he) thowe doest desire blood, do not sprenkle the aultar of Idolls with the slaughter of brute beastes, but sprenkle mine aultar with my bloode. Saie I praie thee: F What ys more merueilouse then this? What ys more louing? This do louers also, whē they see these whom they loue allured with desire of straunge thinges, when they haue geuen frely to them of ther owne, they moue thē that they abstein from the other. But louers shewe this desire in money, in apparell, in possessions, but in his owne blood no man at anie time hath doen yt. But Chryst in this also hath shewed his care, and vehement loue towardes vs. Thus moche Chrysostom.
God for euer and allwaies be praised, who, although yt be his pleasure, Note here that this ys the meaning of St Paules woordes, that that ys in the chalice, which flowed out of Chryctes side. that his church shall be vexed and tried with the fire of tribulacion (as at this present yt ys miserablie afflicted, shaken, and torne) yet he leaueth yt not destitute of sufficient staie and comforte of trueth, wherby yt maie bothe defende yt self, and impugne the enemie, as in this authour expownding this scripture we maie well perceaue. Doste thowe, reader, marke the expositiō of the text? S. Paule saieth: Ys not the cuppe of blessing, whiche we blesse, a partaking of the bloode of Chryst? Chrysostome saieth: of these woordes this ys the meaning: G That, that ys in the cuppe ys yt that flowed oute of the side, and of yt we are partakers. Yf this be the meaning of S. Paule, why then walke we in errour in this matter? Why wander we in the mistes, and darke clowdes of tropes, and figures and significacions? wher Chrysostom expownding the scripture and minding to shewe vs the verie vnderstanding and plain mening of yt, teacheth, that not a trope, figure, or sign of the blood of Chryst ys in the cuppe, but the bloode of Chryste that flowed oute of his side.
In the whiche exposition we maie in clere maner see and beholde the verie, trueth euen the right catholique faith so sett furth, that ther ys no helpe for the aduersarie to cloke his heresie withall. The proclamer requireth one plain sentence, to proue the reall presence of Chryste in the Sacrament: what more plain speache wolde anie man desire to be spoken in this matter, as wherbie to geue him perfect instruction in the same, than to saie: that, that did flowe once of the side of Chryst, ys in the chalice.
Yf the aduersarie with forced violence wolde thrust into Chrysostō woordes his comon glose, that the figure of yt, that did flowe oute of Chrystes side ys in the cuppe, then shoulde he make Chrysostome an vntrewe man. H For Chrysostome saieth, that that, which he saied vpon that scripture, was the mening of the woordes of S. Paule. Now if the Aduersarie will expownd Chrysostom with an other mening, then either Chrysostome did not [Page 275]geue vs the true meaning of S. Paule, which ys not to be thought, or ells A the Aduersarie reporteth vntrulie of him, whiche ys his cōmon practise: For so farre wide ys yt that these two meninges should be one that the one saieth yea, the other saieth no, thone saieth yt ys, thother saieth yt ys not, the one ys an heresie and thother a truthe. So fare I saie be these from being one that for these two sentences, this lamentable diuision, and greuouse contencion in the Churche ys raised by heretiques.
What ys a mening, but a simple and plain opening and declaracion of a woorde or sentence of a mans conceipt, or speache doubtfullie or darkly conceaued or spoken before? Wherfor Chrysostom saing that this was the mening of S Paules woordes, did by plain woordes simplie declare the same
This then being the true mening of S. Paules woordes, what trueth was ther in the saing of Cranmer or the Authour of that booke, who alleaging S. Paules woordes abused by Cranmer. this text abused yt to a cleane contrarie vnderstanding? Thus he saieth: Neither that wine made of grapes ys his verie bloode, or that his bloode ys wine made of grapes, but signifie vnto vs, as S. Paule saieth, that the cuppe ys a communion of Chrystes bloode. Howe wickedlie and vntrulie this ys spoken, and howe this scripture ys drawen to a false vnderstanding, this exposition of Chrysostom dothe wel B proue, as other also hereafter shall do.
That he wolde haue no soche mening vpon these his woordes, as the Aduersarie wolde yll fauouredlie peice and patche vpon them, his like maner of speache in an other place declareth, where he saieth: Reputate salutarem sanguinem Chrysost. ser. de Euch in Enceniis The bloode of Chryst. in the Sacr. how yt ys to be estemed. quasi è diuino, & impolluto latere essluere, & ita approximantes labijs puris accipite. Regarde or esteme the holsome bloode, as to flowe oute of the diuine, and vndefiled side, and so coming to yt, receaue yt with pure lippes Whiche woordes forsomoch as he spake them in a sermon to the common people, he spake them in plain maner, in that sense, as they sownded to the hearing of the people, which was that they shoulde accompte the cuppe of our Lord to be his blood. And therfore they shoulde come and drinke yt euen as oute of his side, as who should saie, yt ys all one. In this also that he willeth them to take yt with pure lippes, he teacheth the reall presence. For the spirituall maner of Chrystes blood ys not to be receaued with lippes, but with heart and soule. Wherby yt ys plain; that Chrysostom wolde his C woords no otherwise to be vnderstanded then they were spoken. Wherfore not to tarie long vpon this saing of Chrysostom, whiche ys so plain that euery childe maie vnderstande yt, I wish yt onely to be imprinted in the memorie of the reader, that ys of him saied, which ys (again to repeat yt) that yt that ys in the cuppe, ys yt that flowed oute of the side, and of yt we are partakers. Chrysost. in 10. 1. Cor.
As by this we are taught the trueth of the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament: So in the rest of his sainges vpon the same text, he teacheth vs, that yt ys a sacrifice: Thus he saieth: In veteri testamento cùm imperfectiores essent quem idolis offerebant sanguinem, cum ipse accipere voluit, vt ab idolis eos auerteret. Quod etiam inenarrabilis amoris signum erat. Hic autem multo admirabilius, & magnificentius sacrificium Chryste cō maunded himself to be offred, praeparauit, & cum sacrificium ipsum commutaret & pro brutorum caede scipsum offerendum praeciperet. In the olde Testament, when they were more vnperfecte, to the entent he wolde turne them from Idolls, that blood, which they offred vnto Idolls he himself, wold accept, which also was a token of an inenatrable loue. But here he hath prepared a moch more woonderfull, and magnificall sacrifice, D both when he did chaunge the saied sacrifice, and for the slaughter of brute beastes commaunded himself to be offred.
[Page]In this saing of Chrysostom, ther be two notable notes to be obserued, which as they do moche declare and confirme the catholique doctrine: E So do they as plainly, and as mightilie ouerthrowe the wicked heresie of the Aduersarie. The first ys, that declaring the great loue of God towarde the vperfect people of the olde lawe, that to turn them from Idolatrie he was contented to accept to be offred to him in sacrifice soche bloode of brute God prepared a moch more wonderfull and magnificall sacrifice for the newe Testament then was in. the olde. beastes, as they offred to their Idolls, when he cometh to the sacrifice of the newe lawe, he saieth that here he hath prepared a moche more woonderfull, and magnificall sacrifice. What I praie thee, Reader, coulde be spoken more plainlie against the wicked assertion of the Aduersarie, teaching that the sacrifices of the newe lawe are nothing more excellent, then the sacrifices of the olde lawe, then to saie that Chryst here in the newe lawe hath prepared a moche more woonderfull and magnificall sacrifice? Which woordes Chrysostom speaketh setting the sacrifices of both lawes together, and therfore they were spoken, in comparison of the sacrifices, of the olde lawe. F
And to the intent that the Aduersarie being here sore pressed with the woordes of Chrysostom shall not with his common glose cloake him self, and gette a subterfuge, saing that Chrysostom spake of the sacrifice of Chryst vpon the crosse, which he graunteth to be moche more excellent then the sacrifices of the olde lawe, the seconde note of the saied Chrysostome shall clerely wipe awaie his glose, and disapoint him of his cloake. Wherfor obserue that when he saied that Chryst prepared this woonderfull sacrisice, he opened the time also when he did prepare yt. He did (saieth he) prepare this woonderfull sacrifice, when he did chaunge the sacrifice of the olde lawe and when he commaunded A plain saing for M. Juell. himself to be offred. When did he these two thinges? Reader yf thowe marke, here be two thinges: the one ys that Chryst chaunged the sacrifice: the other that he commaunded himself to be offred. When did he these two thinges? In his last supper when (as sainct Cyprian saieth) obuiarunt sibi instituta noua & antiqua, & consumpto agno, quem antiqua traditio proponebat, inconsumptibilem Cyp. de Cae. cibum magister apponit Discipulis. The newe and the olde ordeinaunces mett together and the lambe, which the olde tradicion did settsurth being G consumed, the master did sett to his disciples inconsumptible meate. De prodition Iudae.
So that for this lambe of the olde tradicion he gaue nowe inconsumptible meate to his Disciples, whiche was his bodie and bloode, whiche was the veritie of that shadowe as Chrysostom saieth: Ille agnus futuri agni typus fuit, & ille sanguis, Dominici sanguinis monstrabat aduentum, & ouis illa spiritalis ouis fuit exemplum. Ille agnus vmbra fuit: hic veritas. Sed postquam sol iusticiae radiauit, vmbra soluitur luce, & ideo in ipsa mensa, vtrumque Pascha, & typi, & veritatis celebratum est. That lambe was the figure of the lambe to Blood of the Paschall lābe figure of the blood of Chryste in the Sacr. come. And that bloode shewed the coming of the bloode of our Lord, and that shepe was an example of the spirituall shepe, that lambe was the shadowe: this the veritie. But after the Sunne of righteousnesse did shyne with beames, the shadowe was taken awaie with the light. And therfore in that table bothe the passeouer of the figure, and of the trueth was celebrated. Thus he.
In which saing ys declared, that the olde lambe was a figure of our lambe Chryst, whiche were together in the table, as two passeouers, the olde H and the newe. But when the newe passeouer, whiche was the bodie of Chryst ther consecrated, was settfurth ther as a newe passouer, whiche he calleth the sonne of righteousnesse, then the olde Passeouer was taken [Page 276]awaie, and this placed in the stead. Then was the olde sacrifice chaunged, A and a newe sacrifice appointed. So that ys true that S. Augustin saieth: Aliud Cont. literas Petilia est Pascha, quod Iudaei celebrant de oue, aliud autem quod nos in corpore. & sanguine Domini celebramus. Yt ys an other Passouer that the Iewes do celebrate with a shepe: and an other, whiche we celebrate in the bodie and bloode of Chryst.
Yt cā not be saied that Chryst did chaung the sacrifice of the olde lawvpō the crosse, for that sacrifice was after the maner of the sacrifices of the ordre of Aaron, a bloodie sacrifice, as they were. But this chaunge of sacrifice must nedes then be, when the shewing of the chaunge of preisthead was. For (as S. Paule saieth) Necessarium fuit secundùm ordinem Melchisedec alium surgere sacerdotem, & non secundùm ordinem Aaron dici. Yt was necessarie, that an other preist, Heb. 7. shoulde rise to be called after the order of Melchisedech and not after the order of Aaron. Chryst neuer shewed himself a preist after the order of Melchisedec but in the last supper, in the which he sacrificed after that order. Wherfore then was the olde sacrifice chaunged, when this newe preist after B the ordre of Melchisedec did shewe himself in sacrificing. The trueth of this ys well proued by the seconde note in the saing of Chrysostome, whiche ys that he commaunded himself to be offred. Let al the volume of the Gospell be turned and searched, and in no place shall ye finde that Chryst commaunded himself to be offred, but in the last supper, when he had instituted this holie sacrifice of his and bodie and blood. Then he saied. Hoc facite: This do ye. By which woordes he gaue cōmaundement to all to whō cōmission of this holie ministraciō should be geuē, that they should doe that that he had doē.
In that high and woonderfull institucion he did three thinges, that ys, he Three notable thinges doen by Chryst in the inst it [...] cion of the B. Sacr. consecrated his blessed bodie and blood, he offred yt in sacrifice after the ordre of Melchisedech, and receaued yt with his Apostles. Wherfore saing and commaunding that his preistes shoulde that do that he then did, forsomoch as among other his doinges he did then offre sacrifice. Therfore he cōmaunded that he himself should be offred. And thus yt maie be perceaued that Chrysostom looked to this place when he saied that Chryst commaunded himself to be offred. C Li. 4. ca. 32
Of this same sentence and minde be a nombre of the holie Fathers. Irenaeus saieth: Eum qui ex creatura panis est, accepit, & gratias egit, dicens: Hoc est corpus meū: Et calicem similiter, qui est ex ea creatura, quae est secundùm nos, suum sanguinem confessus est. Et noui Testamenti nouam docuit, oblationē, &c. He took the bread ( saieth Irenaeus speaking of Chryst) which ys a creature, and gaue thankes saing: This ys my bodie. And the cuppe likewise, which ys a creature as we, he confessed to be his blood. And of the newe Testament, he taught a newe oblacion, &c. Jn primaoration. praepar.
S. Ambrose also in his praier saieth: Ego enim Domine memor venerandae passionis tuae, accedo ad altare tuum licet peceàtor, vt offeram tibi sacrificium, quod tu instituisti, & offerri praecepisti in commemorationem tui pro salute nostra. I Lorde mindefull of thy woorshippefull passion, come vnto thy aultar, although a sinner, to offer vnto thee, the sacrifice, which thow hauest instituted and commaunded to be The Proclamermaie her learn that Chryst cōmanded his bodie to be offred in sacrifice. offred in the remembrance of thee for our health.
Ye see these two graue and auncient wittnesses testifieng with Chrysostō that Chryst commaunded this sacrifice which he instituted to be offred. What the thing ys that we offre Chrysostome by moste plain woordes D declareth, when he saieth that Chryst commaunded himself to be offred. So that Chryst himself ys our oblacion, and sacrifice, which we offre not vpon our owne inuencion, but vpon his holie, and most louing commaundement. [Page]By this latter part then of Chrysostome his saing, the two other partes before E noted be well proued. For by that, that Chryst hath commaunded vs to offre him in our sacrifice, yt ys most clere, that our sacrifice ys more excellent then the sacrifice of the olde Testament: yt ys manifest also that he spake yt not of his sacrifice made vpon the crosse, but of the sacrifice instituted in his last supper, wher and when the olde sacrifices were taken awaie, and this one placed for them all, which Chrysostom well taught, when he saied: for the slaughter of beastes, be commaunded himself to be offred. So that he commaunded himself to be offred, when the sacrifices were chaunged. But the sacrifices were chaunged in the last supper, wherfore in the last supper he commaunded himself to be offred.
THE SEVENTENTH CHAPITER PROCEAdeth vpon the same text by the exposition of Chrysostom and sainct Hierom.
ALbeit this text ys verie plainlie expownded by Chrysostom, and that, that by me was affirmed by the same his exposition fullie F confirmed, namely that S. Paule here speaketh of the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, and therwith also teacheth that yt ys the sacrifice of the Chrystians: yet that the trueth maie be the better esteemed, as yt ys plentifull in yt selfe, so shall yt be setfurth by plentie of wittnesses. And wher Chrysostom expownding the first parte of the text, hath confessed the catholique faith of the presence of the blood of Chryst in the cuppe with these plain woordes, that yt ys that which flowed oute of the side, which ys so spoken, as the Aduersarie can not once open his mouth to speake against yt: And in confessing the bloode, ther ys no doubte but he al so do the like of the bodie. Yet forasmoch as he proceadeth and expowndeth the other parte of the text, which speaketh of the partaking of the bodie: I shall not for the commoditie of the reader, and the setting furth of Godes trueth spare my laboure to shewe furth the same.
The rest of the text ys: Et panis quem frangimus nonne communicatio corporis Christiest? And the breade whiche we breake, ys yt not a communicacion of the 1. Corin. 10 of the bodie of Chryst? Although the vulgar english bibles doth otherwise G inglish this text: saing that the breade that ys broken ys a partaking of the bodie: Yet I being aduertised by Chrysostom that communicacion includeth more than participacion: I english yt as I maie with this woorde (communicacion) according to his instructiō, which ye shal perceaue in his saing. Thus he saieth. Quare non dixit participatio? quia amplius quiddam significare voluit, Chrysost. in 10. 1. Cor. & multam inter has conuenientiam ostendere. Non enim participatione tantùm & acceptione, sed vnitate communicamus. Quemadmodum enim corpus illud vnitum est Comunicacion ys a nearer coniūction thē participacion, therfor the translacion of the english bible ys to be misliked Christo: ita & nos per hunc panem vnione coniungimur. Sed quare addit, quem frangimus? Hoc in Encharistia videre licet: in cruce autem minimè, sed omnino contrà. Os enim eius (inquit) non conteretur. Sed quod in cruce passus non est, id in oblatione patitur, & propter te srangi permittie. Ys not the bread whiche we breake, a communicacion of the bodie of Chryst? Why did he not saie a particpacion or partaking? Bicause he wolde signifie some more thing, and shewe a great agreement betwixt these thinges. We doe not communicate by partaking and receauing onelie, but also by vnitie. For as that bodie H was vnited to Chryst: Euen so we by this breade are ioined together in an vnion. But wherfore dothe he adde: which we breake? This maie yowe [Page 277]see in the Sacrament: in the crosse not so, but alltogether contrarie. For A (saieth he) his bone shall not be broken. But that he suffred not in the crosse, that he suffreth in the sacrifice, and permitteth for thee to be broken. Thus he.
In this liuely exposition of Chrysostom, whiche so I call bicause he leaueth no woorde vnquickned and made as yt were aliue to mans vnderstanding, he geueth vs three worthie instructiōs. And first, he geueth a cause why Three not able instructions out of Chrysost. S. Paule calleth this a communicacion raither then a participacion, bicause (saieth he) by the receipt of this mysterie we are ioined together in one with Chryst, as his bodie was ioined vnto him. Whiche vnion neither participacion nor receauing do expresse or signifie. For we maie partake or receaue a thing, and yet not be made one with yt. But duely communicating the bodie of Chryst, we are made one with yt. For communication ys either Communicaciō what yt ys. a making of one thing common to manie, or to make manie to be one thing, and all one with yt, and yt one with them. Of this more in the exposition of the next scripture. B
The seconde note ys that where he saieth, that as that bodie was vnited to Chryst: So by this bread we are ioined together in an vnion. Where he instructeth vs again of the presence of Chryst in the Sacramēt, before by his blood, here by his bodie, and yet in eche parte full Chryst. That this maie appeare plain vnto the reader, as yt ys true in yt self, vnderstande this, that the bodie of Chryst ys vnited to him reallie, verilie, and substanciallie, and not spituallie. Yf then ther be an vnion of Chryst and vs, as of him and his bodie, then yt must be an vnion reall, but this maner of vnion can not be but by a reall communicacion, wherfore we do reallie communicate with the bodie of Chryst. This ys confirmed to vs by the saing of Chrysostō, when he saieth, that we be ioined together in vnion by this bread. A bare peice of bread can no more make vs one substanciallie with Chryst, than a peice of beof, or anie other victuall. Wherfore this bread that he speaketh of ys the bread, and the foode of his verie bodie which duely receaued, maketh vs to be in Chryst, and Chryst, as S. Hylary saieth, naturallie, and as S. Cyrill saieth, substanciallie in vs. C
The thirde note also both confirmeth this that here ys saied of the presence, Real presence and sacrifice both auouched. and also that ys before saied of the sacrifice. For here by expresse woordes he dothe so tearme yt. For he saieth thus: that, that he suffred not in the crosse, that he suffreth in the sacrifice, and permitteth to be broken for thee. In the which woordes he declareth two distinct beinges of Chryst: one vpon the crosse: the other in sacrifice. For he maketh no difference either of Chryst, or of his substance, or of his being. But euen the same that suffred not to be broken vpon the crosse, euen the same suffreth in the sacrifice, and permitteth to be broken for thee. Yf the verie same be in this sacrifice, that was vpon the crosse, then we must nedes confesse him to be as verilie present, in the sacrament, as vpon the crosse. And the same so present, for that he ys our onely and euerlasting sacrifice, to be our sacrifice. Yf we aske where he ys a sacrifice, Chrysostome answereth, ther to be a sacrifice, where he permitteth to be broken. He ys broken in the Masse vpō the aultar, wherfore he ys their in sacrifice.
But here vnderstande that although Chrysostom saieth that Chryst suffreth, D and that the Sacrament ys broken: yet he meneth not that anie violence ys doen to that blessed bodie, or that yt ys affected with greif, pain, or passion (for yt being passed all these miseries, yt ys nowe [Page]an impassible bodie, and what violence soeuer anie cruell heart wolde inferre E to yt: yet yt being impassible no pain can be inflicted to yt. Neither think this to be a straunge speache seing that Chryst himself, when he was in hys passible bodie, and gaue his passible bodie to his Apostles impassiblie, saied: Take, eate, This ys my bodie, whiche ys broken for yowe. For although he so saied: yet in geuing oute of his bodie, he suffred no violence nor pain. And as that breaking wrought no greif to his blessed bodie then: no more doth yt nowe. For the same woundes that he bare in his passible bodie passiblie, he beareth the same after his resurrection and now still impassiblie.
And nowe that ye haue hearde. Chrysostome declaring vnto yowe the vnderstanding of this scripture in the whiche he hath in no darke speache, but in plain maner with expresse woordes taught the presence of Chrystes bodie and blood in the Sacrament, and yt also to be a sacrifice, and that by this scripture: we shall nowe leaue him for this place, and heare S. Hierom. Who for this time shall be ioined with Chrysostome, that one veritie maie Hieron. in deci. 1 Cor. be testified on both sides of Chrystes Parliament house S. Hierom ys but short, and this ys his exposition. Calix benedictionis, ideo primum calicem nominauit, vt possit de pane latius disputare, nonne communicatio sanguinis Christi est? sicut ipse saluator F dicit. Qui manducat carnem meam, & bibit sanguinem meum, in me m [...]aet, & ego in eo. The cuppe of blessing which we blesse: therfore hath he first named the cuppe, that he maie more at large dispute of the bread: ys yt not a communicacion of the bloode of Chryst? As our Sauiour himself saieth: He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my bloode, dwelleth in me and I in him. Thus S. Hierom.
This ys his breif exposition vpon this first parte of S. Paules text, whiche ys not so bare and hungrie, but that yt bringeth good foode with yt, to nourish and comforte the faith of a Chrystian man in this matter of the Sacrament. For when he cometh to the pith of the sentence whiche ys this: ys yt not a communicacion of the blood of Chryst: he addeth this for an exposition to yt: as our Sauiour himself saieth: He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him: as who might saie: yt ys soche a communicacion of the blood of Chryst, that who so doth communicate of yt shall haue that benefitt, that Chryst himself spake of saing: He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my bloode, dwelleth in me, and I in him. That he alleaging this scripture of Chryst to expownde the saing of S. Paule doth signifie vnto vs, that S. Paule G ys to be vnderstanded, to haue spoken of the verie bloode of Chryst in the Sacrament, he that hath redde sainct Hierom, howe he vnderstandeth the sixth chapter of sainct Iohn, whose authoritie hath ben vsed in the seconde booke for the same pourpose, shall not nede to doubte. But that the reader shall not be driuen to seke farre for the triall herof, sainct Hierom shall be produced, alleaging this same verie saing of Christ in the sixth of sainct Iohn, Wherin he shall clerely see and perceaue the true vnderstanding of yt, after Jn psalm. 109. the minde of sainct Hierom. Thus he saieth vpon the psalme. Quomodò enim Melchisedech Rex Salem, obtulit panem & vinum: sic & tu offeres corpus tuum, & sanguinem tuum, verum panem, & verum vinum. Iste Melchisedec ista mysteria quae habemus dedit nobis. Ipse est qui dixit: Qui manducauerit carnem meam, & biberi [...] sanguinem meum: secundùm ordinem Melchisedec tradidit nobis sacramentum suum. Sacrisice of Chryste in his supper and Melchisedecs compared. For as Melchisedec King of Salem hath offred bread and wine: so shalt thowe offre thy bodie and bloode, the true bread, and true wine. This Melchisedec hath geuen vs these mysteries which we haue. Yt ys he that hath H said: He that shall eate my flesh, and drinke my bloode: according to the ordre of Melchise dech be hath deliuered vnto vs his sacrament. Hitherto S. Hierom.
[Page 278]Do ye not see that our Melchisedech dothe offre the true breade and true A wine his bodie and bloode, no [...] after the ordre of Aron vpon the crosse, but after the ordre of Melchisedec? And hath not he geuen vs these misteries? And doth not he of these misteries after the minde of S. Hierom, saie: he that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my bloode dwelleth in me, and I in him? By this then yt ys euident that the saing of S. Paule referred and expownded by this, ys vnderstanded, of the true wine, the bloode of Chryst, as this ys.
The other text also ys but breiflie touched and folowed thus: Et Panis quē Hieron. Ibid. frangimus nonne cōmunicatio corporis Domini est? Ita & panis Idololatriae, Doemonum participacio esse monstratur. And ys not the bread which we breake a communicaciō of the bodie of our lorde? Euen so also the bread of Idolotrie ys a partaking of Deuells. Albeit this expositiō in the first seight and face semeth not moche to saie to the maintenaunce of the catholique faith, as touching the matter of the Sacramēt: yet if yt be well weighed, yt shall be fownde to make moch. And for the better weighing of yt, yt shall be necessarie, that yt be called to memorie, that before ys saied in the last chapiter, that the cause why mē be made partakers of Deuells, ys that they do eate of soche meates as be offred B in sacrifice to Deuells, for ther ys no meat accompted to make men in that felowshippe, what meat soeuer yt be (in that onely respect that yt ys eaten) but onely that that ys offred to Deuells.
Nowe then, when in the exposition the probacion ys that as the eating of the breade, which ys broken ys a communicacion of the bodie of Chryst: So the bread of Idolatrie ys a participacion of Deuells: must not both these be vnderstanded of the thinges offred in sacrifice? yf not, what auaileth the applicacion of the one to the other? Howe can S. Paule proue the Corinthians to be partakers of Idolls, but by the partaking of Idolathites? Wherfor this expositour folowing S. Paule bringeth his argument from the sacrifice of Chryste as a thing cleare and manifest to the Corinthians. As who might saie: As the partaking of the bread of Chryst in sacrifice maketh vs partakers of the bodie of our Lorde: So the partaking of meates offred in sacrifice to An argumēt grownded vpon the sacrifice by S. Hierom. Deuells, maketh vs partakers of Deuells. And thus ther must be a sacrifice vnderstanded in both sides, aswell in the one, as in the other. Which being so, yt must nedes be confessed, that the bread which S. Paule speaketh of here C by the whiche we are made partakers of the bodie of Chryst, ys a sacrifice, and in that yt ys a sacrifice, yt necessarily foloweth, that yt ys the very bodie of Chryst, whiche ys owre onely sacrifice. And thus yt maie be perceaued that this short exposition well weighed, had good matter in yt to cōmende and settfurth the catholique faithe, and to teache the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, and yt also to be the sacrifice of chrystians. And nowe that yow haue hearde the expositions of these two, we will proceade to heare other two vpon the same scripture.
THE FICHTTENTH CHAP. PROCEADETH IN the exposition of the same text by sainct Augustin and E Damascen.
SAincte Augustine openeth the minde of S. Paule thus: Nolo vos socios Daemoniorum fieri: eos quippe ab Idololatria prohibebat. Propter quod eis ostē dere volebat, ita illos fieri socios Daemoniorum, si Idolothita sacrificij manducauerint, Aug. cōt. immie. legis & Prophet. quomodò Israël carnalis socius erat altaris in templo, qui de sacrificiis man ducabat. Hinc enim caepit, vt boc diceret: Propter quod, dilectissimi mihi, fugite ab idolorum cultura. Deinde secutus ostendit ad quod sacrificium debeant iam pertenere, dicens: Quasi prudentibus dico, iudicate vos quod dico. Calix benedictionis quem benedicimus non ne communicatio est sanguinis Christi? Et panis quem frangimus, nonne communicatio est corporis Domini? &c. I will not that ye be made felowes of Deuells. He did truly forbidde them from Idolatrie. For the which thing he wolde declare vnto them, that they shoulde euen so be made felowes of Deuells if they did eate Idolathites of the sacrifice, as the carnall Israell, whiche did eat of F S. Aug. c [...]lleth the bread and cuppe of the B. Sacr. a sacrifice. the sacrifices in the temple, was felowe of the Aultar. By occasion of that he began, that he wolde saie this: wherfor my most beloued, flee from the honouring of Idolls. Afterwarde folowing, he sheweth to what sacrifice they aught now to pertein saing: I speake as vnto wise men, iudge what I saie: ys not the cuppe of blessing whiche we blesse a cōmunicacion of the bloode of Chryst? And ys not the bread which we breake a comunicacion of the bodie of our Lorde? Thus farre S. Austen.
This expositiō yf yt be well marked, ād cōpared to the expositiō of this text of S. Paul which ys in the xvi chap. of this book, yt shall be perceaued, that yt doth iustly agree with the same, ād moch also cōfirme yt. But leauing all other things therin cōteined, ād onely to touch that, that to this matter apperteineth this ys here to be noted in S. August. that he saieth this to be the minde of S. Paule, that he labouring to bring the Corinthians from Idolothites, by the whiche they were made felows of deuells, he willed them to flee from them, as (nowe being of the calling they be of) hauing nothing to do with them. And therfore leauing the sacrifices of Idolls (saieth S. Augustin) he G sheweth them to what sacrifice they shoulde nowe pertein. And what sacrifice ys that? euen the cuppe of blessing, whiche we blesse, and the bread which we breake, by the which we are made partakers of the bodie and blood of Chryst.
By the which woords who seith not that the minde of S. Paul ys after the Sacrifice auouched by S. Paule after the vnstanding of S. August. mening of S. Augustin, that the Sacramēt of Chrystes bodie ād bolde ys a sacrifice, vnto the which, as he wolde thē the Corinthiās: So aught al Chrystiās to pertein? For S. Augustin saing, that S. Paul by these woords: ys not the cuppe of blessing, which we blesse a partaking of the blood of Chryst &c. did shew thē the sacrifice vnto the whiche they did nowe pertein, what can be saied but that he ment yt to be a sacrifice? That S. Augustine taketh yt to be a sacrifice, as yt ys most plainlie shewed in the first booke, So in this also hereafter yt shall be made so euident, that yt shall not be denied.
Damascen, whom here we will ioin with S. Austen, although he doth not by waie of exposition folowe the letter of S. Paule: yet treacting of the Sacrament, he expowndeth the tearmes, namelie participacion and cōmunicacion, H whiche here S. Paule vseth and applieth to the Sacrament, of Chrystes bodie and bloode. And forsomoche as the exposition of these termes geueth a great light to the clere vnderstanding of the minde of S. Paule, [Page 279]as whether he ment that the Sacrament were a bare signe of the bodie A and blood of Chryst, or ells verilie conteining the same: I thought to bring in that his saing.
And wher as this holie Sacrament, for that yt ys of infinite vertue can not sufficientlie be expressed: deuoute and godlie men, minding, as the measure of our weaknesse in the capacitie of so great misteries wolde permitte and suffer to signifie some parte of yt, haue called yt by sondrie and diuerse names. of the whiche Damascen remembring some doth thus saie of them. Damascen li. 4. ca. 14 Et si quidam exemplaria corporis, & sanguinis Domini panem & vinum vocauerunt vt deifer vocauit Basilius: non tamen post sanctificationem dixit, sed priusquam sanctificaretur ipsa oblatio, ita vocabant. Participatio etiam dicitur. Nam per ipsam Iesu dininitatem participamus. Dicitur & cōmunio, & est reuera, quia cōmunicamus per ipsam Christo, & participamus eius carne & Diuinitate, & quia cōmunicamus, & vnimur inuicē per illā. Although some haue called the bread and wine exemplaries of the bodie and bloode of our Lorde, as the godly man Basill hath called yt: yet they Bread and wine called exēplaries of the bodie and blood of Chryste before sanctificacion, but not after. did not so after the sanctificacion, but before the oblacion was sanctified they did so call yt. Yt ys also called a partaking. For by yt we partake the God head of Iesus. Yt ys also called a Cōmunion, and yt ys in verie dede, for B by yt we cōmunicate with Chryst, both that we partake his flesh and God head, and also that by yt we be vnited one with an other. I nede not to tarie, to open this saing of Damascen, whiche lieth so open and plain that the simplest maie see the true vnderstanding of yt. And wher S. Paule here speaketh of the partaking and of the cōmunicacion of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, which as before ys noted, some wolde wickedly corrupte sainge that the breade and the cuppe are signes that we partake, and communicate the bodie and bloode of Chryst: This man saieth that we partake both the flesh, and Godhead of Chryst.
And that we shoulde not thinke him to fauoure the hereticall exposition of the Aduersarie, he declareth the catholique faith, and also reiecteth the contrarie opinion in that he dissolueth that, that of the Aduersarie might be An argument of the Sacramentaries soluted by Damascen. taken for an argument against the trueth. For although (saieth he) some haue called yt the exemplaries of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, that ys (saieth he) before the consecracion or sanctificacion, not after the sanctificacion: signifieng C to vs that after the cōsecracion they be the verie thinges themselues that ys the verie bodie and blood of Chryst, and not the exemplaries signes, or figures of them. This authour ys to plain and to strong to be wrested or by violence to be drawen to make any countenannce towarde the signes and figures of the Aduersaries. For in the same very chap. expownding the woordes of Chrystes: This ys my bodie, he saieth thus: Hoc est meum, non figurae corporis, sed corpus. & non figura sanguinis, sed sanguis. This ys not the figure of Damasc. ibid. my bodie, but my bodie and not the figure of my bloode, but my bloode, wherby he plainlie denieth the Deuells exposition settfurth by the Aduersarie. And yet in the ende of the same chapter he calleth the Sacrament exemplaries, but in soche sorte and maner, as he affirmeth withall the verie presence. For this ys his sainge: Exemplaria autem futurorum dicuntur, non vt non existentia verè corpus & sanguis Christi, sed quoniam nunc quidem per ipsa participamus Christi Diuinitatem: tunc autem intellectualiter per solam visionem. They are called Damascen ibidem. the exēplaties of thinges to come, not as not being the bodie and bloode of Chryst verilie: but that we nowe therby partake the God head of Chryst: but then intellectuallie by onely vision. D
By whiche sainges, as the reader dothe clerelie see, that damascen so [Page]constantlie doth teache and affirme the presence of Chryst in the Sacramēt, that he vtterly reiecteth the figures of the Aduersarie: So maie he well vnderstande, E that the saied Damascen speaking of the participacion of the flesh of Chryst, and his Godhead, of the whiche participacion S. Paule maketh mencion, speaketh of the verie participacion of wholl Chryst, God and man verilie, and not figuratiuely. And forasmoche as this ys so plainly taught by Damascen that the Aduersarie can by no meās coulour yt, nor by anie shift or sleight of falshoode auoide yt, I wolde to God that he wolde see his erroure, and calling to God to geue him the spirit of humilitie, he wolde so humble him self, that he wolde confesse his saied errour, knowing this that yt ys bothe more easie, and more profitable to be a litle confownded here, then to be so greatlie confounded before the iudgement seat of Chryst, in the seight of his Angells and Sainctes, and all the woorlde, at the daie of his fearfull and terrible generall iudgement.
THE NINETENTH CHAP. CONTINVETH F the exposition of the same text by Isidore and Oecumenius.
SEinge that of necessitie I must be shorter, for that moche ys yet to be saied, as the one of the wittnesses in the last chapiter hath directlie affirmed the presence the other the sacrifice: So will we heare two breiflie auouching the like. The first shall be Isidorus who speaking of this text nowe in hande geueth a breif and clere exposition of Isidor. li. of fic. ca. 18. The bread that we break vs the bodie of Chryst etc. the same in this wise: Panis quem frangimus corpus Christi est, qui dicit: Ego sum panis vinus, qui de coelo descendi, vinum autem sanguis eius est. Et hoc est, quod scriptum est: Ego sum vitis vera. The breade that we breake ys the bodie of Chryst, who saieth: I am the bread of life, whiche came down frō heauē. But the wine ys his blood, and this ys yt, that ys written. I am the true vine.
In thys exposition that the text might be plain to the reader, wher S. Paule saied: The bread which we breake ys a communicacion of the bodie of Chryst: G This authour geuing the vnderstanding of yt saieth, that the bread which we breake ys the bodie of Chryste. And that he wolde haue yt taken for the verie bodie: he saieth, that yt ys the bodie of Chryst, who saied: I am the bread of life. And who he was, the sixt chap. of S. Iohn declareth that yt was verie Chryste. no figuratiue Chryste. And what the cuppe of blessing dothe contein he fullie declareth when he saieth: The wine ys his bloode. whiche maner of speache ys so plain, and standeth so directlie against the saing of the Aduersarie, that as for the plainesse of yt I neither can nor nede to saie anie thing to make yt more plain: so can I but woonder, that men can erre that either knowe or haue readde these holie fathers except they be puffed vppe with soche pride, and be brought to soche singularitie in ther owne conceat, that they contempn all mens iudgementes, sainges, and learning besides their owne of what faith, trueth, aunciētie, holinesse or learning so euer they be, as this Isidore, who liued well near a thousande yeares agō, and was famouse in all the chrystiā orbe, and as a strong piller stoode against the Arrians whiche then were mightie in Spain, and hath left learned workes H as testimonies of his learning and godly zeale, ys not to be disdained, but to be reuerenced.
And although for his learning and aunciētie he ys to be credited: yet he ys [Page 280]the more so to be for that to eche part of his saing he alleageth the scripture. A For as to the first part he alleageth the sixt of S. Iohn: so to the other parte he alleageth the sainge of Chryst in the xv. of S. Iohn, wher he saieth: I am the true vine. For in dede as he ys the true vine: so cometh oute of him the true wine. The earthlie wine helpeth to maintein the earthlie life, whiche Joan. 15. as S. Gregorie saieth, compared to the eternall life, ys raither to be called death then life. But the heauenly wine that cometh out of the true vine nourisheth to euerlasting life, whiche ys the true life. And bicause we be by faith inserted, and griffed into Chryst, this blessed wine, whiche ys the Iuice of that true vine, ys of vs, as of braunches of the same vine, receaued, and so Cyrill in. 16. Ioan. maketh vs his liuely braunches, not onely spirituallie by faith: but also by nature, whiche thing holie Cirill doth very liuely open and declare. Annon conuenienter dici potest, vitem humanitatem eius, & nos palmites, propter identitatem We are braunches of the vine Chryst both spirituallie and corporallie. naturae. Eiusdem enim naturae vitis & palmites sunt. Ita & spiritualiter, & corporaliter nos palmites, & Christus vitis est. Maie not the manheade of Chryst be very wel called the vine? and we the braunches, for that we be all of one nature? B for the vine and the braunches be of one nature. So both spirituallie and corporallie, Chryst ys the vine, and we be the braunches. Thus Cyrill.
Wherfore Isidore to proue that, that ys in the cuppe, to be the bloode of Chryste, as the wine or iuice whiche shoulde be receaued of vs the naturall braunches of Chryst the true vine, did very well alleadge the sainge of Chryst: I am the true vine. And by this also yowe maie perceaue the minde of S. Cyrill, that we be not onely of one Spirit with Chryst by faith, but we be also of one nature with him. not onely that he hath taken our nature vpon him, wherby he ys one with vs, but that we receaue his naturall flesh and bloode, wherby we are of one nature with him. This his natural flesh and bloode we receaue not but in the Sacrament. Wherfor the Sacrament conteineth the naturall flesh and bloode of Chryste.
And nowe that we haue hearde Isidore, who was of the latin churche, so breifly and plainly expownde this text: we will also heare Oecumenius, who was of the greke churche, howe he breifly expowndeth the same. He saieth: In. decins. 1 Cor. C Poculum voeat benedictionis, poculum sanguinis Christi, quod benedicimus, quod prae manibus habentes benedicimus eum, qui gratiosè sanguinem suum nobis largitus est. He calleth the cuppe of the bloode of Chryst the cuppe of blessing whiche we blesse, whiche hauing before vs we blesse him, who hath graunted vs his bloode, The cuppe of blessing ys the cuppe of the blood of Chryste.
Is not this as plain an exposition, as yt ys breif? ys yt not wonderfull that anie man wolde open his mouth against a trueth so plainlie vttered as this ys? Here maie ye see what maner of cuppe yt ys that S. Paule calleth the cuppe of blessing. Yt ys (saieth this authour) the cuppe of the bloode of Chryste. And when he hath expownded to yowe what yt ys, than he geueth yowe a cause why yt ys called of S. Paule the cuppe of blessinge, being in dede the cuppe of Chrystes bloode. Yt ys so called (saieth he) because hauing yt before vs, we blesse and geue thankes to him that hath graunted vs his bloode▪ and woorthily we blesse him, both for that he hath commaunded vs that as oftē as we eate of that breade and drinke of that cuppe, we shoulde shewe furth his death vntill he come: and also for that besides an infinite nombre of D benefittes, whiche he hath pourchased vnto vs by his passion and bloode shedding, ther ys graunted vnto vs, as a pledge of his vnspeakable loue towardes vs (as this authour saieth) his bloode. For asmoche then as the cuppe of [Page]bloode conteineth his bloode, who hath wrought vs so great mercie, and E quickneth in vs the liuelie remembrance of the same, we are prouoked to The cuppe of the blood why yt ys called the cuppe of blessing. lawde, praise, and blesse him, by whom these mercies were wrought, and therfor yt ys very well called the cuppe of blessing, that ys to saie, the cuppe that moueth stirreth, and prouoketh to blesse Chryst our Sauiour, whose bloode yt ys.
And here, Reader, to commend this trueth better to thee, I meen, that the cuppe which S. Paule calleth the cuppe of blessing, that yt ys (as this authour saieth) the cuppe of Chrystes bloode, call to thy remembrance the saing of Chrysostome what he saied expownding this text: dothe not he saie this ys the meening of S. Paule, that, that ys in the cuppe, ys yt that flowed oute of the side? Nowe this ys a cōmon maner of speache, that the vessell ys named by the thing that yt conteineth, as a cuppe conteining wine, ys called a cuppe of wine a cuppe conteining water ys called a cuppe of water. Nowe whē Chrysostom saieth, that the bloode that flowed oute of the side of Chryst, ys in the cuppe: and Oecumenius saieth, that yt ys the cuppe of bloode, what difference ys ther in the thinge, that they speake of▪ ys yt not all one? Therfor thowe maist see that these authours agree and haue consent bitwixt thē. F For this authour though he differ in maner of speach from Chrysostom: yet in the thing that they speake he saieth euen the same that he dothe. And nowe as for these two wittnesses Isidorus and Oecumenius let not the Aduersarie attempt to corrupt them with his wicked glose, for they be allreadie alleadged, and again shall be withe soch euident and strong sentence declaring their faith, that they can not be altered.
THE TVENTETH CHAP. PROCEADETH vpon the same text by Haymo, and Theophilacte.
THis being true that our Sauiour Chryst saieth, In the mouth of two or three wittnesses standeth all trueth: these that be alleaged might suffice to testifie this trueth that I haue taken in hand to settfurthe, Neuerthelesse for that yt hath pleased him who ys the verie trueth him self, who neded no testimonie, to call twelue, G and when one of them the childe of perdicion perished, to haue an oiher chosen that the nombre of twelue. might be continued, yt shall like me tofolowe his example, and as I haue doen in the exposition of the first text of S. Paule, wher I haue produced twelue wittnesses, to do the like here in the exposition of this text. And allthough the trueth of this matter ys soche that being spoken of him that ys the trueth him self, as ys saied, yt nedeth no other commendacion: yet to the confusion of the enemie, and the comforte of the fauourer and louer of gods catholique faithe, twelue be and shall be cauled, that yt maie beseen howe largely this trueth hath ben spred and receaued and in what diuersitie of times yt hath ben euer cōtinued, as I do not hing doubte, but yt shall be continued to the worldes ende.
But to go a boute that, that here ys entended, that the rest of this nombre which remain maie geue also their testimonie, and shewe their mindes in the vnderstanding of S. Paule, we shall first heare Theophilacte, whose exposition Theoph. in to. prioris ad Corin. of this text ys this: Calix benedictionis, hoc est, gratiarum actionis. In manibus H namque habentes, gratias ei haud dubiè agimus, qui nostri gratia sanguinem sum effuderit, dignatutue nos sit, bonis ineffabilibus. Non enim participatio dixit, sed vt plus alialiquid [Page 281] exprimat, summam scilicet coniunctionem. Quod autem dixit, tale est. Sanguis enim A iste, qui calice continetur, ille est, qui Christi è latere profluit. Hunc ipsi cùm sumimus participamus, Cōmunication vsed of S. Paule to expresse a nearer coniūction betwen Chryste and vs then participacion cā signifie. hoc est, Christo coniungimur. The cuppe of blessing, that ys, of thankesgeuing. For hauing him in handes, we geue vndoubtedlie thankes vnto him, who for owre sake hath shed oute his bloode, and hath esteemed vs woorthie of vnspeakeable giftes. He did not saie participacion but communicacion, that he might expresse somwhat more, that ys to saie, a most near coniunction. But that that he hath saied ys after this maner. This bloode whiche ys conteined in the cuppe, ys the same that flowed oute of the side of Chryste. This when we take we participate, that ys to saie, we are conioined to Chryst. Thus Theophilact.
Yf thow, reader, desierest to be instructed howe this text ys to be vnderstanded, and what ys the verie minde of sainct Paule, yf euer man did clerely expownd yt, no man more plainlier then this, although Chrysostom and Oecumenius, as plainly and almost by the same woordes. Consider therfore Theophilact cōmended. this exposition well and credit yt, and thowe shalt atteign to the true sense and mening of sainct Paule. Ther ys nothing to be desiered in this man, that ys necessarilie required to one to whome creditte shoulde be geuen. B He ys so auncient that he was before anie controuersie as touching the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, for he was before Berengarius. And after the councell of Sisimius in the tripartite historie they are to be called li. 9 ca. 19. to the decision or dissolucion of a controuersie, whiche wrote before that controuersie was risen, and forsomoche as this authour did so, therfore he maie well be called to this matter. That he ys vncorrupted, I suppose, the Aduersarie will depose. For yt ys knowen to all men learned that Oecolampadius did translate him owte of greke into latin, whose sinceritie and dexteritie in the doing of anie soch matter, they that be of that side, can not asmoche as once suspect. And although he hath in other places offended, and vitiated him: yet here he hath not. Learning ther lacketh none in this authour for that he doth ys by imitacion of Chrysostom, whose sentences and matters being setfurth at lenght, this man doth collect, and in a breif maner settfurth. By which fact as we be sure that that ys setfurth ys learned matter: So be we sure that the setterfurth ys without all doubte learned, for soch a C worke can not be doen of an vnlearned man. And besides that the voice of all learned men doth with moch estimacion, and praise so commende him. And therfore he ys so reputed, esteemed, and taken. Breiflie ther was neuer yet authour that euer yt happened me to read, that did either for learning, trueth, or anie other soche like matter, make as moch as a note of anie reprehension, or declared anie thinge, that was to be desiered in Theophilact. Therfore seing all thinges be in him, that are required to be in an authour, he ys withoute all exception woorthie of creditte, and in this matter as a wittnesse maie iustlie be produced. The same blood that flowed oute of the side of Chryste, ys in the cuppe, euen by the minde of S. Paule.
In this exposition then wher no tropes, no signes, no figures of the blood of Chryst be admitted, but the presence of the verie bloode taught to be in the cuppe, yea and the verie same that flowed oute of the side of Christ what can we or maie we ells do but so take yt, that ys, that sainct Paule, when he saied: The cuppe of blessing, which we blesse ys a partaking of the bloode of Christ, spake of no figure, nor by no figure: But of the substanciall bloode of Chryst to be verilie in the cuppe of blessing, whiche we also take and D receaue, and so be verilie partakers of the bloode of Chryste, and partaking yt be conioined to Chryst, as this authour saieth. [Page]And here ys to be noted that Theophilact, doth not here speake as shewing his owne minde but opening vnto vs the minde and meaning of sainct Paul, E and therfore saieth: Quod autem dixit tale est. That he saied ys this, or after thys maner, as who should saie, this ys yt that he saied. So that this exposition ys to be taken as the woordes of S. Paule, for that yt dothe declare the minde Peter Martir. his wresting of Theophil. vpon the woorde. (vertue) and meaning of S. Paule.
Neither ys Peter Martyr to be hearde, who wolde peruert all the negatiues of Theophilact, wherbie he denieth in sondrie and diuerse places, that the Sacrament ys onely a figure of Chrystes bodie, as in the xxvi of S. Matthew, in the xiiii. of sainct Marke, in the vi. of sainct Iohn, and ther auoucheth the verie reall presence by expresse woordes: The saied Peter Martyr wolde I saie, taking a small occasion of a woord vpon the xiiii. of S. Marke by violent pressing, euen turne the face of theophilact backwarde, and make him looke Ʋide ca. 60. li. 2. an other waie, and to speake a directe contrarie sentence to that, that he spake within ten lines before.
In the xiiii. of S. Marke to proue the woordes of Chyst: This ys my body, to be no figuratiue speach he bringeth in the saing of Chryst in the vi. of S. Iohn, and saieth thus: Dominus enim dicit. Panis quem ego dabo, caro mea est, non dixit F Theoph. in 14. Marci. figura est carnis meae, sed caro mea est. Et iterum: Nisi ederitis carnem filii hominis, & quomodò, inquis, caro videtur? O homo propter nostram infirmitatem istud fit. Quia enim panis & vinum ex his sunt, quibus assueuimus, ea non abhorremus. Idcirco misericors Deus nostrae infirmitati condescendens speciem quidem panis & vini seruat in virtutem autem carnis & sanguinis transelementat. Owre Lord saieth: The bread that I wil geue ys my flesh▪ He saied not yt ys a figure of my flesh, but yt ys my flesh. And The flesh of Chryste in the B. Sacrament appeareth not for oure infirmities sake. again: Except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man. And howe (saiest thow) ys not the flesh seen? O man this ys doen for our infirmitie. For bicause bread and wine be of these thinges, vnto the which we haue ben accustomed we doe not abhorre them. Therfor our mercifull God condescending to our infirmitie, dothe kepe the outwardes formes of bread and wine, but he turneth the substance into the vertue of flesh and bloode.
Here wolde Peter Martyr (as ys saied) wrest Theophilact that he wolde haue no reall presence, and therfore that we receaue not the verie flesh and blood of Chryst in the Sacrament, but the vertue of them. But, Reader, I haue ascribed the full sentence of Theophilact, to the entent that thow maist see, G that if anie soch sense should be gathered of him, yt maie well appeare to thee, that yt ys violentlie wrested, and not truly according to the minde of the authour alleadged, nor expownded.
And for proof of this, first obserue and note, that Theophilact bringeth in, the saing of Chryst to proue that ther ys no figuratiue speach, and therfore he saieth, that Chryst did not saie, that the bread which he wolde geue was a figure of his flesh, but his flesh. Yf Theophilact will not haue yt the figure of Chrystes flesh, but his flesh in dede, how standeth Peters exposition, who wolde no flesh, but the vertue of the flesh, ād so denieng the verie flesh, wold haue yt a bare figure, which Theophilact hath so oftē denied? And think yowe Trāselemē tacion vsed of Theophilact. more fullie to expresse the chaunge in the Sacrament. that soch an authour wolde in so fewe lines denie a figure and graunt a figure? Secondly note that Theophilact saieth that for our infirmitie our mercifull God doth transelementate into the vertue of the flesh and bloode, wher I wolde learn of this man what ys the propre significacion of this verbe (transelementare) ād yf yt be to chaunge, then what ys chaunged? As I can perceaue, this verbe cometh H of this woorde (Elementū) which signifieth an Element, and so yt should signifie to chaunge Elementes. As the philosophers do teache, the [Page 282]naturall constitucion of naturall thinges that be compownded ys of the fower A Elementes as offoure principles, yet not as primere, of the whiche the thing hath his beinge, but as concurring to the due order and disposition of the thing, without the which the naturall thing can not abide in his being. As flesh and bone be of the earth, swet and moystnes of the water, breathing of the aier, and the naturall heate of the fire. Euen so the principles of other thinges, whether they be in learning, or religion be called elementa Elementes As in learning the letters of the Alphabete be called Elementes. Likewise in religion as sainct Paule saieth to the hebrues. Etenim cùm deberetis magistri esse propter tempus, rursum indigetis vt vos doceamiui quae sunt elementa exordij sermonum He br. 5. Dei, & facti estis quibus lacte opus sit non solido cibo. For when as concerning the time ye ought to be teachers, yet haue ye nede again that we teach yow the first Elementes or principles of the woorde of God, and are become soch as haue nede of milke, and not of stronge meate. In which sentence wher he saieth that they had need to be taught the elementes of the woorde of God he meneth the principles of religion. And thus the beginninges of all soche B thinges maie be called elementes.
Nowe to applie this to our pourpose, what be the principles of bread and wine? be they not their substances? Then, when Theophilact saith that he doth transelementate, ys yt not to be saied that he doth chaunge their principles, or elementes? But their principles be their substāces, wherfor he doth chaunge their substances.
Although (yf I be not deceaued) this ys spoken according to the rule of An earthlie creature can not be transelemē ted into spirituall vertue. learning: yet if this should mislike the Aduersarie: yet he must nedes graunt that some thing ther must be, that must be chaunged. And then I wolde learn of him what this ys that ys chaunged into the vertue or grace of the flesh of Chryst as the Aduersarie here taketh this woorde (virtus) to be vnderstāded? Yt was neuer readde that euer anie thing earthlie coulde be primarelie chaū ged into the vertue or grace a qualitie spiritual. Wherfor no soch chaunge cā here bemade as the Aduersarie wold feign to be. But that an earthly substāce maie be turned into the substāce of Chryst not onelie we are taught yt by that that he tooke flesh of the virgē Mary: but also as our Theophilact, to proue C this that here ys to be proued, saieth: the foode which our Sauiour Chryst tooke vpō the earth was chaunged into his bodie ād was made like to his holie Of this matter see more in the second booke cap. lx. flesh. Wherfore wher Theophilact saieth here that this transelementacion ys into the vertue of the flesh and blood of Chryst, he meeneth into the verie flesh, as though yt had ben saied: In veritatem carnis & sanguinis Christi, into the veritie or trueth of the flesh and blood of Chryst.
And that this was his mening this proueth: first that in the same sentence he saieth, that God condescending to our infirmitie, kepeth the outwarde formes of bread and wine, signifieng that the formes remaining the substance ys chaunged. For yf the outward formes remain, and the substance (as they saie) be not chaunged, what then ys transelemented, or chaunged? The seconde proofe ys, that Theophilact, speaking of the verie same matter vpon the sixt of S. Iohn, doth by open and plain woordes proue this that I haue saied, for better declaraciō wherof I will bring in his wholl sentence. Non enim dixit panis quem ego dabo figura est carnis, sed caro mea est. Transformatur enim arcanis verbis panis ille per mysticā benedictionē & accessionem sancti spiritus in carnē Domini. Et ne D quē cōturbet quod credēdus sit panis caro. Etenim in carne ambulāte Domino et ex pane alimoniā Theoph. in 6. Joannis. admittēte, panis ille qui māducabatur, in corpus eius mutabatur, et similis fiebat sāctae cius carni et in augmētū, et sustentationē cōferebat iuxta humanum morē. Igitur et nūc panis [Page] in carnem domini mutatur. For he hath not saied, the bread which I will geue, ys a figure of my flesh, but yt ys my flesh. For that bread by the mysticall blessing E and coming to of the holie Goste, with the secret woordes ys transformed Argumē tes of Theophilact to proue the bread in the Sacr. to be made flesh. into the flesh of owre Lorde. And leest yt shoulde troble anie man, that the bread ys to be beleued flesh: when owre Lorde walked in the flesh, and tooke foode of bread, that bread that was eaten was chaunged into his bodie, and was made like vnto his holie flesh and yt went vnto the encreasing and sustentacion after the condicion of the nature of man. Therfore now also the bread ys chaunged into the flesh of our Lorde. Thus Theophil.
In this saing, ye see not the figure only of Chrystes flesh denied in the Sacrament, but withal the very flesh affirmed, and the wholl matter howe yt cometh to passe declared. In the setting furth wherof, wher as vpon S. Marke he saied, that the bread was chaunged into the vertue of the flesh of Chryst, he expownding the same saieth, yt ys transformed into the flesh of Chryst. And that yt might appeare to yowe, that this chaunge was a chaunge of the substance of bread into the substance of the flesh of Chryst, he bringeth in a similitude of the food which Chryst did take being conuersant here vpon the earth after the maner of men, which foode was substanciallie chaunged F in to the substance of the bodie of Chryst, and therupon concludeth, that therfore nowe also the bread ys chaunged into the flesh of Chryst. Whiche conclusion must contein as moch as the premisses of the argument, that as the foode which Chryst receaued was substancially chaunged into the substance of the bodie of Chryste, so now the bread by the mysticall benediction, and coming of the holie Gost, with the secrett woordes ys substanciallie chaunged into the substance of the flesh of Chryst.
In this processe of the declaracion of the minde of Theophilact, ys not onely Peter Martir his glose as plainlie ouerthrowen, as yt was maliciouslie deuised. ouerthrowen the wicked wresting of Peter Martyr, but also the veritie of the Sacrament so sensiblie as yt were opened, that, as I suppose, ther ys no place of doubte left to make a Chrystian to doubte in. For yf ye will conferre the exposition of S. Paule nowe here brought in, with the other sainges, yt alone will sufficiently teache a man the perfect catholique faith aboute the Sacrament of Chrystes bodie and bloode.
Wherfore so moch being spoken of the minde of Theophilact, in the which I haue taried longer then I entended, I will nowe hast me to inferre. Haymo, G who ys placed here with this grecian, Theophilact, to declare the faith of the latin In. decim. 1. Cor. Church in his time. This haymo thus expowndeth this text of sainct Paul: Et panis quem frangimus in altari, nonne participatio corporis domini est? vtique, primùm consecratur, & benedicitur à sacerdotibus & spiritu sancto, & deinde frangitur: cum iam, licet panis videatur, in veritate corpus Christi est. Ex quo pane quicūnque communicant, corpus Although ther seem baead in the Bl. Sa. yt ys the bodie of Chryste. Christi edunt And the bread which we do breake in the aultar, ys yt not a partaking of the bodie of our Lord? Yt ys so. First yt ys consecrated, and blessed of the preistes and the holie Gost, and afterward yt ys broken. And although nowe yt seemeth bread, in verie deed yt ys the bodie of Chryst, of the which bread whosoeuer do communicate, they do eate the bodie of Chryst. Thus Haymo.
Here ye see an other exposition of S. Paule his text, whiche although yt differ from the other in woordes: in the thing that they speake of, they fullie Haimo ād Theoph. their saings conferred. agree. Theophilact saied that the blood that ys in the cuppe ys the same that flowed oute of the side of Chryst, so that he teaching the presence of the verie H blood of Chryst in the Sacrament, teacheth by the same the verie presence of the bodie of Chryst. So this man teaching the very presence [Page 283]of the bodie of Chryst by the same, teacheth also the presence of the verie A bloode of Chryst. The order also howe the bread ys turned into the bodie of Chryst ys here testified. as yt was of Theophilact. For he saied that the bread ys trāsformed by the mysticall benedictiō, and the accesse of the holie Gost: This man saieth, that yt ys consecrated and blessed of the preistes and the holie Gost. Theophilact saieth, that God chaungeth the bread into the flesh of Chryst, the outward formes remaining still: This man saieth, that allthough yt seeme bread, in verie deed yt ys the bodie of Chryst. Wherby we maie see the goodlie consent, and agrement, that the God of vnitie and peace woorketh in them that do loue and embrace his trueth. Theophilact, also saieth that the bloode of Chryst ys in the cuppe: This man saieth, that the bodie of Chryst ys in the aultar. Whiche bothe maner of speaches proue a reall presence. For the spirituall presence ys neither in the aultar, neither in the chalice, but in the soule of man.
Hitherto by all these auncientes, we can learn none other but that sainct Paule in this scripture spake of the verie reall and substanciall presence of B Chrystes bodie and blood in the blessed Sacrament. And therfor receauing this saied blessed Sacrament we are partakers of the same bodie and bloode of Chryste.
THE ONE TWENTETH CHAPITER PROceadeth yet vpon the same text by Anselmus, and Bruno.
NOwe that we haue heard S. Paule expownded by the auncient elders, and learned writers, that be of all studentes of the Chrystian faith, to be reuerenced and so receaued: to bring the matter euen home to our time, for that the later writers be so contemned and without iust cause of the aduersarie reiected, some Anselmus in Deci. 1. Cor. of them shall be produced, that triall maie yet be made, whether they agree with these elders, or dissent from them. And first Anselmus his exposition shall be hearde, thus he writeth: Panis quem frangimus est participatio corporis Domini, quia ipse panis quem multis diuidimus, est verum corpus Domini. Et qui de illo accipiūt C de corpore Domini accipiunt, atque fiunt etiam ipsi, quod accipiunt. The bread that we The bread diuided to many ys the bodie of our Lord. breake ys partaking of the bodie of our Lorde, for that bread, which we diuide to manie ys the very bodie of our Lorde. And they that do take of yt they receaue the bodie of our Lorde, and they also be made that, that they receaue. Thus Anselmus.
This exposition dissenteth not from the expositions of the elders, but as they taught that S. Paule speaketh here of the very bodie of Chryst, so doth this man also. For saieth he, the bread which we diuide to manie ys the very bodie of our Lord, wherfor they that receaue yt, receaue the bodie of our Lord. And with S. Augustine expownding yt that S. Paule saieth, that yt ys a communicacion of the bodie of our Lorde, he saieth that they that receaue the bodie of Chryst, are made that, they receaue. For they, that receaue yt duely, are made membres of the mysticall bodie of Chryst.
But in this exposition the reader ys to be aduertised that this authour, saing that the bread which we geue to manie ys the bodie of Chryst, meneth, not as Luther doth, that the materiall bread in the Sacrament, ys the very bodie D of Chryst. For after the consecracion whē we distribute the holie Sacramēt their ys no materiall bread, but he that ys the heauēli bread, who saieth. Ioan. 6. Ego sum panis vitae. Et panis quem ego dabo, caro mea est, quam dabo pro mundi vita. [Page]I am the bread of life, and the bread which I shall geue ys my flesh, which I E will geue for the life of the worlde. So that we distribute in the Sacrament no other bread but that bread. Wherfore he saied very well, that that bread ys the very bodie of Chryste.
Not minding to trooble the reader, with long declaracion where the authours for their plaines in sentences nede none soch, I shall leaue Anselmus, and call the good holy man Bruno, who was more then foure hundreth years Bruno in dec. 1 Cor. agon. who vpon this texte maketh this exposition: Calix benedictionis, id est, quem ipse Deus benedicit, & consecrat, & cui nos benedicimus per officium nostrum. Deus enim hoc efficit per sacerdotem ministrum. Hic itaque calix, nonne est communlcatio sanguinis Christi? id est, nonne per fanguinem assumptum vnimur Christo, ipsiue conformamur? Et panis, id est, verum corpus Christi, qui sub specie sola panis accipitur, panis dico, quem nos in altari frangimus, vt quod vnum est in veritate, licet ita videatur, scindi tamen non potest, hic, inquam, panis quem frangimus, nonne est participatio corporis Domini? id est, nonne per hoc corpus, Deum in nobis capimus? eumue nobis incorporamus? Ideo in duabus substantiis, corporis scilicet & sanguinis, sacrificium Deus hoc instituit, vt per carnem in altari traditam ostenderet se redimere carnem nostram per haec sacramenta in incorruptionem quando ue transferendā: & per sanguinē, quē tradit, insinuaret se similiter redimisse animā nostrā. Ad F quod de anima insinuandū, quia re incorporali vti non potuit, dignè per sanguinem, qui sedes animaedicitur, animā sigurauit. Haec in duas partes distribuit, vt diuersas partes eius. Qui enim vel sanguinem tantùm, vel corpus solùm, totū accipit. Qui vtrumque accipit, nō magis per vtrū (que) quā per alterā accipit. Quod corpus sicut vera caro Christi est sub specie panis, ita per solā speciem atteritur, diminuitur, in partes diuiditur, cùm in veritate incorruptibile, indiuisibile, impotens diminui permaneat. The cuppe, of blessing, that ys to faie, whiche By the bodie of Christ receaued in the B. Sac. we be incorporated to him: and by his blood we are vnited to him. God himself doth blesse, and which we by our office do blesse (for God doth this by his mynister the preist) ther for this cuppe, ys yt not a communicacion of the blood of Chryst? that ys, are we not, by the bloode receaued vnited to Chryst and conformed to him? And the bread, that ys to saie, the bodie of Chryst, which ys taken vnder the forme of bread alone, the bread I saie, which we breake in the aultar, as which ys one in verie dede, although yt semeth so to be, yet yt can not be diuided, this bread I saie, which we breake, ys yt not partaking of the bodie of our Lorde? that ys to saie, do we not by this bodie receaue God into vs? and incorporate him vnto vs? Therfor God hath instituted this sacrifice in two substances, that ys, of his bodie and his G bloode, that by the flesh diliuered in the aultar he wolde shew himself to haue redemed our flesh by these sacramentes somtime to be trāsferred into incorruption. And by the blood whiche he deliuereth he wolde insinuate him self to haue redemed our soule. Vnto the which thing of the soule to be insinuated, forsomoche as he could vse no corporall thing, woorthilie by blood He that receaueth onelie vnder one kinde, receaueth as moch as he, that receaueth both▪ Chryst being perfectlie in both. (which ys called the seat of the soule) he hath figured the soule. These thinges he hath distributed into two substances, that he shoulde vnderstand his diuerse partes. For he that receaueth the blood onely, or the bodie, he taketh all. He that receaueth bothe receaueth no more by bothe then by one. Which bodie as the very flesh of Chryst ys vnder the forme of bread so by the onely outewarde forme ys yt bruised, diminished, and diuided into partes, when in very deed yt doth abide incorruptible, indiuisible, and not able to be diminished. Thus farre Bruno.
In this exposition both catholique and learned are manie thinges, woorthie of note, whiche yf I shoulde all touch, I feare I shoulde tarie the reader H to long. Wherfore leauing them to his discussion I will onely breifly touche them, that appertein to our principall pourpose to be learned of S. Paule, [Page 284]of the whiche first to speake of the bread, whiche S. Paule saieth, that we A breake, whether yt be vnderstāded to be materiall bread, or bread the bodie of Chryst, this authour expownding S. Paule, and opening his minde to vs faieth. that yt ys the bodie of Chryst, taken vnder the forme bread. And of the cuppe of blessing, he saieth: that we receaue the bloode by the whiche we are vnited to Chryst In that he teacheth, S. Paule by the bread and the cuppe to signifie the bodie and blood of Chryst, as he agreeth with the olde fathers before alleaged, as by conference ye shall easilie perceaue: So in that he teacheth that we receaue Doctours teaching the bodie ād blood of Chryst to be vnder the formes of bread and wine. the same bodie and bloode vnder the formes of bread and wine, though not in their sentences, here vpon this text alleaged, yet in other places, they are in this matter verie plain. S. Ciprian saieth: The bread whiche our Lorde gaue vnto his Disciples, chaunged, not in outwarde thape, but in nature, by the allmightinesse of the woorde ys made flesh. Yf the nature of the bread be chaunged, and by the all mightinesse of the woorde of God made flesh: the outwarde formes remaining still, what ys yt, but that ther ys the flesh of Chryst vnder the outwarde forme of bread, that remaineth vnchaunged.
S. Augustine also saieth vnder the formes of bread and wine, whiche we see, we honour B thinges inuisible, that ys to saie, the flesh and bloode of Chryst. Again he saieth: Li. Senten. Prosperi. Jbidem. In 26. Matth. Yt ys his flesh whiche we receaue, couered vnder the forme of bread. And yt ys his bloode, which we vnder the forme and tast of wine do drinke. And Theophilact saieth: Yt dothe appeare or seem bread, but yt ys flesh. All whiche what do they ells but plainly teache that the bodie and bloode of Chryst be in the Sacrament vnder the formes of bread and wine, So that in this poinct this authour teacheth nothing diuerse or different from the auncient Fathers.
Again wher he saieth that God hath instituted this sacrifice in two substances, that ys of the bodie and bloode of Chryste, as diuerse other haue before doen, teaching that S. Paule in this processe, doth take the bodie and bloode of Chryst in the Sacrament, as a sacrifice: so dothe this authour also. Wherfor seing in these poinctes he swarueth nothing from the doctrine of the Fathers, I see not why anie man, vpon willfull arrogancie shoulde reiecte him, but receaue him as a wittnesse of the catholique faith declaring vnto vs the faith of the Churhe in his time, whiche ys none other but soche as was in the time of the Fathers, as the comparison or conference of this authours C and their teachinges doth very well proue.
Nowe wher the Proclamer by an article of his proclamacion importeth, Here maie he see moo then one or two, yf he list to see affirming the bodie of Chryst to be vnder formes of bread and wine. that we can not shewe one doctour, that saieth that the outwarde shewes or formes of bread and wine remain withoute their substances: Although yt hath ben sufficiently proued in that place, wher we haue treaicted of transubstancion: yet here by occasion of these authours alleadged we maie note the same again. For when S. Cyprian saieth, that the bread ys chaunged in nature, but not in outwarde shewe, what doth he saie, but that the outwarde shewe remaineth, ād that the substance of bread ys chaunged. And when S. Austen saieth of the Sacrament that yt ys the flesh and blood of Chryst that we receaue vnder the formes of bread and wine, dothe he not saie the same that S. Cyprian saied? except the Proclamer will saie, that vnder the formes of bread and wine, ther be bothe the substances of the bodie and blood of Chryste, and also the substances of the bread wine withall, whiche ys to great an absurditie. And to be shorte, when Theophilact saieth that yt doth appeare bread, but yt ys flesh: And Haymo saieth, that yt semeth bread, D but in verie dede yt ys the bodie of Chryste: And this authour saieth, that yt ys the flesh of Chryst vnder the forme of bread: All which what do they [Page]ells teache but that ther be in the Sacrament the outwarde shewes of bread and wine, and the substance of Chrysts bodie and bloode, and not the substance E of bread and wine.
See ye not thē, howe great a smooke the Proclamer wolde make withoute anie fire? See ye not howe greate reproache he wolde laie to the Church See the malice of the Prorcl. see in what depe sleape of heresie he lieth, that can not, or will not see all these doctours. withoute iust cause? See yowe not howe greatt bragges he maketh withoute anie grownde to buill then vpon? Or raither see ye not howe he hath prouoked matter to be shewed to his shame? So that euery man that readeth this maie well saie yt ys a shame for him to saie that the catholikes haue nothing to shewe for that they teache: when ther ys soche plentie produced to proue and confirme that they saie. But as for him self he hath nothing that ys of any substanciall authoritie, to maintein his sainges, but resteth onely vpon his bare bragges, and his owne priuate authoritie. Neither do I doubte, but the Proclamer him self knoweth yt. Manie mo maie in this matter be produced. Feare not then, Reader, neither be thowe cast in doubte, to continewe the olde auncient saing of the church, that thowe hauest seen in the F Sacrament Chryst vnder the formes of bread and wine, for somoche as tho we seist S. Cyprian S. Augustin, whiche were aboue a thousand years agon and other, whiche were eight hondreth, seauen hondreth. and foure hondreth yeares agon, saie that yt ys so. Wherby we maie conclude against this article of this Aduersaries proclamacion, that in the Sacrament, after the consecracion remain the outwarde shewes of bread and wine, with oute their substances, but not withoute the substances, of the bodie and bloode of Chryst.
THE TWO AND TWENTETH CHAP. ENDETH the exposition of this text by Dionise, and Gagneius.
YT shall auaill to declare the continuance of consent of doctrine in all ages, if we also heare the exposition of Dionise the Carthusian, who was somwhat nearer to our time then the G other were. Thus he expowndeth S. Paule his saing: Calix benedictionis. id est, contentum in calice, vt pote sanguis Christi, per quem sanguinem benedicimur, id cst, dona gratiarum consequimur, cui calici seu Dionisius Carthu. in 10. 1. Cor. sanguini benedicimus, id est, quem consecramus, cùm per prolationem sacrorum verborum, à nobis conuertitur vinum in sanguinem Christi. nonne communicatio sanguinis Christi est? id est, nonne veraciter est sanguis Christi, nobis comunicatus seu datus, faciensue nos comunicationem habere cum Christo, incorporando nos ei, & faciendo nos participes meriti suoe ef fusionis. Et panis quem frangimus, id est, corpus Christi consecratum ex pane, quem panem consecratum cuius dimensiones seu species frangimus porrigendo eum fidelibus: nonne participatio corporis Christi est? id est, nonne vtique est corpus Christi verè acceptum à nobis, faciens nos vnum cum Christo, qui ait: Qui manducat meam carnem, & bibit meum sanguinem, in me manet, & ego in [...]eo? The cuppe of blessing, that ys, the thing conteined in the cuppe that ys to witte the bloode of Chryst by the which Cōmunicacion of the blood, ys when the blood of Chryst ys verilie geuen to vs. blood we are blessed, that ys, we obtein giftes of graces, whiche cuppe or bloode we blesse, that ys, we consecrate, wher by the prolacion of the holy woordes, the wine ys turned into the bloode of Chryst, ys it not a Communicacion H of the bloode of Chryst? that ys, ys not the bloode of Chryst verilie communicated or geuen, to vs, and making vs to haue a communiō with Chryst, incorporating vs to him, and making vs partakers of the meritte of [Page 285]his effusion? And the bread whiche we breake, that ys, the bodie of Chryst Participacion of the bodie ys likewise as of the bloode ys saied. A consecrated of bread, which bread consecrated, whose dimensions and formes we breake, geuing yt to the faithfull: ys yt not a partaking of the bodie of Chryst? that ys, ys yt not also the bodie of Chryst verilie taken of vs, making vs one with Chryst, who saieth: he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloode abideth in me, and I in him? Thus mouch Dionise.
In this as in the other expositions, as ye see moche plainnesse: so ye se no parte of S. Paule his sentence left vnexpownded. But yet as truly: as simplie and plainlie. That in the cuppe S. Paule meent to be the very bloode of Chryst, yt ys so plainlie here spoken, as yt nedeth no addicion, for better declaracion. In the whiche his exposition, that he agreeth with all that hitherto haue ben induced, the matter being so clere, I trust, ye will be easilie perswaded, for anie futher proof to be made by me for the same. And therfor leauing this authour to the discrecion of the reader farder to be considered, we will descende a litle lower to one of this our time, and ther ende the exposition of this text of S. Paule.
This shall be Ioannes Gagneius, who treating of this text, dothe thus open Ioann. Gagneius in decim. 1. Cor. B the same. Calix benedictionis. cui benedicimus. id est, quem cum gratiarum actione sumimus, noune communicatio sanguinis Christi est? id est, nonne calicem Christi sumentes, ac sanguinem illius bibentes, cum illo communicamus, & cum illo commercium nobis esse declaramus? Et panis quem frangimus, id est, corpus Christi quod sub speciebus panis sumimus, nonne participatio corporis Domini est, id est, nonne declarat nos partem bahere cùm corpore Domini, & in illud consentire? The cuppe of blessing which we blesse, that ys, whiche we receaue with thankes geuing, ys yt not a Commucacion of the blood of Chryst? that ys, do not we taking the cuppe of Chryst and drinking his bloode communicate with him? and declare vs to haue an entredoing with him? And the bread whiche we break, that ys, the bodie of Chryst, which we vnder the formes of bread do receaue, yt ys not a participacion Communicacion and participation of Chrystes bodie and blood what they be, of the bodie of our Lorde: that ys, dothe yt not declare vs to haue part with the bodie of our Lorde, and into yt to consent? Hitherto Gagneius Who although he wrote but last daie: yet he agreeth in the expownding of S. Paule with them that wrote aboue thousand yeares agon. And teacheth (as they did) that S. Paule in this place spake of the very reall presence of the C bodie and bloode of Chryst in the Sacrament, which we receaue, and by the which we are made partakers of the same bodie and bloode. For wher S. Paule saieth: The bread whiche we breake, that ys to saie (saieth this authour) the bodie of Chryst which we receaue vnder the forme of bread, maketh vs to haue part with the bodie of our Lorde,
Nowe, reader, if thowe wilt gather together the expositions of all these famouse Fathers and learned men, which to shewe thee, the vnderstanding A breif rehersall of the doctours alleaged for this text. of S. Paule vpon this text▪ I haue here alleaged, and laie, them in a breif before thy face, thowe shalt, I suppose, see soche a plain declaraciō of the trueth so euident, so manifest, so clere, so consonant, so agreing, and so consenting one with an other, although spoken in diuerse ages, in sondrie churches, and in moche difference of times, that I thinke, thowe wilt wonder with me that euer men coulde be so stubbornlie blind that they will not see an opē treuth whiche can not be so couered, and hidden, with their deuelish glooses, but yt will allwaie lie aboue of all men readie to be seen. D Chrysoste.
Chrysostome saieth that this ys the meening of S. Paule, that that which ys in the cuppe, vs yt that flowed oute of the side. S. Hierom saieth, that we partake of the bloode of Chryst, as he him self saieth: He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloode &c. Hieron [Page]Whiche saing of Chryst (as ther ys declared) ys spoken of the eating of the verie bodie of Chryst and drinking of his verie blood. wherfor. S. Hierom so E vnderstādeth S. Paule: Damascen, who can not abide these woordes of Chryst Damascen (This ys my bodie) to haue a figuratiue sense, saieth, that in the participacion, and the communion of the bread we partake the flesh of Chryst and his Godhead also. S. Augustin saieth that S. Paule speaking this text did shewe them to August. what sacrifice they shoulde pertein, which was to the sacrifice wherby they shoulde be partakers of the bodie and bloode of Chryst. Oecumenius saieth that S. Paule calleth the cuppe of the bloode of Chryst, the cuppe of blessing. So that he Oecomen. taketh yt for a cuppe of Chrystes bloode. Isidore saieth that the bread whiche we breake, ys the bodie of Chryst. He saieth not yt ys called, but yt ys the bodie. Theophilact saieth that the blood whiche ys cōteined in the cuppe, ys the same that Isidorus. Theophil. flowed oute of the side of Chryst. Haymo saieth, that the bread whiche we breake in the aultar, although yt seem bread in very dede, yet yt ys the bodie of Chryst? Anselmus saieth, that the bread whiche we brake, and diuide to manie ys the verie bodie of our Lorde, Bruno saieth, are we not by the bloode receaued, vnited to Chryst F Haymo. Anselm. Bruno. and ys not the bread, that ys, the very bodie of Chryst, whiche semeth to be broken, and ys not in deed, do not we by this bodie receaue God into vs? and incorporate him to vs? Dionise saieth, that, that ys conteined in the cuppe ys the bloode of Chryst. by the which bloode we are blessed, So that yt ys verilie the bloode of Chryst Dionys. geuen vnto vs, making vs to haue communion with Chryst, and to be partakers of the merittes of the effusion of the same his bloodd. And last Gagneius saieth: that the bread whiche we breake that ys to saie, the bodie of Chryst Gagneius. whiche we receaue vnder the forme of bread, doth yt not declare vs to haue parte with the bodie of our lorde?
Doth anie of these twelue finde anie trope or figures in the saing of S. Paule? No, they do all teach yt to be a plain speache, and a plain assercion of the verie bodie of Chryst, and not a bare sign of yt. And here to conclude this matter, and to make an ende of this expositiō of this text, I haue thought good to heare the minde of the right godlie, and learned Father Roffensis, who, as all thinges that he did, so doth he handle this text learnedly and pithilie. Roffen. in proem. li. 5 Thus he saieth: Poculum benedictionis cui benedicimus, nonne communicatio sanguinis G Christi est? Panis quem frangimus, nonne communicatio corporis Christi est? Quid hic audimus? figuras ne corporis, & sanguinis Christi? Nequaquam. sed veritatem corporis & sanguinis, quibus nos verè communicare Paulus asserit. Profectò si figuram solam hic indicasset Paulus, non adeo frequenter haec (nulla vspiam figurarum habita mentione) vocasset corpus, & sanguinem Domini. Sed nec arbitratur Oecolampadius, nos per panem et vinum suum. communicare corpori & sanguini Christi, sed fidem solam buius communicationis causam esse contendit. Et certè qui fieri potest vt merus panis, aut vinum eam efficatiam habeat, vt nos veri corporis & sanguinis Christi reddat participes? Quare consentaneum est vt quum huius panis esu, & liquoris eius, qui in poculo est potatione, verè corpori, & sanguini Christi communicamus, eiusdem corporis, & sanguinis veritatem hic adesse, ceu compertissimum habeamus. The cuppe of blessing, whiche we blesse, yt ys not a communicacion of the bloode of Chryst? the bread whiche we breake, ys S. Paule in all his processe of the Sacra. maketh not one title of mencion of anie figure. yt not a communicacion of the bloode of Chryste? What heare we here? Figures of the bodie and bloode of Chryst? Not so, but the veritie of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, which Paule affirmeth vs verily to cōmunicate. Truly yf Paule had iudged hero to be an onely figure he wolde not so often haue H called these thinges the bodie and bloode of Chryste, no mention in anie place beinge made of figures. But neither Oecolampadius doth thinke, that we by his bread and wine do cōmunicate with the bodie and bloode of Chryste, [Page 286]but he doeth earnestlie affirme that faith alone ys the cause of this cōmunicacion. A And suerely howe can yt be doen, that the very bread and wine An argumēt grownded on S. Paule to auouche the reall presence: maie haue that efficacie, that yt maie make vs partakers of the bodie and bloode of Chryste? Wherfore yt foloweth agreablie, that seinge by the eating of this bread, and drinking of that liquor whiche ys in the cupp we doe verilie comunicate the bodie and bloode of Chryst, that we haue yt for most assured knowledge, that here ys present the veritie of the same bodie and blood. Thus farre Roffensis.
I praie thee, reader, weigh well the saing of this reuerend Father, and thowe shalt perceaue that here ys made an argument so pithie and so strong that all the Aduersaries power can not stande against yt. For seing the Aduersarie him sellf affirmeth that by the receipt of his Sacramentall bread, we be not partakers of the bodie and blood of Chryst, which ys true, and S. Paule saieth, that by this bread and this drink, we be made partakers of thē, yt must nedes be that this bread, and drinke, whiche the Apostle speaketh of, ys the verie bodie and bloode, whiche duely receaued make vs verilie partakers of Chryst: Yf the Apostle had not ment this bread and this drinke to B be the verie bodie, and verie bloode of Chryst, he wolde not so plainlie haue tearmed them, but in some place he wolde haue called them figures. But so he calleth them not in anie place, but allwaies by the propre names of bodie and bloode. Wherfor to ende and conclude with all these Fathers thus expownding S. Paule, ther ys (as he ment) the verie bodie and bloode.
THE THREE AND TWENTETH CHAP. BEGINnith the exposition of this text: Quoniam vnus panis &c.
IIn the text of S. Paule yt foloweth; Quoniam vnus panis & vnum corpus multi sumus, omnes, qui ex eodem pane, et eodē calice participamus. 1. Cor. 10. By cause that though we be manie: yet we are one bread and and one bodie, in asmoche as we all are partakers of one bread and of one cuppe. Forasmoche as this text dependeth vpon the C other nowe last expownded, and ys inferred as a exposition of that, that the Apostle spake of ther, namely of owre participacion and communion with Chryst, and with our selues, and speaketh of the same bread and the same cuppe, that ys spoken of ther: Therfor yt ys manifest that yt must haue the same vnderstanding, as yt had, I meen, that the bread and the cuppe be not Communiō with Christ ys two waies. taken for bare figures of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, but for the things them selues, the very bodie and bloode. And wher the Apostle speaketh of our communion with Chryst, yt ys to be noted that we haue a double communion with him. One ys spirituall, whiche we come vnto in baptisme through the worke of the holie Gost. of the whiche S. Paule speaketh to the Corinthians, saing: In vno spiritu omnes nos in vnum corpus baptizati sumus, siue 1. Cor. 12. Iudaei, siue gentiles, siue serui, siue liberi. By one spiritt are we baptised to make one bodie, whether we be Iewes, or gentiles, whether we be bonde or free. And again to the Romans: Multi vnum corpus sumus in Christo. singuli autem alter alterius membra, We being manie, are one bodie in Chryst, and euery man emonge vs, Rom. 12. one and others membres. D
And other corporall: whiche we come vnto by the receipt of his bodie and bloode in the Sacrament, of whiche S. Paule speaketh here. By the first [Page]we are admitted, and as yt were gaffed into the misticall bodie of Chryst, to be membres of the same: by the other we are nourished as with an necessarie E foode to growe and to waxe strong and to be made lustie membres of the same bodie, which thing cometh better to passe, for that by this receipt we are incorporated to Chrystes bodie, and receaue with all manie goodlie benefittes of spirituall nutriment, and spirituall health. For as manie meates are both nutritiue, and also holsome, according to the naturall qualities of the same, yf the partie that receaueth them be well disposed in bodie, and not troubled with deseases, by reason of yll humours: So the foode of Chrystes bodie and bloode, ys bothe nutritiue and holsome, according to the good qualities of mercie, grace, and goodnesse, yf the receauour be not euell disposed by the reason of viciouse humours, But in this these two foodes do differ. For the earthlie foode being receaued ys incorporated to the receauer, and made one with him. But this heauenly foode being duely receaued doth incorporate vs to yt: Nec tu me mutabis in te sicut cibum carnis tuae: sed tu mutaberis in me. Neither shalt thow chaunge me into thee, as a meat of thy bodie: but thowe shalt be chaunged into me.
As ther ys then a spirituall communion, wher by we are ioined to Christ, F and spiritually made one with him: so ys ther a corporall communion, by We haue a spirituall cōmunion with Chryste by baptisme and a corporall by the Sacr. of his bodie and blood. the whiche we are ioined to Chryst, and corporallie made one with him. Yf yt were not so, why then hath the Apostle taught vs the communion that we haue with Chryst by the holie gost, and Baptisme, and nowe teacheth vs of an other communion whiche we haue with Chryst, by the receipt of his bodie and bloode? Yf they will saie that yt ys no other neither of anie other effect, then the other by Baptisme and the holy goste: then we maie saie to them, that then yt ys vainly instituted, for thar yt ys supersluouse, seing that this cōmunion ys doen before and ys sufficient for the wholl life of man. But that maie not be saied. for God woorketh nothing in vain. Wherfor seing that S. Paule doth saie that all we, that do eate of that one bread, and drinke of that one cuppe be made one bread and one bodie, ther ys an other vnion in the whiche we are ioined all together, than yt, that we were ioined in before by faith, and Baptisme. Holie bread receaued instead of the B. Sacrament.
For yt ys to be thought that none cometh to receaue this Sacrament, but soche as be perfect in faith ād be baptised. Wherfore in the primitiue church, G and so to the time of S. Augusting, the Cathecumeni, that ys, the younge scholers or learners of faith, were not suffred to receaue this Sacrament, but instead therof they receaued other bread blessed, as our people now doe, whē they doe not cōmunicate, they receaue holie bread. And thē being baptised, and hauing faith, the Aduersarie will not denie, but that they be membres of Chrystes misticall bodie, and haue that spirituall cōmunion that ys doen by faith. Wherfor (as before ys saied) either by the receipt of the bodie and blood of Chryst, they come into an other cōmuniō: or ells they receaue that that they had before. But here the Reader ys to be aduertised, that as they that receaue the spirituall vnion by Baptisme, receaue yt not but with cōdicion: So none can receaue this corporall vniō to Chryste, but with cōdicion. The Sacramentes be receaued of manie, but not profitablie, as touching the finall effect to all that receaue, but to some.
Chryst hath died not onely for our sinnes, but for the sinnes of all the worlde, yet all atteign not remission of sinnes, whiche ys the effecte of the H same death: And as God geuing vs Chryst, gaue vs all thinges with him: yet all receaue not all thinges: Euen so though by the receipt of Chrystes bodie [Page 287]in the Sacrament, we be as yt ys saied vnited and incorporated to Chryst, yet A not all: for the benefittes which God geueth vnto vs, manie of them haue cō dicions annexed, as the benefittes before recited haue. For as touching remission of sinnes all they shall haue yt, that will obserue the condicion declared by S Iohn: Si ambulauerimus in luce, sicut & ipse est in luce, societatem habemus adinuicem, 1. Joan. 1. & sanguis Iesu Christi filii eius emundat nos ab omni peccato. Yf we shall walke in light, as he also ys in light, we haue felowshippe together, and the bloode of Iesus Chryst the Sonne of him clenseth vs from all sinne. Eternall life ys geuen to vs by Chryst, but ther ys a condicion annexed. Si vis ad vitam ingredi serua mandata. Yf thowe wilt entre into life kepe the commaundementes. Vnitie with Chryst, as that Chryst shall dwell in them, and they in him, that do eate the flesh of Chryst, and drinke his bloode, ys promised to them that so doe, but not without a condicion, that ys, that they doe eate yt woorthilie. Iudas eate the flesh of Chryst, and dranke his bloode, as hereafter shall be shewed. But yet he obteined not the promisse, he enioied not the effecte, for not Chryst, but Sathan abidde in him as the Gospell testifieth. Wherfore S. Paule saied not, that yowe all be one bread, and one bodie, but manie. For indede as manie as shall woorthilie receaue that one bread, and drinke of that B one cuppe, all they shall be one bread, and one bodie, both with Chryst, and within themselues. But the euell receauers not so.
This also ys not to be ouerpassed, that sainct Paule saieth, that we all eate of one bread, and drinke of one cuppe. Which in my iudgement proueth very moche, that he tooke not this bread for bare materiall bread (as the Aduersarie doth) for then yt were not true. For all do not eate of one bread. For the grekes eate leauened bread, and the latines fine and vnleauened bread. In the catholique Church ys geuen to euerie communicant a sondrie bread. In the scismaticall church they haue not throughout all one bread, but in euery conuenticle a sondrie bread, and somtime in the same conuenticle diuerse breades. For yt were a meruailouse bread that shoulde suffice them all in all their wicked congregacions. And as before ys noted, their bread hath no soche vertue, as sainct Paule dothe attribute vnto this bread, and this cuppe, which ys to make vs one bodie with Christ. Wherfore yt can haue no other vnderstanding but that the bread which S. C Paule speaketh of ys no materiall bread, but yt ys the heauenly bread of Chrystes bodie, which being but one ys eaten of euery faithfull, and sufficeth Jnsermone Decana. for all. For he ys not so receaued in one aultar, that he ys not, nor cannot be in an other. But (as sainct Bernarde saieth speaking to Chryst in the Sacrament) vnius horae momento, ab ortu solis, vsque ad occasum, ab aquilone vsque ad austrum, praesto es omnibus, vnus in multis, idem in diuersis locis. In the moment of one howre from the rising of the Sunne to the going downe of the same, from the North to the Sowthe thowe art at hande, which arte one in manie places, and the very same in diuerse places.
For (as Chrysostome saieth) Quoniam in multis locis offertur, multi sunt Christi? Nequaquam. Sed vnus vbique est Christus, & hic plenus existens, & illic plenus, vnū corpus. Jn deci. [...]. Corn. hom. 17. For that Chryst ys offered in many places, be ther many Chrystes? not so, but euery wher one Chryst, being full here, and full ther, all one bodie. So that wher S. Paule saieth, that they are one bodie, and one bread, that doth partake of that same one bread, and that same one cuppe, yt ys not very fied, nor can be verified of anie other, but of Chryst the true bread, whiche D (as ys saied) being one bodie, one Chryst, ys euerie where full Chryste, [Page]here full, and ther full, of the whiche one all doo partake, and so by that one they all are made one, I meen as manie as do duelie receaue yt, as ys before E saied. For by the receipt of that one bodie, they growe to be one bodie, both with the bodie, that ys receaued, and also among themselues.
THE FOVR AND TVENTETH CHAP. PROceadeth vpon the same text by Chrysostom, and S. Augustine.
AS among philosophers yt ys vnseemlie to auouche anie thing withoute reason: so among diuines speciallie in matters of controuersie, yt ys vnsemelie to auouche anie thing withoute authoritie, wherfor to doo that, that to a diuine ys seemlie, and withal to geue aduertisement to the Proclamer, who in his sermon powreth oute manie of his hereticall deuises in matter of controuersie withoute authoritie, although, I haue not hitherto without authoritie, but with authoritie expownded this text of S. Paule yet returning to my former order F heretofore in other scripturs vsed, I will proue the same exposition to be good, by farder authoritie of the fathers, coopled together oute of the latine and greke church. In which processe I will beginne with Chrysostome, who thus expowndeth the same text of S. Paule: Quoniam vnus panis, & vnum corpus multi sumus. Quid enim appello, inquit, communicationem? Idem ipsum corpus sumus. Quid nam est panis? Corpus Christi. Quid autem fiunt, qui accipiunt? Corpus Christi, non multa. sed vnum corpus. Nam quemadmodum panis ex multis grauis vnitur, vt minimè grana appareant, sed tamen grana sunt, verùm incerta discretione coniuncta: sic & inuicem & Christo coniungimur. Non en [...]m ex altero corpore tu, ex altero illeeducatur, sed ex eodem omnes. Ideo subdit: omnes qui de vno pane participamus. For being manie we are one bread and one bodie. What do I (saieth he) call cōmunicacion? We are the very same bodie. What ys the bread? The bodie of Chryst▪ what be they made that receaue yt? the body of Chryst, not manie but one bodie. For as bread ys made one of manie cornes, though they do not appeare cornes, but yet they be cornes, yet without certen difference ioined together: So we both within our selues, and with Chryst are ioined together. For thowe G art not fedde or nourished of one bodie, and he of an other, but all of one and the selfsame. Therfore he addeth: all whiche do partake of one bread. Thus moch Chrysostome.
In these woordes ye see the minde of Chrysostome vpon sainct Paule, and therwith ye maie see the minde of S. Paule himself. For in the first entrie of the exposition Chrysostom moueth not the question in hys owne person, but in the person of sainct Paule. For after this maner he moueth Three thinges learned oute of S. Paule. yt: What doe I call (saieth he) communicacion? mening sainct Paule, so that, that ys here spoken, ys after the minde of sainct Paule.
Therfore of sainct Paule we maie here learn three things, as he ys opened of Chrysostome. The first ys, what ys communicacion. What yt ys we are taught, for yt ys to be all one bodie. For when S. Paule had saied, ys not the bread which we break a communicacion of the bodie of our Lorde? And shewing that yt ys a communicacion, and withall what a communicacion yt ys, added: For we being manie eating of one breade, and drinking of one H cuppe, are one bodie and one bread. As though he had saied: we eating one bodie, are made the same bodie. And thus yt cometh to passe that [Page 288]Chrysostome saieth, that cōmunicacion, ys, we be all one bodie. A
The second thing, what that ys, by the eating wherof we are made one bodie. Chrysostom expownding S. Paule asketh this question: What ys the bread that S. Paule here speaketh of. He aunswereth that yt ys the bodie of Chryst Note then, Chrystian Reader, that by Chrysostom yt ys euident that S. Paul here by the bread ment not materiall bread, but the true bread, the verie bodie of Chryste, which ys euen that one bread, of the whiche though we be manie, we maie all receaue, and by yt being one, we all maie be made one both with yt, and within owre selues, whiche can not be doen by materiall bread.
And here this ys not to be ouerpassed, that some one either of malice, or ignorance hath corrupted and falsefied Chrysostome in this place, that wherin Chrysostō corrupted by the trāslatour. the greke Chrysostom asketh: what ys the bread he altered yt in translation saing: what dothe the bread signifie? For the triall of this I haue not onelie seen diuerse bookes in the which this question ys thus corrupted, but other also in whiche yt ys corrected, and besides I haue conferred with diuerse well B learned in the greke toung, whose greke bookes being seen yt was in them all fownde thus: what ys the bread? and not what signifieth the bread? Soche ys the falshead of Sathan and his Angells to corrupt the doctours to maintein their heresie. And yet yf yt might so haue ben iuggled in, the deuell had ben begiled. For yt coulde not beare the sense that S. Paule shoulde aske what materiall bread did signifie, but what the woord bread did in that place signifie. Wherunto when S. Paules aunswer had ben added that that woorde bread did signifie the bodie of Chryste had yt not made against Sathan stil? But nowe that the trueth of the question ys: what ys the bread? and the aunswer ys, that yt ys the bodie of Chryste, ys not Sathan nowe laied flatt vpon his backe, and Chrystes presence in the holie Sacrament most plainlie taught, so plainlie, that the Proclamer, if he will open his eies, maie here see a plain place to induce him into the plain trueth, whiche trueth Chrysostom in that, that foloweth in this exposition dothe verie clerelie commende and Chrystes flesh of one nature with our, but free frō sinne but ful of life ys mingled with vs to deliuer vs frō sinne ād to make vs immortall. setfurth? C
Thus yt foloweth there Non enim simpliciter corpus suum tradidit sed cùm prior carnis natura, à terra formata, à peccato mortalis facta, à vita deserta esset, aliam (vt ita dicam) massam, & fermentum induxit hoc est carnem suam, natura quidem eandem, verùm à peccato liberam, & vitae plenam, quam omnibus tribuit, vt participes fierent, vt ea nutriti, & priore abiecta, quae mortua erat, per hanc mensam viuentem, & immortalem, comisceremur. He hath not simplie deliuered his bodie, but wher the first nature of the flesh, being formed of the earth, was by sinne made mortall, and of life forsaken, he brought in (as I might saie) an other lumpe and leauen, that ys, his flesh, in nature the same, but free from sinne, and full of life, which he hath geuen to all, that they maie be made partakers, that being nourished The immortall table ys the immortal foode of the table, that ys Chrictes flesh wherwith we are nourished to immortalitie. with yt, and the first, whiche was dead cast awaie, by this liuinge and immortall table, we shoulde be mixed together. Thus Chrysostom.
Doest thowe not see here Reader what bread yt ys that we be partakers of, by the which we be mixed together, to be this one bodie? Chrysostome hath plainly taught that yt ys the flesh of Chryst in nature all one with our flesh, but that yt ys free from sinne, ād full of life, which Chryst hath brought in an geueth to vs to the intent we shoulde be partakers of yt. And that ther D should remain in this matter nothing doubtfull, but all scruple taken awaie, as that this flesh spoken of here shoulde not be drawen to the flesh vpon the crosse, or to the spirituall flesh, or figuratiue flesh, or anie soche [Page]other: he doth by expresse woordes declare, that he speaketh of the flesh of Chryst on the table. For (saieth he) he hath geuen vs thys flesh, that webeing E nourished with yt, by this liuing and immortall table we shoulde be mixed together. Ther ys none (I thinke) so insensate, or withoute vnderstanding but he knoweth what Chrysostom meneth by the table. He meeneth the meat of the table. Nowe this meat of the table, ys not (as the Aduersarie dreameth) a peice of dead bread, but yt ys a liuing, and an immortall meat (as Chrysostome termeth yt) whiche ys the flesh of Chryst, of whiche he spake before, saing, that yt was free from sinne, and full of life. Calling yt then before full of life, and here liuing and immortall, there saing, that of yt we are made partakers, and here by yt, we are mixed together: ther that by yt we are nourished, and here calling yt the meat of the table, argueth besides the continuance of the sentence (which proueth the same) that he spake of one thing, whiche ys the flesh of Chryst, which ys on the table, by the nutriment of which we are partakers of that one bread, and so be made one bodie and one bread. And nowe reader, that thowe hauest hearde Chrysostome so plainlie expownding sainct Paule, we will leaue him and heare sainct Augustine, for he also geueth an vnderstanding of this text on this wise: F Quia Christus passus est pro nobis, cōmendauit nobis in isto sacramento corpus & sanguinem suum. Quod etiam fecit & nos ipsos. Nam & nos ipsius corpus facti sumus, & per misericordiam ipsius quod accipimus nos sumus. Bicause Chryst hath suffred for vs he commended vnto vs in this Sacrament his bodie and bloode, whiche also he hath made our selues. For we also are made his bodie, and August. feria. 2. Pasch Chryst hath cōmē ded to vs his bodie and blood in the Sacr. by his mercie that we receaue we be. In this short saing he hath declared both the mean by the which we are made the bodie of Chryst, and that we be the bodie of Chryst. First he openeth the mean saing, that bicause Chryst hath suffred for vs, he hath commended vnto vs in this Sacrament his bodie and bloode. Note the speache of sainct Augustin, he saieth not that Chryst hath commended vnto vs, bicause he hath suffred for vs, a figure for a memoriall of that his passion: but he saieth by plain woordes, that Chryst commended to vs his bodie and bloode. And applieng the cause to the effecte afterwarde he saieth: By his mercie we be that we receaue. Which in plain speache ys, that bicause we receaue the bodie of Chryste, therfore by his mercie we be the bodie of Chryst. And to moue vs to abide in this bodie of Chryst, he proceadeth: G Dic mihi, quid est, ex quo viuit? Spiritus tuus viuit de corpore tuo, an corpus ex spiritu tuo? Respondet omnis qui viuit: Ex spiritu viuo. Qui autem hoc non potest respondere, nescio an viuat. Quid respondet omnis qui viuit: Corpus vtique meum viuit de spiritu meo. Vis ergo viuere et de spiritu Christi? In corpore esto Christi. Nunquid enim corpus meum viuit de spiritu tuo? Meum viuit de spiritu meo, et tuum de spiritu tuo. Non potest viuere corpus Christinisi de spiritu Christi. Inde est quod exponens Apostolus Paulus hunc panem, vnus panis (inquit) vnum corpus sumus. Tell me, what ys that of the which thow liuest? dothe thie spiritt liue by thie bodie, or thie bodie by the spiritt? Euerie one that liueth answereth: I liue by my spiritte. He that can not this answere, I can not tell whether he liueth. what doth euerie one answere that liueth? My bodie liueth by my spirit. Wilt thow also liue by the Spiritt of Chryst? Be in the bodie of Chryst. For doth my bodie liue by thie spiritte? My bodie liueth of my spiritt, ād thy bodie of thie spiritt. The bodie of Chryst can not liue but by the Spiritte of Chryst. Therfore yt ys that the Apostle Paule expownding vnto vs this bread, saieth: we H being manie are one bread, and one bodie. Thus sainct Augustine. In whom as we haue goodlie instruction for our faith: so we haue the like for our [Page 289]conuersacion. But not to be tediouse to the reader, S. Augustin shall be left A withoute note here vnto him to his farder cōsideracion of this his saing, for that by yt that ys saied, yt ys easie to perceaue the wholl minde of him in this matter.
THE FIVE AND TWENTETH CHAPITER proceadeth vpon the same text by Damascen and Haymo.
AS the Aduersarie vseth all the craft subtletie and falshead that he can, to deceaue the simple, and to abduce him, to lead him awaie and to carie him a farre from the flocke and folde of Chryste to the entent he shall not desire to come home again, and yf he do: yet for the distance, he shall not finde the waie to come, as a shepe, if he be caried but a litle waie from the flocke, that he went in, he will make great shift to return to yt again: if he be caried farre of, he neither B desiereth neither for his simplicitie can find the waie to return, therfore the Aduersarie (I saie) cōtenteth not himself to bring the simple a litle oute of the waie from the faith into one onelie erroure or heresie: but he will carie and The Aduersarie leadeth the simple into manie errours that holden by them he shall not find the waie home again. lead him a great waie out of the right waie, by manie steppes, and manie passes, that ys into manie errours and heresies. For seldome hath yt ben seen, that the Deuell bringeth a man into one onelie heresie, but into Diuerse, wherwith that common enemie oftentimes will so delight him, that he shall haue no desire to return home again, or ells through plain simplicitie, not perceauing the falshead of heresie, or by malice blinded, he shall be as yt were plainlie ignorant, not able to finde the waie to return: but so shall remain in a straung place, and then (which ys the woorst of all) he shall thinke himself at home, when he ys fardest of. Therfore, I saie, seing the Aduersarie hath so moch falshead to bring men to soch great blindnesse, in to so great calamitie and miserie of their soules, yt ys our parte to seke all the helpe of trueth to reduce them that be straied, and to staie them that be at home, that they perish not in that lamentable daunger, neither suffre them to come to C yt. Wherfore although this trueth of our naturall, and corporall communion with Chryst be allreadie sufficiently proued, and testified: yet that the reader shall perceaue that yt ys not a doubtfull matter, and testified of a few, but a certen matter of assured trueth, and generallie receaued, and testified of manie: we shal go forwarde in producing of mo, and of these Damascen shall be the first, who saieth thus.
Quia ex vno pane participamus omnes, vnum corpus Christi, & vnus sanguis, & inuicem Damascē. li. 4. ca. 14. membra efficimur, concorporati Christo existentes. Omni igitur virtute obseruemus, ne participemus participatione haereticorum, neque tribuamus. Nolite enim sancta dare canibus, inquit Dominus noster, neque seminare margaritas vestras ante porcos, vt non participes erroris, & malae fidei eorum efficiamur, atque condemnationis. Si enim omnino vnio est ad Christum, & ad inuicem: omnino & omnibus comparticipantibus nobis secundùm electionem vnimur. Nam ex electione vnio ipsa fit, non sine nostra sententia, ac deliberatione. Omnes enim vnum corpus sumus, quoniam ex vno pane participamus, &c. Bcause we do all partake of one bread, we are made one bodie of Chryst, and one blood, and membres one of an other, being cōcorporated vnto Chryst. Let vs therfore D obserue with all our powre, that we partake not with the partaking of heretikes, neither that we geue vnto thē. For our Lord saieth Geue not the holie thinges to dogges, neither sowe preciouse stones before hogges, that we be not partakers [Page]their errour, and euell faith and condemnacion. For if the vnion be whollie to Chryst, and whollie one to an other, we be also vnited to al that after our E election be comparteners with vs. For that vnion ys doen by election, not without oure sentence and deliberacion. For we all are one bodie, bicause we partake of one bread, as the Apostle of God saieth: Thus farre Damascen.
Although occasion be here geuen to note manie thinges: yet for that I will not trooble the reader with mo notes then be necessarilie appertinent: I will here make but onely two notes. The first ys that this authour, according to the text of sainct Paules epistle, saieth: that bicause we partake of one bread, we are one bodie of Chryst. Wherin the Aduersarie still ys impugned. For although this authour with all good catholique men confesseth, that we be vnited to Chryst by faith: yet with them also he affirmeth that we be neuerthelesse vnited to Chryst by a corporall vnion, for that we do partake his very bodie and blood. Whiche he noteth when he saieth that we be concorporated vnto Chryst. Which concorporacion he doth not attribute to faith, F but to the partaking of that one bread, although by faith we are spirituallie vnited to Chryst.
Of which cōcorporacions, this authour maketh a plain distinction in an Damascē. li. 4. ca. 13. other place saing: Non simpliciter, & fortuito ad orientem adoramus, sed quia ex visibili, & inuisibili, id est, intellectuali & sensibili constati sumus natura, duplicem adorationē conditori nostro offerimus, vt & mente psallimus, & corporalibus labiis: & baptizamur aqua & Spiritu: & dupliciter Domino vnimur, mysteriis participantes, & gratia spiritus. We are vnited to our Lord two waies. Not simplie, and by chaunce we do adore vnto the east: But bicause we are made of a visible and inuisible, that ys to saie, of an intellectuall and sensible nature, we offre vnto our maker a dooble adoracion, as we do both with minde and corporall lippes sing: and are baptised both with water and spirit: and to maner of waies we are vnited vnto our Lorde, partaking of the mysteries, and by the grace of the spiritt. Thus Damascen.
Do ye not see that we are two waies vnited to our Lorde? Are we not vnited to him by the participacion of the mysteries (which mysteries be the Sacramentes of Chrystes bodie and Chrystes bloode) and by the grace of G the spritte? This doth this authour plainlie teache. Wherfore consider hys grownde, that we be made of a visible and inuisible nature and should therfore by bothe these partes honour God. And so by means conuenient both these partes shoulde be vnited to God, the inuisible parte by grace of the holie Gost, as by faith and charitie: the visible parte by that that ys of like nature, that ys by the bodie and blood of Chryst. In. 6. Ioan. ca. 14.
For as S. Cyrill saieth: Oportuit enim certè, vt non solùm anima per spiritum sanctum in beatam vitam ascenderet, verumetiam vt rude, atque terrestre hoc corpus cognato, sibi gustu, tactu, & cibo ad immortalitatem reduceretur. Truelie yt behoued, that not onelie the soule by the holie Gost should ascende into the blessed life: But that also this rude and earthlie bodie with a taste, touching, and meat of hys nature, should be reduced to immortalitie. Thus S. Cyrill.
As both the visible, and inuisible, the mortall and immortall partes of man Both bodie and soule of man releiued by Christe, and howe yt ys doen. had need of releif, and bothe these most conuenientlie might be releiued by his like in nature, therfore Chryste, hauing the likes of these two in his person, that ys to saie, the immortall nature of the Godhead and the H mortall nature of man (which mortall nature being still the same nature, was chaunged in his condicion, and by the immortall Godhead was made also immortall) was by these two his partes able to amende the [Page 290]imperfection of our two partes. For wher the soule had infirmitie by sinne, A he was able as God to saie: Remittuntur tibi peccata tua. Thy sinnes be forgeuen thee.
By this parte wher the soule was spoiled of spirituall giftes, and impouerished for lacke of the same, he was able to enriche her, and adorne her, with the first and cheifest giftes, as with faith, hope, and charitie.
As touching our other parte, yt receaued great and singular benefittes by the like parte of Chryst, I mean by his bodie. For by his bodie be cured manie diseases, he raised the dead, and wrought great woōders, by his bodie now immortall he maketh our mortall bodies duely receauing the same, to In 6. Ioon ca. 14. come, at the time by him assigned, to immortalitie, as S. Cyrill saieth: Non verbo solùm, sed & tactu mortuos excitabat, vt ostenderet corpus quoque suum viuificare posse. Quod si solo tactu suo corrupta redintegrantur, quomodò non viuemus, qui carnem illam & gustamus, & manducamus? Reformabit enim omnino ad immortalitatem suam, participes sui. Ne velis iudaicé (quomodò) quaerere, sed recordare quamuis aequa naturaliter frigidor sit: aduentu tamen ignis frigiditatis suae oblita aestuat. He did not by his woorde B onelie allwaies raise the dead: but also with his touching, that he might declare that his bodie also was able to quicken or geue life Yf then by his onely touching the corrupted thinges are restored: howe shall not we liue whiche do taste and eate that flesh? He shall whollie reforme to his immortalitie, soche as be partakers of him. Neither aske thowe Iueshlie (howe) but remēbre that although the water be naturallie colde, yet by the coming to of fire, forgetting her coldnesse yt waxeth hote. Thus S. Cyrill. So then according as Damasen saied, as to our duetie yt apperteineth to honour God with the two partes of our compownded bodie, both spirituallie, and corporallie: So God of his mercie helpeth bothe these partes, geuinge to eche of them giftes vniting vs spirituallie to him by faith and charitie, and corporallie by his bodie and bloode receaued in the Sacrament, By the which (as S. Cyrill hath saied) he will reforme this mortall bodie of oure to his immortalitie.
Therfore, Reader, looke to thie self, and be not seduced withe the heresie of the Aduersarie. Weigh well the sainges of the holie and auncient Fathers, C and for lacke of faith leese not these goodly giftes of excellencie, Yt ys an excellent thing to be ioned to God and Chryste, and to be as one with him. Which thowe shalt be if thowe hauest a perfight faith, and so receaue that blessed bodie of Chryst.
But yt ys time that I shewe the seconde note in the saing of Damascen. The Communiō aught not to be had with heretiques. seconde note ys his admonition that we beware with all diligence that we do not communicate with heretiques. neither ministre the Sacrament vnto them, For if we do we partake of their euell faith and condemnacion. This admonicion, as yt ys good: so ys yt necessarie to be kept. For yt ys agreable to the scriptures. For as this place of S. Paule to the Corinthians, doth forbidde them, that they shoulde not be partakers with Idolaters in their Idolathites, for then they shoulde entre into felowshippe with Deuells: so doth yt forbidd vs to be partakers with heretiques. For if we do we entre into felowshippe with them, we seem to consent to their wicked heresie, and so to be 2 Ioan. partakers of the same, wherfor S. Iohn gaue streict charge, saing: Si quis venit ad vos, & hanc doctrinam non adfert, nolite eum recipere in domum, nec aue ei dixeritis: D Yf any man come vnto yowe, and bring not this learning, receaue him not to house, neither bidde him God spede.
So farre wide was yt frō the minde of the Apostle that we shoulde entre [Page]into the house of God with heretiques, and their to ioin with them in the partaking of sacramentes, that he wolde that we shoulde not receaue them E into our house, neither as moche as to bidde them God spede. And shewing the cause of this his commaundement saieth: For he that biddeth him God spede ys partaker of his euell dede: And to the entent this his admonicion shoulde be the better regarded, and the daunger of the breach therof well knowen to them, and feared, he concludeth thus: Beholde I haue tolde yowe before, that ye shoulde not be ashamed in the daie of our Lorde., In this saing of S. Iohn yt ys easie to perceaue that yt ys daungerouse to ioin with heretiques, and speciallie in the communion of sacracmentes. For if we do, we shall be confownded in the daie of our Lorde.
Yf S. Paule did earnestly require the Thessalonians and that in the name of our Lorde Iesus Chryste, they shoulde with drawe them selues from euery brother that did walke inordinatelie, and not after the tradicion whiche 2 Tessalō 3. they had receaued, shoulde we not withdrawe our selues frō them, which do not onelie walke inordinately but do with all that in them lieth laboure F to subuert the wholl order of Chrystes Churche, and with all violence and blasphemie impugn not onelie the tradicions which they haue receaued, but the Sacramentes and misteries of the true religion, and the wholl faith of Chryst?
S. Paule willeth that with fornicators, adulterers, dronkers, and idolaters we shoulde not asmoch'as eate meate. Therfor with the other yt ys withoute 1 Cor. 5. doubte, that we shoulde haue no felowshippe, nor medle with them, and speciallie in the communion of sacramentes. And as yt ys not laufull for the true chrystian to communicate with them in the sacramentes of the catholique Churche: no more ys yt laufull for him to communitate with anie in the newe forged sacramentes of the congregacion of heretiques, for like perill enseweth vpon bothe.
But let not the reader take me that I meen that they, which ignorantlie Heretiques how, they must be auoided. not knowing them to be soche, incurre anie soche daunger, if they communicate with them: But I meen of them who knowing soch to be heretiques, will yet communicate with them. They vndoubtedlie incurre the daunger. G For when they be knowen to be soche and will not be reformed, S. Paule willeth them to be auoided. Haereticum hominem post vnam & alteram admonitionem deuita, sciens quia subuersus est, qui eiusmodi est, & delinquit, cùm sit proprio indicio condemnatus. A man that ys an Heretique after the first and second admonicion Tit. 3. auoid, knowing that he who ys soch ys peruerted, and sinneth euē dā ned by his own iudgement.
According to this rule the people knowing Macedonius to be a, notable Eccl. hist. tripar. li. 4. ca. 39. & li. 5. ca. 30 heretique did both men and women so auoid him, that they wolde not, although enforced with great and cruell tormentes, once communicate with him, as in the Tripartite historie yt ys more at large declared.
In the primitiue Churche this matter was so straightlie obserued, that by the Canons of the Apostles ys was ordeined, that Byshoppe, preist or Deacon, Can. 45. which did but onely praie with heretiques, shoulde be putte from the comunion. if they suffred them to do anie thing as clerkes, they shoulde for their soche permission be depriued from their office. Although ther be manie H histories declaring this auoiding of the communion of heretiques to haue ben moche practised: yet I omitte them, for that this maie suffice to be spoken as but by occasion of the note of the woordes of Damascen, whiche [Page 291]although breiflie, yet with dumbe scilence I coulde not ouerpasse yt, perceauing A the note to be verie necessarie for this time. In. 10. 1. Cor.
And nowe here shall be place for Haymo, whom I haue thought good to ioing with Damascen bicause his sentence ys but short, and yet doth plainlie expresse the minde of S. Paule. Thus he saieth, Diuinitas Verbi, quae implet coelum & terram, & omnia quae in eis sunt, ipsareplet corpus Christi, quod à multis sacerdotibus per vniuersum orbē sanctificatur, & facit vnū corpus Christi esse. Et sicut ille panis et sanguis in corpus Christi transeunt: ita omnes, qui in Ecclesia dignè comedunt illum, vnum The God head silleth the bodie of Chryste, which ys sanctified of the preist. corpus Christi sunt, sicut & ipse dicit: Qui manducat carnem meam, & bibit sanguinem meum, in me manet, & ego in eo. The Godhead of the Sonne which filleth heauen and earth and all that in them ys, that same filleth the bodie of Chryst, the whiche ys sanctified of manie preistes, throughoute all the worlde, and maketh one bodie of Chryst to be. And as that bread and bloode do passe into the bodie of Chryst: euen so all that in the Church do woorthilie eate yt, they are one bodie, as he himself saieth: He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me and [...]n him. Thus moche Haymo.
Do ye not in these fewe lines see these two thinges, that ys, that in the Sacrament ys the verie bodie of Chryst and his verie blood: and also that all The excellēcie of the blessed Sacrament. B they which do woorthilie receaue the same, that they are one bodie of Chryst? As concerning the first, yt ys woorthie of note to see howe he doth settfurth the excellencie of the Sacrament, whiche I wish the reader more diligentlie to obserue, that the wickednesse of the Angells of Sathan maie be the better perceaued. Beholde howe litle so euer they esteem yt, or howe barelie so euer they terme yt: yet this authour saieth, that the Godhead of the Sonne of God doth fill the bodie of Chryst that ys sanctified of the preistes through oute all the worlde. So that he doth not take yt for a bare peice of breade, neither for the bodie of Chryst in consideracion of his humanitie onely, but as the bodie of Chryst vnited to the Godhead in vnitie of person, ād so of Chryst perfectly God and mā. And this ys the excellencie of the Sacrament in dede, howe barelie soeuer they sett yt furth.
And if they will reiect this authour so sainge, by cause he was (as some accompt) Haymo his doctrine cō ferred with the elder fathers. within the compasse of these thousand yeares: In dede if he were not a full thousand years agone, he ys verie neer. But who geueth this wicked C generacion authoritie to reiecte him nowe at their pleasure, whom the churche hath so long approued and receaued? And what saieth he that the holie elders before a thousande years saie not? As touching that he saieth, that God ys in the Sacrament what ys he of the elders that treacteth of this misterie and saieth yt not? In deci. 1. Cor. homil. 24.
Among other Chrysostome most plainly doth saie yt euen vpon this chapiter, in this maner: Absterge ab omni sorde animam tuam. Praepara mentem tuam ad horum mysteriorum perceptionem, Etenim si puer regius purpura & diademate ornatus tibi ferendus traderetur, nonne omnibus humi abiectis eum susciperes? Verùm nunc cùm non hominis regium puerum, sed vnigenitum Dei filium accipias, Dic queso, no horrescis? & The onelie be gotten Sonne of God ys receaued in the B. Sacr. omnium secularium rerum amorem abiicis? Make clean thy soule from all filthinesse, prepare thy minde to the receipt of these misteries. For if the kinges childe decked with purple and diademe were deliuered to thee to be born, woldest not thowe, all other thinges cast down on the grownde, receaue him? But nowe when thowe takest not the childe of a king a man, but the onelie begotten Sonne of God, tell me, I praie thee, arte thowe not afearde? D and castes awaie the loue of all worldlie thinges?
In this sentence Chrisostome being in exhortacion that men shoulde prepare [Page]them selues woorthilie to receaue the blessed Sacrament, doth he not by plain woordes tell them, that they receaue the onelie begotten Sonne of E God? S. Cyrill also saieth: Qui Christi carnem manducat, vitam habet aeternam. Habet enim haec caro Dei Verbum quod naturaliter vita est. He that eateth the flesh of cap. 15. in 6. Joan. The flesh of Chryst in the Sacr. hath the Sō ne of God ioined to yt Chryst, hath euerlasting life. For this flesh hath the Sonne of God, whiche ys life naturallie. As the sentences of these two Fathers be, that the Sacrament conteineth and hath the bodie of Chryst, and the Godhead also, and so verie Chryst God and man: so ys the concorde sentence of all the rest of the holie auncient fathers. But to shewe that Haymo ys agreable to the catholique and auncient faith, these two maie suffice.
Nowe yt were a meruailouse kinde or maner of teaching, if these fathers ment, that in the Sacrament were no presence, but that yt ys a bare sign or figure, that they wolde teache that yt ys the verie onelie begotten Sonne of God, as Chrysostom doeth. And that yt ys the flesh of God, that hath the Godhead ioined to yt (as S. Cyrill saieh) and neuer as moche as once to teache that yt ys not Chryst in dede, or onely a figure of him. Can anie man F whose head and iudgement the madde spiritt hath not infected and corrupted, thinke, that these being reputed holie, vertueouse, and larned men wolde allwaies by these tearmes so haue taught, and the trueth to be clear, the cōtrary by the negatiue? wolde they allwaies haue saied: yt ys the bodie of God, yt ys the bodie of Chryst, yt ys his flesh, yt ys his bloode: if the trueth were by the negatiue, as the Aduersarie saieth, that yt ys not so? Wolde they haue saied yt ys so, if the trueth were to saie, yt ys not so? Yt ys not to be thought in them. For all their trauaill was to plant Gods trueth in the heartes of people, and to roote oute errour ād heresie. wherfore (as ys saied) obserue howe this authour setteth furth the excellencie of the Sacrament, which ys doen agreablie to the sentence of the Fathers, and therfore repute thowe yt soche a thing, as of soche men yt ys commended vnto thee, and not as by these inuentours of mischeif yt ys discommended to thee. This thing being thus manifested to thee (Reader) the other note (whiche ys, that all that do woourthily receaue the Sacrament be one bodie of Chryst) can not be obscure. For as Chryst taking vpon him our flesh and our bloode, G ys one with vs: so we again receauing his flesh and his blood woorthily; are one with him. And nowe of the expositions of these two vpon this text, this maie suffice.
THE SIX AND TWENTETH CHAP. PROCEAdeth vpon the same text by S. Cyrill, and S. Thomas.
THough the plentie of testimonies maie, and (as I am sure) doth offende the Aduersarie, (for the more testimonie against him, the more confusion) yett I doubt yt not, but on the other side yt dothe aswell delight and also comforth the catholique chrystian. Therfor we shall not refuse to heare S. Cyrill, howe he vnderstandeth S. Paule in this text. In diuerse places he maketh mencion of this text, very plainly declaring howe he vnderstandeth yt, but most plainly vpon the xvii. chapter of S. Iohn wher he saieth thus: Cùm trinitas vnum natura H sit, consideremus quomodò etiam nos ipsi inter nos corporaliter, & cum Deo spiritualiter Cyril. in 17 Ioan. vnum sumus. Ex Dei patris substantia, vnigenitus prodiens, & totum in sua natura genitorem possidens, carofactus secundùm scripturam est, seue ipsum naturae nostrae, ineffabiliter [Page 292] coniunxit atque vniuit. Qui enim natura Deus est, verè homo factus est: non Theophorus, A id est, Deum in se per gratiam habens, vt mysterii vim ignorantes contendunt, sed verus deus simul & homo est. Sic quae inter se plurimum distant secundùm naturam in vno seipso coniunxit, & naturae diuinae nos participes effecit. Communicatio enim Spiritus & (vt ita dicam) mansio, primum in Christo fuit, & ab eo in nos penetrauit, cùm homo factus, ipse templum suum proprio spiritu perunxit, atque sanctificauit. Origo ergo & via qua Spiritu sancto participamus, & Deo vniti sumus, Christi misterium est. Omnes enim in illo sanctificamur. Vt igitur inter nos & Deum, singulos vniret, quamuis corpore simul & anima distemus, modum tamen adinuenit consilio Patris, & sapientiae suae congruentem. Suo enim corpore credentes per Communionem mysticam benedicens, & secum, & inter nos, vnum corpus effecit. Quis eos qui vnius sancti corporis vnionem in vno Christo vni tisunt, ab hac naturali vnione alienos putabit? Nam si omnes vnum panem manducamus, vnum omnes corpus efficimur: Diuidi enim, atque seiungi Christus non patitur. idcirco etiā Ecclesia corpus Christi facta est, & nos singuli membra Christi, secundùm Paulū, vni enim Christo per corpus suum coniuncti, quoniam in nobis illum, qui est indiuisibilis, accepimus, ipsi potius, quam nobis membra nostra accommodantur.
Forasmoche as the Trinitie in nature ys one, let vs consider howe we ourselues among our selues corporallie, and with God spirituallie are one. The B onelie begotten coming oute of the substance of God the Father, and possessing in his nature, the wholl Father according to the scripturs, was made flesh, and vnspeakeablie conioined and vnited himself to our nature. He that in nature ys God, ys verilie made man, not hauing God in him by grace (as they that knowe not the power or vertue of the misterie do contende) but he ys very God, and also very man. So he hath conioined thinges to gether in him self being one, which in nature betwixt them selues, are very moche different, and hath made vs partakers of the diuine nature. The communicacion, and (as I might saie) the dwelling of the spirit was first in Chryst, and from him hath comed into vs, when he being made man, throwly anointed and sanctified his temple, with his owne spiritt. The originall therfore, By the B. Sacrament Chryste maketh vs one bodie in his bodie and among our selues and the waie by the whiche we participate the holie Gost, and be vnited to God ys the misterie of Chryst. For in him we are all sanctified. Therfor that he might vnite euery one betwixt our felfes and God, (all though both in bodie and soule we differ moch) yet he fownd awaie agreing to the counsell C of the Father and his wisdom, for blessing the beleuers by the misticall communion, he hath made vs in his bodie, one bodie both with him selfe, and also emong our selues. For who shall thinke them straunge from this natuturall vniō, whiche by the vnion of one holie bodie are vnited in one Chryst. For if we do all eate one bread we are all made one bodie. For Chryst suffreth vs, not to be disioined, and diuided. Therfore the churche of ys made the bodie of Chryst, and euery one of vs the membres of Chryste, after S. Paule, being conioined to one Chryst by his bodie, for that we haue receaued him in vs, who ys indiuisible, our membres be raither appropriated to him then to vs. Thus farre S. Cyrill.
Ye haue hearde the long saing of this woorthie Father, and yet in my iudgement, as pleasant and profitable, as yt ys long. For he hath made a full discourse of the vnion of vs to God. For plain declaraciō wherof, this if yowe haue marked maie be perceaued, that first he hath taught the vnitie of God the Sonne in nature with God the Father. Secondarelie, the vnion of the nature of God, and the nature of man, in the person of Chryst, whiche although D they were so different and distant: yet he ioined them together in him self in vnitie of person, when he became man. Thirdlie, the vnion of [Page]men senerall and distincte in persons, which although they be distante and E different both in bodie and soule: yet he fownde awaie agreing bothe to the counsell of the Father, and his owne wisdome also, to vnite them by the By receipt of the bodie of Chryste all woorthie receauers are made one. vnion of his holie bodie in a naturall vnion, and so they become one bodie. And to proue this he taketh this text of S. Paule, which ys now in hād, saing. Nam si omnes vnū panē manducamus, vnū omnes corpus efficimur. For yf we all eate of one breade, we are all made one. So that as he gaue the cause of the vnitie of the Father and the Sonne in Godhead, which was for that they be one in nature. And as he shewed the meā of the vniō of the naturs of God and mā, whiche was brought to passe by the misterie of the incarnaciō: So he taught the communion of vs among our selues, and with Chryst to be by that, that we all receaue that his one bodie. And that ther shoulde be no inuention added to peruert the trueth of his intent and pourpose, he saieth: that we are all with his bodie by the misticall communion made one bodie. By which his saing yt ys most euidentlie to be perceiued that he teacheth not onelie a communion by a bare sacrament, but a communion by the verie bodie of Chryst in the sacrament. Which cōmunion also ys not a spirituall cōmunion onelie, but a naturall communion by the receipt of the naturall bodie of F Chryst, whiche he signifieth by plain woordes, when he saieth: Quis enim cos, qui vnius sancticorporis vnione, in vno Christo vniti sunt, ab hac naturali vnione alienos putabit? Who shall thinke them straunge from this naturall communion, which by the vnion of one holie bodie are vnited in one Chryst?
I trust, I shall not nede any more to note vpon this allegacion, but that by this yt maie well be perceaued howe he vnderstandeth the text of S. Paule to be spoken of communion of Chrystes bodie and bloode, by the which, besides the communion spirituall, whiche ys by faith and charitie, we communicate naturallie with Chryst, by the receipt of his naturall bodie in Communiō and vnion both spirituall and naturall by the B. Sa. the Sacrament.
And that S. Paule ment that we do so communicate yt appeareth most euidentlie by this holie father, who reasoning against one that saied the contrarie whose heresie the wittnesses of iniquitie, the newe masters of our time, haue neuely skoured, and sett abroade as sale ware to the worlde, as they haue a nombre mo, did thus write: Verùm quoniam nulla nos ratione, humanitati Christi posse tribuere ista, arbitratur, quoniā fide ac dilectione non carne, illi coniuagimur: G Cyrill. in 15 Ioan. ca. 6. Age pauca de hoc dicamus, ac peruersè ab eo sacrarum litterarum sensum exponi ostendamus. Non tamen negamus nos recta fide, charitateue sincera Christo spiritualiter coniungi: sed nullam nobis coniunctionis rationem secundùm carnem cum illo esse, id profectò pernegamus, idue à diuinis scripturis omnino alienum esse dicimus. Quis enim dubitauit Christum etiam sic vitem esse, nos verò palmites, qui vitam inde nobis acquirimus? Audi Paulum dicentem, quia omnes vnum corpus sumus in Christo: Quia & si multi sumus, vnum tamen sumus in eo. Omnes enim vno pane participamus, But sorasmoche as he supposeth that we by no means can applie this to the humanitie of Chryst, for that we are conioined to him by faith and charitie, and not by flesh. Go to, let vs saie a fewe woordes of this matter, and lett Cōiunction of us to Chrysse by faith and charitie spirituallie, by his flesh naturallie both auouched. vs shewe the sense of the holie scripturs peruersly to be expownded of him. Yet for all that we denie not that we be ioined spirituallie to Chryst by right faith and sincere charitie, but that we haue no maner of coniunction with him after the flesh, that truly, we vtterlie denie, and we saie that to be alltogether contrarie to the diuine scriptures. For who hathe doubted H Chryst also so to be the vine, and we the braunches, whiche from thence gett life vnto vs? Heare Paule saing, that we all are one bodie in Chryst, [Page 293]for alltho we be manie: yet we are one in him. For we do all partake of one A bread.
Do ye not here see that S. Cyrill bringeth in this text of S. Paule, to proue that we haue not onely a communion spirituall with Chryste, but also a communion after the flesh? What plainer exposition can be desired for the vnderstandinge of the scripture, then that sense in the whiche yt ys alleadged in argument to conuince an heresie? And if sainct Cyrill did iudge him per [...]erslie to expownde the scriptures that saied, that we had no corporall The Proclamer and his felowes setfurth that for a trueth now, which S. Cyrill reputed an heresie. communion with Chryst, but onelie spirituall, what shall we saie of the fautours of the like vntrueth? Shall we not saie, that they also peruerslie, expownde the scriptures? And shall we not woorthilie repute them as corrupters of Godes trueth, and deceauers of his people, whiche settfurth that to them for a trueth whiche was so manie hondreth yeares agon reproued as a falsheade, and so of all catholiques, and good Chrystians holden and estemed? no doubte but God will so declare yt, when yt shall please him to take his time to ouerthrowe their building. Endure B yt can not. For they haue builded vpon the sandes, and not vpon the rocke. In the mean time let them bluster oute their stinking doctrine, as yt shall please God to suffer them, for the punishment of our sinnes, for the triall of the constancie of hys faithfull, and for the excercise of their pacience, to the honour and glorie of God. But veritas vincet. The trueth shall ouercome, and veritas Domini manet in aternum. The trueth of our Lord abideth for euer. Yt maie be impugned, but ouerthrowen yt can not be. What the trueth ys in this matter, I trust yt maie easilie be perceaued, and yet ther lacke no wittnesses for the better declaracion of the same.
S. Thomas a man approued as learned and holie of all the church, hath trauailed in the exposition of the scriptures, and that not withoute his immortall laude and praise. He ys a woorthie wittnesse in this matter. And for the fuller vnderstanding of him, we will heare his exposition on bothe the textes iointlie as they lie one depending of the other. Thus he saieth: Et panis quem frangimus, id est, sumptio panis fracti in altari noune participatio C corporis Domini est? faciens no [...] vnum cum Christo? quia sub specie panis, sumitur corpus S. Thomas Aqui. in deci. 1. cor. Christi. Deinde cum dicit: Quoniam vnus panis, &c. ostendit quod omnes sumus vnum in corpore eius mystico, & tangit duplicem vnitatem: primam incorporationis, qua in Christum transformamur, aliam vitae & sensus, quam à Christo capite accipimus, quasi diceret: Per hoc patet quod vnuni sumus cum Christo, quoniam vnus panis vnione fidei, spei, & charitatis, & vnum corpus multi sumus, per subministrationem operum charitatis: Corpus seilicet illius capitis, qui est Christus. Multi dico: scilicet omnes qui de vno pane, id est, corpore Christi, & vno calice, id est, sanguine participamus, digna participatione scilicet spirituali, non tantùm sacramentali.
And the bread which we breake, that ys to saie, the receauing of the bread broken on the aultar, ys yt not a partaking of the bodie of our Lorde Vnder the forme of bread ys receaued the bodie of our Lorde. making vs one with Chryst? For vnder the forme of bread ys receaued the bodie of Chryst. Thē whē he saieth: For we are one bread, &c. he sheweth that we are all one in his mysticall bodie, ād he toucheth a double vnitie: The first ys the vnitie of incorporacion, by the whiche we are transformed into Chryst. The other ys of life, ād feeling, which we take of Chryst our head. As who D might saie, by this yt ys manifest that we are one with Chryst. For we being manie are one bread, bi the vniō of faith hope, ād charitie: And one bodie bi [Page]the subministracion of the workes of charitie, that ys to saie: the bodie of that head, which ys Chryst. I saie, manie, that ys to saie, all we that do partake E of one bread, that ys to saie, of the bodie of Chryst, and one cuppe, that ys to saie of the bloode of Chryst, with a woorthie participacion, not onely sacramentall, but also spirituall. Thus moch S. Thomas.
In whose exposition we finde nothing dissonant from the elders, but in all consonāt. The elders before alleadged haue expownded the bread and the cuppe whiche we partake of, to be the bodie and blood of Chryst: so doth S. Thomas his doctrine consonāt to the elders. this S. Thomas. They haue taught that S. Paules mindeys, that by that participacion we are made one bodie with Chryst: and the like teacheth he also. Thus as God ys the God of peace and concorde: so in his house ys agrement and consent, in the substanciall poinctes of our faith and religion: And this ys a trueth hetherto constantlie, as yt were, with one mouthe taught that the bread broken in the aultar or table of Chryst, ys his bodie, and all we woorthilie receauing yt, are by the same incorporated to Chryst and made one bodie with him. Wherfore, we shall nowe leaue these, and heare F other.
THE SEVEN AND TVENTETH CHAPITER proceadeth vpon the same text by Euthym. and Hugo.
AS God hath builded his church vpon a Mounte to be seen of all men: so hath he caused his trueth to be professed of manie, that yt might be knowen to all men. He sent his Apostles into all the woorlde to preach the Gospell to euery creature. He hath appointed learned men in euery parte of the worlde to geue the true vnderstanding of the same to euery creature. Praised therfore be his holie name, that wher now Sathan hath sent his wicked mynistres to corrupt the trueth of the Gospell, and to lead vs from the true vnderstanding of the same, our mercifull Lorde God hath prouidentlie before prouided soche teachers, by whom we maie not onelie see the falshead of the wicked: but also haue sufficient knowledge and testimonie to rebuke, detect, and conuince G their vntrueth, and their deuelish setting furth of the same, and to kepe vs in in the right waie that we erre not with them, if we will geue eare to good ād holsome doctrine. And therfore seing God hath sent soche plentie of good authours yt were pitie, but that they shoulde be brought furth, wherby God in his trueth maie glorified, and his people in the same edefied.
Of all these that remain first cometh to hande the learned grecian Euthymius, who withoute all darke maner of speache openeth to vs the true vnderstanding Euth. in 26 Matth. of S. Paules saing. Thus he writeth: Quemadmodum panis confortat: ita & Christi corpus hoc facit, ac magis etiarn, corpus & animam sanctificat. Et sicut vinum taetificat: ita & sanguis Christi hoc facit, & insuper praesidium efficitur. Quodsi de vno corpore & sanguine omnes fideles participamus, omnes vnum sumus per ipsam horum Flesh vnited to the Sonne of God by assumption, the same vnited to vs by participacion. myst eriorum participationem & in Christo omnes, & Christus in omnibus. Qui edit (inquit) meam carnem, & bibit meum sanguinem, in me manet, & ego in eo. Verbum siquidem per assumptionem carni vnitum est, baec rursus caro vnitur nobis per participationem. As bread doth comforte, so doeth the bodie of Chryst also this, and more, yt sanctifieth both bodie and soule. And as wine dothe make gladde: H Euen so the blood of Chryst doth this also, and moreouer yt ys made a defence. And if all the faithfull do partake of one bodie and bloode, we are all one by the same participacion of the mysteries. For all be in Chryst, [Page 294]and Chryst in all, he that eateth (saieth he) my slesh, and drinketh my bloode, dwelleth A in me and I in him. For truely the Sonne of God ys vnited to the flesh by assumption. Thys flesh again ys vnited to vs by participacion. Thus Euthym.
I nede not (as to me yt semeth) to saie anie thing to the opening of this authours minde. For he ys both plain in himself, and also plainlie dothe open the minde of sainct Paule vnto vs. Whose sentence he setteth furth in the plain tearmes, and leaueth the tropes. For wher sainct Paule saieth, that we that eate of one bread, and drinke of one cuppe are one bodie. He saieth that we that partake of one bodie and bloode are made one. So that wher the text calleth Bread and cuppe in S. Paule meē the bodie ād blood, &c. yt bread: the expositour calleth yt the bodie, and what the text calleth the cuppe, that this authour calleth the bloode. Wherfore the true mening must be taken, as the expositour doth expownde yt. For somoche then as the expositour doth expownd the bread and the cuppe, calling them the bodie and the blood: yt can not be auoided but that yt ys so, except the Aduersarie will saie that the text expowndeth the exposition. For vnto that sense that he wolde wrest all the authours vnto, the text ys more nearer then the exposition. The aduersarie wolde haue yt bread, and the text calleth yt B bread. The Aduersarie wolde not haue yt the bodie of Chryst: but this authour saieth yt ys the bodie of Chryst. Wherfore to the sense of the Aduersarie the text ys more clere then the exposition. And so yt cometh to passe (as before ys saied) that the text expowndeth the exposition, whiche ys after the maner of other of their doinges. For they turn the catte in the panne, and make light darknesse, and darknesse light.
But thowe, Reader, be thowe sure that Chryst who hath promised his holie spiritte to his Church, which ys the pillour of the trueth, hath not left yt contratie to his promisse destitute of this guide of trueth these thousand yeares, but yt was that Spiritt, that did leade the minde and the penne of these holy Fathers to vnderstand and perceaue the true sense of the scriptures, and so to write yt to vs.
God hath left vnto vs bread, euen the holie scripture to feede vs withall: but as he bidde his Apostles to breake the breade, that he had Ioan. 6. Bread of the woord of God how yt ys brokē. blessed for the siue thousand people: so by his mynistres in the church C he hath commaunded the bread of the scripture to be broken to the people, and what ys yt to breake yt but to expownd yt. And why shoulde they expownd yt, yf their were not places to be opened, and cleared by exposition? And therfore I saie these holie fathers, being appointed to breake this bread of the woorde of God vnto vs, ther ys no doubte but as they had learned of the master of trueth, so they brake yt truly vnto vs, and haue geuen vs the true vnderstanding of yt. And therfore the bread, and the cuppe expownded by so manie to be the bodie and bloode of Chryst, yt must nedes be true that by so manie, and so manie yeares hath with concorde and consent, withoute contradiction, ben preached, taught, and written.
This also ys not to be ouerpassed, that thys Authour leaueth yt not vntaught howe we are made all one in Chryst, bicause (saieth he) we do all partake of one bodie and bloode, we are all made one by the participacion of the mysteries. So that although he well knewe that we are all made one in Chryst by faith and charitie: D yet he also saieth, that we are made one by the participacion of the mysteries. And that yt shoulde moste manifestlie, well be [Page]be perceaued what maner of vnion this ys, of the whiche he speaketh E here, when he had alleaged the saing of Chryst: He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I him: mening therby to proue this vnion, he by most plain woordes openeth the same, saing. The Sonne of God ys vnited to the flesh by assumption: this flesh again ys vnited to vs by participacion, wherby yt ys very manifest that we are vnited to Chryst by the vnion of his flesh. For that flesh vnto the whiche the Sonne of God was vnited, that same ys vnited to vs. Chryst was vnited to vs by his incarnacion, we be vnited to him by participacion &c. So that, as Chryst was vnited to vs by taking of our flesh in his incarnacion, and so was made one with vs: In like maner, we are vnited to him by the taking of his flesh in the Sacrament, and are therby made one with him. Wherfore note that he saieth not, that we are in the receipt of the Sacrament vnited to Chryst by faith, but by participacion of his flesh. And yet this authour was not ignorant, that we are also vnited to Chryst by faith. But minding to open the peculiar commoditie of this mysterie he teacheth that by flesh we are vnited to Chryst.
Consider therfore, Reader, that wher the Aduersarie trauaileth to obscure and hide the benefittes of God whiche he geueth to the woorthie receauers of his blessed and honourable Sacrament: we on the other side labour to F open and declare them vnto thee, that thowe maist according to thy duetie more reuerentlie prepare thee to the recept of them, and also more thankfullie accept them. For we teache thee by the authoritie of these scriptures and holie fathers alleaged, that thowe woorthilie receauing the Sacrament doest not onely enioie the vnion vnto Chryst by faith (whiche onely vnion the Aduersarie teacheth) but also the vnion by the flesh of Chryst, by the which thow arte verilie vnited to him, being nowe of his flesh, as he by his incarnacion ys of thy flesh, as this authour hath saied.
These two poinctes then, I trust, be made clere, that in the Sacrament ys The natural flesh of Chryst in the B. Sac. couseth natural vnitie of vs to Chryste. the very substanciall and naturall bodie of Chryst, and that the woorthie receauers of yt are vnited and incorporated to Chryst, spirituallie by faith: and also naturallie by the flesh of Chryst. Whiche coniunction ys taught of sainct Cyrill to be so necessarie, that he thinketh that our mortall bodie coulde not atteign to immortalitie yf yt shoulde not be so ioined to this liuing and immortall flesh of Chryst. Non poterat aliter corruptibilis haec natura corporis ad incorruptibilitatem & vitam traduci, nisi naturalis vitae corpus G ei coniungeretur. This corruptible nature, of the bodie (saieth he) coulde not otherwise be brought to incorruptibilitie and life, except the bodie of naturall Cyrill. 15. cao. in 6. Ioac. life shoulde be ioined to yt. And (saieth he) if thowe beleuest not me saing these thinges, I beseche thee beleue Chryst, saing: verilie I saie vnto yowe, Except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his bloode, ye shall haue no life in yowe.
Whether that sainct Cyrill here speaketh of this naturall coniunction of the naturall bodie of Chryst, to our naturall and corruptible bodie yt ys more manifest then yt nedeth either probacion or declaracion. As for Euthymius yf the Aduersarie wolde wrest him, and corrupt him, yt can not be suffred. For wher he speaketh these woordes here alleadged, within a verie fewe lines before he speaketh of the transmutacion of the bread and wine into the bodie and bloode of Chryst, and therwith expownding the woordes of Chryst: This ys my body: denieth by expresse woordes, anie figure to be in these woordes of Chryst. Wherfore as he ys a H stowte auoucher of the trueth of the catholique Churche, and a mightie vanquisher of the Aduersarie, so can not he by anie engine be drawen from [Page 295]his assertion. But the Aduersarie maie waxe red for shame, when he shall see A so manifest testimonie against him, that he can not once open his mouth to auoide yt.
And nowe that this grecian hath so notablie testified the trueth, and opened the verie true faith of Chrystes Parlament house, what yt was in his time, and before: Beholde here cometh one of the latine church, being of these later daies, which, to trie concorde and consent in faith to be in both their sides, and in both their times and ages, sheweth what was professed throughoute the latin church in his time, who in the exposition of this text of S. Paule saieth thus: Dico quod vnum sumus cum Christo, per sumptionem sacramenti Eucharistiae, Quoniam omnes quidem participamus, id est, participes efficimur, vel quoad speciem, vel quoad effectus cōmumonem. vnde benè dicit participamus, propter diuisionem, quae fit aliquando in specie panis, vel propter effectus diuersos, quos habent ipsi sumentes. Altam enim gratiam recipit ille, aliam ille sumendo dignè Sacramentum illud. Qui de vno pane, id est, de corpore Christi & de vno calice, id est, de sanguine Christi, licet multi sumus participamus. Non dicit omnes, quia non omnes, qui sumunt hoc sacramentum effectum Hugo Card in Dec. 1. Cor. B illius recipiunt, & ideo non sunt vnus panis, quo reficiatur Dominus, nec vnum corpus cum Christo. Licet (inquam) multi, tamen sumus vnus panis per vnionem fidei, spei, & charitatis. Quae vnto initiatur in fide, & consummatur in charitate. Et vnum illius capitis, quod est Christus. I saie that we are one with Chryst by the receipt of the Sacrament of the aultar. For we do all partake, that ys to saie, we are made partakers, either as touching the forme or ells as touching the effect of the communion. Wherfore he saieth well, that we partake, for the diuision All we partake of one bread. that ys the bodie of Chryste and of one cuppe that ys the blood of Chryst. whiche ys doen somtime in the forme of bread, or ells for diuerse effectes whiche the receauers haue. For he receaueth one grace, and he another, receauing the Sacrament woorthilie, which although we be manie, do partake of one bread, that ys to saie, of the bodie of Chryst, and of one cuppe, that ys, of the blood of Chryst. He doth not saie, all, for all that do receaue this Sacrament do not receaue the effect of yt. And therfore they be not one bread, with the whiche our Lorde maie be fedde, neither one bodie with Chryst. Although (I saie) we be manie: yet we are one bread by the the vnion of faith, hope and charitie, which vnion ys begō ne C by faith, and ys consummated by charitie, and we are one bodie of that head which ys Chryst.
In this authour as in the rest before alleadged owre two cheif poinctes, whiche are here sought, are plainly taught. For he dothe bothe teache the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament: and also that by the receipt of that bodie, we are made one with Chryst. As touching the first, as the other authour last before alleadged, expownded these woordes (The bread, and the cuppe) to be the bodie and bloode of Chryst: so this authour likewise expowndeth the bread and the cuppe to be the bodie and Bloode of Chryst: Wherfore betwixt them ys goodlie consent, soche as although they were so farre distant in time and place: yet in this they be not a finger breadeth a sondre, but euen iointlie together. I nede therfore no more to trauaill in this, the matter ys clere in yt self.
The other poinct ys likewise as plainlie settfurth to vs. For in the first entrie he saieth, that by the receipt of the Sacramēt, we are made one with Christ, yf by the Sacrament, then not by faith onely: yf by the Sacrament, not by D bare bread. For onelie bread can not make all Chrystians, whersoeuer they be abiding, to be one with Chryst, and among them selues. And the Aduersarie himself saieth that bread hath no soche powre. [Page]And all Chrystians can not be made one, but by that that ys one thing to vs all, of the which all we be partakers. And in the Sacramēt can nothing be E imagined to be one to all the Chrystiā church, of the which all they cā be parkers, but the bodie of Chryst. Wherfore in the Sacrament ys the bodie of Chryst of the which all Chrystians receauing woorthilie be (as this authour saieth) made one in Chryst.
In this vnion we are not onelie one bread: but also, by S. Paule, one bodie. Which distinction of vnion, this authour semeth to refer or applie to the seuerall vnions before treacted of: as to the vnion spirituall by faith, and to the vnion naturall of vs to the naturall bodie of Chryst. As touching the first, he saieth, that although we be manie: yet we are all one bread, by the vnion of faith, hope and charitie. As for the seconde, he saieth that we are one bodie of that head, which ys Chryst. The fitst ys mere spirituall, and ys and maie be doen withoute the Sacrament, although not so certenly, nor so perfectlie.
For Dionysius Areopagita saieth: this Sacrament ys omnium sacramentorum consummatissimum, F of all Sacramentes yt ys most consummate, both for that yt ys Dionys. Areop. Eccle. Hielar. 1. part. ca. 3. so perfect in yt self, and also for that yt perfecteth all other Sacramentes, as the same Dyonise also more at large saieth: Dicimus ergo caetera sacrarum rerum signa, quorum nobis societas indulgetur, huius diuinis profectò, consummantibusue muneribus perfici. Neque enim fermè fas est saccrdotalis muneris mysterium aliquod peragi nisi diuinum istud Eucharistiae augustissimumue sacramentum compleat. We saie therfore, that the other signes of holie thinges, the societie of the whiche ys geuen to vs, to be perfected by these diuine and consummating giftes. Neither ys yt laufull allmost anie mysterie of the preistlie office to be full doen, except this diuine Sacrament and most full of maiestie do finish or performe yt.
Wherfore as by Chrysostom and other yt maie be perceaued, in the primitiue church they that were baptised, were brought frō baptisme to the receipt of the blessed Sacrament of Chrystes bodie as therbie to be perfected in Chryst, and certenly to be vnited to him bothe by faith, and also by hys blessed bodie. Although then by faith we be spirituallie vnited to Chryste G without the Sacrament: yet (as yt ys saied) we be not so certenly vnited, as when this noble Sacrament, which perfecteth other Sacramentes cometh also, but spirituallie vnited we be.
Nowe as touching the seconde vnion, whiche this authour speaketh of, yt ys not likewise mere corporall as the other ys mere spirituall, but yt ys so corporall, as yt ys neuerthelesse spirituall. According as the bodie of Chryst ys, which we receaue, which although yt be a verie true and perfect bodie, Amb. de init. myste. cap. 9. yet yt ys spirituall, as S. Ambrose saieth: Corpus enim Dei corpus est spiritale. Corpus Christi corpus est diuini spiritus. The bodie of God, ys a spirituall bodie. The bodie of Chryst ys the bodie of the diuine spiritte. Yt ys also spiritually receaued for that yt ys doen onely by the knowledge of faith, and not of anie sense. Although the office of senseis, and also of the bodie be required to the receipt therof.
So then as the bodie of Chryst ys so corporall, as yt ys also spirituall, and the receipt of the same bodie so corporall, as yt ys neuerthelesse spirituall: Receipt of Chrystes bodie both corporal ād spirituall. so also the vnion brought to effect by the same receipt, yt ys verilie corporal, H altho withall yt ys spiritual. This vniō he signifieth vnto vs, whē he saieth that we be the bodie of that head which ys Chryst. For as cōcerning the spiritual vniō, he saied before, that we are al one bread, ād therfor for the corporal [Page 296]vnion he saieth that we be one bodie. For proof wherof that he so plainly A ment, the allegacion of S. Paule to the Ephesians declareth which he bringeth to open the true sense and mening of S. Paule here. For (saieth he) we are membres of his bodie, of his flesh and of his bones▪ whiche woordes that they be vnderstanded of our corporall vnion with Chryst, yt ys more manifestlie declared by Iraeneus, then by the Aduersarie yt can Li. 5. aduers. heres. be denied.
Thus hetherto of so manie auncient and learned authours, ye haue heard no dissonante, but a consonante voice, all sownding one thing, that by the receipt of the blessed bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament we be vnited to Chryst, and made one with him.
THE EIGHT AND TWENTETH CHAP. PROceadeth vpon the same text by Oecumenius, and Anselmus.
I Reade in the fourth booke of the Kinges, that the King of Syria, 4. Reg. 6. B who was in warre against the King of Israell, for somoche as he vnderstoode that Eliseus the Prophet disclosed to the kinge of Israell the secrett counsells, intentes, and pourposes of the saied King of Syria, that he sent an armie of men to the cittie wher the Prophet laie to take him. And when the seruante of the Prophet went furth in the morning and sawe so great a multitud with horses and chariottes compassing the cittie rownde aboue, he cried, and saied, Alas master, what shall we dooe? The Pprophete saied vnto him: Feare not, here be mo with vs them with them. And when the Prophete had praied, the eies of his seruaint were opened, and he sawe the mowntain full of horses, and chariottes of fire rownde about the Prophete.
As the Prophete was thus strenghtned with so great a multitude, that his enemies were not able to preuaill against him, though his seruante knewe yt not, and therfor feared and cried: Euen so the verie prophet of God in the Churche of Chryste, who hath geuen him self ouer to the seruice of God, C that he ys fullie become the man of God, therfore ys lightned and illumined with the wholsome knowledge of the catholique faith, wherby he seeth God and his holie will and pleasure, he doth well see that though the Kinge of Syria hath now moued warre against the King of Israell: that ys, Sathan against Chryst the Kinge of verie Israell, and his catholique kingdom his Churche: and hath for the better expedicion of his pourpose sent an armie to kake awaie the prophete and godlie learned man, that he shoulde not warne the people of Israell of the assaute of Sathan, whiche he entendeth to moue by heresie, schisme, diuision, and subuersion of all good ordre in the Churche of Chryste: He doth, I saie, well see, that the prowde and cruell kinge ys not able to carie him awaie oute of the kingdom of Chryst, into his kingdome. For he ys compased abowte with a most mightie armie of the noble soldiers of God, all the holie catholique fathers, godly writers, and noble Martirs, whiche stand by him mightilie in the confession of Chrystes holie faith, whiche nombre being infinite, he maie (as euery learned catholique also maie) vnto the vnlearned faithfull man, the seruante of God, saie, D Feare not, ther be mo with vs, then with these enemies of Israell, with these Aduersaries of Chrystes Churhe. And for that these Aduersaries when they knewe the trueth, wolde not abide in the trueth: and when they knewe God, wolde not glorifie [Page] him as God, but they haue vanished awaie in their owne thoughtes, and saing them selues to be wise, they are become verie fooles. So that as their likes the people of the host E of Syria, were striken with blindnesse: so, obscuratum est insipiens cor eorum. their Rom. 1. foolish heart ys blinded. So that nowe blinder then Molls, they saie, light ys darknesse, and darknesse light. And thus being blinde are contented to be caried in to the handes of their enemies, as the Syrians were.
But God of his mercie woorke mercifullie with them, that they perish not in the handes of their enemies in the end, but that yt maie please him, that they maie be deliuered by the charitable mean of the Prophet of God, by the ministerie of the catholique preacher, and that for his persecucō they maie sustein no other affliction, but that they maie eate in the middest of the cittie, the bread of the Israelites, the bread of the true chrystians the bodie of Chryste in the holie Sacrament, and so ceasse anie more to persequute Israell, but to become one with thē, in that sorte, that Multitudinis credentium fiat cor vnum, & anima vna in Domino. Of the multude of them that beleue, Acto 4. ther be but one heart, and one soule. An ende they shall haue, for to F continue God will not suffre them, and if their demerites so require (as nowe ours do to be afflicted with them) God will withholde that mercie from them, that they maie not come to that ende, which before I haue desiered for them: Oh Lorde, howe miserable then shall be the ende?
Wherfore, Chrysten reader, be of good cheer, and feare not. For though they haue worldlie might and power on their side: yet they can not preuaill against vs. For ther be mo on our side, then on theirs. All the holie writers be with us, of which thowe hauest hearde a good nombre, and yet thowe shalt heare moo, which shall not speake in darke maner, so as thowe maist be doubtfull what they meen, or howe they be to be taken and vnderstanded, thowe shalt heare them in so clere maner testifie the trueth, that yt shall be easie to saie,: this ys their meening, and thus they are to be vnderstanded.
And for triall herof, here ys first the testimonie of Oecomenius to be hearde. Which ys this vpon the text of S. Paule nowe treacted of. Vnus panis, & vnū corpus sumus. Nam ex vno pane omnes participamus. Ratiouem addit, quomodò corpus Christi efficiamur. Quid enim (inquit) est panis? corpus nempe Christi. Quid autem efficiciuntur Oecum. iudeci. 1 Cor. hi, qui participant? Corpus sanè Christi. Nam participantes corpus Christi nos quoque illud efficimur. Quoniam vnus panis est Christus. Ex multis namue grauis (vt exempli gratia loquamur) vnus panis factus est, & nos multi, ex ipso vno participantes, efficimur Note howe Oecum. foloweth the woordes of Chrysostom before alleaged, saing what ys the bread, and answereth, the bodie of Chryste. vnum corpus Christi: Quontam enim vetus nostra caro corrupta est sub peccato, opus nobis fuit noua carne. We are one bread, and one bodie, for we do all partake of one bread. He addeth a reason ( saieth Oecumenius) howe we are made the bodie of Chryst. What (saieth he) ys the bread? Verilie the bodie of Chryst. And what are they made that do partake? truelie the bodie of Chryst. For we partaking the bodie of Chryst, are also made the same. For Chryst ys one bread. for of manie granes (As for example we maiespeake) one bread ys made. and we being manie partaking of that one, are made one bodie of Chryste, forasmoche as our olde flesh was corrupted vnder sinne, we had nede of a newe flesh. Thus he.
In my iudgement I nede not anie thinge vpon this exposition to saie, as wherby to make yt clere or plain, for that yt ys so plain of yt self: but yet in consideracion that I write not to the learned, but to helpe the vnlearned, H to whom nothing can be to plain, I will somwhat saie, therbie at the leest to ministre occasion to the reader, the better to note what this authour doth saie. S. Paule immediatelie before this text, had saied: that the bread whiche [Page 297]we breake ys a communicacion of the bodie of our lorde. by the whiche A woordes (as also Chrysost. did note) S. Paule wolde teach, that neer coniunction and vnion of vs, to and with Chryst, whiche ys no lesse then that we be made the bodie of Chryst. Then S. Paule proceading to this text which we haue nowe in hande, this authour saieth that wher before he had saied, that we be made the bodie of Christ, Herehe geueth a reason howe we are made the bodie of Chryst.
Among philosophers yt ys accompted vnsemelie to affirme anie thing without a reason. the scripture also willeth vs to be readie to geue an answere to euerie one that asketh vs a reason of that hope that ys in vs. So when S. Paule (as this authour implieth) had taught, that we be made the bodie of Chryst, here he geueth a reason, howe we be made the bodie of Chryst. And that this reason of S. Paule maie the better appeare vnto vs: the authour first openeth the partes of yt to vs. For wher S. Paule in his reason saieth: that we do all eate of one breade: to open what that bread ys, he asketh a question, saing: what ys the breade? he solueth the question furthwith and saieth: verilie yt ys the bodie of Chryst. B 1. Pet.
Note this then, Reader, that the bread whiche S. Paule speaketh of here, ys the bodie of Chryste. And note farder that he saieth not yt ys a figuratiue bodie, but he saieth yt ys the bodie of Chryst verilie. Wherbie the Aduersaries signes and figures are cutte of, and in this sentence of S. Paule ther ys no place for them. For yf yt be verilie the bodie of Chryst, yt ys not figuratiuelie his bodie.
Yf the Aduersarie wolde seke some shifte to helpe to hide and couer his falshoode and wickednesse, and saie that the bread, whiche this authour asketh this question of, and solueth yt to be the bodie of Chryst: ys the congregacion of the faith full, whiche he will graunt to be the very bodie of Chryst misticall. This glosse will not serue him, but raither declare him to be The reall bodie of Chryste partaken: the misticall bodie the partakers. a violent wrester of this authour, as he ys of manie other mo. For this authour speaketh of the bread that ys partakē and receaued, and not of vs which do partake and receaue yt. For when he had declared the bread to be the bodie of Chryst, then immediatelie he asketh: what be they made that dopartake yt? So that yt ys most manifest that he speaketh distinctlie bothe of C the bread that ys partaken, Whiche bread ys the bodie of Chryst, and that verilie, and also of the partakers, who be made his misticall bodie therby. See then, Reader, what a plain document this ys, howe mightilie yt confirmeth the catholique trueth, and confuteth the Aduerscries heresie. Weighe yt well, and thowe shalt perceaue good grownde to staie thie self vpon. Consider that the authour ys an auncient writer of the Greke churche, and for that which he hath written, he was neuer by anie godlie writer impugned. No man hath inucighed against him, for his assercion of Chrystes presence Catholiqus fathers agree all in one. in the Sacrament. Oecolampadius, Zwynglius, Carolstadius, and that rable, they haue not onelie ben impugned, but also their wicked heresies in this poinct, haue ben in manie and sondrie Councells condemned erthey tooke vpō them by the mocion of Sathan, to pull them oute of that filthie and stinking pitte, wher they and manie other heresies laie buried. And nowe yet again they and their heresies against the blessed Sacrament, haue ben newlie by a generall Councell condemned. This authour standeth vpright, clean vntouched and vndefiled. D
Consider that he expownding the text of S. Paule last before this treacted of, that ther he called the cuppe of blessing, the cuppe of the bloode of [Page]Chryst So that as ther he taught the presence of Chrystes very bloode. so E here he agreablie teacheth the presence of his bodie. Ther ys not in his mouthe, neither in the mouthe of anie of the other catholique fathers, whose doctrine we folowe, bothe yea and naie, but onelie yea.
In the mouthe of Luther, Oecolāpadius, and other, ther ys both yea, and naie, yt ys so, and yt ys not. For Luther hath not onelie preached and taught the presēce of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, as the catholique Churche doth but hath also writtē yt euen so: Again he hath preached, taught, and written moche against that that the catholique Church dothe teach. In this he agreeth with the catholique churche, that he teacheth the verie reall presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament: But in this he varieth, that he saieth, the bread ys the bodie of Chryst, and the wine ys his bloode.
And here note that heretiques falling frō the catholique church, as they Heretiques dissent frō the church and among them selues dissent and varie from yt: so do theye amonge them selues. For as heresie ys election so they though they take occasion by some one or other to folowe some deuelish doctrine: yet they will haue in diuerse thinges a speciall choice, neither agreable with the catholique Churche, neither with these heresiarkes whō they folowe. As Luther, who ys a great folower of Wicleff. hath not F chosen to folowe him in his assertion of the Sacrament as he left yt, but hath a peice of his propre phansie, as he thought yt good. For wicleff affirming Luther. the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, but denieng transubstanciacion, taught, that the bread remained with the bodie of Chryst, so that ther was both the substance of bread, and the substance of the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament. But Luther varieth from this, and choosing to folowe his owne inuencion, so affirmeth the presence of Chryst, that he wolde auouche the bread to be the bodie of Chryst.
Nowe Oecolampadius the disciple sometime of Luther hath in this mouth Oecolāpad both yea and naie. For he somtime both taught and preached, yea also did write, that Chrystes bodie was reallie present in the Sacrament, euen as the catholique Churche doth teache. Afterwarde being by his owne election the disciple of Luther he beganne to haue a peice of a naie in his mouthe to that, to the whiche before he had saied yea. And finallie, as his master Luther choose to varie from his Master Wicleff, and to folowe his owne phantasie: so this Oecolampadius chose to varie from his Master Luther, and to folowe his G phantasie. For he neither with his master, neither his graunt M. Wicleff wolde phantasie as they did, but all together the contrarie, teaching that ther was no presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, but as in a signe or figure. In the whiche he was so vehemēt, that he wrote against his master Luther, and that verie earnestlie. So that in these mens mouthes ye maie perceaue ther hath ben yea and naie: Their mouthes were soche of the which S. Iames speaketh that oute of them cometh bothe blessing and cursing. They are soche springes as oute of the whiche come waters both salte and fresh: bitter and swete: So that as ther ys no staie in them selues: so can no man be staied by them, in any good certentie.
The masters whom God hath appointed in his catholique Churche, they be not inconstant, they be not double tunged, with yea and naie in one matter, they saie not nowe this, and then that. The master saieth not one thing, and the scholer an other. The pestilence and destruction of comon wealths whiche be discorde, contencion, and diuision, ys not among them, But H as allmightie God saied by his Prophet Malachie of Leui. Lex veritatis Malach. 1. fuit in ore eius. & iniquitas non est inuenta in labiis eius. In pace & aequitate [Page 298] ambulauit mecum. The lawe of trueth was in his mouthe, and ther was no A wickednesse fownde in his lippes, he walked with me in peace and equitie, and did turne manie one awaie from their sinnes. This (as S. Hierom saieth) The office of a persight preist. in three poinctes. being the description of the office of a persight preist, agreeth very well to these holie preistes of the stocke of spirituall Leui, our auntient Fathers and writers, in whose mouthes was the lawe of trueth and they walked with God in peace and equitie, and turned manie from their sinnes.
This being the office of a perfight preist, and Luther, and his complices taking vpon them to reforme the state of the wholl Church, as though they were the masters of perfection: let vs make a proof how yt will agree with them. 1 The first point of this office ys that the lawe of trueth shoulde be in their mouthes. But this poincte ys not in them. For besides that the catholique Church argueth and reproueth them of most detestable falshead and heresie, they among them selues do reproue one an other of fasheade and vntreuth. Oecolampadius writing against Luther, and so his wholl sect of Sacramentaries against the sect of the Lutherans, wherin the one conuincing B the other of vntrueth, they make this true, that the lawe of trueth ys not in their mouthes. Hauocke made in the churchs by heretiques.
2 An touching the secōd which ys, that a preist should walke with God in peace and equitie, in this also they are to farre wide: For ther yt not onely a great lacke of peace betwixt God and their conscience: But also they be fixed in deadlie warre against his holy spouse, the church. Whiche they haue most cruellie diuided, cutt and mangled. They haue throwen dowen her houses, destroied her aultars, spoiled her treasures, prophaned her ornamentes, contemned and cast oute her sacramentes, violated and broken her lawes, infringed her liberties, derided her ceremonies, and with one woorde to ende, euerted all her orders. What peace ys in them that woorke these horrible troubles, and destructions? of all warres this ys the most cruell, this passeth fire and swoorde.
3 In the thirde poincte, whiche ys that a preist shoulde turne manie from iniquitie, they are clean contrarie. For they turn manie, not from but to iniquitie. For preistes (which as S. Hierom saieth) shoulde be so pure in preistlie C chastitie, that they shoulde abstein from all vnclean worke both in their bodies and their mindes spirituallie, for that they are ministres to consecrate the bodie of Chryst they should be free from all errour of filthie thought are nowe by these masters of wickednesse turned to all carnalitie and corruption of licenciouse life. And that they shoulde haue no conscience of their wicked doinges, they cloake whoordom with matrimonie. After this sorte religiouse men are poluted, virgens consecrate to God are defiled and so all virginall chaistitie almost vtterlie (wher they reign) abandoned. Praier ys shortened, fasting ys not regarded, obediēce to auncient order ys extinguished. What shall I stand in rehersall of the wickednesse wherunto men be nowe induced? As the time will not suffice, no more will my heart abide for wo to rehearse the heapes of euells that be nowe laied open for men frelie to runne to. These be to manie which be allreadie rehearsed to proue that these masters of wickednesse do so litle stoppe men from iniquitie, that they open wide gates for them to passe frely to yt. And yet I wolde to God ther were no mo but these. Thus by these three poinctes of the descriptiō of D the office of a preist described by God him self, for somoche as they be not fownde in these aboue mencioned men, yt maie well appeare that they be not of the nombre of gods preistes, as the other holie fathers be vnto whom [Page]these three poinctes be well applied, as in whome they were fownde.
But I see howe I am digressed, I will recall my self backe, and go forwarde E in my matter in farder opening of the notes of the expositiō of this authour, and committe the redresse of these euells vnto God, whom I beseche not to deale with vs accordinge to owre sinnes, nor to our iniquites, but that his mercieis maie sooen come vpon vs. For we are become in life and religion verie miserable.
Ye haue heard the authour before alleaged clerelie testifieng the presence of Chrystes bodie, which he so opened bicause the reason of S. Paule might the better appeare vnto vs howe we be made the bodie of Chryst. And therfore that doen, he entreth to the opening of S. Paules reason with this question saing: What be they made that do partake? He aunswereth: Truelie the bodie of Chryst. And geuing the reason whie they be so made, he saieth: For we partaking the bodie of Chryste, are also made the same.
Note then what ye do partake, and what by the same partaking ye are made. Ye partake the bodie of Chryst, not a peice of materiall bread, and by F the partaking of that bodie of Chryst, ye are made the bodie of Chryste. In this saing yt ys geuen vs to consider (as by other yt ys allreadie saied) that not onely by faieth, but also by the receipt of the blessed Sacrament, we are ioined and vnited to Chryst, whiche vnion, for that yt ys doen by the verie Oure naturall flesh corrupted by sinne ys repaired bi the ioining of Chrystes naturall flesh ther vnto. bodie of Chryste, yt ys corporall a vniō. Whiche corporall vniō this authour dothe manifestlie declare and prooue to vs by his last sentence, when he saieth: For somoche as our olde flesh was corrupted vnder sinne we had nede of a newe flesh. Wher withoute all controuersie he speaketh of our naturall flesh that was corrupted. Wherfore then to repaire this naturall flesh corrupted, yt was necessarie to haue a naturall flesh vncorrupted and soche ther ys none in that respecte but the flesh of Chryst. Wherfore yt ys that flesh that must be ioined to owre flesh, to releiue the nede of yt, and so vniting vs to yt reduce vs (as S. Cyrill saieth) to incorruption and immortalitie, whiche shall come to our flesh by that vncorrupted and immortall flesh.
But of this authour vpon this scripture here ys enough, yt ys time nowe breiflie to heare his yockfelowe of the latin church, which shall be Anselmus G who expownding this text saieth thus: Dominus corpus & sanguinem suum in eis rebus commendauit, quae ad vnum aliquid rediguntur ex multis. quoniam aliud in vnum Auselm. in deci. 1 Cor. ex multis granis conficitur: aliud in vnum ex multis acinis confluit. & ob hoc communicatio corporis & sanguinis Christi societatem sanctorum designat, & facit, vbi pax erit, & vnitas plena, atque perfecta. Propter qua omnia rectè dicimur omnes vnus panis, & vnū corpus, quia & omnes de vno pane corporis Christi participamus. Quod enim quisque suā partem ex hoc pane percipit, significat quia vnusquisque iuxta mensuram suam, particeps fit huius gratiae. Steut autem vnus panis Dominici sacramenti, vnum corpus Christi efficit in ecclesia: sic panis Idolatriae Daemonum participatio est. Et sunt omnes, qui de vno pane, ac de vno calice Domini sumimus, vnum corpus efficimur [...] ita si cum idolatris de sacrificio corum sumimus, vnum corpus efficimur. Qui comedit idolothitum vnum cum Daemone fit, sicut qui comedit corpus Christi, fit vnum cum Christo. Owre Lorde hath geuē furth his bodie and blood in those thinges, whiche of manie thinges are brought into one certen thinge. For the one ys made of manie granes into one thing and the other oute of manie grapes into one thing, And therfore the cōmunicacion of the bodie and bloode of Chryste, doth signifie and make also H the societie of sainctes, where shall be peace and also full and perfect vnitie. For all whiche thinges we are all well called one bread, and one bodie bicause we all do partake of the one bread, and of the bodie of Chryst. That eueeuerie [Page 289]one dothe take his parte of this bread, yt signifieth that euerie one A accordinge to his measure ys partaker of this grace. For as that one breade of our Lordes Sacrament, maketh one bodie in the Churche: So the bread of Idolatrie ys the partaking of Deuells. And as all we whiche receaue of one bread, and one cuppe, are made one bodie: Euen so yf with Idolaters we receaue of their sacrifice, we are made one bodie. For he that eateth of that that ys offred to Idolls, ys made one with the Deuell: as he that eateth the bodie of Chryst, ys made one with Chryst. Thus moche Anselmus.
In whome maie be perceaued, a most godly concorde, and agreement, with his yockfelowe Oecumenius. For as he taught that we partaking the The one bread that manie be made one by ys the bodie of Chryste. bodie of Chryst, are made one bodie in Chryst: So dothe this Authour teache also. For declaracion wherof as also for a note for the better vnderstandinding of Sainct Paule, obserue that where Sainct Paule saieth. All we are one bread, and one bodie, which do partake of that one bread. This Authour expownding what that one bread ys, doth not saie that yt ys materiall or Sacramentall breade, but with expresse woordes he saieth that yt ys the B bread of the bodie of Chryst.
And let not the Aduersarie thinke that he maie wrest this saing to the spirituall bodie of Chryst, after his wicked maner and custome. For neither the euident and plain sentences of this Authour whiche are before alleaged, in the whiche ys declared the very reall presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, neither this exposition will suffre yt. For where he expowndeth, The one bread, in Sainct Paules saing to be the bodie of Chryst: afterwarde he calleth the same the bread of our Lordes Sacrament, So that the bread of the bodie of Chryste being the breade of our Lordes Sacrament, we are plainlie taught that he speaketh of the bodie of Chryst in the Sacramēt. For the spirituall maner whiche the Aduersarie speaketh of, neither ys, neither cā be in the Sacrament but in the receauer, Wherfor the other before spoken of must nedes be true.
And for our vniō to Chryst agreablie as before ys taught, he teacheth here. C For in the ende he saieth: He that eateth Idolathites ys made one with the Deuel, as he that eateth the bodie of Chryst ys made one with Chryst. Wherby yt ys plain that this Authour teacheth that vniō to be made by the receauing of the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament, for of yt he speaketh, as before ys proued. We are vnited to Chryst, not onely after the maner wherwith we are by faith and charitie vnited, but by that special maner, that before ys declared oute of S. Cyril, and other, whiche ys a natural and substancial vnion, Whiche vnion cometh to vs by the nature and substance of the flesh of Chryste receaued in the Sacrament, as Chryst ys one with vs by the taking. vpon him our flesh in his incarnacion.
THE NINE AND TWENTETH CHAPITER, treacteth of the same text by Theophilact and Dionyse, and endeth with Remigius.
NOwe to finish the exposition of this text in hande cometh the last D coople to make vppe the nombre of twelue, whiche nombre as yt ys taken, and reputed as sufficient by the lawes to determine matters of great controuersie, and weight, yea euen for the life, and death of man: So yt maie suffice to anie reasonable man to determine this [Page]matter nowe called in controuersie by euell men, whiche of yt self ys a most plain matter, and so hath ben accepted these fiftene hundreth yeares, althought E a fewe light sculkers haue somwhat murmured, and whispered against yt in corners: yet yt hath allwaies preuailed, and shall vndoubtedlie nowe also, albeit that Sathan so mightilie impugneth yt, and that with so great an Armie, as the like to this time was neuer seen.
But to speake in the boldenesse of faith with S. Paule. Deus pacis conteret Satanam sub pedibus vestris velociter. The God of peace shall treade Sathan vnder your feete shortlie. Rom. 16.
And therfor Reader, be strong in faithe, and feare not though the Aduersary glorie a litle while, thowe shalt see yt come to passe, that thowe maist saie with the Prophet Dauid. Vidi impium superexaltatum, & eleuatum sicut Psal. 36. Cedrus Libani, & transiut, & ecce non erat. Quaesiui eum, & non est inuentus locus eius. I my self haue seen the vngodlie in great power, and flowrishing like a green baie tree, and I went by and lo, he was gon, I sought him but his place coulde not be fownde.
Holofernes was mightie ouer the people of God in Bethulia. He gloried F Indich. 13. moche, and spake great woordes, but howe soddein and short was his destruction? Goliath defied the host of the liuing God, he reuiled and railed 1. Reg. 17. vpon Israell, and God suffred him a certain time: but yet was he by litle Dauid, whom he contemned soen ouerthrowen, and Israell that daie had great and ioifull victorie vpon Goliath and all the Philistines. Therfore let neither their glorie dismaie thee, or put thee in doubte, neither feare put thee from this faith, but remembre the saing of S. Paule, Oportet haereses esse vt qui probati sunt, manifesti fiant in vobis. Ther must be herseis or sectes among 1. Cor. 11. yowe, that they, which are perfecte among yowe, maie be knowen. Not (as Sedulius saieth) quod haereses Deo placeant, sed quòd per eas fideles exerceantur, vt qui Se dulius in Dec. 1. Co. Deo noti sunt, hominibus manifestentur. Not that hereseis please God, but that the faithfull maie be exercised, and that they whiche be knowen to God maie also be knowen to men. Stand therfore stronglie in the battaill of thie Lord God, abide pacientlie his pleasure, abide thie triall in this exercise, and God will turne yt to thie glorie. And for thie better staie, and conforth read the G holie writers in whiche thowe shalt sinde that, that shall moche streng then thie faith.
Let vs nowe therfore procead, and heare howe Theophilact vnderstandeth Sainct Paule. Thus he saieth vpon this text. Cùm itaque vnum sumus, In Dec. 1. Cor. quopacto inter nos charitate seruata, non in vnum inuicem cohaeremus, praesertim cùm Paulus dicat, cò nobis Dominus proprium corpus impertitur, vt sibi nos copulet, & nexu quodam mutuo, nos reddat propinquiores? At vbi prior illa carnis natura prauis est facinoribus corrupta, & vitae caelestis est effecta expers, suam nobis Deus contulit, nostrae assimilem, quae & peccato careret, & vitam largiretur, vt eius effecti participes, & sibi admisceremur, & vitam duceremus innoxiam, vtpote qui vnum essemus cum Christo corpus adepti. Forasmoche therfore as we be one, why by keping of S. Paule saieth that our Lorde imparteth to vs his owne bodie charitie among vs, do we not cleaue together in one? speciallie seing that Paule saieth, that our Lorde therfor imparteth to vs his owne bodie that he might coople vs vnto him, and make vs nearer together by a bande or knotte H among our selues. And wher that first nature of our flesh was corrupted, and was made voide of the heauenly life, he gaue vs his, being like vnto our the whiche shoulde both lacke sinne, and shoulde geue life, that we being made partakers of yt, we shoulde bothe be mixed with him, and also leade an harmelesse life, as whiche haue gotten one bodie with Chryst. Thus he.
[Page 300]Among other thinges woorthie of note in Theophilact, to trooble the A Reader with no mo then appertein to the declaracion of the matters, whiche be here to be decided, two onely shall be noted. As for the presence of Chryste in the Sacrament, as he doth euerie wher: So dothe he here most plainlie teache the same. Owre incorporacion also to Chryst by the receipt of the same bodie, with other Fathers before alleaged he doth professe and acknowledge.
As for the first, this Authour perswading vs to the vnitie of loue and charitie, induceth for his cheif and great argument for that pourpose that we shoulde so be, bicause our Lorde hath imparted his owne bodie to vs, to the entent we shoulde be one. And yf the Aduersarie wolde blinde the simple reader, that this Authour meneth, that he gaue vs his owne bodie vpon the crosse for our redemption, yt ys true in dede that our Sauiour Chryste gaue his bodie for vs to the death of the crosse. But that this Authour ment here of that his geuing of his bodie, that ys most false. For he speaketh of that maner of the geuing of the bodie of Chryst, that S. Paule speaketh of in this scripture, which he expowndeth. And here Sainct Paule speaketh of the B geuing of Chryst, as he ys geuen in the Sacrament, as the wholl processe of Sainct Paule doth well proue. So that this Authour expownding Sainct Paule, speaketh as Sainct Paule doth of the Sacrament. Then speaking of the Sacrament this Authour saieth, that Chryst geueth vs his owne bodie therin.
And here by the waie note, that he saieth not this as of him self, but saieth that Sainct Paule saieth so. Wherhie he signifieth that this text of Sainct Paule speaketh not of materiall bread signifieng or figuring the bodie of Chryst, but of the verie reall bodie of Chryst, and therfore saieth, that he Argument vpon the woorde (bread) in S. Paule refelled. imparteth to vs his owne bodie. He geueth vs not his owne bodie yf we haue but a peice of bread. For the bread ys but a sign or figure of the bodie of Chryst, not present to be geuen, but absent. So that wher the Aduersarie buyldeth (as he thinketh) his strong towers and bullwarkes against the veritie of this blessed Sacrament vpon this and other places of Sainct Paule, C of the whiche some be allreadie treacted of, and the rest by the helpe of Gods grace hereafter shall be: saing that yt ys but bread bicause Sainct Paule calleth yt bread, ye maie well perceaue what a false grownde he taketh, and howe vnsure his buylding ys. For this Authour saieth, that Sainct Paule in this place saieth, that Chryst geueth vs his owne bodie, wherby yt ys euident, that though Sainct Paule calleth the Sacrament bread, yet he meneth not nor vnderstandeth therbie materiall breade, as the Adueasarie dreameth, but meneth that yt ys that breade which ys Chryst, in that sense that Chryst calleth himself, when he saied. Panis quem ego dabo, caro mea est, quam dabo pro mundi vita. The bread whiche I will geue Ioan. 6. ys my flesh, whiche I will geue for the life of the worlde. This sentence, as Chrysostome, Theophilact, and manie mo (as yt ys declared in the seconde booke) do testifie, ys spoken of the Sacrament, and then wolde I aske the Aduersarie, whether Chryst calleth him self materiall bread here or no. Yf he shoulde aunswer that he did so, then the saing of Chryst must nedes haue this sense: that materiall bread, which I will geue ys my D slesh. And so shall he bothe graunt a presence of Chrystes flesh in the Sacrament, and also condescend to Luthers heresie, who saieth that this ys a good and true proposition: This bread ys my bodie, and this wine ys my bloode.
[Page]Yf he saie, yt that ys not taken there for materiall bread, but in the generall E significacion for foode, as the scripture calleth Manna: as when yt saieth: Panem caeli dedit eis, panem Angelorum manducauit homo. He gaue them bread of heauen, Man hath eaten the bread of Angells. Of the which in the Psal. 77. same significacion Chryst saieth: Non Moyses dedit vobis panem de coelo. Moyses did not geue yow bread from heauen. Whie then maie not Sainct Paule Ioan. 6. S. Paule calleth the bodie of Chryste bread, as Chryste called himself in the 6 of S. Iohn. 1, Cor. 2. speaking of the Sacrament, vse the same terme in the significacion, that his master Chryst did, when he spake of the same Sacrament, and yet the same not to be taken for material bread, but for foode, as yt was in the sense of his master? Sainct Paule was no soche disciple to varie and chaunge the significacion of a woorde, wherby he shoulde varie from his master in sense. For he well knewe the minde of his master, as he saied. Nos sensum Christi habemus. We vnderstand the minde of Chryst. Yf then Chryst vsed this woorde Panis, not for materiall bread, but for foode, when he spake of the Sacrament, that he wolde geue furth, and leaue to vs: will not (trowe ye) his chosen vessell, who vnderstandeth the minde of his master, when he speaketh of the same thing that his master F spake of, and vseth the same woorde that his master did, will not he vse the woorde in the same significacion that his master did, to kepe the minde of his master, and not to varie from yt? He shoulde haue varied from the minde of his master all the heauen wide (as they saie) yf he shoulde take this woorde, panis, for materiall bread. For then this great mysterie of our incorporacion to Chryst, and this gteat benefit of the incorruptibilitie and immortalitie of our flesh and bodie, which cometh to vs by the partaking of Chrystes flesh, shoulde be attributed to a peice of materiall bread. Which thing what ys yt but plain idolatrie, geuing the diuine honours of Chryst to a creature, a dumbe peice of bread? Wherfor to ioin with this learned Authour we must saie (for that otherwise we can not trulie saie) that Sainct Paule saieth here that Chryst imparteth to vs his owne bodie, And so Sainct Paule speaketh here of no materiall bread, but of that high and godlie foode, the bodie of our Lorde and Sauiour Iesus Chryst. G
Wher then nowe ys the force of the herculeouse argument of the Aduersarie, who by this processe of Sainct Paule wolde proue that the Sacrament The argument of the Sacramētarie ouer throwen, for S. Paule speaketh not of materiall bread. ys but bread. bycause Sainct Paule calleth yt bread after the consecracion. For he speaketh (saieth he) of the bread broken to the vse of the communion, whiche ys after consecracion. Wherfor seing Sainct Paule calleth yt bread after the consecracion, yt ys after the consecracion but bread.
Yf this woorde bread were not vsed in the scripture in an other significacion then for materiall bread, and were not also of our Sauiour Chryst him self speaking of this Sacrament otherwise vsed, as yt ys declared, the argument might seem to haue force but nowe yt ys to vain: yt ys as good an argument as the heritique might make that denied the Sonne of God to be incarnate, bycause the scripture saieth directlie against him. Verbum caro factum est, The woorde was made flesh: that bycause, Verbum, signifieth H a materiall woorde, therfor he shall argue that yt doth none otherwise signifie ther, and so as he thinketh ouerthrowe the faith of the incarnacion of the Sonne of God, and maintein his heresie, as this Aduersarie wolde ouerthrowe the faith of the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, and by this woorde, bread, maintein his heresie. But as the one hath small force or strenght, so hath the other.
[Page 301]Wherfor nowe leauing this note in this Authour as which mightilie destroieth A one of the fundacions of the Aduersarie, and confirmeth the catholique faith, I will in fewe woordes touche the other note, whiche ys for our incorporacion to Chryste, by partaking of his bodie in the Sacrament, whiche incorporacion he so plainly setteth furthe, that yf his saing be considered, verie fewe woordes shall nede to explain yt.
Note therfor that thus he saieth: And where that first nature of our slesh was corrupted, and was made voide of that heauenlie life, be gaue vs his nature of slesh, being like vnto owers, the whiche did both lack sinne, and shoulde geue life, that we being made partakers of yt, we shoulde be mixed with him.
Doest thowe not Reader, see here that he saieth, that Chryst hath geuen vs the nature of his flesh, not the figure of his flesh, but the nature of yt, the substance of yt, but to what pourpose hath he geuen vs his naturall flesh? he declareth, to this pourpose that we shoulde be partakers of yt. Yf we procead and aske, what commoditie or profitte haue we by the partaking of his What profitte we haue by partaking Chrystes flesh. flesh? He aunswereth by the partaking of his flesh we are mixed with him in soche sorte that we receauing his bodie, and nowe being ioined to the same B the great vertue and poower of that bodie turneth our bodies into his bodie, So that nowe we are be come one bodie of Chryst.
Neither let the grosse Capharnait saie, that yf all faithfulll and woorthie partakers of the Sacrament be one bodie of Chryst, that then Chryst hath an huge great bodie: but let him remembre that the naturall man hauing twentie children, euery one of them ys his flesh and bloode, and yet the Father ys neuer the greater: So, manie of the faith becoming the flesh of Chryst by partaking of the Sacrament, yet the flesh of Chryst ys nothinge bigger of the person of Chryst. And howe soeuer this Aduersarie listeth grosselie to dallie in soche diuine mysteries: yet this ys the trueth, as by this Authour ye haue perceaued yt clerelie to be testified, and the like shall you see in him that foloweth: who ys Sainct Dionise, who expowndeth this text of Sainct Paule, almost woorde by woorde in this maner. Quoniam vnus panis per proprietatem, & vnum corpus mysticum vnitate fidei, spei & charitatis, Dionysius Carthus. C cuius corporis caput est Christus, multisumus, videlicet, omnes qui de vno pane, & de vno calice participamus: id est, de singulari & vero corpore, & sanguine reficimur, & Sacramentum tantum dignè recipimus. For we are one bread by propertie and one bodie mysticall by the vnitie of faith hope and charitie of the which bodie Chryst ys the head, we being manie, that ys to saie, all we whiche do partake of one bread and one cuppe, that ys, all we whiche be refreshed of the singular, and verie bodie and blooode of Chryst, and worthilie receaue so great a Sacrament-Thus Dionyse.
In this exposition let this be diligentlie noted against the Aduersarie, that the bread which all we receaue, and by the whiche we are made all one bread and one bodie: yt ys not materiall bread, but the singular, and verie bodie and bloode of our Sauiour Chryst, and so did Sainct Paule meen yt, as this Authour agreablie with all other before alleaged, dothe testifie, expownding and declaring the minde of Sainct Paule. D
Wher then ys the great argument that the Sacrament shoulde be nothing Argument of the woorde (bread) ouerthrowē but bare bread, Bycause Sainct Paule calleth yt breade? What bread yt ys, and what the cuppe conteineth not onely this Authour, but also one, many hondreth yeares elder then he doth declare. Whiche auncient Authour shall ende the exposition of bothe these last textes, [Page]and ioin them together. Thus he saieth: Calix benedictionis cui benedicimus, E Remigius in 1. Cor. nonne communicatio sanguinis Christi est? Idcirco primùm calicem nominauit, quia de pane posteaplus erat disputaturus. Calix autem benedictionis dicitur, qui benedicitur à sacerdotibus in altari. Appellatur & ipse calix communicatio, quasi participatio, quia onmes communicant ex illo partemque sumunt ex sanguine Domini, quem continet in se. Et panis quem frangimus in altari, nonne participatio corporis Domim est? vtique, primùm consecratur, & benedicitur, à sacerdotibus & spiritu sancto, & deinde frangitur, cùm iam licet pants videatur in veritate corpus Christi est. Ex quo pane quicunque communicant, corpus Christiedunt. Quoniam vnus panis, subaudis Christi, & vnum corpus, Christi, multi sumus qui comedimus illum panem. The cuppe of blessing whiche we blesse, ys yt Cuppe of blessing howe yt ys called. not a communicacion of the bloode of Chryst? Therfor did he first speake of the chalice, bicause he wolde afterwarde more at large treacte of the bread. Yt ys called the cuppe of blessing bicause yt ys blessed of the preistes on the aultar. The same cuppe also ys called the cōmunicacion, for that yt ys a participacion, bicause all do communicate of yt, and do partake of the bloode of our Lorde whiche the cuppe conteineth in yt self. And the bread, whiche we breake in the aultar ys yt not a partaking of the bodie of our Lorde? Yt ys F so, for first yt ys consecrated of the holie Gost, and of the preistes and afterwarde yt ys broken, when nowe although yt seem to be breade, yet in verie dede yt ys the bodie of Chryst, of the whiche breade as manie as do cōmunicate, do eat the bodie of Chryst, yt ys one bread of Chryst, and one bodie of Chryst, and we being manie do eate the same bread. Thus moche Remigius Who being aboute the yeare of our Lorde 511. liued before this our time aboute 1050. Whose confession yet of the veritie of the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, ys as plain as yf yt had ben made in this our time. What can be more plainlie spoken then to saie that the cuppe conteineth the bloode of Chryste? Who can better opē the trueth then to saie, although yt seem breade: yet in verie deed yt ys the bodie of Chryst? and so moche he saieth therbie not onely declaring his owne faithe, but also the faith of the Church he liued in. Nowe reader when thowe seest so auncient and with all so euident testimonie of and for the trueth, laie hande to yt and be not G caried, awaie with the vain woordes of this Proclamer. And thus ending this text we will go to an other.
THE THIRTETH CHAPITER BEGINNETH THE exposition of this text. Ye can not drinke of the cuppe of oure Lorde, and of the cuppe of Deuells, By S. Cyprian and Chrysost.
FOrasmoche as in the sixtenth chapiter of this booke. Wher I began the exposition of this disputacion of Sainct Paule with the Corynthians, the dependence of these scriptures, the one of the other and also the minde of Sainct Paule ys opened, what he here intendeth: I will not trooble the Reader with that argument again in this place, but remitte him thither. Onelie this I wish him to obserue that Sainct Paule diswading the Corynthians from Idolathites vseth three means to doe the H same.
One ys the declaracion of the greuouse punishment of the Iewes whiche S. Paule vseth three meanes to diswade the Corynthiās frō Idolathites. they susteined for Idolatric. Whiche being laied before their faces, they might be moued to flye the like offence, for feare of like pain.
The seconde ys vpon the communion of the bodie and bloode of Chryst [Page 302]that wher by the communion of that, that they did communicate they were vnited to yt, which they did communicate. And vnited they coulde not be A bothe to Chryst, and to deuells. Therfor forsomoche as by the communion of Chrystes bodie and bloode, they were vnited to him, they must forbeare the communion with deuells by Idolathites, by which they shoulde be separated, and diuided from Chryst again.
The thirde ys (as Sainct Thoms saieth) by the similitude of the legall sacrifice, whiche Sainct Paule bringeth in as an argument of like, to prooue this communion or participacion, when he saieth: Nonne qui edunt hostias, participes sunt altaris? Are not they whiche eate of the sacrifice partakers of the aultar?
To ioin the partes of the similitude together, and to make yt fullie to Thomas Aqui. in dec. prima Cor. appeare, thus Sainct Thomas doth sett yt furth: Are not they whiche eate of the sacrifices, partakers of the aultar, as they whiche eate of the flesh of Chryst are partakes of the bodie of Chryst? Forasmoche as eche of these be so, and Chryst and Baall can not dwell together, neither can we serue two masters. Therfor as a perfect conclusion he inferreth and saieth. Non potestis calicem Domini bibere, & calicem daemoniorum. Ye B can not drinke of the cuppe of our Lorde, and of the cuppe of Deuells. Where note this conclusion depending vpon the premisses, must include in yt tearmes of the same significacion that were in the premisses. Forasmoche then as the premisses spake of the partaking of sacrifices: yt must nedes be that Sainct Paule speaking here of the partaking of the table of our Lordre, and of the table of deuells, speaketh of the sacrifice of our Lorde, and the the sacrifice of deuells.
That he teacheth the bread and wine to be a sacrifice, yt shall be opened to yow, after the exposition of the doctours, although this ys sufficiētlie testified Sacrifice auouched by S. Paule before from the sixtenth chapiter vnto this place: yet that yt maie well be perceaued of the Reader, that my saing ys agreable to the holie Fathers and that this text was spoken of Sainct Paule, as of the sacrifice of the bodie and bloode of our Lordre on the aultar, the holie Fathers shall be brought furth as before they haue ben vpon the other scriptures, by whose testimonie C this matter shall be made clere.
And for that Sainct Cyprian rebuketh the same offence, that Sainct Paule doth, and vseth the same woordes that Sainct Paule doth, wherby the true mening and vnderstanding maie the better be perceaued, we shall first let his saing be hearde. This yt ys. Contra euangelij vigorem, contra Domini, ac Cyp ser. 5. de lapsis. Dei legem, temeritate laxatur incautis communicatio, irrita & falsa pax, periculosa dantibus & nihtl accipientibus prosutura, Non quaerunt sanitatis paenitentiam, nec veram de satisfactione medicinam. Paenitentia de peccatoribus exclusa est. Grauissimi, extremiue delicti memoria sublata est. Operiuntur morientium vulnera & plaga laetalis altis & profundis viseeribus infixa dissimulato dolore contegitur. A diaboli aris reuertentes ad sanctum Domini, sordidis & infectis nidore manibus accedunt. Mortiferos idolorum cibos adhuc penè ructantes, exhalantibus nunc etiam fcelus suum faucihus, & contagia funesta redolentibus Domini corpus inuadunt, cùm occurat scriptura diuina, & clamet & dicat. Omnis mundus manducabit carnem, & anima quaecunque manducauerit ex carne salutaris Leuit. 7. sacrificij, quod est Domini, & immundicia eius super ipsum & peribit anima illa de D populo. Apostolus item testetur, & dicat: Non potestis calicem Domini bibere, & 1. Cor 10. calicem' daemoniorum. Non potestis mensae Domini communicare, & meusae daemomorū. Against the force of the Gospell, against the lawe of our Lorde and God, through the rashnesse of some, communicacion ys frelie genen to the necligent, being a false peace and of no force, yet perilouse to the geuer, and [Page]which shall nothing profitte the receauer. They seke not the penance of E Penance of health, and the medicē of satisfactiō S. Gp. tearmes. healthe, neither the true medicen of satisfaction, penance ys excluded from sinners, the memorie of the extreame and most greu ouse offence ys taken awaie. The woundes of them that be dieng be couered, and the deadlie plague stricken into the depe bowells ys with a dissimuled sorowe hidden. Returning from the aultars of the Deuell with filthie and infected handes with the sauoure they come to the holie thing of our Lorde. Theie yet almost breathing owte the deadlie meates of idolls their chekes puffing oute euen yet their mischeuouse dede, and smelling of the deadlie infection, they violently come vpon the bodie of our Lorde, When yet the scripture of God cometh against them, and crieth and saieth Euery clean person shall eate the slesh. But yf anie eate of the flesh of the holsome sacrifice, which belongeth to our Lorde hauing his vncleannesse vpon him, the Leuit 7. same soule shall perish from among his people. The Apostle also witnesseth and saieth. Ye can not drinke the cuppe of our Lorde, and the cuppe of Deuells: Ye can not communicate of the table of our Lorde, and of the table of Deuells: Thus moche Sainct 1. Cor. 10. Cyprian. F
Who being moche offended with the necligence of soche preistes, as did admitte them to the receipt of the holie Sacrament, which had defiled them selfes with Idolathites, before they had sufficientlie doen penance, and made amendes for the same, rebuketh them both, the preistes sor that they suffred yt, and the receauers, for that they presumed to receaue yt. Whose rebuke, yf you marke, ys verie sore, sharpe, and terrible, whiche of so graue, and godlie holie martyr shoulde not haue ben doen, yf the thing that they receaued had ben but a peice of breade. For soche graue men as holie Cyprian was did with moche grauitie and godlie wisdome rebuke offences with iust measure, a small faulte gentlie and easilie, a great faulte seuerely and sharpelie. Wherfor this rebuke of S. Cyprian being sharpe and sore, yt argueth that their offence was great, and so in dede yt was. For they being so filthilie desiled, presumed to come to receaue the blessed bodie of Chryst: For they yet Table of our Lorde, the bodie of our Lorde. smelling of the deadlie infection (saieth S. Cyprian of the eating of the Idolatites) came violently vpon the bodie of our Lorde, to receaue yt. By whiche his woordes as G ye maie perceaue, ther was a great offence committed, iustly deseruing so great a rebuke: So maie ye perceaue, that by the table of our Lorde spoken of by S. Paule, he vnderstandeth the bodie of our Lorde. So that when S. Paule saieth: Ye can not be partakers of the table of our Lorde, yt ys asmoche to saie: as ye can not be partakers of the bodie of our Lorde. In this then the one parte heretofore in the former processe taught, ys confirmed namely that S. Paule rightly vnderstanded, taught the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament.
I shall not nede to make farder proof of this, seeing that yt ys manifest, that S. Cyprian correcting them that being defiled with Idolathites did presume to receaue our Lordes bodie, dothe touche them with the saing of S. Paule: Ye can not be partakers of the table of our Lorde. Whiche texte in dede shoulde nothing touche them, yf the thing that S. Cyprian spake of, were not the same that S. Paule spake of. And so contrarie wise yt ys manifest then that S. H Cyprian speaking of the euell receauing of the bodie of Chryst, that S. Paule also spake of the bodie of Chryste, and so both of them of the very presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament.
The other parte also, namely that he speaketh of the bodie of Chryst, as of a sacrifice, ys also easie in him to be pceaued. For to what pourpose ells shoulde Sainct Cyprian alleadge that place of Leuiticus forbidding the vnclean [Page 333]person to receaue anie parte of the sacrifice of our Lorde, but that that prohibition A being spoken of the sacrifice that was the figure, shoulde directlie be applied to the sacrifice which ys the thing, which ys the bodie of Chryst our sacrifice, and so teache vs that euery vnclean person ys forbidden to eate of this holie sacrifice? For to that pourpose did S. Cyprian alleadge that text, as a scripture by the which we are forbidden to be partakers of our Lordes sacrifice, yf we be ioined in anie folowshippe with Sathan. I minde not to stande long vpon this matter, for that I haue saied moche of yt allreadie, both in the first booke, and also in this booke. Wherfore thus leauing Cyprian, I will call in Chrysostom, as one of the other side of Chrystes parliament house, of whose iudgement in the matter of the Sacrament, soche a nombre of his sainges being produced, I trust the Reader ys not ignorāt, of the whiche also diuerse produced vpon this Epistle of Sainct Paule, whiche we nowe treat of, be so plain and clere, that none can be desiered more clere.
But for that vpon this text I finde him not by expresse woordes speaking so plainlie as the matter maie fullie appeare to the Reader, for the opening of the matter that ys here to be spoken of, I will produce him where he B speaketh of the same sense, that S. Paule doth, and withall openeth our matter very plainly. Thus he writeth: Quomodò sacrum videbimus Pascha? quomodò sanctum suscipiemus sacrificium? quomodò mirabilibus communicabimus mysterijs, lingua Chry. hom. 11. ad pop. Antioch. illa, qua Dei legem conculcauerimus? lingua illa, qua animam contaminauerimus? Si nemo namue purpuram regalem manibus accipere inquinatis auderet: quomodò Dominicum corpus lingua polluta suscipiemus? Iuramentum enim maligni: Sacrificium verò Domini: Quae igitur communicatio luci ad tenebras, vel quae conuenientia Christo ad Belial? Howe shall we see the holie Easter? howe shall we receaue the holie sacrifice? howe Sacrifice plainly auouched with reall presence. shall we communicate the wonderfull mysteries with that tounge, whiche we haue contemned the lawe of God withall? with that toung wherwith we haue defiled our soules? For yf no man wolde be so bolde, with defiled handes to take the kinges robe: howe shall we with a defiled toung receaue the bodie of our Lorde? Swearing ys of the wicked. The sacrifice ys of our Lorde. What folowshippe then ys ther betwixt light and darknes? or what agreement betwixt Chryst and Beliall? Thus Chrysostom. C
Who diswading the people from vain and superfluouse swearing (Whervnto Swearing to moche vsed. wicked custom, hath at these daies also to moche brought our people) saieth in effect, that they can not receaue, and become partakers of the bodie of our Lorde, with the same toung, with whiche they blaspheme Gods holy name, and contemne his holy lawe. Whiche ys euen the same that S. Paule saieth here: ye can not be partakers of the table of our Lorde, and of the table of Deuells.
And here note that as S. Paule by the table of our Lorde vnderstandeth the sacrifice of our Lorde, of the whiche the wicked can not be partakers: So here Chrysostome by expresse woordes saieth, that the wicked blasphemour can not be partaker of the sacrifice of our Lorde: By the whiche sacrifice he vnderstandeth the bodie of Chryste.
For the better perceauing wherof, note that he tearmeth the holie Sacrament with these tearmes. He calleth yt, the holy sacrifice. He calleth yt, the wonderfull Excellent titles of the blessed Sac. mysteries. He calleth yt, the bodie of our Lorde: He calleth yt, light: Yea he D calleth yt Chryst himself. By whiche tearmes he declareth vnto vs the excellencie of the Sacrament, as in which ys the very presence of Chrystes bodie, verilie and substancially, whiche ys also our sacrifice. These two partes we shall breiflie open in this Authour.
[Page]The verie reall presence he teacheth when he saieth: Howe shall we with E Reall presence ꝓued by Chryso. a defiled toung receaue the bodie of our Lorde? Yt ys manifest that with our mouth and toung we can receaue nothing, but that that ys substancial, and corporal, but with these (saieth Chrysost,) we receaue the bodie of Chryst. Wherfor we receaue the substācial and corporal bodie of Chryst. And therfor this being well knowen to the Aduersarie, he with might and main, denieth that we receaue the bodie of Chryst with hande or mouth, but onely with heart. But howe shamefullie he doth yt thowe maist perceaue, both by this famouse and notable Authour, and also by Sainct Cyprian, by Sainct Ambrose, Sainct Augustin, and a nombre mo. Which do plainly by expresse woordes saie, that the bodie of Chryst ys receaued both with hand and mouthe. But nowe to staie vpon our Authour this one maie suffice against the Aduersarie that he by expresse woordes saieth, that we receaue the bodie of our Lorde with our mouth and tounge.
For the other parte also he teacheth that the same bodie of Chryst ys Sacrifice proued by Chrysost. a sacrifice: For he asketh: Quomodò sanctum suscipiemus sacrificium? Howe shall we receaue the holie sacrifice? Nowe yf ye compare these two sainges F of Chrysostome together, namely that we receaue the bodie of our Lorde with our mouthe, and that euen so also we receaue the woonderfull sacrifice: yt shall be withoute all doubte easie to peaceaue, that this woonderfull sacrifice ys the bodie of owre Lorde, and that these two sainges be spoken of one thing. And thus these two partes stande clere being here auouched by Chrysostom, that both ther ys the very corporall presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, and that the same bodie so being in the Sacrament, ys our sacrifice.
By this saing of Chrysostome shall ye perceaue howe vain the generall rule of Cranmer (Or of him that settsurth that booke in his name) ys, who Crāmers generall rule resuted. in his fifte booke treating of the sacrifice saieth, that the sacrifice of the preistes, and the people, ys onely a sacrifice gratulatorie, that ys of thankes geuing, and a sacrifice commemoratiue remembring the bodie of Chryst, that suffred, but not hauing Chryst reallie, and substanciallie present. And this ys his aunswer to the Nycen Councell, and to Petrus Lombardus G and so generallie to all.
But nowe consider what ys the nature of a sacrifice of thankes geuing, or as he calleth yt gratulatorie. A sacrifice gratulatorie ys not receaued of Sacrifice gratulatorie, or of thankes geuing. vs, but offred and geuen of vs and from vs. For we geuing thankes to God our hauenly Father, that he so loued vs, that he spared not his owne Sonne but for our sakes deliuered him to suffer most cruell death for vs. And to that his Sonne also we gauing thankes, that he hath vouchedsafe to wash awaie our sinne with his bloode, and to cancell the obligacion that was against vs, wherby he hath made vs free from sinne, hell, and death, and hath made vs heires to the kingdom of his Father, and coheirs with him of the same kingdom? we offer a sacrifice of thankes geuing. But this maner of sacrifice aught to be geuen frō our heartes to our Lorde God, and to our Sauiour Iesus Chryst: And ys so, yf yt be reuerently and deuoutlie doen of vs. H
This sacrifice of the aultar ys soche a sacrifice, that yt ys receaued, of vs, saieth Chrysostom. Nowe ther ys a great difference betwixt these two thinges, Sacrifice of the aultar. of the whiche the one we maie in diuerse respectes both offre, and also receaue: The other we can onely but offre. An other difference ther ys also. The sacrifice of thankesgeuing, ys no wonderfull sacrisice. For yt ys no wonder, but a duetie to geue God thankes, for his manifold benesittes. [Page 304]But the sacrifice of the aultar (as Chrysostō saieth) ys a woonderfull sacrisice. A
In an other place he calleth yt also an holie, and a terrible sacrifice: This sacrifice of thankes geuing ys holy but yt ys not terrible. Many soche other Homil. 30. De prodit. Iudae. tearmes he geueth to the sacrifice, whiche will not be applied to the sacrifice of thankes geuing. But to be short, by these fewe differences yt ys easie to perceaue, that the generall rule of Crāmer, that he wolde al the doctours, wher they call the Sacrament, a sacrifice, should be vnderstanded to haue spoken onelie of the sacrifice gratulatorie, will not stand. For the sainges of the holie doctours, can not beare that rule, as hereafter shall appeare more clear to yowe.
Wherunto euen in this place also, the conclusion of Chrysostoms sainge geueth good light, and plain vnderstanding. For after he had declared that the blasphemouse mouthe can not receaue the sacrifice of our Lorde: he setteth these two together, and saieth: An othe ys of an euell, The sacrifice ys of our Lorde. What folowshippe betwixt light and darknesse, and what agreement betwixt Chryste and Beliall? In whiche maner of speache yf yow note, as blasphemie, darknesse, and Beliall be of one side, and signifie one B thing: So ys the sacrifice of our Lorde, light, and Chryst sett on the other side, and signifie one thing. So that our sacrifice ys here also called light, and Chryst himself. Whiche names can not be attributed to Cranmer his sacrifice of thankes geuing, but to the sacrifice of Chrystes bodie. Whiche ys in verie dede that thing, that both ys and maie be called the sacrisice of our Lorde, light and Chryst. Of the whiche I nede to make no proofe to a true Chrystian.
This then being prooued, that Chrysostom teacheth here the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, and that the verie same ys the sacrifice of our Lorde: Let ys return to our text, and somewhat more open yt, for the better vnderstanding of yt in all the processe that foloweth, and of the doctours also that shall be produced for the exposition of the same.
Wher Sainct Paule saieth here: Ye can not drinke of the cuppe of Owre Lorde, S. Paules woordes here are to be vnderstanded, with a condicional negatiue, not with an absolute. and of the cuppe of Deuells: Ye can not be partakers of the table of our Lorde, and of C the table of Deuells. He dothe not speake these as absolute negatiues, but as condicionall. For he meneth not that they coulde not do so in verie dede, but that they coulde not so do, yf they wolde do well. For he welll knewe that the Corynthians went both to the table of Chryst, and also to the table of Idolls. And to diswade them from the table of Idolls, he saieth that they can not without the offence of God partake of bothe tables. Ther ys a saing: Hoc possumus, quod de iure possumus. That maie we doe, whiche we maie do by the lawe. Euen so maie yt be saied on the other side. Hoc non possumus, quia de iure non possumus. This we can not doe, bicause we can not doe yt by the lawe. Whiche maner of sainge implieth not an absolute negatiue, vtterlie denieng the facte to be doen: but (as ys saied) a condicionall negatiue, that yt can not be doen by the lawe.
For S. Cyprian, who rebuketh them that impenitently came defiled with eating of Idolls meat, to eate of the meat of our Lordes table, and saieth also to them with Sainct Paules sentence. Ye can not be partakers of the table of D our Lorde, and of the table of Deuells: Yet he accuseth them, that they so were, and in facte they did so: but to Gods pleasure, and the wealth of their soules, they coulde not do so. For yt ys proprely saied, that we maie doe that, that we maie doe well. And that we can not doe, whiche we can not doe well. To this sense also Chrysostome by his interrogatiue including soch a negatiue [Page]saied: The blaspbemers of Gods name coulde not with the same mouth and toung that they blasphemed with, receaue the bodie of our Lorde, receaue the sacrifice of our Lorde. E Whiche his sainge yet rebuketh them bicause they did so. Wherfore yt ys not a negatiue absolute.
A like sainge ys ther ascribed to Origen, for yt ys vncerten whether yt Origenes. be his worke or no, oute of the which yt ys taken, and yt ys this. Multa porrò & de ipso Verbo dici possunt, quod factum est caro cibusue verus, quem qut comederit, viuet in aeternum, quem nullus malus potest comedere. Manie thinges also maie be saied of the Sonne of God himself, that yt was made flesh, and verie meat, whiche whosoeuer shall eate, shall liue foreuer, whiche no euell man can eate. Thus moche Origen.
As S. Paule and S. Cypriane saied, that they that were parteners of Idolathites A place of Origen opened. coulde not be partakers of our Lordes table: And as Chrysostom saied, that vain swearers by Gods holie name, coulde not with the same mouthe, and tounge receaue the holy sacrifice, whiche ys the bodie of our Lorde, whiche ys the table that S. Paule and S. Cyprian spake of in whiche their sainges they haue made mencion but of two vices, that shoulde let F them from the partaking of the holie and blessed meate of our Lordes table: So Origen declareth that all vices that be mortall, and whiche make a man an euell man, do diuide him from the same table. And saieth that soche a man can not eate of the meat of our Lorde, not that soche a one doth not eate yt, but that soche a one dothe not eate yt to his profitte, but raither to his condemnacion, bycause with the offence of God he doth abuse the bodie of Chryst, with moche irreuerence, ioining yt, as yt were in the house of his bodie with Sathan: betwixt whom and Chryst, as betwixt God and Beliall, ys none agreement.
A liuely argument wherof ys declared in the first booke of kinges, where 1. Reg. 5. we read that the Azotyans hauing the Arke of God, put yt into the temple of Dagon. And forasmoche as they accompted yt as the Arke of the God of Israell, of whose great might and power they had heard moche, they set yt by their Idoll Dagon. But in the morning when the Azotians came into the temple, they fownde Dagod lieng grooueling vpon the grownde. They G set him vppe again, and the next daie coming into the temple, they fownde him lieng before the Arke of God like a trunke, cast downe to the grownde, his head and palmes of his handes cutte of. By this ys signified vnto vs, that although yt pleased God through his great sufferance so to be abused, as to be ioined with Sathan, Behall, or Dagon: yet to declare that he ys offended withall he throweth down Dagon, and causeth him to be fownde lieng like a stocke, or trunke, and with all striketh the people with a great glague. By this then (as by that that ys before saied) yt maie be perceaued, howe this scripture of S. Paules epistle ys to be vnderstanded, and the doctours also, whiche haue ben hetherto alleaged for the exposition of the same, or shall hereafter be alleaged.
THE ONE AND THIRTETH CHAP. ENDETH the exposition of this text by Theophilact and Anselmus.
I Shoulde not nede to alleadge so manie holie Fathers and doctours H vpon euery scripture as I doe, so to seke oute the true vnderstanding of them, but that the impudencie of the Proclamer hath thervnto enforeed me. He saieth the catholike Churche [Page 305]hath not one scripture nor doctour for them, but yt ys and shall be made manifest, A that yt hath not one in dede alone, but yt hath all the scriptures, and holie doctours, that treacte of the blessed Sacrament. But bicause vpon this tenth chapiter of Sainct Paule a long exposition by diuerse, and manie doctours ys allreadie made, by whom being made plain howe these scripturs going before are to be vnderstanded, yt ys the easier to perceaue the vnderstanding of this nowe in hande, depending of them, therfor I will cuttof some parte of my pourpose, and nowe vpon this text bring in but one coople more, of the which Theophilact shall be the first, Who for that that S. Paule willed the Corinthians to consider the Iewes, who vsed to offre sacrifices and be partakers of the aultar to the entent that they being chrystians might perceaue that of soche sacrifice as they offred, they were partakers by expresse woordes openeth and declareth what S. Paule ment that the Corinthians were partakers of. Thus he saieth: De Iudaeis namque nil intulit, Theoph. in Dec. 1. Cor. quod de eo participarent, sed Altaris sunt participes dixit, in quo, quod immolandum suisset, impositum igni consumebarur. De Christi autem corpore haud quaquam res ita se habet, sed Christi corporis fuit participatio. Non enim altaris sumus, sed Dominici corporis ipsi B participes. Of the Iewes he saied nothing, that they shoulde partake of yt (meninge the sacrifice) but he saied that they are partakers of the aultar. We are partakers euen of the bodie of our Lord offred on the aultar. vpon the which aultar that, that was to be offred in sacrifice, when yt was put vpon yt, yt was consumed with fire, But of the bodie of Chryst the matter ys not so: but ther was a participacion of the bodie of Chryst. For we are not partakers of the aultar. But we are partakers euen of the bodie of our Lorde. Thus moche Theophilact.
In whome this cometh woorthilie to be noted that S. Paule speaking of VVhie S. Paule saied not, that the Iewes were partakers of their sacrifices as the chrystians of theirs. the sacrifices of the Iewes, doth not name anie thing by speciall name wherof they shoulde be partakers, but onely vseth the generall tearme of the aultar, saing that they be partakers of the aultar. And whie? bicause in some of these Sacrifices yt was ordeined that they shoulde be burnt, and consumed. And therfor he saied not that they shoulde be partakers of the thing offred but of the aultar. But when he spake of the bodie of Chryst (saieth C Theophilact) he did not handle the matter so, but by expresse and speciall woordes saied allwais that ther was a partaking of the bodie of Chryste. Nowe yf the bodie of Chryst by his ascension were absumed frō vs, as the sacrifice of the Iewes was consumed from them by fire, so that we did no more by no nearer partaking by presence receaue Chryst, then they did their sacrifices: by the mening of Theophilact yt shoulde some, that S. Paule wolde haue saied of the chrystians that they are partakers of the aultar, as the Iewes, and not by speciall woorde haue saied, they are partakers of the bodie of Chryst.
Nowe in the disputacion of S. Paule yt ys plain to see that speaking of the sacrifice of the Chrystians, he nameth, wherof they are partakers. As when he saieth: The cuppe of blessing, which we blesse, ys yt not a partaking of the blood 1. Cor. 10. of Chryst? And the bread whiche me breake, ys yt not a partaking of the bodie of Chryst. Wher by speciall woordes he nameth the thinges their receaued and partaken. But speaking of the sacrifices of the Iewes throughoute all the disputacion he nameth no speciall thinge, but vseth (as I saied) the generall terme D of the aultar. Wherby we maie conclude with Theophilactes woordes. Non enim altaris sumus sed Domini corporis ipsi participes. We are not partakers of the aultar, but we are partakers of the bodie of Chryste. Yf the bodie of Chryste were absent from the sacrifice, we shoulde be by Theophilactes [Page]iudgement partakers of the aultar: but bicause the bodie of Chryst ys present in the sacrifice, and ys the sacrifice yt self, that ys offred, therfore are we partakers E of the bodie of Chryst. By which processe of Theophilact yt ys plain to be perceaued that he vnderstandeth Sainct Paule here to haue spoken of the verie bodie and bloode of Chryst, of the whiche we are verie partakers. The bloode of Chryste ys not onely in heauen, but also in in the chalice. Of this who can doubte, that remembreth his exposition of the first text of this disputacion of Sainct Paule wher he saieth, speaking of him. That, that he saied, ys after this maner: This bloode that ys conteined in the cuppe, ys euen the same that flowed oute of Chrystes side. This bloode when we receaue, we do partake, that ys, we are ioined to Chryst.
Who can doubte of the faith of this man, and howe he vnderstandeth Sainct Paule, that so plainlie expowndeth him? He saieth that we receaue, not a figure onely, but the bloode of Chryste. And this blood ys not onely in heauen, whether onely, the Aduersarie saieth, we must by faith lift vppe our eyes and heart, but yt ys conteined (saieth Theophilact) in the cuppe, wher also by faithe we must beholde yt. And this ys not onely a Sacrament of Chrystes bloode, so called bicause Sacramentes haue the names F of thinges wherof they are Sacramentes, but yt ys (saieth Theophilacte) euen the same bloode that flowed oute of Chrystes side, and not a thing bearing the name of the bloode of Chryst
Nowe Chrystian Reader, iudge yf the Aduersarie haue not plain authoritie against him, that wher he wolde that yt shoulde be prooued, that Chrystes naturall and substanciall bodie ys in the Sacrament. Yf that bodie vpon the croosse, oute of the whiche for mannes redemption did plentifullie flowe oute bloode, were naturall, forasmoche as this bloode in the holie Sacrament ys euen the same bloode, yt must nedes folowe, that the naturall bodie, and naturall blood of Chryst, ys in the Sactament.
Why stand I so long vpon so clere a matter, seing that Anselmus who ys ioined with him to shewe the faith of the latin churche, as Theophilact hath doen of the greeke churche, ys euen as plain as he? Thus expowndeth he Sainct Paule. Non potestis calicem Domini, in quo sanguis est eius, bibere, & calicem Daemoniorum, in quo vinum est sacrilegae superstitionis. Nec potestis mensae, id est, altaris G Ansel. in 10. 1. Cor. Domini, in quo corpus eius est, participes esse, & mensae, id est, altaris Daemoniorum. Ye can not drinke the cuppe of our Lorde, in the whiche ys his bloode, and the cuppe of Deuells, in whiche ys the wine of sacrilegall supersticion. Neither can yow be partakers of the table, that ys of the aultar of our Lorde, in the whiche ys his bodie, and of the table, that ys, of the aultar of Deuels. Thus he.
In this Authour, who liued within xvi. yeares of fiue hundreth yeares agon, ye see a very plain exposition, fullie agreing, yea allmost vsing the same woordes that Theophilact did. Who was liuing almost three hundreth yeares before him. Which Theophilact vseth the woordes of Chrysostome, who liued more then foure hundreth yeares before Theophilact. Whose saing ye shall finde in the xvi. chapiter of this booke. I saie in this Authour here alleadhed, ye haue a plain exposition of Sainct Paules woordes. For first, he expowndeth what S. Paule meneth by the cuppe of our Lorde, and H saieth that yt ys the cuppe of our Lorde, bicause the blood of our Lorde ys in yt. Then teaching what he meneth by the table of our Lorde he saieth, he meneth the aultar of our Lorde. Whiche ys so called bicause the bodie of our Lorde ys vpon yt. So that as the cuppe ys called the cuppe of our Lorde, bicause his bloode ys in yt: So ys the table called the aultar of our Lorde, [Page 306]bicause the bodie of our Lorde ys vpon yt. I thinke these woordes be plain A enough, wher by expresse woordes ys taught the presence of the very bodie and bloode of Chryst in the Sacrament, and that in no other sorte of woordes, than Theophilact before him, and Chrysostome before him, as ye haue hearde did teache.
Peraduenture ye will saie he expowndeth the table to be an aultar, which A proof of the vse of aultars euē frō the Apostles time. Dion. Are. eccles. Hie. par. 3. ca. 3 cometh in but of late daies, and ys a terme not vsed amonge the auncient doctours. That bothe the woorde and the thinge, was in vse in the time of the auncient doctours, yt shall be made manifest to thee, gentle Reader, and that euen from the Apostles.
Sainct Dionyse the disciple of S. Paule declaring the order of Chrystes Churche in his time, among other declaracions of the blessed Sacrament, maketh mencion of the same sett vpon the aultar, saing thus: Sed & illud sacratius intuere, quod impositis altari venerabilibus signis, per quae Christus signatur & sumitur, adest protinus sanctorum descriptio. But reuerentlie beholde that, that when the honorable signes be put vpon the holy aultar, by the whiche Chryst ys both fignified and receaued, furthwith their ys a description of B sainctes. In these woordes ye perceaue bothe the name of the aultar, and the vse of yt. For the vse of yt was to put vpon yt the holie Sacrament, for the whiche vse sake, this auncient holie Father called yt the holie aultar. Whiche wolde be noted of thē, who in these our daies, geue the aultar moche baser tearmes, yf I shall saie no woorse of them. And herwithall note that this Authour doth not onely call this Sacrament honourable, but also furthwith addeth the cause, for bicause (saieth he) Chryst ys bothe signified, and receaued. So that by the outwarde formes he ys not onely signified, but also verilie vnder them receaued. Of the which two partes of the Sacrament we haue more at large spoken before.
Of the aultar and the vse of the same also Sainct Ambrose maketh mencion saing: Ego Domine memor venerandae passionis tuae accedo ad altare tuum licet Amb. orat. praepar. Aultar and sacrifice both mēcioned by S. Amb. and vsed. peccator vt offeram tibi sacrificium quod tu instituisti, & offerri praecepisti in commemorationē tui pro salute nostra. I (o Lorde) being mindefull of thy honourable passiō C come vnto thine aultar allthough a sinner, to offre vnto thee the sacrifice that thowe didest institute and commaunde to be offred in the remembrance of thee, for our health. Here maie ye perceaue that S. Ambrose came to that aultar, of whom also ye maie learn the vse of the aultar, for he came to offre sacrifice vpon yt, so that the vse of the aultar was to haue sacrifice offred vpon yt, which thing S. Ambrose his facte dothe well declare. For so holie a man as he was wolde notabuse the aultar. Wherfore yt dothe well appeare that yt ys the right vse of the aultar.
The name and the vse of the aultar ys likewise declared vnto vs by his disciple S. Augustine, who shewing the godlie zeale of his Mother lieng on her death bedd, and what she desiered to be doen for her, saieth. Illa imminente die resolutionis suae, non cogitauit corpus suum sum ptuosè contegi, ant condiri aromatibus, aut monumentum electum concupiuit, aut curauit sepulchrum patrium. Non ista mandauit Aug. lib. 9. cōfes. ca. 13 nobis, sed tantummodò memoriam sui ad altare tuum fieri desiderauit, cui nullius diei praetermissione seruierat, vnde sciret dispensari victimam sanctam, qua deletum est chyrographum D quod erat contrarium nobis. She, the daie of her death being at hand, was not mindefull to haue her bodie sumptuously buried, or to be spiced with Aultar serued wher facrifice was done. spices, nor coueted to haue a solemne monument, neither desiered to be buried in her owne contrie. These thinges did she not commaunde vs, but onely desiered she to be remembred at thine aultar, which she withoute [Page]anie daies omission had serued, from whence she knewe that sacrifice to be E despensed, by the whiche the hand writing was put oute that was against vs.
Thus of Sainct Augustine also ye heare the name of the aultar and the vse. The vse ys like as ye haue hearde in S. Ambrose, that ys, to offre sacrisice vpon. For S. Augustins mother knewe that that sacrifice was despensed or geuen from the aultar whiche redemed vs and washed vs from our sinnes in his bloode, whiche euery true Chrystian will confesse to be the bodie of our Lorde Iesus Chryst.
The same S. Augustine also ys a plentifull withnesse of this matter of the aultar, ad Casulanum. And in his sermon to the infantes, of whiche place also The Proclamers false sleight in his allegacion of S. August. the Proclamer in his sermon maketh mencion: but with soche sleight, and crastie falsheade, as I can not ouerpasse yt, but note yt to the Reader. For first, wher S. Augustine vseth the plain terme or name of the aultar, this man not liking that name corrupted S. Augustine and putteth in to the place of yt the name of table. Secondly wher S. Augusten plainly teacheth the presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode. He to deceaue his audience bringeth three or foure woordes of the place to make them beleue that S. F Augusten reputed the Sacrament but as a peice of breade, and leaueth oute all the rest. But I shall first alleadge S. Augustine as his owne woordes be. Thus he writeth: Hoc quod videtis in altari Dei, etiam transacta nocte vidistis. Aug. serm. ad infant. Sed quid esset, quid sibi velit, quam magnae rei Sacramentum contineret, nondum audistis. Quod ergo vidistis panis est, & calix, quod vobis etiam oculi vestri renunciant. Quod autem fides vestra postulat instruenda, panis est corpus Christi, calix sanguis. Dominus noster Iesus Christus nouimus vnde acceperit carnem, de virgine Maria, infant lactatus est, nutritus est, creuit, ad iuuenilem aetatem peruenit, à Iudaeis persecutionem passus est, in ligno suspensus est, in ligno interfectus est, sepultus est, tertia die resurrexit, quo die voluit in coelum ascendere, illuc leuauit corpus suum, vnde est venturus vt indicet viuos & mortuos, Ibi est modò sedens ad dextram Patris: Quomodò est panis corpus eius? & calix, vel quod habet calix, quomodò est sanguis eius? Ista fratres ideò dicuntur Sacramenta, quia in eis aliud videtur, aliud intelligitur. Quod videtur speciem habet corporalem, quod intelligitur, fructum habet spiritualem. This that ye see in the aultar of God, ye did also see yt the last night. But what yt was, what ytment, G Wher S. Aug. here nameth the aultar, the Proclamer a shamed of so honourable a name calleth yt a table. of howe great a thing yt conteineth a Sacramēt yet haue not yet hearde. That then that ye haue seen ys bread and a cuppe, whiche thing also your eyes doe tell yow: but that your faith requireth to be instructed, the bread ys the bodie of Chryst, and the cuppe his bloode. Owre Lorde Iesus Chryst, we knowe from whence he tooke flesh, euen of the virgen Marie, being an infant he sucked: he was nourced, he grewe, he came to the age of a young man, he suffred persecucion of the Iewes, he was hanged vpon the crosse, vpon the crosse he died, he was buried, the thirde daie he rose, what daie he wolde he ascended into heauē: Thither did he cacrie vppe his bodie from whence he will come to iudge the quicke and the dead: Ther ys he nowe sitting at the right hand of God the Father. Howe ys the bread his bodie? and the cuppe, or that ys in the cuppe, howe ys yt his bloode? These thinges bretheren are therfore called Sacramentes, bicause in them one thing ys seen, an other thing ys vnderstanded. That that ys seen hath a H corporall forme, that ys vnderstanded, hath a spirituall profitte. This ys the wholl saing of Sainct Augustine. The Proclamer alleadgeth him thus: Quod videtis in mensa, panis est. That ye see in the table, ys bread.
[Page 307]In whiche his allegacion first ye maie perceaue, that wher Sainct Augustine A putte and vsed this woorde, aultar. This man to make him appeare to haue saied to his pourpose, was contented to corrupt him, and falsifie him, in stead therof to put his woorde, table. In dede yt coulde not but haue sownded to his shame in soche a wise and learned audience yf he shoulde haue alleaged Sainct Augustine making mencion of the aultar, and not onely calling yt the aultar, but also the aultar of God, the whiche Aultar of God. aultar with the mencion and wholl remembrance of yt, he hath laboured to deface, and vtterlie to wipe awaie. What ye maie thinke and iudge of the doctrine of this man, that to maintein yt dothe so manifestlie falsifie the doctours, and dare not alleadge them as they be written, but as he listeth him self, I leaue to be considered. What synceritie also he vseth so truncatelie alleadging Sainct Augustine, that wher he taught the twoo S. August. truncathe alleaged by the Proclamer to deceaue the people and to robbe the B. Sacr. of the prefence of Christe. partes of the Sacrament, namely the outwarde corporall forme, and the inwarde substance of Chrystes bodie and bloode: the one knowen by the eye of the bodie, the other by the vnderstanding of faith, this man snatcheth the first parte, and renneth awaie with yt, leauing the other parte B behinde him, and so truncating Sainct Augustin deceaueth the people, and abuseth the holie doctour. I shall not nede to geue farder aduertisement here. Sainct Augustine as he did write, and as this man alleageth him lieth before yow, ye maie compare them, and trie the trueth. Wherfore I will leaue to speake of them anie more and proceade in my matter.
As of these Fathers before alleaged we haue learned that in the primitiue Churche the aultars werein vse: So nowe learn withall what in those daies was thought of them that did abuse aultars. To geue vs vnderstanding in this matter, we will heare Optatus, the holie auncient Bishoppe, who liued before Sainct Augustine, Sainct Hierom, or Sainct Ambrose, and was almost xij. hondreth yeares agon. This learned Father and Bishoppe writing against the Donatistes who threwe downe the aultars, and spoiled the Churches, saieth thus: Quid est tam sacrilegum quam altaria Dei, in Optatus li. con. Donatist. quibus & vos abquando obtulistis, frangere, radere, & remouere, in quibus vita populi, C & membra Christi portata sunt, quo Deus omnipotens inuocatus sit, quo postulatus descendit Spiritus sanctus, vnde à multis pignus salutis aeternae, & tutela fidei, & spes resurrectionis accepta est? Alcaria, inquam, in quibus fraternitatis munera non iussit saluator poni, nisi quae essent de pace condita. Depone, inquit, munus tuum ante altare, & redi, priùs concorda cum fratre tuo, vt pro te possit sacerdos offerre. Quid est enim altare, nisi sedes corporis & sanguinis Christi? Haec omnia furor vester, aut rasit, aut fregit, aut remouit. Quid vobis secit Deus, qui illic inuocari consueuerat? Quid vos offenderat Christus, cuius illic per certa momenta, corpus & sanguis habitat? Quid vos offen. ditis etiam vos ipsi, vt altaria frangatis, in quibus ante nos per longa temporum spatia, 3. Reg. 19. sanctè (vt arbitramini) obtulistis? Hoc modo Iudaeos estis imitati. Illi iniecerunt manus Christo in cruce: à vobis pereussus est in altari, De quibus apud Dominum Helias Propheta quaerelam deponit, ijs enim locutus verbis, quibus & vos inter alios ab ipso accusari meruistis. Domine, inquit, altaria tua confregerunt. Dum dicit tua, indicat quia res est Dei, vbi Deo aliquid à quocumque oblatum est. What ys so great sacrilege, as to breade See here the vse, the regard, the estimation and reuerē ce of aultars in the auncient churche. rase, and remoue the Aultars of God, in the whiche yowr selues somtyme haue D offred in whiche the praiers of the people and membres of Christ were born: wher allmightie God ys called on: wher the holy Spirit desired descendeth. from whence of manie the pledge of euerlasting health: and the sauegarde of faith: and the hope of resurrection ys taken? the Aultars Isaie, on [Page]the which our sauyour commaunded the offrings of the bretheren not to be E put, except soche as were seasoned with peace. Laie downe, (saith he) thy offring before the Aultar. and go first and agree with thy brother, that the preist maie offer for thee. What ys the Aultar but the seat of the bodie and bloode of Chryste? But all theise hath yowr furie either raced, broken, or remoued and taken Aultar what yt ys, ād the spoil of aultars. awaie. what had God doen to yowe, who was wount ther to be called on? What had Chryst offended yowe, whose bodie and bloode somtime dwelleth ther? what doe yowe yowr selues offende yowr selues, to breake those aultars in the whiche a long time before vs ye haue offred, as ye thinke, godlie. By this ye haue folowed the iewes. They smitte Chryst vpon the crosse: of yowe he ys smitten on the aultar, of whome the Prophet Heltas maketh cōplaint to our lordre. For he speaketh soche woordes, wher with yowe also are woorthie to be blamed. Lorde (saieth he) they haue broken downe thine aultars. When he saieth (, Thine) he declareth that that thing ys gods or belongeth to God, wher anie thing of ani man ys offred to God, thus moch Optatus. Who was not born yesterdaie to tell vs the fashion of religion in the latter daies. But he talleth vs the religion of the auncient F Churche, whiche was almost twelue hondreth yeares agone at which time he liued and in that tyme yt was thought that ther coulde be no Let the Proclamer and his folowes see and saie howe they agree in their doings withe the auncient church wherof in woordes they bragg somoche. greater sacriledge then to breake and pull downe the aultars.
In those daies (as by this authour yt maie be perceaued) yt was religion to saie that the aultar ys the seat of the bodie and bloode of Chryst. Wherby as the presence of the verie bodie and blood in the Sacrament maie euidently be perceaued to haue ben faithfullie beleued and taught: So maie yt that the aultars, for that they were accompted the seat of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, were reuerently vsed. Yt ys easie also to perceaue howe that in those daies the vse of the aultar was to offer vpon, as ye maie perceaue by hys allegacion of Chrysts sainge. Yf then to pull downe and destroie aultars be so heynouse and great an offence, that ther ys no sacrilege greater than yt, and thys was so thought aboue eleuen hondreth years agon, I wish them that finde them selues giltie of soche facts to haue consideracion of their dooings, yf they haue anie regarde to the iudgments and aduertisements of the auncient Fathers. Yf they will not creditte G their iudgements let them creditte the iudgements of God. who in times passed hathe euedently declared the same. Wherfore as ye haue hearde the vse of the aultars testified by diuerse Fathers, and the abuse of them also reputed as an heinouse crime and offence, yea more heinouse then sacrilege: So shal ye nowe perceaue the contemptuouse abuse of them to haue ben sore and greuouslie punished of God, therby well appearinge soche abuse moche to offend him. Lib. 6. cap. 23. The impudens fact of Iulianus in possing against the holie aultar.
In the tripartite historie we reade that in the tlme of Iulianus Apostata, one called Iulianus beinge the ruler of the east parts vnder the same wicked Iulian then Emperour, entred in to a church, and pissed against the aultar. The woordes of Theodorete be these: Iulianus praefectus impudenter contra sacrum altare minxit, quem cùm Euzoius prohibere tentaret, eum ille percussit in capite. Iulian the president impudently pissed against the holie aultar, whom when Euzoius wolde haue forbidden, he strooke him vpon the heade. Here by the reporte H of this authour, ye see the impudente facte of this wiked Iulianus, wher by the waie note that the authour calleth yt an impudent facte, and also calleth the aultar an holie aultar.
[Page 308]And nowe heare the punishint of this facte. The authour reporting the wiked doinges of the saied Iulianus, and of one Felix together, shewinge both their punishiments saieth thus: Sed pro ijs impietatibus vesanisque praesumptionibus non post multum paenas exacti sunt. Nam repente Iulianus saeuo morbo correptus viseribus putrefactis interijt. & excrementa non per meatus egestinos emittebat, sed scelestum os, quod blasphemijs ministrauerat, organum huius excretionis est factum. But Abuse of aultars and spoilt of churches punished. for all these wickednesses, and furiose presumptions, they within a litle while after, suffred paines. For Iulianus being sodenly taken with a sore disease his bowells being putrifieddied, and he did not voide the excrements by the lower parts of his bodie. But the wiked mouthe, that had ben an instrument to blasphemies, was nowe made an organ of excretion. Thus moche the ecclesiesticall historie.
In whiche, as before we sawe the offence of the man: So nowe perceaue Arrius his filthie deathe. we the punishmēt. Arrius was a blasphemouse heretique whose heinouse offence, was (by his death inflicted of God) declared to all the worlde, to be to God very greuouse, and displeasaunt, and yet yt was not more greuously punished then this. For that man though he in easing of nature, by gods B plague powred oute with thexcrements the bowells of his bodie, and so died a fylthie deathe: Yet this man, whose bowells, by the like plague of God were putrified, and rotten in his bodie, and therby God so disposing, the filthie and stinking excrements, that shoulde haue ben voided by the lower parts of his bodie wer voided and powred oute at his mouth, and so dieng, died yet a filthier deathe, then thother. Yf then the contemptuouse abuse of aultars were so greuously punished of God, and the reuerent vse of aultars was neuer reproued, easie yt ys to iudge that the well vsers of aultars, are of God praised, and the abusers of them, of God dispraised. the vse of aultars of God and auncient Fathers well liked the abuse of thē moch misliked.
But once, to finish this matter, and to returne to our text, and to Anselmus whose exposition we alleaged: ye maie by this that ys saied well peceiue that both the name of the aultar, and also the vse of yt, ys comed to vs from the primitiue churche. So that this authour Anselmus ys not the first authour C of yt. But he speaketh of yt as he hath learned of the Fathers. And therfore dothe verie well expownde the table of our lorde in S. Paule, calling yt the aultar. For the aultar in deed ys the table of our lorde, wherin ys the meat of the bodie of Chryst whiche ys the sacrifice of our lorde. of the which the faithfull people be partakers, and wher vpon we feede, to repayre this corruptible flesh that yt maie once come to incorruption, ad from mortalitie to immortalitie.
Neither onelie are we moued by the exposition of this authour to vnderstande Aultar wherfor yt serueth. S. Paule to speake of the aultars: but also to vnderstand him to haue spoken of the sacrifice of the same aultar of Chryst. for that therin he implieth the sacrifice of Chrysts bodie and blood, by cause an aultar generaly serueth to beare a sacrifice: wherfor particularlie the aultar of Chryst serueth to beare the sacrifice of Chryst. To this vnderstanding of S. Paule the verie letter leadeth: S. Paules own argument made to the Corinthians enforeth. For when he saieth vnto them: Ye can not drinke D the cuppe of our lorde, and the cuppe of deuells: ye can not be partakers of the table of our lorde, and of the table deuells. In bothe parts he calleth yt indifferentlie [Page]the cuppe. So that to the vessell of our Lordes table he geueth no other terme E then he doth to the vessell of the table of Deuells. Yf then yt be the cuppe of the Deuells bicause yt was offred to Deuells, in sacrifice: then ys the other the cuppe of our Lorde, bicause yt ys offred to him in sacrifice. Likwise for the second sentence: Yf the table of Deuells, be so called bicause yt serueth to the sacrifice of Deuells: Euen so must the table of our Lorde be so called, bicause yt serueth to the sacrifice of our Lord.
Thus then ye see that of the verie letter, and of Sainct Paules argument, yf yt shall haue anie force by the comparison, whiche he here maketh, that as he spake of the sacrifice of Deuells on the one side: so he spake of the sacrifice of our Lorde on the other side. For as Hilarie saieth. Omnis comparatio ad intelligentiae formam praesumitur, vt id, de quo agitur, secundùm exemplum propositum assequamur. Euery comparison ys taken to the forme Hilar de Trinit li. 8 of vnderstanding, that we maie atteign yt that ys spoken of according to the example that ys proposed.
Nowe yf Sainct Paule making his comparison shoulde in one parte speake of one thing, and in the other parte of an other thing, howe shoulde F the comparison healpe our vnderstandinge? Wherfore according to Sainct Paules example we vnderstand him speaking of the cuppe of our Lorde. to haue spoken of yt, as of the bloode of Chryst offred in sacrifice (of the whiche, as before ys saied we be partakers) as in the same example speaking of the cuppe of Deuells, he speaketh of yt as of a sacrifice offred to Deuells, of the whiche Idolaters are partakers. Otherwise what shoulde the cōparison auaill, when betwixt a thing offred in sacrifice and a thing not offred in sacrifice ther ys no proporciō. Wherfor as the exāple ys vnderstāded of a thing sacrificed: So must the thing compared to the exāple be vnderstanded of a thing sacrificed, that ther maie be proporcion and similitude betwixt the thinges ioined in cōparison. Then must yt be concluded that as Sainct Paule spake of sacrifice in the example: So spake he of sacrifice in the thing compared to the example. And so yt ys euident that the bodie and bloode of Chryst in the Sacrament, of which we are partakers, after the minde of Sainct Paule, ys a sacrifice. G
To this yf ye adde the sainges of Sainct Cyprian and Chrysostome in the last chapiter, and the expositions of all the doctours vpon these textes of Sainct Paule: The cuppe of blessinge, &c. and, The bread which we break, &c. Which ye shall sinde before alleaged in this booke, whiche all so shewe the minde of Sainct Paule, as that he spake not onely in these places of the bodie and bloode of Chryst in the Sacrament, as ther verilie present: But also as yt ys a sacrifice, ye shall yf ye will, easilie perceaue and vnderstand the trueth of the matter, that Sainct Paule in this disputacion withe the Corynthians, treacted of the bodie and bloode of Chryst in the Sacrament as of a sacrifice. To the vnderstanding of whiche trueth moche light ys added by that ys declared, that the auncient Fathers of the primitiue Churche accepted both the name and the vse of an aultar, whiche argueth a sacrifice. For a sacrifice, and an aultar be (as yt were) Correlatiues: Aultar and Sacrifice be correlatiues. So that whether yt be extern or interne sacrifice, yt hath answetablie H an aultar, so that we maie saie: Yf here be an aultar yt presupposeth to doe sacrifice on. Yf we saie, here ys a sacrifice, yt presupposeth to be doen on an aultar. This the Aduersarie knewe right well. Wherfore to compasse his pourpose to take awaie the sacrifice he [Page 309]remoued and tooke awaie aultars. But what soeuer the Aduersarie hath A doen, yt ys plainly prooued, that the primitiue Churche vsed bothe, and had both in honoure and reuerence.
THE TWO AND THIRTETH CHAP. VPON OCCAsion that yt ys prooued, that the primitiue Church vsed the aultar, and reputed the bodie and bloode of Chryst to be a Sacrifice, beginneth to treact of the same sacrifice, whiche we commonlie call the Masse.
AS the Sacrament of Chrystes bodie and bloode ys (as Dionysius Areopagita saieth) of all Sacramentes most excellent, and most honorable, perfecting and consummating al other Sacramentes: Euen so ys ther none that Sathan more cruellie persecuteth by his minysters in these our daies than this. For of all the partes or membres [...] this he leaueth none vntouched and not impugned: The presence he vtterly denieth: B transubstanciacion he derideth: Adoracion as Idolatrie he detesteth reseruacion he contemneth: Communion either priuate (as he tearmeth yt) or vnder one kinde, he flieth and despiceth: The sacrifice as a pestilence he abhorreth and hateth: the hatred, wherof he hath so fixed, and fiered in the heartes of his disciples, that not onely the thing, as the sacrifice yt self, and the Ceremonies thervnto apparteining: but the very name ys vnto them so odiouse, as nothing can be more odiouse. This sacrifice and the wholl ministracion of the same ys called the Masse, whiche howe yt hath ben mocked and skorned, what raiginges and railinges haue ben vsed against yt, yt ys raither to be lamented, then rehersed. After the whiche sorte this Proclamer bendeth himself cheiflie to inueigh against the Masse.
But forasmoche as S. Paule hath taught vs that the bodie and bloode of Chryst be our sacrifice, and the Fathers of the primitiue Churche did so receaue yt and beleue yt: by breaking and drinking of which in the aultar of C our Lorde, they trusted fastlie and inseparablie to be vnited to Chryst: I will somwhat more speciallie (being thus as ys saied occasioned) speake of the same sacrifice and the ministracion of yt. And first of the name. Secondly of the wholl ministracion. Thirdly of certain partes of the Canon, whiche the Proclamer impugneth. Forthlie of the valeu of yt to the quicke and dead.
As for the name, I can but merueill what they meen that so furiouslie rage Masse the woord how yt cometh. against yt, considering that yt was not yesterdaie begon or inuented: but vsed in the primitiue Churche, and from the primitiue Churche in the same significacion as yt ys at this present daie. For this woorde, Masse, whiche ys vsed in the english tounge: And Missa, whiche to signifie the same ys vsed in the latin tounge, be (as the learned in the tounges saie) Hebrue woordes. In the whiche toung of this woorde (Mas) cometh Missa, whiche in significacion ys all one with the greeke woorde (Liturgia) insomoche that yf a man wolde translate or interprete this woorde (Missa) into greke, he can haue no meeter woorde, then this woorde (Liturgia) D liuely, and fully to aunswer, and expresse his significacion. Likewise yf a man will interpreter or translate this woorde (Liturgia) into the Hebrue toung he can haue no apter terme then this woorde, Missah. And yf yowe will translate both these into the latin tounge, yt shall be rightlie [Page]and iustly doen by the woorde (officium) as yt signifieth our duetie in doing E sacrifice and diuine seruice to God. Missa. Liturgia. Officium.
And although these woordes, Missa, Liturgia, and officium, be of more large significacion: yet haue they ben by great auncient Fathers of Chrystes Churche restreigned, and limited to signifie onelie our sacrifice, and seruice to God. Wherfore in the greke Churche the Masse of Sainct Basill war called Liturgia, the Masse of Sainct Chrysostom was called Liturgia. So ys this woorde, officium, vsed in Sainct Lukes Gospell wher he speaketh of Zacharias the preist and father of Sainct Iohn Baptist: Et factum est, vt impleti sunt dies officij eius, abijt in domum suam. And when the time of his seruice was Luc. 1. expired, he went home. In whiche sainge this woorde, seruice, ys taken for the sacrifice and diuine seruice doen in the time of his course in the temple. And that this woorde Missa, whiche the latines haue borowed of the Hebrues, hath ben vsed of the Fathers of the latine Churche, for the sacrifice and seruice of God, whiche we cal Masse, fewe that haue vsed to readd those Fathers be ignoraunt.
And here to beginne with that holie Leo the first, who was, as ye haue F before hearde, more then a thousand yeares agon, he willing two Masses to be had in one daie for the commoditie of the people, saieth thus: Necesse est vt quaedam pars populi sua deuotione priuetur si vnius tantùm Missae more seruato Leo epi. 79 sacrificium offerre non possunt, nisi qui prima diei parte conuenerint. Yt must nedes be that some parte of the people shall be hindred of their deuocion, yf the maner of one Masse onely being kept, none can offre sacrifice, but they that come together in the first parte of the daie. By this saing of Leo, we are taught, two thinges: The one ys, that Masse here ys taken for the common sacrifice and seruice of the people to God. Which ys easie to be perceaued by that he saieth that a great part of the people shoulde be hindered of their deuocion, and shoulde not offre sacrifice, yf ther should be but one Masse. For the Masse being a common seruice and sacrifice to God, ys or ought by ioinct affection and deuocion of the people to the preist (who ys the common ministre of the Churche, and offreth for them all) to be offred of them all. And therfore the preist saieth plurallie, offerimus, we offre. And when he G hath doen he likewise saieth plurallie, obtulimus, we haue offred. And this common offring or sacrifice ys commonly called Masse.
The other ys that ther maie be mo Masses then one in a Church on one daie. Whiche nombre of Masses in one church, the Proclamer impugneth Ther maie be mo masses then one in one churche and one daie. by a membre of his proclamacion, and chargeth the catholique Church with an abuse in that ther haue ben in one Churche mo Masses than one in one daie. Yf he saie that yt was doen that the people might communicate: I content me, let yt be so (though the trueth ys, ys was doen that all the people might sacrifice) Then for communion ther maie be no Masses then one in one daie. Then yf ther be fiue ten, or twentie communions in one daie ther maie be fiue, ten, or twentie Masses in one Church in one daie. For why not aswell twentie as two, and those aswell for thoffring of sacrifice, as for communion? what scripture hath the Proclamer to the contrarie? But thus moche oute of the principall matter by occasion, as the like shall H happen again when we shall alleadge Telesphorus.
But nowe as touching the name of Masse, we finde yt also vsed of Sainct Ambrose. For he saieth of him self: Ego mansi in munere, missam Ambrosius epist. 33. facere cepi, orare in oblatione Deum, vt subueniret. I did abide in my office: [Page 310]I began to saie Masse: to praie God in the sacrifice, that he wolde helpe. A In which saing Sainct Ambrose vseth the name of Masse to expresse to vs the sacrifice of God, that he began to doe. Whiche by plain woordes he openeth when he saied, he began Masse to praie God in the sacrifice to helpe. So that to saie Masse, was to offre sacrifice, and the oblacion of yt to make praier to God.
So familiare was the name of the Masse, that as yt ys thought, Sainct Ambrose making two godly praiers to be saied before Masse, he entitled them: the praiers preparatiue before Masse. Yt ys not vnlike that the name of Masse was familiar in Sainct Ambrose daies, seing yt was in vse in the time of Telesphorus. Who being the seuenth Byshoppe of Rome after Sainct Peter, was wellnigh three hundreth yeares before Sainct Ambrose. This man made a statute that in the feast of the natiuitie of our Lorde there shoulde three Masses be songe. The first, at midnight, when Chryst was born in Bethleem: The seconde, in the morning, when he was seen of the shepards. The thirde, aboute the howre, that Chryst suffred his passion. And ye maie perceaue that yt was the Masse nowe in vse for a Telesphor. Three masses cōmaunded to be doen on Chryst maesse daie. 140 yeares agō. B great parte of yt, calling the Masse the wholl Ceremonie, that was by this man appoincted. For by him, was Gloria in excelsis, commaunded to be songe before the sacrifice shoulde be offred. From this mans time who liued more the fourten hundreth yeares agon, not onely the name of Masse hath ben in the Churche: But also on the daie of the Natiuitie of our Lorde, three Masses haue ben vsed in the Church. For some proofe wherof we haue Sainct Gregorie, who vpon the Gospell of Sainct Luke readde that daie in the Churche, making an homelie or sermon to the people saieth thus. Quia missarum solemnia ter hodie celebraturi sumus, diude Greg. hom, Euangelica lectione loqui non possumus. Bicause this daie we must sing three solemne Masses, we can not long speake of the Euangelicall lesson. That this hath ben also obserued in these later daies, ther ys no doubte. Then seing yt hath ben solemnely obserued so long time, to sing three solemne Masses vpon the daie of Chrystes birth, who can be so blinde C not to see the name to haue ben from the primitiue church vsed?
Nowe here by the waie note howe true the article of the Proclamer ys, wher in he auoucheth that yt can not be shewed, that mo Masses then one were saied in one daie. Yt ys I suppose, laufull to haue mo then one on a daie, when first we finde yt by so auncient, and so holie a Martyr commaunded, and that so nere to the beginning of the Churche. Secondarely, for that Leo gaue ordre that in one daie, and in one Church mo Masses should be celebrated then one. Thirdlie, we maie iudge yt laufull, forasmoche as we finde yt so obserued to Sainct Gregories time. In all which time, who can doubte the Churche to haue ben in good perfection. And yf the Churche did repute yt well doen that time: Yf so manie learned men, as were in that flowrishing time, whiche was for the space of foure hundreth yeares, in the which time liued: Tertullian, Cyprian, Hylary, Hierom, Ambrose, Augusten, and a nombre of men both famouse in holinesse of life, and excellencie of learning did practise the same, did obserue, and folowe the same: What maie we, or D can we saie, but yt ys laufull to haue mo Masses saied then one in one daie, and in one Churche? For yf three be commaunded, to be saied: Why maie not fiue be saied? Why not ten? Why not [Page]not fiftene, and so furth, wher the nombre of preistes and denocion of the people suffice and require. The Proclamer brageth moche of the primititi [...]e churche, but his doinges be against yt. E
Thus ye maie see howe the Proclamer bragging of the primitiue Churche, ys confownded by the primitiue Churche. He wolde with woordes of the primitiue Churche, bleer the eyes of men, when the doinges of the same Church shall cause them to see him ouerthrowen. And thus by shamefull speakinge against the trueth he geueth occasion to his owne shame, to haue the trueth shewed, And here also yt ys to be obserued, that this impugnacion of the nnmbre of Masses can not procead oute of anie godly or vertuouse principle. For yf yt be godly, and to our duetie apparteining highlie to esteeme Chrystes passion and death for oure redemption therin wrought, to rendre to God and our Sauiour Chryst, most humble heartie and often thankes, and often also to doe that solemne memoriall that Chryst himself hath appoincted to be doen, all whiche be doen in the Masse, what shoulde let, or what likelie or apparaunt dissuasion can this Proclamer make that the Masse shoulde be seldomer, and not raither oftener doen? Soche doctrine as moueth to vertue, to the setting furth of Gods honoure, ys to be F embraced. Soche as dissuadeth from vertue, and causeth a decaie of deuocion, and slacknes of our duetie in remembring of Chrystes passion, and death and thankes geuing for the same, ys not onely to be suspected, but to be iudged euell deuelish and abhominable. And truelie in this ys a farder matter entended by Sathan and his mynisters, then ys yet opened. But this The finall marke that Sathā shooteth at. maie be coniectured, that where they beginue to diminish the memorie of Chryst they will afterwarde clean extingnish yt. And so at the last alltogether wipe Chryst from all memorie.
But to returne to our cheif pourpose: Although this sufficeth to prooue the name of Masse, the vse of Masse, and the vse of moo Masses then one in one daie and one place, to be right auncient, yet we shall ascende somwhat higher, and come nearer to the Apostles time. Before Telesphorus, was Sixtus, who commaunded that when the preist began the solemne action of the Masse (wherby ys ment the praiers going before the consecracion) the people shoulde singe Sanctus, Sanctus &c. Whiche we see to this daie obserued G in the Masse, where yt ys vsed. Before Sixtus was Alexander the Martyr, a Roman borne, and aboute the yeare of our Lorde cxix. Byshoppe of Sixtus in Decret. Alexan. in epist. ad orthodox. Rome. Who made soche a decree, as I finde yt in the summe of decrees. In sacrificio missarum, panis tantùm & vinum aqua mixtum offeratur. In the sacrifice of Masses, let onely bread and wine mixed with water be offied.
This man being a Roman borne, an auncient of the Churche, and an holie Martyr withe his plain speach of Masse presseth the Aduersarie so sore that he ys fain to slie to his common solucion. Whiche ys to denie the Authour. In whiche his doing he doth not degenerate from his fore graunde Fathers. Marcion for the maintenance of his heresie reiected the olde Testament and the Prophetes, all the Euangelistes sauing Sainct Luke. The Manicheis also reiected the olde Testament. Martin Luther reiected the Epistle of Sainct Iames. The Sacramentaries reiecte Sainct Ambrose bookes of the Sacramentes. And why haue all these denied H these bookes? Bycause they be directlie against their heresies and do confute them. So, I saie, the Aduersary denied Alexander, bicause he maketh so expresse, and plain mencion of Masse, whiche he wolde ouerthrowe.
[Page 311]But let vs see what proofe he hath to prooue that Alexander did not make A this aboue mencioned constituciō, Bicause (saieth he) The charche in the time of Alexander, did not knowe this woorde Masse. And therfore yt ys like not to be his sainge.
This saing shall be diuided in to two partes, and to aunswer the first parte of yt, I saie, yt ys a merueilouse thing, that he will saie of him self withoute all authoritie, yea euē against plain authoritie, that the Church did not knowe Alexan. his authortie approued and delinered frō the cauile of the Aduers. this woorde Masse, when by authoritie the contrarie ys prooued. Yf he will refuse yt, let him counteruaill yt withe like authoritie, and then we shall geue him place. But naked woordes without proofe in matters of controuersie are not of weight able to prooue any thinge. For the second parte, wher he saieth: yt ys therfore like not to be his sainge: I must saie that oute of a fainct antecedent, commeth but a weake consequent. Euerie likelihoode hath not the verie veritie, no more hath his. And therfore in case yt were like (as he saieth) yet yt proueth not.
But to prooue that this ys the saing of Alexander, we will vse neither bare woordes, neither fainct likelihoods. But authoritie, and probable matter. B For authoritie we haue a councell holdē more then sex hōderth yearesagon, Conc. Constantine. 6. whiche testifieth this to be the saing of Alexander. and neuer yet against saied by anie councell that since hath ben celebrated, or by anie famouse learned catholique man. Probable matter we haue, that for asmoche as the name of Masse was in vse in the time of S. Gregorie, as ys allreadie testified. In the time also of Felix the fourth who was before S. Gregorie, in whose time the vse of the thing yt self with the name was so moch in vse, that he made a decree that no preist withoute a great necessitie shoulde saie masse but in places halowed and dedicated to God, wher by yt ys clere that yt Felixquartus epistola. ad Episc. was vsed also before his time. Nowe yf the name of Masse or the thing were so straung in that time, as the Aduersarie wolde beare vs in hande, ther shoulde no soch commaundement haue ben made to will the preistes to celebrate onely in churches, For by this restraint yt maie be coniectured, that yt was commonlic vsed in prophane places, I meen in their houses, no necessitie enforcing them therto, but their owne priuate deuocion. C
Nowe yf I were in the Aduersaries case and shoulde perceaue the vse and continuaunce of the Masse, and the name of yt to haue continued but for so long time as from Felix hitherto, which ys almost a thousand yeare. I shoulde be ashamed to take vpon me, to reprehende the doing of the wholl christian worlde so long vsed, and the iudgement of so manie holie and learned men, as in so moche time haue liued: And contemning all them to setfurthe mine owne phantafie. But pitie yt ys to beholde, he doth not onely so, but (arcogancic so leading him) he reproueth the wholl christian worlde and all the Church and learned men that haue ben these eleuen hondreth, and three skore years and more. For euen by his owne confession yt ys euident that the name of Masse hath ben in vse since foure hondreth years after Christ For these be his woordes towardes the ende of The Proclamer him self graunteth the name of Masse to haue ben vsed from four hundreth years after Christe. his sermon: I assure [...]owe Bretheren, in the time of Peter and Iames, neither was ther anie man that euer heard the name of Masse. For Missa was neuer named vntill foure hundreth yeares after Christ. And yet then was yt no Priuate Masse neither. By whiche D woords yt ys euident that he acknowlegeth the name of Masse to haue ben vsed, from foure hundreth years after Christ, and yf yt hath continued but so long, what arrogancie maie be thought in him? Not onelie arrogancie, but manifest vntrueth maic be perceaued in him. For yt ys allready [Page]vse within one hundreth and a fewe yeares after Chryst. For better declaracion wherof, we haue shewed the vse of yt in the time of S. Gregorie E and Felix. But yet here ys not the beginning of the matter. For as ye haue hearde Leo, who was before this Eelix. and S. Ambrose, who was before, do make expresse mencion of yt. Thelesporus also and Sixtus that were verie nere the time of Alexander (as yt ys before shewed) made decrees for the Masse.
Seing then yt ys prooued that the name of Masse was in vse from owre time to Sixtus, who was next Bishoppe of Rome to Alexander: ys yt not a probable matter, or raither dothe yt not prooue in dede, that yt was in vse in the time of the same Alexander. For when Sixtus made the addicion of Sauctus to the Masse, yt presupposeth that the Masse was before his time. Yf before his time then neades in the time of Alexander, who went next before him.
Nowe Reader thowe seist substanciall proofe against the Aduersarie wherby ys prooued this to be the saing of Alexander? as some accompt the fifte Bishoppe of Rome after Sainct Peter, whom the Aduersarie wolde F reiect by cause he so planlie impugneth his heresie. But this being thus prooued, the trueth appeareth that the name of Misse hath bē in the Churche assuredlie withoute all double more then fourtene hondreth years. And yf vaingloriouse pride did not to moche preuaill in the Aduersarie, soche reuerence shoulde be geuen to antiquitie, and speciallie to so holy a Martir as he was, that that ys saied of him with the approbacion of the wholl Churche shoulde be embraced and humblie receaued, and not arrogantlie and contemptuoslie reiected and despised. And yet this ys to be thought of so holy and auncient a Martir, that he himself wolde not inuent a noueltie of himself but raither that he tooke yt of his Fathers as the maner of his writing doth in good parte prooue.
And nowe that we haue driuen the matter thus farre, let vs here rest with S. Augustins rule and counsell, whiche ys this: Illa quae per orbem vniuersa obseruat Ecclesia, datur intelligi vel ab ipsis Apostolis, vel à plenarijs Concilijs, quorum Ad Ianua. epus. [...] 18 est in Ecclesia saluberima authoritas, statuta retineri. Soche thinges as the wholl G Churche through the worlde dothe obserue, we maie vnderstand that they are retined as ordeined either of the Apostles them selues: or ells of generall councells, whose authoritie ys in the Churche most holsome or profitable. Then forasmoche as the name of Masse ys reteined through This his false assurance declareth both vntreuth, and arrogancie. vntreuth for yt was in vse before foure hondreth yeare: arrogancie that confessing the vse for Mc. years, he dothe nowe reiect yt. all the Churche, For that which the Grekes call Liturgia, the Latines call Missa, and in the english tounge both be called Masse, and that name was not appointed by anie generall councell, but was in vse before the first generall councell that was holden, we maie saie by S. Augustines rule, that yt cometh from the Apostles.
And nowe wher ys the great assurance that this Proclamer made vnto yowe, wen he saied. I assure yowe Bretheren, that the name of Masse was neuer named vntill foure hondreth years after Chryste? And among vs english men I wolde see what other name either the Proclamer, or anie other learned or vnlearned man, can shewe to haue ben in this realme generallie vsed H since yt receaued the faithe, but onelie this name. Yf thei haue none other name but this: and this name they receaued when they first receaued the faithe as inglish men, and haue from that time till within these fewe late yeares continued the same: What nowe moueth the english man to reiecte that name that he receaued withe his faithe? With the greif of [Page 312]my heart I tell the cause: The cause ys that he reiecteth the faithe that was A first receaued. And therfor I feare that the english man reiecting the faith, wherby he was first made a christian man, and the names of thinges to that faithe apperteyning, he will also reiect Chryst, and the name also of a christian man. But God of his mercie turne his face from our sinnes, and turne vs home again to him, that we perish not in our vnfaithfullnesse: but by his grace acknowledging our offence, we maie euerie one of vs determe with the prodigall Sonne and saie: Surgam & ibo ad patrem meum, & dicam ei: Luc. 15. Pater peccaut in coelum & coram te iam non sum dignus vocari filius tuus &c. I will arise and go to my Father, and I will saie to him: Father I haue sinned against heauen, and before thee: I am not woorthye to be called thy Sonne. Whiche determinacion God graunt shortely to come to passe.
THE THREE AND THIRTETH CHApiter treacteth of the Masse yt self. B
FOrasmoche as Masse hath a larger and straiter acception or significacion: Masse hath two significations. meet yt ys that both be declared, that yt maie be discerned whiche of them yt ys that proprely ys called Masse. Of Masse in his large signification the Proclamer, though more like a Sicophant, then a man of true and sincere reporte, saieth, that yt consisteth in foure partes. Yf he had added the fifte, or if in the holie consecracion, he also vnderstandeth holy oblacion he hath declared what Masse ys in the large signification. For the holie praiers that go before consecracion, oblacion, and receauing. and that folowe them: holie doctrine also as the epistle, the Gospell and other scriptures ther placed and readde, with all the Ceremonies therunto apperteining added and putto of diuerse holy Fathers, to encrease, nourish, and conserue the deuocion of the people, C for the more reuerend vse of the Sacrement to the honour and glorie of God (whose honour ys moche mainteined by the reuerend handling of his misteries) are not proprelie called Masse, but largelie forasmoch as they be annexed and ioined to that that proprely ys called Masse, and be not the Masse yt self. For the Masse yt self ys the holie consecration of the bodie Masse prophelie what yt ys. and bloode of Chryst, the holie oblacion and offringe of the same, in the memoriall and remembrance of his passion and death with humble and lowlie thankes, lawdes, and praises for the same, and holie receauing, of that bodie and bloode so consecrated. This ys yt that proprely ys called the Masse, bicause thus moche ys instituted of Chryst him self. For he in his last Supper when he had consecrated and offred his blessed bodie and bloode, he saied. Accipite, comedite. Hoc in mei memoriam facite. Take and eate, do this in remembrance of me. So that consecracion oblacion with thankfull remembrance of Chrystes deathe, and holie receauing, of his blessed bodie be the thinges that proprely be called the Masse. Nam per reliqua Ambr. de Sar. lib. 4. cap. 4. omnia quae dicuntur, Laus Deo defertur, oratione petitur pro populo, pro Regibus, D pro caeteris. Vbi venitur vt conficiatur venerabile Sacramentum, iam non suis sermonibus sacerdos, sed vtitur sermonibus Christi. For by all the other thinges that be saied (saieth Sainct Ambrose) lawde and praise ys geuen to God, praier [Page]ys made for the people, for kinges, and for other, but when the honorable Sacrament shall be consecrated, then the preist vseth not his owne woordes, E but the woordes of Christ. So moche then as ys of Chrystes institucion, ys properly called the Masse, by the propre signification. And the rest that of godlie men ys added for consideracions before mencioned, ys generaly called the Masse by a general significacion.
As baptisme proprely ys no more, nor proprelie extendeth yt selfe anie farder then to the washing of the bodie in the name of the Father, and Baptisme vsed in two significacions. of the Sonne, and of the holie Gost and to the washing of the Soule from sinne by grace geuen in the ministracion of the same Sacrament: yet the wholl ministracion and praiers aswell before batisme as after vsed in the same, by a generall significacion ys called Baptisme. So ys the consecracion and oblacion of the bodie of Chryst with all praiers and Ceremonies either going before or folowing the same, by generall significacion called Masse.
This breif description of the Masse being made, let vs examin the partes of yt, whiche of them or howe manie of thē be against the woorde of God, F and the example or practise of the primatiue Church (as yt ys pretended) that yt maie be perceaued what iust cause the Proclamer hath so moche to exclame against the Masse.
The first parte ys consecracion. This parte for that by yt ys taught the Parts of the Masse. presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode, whiche the Proclamer can not abide, ys one cause why he reiecteth the Masse, But howe iustly he doth it yt maie be perceaued through oute all this booke, in which ys prooued the presence, whiche the catholique Church teacheth, and the figure ys improued, whiche the Aduersary mainteineth.
An other parte ys oblacion or sacrifice, wherin the Churche offreth Chryst to God the Father according to the commaundement of the same owne maister Chryst in the memoriall of his passion and deathe. That this parte ys not against the scriptures, and the holy Fathers yt ys allready proued in the declaracion of the prophecies of Melchisedech, Daniel, and Malachie in the first booke, wherunto ys made an addicion, whiche thowe shalt G finde in the xxxvij. chapiter of that same booke, sufficient I trust to aunswere and satisfie anie reasonable man.
An other parte ys receauing of the Sacrament. In the whiche twoo thinges do offend the Proclamer: The one ys that the people do receaue vnder one kinde: The other that the preist receaueth alone. Whether the receauing vnder one kinde be against the Scriptures, or the practise of the Primitiue Churche, yt ys disputed, and the trueth declared in the seconde booke from the lxiiij chap. to the. end of lxvijchap. As for the receauing whiche the Proclamer termeth priuate, yt shall be hereafter treacted of.
In doctrine, which ys an other parte, I knowe not what fault he can finde. In praier the first and last parte of the Masse he findeth two faultes. The one that praier ys made to sainctes: The other that praier ys made for the dead, for these two we shal haue recourse to the primitiue Churche, and there H make triall whether the Church doth well in so doing: or the Aduersarie euell in denieng the same to be laufull and good.
Nowe for the first parte of the Masse whiche ys consecracion, I will not moche otherwise here treact of yt, but onelie laing furth the practise of [Page 313]the Apostolique and primitiue Churche therin, compare the doinges of A the catholique Churche nowe therwith, that yt maie be perceaued howe iustlie yt foloweth the example therof. As for the effect of consecracion, whiche ys the presence of Chrystes bodie, ther neadeth here no speciall treactice, for that the woll booke treateth therof so fullie, that yf the Proclamer will finde fault in the Masse forthat the presence ys taught ther to be, he maie in other places of this worke finde sufficiēt matter for the proofe of the presence whiche yf yt will not satisfie him, neither maie a fewe woordes here spoken moche helpe him.
As for the seconde parte, whiche ys the oblacion or sacrifice of Chrystes bodie, as before yt ys declared, that yt ys offred according to the will and commaundement or Chryst himself, and that by the testimonie of the Scripturs, as they be vnderstāded of a nombre of the most auncient Fathers, and by diuerse other graue authorities: So shall yt be nowe set furth and cō mended to yowe by the practise of the Primitiue Churche. Whiche we haue differred to this place.
And forasmoche as the Proclamer to extenuate and abase the honorable B estimacion of the Masse, whiche yt ought to haue in the heartes of the people, doth for shame, and with shame conceale the names of soche auncient Authours as do testifie that both Sainct Peter and Sainct Iames saied Masse, the one at Rome the other at Hierusalem, and doth also to Whē truth and learning serueth not, mocking and skorning be their best argumētes. bring the matter in contempt aske by waie of skorn, whie raither we saie not that Chryste him self saied Masse, for that were the neerer waie to bring the Masse in creditte: I shall by good and sufficient authoritie shewe that not onelie Sainct Peter and Sainct Iames, but also Chryste him self did saie Masse. And so beginning at Chryst descende to three or foure hundreth yeares after Chryst, and shewe the practise of the Churche. And for this time I will ouerpasse the farder mocke and skorn that he maketh against the blessed Masse, asking whie we doe not raither saie that Aaron and his chapleins saied Masse, For in dede (saieth he) as yt hath ben vsed, the Churche hath had moch more of the Robes of the Ceremonies, and of the sacrifices of Aaron, then of the institucion or ordeinance of Chryste. For ys I shoulde touche him for that, I shoulde cause Arons garment worne for a Bishopporke, and the Cō munion ministred in a cope. C him to be perceaued to impugne and in that behalf to skorne the ministracion of the Communion. For that ys ministred in coapes and other soche garmentes as before were vsed in the Churche, and he himself refuseth not to weare Aarons garment for a Bishoppericke. So well agreeth his doing and his preaching together. And thus scoffing at the garmentes that be nowe yet vsed, he seemeth to me not to like this order of Religion that he liueth in, but raither to reprooue this as he doth the other: For in this poinct by his iudgement they holde both of Aaron.
But letting this passe I will returne to my matter, and wish the Reader to remembre, what this woorde Masse doth signifie, as yt ys declared in the last chapiter and therwith to haue in minde, as yt ys saied in this chapiter, Chryste saied Masse. that Masse ys the action of the consecracion, oblacion and receauing of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, and so vnderstanding Masse, I saie that Chryst did saie Masse. For he in his last Supper did institute Masse, and did ther consecrate his bodie and bloode, and offred them in sacrifice, D and gaue them to his Apostes to be receaued, and commaunded that so yt shoulde be doen in the remembrance of his passion and death. In this matter who listeth to be satisfied (forsomoche as one auncient Authour [Page]maie satisfie a man) let him reade the Epistle of Sainct Ciprian to Cecilius, Epist. li. 2. Epist. 3. E and he shall ther sinde euery parte of the Masse here reckned, to be doen by Chryst.
First for the consecracion he saieth thus: Vt in Genesi per Melchisedech Sacerdotem benedictio circa Abraham possit ritè celebrari, praecedit antè imago sacrificij in pane & vino scilicet constituta. Quam rem perficiens & adimpleus Dominus panem & calicem vino mixtum obtulit, & qui est plenitudo veritatem praesiguratae imaginis adimpleuit. That the benediction in Genesis by Melchisedech the preist might be celebrated accordinglie aboute Abraham, the image of the Sacrifice appoincted in bread and wine goeth before. Which thing our lotde perfecting and fullfilling offred bread and the cuppe mixed with wine, and he that ys the fullnesse, hath fullfilled the veritie of the presigurated image.
Holy Ciprian teacheth here that the bread and wine offred by Melschisedechi, were the prefigurated ymage of the veritie fullfilled by Chryst. What the veritie ys he doth in the same epistle declare when he saieth: Obtulit hoc idem quod Melchisedec obtulerat, id est panem & vinum, suum scilicet F corpus & sanguinem. He did offre euen the same that Melchisedech offred, that ys to saie, bread and wine, that ys to witte, his owne bodie and blode. Christ then fullfilling the veritie of Melchisedechs bread and wine, made bread and wine his bodie and bloode, which fullfilling of the veritie, and making the bread and wine his bodie and bloode, what ys yt ells, but that we call consecracion? This bodie so consectated, ys offred of vs in sacrifice, as the same Sainct Ciprian disputing against them that vsed onelie water in the Sacrifice, testifieth and saieth: Quaerendum est enim ipsi quem sint secuti. Nam si in sacrificio quod Christus est, non nisi Christus sequendus est: vtique id nos obaudire, & facere oportet, quod Christus secit, & quod faciendum esse mandauit. Yt must be asked, whome they haue folowed. The Sacrifice in the Maste ys Chryste himself. For yf in the Sacrifice whiche ys Chryst, none ys to be folowed but Chryst, we must then obey and doe that that Chryst did, and that he commaunded to be doen.
Marke well these woordes: that in the Sacrifice whiche ys Chryste, G none ys to be folowed But Chryste. The sacrifice then that the christian Churche in the time of holie Ciprian did offre was the bodie of Chryst, yt was Chryst him self. In the Sacrifice (saieth he) whiche ys Chryst.
That the Churche ys commaunded by Chryst to offre this sacrifice, in the remembrance of him, the same Sainct Ciprian by most expresse and plain woordes doth teache, saing: Quodsi nec minima de mandatis Dominicis licet soluere: quanto magis tam magna r tam grandia, tam adipsum Dominicae passionis & nostrae redemptionis Sacramentum pertinentia, fas non est infringere, aut in aliud quàm quod Diuinitus institttum est, humana traditione mutare? Nam si Iesus Christus Dominus & Deus noster, ipse est summus sacerdos Dei Patris, & sacrificium ipse primus obtulit, & hoc fieri in sui commemorationem praecepit, vtique ille Sacerdos vice Christi verè sungitur, qui id quod Christus fecit, imitatur. Et sacrificium verum & plenum tunc offert in Ecclesia Deo Patri, si sic incipiat offerre, secundùm quod ipsum H Christum viderit obtulisse. Yf then yt be not laufull to breake the least of the commaundementes of our Lorde, howe moche more yt ys not laufull to infringe or breake thinges so great, so weightie, so apperteining to the verie Sacrament of the passion of our Lorde, and of our Redemption, or [Page 314]ells by mans tradicion to chaunge yt into anie other thing, then that that A by God was instituted. For yf Iesus Chryst our Lord and God yf he be The same sacrifice that Christe did ys cōmaunded to be offred in his church. the high preist of God the Father, and he first did offre this sacrifice, and commaunded this to be doen in the remembrance of him: that prest doth the office of Chryst trulie, that doth folowe that, that Chryst hath doen. And then dothe he offre in the Churche vnto God the Father a true, and a full sacrifice, yf he so beginne to offre, as he hath seen Chryst him self to haue offred. Thus moch S, Ciprian.
Manie thinges are in this saing of Ciprian to be noted whiche I shall breiflie touche and passouer First, yt ys to be obserued, that to alter the institucion of Chryst ys a great and a weightie matter, whiche he accompteth to be altered, when either water alone or wine alone ys ysed in the ministracion, and not both together mixed. Wherin I wish the Aduersarie to weigh whether he offende not in a weightie and a great matter, when he breaketh and altereth the institution of Chryst, as Sainct Ciprian saieth, in that he vseth but wine alone in the ministracion. And farder obserue The Communions in Englond test ifie the breach of these ordō nances and mo to. that yf to take awaie wine or water from the ministracion be a great and B a weightie matter, howe moche greater and more heinouse matter ys yt to take awaie the blessed boodie of Chryste from the Sacrament? Which Sainct Ciprian teacheth not onely in this place but in diuerse other, as before maie be seen, that Chryst aswell instituted his bodie and bloode ther to be present, as he did the matters of bread wine and water ther to be vsed. And yet in these two poinctes to alter the institucion of Chryst the Proclamer thinketh yt no great matter.
And here by the waie to note, yt ys merueilouse to beholde howe the Deuell bewitcheth this man. For he sindeth great fault with the Church, and wolde make those which he reputeth faultes to be as Mowntaines in the seight of the people, as the vsing and wearing of ornamentes in the ministracion, the speaking of the woordes of consecracion high or lowe, and soch other: And yet the deniall of the presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode to be in the Sacrament, he accompteth yt but a small matter. C
In the Apologie of the Churche of Englonde, which semeth an arrowe The Appologie and the Proclamaciō both like bolts. that came oute of the same quoiuer that this Sermon did, and to be both feathered whith the feathers of one Goose, of like maner, and coolor, I meen, of phrase and matter, so near and so like are they or raither the same, that a man maie well thinke, they be one mans boltes. In that Apologie, I saie, the Authour being so desirouse to hide and cloake the famouse and notable dissention in weighty matters of Faith betwixt Luther, and Zwinglius, saieth that they were both good and excellent men, and they did not (saieth he) varie in great matters of faith, as of iustificacion, and soche like, but they varied in a litle matter, a matter of no great weight. And yet that litle matter was the matter of the Sacrament. For Luther taught the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament. But Zuinglius denieth yt, as this proclamer dothe. And so that, which Sainct Cyprian accompteth a great and a weightie matter: this man being blinde D on the one side can perceaue yt but a small matter, but opeining his eies to the other side he seeth yt to be a great and horrible faulte. For the ministres of Chrystes catholique churche teaching according to Chrystes instituciō and woorde, saing this ys my Bodie, that his bodie ys in the Sacramēt, are [Page]by this man not a litle exclamed at. For here are we Papistes: here are E we Capharnates: Here are we Idolaters, and the Authours of destable Idolatrie: here are we makers of Gods: here are we blasphemers: here are we the Robbers of Gods honour, and what are we not that euell ys, so great and wicked ys our offence teaching Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, and yet the same in Luther was but a small matter. Soche ys the parciall Iudgement of this man.
But howe soeuer he iudgeth, holie Ciprian iudgeth him and all soche as he ys greuouse offenders and brakers of the institucion of Chryst, that doe so alter Christes institucion, that wher yt pleased him of the abundant and vnspeakeable loue that he beareth to vs, to ordein his owne blessed bodie to be ministred vnto vs in the holie Sacrament, as a pledg of that same his loue to our great consolacion and comforte, and to our great benefitt both in bodie and soule: they will ministre and geue vnto vs not his bodie, but a peice of bread and a cuppe of wine. But that Chryst did geue furth his owne bodie and bloode, and not bread and wine ye haue before heard yt declaretd. For Chryste fulfilled that in veritie F (saieth Sainct Ciprian) that Melchisedeth did in figure. Melchisedech offred bread and wine: Chryst perfecting that figure offred bread and wine, that ys (saieth holy Ciprian) his bodie and bloode. Note then that Sainct Ciprian expownding the fullfilling of the figure of bread and wine offred by Melchisedech saieth not that Chryst offred bare bread and wine, but bread and wine, that was his bodie and bloode. wiche blessed bread and wine of his bodie and bloode being made present by his allmightie power, by the turninge of materiall bread and wine into his bodie and blood ys the right fullfilling of the figuratiue breade and wine offred by Melchisedech. Ita nunc sanguinem suum in vino consecrauit, qui tune vinum in sanguine Tertull. cō. Martionē. Consecracion the woorde vsed by Tertul. figurauit. So nowe (saieth Tertulian) he hath consecrated his blood in wine, who then figured wine in his blood. Thus then ye perceaue that Chryst did consecrate his bodie and bloode, whiche woorde of consecracion ye see that Tertulian abhoreth not, although yt mislike manie in these daies, but vseth yt as the Church nowe vseth yt, and saieth that Chryst did G consecrate his bloode in wine.
An other note we haue whiche ys this, that Iesus Chryst our lorde and God the high preist of God the Father did first offre this sacrifice. In whiche woordes we are taught not onelie that he did in his last Supper offre a Sacrifice, but that he did then offre a Sacrifice, that was neuer offred before. Let vs therfor discusse and searche what sacrifice that was. Yt was not a sacrificie of figuratiue bread and wine, For that also was offred by Aarons preistes: yt was not a sacrifice of thankes geuing onelie, For that was both in the lawe of nature, and by the lawe of Moises, and also by Chryst diuerse times doen. What sacrifice was yt then? was yt a sacrifice after the ordre of Melchisedech? Yt was a sacrifice after the ordre of Melchisedech. But yt maie be saied that that sacrifice was ofred by Melchisedech thousand of years before Chryst, so that Chryst was not the first that did offre after that maner, wherfor yt shoulde appeare, H that yt was not that maner of sacrifice. True yt ys, that Melchisedech offred sacrifice in bread and wine, as yt ys proued in the first booke. But Melchisedech offred bread and wine in figure, Chryst offred after the same ordre, bread and wine in veritie. What did he offre in veritie? [Page 315]That that the bread and wine of Melchisedech did figure, what Chryste in his last Supper offred his bodie and blood in sacrifice. A did yt figure? Yf figured the verie bread and wine of Chrystes bodie and bloode. Then Chryst offred in sacrifice his bodie and blood. True yt ys. And this sacrifice was neuer offred before Chryst himself did offre yt. For neuer man did offre yt before in veritie, though Melchisedech and other did offre yt in figure. For as Sainct Ambrose saieth: Christus formam Sacrificij perennis instituens, hostiam se primus obtulit, & primus docuit offerri, Chryste instituting Ambro. in praesaction Misse in cana Dom. the forme of the euerlasting sacrifice, he first offred him self a sacrifice, and first taught yt to offred.
And that Chryst did offre his owne blessed bodie in sacrifice Sainct Ciprian hath taught vs. For first he saied that Chryst offred bread and wine, that ys (saieth he) his bodie and bloode, and nowe teaching howe yt ys offred, he saieth that yt ys offred in sacrifice. Thus, yf I be not deceaued, the matter ys plain that Chryst did offre hys bodie in his last Supper in sacrifice. And yf the Aduersarie can shewe what sacrifice yt was ells that Chryst did first offre, yt maie somwhat make for him. yf he can not (as I am sure he can not) let him geue place to the trueth taught by the holie Fathers in the auncient Curche. B
Thus moche then for this note being saied, let vs farder consider what ys saied of this holie Father. He saieth not onely that Chryst did first offre this sacrifice, but he saieth also: Et hoc fieri in sui commemorationem praecepit. And he commaunded this to be doen in the remembrance of him. Here I wolde learn of the Aduersarie which shall be the substantiue to the Pronowne This, yt ys manifiest to him and to all that haue but their grammer rules, that this woorde, Sacrificium, ys the Substantiue. Then must yt of necessitie folowe that our lorde and God Iesus Chryst hath commaunded vs to offre We acc cō maunded by Chryste to offre the same sacrifice that he offred. this sacrifice in remēbrance of him, that he offred in his last Supper, whiche sacrifice ys his blessed bodie and blood. Wherfore I wishe this to be well noted, that howsoeuer the enemies of Chryst doo raile at the catholique Churche, and at the ministres of the same, for that they doo teache that in the Masse they offre sacrifice to God: yet we are so commaunded to doo by the authoritie of Chryste, as here by holie Ciprian ye C see yt testified.
Neither ys this to be ouerpassed, but diligentlie to be noted, that wher the same enemies of Chryst in their sondrie workes doo triumphe against certain learned catholique men, for that they saie that power ys geuen to Chrystes Churche to offre sacrifice by these woordes of Chryste, This doe ye in the remembrance of me: for asmoche as holie Ciprian saieth, that Chryst hath commaunded vs to offre his bodie in sacrifice, and before him so saied Irenaeus, and after him so saied Sainct Ambrose, and diuerse other holie learned Fathers, I wolde learn of them, what place ells in the scripture ther ys wherupon these auncient Fathers, dooe grownde these their sainges. But let them mocke and skorn at Chrystes trueth as the Phariseis and Scribes did at him self, yet as Chryst remained, and remaineth, and shall for euer remain, and shall condemne the wiked generacion: So dothe and shall this trueth remain to their condemnacion. D
And howesouer they will laboure to obscure yt: yet the holie doctours, who verie well knewe by the doctrine of the primitiue Churche, howe the scripture ys to be vnderstanded, shall allwaies open the same, and make yt clere. As nowe Sainct Cyprian in declaring [Page]the commaundement of Chryst, doth almost speake the verie woordes E of the commaundement. Chryste saied: Hoc facite in meam comm [...]morationem. This doe ye in the remembrance of me. Ciprian saieth: he commaunded this sacrifice to be doen in the remembrance of him. Sainct Ambrose likewise growndeth himself vpon these saine woordes of Chryst, when he saied: I lorde being mindfull of thy honorable passion, come vnto thing aultar, although vnwoorthie and a sinner, that I maie offre vnto thee the sacrifice, that thowe didest institute, and commaundest to be offred in the remembrance of thee. The Ambr. oratione praepar. ad Missem. same allusion haue other Fathers also. So that yt ys as clear as the daie light amonge the auncient doctours, that Chryst by these woordes commaunded his Churche to offre his bodie and bloode in sacrifice.
Nowe once to ende the notes that maie be made vpon Sainct Ciprian, and to stoppe the mouthes of them that speake wicked thinges, as saieth the spalmist: Note well the last parte of Sainct Ciprians sainges, and ye shall see, that both Chryst did offre sacrifice in his last Supper and that we also do òffre sacrifice, yf we doe obserue, and kepe the institucion of Christ. For Sainct Ciprian saieth: Sacerdos vice Christi verè sungitur, si id quod Christus secerit F imitatur. & sacrificium verum & pleanum tunc offert in Ecclesia Deo Patri, si sic incipiat offerre secundùm quod ipsum Christum viderit obtulisse. The preist doeth truelie exercise the ministracion of Chryste, yf he folowe that that Chryst hath doen, and then doeth he offre in the Chruche vnto God the Father a true and sull sacrifice, yf he so beginne to offre, as he hath seen Chryst to haue offred. In which sentence this maie be noted, first that Chryst did offre sacrifice in the last Supper, which the Aduersarie denieth. Secondarely, that the Church folowing the institucion of Chryste, offreth to God, a full and a true sacrifice, whiche also the Aduersarie denieth. By this then ye perceaue these two partes of the Masse, that ys, holie consecracion, and oblacion, to be doen by Chryst in his holie ministracion.
As for the thirde, whiche ys holy receauing, ther ys no controuersie betwixt vs and the Aduersarie. Yt ys more then neadeth to be spoken of, that both Chryst him self, and all the Apostles present at the borde of Chryst, did eat of that holie oblacion or sacrifice. These three being the substanciall G partes of the Masse, and the verie true Masse in dede, and being by Christ instituted, ordeined, and appoincted, as yowe haue perceaued, what can we ells saie, but that Chryste ys the Authour of the Masse, that he instituted the Masse, and that he saied Masse? Yf anie desire to be better satisfied in these two partes namely consecracion and oblacion, for the first let him repaire to the second booke, and ther from the xli chapiter to the ende of the booke he shall finde enoughe to satisfie him. For the other in the first booke from the xxxiij chapiter to the ende of that booke he shall likewise finde that maie content him.
THE FOVR AND THIRTETH CHApiter A sheweth, the vse of the Masse vsed and practised by the Apostles.
THe Masse (as ys saied, and proued) being instituted by Chryste, and by him also cōmaunded to be practised and vsed of his Church: yt shall be expedient and necessarie that we see how and in what maner that his commaundement was executed, and his instituciō practised, first, by the Apostles, and after by the holie Fathers of the primitiue and auncient Chruche. For they well knowing Chrystes verie minde, their doinges are to vs a perfect expositiō and declaraciōof the same. Wherfore minding to see them, they shall yet so be seen, as both the practise of the Masse of the catholique Church nowe in vse, and the practise also of the Schismaticall Churche maie be plainlie laied furth and compared to the former practises, that therbie triall maie be made, whether of these two agree or disagree with the Apostolique and primitiue Churche. Yf we of the catholique B Churche dissent either from Chrystes institution, or from the Apostles and Fathers as touching the substanciall parts of the Masse or anie other weightie matter of the faith, let vs suffre the reproche? Yf the Proclamer and and his complices haue swerued from them, let them repent and seke gods mercie. This I promisse before God, that I will laie furth the matter as simplie for the declararatiō of the trueth, as I can deuise, that the fault maie be fownd wher yt ys.
And before I enter to declare this practise. I wish the reader to be aduertised, and to haue this for a generall rule, that wher in this Processe we shall treact of the Masse and call yt the Masse of S. Peter, of S. Andrewe, of S. Iames, of S. Clement. or S. Dionise Masse, S. Basills Masse, Chrisostomes Masse, S. Ambrose Masse, and soche other, that we doe not neither ys yt so to be betaken, that these distinctions be vpon the propre significaciō of the Masse that ys, that these Masses be distincted in the substanciall parts of Masse: as that C the Masse of S. Peter shoulde be substanciallie distincted from the Masse of S. Iames, and the Masse, of S. Iames substanciallie different from the Masse of S. Basill, and so furth: But the difference ys taken of the generall acception or significaciō of Masse, that ys, that they be different in extern thinges, as in some ceremonies, in praiers, and in other gestures or maners, but not in intern or inwarde substanciall thinges. For in them all ye shall finde one thing onely consecrated, one thing onelie offred in sacrifice, one thing onelie receaued. And therfore in Consecracion, oblacion, and receauing they being not different, Masse of the Apostles and Fathers, and that ys vsed nowe in the Church, all one in substance. But all one, are not called S. Peters Masse, nor S. Iames Masse and so furth: But Chrystes Masse. For these thinges be of his institucion, and not of theirs. The diuersitie of Ceremonies, praiers, and other maners, ys of thē by the magisterie of the holie Gost instituted, and not of Chryste. In this processe then be diligent to see the agreement in the substanciall matters of ministracion, be yt either Masse or Communion, and yf anie be fownde to varie in the substanciall partes from the doctrine of the Apostolique and primitiue Chruche, discredit them, and reiect them: and soche as D shall be fownd to retein like doctrine in inthose parts to the primitiue Churche receaue them, and embrace them. So vpright and indifferent will I be, that other thing then trueth will, I will not require.
And that the matter, as yt ys confessed on either part, maie clerlie appear, [Page]and as yt were lie flat before yowe, vnderstand, that the catholique, Masse what yt ys Churche reteining the name of Masse, confesseth yt, as ys saied, tobe a consecracion E and oblacion of the bodie and blood of Christe in the memoriall of his passion and dath, to the releef and comforte both of the liuing, and of the dead, and the holie receauing of the same blessed bodie and blood. And although the Proclamer and his complices moche raill against the name of Masse: yet the thing that they shoote at and wherwith they are most greiued ys the presence of Christes bodie and blood, and the sacrifice of the same, Take awaie these two, and they will not force what name ys put to yt. But frasmoche as the catholique Churche teacheth these things, and these be they that the Aduersarie impugneth, yf we can shewe these two things to haue ben vsed of the Apostles, and their disciples, and the Fathers of the primitiue church we shall caselie prooue them to haue vsed Masse, whiche thing by Gods helpe I doubte not to doe. And doing this, I must to eche of these adde one other thing, as it were an handmaidden to wait vpon them. For to consecracion, must be added intencion: and to sacrifice, praier for acceptation. Fo so shall we see a great part of the order of the Apostolique F and primitiue Churche in this holie ministracion: vnderstand therfor that of these four, that ys, of the two principals, and their hādmaides, we wil seuerallie treat after this order. First, of consecration: then of the intencion of the consecratours: after that of oblacion, last of praier for acceptacion of the same. In treating of euerie of whiche I will laie to the practise of the Apostolique and primitiue Churche the doinges of the catholique Church in these daies, and of the schismaticall Churche, that iust triall maie be made whiche agreeth withe the Apostles and Fathers, which dissenteth from them.
To enter into this matter, let vs first see the maners of the ministration of the Apostles. And forasmoche os the Proclamer with a certain skof or skorn of (some saie) beginneth with the cheif Apostle S. Peter, saing that some saie, he saied Masse at Rome: I will also first beginne with him. And albeit, as ys saied, yt ys spoken with skorn that he saied Masse: yet yf yt be well weighed, the skorn turneth to the Proclamers owne head. For yf some G saie that he saied Masse, and none saie the contrarie, I meen among the catholique writers, then that S. Peter saied Masse, bicause yt ys of some affirmed, yt ys a trueth: And that he saied no Masse whiche this Proclamer saeth, bicause yt ys of no catholique writer affirmed, ys an vntreuthe. And thus (though in skorn) he hath confessed more for the trueth, then he ys hable to bring to maintein his vntrueth. For yf we haue some to saie for vs, and he none to saie for him, whose cause ys best, yt ys easie to iudge.
That S. Peter saied Masse at Rome I can not doubt, for that he and S. Paule being the fownders of the Churche ther, as Irenaeus witnesseth and Peter being ther Bishoppe resident xxv years, as bothe Eusebius, and S. Hierom do testifie, yt maie not be thought of soche an Apostle, so feruentlie Irenaeus li. 3 cap. 3. Euseb. eccl. hist. lib. 3. cap. 2. Hieron. li. eccl. scriptorū. Hugo de S. Vict. lib. 2. de Sac. part 8. cap. 14. professing, and folowing Christe, for so long time to haue neclected that part of his duetie. And that he thersaied Masse yt proueth well, that before being resident at Antioche he ys of diuerse testified so to haue doen. Wherfor yt well foloweth that he saing Masse at Antioche, wher he was first resident, H did the like at Rome, wher (as Irenaeus saieth) he fownded the churche, and was all the rest of his life resident.
That he saied Masse at Antioche Hugo de S. Victorys a plain wittnesse, who saieth thus. Celebratio Missae in cōmemorationē passionis Christi agitur, sicut ipse praecepit [Page 317] Apostolis, tradens eis corpus & sanguinem suum dicens, Hoc facite in meam commemorationem. A Hanc Missam beatus Petrus Apostolus primus omnium Antiochiae dicitur celebrasse, in quae tres tantùm orationes in initio fidei dicebantur. The celebracion of the Masse ys doen in the commemoracion of the passion of Chryste, as he commaunded the Apostoles, deliuering vnto them his bodie and blood, saing: This doye S Peter saied Masse at Antioche. in remēbrāce of me. This Masse S. Peter the Apostle ys saied first of all to haue saied at Antioche, in the which in the beginnīg of the faith ther were oneli three praiers saied. Thus moche he. In whom besides his testimonie that S. Peter saied Masse at Antioche, yt ys also testified and taught, that Chryste did institute the Masse, in the which he deliuered his bodie and blood. And that yt shoulde not be left in doubt what Masse S. Peter saied, this authour saieth that he saied this Masse wherin ys deliuered the bodie and blood of Chryst, whiche ys the Masse of the catholique Church.
A moch like testimonie geueth Remigius. But yt shal suffice to heare the testimonie of Isi lorus, who ys the eldest of these three, for he liued more then Jsid. li. 1. de off. ecl. cap. 15. nine hundreth years agon, who saieth thus: Ordo Missae vel orationum, quibus oblata B Deo sacrificia consecrantur, primùm est à sancto Perro institutus. The ordre of the Masse or of the praiers, with the which the sacrifices offred to God are consecrated, was first instituted of S. Peter. Thus Isidorus. In whiche his saing yt ys to be noted, that he maketh not S. Peter the institutour or authour of the Cap. vltim. Masse. For (as yt ys shewed in the first booke) he doth attribute that to Chryste, but he maketh him the authour of a certain ordre of the Masse, and of praiers to be saied at the consecracion, oblacion, and mynistracion doen in the Masse, but not of the Masse yt self. Thus moch being saied to aunswer the Proclamer for S. Peters Masse, let vs nowe procead.
Yt maie perchaunce seem straunge to the Proclamer, to saie that S. Paule saied Masse: but that he did so, to the faithfull Chrystian considering the weight of that, that shall be saied, yt shall be made manifest. Yt ys therfore to S. Paule said Masse be remembred that Masse, as yt ys taken in the propre significacion ys no more, but the consecracion oblacion, and receauing of Chrystes blessed bodie and bloode. Masse largelie taken ys both the consecracion, oblacion, receauing, and also a certain ordre of rites, ceremonies, praiers, and C reading of scripturs added therunto. Nowe that S. Paule did consecrate the bodie of Chryst and sacrificed the same his doctrin in the x. and xi. of his epistle to the Corinth. hath and shal so declare the same, that the Proclamer by no honest mean shall denie yt, this being presupposed that he did as moche as he taught. But he taught the bodie and blood of Chryst to be consecrated and sacrificed. Wherfor he did the same, yf he did that, then saied he Masse as of Chryst yt was instituted. But to this institucion S. Paule also (as S. Peter) added a certain maner and ordre of praiers and ceremonies, and therfore yt maie be saied, that he saied Masse in the large maner of the acceptiō of Masse 1. Cor. 11. That he made a certain ordre, his own woordes will proue yt. For when he had trauailed to reduce the Corinthiās to the right instituciō of Chryst, that ys, to the honourable maner of the mynistracion of his bodie and blood, which ys the consecraciō, oblaciō, and godlie receauing of the same, in the ende of all he saieth: Caetera cùm venero disponā. Other things I shal sett in ordre when I come, As who might saie: I haue now geuē instructiōs as touching the substancial parts of the Masse aboute the well doing of the whiche lieth D the great weight: I haue put yow in mind of the verie instituciō of Chryst: I haue taught yow how ye aught to examin yower selues, before ye come to receaue that blessed bread the bodie of Chryste. I haue let yowe vnderstand what horrible daunger abideth thē, that vnwoorthilie receaue that bodie ād [Page]drinke that blood: and that ye might perceaue some foreshewe and feel (as E yt were) a foretaste of the wrath and displeasure of God vpon them, that vnwoorthilie receaue the bodie and blood of Chryste, I haue certified yowe, that for soche vnwoorthie receauing God hath plagued manie with diuerse diseases, and sicknesses, yea and manie with death. Thus haue I instructed yowe in the weightie pointes of this honorable mynistracion. As for the extern maner of ceremonies and praiers to be vsed therat after the maner of some other Churches, to bring yowe to one forme, when I come, I shall make that ordre for yowe.
That thus S. Paule did meen, the expositours of the scriptures beare witnesse. Hugo Cardinalis saieth thus: Caetera necessaria ad sumptionem Eucharistiae, et ad ordinationem ecclesiasticam, cùm venero disponam. Other thinges necessarie for the receipt of the Sacrament, and the ordeinance of the Church, I shall dispose Hugo in 11 1. Cor. and set in ordre when I come. But though this exposition maie like the quiett man: Yet yt ys like not to please the contentiouse Sacramentarie. Wherfore we will heare S. Hierom who breiflie saieth thus: Caetera de ipsius mysterii sacramento, cùm venero disponam. Other thinges as concerning the sacrament Hierō. ibid of that mysterie when I come. I shall take ordre for them. Thus F S. Hierom.
The necessarie, substanciall, and weightie parts of the Sacrament being spoken of in the, x. and xi. chapters, yt ys easie to gather and perceaue, that here he speaketh of the ordeinance of the rites ceremonies, and praiers tobe doen aboute the mynistracion. But that all cauille of the Aduersarie maie vtterlie Aug. ad Ianuar. be remoued, the plain exposition, and sentence of S. Augustine shall be heard vpon this place, who saieth thus. Vnde datur intelligi, quia multum erat vt in epistola totum agendi ordinem insinuaret, quem vniuersa per orbem obseruat Ecclesia, ab ipso ordinatum esse quòd nulla morum diuersitate variatur. Wherbie yt ys geuen tobe vnderstanded, that yt was to moche that in an epistle he shoulde declare all that ordre of mynistracion, which the vniuersall Churche throughout the worlde taketh to be ordeined of him, forasmoch as yt ys not by anie diuersitie of maners varied, or altered.
Yf then S. Paule deliuered to the Corinthians both the substanciall parts of the Masse, as ys saied, and also by this testimonie of S. Augustine deliuered vnto them the ceremonial part, that ys, the ordre and maner of celebracion, G and mynistracion, what can we ells saie, but that he deliuered and taught thē the ordre of Masse? And that he did so, S. Augustines wordes prooue inuinciblie. For he saieth, that he speaketh of that ordre which the vniuersal Church Ad Januar. epist. 118. obserueth. But the vniuersall Church obserueth the ordre of Masse. Wherfor yt ys the ordre of Masse that S. Paule speaketh of. And what should we think but that these two cheif Apostles ād the other also should setfurth the ordre of the mynistracion of the Sacrament, the ordre of the Masse, sith that Christ instituting the thing, left the ordre and maner of the mynistracion to them, Chryst himself instituted the substanciall parts of the Masse, but left the order of mynistracion to the Apostles. as S. Augustine ys a strong and a plain wittnesse saing: Non praecepit quo deinceps ordine sumeretur, vt Apostolis, per quos ecclesias erat dispositurus, seruaret hunc locum. Chryste gaue no commaundement after what ordre yt shoulde afterwarde be receaued, bicause he wolde leaue that place to his Apostles, by whom he wolde sett his Church in ordre.
In this saing of S. Augustin note that Chryst instituting the holie mynistracion, did, as ys saied, onelie institute the substanciall parts of the Masse the H thing yt self, and not the ordre and maner how yt should be doen. Wherbie maie be perceaued the vanitie of the railing of the Aduersarie against Chryst [Page 318]catholique Churche for the rites and ceremonies vsed in the Masse. For A (saieth he) Chryste commaunded no crouching no kneelinge, nor no soche dumbe ceremonies as the, Papistes doo vse. Yt ys true he commaūded none soche, but he left the ordre of them to his Apostles, that they in those matters should take ordre. Wherfor the Aduersarie maie not drawe the Church to do nothing more in the holie mynistracion, then Chryste did. For so, as by S. Augustine yt maie be perceaued, Chryste himself wolde not, but he wolde haue an ordre and maner therin, whiche he wolde shoulde be made by hys Apostles, and Churche, wherfore let not the Aduersarie vse anie more his vain argumēt: Chryst did not this, or, Chryst did not that, therfor we should not doo yt. For soch doings he lefte to the ordre of his Church. And forasmoch as he so did we must with reuerent obedience accept and regard, that by her ys ordeined.
And now seing that Chryste hath lefte soch ordre by other then by himself to be made, what should yt offend the Proclamer to hear that S. Peter, ād S. Paule did make a certain ordre, and certain praiers to be vsed in the Masse, B and so likewise S. Andrew, S. Iames, S. Dionyse, S. Basil, and S. Chrysostō, and other, by reason of whiche ordeinaunces and praiers by them seuerallie made they should be called S. Peters Masse. S. Andrews Masse, S. Iames Masse, and so furth.
As S. Peter and S. Paule are testified to haue saied Masse, So ys S. Andrew the S. Andre as Apost. ad Aegeā. brother of S. Peter, who after he had with moch trauaill and manie miracles preached Chrystes faith in Scythia in Europe, which contrie happened to him when the Apostles diuided thēselues to preach throughout the woorld He came to Patras in Grece, wher being resisted by Aegeas the Proconsull, and by him apprehēded, in geuing an accōpt of his doinges, saied thus to the same Aegeas: Omnipotenti Deo, qui vnus & verus est Deus, ego omni die sacrifico, non S. Andrew offred sacrifice dailie. thuris fumū, nec taurorū mugientiū carnes, nec hircorū sanguinē sed immaculatū agnū qnotidie in altari crucis sacrifico, cuius carnes postqaam omnis populus credentiū manducauerit, & eius sanguinē biberit, agnus qui sacrificatus est, integer perseuerat & vinus. Et cūm verè sacrificatus fuerit & verè carnes eius manducatae sint à populo, & verè sanguis eius sit bibitus: tamen (vt dixi) integer permanet. & vinus. Vnto the Allmightie God, which C ys one and the verie God, euery daie do I sacrifice, not the smook of franken cense, neither the flesh of roaring bulls, nor the blood of kiddes, but an vndefiled lābe do I dailie offre in sacrifice in the aultar of the crosse. whose flesh after that all the beleuing people haue eaten, and haue dronken his bloode, the lābe that ys sacrificed doth remain wholl, and aliue. And when he ys verilie sacrificed, and his flesh verilie eaten of the people, and his blood verilie dronken, yet for all (as I haue saied) he doth remain wholl, and vndefiled and aliue. Thus he.
Although in this saing of S. Andrew here ys no menciō made of the woord Masse what yt ys. Masse: yet he hath reported himself to haue doē that thing that he should haue doē, yf he had saied that he saied Masse. For call to remēbrance what we haue saied Masse to be: yt ys to consecrate the bodie and blood of Chryste, to offre the same in sacrifice, and to receaue yt. These three S. Andrewe reporteth himself dailie to haue doen. For he saieth that in the aultar he sacrificed the immaculate lambe, &c. Wherbie declaring the blessed and innocēt lambe Chryste to be on the aultar, he declareth the consecracion: and saing D that he did on the aultar sacrifice yt, he doth open the sacrifice, and expressedlie also confessing the receipt, the wholl three parts of the Masse be confessed to haue ben by him doen.
[Page]Nowe let not the Aduersarie reiect the saing of S. Andrew as of none authoritie, for yt hath ben in the Churche receaued manie hundreth years, E and written in an epistle by the preistes and deacons of Achaia, of the passiō of S Andrewe, and to this daie of no catholique to my knowlege reproued. To these three Apostles, we shall adde one other Apostle S. Iames by name, whom with the skoff of somsaie this Proclamer wolde haue made his audien ce beleue that he had neuer saied Masse at Hierusalem, as he wolde haue persuaded that S. Peter neuer did at Antioche, or at Rome. But afterward correcting himself, as a man waking oute of a sheape or dreame, and better aduised, perchaunce not knowing when he preached his sermon that the Masse S. Iames Masse allowed and praised by the Proclamer. of S. Iames was a broad in print, but before he penned yt coming to knowledge, he corrected his Some saie spoken in his dreame and vnaduisedlie, ād being now waking and better aduised chaungeth his phrase, and saieth that yt ys constantlie affirmed that S. Iames saied Masse at Hierusalem. And finallie he himself confessing the same and magnifieng and highlie extolling yt by soche comparison as yt liketh him to make, he abaseth, depresseth, and F dispraiseth the Masse of the catholique Church that ys nowe vsed, but howe, well he handleth the matter thowe shalt hereafter vnderstand.
Let vs nowe examen the Masse of S. Iames, and see whether his maner of consecracion agreeth with ours. Dominus Iesus ea nocte qua tradebatur, vel potius seipsum tradebat pro vita & salute mundi, accipiens panem in sanctas, immaculatas, inculpabiles & immortales manus suas, in coelum suspiciens, ac tibi Deo & Patri ostendens, gratias agens, sanctificans, frangens dedit nobis Discipulis suis dicens: Accipite, comedite, S. Iames directed his speache in the cōsecracion to God the Father Hoc est corpus meum, quod pro vobis frangitur, & datur in remissionem peccatorum. Oure Lord Iesus the same night that he was betraied, or raither in the which he deliuered himself for the life and saluacion of the worlde, taking bread into his holie, vndefiled, innocent, and immortall handes, looking vppe into heauen, and shewing yt vnto thee God and Father geuing thankes, sanctifieng, and breaking, gaue yt vnto vs his Disciples saing: Take, eate, this ys my bodie which ys broken for yowe, and geuen in the remission of Chryst mixed his cuppe with wyne ād water sinnes. Then he tooke the cuppe and saied: Similiter postquàm coenauit accipiens calicem, & permiscens ex vino & aqua, & aspiciens in coelum, ac ostendens tibi Deo & G Patri gratias agens, sanctificans, benedicens, implens Spiritu sancto, dedit nobis Discipulis suis, dicens: Bibite ex hoc omnes. Hic est sanguis meus noui Testamenti, qui pro vobis, & multis effunditur & datur in remissionem peccatorum. Likewise he after he had supped taking the cuppe and mingling yt with wine and water, and looking vppe into heauen, and shewing yt to thee God and Father, geuing thankes, sanctifieng, blessing, filling yt with the holie Gost, he gaue yt vnto vs his Disciples, saing: Drinke ye all of this. This ys my bloode of the newe Testament, which for yowe, and for manie ys shed and geuen in the remission of sinnes.
This was his maner of consecracion. And forasmoche as all the holie Apostles preached one Chryste, one faith one religion, and did all see Chryste setting furth this one institucion, yt ys to be thought in so weightie a matter, Chryst before the consecracion of his bodie lifted vppe hiseies, and gaue thāks to his Father. that they all vsed one forme, which maie well be proued to be this, for that S. Iames being an Apostle wolde not in this high ministracion varie or dissent from other Apostles, but vse the same ordre and maner that they did. Nowe then let the Masse of the catholiques, and the Communion (as yt H ys tearmed) of the Schismatiques, be compared to his maner of consecraciō that triall maie be made, which of the two ioineth nearest vnto yt, and best agreeth with yt. S. Iames approching to the holie consecracion abideth in [Page 319]deuout praier, and proceading in his pourpose directeth his wholl talke to A God the Father, as Chryste in his propre person before the same consecracion did, both lifting vppe his eies, and geuing thāks to the same his Father. The catholique Church euen so approching to the holie consecracion abideth and continueth in deuoute praier, and proceading in the same pourpose directeth all her woordes to God the Father after the example of the Apostles Masse, thus saing: Who the daie before he suffred, tooke bread into his holie ād honorable hādes, and lifting vppe his eies vnto thee, God his father The maner of the Apostles and catholique preists incō secracion. allmightie, ād also geuing thankes he blessed yt, &c. In the which woords by the waie note, that as in the Masse of the Apostles these woordes were vsed as directed to God the Father: He lifted vppe his eies, and gaue thanks to the God ād Father: So in the Masse of the catholique Church yt ys saied to the Father: He lifted vppe his eies into heauen vnto thee God his Father allmightie, and to thee geuing thankes blessed yt, &c. Wherin ys made direction of woordes to God the Father, as was in the Apostles Masse. And here also this maie be noted that the rule of the Apostles Masse was, that when the preist came to the consecracion, folowing the example of Chryst, who tooke the bread into his holie handes, he tooke also the bread into his handes: So the preist of the catholique B Church coming to the consecracion, taketh the bread into his handes, and soloweth both the example of Chryste, and of his Apostles.
Now the mynister of the Schismaticall Cōmuniō approching to, I cā not tel The maner of new mynisters in their Communion. what (for that church not bearing the name of cōsecracion, I know not how to terme their doings) hystorically reherseth the woordes of Chrysts supper, not as Chryst himself and his Apostles did directing his cōmunicaciō to God the father, but passeth furth as one that wolde tell a tale, saing thus: Who in the same night that he was betraied, tooke bread and when he had geuen thankes, he brake yt, ād gaue yt, to his Disciples, saing: Take, eate, this ys my bodie, which ys geuen for yowe, doe this in the remembrance of me. In these woordes ye see no soch direction of speach to Woordes of the Comunion. God the father, as Chryste and his Apostles made, and as the catholique Church vseth folowing thē. The mynister saieth, not to the Father these wordes: he looked vppe into heauen to thee, God and father, and geuing thee thanks, but onelie maketh a bare rehersall of the hystorie. Yt ys euident then that in this part, the schismaticall church foloweth not the maner of the Apostolique C Church, but the catholique Churche doeth.
The rule of the Apostolique Churche was to take the bread that shoulde Conference of the Apostles and new mynistres in consecracion of the bread. be consecrated into their handes: The breach of rule in the Schismaticall Church that they take not the bread into handes, but let yt lie on the table, as though they had nothing to do withall. In this also they fall not onelie from the order receaued of the Apostles, but also from the doing of Chryst, who (as in S. Iames Masse yt ys saied) tooke bread into his holie immaculate handes, &c. before he did consecrate yt. And allthough the woordes of the Euangelistes be not so full as to saie that he tooke bread into his handes: yet in that they, and S. Paule also saie that he tooke bread, yt importeth as moch as S. Iames saieth, that he tooke yt into his handes.
The conference thus farre being made aboute the bread and consecracion of the bodie of Chryste: let vs procead to make conference also aboute Conference of the same in the consecraciō of the wine. the wine, and the bloode. First, as touching the wine, yt ys manifest that the Apostles vsed to mixte yt with water. For yt ys in the Masse of sainct Iames saied, that Chryste tooke the cuppe and mixed wine D with water, &c. The catholique Church both Latines, and Grekes in all ages preparing the cuppe of our Lorde for the holie mynistracion mixeth, [Page]water with wine in the same cuppe. The Schismaticall Communion (if yt E maie be so well termed, as to call yt a Communion, when in dede yt ys raither a disunion) dissenteth here from the doing of Chryste, of the Apostles, and of the primitiue Churche, for in yt ys not vsed to mixe water with wine.
The Euangelistes saie, that Chryste likewise tooke the cuppe, that ys, as he tooke the bread into his holie handes: so tooke he the cuppe into his holie handes. The preist in the catholique Church folowing Chrystes example, and the Apostles, and Fathers of the primitiue Church taketh the cuppe into his handes before he consecrateth yt. The mynister of the Shismaticall Church herein also foloweth not the doing of Chryste, nor of the Apostles and primitiue Churche, but letteth the cuppe stand as a straunger to him, not taken into the handes. Chryste entring towarde the consecracion of his blood continueth his communicacion to his Father with thankes geuing. The Apostles beginning the same direct their woordes to God the father, as yt ys seen in the Masse of sainct Iames, wher they speake to him saing. Geuing thankes to the God and Father. The primitiue Churche did the like. The catholique Church folowing Chryste, the Apostles, and primitiue F Woordes of the Masse. Churche entreth the consecracion of the blood with these woordes: In like maner after he had supped taking this cuppe into his holie and honourable bandes, geuing thee also thankes, he blessed yt, and gaue yt to his Disciples, &c.
In whiche woordes yt ys easie to perceaue that the catholique Churche continueth her praies to God the Father, and directeth her speach to him, as Chryste the Apostles, and the primitiue Churche did. The late fownde Churche, as aboute their sacramentall bread: so aboute their sacramentall wine leauing the maner vsed of Chryste, the Apostles, and the primitiue Churche, proceadeth onelie historicallie rehersing the woordes of Chryste Woordes of the Communion. thus: Likewise after supper he tooke the cuppe, and when he had geuen thankes he gaue yt to them, saing: Dirnke ye all of this, &c. In whiche maner howe moche soeuer the Proclamer braggeth for himself and his Churche, that they folowe Chryste, and the primitiue Churche, yt maie be perceaued that these are but woordes, For their doinges doo almost in nothing agree. But let vs see more of the consecration of the cuppe of our Lord. G
The Apostles did not onelie saie that Chryste gaue thankes to his Father, but also that he did sanctifie and blesse yt. The catholique Churche folowing them saieth likewise that he gaue not onelie thankes, but also that he blessed yt, The Proclamers Church saieth no more but that he gaue thanks, and liketh not to saie that Chryst blessed yt, or sanctified yt. And wote yow whie? Bicause they feared that the trueth might be sooner perceaued, that by the blessing and sanctificacion of Chryste, his verie bodie and blood were consecrated (as they were in dede) which by all shiftes and meanes they labour, to hide. But I wishe the wholl woordes of S. Iames Masse not onely to be well noted, but also continuallie to be remembred, that he saieth that Chryste gaue thankes, he sanctified, he blessed, and fylled the cuppe with the holie Gost. For these woordes not onelie impugne the wicked assertion of the Sacramentarie, but also commende to vs the excellencie of the B. Sacrament, and Woordes of S. James. Masse. proue the presence of that blessed bloode whiche the catholique Churche teacheth there to be present. For who can saie that after these great doings of Chryste, of sanctifieng, blessing and filling with the holie H Gost, that ther ys nothing ells made but a bare hungrie figure? This godlie acte of Chryste the Apostles and Fathers foloweing, as S. Iames [Page 320]in his Masse, S. Basill, and Chrysostom in their Mases, did not onelie make A mencion of his blessiing and sanctifieng, but did them selues sign and blesse the Sacrament, as in their Masses yt ys plain to see. Which acte of Chryst, of the Apostles ād fathers, the catholike church embrancing signeth with the sign of the crosse, and blesseth the Sacrament, signifieng the sanctificacion their doen to be doen by the power of him that by his crosse sanctified all the faithfull. But these wicked bretheren of the late fownd Church geue as fewe termes of excellencie to yt and vse as fewe gestures and actes signifieng blessing and sanctificacion, as they maie, that the estimacion of that gloriouse Sacrament maie be impaired.
Thus nowe ye haue seē the conference made, ye see the catholique Churche Conference of the catholeque authoritie of preists withe the lacke of authoritie of newe ministers. in euerie poinct agreing with Chryste, withe Apostles, and with the pritiue Churche. Contrarie wise ye see the newe fownd Churche allmost in all pointes disagreing. Finallie I thinke yt expedient that as I haue here spoken of consecracion, and conferred the doing of the catholique Churche, and of the newe Churche, with the Apostolique and primitiue Churche: So to saie a fewe woordes of the preist of the one, and of the minister of the other. And here not moche to tarie the reader, yt ys to be remēbred that B Chryste, when he had instituted this diuine and noble Sacrament, willing yt to be continued gaue his Apostles, and in them to all their successours power, authoritie, and commaundement to doo that, that he had doen. By which commaundement euery catholique preist duelie executing this ministracion, doth consecrate the verie bodie and blood of Chryste, by vertue of Chrystes ordeinance, and woordes duelie pronouced.
The ministres of the newe churche not being of the catholique succession, as they haue no soche power, authoritie or cōmaundement from Chryste Newe ministres haue no authoritie to consecrate. to consecrate his bodie and blood, and as their monstrouse heades neither can geue them soche, neither mindeth that they shoulde doe anie soche thing, but raither as they finde yt bread and wine so to let yt remain, and so to receaue yt: they do not so rehersing Chrystes woordes, consecrate his blessed bodie, no more then they doo that read those woordes vpō the booke in their cōmon studies. For if the historie of Chrystes supper rehersed of a minister not endewed with laufull authoritie, descending to him by catholique C ordre, did consecrate then shoulde consecracion haue ben doen in manie a querulouse and contenciouse dinner, and supper, aswell in Tauerns as ells wher, wher the like woords haue ben spokē and rehersed of men of as good authoritie for that pourpose, as the ministre. Be not deceaued therfor (gentle readers) to thinke that of sochemens hands yowe receaue the bodie of Chryste. Yt ys to moche that yowe receaue ther schisinaticall bread: yt were lamentable therwith also to committee Idolatrie.
And now although this might suffice to prooue the Masse to haue benvsed of the Apostles, yet for thy better confirmaciō (gentle reader) I shall adde Addias hist. Apost. li. 7. the testimonie of Abdias Bishoppe of Babilon, and a Disciple of the Apostles who writeth thus of the Masse and death of S. Matthewe. Cumue respondissent amen, & misteria Domini celebrata & Missāsuscepisset omnis Ecclesia, retinuit se vt iuxta altare, vbi corpus ab eo fuerat Christiconfectum, illic martyriū Apostolicū exultaret. S. Matt hew saied Masse. And when all had saied Amen, and all the Churche had receaued the Masse, and the ministeries that were celebrated, he staied him sem self, that by the aultar, wher the bodie of Chryste was by him cōsecrated, ther should D his martidom be solemnised, Thus ther. In this place ye heare plain menciō made of the Masse doen and celebrated by S. Mathewe, whiche if the Aduersarie [Page]wil seke to auoid, as put in by the translatour: yet he can not denie these E two thinges, whiche be in effect equiualent, that ys, the aultar, and the consecracion of the bodie of Chryste. Nowe if he did clerebrate at the aultar, and on the aultar did consecrate the bodie of Chryste, yt foloweth that he did celebrate the Masse.
And here I wish these two thinges to be well noted, forsomoch as they were written of one that was disciple to the Apostles, and did write diuerse bookes of their liues. The one ys, that S. Matthew did celebrate at the aultar: the other that he did consecrate the bodie of Chryste. Yf these two were to be writtē as in vse thē, yt maie easelie be iudged who doth offēd: he that doth vse both in these daies, or he that refuseth both. And wher the Proclamer as ys of late saied prouoketh so moche to the primitiue Churche, iudge nowe again, Reader, how well yt liketh him to folowe the order of the primitiue Churche, whē he abādoneth and flieth frō these two thinges, as frō a serpēt, and yet both vsed, as ye perceaue, of the Apostles and the Primitiue Church.
Hauing nowe saied sufficiētlie for the vse of the Masse in the Apostles time, to cōclude this chapter, this maie be saied, that as yt pleased our Sauiour Christe to cōmend to the worlde the trueth of his holie Gospell principallie by F foure Euāgelistes, and S. Paule his chosē vessell: So yt hath pleased him to cō mēd the trueth of the holie ministracion of his bodie and blood called the Masse, by foure Apostles, namelie S. Peter, S. Andew, S. Iames, and S. Matthew and also by S. Paule. He of his mercie graūt that as by the Euangelistes his Gospell was receaued and beleued: so by the testimonie and doinges of these Apostles the trueth of the blessed ministracion maie be embraced.
THE FIVE AND THIRTETH CHAPTER SHEweth the maner of consecracion vsed and practised by the Disciples of the Apostles and the Fathers of the primitiue and auncient Church.
HAuing nowe saied of the consecracion vsed in the Apostles time, and to yt cōferred the maner of consecracion of the cathollque Church that now ys, ād the disordred maner of the schismatical church: yt shall geue good light to the atteigning of the trueth G yf we see allso the order of the same consecracion vsed of the eldest fathers of the priuitiue Church. Amōg the whiche, as among the Apostles we began with S. Peter, and S. Paule so shall we here beginne with their disciples S. Clement, and S. Dionise. That S. Clement saied Masse, and consecrated the bodie and blood of Chryste in the same maner that S. Peter, and the rest of the Apostles did, not onelie his Masse, which ys extant, and the woordes of consecracion ther in conteined, but also Nicolaus Methonen: by expresse woordes doth testifie yt. Whose woordes for the clere declaracion of the matter I shall at large alleage. Thus he saieth: Offerimus panc̄ perfectū viuum, siue corpus Christi quod perfectum etiam post passionem permansit & integrum. Neque enim os eius contritum est, & à diuina vita inseparabile, planè quale ipse primus noster ac magnus Pontifex & sacrificus victimaue suis ipsius Discipulis tradidit, iiue denuo, qui ab initio suis ipsis oculis verbum intuiti sunt, eiue ministrarunt, catholicae Ecclesiae ab extremis ad extremos vsque orbis terrarum limites tradiderunt: Omnes quidem, Hierosolimitanae, vbi & D. Iacobus primi magniue Pontificis frater ac successor mysticā incruentā (que) H bturgiam exposuit. Petrus autem et Paulus Antiochensi. Paulus verò peculiariter orbi vniuerso. Marcus Alexandriae. Ioannes & Andreas Asiae & Europae. Omnesue vniuersae [Page 321] Ecclesiae vbicunque sit per eam, quā S. Clemens conscripsit hturgiam, tradiderunt, in qua haec A ita ad verbum habentur: Memores igitur eorum quae propter nos passus est, gratias agimus tibt omnipotens Deus, non quantum debemus, sed quantum possumus, vt [...]ius statutū adimpleamus. In qua enim nocte tradebatur, accipiens panem in sanctas & unmaculatas suas manus & eleuatis oculis ad te Deum & Patrem suum fregit, deditue nobis dicens: Accipite ex eo, comedite, hoc est corpus meum, quod pro multis comminuitur in remisstonem peccatorum. Similiter & calicem ex vino & aqua temperatum sanctisicauit deditue nobis dicens: Bibite ex eo omnes. Hic est sanguis meus, qui pro multis essunditur in remisstonem peccatorum. Hoc sacite in meam commemorationem,
We offre a perfect liuelie bread, that ys, the bodie of Chryste, whiche The bodie of Chryste ossred in the Masse. remained also perfect and wholl after his passion, for ther was no bone of his brokē, and plainlie soche bodie as oure high and great Bishoppe, who ys both preist and sacrifice, deliuered to his owne Disciples, was from the diuine life inseparable, and they again, whiche from the beginning did withe their eies see the Sonne of God, and did wait vpon him, deliuered the same to the catholique Churche, euen from one ende of the worlde to an other: B euen all of them at Hierusalem, wher also S. Iames the brother and successour of that cheif and great Bishoppe settfurth the misticall and vnbloodie sacrifice, or Masse. Peter and Paule at Antioche, but Paule peculiarly to the The Masse of S. Clemēt the same that all the Apostles vsed. wholl worlde. Mark at Alexandria. Iohn and Andrew in Asia and Europe. And all of them deliuered yt to the vniuersall Churche, wher soeuer yt be, by that same Masse, whiche S. Clement setfurth, in the which these woordes be had woord for woorde Being mindefull of those thinges, whiche he suffred for vs, we geue thee thankes, Allmightie God, not asmoche as we aught, but asmoche as we can, and we fullfill his ordinance, In the night that he was betraied taking bread into his holie and vndefiled hands, and lifting vppe his eies vnto thee God and his father, he brake yt, and gaue yt vnto vs, saing: Take of yt, eate, This ys my bodie whiche ys broken for manie in the remission of sinnes. Likewise also the cuppe mixed with wine and water, he sanctified and gaue yt to vs saing drinke ye all of this. This ys my blood, which ys shed for manie in the remissiō of sinnes. This doe ye in the remembrance of me. Thus moche this authour. C
I haue produced this part of the Masse setfurth by S. Clement vnder the authoritie and testimouie of this man, both for that he being of the greke churche ys not to be suppected of Papistrie by the euell bretheren, and also liuing some hundreth years agon ys to be thought the freer from corruption. And albeit I iudge this that he saieth that Peter, Paule Iames and all the Apostles saied the same Masse that S. Clement afterward vsed and commended also to the churches, to be a verie notable saing, euen so notable that both catholique and protestant maie well note yt, the catholique for ioie seing the catholique religion well testified: the protestant for furie and greif seing his vntrueth impugned, and his falshed detected: yet I shall in consideracion that of this matter moche ys saied in the last chapter, ouerpasse yt, and applie my self to that, that ys in this chapter to be spoken of. This then in this place ys to be noted that the Masse that S. Clement vsed ys euen the same that Peter, Paule and all the Apostles did vse. This Masse vseth not anhistoricall narracion in the rehersall of the woordes of Chryste at the consecracion, but entring into yt by praier made to the heauenlie father, abideth D and continueth in the same, vsing the like directiō of woordes, as were vsed in the Masse of S. Iames, as by confernce yt shall be easilie perceaued. This also here, as in S. Iames Masse, yt to be noted, that the cuppe of Chryste [Page]was not a cuppe of wine onelie, but yt was a cuppe of wine mixed with E water. S. Proclus tractatu de tradi. diuina liturgie.
But perchaunce the Aduersarie will demaunde howe we prooue that yt ys S. Clements Masse God be praised we lacke no proues, for besides this Grecian, whom we haue allreadie produced, we haue an other Grecian Proclus Bishoppe of Constantinople who liued aboute 1100 years agon testifieng that manie did setfurth the Masse in writing emong whiche he nōbreth sainct Clement his woordes be these. Multi quidem & alii diuini pastores, qui Apostolis successerunt, ac Ecclesiae doctores sacrorum illius diuinae liturgiae mysteriorum rationem explicantes, scriptis mandatam Ecclesiae tradiderunt. In quibus primi & clarssimi sunt beatus Clemens, summi illius Apostolorum Discipulus, ac successor, qui sacro sancta illa mysteria à sanctis Apostolis sibi reuelara in lucem edidit, & D. Iacobus, qui in sortem Ecclesiae Hierosolimitanae administrandae vocatus fuit, quiue huius primus Episcopus à primo illo & summo Pontifice Christo Deo nostro cōstitutus est. Manie other godly pastours also, whiche succeded the Apostles and doctours of the church, setting furth the order or maner of the Godlie Masse of the diuine misteries F left yt vnto the Churche in writing. Amōg the whiche the cheifest and most famouse be S. Clement the Disciple of him that was cheifest of the Apostles, and successour, who did setfurth these holie misteries, as they were deliuered or taught vnto him of the Apostles: And S. Iames who was called to rule the churche of Hierusalem, who also was ordeined the first Bishoppe of that cheif and high Bishoppe Chryste our God. Thus he. In this testimonie ye heare that not onelie S. Clement did setfurth the ordre of Masse, but other doctours, and pastours of the church also, and that not by their owne authoritie, but as they had learned of the Apostles, And note here also an euident testimonie for the Masse of S. Iames, wherof we haue spoken in the last chapter.
Nowe to proceade, to heare more of the maner of consecracion in the primitiue Church. S. Dionisius Areopagita Disciple to S. Paule, as S. Clemēt was to Peter, that he saied Masse yt ys more euident, then nede to be declared. His booke of the ecclesiasticall hierarchie ys extant, wherin the wholl order of Masse ys at lenght setfurth and declared. But forsomoche as that booke to G the learned ys well knowen, and to the vnlearned although he were alleaged, yet for his obscuritie he wold be still vnknowen, I haue thought good here to ouer passe him as a witnesse famouslie knowen, ād bring in other more plain, and yet right famouslie knowen. Among the whiche holie Basill shall be first, who in his Masse vsed this forme of consecracion, entring into yt by praier made to the heauenlie father, in the whiche he thus spake Bassil. in Miss. of Chryste.
Debens enim exire in voluntariam & beatiss. & viuificam, suam mortem in nocte qua tradebat seipsum pro mundi vita, accipiens panem in sanctis suis & immaculatis manibus, & ostendens tibi Deo & Patri gratias agens, benedicens, sanctificans, frangens, dedit sanctis suis Discipulis & Apostolis, dicens: Accipite & manducate, hoc est corpus meū, Chryst tooke the bread and cuppe mixed withe wine and water in to his hands and blessed and sanctified them. quod pro vobis frangitur in remissionem peccatorum. Similiter & calicem de genimine vitis accipiens, miscens, gratias agens, benedicens, sanctificans, dedit sanctis suis Discipulis & Apostolis dicens: Bibite ex hoc omnes. Hic est sanguis meus noui Testamenti, qui pro vobis & pro multis effundetur in remissisnem peccatorum. Hoc facite in meam commemorationem. Willing to go furth to his voluntarie and blessed death geuing life, in H the night in the whiche he deliuered himself for the life of the world, taking bread in his holie and vndefiled hands, and shewing yt to thee God and Father, geuing thankes, and blessing sanctifieng breaking, he gaue yt to his [Page 322]holie Disciples and Apostles, saing. Take and eate, this ys my bodie, whiche A ys broken for yowe in the remission of sinnes. Likewise also taking the cuppe of the iuice of the wine, mixing, geuing thankes, blessing, sanctifieng he gaue yt to his holie Disciples, and Apostles saing drinke ye all of this. This ys my blood of the newe Testament whiche shall be shedd for yowe and for manie in the remission of sinnes. This do ye in the remembrance of me. Thus moche in the Masse of S. Basill.
Whiche if ye conferre and compare to the consecracion vsed by S. Iames Chrysost in Miss▪ and S. Clement, so moche shall yt see them agree that ye shal iustilie saie that they be all one. Therfor leauing him to be considered with the notes made vpon S. Iames and S. Clement, we shall procead to see what maner of consecracion was vsed in S. Chrysostoms Masse. Chrysostom (as the rest before mencioned) entreth into yt with praier made to the Father, and coming to speake of our Lorde and Sauiour Iesus Chryste instituting this most holie and noble sacrament, saieth: Qui veniens, completo pro nobis omni mysterio, nocte qua tradebatur, magis autem tradebat seipsum pro mundi vita, panem accipiens cum sanctis suis & immaculatis & impolutis manibus, cùm gratias egisset, benedixit, sanctificauit, & frangens sanctis suis Discipulis & Apostolis tribuit dicens: Accipite, & comedite, B hoc est corpus meum, quod pro vobis tradetur in remissionem peccatorum. Similiter autem & calicem postquam caenauit dicens: Bibite ex hoc omnes. Hic est enim sanguis meus noui testamenti, qui pro vobis & pluribus effundetur in remissionem peccatorum. Who coming, when all the misterie for vs was fullfilled, in the night in the whiche he was be traied or raither in the whiche he deliuered him self for the life of the worlde, taking bread with his holie, vndefiled and impoluted hands, when he had heuen thankes, he blessed yt, sanctifieng yt, and breaking yt, gaue yt to his holie Disciples, and Apostles, saing: Take, and eate, this ys my bodie, whiche shall be deliuered for yowe in the remission of sinnes. Likewise also the cuppe after he had supped saing: Drinke ye all of this. This ys my blood of the newe testament. whiche shall be shedd for yowe and for manie in the remission of sinnes. Thus moche in Chrysostomes Masse for the consecracion, whiche that yt agreeth with all before alleaged, yt ys easie to perceaue. S. Basill ād Chrysostō not the first fownders of Masse but setters furth of soche order ther in as they had receaued by tradicion.
But that the Proclamer seem not with his skoff of somsaie to weaken or C call into doubt the authoritie of the Masse of S. Basill, and S. Chrysostom, as I haue by authoritie proued the Masses of S. Peter S. Iames and other Apostles, and also of S. Clement, by good and sufficient authoritie: so also shall I doo these two of S. Basill, and S. Chrsyostom. And here I wish the reader first to be aduertised that S. Basill and S. Chrysostom did not make the ordenaunce of the Masse as the first fownders of the ordeinance, for that, as ye haue heard, was doen by the Apostles, and vsed by S. Clement, and so by liueall tradicion brought to the time of these two fathers. But the Masse of the Apostles being verie long as the holie Father Proclus witnesseth, and the deuocion of the people waxing short, and colde, these holie Bishoppes Basill and Chrysostom were compelled to bring yt into a shorter forme of praiers and ceremonies (the substance allwaies standing and abiding) which so being setfurth were called the Masses of Basill and Chrysostome, so that not the lack of an ordeinance of Masse, as though ther were none before, moued Proclus vbi supra. them to make this ordre, but the lacke of deuocion in the people, as yowe shall perceaue by the testimonie of the auncient Father Proclus thus reporting. D Posteri, abiecta fidei firmitate & feruore, negotiis huiusce seculi & curis mundi mancipati & immersi, Missae longitudinem (vt dixi) pertaesi, vix conueniebat ad audienda [Page] Domini verba. Quare D. Basilius medica quadam ratione vsus, breuiorem eam & concisiorem reddidit. Haud multò post Pater noster Ioannes, cui aurea lingua cognomen dedit E curam ouium, vt pastorem decet magna alacritate animi suscipiens, ac hominum naturae socordiam, atque ignauiam prospiciens, fibras omnes & radices huius praetextus sathanici prorsus auellere voluit. Quare multa praecidit, & vt breuior esset constituit, ne sensim homines libertatem & ocium maximè amplectentes fallacibus, & furiosis Aduersarii sermonibus decepti ab hac Apostolica & diuina traditione deficerent, quod multis saepe accidisse variis in locis ad hunc vsque diem deprehendimus. Men of later daies leauing the feruencie and sowndnesse of faith being seruilelie geuen, and drowned in the businesse and cares of this world, as I haue saied being wearie of the lenght of the Note the decaie of deuocion the cause of the shortning of the Masse by S. Basill ad Chrysost. Masse, they skantlie assembled or came to heare the woord of our Lorde. Wherfor S. Basill vsing the waie of a good phisition, made yt breifer and shorter. Not long after, our Father Iohn, whose golden toung hath geuen him a Surname, taking vpon him the charge of the shepe as yt becometh a good sheperd, beholding the slacknesse and sluggishnesse of the nature of men, he wolde vtterlie remoue or pluck awaie all the rootes and small stringes F of this intencion of Sathan. Wherfor he cutt of manie thinges, and ordeined that yt shoulde be shorter, leste by litle and litle men embracing libertie and idlenesse, and by the deceiptfull and furiouse woordes of the Aduersarie deceaued, shoulde fall from this diuine and Apostolique tradiciō, which thing euen vnto this time we haue perceaued to happen to manie. Thus moche he, in whom yowe perceaue plain testimonie to be made both of the Masse of S. Basill, and of S. Chrysostom. And not that onelie, but also (as I haue noted) yowe maie perceaue the cause whie these two holie men made these ordeinances of Masse. Tradiciō of the order of Masse obserued frō the time of the Apostles.
Last of all yt ys to be noted, as well woorthie yt ys so to be, that the Masses of these two holie Fathers, be not newe Masses, but they be both euen that same Masse, that by the diuine and Apostolique tradicion, was first setfurth and commended to the catholique Churche to be practised, but that by the se men, the small deuocion of the people ther vnto enforcing them, they be drawen shorter. Wherbie we maie learn howe the auncient Churche did retein, and abide in the tradicions of the Apostolique and primitiue Churche, G and did for no other pourpose make the order of the Masse receaued from the Apostles shorter, but to kepe the people, that they shoulde not for lack of faith and deuocion by the temptacion of Sathan fall from the diuine and holie tradicion of the Masse, as nowe by the like means Englond hath doen. Cōcil. Cstā tin. sext. cā 32.
Of these Masses as also of the Masse of S. Iames, we haue yet not one or two, or twentie witnesses onelie, but we haue a nombre euen the wholl, vi Councell of Constantinople, wher the Fathers making a canon against the Armenians and Hydroparastas, whiche semed to misunderstand Chrysostome, for the true vnperstanding of the matter saie thus of Chrysostom: Non docet sanctus Pater per solum vinum oblationem fieri, quandoquidem & suae Ecclesiae, vbi est illi pastoralis administratio tradita, aquam vino miscendam tradidit, quando incruentum peragi sacrificium oportet, & precioso & honorando nostri redemptoris sanguine & aqua contemperationem attendens, quae in totius mundi viuificationem effusa est, & peccatorum redemptionem. Et in omni Ecclesia vbi spiritalia luminaria refulserunt, hic ordo diuinitus Wine and water why they were mixed in our Lordes cuppe. traditus seruatur. The holie Father teacheth not that the sacrifice shoulde be H doen with wine alone, forasmoche as he gaue order to the Churche wher he was Bishoppe that water shoulde be mingled with wine, when the vnbloodie sacrifice ys to be doen considering the cōtemperacion of the perciouse and [Page 323]honorable blood and water which was shedde for the life of the worlde, and A the remission of sinnes. And in euerie Church wher spirituall lights did shine, this order setfurth by diuine tradicion ys kept.
In that the Councell saieth that Chrysostom gaue order to the Churche wher he was Bishoppe, to mengle water with wine: they vnderstand his Masse, wherin soch order was vsed. And let the Proclamer and all his complices note this saing well, that this order setfurth by diuine tradicion was kept in euery Church wher spirituall lights did shine: wherby maie be gathered that in Englond wher this order ys contemptuouslie banished, ther be no spirituall lightes, but carnall and earthlie smoking Turffes. Of S. Iames and S. Basill thus yt foloweth in the same Councell: Nam et Iacobus Domini nostri Iesu Christi secundùm carnem frater, et Basilius Caesariensis Archiepiscopus, cuius gloria omnem terrarum orbem peruasit, mystico nobis in scripto tradito sacrificio, ita peragendum in sacro mysterio ex aqua et vino sacrum poculum aediderunt, et qui Cartagine conuenerunt ita apertè tradiderunt. Iames the brother of our Lorde Iesus Chryste after the flesh, and Basill the Archbyshoppe of Cesaria, whose prayse ys gon throughout all the B worlde, in the mysticall sacrifice deliuered vnto vs in writing, did setfurth the holie cuppe so to be vsed with water and wine. And the holie Fathers which were together at the Councell of Cartage did euen so apertlie and openlie setfurth. Thus the Councell.
Here now in the whol, ye see that not onelie S. Iames, and S. Basil, and also Chrysostō did se [...]surth the holie mynistraciō in writing, but also taught that the cuppe in the same mynistracion should be mixed with water and wine as a diuine tradicion coming from the Apostles, which tradiciōalthogh vsed of the Apostles, and receaued of the auncient Fathers, this Proclamer and his felowes doe reiect And yet to bleer the eies of mē he ys euer prouoking to the Apostles and the Primitiue Church, when yet he himself will not come near yt. And here, reader, consider, that if this Proclamer intended the restitucion of religiō to the maner of the Apostles ād the primitiue Church, whie doeth he not obserue this, which he can not denie ther to haue ben obserued, and by the Councels of Cartage, and Constantinople decreed accordinglie to be receaued? But yt ys not the primitiue Church that he trauaileth C for to be regarded, but yt ys his phantasie and will that he seeketh to be receaued. God geue him a better minde.
This also ys not to be ouerpassed that the Councel of Constantinople testifieng that S. Iames did setfurth in writing the holie mynistracion, doth call yt by the name of Sacrifice, saing that he did setfurth the mysticall sacrifice, Masse called a sacrifice by the Counc. of Constātin. which name the Proclamer abhorreth. But what do I tarie so long aboute the settingfurth of these wittnesses, seing ther be diuerse other that testifie the same? As Nicolaus Metbonen. S. Bernard. Algerus, Bessarion, and other whom for breuitie sake, I thinke yt sufficient to haue named.
Nowe, Reader, wher the Proclamer in the second place that he speaketh of S. Iames, saieth that we constantlie affirme that S. Iames saied Masse, I praie thee, maie we not so doo, and doo truelie? And yf he and his complices saie the contrarie, shall they not saie falselie? we haue wittnesse and good authoritie to maintein that we saie: He deskanteth voluntarilie with manie discordes all oute of tune. For he singeth without his rule, hauing nothing well alleaged to maintein what he saieth. Thie parte therfore shall be, Reader to D lean and cleaue to that side that gro [...]ndeth yt self vpon substanciall authoritie, and not vpon phantasie and willfull affection.
[Page]But yt ys time that we also see the maner of consecracion vsed in the latime Church in time of the auncient Fathers of the same, of the whiche one E maie nowe suffice for all, whiche one shall be S. Ambrose, who thus reporteth yt: Vis scire quia verbis coelestibus consecratur? Accipe quae sunt verba. Dicit sacerdos: Fac nobis (inquit) hanc oblationem ascriptam, rationabilem & acceptabilem, quod est Ambr. li. 4 de sac. ca. 5 figura corporis & sanguinis Domini nostri Iesu Christi. Qui pridie quàm pateretur, in sanctis manibus suis accepit panem, respexit ad coelum ad te sancte Pater omnipotens aeterne Deus, gratias agens benedixit, fregit, fractumue Apostolis suis & Discipulis tradidit, dicens: Accipite, & edite ex hoc omnes. Hoc est enim corpus meū, quod pro multis confringetur. Similiter etiam calicem postquàm coenatum est pridie quàm pateretur accepit, respexit ad coelum ad te sancte Pater omnipotens aeterne Deus, gratias agens benedixit, Apostolis et Discipulis suis tradidit, dicens: Accipite, et bibite ex eo omnes: Hic est enim sanguis meus. Wilt thow know that the Sacrament ys consecrated with heauenlie woordes? Marke what be the woordes. The preist saieth: Make this oblacion (saieth he) Conferre this praier with the Masse book and yt agreeth nere conferre yt with the Cōmunion ād yt dissenteth farre. alowed, reasonable and acceptable, which ys a figure of the bodie and blood of our Lord Iesus Chryste. Who the daie before he wolde suffer, tooke bread F in his holie handes, and looked vnto heauen to thee holie Father allmightie euerlasting God, geuing thankes, he blessed yt, he brake yt, and brokē he deliuered yt to his Apostles and Disciples saing. Take ye, and eate ye of this all. For this ys my bodie, which shall be broken for manie. Likewise also the daie before he wolde suffre, he tooke the cuppe after they had supped, he looked to heauen vnto thee Father, allmightie euerlasting God, geuing thankes he blessed yt, and gaue yt to his Apostles and Disciples saing: Take and drinke ye all of this. For this ys my blood.
Hitherto S. Ambrose hath opened the praier vsed in the Church immediatelie before the consecracion, and the consecracion also. Which doen he maketh a certain exposition of yt, and saieth thus: Vide, omnia illa verba Euange listae sunt, ad Accipite siue corpus, siue sanguinem, inde verba sunt Christi. Vide singula: Qui pridie (inquit) quàm pateretur, in sanctis manibus suis accepit panem. Antequàm consecretur panis est, vbi autem verba Christi accesserint corpus est. Christi: Denique audi dicentem: Accipite, & edite ex eo omnes, hoc est corpus meum. Et ante verba Christi calix est vini & aquae plenus, vbi verba Christi operata fuerint, ibi sanguis efficitur qui plebem redemit. G Marke, all those woordes be the woordes of the Euangelist vnto these woordes: Take either bodie or blood, frō hencefurth they be the woords of Chryste. Note enerie thing: Who (saieth he) the daie before he wolde suffer tooke bread in his holie handes. Before yt ys consecrated yt ys bread: when the woordes of Chryste haue comed to yt, yt ys the bodie of Chryste. For hear him saing: Take and eate ye all of this, This ys my bodie. And before the woordes of Chryst yt ys a cuppe full of wine ād water, whē the woords of Chryst haue wrought, ther ys made the blood that redemed the people.
Now of S. Ambrose ye haue heard the praier preparatiue to the cōsecracion: Ye haue heard the cōsecracion yt self, which be the woords of Chryst: Ye haue heard the effect of consecracion, as yt was beleued of the holie catholique Church before ād in the time of S. Ambrose, ād of S. Ambrose him self, as his owne woordes not onelie here, but in diuerse and sondrie other places do declare. Who among other expownding the Pater noster, saieth thus Memini sermonis mei cùm de sacramētis tractarē, dixi vobis, quòd ante verba Christi quod offertur, panis dicitur, vbi Christi verba deprōpta fuerint, iam non panis dicitur, sed corpus appellatur. Ambr. in oratione dominica. H I remēbre my saing, whē I treacted of the Sacr. I saied vnto yow that before the woords of Chryst, the thing that ys offred, ys called bread: when the woords of Christ be vttered, now yt ys not called bread, but ys called the bodie of Chryst. The like woordes hath S. Augustine.
[Page 324]Now what the maner of consecracion hath ben among the Fathers of the A primitiue and auncient Church, as we haue learned yt in the last chapter by All one consecraciō in the Masse vsed by the Apostles their Disciples, the Fathers of the primitiue Church, ād of the Churche nowe. foure Apostles, and S. Paule: so in this we haue learned yt by foure Fathers, and S. Dionyse the Disciple of S. Paule, all which doe well agree, that yt maie well be perceaued that Proclus saied: that yt ys all one consecraciō of one Masse varied in shortnesse or lenght in some praiers or extern ceremonies or gesturs onelie, for the variacion of the maners of the people, but not in the substanciall parts. For proof wherof, note (gentle reader, as before ys saied) that as S. Iames, and S. Clement directe their communicacion in praier to God the Father: so doth S. Basill, Chrysostom, and S. Ambrose, so also doth the catholique Church: The schismaticall Church of the Proclamer and his felowes doth not so, but reherseth historicallie the woordes of the scripture.
Yf yt should be asked whie the Proclamer and his likes refuse to folowe herin the auncient maner of the primitiue Church, the imitaciō, of whiche Protestāts why they folow not the maner of primitiue Church. they so moch pretend, and so often haue yt in their mouth: yt ys easie to aunswer that they so doo, bicause innouaciō (which delighteth yt self with thown inuencions and desiereth nouelties, and liketh allmost nothing that before was fownded ād setled by the Fathers, which also pleaseth the people thursting B chaunges of thinges) occupieth their heades. Other cause whie they shoulde not kepe the same forme maner and order of consecracion, as the Apostles, their Disciples, and the Fathers did: whie they should not cōtinew their peticion and praier in the time of consecraciō, to god the father, as they did: whie theie vse not soch phrase and maner of woordes as all or most, or some of thē did: whie they put not water to the wine, as all they did, I cā none assign. But to conclud, hitherto yt maie be perceaued that the catholique Church in nothing varieth from the Apostolique primitiue and auncient Church, and that the hereticall Church in nothing, as touching consecraciō agreeth.
THE SIXE AND THIRTETH CHAP. DEclareth what was the intencion of the Apostles and Fathers in and aboute the consecracion in the Masse.
THe order by me appointed now requireth, that we search what was the faith ād intenciō of the Apostles and Fathers of the primitiue C Church aswell Grekes as Latines in and about the cōsecracion. Yt ys a world to see how the Proclamer like a commō iester trifleth with soch a weightie matter. Ah mercifull God, that wise men can not see the deuelish wicked intēts of this heretical brood. Brentius and Caluine contemne the woordes of the formes of Sacraments: The Proclamer mocketh and skorneth the intencion of soch as mynistre the sacraments. Yet when these two be taken awaie, what sacrament haue yowe? But that I tread not oute of my path, leauing to entre the disputacion of intencion and faith generallie in all sacraments, I will onelie here declare the intencion of the consecracion of the B. Sacrament by the practise of the Apostles and fathers. And without all circumstances breiflie to entre into the matter, we will first see the intent, and faith of S. Iames, what he thouht to be wrought in the consecracion of the Sacrament. Which his goodlie praier wilfullie declare wherin he praieth thus: Miserere nostri Deus omnipotens, miserere nostri Deus seruator noster, misere nostri Deus secundùm magnam misericordiam tuam, & demitte super nos, et super haec dona proposita, Spiritum tuum sanctissimum, Dominum viuificum, D S. . Jacobus in Missa. vnà tecum Deo Patre, et vnigenito Filio tuo, assidentem, simul regnantem, consubstantialem, ac coeternū, qui locutus est in lege et Prophetis, et in nouo tuo testamento, qui descendit [Page] in specie columbae super D. n. Iesum Christum in Iordanis stuuio, & mansit super eum, E qui descendit super Apostolos tuos in specie ignearum linguarum in coenaculo sanctae & gloriosae Syon in die Pentecostes: Ipsum spiritum tuum sanctiss. demitte nunc quoque Domme in nos, & in haec dona sancta proposita, vt superueniens sancta, et bona, et gloriosa sua praesentia sanctificet, et efficiat hunc panem corpus sanctum Christi tui, et calicem hunc preciosum sanguinem Christi tui, vt sit omnibus ex its sumentibus in remissionem peccatorum, et in vitā aeternam. Haue mercie vpon vs, o God allmightie, haue mercie vpon vs, o God our Sauiour, haue mercie vpon vs, o God according to thie great mercie, and send downe vpon vs, and vpon these proposed giftes thy most holie Spiritt our liuing Lorde sitting, and reigning, and euerlasting together with thee S. Iames beleued by the worke of the holie Gost, the bread and wine to be consecrated into the bodie ād blod of Chryste. God the Father, and thy onelie begotten Sonne, who hath spokē in the law, and in the Prophets, ād in thie new testament, which came down in the shape of a done vpon our Lord Iesus Chryst in the floud of Iordane, ād abidde vpon him, who came downe vpon thy Apostles in the shape of sierie toungs in the parlour of the holie and gloriouse Syon in the daie of pentecost: The same thy most holie Spiritt o Lorde sende down also vpon vs and these holie proposed gifts, that he coming vpon them maie with his holie good and gloriouse presence sanctifie and make this bread the bodie of thy Chryst, ād this F cuppe the preciouse blood of thie Chryst, that yt maie be to all that receaue of yt, remission of sinnes, and life euerlasting, &c.
Allthough in this praier of S. Iames manie things might be fownd woorthie of note: yet yt shall suffice for this present that we obserue that he vpon the consecracion had the same maner of intent and faith that the catholique Church how hath, that ys, that the bread and wine set vpon the aultar, by the miraculouse woork of the holie Gost be made the bodie ād blood of Chryst. Which thing ys so liuelie and fullie spoken and vttered, that yt nedeth no farder declaraciō. This onelie maie be added that yf ther were no more doē by the consecracion, but that the bread and wine be made a sacramentall bread and wine, that ys, onelie figurs and tokens of the bodie and blood of Chryst, S. Iames wold neuer haue so earnestlie praied for the coming down of the holie Gost to sanctifie that bread and wine, he knowing that the bread and wine might without the speciall sanctificacion of the holie Gost verie well be figurs of Chrystes bodie and blood, as manie other things were in the olde lawe. Neither wolde he haue praied that the holie Gost by his holie G presence should make the bread and wine the bodie and blood of Chryste, yf he had entended or beleued Chrysts institucion to haue but figures. Yt were in my iudgement a mockrie of God to desire, that the bodie and bloode of Chryste might be ther, and wolde not haue yt in dede, but onelie the figurs of yt. But whie do I saie so moch in so plain and clere a mater.
As ye nowe perceaue by S. Iames his praier that his entent and faith was that Chrystes verie bodie and verie blood were consecrated on the aultar: so shall ye see that S. Clement came to the aultar with, the same faith, and entent, wherupon he praied thus: Rogamus vt mittere digneris sanctum tuum Spiritum super hoc sacrificium, testem passionum Dom. Iesu, vt efficiat panem hunc corpus Christi tui, & ealicem hunc sanguinem Christi tui. We praie thee that thowe wilt vouchsafe to send thie holie Spirit vpon this sacrifice, a wittnesse of the passions of our Lorde Iesus, that he maie make this bread the bodie of thie Chryste, and this cuppe the blood of thie H Chryste. Thus moche S. Clement. Yf in anie place the faith and intent of [Page 325]holie men maie appear, that shoulde yt most cheiflie doo in their holie praiers A deuoutlie and simplie powred oute in the seight of God. S. Clement then S. Clement beliu [...] the bread and were to be made the bodie and blood of Chryste by the work of the holie Goste. making his deuoute praier in the holie diuine mynistracion of this blessed and gloriouse Sacrament, and desiering God that the holie Gost might be sent to make by his diuine power the bread and the wine vpon the aultar the bodie and blood of Chryst, his intent and faith was that yt should so be. No man will saie that he praied against or contrarie to that, that he beleued, and intended. His faith therfore and intent was, that by consecracion ther was made present the bodie and blood of Chryste. As in the last chapiter I referred the reader to S. Dionyse to see his mynistracion in his booke: so doe I here also And therfore the practise of the Apostles perceaued by S. Iames, and of their Disciples by S. Clement, thinking that yt will do well to vnderstand the like in the Fathers, that by the receauing and continuall practise of the same one thing in diuerse times, in diuerse churches, and of diuerse Fathers, the more adsured and perfect knowledge maie be had, and so occasion maie be taken for the reader to staie, and confirme himself in the veritie of B Chrystes Sacrament: we shall descend to the Fathers that were more then two hundreth years after them, to make trial whether they kept like order as the Apostles and their Disciples did, or varied from them.
And in this processe we will first see what S. Basill intended, and what he beleued to be wrought in the Sacrament, what he intended and beleued his owne praier will liuelie and fullie declare. Thus in his Masse, he praieth: Tepostulamus, & te obsecramus sancte sanctorum beneplacita tua benignitate venire Spiritum sanctum super nos, & super proposita munera ea, & benedicere ista, & sanctisicare, & ostendere panem quidem istum, ipsum honorisicum corpus Dom. Dei, et saluatoris nostri Iesu Christi: quod autem est in calice isto ipsum sanguinē Dom. Det & saluatoris nostri Iesu Christi, qui effusus est pro mundi vita. We besech and desire thee, o most holie of al holie that by thie wellpleasing goodnesse thie holie Spirit maie come vpon S. Basil by the sanctisicacio of the holie Gost beleued the bread and wine to be made Chrysts bodie and blood. vs, and vpon these proposed giftes, and to blesse and sanctifie them, and to shewe this bread to be the verie honorable bodie of our Lord God and Sauiour Iesus Chryste. And that ys in this cuppe the verie blood of our Lord God and Sauiour Iesus Chryste, which was shedde for the life of the world. C Thus moch S. Basill.
Yf ye call to remembrance the maner of S. Iames his praier in his Masse, and compare yt to this, so litle difference ys ther betwen them, that they might be thought all one, so well doo they agree in woordes, so well in faith that as thei speake all one thing: so they beleued all one thing, namelie the consecracion of Chrystes bodie and blood to be wrought in the holie mynistracion by the worke of the holie Gost. And yet thus moche hath S. Basill more then S. Iames, that he doth not onelie desire that the bread and wine maie be made the bodie and blood of Chryste, but that the holie Gost will make thē ipsum corpus, et ipsum sanguinē Domini, the verie self same bodie ād blood of our Lord. So that ther ys no doubt, but that in the Masse, he beleued by the cōsecracion, the bodie and blood of Chryst to be made verilie present. That the reader be not lōg deteined frō the pleasure ād godliedelight that he maie cōceaue ād haue by the heauenlie harmonie of the iust cōsent ād agree mēt of the holie fathers breiflie laied together: we will also heare Chrysostō, ād by his own woords learn of him, what intēciō and faith he had about the D mynistraciō of the blessed Sacr. Thus he like vnto other praied: Precamur et Chrysost. in Missa. supplicamus, vt mittas Spiritum sanctum tuum super nos, et super haec apposita munera, et fac panem istum quidem preciosum corpus Christi tui, et quod in calice, est [Page] preciosum sanguinem Christi tui, permutans ea sancto Spiritu tuo. We praie and beseche E thee, that thowe wilt sende thy holie Spirit vpon vs, and vpon these gifts setfurth, and make this bread the preciouse bodie of thy Chryste, and that ys in this cuppe the preciouse blood of thy Chryste, permuting or chaū ging them by thine holie Spirit. Thus farre Chrysost.
Yt ys not hard to perceaue either his agreement will other before alleaged, or his like intencion and faith when he vseth the same maner of woordes that they did, and the like request or praier? sauing that wher they desiered Chrysostō beleued the bread and wine by sanctificaciō to be the bodie ād blod of Chryste. Li. 4. de Sacram. ca. 5 the bread and wine to be made the bodie and blood of Chryste by the high and great woorke of the holie Gost, he declareth also by what meā the holie Gost doeth yt, saing: Permutans ea spiritu tuo sancto, chaunging them by thy holie Spirit, mening that yt ys doen by the holie Gost chaunging the bread and wine into the bodie and blood of Chryste.
To procede by as manie in this matter as we did in the other treacted of in the last chapiter, we must than also heare S. Ambrose, who declareth the faith and intent of the Latine Church aboute the consecracion saing thus: Vis scire quia verbis coelestibus consecratur? Accipe, quae sunt verba. Dicit sacerdos, Fac nobis (inquit) hanc oblationem ascriptam, rationabilem, & acceptabilem, quod est figura corporis F & sanguinis Do. n. Iesu Christi. Wilt thow knowe that the Sacrament ys consecrated with heauenlie woordes? Marke what be the woordes. The preist saieth. Make this oblacion (saieth he) allowed, reasonable and acceptable which ys a figure of the bodie and blood of oure Lord Iesus Chryste.
As S. Ambrose willeth yowe to marke the woordes of the praier of the preist, wherby ye maie perceaue, what intent and faith was in S. Ambrose and in the holie Fathers, that mynistred and consecrated the holie Sacrament in those daies: So wish I yowe to marke them that ye maie conferre them, with the praier of the catholique Church that now ys, declaring the intent and faith of the same. The praier of the Church ys thus: Facere digneris hanc oblationem, tu Deus omnipotens, in omnibus quesumus, benedictam, ascriptam, ratam rationabilem, acceptabilemue, vt nobis corpus & sanguis fiat filii tui Do. n. Iesu Christi. Vouchsafe, we beseche thee, o God Almightie, to make this oblacion blessed, allowed, approoued, reasonable and acceptable, that yt maie be made vnto vs the bodie and blood of thy beloued Sonne oure Lord Iesus Chryste.
Yf ye note the first part of this praier yt agreeth almost woord for woord G The praier in the Masse now vsed agreeth with the Apostolique ād primitiue church. with the praier of S. Ambrose, yf ye note the second part, wher yt saieth and desiereth that yt maie be made the bodie and blood of our Lord Iesus Christ yt agreeth with S. Iames S. Clement. S. Basill and Chrysostom, all whiche desiered the like. So that the praier of the catholique Church declaring the intent and faith of the same agreeth fullie with the Apostolique, primitiue, and auncient Church, euerie one of them desiering that the bread and the wine maie be made the bodie and blood of oure Lord Iesus Chryste. But the intencion withoute faith of the newe feigned Church ys sooen perceaued to dissent and disagree from all these princes, pillers, and Fathers of the Church for soch a countenaunce of praier they make. Heare vs, o mercifull Father, we beseche thee, and graunt that we receauing these creatures of bread and wine according to thie Sonne our Sauiour Iesus Christs institucion in remembrance of his death and passion, maie be partakers of his most blessed bodie and blood. Thus they. Here first let vs, before we haue of other, make conference of this praier with the praiers of the Apostles, woordes of the Communion. and primitiue Church, and then after we shall examen the treuth of yt, H and of their intent.
Remembre, gentle reader, obserue and note, that S. Iames, S. Clement. [Page 326]in remembrance of his death. Yf anie place be, yt must be the place of the A S. Basill. S. Chrysostom. S. Ambrose and so of all the Churche which they liued in both greks and latines for the space of foure hundreth years immediatlie The praier of the newe Church varieth from all the praiers of the Apostoli (que) ād primitiue Churche after Chryste, praied not that they might receaue the creatures of bread and wine, but that the creaturs of bread and wine might be made the bodie and blood of Iesus Chryste. Wherfor the newe Church making to them selues a newe fownd praier, so farre dissenteth here from the Apostolique and primitiue Churche, that I can not proprelie make a conference betwene them, but raither shewe the great difference of them. The Apostolique and primitiue Churche desire the bread and wine maie be made the bodie and bloode of Chryste: The newe Churche, that the bread and wine maie remain to be receaued, and so of consequent contrarie to the other church, desiereth that they maie not be made the bodie and blood of Chryste. See ye not then howe farre these two praiers are different? They are so farre different as two contraries, euen as yea and naie, I will, and I will not: so neerlie and iustlie doth this newe fownde Church folowe the primitiue Church, of the which this Proclamer so moche braggeth. The Apostolique and primitiue Churche desiereth not to receaue the creatures of bread and B wine in the B. Sacrament, but the verie bodie and blood of Chryste, as their plain woordes do plainlie testifie: This erring Churche desiereth not by expesse woordes to receaue the verie bodie and blood of Chryste in the Sacrament, but the creaturs of bread and wine, and then to be made partakers of the bodie and blood of Chryste, but howe, or whiche waie, wher or by what means, what maner of bodie, spirituall or corporall, reall or phantasticall, they ourpasse with silence. Thus still ye see, that they in all these weightie matters alltogether dissent frō the Apostolique and primitiue Churche, and do no lesse varie from yt then they do from the catholique Churche nowe being, whiche they so feercelie persecute.
And that they so doo, this shall well prooue yt, that neuer yet did anie catholique Father or authour, greke or latin, young or olde vse this phrase The praier of the newe Cōmunion neuer vsed nor heard of before of woordes of theirs, either in praier, sermon or writing. Whiche if yt had ben agreable, yt must nedes haue ben fownde in some of them, and learned of some of them. But this newe praier of this newe churche ys so newe, that C the like of yt could neuer vntill this newe degeneraciō be seen heard or knowen. Yf yt were let the Proclamer, and all his complices learned and vnlearned bring furth some president. Yf they can, I will ioin this issue with them, that I will praie and receaue with them. Yf they can not, as I am sure they can not, let them praie and receaue with vs. We haue brought furth presidents for oure praiers: let them bring furth presidents for theirs, I prouoke them to yt. What autoritie hath the Proclame or all the Protestants to shewe, that the eating and drinking of bread and wine ys of Chrysts institution
Thus moche being saied of the difference of the praier of the newe Churche from the praier of the Apostolique Churche: let vs nowe examen the trueth of the same praier. Their praier hath these woordes: that we receauing these they creaturs of bread and wine, according to thy sonne our Lord Iesus Chrysts institucion in remembrance of his deathe &c. I wolde learn of the masters of this Churche, wher that institucion of Chryste ys, that we shoulde eate the creatures of bread and wine in remembrance of his death. The proclamer requireth some plain and expresse sentence of the Catholiques to proue what they affirme against his articles: I require of him and his companie some plain sentence D in the scriptures to prooue that, that he and his companie affirme, that Chryste by expresse woordes cōmaunded vs to eate bread and drinke wine [Page]in remembrance of his death. Yf anie place be, yt must be the place of the institucion of the Sacrament, in whiche place although yt be testified that E he tooke bread in his holie hands: yet yt testifieth withall that he sanctified and blessed the same bread, and when he had so doen, yt was so farre chaunged from the nature of bread, that Chryst who ys the trueth, and in whose mouth was no guile might and did boldlie saie, Take and eate, not a peice of bread, but my bodie, euen the same that shal be deliuered for yowe. And likewise of the cuppe he said: Take ād drinke ye, this ys, not a cuppe of wine, but euē my blood that shall be shedd for yowr sinnes and the sinnes of manie. This eate ye, and this drinke in the remembrance of me What should they eate? That that he tooke vnto them. what did he take vnto them? The Euangelists do testifie: Take eate, this my bodie. They shoulde drinke in the remēbrance of him. What shoulde they drinke▪ That also that he did take them. What did he take them? The Euangelists likewise declare. Drinke ye all of this, saieth Chryste, for this ys my blood of the newe testament &c. Here be the woordes of the institucion. Here ys instituted that the bodie and bloode of Chryste should be receaued in F By Chrysts institucion we shoulde receaue his bodie and bloode in [...] &c. the remembrance of his passion and death, that bread and wine shoulde be so receaued, here ys not one title. Chryste saied not, eate this bread, and drinke this wine in my remembrance. Wher then be we commaunded to receaue the creaturs of bread and wine according to the institucion of Chryste, yf yt be not commaunded here? As touching the institucion of Chryste, yt ys at the full treacted of in the second booke, wher be produced xii cooples of the higher house of Chrystes Parliament, and vi cooples of the lower house, of the which a great nombre declare the verie substance of Chrystes bodie and blood to be verilie dispensed and geuen in the Blessed Sacrament The newe church chargeth Chryst with an vntrueth. and a good nombre of them denie the same Sacrament to be a figure onelie. Yf yt be not a figure, then ys yt not bread and wine: Yf yt be not then we eate not bread and wine, as they saie, according to Chrysts institucion. Beholde thē the impudencie of these mē see their notable vntrueth, that fear not before mē onelie (which in so weightie a matter were to moche) but also as yt were) euen to the face of God to make a stoute lie against his onelie begotten sonne charging him with that, that they be not hable to prooue. G But that this their vntrueth wher with they charge our Sauiour Chryst maie more fullie appeare, and the trueth of the catholique Churche clerelie be seen, ye shall not onelie when ye come to the next chapter, note what ys doen according to Chrysts institucion, but also here the practise of the Apostolique and primitiue Churche shall teache yowe, what Chryste instituted to be receaued for the remembrance of his death. S. Iames praied thus in his Masse: Misericors Deus dignum me fac gratia tua vt citra condemnationem particeps fiam sancti corporis, & preciosi sanguinis in remissionem peccatorum &c. O mercifull God make me by thie grace wourthie that withoute my condemnacion, I maie be made partaker of thie holie bodie, and preciouse blood, to the remission of sinnes. S. Basill thus: Nullum nostrum ad iudicium aut condemnationem facias accipere sanctum corpus & sanguinem Christi tui. Make none of vs to iudgement or condemnacion to receaue the holie bodie and bloode of thie Chryste. S. Chrysostom praied thus: dignare potenti manu tua tribuere nobis immaculatum corpus tuum & preciosum sanguinem, & per nos omni populo. Vouchsafe with thy mightie hand to giue vnto vs thie vndifiled bodie and thie preciouse H blood, and by vs to all the people. Thus they,
Yt ys not to be doubted, but that all these, and the Churche that they liued in receaued the sacrament according to Chrystes institucion. But these [Page 327]creaturs of beead and wine omitted, they shewe thē felues by expresse woordes, A to receaue the bodie and bloode of Chryste. Wherfor Chrysts instituciō ys to receaue his bodie and blood, and not the creaturs of bread and wine. And that they speake not of the spirituall bodie onelie, but of the reall bodie in the blessed Sacramēt, two thinges in these fathers prooue yt in uinciblie. The one ys in S. Iames and S. Basill. They both desire that thoy not to cōdēnaciō maie receaue the holie bodie ād preciouse blood of Chryst. That [...] bodie thē ys here receaued, that maie be receaued both to saluaciō and damnacion. The spirituall bodie can be receaued but to saluacion, the reall bodie both to saluacion and damnacion, wherfor they receaue the reall bodie of Chryste, that maie be receaued to condemnacion. The other ys in Chrysostom, who desiereth Chryste that he wold vouchsafe both to imparte vnto him his bodie and blood, and also by him and the preists to the people. Wher vpon we maie thus reason: That bodie was receaued of Chrysostom and the preistes, which by them also might be deliuered to the people, But thereall bodie of Chryste, and not the spirituall might by them be deliuered to the people. Wherfore Chrysostom and the preists receaued the reall bodie of Chryste. That the spirituall bodie of Chryste, or Chryste spirituallie B cā not by the preists be deliuered to the people, yt ys so manifest that yt nedeth no probacion, yt standeth thē certē and sure that Chrysostome receaued the verie reall bodie of Chryste.
To conclude then this disputacion vpon the principall part of that, that here ys intended: S. Iames, S. Basill. S. Chrysostom receaued that, that was according to Chrysts institucion to be receaued in the remembrance of his death: But they receaued not the creaturs of bread and wine, but the verie reall bodie of Chryste: Wherfor they receaued according to Chrysts institucion his verie reall bodie in the remembrance of his passion and death. Yt ys euident then that yt ys not Chrysts institucion to receaue the creaturs of bread and wine in the remembrance of his death, wherfor we maie conclude that the pretensed praier of the lare erected Churche hath a foule and a wicked vntrueth in yt, and for the maintenance of an abhominable heresie, doth vntruely report and saie of our Sauiour Chryste, and that not onelie Of intēciō of the newe ministres. to the world, but euen, as yt were to the face of God. C
Nowe remaineth the last thing appointed here in this chapter to be spoken of, which ys the intencion and faith of the ministers of this newe Churche, in the whiche a sewe woordes, maie and shall suffice. The intencion and faith of this Church ys not onelie perceaued by their cōmon professiō: Two sortes of ministres of the Communion. but also by this their praier. Their common profession denieth the presence of Chrysts bodie in the Sacrament, their praier confirmeth the same. For desiering to receaue the creaturs of bread and wine, they exclude the bodie and blood of Chryste, into whose substance (as Euseb. Emis. saieth) the inuisible creaturs are turned. Vnderstand that in this newe fownded Church be two sorts of ministres that doo minister this Communion. One sorte ys of preists, whiche lausullie consecrated in the catholique Churche, haue fallen to heresie, who although they haue authoritie by their holie orders to consecrate the bodie and bloode of Chryste: yet nowe hauing neither right intencion nor faith of the catholique Churche, they consecrate not. The other sort ys of ministres made after the schismaticall maner. These men though they D wolde vnwiselie haue intencion to consecrate: yet laking the laufull authoritie they neither do nor can consecrate, but (as yt maie be iustlie [Page]thought) hauing neither autoritie, nor due faith and intencion they neither E receaue nor distribute to the people anie other thing then bread and wine. Whiche their doing and intencion compared to the Apostolique and primitiue Churche sooen sheweth yt self to be nothing like yt, to haue nothing to do with yt, nor nothing to folowe yt.
The condicion of this matter being soche, what case be those preists in, whiche hauing catholique authoritie and catholique faith, and thinke but well of the catholique misteries and religion, for feare, or for liuing sake, leaue The miserable state of catholique preists folowing the schisme that they knowe to be good, and doo that they knowe to be euell? What trembling hearts shall they haue before the terrible iudgement seat of God, when their owne consciences shal accuse them, saing: we were called to serue the aultar, we had authoritie geuen vs to confecrate Chrysts bodie and blood according to his holie institucion, we might haue offred the same in sacrifice to the memoriall of Chrysts death, to the cōfort of our owne soules, and releiff of manie. We might haue receaued that blessed food to the nutriment of our soules to euerlasting life. Thus might we haue spent our time in the seruice of God, thus might we haue liued in our calling, wher omitting F all these, we haue ioined with schismatiques and heretiques, and ben as yt were in armes against Chrystes ordeinance, against his catholique Church and the holie religion of the same, wo be to vs, wo be to vs, what shall we doo? This or soche like or moche more bitter and greuouse accusation will yowr consciences make against yowe. Awake therfor and looke a bout yowe in time. Yt ys yet the time of mercie, the time of iustice will come in whiche repentance shall come to late.
Thus hauing here to speake of intencion and faith, for that I see yowe in countenance to decline form the excucion of that intencion and faith that shoulde be seen in yowe, and professed of yowe, I haue a litle digressed from my principall intencion to ad monish yowe to return to yowr deutifull intencion. And here to conclude with yowe as I do with schismatiques and heretiques, whiche ys a greif to my heart that I maie so doo, I saie that hauing intent to receaue the creatures of bread and wine in the Sacrament, ye fullfill not Chrysts institucion, neither do ye folowe the intencion and faith of the Apostolique Churche, neither of the primitiue and auncient Church. G
THE SEVEN AMD THIRTETH CHAPITER treacteth of the oblacion and sacrifice of the Masse as yt was vsed of the Apostles and Fathers.
SO moche being all readie spoken of the oblacion and sacrifice of the Masse, I should not nede, but that the speciall order here taken so requireth, to speake anie more of the same. I minde therfor no otherwise here to treact of yt, but onely as I haue doen in the matters of consecracion and intenciō to shewe furth the practise of the Apostles and fathers vsed in their Masses. And here first for the practise vsed among the Apostles, we will see what was doen by S. Iames being well assured that he did in this weightie matter of faith no otherwise then all the rest of the Apostles did. For what he did, all they did: and what they did he did H Iacob. in Miss. soche was their conspiracion, common consent, vnitie and agreement. In his Masse immediately after consecracion, thus he proceded: Memores igitur [Page 328]& nos peccatores passionum eius viuificarum, crucis salutaris ac mortis, sepulchri & A resurrectionis à mortuis tercio die, ascensionis in caelos, & assessionis eius ad dextram tuam Dei Patris, & secundi, glortosi, & tremendi eius aduentus, cùm veniet cum gloria ad indicandùm S. James of fredsacrifice in the memorial of Chrysts Death viuos & mortuos, cùm reddet vnicuique secundùm opera euis, offerimus tibi, Domine, hoc sacrificium verendum & incruentum, orantes ne secundùm peccata nostra nobiscum agas. We sinners also therfor mindefull of his liuelie passions, of his holsom crosse and death, buriall and resurrection from the dead the third daie, of his ascension into the heauens and of his sitting at the right hand of God the Father, and of his second, gloriouse and fearfull coming, when he shall with glorie come to iudge the quicke and the dead, when he shall geue to euery one according to his workes: We offre vnto thee, o Lord, this dreadfull and vnbloodie sacrifice, praing that thowe do not with vs according to our sinnes.
In this part of S. Iames Masse we maie perceaue three thinges. The first that Chrysts bodie ys offred in sacrifice: The second, that yt ys offred in remembrance Three thīgs notable in S. James Masse. of his passion and death, resurrection, ascension &c. The third, B that yt ys doen for the remission of sinnes. For the first, yt ys to be noted that immediatelie after consecracion, by the which ys wrought the presence of Chrysts bodie (as ys saied) hauing yt present he furthwith saieth: We offre vnto thee, o lord, this dreadfull and vnbloodie sacrifice. This saied S. Iames immediatelie vpon the consecracion, when nothing ells was before him to offre but the bodie of Chryste. Wherfor he then offred the bodie of Chryste.
To this vnderstanding manie things do enforce vs in the woords of S. Iames. first, that he vseth the demonstratiue (thus) saing this sacrifice, whiche spoken at the aultar vpon the consecracion of Chrystes bodie, whiche ys the verie true sacrifice, signifieth vnto vs, that he offreth yt. Farder, that he calleth the sacrifice whiche he offreth a dreadfull sacrifice. What sacrifice, that by man can be offred to God, ys dreadfull, but onelie the bodie of Chryste, the bodie of God and man? whiche for the maiestie of Godhead, wherunto this bodie ys ioined in vnitie of person ys dreadfull, other sacrifices what soeuer, be not of themselus. Wherfor the dreadfull sacrifice that he offred was the bodie of Chryste. Lastlie, he calleth yt an vnblooddie sacrifice. Whiche verie C well agreeth with the sacrifice of Chrysts bodie offred on the aultar. For that bodie being nowe glorified ys impassible, and immortall, and neuer shall shedd blood to be sacrificed by death again, but ys nowe offred to the Father with remembrance of that passion and death, and blood shedding, whiche he once suffred, and shall neuer suffre again, and ys so set before the face of his Father to procure vs mercie of the remission of oure sinnes, and to obteign for vs the grace of God, and the giftes of his holie Spirit.
Nowe the oblacion perceaued in this holie Apostle, and by him in all the Apostles: let vs descend to the Disciple of the cheif Apostle, to see in him whether he and other Disciples did in the Masse make oblacion and offre sacrifice as the Apostles did. This man (S. Clement I meen) euen as S. Iames did, immediatelie after the holie consecracion praied thus: Memores igitur passionis eius, mortis, resurrectionis, reditus in coelos, & futuri eius secundi aduentus, in quo veniet iudicaturus viuos & mortuos, redditurusque cuique secundùm opera sua, offerimus S. Clemens in Missa vt refert Methon. ibi Regi & Deo secundùm eius institutionem panem hunc, & hunc calicem, gratias tibi per eum agentes, quod nos dignatus fueris astare, coram te, & tibi sacrificare. Being D therfor mindefull of his passion, death, resurrection, ascension into heauen, and of his second coming, in the whiche he will iudge both quicke and dead [Page]and will geue to euerie one according to his workes: We offre vnto the King and God according to his institucion this bread and this cuppe, geuing E thee thanks by him, that thow hauest vouchsafe vs to stand before thee, and to offre sacrifice to thee. Thus S. Clement.
Let not the good Chrystian be dismaied, nor the Sacramentarie triumphe S. Clement offred Chrysts bodie and blood in sacrifice. that he saieth we offre this bread, but let them both vnderstand, that as our Sauiour Chryste in the vi of S. Iohn, and S. Paule in the x of the first to the Corinth. whiche ys allreadie declared, and in the xi of the same, whiche here shall be declared, doo call the bodie of Chryste bread: So doth S. Clement here. For proofe wherof haue recourse to the praier of S. Clement in the last chapter before and see his faith what he beleued to be in the Sacrament, wher ye shall finde him desiering that the holie Gost maie be sent, who maie make the bread the bodie of Chryste and the wine the blood of Chryste. Yf then the bread by the worke of the holie Gost be made the bodie of Chryst, then ther ys no other bread there after consecracion to be offred in sacrifice but the bread of the bodie of Chryst and the cuppe of his blood. F Neither can the Sacramentarie with all his wresting malice vnderstand this of materiall bread. For this that ys here offred, ys offred according to the institucion of Chryste: but as the Sacramentarie can not but confesse, Chryste neuer instituted materiall bread to be offred in sacrisice. Wherfor yt can not be vnderstanded of materiall bread. Yt ys euident then that S. Clement offred Chrysts bodie, and blood the verie true bread, and true wine in sacrifice.
This being made plain, we shall descende to S. Basill and see what he did, whether he offred in his Masse or no. He as S. Clement, immediately after S. Basill offred the like sacrifice to S. Ja. ād S Clem. the consecracion continued his holie taulke to God, saing on this wise: Memores ergo, Domine, & nos salutarium eius passionum, viuificae crucis, triduanae sepulturae, ex mortuis resurrectionis, in caelum ascensionis, in dextra tua Dei Patris sessionis, & gloriosae ac terribilis secundae eius praesentiae, tua ex tuis tibi offerimus. We also therfor, o Lorde, being mindfull of his holsom passions, liuelie crosse, three daies buriall, his resurrection from the dead, his ascension into hauen, his sitting at thie right hand, God and Father, and of his gloriouse and terrible second G presence: we offre thine to thee oute of thine. Thus he.
See ye not here, as in S. Iames and S. Clement an oblacion of the bodie and bloode of Chryste, whiche be thinges of God, consecrated of his creaturs bread and wine, and so offred vnto God? Hitherto then ye see the holie Fathers, to haue offred Chrystes bodie and blood, and therfor in their woordes and writings not to haue abhorred the tearmes of offring, or making oblacion and sacrifice, as the newe brothers do.
But for farder proofe of the practise of the Sacrifice we will procede and see what Chrysostom did in his Masse. For he keping the order before mencioned immediatelie vpon the consecracion addeth this praier: Memores igitur salutaris huius mandati & omnium eorum, quae pro nobis facta sunt, crucis, sepulchri, Chrysostome offred sacrifice in Masse. resurrectionis, ad caelos ascensionis, sessionis ad dextram, secundi & gloriosi rursus aduentus, tua ex tuis tibi offerimus. Remembring therfor this holie commaundement and all those thinges that haue ben doen for vs as the crosse buriall, resurrection, ascension into heauen sitting at the right hand, the seconde and gloriouse coming again: we offre thine vnto thee of thine owne. Thus ther. H
Yt can not be that they that so iustlie agree in woordes and sentēce shoulde varie and dysagree in sence and vnderstanding. Wherfor Chrysostom, as the other did, did in his Masse offre sacrisice. I labour not here to seke the [Page 329]deapt of this matter, for that I haue done allreadie in diuerse places of this A worke, but I cheiflie seke by the woordes of these Fathers to declare that all S. Ambrose and the church that he liued in offred sacrifice in the Masse. they did offre sacrifice. What they offred, and to what effect, yt ys and shalbe declared, and, as yt maie for this place suffice, by S. Ambrose yt shall be made euident, what he and the auncient Church in his time did offre. Wherby also we shall be assured what the former Fathers did offre, this being certen that holie Ambrose did nothing contrarie to the holie faith of the primitiue Church. Thus he reporteth, of the practise of the auncient Church of his time and before: Sacerdos dicit: Ergo memores gloriosissimae eius passionis, & ab inferis resurrectionis, & in coelum ascensionis, offerimus tibi hanc immaculatam hostiam rationabilem hostiam, incruentam hostiam, hunc panem sanctum, & calicem vitae aeternae. Being therfor mindful of thie most gloriouse passion, and resurrection frō death, ād ascension into heauen, we offre vnto thee this vndefiled sacrifice, reasonable sacrifice, vnbloodie sacrifice, this holie bread and cuppe of life euerlasting. Note here what maner of sacrifice was offred in the Masse.
Doo ye not here see by the testimonie of S. Ambrose that the preist did offre sacrifice in the remēbrance of Chrysts passion, resurrection and ascension? B But note and marke well what maner, of sacrifice: An immaculate or vn defiled sacrifice, a pure sacrifice. What sacrifice ys yt that man can offre to God, that he maie boldlie so tearm and call? No pure man dare so farre presume of his owne doings of offrings to God. This pure and vndefiled sacrifice then can be none other, but that pure and innocent lambe of God, that purifieth and clenseth vs by taking awaie the sinnes of the worlde, euen Iesus 1. Joan. 1. Ibid. 6. Chryste his verie bodie and blood. Which maner of vnderstanding the later woordes of this offring sentence doeth also enforce vs to take, determining this pure and vndefiled sacrifice to be the holie bread on the aultar liēg before the preist, in that he saieth: hunc panem sanctum, this holie bread, and that he tearmeth the cuppe to be the cupp of euerlasting health. For as the bread ys holie, and the fountain of holinesse, from whence to vs floweth all holinesse: so ys the cuppe the cuppe of euerlasting health. For sanguis Iesu Christi emundat nos ab omni delicto. The blood of Iesus Chryst doth clense vs from all sinne, and so pourging the grosse and filthie humoures of sinne, which make the soule sicke geueth vs euerlasting health, and wher euerlasting health ys, ther C ys euerlasting life. And so cometh to passe that Chryst saieth: Qui manducat meam carnem, et bibit meum sanguinem, habet vitam aternā. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath euerlasting life.
Thus then maie yt be perceaued, that this holie bread and cuppe of life euerlasting, Chrysts bodie in the Sacr ys the vnbloodie sacrifice of the Church ys the holie vndefiled and vnbloodie sacrifice, which S. Ambrose testifieth to be offred in the Church, which (as ys saied) well considered and weighed, and these tearms: the vndefiled and vnbloodie sacrifice, and the holie bread and cuppe of life euerlasting, compared and ioined together as meening one thing (as they doo in dede) cā signifie no other thing to vs but the verie bodie and blood of oure Lord and Sauiour Iesus Chryst, offred as the vndefiled and vnbloodie sacrifice of his Church.
And Reader in case the Aduersarie wold bleer thine eie, expownding thys woord of S. Ambrose Masse, panem sanctum, holie bread, to be the sacramētall bread, and the bread of their holie cōmunion, so to delude thee, and to elude the argument, and to auoide the presence of Chrysts blessed bodie in the Sacramēt yet the woords adioined, which be, that the cuppe ys called the cuppe D of euerlasting life, do ād shal so streict him, that he cā not but vnderstand thē of the bodie ād blood of Chryst, ād not his sacramētal bread, and cuppe. For the one bi the cōfession of Oecolāp. ād Crāmer cā receaue no holines being a [Page]dumbe creature, and the other wil be confessed of all men, yf yt be but a cuppe E of wine, that yt ys not the cuppe of euerlasting life. Yt remaineth then that they are vnderstanded of the bodie and blood of Chryst, which be the holie bread, and cuppe of euerlasting life, and the vndefiled and vnbloodie sacrifice of the Church. Hitherto ye haue perceaued that S. Ambrose agreeth with S. Iames, S. Clement, S. Basill, and S. Chrysostome in this poinct, namelie in the oblacion of sacrifice.
And now that by S. Ambrose yt ys perceaued that he and the Church that he liued in did offre sacrifice, and that that sacrifice was the bodie and blood of Chryst, ther remaineth now that we conferre with him and the rest, the doing of the catholique Church now in their Masse, and of the hereticall Woords of the Canon in the Masse. cōgregacion in the Cōmunion, as they vntruelie tearm yt. The catholique Churche as in the practise of all the Fathers yt was vsed, immediatelie after the consecracion ys doen proceadeth thus saing: Vnde & memores nos Domine, serui tui, sed & plebs iua sancta eiusdem Christi Filii tui tam beate passionis, necnon & ab inferis resurrectionis, sed & in caelos gloriosae ascensionis, offerimus praeclarae maiestati tuae de tuis donis ac datis, hostiam puram, hostiam sanctam, hostiam immaculatam, panem sanctum vitae aeternae, & calicem salutis perpetuae. Wherfore, o Lord, we thie seruantes, F and the holie people also being mindeful of the blessed passion of the same Chryste thie Sonne, and of his resurrection, and also of his gloriouse ascensiō into heauē, we offre to thie excellēt maiestie of thie gifts, and graunts a pure sacrifice, and holie sacrifice, an vndefiled sacrifice, the holie bread of euerlasting life, and the cuppe of euerlasting saluacion. Thus the Church.
Wher ye perceaue that as S. Iames. S. Clement S. Basill, and other did offre sacrifice and that in the remembrance of Chrysts passion, resurrection, &c. So dothe the catholique Church now likewise offre in this praier, which forasmoch as yt dependeth of somthing going before, vnderstand, that as in the Masse of S. Iames and the other, so in this Masse rehersal ys made of this cōmaundement of Chryst: Do ye this in remēbrance of me. Wherupō this praier, wherin in euerie of these Masses oblaciō ys made of the sacrifice of Chrystes bodie and blood, ys furthwith added as the fulfilling of that cōmaundemēt, and therfore saieth: Wherfor we mindeful, o Lord, of the blessed passion, &c. Whiche ys asmoch to saie, forasmoch as thie Sonne our Lord and Sauiour hath commaunded vs to offre in sacrifice his blessed bodie and blood in the remēbrā ce G of that death, which he did once suffre in that bodie, ād of other his great and wōderfull actes that he did in the same, as his resurrectiō, ascension, &c. Therfor, o Lord, according to this thy Sonne his cōmaundemēt, being mind full of those great ād wonderful actes, we offre vnto thee this holy sacrifice.
And here by the waie let the Proclamer note, that wher he wold be certified, wher we be commaunded to offre Chryst in sacrifice, he maie by all these Masses be taught that we are so cōmaunded by Chrysts owne woord, we be commaunded to offre Chryst in sacrifice. wherupō, if he wil see, he maie perceaue that oblaciō ys made of the bodie ād blood of Chryst in eche of thē, euen by his cōmaūdemēt as ys allreadie saied
That the bodie and blood of Chryst ys the sacrifice that ys here offred yt maie suffice to repete a fewe words of S. Sames our first witnesse, ād of S. Ambrose our last witnesse for the profe of the same, this being oute of all doubte Sacrifice of fred by S. James. that the Fathers betwē thē dissented not frō thē. S. Iames saied: Offerimus tibi, Domine, sacrificiū verendū, et incruentū. We offre vnto thee, o Lord, this dreadful ād vnbloodie sacrifice. This sacrifice being dreadfull and vnbloodie cā be none H other, as ther yt ys proued but the bodie of Christ. And in that he calleth yt an vnbloodie sacrifice, he beateth downe the grosse hereticall obiection [Page 330]of the enemies of Chrysts euerlasting sacrifice, saing: that if he be offred in sacrisice, A he must be slain again, and his blood as often shedd, as he ys offred, wher the faith of all holie Fathers acknowlegeth, yt to be an vnbloodie sacrifice, for that no violence ys now wrought to the shedding of Chrysts blood. S. Ambrose saieth: Offerimus tibi hanc immaculatā, rationabilē, incruentā, hostiā. We offre vnto thee this pure reasonable and vnbloodie sacrifice. And determining what this sacrifice ys he addeth: Hunc panē sanctum, & calicē vitae aeternae. This holie Sacrisice was offred in Masse by S. Ambr. blood, and cuppe of euerlasting life. In that he calleth yt a pure sacrifice, he alludeth to the Prophet Malachie calling yt an vnbloodie sacrifice, he foloweth S. Iames: in that he calleth yt the holie bread, and the cuppe of the euerlasting life he perfectlie determineth yt to be the blessed bread of Chrystes bodie, ād the cuppe of his blood geuing euerlasting life. Now the catholike Church embracing the faith of the Apostles and Fathers, saieth as they saied, and doeth that they did. For as S. Ambrose saied we offre this pure sacrifice, so saieth the catholique Church now, we offre this pure sacrifice. As S Ambrose saied, we offre this holie bread and cuppe of life euerlasting. So saieth the Church, we of The catholike church now offring sacrifice in Masse foloweth Christ his holie Apostles, ād the primitiue Church the newe Church offring none do cōtrarie to them all. B fre the bread of euerlasting life and the cuppe of euerlasting saluacion. Thus ye see howe iustlie he catholike Church in this our time foloweth in this point the faith and doing of the aunciēt Church. But now the degenerating church maketh no one title mencion of offring Chryst in sacrifice, neither wold that her mynisters should haue soch intent, therfore can therbe no comparison here made of her faith and doing. For cōparison must be made betwen two thinges or mo that be or haue a being. For Inter ens & non ens nulla est comparatio. Betwen a thing that ys, and that that ys not ther ys no cōparison. Thus thenwe maie ende this part that the new Church not offring sacrifice neither kepeth Chrystes institucion, neither foloweth the practise of the Apostolique primitiue, and auncient Church, but omitteth the commaundement of Chryst in his institucion, and dothe clean contrarie to the examples of the Apostles, and holie Fathers.
THE EIGHT AND THIRTETH CHAPTER TREAteth of the praier for acceptacion of the oblacion or sacrifice made in the C Masse, and vsed aswell by the Apostles as the Fathers.
NOwe remaineth to shewe what maner of praier was vsed of the Apostles and of their Disciples, and of the primitiue Church after the offring of sacrifice in Masse, for the acceptacion therof. The holie Apostles and Fathers thought yt not enough onelie in bare maner to offre the sacrifice to God: but also their condicion considered thought yt apperteining to their duetie most humblie by deuoute praier to craue and desire at Gods hād that their seruice in so doing might be mercisullie accepted. And her to obserue the ordre before vsed we shall first see how the Apostle S. Iames made his praier to God for the acceptacion of his seruice in offring of the sacrifice. Thus he praied: Pro oblatis & Jacob. in Missa. sanctificatis, preciosis, supercoelestibus, ineffabilius, immaculatis, gloriosis, tremendis, horrendis, diuinis donis Dom. Deo nostro oremus, vt Dom. Deus n. acceptis iis in sanctum & super coeleste, mentale, & spiritale altare suum, in odorem spiritalis fragrantiae, rependat ac mittat nobis diuinā gratiā et donū sanctiss. Spiritus: Oremus. Let vs praie to our Lord God for these offred ād sāctified, preciouse heauēlie, vnspeakable, immaculate, gloriouse, D fearfull, horrible, diuine gifts: Let vs praie that our Lord God accepting these into his holie ād heauēlie, mētall ād spirituall aultar to the sauour of spituall [Page]fragrance or sweetnesse, maie geue again and send to vs the diuine grace, E and the gift of the most holie Spirit. Thus he ther.
S. Clement after he had offred sacrifice praied thus. Rogamus vt propicio ac sereno vultu respicias supra haec proposita dona coram te, tu qui nullius indiges Deus, & tibi complacitum sit in eis ad honorem Christi tui, &c. O God, which neadest no other mans goods we beseche thee, that with a merciful and pleasant countenance In Missa Apost. thow wilt looke vpon these present gifts set before thee, and that thowe maist be well pleased with them to the honour of thy Chryste.
S. Basill praied thus: Dominum postulemus pro oblatis & sanctificatis, honorificentis simis muneribus Domini Dei nostri & commoditate bonorum nostrarum animarum, vt clementiss. Deus, qui accepit ea in sancto & super caelesti, intelligibili altari in odorem suauitatis emittat nobis gratiam et communionem sancti sui Spiritus. Let vs desire our Lorde for the offred and sanctified most honourable gifts of our Lord and God, ād Basil in Missa. the commoditie of the goodnesse of our soules, that our most mercifull God who hath receaued them in his holie and heauenlie and intelligible aultar in the sauour of sweetnesse, maie send vnto vs the grace and communion of F his holie Spirit. Thus he.
S. Chrysostom foloweth S. Basill, and after the oblacion of sacrifice praieth thus: Pro ablatis et sanctificatis preciosis donis Dominum deprecemur, vt clemens Deus qui ea suscepit in sancto coelesti intelligibili altari suo mittat nobis propterea gratiam, et donum sancti spiritus. For the offred ād sāctified preciouse gifts, letvs praie to our Lord Chrysost. in Missa. that our merciful God, who hath receaued thē in his holie ād heauēlie intelligle aultar, maie sēd vs therfore grace, ād the gifte of the holie Gost. Thus he. I wish that all these alleaged Fathers praing to God for the acceptacion of their seruice in the offring of sacrifice, might be so diligētlie noted, that their phrase maie hereafter be remēbred. For yf they be well noted, they seme in maner of speach to praie for their sacrifice, which maner of speach S. Ambrose also vseth, and after him the catholique Church S. Ambrose in this maner. Ambr. li. 4 ca. 6. de sacr. Petimus et precamur vt hanc oblationem suscipias, in sublimi altari tuo per manus Angelorum tuorū, sicut suscipere dignatus es munera pueri tui iusti Abel, et sacrificiū Patriarchae nostri Abrahae, et quod tibi obtulit summus sacerdos tuus Melchisedec. We desire and praie thee that thow wilt receaue this oblaciō bi the hāds of the Angels into G thy high aultar, as thow hauest vouchesafe to receaue the gifts of thie childe Abell, and the sacrifice of our Patriarch Abraham, and that, which thie preist Melchisedech did offre vnto thee. The catholique Church maketh the like request in this maner: Supra quae propitio ac sereno vultu respicere digneris, et accepta habere, sicuti accepta habere dignatus es munera pueri iusti tui Abel, et sacrificium Patriarchae nostri Abrahae, et quod tibi obtulit summus sacerdos tuus Melchisedec, sanctum sacrificium, immaculatam hostiam. Vpon which things, vouchesafe to looke with a mercifull and pleasaunt countenance, and to accept them, as thow didest vouchesafe to accept the gifts of thie child Abel the iust, and the sacrifice of our Patriarch Abraham, and that which thie high preist Melchisedec did offre vnto thee, an holie sacrifice, ād an vndefiled hoste. And immediatelie yt foloweth thus: Supplices te rogamus, omnipotens Deus, iube haec perferri per manus sancti Angeli tui in sublime altare tuum, in conspectu diuinae maiestatis tuae, vt quotquot ex hac altaris participatione, sacrosanctum Filij tui corpus et sanguinem sumpserimus omni benedictione coelesti Woordes in the Masse nowe vsed. repleamur et gratia, per eundem Christum Dominū nostrū. We mekelie besech thee (o allmightie God) cōmaunde these to be caried by the hands of thie holie H Angells vnto thie high aultar in the seight of thy diuine maiestie, that as manie of vs as do by this participacion of the aultar, receaue the most holie bodie and blood of thy Sonne, maie be fulfilled with all heauenly blessing [Page 331]and grace by the same our Lord Iesus Chryst. A
These be the praiers that the Proclamer in his sermon derideth, mocking withall the godlie doings of the catholique Church. Here he triumpheth, here he sheweth his trifling toies and merie cōceates to delight himself, ād soch as were of light heads and gracelesse heartes in his audience. Here his dissembled grauitie failing, he shewed himself in his owne colours, euen like a man of his profession, that ys to misconstrue, to misunderstand, to wrest, to distort to adulterate soch things as they read, and yet shameleslie with bolde countenaunce to vtter yt, to compasse therbie a mischief. But that he be no otherwise charged then his own woordes will require we shall reporte them as they be. Thus he saieth as touching these praiers.
Moreouer the preist desiereth God so to accept the bodie of his Sonne Iesus Christ as he The woordes of the Proclamer See what blind iudgement blind malice pronounceth of all the chrystian world once accepteth the sacrifice of Abell, or the oblaciō of Melchisedec. Yt ys knowē that Abell offred vppe of his fruict of his slocke a lābe or a shepe, and that Melchisedec offred vnto Abrahā and his cōpanie returning frō the battaill bread and wine. And think we that Christ the Sonne of God standeth so farre in his Fathers displeasure that he nedeth a mortal and miserable man to be his spokesmā to procure him fauour? or think we that God receaueth the bodie of his onelie begotten sonne none otherwise, then he once receaued a shepe or a lābe, at B the hands of Abel? or then Abrahā receaued bread and wine of Melchisedec? Yf no: why doth the preist then make this praier in the Canon immediatelie after consecraciō? Supraquae propitio ac sereno vultu respicere, digneris, & accepta habere, sicuti accepta habere dignatus es munera pueri tui iusti Abel, & sacrificiū Patriachae nostri Abrahae, & quod tibi obtulit summus sacerdos tuus Melchisedec, that ys to saie: Looke down with mercifull contenāce vpō these sacrifices (that ys, the bodie of Chryst thy Sōne, and the cuppe of his blood) and vouchesafe to receaue thē, as thow somtime vouchsafest to receaue the oblaciōs of the child Abel the iust, and the sacrifice of our Patriarch Abrahā, and that thing that was offred to thee by thy high preist Melchisedec. Besides this he desiereth that an Angell maie come, and carie Chrysts bodie awaie into heauen. This ys the praier that he maketh: Iube haec perferri per manus sancti Angeli tui in sublime altare tuum. What a fable ys this that Chryst should be born vpon an Angel, and so caried vppe awaie into heauen? Thus moch the Proclamer.
How saie yow? Haue not seen him plaie his part? Haue ye not seen a meruelouse mockrie of Gods holie mysteries? Haue ye not heard the phrase of The praiers of the Canō of the Masse be the praiers of Fathers of the primitiue Church. C the praiers of the holie Apostles, ād of their Disciples, of the aunciēt Fathers of the primitiue Church ād of all the catholike Church derided ād skorned? For thus skorning ād abusing the praiers of the canō of the Masse vsednow in the catholique Church, he skorneth and abuseth the praiers of all thē a foresaied. For the praiers of the Canon contein their woordes, ād are cōpiled of thē. The beginning of these woordes produced by the Proclamer, that ys, Supra quae propitio ac seren, &c. ys taken oute of S. Clement, who praied thus: Rogamus vt propitio sereno (que) vultu respicias super haec doua. The Church saieth: vpō which vouchesafe, with a mercifull and pleased countenāce to looke vpō, &c. S. Clement saied: We beseche thee that with a merciful and pleased countenaunce thow wilt look vpon these gifts or sacrifices, that that foloweth in the praier of the Canon yt ys whollie in S. Ambrose, sauing that yt ys ther diuided as yt were into two praiers, that S. Ambr. cōprehēdeth in one. For wher in the praier of the Churche yt foloweth thus: & accepta habere sicuti accepta, &c. And vouchesafe to receaue these, as thow vouchsafest to receaue the gifts of Abel the iust, and the sacrifice of our Patriarch Abraham, &c. yt ys in S. Ambrose woorde D for woorde in effect. For thus he praied. Petimus & precamur vt hancoblat, &c. supra. We desire ād praie thee that thow wilt receaue this oblaciō by the [Page]handes of the Angels into thie high aultar as thowe vouchsafest to receaue E the gifts of thy childe Abel the iust, and the sacrifice of oure Patriarch Abraham, and that, that thie high preist Melchisedec offred vnto thee. See ye not nowe that the catholique Church vseth the verie same woordes that S. Ambrose and the auncient Church in his time did vse? well let vs procede to see and compare the rest.
The Church goeth further in the Canon and praieth thus: Suplices te rogamus omnipotens Deus iube haec perferri, &c. We humblie beseche thee, o Allmightie God, that thowe wilt commaunde these sacrifices to be caried by the hands of thy holie Angell into thie high aultar in the seight of thine diuine Maiestie S. Ambrose praieth, thus: Petimus et precamur, vt supra. We desire and praie, that thow wilt receaue this sacrifice by the hands of the holie Angells into thie high aultar.
Nowe ye see the praier of the Canon of the Masse vsed in the catholique Churche, with which the Proclamer hath fownd soche fault, ye see also the praiers of S. Clement and S. Ambrose, and by conference ye perceaue them so to agree, that the woordes of the praier of the Church nowe be none other then the woordes of S. Clement and S. Ambrose. Maie yt not then be F truelie saied, that the Proclamer deriding and skorning the praier of the Church nowe vsed, dothe deride and skorn S. Clement and S. Ambrose and the church that they liued in? But let vs consider the great enormities and abuses that the Proclamer pretendeth to be in these praiers of the Canō in the Masse. Three feigned faultes fownd in the Canon of the Masse by the Proclamer.Ther be in all three principall and horrible blasphemies, as he feigneth ād setteth thē furth, cōmitted in these praiers: The first is, that Christ should so stand in the displeasure of his heauenlie Father that he nedeth a mortall and miserable man to be his spokesman. The second, that the bodie of the onelie begotten Sonne of God should in no better wise be receaued of the father then a lambe at the hands of Abel. The third, that desire ys made that an Angell maie come and carie awaie Chrysts bodie into heauen.
Answer to the first. As touching the first, hath the Proclamer no more learning and knowledge in the phrasis of the scripturs and doctours, then here his railing blasphemie declareth? Or wher the Fathers in the scriptures vpon the oblacion of their sacrifices were yt oxe, calf, kidde, or lambe made their praiers for acceptacion, will he also mock them and saie that they vnsemelie praied to God G to receaue an oxe, calf, kidde or lābe at their hāds, or that they praied for soch brute beasts as they offred to be receaued into his fauour? But to discusse this point within the list and compasse of oure owne matter: When S. Iames in his Masse praied as ys before alleaged, saing: For these offred, and sanctified, preciouse, heauenlie, vnspeakeable, immaculate, gloriouse, dreadfull, horrible, diuine gifts, let vs praie that oure Lord accepting these into his holie heauenlie mentall and spirituall aultar, vnto the sauour of spirituall fragrance: And when S. Basill saied: For the offred and sanctified moste honorable gifts of oure Lorde and God, let vs praie: And when Chrysostom likewise saied: Let vs praie to oure Lorde for the offred and sanctified preciouse gifts: wher vndoubtedly by these sanctified, precioufe, dreadfull offred gifts, they vnderstood and ment the bodie and blood of Chryst, ther on the aultar offred in sacrifice: Wil the Proclamer, I saie, mock all these and other holie Apostles ād Fathers, and skorning their phraseis saie that they praie to God the Father for the bodie of his Sonne Iesus Chryst to be accepted? Ys this the learning and grauitie wherwith a matter of so great importance of so great, H weight, of so long continuance, of so great estimacion, reuerence and honoure, shal be ouerthrowē Maie so great a mysterie of christiā religiō be without [Page 333]scripture against saied, without autoritie cōuelled withoute graue reasō impugned, A without strōg argumēt cōuinced, ād without formall processe clean defaced. Trust me, gētle reader, in al his vehemēt inuectiue against this part of Mockes ād skoffes the onely argumentes of the Proclamer in this matter. the Canon of the Masse, he hath impugned yt with no other good learning or authoritie, no other graue reason or argument, then onelie gibing mockes. This ys one that ys woorthie to occupie the place of a Bishoppe, this ys one that ys reputed a famouse preacher: this ys a Iuell to helpe to plucke down the Churche of Chryste and to sett vppe the Sinagog of Sathan, that can with a false feigned skoff seeme to sticke down all that stand in his waie doctours, Fathers, Bishopps, Disciples, Apostles, and all. Can anie chrystian heart thinke that S. Iames S. Clement S. Basill S. Chrysostom, S. Ambrose, and all other holy fathers vsing these alleaged praiers, did thinke thē selues spokesmen to intreate the Father for Chryste? Yf yt can not be thought of them, howe can yt be thought of the catholique Churche vsing the same praiers.
To conclude therfor this first part against the maliciouse mocke of the Proclamer, I saie, that yf the Apostles and Fathers vsing this maner of phrase in their praiers were spokesmen to the Father for Chryst his Sonne, then ys B the Church so nowe likewise: yf they were not, no more ys the Churche. The mening of the Curche in the first poincte. The Apostles and fathers, and the Church did allwaies and doth well know Chryste, as he ys the onelie begotten, so ys he the welbeloued Sonne of the Father. They beleue, they teache and preache that yt ys he, in whō the Father ys wel pleased: yea they beleue that in him the Father ys so wel pleased, that whatsoeuer thei aske of the Father in his name, he wil geue yt thē. Wher vpon the churche in this praier making humble intecession (as the Apostles and fathers before haue doen) not for Chryst, but by Chryste, not to procure fauour for him, but to procure mercie to them selues from God the Father, cocludeth their peticions and requests in these same praiers, whiche the Proclamer skoffinglie abuseth, with these woordes, Per Christum Dominum nostrum. By Chryste oure Lorde, which ys as moche to saie: All this we desire for Chryste our Lorde his sake. In this first part then behold the slaunderouse vanitie, and so let vs examine the next pretended fault.
2 Answer to te the secōd fault. In the seconde he accuseth the Churche that yt wolde Chrstes bodie no C better to be accepted of the Father, then the sacrifice of Abel, of Abraham, of Melchisedec. Abel, Abraham, and Melchisedec were men acceptable to God, whose sacrifices were also acceptable, not for the thinges them selues that were offred by them, as a shepe a ramme, bread, wine, for of these thinges as God hath no nede being the Lorde of the wholl earth and all that ys ther in: so of them, as of them selues he hath no pleasure. In these sacrifices then not the things but the seruice of them which offred those thinges, was acceptable God looked not on the thing offred in the olde sacifices, but on the deuociō of the offerers. and pleasaunt vnto God. Abel offred sacrifice to God, so also did Cain. But respexit Dominus ad Abel, & ad munera eius. ad Cain autem & ad munera eius non respexit. God did looke vnto Abel and to this gifts, but vnto Cain and to his gifts he did not looke. He looked first to Abel him self, then to his gifts He behelde his hartie deuocion and for that looked to his seruice in his ductifull sacrifice: he sawe in Cain a slacknesse or coldenesse of deuocion, wherfor he neither looked fauorablie to him nor to his seruise in offring sacrifice.
Noē offred sacrifice and God smelled a swete sauoure, saith the scripture, not that God was delighted with the kitchē sauour of burnt meate as here D the Proclamer might in his licenciouse maner skoff at the phrase of the scripture as he doth at the phrase of the catholique Churche, but God smelled [Page]the swete sauour of his deuoute and duetifull seruice. As God then was not E desiered by Abel to receaue his shepe in to heauen, nor by Melchisedec to take vppe thither bread and wine, nor by Abraham to take the ramme that he offred, but that their humble seruice and obedience therby shewed and declared might be accepted: So the Churche desiereth not that her sacrifice whiche ys Chryste might be accepted (being most acceptable in yt self, and all other made acceptable by yt) but that her deuocion, humble seruice and obedience in doing that sacrifice maie be soche, that yt maie be accepted as was the seruice of Abel, of Melchisedec, and of Abraham in the offring of their.
In this same sense praied the Apostolique and primitiue Churche. S. Iames Jacob. in Miss. in this maner: Respice in nos, o Deus, & ad nostrum hoc rationabile obsequium in tuere, idue accipe vt Abel dona accepisti, Noē sacrificia, Moysis & Aaronis sacerdocia Samuelis pacifica, Dauidis poenitētiā, Zachariae incensum. Looke vpō vs, o Lord, and be hold this our resonable seruice, ād receaue the same as thowe didest receaue the gifts of Abel, the sacrifices of Noe, the preistlie oblaciōs of Moyses ād Aarō, the peace offrings of Samuel, the penance of Dauid, the inceuse of Zacharie.
S. Basill in his Masse praied almost with same woordes: Respice in nos, Deus & vide super seruitutem nostram hanc, & suscipe eam sicut susepisti Abel munera, Noe, F Basil in Miss. sacrificium, Abrahae horocaustum, Moyses & Aronis sacrationes, Samuelis hostias pacificus, sicut susepisti de sanctis tuis Apostolis verum istud mysterium, sic & ex manibus nostris peccatorum suscipe munera ista in benignitate tua Domine. &c. Looke vpon vs, o God, and looke vpon this our seruice, and receaue yt, as thow didest receaue the presentes of Abel, the sacrifice of Noē the burnt offring of Abraham, the oblaciōs of Moyses and Aaron, the peace offrings of Samuel, euen as thowe hauest receaued this true misterie of thie holie Apostles, so, o Lord, receaue these sacrifices of oure hands being sinners, in thy benignitie.
S. Ambrose and the auncient latin Churche that he liued in, as ye haue heard yt allreadie testified, vsed a moche like phrase. We beseche thee, o Lorde, saieth he, vouchsafe to receaue this sacrifice as thowe hauest vouchedsafe to receaue the gists of thy childe Abel the iust, the sacrifice of our Patriarche Abraham, and that whiche thy high preist Melchisedec did offre vnto thee.
Thus haue ye nowe seen the praiers for acceptacion of sacrifice, that were praied by the Apostles, vsed of the greke Church, receaued of the auncient The seruice in doing of sacrifice ys desierd to be accepted, not the sacrifice yt self. latin Churche, and cōtinued by the catholi (que) Churche euē to this our time. G Nowe did S. Iames ād the Apostles praie for the acceptaciō of Chryste their sacrifice? Did S. Basill and the greeke Churche desire that the bodie of Chryste might no otherwise be accepted thē the sacrifices of Abel, Noē, Abrahā, &c. Did S. Ambrose ād the fathers of the latin Church for these xii hūdreth years so basely think of the woorthinesse of Chrysts bodie and sacrifice, that they thought a shepe, an oxe or breadād wine as acceptable as the bodie of Christ? No, they thought nothing so, but thei desiered (as ys saied) that their seruice in offring this sacrifice might be accōpted as the seruice of those other was accepted. This acceptiō thē hath respect to the offrers, ād not the sacrifice off.
And that the Proclamer shall not saie, that this exposition ys feigned by me, let him vnderstād that this same expositiō hath ben made by diuerse learned fathers some hundreth years agon, of the whiche for profe I will alleage the saing of one whiche shall be Hugo de S. victore, who expownding the canon of the Masse, vpō, this praier which the Proclamer by his mooking so blasphemouslie Lib. 2. de. eccl. off. ca. 33. abuseth and derided saieth thus: Quasi per gradus scalae ascēdens cōme H morat munus Abel pueri, sacrificiū Abrahae Patriarchae, oblationē Melchisedec sacerdotis, qui in pane & vino speciē veri sacrificii elegāter expressit, sicut Abrahā veritatē in filio, et Abel inuocentiae munus in agno. Quod dicit: Sicuti accepta habere dignatus es munera, &c. non [Page 332] optat similiter acceptari oblationes (haec enim multo est acceptabilitor) sed offerentes. As A one going vppe by the steppes of a ladder he maketh mencion of the gifte of Abel his childe, of the sacrifice of Abraham the Patriarch, and of the oblacion of Melchisedec the preist, who in bread and wine did well setfurth the figure of the true sacrifice, as Abraham the veritie in his Sonne, and Abel the gift of innocentie in a lambe. That he saieth: As thowe hauest vouched safe to accept the gifts of thy childe Abel &c. he desireth not the oblacions or sacrifices to be in like accepted (for this sacrifice ys moche more acceptable) but the offerers. Yf of this vnderstanding the Proclamer wolde see more he maie read Gabriell and other whiche treacte of the Canon of the Masse, and The mening of the Churche in the secō de poinct. he shal see so moch that he maie haue iust cause to be ashamed of his vain ād wicked saings and false imaginacions against the godlie doings of Chrysts catholique Churche. To conclude then this seconde parte also yt ys euidēt that the Churche desiereth not the sacrifice of Chryste to be equallie taken with the sacrifices of Abel, Abraham. Melchisedec, but raither the offerers of these sacrifices, that ys, that the preist and people offring this sacrifice B maie so do yt, as bothe they and their seruice in so doing maie please God and be accepted as were Abel, Abraham, Melchisedec, and their seruice in offring their sacrifices to God. E
Answere to the thirde fault. The third faulte that the Proclamer falselie (I wil not saie folishlie) pretēdeth to be in the Canon, ys, that (as he fableth) desire ys made that an Angel maie come and carie Chrystes bodie awaie into heauen. Ys not this a fonde deuised toie of a man pretending grauitie? Did euer man as moche as dreame anie soche phantasie that had his witts not intoxicated with the poison of heresie, and his heart not fiered with the furiouse flames of malice? Ah good Lord, who wolde haue thought that euer soche time wolde haue comed, that a Chrystian man shoulde be so depelie drowned in heresie, that by force of malice therof he shoulde blowe oute soch blasts of contempt of honorable antiquities, and soche horrible blasphemie against Gods blessed sacrrfice, and ministerie and that in so honorable audience, and not so to ceasse, but afterward in printe to publish the same to the notice of the worlde? or that chrystian people coulde euer haue patientlie heard soche vain inuēted toies C so farre vide from all good reason and learning, soche wicked vntrueths so farre abhorring from all godlie pitie and religion? or that euer they shoulde like to read them? So farre hath this Proclamer presumed, so clean hath he cast awaie all reuerence and semelie iudgement of all holie forefathers and their doinges, folowing therin Melhoserus, Zuin glius and soche like, that he iudgeth them insensate men and verie fooles, and thinkes him self onelie wise.
But that thowe (gentle reader) maie, not by my woordes onelie, but by good substanciall matter iudge these maliciouse false imaginacions to be his inuēted toies void of all learning and rrueth, and aswell impugning and skorning the phrase of holie scripture and auncient fathers, as of the catholique Church in these daies, vnderstand that the scriptures haue this maner of speache that an Angell doth carie oure praiers into the seight of God. For the Angell Raphaël saied vnto the holie father Tobias, Quandò orabas cum lachrimis, & sepiliebas mortuos &c. ego obtuli orationem tuam Domino. when thowe didest praie with tears and didest burie the dead &c. I did offre or present D thy praier to God.
Nowe will the Proclamer here skoff at the saing of the Angell Raphaël and Tob. 12. aske in his histrionicall maner whether he caried Tobies praiers in a cart or a [Page]whelebarow, or will he aske him whether God could not knowe the praiers of Tobie except he had brought them vppe into his seight? Soche fond friuolouse E questions might he aswell here moue against the saing of the Angell in the holie scripture, as he doth against the same maner of speache in the Canon of the Masse. S. Ambrose praied in this poinct as the Churche doth nowe.
S. Ambrose, as before ys seen, declareth that he and the Churche wher in he liued, vsed the like maner of speache in their praier within the Canon of the Masse, saing thus: We desire and prate thee, that thow wilt receaue this sacrifice into thie high aultar, by the hands of thie holie Angells. Nowe did S. Ambrose and the Churche that he liued in desire by this maner of praier as the skoffing Proclamer fableth, that their sacrifice (whiche was he bodie of Chryste) might be caried a waie into heauen by Angells? Was S. Ambrose of so small learning and knowledge, or of so litle witte and vnderstanding as to iudge or think that? Naie, the lacke of learning knowledg witte and grace also ys raither in the Proclamer, who of so learned and holie a man, and of the wholl Churche withall, so rashlie and wickedlie iudgeth. S. Ambrose so praieng F foloweth the maner of speache vsed in the scripturs, and the Churche nowe vsing the same phrase foloweth both the scripturs and S. Amhrose, and the auncient Churche, wherfor in the vsing of soche phrase ther ys no soche fable entended, as the Proclamer maliciouslie pretendeth and feigneth.
But that the right sense of this phrase maie be here more fullie declared: Of the ministerie of Angells. vnderstād, that, as S. Paule saieth, the Angells of God are all ministring spirittes sent to helpe thē, that shal atteing the inheritance of saluacion. In the old law they did to Abraham, to Isaac, to Iacob, to the parents of Sampson, and to diuerse other innumerable ministeries. To holie Tobie the Angel Raphael was the minister to conduct his sonne to Raguel in Rages. and ther to him he was Gen. 22. ibid. 28. Judic. 13 Tob. 3. 4. 5 the counsailour, not onelie to take Sara to wieff, but also by chaistvsage of her, and by other means to restreign and debarre the wicked assaulting and molesting spirit, that infested that house. To the same father Tobie the Angell so ministred that his seight was restored. His praiers also and other good Ibid. 10. 11. 12. dedes he did present in the seight of God. G
In the newe testament the Angell Gabriell was the messenger of the ioifull conception of the Sauiour of the world. An Angell was the Messenger to Luc. 1. ibid Ma. 2. Act. 5. 8. Zacharias to tell him before of the birth of his sonne Iohn the Baptist. An Angell was messenger to the poore sheperds to geue them to vnderstand that they had a Sauiour born. An Angell attended vpon Peter and opened the doores of the prison, guided him oute and dimissed him in safetie. What shall I stand to enombre the nōbre of the places of scripture to this matter Euerie mā hath a propre Angell apperteining, whiche be allmost immunerable? This ys certen, that both men and children haue their Angells to kepe them, helpe them, and to offre vppe their praiers to God for them. Angelis suis mandauit de te &c. He hath Psal. 90 Math. 18. commaunded his Angells (saieth the Psalmist) to attende thee, that they maie kepe thee in all thie waies, they shall carie thee in their hands, that thowe hurt not thy foote with a stone. And for children Chryste gaue monicion Bern. ser. 7 in Cant. saing: Nolite scandalizare vnum ex his pusills. Do not offend one of these litle ones. I saie vnto yowe that their Angells do allwaies see the face of my Father Angells offre vppe our praiers to God. which ys in heauen. H
Diuerse of these scripturs are treacted of by S. Bernard and expownded to the same sense that I haue alleaged them for. Of the place of Tobie thus he saieth: Credimus Angelos sanctos astare orantibus, offerre Deo preces & vota hominum [Page 333] vbi tamen sine ira & disceptatione leuari puras manus perspexerint. Probat hoc angelus A ita loqueus ad Tobiam: Quando orabas cum lachrimis &c. We beleue that the holie Angells be present with them that do praie to offre to God the praiers and Idem ser 12 in psal. 90. desires of men, wher they see clean hands to be lifted vppe withoute wrath and disceptaciō. This doth the Angell prooue thus speaking to Tobie: when thowe didest praie with tears and didest burie the dead &c. I did offre thie praier before God. And vpō the saing of the Psalmist he saieth thus: Quantā tibi ibidem debet hoc verbum inferre reuerentiam, adferre deuotionem, conferre fiduciam? Reuerentiā pro praesentia, deuotionem pro beneuolentia, siduciam pro custodia. Cautè ambula, vt videlicet cui adsunt Angeli &c. Howe moche reuerence, howe moche deuocion, howe moche trust aught this woorde to bring to vs? Reuerence for the presence, deuocion for beneuolence, trust for their custodie, walke wiselie forafmoche as Angells be present. Adsunt, & adsunt tibi, non modò tecum, sed etiam prote. Adsunt vt protegāt, adsunt vt prosint. They are present, and vnto thee they are present, not onelie with thee but also for thee. They are present to defend, they are present to profitt thee, and to doo thee good. That the saing of Chryste teacheth that Angells attend young children, S. Bernad doth also wittnesse thus: Parum est, quod facis Angelos tuos spiritus, facis & Angelos paruulorum. B Denique, Angeli eorum semper vident faciem Patris. Yt ys but a small matter to thee, o God, that thowe makest thie Angells spirits, thowe makest thē also the Angells of litle children.
To conclude with S. Bernarde speaking of the ministerie of Angells aboute vs in the seruice of God, thus he saieth: Attendite principes vestros cùm statis Jdem ser 7. in Cant. ad orandum, vel psallendum, & state cum reuerentia, & disciplina, & gloriamim quiae Angeli vestri quotidie vident faciem Patris, nimirum missi in ministerium propter Angells what ministeries they do for vs. nos, qui haereditatem capimus salutis, deuotionem nostram in superna ferunt, reserunt gratiā. When ye stand to praie or to sing praises to God, remembre your rulers (mening Angells) and stand with reuerence and good ordre, or semelie maner, and reioice that your Angells do dailie see the face of the Father. For they being sent in ministerie for vs, which receaue the inheritance of saluacion, do carie vppe our deuoute seruice into heauen, and bring vs again grace. That Angells then be present with vs, that they kepe vs, that they helpe vs, that they carie vppe oure praiers and deuoute seruices and offre them C to God, not withstanding the Proclamers apish mockrie, yt ys euident both by scripturs and Fathers.
But that the reader maie vnderstād howe they offre our praiers, and what ys therby ment, and to the intent also that both he maie be deliuered from all scruple of that matter, and the Proclamers vntrue feigning vpon this place of the Canon, perceaued to be all together against the minde of the Churche, as a thing neuer by anie of them ther thought or spoken, I shall for this time produce one of the same Churche, expownding the same praier of the Canō whiche the proclamer so shamefullie abuseth and wickedlie wresteth to a deuelish sense. This shall be the reuerend Father Hugo de S. Victore, who expowndeth yt thus: Sacrificium per manus Angeli perferri nihil aliud intelligimus, li. 2. ca. 34. de ossic. ecl quàm ipsum cooperari nostrae deuotioni. Cooperatur autem nobiscum pro nobis orando, modoue inenarrabili et inuisibili bona mentibus nostris suggerendo. The sacrifice to be caried by the hands of the Angells, we vnderstand to be no other thing, but the Angell to woorke with our deuocion. He woorketh with vs both praieng for vs, and also by a merueilouse and inuisible maner putting good D things into our mindes.
The Angell then, after the minde of the Churche, to carie oure sacrifice, [Page]ys to helpe vs by godlie suggestion to doo our seruice therin humblie and deuoutlie, and by faith and charitie effectuallie, and therin to praie with vs E and for vs, that our doing maie be acceptable and pleasant in the seight of The mening of the Church in the third poinct God. This ys and euer hath ben the minde of the Churche in this praier of the Canon. And here will I ioin issue with the Proclamer, that yf he bring furth anie one catholique writer, be he neuer so slender, neuer so vnlearned, neuer so auncient, or neuer so young, that saieth that the praier of the Canō ys to be vnderstanded as he hath most vainlie and falselie (after his hereticall maner folowing Melhoferus) feigned and diuised, I will yelde to him and saie, that the wholl Church hath offended: yf he can bring no one (as certen I am he can not) and I dare saie he himself knoweth that he can not, let him blush and be ashamed of this his wicked toieng: and let the reader see his vanitie, and beware of his false hereticall subtiltie, knowing that this ys but a vain imagined, and maliciouse diuised vnderstanding of heretiques, neuer asmoche as once dreamed of any good catholique.
And here I saie farder to the Proclamer, that yt can not be but that he F hath vttered this feigned vnderstanding either of ignorance or of malice. Yf of ignorance, yt ys to moche shame for him occupieng the place of a Bishoppe so fierelie and in soche audience to impugn that he ys ignorant of: Yf of malice (whiche ys more like) then must yt nedes be of the Deuell, who so leadeth men, that although they knowe the trueth, he maketh them maliciouslie to impugn and depraue yt, they knowe to be the trueth, and so to speake directlie against their knowledge, and their consciences. By whiche of these the Proclamer hath thus depraued the godlie praiers of the Churche, I will not here certenly pronownce, but leaue yt to his conscience, whiche I dare saie, doth greuouslie accuse him. Thus these praiers being deliuered frō wicked vnderstanding, and opened according to the true mening: and so finallie consecracion, intencion, oblacion, and acceptacion by full declaracion from the Apostles and Primitiue Churche, proued, I shall here ceasse of them any farder to treact, and go to other Matters of the Masse.
THE NINE AND THIRTETH CHAPT. TREacteth G of the value of the Masse to the quicke and the dead
NOw foloweth the fourth thing I pourposed to speake of, namelie of the value of the sacrifice for the quicke and the dead. For the whiche also I will haue recourse to the time of the Apostles and the Fathers of the primitiue Churche, as here tofore I haue doen in the proof of matters reproued by the Aduersaries, and the proclamer. Yf yt shall be made euident that S. Iames in his Masse, S. Basill in his Masse S. Chrysostom in his Masse, and other auncient Fathers in their writings doo saie that the sacrifice of the Masse auaileth all that be faith full both the quicke and the dead, and not one can be brought that denieth yt, reason wolde that oure cause shoulde be approued and alowed, and the cause of the Aduersaries disprooued and disalowed. And for that the Aduersaries will sooner graunt yt to be profitable to the quicke then to the dead, H and the proof of the value of yt to the dead, proueth well the value to the quicke, I shall stand the more vpon yt, and so by proof of the one, make good the other.
[Page 335]And first to see what was doen of and among the Apostles, we will see A what was doen in S. Iames Masse, thus praied he: Recipe munera haec proposita pertuam benignitatem, & fac vt oblatio nostra grata et acceptabilis sit, per Spiritum sanctum sanctificata, in propitiationē peccatorum nostrorum, & eorum, quae populus per ignorantiā admisit, & in requiem animarum eorum, qui ante nos dormiunt, vt & nos abiecti, & peccatores, & indigni serui tui, digni habiti, qui sine dolo ministremus sancto altari tuo, mercedem, accipiamus fidelium & prudentium dispensatorum, gratiamue inueniamus et misericordiam in die illa tremenda retributionis tuae iustae et bonae. Receaue through thy mercifulnesse these giftes of our handes which be sinners, ād graunt that our oblacion maie be pleasing and acceptable, sanctified by the holie Gost, vnto the S. James praieth both forthe quick and the dead forgeuenesse of our sinnes, and of those which thy people hath cōmitted by ignorance, and vnto the rest of the soules of them, which sleape before vs, ād that we also abiectes and sinners, and thy vnwoorthie seruantes, maie be accōpted woorthie, which maie without gile mynister at thie holie aultar, and that we maie receaue the rewarde of the faithfull and wise stewardes, ād that we maie finde grace and mercie in that fearfull daie of the iust and good rewarde. B Thus moch S. Iames Masse.
Not minding to tarie vpon the beginniug of the praier, wher ye maie perceaue that like maner of praier ys vsed, as in the last chapter ys spokē of, namelie that this sacrifice maie be receaued gratefullie acceptably, &c. Whiche I doe but touche, wishing yt to be noted the better to perceaue the malice of the Proclamer, who (as ye haue heard) reproueth and skorneth that in the Church, that was vsed of the Apostles. I minde not, I saie, to tarie, but to hast me to note these thinges, that now we haue to speake of, namely that the sacrifice of the Masse ys auailable both to the quicke ād the dead, which both be here testified, whē the Apostle praieth that this sacrifice maie be pleasing and acceptable vnto the remissiō of sinnes, ād to the rest of the soules of thē that sleape before vs. Doe not these woordes teach vs, that S. Iames took this for a sacrisice propiciatorie, whē he desiereth that the sacrifice maie be accepted to the propiciaciō of our sinnes? And did he not thinke yt auailable to the dead, whē he praieth that yt maie be to the rest of the sowles of thē that be dead? The woordes be so plain, that yt can not be deuied. C
And as Caiphas, though he were an euel Bishoppe spake one trueth of the S. James Masse ys full of knowlege euē by the iudgement of the Proclamer death of Chryst: so the Proclamer though he be an euell mā spake one trueth of S. Iames Masse. For he saieth that S. Iames Masse ys full of knowledge. Yf yt be full of knowledge by the testimonie of the Aduers. thē feare thowe not, whether thow be catholike or other, to saie that this ys good knowledg, that the sacrifice of the Masse ys aualeable to the quick ād the dead. For soch ys the knowledge in S. Iames his Masse. And that thow maist be farder assured that the Apostles taught praier and the Masse to be profitable to the dead, harken first what Dionyse the Disciple to sainct Paule, saieth for the one, and what Chrysostome testifieth for both. S. Dionyse describing the maner Dionys. eccles. Hier. cap 7. parte prim. of the buriall and exequies vsed in his time and before his time in the churche, for parte of yt saieth thus: Accedens venerandus Antistes, precem sacram super mortuum peragit, precaturue diuinam clementiam vt cuncta dimittat, per infirmitatem humanam admissa, peccata defuncto, eumue in luce statuat, in sinibus Praier for the dead vsed in S. Dionyse time. Abrahae, Isaac, et Iacob, in loco vbi aufugit dolor et tristicia, et gemitus. The reuerēde Bishoppe coming, maketh holie praier vpon the dead, and praieth the goodnesse of God, that he wold forgiue the dead person al hys sinnes D which he hath through infirmitie committed, and that he will place him in the place of light in the Bosomes of Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, in the [Page]place frō whēce flieth sorowe, heauinesse ād morning. Thus moch S. Dynise.
See yowe not praiers here made for the Sinnes of the dead? See yowe not E peticion made for him that he maie come to the place of light, to the place wher he maie feell neither sorowe nor heauinesse? Yf this maner of praier was vsed in the time of the Apostles, in whose time this Dionyse liued, what shall we thinke, but that S. Iames being one of them, praied for the dead as the other Apostles did. Obiection.
Perchaunce yt maie be saied that yf the Apostles had thought yt necessarie to praie for the dead they wolde haue left yt writtē in some of their epistles. To this I saie, that yt neaded not. For first amōg the Iewes yt was before the coming of Chryst in vse, to praie and offre sacrifice for the dead, as the secōd booke of the Machabies doeth testisie. Which booke although the Aduersarie doeth reiect: yet S. Augustin saieth yt ys in the Canon of christē men. And August. de cura promortu. Lib. vniuers fid. Indaeorum. Antonius Margarita one conuerted frō a Iewe to a Chrystian man, in a booke that he made of the faith of the Iewes, declareth the praier that they made for the dead which ys not, moch vnlike to this praier of S. Dionyse. And ouer he saieth that they haue a booke wherin be written the names of them that be dead, which thrice in a yeare be redde and so praied for. Which order ys F yet amongest them. so that then neaded not.
As for the Gētiles although they vsed funerall obsequies: yet for that they were vngodlie after the heathē maner, the Apostles gaue thē commaundement by tradicion to burie their dead, and to praie for thē after the chrystiā maner. Of the which cōmaundement S. Clement maketh mēciō, how yt was geuē by S. Peter. And so doth Chrysostome that yt was doē by the Apostles. Clemens epist. 1. Hom. 3. Philip. pri. For he saieth thus: Non frustra ab Apostolis sancitū est, vt in celebratione venerandorū mysteriorū memoria fiat corū qui hinc decesserunt. Nouerunt illis multū hinc emolumenti fieri, multū vtilitatis. Stante siquidē vniuerso populo manus in coelos extendente, coetu itē sacer dotali verendoque posito sacrificio quomodò Deū non placaremus pro istis orantes? Yt was not but to good pourpose decreed of the Apostles that in the celebracion of the honourable mysteries (wherby he meneth the Masse) a memorie or remē The Apostles decreed that the dead should be praied for in the Masse. brance should be made of thē that haue departed hence. They knew that moch commoditie shoulde come from thence to thē, and moch profit. For all the people standing, and holding vppe their hāds into heauē, the cōpanie also of preistes, and the fearfull sacrifice being settfurth, how shall we not appease G God praing for these? Thus Chrysostome.
As before ye haue seen the praier of the Apostle. S. Iames praing for the dead: so now ye see yt testified by Chrysostome that the Apostles cōmaūded the dead to be praied for in the celebraciō of the holie mysteries, whiche ys the Masse, wher the holie and blessed bodie and blood of Sauiour Chryst ys setfurth in the seight of the Father: wherby his passiō ād death being liuelie remēbred, ād hūble peticiō in the presence therof, and for the meritte therof by the preistes ād people being made, yt cā not be (saieth Chrysost.) but that God will be appeased ād mercie for the soules obteined. For (as S. Cypriā saieth) In huius praesentiae nō superuacuè mēdicāt lacrimae veniā, nec vnquā patitur cōtriti cordis holocaustū repulsam. In the presence of this (vnderstād sacrifice) teares doe adsurediebegge pardō, neither doeth the sacrifice of acōtrite heart at anie time suffre repulse. Ther for in this sentēce Chrysostome doeth not onelie testifie the Cypr serm. de coena. dead to be praied for by the decree of the Apostles, but also that they are to be praied for in the celebracion of the honourable mysteries. Which mysteries H after, when he speaketh of the praiers of the preistes, ād the people, he calleth the fearfull sacrifice, wherbie ys fullie taught that this holie celebraciō [Page 336]ys a sacrifice. Finallie howesoeuer the Deuel hath bewitched some, A that they in their death beddes make speciall request not to be praied for when they be dead, and at the buriall of the dead praier ys abandoned: yet of S. Chrysostom we maie learn, that yt ys highlie beneficiall to the dead, that the preistes and the people shoulde in the presence of the blessed sacrifice, which ys Chrystes bodie and bloode, praie for the dead. But let vs go to S. Basills Masse, and see whether he did therin praie for the dead. In his Masse Basil. in Missa. I finde, this praier: Nos autē oēs de vno pane & de vno calice participantes, coadunari Spiritus sancti cōmunione, & nullū nostrū ad iudiciū aut condemnationē facias accipere sanctū corpus, & sanguinē Christi tui: Sed vt inueniamus misericordiā & gratiā in coetu omniū sanctorū, qui à seculo tibi placuerunt, Auorū, Patrū, Patriarcharū, Prophetarù, Apostolorū Euangelistarū, Martyrum, Confessorum, Doctorū, & omnis spiritus iustorum finē in fide habentium. Praecipuè sanctae & intermeratae, benedictae dominatricis nostrae Dei genitricis, & semper virginis Mariae, sancti Ioannis praecursoris & Baptistae, Sancti illius, cuius memoriam facimus, & omnium sanctorum tuorum, quorum postulationibus visita nos Deus. Et memento omnium dormientium in spe resurrectionis vitae aeternae, & refrigera eos vbi B visitat lux vultus tui. Make all vs partaking of one bread and cuppe to be made S. Basil praeied in his Masse for the dead, and made intercessiō to Sainctes one together in the Communion of the holie Goste, and make none of vs to receaue the holie bodie and blood of thy Chryst, to iudgement and condemnacion, but that we maie finde mercie and grace in the companie of all sainctes which haue pleased euen from the time of owre Graunfathers, Fathers, Patriarches, Prophetes, Apostles, Euangelistes, Martyrs, Confessours, doctours, and of the spirittes of all righteouse men hauing their ende in faith, speciallie of the holie and vndefiled our blessed Ladie, the Mother of God, and euer virgen Marie, of sainct Iohn the forerunner, and Baptist, and of that Sainct whose memorie we make this daie, and of all thie sainctes, by whose praiers visite vs (o God) And remembre all them that sleape in the hope of resurrection of euerlasting life, and refresh them, wher the light of thy countenaunce comforteth. Thus fare S. Basill.
In this praier yt not onely request made for them that be deade, whiche Iacob in Missa. S. James made intercession to Sainctes ys one thing among other for the whiche the Aduersarie raileth at the Masse: But ther ys also intercession made to sainctes, which ys an other matter C that misliketh him therin, which intercession also ys in the Masse of sainct Iames. For thus shall yowe finde ther: Commemorationem agamus sanctissimae, immaculaiae, gloriosissimae, benedictae Dominae nostrae Matris Dei, & semper virginis Mariae, ac omnium sanctorum, & iustorum, vt precibus atque intercessionibus eorum, omnes misericordiam consequamur. Let vs make a commemoracion of the most holie, vndefiled, most gloriouse, our blessed ladie the Mother of God, and perpetuall virgen Marie, and all holie and iust men, that by their praiers and intercessions, we maie all obtein mercie.
See ye not peticion here made that by the intercessions and praiers of all sainctes and iust men mercie maie be obteined. Nowe yf the knowledge of S. Iames Masse teacheth vs the consecracion of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, yf yt teach vs the same bodie and bloode ther to be offred in sacrifice: yf yt teache vs yt to be auaiable to the quicke and the dead: yf yt teache vs the intercession of Sainctes: and yf the same thinges be in the Masse nowe vsed in the Churche, howe happened yt that the Proclamer coulde make that to be ignorance in our Masse, that ys knowledge D in sainct Iames Masse, sithen ther ys one knowledge in them bothe? Yf yowe will knowe how yt happened, I shall shewe yowe. Yt happened by the same mean that he in an other comparison saieth, that sainct Iames in hys [Page] Masse preached and setfurth the death of Chryst: but they in their Masse ( speaking of the catholique Church) haue onelie a nombre of dumbe gestures, and Ceremonies, which E they themself vnderstande not, and make no maner mencion of Chrystes death. The mean that he spake this by was the spiritt, but wilt thow aske me what spirit? For ther be two spirittes: Spiritus veritatis, qui docet omnem veritatem: The Spiritte of The spiritt of the Proclamer. trueth that teacheth all trueth: And Spiritus mendax in ore prophetae, the liēg spiritt in the mouth of the Prophet. To the question then I saie, that yt can not be the spiritt of the trueth, that teacheth all trueth. For that spiritt can teach and vtter nothing but trueth, ād with vntrueth he medleth not. But yt ys the lieng spiritte, who although somtime he vtter a trueth: yet yt ys to maintein an vntrueth, and to sett a countenance of a trueth vpon an vntrueth, and so by that countenance of trueth, to make sale of his bragge and vntrueth.
For in the comparison vnder this trueth that S. Iames in his Masse preached, and setfurth the death of Chryst, he vttereth three vntrueths against the Three vntrueths vttered in one place by the Proclamer. catholique Church. First, he saieth that they in their Masse haue onely a nō bre of dūbe gestures and ceremonies. How farre wide this ys from the trueth F yt ys easie to perceaue by his one testimonie. For he saieth that in the Masse ys holie praier holie doctrine of the woorde of God, holie consecracion, and holie receauing. But contemning his testimonie ther ys (as in S. Iames Masse) the sacrifice of lawd es, and thankesgeuing: ther ys the holie sacrifice of Chrystes bodie, with praiers for all states and soch other: ther ys a remembrance of Chrystes frendes, the holie Apostles and Martyres, and Sainetes, What thinges be conteined in the Masse now vsed. to the settingfurth of Gods honour in them, who so mercifullie hath wrought in them, that in their weake bodies, he wolde woorke the stronge confession of his holy name, euen to the sheding of their bloodes for the same, ther ys charitable praier for the soules departed, according to the tradicion of the Apostles: all which be more thē onelie dūbe gestures, ād ceremonies, wherfor by this he ys conuinced to haue spokē and writtē an vntrueth.
The seconde vntrueth ys that he saieth that we oure selues vnderstāde not these dūbe gestures and ceremonies. This ys not onely an vntrueth. For he knoweth that ther be learned Fathers, that haue written bookes of the ceremonies of the Masse, and farder haue declared what euerie p cercell or peice G of the garmētes that the preist doeth weare in mynistracion doe signifie and haue fullie ād plainlie expounded euerie part of the Masse and the canon of the same, as Isidorus, Rabanus, Hugo de Sancto Victore, Gabriel, Hoiffmister ād Garetius with other. But yt ys also arrogantlie slaunderouse, For he generallieaccuseth the wholl Church of ignorāce, therbie seking to winne to himself the praise of singular knowledge, and to blott all other before him with the grosnesse of ignorance, to make himself to be seen wise, and all other to be reputed as fooles but dicentes seesse sapientes stulti facti sunt.
The thirde, which ys so manifest an vntrueth, that euen a plain mā wolde by plain woorde call yt a lie, as he maie doe the rest before mencioned, ys that the Masse maketh no maner of mencion of Chrystes death. Who wolde hauing knowledge so saie except he were so farre past shame, that he regarded not what he saied? Who wolde so saie that were not forced by Deuellish malice, The Masse setfurth the death of Chryste more liuelie thē the new Communiō that wittinglie he wolde impugne the trueth and saie that not to be that ys, and that to be that ys not? What ys he that knoweth not, that the Masse ys the memoriall of Chrystes passion and death? Why ys the consecracion, H and oblacion of the bodie of Chryst doē, but to the remēbrance of his passiō ād death? Farder whē the preist saieth, that the daie before our Lord Iesus suffred, he tooke bread into his holie bādes, and gaue thankes and saied, take, eate, this ys my [Page 337] bodie which shall be geuen for yowe: maketh he no mencion of Chrystes death? A When he saieth also, This ys my bloode of the new testament which shall be shedde for yowe and for manie: ys ther no mencion made of Chrystes passion and deth? what hath the newe Communion to settfurth the death of Chryst more thē this? but in the Masse besides this, when the bodie and blood of Chryst be lifted vppe, as once that same his bodie was vpon the crosse: ys ther not a liuelie mencion made of his exaltacion vpon the crosse, and of his death? whē the preist in doing of this speaketh the woords of Chryst, As often as ye doe this ye shall doe yt in the remembrance of me: ys ther not good occasiō geuē to remembre Chrystes passiō, and death by the rehersall of his owne cōmaundemēt?
After all this the preist immediatelie praieth and saieth: Wherfore we Lorde being mindefull of the passion, resurrection, and ascension of oure Lorde, offre vnto thie noble maiestie this pure sacrifice: and be these woordes spoken without anie menciō of Chrystes death, wher his passion, resurrection and ascencion be called to minde, and spokē by expresse woordes? Ys not the prophecie of S. Peter fulfilled in this man and his likes when he saieth: Erunt in vobis magistri mendaces, qui 2. Peter. 2. introducent sectas perditionis, &c. Ther shall be among yowe liēg masters which shall bring in sectes of perdiciō, denieng the God, that bought thē, bringing B vpon thē selues hastie perdiciō? But leauing his vntrueths ād slaūders to him self, and wishing this onelie here to be noted that soch vntrueths come not frō a good spirit, I will returne to holie Basill, of whose spirit ther ys no doubte, and remembre that he in his Masse doeth both make intercession to Sainctes, and doeth also praie for the soules of them that be departed.
Chrysostome also in his Masse praieth likewise in this maner. Offerimus tibi MissaChrisost. rationabile hoc obsequiū pro fideliter dormientibus, pro patribus & pro auis nostris, interuenientibus Patriarchis Prophetis, Apostolis, Martyribus, confessoribus, et omnibus sanctis. We offre vnto the this reasonable seruice for thē that sleape in faith, for our Fathers and great graundfathers, the holie Patriarches, Prophetes, Apostles, Martyrs, and confessors, ād all saincts praing for vs. And shortlie, after he praieth thus again: Sancti Ioannis Baptistae prophetae & praecursoris, sanctorū & nominatis simorū Apostolorū, et sanctihuius cuius memoriā agimus, et omniū sanctorū supplicationibus visita nos Deus, et memor esto omniū in Domino dormientiū, in spe resurrectionis vitae aeternae Chrysostō desurethin tercessiō of Sainctes ād praieth for the dead. ac requiem praestaeis, vbi lumen vultus tui superintendit. By the supplicaciō or praiers C of S. Iohn the Baptiste the prophet and forerunner, ād of the holie ād most famouse Apostles, ād of this Sainct whose memorie we make, o God viset vs, ād be mindfull of all that sleape in our Lord, in hope of the resurrectiō of euerlasting life, ād geue thē rest wher the light of thy coūtenance ouerlooketh all. As in the other, so in Chrysostōs Masse yowe see oblaciō made for the dead, yowe see praier made for thē to obtein thē rest, ād that also by the intercessiō of Sainctes. By this then ye maie perceaue the maliciouse and slaunderouse railing of the Aduers. against the Church, who saieth that the Papistes haue made the Masse a sacrifice for the quicke ād the dead, to the entēt they might make their merchandise therwith, and so robbing the people fill their Aug. li. de heres. Aerius accōpted an heretike deniengthe sacrifice of the Masse to auail the dead. purseis, with soule pence. But ye see yt not inuēted of the Papistes as the Aduersarie termeth the catholike Chrystiās, but ye see yt vsed ād practised of the Apostles and the holie Fathers in their Masses, and so deliuered to vs. Now as we haue seen the practise of the aunciēt Church, for the doing ād affirming the thing: so let vs see the practise of the same for deniēg ād refusing the thing. S. Augustine, and before him Ephiphanius, declare that ther was one D called, Aerius, who as our newe masters doe nowe a daies, denied the sacrifice of the Masse to be profitable to the dead, for the whiche and [Page]certain other doctrines, he was of the holie learned Fathers nombred amōg E heretiques, and of the Church so esteemed and reputed. The practise of the Church then vpon them that denied the sacrifice of the Masse to be auailable to the dead, was to esteem them, and repute them as heretiques, and this estimacion and reputacion was before the time of Epyphanius, ād S. Aug. Concil. Cartha. 4.
Let vs now proceade and see yet a litle farder. In the fourth Councell of Cartage, in the which S. Augustine was one, soch a decree was made: Qui oblationes defunctorum. aut negant ecclestis, aut cum difficultate reddunt, tanquam egentium necatores, excommunicētur, they which denie vnto the church the oblacions of the dead, or ells doe slacklie paie thē, let them as the slears of the neadie be excommunicated.
What shal I stand longer in so plain a matter, sithen the practise declared vnto vs by holie Cyprian, doth both teach vs that sacrifice was offred for the dead as to ther releif, ād that to some yt was denied, as a pain inflicted? Thus in acertain epistle we finde this practise to be reported, Episcopi antecessores nostri religiosè cōsiderantes, & salubriter prouidētes censuerūt ne quis frater excedēs, ad tutelā vel curam clericū nominaret. Ac si quis hoc fecisset, non offerretur pro eo, nec sacrificium pro dormitione eius celebraretur. Neque enim ad altare Dei meretur nominari in sacerdotum F Gip. li. epist. 9. prece, qui ab altari sacerdotes, & ministros suos leuitas auocare voluit. Et ideo Victor, cūm contra formam nuperin concilio ā sacerdotibus datā, Geminiū Faustinum ausus sit actorem constituere, non est quo pro dormitione eius apud vosfiat oblatio, aut deprecatio aliquae nomine cius in ecclesia frequentetur, vt sacerdotu decretum religiosè, & necessariè factum, seruetur à nobis. The Bishoppes our predecessours, godlie considering and holsomlie prouiding, made a decre, that no brother departing this life should appoincte Yf yt be the aultar of God what a wicked de de ys yt to throw them downe? anie one of the cleargie to be his Gardiā. And if anie did so, neither shoulde oblacion be made for him, nor sacrisice celebrated for his death. Neither doth he deserue to be named in the praier of the preistes at the Aultar, of God, that wold call awaie the mynisters, the preistes and Deacons from the aultar. And therfor sithen Victor contrarie to the order of late geuen oute by the preistes in the counsell, hath ben so bolde to cōstitute Geminius Faustinus, the preist his Gardian, their ought not among yowe, anie oblacion to be made for his death, or that anie praier should be vsed in the Church in his name that the decree of the preistcs godlie and necessarely made maie be kept of vs. Thus moch S. Cyprian. G
Of whom as we maie learn the decree and practise of the Church before The denial of praier for the dead of fending proueth the vse therof to be good. his time, that soch as made preistes their Gardians, for the punishment of their so doing, ther should neither sacrifice nor praier be doen or made for them in the Church after their death: so maie we verie well perceaue, that for them that died in the obedience of the Church ther was both sacrifice and praier offred and made for them at their burialls, and so after their deaths were remembred in the praiers of the preistes. Bi the same also are we instructed that as the deniall of oblacion, sacrifice and praier was to the pain of them that were dead: so was the doing of the same to the emolument releif and profitte of them that were dead.
What shall I nede after so manie practises of the holie Apostles, of the primitiue Church, and of the Church in the time of the auncient Fathers to setfurth Amb. ad Faustin. the practise of the Church in the time of S. Ambrose, who writing an epistle of cōforth to Fustinus, for the death of his sister saieth, that he thinketh her not so moch to be lamented, as with praiers to be releiued: not moche H Li. 9. Cōfesca. 13. to be made sad with tears, but raither with oblacions to be commended to God? Or of S. Augustine, whose mother (as before ys saied) desiered in her [Page 338]death bedde to be remembred at the Aultar, which ys, ther to be praied for? A whiche her doing being recited of S. Augustine to her immortall laude, and praise, well proueth the thing to be according to the order of the church that then was, and also that to desire to be praied for after death ys well doē and woorhie of praise. And if they be woorthie of praise that so desire, what be they that desire not to be praied for, or they that deride the praier for the dead, or take awaie the order of praing for them? yt ys easie to iudge.
The practise of the churche in this matter being so farre brought furth as to the time of S. Augustine, I shall therin nowe no farder encombre the reader, August. de Verbis Ap. serm. 32. but staing vpon a place or two of the same S. Augustin, end this chapter In one place thus he saieth: Orationibus verò sanctae Ecclesiae, & sacrificio salutari, & eleemosinis quae pro eorum spiritibus erogantur, non est dubitandum mortuos adiuuari, vt cum eis misericordius agatur, quam eorum peccata meruerunt. Hoc enim à patribus traditum vniuersa obseruat Ecclesia, vt pro eis qui in communione corporis & sangutnis Christi desuncti sunt, cùm adipsum sacrificium loco suo commemorantur, oretur, ac pro illis quoque id offerri commemoretur. Yt ys not to be doubted, that the deade Praier, sacri [...]ice, and almose pro [...]itable to the dead, decessing in the Coīon of the bodie ād blod of Chryste. B by the praiers of the holie Church, and the holsom sacrifice, and the almoses whiche are geuen furth for their soules, be holpen, that they maie be more mercifullie dealt with all then their sinnes haue deserued. For this as deliuered of the Fathers the vniuersall Chuhch doeth obserue, that for thē which are dead in the communion of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, praiers shoulde be made, when at that sacrifice they are remembred in their place, and that remembrance be made, that that sacrrfice also ys offred for them. Thus he.
In this saing of S. Augustine first note the maner of his speache. that yt ys Praier for the dead banished out of Euglond. not to be doubted but the dead are holpen with the praiers of the holie Churche, with the holsom sacrifice, and with almose. Yf by the iudgement of S. Augustin yt ys not to be doubted, mercifull God, whie ys yt called in question at the bare saing of a railing heretique, and not onelie called in questiō, but vtterlie denied, and almost with skorne hissed oute of the Churche The uniuersal Churche in and before the time of S. August. praied for the dead. of Inglonde?
Secondlie, note that in the time of S. Augustine, the vniuersall Church C did receaue this order of praing for the dead. For asmoche as the vniuersall churche did accept yt in S. Augustines time, and before (for they receaued yt of the Fathers) and then was the flowrishing Church both in holinesse of life, and excellencie of learning howe dothe nowe a peice of the church that ys in holinesse farre vnlike, in learning moche inferioure, reiect and contemne that, that (as ys saied) the wholl church hath in the auncient time reuerentlie August. in Enchi. ca. 110. receaued?
Thirdlie, marke what was receaued, namely that bothe praier shoulde be made for them that died in the Communion of Chrystes bodie and bloode, and also that sacrifice shoulde be offred for them. This doctrine S. Augustine saith, Sith yt can not be denied but that praier for the dead ys good yt cannot again be denied. but they be naught that saie yt ys euel shoulde not be doubted of: yea yt ys so certen a doctrine that in an other place he saieth yt can not be denied. Thus he writeth: Neque negandū est defunctorum animas pietate suorum viuentium releuari, cum pro eis sacrificium mediatoris offertur, vel eleemosinae in ecclesia fiunt. Neither ys yt to be denied, but that the soules of the dead are releiued by the godlinesse of their frendes liuing, when the sacrifice of the mediatour ys offred for them, or ells almose dedes D be doen in the Churche. Yf by the iudgement of S. Augustine yt be not to be denied, then yt ys a doctrine to be receaued and holden of a good chrystian. [Page]And wicked maie he be iudged that reiecteth yt, contemneth yt, and E derideth yt. The time shall come that soche shall desire to be refresshed as did the riche glotten, but they shall not be heard.
But that I maie once make an ende of this matter of the value of the Masse to the dead, though a iust volume might be made of that that therin maie be saied: yet this maie suffice to him that will be satissied. For first ys shewed that the praier and sacrifice for the dead, was vsed of the Apostles. For proof wherof ys produced the praier of S. Iames Masse, and to confirme that, ther ys added both the testimonie of Chrysostom, and also the maner of praing for the dead described by S. Dionise S. Paules Disciple. Asterwarde for the farder declaracion of the practise of the Churche the authorities of the Masses, aswell of S. Basill as of Chrysostom be alleaged. And that the continuance and generall receipt of this practise maie be perceaued to be good, and the refusall of yt to be euell, aswell in the greke Church as in the latin, Epiphanius and S. Augustine be brought furth as wittnesses testifienge that Aerius mainteining the cōtrarie doctrine, was reputed esteemed and nombred among heretiques. Against soche like persons did the Councell of Carthage publish a decree. And that this practise might most clerelie be perceaued F to be frequented in the churche, the decree reported by S. Cyprian, and the practise of the same decree by S. Cyprian vpon Geminius Faustinus and Victor ys added, which inuinciblie prooueth praier and sacrifice to be vsed for the dead in the holie auncient churche.
Finallie for the proofe of the countinuāce of this sacrifice from the Apostles time to the time of S. Ambrose and S. Augustine not onely mencion ys made what S. Ambrose wolde haue doē towarde and for Faustinus sister, and what was doen of S. Augustines Mother, but also two places be alleaged, in the which the certentie of this matter ys so taught, that yt ys neither to be denied nor doubted. And good cause whie we shoulde neither denie yt, nor doubte of yt. For yt was receaued ād obserued of the vniuerfal Churche.
Nowe, reader, when thowe seist this matter so plainlie and so euidentlie testified to thee, that thus yt hath ben taught, thus yt hath be doen: thus yt hath ben vsed: and yet all this not withstanding, that the Aduersarie raigeth and raileth against yt, and that, that by these Fathers was taught to be heresie of him to be taught to be averitie: that the Apostles and Fathers G commaunded to be vsed, that he commaundeth to be refused: that the holie Fathers had in reuerence, that he hath in contempt, I suppose, thowe neadest no farder aduertisement, but when thowe seist him so stowtlie, so arrogantlie, and therfor hereticallie impugn this being so certen a trueth, thowe maist iustlie thinke, that he ys not ledde of the spiritt of trueth, who medleth not (as ys saied) with falsheade, but he ys ledde with the lieng spiritt. And therfor iust cause hauest thowe to suspect all that he saieth, and to no parte of yt to geue creditte as spoken of him, but as spoken of other whose doctrine agreeth with the doctrine of the Spiritt of trueth, taught in his schoole the holie Churche.
And nowe to ende, I will ioin this yssue: yf either the proclamer, or anie Yssue ioined with the proclamer for praier for the dead. other of his adherentes can bring anie one catholique and auncient Father, that saieth that soche as departe in the saith of Chryst, are not to be praied for, or that sacrifice ys not to be offred for them, or that charitable almosse doeth not profitt thē: Let them I saie bring one aunciēt and catholi (que) Father H so writing, and I dare and will not onely for my self, but for asmanie as be catholique and learned, promisse that we will subscribe.
[Page 339]Again, reader I beseche thee, if thowe be learned marke: if thow be vnlearned A enquire if euer anie Aduersarie in anie booke made anie argument of authoritie against this matter, other then mocking, lieng, denieng, and reproouing by voluntarie reason, and will warrant: if thowe wilt weigh and marke, thowe shalt finde none. Yf then in that side ys nothing but willfullnes: and on this side thowe seist graue auncient and weghtie authoritie: call vnto God for his grace, and staie wher authoritie ys, and flee from thence wher noisom wilfullnes reigneth.
THE FOVRTETH CHAP. TREACTETH OF priuate Masses (as the Proclamer tearmeth them) and solueth his argumentes.
HAuing nowe somwhat saied of two principall partes of the Masse, namelie consecracion and oblacion: ther remaineth the thirde principall parte to be spoaken of, whiche ys receauing. As B touching that the Sacrament shoulde be receaued ther ys no controuersie, betwixt vs and the Aduersarie. For on both sides yt ys affirmed that yt shoulde be receaued. But the controuersie ys aboute the maner of receauing. Which standeth in two poinctes: The one whether of necessitie yt must be receaued vnder bothe kindes: The other whether of necessitie yt must be receaued of mo then one at once. Of the first we haue spoken at large in the second booke. Of the other shall be reacted here.
In this matter, for that the catholique Church permiteth preistes in their common ministracion to receaue the blessed Sacrament alone, and sekemen for their necessitie to doe the like, yt liketh the Proclamer (as yt hath doen other his likes) with might and main to accuse the Church of transgression and breach of Chrystes ordinance. And here we be all that euell ys, for our so doinge. Here the Proclamer triumpheth vpō vs in his own conceipt, pressing and crushinge vs, as he suppseth, euen to the grownde, so lowe, C that he thinketh we shall neuer be able to stand on foote again against him, and hath (as to him appeareth) so stopped our mouthes with scriptures and the practise of the primitiue Churche, and the authorities of auncient Fathers, that we shall likewise neuer be able to open our mouthes against him. But as Horace saieth: Parturiunt montes, nascetur ridiculus mus: so here be great bragges, but we shall haue but colde roste: here ys a great cowntenance, but small ys the force. The Priclamer his arguments against sole receauing.
Chryste (saieth he) ministred not to one alone, but to all the twelue Apostles. Paule commaunded that one shoulde tarie and wait for an other, Inuicem expectate. S. Clement willed that so manie hostes shoulde be offred vpon the Aultar, as might be sussicient for the people, S. Dionise saieth that the preist when he had receaued himself and deliuered the holie communion to all the people, geueth God thankes and maketh an ende of the misteries. Iustinus the holie Martir saieth that in his time the Deacon exhorted the people that they will be partakers of those thinges that be laied furth before thē S. Ambrose rebuketh his people that were then growen necligent in receauing the lordes supper, and vsed to excuse the matter for that they thought D them selues not woorrhie, saing to them: Yf tbowe be not woorthie euery daie, thē art thowe not woorthie once in a yeare. And again S. Ambrose expownding these woordes of S. Paule: Alius alium expectate, writeth thus: He commaunded them to tarie one for an other, that the oblacion of manie maie be celebrated [Page]together, and so be ministred vnto them all S. Hierom, S. Augustine, and the ecclesiasticall historie, wittnesse, that vntill that time cōmonlie euery E where, but speciallie in Rome, the people vsed to cōmunicate euery daie. Leo wrote to Dioscorus Bishoppe of Alexandria, and willed him, that wher the churche was not able to receaue all the people to cōmunicate together, that the preist shoulde ministre two or three communions on one daie, that as the people came in, and had once filled the Churche: so they shoulde receaue the communion, and afterwarde geue place to other. S. Hierom writing vpon the elementh chapter of S. Paules first epistle to the Corinthians saieth that the supper of the Lorde muste be common to all the people. For Chryste gaue his Sacramentes to all his Disciples that were present. These be the Proclamers scriptures, these be his Doctours, these be his authorities.
And nowe, gentle Reader, weigh with one, what force these authorities haue, to proue that he intendeth. His intent ys to prooue that of necessitie Solucion of the Proclamers arguments. ther must be mo communicantes then one at euery place and time, wher and when yt happeneth Masse to be saied. Nowe these places prooue no F soche necessitie, onelie they prooue that the Sacrament in the beginning was ministred to the people, that were disposed to receaue, and therby he maie prooue that manie maie receaue, and that the Sacrament ought to be cōmon to all that will orderlie desire to receaue. And that yt can not be denied to soche as so require yt, bicause Chryste hath instituted yt be a cō mon Sacrament of all his faithfull, that be meet and able to receaue yt, to be receaued, as he hath also instituted Baptisme. For these sacramentes were not instituted for Kinges, Princes, Bishopps and the mightie of the earth onlie, but answearablie to their figures, for all people. For as all the Iewes, as well high as lowe, riche and poore did all (as S. Paule saieth) passe through the Read Sea, and all did eate of one meat and all drinke of one drinke: so (as Chrysostom saieth) yt ys in the churche. Non aliud quidem corpus diues, aliud verò Chrysoft homil in dictum Apost Nolo vosignor pauper, neque alium quidem sanguinem ille, alium autem iste. Sic & tunc, non aliud accipiebat quidem diues Manna, aliud verò pauper, neque alterius fontis iste participes erat, alterius verò indigentoris ille. For so yt ys nowe in the Churche. For he riche man receaueth not one bodie, a poore man an other, neither he one maner G of bloode, and this man an other. So also then the riche man did not eate of one Manna and the poore man of an other, neither of one fowntain was this man partaker, and of a woorse the other man. So these two sacramentes, I saie, are common to all, bothe Baptisme, and the Sacrament of Chrystes bodie and bloode.
And to this pourpose saied S. Hierom, wher the Proclamer alleageth him, that the supper of our lorde must be common to all people. For Chryst gaue his sacramentes equallie to all his Disciples, that were present, and not to the pourpose that the Proclamer alleageth yt, whiche ye maie perceaue by this woorde (equallie) wherby ys signified that Chryst gaue his bodie and bloode as well to the inferiour Apostles, as to the higher, and so equallie to all. The Proclamer both falslie interpreteth S. Hierom and misunderstādeth him.
And here note that the proclamer in his translacion left oute this woorde equallie, and saied thus: that Chryst gaue his sacramentes to all his disciples that were present, minding by that phrase of woordes to make yt appeare that all that be present must communicate, whiche was not saincte Hieroms H minde, but raither after the minde of S. Paule to shewe that both the supper of the riche, and the Sacrament of Chryste should be common to all that were present equallie, as Chryst made his supper of the paschall lambe [Page 340]and the supper of his bodie blood common to all his Disciples, equallie geuing A yt as well to the lower, as to the higher. But soche ys the sleight of this man.
But to returne: Baptisme ys a common sacrament for all, Nowe shall we saie that we maie not ministre yt to one alone, but to manie at once? Naie: the communitie of yt standeth well if all receaue yt, though but one at once receaue yt. But yowe vrge and saie, that he bringeth the practise of the primitiue and auncient Churche, that yt was receaued of manie. To this first I saie that he maie doe the like for the ministracion of the sacrament of Baptisme. Yt ys knowen to all that be learned, that ther were in the primitiue She wing that manie receaued together, yt prooueth that the like maie be doen nowe, but enforceth no necessitie that yt aught so to be, or that anie ys forbodden to receaue alone. Churche two speciall assigned times for Baptisme: Easter and whitsontide, at which times not one alone, but manie were baptised, and commonlie in that time Baptisme was ministred to manie, and not to one alone. But yet no good argument can of that be deduced that Baptisme ys not to be ministred, but to manie together, and not to one alone. So though he bring manie practises of the Church, that manie did receaue the sacrament together, yet yt prooueth not that yt can not be receaued of one alone at one time. For though the Sacrament be common, yt nothing hindereth the communitie B of yt (when all maie and doe receaue yt) though but one at one time doe recaue yt. And so receaued yt maie verie well be called, and ys in dede a communion, forasmoche as one thing ys made common to all, and one thing ys receaued of all, and in that one thing all the receauers being manie be made one. And therfor dothe the Proclamer against all trewth call the Masse, wher one alone doeth receaue, a priuate Masse. For the thing ther receaued ys yt, by which all we be made one.
Again I saie, these allegacions prooue well the deuocion and godlie zeale of the people in the primitiue churche, whiche I wish were like nowe in Fabiamus made a lawe that people shulde receaue thrice in a yeare. our people, but they prooue no lawe. For if yt had ben a lawe that the people as often as Masse was saied, shoulde communicate, Fabianus the ninetēth Bishoppe of Rome and holie Martir, who liued aboute the yeare of our Lorde two hundreth fourtie and two, and therfor in the pure time, wolde not haue made a lawe, that the people shoulde receaue the Sacrament at the leest thrice in a yeare, that was, at Easter, Whit sontide and Chrystenmasse. C And yet after this the deuocion of people decaing, and waxing colder and colder, that lawe was remitted, and a newe decree made, that the people shoulde once in the year, at Easter, receaue the Sacrament, whiche ys yet obserued.
Nowe I wolde aske of the Proclaimer whether holie Fabian when he or deined that the people shoulde communicate thrice in the yeare, ment that the preist also shoulde saie Masse but thrice in the yeare. And whē the other decree was made, that they shoulde receaue once in the yeare, whether yt was ment that the preist shoulde also saie Masse but once in the yeare: yf he saie yt was so ment, the practise of the churche prooueth the contrarie. For Chrysostom saieth: Nonne per singulos dies offerimus? offerimus quidem, sed ad recordationem facientes mortis eius. Doe we not euerie daie (saieth he) make oblacion? we make oblacion in dede, but doing yt to the remembrance of his death. And who doubteth but the holie fathers of the latin Churche did the like? yf he saie that he ment not but that the preist might oftener saie Masse, then yt ys manifest that he ment that the preist might saie Masse without communicantes. D For none by lawe, but preistes, were bownde oftener to receaue then thirce in the yeare, and afterwards once in the yeare. Thus maie ye [Page]perceaue, that all these alleadged authorities prooue not that the preist maie not, if he be disposed, receaue alone, when none of the people will E but they shewe vs the godlie deuocion of the people in those daies (as ys saied) and the diligence of holie Bishoppes and preistes in rebuking the slackenesse of the people in receauing, wherunto serueth the place of S. Ambrose alleaged by the Proclamer, and not to that he maketh the cowntenance of.
Likewise he alleageth against the order of the Churche the decree of that holie man and auncient Father Leo Bishoppe of Rome, But howe sincerelie and truelie I shall cause thee to vnderstande, when I haue produced the verie woordes of the same Leo and the woordes of the Proclamer, and conferred them together. These be the woordes of the Proclamer: Leo writing vn Note this false trauslacion of M. Juell. to Dioscorus the Bishoppe of Alexandria, gaue him this aduise, that when the church was so litle, that yt was not able to receaue all the wholl people to communicate together, then the preist shoulde ministre two or three communions in one daie, that as the people came in and had once filled the churche so they shoulde receaue the communion, and after geue place F to other. Thus the Proclamer.
In reporting of this authour first note this in the Proclamer, that alleadging S. Clement, Dionise. Iustine, Ambrose and Hierom in this matter, he alleadgeth A common sleight of heretiques to alleage the fathers wher they maie wrest them or els to falsisie them. them in the latin tonge as being bolde by sleight to make them appeare to his hearer or reader, that they made somwhat for his cause and pourpose. And being desierouse to haue a nombre of authours for the better commen dacion of his matter, he wolde also alleage Leo. But here he folowed his auncient Father Cranmer, who alleaging certain Authours, alleadged soche as he might with some cowntenance wrest, in the latin tonge: other, whiche he coulde not well wrest he wolde reporte as yt pleased him in the inglish toung, but so as apparantlie they shoulde seme to be of his side, when in dede they were alltogether against him Euen so this man, not daringe for verie shame, to alleage Leo, with his owne woordes, reporteth him as he wolde haue had him to saie, and not as he saied in dede. The verie woordes of leo be these: Vt autem in omnibus obseruantia nostra concordet, illud quoque volumus custodiri, vt quum solemnior festiuitas conuentum populi numerosioris indixerit, & ad G eam tanta multitudo conuenerit quam recipere basilica simul vna non possit, sacrificii oblatio Leo epla 79. ad Dioscorū. indubitanter iteretur, ne his tantùm admissis ad hanc deuotionem, qui primi aduencrint, videantur hi, qui postmodum confluxerint non recepti, cùm plenum pietatis atque rationis sit, vt quoties basilicam, in qua agitur, praesentia nonae plebis impleuerit, toties sacrificium subsequens offeratur. Necesse est autem vt quaedam pars populi sua deuotione priuetur, si vnius tatùm Missae ordine seruato, sacrificium offerre non possint, nisi qui prima diei parte conuenerint. Studiosè ergo dilectionem tuā & familiariter admonemus, vt quod nostrae consuetudini, ex forma paternae traditionis insedit, tua quoque cura non necligat, vt per omnia Jn stead of oblacion of sacrifice ād Masse the proclamer hath cōmunicate and Communiō and for so often he hath twice or thrice. nobis & side, & actibus congruamus. That our religion maie in all thinges agree we will that this be kept, that when a solemne feast shall cause a great nombre of people to come together, and to that solemne feast so great a multitude shall come, as one Church can not receaue at once, that the oblacion of the sacrifice be without all feare doen again, leest these whiche came first being admitted to this seruice, they that came afterwarde maie seme not to be receaued, sithe yt ys right godlie and reasonable, that as often as the churche wher the seruice ys doen ys replenished with a newe people, so often the sacrifice H folowing be celebrated. Yt must nedes be that some parte of the people shall be hindered of their deuocion, if the order of saing of one Masse being kept, none can offre sacrifice, but they whiche come together in the [Page 341]first parte of the daie. Diligentlie therfor and familiarlie we aduertise yowr A louing gentlenesse, that the thing which hath remained in our custome, by forme of tradicion of our Fathers, thy care wolde not neclect, that in all thinges, bothe in faith and doinges we maie among our selues consent and agree.
These be the verie woordes of Leo. Thys ys the place which the Proclamer taketh in hande to reporte. Iudge now I saie, gentle Reader, whether he hath truelie reported him or no. And first wher he alleadged Leo, to prooue his communion, vieue well, I praie thee, the authour and obserue diligentlie yf ther be in him anie one woorde of communion or communicantes, and See here the impudencie of the Proclamer. thowe shalt perceaue that ther ys no mencion made therof. What trueth then ys to be thought either in the man, or in the cause that he defendeth, when to maintein yt, he ys fain to falsifie the authours that he alleageth? Ys yt not lamentable to see his shamelesse boldenesse that he wolde wittinglievtter in an honorable audiēce, and also publish the same in printe to an wholl realme that he knewe to be false and clean otherwise, then was the intent or minde of the authour which he alleaged? That yt was not the minde of the authour thowe shalt easilie perceaue: For first, wher the Proclamer vseth these woordes communicate and communion, The authour hath these See here his false, sleight. B woordes, the oblacion of the sacrifice, and the sacrifice. Nowe bicause the Proclamer hateth this woorde sacrifice as a scorpion, as being applied to the holie Sacramēt of Chrystes bodie and blood, therfore to ease his maliciouse affection, and to delude his hearers and readers, yt liked his Chrystian sinceritie, properlie tearmed hereticall malignitie, to corrupt and falsifie the authour, and reporte soche matter to be in him, as ther ys in dede no woorde toward yt in him, I mene to that sense and vnderstanding.
Again thowe seist that in all that sermon (yf yt be woorthie of that name) his cheifest pourpose ys to inueigh against that holie mynistracion, whiche ys called the Masse in so moch that he saieth that this name, Masse, was not in vse manie years after Chryst, which ys before improoued, yet in this authour Leo euen in this place: whiche he alleaged, ther ys expresse and liuelie mencion made of the Masse, and he calleth yt Masse, that thys man calleth Communion. And these twoo woordes, sacrifice and Masse, Sacrifice and Masse cause the Proclamer to falsisie Leo. C vsed of this authour, caused (as I haue saied) thys man to falsifie the authour, so that he durst not alleadge him as he wrote, but as yt might serue to helpe hys wicked cause. To ende this note of the falsifieng of this authour by this Proclamer, this also ys to be obserued and marked, howe God suffreth Sathan and his Disciples to be blinded, that they shall bring furth and alleadge places, whiche being well weighed, and taken as they lie according to the minde of the authour, shall not onely ouerthrowe their matter (as this authour in testifieng both sacrifice and Masse) but shall also geue and mynistre occasion, that theyr falshead, their corruption of authours, their blinding of the people, shall be perceaued, as nowe allreadie yt hath ben perceaued in sainct Hierom, and this authour, and shall more hereafter in thys matter.
But the Proclamer proceadeth and prooueth by the Masse booke, that ther shoulde be a Communion, bicause the preist saieth, orem [...]is, Let vs praie. I see this man wolde plaie smal game raither then he will set out, D he wolde content himself with some ssender shewe or countenaunce [Page]of proofe, raither then mainteining an euell matter to seem to be destitute of all proofe. I praier thee (good reader) weigh with me what proof ys yt of E the communion of the Sacrament that the preist saieth (oremus) Let vs praie? what dependance ys ther of that woorde to proue the communion of the Sacrament? Yf he can by that woorde prooue the communion of the Sacrament: Let vs praie, ys saied in the morning and euenning praier whē ther ys no Communiō he maie doe the like in the Sacrament of Baptisme, and in other sacramentes also, for ther the preist saieth (Oremus) Let vs praie. Yf by yt he had trauailed to proue a communion in praier, he had doen right, but to abuse yt to prooue the necessitie of the Communion of the Sacrament in soch sorte as he meneth, yt ys raither a declaracion of his malice against the churche, then anie proofe of his pourpose.
That ther ys a Communion in praier, the other woordes of the preist, whiche he also alleageth for hys pourpose, doe manifestlie declare. The preist (saieth he) saieth: The Lorde be with yowe, and the people aunswer: And with thie spirit. Doe ye not see here howe the preist and Communiō in praier at Masse. the people ioin themselues together, one praing for the other? Whiche maner of Communion ys also liuelie settfurth by that that he afterwarde produceth oute of the order of the Masse. The preist (saieth F he) turneth him to the people and saieth: Orate pro me fratres, & sorores. Praie for me brothers and sisters. Here (as before ye haue perceaued and shall hereafter perceaue) he vseth a sleight, he durst not for shame tell yowe, why the preist desiereth the people to praie for him, but as traitours clippe the kinges coin, and deceaue the people, so he clippeth manie of the places whiche he alleageth to deceaue gods people. But that his falshead maie be perceaued, and the cause knowen why the preist desiereth the people An other sleight of the Prolamer. to praie for him, I shall laie before yowr eies the wholl praier. Thus he praieth. Orate fratres & sorores pro me, vt meum pariter & vestrum acceptum sit omnipotenti Deo sacrificium: Whiche ys thus moche to saie in english: Praie for me brothers and sisters, that my sacrifice and yowr maie be accepted of our Lord God. Two Communions in the Masse besides the rauing of the Sacra.
Se ye now his sleight? Ys here anie praier for the communion whiche he intendeth? Doe these woordes proue that the preist can not receaue alone? Ys ther anie mencion made here of that his communion? Doe ye not perceaue that with two or three woordes he wolde blere yowe eyes, and (as G the inglish prouerbe ys) make yowe beleue that the Moone ys made of a green cheese? The desire of the preist ys not, that all they that be present wolde receaue the Communion: but that they wil praie that their common sacrifice maie be acceptable to God. This with the bringing in of two or three woordes, wolde this man craftelie haue concealed, and suppressed, being (as I suppose) ashamed, and grudged in conscience to let yowe know the verie thing required to be praied for, which ys the acceptacion of the sacrifice, which sacrifice he and his complices doe wickedlie denie.
Thus ye see that he wolde claime helpe of the Masse booke, which in dede doeth him no other helpe but open his shame. Yt doeth vs thus moch helpe, that hereby we learn two Communions: The first ys of praier: the second of sacrifice. For in these two all that be faithfullie and deuoutlie present, lifting vppe their heartes to God, and ioining with the preist in godlie affection, be communicantes: And so yt commeth to passe, that both the praier and the sacrifice made and offred by the preist, as by the common mynister of the H Church, ys common to all the people of gods church.
I will not stand vppon this being so plain, but leaue yt to the farder [Page 362]consideracon of the Reader, and come to his conclusion of the Masse booke A wher he saieth shus: And to conclude the preist, by his owne Masse booke ys bidden to saie these woordes immediatelie after the Agnus Dei. Haec sacrosancta commixtio & consecratio The Procl. corporis & sanguinis Domini nostri Iesu Christi fiat mihi & omnibus sumentibus salus mentis & corporis. That ys to saie: This commixtion and consecracion of the bodie and blood of our Lorde Iesus Chryst be vnto me and to all that receaue yt, health of bodie and soule.
I perceaue this man kepeth his profession. For yt ys apperteining to mēof his calling either to diminish and take awaie, or to adde and put to somwhat The Answer. from or to most of the sentences that they allcage. For where before he cuttof from the places which he alleaged here he putteth to For wher the Masse booke hath but these woordes. Haec sacrosancta commixtio corporis & sanguinis, &c. He putteth in this woorde (consecratio) which the booke hath not. But ouerpassing yt, let vs see the force of the argument that he maketh oute of our owne Masse booke (as he tearmeth yt) and verie well. For in dede yt ys our booke, that abide and remain in the catholique Church, not his, that hath B cutte himself of, from yt, and ys become a cast awaie. But our Lord chaunge his minde, that the lost shepe maie be fownde and brought home to the folde again.
The praier ys that the cōmixtion of the bodie and blood of Chryst maie be to the preist, and to all that receaue, health of bodie and soule. Vnderstād that the preist ys the cōmon mynister of the Church, wherfor doing the comon The cōmon praier of the Church ys not for one angle, but for the wholl vniuersall Church mynistracion he cōmonlie praieth for all that doe receaue generally, he stricteth not his praier for a fewe, neither doeth he limitte yt, or bownde yt withtime and place, but he leaueth yt cōmon, and vttereth yt with an vniuer sall. He praieth not that the bodie and bloode of Chryst maie be health of soule and bodie to thē onely that receaue with him at that time and in that place (which ys the thing the Proclamer laboureth to proue (but in vain) but he praieth for all that receaue indifferenlie either in that place and time, or anie other. Whether yt be now or at anie other time, in that place, or in anie other place in Fraunce, or in Italie, in Spain or in Germanie in Englōdor in Hierusalem, whersoeuer the catholique Church ys, and the Sacrament catholiquelie C receaued.
But be yt that the preist had praied with limitaciō of time ād place, ād desiered that yt might be halth of soule and bodie to all that receaue with him in that place and time, what offence should the preist cōmitte, yf when none wolde receaue with him, he receaued alone? or howe can the Proclamer proue a necessitie by yt, that neades ther must be mo then the preist? or that at that time and place the preist can not receaue alone? Yf the Church charitablie wishing that some people shoulde receaue the holie Sacrament with the preist, had made soch a praier, coulde the Proclamer turne this charitie to a necessitie? Will he turne the charitie of the Church wishing vertue, godlinesse, and deuocion in the people to a necessitie, that bicause the people wil not vse this of necessitie the preist shall not? Ys this good learning? Ys this hys good doctrine ys this his holie religion? Yt ys as moch to saiethat yf the people waxe colde in deuociō, so shall the preist to: Yf the people slacke their deuocion, so shall the preist to: yf the people neclect the seruice of God, so shall the preist to. Yf the people omitte to rendre most humble thankes to D God and our Sauiour Iesus Chryst for our redemption, so shall the preist to. Finallie if the people will but twice or thrice in the yeare celebrate that solē ne memorie of Chrysts passiō and death as (the more pitie yt ys) the most of [Page]them doe yt not so often, no more shal the preist also. Thus shall yt come to passe that the deuociō ād duetie of the preist, shall hang vpon the will of the E people. Thus the preistes that should be the salte of the earth, the light of the woorlde, whose light should so shine before men, that they seing their good workes, might glorifie their Father which ys in heauen, shall neither be salt, light, nor geuers of good exāple to prouoke them to doe the memoriall of Chrystes death, but when the people will. Yt ys a straunge doctrine, that yf Math. 5. the people will not serue God, the preist shall not. But who ys he that wise ys that seeth not the vanitie of yt, and whether yt tendeth? Hitherto, I trust ye perceaue that how great so euer the countenaunce was made by these allegacions As odiouse as Popes be to protestā ts they can alleage their decres wher they thinke good. before alleadged, that yet the force ys verie small.
But nowe come the great argumentes, nowe come they, which can not be auoided (as the Proclamer supposeth) so great ys the force of them. Where to his places before alleadged I saied and doe saie, they are raither examples of vertue for the people, and not lawes of necessitie for the preist, nowe he produceth lawes, as the Canons of the Apostles, and the decrees of Bishoppes F of Rome, which how odible socuer they be, and haue ben to this Proclamer and his complices: yet nowe in this matter, they are fain to praie aide of thē. First he alleageth a Canon of the Apostles in this sorte. Fideles qui ecclesiam ingrediuntur, & scripturas audiunt, & Communionem sanctam non recipiunt, tanquàm eccle Canon. 19. See this Canō cut of in the middest. siastica pacis perturbatores à Communione arceantur. Soch Chrystian men as come to the church and heare the scriptures, ād doe not receaue the holie communion, let them be excommunicated, as men that disquiet the Church.
In the alleaging of this Canon he kepeth his profession as he did in other by him before alleaged, that ys to cutte them of, and to mangle soch places as he alleageth, and not to bring thē wholl as they lie, wherof, reader, I make thee iudge. This ys the Canon. Omnes fideles, qut conueniunt in solemnibus sacris ad ecclesiam scripturas Apostolorum, & Euangelium audiant. Qui autem non perseuerarint in oratione vsque missa peragitur, nec sanctam Communionem percipiunt, velut inquietudines eccle siae mouentes, conuenit communione priuari. All the Chrystian men that in the solemne seruice come together to the Church let them heare the scriptures of the Apostles and the Gospell. And soche as continue not in praier vntill G Masse be all doen, nor doe receaue the holie Communion, yt ys meet that they be excommunicated, as soch as moue disquietnesse to the Church.
Now conferre this with that he hath alleaged, and ye shall perceaue that he hath varied in diuerse poinctes. But of those I will touch but one. In this The Proclamer alleaging this Canō cheiflie against the Masse leaueth oute the woorde Masse in the same. sermon he cheiflie bendeth himself to impugn the Masse, wherin (malice blinding his heart) he findeth by his iudgement manie horrible faultes, of the which he speciallie choseth fower, against the which with might and main, that ys to saie, with as moch falshead as he can, he doeth inueigh. And amōg these foure, as ye perceaue, he traualleth very sore against that, that the preist shoulde receaue alone. And to improue that receipt he pretendeth that thys Canon did mightilie make for him. But when he redde yt and sawe in the same Canon mencion made of the Masse, which he impugneth, that the people should continue in praier vntill yt were all doen, for hin dering of hys cause, though his cōscience were touched, he vsed his cōmon sleight, and for shame durst not speake the Canō as yt laie, ād so with more shame wrote yt, ād caused yt to be printed, that all mē might see ād perceaue his sinceritie, ād H true dealing in alleaging the Fathers and writers, which ys (as yeperceaue) to corrupt them, to falsifie thē, and to leaue oute, ād cutte of what liketh him.
But to aunswer that part of the Canon, that he alleageth, as so stronglie [Page 343]making for him: I saie first that he doeth mystake yt and misunderstand yt. A For the Canon ys not made for the good catholique people that doe communicate The true mening of the Apostles Canon misunderstanded by the Proclamer. with all good Chrystians in praier, and when deuocion serueth them in the receipt of the holy Sacramēt, but yt ys made against licenciouse and yet dissembling heretiques and schismatiques, who then (as manie haue of late doen) came to the Church among good Chrystiās, ād yet being there wolde neither cōmunicate with them in praier, neither in the receipt of the holie Sacrament. Against soch (I saie) as wolde neither in praier, nor in Sacrament communicate with the good Chrystians, that theie should be excommunicated, was the Canon made.
And, Reader, I doe not feign this vnderstanding of my own head, I haue authoritie right good for me, that ys right auncient, which ys the Councell of Antioche, which Councell hauing the same Canon allmost woord for woord expowndeth yt to the same vnderstanding that I haue. These be the woords Concil. Antioch. of the Councell Omnes qui ingrediuutur ecclesiā Dei, & scripturas sacras audiunt, nec communicant in oratione cum populo, sed pro quadā intēperantia se à perceptione sanctae cō munionis auertunt, ij de ecclesia remoueantur, donec per confessionē poenitentiae fructus osten dant, & precibus indulgentiā consequantur, Cum excōmunicatis autē non licet communicare, B nec cum ijs, qui per domos conueniunt deuitantes orationes ecclesiae, simul orandū est. Al that come to the Church of God, and heare the holie scriptures, and doe not cō municate with the people in praier, but for a certain wantonnesse doe auerte thē selues frō the receipt of the holie communion, let these men be remoued frō the church, vntill by confessiō they shewe the fruictes of penaunce, and through praiers doe obtein pardon. With excōmunicate persons yt ys not laufull to communicate, neither maie we praie with soch as go from house to house shunning the praiers of the Church. The canon was made against wā ton heretikes ād Schis matiques, whocoming to the churche wolde not for a singularitie cō municate either inpraier or in sacrament with the faithfull.
This ys the Canon of the Councell of Antioche, which ye see to be the verie same, and all one with the Canon of the Apostles, or raither the expositiō of yt. In the whiche yt ys plain to perceaue that yt was spoken against soche as were singular and wanton in their own conceiptes, disdeining to cōmunicate with the people of God, either in praier, or in the receipt of the Sacram. but onelie they wolde come to the church to heare the scriptures redde. To meet with soch as will not praie with the Church, the Canō forbiddeth the C catholique person to praie with thē. By this then ye maie perceaue that the Canō ys to be vnderstāded of thē that both refused to cōmunicate with the faithfull people in praier and sacrament, vpon wantō singularitie as contemning the receaued ordre of the Church, and as Scismatiques and heretiques gadded from house to house, and fled the Church: and not of good Chrystiā people that abstein not for anie soch pourpose.
Secōdarelie to saie, yf the Proclamer wil not admitte or alow this true vnderstanding, grownded (as yowe perceaue) vpō authoritie, but cleaue to hys false vnderstāding of the Canō, grownded vpō his onelie phantasie, what maketh the Canō so vnderstāded, either against the Masse, or against the Churche, or against the preist? What one woord findeth he in this Canō that proueth the Masse to be naught, if the people doe not cōmunicate? By what parte of the Canō cā he reprehēd the Church, if the whol cōgregaciō receaue not? which The Canon of the Apostles forbiddeth not the preist to recaaue alone peice of the Canō doeth prohibitt the preist to receaue alone yf none other desire to receaue with him? Weigh wel the Canō ād ye shall perceaue euen after his own vnderstāding, that ther ys a lawe of correctiō for the people, if D they wil not receaue with the preist: but ther ys no woord against the preist, if he receaue without the people. The law ys against the slacknesse of the people, [Page]and not against the godlie deuocion of the preist. Thus his greatest argument E being so easilie solued, and his crafte in the alleaging of the same detected, as with more easie we maie solue the other: so shall we therin perceaue his more falsheade.
Calixtus (saieth he) Bishoppe of Rome not long after the Apostles time geueth oute the like commaundement, in the same behalf. His woordes be these: Peracta consecratione omnes communicent, qui noluerint ecclesiasticis carere liminibus. Sic enim Apostoli statuerunt, & sancta Romana tenet ecclesia. That ys (saieth he) when the consecracion ys doen, let euerie man receaue the Communion, vnlesse he will be put of from the entrie of the Church. For The decree of Anacletus abused. by the Proclamer. this thing haue the Apostles ordeined, and the holie church of Rome continueth the same.
In this alleaged place be mo vntrueths then one vsed by the Proclamer. First he doeth father yt vpon Calixtus, wher in dede yt ys the decree of Anacletus. But this ys not so great a matter. I wolde easelie pardon that fault, yf ther were no woorse in him. But he cōmitteth two great faultes here besides that. For he doeth both distort abuse and wrest the place, and also (as he hath doen diuerse other) he doeth mutilate yt, and cutte yt of by the knees (as we saie) and bringeth yt not whollie as yt lieth. I will therfor bring the whol place, that yowe maie both perceaue, how moch he hath of a deuelish pourpose F left oute, and also plainlie see howe vntruelie he wresteth yt to a false sense. This ys the place as yt ys alleaged oute of Anacletus by Bartholemew Carāza in the summe of the Coūcels: Sacerdotes quando Domino sacrificant non soli hoc agere debent sed testes secum adhibeant, vt Domino in sacratis Deo locis perfectè sacrificare probentur, iuxta illud Deuteron. 12. Vide ne offeras holocausta in omni loco, quem videris, sed in loco quem elegit Dominus Dens tuus. Episcopus Deo sacrificans testes secum habeat, et plures quàm alius sacerdos, cum quo peracta consecratione, omnes ministri communicent, qui noluerint ecclesiasticis carere liminibus. Sic Apostoli statuerunt, et sancta Romana tenet ecclesia. The preistes when they doe offre sacrifice vnto our Lord, they shall not doe yt alone, but they shall haue wittnesses with thē, that they maie be proued to doe sacrifice to our Lorde perfectlie in places dedicated vnto God, according to the saing of Deuteron. the xii. chapter: Take beed thowe offre not sacrifice in euery place that thow seest, but in the place that thy Lord God hath choosē. A Bishoppe doing sacrifice to God let him haue mo wittenesses with him then an other preist, with whome, when the cōsecracion ys doen, let all the mynisters communicate, they that will not, shall be forbidden to enter into the church. G
This same place of Anacletus ys also alleadged in the second distinction hauing the same sense, in lenght, that this hath in Summe or in breif. Nowe first iudge of the sinceritie of the Proclamer in alleaging the Fathers, whether he doeth as yt becometh one that taketh vpon him to correct all the worlde, and to preache the trueth, which in his iudgement, was before lacking. Ys this sinceritie to bringe three or foure woordes of the ende of a saing, which maie be wrested to his pourpose, and to leaue oute all that goeth before? Secondlie, for the vnderstanding of the place, he hath voonderfully abused his audience before whom he preached yt, and all soche also as haue or shall happen to read the same sermon nowe imprinted and diuulged. For in the epistle of Anacletus yt ys decreed thus: Episcopus Deo sacrificans testes secum habeat, in solemnioribus diebus aut septē, aut quinque, aut tres Diaconos, qui eius oculi dicūtur, & subdia conos, at (que) reliquos ministros secūhabeat. The Bishoppe doing sacrifice vnto God, let Anacletus cpla. 1. him in the solemne daies haue either seuen or siue, or three deaeons whiche be called his eies, and subdeacons and other mynistres. And then yt foloweth H that the Proclamer alleageth: Peracta consecratioue omnes communicent, when the consecracion ys doen let all communicate. So that thys decree [Page 344]can not be vnderstāded of all the people, but onelie of all those Deacons, and Subdeacons, and ministres which shoulde attende vpon the Bishoppe in the A time that he offreth sacrifice to God, which ys as moche to saie, as when he saied Masse. The decree saieth not: when the consecracion ys doen let all the people communicate: but let all, that ys, all they assistent to the Bishoppe in the ministracion, the Deacons the Subdeacons, and the ministres let them communicate and if they will not, let them be prohibited to entre the churche.
That this shoulde be vnderstanded as ys saied yt doeth well appeare by the relacion of this decree to the doctrine of the Apostles. So (saieth the decree) Canon. 9. Apostol. haue the Apostles taught. In dede in their canons they haue so taught. For this ys one of their Canons. Si quis Episcopus, aut Presbiter, aut Diaconus, vel quilibet ex sacerdotali catalogo, facta oblatione, non communicauerit, aut causam dicat, vt si rationabilis fuerit, veniam consequatur, aut si non dixerit, communione priuetur. Yf anie Bishoppe or preist, or deacon, or anie other of the clergie, when the consecracion ys doen doe not communicate, either let him shewe a cause, that if yt be reasonable he maie be pardoned, or if he shewe none, let him be excō municated. Thus the Apostles Canon. B
The cause why this Canon was so made, was not for the necessitie of the thing, that the sacrifice were not perfect, or the Masse not good in yt self, if the cleargie assistent did not communicate, but that they absteining might be occasion of offence to the people of suspicion against him that did offre the sacrifice, that he had not wel doē yt, as the words immediatelie folowing in the same Canon doe plainlie declare. Sinon dixeritcōmunione priuetur, tanquā qui populo causa laesionis extiterit, dans suspicionem de eo qui sacrificauit, quod rectè non obtulerit. Yf he shewe no reasonable cause why he absteineth let him be excommunicated, as one that ys cause of offence to the people, geuing suspicion of him that did sacrifice, that he had not well offred yt.
Thus nowe ye see howe this man hath abused this decree of Anacletus, vnderstanding yt of all that be present, where yt ys to be vnderstanded onelie of them that attend vpon the Bishoppe in the time of the holie ministracion, and that also on solemne daies. In this poinct onelie he hath not abused this decree, but in this also, that by yt he intended to prooue the C Masse an euell thing, ād to be naught if ther were no communicates besides the preist, and that masse ought not to be saied withoute communicantes, and finallie that the Church ys wicked so abusing yt, where in dede ther ys no one sillabe, in that decree to prooue these or anie one of them, or anie parte of one of them. For as in the answer to the tenth Canon of the Apostles by them alleaged, yt was saied: so yt maie be saied here, that be yt yt were vnderstanded that all the people shoude communicate, as he wolde haue yt (but vntruelie) yet in this decree he findeth no prohibition that the preist shall not offre sacrifice, nor receaue him self, if the people will not, hefindeth not either here or ells wher, that the masse ys naught, if ther be nomo communicantes in that place but the preist. Wherfor we maie conclude that all that he hath in this poincte alleaged hath but a shewe of woordes and no proofe in dede of that that he alleadged yt for.
As for the ninthe Canon of the Apostles yt also after the right vnderstanding proceadeth not of necessitie, but of condicion. For if they or anie of them, that attend vpon the Bishoppe in the time of ministracion, haue reasonable D cause to saie whie they abstein, they maie abstein. And possible yt might be that when the Bishoppe had but three attendante vpon him or [Page]soche like small nōbre, they might all haue cause to abstein. And so yt ys plain E that this Canon geueth vs to vnderstand that wher a nombre ys assembled at the ministracion, if all the nombre haue iust cause to astein from the receaving of the Sacrament, that the Bishoppe or preist shall neuer the lesse proceade to receaue alone. For the sacrifice must be receaued. And so by this Canon the preist alone maie receaue, though in that place ther be none to communicate with him. But whether all or no, certen yt ys that some of the attendantes might abstein, and so yt foloweth ineuitablie, that some might be present, and not receaue. Priuate Masse vsed in the time of Chrysost.
And thus ye maie perceaue that wher the Proclamer saieth that he wolde make yt plain to yowe by the most auncient writers, that were in and after the Apostles time, and by the order of the first and primitiue church, that then ther coulde be no priuate Masse, yt was a saing more full of ostentacion and bragge, then of trueth. For though he hath heaped a sorte of places: yet ther ys no one sentence in anie of them, that prooueth that ther coulde be Jssue ioined with the Proclamer for priuate Masse. no priuate Masse And so farre from trueth ys this his saing (that in the auncient Churche was no priuate Masse, I mene a Masse with sole receauing) that in the Masse of Chrysostom ys a plain rule geuen, what was to be doen F whē the preist receaued alone, and what whē the people receaued with the preist. But yt ys like, the Proclamer had not learned so farre as to knowe this.
And here to knitte vppe all that he hath saied, or can saie in this matter, whiche he tearmeth priuate Masses: This I saie, that if he can bring furthe anie one scripture, auncient councell, or catholique doctour that saieth, that that Masse, that ys saied withoute a nombre of Communicantes in the same place, ys naught, or that yt ought not to be saied, except ther be mo then the preist to receaue, or that ther ys prohibition for the preist to receaue alone: or anie penaltie in anie catholi (que) lawe assigned for the preist that doeth receaue alone: or anie like decree forbidding a sicke man to receaue the Sacrament, except some receaue with him: Let him (I saie) prooue these, or some one of them by expresse woordes in maner aboue saied, and I will not onelie subscribe, but I will agnise myself his scholer during our two naturall liues.
TAE ONE AND FOVRTETHT CHAP. PROOueth G that the Masse maie be saied and the Sacrament receaued withoute a nombre of communicantes at one time in one place.
AS yt ys not sufficient for a man to decline from euell: but also to doe good, the scripture so ioining them together, and saing: Declina à malo, & fac bonum. decline from euell and doe good. So Psal. 33. yt ys not sufficient for a man onelie to flie heresie, but he must also professe the trueth. Wher then I haue in this last chapiter opened the craftie falshed of the Proclamer and solued his argumētes which in dede be not woorthie to be called argumētes for that they haue no force to impugn that that they are forged for, and therby geuen occasion, as I myself doe flie that wicked doctrine, that other men maie doe the like: so will Rom. 10. Soche ther be maie nowe in Englond. I nowe professe the tueth of that matter that other men maie doe the same. Manie in this time of temptacion embrace parte of the saing of S. Paule: H Corde creditur ad iusticiam, but the greater nōbre (the more ys the pitie) stādeth not to the other part: Ore confessio fit ad salutem. Thei beleue well in heart: but [Page 365]they feare with mouth to confesse the same to saluacion. They turne the A admonicion of Chryst vppe side downe. Chryst saieth: Nolite timere eos qui occidant corpus, animam autem non possunt occidere, sed illum potius timete, qui potest & Math. 10. animam & corpus mittere in gehenuam. Feare not them that sleie the bodie, but can not sleie the soule: But raither feare him who can cast both bodie and soule into hell fire. But they saie in their dedes, feare him that killeth the bodie, and regarde not him that hath power to kill both bodie and soule. For lamentable yt ys to saie, soche ys the loue of manie to the life of the bodie, and to worldlie honour and wourshippe, and to the transitorie baggage of this worlde, that for the conseruacion of these, man ys feared, and God the lorde of all power and maiestie neclected. God graunt vs to heare the voice of the caller, that calleth and saieth: Venite filti audite me, timorem Domini docebo vos. Come ye children and heare me. I will teach yowe the feare of our Psal. 33. Lorde. Yf we feare him and loue him as to our duetie apperteineth, we shall neither feare nor be ashamed to confesse him and his holie faith before men. B
S. Paule thought all thinges in the worlde, as filth or dunge, so that he Worldlie cares kepemen from God. might winne Chryst, but we are contented to lese Chryst, so that we maie wine the worldlie mucke, and filth, for sauegarde of the which, wher Chryst in his last supper, instituting the sacrifice of his bodie and bloode to be offred and frequented of his faithfull in the remembrance, and for the high and solempn memoriall of his passion and death, and we haue heretofore so receaued yt, and in heart still receaue yt: yet nowe we ioin with them, that hate yt, we go with them that raill at yt, and abandoning yt with them we doe as they doe. But mans folie shall come to an ende, and the trueth of our Lorde abideth for euer.
To take awaie this trueh of Chrystes sacrifice Sathan hath taught his Disciples that the Sacrament was instituted to none other ende and pourpose but onelie to be receaued, and not to be offred. And to make that apparante all their and his endeuoure ys to prooue that yt must be receaued of manie. And that that receipt maie be compassed, and the sacrifice defaced, they exclame against the Masse. But when they haue all saied and doen, the Masse C shall be holie and good. and this shall be a trueth, that a preist saing Masse, or anie other Man godlie disposed sicke or holle, maie receaue the holie Sacrament alone.
For proofe of this, first, I vse this reason. All thinges forbidden vs to doe (as the Aduersarie saieth) be conteined in the scripture: But in the scripture Reasons for sole receauing grownded vpon the Peotestants doctrine. yt ys not conteined that anie man ys forbidden to receaue the Sacrament alone. Wherfor by the woorde of God man ys not forbiddē to receaue the Sacrament alone. Then maie we also reason thus: What soeuer ys not for biddē by Gods woorde as touching matters of faith the Aduersarie saieth we maie lawfullie doe yt: To receaue the Sacrament alone ys not forbidden by Gods woorde, Wherfor we maie laufullie doe yt. But leauing reasons, although they be of soche force that the Proclamer can not with stand them, and doe also ouerthrowe his false doctrine: I shall vpon and after the rehersall of his owne woordes, prooue by authoritie, that the Sacrament maie be receaued of one person alone, which ys the contrarie of that that he wold maintein and defende, but all in vain. D
He vseth a certain preoccupacion and saieth thus: Perhappes their maie be some that will saie. We graunt these thinges be spoken of the commuuiō in the olde doctours: but ther be as manie thinges or moo spoken by them, of the priuate Masse, and all that yowe [Page] dissemble and passe by. I knowe soch replies haue ben made by diuerse. Thus moche E the Proclamer.
These woordes haue two principall partes: First ys, that the catholiques do graunt, that these thinges which the Proclamer hath alleaged, be spoaken of a communion. The seconde, that ther be as manie thinges or mo spoken of the priuate Masse by the holie doctours, which he dissembleth or passeth by. In dede the catholiques graunt both these partes, and saie that they be both true. As for the first, we saie, wher manie of the people in the primitiue Churche, and for the space of foure or fiue hundreth yeares after, were well disposed, deuoute and well and godlie affected to the often receipt of the holie Sacrament. For the continuance wher of, the holie Fathers the Bishopps and the preistes did trauaill with lawes and decrees, with exhortacions, yea and somtime as occasion was geuen by exprobacions to trade the people in the same (which thing wolde to God the people wolde again bring in vse, and frequent in these daies) to the great honour of God, and singular comforte of their owne soules health: yet we saie that all this prooueth F not, that ther ys anie lawe, decree, commaundement or ordinance, that the preist in time of ministracion, or anie other faithfull at time conuenient, maie not receaue alone. And as we saie that this prooueth not, so we saie that yt neuer can nor shall be prooued by the Proclamer, and all his adherentes, but that the blessed Sacrament maie verie well be receaued of one alone.
For the seconde part of his saing, wher he saieth that we saie, that ther be as manie thinges spoken by the holie doctours of priuate Masse whiche he Marke here a sleight of the Proclamer. dissembleth and passeth by: yt ys also true, that ther be so. And therfor the more shame for him, that, he dissembleth them. And here marke his sleight: He saieth that ther be places in the olde doctours for the matter that he calleth priuate Masse, but which of these did he alleadge and answere. He craftilie conueigheth him self awaie from them saing: I knowe soche replies haue ben made by diuerse. And by these woordes he bleereth the eics of his simple Readers, and filleth the eares of his audience, as though he had made sufficient aunswer to them all, wher in dede he toucheth no one sillable G of them.
But Reader, thowe shalt perceaue that we will vse no soche dissimulacion nor sleight with thee, but as we haue solued his argumentes without anie The catholique doctrine and practise ys that the Sacrament hath ād maie bereceaued of or of one manie at once. great laboure, for in dede ther was no weight in them: So shall we nowe open the trueth vnto thee simplie without all coolour of sleight or crafte, and that by good and sufficiēt authoritie, as thowe shalt well perceaue. First to certifie thee of the trueth: The trueth ys that the people did often and moche communicate togeather in the primitiue and auncient church. And yet neuer the lesse, trueth yt ys, that bothe the preist and other also vpon occasion did often and moche receaue alone. Of the which two practises this trueth maie be gathered, that the blessed Sacrament maie laufullie be receaued of manie together, and maie also laufullie be receaued of one alone, the first ys prooued by that, that the Proclamer hath alleaged: The seconde shall be prooued by that that I will alleadge.
And first I will vse the testimonie of Iustinus whome both Cranmer and this Proclamer doe pitifullie abuse, and truncatelie alleadge. But alleaging H no more then this mā alleageth euen in this matter, ye shall perceaue howe he goeth aboute to deceaue them, that ther did heare him preache, or shall happen to reade his sermon. Thus he alleageth Iustinus in his saied sermon. [Page 346] Diaconi distribuunt ad participandū vnicuique praesentiū ex consecrato pane, vino & aqua. A Illis verò, qui non adsunt deferunt domum. The Deacons deliuer of the consecrated bread and wine and water, to euerie one that ys present. And if ther be anie awaie, they carie yt home to them. Vpon this peice of this authour thus alleaged, the Proclamer bringeth in these his woordes: Here also we finde a Communion, but no priuate Masse. Note well (good Reader) what this man findeth in this authour, and then shalt thowe perceaue whether he be clere or corrupted in seight, or not raither alltogether blinded.
In these woordes that Iustine saieth, that the Deacon deliuereth to euerie one that ys present of the consecrated bread wine and water, I graunt that he findeth a The Sacrament was seuerallie and solie receaued of thē to whom yt was caried home, and therfore priuatelie, as the proclamer vseth the tearmi. Communion: But in the other parte, when the same authour saieth: And if anie be awaie, they carie yt home to them: What findeth he ther? Ys he so blinde that he can not see the Sacrament caried home to them that be absent? Can he not see that to euerie one of these that were absent, and had the Sacrament brought home to them, that yt was brought that they shoulde receaue yt? And when euerie of these to whome the Sacrament was brought, did seuerallie receaue yt in their houses, what was yt then? howe will he terme yt, was yt priuate, or a common receipt? What findeth he here? What seeth B he here? Can he not finde that the people that were at home did seuerallie receaue it in their houses, as the people assembled did receaue yt at the time of the ministracion? Yt ys most like that this man looked onely vpon this matter with his left eie, as manie a fletcher doeth vpon a crooked bolt, and not with his right eie. And so likewise when he did write yt, he forgatt the counsell of Chryste, and by like made his left hand of coūsell what the right hand did. But whoso will with the right eie looke vpon this place of this holie Martir Iustine, shall finde that trueth that before I testified, that in the primitiue and auncient churche the people did receaue both in nombre and alone.
Perhapps the Proclamer being by this place of Iustine driuen to his shiftes, will saie that yt was (notwithstanding that some of the people did receaue at home) a right communion, for that both they and the people being at the ministracion, did all receaue of one consecrate bread. Will yowe see what a bare shift this ys? And to ioin with him in his owne termes, I will aske him, C whether by this one consecrate bread he mean one loaf of bread, or one Sacramentall breade. He can not speake of one loaf of bread. For in the primitiue Church when the nombro of people did receaue, one loaf coulde not suffice. Yf he speake of one sacramentall bread, or one consecrated bread, as Iustine doth tearin yt, ys not the bread consecrated to daie, and the bread consecrated to morowe all one consecrated bread? all one sacramentall breade, ys yt not allwais one Sacrament? Ys not the sacrament of Baptisme ministred to daie, and ministred to morowe all one Baptisme? forasmoch as S. Paule saieth: Vnus Dominus, vnae fides, vnum Baptisma. Ther ys one lorde, one faith, and one Baptisme. Likewise ys not the bread consecrate in the morning, and at noone all one consecrate bread? And to saie more at large, ys not the bread consecrated in the Supper of Chryst by Chryst him self, and the bread consecrated nowe by his minister, and that shall be consecrated in the last daie of the worlde all one bread? yf yt be not so, why saieth S. Paule, that we are all partakers of one breade? The reason why yt ys one breade, Chrysostome sheweth, speaking of the table of Chryst consecrated by the minister, D Homi 83 in 26. Math. saing: Haec enim illa non alia mensa est. Haec nulla re minor quàm illa est. Non enim illam Christus, hanc homo quispiam facit, sed vtramque ipse. This ys euen the same, [Page]not an other table: This in no poinct ys lesser then that. For Chryst did not E sanctifie that, and this an other man, but Chryst did sanctisie both: So that the reason whie yt ys one bread, ys by Chrysostom, bicause yt ys sanctified and consecrated by one Chryst. Yf then yt be a communion bicause they receaue all of one consecrated bread, and S. Paule saieth that we all doe eate of one bread, in somoch that by yt we are made one bread and one bodie: ys yt not one Communion that the Apostles, and the faithfull that nowe be, and shall be in the last daie of the worlde, haue made, doe Priuate Cō munion howe and wher yt ys. and shall make? Yf yt be so, then among true Chrystians receauing as becometh them the holie Sacrament, ther ys no priuate communion. Priuate communion ys among priuate men, soche as cutte them selues of frome the vniuersall churche, and eate of one peice of bread to daie, and of and other to morowe, as heretiques doe, and doe not all eate of one breade, as the faithfull doe.
This Proclamer alleageth Leo Bishoppe of Rome, that vpon consideracion that the churche being litle, and not able to receaue the people, ther might be three communions in one daie, in one churche. I wolde nowe knowe whether they that receaued at the first, Second, and thirde communion, F whether they did all communicate together or no. Yf they did not, then were they not all of one communiō, whiche ys not to be saied: Yf they did, and did not receaue of one cōsecrated bread, nor at one time, yt shoulde folowe, that cōmunion dependeth vpon some other thing, then one bread, time, or ministracion. And in dede so yt doeth: For yt depēdeth of one thing made common to vs all, and which all we being faithfull doe receaue, in the whiche we are made one, and knitte together as membres of one bodie, which thing ys the bodie and blood of Chryst, which ys that one bread, that S. Paule speaketh of and saieth that all we partake of, whiche ys in dede the bread of life nowrishing vs to euerlasting life.
I haue taried to long vpon this place, in opening the vanitie of this mans doctrine, and the longer, that yt might be perceaued, that he alleaging this holie man was so blinded, that he wolde not aswell see the one trueth as the other, but brought yt as an argumēt to reproue the church, wher yt reprooueth him self, and to confute the trueth wher yt confuteth his heresie. But let vs heare other testimonies, and first of Tertullian, who liued in the time of G Seuerus the Emperour, in whose time the chrystian religion not yet being receaued of the Princes of the worlde, the chrystians liued vnder great and fearfull presecucion, by reason wherof, though the people were right godlie affected, and well disposed to the seruice of God, and the receipt of the blessed Sacrament: yet they coulde not freely make their assemblies when they wolde. Wherfor at soch time as they came together the Bishopps and pastours wold to soch as were right godlie and holie chystians deliuer the blessed Sacrament to carie home with them, to receaue yt at home, at soche time as they might, bicause they coulde not otherwise when they wolde.
For the which pourpose, as by S. Cyprian, S. Basill, and S. Hicrom yt maie be gathered, the godlie brought with them, either a faire cleā linnen cloath, or a prettie boxe to carie yt home in. The like yt appeareth that Tertullians wief did. For he diswading her from the Marriage of anie gentile or heathen man after his decesse, and knowing that she did secretlie H receaue the Sacramēt at home, ād wolde also doe the like though she maried an insidel vsed this for one part of his diswasion. Non sciet maritus, quid secretò [Page 347] ante omnem cibum gustes? et si sciuerit, panem non illum credet esse qui dicitur. Shall not A thy husbande knowe, what thowe doest secretlie eate before all meat? And Tertulliās wief receaued the B. Sacr alone or solie, or priuatelie if he knowe yt he will not beleue yt to be that bread, that yt ys called. As who might saie: As I being yowr housband doe know that yowe doe receaue the Sacrament secretlie: So yt can not be but an heathē man being yowr husband shall perceaue also that yowe doe receaue yt secretlie. Wherby yt shall come to passe that either he will restreign yowe from that libertie, that nowe ye vse in yowr secrete receipt, or ells taking, and beleuing yt not to be that bread that yt ys, he will with irreuerencie abuse yt. In this saing of Tertullian yt ys easie to be perceaued, that his wief did secretlie receaue the Sacrament at home, yf secretlie then with no nombre, So these woordes of Tertullian sauer of the receipt of the Sacrament by one alone.
S. Basill also, as before ys mencioned, geueth a notable testimonie in this, matter, who writing to a notable godlie matrone, who for the great reueren ce she bare to the blessed Sacrament, feared and thought yt vnsemclie to receaue yt at her owne hand in her owne house, withoute the deliuerie of the B same by the preist, or the Deacon, saieth thus: Communicare per singulos dies, & Basil epist, ad Caesariā patrici. participare de sacro corpore & sanguine Christi pulchrum & valdè vtile est, ipso manifestè dicente: Qui manducat meam carnem, & bibit meum sanguinem habet vitam aeternam. Quis enim ambigit, quin frequens vitae participatiō nihil aliud sit quàm pluribus modis viuere? Nos idcirco quater in singulis hebdomadis communicamus: in die Dominico, in quarto die hebdomadae: in Parasceu [...], & in Sabbato, ac in aliis diebus, si qua memoria fuerit sanctialicuius, Illud autem in persecutionis temporibus necessitate cogi quempiam non praesente sacerdote, aut ministro, communionem propria manu sumere nequaquam esse graue, superuacaneū est demonstrare, propterea quòd longa consuetudine hoc ipso reru vsu confirmatum est. Omnes enim in eremis solitariam vitam agentes, vbi non est sacerdos, Communionem domi seruantes, à seipsis communicant. In Alexandria verò & in Aegypto, vnusquisque eorum qui sunt de populo, plurimùm habet communionem in domo sua. Semel enim sacrificium sacerdote consecrante, & distribuente, meritò participare & suscipere credere oportet. Etenim & in ecclesia sacerdos dat partem, & accipit eam is qui suscipit cum omni libertate, & ipsam admouet ori propria manu. Idem igitur est virtute, siue vnam partem accipiat quisquam à sacerdore, siue plures partes simul. To communicate euerie daie, and C to be partaker of the sacred bodie and bloode of Chryste, yt ys a goodlie thing and verie profitable. For he himself manifestlie saieth: He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood hath euerlasting life. For who doubteth but that the often receipt of life ys nothing ells but manie waies to liue? We therfore doe communicate foure times in the weke: on the Sondaie, the Vednisdaie, the Fridaie, and the Satterdaie, and on other daies yf ther be the memorie of anie Saincte. That yt ys no greuouse thing anie man in the time of persecucion to be enforced when ther ys no preist nor Deacon present, to take the communion with hys owne hande, yt ys more then neadeth Ermets ād holie menliuing in wildernesse reccaued the Sacr. by themselues. me to declare, forasmoche as yt, by the verie practise of the thing yt self, ys established and confirmed by a long custome. For all they that liue solitarie liues in the wildernesse, wher ther ys no preist, hauing the Sacrament at home, they communicate by themselues. In Alexandria, and in Egypte euery one of the people for the most part hath the Sacrament in his owne house. We must beleue that after the the preist hath once consecrated and distributed the sacrifice, we maie well D be partakers of yt, and take yt. For in the Church also the preist geueth part, and he that doeth receaue yt, doeth freelie and boldlie take yt, [Page]and putt yt to his owne mouth, with his owne hand. Yt ys all one in vertue or power, whether anie man take one part of the preist, or manie partes together. E
Thus moch at lenght haue I written oute of sainct Basill, that manie thinges maie be perceiued in one saing. In this yowe maie perceaue his faith as touching the presence of Chrystes bodie and blood in the Sacrament, which ys so farre wide that he beleueth yt to be a onelie figure that he called yt the sacred bodie and blood of Chryste. In this ye maie also perceaue that he vnderstandeth the sixt of S. Iohn of the blessed Sacrament. In this ye maie perceaue that he beleued not the Sacrament to be a dead peice of bread, forasmoch as he tearmeth and calleth the same life. In this ye maie perceaue the godly disposition and deuocion of the people, that did cōmunicate foure times euerie weke, and oftener if anie feast of anie Martyr happened. In thys also ye maie euidentlie perceaue, that in the time of persecucion (as before ys saied vpon Tertullian) yt was of long custome vsed, euerie man in his owne house to receaue the Sacrament. For farder proof of this ye perceaue here also, that they which liued solitarie liues in the wildernesse, though they had F no preist nor Deacon with them, did communicate by themselues.
Now to lead a solitarie life, What ys yt ells but to liue sole, to liue in a caue or denne, as Paule and Antonie did, alone, and so whollie geuing themselues to praier and godlie contemplacion, for their exercise therin did often receaue the Sacrament, which they had readie by them. In this also ye maie perceaue howe vntruelie the Proclamer hath heretofore setfurth his matter, when he saieth, that all the catholique Church of Chryst vsed the communion as he vnderstandeth yt, that ys, that none receaued yt alone. And to amplifie hys matter he saieth the Indians the Arabians, the Armenians, the Grecians, and as manie as bare the name of Chryst, haue kept and continued the same amongest themselues, from the first time they receaued the Gospell, vnto this daie, ād neuer receaued, nor vsed priuate Masse. For yowe here see yt testified by S. Basill, whose creditte farre surmoūteth the creditte of the Proclamer, that in Alexandria and Egypt, euerie one of the people had the Sacramēt in his house. And whie had they so, but that euery one by himself might ād did receaue yt in his own house? Thus ye maie perceaue G that ratling oute his amplificacion he ratled beiond the trueth, and ended his matter with an vntrueth, and ther he resteth. But the trueth ys, as S. Basill doeth testifie, that the people in the primitiue Church did often receaue the B. Sacrament alone. But to ende with sainct Basill, wher the Aduersarie saieth, that the Sacrament was onelie instituted to be receaued, and not to be offred, and therfor doth allwaies call yt the Sacrament or Communion, or the Lordes supper, but neuer sacrifice, for that name he abhorreth as the name of Beelzebub, in S. Basill yt maie be perceaued, that yt ys called a sacrifice. And here I wish that, as sainct Basill doth call yt both Sacrament, and sacrifice, so the Aduersarie wolde also, and as he testifieth yt to be receaued both of manie together, and of some alone: so he wolde also beleue bothe and knowe as well the one to be true as the other, and not maliciouslie to dissemble the one, and confesse the other.
Yt ys not vnlike to this that sainct Hierom testifieth to haue ben vsed in Rome in his time, in the time of persecucion. Thus he saieth: Scio Romae hanc esse consuetudinem, vt fideles semper Christi corpus accipiant, quod nec reprehendo, nec probo. Hieroe. Apolo. aduersus Iuni. H Vnusquisque enim in suo sensu abundat. Sed ipsorum conscientiam conuenio, qui eodem die post coitum communicant, & iuxta Persium, noctem flumine purgant. Quare ad Martyres ire non audent? Quare non ingrediuntur ecclesias? An alius in publico, alius in domo [Page 343] Christus est? quod in ecclesia non licet, nec domi licet. Nihil Deo clausum est, & tenebrae A quoque lucent apud Deum. Probet se vnusquisque & sic ad corpus Christi accedat. I know at Rome this to be the custome, that the faithfull doe alwaies receaue the bodie of Chryste, which thing I neither reprehended nor alowe. Euerie man doeth abunde in his owne sense. But I call their conscience to iudgement which after the duetie of matrimonie doe euen the same daie communicate, and according to the sainge of Persius, they clense the night with the floode, Why dare they not go to the Martyrs? Why doe thei not entre the churchs? Ys ther one Chryst in the open place, and an other Chryste at home? That, that ys not laufull in the Churche, ys neither laufull at home. Ther ys nothing shett from God, yea the verie darkenesse ys bright before him. Let euerie man examin himself, and so let him come to the bodie of Chryst. Hitherto Sainct Hierom.
As S. Basill reproued the Proclamer of vntrueth, so doeth S. Hierō of craft. The Proclamer saied that S. Hierom wittnesseth that vntill that time, commonlie The Proclamers sleight in alleaging S. Hierom. euerie where but speciallie at Rome, the people vsed, to communicate euerie daie: but craftelie he suppresseth the maner howe and where, wher vpon resteth all the cōtrouersie. The people of Rome in dede did alwaies cō municate, B but howe? in the Church allwaies? Naie, but often in their houses, and S. Hierome saieth that some of them, when they had doen the office of matrimonie, and durst not go to the Church to the commune receipt of the Sacrament, nor to the memorialls of Martyrs, they wolde yet receaue at home in their owne houses, wher they had allwais the Sacrament readie, for their which doing S. Hierom rebuketh them, asking whether ther be one Chryst in the Church and an other at home.
In this saing then of S. Hierome we maie perceaue that the Chrystiā people of Rome did both receaue the Sacrament, somtime priuatelie at home, and somtime also openlie in the Church, wherbie the assertion of the Proclamer ys reprooued. In this saing also are we taught, what ys in the Sacrament, not bread, but Chryst. For saieth S. Hierom, ther ys not one Chryst receaued at home, and an other in the Churche, but euery where one Chryst.
And here I wish the Sacramentaries to dispute with S. Hierom howe the C bodie of Chryst maie be in diuerse places. For here yt ys euident by S. Hieroms owne woordes, that yt ys one Chryst that ys receaued in the Churche and at home. And if he maie be in two places, he maie be in two thousand, and so furthe. In this saing also we maie learn to vnderstande sainct Paule calling the Sacrament (in the eleuenth chap. of the first epistle to the Corinthians) bread, as wher he saieth: Let a man examine himself, and so lett him eate of that bread, and drinke of that cuppe, that by that bread he meneth the bodie of Chryst. For S. Hierom vsing the same text, and vttering the right vnderstanding of the same, speaketh yt thus: Let euery man examine himself, and so let him come to the bodie of Chryst. So that sainct Paule by bread ment not material bread, as the Sacramētaries wolde haue yt, but the verie bodie of Chryst, the bread The act of matrimonie for praier and receipt of tho B. Sacram. to be for born. of euerlasting life.
In this saing also ys geuen an admonicion to maried persons, that although matrimonie be honorable, and the office of the same duelie doen not displeasant to God: yet as S. Paule willeth a man to abstein frōyt, when he will geue himself to praier. And as Dauid ād his men might not eate of the shew bread D except they had a certain time before absteined from ther wieues Euen so [Page]sainct Hierom rebuketh them that after soch acte with their wieues, did presume E to receaue the holie and blessed Sacrament. Yf they which did vse their owne laufull wieues, were fownde woorthie of reprehension, bicause they did not dispose themselues to abstein when they entended to receaue: howe great rebuke ys to be laied on our preistes, who by their office being appoincted allwaies to mynistre or receaue, when they be called on, doe come frō their silthie doinges not with their laufull wieues, but with their cloaked euell wemen, to mynister or receaue? What, trowe ye, wolde S. Hierom haue saied of them? Let the pretensed maried preistes well warke sainct Hierom his saing vpon the epistle of sainct Paule to Titus. And thus leauing vnto them the matter farder to be considered, I will in my pourpose proceade, and after sainct Hierom who hath testified the maner, howe the people of Rome did communicate by themselues in their houses, we will heare howe the preistes in Grece did the like in their churches.
Chrysostome for that he perceaued the godlie deuocion of the people, as Chrys. in cap. 1. ad Eph. ho. 3. The people did not dailie receaue though Chrysost. did dailie saie Masse, Wherfore in that respect he saied he did in vain offre sacrifice at the aultar. touching the receipt of the Sacrament, to waxe colde, he earnestlie rebuked his people, as I wish that our Bishopps, and Pastours shoulde doe theirs, and to their reproache saied thus: Frustra habetur quotidiana oblatio, frustra stamus ad F altare. Nemo est qui simul participet. The dailie oblacion or sacrifice ys doen in vain, we stand at the aultar in vain. Ther ys no man that will partake with vs. In this saing of Chrysostome these two thinges maie be perceaued that by Chrysostom and his preistes the dailie sacrifice was offred in the Church of Constantinople, that ys, that Masse, was dailie saied ther. For he saieth. Quoti diana habetur oblatio. The dailie sacrifice ys doen, which ys to saie, that euerie daie the sacrifice ys offred. The other that although Masse were dailie saied, yet manie times none did communicate with him that did offre the sacrifice And therfor he saied: Nemo est qui simul participet. Ther ys none that will take parte of the sacrifice. Wherbie yt ys euident that in the greke Church Masse was saied though ther were no communicantes with the preist.
Neither let the Aduersarie grownde his sandie argument vpon this woorde (Frustra) for nothing ys absolutelie doen in vain that atteigneth anie end that yt was ordeined for. Nowe wher the holie consecracion of Chrystes bodie Obiection, with answ. The bodie and bloode of Chryste consecrated to two ends and blood ys cheiflie and principallie doen for two endes: The one that yt should by an vnblooddie maner in the name of the wholl Church be offred G vnto God our heauenly Father in sacrifice representatiue, ād cōmemoratiue of that his blody sacrifice offred vpō the crosse, The other thatyt should be receaued when yt ys offred. Yf yt haue these two endes, as alwaies yt hath for after yt ys cōsecrated, yt ys allwaies receaued, Thē hauing the endes that yt was ordeined for, yt can not be saied absolutelie to be doen in vain. In some respect yet yt maie be saied to be doen in vain: as in the godlie entent of Chrysostom, who of godlie zeale to prouoke his people, to receaue the blessed Sacrament, did by himself and his preistes, dailie offre the solemne sacrifice, which forasmoch as he did yt to the pourpose that they should cōmunicate, and yet did not, he might verie well saie that his pourpose was frustrated, and that, sithen they came not, hys doing in that respect was vain. And that this was hys mening his woordes doe well declare. For when he had saied that the dailie sacrifice was doen in vain, and that he stoode at the aultar in vain: he addeth the cause: For (saieth he) ther ys none that will partake with vs. As who might saie: In this respect that we looke that the people shoulde H communicate and yet none will come, we stand in vain at the aultar.
That he ment not that the holie oblacion was absolutelie vain yf [Page 349]the people did not communicate, yt ys more plain then that yt neadeth anie A probacion. For first yf yt were so, wolde so great a learned man, so holie a mā, either haue offred the sacrifice himself, or cause yt to be offred dailie, whē he knewe yt to be doen in vain? Secondlie, howe can he saie that holie mynistracion to be doen in vain, wher himself confesseth in the consecracion so li. 3. de sacerd. great a miracle to be doen? so great beneuolence of God to be shewed to mankinde, that in the same time of consecracion Chryst that sitteth aboue with the Father, ys nowe in the handes of men? Again, doeth he mean yt to be doen in vain, that saieth that the mynistracion ys so high, so excellent, and Jbid. li 7. so honourable, that Angels in that time doe accompanie the preist, and that the heauenlie powers be assembled together in the honoure of him that ys ther offred?
Farder, doeth he thinke this sacrifice to be doen in vain, that saieth we offre Hom. 17. ad Hebr. the same sacrifice that Chryst offred? Moreouer, ys yt like that he taketh yt to be doen in vain wher praier ys made for princes, for rulers, and for all that doe acknowledge Christ? wher also praier ys made for peace, for health, B for wealth, for prosperitie, and for the helpe and releif of all that be sicke, in Idem. in Liturgia. Sermon in. Enceniis Serm. 3. ad Philip. pain in captiuitie, and in pryson? wher all the heauenly powers doe praie for vs with the preist?
Finallie, yt can not be saied that he thinketh yt to be in vain, that saieth that the Apostles did know that moche releif and moche profitte cometh to the soules departed by the oblacion of this holie sacrifice. Wherfor I conclude that he spake yt to be vain, not absolutelie but in respect of his pourpose and desire, which was frustrated bicause the people did not communicate.
That the Sacrament maie be receaued alone without a nōbre of communicantes, Euseb. li. 6. ca. 34. the historie ecclesiasticall also proueth inuinciblie. For ther we read that one Serapion being sicke, sent his seruant to the preist, desiering that he wolde mynistre the Sacrament to him, that he might depart. The preist being sicke and not able to go himself, and yet loath but that the man shoulde Serapion being sick receaued the Sacramēt alone. receaue the Sacrament or that he died, in this necessitie sent of the Sacrament by the messenger, which when yt was brought, the sicke man receaued yt withoute anie to communicate with him, which maie well be saied, C both for that the historie maketh no mencion of anie communicantes, and also that, as the historie testifieth, the quantitie of the Sacramēt that was sent was verie litle not able to suffice anie nombre. By this then yt maie be perceaued, that in the auncient Church yt was not reputed or taken as an heynouse crime to receaue the Sacrament alone, as now the Proclamer wold make yt, but yt was thought good and commendable when occasion serued.
A moch like testimonie for this matter haue we of S. Augustine, wherof mencion ys made before, which ys, that a certein man hauing hys house infested with euell spirittes, came to sainct Augustin house S. Augustin being absent, and desiered of hys preistes that they wolde ease him of that molestacion. One of them went, and saied Masse ther, and praied earnestlie and the euell spirittes ceassed anie more to trooble the house. Here we perceaue the Sacrifice to be offred, Masse to be saied, but we heare no woorde of a communiō. As by this that ys hitherto saied yt maie be perceaued, that the preist mynistring, or anie other person maie receaue the blessed Sacrament, with oute anie other communicantes, according to the practise of the primitiue D and auncient Church: so shall yt now be declared by auncient lawes and decrees that the people were by lawe, bownd but to heare Masse, and not allwaies to receaue.
[Page]Soter that was the eleuenth Bishoppe of Rome after S. Peter, and liued aboute the yeare of our Lorde lxiii. made this decree. Nullus presbyterorum Missarum E solemnia celebrare praesumat, nisi duobus praesentibus, sibiue respondentibus, & ipse Soter vndecimus Rō. Epis. Epist. secund. ad Episcop. Jtaliae. tertius habeatur, quia cùm pluraliter ab eo dicitur, Dominus vobiscum, & illud in secretis: Orate pro me: apertissimè conuenit, vt ip sius respondeatur salutationi. Let none of the preistes presume to celebrate the solemne office of the Masse, except ther be two present and answering him, so that he maie be the thirde, for when yt ys plurallie saied of him: Owre Lorde be with yowe, and in the secretes: Praie for me, yt ys most manifestlie conuenient, that his salutacion be answered. Here ye see yt commaunded that some be present at the Masse, but not alwaies to communicate, but answere the salutacion of the preist.
In a Councell also thus we finde yt decreed: Missas die Dominico secularibus totas audire, speciali ordine praecipimus, ita vt ante benedictionem sacerdotis, egredi populus Concil. Agathen. & habetur de consecr. Dist. 1. non praesumat, quodsi fecerint ab Episcopo publicè confundantur. We commaunde the secular people by speciall order, vpon the sondaie to heare the wholl Masse. So that the people presume not to go furth before the benediction of the F preist. And if they doe, let them be openlie rebuked of the Bishoppe. Here we finde soch order commaunded as the catholique church, for all the west part of yt, obserued, namelie that the people shoulde heare Masse euerie sondaie, but of communion here ys no title, A like decree we finde in an other Concil. Aurelian. councell in these woordes. Cùm ad celebrandas missas in Dei nomine conuenitur, populus non ante discedat, quàm Missae solemnitas cōpleatur, & vbi Episcopus non suerit, benedictionem à sacerdote percipiat. When they be come together in the name of God to celebrate Masse, the people maie not departe before the solemnitie of the Masse be fulfilled. And wher ther ys no Bishoppe present let them receaue the benediction of the preist. This decree commaundeth no more but that the people shall not departe vntill Masse be doen, of the communion therys no woorde.
S. Augustin also made this ordeinaunce, as yt ys to be seen in the first distinction of consecracion in these woordes. Et hoc attendendum, vt missae peculiares, quae per dies solemnes à sacerdotibus fiunt, non ita in publico fiant, vt propter eas populus Aug. de conse. Dist. 1. cap. ct hoc. à publicis missarum solemnibus, quae hora tercia canonicè fiunt, abstrahatur, sed sacerdotes G qui in circuitu vrbis, aut in eadem vrbe sunt, & populus in vnum ad missarum publicam celebrationem conueniant. And this ys to be obserued, that the peculiar Masses that be saied of the preistes vpon the solempn daies be not so openly doen, that for them the people be not drawen awaie from the publique solemnitie of Masses, whiche be canonicallie doen the thirde howre. But the preistes that dwell aboute the cytie, or within the same citie, and the people also shall come together to the publique celebracion of Masses. Thus he.
In this ordeinanceye first perceaue that peculias Masses were saied in one citie, beside the high or cōmon Masse, to the which the people might so resorte, as that they might not be letted or withdrawen frō the high Masse. Ye see again, that both the preistes that had saied Masse, and the people that had heard thē, were appoincted neuer the lesse to come to the high Masse. Now if none maie be present (as the Aduersarie teacheth) but soch as will communicate, and these preistes hauing saied their peculiar Masses, and ther communicated must yet be present at the high Masse by S. Augustines ordeinance, yt foloweth that the doctrine of the Aduersarie ys contrarie to the ordeinaunce H of S. Augustin. And although the name of Masse be so odiouse to the Proclamer: yet ye maie perceaue yt was not so to sainct Augustine, bus he aloweth both peculiar Masses and high or publique Masses, at bothe [Page 350]the whiche although the people might and aught to be: yet ther ys no commaundement A for them al to communicate as in his ordeinaunce yt ys to be perceaued.
What shall I nede anie more to saie in this matter, sith yt ys manifest by manie practises of the primitiue and auncient churche, that both pristes at the ministracion and other persons as well wholl as sicke did and therfor maie nowe receaue the blessed Sacrament alone, withoute a nombre of cō municantes? And therfor to returne part of the Proclamers woordes home to him and his complices, again I saie, O mercifull God, who wolde thinke ther coulde be so moche wilfullinesse in the heart of man, so maliciouslie, so slaunderouslie to caluminate the Churche, for that she like a good mother doeth suffer her children to take their blessed and holie foode of Chrystes bodie and blood either by nombre or by one alone, as deuocion and occasion shall serue, sith that both maners haue ben allwaies practised as before ys prooued?
Wherfor we maie trulie saie: O Iustine, o Tertullian, o Basill, o Hierom, o Chrysostom. B o Austen, o Leo, o auncient councells, if we be deceaued, ye are they that haue deceaued vs. But sure we are, that we are not deceaued, but we rest in the trueth that ye haue taught vs. But alas whose heart wolde yt not greiue to see the blasphemie of the Proclamer against Chryst and S. Paule, and his detestable slaunder of the holie doctours, whom he chargeth to haue taught him his Scismes, diuisions, and heresies? Ys Chryst who ys the trueth, the ministre of heresie? Ys Paule the doctour and Apostle of the gentiles, the teacher of Scismes? Be the holie doctours and Fathers of Chrystes Church, who haue ben pastours and feaders of Chrystes flocke, and kepers of the same with in his folde, in vnitie and peace, the authours of diuisions, and dispersions of the shepe of Chryst? Naie, yt ys Sathan the first lie maker, the father of lies and vntrueth, the authour of diuision betwixt God and man, that hath taught him heresie, Scisme and diuision, whose wicked inspiracion (the more ys the pitie) he foloweth. For neither Chryst, nor Paule, not Iustine nor Basill &c. hath taught that the celebracion or ministracion of Chrystes Sacrament ys not godlie or good, if ther be not manie communicantes at yt, But they C haue taught, that manie maie receaue yt, and that manie did receaue yt, and that one alone maie receaue yt, and that diuerse alone did receaue yt, and both to be true.
And nowe to ende this matter, as the Proclamer hath doen all that he can, and yet, by no autoritie (as ys saied) hath prooued that a preist or anie other maie not receaue alone: so I saie, that neither he, nor all his complices, though they be ioined all together, shall euer bring furth anie expresse place of scripture, Councells, or doctours, that doeth by commaundement forbidde a well disposed chrystian to receaue the Sacrament alone. And thus the three principall partes of the Masse being auouched by scriptures Councells, and doctours: I shall confirme the same by miracle, wrought by God, in the blessed Sacrament in the Masse time.
THE TWO AND FOVRTETH CHAP. DROOueth E the trueth of these matters of the Sacrament by that yt hath pleased God to confirme the same with miracles.
ALlthough the cominge of Chryst into the flesh was most certenly taught by promisses, figures, and prophecies (as before in the first booke ys saied) yet the same his coming his conception, his birth and abode with vs, was commended vnto vs, by manie protentes, miracles, and woonders, which the Gospell doeth declare: Euen so yt hath pleased the goodnesse of God well knowing owre infirmitie and weaknesse, to deale with vs in the matter of the Sacrament of the bodie and bloode of the same his Sonne Iesus Chryst. The certen trueth wherof although by figures, prophecies, and by the liuelie woorde of Chryst himself yt be certenlie commended vnto vs: yet to the consirmacion of the same trueth to vs warde, which otherwise in yt self ys most F certen, yt hath, I saie, pleased him to confirme the same trueth to vs by diuerse miracles, that we maie be assured, though reason, though senses, though hell gates wolde arise against yt, this ys and shall be a trueth, and euer endure a trueth. 3 Reg. 18.
In the time of Elias the Prophett when God and his holie faith and religion (as nowe yt ys with vs) was so farre forsaken that none were fownde, that openlie for the feare of the king and wicked Iesabell wolde professe the same, although some laie in caues and dennes, as nowe I trust ther doe some, faith fullie seruing God, Elias moued by the spiritt of God to haue the religiō and faith of God discerned frō the religion of Baall wolde the triall of the same shoulde be made by somme miracle from heauen. Wher vnto the Kinge and the people agreed, that if anie miracle were doen on Baalls side he shoulde be taken for God, and his religion receaued: yf on Elyas side: his God and his religion shoulde be embraced. The preistes of Baall laied on their sacrifice, they called on their God in their maner, no fire came from heauen, no miracle was doen. After that they had doen, Elyas prepaired the saicrifice, he G called on his God, fire came from heauen, and burnt the sacrifice. Wherupō the people seing the miracle, cried: Dominus ipse est Deus, Dominus ipse est Deus. Owre Lorde ys God, owre Lorde ys God. Euen so nowe the ministers of Baall haue peruerted Chrystes faith and religion. The people in outwarde countenance for seare of lawes haue forsaken the same: They are nowe taught that Chryst ys not reallie in the Sacrament duelie ministred: They are taught that his bodie ther ys not to be honoured, They are taught, that the blessed Sacrifice of Chrystes bodie and bloode ys nothing auailable either to the quicke or to the deade, with soche other. Chryst ys not in the sacramentall bread of the newe ministers, but he ys in the B. Sacr. duelie ministred by a preist.
Nowe let them search all histories of antiquitie, and shewe anie one miracle that God hath wrought either in the time of Berengarius: of Wicleff, and Husse, of Zwinglius Oecolampadius, or of this Proclamer for the confirmacion and declaraciō of that their faith, and if they doe, we shall saie that their faith ys good: Yf theie doe not, and we doe: let them yelde and saie that owre waie ys good. For like yt ys the trueth ther to be, wher yt pleaseth God to confirme the same by miracle: And like yt ys no trueth to be on the contrarie H side wher God doth not vouchsaffe at anie time to commende yt by some miracle?
Nowe the catholique Church teacheth the presence of Chrystes bodie [Page 351]in the Sacrament: The Aduersarie teacheth no bodie, but the figure of the bodie. The catholique Church teacheth Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament A to be honoured: Luther and the Sacramentaries teache that yt ys not to be honoured. The catholique Church teacheth that Masse ys to be vsed: Luther and the Sacramentaries teache that yt ys to be abhorred. Nowe as Elyas willed the preistes of Baall, first to confirme their waie with miracles: So lett the Lutherans and the Sacramentaries, bring furth first some Miracle.
As for miracles for the confirmacion of their doctrine as touching this matter of the Sacrament, I neuer did nor coulde heare or reade of anie, but onelie of one, which ys a miracle meet for the doctrine. Of whiche miracle Luther himself ys the reporter, Ionas his disciple being interpretour in his booke of priuate Masse, wher he saieth thus: Ego coram vobis reuerendis patribus Luther. & sanctis, confessionem faciam, date mibi absolutionem bonam, quae vobis (opto) quamminimum noceat. Contigit me semel sub mediam noctem subito expergefieri. Ibi Sathan mecū caepit eiusmodi disputationem. Audi (inquit) Luthere, doctor perdocte. Nosti te quindecim annis celebrasse Missas priuatas penè quotidiè. Quid si tales Missae horrenda essent Idololatria? Quid si ibi non adfuisset corpus & sanguis Christi, Sed tantùm panem & vinum B adorasses, & aliis adorandum proposuisses? I will before yowe reuerend and holie Fathers make a confession, geue me a good absolucion, which I wish maie nothing hurte yowe. Yt happened me once at midnight sodenlie to be wakened. Sathan appeared to Luther ād disputed with him of priuate Masse. Ther Sathan beganne this maner of disputacion with me. Hearken (saieth he) thowe well learned doctour Luther. Thowe knowest that by the space of these fiftene years, thowe hauest saied priuate Masse all most euerie daie. What if soche priuate Masses were abhominable Idolatrie? What if ther hath not ben present the bodie and blood of Chryst, but that thowe haddest honoured onely bread and wine and haddest sett yt furth to other to be honoured? Thus moch Sathan to Luther.
In which talke Sathan goeth aboute to confirme three pointes of their doctrine, that ys, that Chrystes bodie and bloode be not in the Sacrament, but onelie bread and wine: That Chryst in the Sacrament ys not to be adored: And that priuate Masses are not to be vsed. See ye not nowe what a miracle here ys, that Sathan wolde vouchesaf to speake with Lurher at middenight? C ys not this doctrine moche confirmed nowe, that Sathan hath perswaded yt? who knoweth not that Sathan perswadeth to heresie, not to the right faith? to euell, not to good? to falshoode, not to trueth? Wherfor chrystian reader, if thowe wise be, flee that he perswadeth thee vnto, and embrace that he diswadeth thee from.
And thus to a good chrystian this doing of Sathan maie be occasion of confirmacion in faith. For wher Sathan disswadeth Luther from the Masse, from the beleif of the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, from the honouring Ioan. 8. of Chryst ther, we maie be certen and sure that the Masse ys good, that the presence of Chryste in the Sacrament, and the honouring of him ther be holsom and good doctrines. For he being (as Chryst saieth) a liar, and 1. Pe. 5. a manisleer from the beginning: seketh not to teache vs the trueth, nor to helpe to saue ys, but raither (as S. Paule saieth) he being our aduersarie goeth aboute like a roaring lion seking whome he maie deuoure, whom God graūt vs stronglie to withstande in faith. Thus I saie, occasion ys geuen vs to be cō firmed in that faith from the whiche Sathan wolde disswade vs. D
But as touching the matters which Sathan wolde perswade by his deuelish apparition to Luther, if ther were no more saied, a wise reader wolde [Page]by these fewe woordes easelie perceaue, howe good and true the doctrine of the Proclamer ys, which ys soche as Sathan perswaded, and euen the verie E same. This being all the miracles that I can finde of the confirmacion of the Proclamers doctrine, I maie thus conclude, that forasmoch as this doctrine ys setfurth by the apparition and perswasion of Sathan, and not by God, that yt ys Sathans doctrine and not gods.
Nowe for the catholique doctrine let vs see if God hath besides his figures, prophecies, plain speaches of his onelie begotten Sonne Iesus Chryst, and the great nombre of assertions, declaracions, and expositions of most holie famouse, auncient and learned Fathers, shewed anie miracles for the confirmacion of the trueth of the blessed Sacrament. And First let vs see for the presence of Chryst in the Sacramēt. Sathan perswaded Luther that ther ys not present the bodie and bloode of Chryst, but bread and wine let vs trie the trueth therof by Gods worke.
Amphilochius an holie Bishoppe, who liued within the compasse of foure hondreth yeares after Chryst and therfor a good nombre of yeares, more Jn vita Ba. The blessed Sacr. deliue red to a Jewe was verie flesh ād verie blood in seight then eleuen hondred agone, writing the life of S. Basill, testifieth that a certain Iewe desierouse to see the misteries of the chrystians, came among an F infinite multitude to the churche wher S. Basill saied Masse. And feigning himself to be a Chrystian, and being among them at S. Basills Masse, sawe in the handes of S. Basill a childe diuided. Neuer the lesse when the time of the communion came, he stoode among other to doe as they did and when the Sacrament was deliuered vnto him, yt was yerie flesh: And when the cuppe was brought to him, yt was verie bloode: of whiche both as he might keping some parte, when he came home he shewed them to his weif, and tolde her what he had seen with his eies. Whervpon beleuing that the misteries of the christians were woonderfull, the next daie he went to S. Basill, and tolde him all the wholl matter, and desiered him that he might withoute delaie be christened and so he was, and all his housholde.
Yt ys redd also in the liues of the Fathers, that ther was a certain olde mā, who although he were a great man: yet he was simple and did erre in the matter of the Sacrament, and saied that the consecrated bread which we doe receaue ys not the naturall bodie of Chryst, but a figure of yt. This his errour when two auncient men did vnderstand and knowe that his life and cō uersacion G other wise was good, they thought that he did yt innocētlie, and simplie. And therfor they went to him and rehersed his errour to him. He graunted that he did so saie. They perswaded him that he should not so beleue, but as the catholike Church doeth. We (saie they) beleue that that bread ys the bodie of Chryst, and that cuppe his bloode in verie dede, and not in The blessed Sacr. deliuered to a doubting chrystian appeared flesh. figure. But as in the beginning God taking a litle earth, made man to his owne image, and no man can saie but that man, although he be made of the earth he ys the image of God: Euen so the bread, by cause he saied: This ys my bodie: we beleue that yt ys verilie his bodie. The olde man saied: except I maie know yt so to be in verie dede, yowr reasons can not satisfie me: Then they saied: Let vs geue our selues to praier this weke, that God maie vouchsaffe to reueill this mysterie vnto vs. After their praier they three came to the church. And when the time came that they shoulde receaue, the one lie porcion of the Sacrament deliuered to that olde man, was verie bloodie flesh, whiche when he sawe he was afearde and cried, saing: I beleue that H the bread that ys on the aultar ys thie bodie, and the cuppe ys thy bloode. And furthwith the flesh in his hand was made breade, and so he receaued yt, and gaue thankes to God.
[Page 352]Let not the Aduersarie by skorning trauaill to reiecte this miracle or auoide the force of yt by slaunder, saing that some papist hath inuented yt. For A as yt ys testified, this was doen, as the last rehersed miracle was, with in the compasse of foure hundreth yeares after Chryst, at whiche time yt were to moch wickednesse for the Aduersarie to think anie vain inuencions to haue ben deuised for the maintenance of the treuth of the Sacramet.
I omitte to alleadge here soche miracles, as S. Cyprian and S. Ambrose reporte aboute the blessed Sacrament, for that I haue made some mencion of them allreadie, and again by occasion shall. Manie goodlie miracles also be reported by S. Gregorie, and manie were doen in his time, aboute this blessed Sacrament, whiche were to long to reherse. These two therfor shall suffice to helpe vs to perceaue and vnderstand Gods pleasure and his holie trueth as concerning the presence of Chrystes bodie in the blessed Sacrament.
Sathan perswaded Luther not to honoure the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament, but what the Churche hath doen frō the Apostles time, and what B the holie Martirs and learned Fathers teach in this matter yt ys declared in the secōd booke: Besides whiche knowledge so left vnto vs of God, we shall Optatus li. 2. cont Donatist. perceaue gods pleasure by miracle, that the blessed Sacrament shoulde be honoured. In the which matter yt ys verie notable that Optatus reporteth of the Donatistes, who being cruell heretiques, so farre misliked what was doen by the catholiques, that violentlie inuading their Churches, they commaunded the Sacrament to be geuen to the dogges. But the iudgement of God Dogges after their eating of the Sacrament worowed their Masters that cast yt vnto them. not suffring so heinouse an offence to be vnpunished, so great contumelic to the dishonour of the blessed Sacrament, to be vnreuenged: The dogges vnto their owne masters whom before they loued and defended, nowe being enemies, fell on them as on straungers or theues, and with all violence as though they had neuer knowen them, waxed feirce on them and worowed them, God herby (as I take yt) signifieng vnto vs that as rabbish men forgatte their duetie and honoure to their Lorde God: so the vnreasonable creatures forgatt their loue to their masters.
Whether they haue offended and displeased God, that in this our time C haue as wickedlie abused the Sacrament, as did these Donatistes, they maie by this miracle easilie perceaue. And this maie we perceaue also, that as the dishonouring of the Sacrament offendeth and displeaseth God, and therfor he punissheth yt, So in the honouring of the Sacrament, neuer anie Idolatrie was committed, for we neuer readd yt punished. Let anie of the Aduersaries, if they can bring furth anie one sufficient example, that euer anie one was punished of God, for honouring Chryst in the Sacrament, and then they haue doen somwhat, but they neuer coulde yet, nor neuer shall, so weake ys their cause.
Against the Masse also Sathan perswaded Luther, and good cause whie. For by the Masse his power as well in extern or worldly thinges as in intern Sathan his power abated by the vertue of the Masse. or spirituall thinges, ys ouerthrowen. For worldlie thinges we haue the testimonie of S. Augustine, who as be fore ys mencioned, testifieth that by the offring of the sacrifice of the bodie and blood of Chryste (whiche ys the Masse) the wicked power of the Deuell molesting the house of a certain mā, and moche disquieting his familie and seruants, was clean driuen awaie, Aug li. 22. De ciuit. Dei. ca. 1 D and the house after wel quieted.
Howe moche then so euer they crie oute against Masse, howe great ab hominacion soeuer they make yt to saie that the sacrifice of Chrystes bodie ys [Page]offred by the preist: howe moche soeuer Sathan and his disciples wolde extenuate the vertue and power of yt: yet in spite of their teeth they must E heare S. Austen saie, that the preist offred the sacrifice of Chrystes bodie. And what ys yt to offre the sacrifice of Chrystes bodie, but to saie Masse? And to saie Masse ys to offre this sacrifice. And wher Sathans Angells troobled the house of this man to great hurt bothe of his seruantes and of his cattaill, when Masse was saied in the house, the power of Sathan was put to fleight. Yowe maie perceaue then, that yt ys not without cause, that Sathā stirred vppe his ministres so cruellie and fiercely to crie oute, to raill, and to rage against the blessed and holie Masse. For being deuoutlie and godlie doen, yt weakeneth his power, yt withstandeth his malice, yt abateth his tirannie, and diminisheth his kingdom. And by this ye maie consider howe acceptable a thing the Masse ys that at once saing the Deuel and his Angells were driuē awaie. Yf the Masse were so detestable before God as they wolde make yt, God wolde at the doing of yt haue caused mo Deuells to come to the house, rather than by the doing of yt to putte them to fleight. F Thus maie yowe perceaue that God commendeth to vs the goodnesse of the Masse by miracle.
In spirituall thinges yt also abateth the power of the Deuell, for yt diminisheth the force of temptacion (as saieth S. Bernard) Duo enim illud sacramentū operatur in nobis, vt videlicet & sensum minuat in minimis, & in grauioribus peceatis tol Sermon. de Baptis. lat omnino consensum. Si quis vestrum non tam sepè modò, non tam acerbos sentit iracundiae motus, luxuriae, aeut caeterorū huiusmodi, gratias agat corpori, & sanguini Domini quoniā virtus sacramenti operatur in eo. Two thinges that Sacrament woorketh in vs, that in lesser sinnes yt diminisheth the feeling, and in greater sinnes yt taketh awaie consent. Yf anie of yowe doe not so often nowe feele so bitter mocions of wrathe, of enuie, of lecherie, or soche other, let him geue thankes to the bodie and bloode of ower lorde. For the vertue of the Sacrament woorketh in him. Thus the bodie and blood of Chryst in the Sacramēt with standeth the furie of Sathan and his Angells both in outewarde thinges and inwarde thinges.
Nowe let not the Aduersarie cauill that bicause S. Bernarde saieth here G that the vertue of the Sacramēt woorketh, that he vnderstandeth not Chryst Three thin ges to be attended in the bless. Sacr. him self to be geuen in the Sacrament, but the vertue. For S. Bernarde with all catholiques acknowlegeth three thinges in the Sacrament, the outwarde formes, the bodie and bloode of Chryst, and the spirituall grace which three he professeth in a sermon saing. Tria in sacramento Altaris attendere debes, speciem panis, veritatem carnis, virtutem gratiae spiritualis. vsque ad speciem panis sensus pertingit exterior: ad veritatem carnis fides interior: ad virtutem gratiae spirituallis charitas Bernardus sermon. de Cana Dom superior. Three thinges thowe oughtest to attende in the Sacrament of the aultar: The outwarde forme of bread: The veritie of the flesh: the vertue of spirituall grace. Vnto the outwarde forme of breade reacheth the outwarde sense: Vnto the veritie of the flesh the inwarde faith: Vnto the vertue of the spirituall grace, perfect charitie. So that in the Sacrament ys both the bodie of Chryst, vnto whome we must geue thankes and the vertue of the spirituall grace therin receaued, for the whiche we aught to geue thankes.
The pleasure of God being by his miraculouse workes shewed to be other H wise, yea euen contrarie to that that yt pleased Sathan to perswade Luther as touching the presence of Chryst in the holie Sacrament, and the hououringe of him in the same, with or seruice and duetie in the holie sacrifice of [Page 353]the Masse: we will cease to saie any more vpon the woordes of S. Bernard. A
But if yowe desire to be aduertised of some notable practise, call to remē brance Paul Diacon. the historie of the noble matrone of Rome, who by Sathans tentaciō encōbred and in (faith as manie be now a daies) blinded that could not beleue the verie bodie ād blood of Chryste to be in the blessed Sacramēt, but coming to the Masse ād ioining in cōpanie with other to receaue, whē in the deliuery of the Sacrament to her, she heard these woordes: The bodie of our Lorde Iesus Chryste, awail thee to the remission of sinnes, she similed, which when S. Gregorie perceaued and by examinaciō vnderstoode her vnbeleue, he and the people praied and after praier going again to the aultar, and taking the Blessed Sacramēt in his hand, to the helpe of the faith of that womā and the confirmacion of the faith of the people, yt was of the one and of the other seen as a verie bloodie fleshly litle fingar. Wherupon S. Gregorie willed her to remembre the saing of Chryst: The bread which I will geue yowe, ys my flesh. Which so being seen, and praier made by S. Greg. and the people, that yt might be reduced to the forme that yt might be receaued, yt came furthwith B so to passe, and she thus of an vnfaithfull made a faithfull receaued the blessed Sacrament, as other faithfull had doen. Thus she holden captiue in lacke of faith in the forts of Sathan, was by the holie mynistracion of Chryst at the Masse deliuered from the same.
And now that we haue made reporte of one miracle, doen in the time of S. Gregorie, we will touche one or two mo reported by hym and so ende this matter of proof. Thus writeth S. Gregorie: Non longè à nostris fertur tempori bus factū, quòd quidā ab hostibus captus, longè transductus est. Cumue diu teneretur in vin Greg. hom. 37. culis, eum vxor sua, cùm ex eadem captiuitate non reciperet, extinctum putauit. Pro quo iam velut mortuo, hostias hebdomadibus singulis curabat offerri. Idem ergo vir longo pòst tempore reuersus, admirans valdè, suae indicauit vxori, quod diebus certis, hebdomadibus singulis, eius vincula soluebantur. Quos videlicet dies eius vxor, atque horas discutiens, tunc eum Aprisoners cheines loosed by vert ue of the Masse. recognouit absolutū, cùm pro eo sacrificiū meminerat oblatū. Yt ys saied to be doen not long before our time, that a certain man takē of his enemies was caried into a farre contrie, and whē he was lōg kept in prison, so that he could not come home to his wief, she thought that he had bē dead. For whō as for one being C dead, she caused wekelie sacrifice to be offred. The same mā after a lōg while returning home, greatlie wondring declared vnto his wief that certain daies euerie weke his bandes were loosed: Which daies and howres, whē his wief had well remembred, she perceaued him then to be loosed from his bandes when she caused sacrifice to be offred for him. Thus he.
In this miracle reported by S. Gregorie, this maie we first perceaue, that Masse for the dead before S. Gregories time. the order of the vniuersall Church was to praie for the dead, and to offre sacrifice for them, which thing moued this woman supposing her husband in captiuitie to haue bē dead, to cause the sacrifice of Masse to be celebrated for him certain daies euery weke, Again this ys to be obserued, that Chrysts sacrifice being offred for that man as for one that was dead, was not ouerpassed or let fall from the mercifull seight and hearing of God, as a thing doē in Gregorius. ibidem. vain, but miraculouslie, wher yt was offred to loose the bandes if a dead mā (he being a liue) yt loosed the bādes of a liuing man. Which thing S. Gregorie verie godlie also doeth note vpō the same miracle, by these woords: Hinc ergo, fratres chrissimi, hinc certa consideratione colligite, oblata à nobis hostia sacra, quantā D in nobis soluere valeat ligaturācordis, si oblata ab altero, potuit in altero soluere vincula corporis. Vertue of the Masse. Of this thē deareli beloued, of this doe yowe certēlie gather, how moch the holie sacrifice offred of vs, maie loose the bāde of cōsciēce, if being offred of one, yt might in an other lose the bādes of the bodie.
[Page]The same S. Gregorie also reporteth an other miracle doen by one Agapetus, a verie holie and a verteouse man by the report of diuerse writers, and E Bishoppe of Rome before the saied Gregorie. Yt happened the saied Agapetus A miracle doen in the Masse vpon a dumbe and lame man. go to Constantinople to the Emperour Instinian. Vnto whome, as he trauailed in the waie, was brought one being both lame and dumbe to be cured, who was so sore taken, that he coulde neither speake anie woorde, nor was able to rise from the grownde. When the holy man vnderstoode, that they that brought him had faith in God, that God by him wolde cure the deseased man, he prepared himself to Masse, and doing the solemne seruice of the same, he offred vppe the sacrifice in the seight of allmightie God, whiche being doen, he went from the aultar, and tooke the lame man by the hand, and in the seight of all the people, he lifted him vppe, and sette him on his feete. And when he had putte the bodie of oure Lorde in the mouthe of the dumbe man, that tounge that long before had ben bownde, and could not be framed to speake a woorde nowe ys loosed, and the man can speake, and with all his frendes reioice and praise God. F
In this miracle I will not encombre the reader with manie notes, but this onelie I wish to be marked, that the Masse ys holie and the power of the blesed Sacrament ys great, for when after the Masse yt touched the dumbe tong yt made yt furthwith to speake. Now reader of manie, I haue produced a few miracles to the entent thow maist perceaue, and be assured, that if the doctrine of the presence of Chryste in the Sacrament were wicked capharnaites doctrine (as the Aduersarie tearmeth yt) or the sacrifice of Chryst on the aultar were the robberie of Gods honour, or the wholl mynistracion of the holie and blessed Masse were filthie stinking abhominacion, as gods enemies abhominablie tearmeth yt, God wolde neuer commende yt to vs with so manie miracles. And hereunto if thow adde the lowlie and reuerent seruice doen of the holie Angels vnto the blessed Sacrament, in the time of the Masse, as yt ys testified of Chrysostome, S. Ambrose, and S. Gregorie, thowe shalt not nede (I suppose) to feare to folowe the faithe of the holie Church in beleuing, neither to doe the duetie, and shewe thine obedience with them in honouring, nor to leaue thie charitie at the Masse time, but for the quicke G and the dead allwaies to be praing. For why shall man feare to confesse Chrystes presence, wher the Angells doe acknowledge yt? Why shall manstaie to doe most humble honoure, wher Angels vse most lowlie obeysaunce? Why shall man forsake and flee from that as from a serpent, wher Angels are desierouse to be present?
Looke therfore to thy self (o Chrystian man) and ioin with Angell prouoking thee to thy duetie, and consent not to Sathan though he call the Masse, Idolatrie. For this I will assure thee, that the Masse was neuer so termed but Jssue ioined with all Sacramenries that the Masse was neuer by anie catholique called Jdolatrie. by Sathan. And here I will make this issue with Sathan and the Proclamer, and all the rest of Sathans disciples, that although the Masse hath ben in vse by the Proclamers owne confession, more then eleuen hundreth yeares agone. For he saieth, although falselie, that the name of Masse began but foure hundreth years after Chryste, yet they neuer haue nor neuer shall finde anie one approued catholique authour either within the compasse of those foure hundreth years or since that saieth as they doe, that the Masse ys Idolatrie. Yf none saie yt thē he and his cōplices speake yt of them selues, & qui ex propriis H loquitur, mendaciū loquitur. Finallie to conclude for our faith, that yt ys to gods pleasure, we haue besides the scriptures and Fathers, the testimonie of miracles. Let nowe the Proclamer, if he can, bring furth one miracle for the [Page 354]confirmaciō of his religion. Yf he can not, let him learn to know himself, and hys companie, to be the preistes of Baall vnder Iezable. And let him confesse A the catholikes the preistes of God with Elyas the Prophett.
Neither, reader, be thowe dissuaded or oute of countenance, if thow see anie of Sathans scholers mocking or skorning at these miracles, whiche ys their maner of folowing of argumentes, when other wise they can not auoide that ys saied. For vnderstand and marke well, that none of these by me alleaged, were yesterdaie doen, but they were all doen before and in time of S. Gregorie. And therfore vpon the poinct of a thousand yeares and vppewarde, and are reported and testified by right graue and holie men. I knowe that these miracles will and haue spited the rebelliouse enemies of God, and his Chryst. For the Phariseis coulde not abide the miracles, that Chryst himself did, but wickedlie saied: that in Beelzebub prince of Deuells he casteth oute Deuells. The Arrians not bearing miracles confirming the faith of Chryst, which they impugned, either derided them, or saied they were feigned miracles, or flatlie, though the matter were neuer so euident denied them, as in S. Ambrose yt maie be at large fownde testified. So for that these Sermon. 91 de inuent. corp. Geruas. & Protha. miracles commende and cōfirme the catholique faith, which our heretiques B nowe impugn, they will with the Pharisies, with the Arrians and with Melancthon, and Vadian for spite mocke, and skorn at them, call them feigned miracles or denie [...]latlie anie soch to haue ben doen. But consider thowe the reporters: Theie be sainct Amphiloch, S. Optatus, S. Ambrose, S. Chrysostom, S. Augustine, and S. Gregorie, whiche all be in time auncient, in life famousely holie, in learninge with moche commendacion excellent, of the Church euer receaued, and therfore of a vain man not to be reiected. Great ys the difference betwixt the creditte of a nombre exalted to glory, and of some yet liuing in sinfull miserie. Ther ys great oddes betwixt them, whose doctrine hath allwaies ben approued, and those whose doctrine ys allwais reproued. To be short, yt ys more wisdom to beleue an holie sainct reporting, then a wicked heretique denieng. For that then these miracles be reported of soche as be reputed holie sainctes, yt ys verie meet, and most saiftie for vs to beleue them. C
THE THREE AND FOVRTETH CHAPT. MAketh recapitulacion of the conferences of the Masses of the Apostles and Fathers of the primitiue Church, and of the catholique Church that nowe ys, with a breif confutacion of the conference made by the Proclamer betwen, the Masse of S. Iames and that ys now vsed.
FOrasmoch as a matter discoursed at large, being drawen into a compendiouse and breif forme ys sooner atteigned, and better kept in memorie: therfore, and for that also I wold take iust occasion to open and shewe the folies vanities, and shamfull vntrueths of the conference that the Proclamer hath made betwē the Masse of S. Iames, and the Masse nowe vsed of the catholique Church: I will, as yt were into a breif Summe collect that ys saied, and make a shorte D recapitulacion of that, which of necessitie both for the opening of the matter, and for answering of the Proclamer, I was compelled more at lenght to [Page]setfurth. The Proclamer diuided the Masse into foure parts: into holie doctrine, E holie praier, holie consecracion, and holie Communion. Of the first, which ys holie doctrine, I mene the Epistle and Gospell, but that they shoulde be red and vsed in the Masse ther ys no controuersie, therfore haue I entred no disputacion therof. In the other three ther be by the Proclamer and his likes, controuersies moued, which ye haue heard by sufficient good authorities discussed and dissolued.
And here breislie to repete the parts as we haue treacted of them, we haue A breif collection of the conferē ces of the Masse now vsed and of the new cō muniō with the Masse of the Apostles and Fathers. first to speake of Consecracion. Consecracion, as yt ys vsed nowe in the catholique Churche, hath ben by me conferred to the consecracion vsed by the Apostles and Fathers, and ys fownd in all substanciall parts to agree. The schismaticall mynistracion in most of them disagreeth. The intencion of the Apostles and Fathers in and vpon consecracion ys shewed, wherin they are perceaued to haue beleued, that by their due consecracion, the verie bodie and blood of Chryste by the almightie power of God and vertue of his woord were made present in that blessed Sacrament. Wherun to the faith and intencion of the catholique Church being conferred, yt ys fownd fullie to agree. The schismaticall Church alltogether dissenteth and F disagreed.
Vpon their consecracion the Apostles and Fathers made in the remembrā ce of Chrysts passion, death, resurrection, and ascension, an oblacion or sacrifice Sacrificevsed of the Apostles. abhorred of the Sacramentaries. of the same bodie to God the Father according to the institucion and ordeinance of Chryst. The doing of the catholique Church in this poinct ys conferred and fownd agreable. The schismatical church ys so farre wide frō folowing the Apostles and Fathers, that yt can not abide to heare soch sacrifice asmoch as once named or spoken of.
The catholique Church in the Masse maketh humble supplicacion and peticion for the mercifull acceptacion of their sacrifice, which maner of supplicacion the Proclamer most fondlie ād vndiscretlie derideth and skorneth. But by conference yt ys fownde that the catholike Church foloweth therin the phrase of scriptures, Apostles and Fathers, and dothe altogether as ys fownd to haue ben doen by them, so neerlie that yt praieth with the same woordes that the Fathers did. The Schismaticall congregacion as yt foloweth not the Apostles and Fathers in making this oblacion or sacrifice so contemneth G yt their praier for acceptacion.
Thus moch being saied of Consecracion, intencion, oblacion, and acceptacion, we descended to the praiers in the Masse, wherin be two things which Praier for the dead vsed of the Aposts ād the catholique Church dispised of the Schism. the Schismaticall church impugneth that ys, praier for the dead, and inuocacion of Saincts. As for that the catholique Church praieth for the dead, the doing therof ys conferred to the doings of the Apostles and Fathers, and yt ys fownd that they praied for the dead in their Masses, and that they gaue ordre to frequent and vse praier for the dead, wherfore yt ys euidēt that the catholique Church in so doing foloweth thē, and obserueth their ordre appoincted. The Schismatical Church cā not wel be cōferred herin, for yt vtterlie abandoneth all praier for the dead so that yt hath not one title for that pourpose, and wher nothing ys, no comparison can be made.
Inuocacion of Saincts vsed in the Masse, ys also conferred with the doings of the Apostles and Fathers, ād fownd to haue ben doen by thē in their Masses. Jnuocacion of Sainctes likewise. The Schismaticall Church as in this yt flieth the doing of the catholique H Church: so doth yt slie the doing of the Apostolique and primitiue Church whose doctrine and example the catholique Church holdeth and foloweth.
[Page 355]Finallie we come to holie Communion, wher the catholique Churche ys accused and charged in two poinctes heinouslie to offende. The one that A the preist tarieth not allwais for some nombre of communicants: The other, that to soche as do communicate at times, but one kinde ys mynistred. For these two poincts, as for the other before, the auncient presidents of the primitiue Sole Communion ād vnder one kinde vsed in the primitiue church and auncient church are sought, and laied furth, and no commaundement fownde forbidding the preist in his Masse, or anie other man sicke or wholl to receaue alone. And the practise also of the same Church sheweth that oftentimes one kinde onelie was receaued, and none offence therin iudged. Whervnto the vse of the catholike Church being cōferred, yt ys fownd to be agreable and to do that that in the primitiue Churche was practised. The Schismaticall Church vnder pretence of singular obedience, committing great disobedience, and vnder the countenance of sincere imitacion vsing a wicked innouacion, neither communicateth vnder one kinde, nor alone, thinking that of necessitie yt must so be, and cōtemneth the auncient practise of the primitiue Church and most fiercelie accuseth the wholl Churche B for these thousand years of the transgression of Chrystes institucion and commaundement.
Thus ye maie see that the Masse of the catholique Church for the substanciall parts, and poinctes of yt being conferred to the Masse of the Apostles and Fathers of the primitiue and auncient Church, ys fownd to be fullie agreable, and the Communion of the Schismaticall Church in all poincts disagreable. Yf the Masse had disagreed or dissented in anie substanciall poinct thow maist be well assured (gentle Reader) that the Proclamer wolde not by so slender, so impertinent yea and so vntrue conferences, haue gone aboute to improue and disgrace yt, as he doeth. He conferred yt with the Masse of S. Iames but in soch sorte, that yf he had neuer made pithier oracion in the disputacion at the Paruis in Oxforde, I ween he shoulde neuer haue ben alowed for a generall Sophister. But God be praised that his catholique Churche ys so appoincted, that the enemies can not finde anie weightie matter iustlie to repugn or reproue yt. But let vs see his conferences. C
1 S. Iames (saeth he) saied Masse in the common toung, as the people might vnderstand him: They saie their Masse in a straunge toung, that the people should not knowe what they mene. This ys the first peice of his conference. The man lackt good stuff to beginne his worke, when he ys fain in the first shewe of all to place soch pelf. Confider, I praie thee, gentle reader, that yf yt shoulde be in question whether Plato were a man, and his enemie shoulde come in and saie, he was no man bicause he spake latin, yt were but a fond argument and all together impertinent. For the matter to be tried ys aboute the substance of Plato, and not aboute anie accident, and the enemie growndeth vpon the accident and leaueth the substance: So the question here ys whether the Masse be good or no, which ys about the substance of the thing, and he cometh in with an argument of an accident, that yt ys saied in latin, and therfore yt ys not good, what ys this to the pourpose? Manie a thing ys good in yt self, though yt be not of all vnderstanded. The seuen liberal Sciēces be good though they be not vnderstanded of all men. The holie scriptures be good in themselues though all men vnderstād them not. Yea, euen nowe when they D be in the vulgar toung they will not speake so familiarlie no not to the mynisters, that euerie mynister maie vnderstand them: and yet they be [Page]good. So ys the Masse likewise good though all the people vnderstand yt not. This argument therfore proueth nothing against the Masse. Yf he E wolde rightlie haue proceaded he shoulde haue proued no Masse to be or that that ys called Masse to be in substance not good, before he shoulde improue yt, for being saied in an vnknowen toung (as he tearmeth yt) for yt ys meet yt be disputed whether the thing be, before yt be disputed whether yt be of this maner of that. Against his first comparison therfore we maie conclude, that as S. Iames Masse saied in the hebrue toung, was in yt self godlie and good, though the greke or latin being at the same vnderstand not what was saied: so the Masse nowe saied in the catholique Churche in the latin toung though the english or frenche man vnderstand yt not, yet yt ys godlie and good in yt self.
2 His second comparison ys: S. Iames spake oute the woordes of consecracion: They in their Masse suppresse the same woordes, and kepe them close. Hetherto the Proclamer plaieth small game. He had leuer in a weightie matter speake some trifling woord, then saie nothing. Malice will cast dust or what soeuer cometh to hand at his enemie in want of better weapon. Here semeth a bare Armarie wher so weake a weapon ys bent against that, whiche with all force F he wolde ouerthrowe. He hath small fauts to obiect against the blessed Masse, when lowd speaking or softe speaking ys made a faute. As before ys saied, what ys this to the substance of the Masse? As the Masse saied, ys as good as the Masse songe, so ys the Masse softelie spokē in substāce as good as the Masfe lowdlie The primitiue church praied manie praiers of the Masse secretlie. spoken. Ys not yowr owne Communion as good saied as songe, yf ther were anie goodnesse in yt? or ys yt not as good saied in a great congregacion wher some stand so farre of as they can not heare the woordes of consecracion whiche in that case are spoken as in soste silence to them, as yt ys being song in a small congregacion where all the people maie heare? Were all the Masses in the auncient Church throughlie oute spokē alowde? Let the Proclamer looke the bookes, and he shall finde yt otherwise. Did S. Basill in his Masse pronounce the wholl action of cōsecracion with a lowde voice? No, when he began the Canon to entre toward consecracion he praied secretlie, and the rule ys prefixed at the beginning of the praier: Pontifex secretè. The Bishoppe praieth this secretlie. By imitacion wherof I thinke yt receaued throughout the catholique Churche to praie the praiers of the Canon secretlie. And when S. Basill came to the consecracion, did he speake G the wholl processe with a lowde voice? No, part he spake with a lowde voice, part with a secret or sost voice, but this moch the Proclamer did not knowe percase whē he obiected this secrette speaking for a sault: Yf he did, he obiected yt more of malice then of trueth or wisdom. Howe shender then thys comparison ys, and of what weake force yt ys, yt maie easilie be perceaued.
3 The thirde comparison ys this S. Iames in his Masse mynistred the Communion to the people: They in their Masse, receaue themselues alone. This comparison in some vnderstanding ys true, in some yt smelleth of vntrueth. Yf yt be vnderstanded particularlie and not generally that ys, that S. Iames somtimes when he saied Masse mynistred the Communion to the people, yt ys true. And so yt ys true that the catholique Church somtime mynistreth the Sacrament to to the people when Masse ys saied. Yf yt be vnderstanded generallie, that sainct lames at all times when he saied Masse mynistred the Communion H to the people, yt smelleth, I saie, of an vntrueth, and so shall stand and be reputed, vntill the Proclamer proue yt. For I see so litle trueth, in [Page 356]in him, that withoute some better authoritie then his owne bare woorde, I A can not beleue him in this matter. And that I thus doo, I haue euen in this Masse saied withoute commucants matter good cause. For as I finde that in the Churche of Constantinople Masse was dailie saied, when the people did not communicate: so doe I finde a rule made in the auncient Churche, what the preist shoulde doo, when ther were no communicantes. Wherbie being euident that Masse was saied without communicantes, yt smelleth, as I saied, of an vntrueth, that S. Iames ministred the communion to the people allwaies, when he saied Masse. In Missa Chrysost. And for somoche as yt so doeth, yt raither declareth the malice of him that wolde somwhat saie against the holie Masse, thē that of certen knowlege he can auouche anie thing against yt.
4 Nowe cometh the fourth comparison, whiche ys of asmoch force as this last was, and yet yf anie force be in all his heape of comparisons, yt ys in these two. This ys the comparison: S. Iames in his Masse ministred the communion to the people vnder both kindes: They in their Masse minister the Sacrament vnto the people in one kinde onelie. A proposition framed in an argument, and not conteining the wholl trueth of the matter disputed, maie well be reiected wherfor in consideracion that the Proclamer trauaileth to improue euerie Masse in the Yt ys euidēt by diuerse histories that the bless. Sacr. hath ben ministred vnder one kinde in the primitiue Churche B whiche the Sacrament ys not ministred vnder both kindes, alleageth S. Iames Masse, as in which S. Iames did allwaies geue the Sacrament to the people vnder both kindes, this allegacion ys to be reiected as insufficient for yt ys onelie saied but not proued, and so he maketh his conclusion vpon his premisses, before the parts of his argument be graunted. Naie Sir, tarie a while and proue that S. Iames allwaies when he saied Masse ministred the Sacrament to the people vnder both kindes. And if yowe proue yt not, as I knowe yowe can not, yt shall be cast into the bagge of your vntrueths, among your other store. That S. Iames did not allwaies minister the Sacrament vnder both kindes I haue not onelie a vehement presumption, but the practise of the primitiue and auncient churche whiche wolde infringe and breake no necessarie order fullie perswadeth me so to beleue, forasmoche as in the tyme of Tertullian, who was near to the Apostles in the time of S. Cyprian, who was not long after him, in the time of S. Basill and other, the Sacramēt was diuerse times ministred vnder one kinde. C
5 But let vs see an other of his comparisons the fifte comparison ys this. S. Iames in his Masse preached and setfurtb the death of Chryste: They in their Masse haue onelie a nombre of dumbe gestures and ceremones, whiche they them selues vnderstand Amaliciou seslaunder. not, and make no maner of mencion of Chrysts death. Hitherto he hath made conferences impertinent and slender: nowe for lacke of soche pelting store, he ys fain to bodge vppe a fewe moo euen with flatt lies. I tolde yowe before his store of stuff was not great, and that his armarie was not well furnished with weapons and nowe yt doth appeare. Ye haue seen the best stuf and sharpest weapons, nowe ys he driuen to this shifte to sett vppe Skarecrowes in stead of men, I meen, vntrueths in stead of trueths to skare awaie simple men frō the blessed Masse as the Skarecrowes do the simple fowls and birdes from the corne, eche of thē making the poore creatures to thinke them to be that in dede they be not. That S. Iames setfurth the death of Chryste I well allowe, Three vntrueths in one cōparison of the Proclamers. and willinglie confesse but that the Masse of the catholique Churche ys none other then he reporteth, yt ys to manifest an vntrueth. And that my saing maie be iustified in the seight of all men, yt shall be made euident that ther D be here in this one place three vntrueths packt together. Firsthe saieth that the Masse of the catholique Churche hath onelie a nombre of dumbe [Page]gestures and ceremonies. Secondlie, that we our selues vnderstand them not. Thirdlie, that the Masse maketh no mencion of Chrysts death. E
1 As for the first, what face had he so to saie, sith ther be diuerse Fathers some of two or three, some of foure or fiue, some of seuen and eight hundreth yeares agon, whiche haue written in this matter, and haue geuen a reason of euery ceremonie in the Masse, and declared what euery of them do signifie, of whiche I haue named some alreadie, so that they be not dumbe ceremonies, but liuelie signifieng vnto vs godlie things, which here to reherse ys nowe no place. But as to his shame ther hath ben mencion made allreadie of some Fathers writing of these things: so shall ther hereafter, yf I be prouoked, to his more shame and confusion, a greater nombre be produced and the ceremonies also opened and declared. In the mean while this maie be to his shame, and the confusion of his vntrueth that notwithstanding so manie authours haue written and declared these things, that he either ignorantlie or maliciouslie saieth nowe that they be dumbe ceremonies. And yet to adde to these, this maie I saie, first, that in case we coulde not geue a F reason of euery ceremonie, might not the Proclamer, if he were godlie disposed, as well beare yt, as the Fathers of the Primitiue Churche who saied that of the gesturs and ceremonies then vsed, fewe coulde geue a reason or vnderstanding. Secondlie, that the gesturs and ceremonies of the Masse, are an hundreth folde more liuelie then the gesturs of their barren cōmunion.
2 His second vntrueth being more arrogant, then reprochefull ys in this first vntrueth answered. For wher he arrogantlie condemneth the wholl Church for this thousand year, that yt did not vnderstand the ceremonies of the Masse, besides that his saing ys verie false, for that diuerse fathers haue (as I saied) written therof, he wolde be demaunded what proof he hath to maintein this his maliciouse arrogant saing. Howe proueth he that all the Church did not vnderstand the ceremonies of the Masse? Had he commission from God to examine al the Churche that hath ben since the Masse was receaued? Hath he examined all the holie Martirs, all the holie Confessours the Bishopps, Doctours, Fathers, and all other holie learned men, that haue ben in all this time? Yf he hath not, howe dare he thus arrogantlie to pronounce G and condemne them of ignorance. O vane arrogant man. But let vs examine his third vntrueth.
3 In the third vntrueth he ys as impudent and shamelesse as he ys in the second arrogant. He saieth that the Masse maketh no maner of mencion of A brief explicacion of the liuelie represē tacion of Chrysts passionin the Masse. Chrysts death, wher yt doth not onelie contein the memoriall of Chrysts death by the consecracion, oblacion, and receauing of his blessed bodie and blood according to his institucion in his last supper, but also by outward ornamentes and gesturs expesseth all or most of the circumstances of his passion, as the albe with whiche the preist ys cloathed, signifieth the white garment that Chryste was sent in from Herode: the vestment signifieth the garment that he was mockt in, in the howsse of Pilate: the crosse vpon the vestiment signifieth the crosse of Chryste which the preist beareth on his back going to the aultar, in significacion that Chryste bare his crosse vpon his backe to the place of execution. And as Chryste was there lifted vpon the crosse: so hys bodie and blood consecrated on the aultar are ther to the liuelie remembrance of the same his eleuacion, eleuated, speaking (as yt were) H to vs this: As ye see this bodie and blood here lifted vppe distinctlie and sunderlie apart, so was this bodie once lifted vppe for yowe vpon the crosse, wher the side of the same bodie being peirced the blood for your redemption [Page 357]ran oute and was diuided apart from the bodie as here ye see yt apart A For the like admonicion the preist eleuating the blood of Chryste saieth: As often as ye dooe this, ye shall doo yt in the remembrance of me. That the Proclamer then saieth, that the Masse maketh no maner of mencion of Chrysts death, ys soch and impudent vntrueth, that a plain man will tearme yt a shamefull false lie. This place suffreth me not to answere euerie of his comparisons full. Wherfor I staie my self here, where moche more might be saied, and will breiflie touche the rest of his comparisons.
6 His sixt comparison ys this. S. Iames Masse was full of knowlege: Their Masse ys full of ignorance. As vain gloriouse men, hauing not plentie of victualls in their larders, for their glories sake will inuent some toie to supplie a dish and furnish the seruice, so this man ys nowe fain to runne to his Rethorike to make vppe a shewe of comparisons. But remembre, gentle reader, that in the conferences, and comparisons whiche I haue made at large, I haue declared the same knowlege that was in S, Iames Masse, to be in the Masse of the catholique Churche that ys nowe, forasmoche as in substance they be all one. S. Iames Masse B hath the knowlege of the consecracion of the bodie and blood of Chryste: so hath the Masse of the Churche nowe the consecracion of the bodie and blood of Chryste. In S. Iames Masse, the oblacion of them was made in the memoriall of Chrysts death: In the Masse nowe the oblacion of them ys made in the remembrance of his death. In S. Iames Masse was knowledge to offre the bodie and blood of Chryste and to make praier for the liuing and dead: in owre Masse ys the like. In S. Iames Masse was the knowlege of the receipt of the same bodie and blood: in our Masse ys the same bodie and bloode receaued. Howe then saieth this man that our Masse ys full of ignorance? Let him shewe, if he can what knowledge was in S. Iames Masse that ys not in the Masse of the Churche. Be well assured, Reader, that he can not. For as the Masses are in substance one and not diuerse: so be they in knowlege one and not diuerse. But this dishe he deuised for yowe oute of his Rethorike, of the same confection ys the next, whiche ys his seuenth comparison, C and saieth thus:
7 S. Iames Masse was full of consolacion: their Masse ys full of superstition. Here ye maie see his gifte of amplificacion. For he hath made a large shewe in tearmes, and done nothing in dede. I praie yowe, what consolacion was ther in Sainct Iames Masse that ys not in the Masse nowe? and what superstition ys in this, that was not in that? When yowe haue declared these two, and proued that yowe haue declared, then yowr amplificacion shall be somwhat in dede. In the mean while yt shall stand for a fume of vain woordes to helpe to fill vppe yowr vain sermon.
8 As for yowr eight comparison doth yowe small honestie, yt sheweth yowe were nere driuen, when yowe bring that in, for a newe comparison, that was brought in before. For what difference betwixt yowr third comparison, wher yowe saied that S. Iames ministred the Communion in his Masse to the people, and this, which with certein alteracion of woordes yowe make to appeare an other comparison, when yowe saie. When S. Iames D saied Masse the people resorted to receaue the Communion, wher in effect [Page]yt ys all one. But particularlie to saie to this comparison, what ys this against the goodnesse of the Masse, that the people resorte not to receaue? yowr E comparison ys altogether against the people that come not to receaue, as they did in the time of S. Iames, and not against the Masse, although yowe wolde haue yt sownde against the Masse, so furiouse ys the rage of yowre heresie to impugne the same, that yt forceth yowe blindlie to hitte other, when yowe thinke to sticke at yt. Yf yowe had saied, that when S. Iames saied Masse, the people resorted to receaue the bodie and blood of Chryste, but now when the Communion ys saied they come to receaue a bare morsell of bread, and a sippe of wine, yowe had made a newe comparison and a true.
9 Finallie he concludeth his comparisons thus: And to conclude S. Iames in his Masse had Chrysts institucion: They in their Masse haue wellneer nothing ells but mans inuencion. This comparison semeth couertly to denie the institucion of Chryste to be in the Masse, but plainlie yt doth yt not, fearing that then yt shoulde be reiected as a plain lie. For yt ys allreadie proued that in the Masse ys the institucion of Chryste. Wher he saieth, that yt hath wellneer nothing but mans inuencion: yf he tearme all things that the holie Gost hath appointed F to be sett furth by men, the inuencions of men, I can not skill of his inuencions. For certen I am that of the Masse, as yt hath ben receaued, no more but consecracion, oblacion, and communion ys of the institucion of Chryste, The order of the Masse was left to be disposed by the Apostles the rest by the institucion of the holie Gost, was added by the Apostles and holie men. For, as S. Augustine saieth, Chryste did not institute or appoinct after what maner his supper shoulde be celebrated, but he left that to his Apostles by whom he wold set his Churche in order. Wherfor the maner of the Masse being ordeined and appoincted at the instruction and mocion of the holie Gost, and the appoinctment of Chryste. yt becometh not the Proclamer so to abuse yt, and discredit yt with soche tearmes, calling the contents therof the inuencions of men. A man in whom were regarde of God, and his holie Church, wolde not so irreuerentlie, and so contemptuouslie speake of thinges, that yf they had not ben ordeind by the Apostles and men Apostolique, but had ben onelie made by godlie and vertueouse Bishoppes, and had continued in estimacion and reuerence more then a thousand years, might yt not haue be comed the proclamer reuerentlie also G to haue receaued them, and so haue tearmed them accordinglie? Yf his Cō munion had but one hundreth years of reuerend estimacion, he wolde not a litle triumphe of yt. But letting that passe as yt ys, he endeth his comparisons thus: Soche differēce yowe maie see betwen S. Iames Masse and their Masse. Soche ys the differēce for anie thing that he in these comparisons hath saied, that as before he was borne they were in substance all one: so be they still, and so will remain when he shall be rotten.
But where I haue made comparisons betwen S. Iames Masse, and the Communion of the Churche of this Proclamer and his complices, yowe maie see manifest and great differences, not by my woordes, not by toies of rethoricall inuencion, not by vntrueths, but in the things them selues, in their substanciall poincts, in matters of weight and trueth. For soche ys the Substācial dyfferēces of the Masse and the newe Cōmnuniō difference betwen S. Iames Masse (whiche ys the Masse of all the holie Apoles and fathers, and of the catholique Churche that hath ben or nowe ys, for in substance all ys one) and the newe Cōmunion of the newe Churche, H that first wher the Masse setting furth the matter of the Sacrament doth vse bread, wine and water, the newe Communion vseth no water, wherin yt [Page 358]doth neither folowe the Apostles, nor so well and liuelie set furth the death of Chryste, as the Masse. For as oute of the side of Chryste yssued oute bothe A blood and water, so the Masse in the latine Churche at the putting in of the water into the chalice, saith thus: of him be this water blessed, oute of whose sideo ran oute both blood and water. And the greke Church saieth, these woordes of the scripture: Et vnus militum lancea latus eius aperuit, & continuò exiuit sanguis & aqua. And one of the Soldiers perced his side with a speer, and furth with ther went oute blood and water: both well minding that blessed welspring of Chrysts side, oute of the whiche ran that clensing water and blood that washed awaie the filth of our sinnes. Here yowe see one difference in substance.
The Masse of the Apostles, Fathers, and catholique Churche (as ys saied) had intencion, and beleued that they folowing Chrysts institucion shoulde consecrate the bodie and blood of Chryste: The newe Communion of the newe Churche hath no soche intencion nor beleueth, no nor mindeth nor pourposeth to consecrate the bodie and blood of Chryste according to B his institucion. The Masse, as before ys saied, foloweth the institucion and cōmaundement of Chryste, who commaunded saing: This do ye in the remem. and consecrateth as he did, his verie bodie and blood: The newe Communion, neither consecrateth the bodie and blood of Chryste, neither abideth the name of consecracion, so farre ys yt from that Church either to obeie Chryste, or to folowe the church of his Apostles and Fathers. The Masse according to Chrysts institucion and commaundement, as ys proued, offreth his bodie and blood in sacrifice to the Father, in the remembrance of his passion and death. The newe Communion not onelie abhorreth this to do, but also detesteth both the name of sacrifice, and the name of him that hath authoritie to do yt, that ys, A preist. The Masse aswell of the Apostles as other offreth the same sacrifice, as yt ys also proued, for the liuing and the dead. The newe Communion of the newe Churche, deriding both, offreth neither for the one nor for the other. The Masse of the catholique Churche desiereth the aide and intercession of blessed Saincts to commende their seruice and praiers to God: The newe Churche skorneth yt, and C vseth yt not in their Communion. The Apostles and fathers with great reuerence and lowlie humblenesse came to an aultar semelie, as meit yt was, adorned to do this blessed oblacion and memoriall of Chrysts death. The minister of the newe Communion commeth Tapster like to a pelting table onelie to eate and drinke and to deliuer to a fewe mo a bare peice of bread and a cuppe of wine: so that the Apostles, and catholique Churche in their Masse fedde them selues and the people with the blessed bodie and blood of Chryste the fatt and the sine flower of the heauenlie wheat, and these feed them selues and the people with chaf and bran in respect, euen a bare peice of bread, and a cuppe of wine. Soche differēce ys ther, and soche maie yowe see betwixt the Apostles Masse, and the newe communion. And these defferences be in weightie matters and substanciall poincts, soche as the doing or refusing of them, bringeth life or death, heauen or hel, saluacion or damnacion.
Wherfor, Reader, looke well to thie doings, ther ys no dallieng in Gods, matters. For the Masse ther haue ben brought furth without all haulting or D colouring, withoute all dissembling and lieng the auncient presidents of the Apostles, of their Disciples and of the Fathers of the Apostolique and primitiue Churche, as plainlie, as truelie, and as simplie, as they be commended [Page]to vs by the books of our elders. As for the comparisons of the Proclamer, E besides, that they be but voluntarie deskant, they are toies, colours of Rethorik, cloaked vntrueths, setfurth withoute all authoritie. Nowe therfor, which ys to be embraced, whether the Masse commended to vs by so good authoritie, great antiquitie, long and reuerend continuance: or the newe Communion set furth without good authoritie and of no antiquitie, and neuer yet reuerentlie continued, yt ys of him that hath either grace or wisdom easie to be perceaued. Wherefor trusting that I haue sufficientlie instructed and warned the reader aboute the Masse, I ende and go forwarde in my matter.
THE FOVRE AND FOVRTETH CHAPT. RETVRning to the exposition of S. Paule, expowndeth this text. As often as ye shall eate of this bread &c. by S Hyerom and Theophilact.
IDoo here omitte the institucion of the Sacrament declared F by S. Paule to the Corinthians, as he had receaued the same of our Lorde, for that in the seconde booke those woordes of Chryste, and that his institucion ys largelie spoken of and expownded by a great nombre of holie learned Fathers. Wherfor I thought yt wolde be to tediouse to the reader, and superfluouse for me to expownde the same woordes here a gain.
I come therfor to the woordes immediatelie folowing in S. Paule. As often as ye shall eate of this bread, and drinke of the cuppe, ye shall shewe furth the death, of oure Lorde vntill he come. For that this text hath ben woonderfullie abused and by soche abuse manie of the simplie haue ben deceaued, and caused otherwise to thinke and beleue of the blessed Sacrament, than the trueh ys, I haue thought yt good to open the true vnderstanding of the same scripture to the reader, that he being instructed maie withdrawe his foote from the snares of Sathan, and well espie his falshoode, and so eschewe soch erroure, as he wolde entrappe him into. G
Vpon this text the ministres of Sathan haue grownded two argumentes against Chrystes reall presence in the blessed Sacrament. The one ys (as Two arguments of the Sacramentaries grownded vpon S. Paule. theie saie) that by this scripture yt ys manifest, that the Sacrament ys instituted for a memoryall of Chryst: A memoriall ys of a thing that ys absent. Wherfor the Sacrament ys a memoriall of Chryst that ys absent and not present. For (saie they) what neadeth a thinge present, anie memoriall? yt will cause yt self to be remembred. The Sacrament then being a memoriall of Chryst, argueth Chryst not to be present in the Sacrament, but to be absent. The other argument ys, that S. Paule calleth the Sacrament not the bodie of Chryst but calleth yt bread. For he saieth that as often as ye shall eate of this bread, and saieth not, as often as ye shall eate the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament wherfor (saie they) the Sacrament ys but breade and not the bodie of Chryst.
As touching the first, yt ys not true that Chryst did institute this Sacrament Solucions of the same argu. as a memoriall of him self or of his bodie, but of his passion and death suffred in his bodies. which thing S. Paule here by expresse woordes H doeth teache saing: As often as ye shall eate this bread, and drinke this cuppe ye shall declare or setfurth the death of our Lorde. So that the eating and drinking of this Sacrament ys not for a remembrāce or a memoriall of the bodie of Chryste [Page 359]in yt self, as the Aduersare falselie pretendeth, but ys (as ys saied) a memorial A of the passion and death suffred, as ys saied, in that bodie, which passion and Receipt of the B. Sac. ys not a memoriall of Chrysts bodie but of his passion and death. death be once doen actuallie, ād neuer shall so be again in that gloriouse bodie, but onely in mysterie. Wherfor the passion and death whose memoriall ys celebrated in that solemne instituciō of Chrystes Sacrament ys and euer shall be absent, and neuer present. And so ys the Sacrament the memoriall of a thing absent and not present, which thing ys the passion and death of Chryste.
As touching their second argument, true yt ys that S. Paule calleth the Sacrament bread, but will the Aduersarie therupon induce that S. Paule meneth materiall bread? euen bakers bread? Though he wolde so induce: yet he neither doth nor can so prooue yt, nor neuer shall. Bread he calleth yt, but Joan 6. S. Paulecalleth the Bl. Sacr. bread but he addeth withal the article this, to signifie a speciall bread. what bread? euen soch as Chryst the institutour of the Sacrament called yt whē he saied: Panis quē ego dabo, caro mea est, quam dabo pro mundi vita. The bread that I will geue, ys my flesh, which I will geue for the life of the world. Wherfor S. Paule did not barelie call yt bread, but with an article, saing: This bread. B As who might saie: As often as ye shall eate of this bread, which ys no common bread, but the bread of the flesh of Chryst, which as he gaue yt for the life of the worlde: So he did according to his promisse, geue yt vs to eate in the Sacrament, that we shoulde alwaies haue that his passion and death in minde. Therfore so often as ye eate of this bread, be ye mindefull of Chrystes passion, and remembre his death suffred for yowr redemption. Wherfor the wholl Chrystian church aswell the greke church as the latin immediatelie Woords of the Canōin the Masse. after the consecracion (as before ys declared) doe saie this in effect. Were therfor (o Lorde) being mindefull of the passion of thy Sonne our Lord Iesus Chryst doe offre vnto thee, &c. The wholl catholique Church by open profession of their duetie in the holie mynistracion declareth their obedience, and the fulfilling of Chrystes commaundement, in that they offring and receauing the blessed sacrifice of Chrystes bodie and bloode, be mindefull of the passion and death suffred in that same bodie, at the effusion of that preciouse blood. Thus ye see howe they abuse this scripture. For both S. Paules owne woordes, and also the practise of the wholl Church, doth declare that the holie C Sacrament was instituted as a memoriall of Chrystes death, and that yt ys not cōmon bread, by S. Paules owne woords, but yt ys (as ys saied) a speciall and singular bread noted with an article.
But that this trueth maie be proued, and therby their falshead the more confuted, I will also as I haue vpon other textes produce the expositions, ād vnderstanding of holie Fathers and doctours, that yt maie be fullie perceaued Hieron. in. 11. 1. Cor. how this scripture ys to be vnderstanded, not by phantasie, but by their sownde doctrines. And first we will heare sainct Hierom vpon the same text, who saieth thus: Ideo hoc saluator tradididit Sacramentum, vt per hoc semper commemoremus quia pro nobis est mortuus. Nam & ideo cùm accipimus à sacerdotibus commonemur, quia corpus & sanguis est Christi, vt beneficiis eius non existimemur ingrati. Therfor our sauiour deliuered this Sacrament, that by this we shoulde allwaies remembre that he died for vs. For therfore also when we receaue yt, What S. Paule calleth bread, S. Hieron calleth yt the bodie of Chryste. we are warned of the preistes, that yt ys the bodie and blood of Chryst, that we be not thought to be vnthankfull for his benefittes.
If this saing of S. Hierom be well noted, those two thinges, which I before D taught, shall be fownde to be taught of him also. I taught, according to sainct Paule, that the Sacrament was instituted for the memoriall of Chrystes passion and death, sainct Hierom saieth that Chryst therfore gaue furth [Page]the Sacrament, that we should allwaies remembre that he died forvs, so that yt ys the death of Chryst that ys to be remembred. I saied that though sainct E Paule in this text vseth this woord bread: yet he meneth not materiall bread but the heauenly bread the bodie of Chryst: so ys he vnderstanded of sainct Hierom. For he saieth, that when we receaue the Sacrament, we are admonished that yt ys the bodie and blood of Chryst. So what sainct Paule in the text calleth bread, that S. Hierom in the exposition calleth the bodie and bloode of Chryste. Nowe who doubteth but the expositions of holie doctours be to explain that that semeth in the text not to be plain, and so plainlie and clerely to open the trueth and the true meaning of the text. Forsomoch then as sainct Hierom doeth so here: we must nedes saie that by this woorde (bread) in this text of S. Paule, ys vnderstand the blessed bread of Chrystes bodie.
To S. Hierom, we shall ioin Thcophilact, to declare howe this scripture was vnderstanded in the greke Church. Thus he writeth: Hoc facite, quottes biberitis, in meam commemorationem. Per poculum isthuc (inquit) memoriam facis Dominicae passionis. F Theoph. in 11. 1. Cor. Quid tu ig tur solus bibis & mebriaris, tremendo isto calice omnibus ex aequo tradito? This doe as often as ye shall drinke in the remembrance of me. By this cuppe (saieth he) thowe makest a memoriall of our Lordes death, why thē doest thow alone drinke, ād arte dronkē seeing that this fearfull cuppe ys equallie deliuered to all. Thus Theophilact.
Se ye not that the cuppe of our Lordes table ys receaued in the remembrance of his death? But yt shall not be without profit to learn of him whie Cuppe of our Lorde a fearfull cuppe. he calleth our Lordes cuppe, a fearfull cuppe. Yf yt be but a cuppe of wine (as the Aduersarie saieth) yt ys not fearfull but pleasaunt. Why yt ys a fearfull cuppe yt ys declared of the same Theophilact expownding the text immediatelie going before, which ys this: Likewise when he had supped be tooke the cuppe, saing: This cuppe ys the newe testament in my bloode, vpon this text he saieth thus: Fuerunt & in veteri Testamento calices siue pocula, quibus sanguinem brutorum post victimam oblatam libarent. Pro sanguine itaque brutorum, qui vetus Testamentum veluti sigillo consignabat, meum ego nunc sanguinem pono, nouum Testamentum eo seu sigillo muniens. Ne turberis igitur sanguinem audiens. Nam si irrationabilium sanguinem pecorum accepisti G in veteri Testamento: quanto potius nunc diuinum? Ther were in the olde Testament also cuppes or pottes in the which after the sacrifice they should offre the bloode of brute beastes. Therfor for the blood of brute beastes, whiche did signe the olde Testament as with a seale, I nowe setfurth before yowe my bloode, signing therwith the newe testament as with a seale. For yf thowe hauest receaued the blood of vnreasonable beastes in the olde Testament, howe moch raither maist thowe now receaue the blood of God?
In this exposition I wish yt to be noted, howe the authour in the person of Chryst speaketh, saing: For the bloode of brute beastes I put before thee my bloode. Seist thowe then whie he calleth the cuppe of our Lorde a fearfull A plain place for the Proclamer. cuppe? Yt ys bicause owre Lorde in that cuppe putteth before thee hys owne bloode. And what blood ys yt? Ys yt the blood of a pure or onelie man? Naie saieth Theophilact, yt ys the bloode of God. For (saieth he) yf in the olde testament the blood of vnreasonable beastes was receaued, moch more nowe receaue thowe the blood of God. Perceaue thē that yt ys the blood of God that ys in the cuppe of our Lord. Wilt thowe fullie perceaue whie yt ys fearful? Cōsider ād H vnderstād that soch is the coniunctiō of the Godhead with the manhead in Chryst, that wher the māhead ys or any part of yt (if now yt maie beparted) [Page 360]ther ys also the Godhead. In the death of Chryst, the soule was parted from A the bodie: the soule descended into hell, the bodie laie in the graue: the Godhead was whollie with the Soule descended into hell, yt was also whollie with the bodie lieng in the graue: Euen so wher the blood of Chryst ys, forsomoch as Chryst ys both God ād mā, that blood ys the blood of God also ād so ther ys the blood of God ād mā, which now being inseparable both from the manhead and the Godhead of Chryst, wher the blood of God ys, ther ys also God himself. Nowe then forasmoch as in the cuppe of our Loord ther ys the blood of God (as Theophilact saieth) and where the bloode of God ys, ther of consequence ys also God: doth not Theophilact well in calling yt a fearfull cuppe? who maie not well feare to approche so near vnto hys Lorde God, and the more that he knoweth his owne filthinesse, and ther by his vnwoorthinesse? As nowe yowe knowe whie the cuppe of oure Lorde ys fearfull: so, what so euer the Aduersarie bableth to the contrarie, ye haue learned that in owre Lordes cuppe ys not bare wine but the blessed blood of God.
What shall I neede to alleadge anie mo of the sainges of Theophilact, seing he hath allreadie opened the trueth that we seke for namelie that the Sacrament B ys a memoriall of Chrystes passion and death, and ys also the same bodie Theoph. Ibid. and blood of Chryst that suffred. Yf any man will desyre anie other place let the same vnderstande that Theophilact expownding this place, as often as ye shall eate this bread, and drinke of this cuppe, ye shall shewe furth the death of our Lorde What we aught to thinke inreceauing the Bl. Sacr. vntill he come, saieth thus: Eo affectu debetis esse imbuti, perinde quasi in illa ipsa esse tis Christicaena, & ab ipso Christo acciperetis sacrum istuc. Illa enim ipsa coena est, & illam ipsam mortem annunciamus. Ye should be of the same minde, or so be haue yowrselues, as though ye were in the selfsame supper of Chryst, and shoulde take of Chryst himself this holie thing. Yt ys euen the same verie supper, and we shewe furth the verie same death. Yf ye will learn of Theophilact what Chryst gaue in his last supper, expownding Chrystes woordes rehersed by S. Paule, What Chryst deliuered in his last supper. he saieth thus: Ille verò in cōmune, & generatim omnibus dixit: Accipite, edite, idue corpus suum, quod pro omnibus ex equo fregit, in mortem tradens. But he in cōmon and generallie saied to all: Take, and eate, yea and that his bodie, which he brake equallie for all deliuering yt to suffer death. Thus Theophilact. C
Here ye perceaue by him, that Chryst gaue his bodie in his last supper. And if this doe not satisfie yowe, know that this Theophilact, as before ys shewed in the second booke, and ells wher, wher he expowndeth S. Matthewe, Marke, Luke, and Iohn, saieth that Chryst gaue in his last supper, his verie bodie, ād not an onely a figure of his bodie. By all this then yt ys euident, that Theophilact vnderstandeth by the woorde bread in S. Paule, the bodie of Chryst, and not materiall bread, and that that bread and cuppe are to be eaten and dronken of, not in the remembrance of that bodie in yt self, but in the remembrance of the passion and death suffred in the same bodie.
THE FIVE AND FOVRTETH CHAP. ABIDETH E in the exposition of the same text by sainct Basill and Rupert.
I Wolde haue staied my self, ād ceassed to haue produced aniemoauthours for the exposition of this text: but well knowinge that manie (as is saied) haue abused it and deceaued manie, I thought yt expedient, and necessarie for the helpe of the vnlearned, somwhat more to saie vpon yt, by the expositions of S. Basill and Rupertus. And whether we take a peice of bread in the remembrance of Christ, or whether we receaue the bodie and blood of Chryst in the remembrance that he suffred for vs in that bodie, and shedde that preciouse blood, we will Basilius de Baptismo. first heare S. Basill, who writeth thus: Oportet accedentem ad corpus & sanguinem Domini, ad rememorationem eius, qui pro nobis est mortuus, ac resurrexit, non solùm purum esse ab omni inquinamento carnis ac spiritus, ne ad iudicium edat, ac bibat, sed & euidenter ostendere & exprimere memoriam eius qui pro nobis mortuus est, acresurrexit. Yt behoueth A plain place for the Proclamer him that cometh to the bodie and blood of our Lorde to the remēbrance of him that hath died for vs, and risen again, not onely to be pure from all vnclennesse of bodie, and soule, least he eate and drinke to his owne condemnacion, but he must also euidentlie shewe and declare the memorie of him F that hath died for vs and risen again. Thus moch S. Basil.
Nowe wher S. Paule saieth, that as often as we eate of that bread, and drinke of that cuppe we must declare the death of Chryst S. Basill saieth that he that commeth to the bodie and blood of Chryst must remembre him that What S. Paule calleth bread, and cuppe S. Basil calleth the bodie ād blod of our lord. died for vs. So that what S. Paule in termes called, this bread and this cuppe, S. Basill geuing vs to vnderstand what S. Paule meneth by these termes speaketh by plain woordes, calling those thinges as they be in dede, the bodie and blood of our Lord. Likewise yt maie be perceaued that S. Basill folowing S. Paule teacheth that the Sacrament ys a, memoriall of Chryst as suffring for vs, ād not of Chryst in himself or absolutelie without respect of passion and death suffred for vs, which ys asmoch to saie as a memoriall doen in the remembrance of Chrystes passion and death agreablie to the sainges of other before alleadged.
Rupert also, whom we ioin at this present with S. Basill, doeth euen likewise vnderstand S. Paule. Thus he writeth: Sacramentum hoc, quo mors eius annunciatur (quemadmodum Apostolus dicit: quotitscunque manducabitis panem hunc, & calicem bibetis, Rupert. in cap. 26. Matth, G mortem Domini annunciabitis donec veniat) quando debuerat condi & dari, nisi sub ipsius articulo passionis. This Sacrament by the which the death of our Lord ys declared (as the Apostle saieth: As often as ye shall eate this bread, and drinke of thys cuppe ye shall shewe furth the death of our Lorde vntill he come) when should yt be made, and geuen furth, but euen at the verie poinct of the same passiō? In thys saing of Rupert, the one parte of our saing, namely that the Sacrament ys a memorial of Chrystes death ys clerely by expressed woords testified. The other part, that in the Sacrament the verie bodie and blood ys eaten and dronken Rupert. in a Joon. We cate the flesh and drinke the blood of Chryst in the remembrance of his death. to and for the memoriall of the same death ys not here manifestlie spoken? Wherfor we shall heare him in an other place vttering his knowledg in thys matter. Thus he saieth: Quod fecit ipse, hoc idem in commemorationem ipsius scimus, et bene scimus, nos facere, id est carnem ipsius manducare, & sanguinē bibere. That which Chryst himself did, we know and we wel know that we doe euen the verie same thing in the remembrance of him that he did, that ys to eate his flesh and drinke his bloode. H
Marke now the learning of Chrystes catholique Church, note nowe well what we eate and drinke in the remembrance of Chrystes passion [Page 363]and death. Iudge nowe whether S. Paule ment materiall bread as the Sacramentaries A wolde haue yt to be vnderstanded, and not raither the heauenlie bread of Chrystes bodie to be eatē in the remēbrance of his passiō ād death.
I haue now produced but fower, two of the greke Church and two of the latin Church, to geue vs vnderstanding what we ought to remēbre in the receipt All the rable of the Sacramentaries cannot bring one coople of catholike authours that saie S. Paule spake here of materiall bread. of the Sacrament, and what in that Sacrament we doe receaue, wherupon they all conclude that we receaue the bodie and blood of Chryst in the remembrance of his death, and so S. Paule ys to be vnderstāded in this place. Now let all the whol rable of the Aduersaries side bring furth but two, wheras we might (as the Aduersarie himself knoweth) haue brought manie mo, which for the auoiding of more prolixitie, wherin we haue allreadie offended we doe ouerpasse and omitte, that shal by expresse woordes expownde S. Paule in this place, that he ment not the bodie of Chryst, but plain materiall bread: Let them, I saie, bring but two catholique, approued authours, ād they shall haue the victorie. So weake ys their cause besides their owne asseueracion, that yt ys verie certen they can not bringe one. B
Although then this ys a trueth receaued of all the holie Fathers of Chrystes Church, and ys the doctrine of S. Paule, that the bodie and blood of Chryst be receaued according to commaundement in the remembrance of his passion and death, and so yt also cometh to passe, that the bodie of Christ euen the self same bodie in substance vnder the formes of bread and wine, ys Jnexpositiō verborum caenae. Obiectiō of Oecolamp. a figure of the self same bodie hanging vpon the crosse, and suffring passiō ād death: yet Oecolampadius after his Sicophants maner, he himself either of malice not willing to knowe, or ells plainlie ignorant, doeth accuse the learned men of Chrystes Church of ignorance, that they make the bodie of Chryst both the exemplar and the thing exemplified, the figure, and the thing figurated, the sign and the thing signified, for that (saieth he) relacion must be betwixt two thinges distincted, and not of one thing to ytself. For euery relatiue must haue a correlatiue.
To answere him for that I write to the vnlearned to instructe them in the faith, I will not vse the quiddities of schooles, neither with schoole tearmes The nnswer. so darken the matter, that the reader shall not vnderstand me, but I will vse C plain examples. And first, wher Oecolampadius saieth: that relacion must be betwixt two thinges distincted, did he not knowe that in the diuine persons Matth. 17 were sundrie relacions grownded vpon the one nature of God. But to come to examples in Chryst of whome we nowe dispute, was not Chryst transfigured in the mount, and shewing himself in a glorionse maner, was he not an Theoph. in 17. Math. Chryst one and the same in substāce hath ben, ys and shalbe a sigure of bim self in diuer se maners. exemplar or figure of himself now in glorie, and of his gloriouse cominge to iudgement? Theophilact saieth that Dignitas secundi aduentus in splendore faciei Christi ineffabili claruit. The dignitie or excellencie of the second cominge of Chryst did appeare in the vnspeakable brightnesse of the face of Chryst. So that Peter Iohn and Iames sawe now in his first coming an image of the glorie of Chryst that he shall come in his second coming. Then maie we see that the self same bodie in substance after one maner, maie be an exemplar or figure of the same bodie after or in an other maner. Chryst shewed his bodie to Thomas, and other the Apostles with the signes and tokens of his woundes, was not that bodie now immortall and impassible an exemplar of the same both mortall and passible? D Chrysosthom. decru & Latrone
The scripture saieth, that the wicked shal in iudgement see Chryst, whom they pricked and perced. For (as Chrysostom saieth) he shall appeare with his crosse and woundes in the face of the worlde. This ys his saing: Sed cur cùm [Page] cruce veniat videamus, scilicet vt hi, qui eum crucifixerunt, suae sentiant dementiae caecitatem E & ideo dementiae eorum signum portatur. Ideo Propheta ait. Tunc lamentabuntur tribus terrae, videntes accusatorem, & agnoscentes peccatum. Et quid mirum est, si crucem portans adueniet, quando & vulnera corporis ipse demonstrat. Tunc enim (inquit) videbunt quem compunxerunt. Et sicut post resurrectionem Thomae voluit diffidentiam commutare, & illi clauorum loca monstrauit, & laterum vulnera declarauit, & dixit: Mitte manum tuam, & vide, quoniam spiritus carnem & ossa non habet: sic & tunc ostendet vulnera, crucemque demostrabit, vt istum ostendat illum esse qui fuerat crucifixus. But whie he cometh with a crosse, let vs see, forsooth that they that crucified him maie perceaue the blindenesse of their madnesse. And therfor ys the signe of their Chryst shal come to iudgemēt with the signe of the crosse ād the printes of the woondes he suffred. madnesse caried. Therfore the Prophet saieth: Then shall all the tribes of the earth mourne seing the accuser, and they acknowleging the sinne. And what wonder ys yt yf he come bringing a crosse, seing that he himself doeth shewe furth his woundes. For then (saieth he) shall they see whom they haue pricked. And as after the resurrection he wolde amende the lacke of beleif in Thomas, and did shew him the places of the nailes, and opened the woundes of his sides, and saied: Put furth thy bande and see, that a spiritt hath not flesh and bones. So then also shall he shewe his woundes, and shall openlie setfurth his crosse in seight, that he maie shew F this man to be him that was crucified. Thus Chrysostome.
Seing then Chryst shall cōme to the generall iudgement with woundes ād crosse representing the state and condicion of himself somtime a passible ād a mortall man, he yet now being impassible, and immortall, and being soche an examplar of himself, as he shall cause the faithfull vpon the remembrance of that seight to reioice that they embraced his faith and receaued the benefett of their redemption wrought and doen vpon the crosse, and by the suffring of the woundes nowe ther shewed: and the wicked contrariwise vpon the same seight to waile and mourne that through their madnesse they contemned him, by whom they now perceaue they might haueben saued: Why maie not the same bodie in the Sacrament cause the faithfull nowe to their comforte as well to remembre the passion and death and their redemption wrought by yt, and so to be a memoriall to them, as yt shall be both to the faithfull and wicked at the daie of iudgement? At the daie of iudgemēt that same bodie shall be a memoriall and an examplar of yt self, yt being the same verie bodie in substance that yt was, but chaunged in maner, as ys saied? why G maie not the same bodie be now likewise to vs that be faithful, who by faith see yt as certenlie though in a darke maner, as then we shall see yt with open face? Of these kindes of examples ther be manie in the scriptures, but to him that will be satisfied these be sufficient. For by these yt ys made euident, that that Chryst in one maner of being, maie be a figure of himself in an other maner of being. Wherfore Chryst in the Sacrament vnder the formes of bread and wine, maie right well be and ys a figure of himself hanging vpon the crosse, and suffring for our redemption. Thus ye see the true vnderstanding of this scripture laied before yowe, oute of the holie doctours, and the cauills of the Aduersarie solued, which be against the same. Now to the next scripture.
THE SIX AND FOVRTETH CHAP. BEGINNETH A the exposition of this text: Who soeuer therfor shall eate of this bread, and drinke of the cuppe &c.
AS ye haue seen the scripture last handeled recouered from the wresting and wicked abusing of the Aduersarie: so by Gods grace shall yowe see this that foloweth. Thus ymmediatelie saieth S. Paule. Itaque quicunque manducauerit panem hunc & biberit calicem Domini indigne, reus erit corporis & sanguinis Domini. Whosoeuer therfor shall eate this bread, and shall drink of the cuppe of our Lorde vnwoorthilie, shall be giltie of the bodie and bloode of our Lorde.
After the Apostle had declared the institucion of the honorable Sacrament, and ther vnto had added the cause of the same, namelie that yt shoulde be doen in the remembrance of Chrystes passion and death, that neither the Corinthians to whome he wrote, who abused the same Sacrament, neither other chrystians shoulde thinke them selues to haue doen to B God, their high and due seruice if they onelie had receaued the same Sacrament as the memoriall of Chrystes passion and death, other circumstances not regarded, he goeth aboute to open vnto them two maner of receiptes, and the rewardes apperteining vnto them: that ys to saie, an vnwoorthie receipt, and condempnacion for the rewarde of yt: and a woorthie receipt, and grace ād glorie for the reward of yt. Forasmoch thē as their ys soch difference in receauing, meet yt ys that the difference be knowē, that we maie discerne, who ys a woorthie receauer, and who ys an vnwoorthie receauer. As woorthinesse and vnwoorthinesse be contraries, and therfor the one ys knowen by the other: So the woorthie receauer being knowen yt shall be easie to knowe the other.
TWoo thinges are required to a woorthie receauer, true faith and perfight charitie. For as Ignatius saieth: Fides est principium vitae. Charitas est consummatio. Jgnatius epla ad Ephesios. Faith and charitie together make woorthie receauers of the bless. Sacr. Hae duae simul iunctae, & in vnitate factae Hominem Dei persiciunt. Faith ys the beginning of life. Charitie ys the consummacion. These two ioined together C and made in one, doe perfect a man of God. As the one of these withoute the other doth not make a perfect mā in God: so the one without the other dothe not make a woorthie receauer. But if both be ioined together in the receipt of the Sacrament, then ys that man a woorthie receauer. Faith here spoken of ys not a peiced or patched faith, that beleueth one part of the catholique faith, and refuseth and other, but yt ys a true and an wholl faith. Wherfor heretiques be no woorthie receauers. Charitie here, ys not taken for that loue that a man flattereth him self to haue when he thinketh he loueth his neighbour: but for that charitie that S. Paule spake of, when he saied: Qui diligit, legem impleuit. He that loueth hath fullfilled the Lawe. This loue causeth a man to ioin in vnitie with God and man. Yt causeth obedience to an ordinarie power. Yt causeth a man also to flee all corrupt licenciouse, and voluptuouse life. Wher this charitie ys not, be his faith neuer so sownde he ys no woorthie receauer. Wherfor Scismatiques and contemners of ordinarie power, and voluptuouse or corrupt liuers be no woorthie Two things to be considered in S. Paules woordes receauers. D
Thus moche being saied of woorthie and vnwoorthie receauers, ther remaineth two other thinges in S. Paules woordes to be spoken of the one ys [Page]what ys receaued, the other the peine inflicted for vnwoorthie receauing. The thing to be receaued ys signified when he saieth: This bread, and the cuppe E of our Lorde. The peine, that he shall be giltie of the bodie and blood of our Lorde.
For the first, what the bread and the cuppe of our Lorde ys, yt was opened in the exposition of the last scripture, that S. Paule ment therby the bodie and bloode of our Lorde. Whiche exposition shall here again be verisied and iustified by a nombre of holie Fathers to the entent the trueth receaued in Chrystes Parliament house maie be well knowen, and the vntrueth of the aduersarie as well perceaued and seen.
The second, whiche ys the pein inflicted to the vnwoorthie receauer forasmoche as yt shall be plainlie opened and declared by soche auncient writers, as I shall alleage, I will to auoide prolixitie omitte to speake of yt my self and referre the Reader, to the expositions of the Fathers, For the whiche consideracion also forasmoche as S. Paule repeteth this text again, I haue thought good for the ease of the reader, to ioin them together in exposition F onelie letting him vnderstand the difference betwixt them, that in this text, the pein (as ys saied) of the vnwoorthie receauer ys declared, in the other both the pein and the cause also ys opened. Of both whiche full declaracion shall be made by the Fathers.
But before I entre into the exposition of these Fathers I wish the Reader The Sacramentaries abuse S. Paules woordes in two poinctes. to vnderstand that the Aduersarie hath also abused this scripture in two poinctes: The one that by cause S. Paule calleth the Sacrament bread. Therfor yt ys after yt ys consecrated materiall bread: the other, whiche ys more stowtelie then trulie mainteined, they saie that euell men doe not receaue the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament. These their wicked assertions by Gods grace shall be plainlie ouerthrowen. For yt shall be ineuitablie proued, that by the bread and cuppe that S. Paule speaketh of ys vnderstanded and meāt the bodie and bloode of Chryst, whiche being by S. Paule receaued of euellmen, yt must necessarilie folowe that euell men receaue the bodie of Chryst in the Sacra. And here maie we see the miserable strictes, that men teaching an vntreuth be brought vnto, who for the maintenāce of that vntrueth are G enforced to fall into manie moo. For the damnable heresie inuented against the presence of Chryst in the Sacrrment, they are compelled to denie the plain woordes of S. Paule, as ye shall in the processe perceaue. But let vs heare the holie Fathers agreeablie shewing their learninges and faith in vnderstanding S. Paule, of the whiche the first coople shall be saincte Cyprian and Origen.
S. Cyprian writing to certain Martirs and confessours, and lamenting the rash admission of certain that had offended to the recipit of the holie Sacrament, writeth thus of them so had admitted the offendours. Illi contra euan gelii Cypr. li. 3. epist. 15. legem, vestram quoque honorificam peticionem, ante actam paenitentiam, ante exomologesin grauissimi atque extremi delicti factam ante manum ab Episcopo & clero in paenitentiam impositam, offerre pro illis, & Eucbaristiam dare, id est, sanctum Domini corpus prophanare audent, cùm scriptum sit: Qui ederit panem, aut biberit calicem Domini indignè, reus erit corporis & sanguinis Domini. They against the lawe of the Gospell, and yowr commendable peticion, before they had doen penannce, before they had made confession of their most greuouse and extreame offence, before H anie hand was putt vpon them, of the Bishoppe and the cleargie vnto penance, they were so bolde both to offre for them, and also to geue vnto them the Sacrament, which ys as moch, as to prophane the holie bodie of [Page 363]our Lorde. Forasmoch as yt ys written: He that eateth the bread and drinketh A the cuppe of our Lorde vnwoorthilie, shall be giltie of the bodie and blood of our Lorde. Of this holie Father and martir, S. Cyprian, if yowe will learn what ys to minister the Sacrament to anie vnwoorthie person, yt ys (saieth he) to prophane to holie bodie and blood of our Lorde. That yt ys prophaned in so doing he prooueth by this scripture of S. Paule: He that eateth and drinketh vnwoorthilie shall be giltie of the bodie and bloode of our Lorde.
A thing ys prophaned, when yt being holie ys occupied aboute vnholie or cōmon vses. As a church dedicated to God to be made a stable. The ornamentes The practise of prophanaciō ys lament ablie to be seē in Englond. of the same to be applied to the vanitie of mans pride, as to make beddes hanginges or cooshinges. The plate of yt, as king Balthasar did with the plate of the temple to make them vessells for the bankettes of men. So the bodie of our Lorde, saieth S. Cyprian, ys prophaned forasmoch as yt being holie, ys cast into an vnholie thing, whiche ys the vnwoorthie receauer. Now if by the bread spokē of in S. Paules sentēce were not vnderstāded the bodie of our Lorde, to what pourpose should S. Cypriā alleadge that text, as therby to prooue the bodie of Chryst prophaned. That thing ys prophaned that ys deliuered and so abused. Yf thē not the bodie of our Lorde be deliuered B in the Sacramēt, but mere materiall bread, than ys the bread prophaned and not the bodie. But Cypriā saieth the bodie ys prophaned, wherfore the bodie ys deliuered.
And here I wish the ministers of Chrystes Churche to take hede, and to be verie circūspect, that they looke well to whō they ministre this holie Sacramēt, leest they be dot onelie giltie of the prophanaciō of the holie bodie of our Lorde: but also be in verie dede, not feeders, but deceauers, not deliuerers frō sinnes, but heapers and increacers ther of, as S. Cypriā saieth in the same li 3. epla. 15. epistle. Ea enim cōcedere quae in pernitiē vertāt, decipere est. Nec erigitur sic lapsus, sed per Dei offensam, magis impellitur ad ruinam. To geue or graunt those thinges that turne to a mans destructiō ys to deceaue. Neither ys the offēder so sett in good staie, but by the offēce of God, he ys more impelled to ruine. Which offēces, I meē as well of the ministre deliuering, as of the vnwoorthie receauer receauing, being well weighed of Chrisostome howe weightie, ād burdenouse thei be, he saieth thus of the deliuerie of the Sacramēt. Non permittā ista fieri animam C prius tradam meam quam Dominicū alicui corpus indignè. Sanguinem (que) meū effundi potius Chrysost. hom 83. in. 26. Math. patiar, quamsacratisssmum illum sanguinē praeterqā digno cōcedā. I will not suffer these thinges to be doē, I will first deliuer vppe mi life, rhē I will deliuer the bodie of our Lorde to anie bodie vnworthilie: And I shall suffer my bloode raither to be shedde, than I will geue that most holie bloode to anie other then to a worthie receauer.
Howe moche maie the sentences of these two graue auncient Fathers moue soche as be in the place of ministracion. Let them take heed that ministre to heretiques. Let them take heed that ministre to scismatiques. Let thē take heed that ministre to soche as they knowe to be in sinne or in the pourpose of sinnes: They were better with Chrysostom to deliuer vppe their liues, and shed their bloode, then to soche to deliuer the blessed bodie and most holie bloode of our Lorde.
Here with all, good Reader, note, that Chrysostome alludinge to this our text of S. Paule, and opening what S. Paule spake of ther, and what he ment bi the bread and the cuppe, calleth yt neither bread nor figure nor signe, but by plain and expresse woordes calleth yt with tearmes of honoure, that ys, D owre Lordes bodie ād his most holie blood. Again note if the bodie of our Lorde were [Page]receaued onelie bi faith (as the Sacramētaries doe saie) so that yt stood vpō the will of the receauer, according as he will measure his faith, not vpon the E power of God, and his woorde vsed in the consecracion: then wolde not Chrysostom saie that he wolde not deliuer the bodie and blood of our Lorde, for yt shoulde not lie in his power to deliuer yt, yf he haue yt not in the Sacrament to deliuer. But let these Sacramentaries saie their phantasies and let vs that loue Chrystes true faith folowe yt in the holie fathers, and let vs with Chrysostom beleue, that the ministers of Chrystes Church maie deliuer vnto vs the bodie and blood of Chryst. Whiche then must nedes be in the Sacrament. Orig ho. 6 in diuers.
But yt ys time to heare Origen S. Cyprians yockfelowe in this place, what light he geueth vs to vnderstand S. Paule. Thus he writeth: Quando sanctum cibum, illudue incorruptum accipts epulum, quando vitae panè & poculo fueris, manducas & bibis corpus & sanguinem Domini, tunc Dominus sub tectum tuum ingreditur. Et tu ergo humilians temetipsum, imitare hunc Centurionem & dicito: Domine non sum dignus vt intres sub tectum mecum Vbi enim indignè ingreditur, ibi ad iudicium ingreditur accipienti. When thow takest the holie meate, and that vncorrupte bankett whē thowe receauest the bread and cuppe of life, then our Lorde entereth vnder thie F roofe, and thow humbling thie self, folowe this Centurio ād saie: Lord I am not woorthie, that thow shouldest enter vnder my rofe wher he entreth vnworthilic, ther he entreth to the condemnacion of the receauer. Thus Origen.
Who willing the chrystian man to be a woorthie receauer of the holie Sacrament, he doeth first declare the greatnesse, the holinesse and excellencie of the Sacrament, and what he receaueth. Which doen as a meā to make a man to humble him self he moueth him, to the intent that he maie be a woorthie receauer, to folowe the humblenesse or humilitie of Centurio in acknoweleaging, and confessiinge his vnwoorthinesse, and the raither to cō passe this he feareth him from vnwoorthie receauing with the terrour of S. Paules sainge, whiche nowe we haue in hand, saing: where he vnwoorthilie entreth he entreth to the condemnacion of the receauer. In the whiche his godlie admonicion and exhortacion ye maie first perceaue with what woordes he doeth extoll the blessed Sacrament, with soche woordes trulie that if the bodie of Chryst were not ther, they coulde not so be applied. But he was certen of that blessed presence, and therfor he saied: when thowe G takest this holie meate, when thowe receauest this vncorrupt bankett, when thowe enioiest this bread, and cuppe, thowe eatest and drinkest the bodie and bloode of our Lorde. Secondlie, ye maie perceaue that receauing the sacrament ye receaue not a bare peice of bread, but the bodie of Chryst. For then (saieth Origen) owre lorde entreth in vnder thy roofe, mening that he entreth the house of thie bodie. Thirdlie, ye maie perceaue that the same our Lorde as he maie entre into our house of our bodie woorthilie; as he did into the house of Centurio: so maie he (saieth Origen) entre into owre house of our bodie vnwoorthilie. And if he so dooe, yt ys to the damnacion of the receauer. What S. Paule calleth the bread Origen calleth it the bodie of our Lorde.
Nowe conferre S. Paules saing and Origen togeather. S. Paule saieth, he that eateth this bread and drinketh this cuppe vnwoorthilie & c: Origen saieth wher our Lorde entreth vnwoorthilie & c: So that, what S. Paule calleth bread, and the cuppe of our Lorde, Origen openinge and declaring the minde of S. Paule, calleth yt as yt ys in dede, our Lorde. Thus for the vnderstā ding H of this text of S. Paule whiche the Aduersarie hath wickedlie abused, wrested, and distorted taking the Apostle to haue spoken of verie materiall [Page 364]breade: ye see these two pillers of the Church, and auncient Fathers of A Chrystes Parliament house teach the true vnderstanding receaued in that house in their time, which was verie near the primatiue church, that S. Paule did not ther speake of materiall bread, but of the bodie of owre Lorde, the heauenly bread.
Likwise the Aduersarie hath taught, that euell men receaue not the bodie S. Cyprian and Origē teache that euell mē receaue the bodie of Chryst. of Chryst, ye see that these two Fathers do auouche that euell men doe receaue the bodie of our Lorde. For S. Cyprian saieth that to geue the Sacrament to an vnwoorthy man, ys to prophane, not the Sacramentall bread (as the Aduersarie tearmeth yt) but the holie bodie of our Lorde. So that yt ys the bodie of our Lorde being a most holie thing that ys prophaned, bicause yt ys geuen to an euell man, which ys an vnwoorthie thing. Origen saieth also by expresse woordes, that wher our lorde entreth vnwoorthilie, he entereth to the condemnacion of the receauer teaching plainlie that our lorde entreth into the vnwoorthie man. Chrysostome also, whome by occasion I haue in this chapter alleadged, saing that he will raither yelde his life, and B shed his bloode, than he will geue the bodie of our Lorde and his most holie bloode to an vnwoorthie man: signifieth that yt maie be geuen to an vnwoorthie man. Yf nothing were deliuered but bread and wine, what neded Chrysost for small a matter raither to spend his bodie and bloode thē to deliuer yt? Perchaunce some one maie obiect, that Origen ys otherwise to be vnderstanded in this place, then ys here declared, bicause he in an other place by expresse woordes saieth, that an euell man can not eate the bodie of Chryst. To this obiection answere ys made in the xxx chap. of this booke, whether for the auoiding of prolixitie, I remitte the Reader, and procead to heare moo of the auncient Fathers of Chrystes Parliament house, to the entent, that we maie perfectlie learn the enacted trueth of the vnderstanding of S. Paule in this place.
THE SEVEN AND FOVRTETH CHAPT. PROCEAdeth in the vnderstanding of the same by sainct Basill and samct Hierom. C
FOr somoche as nothing doth more declare the trueth of anie matter called in controuersie in matters of our faith, then doeth the consonant, and accorde testimonie of maie holie learned Fathers, of sundrie times, places and ages, as well of the greke churche, as the latin churche: Therfor shall I proceade to bring furth mo of the holie auncientes of Chrystes Parliament house, that their agreement and concorde maie be perceaued in the vnderstanding of S. Paule. In the whiche, gentle Reader, trust me, thowe shalt finde so great consent, and so euident matter, that this alone shall suffice, to bring thee or staic thee in the matter of the blessed Sacrament, to beleue Chrystes verie reall presence ther, if Gods grace hath not forsaken thee, that thowe wilt willfullie or obstinatelie refuse to see the clear beames of the Sunne.
Wherfor to go to our matter note well this sainge of S. Basill who asketh this question, whether yt be withoute daunger, that anie man not beinge clean from all filthinesse of bodie and Soule, maie eate the bodie and drinke D the bloode of our Lorde: wherunto he maketh this answere: Quoniam Deus Basil. li. de Baptis. 2. ques. 93. in legè supermam paenam constituerit contra eum, qui immundicia audet contingere sancta, scriptum est enim, figuratè quidem illis, ad nostram verò commonefactionem. Et locutus [Page] est Dominus ad Moysen, Dic Aaron & filiis eius, vt attendant à sanctis filiorum Israel, & non contaminabunt nomen meum, quicunque ipsi sanctificant mihi, Ego Dominus. Dic ipsis E in familias ipsorum: Omnis homo, qui accesserit ab omni semine vestro ad sancta quaecunque sanctificauerint filis Iraël Domino, & immundicia ipsius in ipso: anima illa exterminabitur à facie mea. Ego Dominus, Tales minae propositiae sunt cōtra cos qui simpliciter accedunt ad ea quae ab hominibus sanctificata sunt, Quid verò quis dixerit contra eum, qui in tantum ac tale mysterium audèt? Quanto enim plus templo hic est, iuxta ipsam Domini vocem, tanto grauius & horribilius in inquinamento animae audere contingere corpus Christi, quàm attingere arietes aut cauros? Sic enim Apostolus dixit: Quare qui ederit panem, & biberit poculum Domini indignè reus erit corporis & sanguinis: Domini, Vehementius autem simulue horribilius proponit ac declarat condemnationem per repetitionem dum ait: Probet autem vniusquisque seipsum, & sic ex pane hoc edat, & ex poculo bibat. Quienim edit & bibit indignè, iudicium sibi ipsi edit ac bibit, non diiudicans corpus Domini. Si verò qui in sola immundicia est (immundiciae autem proprietatem siguratè ex lege discimus) adeo horrendum habet iudicium, quanto magis qui in peccato est, & contra corpus Christi audet, horrendum attrahet iudicium? Forasmoche as God in the lawe hath ordeined so greate a pain against him, that in his vncleannesse ys so bolde to touche the F holie thinges. For yt yt written figuratiuelie to them, but for aduertisement to vs. And our Lorde saied vnto Moyses, Saie to Aaron and his sonnes, that they take heed of the holie thinges of the children of Israëll, and whatsoeuer they shall sanctisie vnto me, they shall not defile my holie name, I am the Lorde. Saie to them, and to their families: A plain place for thr proclamer both for the presence and the excellencie of the bl. Sacr. aboue the Sacramets of the olde Lowe. Euerie man that ys of yowr seed, and cometh to the holie thinges, what soeuer they be that the childeren of Israell shall sanctifie to the Lorde, and his vnelenesse be vpon him, that soule shall be putte awaie from my sace. I am the Lorde. Soche threatinges are settfurth against them that onelie come to those thinges that be sanctified of mē. But what will a man saie against him that ys so bolde to come with his vnclennesse to so greate a misterie? Looke howe moche greater this (mening Chryst) ys then the temple, according to the verie saing of our Lorde: So moche more greuouse and horrible ys yt in the filthinesse of his soule to be so bolde to touche the bodie of Chryst, as to touche rāmes or bulls For so the Apostle hath saied: wherfor he that eateth the bread ād drinketh the cuppe of our Lorde vnworthilie, shall begiltie of the bodie and blood of owre Lorde. But more vehemēlie, ād also G more horriblie he doeth settfurth and declare the condemnacion by repeticion, when he saieth: Let euery man examin himself and so let him eate of this bread, and drinke of this cuppe. For he that eateth and drinketh vnwoorthilie, he eateth and drinketh his condempnacion, making no difference of our Lordes bodie. Yf then he that ys in vncleannesse onelie (the propertie of which sigurated vncleānsse, we haue learned of the Lawe) hath so horrible iudgement, howe moche more he that ys in sinne, and dareth to presume vpon the bodie of Chryst, shall drawe vnto him self horrible iudgement? Thus moche S. Basill.
Whoso doeth but superficiallie note this saing of his maie easilie perceaue the difference betwixt the lawe and the Gospell: Betwixt the vncleannesse so reputed in the lawe, and sinne reputed for vncleannesse in the Gospell, and figured by the vncleannesse in the lawe. But cheiflie the difference betwixt the sacrifice of the olde lawe, and the partaking of them, and the sacrifice of the newe lawe, and the partaking of yt: the excellencie also of this aboue that, and therunto agreablie, and to the solucion of his question, the greatnesse of iudgement and cōdempnacion to the euell partaker of the H holie sacrifice of the Gospell aboue the pain of the euell partaker of the sacrifice of the lawe.
But leauing the first twoo differences and to speake of the other twoo, for [Page 365]that they appertein directlie to the matter that we haue to speake of ye shall note that they be conteined breiflie, in this one sentēce wher he saieth: Howe Yf Chryste be receaued in the bl. Sace. but spirituallie, howe ean the sinner presume vpon the bodie, which he nor will nor cā receaue? A moche greater Chryst ys then the temple, so moche more greuouse and horrible pain remaineth for them that being defiled in the soule, dare touche the bodie of Chryst, than doeth them that touche but Rammes, and bulls? In whiche woordes the sacrifices of both lawes are expressed. The sacrifice of the olde lawe were Rammes, and bulls: The sacrifice of the newe lawe ys the bodie of Chryst. The euell or vnworthie partakers of the sacrifices of the lawe were soche as were vnclean with vncleānesse described in the lawe: The vnwoorthie partakers of the Sacrifice of the Gospell are soche as with deadly Sinne or the pourpofe of yt, being defiled in Soule, doe presume to receaue Chrystes bodie in the holie Sacrament. The pain of an vnwoorthie partaker of the Sacrifices of the lawe was death corporall: The pain of an vnwoorthie receauer of the sacrifice of the newe lawe (which ys the bodie of Chryst) ys death eternall. This he prooueth by the scriptures of S Paule, whiche we nowe haue in hand. For (saieth he) S. Paule saieth, Whosoeuer shall eate the bread and drinke the cuppe of our Lorde vnwoorthilie, shall be giltie of the bodie and bloode of our lorde. B
Nowe, gentle Reader, weigh with me I paraie thee, that wher S. Basil saied that so greuouse and horrible condemnacion shall fall vpon them, that with vncleannesse of soule presume to touche the bodie of Chryst, howe doth he prooue the same by this sainge of S. Paule, yf by the bread and cuppe therin spoken of, be not vnderstand the bodie and bloode of Chryst? Yt ys therfor most certē that holie Basil so aleading S. Paule, vnderstood him by the bread and cuppe to haue most assuredlie mēt that blessed bread of Christes bodie, and the cuppe of his holie bloode in the Sacrament. Basill was not so base in learning, nor so simple in iudgement, that he speaking of the vnworthie receauers of Chrystes bodie, wolde for the confirmacion of his sainge alleadge a text that speaketh but of a peice of bread, and nothing to his pourpose. No, he was of an other maner of learning and grauitie of iudgement.
As this text by his iudgement, ys vnderstanded of the bodie and bloode S. Basill vnderstandeth Sainct Paule to speake of the bread of Chrysts bodie. of Christ: So ys the other also, which (saieth he) S. Paule speaketh by repeticiō. C Vpon the which text he maketh like exposition, as he did of the other before, but in more compendiouse maner, saing thus: Si verò qui in sola immundicia est, adeo horrendum habet iudicium, quanto magis qui in peccato est, & contra corpus Christi audet, horrendum attrahet indicium? Yf he that ys in the vncleanesse of the lawe onelie hath so horible iudgement, howe moche more he that ys in sinne, and dare presume vpon the bodie of Chryst shall drawe vnto him horrible iudgement? In the wiche who seeth not that he, as one expownding and declaring S. Paules wordes, geueth vs to vnderstand that S. Paule by the bread meneth the bodie of Chryste? For wher S. Paule saieth, He that eateth this bread vnwoorthilie eateth his owne damnacion: S. Basill saieth: He that presumeth vpon the bodie of Chryst shall haue horible Damnacion.
A moche like questiō the same S. Basil moueth in the same booke, which also openeth the trueth of our matter. This ys the questiō Whether yt be withoute daunger that he that ys not pure in heart from an euell conscience and vncleannesse of life maie doe the office of a preist. In the aunswere of D which questiō he saieth thus: Dominus dicens: plus templo hic est, erudit nos quòd tanto magis impius est, qui audet tractare corpus Domini, qui dedit semetipsum pro nobis oblationem, & hostiam in odorem suauitatis; quantum corpus vnigeniti filij Dei excedit, arietes, & tauros, non in comparationis ratione, Incomparabilis est enim excellentia. [Page]Owre lorde saing: This man ys greater then the temple (mening him self) teacheth Let schismaticall ād irreuerent preists note well this saing of S. Basill. E vs that he ys so moche the more wicked that ys so bolde to handle the bodie of our Lorde, who gaue him self an oblacion and sacrifice of swete Sauour, as moche as the bodie of the onelie begotten Sōne of God doeth excead Rammes, and Bulls, not by the mean of comparison. For the excellencie ys incomparable. Thus ther. Of Sainct Basill in this place we learn, that the office of preists ys not (as the Aduersarie saieth) to handle a peice of Sacramentall bread: but to handle the bodie of our lorde euen the same bodie that the same lorde gaue an oblacion and sacrifice to God the Father in the Sauoure of swetenesse. And as that bodie incomparablie exceadeth Rammes and Bulls, whiche were figures of that blessed bodie: So doeth yt in cōparablie excead a peice of bread, being also but a figure of that bodie.
And here Reader if thowe be desierouse to knowe the trueth, note and marke well, howe great condemnacion commeth to them, that vnwoortilie handle the Sacrament, aboue them that vnwoorthilie handle the sacrifices of the olde lawe ād Testament. They are (Saieth Sainct Basill) as moche more wicked, as the bodie of the onelie begotten Sonne exceadeth Rammes and F bulls. Yf the vnwoorthie receauer of the Sacrament be so moche more wicked aboue the vnwoorthie receauers of the Sacrifices of the olde lawe, as the bodie of the onelie begotten Sonne of God exceadeth Rammes and bulls: yt prooueth well that the receauer of the Sacrament, receaueth the bodie of the onelie begotten Sonne of God, or elles why shoulde he be so incomparablie wicked, yf he did not wickedlie, receaue that bodie? Soche incomparable wickednesse, so greuouse, and exceading condemnacion can not be but vpō the abuse of an incōparable thing, which ys the bodie of Chryst, and not Sacramentall bread. The receipt of Sacramentall bread, ys but a receipt of a figure: The receipt of a figure, though yt be euell ys not incomparablie wicked. Wherfor the receipt of the Sacramentall bread though yt be euell receaued ys not incomparablie wicked: but the receipt of the Sacrament, yf yt be euell, ys incomparablie wicked. Wherfore the receipt of the Sacrament ys not the receipt of Sacramentall bread.
And here plainlie to saie yf the Sacrament were but a figure of the bodie G of Chryst and did not contein the same, whie shoulde the receauer of yt be Yf the bless. Sacr. be but a figure as the Sacramēts os the old lawe were, whie do the euell receauers offend so incomparablie? more wicked, and suffer more greuouse and horrible damnacion, then they that receaued the figures of Chryst in the olde lawe? And here Reader vnderstanded that by the doctrine of the Aduersarie, the Sacramentes of the newe lawe, are no better, then the Sacramentes of the olde lawe. Which yf yt be true, wheer ther ys equalitie betwixt the thinges themselues: ther ys the abuse, I mean the vnwoorthie receauing equall also. But to an equall abuse iustice inflicteth an equall pain. Wherfor for the abuse of the Sacrmentes of both lawes, ther shoulde be equall pain. But the pain for the abuse of both Sacramentes are not equall. For the pain of the abuse of this Sacrament exceadeth the other as farre, as the Sonne of God exceadeth Rā mes, and bulls. Wherfor the Sacramentes also are not equall. By that then that the pain of the vnwoorthie receauinge of the blessed Sacrament, so farre exceadeth the pain of the abuse of the Sacramentes of the olde lawe: yt H maie well be perceaued that this Sacrament incomparablie excelleth the other. And for as moche as S. Basill teacheth them to be as farre different, and as farre to passe the one the other, as the Sonne of God exceadeth Rammes, and bulls, yt ys euident that the thinges them selues be euen the same that he speaketh of, as abused by euell receipt. Wherbie also yt must nedes folowe, [Page 366]that the bodie of the Sonne of God ys receaued of euell men in the bless. Sacrament. A
But that ye maie heare him by most plain woordes teache as moche harken what he saieth in an other place: Si verò is qui fratrem propter cibum offendit Basil. de Bapt. li. 1. cap. 3 A plain place that euell men maie eate the bodie of Chryste and drinke his blood. But vnprofitablie. Ioan. 6. à charitate excidit, sine qua & magnorum donorum & iustificationum operationes nihil prosunt: Quidnam dixerit quis de eo, qui ociose, & inutiliter edere audet corpus, & bibere sunguinem Domini nostri Iesu Christi? Yf he that for meate offendeth his brother falleth from charitie, whitoute the whiche both the woorkes of great gistes, and also of iustificacions doe nothing auaill, what shall a man saie of him that idely and vnprofitablie dareth to eate the bodie and drinke the bloode of our lorde Iesus Chryst? What can the Aduersarie saie to this? Be not these woordes plain? Saieth not Basill that a man maie eate the bodie and drinke the blood of Chryst ydelie, and vnprofitablie? And who can eate the bodie of Chryst, and drinke his bloode vnprofitablie, but the euell and sinfull man? For of the good receauer Chryst saieth: Qui manducat meam carnem, & bibit meum sanguinem, habet vitam aeternam. He that eateth mi flesh and drinketh my blood, hath euerlasting life. B
But I haue taried long vpon Sainct Basill: I will therfor be short aboute Sainct Hierom, who ys placed with Sainct Basill to shewe the enacted trueth of the vnderstanding of Sainct Paule in the latin Church, as the other hath doen in the greke Churche. Thus writeth Sainct Hierom vpon this verse of the psalme: Adhuc escae eorum erant in ore ipsorum, & ira Dei descendit supercos. Hieron. in Psal. 77. While the meat was yet in their mouthes the wrathe of God fell vpon them. Haec de his qui Deum past acceptnm Manna dereliquerunt. Nam nunc in Ecclesia si quis carne & sanguine Christi reficitur, & declinat ad vitia, nouerit iudicium Dei sibi imminere, sicut Paulus Apostolus ait: Qui acceperit corpus & sanguinem Domini indignè, reus erit corporis & sanguinis Domini. These woordes be spoken of them, A plain exposition of S. Paules woordes for the Proclamer. that did forsake God, after they had receaued Manna. For nowe in the Church yf anie man be fedde with the bodie and bloode of Chryste and doeth decline to vices, let him knowe that the iudgement of God ys at hand, as the Apostle Paule saieth: He that taketh the bodie and bloode of our lorde vnwoorthilie, shall be giltie of the bodie and bloode of our lorde. C
Marke here the saing of Sainct Paule reported by Sainct Hierom, and so shalt thowe see the verie minde and true vnderstanding of Sainct Paules sentence, whose vnderstanding we nowe seke. S. Hierom saieth, that S. Paule saieth thus: He that taketh the bodie and bloode of our Lorde vnworthilie, shalbe giltie of the bodie and bloode our lorde. In dede, as yt ys allreadie often rehersed, the woordes of Sainct Paule be not soche: yet Sainct Hierom saieth he saieth so, bicause in verie dede, the authour saieth that, that Sainct Paule doeth meen. As when Chryst did saie: Destroie this Temple, and in three daies I Ioan. 2. will reedifie yt, The Iewes according to the outward sownde of the woordes, saied: that he spake that saing of their verie Temple. But the Euangelist well knowinge the minde of his master, saied: Hoc autem dicebat de templo corporis sui. This he saied, of the temple of his bodie Nowe yf a man shoulde saie, that Chryst saied. Destroie ie or kill this my bodie and in three daies I will raise yt vppe again, he shall with the Euangelist saie the trueth of Chrystes saing, though Chrystes woordes were not the same woordes: yet Chryst did so D saie bicause he did so meen: So likewise here doth Sainct Hierom. Sainct Paule speaketh of bread, as Chryst did of the Temple. The Iewes tooke him to haue spoken of the verie materiall temple, as the Sacramentaries doe Sainct Paule of materiall breade But as the Euangellst testifieth that
solde, that he might, haue remission of his sinnes, yf he wolde not haue had E ben wicked. For Iudas was present, and was partaker of that sacrifice. Thus farre he.
In these woordes that Chrisostō saieth that Chryst offred Iudas the blood that he solde, ys both taught vs the presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode in the Sacrament, and also that euell persons doe receaue the same. For as Iudas: so all like vnto Iudas. And let these woordes (gentle Reader) be well noted of thee, that Chrisostome saieth, that Chryst gaue Iudas the blood that the solde. Yf he gaue him that he solde, he gaue him his verie blood, and not the figure of his bloode. For not the figure, but he blood yt self was solde. Wher also in the ende of this place nowe alleaged, Chrisostom saieth, that Iudas was present at the last Supper, and was partaker of the Sacrisice, these twoo pointes nowe here inquired, are reuiued, and the trueth of them to vs confirmed. For the sacrifice offred in the last Supper by Chryst, was the sacrifice of his bodie, as before in the first, and second, and also in this thirde booke yt ys euidentlie prooued, and here also by Chrisostom signified. Wherbie we are taught that the bodie of Chryst ys present in the Sacrament, and F Iudas was at Chrystes supper and receaued there &c. so Iudas being a partaker of that sacrifice, was (though he were a traditour and a wicked man) a receauer of the bodie of Chryst. Which being so, yt maie be concluded that euell and wicked men maie receaue the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament.
Allthough this that ys produced oute of Chrisostom maie fullie satisfie anie man, for that yt ys euident and plain: yet that yt maie be perceaued by that he speaketh the same in sondrie places, that yt was a trueth assured and commonlie receaued, I will touche a place or two moo of his. Of the whiche this ys one. Nullus igitur fictus accedat, nullus fucato animo tantis audeat mysterijs proximare ne condemnetur, & sententiam mereatur, & quod Iudas sustinuit patiatur. Nam in illum post communicationem mensae Diabolus intrauit, non quia contempsit Dominicum corpus, sed quia impudentia Iudae & malignitas mentis, vt aduersarius Sathan entred into Iudas not in contempt of the bodie of Chryste but to punish the treason of Iudas. in eo habitaret, essecit. Let therfore no feigned man come, let none be so bolde with a counterfeit minde to come neare so great misteries, lest he G be condemned, deserue sentence, and suffre that that Iudas suffred. For after he had partaken of Chrystes table, the Deuell entred into him, not that he contemned the bodie of our Lorde, but bicause the impudencie of Iudas, and the mischeif of his minde had caused that the Deuell shoulde dwell in him.
Wher Chrisostome saieth that after Iudas had receaued, the Deuell not contemning the bodie of Chryst, entred into him: what ells therby doeth he teach, but that Iudas receaued the bodie of our Lorde. For yf he did not receaue yt, Chrisostom neded not to declare that the Deuell entred not vpon contempt of the bodie of Chryst, For what contempt shoulde he seme to make to the bodie of Chryst, by entring into Iudas yf the bodie of Chryst entred not into that person before. Yf anie contempt shoulde appeare to be in that entrie, yt shoulde be that that wicked Aduersarie, and miserable damned creature shoulde presume to entre to that place wher his Lorde and master had so latelie entred. But (saieth Chrisostome) H he did not so entre, as contemning the bodie of our lorde, but raither to the punishement of his detestable treason, doen and committed against his master. And for his presumption then vsed, that he being defiled [Page 368]with soche trecherie, wolde with dissimuled holinesse and loue receaue A into his filthie and sinfull bodie, that pure and innocent bodie. And so the Deuell entred as a subiect whom God suffred for the torment of Iudas his mischeif, and not as a Lorde by power to contemne the Lorde of all Lordes ther entred. Chris. hom. 83. in 26. Math.
A like sentence hath he in an other place whiche ys this: Caenantibus autem eis, accepit Iesus panem & benedixit, atque fregit, & dedit Discipulis suis. O caecitatem proditoris, qui cùm ineffabilibus mysterijs communicasset, idem permansit, & diuina mensa susceptus in melius commutari noluit, quod Lucas significauit dicens: Quia post hoc introiuit in cum Satanas, non quia dominicum corpus despiceret, sed quia proditoris stoliditatem irridebat. When they were at Supper Iesus tooke bread, and blessed yt, and brake yt, and gaue yt to his disciples. O the blindenesse of the traditour, who when he had taken of the vnspeakeble misteries, he remained the same man, and being allowed at Gods table, he wolde not be chaunged into better, whiche thing Luke signified sainge: that after that Sathan entred into him not bicause he despised the bodie of our Lorde, but bicause he skorned the leudnesse of the traditour. B
Here again ye see, as before, that the Deuell despised not the bodie of Sacramentall bread and wine be not vnspeakeable misteries. our Lorde receaued of Iudas, though he entred into him after yt. That he had receaued yt, these woordes of Chrisostom goinge a litle before, doe well declare, when he saieth: When Iudas had taken of the vnspeakeable misteries, he remained all one man. Whiche be the vnspeakeable misteries? not a peice of bread, and a cuppe of wine, receaued as signes and tokens of the bodie and bloode, For so these Sacramentes be not vnspeakeable misteris, but the matter ys well able to be spoken of, as other figures of the olde lawe were, whiche by the doctrine of the Aduersarie be as good as this, and this no better then they. Yf then the figures of the olde lawe were not vnspeakeable misteries (as in dede they were not) then be these figures of bread and wine no vnspeakeable misteries. Yf bread and wine as onelie figures be no vnspeakeable misteries, and Iudas in Chrystes Supper receaued vnspeakeble misteries then he receaued not bare bread and C wine. Yt remaneth then that he receaued the bodie and blood of Chryst vnder the formes of bread and wine, whiche in dede be vnspeakeable misteries. For neither can reason atteign the knowledge of the worke of the holie Gost herein, nor toung speake and expresse the same, but onelie faith, as Damascen saieth: Deus spiritus sancti operatione haec super naturam Damnasc. li. 4. ca. 14. operatur, quae non potest capere, nisi sola fides. God by the operacion of the holie Gost woorketh these thinges aboue nature, wich thinges onely faith can vnderstand. Wherfor thus speaking of the holie misteries, we manie well call them vnspeakeable misteries, whiche vnspeakeable misteries, Chrisostom August. epictola cont. Donatist. post collation. S. August reporteth the woordes of S. Paule as S. Hier. and Chryso. did before. saieth that Iudas did receaue.
The like are we taught of Sainct Augustine, but we will first heare him geue vs his vnderstanding of the saing of Sainct Paule which he doeth without all circumstance euen by plain woordes, as other haue doen before him. Thus he writeth against the Donatists. Quisquis autem in hac Ecclesia bene vixerit, nihil ei praeiudicant aliena peccata, quia vnusquisque in ea proprium onus D portabit, sicut Apostolus dicit. Et quicunque corpus Christi manducauerit in dignè, iudicium sibi manducat, & bibit. Nam & ipse Apostolus hoc scripsit. Whosoeuer shal liue wel in this Churche, other mens sinnes shall nothing hinder him. For in her [Page]euerie man shall beare his owne burden, as the Apostle saieth. And in her whosoeuer E shall eate the bodie of Chryst vnwoorthilie, eateth and drinketh his owne condēnacion. For the Apostle himself hath written this.
Note in this sainge howe Sainct Augustine vttereth the sainge of Sainct Paule, he saieth not whosoeuer eateth the bread, but as an expositour, whose office ys to geue light to the text, yf anie part of yt be darke, and to geue the true sense of woordes that maie be diuerselie vnderstanded he expowndeth the text and openeth yt, and plainlie teacheth vs that by bread ys vnderstanded the bodie of Chryst. Wherfore by plain wordes he speaketh Sainct Paules sentence, sainge: Whosoeuer shall eate the bodie of Chryste vnwoorhilie &c.
Thus maie ye see the true vnderstandinge of this scripture and by yt maie ye learn that Sainct Augustine vnderstoode that in the Sacrament ys the verie bodie of Chryste, and that euell men though to their condemnation receaue the same. of whiche bothe, Sainct Augustine saieth again. Sicut enim Cont. donatist. lib. 5 cap. 8. Iudas cut buccellam tradidit Dominus, non malum accipiendo, locum in se Diabolo praebuit: sic indignè quisque sumens Dominicum Sacramentum, non essicit, vt quia ipse malus est, malum sit, aut quia non ad salutem accipit, nihil accipiat. Corpus enim Domini, & F sanguis Domini nihilominus erat etiam illis, quibus dice bat Apostolus: Qui manducat & bibit indignè iudicium sibi manducat & bibit. As Iudas to whome our lorde gaue a morsell, not taking an euell thing, but euell takinge the thinge, gaue place to the deuell in himself: So anie man receauinge vnwoorthiely our Lordes Hell gates cā not preuail against these places, let the Proclamer well consider them. Sacrament, causeth not, bicause himself ys euell, that yt shoulde be euell: or bicause he receaueth yt not to saluacion, that he receaueth nothinge. For yt was neuerthelesse the bodie of our Lorde, and the bloode of our Lorde also vnto then to whom the Apostle saied: he that eateth and drinketh vnwoorthily eateth and drinketh his owne condemnation. Thus moche Sainct Augustine.
Yt ys nowe to be remembred that the Aduersarie denieng the reall and substanciall praesence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, ys compelled for the mainteinaunce of that his wicked heresie, to saie that Chrystes bodie ys receaued spirituallie, that ys, that the grace, the vertue, and the meritte of Chrystes passion suffred in the same his bodie, ys receaued. And for that these G benefittes be not receaued of an euell man, as beinge an euell man, therfor he mainteineth an other wicked heresie against the scripture, and the holie Doctours, that euell men receaue not the bodie of Chryst. For the confutacion of whiche euell doctrine, as the liuelie and plain sentences of holie Fathers haue ben produced: So nowe speaketh S. Augustine as plainlie against yt. For he contented not himself onelie to saie that euell men receaue the Sacrament A [...] vnto Iudas yt was the verie bodie and blood of Chryste that he receaued So yt ys to all other yll receauers. Angu. in Ioan tract. 26. of our Lorde, Whiche woordes the Aduersarie wolde haue wrested to his pourpose, but by expresse woordes he saieth that ys was the bodie of our Lorde, and the bloode of our Lorde vnto them also, of whom the Apostle saied: he that eateth, and drinketh vnwoorthilie &c. Nowe what they be that receaue vnwoorthilie, yt neadeth no declaracion, being manifest that they be euell men. And thus by S. Augustine yt ys taught, that the verie bodie of Chryst beinge in the Sacrament, ys receaued of euell men: And although this place of S. Augustine ys so euidentlie gainst them: yet in an other place he presseth them so strictlie, that they haue no refuge, and yt ys this. Quantum autem pertinet ad illam H mortem, de qua terret Dominus, quia mortut sunt patres eorum. Manducauit Manna & Moises, manducauit Manna & Aaron: manducauit Manna & Phinees, manducauerunt & multi, qui Domino placuerunt, & mortui non sunt. Quare? quia visibilem cibum spiritualiter intellexerunt, spiritualiter esurierunt, spiritualiter gustauernnt, vt [Page 369] Spiritualiter satiarenter. Nam & nos hodie accepimus visibilem cibum. Sed aliud est Sacramentum, A aliud virtus Sacramenti, quam multi de altari accipiunt, & moriuntur, & accipiendo moriuntur. Vnde dicit Apostolus: Iudicium sibi manducat & bibit. As touching that deathe, of the whiche our Lorde saieth: that their Fathers be dead: Moises also did eate Manna, and Aaron did eate Manna, and Phinees did eate Manna, and manie did eate, whiche pleased our Lorde, and they died not. Whie? Bicause they vnderstoode a visible meate spirituallie: They did spirituallie hungar yt, they did spirituallie eate yt, that they might be spirituallie satisfied. And we also this daie haue taken a visible meate. But the Sacrament ys one thinge, and the vertue of the Sacrament an other thing, whiche vertue manie doe receaue at the Aultar and doe die, and in receareceauing yt doe die. Wherfor saieth the Apostle. He eateth and drinketh his damnacion. Thus farre he.
Note here the distinction that S. Augustine maketh betwixt the Sacrament, and the vertue of the Sacrament sainge, that the Sacrament ys one thinge, and the vertue of the Sacrament an other. Then of the vertue of the Sacrament he saieth, that manie receaue yt at the Aultar, and doe die meaning according to the saing of the Apostle, that receauing yt vnwoorthilie B they die in the Soule, eating and drinking their owne damnacion. Nowe wolde yt be learned of the Aduersarie, howe he will vnderstand S. Augustine in this woorde (Vertue.) First certen yt ys, that yt ys not taken for the Sacramentall Vertue of the blessed Sacr. what yt ys, and that euell men reccaue yt. bread. For that ys the other membre of the distinction. Then must yt either be taken for the vertue of the passion of Chryst, or for the bodie of Chryst yf self. For in the Sacrament be no more but these three to be receaued: The Sacrament, the bodie of Chryst, and the vertue of his passion. Yt can not be taken for the vertue of Chrystes passion, for that ys not nor can not be death and damnacion to the receauer in the receauing, but life and saluacion. This vertue that S. Agustine speaketh of ys soche, that manie doe die in the receauing of yt. Yt remaineth then that by this vertue of the Sacrament, ys vnderstanded the bodie of Chryst, whiche manie by vnwoorthie receauing doe wickedlie abuse, and so receauing kill their soules, and die the deathe that Iudas did. C
What shall I tarie in the rehersall of Sainct Augustines sainges that touche this matter? They were euough to make a iust volume. Wherfor omitting manie, I will ende with one, whiche also expowndeth this our text: Thus he saieth: Recordamini vnde sit scriptum: Quicunque manducauerit panem, aut biberit calicem Domini indignè, reus erit corporis & sanguinis Domini. Et de iss erat sermo, cùm Apostolus August. in Ioan. tra. 6. hoc dicerit, qui Domini corpus velut quemlibet alium cibum indiscretè, necligenter ue sumehant. Remembre from whence yt ys written: Whosoeuer shall eate the bread, and drinke the cuppe of our Lorde vnwoorthieli, shall be giltie of the bodie and bloode of our Lorde. For when the Apostle saied this, he spake yt of them, Whiche receaued the bodie of our Lorde vndiscreetlie and necligentlie, as they wolde doe anie other meat.
Marke this well that Sainct Augustine saieth plainlie that Sainct Paule spake this of them that necligentlie and vndiscreetlie receaued, not a peice of Sacramentall bread, but the bodie of our Lorde. Then yt ys manifest that the bodie of our Lorde ys receaued in the Sacrament, and that D yt ys also receaued by the testimonie of Sainct Augustine of negligent and vndiscreet persons, whiche make no differēce of the bodie of our Lorde. To make no differēce, saieth S. Augustine, ys, non discernere à ceteris cibis diuinū corpus. to make no differēce of the bodie of our Lorde from other meates, but euen [Page]as wewolde with polluted cōsciences eate prophane meates, ād with pourpose of sin ne, without repentāce or pourpose of amendmēt of life, receaue our E bodilie foode, so receaue the bodie of our Lorde. In whiche fewe woordes again S. Augustine teacheth the bodie of Chryst to be receaued of euell persons. Thus ye haue the mindes of Chrysostome and Sainct Augustine in the vnderstāding of S. Paule,? which bothe vnderstand him to haue spoken of the bodie of Chryste, as the catholique Churche teacheth, and not of Sacramē tall bread, as the malignaunt Churche feigneth. Thus moche being doen we shall with like spede heare other that remain, that the trueth of Chrystes faith maie be seen to the confusion of the enemie.
THE NINE AND FOVRTETH CHAP. CONtinueth the same exposition by Isichius and. Sedulius.
SAinct Augustine writing against the Manicheis (in whiche sect he was by the space of nine years pietifullie deteined, and deluded) F perceaued after his conuersion one great cause of the continuance of manie in that heresie, to be, that they wolde not heare the holie learned doctours and Fathers of the Churche. Wherfor to remoue them from that euell minde, he thus wrote to them: Audite doctos catholicae Ecclesiae Viros tanta pace animi, & eo voto, quo ego vos audiui. Nihil opus erit nouem annis, quibus Aug. de morib. Eccl. cap. 25. me ludificastis. Longè omnino, longè beuiore tempore, quid intersit inter veritatem vanitatemue, cernetis. Heare ye the learned men of the catholique Churche, with so moche quiettnesse of minde, and with that desire, that I heard yowe. Ther shall not nede the nine yeares, in the whiche ye mocked me. In a shorter time, yea in a moche shorter time shall ye see, what difference ys betwixt veritie and vanitie. Euen thus doe I wish that they that haue ben deluded with vain perswasions, and haue ben therbie insnared and entrapped in the heresie of the Sacramentaries, wolde with as good will heare the learned Fathers of Chrystes Churche, as they haue hitherto hearde them, that haue deceaued them. And I nothing doubte but yf they will so doe, ād with deuoute praier G to God for grace assistent, and with humblenesse of minde, enkindled with feruent desire (all affection sett aparte) Learn and knowe the verie trueth, but that they shall sooen discerne betwixt veritie and vanitie.
Sixe nowe haue ben alleadged of the auncient and right famouse Fathers, The Proclamer required one plain sentē ce, he hath had nowe these sixe and manie nio before, ād herester yet mo shal haue. whiche all with great and goodlie consent, haue expownded the woordes of Sainct Paule, to be vnderstanded of the bodie of Chryst. Whiche expositions be not settfurth with obscurities in doubtfull maner, as they maie seme to be vnderstanded diuerse waies (whiche maner of sentences the Aduersarie doth produce to maintein his heresie) But they are clere plain, and easie to be vnderstanded in their right sense, so, that they can not be drawen to anie other sense. And therfor let the Proclamer looke well vpon these expositions of these sixe Fathers past, and he shall perceaue that they by expresse woordes teache that the bodie of Chryst ys in the Sacrament, and ther receaued both of good and euell men, whiche thinge he shall see H also taught of sixe other or mo. And therfor let him for shame recant, and call in again his arrogant sainge, that the catholique Churche hath not one scripturē, nor one doctour. For I doubte not but by the iudgement of them that shall reade this worke, that his sainge shall be prooued to be as false as vain.
[Page 360]Of these that yet remain to be alleaged, the first coople shall be Isichius and Isich. in Leuit ca. 26. A Sedulius. Isichius hath this sainge: Propter quod sanctuarium eius paueamus, vt nec corpus nostrum polluamus, nec ad corpus Christi, in quo est omnis sanctificatio (in ipso enim omnis plenitudo inhabitat diuinitatis) sine subtili dijudicatione nostri, temerè accedamus, sed potius nosmetipsos probemus, reminiscentes eius qui dixit: Quicunque manducauerit panem aut biberit calicem Domini indignè, reus erit corporis & sanguinis Domini. Wherfor Jsich. vnderstādeth S. Paule to haue speken of the bodie of Chryste, let vs feare his holie place, that we neither defile our owne bodie, nor rashlie come to the bodie of Chryst, in the whiche ys all sanctificacion (For in him abideth the fullnesse of the Godhead) withoute diligent examinacion of our selues. But raither let vs trie our selues remembring him that saied: Whosoeuer shall eate the bread, ād drinke the cuppe of our Lorde vnwoorthielie, shall be giltie of the bodie and bloode of our Lorde.
Howe this Authour vnderstandeth S. Paule, yt ys withoute great studie to be perceaued. For he exhorting vs to come with great examinacion of our selues, with puritie and cleannesse of bodie and soule to the receipt of Chrystes bodie, vseth for the place of his authoritie the sainge of S. Paule nowe in hand: Whōsoeuer eateth the bread, and drinketh the cuppe of our Lorde vnwoorthielie, shall be giltie of the bodie, and bloode of our Lorde. Wher in (as the other Fathers B haue doen before) what Sainct Paule calleth the bread of our Lorde, that doeth he by explaining woordes, call the bodie of Chryste. And that we shoulde not take yt for a figuratiue bodie, but for the verie true and self same bodie of Chryst, and therwith to stirre vs to haue the more regarde to our duetie, as with all honour and reuerence to come to yt, he saieth that in that bodie dwelleth the fullnesse of the Godhead, that ys, as Theophilact saieth, Si quid est Deus Verbum in ipso inhabitat, That that ys the Sonne of God dwelleth in him. And farder expowndinge the same, saieth: Ne autem cùm audis, Theoph. in 2. cap. ad Coll [...]ss. habitauit, existimes quòd ageretur, aut impelleretur sicut Prophetae (commorabatur enim & in illis Deus, iuxta illud, inhabitabo in ipsis, & inambulabo) adiecit: corporaliter, hoc est, non energia vel operatio quaedam, verùm substantia, ac veluti corporatus, & vna hypostasis existens cum assumpto. Least thowe (when thowe hearest this woorde Exod. 29. 2. Cor. 6. (dwelleth) shouldest thinke that he shoulde be moued or led, as the Prophetes were (for God dwelled in them also accordinge to that saing I will dwell C in them, and I will walke a mong them) he added, Corporally, that ys, not a certain force or operacion, but a substance, and as corporated and being one persō with the nature assumpted. Cyrill also by the testimonie of Theophilact, expownding these woordes, geueth great light to the vnderstanding of them by an example and saieth this: Vel hunc ad modum intelligere iuxta Diui Cyrilli sententiam Cyrill. poteris: Perinde ac in corpore immoratur anima (immoratur autem ipsi corpori essentialiter, & indiuisibiliter, ac citra mixturam) caeterum ipsa quidem anima per mortem à corpore separatur, Deus autem Verbum, nunquam ab assumpta carne separatus est, verum etiam in sepulchro aderat, ipsam incorruptibilem seruans, animaeque, apud inferos praedicans sine donans captiuis remissionem. Ye maie also according to the minde of S. Cyrill thus vnderstand yt, that as in the bodie dwelleth the soule, (but yt dwelleth in the bodie essentiallie, and indiuisiblie, and that withoute the commixtion of the two natures.) But yet the soule ytself ys separated from the bodie by death. But God the Sonne ys neuer separated from the flesh whiche he hath taken, but he was with yt bothe in the graue keping yt from D corruption, And with the Soule declaring or geuinge remissiō of sinnes vnto them that were in captiuitie. Thus farre he.
By all this ys ment that the verie Godhead ys substanciallie in Chryst, as the soule ys substāciallie in the bodie, so that we cometo that bodie of Chryst [Page]in the whiche dwelleth fullie, that ys to saie, substanciallie, the Godhead, E which Chryst ys God and man. And for somoche as we come to so woorthie a person, meet yt ys that we compownde ourselues accordinglie. In this Father then this maie we learne as in the other allreadie alleadged, that S. Paule speaketh of the bodie of Chryst, and ys so to be vnderstanded. For clls when he moueth vs to prepare our selues as to come to the bodie of Chryst, what shoulde yt appertein to the pourpose to alleadge Sainct Paule yf Sainct Paule did not, or doe not speake of the same thinge that he ys alleadged for? What ys yt to the pourpose to alleadge Sainct Paule speaking of a peice of bread, to prooue that we must examine or selues before we receaue Chrystes bodie? Betwixt the bodie of Chryst and a peice of bread ther ys no comparison Likewise are we taught here that euell men maie receaue the bodie of Chryst. For if they coulde not, why shoulde he dehort them from soche receipt? Vain yt were to moue a man not to doe a thing, whiche Euell men receaue the bodie of Chryste. ys vnpossible to be doen. Yt were straung to perswade a man not to pull dowen heauen with his handes. He were to beskorned that wolde moue men to eate the starres. And whie? Bicause he shoulde moue them to doe that, that F ys vnpossible to be doen. Euen so yf euell men can not receaue the bodie of Chryst (as the Aduersarie teacheth) what vanitie ys yt for this holie Father and other his likes, to make so manie and earnest exhortacions, that men shoulde not receaue the bodie of Christe vnwoorthilie? Forsomoche then as these graue wise, and learned Fathers gaue vs so manie godlie exhortacions, so manie vertueouse admonicions that we shoulde not receaue the bodie of Chryste vnwoorthilie, yt ys most certen, that we maie so receaue yt. And yf so, then euell men maie receaue the bodie of Chryst.
To Isichius ys ioined Sedulius, who in euery parte, affirmeth what the other hath taught. For he saieth thus vpon these woordes of Chryst recited of S. Paule: Take ye, This ys my bodie. Qnasi dixisset Paulus: Cauete ne illud corpus indignè comedatis, dum Corpus Christi est. Indignè hoc comedetis: si pauperes confundatis, siue escam aliquam ante spiritualem & Dominicam Caenam comedatis. As though the Apostle had saied: Beware ye that ye eate not that bodie vnworrhilie, forsomoche as yt ys the bodie of Chryst. Ye shall eate this bodie vnwoorthilie yf ye confownde G the poour, yf also ye eate anie other meate before the spiritual meat, the Supper of Lorde. Thus Sedulius. Wher Sainct Paule saieth: he that eateth this bread vnwoorthilie &c. This man saieth that Sainct Paule in that wholl proceasse spake of the bodie of Chryst. And therfor (saieth he) when S. Paule Sedulius saieth that S. Paule spake of the bodie of Chryst. had recited the woordes of Christ: Take ye, and eate. This ys my bodie: yt was as moche, as though the Apostle had saied: Beware that ye eate not that bodie vnwoorthilie for somoche as yt ys the bodie of Chryst. In sewe woordes then yt ys euidēt and plain that the Apostle theer spake of the bodie of Chryst, whiche thing that yt sholude be perceaued to be voide of all doubte, this Authour not contē ted with once speaking of the bodie, saieth with an addicion: For yt ys the bodie of Chryst. Whiche maner of speache maketh an assurance vnto vs that yt ys so. This also ys to be obserued, that as he saieth that S. Paule teacheth vs the presence of Chrystes bodie, that he also geueth vs an admonicion that we be ware that we receaue not that bodie vnwoorthilie. Wherby (as before ys noted) H what ells ys geuen vs to vnderstande but that that bodie maie be receaued The bodie of Chryste maie be receaued of vnwoorthie persons. of vnwoorthie receauers. Whiche ys as moche to saie, as euell men maie receaue the bodie of Chryst.
Nowe let not the good Christian be brought in doubte with the vain argument of the Sacramentaries, who doe reason thus: The Spiritt of Chryst ys allwaies [Page 370] with his bodie or ys not. We maie not, saie that yt ys not for that the spiritte of Chryst ys This argumens was made to me in the Bishop of Elies house bye one yet liuing. A inseparable from him. Yf then yt be allwaies with him, then the euell man receauing Chrystes bodie, receaueth also his Spiritte. And so shall the Spiritte of God be in sinners, whiche ys not to be saied. This vain argument shall the substanciall and pithie sainge of the holie Martir Ciprian clean dissolue and wipe awaie, who saieth thus. Sacramenta quidem quantum in se est, sine propria esse virtute non possunt. Nec vllo modo diuina se absentat maiestas mysterijs. Sed quamuis ab indignis se sumi, vel contingi Sacramenta permittunt, non possunt tamen Spiritus esse participes, quorum infidelitas vel Ciprian, serm. de Caena. indignitas tantae sanctitati contradicit. Ideoue alijs sunt haec munera odor vitae in vitam, alijs odor mortis in mortem. quia omnino iustum est, vt tanto beneficio priuentur gratiae contemptores, nec indignis tantae gratiae puritas sibi faciat mansionem. The Sacramentes Solucion of the argument by S. Ciprian. trulie formoche as in them ys, can not be withthoute their propre vertue. Neither doeth the diuine maiestie, by anie meanes absent yt self from the misteries. But although the Sacramentes suffre them selues to be touched or receaued of the vnwoorthie: they for all that, whose vnbeleif or vnwoorthinesse doeth withstand so great holinesse, can not be partakers of the Spiritt. And therfor are these Sacramentes vnto some the sauoure B of life vnto life, and vnto other the sauour of death vnto death. For yt ys allwaies meet, that the contemners of grace shoulde be destituted of so great benefitte, and that so excellent grace shoulde not dwell in vnwoorthie persons, Thus S. Ciprian.
Of whome we learn that allthough the diuine maiestie absenteth not yt self from the Sacrament: yet the vnwoorthie receauers be not partakers of the grace of the Spiritte, bicause yt ys vnmeet that the cōtempners of grace, shoulde haue grace abiding in them. For the more full vnderstanding of God and his Spirit in his creatures two waies. this, note that God and his holie Spiritt be in creatures two sondrie waies: that ys, by presence, and by grace. By presence God ys in manie places and creatures, where he ys not by grace. God by presence ys in hell among the damned soules, but he ys not among them by grace. Chryst was in the house of Zachaeus by grace: But he was in the house of Caiphas and Pilate by presence, and not by grace. Chryste was in the middest of the Iewes by presence, but he was in the middest of his Apostles also by grace. C The Apostles receaued the presence of Chryst with his grace in his last supper: Iudas receaued the presence of Chryst withoute his grace in the same Supper. And so yt cometh to passe that the same Chryste, who was sett to be a fall, and an vprising of manie in Israell, ys by the receipt Luc. 2. of his bodie in the Sacrament, as Sainct Ciprian saieth, to some a sauoure of life, to life: and to other some a sauoure of death to deathe. For the same flesh and blood, whiche ys to some receauers (as Chryst saieth) euerlasting life, ys to other some, (as Sainct Paule saieth), euerlasting deathe.
Of the whiche saieth Sainct Augustine: Quid de ipso corpore, & sangume Domini Aug. cont. Gesconiū. vnico sacrificio pro salute nostra? Quamuis ipse Dominus dicat: Nisi quis manducauerit carnem meam, & biberit sanguinem meum, non habebit in se vitam: Nonne idem Apostolus docet etiam hoc perniciosum malè vtentihus fieri? Ait enim: Quicumque manducauerit panem, vel biberit calicem domini indignè, reus erit corporis & sanguinis Domini. What shall we saie of the verie bodie and bloode of our Lorde, the onely sacrifice for our Saluacion? of the whiche although our Lorde himself doeth D Saie: Except a man doe eate my flesh, and drinke my bloode he shall not haue life in himself: Dothe not the Apostle teache that the same also ys hurtfull to them that doe vse yt euell? For he saieth: Whosoeuer shall eat the bread, or drinke the cuppe of our Lorde vnwoorthilie shall be giltie of the bodie and blood of our Lorde, By this then I [Page]trust yt be made manifest and plain, that Chryst and his Spiritt maie of euell E receauers be receaued as touching his presence, but of soche by grace he ys not receaued, bicause they be not meet vessells for grace, forsomoche as they doe contemptuouslie reiect yt, and by sinfull life withstande yt. But yet the same receaue the verie presence of Christ. The good receaue Chryst outwardlie in the Sacrament and inwardlie by grace, and so the fruict, which ys life: The euell receaue him outwardlie in the Sacrament, but not inwardlie by grace, and so forgoinge life, they, for their abuse gett death, whiche ys euerlasting damnacion.
THE FIFTETH CHAP. SHEVVETH THE vnderstanding of the same text by Esfrem, and Primasius.
AS the mercifull goodnesse of God whiche by the testimonie of the Prophete Dauid, endureth for euer and euer vpon thē that feare him, ys declared by innumerable his workes wrought in the creacion, redemption, and conseruacion of man: So the F trueth of God, Whiche by the testimonie of the same Prophete, abideth for euer, and resteth vpon soche as be humble searchers of the same, ys testified by nombers of wittnesses. Wherfor the nombre of wittnesses beinge manie, that maie be produced for the true vnderstanding of Sainct Paule in this text, I coulde not contein, but oute of so manie, yet bring some moe. Of the whiche I minde here to bring Esfrem and Primasius, men of great antiquitie. And for that they were of Chrystes Parliament house, and therfor well knowing the enacted trueth of the vnderstanding of S. Paule in their times, they are the better to be beleued.
This holie Father Esfrem, writing of the daie of iudgement, and speakinge of the woorthie and vnwoorthie receauinge of the Sacrament, maketh relacion to Sainct Paule, sainge: the vnpure receauer to receaue the same to his confusion in the daie of iudgement, as the pure receauer to his comfort and glorie. Thus he writeth: Si procul est à nobis Siloë, quo missus est caecus, sed D. Esfrem tract de die Judic. preciosus calix sanguinis tui plenus vita & lumine nobis in proximo est, tanto propinqutor, G quanto qui accesserit sucrit purior. Hoc igitur nobis restat, misericors Christe, vt pleni gratia & illuminatione scientiae tuae cum fide, & sanctificatione accedamus ad calicem tuū, vt proficiat nobis ad remisstonem peccatorum, non ad confusionem in die iudicij. Quta quicumque mysterijs tuis indignus accesserit, suā animam ipse condemnat. non se castificans vt cae lestem regem, atque immortalem Sponsum in sui pectoris purissimum suscipiat Thalamum. Nam a [...]ma nostra sponsa est, immortalis sponsi. Copula, autem nuptiarum, caelestia Sacramē ta sunt, quia cùm manducamus corpus eius, & sanguinem bibimus, & ipse in nobis est, et nos in eo. Attende ergo tibimet ipsi frater, festina thalamū cordis tui iugiter virtutibus exornare, vt mansionem cum benedicto Patre suo faciat apud te. Et tunc coram Angelis, & Archangeits erit tibi laus, & gloria, & gloriatio, et cum magna exultatione, & gaudio ingredieris in Paradisum. Yf Siloe whether the blinde man was sent, be farre from vs: Yet A. plain saing of holie Esfrem for the Proclamer. the preciouse cuppe of thie bloode being full of life and light, ys neare to vs, yea so moche the nearer, as he that cometh to yt ys the purer. This then, o mercifull Christ, remaineth vnto vs, that we being full of grace, and the illuminacion of thie E knowledge, come vnto thy cuppe with faith and holinesse of life, that yt maie auaill vs to the remissiō of simes', and not to our confusion in the daie of iudgement. For whosoeuer being vnwoorthie cometh to the misteries, he condemneth his ownesoule, not purisieng himself, that he might into the most [Page 372]pure or clean chambre of his breast receaue the heuenlie kinge and immortall A Spouse. For our soule ys the Spouse of the immortall husbād: The cooplinge of the Marriage be the heauenly Sacramentes. For when we doe eate his We eate the bodie and drinke the blood of Chryste. bodie, and drinke his bloode, both he ys in vs, and we in him. Take heede to thy self therfor, Brother, hast thee to adorne the bride chambre of thy heart continuallie with vertues, that with his blessed Father he maie make his mansion with thee. And then ther shall be to thee before Angells and Archangells praise and glorie, and with great ioie and gladnesse shalt thowe entre into Paradise. Thus farre holie Esfrem.
Ye haue hearde a long testimonie, but as godlie, as long: and as true, as godlie. Cuppe of blood near to vs. Ye haue heard that the cuppe of the blood of Chryst, ys neare at hand with vs. Yf yt were not in the Sacrament, (as the Sacramentarie saleth yt ys not) then were Syloë being vpon the earth nearer vnto vs, then the bloode of Chryst, which by their saing ys neuer vpon the earth, but allwaies in heauen. This cuppe of bloode maie not be vnderstanded by a figure, as to saie we haue at hand a cuppe of wine, whiche ys the figure of Chrystes bloode. For the woordes of singular praise, whiche this Authour addeth vnto the cuppe B of the bloode which he speaketh of, can not be applied, nor verified in the figuratiue cuppe. The cuppe that this Authour speaketh of ys, as he tearmeth yt, a preciouse cuppe: A cuppe of wine in this respect ys not preciouse. This cuppe ys full of life and light: the figuratiue cuppe, by the Aduersaries owne saing, hauing no holinesse, hath neither life nor light. This cuppe the Authour by plain tearmes, calleth the cuppe of Chrystes bloode: The other ys not so, but a figure of Chrystes bloode. By all these titles then of singular praise yt ys euident that this Authour iudged the preciouse cuppe of Chrystes verie bloode to be neare at hand with vs, and so teacheth the verie presence of Chryst in the blessed Sacrament, who in dede ys full of life and light he trulie sainge of him self: Iam the life. Iam the light of the worlde.
This Authour also openeth the minde of S. Paule, saing: that whoso commeth Bread in S. Paule ys not materiall bread. to the misteries of Chryst vnwoorthilie, doeth condempne his owne soule. He geueth the cause why: For (saieth the Authour) he doeth not receaue that heauenly king and immortall bridegrome into the bride chambre C of his heart being purified and clensed, but fowlie araied & defiled. The thing then receaued in the misteries of Chryst, called of S. Paule the bread of our Lorde, ys not materiall bread, but yt ys Chryst the heauenlie bread, the verie heauenlie kinge and immortall bridegroome of our soules, as this Authour declareth. For immediatelie declaring that Chryst ys ioined to our Soules, as the bridegroome to the bride, he saieth that yt ys doen by the Sacramentes. For (saieth he) when we eate his bodie, and drinke his bloode then he dwelleth in vs, and we in him. In dede in the receipt of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament ys wrought the perfect coniunctiō betwixt Chryst and vs, yf he be therin receaued as he aught to be receaued. For then we are not onelie conioined to him spirituallie by faith and charitie, but also (as Chrisostom, and S Cyrill saie) naturallie. For both we be in him by that he tooke our nature into him in his incarnation, And he ys in vs by that we take his naturall bodie in the holie ministracion. Wherfor reason wolde, duetie wolde, and loue also wolde, that as he ioined our nature to that gloriouse personne the Sonne of D God in deitie, that we also shoulde trauaill and labour to ioin again that his blessed bodie to our nature, adorned with vertue ād lifes puritie. Of this coniunction moche ys saied in the beginning of this booke, and more shall be saied, God willing in the ende.
[Page]Wherfor nowe ouerpassing yt, I hast to heare what Primasius will saie, to H helpe vs to vnderstand S. Paules sainge nowe in hande. Thus he writeth: Qui Primasius n [...] Apocal. edit meā carnem, & bibit meum sanguinem, in me manet, & ego in eo. pro eo acsi diceret: qui sic edent, vt edent est, & sic bibent, vt bibendus est sanguis meus. Multi enim cùm hoc videantnr accipere, in Deo non manent, nec Deus in ipsis. quia sibi iudicium manducare perhibētur. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me, and I in him. As yf he shoul saie: they that so shall eate my flesh as yt ys to be eatē, and shall so drinke my bloode, as yt ys to be dronken. For manie wen they are seen to receaue this Sacrament neither dwell they in God, nor God in them bicause they are wittnessed to eat and drinke their owne damnation.
Primasius in this place alleadged expowndeth two scriptures, the one oute of the vj. of S. Iohn: the other, whiche we nowe haue in hand oute of S. The vj. of S. John ād S. Paule speak of one thing. Paule. Oute of the vj. of S. Iohn, wher Chryste saieth. He that cateth my flesh, and drinketh my bloode, dwelleth in me, and I in him: Ys not so to be vnderstanded, that what soeuer he be, and in what state or condicion soeuer he be, in sinne or oute of sinne, delighting in sinne or detesting Sinne, penitent or impenitēt viciouse, or vertuouse, yf he eate the flesh of Chryst, and drinke his blood that he dwelleth in Chryst and Chryste in him: But yt ys to be vnderstāded, F that he that eateth the flesh of Chryst, and drinketh his blood, as yt ys to be eaten and dronken, that ys, with sownde faith, with perfect charitie, with puritie of minde and cleannesse of conscience, that then he dwelleth in Chryst, and Chryst in him. To prooue this he hath recourse to S. Paules sainge, that manie doe eate the flesh of Chryst, and drinke his bloode, that doe eate and drinke ther owne damnacion. by whiche his allegacion he also expowndeth howe that Scripture ys to be vnderstanded. Whiche of him that will well weigh the allegacion shall be easelie perceaued.
First, yt ys to be considered that the vj. S. of Iohn, oute of the whiche he alleageth this scripture (as yt ys allreadie invinciblie prooued) speaketh of the verie flesh and verie bloode of Chryste. Secondlie, yt ys to be noted that he expowndeth this text, and saieth that yt ys not to be vnderstanded indifferentlie of all men to dwell in Chryste, and Chryst in them, that do eate his flesh and drinke his bloode: but of them that eate and drinke them as they G aught to be eaten and dronken, and alleadgeth for his proof our text of S. Paule. Whiche so being alleadged, prooueth that he vnderstandeth S. Paule ther to haue spoken of the same thing that the vi. of S. Iohn spake of. But the vj. of S. Iohn spake of the flesh and bloode of Chryst in the Sacrament. Wherfor by this Authour so doeth S. Paule here. And so yt foloweth by S. Paule and this Authour that euell men maie eate the fleshe of Chryst, and drinke his blood, in whome yet neither Chryst shall dwell, nor they in Christe. But they for their presumption presuming with a filthie Soule to receaue so pure a bodie, shall suffre their iust condemnacion. Thus by these two Fathers, as by other before alleadged, yt ys testified that the very presence of Chrystes bodie ys in the Sacrament, and that the same ys receaued of euell men, though to their condempnacion.
THE ONE AND FIFTETH CHAP. ABIDETH IN H the exposition of the same text by Cassiodorus, and Damascen.
YT Ys moche for the probacion and confirmacion of the trueth, to see the goodlie consent and agreement emong the holie Fathers of Chrystes parliament house. Wherfor perceauing Cassiodorus to ioin [Page 373]the vj. of S. Iohan whith S. Paule, as Primasius did, as hauing both one vnderstāding. I haue thought good, of this coople, that here shall be brought furth, A first and next to Primasius to place Cassiodorus, that yt maie more liuely be perceaued, that of them ys by me reported.
This Cassiodorus in his commentaries vpon the psalmes expowndinge this verse spoken as a prophecie of Chryst: Thow arte a preist for euer, after the ordre of Melchisedech: writeth thus: Cui potest veraciter, et euidenter aptari nisi Domino & saluatori, Cassiodor. in versu: Tues sacerdos &c. qui corpus & sanguinem suum in panis ac vini erogatione salutariter consecrauit? Sicut ipse in Euangelio dicit: Nisi manducaueritis carnem filij hominis, & biberitis eius sanguinem non habebitis vitam in vobis. Sed in ista carne & sanguine, nil cruentum, nihil corruptibile mens humana concipiat (ne sicut dicit Apostolus: Qui enim corpus Domini indignè manducat, iudicium sibi manducat) sed viuificatricem substanciam, atque salutarem, & ipsius verbi propriam factam, per quam peccatorum remissio, & aeternae vitae dona praestantur. Vnto whome maie this be trulie and euently applied, but vnto our Lorde Chryste cō secrated his bodie and blood. and Sauiour? Who in the geuing furth of bread and wine to our health, consecrated his bodie and bloode, as he in the Gospell saieth: Except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his bloode, ye shall not haue euerlasting life. But in this flesh and bloode let not the minde of man conceaue anie thinge grosse, anie thing B corruptible, least, as the Apostle doeth saie, he that eateth the bodie of our Lorde vnwoorthilie eateth his owne condempnacion: but let man conceaue yt to be a substance geuing life and saluaciō, and soche a substance as ys made the verie owne substance of the Sonne of God himself, by the whiche remission of sinnes and the giftes of euerlastinge life be geuen.
Ye haue nowe heard the weightie and pithic sainge of the holie Senatour Cassiodorus. Who as for his wisdome was woorthilie called to be a Senatour to geue counsell in worldly affaires: So for his godlinesse and learninge he ys a Senatour of Chrystes house in heauenlie thinges. In these fewe woordes he hath vttered manie trueths and geuen vs manie instructions. First, he vttereth this trueth, that Chryst in his last Supper did consecrate his bodie and his bloode. Whiche his sainge, as yt declareth and setteth furth the trueth of the catholique faith: So yt openeth and declareth, and therwith impugneth C the vntrueth of the heresie of the Sacramentaries. Secondly, wher he saied that Chryst had to our health consecrated the same his bodie and blood, he proueth yt by Chrystes faing in the vj. of S. Iohn, wher he saieth: Except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his blood ye shall not haue life in yowe: Wherby yt ys manifest, that as by the forbearinge to eate the flesh of Chryst we leese the benefett of euerlasting life: So by eatinge the same, as yt ys to be eaten, we obtein life euerlasting. Whiche being so, his sainge ys affirmed and prooned wher he saied, that Chryst to our health and saluation consecrated his bodie and blood in his last Supper. For, hauinge euerlasting life by the eating of that his bodie consecrated in his last Supper, we maie iustlie saie that yt was consecrated to our saluacion. Thirdlie by that, that. the vj. of Iohn ys so alleaged, yt prooueth well that the same speaketh of the bodie and blood of Chryst, that shoulde be consecrated by him in his last Supper, to ower health and saluacion, as ys saied. Forthlie, we are instructed and taught what What we shoulde thinke of the bodie of Chryste cō secrated. we aught to conceaue and thinke of that blessed bodie and flesh of Chryst so consecrated. D We maie not thinke yt a phantasticall bodie, as Marcion and Mā nicheus did, or the bodie of a mere man, as did Ebion and Cerynthus, against whiche heretiques, as S. Hierom saieth, S. Iohn first was moued to write his gospell, therby moued to open, declare and settfurth the deitie or godhead of Chryst, whiche heresie afterward notwitstanding S. Iohns Gospell, and Epistles [Page](as Philaster wittnesseth) was settfurth by Theodotus, who was condemned E by Victor then Bishoppe of Rome, who was the thirtenth Bishoppe ther after S. Peter, as the computacion of some doeth testifie:
Neither maie we thinke, that bicause ther be in Chryst two natures, that Two natures in Christe, but not two persōs. ther be also in him two distincted persons, as did Nestorius, so that the nature of man in Chryst ys so distincted and diuided frō the Godhead, that yt hath no soche coniunctiō with the Godhead, as that yt by the reason of the vnitie of person, shoulde either be called the Sonne of God, or the propre and verie flesh of God, but the Sonne of man onelie. For all these thought yt a corruptible flesh, the flesh of a pure man, and not the flesh of the Sonne of God, as yt ys in dede, but we must thinke yt, as this Authour teacheth, that yt ys a substance quickning vs to saluacion and euerlasting life, forasmoche as yt ys made the verie owne and propre flesh of the Sonne of God, by the whiche we haue remission of sinne, and life euerlastinge.
And this also are we taught of holie Cyrill, who geueth also a reason, whie the flesh of God shoulde geue life, sainge thus: Quoniam saluatoris caro, verbo Dei quod naturaliter vita est, coniuncta, viuifica effecta est, quando eam comedimus, tunc vitam Cyrill. in 6. Joan. cap. 14. habemus in nobis illi coniuncti, quae vita effecta est. Forasmoche as the flesh of our F Sauiour being ioined to the Sonne of God, who naturallie ys life, ys made geuing life, when we eate that flesh, thē haue we life in our selues, for asmoche as we ar ioined to yt, whiche ys made life.
Thus then maie we perceaue that not onelie corrupt maners, but also corrupt faithe, otherwise conceauing or phantasinge of Chrystes bodie then the catholique Faithe teacheth, diuideth vs from Chryst, and maketh vs vnwoorthie receauers of that blessed bodie. Yf they be accompted amonge euell receauers, that otherwise thinke of the bodie of Chryst, then ys to be thought of yt: What ys to be thought of them, that wher Chryst promised, that the bread, which he wolde geue shoulde be his fleshe, whiche he wolde geue for the life of the worlde, and by expresse woordes, for the perfourmāce of the same promesse, takinge bread, saied plainlie: This ys my bodie: And S, Paule (as the wholl companie of the Fathers hitherto haue testified, and mo yet shall testifie) saieth that in the Sacrament ys the bodie of Chryst, what, I saie, G ys to be thought of them, that will not thinke Chrystes bodie to be his bodie, but withe the Ebionites and Cerinthians will make Chryst no God, with the Manicheis will make him but a phantasticall figure, and with the Nestorians, will, as they made a distinction betwixt the two naturs, leauing the nature of man deuided and distincted from the Godheade, so make the holie Sacrament distincted from Chryst? wher in verie dede, as God and man ys one Chryst: So the blessed Sacrament as touchinge the Substance, and Chryst ys all one the Substance of the Sacrament being none other but the verie substance of Chryst. These euell receauers, and abusers of Chrystes holie Sacrament, as they abuse the thinge yt self: So by slaunderouse tearmes doe they abuse them that well vse the same. For the true Christians that honour God, call they Idolaters: Soche as acknowledge Chrystes verie bodie in the Sacrament, call they grosse Capharnaites: And soche as beleue the substance of bread by the omnipotencie of God to be chaunged, and made the substance of Chryste, they call Papistes. But God geue them a better H minde, and the catholiques plentie of pacience, patiently to suffre their railinges, so long as God for our correction, will permitte the same to continue.
[Page 374]And nowe to return to our matter, this finallie ys to be noted in our Cassiod, howe he vttereth Sainct Paules woordes. A Authour, that alleging our text of Sainct, Paule, he vseth not the woordes of Sainct Paule, but the meaning and vnderstandinge. Thus he alleageth Sainct Paule: Qui enim corpus Domini indignè manducat, iudicium sibi manducat. For he that eateth the bodie of our Lorde vnwoorthilie, eateth his owne iudgement. Note well that he saieth not, he that eateth the bread, but he that eateth the bodie of our Lorde, expownding what bread Sainct Paule spake of in that scripture, the bread, I saie, of Chrystes bodie, as oftentimes yt ys allreadie saied. What can be saied more plainer? wolde the Proclamer haue anie plainer speache then this? Let him note the woordes, and the circunstance also, and weigh yt well, and he shall finde yt so plain, that all his engines and wrestinges, and all his subtilties [...], with the aide of all his complices, shall not be able to withstand the plain trueth of yt.
But Let vs heare Damascen speaking as plainlie, as he, and by like woordes openinge to vs the true mening of Sainct Paule. This Damascen setting Damascen. li. 4. ca. 14. furth the vertue, goodnesse, and power of the Sacrament, saieth thus: B Si aurum offendat adulteratum, per iudicialem correptoriamue ignitionem purgat, vt non in futuro cum mundo damnemur. Curat enim morbos, & omnimoda damna, quemadmodum dicit Apostolus: Si nos vtique iudicaremus, non vtique iudicaremur. Cùm iudicamur autem à Deo, corripimur, vt non cum mundo condemnemur. Et hoc est quod dicit: Quare qui participat corpus & sanguinem Christi indignè, iudicium sibi tosi manducat, & bibit. Per illud purgati vnimur corpori Domini, & spiritui eius & efficimur corpus Christi. Nam spiritus viuificans est caro Domini, quia ex viuificante spiritu concepta est. Quod enim natum est ex spiritu, spiritus est. Hoc autem dico non auferens corporis naturam, sed viuificationem, & diuinitatem eius ostendens. Yf yt finde golde that ys corrupted, by iudiciall and correptorie fieringe yt pourgeth yt, that we be not in time to come condemned with the worlde. For yt cureth diseases, and all maner of hurtes, as the Apostle saieth. Yf we wolde iudge our selues, we shoulde not be iudged, but when we are iudged of God, we are chasticed, that we shoulde not be damned with the worlde. And this ys yt that the Apostle saieth: Wherfor he that receaueth the Damascen. vttereth the woordes of S. Paule as other elders before. C bodie and blood of Christe vnwoorthilie, he eateth & drinketh his owne damnacion. We being purged by that, are vnited to the bodie of our Lorde, and to his Spiritt, and are made the bodie of Chryste. For the flesh of our Lorde ys a quickning Spiritt, bicause yt was conceaued by the quickninge Spirite. For that that ys borne of the Spiritte, ys a Spiritte. This doe I saie not taking awaie the nature of the bodie, but declaring his Godhead and power to geue life. Thus he.
Leauing diuerse good and godlie notes in this sainge of Damascen to be considered, by the Reader, I hast me to note those thinges that be to the pourpose of this present cause. Of the whiche the first and cheifest ys, that he alleaging the sainge of Sainct Paule, shewinge vs the exposition of the scripture, and geuing vs the vnderstanding of the same, and the right meninge of Sainct Paule, speaketh yt by these woordes. He that receaueth the bodie and blood of Chryst vnwoorthilie, eateth and drinketh his owne damnacion. In whiche maner of D speache, as an expositour aught to doe, by vnwrestable woordes he declareth what Sathan wolde wrest, and soo by plain woordes calleth that, that Sainct Paule calleth the bread, and cuppe of our Lorde, [Page]the bodie and blood of Chryst, he right well knowing that they be so in E verie dede.
I trust the Proclamer will not here vpon this Authour cast the stinking mist of his figure, considering that yt ys an exposition. And the nature of an exposition ys to be plainer then the thing expownded. And although both the text, and the exposition speake the trueth: yet he knoweth that what the text oftentimes speaketh obscurely or doubtfullie, that must the exposition speake plainlie, clerely, and manifestlie. Whefor he must nedes confesse, that this Authour shewing the minde of S. Paule, and expownding the bread and the cuppe to be the bodie and bloode of Chryst, that yt ys plainlie so. And wher diuerse of the adherēts of this Proclamer beare great Stomacke against this Authour for his plain trueth in manie matters, Lett both him and them knowe, that as in all pointes of this matter the wholl catholique Churche hath alowed him: So ys he agreable to all that hitherto haue ben alleaged in the exposition of S. Paule, which all be right auncient, or hereafter shall be alleaged, though they be not so auncient.
A Breif note also can I not but make of Damascen, wher he saieth, that we F being pourged are by the receipt of the bodie of Chryste vnited to the same bodie and to his Spiritt, and are also made his bodie. For as by these fewe wordes the trueth ys opened, Woorthie receauers os the bless. Sacr. What benefitts they haue. and the great commodities that come to vs by the woorthie receipt of the Sacrament declared: So ys the vain argument of the Aduersarie before moued, fullie solued and answered. The trueth ys, that both good and bad receauing the Sacrament, doe receaue the bodie of Chryst. Commodities thercome none, but to the woorthie receruer, whiche cōmodities be three. The first ys, that we be vnited to the bodie of Chryste, of the whiche moche ys saied in this booke vpon the tēth to the Corinthians. The second benefitt ys, that we be also vnited to his holie Spiritte. The thirde ys, that we be made the misticall bodie of Chryste. These three commodities and benefites doe we enioie by the receipt of the Sacrament, saieth this authour. But when? when (saieth he) we being pourged doe receaue yt. For otherwise we receaue not soche commodities, but we receaue great and notable incommodities For we receaue (saieth S. Paule) our owne damnation. Then wher the Aduersarie Vnwoorthie receauers what they receue. G boyleth vppe his violent argument, that wher Chryst ys, ther his Spirite ys also, And so yf euell men receaue in the Sacrament the bodie of Chryst, they receaue his Spirite also: Yt ys true, that they receaue Chryst and his Spirite as touching their presence, but not as touching grace. For although they receaue his presence, yet forsomoch as they be not (as this Authour saieth) pourged, they receaue him not to grace. For neither be they vnited to the bodie of Chryst, neither to his holie Spirite, neither be they therby made membres of Chrystes mistical bodie. for (as Primasius hath saied) they eate not that flesh as yt ys to be eaten, nor drinke that blood, as yt aught to be dronke. For in dede yt ys not to be eatē and dronkē, but of soche as be clensed and pourged from sinne by penaunce, and be clerelie voide of pourpose to sinne again, And to soche yt bringeth these three commodities, and manie moe, to the other nothing, but they them selues woorke their owne damnacion. H
Thus gentle Reader, thowe maist perceaue, that yf with the minde of the holie Fathers of Chrystes Parliament house, thowe wilt reade the Scriptures, and by them learn to vnderstande the same, thowe shallt not onelie not be deceaued, but also in all matters of controuersie be settled and staied, and clerelie see the toies and [Page 375]phantasies of the Aduersaries to be maliciouslie, and deuellislie forged and inuented. A
THE TVVO AND FIFTETH CHAP. ENDETH THE exposition of this text by Theodoret, and Anselmus.
HItherto none be produced to shewe vs the minde of S. Paule, but soch as by the testimonie of diuerse writers, were a thousād years agon and more, saue this last alleadged Damascen, whome some so place, as he had not liued full nine hundreth yeares agon. But be yt that he were so, yet he ys of so che antiquitie, as he maie verie well be called as wittnesse in this matter, for that he was before this controuersie was raised in the Churche, I meen, before the time of Berengarius, Before whose time, I am sure the Aduersaries can make no prescription, nor yet since, but by startes as Sathan might gett occasion and ministers nowe and Whie God suffreth Sathan noweto wexe his Church with heresies. then to disturbe gods Churche. Whiche, I take, ys suffred of God bothe to correct our euell liues: and also to stirre vs to seke the knowledge of gods trueth. Whiche although we had, as yt were an vpper face of the knowledge B of yt: yet through necligence we did not wade to the deapth of yt.
But be yt, that Damascen were not nine hundreth years agon: yet the promisse of Chryst being considered that he wolde be with his, Churche to the ende of the the worlde, ād that he wolde also sende his holie spirite into the same his Churche, that shoule lead yt into all trueth: As yt ys to moche shame for the Aduersarie to saie that all this time since Damascen taught Chrystes promesse hathe failed: So yt ys as moche shame to saie that all this time his owne doctrine hath ben suppressed.
In dede I wolde thinke that this Proclamer shoulde doe that, that all his The Proclamers doctrine hath no presidēt, that yt hath ben quietly receaued. progenitours coulde neuer yet doe, yf he coulde shewe that doctrine of the Sacrament that he professeth to haue ben receauedvuiuersallie and quietly but one hūdreth yeares: yea one half hundreth years: yea one twentie years or yf he can not doe that, as I am sure he can not, Let him shewe yt receaued and cōtinued, as ys saied, but one yeare. Yf he can make no soche prescriptiō C of his doctrine, he ys to blame to reiect the catholique doctrine, which by manie of their confessions hath stand these thousande yeares, and to obtrude, vnto vs his doctrine, that neuer was yet staied quietlie one yeare. Yf euer his droctrine was vniuersallie receaued yt coulde neuer withoute great and notable trooble to the wholl Churche be taken awaie. Let him then shewe, when, by whome, and by what meanes yt was taken awaie, by the authoritie of anie autentique historie or catholique authour, and thē he shall doe somwhat, but that somwhat will neuer be doen. Seing then the doctrine of the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament hath vniuersallie ben recaued since the time of Damascen vntill the time of this heresie: as we should be madde, men to receaue sochenouelties of so small staie or holde: So ys the Proclamer more madde so to moue vs. Damascen then teaching that, that all the Christian worlde receaued, and that also long before the controuersie was moued, cannot he iustlie reiected, but ys to be regarded.
These being twelue in nombre, are sufficient to be a quest and to geue their D verdicte vpon this matter. Whiche all finde that S. Paule here spake of rhe bodie and blood of Chryst in the Sacrament, no mencion being made of material bread. Whiche so being, yt ys easie by the same verdicte to pronownce, that to saie that Chrystes bodie and bloode be not in the blessed Sacrament, ys wicked heresie.
[Page]matter, and not delighted with some varietie whiche of manie ys desiered: E I will but note our principall matters, that are of his text of Sainct Paule to be learned, whiche (as before ys declared) are but two, and so ouerpasse the rest. The one that Sainct Paule here speaking of the Sacrament, and calling What bread S. Paul spake of. yt the bread of our Lorde, and somtime with and article, this bread: mente not common bread, but a speciall bread that ys, as often before ys saied, the heauenly bread of Chrystes bodie, whiche ys the bread of our Lorde in veriedede. For in him onely consisteth the power to make this bread, and to geue yt to the people. The other, that God suffreth this heauenlie bread of Chrystes The bless. Sacr. t. ys proued byour Lorde Iesus, to be his bodie. bodie, to be receaued of sinners. As touching the Frst, the presupposall or cause why a man shoulde be giltie of the bodie and bloode of Chryste, when he doeth vnwoorthilie receaue the Sacrament ys, saieth Anselmus, bicause by the authoritie of our Lorde Iesus yt ys proued, that this bread that we speake of here, ys his bodie, and that the wine here also spoken of in the vse of the Sacrament ys his bloode.
Note I praie yowe, that this Authur saieth, that yt ys prooued of Sainct Paule by the authoritie of our Lorde Iesus, that the bodie of the same our Lorde Iesus ys in the Sacrament, formoche as the bread and wine ther, F ys no other but the bodie and bloode of Chryst. And doe not onelie as by transcourse lightlie reade these woordes, but earnestlie note that he saieth, yt ys prooued by the authoritie of our Lorde Iesus. Yf yt be proued by him, who can improoue yt? Yf he saie yt, who can denie yt? Yf he so teache yt, why shall we otherwise beleue yt?
Let the Proclamer nowe, let all the Sacramentaries, whiche be his companions, bringfurth one Authour that saieth that yt ys proued by the woordes of our Lorde Iesus that the bread and wine of the bless. Sacrament be not the bodie and blood of our Lorde Iesus, but onelie figures of the same bodie and bloode, and not the thinges themselues, and shewe the place as we doe, and they shall haue the victorie. But let them painte their matters as well as they can to bleer the eyes of the simple, yet Vincit Veritas, the trueth ouercometh. And so shall yt in the ende faull oute, that they shall be perceaued to be destitute of trueth. For their vntrueth shall be confownded by the trueth. Though vntrueth for a time gett the vpperhand, and be mainteined G by the princes and mightie of the earthe, for that their sensuall libertie ys not by her restreined, but by her in that respectt, they are moche pleasured: yet as all vanitie faileth, vadith and vanisheth: So yt being of the same kinde shall fall awaie and consume as the smooke, and the fauourers of the same shall be as the dust, which the winde bloweth awaie from the face of the crathe.
But so, while I am a litle passed the compasse of the ringe, my second matter knocketh and calleth me again, wherin breiflie to touche moche matter: Three sortes of euell receauers. this Authour maketh three sortes of euell and vnwoorthie receauers. The first ys of them that doe otherwise celebrate or receaue this holie misterie, then yt was deliuered of Chryst. In the whiche sorte as he touched the Berengarians, whiche were in his time: So doeth he the Oecolampadians and the Caluinists of this our time, whiche both otherwise celebrating, and otherwise receauing this holie misterie, then yt was of Chryst instituted, they make thē selues vnwoorthie receauers. Chryst instituted his bodie to be distributed ād H geuen in this holie refection: They geue and receaue a peice of bread, and a cuppe of wine. Chryst instituted a sacrifice to be celebrated: They celebrate a beare tokē of remēbrance. Wherfor by the iudgement of this Authour, they altering Chrystes institucion, are accompted among the euell receauers.
[Page 377]An other sorte ys of them that receaue the holie Sacrament without due A reuerence: Of this sorte be all the Lutherans who although they cōfesse the verie presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacramēt: yet they denie anie honour or woorshippe to be doen vnto yt. Which fond and infatuate doctrine, I cā but woonder at, wel knowing that whersoeuer Chryst ys either in heauē or Philip. 2. in earth, he ys (as Chrysostome saieth) woorthie of most high honoure, ād if God hath so exalted him and geuen him a name, which ys aboue all names, that in the name of Iesu euery knee shal bowe, both of thinges in heauē, and things in earth, and thinges vnder the earthe: by what authoritie cā or will man will or cōmaunde no honour to be doen to him? but of this we haue alreadie 3 spooken, wherfore staing anie more to saie of yt here, I come to the third sorte of receauers, which ys (saieth this authour) of them that presume to come to the receipt of the blessed Sacrament before they haue pourged thē selues, and clensed their consciences by penance. Of this sorte be all they who well beleuing, yet not well liuing, come with the filthinesse of sinne allreadie cōmitted, yet remaing vpon them, or ells with pourpose of sinne to be B committed, by which both they make themselues vnwoorthie receauers.
Here nowe ye see a varietie of euel receauers, and yet (saieth this authour) that they all receaue the Sacrament. And the Sacrament (saieth he) by the authoritie of our Lord Iesus ys proued to be the bodie ād the blood of Chryst. Which thing this authour yet by more expresse woordes teacheth in the exposition Anselm. ibid. of the other text, wher S. Paule as by repeticion saieth: He that eateth and drinketh vnwoorthilie, eateth and drinketh his owne damnacion: saing thus: Ideo prius se discutiat & purget. Quia qui manducat & bibit indignè, id est sine sui examinatione, iudicium sibi manducat & bibit. Sicut enim Iudas cui buccellam tradidit Dominus non malum accipiendo, sed malè accipiendo, locum in se Diabolo praebuit: sic indignè quisque sumens Dominicum Sacramentum, vt quia ipse malus est, malum sit quod accepit, aut quia non ad salutem accipit, nihil acceperit, corpus enim Domini, & sanguis Domini nihilominus est, sed ille accipit hoc non ad vitam, sed ad indicium, quia non di [...]uidicat corpus Domini, id est, non discernit quàm sit dignius omnibus creaturis hoc corpus, quod videtur esse panis. Si enim cogitaret hoc corpus esse Verbo Dei personaliter vnitum, & vitam ac salutem eorum esse, qui hoc dignè accipiunt, non praesumeret indignus accipere, sed dignum se praepararet. Let him therfor C first examine himself, and pourge himself. For he that eateth ād drinketh vnwoorthilie, that ys without examinacion of himself, eateth and drinketh his owne damnacion, making no difference of the bodie of our Lord. For as The bless. Sacr. ys the bodie and blood of Chryst though euell men receaue yt. Iudas to whome our Lorde gaue a morsell, not taking an euell thinge, but taking yt in euell maner, gaue to the Deuell a place in himself: so whosoeuer receaueth the Sacrament of our Lorde vnwoorthilie, causeth not, bicause heys an euell man, that thing which he hath receaued ys euell, or bicause he receaued yt not to saluacion, that he receaued nothing (For yt ys neuerthelesse the bodie of our Lorde, and the blood of our Lord) but he taketh this not to life, but to condemnaciou, bicause he maketh no difference of the bodie of our Lord, that ys, he discerneth not howe moch more woorthie this bodie, which semeth to be bread, ys aboue all creatures. For if he had in minde that this bodie ys personallic vnited to the Sonne of God, and to be the life and saluacion of them that doe receaue yt woorthilie, the vnwoorthie wolde not presume to receaue yt, but he wolde prepare himself to be woorthie.
See ye not, that the blessed Sacr. ys neuerthelesse the bodie and blood of D our Lord vnto thē that take yt not to life but to condēnacion? yt ys so plain that I nede to saie no more but to conclude with thys authour, and all the rest hitherto alleaged, that sainct Paule here speaketh of the bodie [Page]of Chryst, and teacheth the same to be verilie receaued of euell and vnwoorthie receauers. Yt ys not vnknowen to the Proclamer, but of the lower house E of Chrystes Parliament, I might haue brought manie moe both grecians and Latines: as Haymo, Bede, Photius, Oecumenius. Thomas de aquino, Lyra, Dionyse, Hugo, and Erasmus, and as manie as haue within the compasse of these nine hundreth yeares, either written vpon S. Paules Epistles, or alleaged him in the matter of the Sacrament oute of the eleuenth of the first epistle to the Corinthians. For they all vnderstand S. Paule both to haue spoken of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, and that the same bodie ys oftentimes receaued of euell men.
But amonge so manie, I can not staie my self, but I must heare one of them, and the raither for that he ys a grecian, and so being no Papist, he maie be heard with more indifferent eare. Yt ys Oecumenius, who vpon the woordes of S. Paule saing, that the vnwoorthie receauer shall be giltie of the bodie and bloode of our Lorde, saieth thus: Quod ait, reus erit corporis & sanguinis: hoc Oecum. in 11. 1. Cor. indicat, quòd quemadmodum Iudas eum tradidit. Iudaei verò in ipsum, debacchati sunt: Ita F ipsum ignominia afficiunt, qui sanctissimum ipsius corpus manibus impuris suscipiunt (veluti Iudaei tunc eum tenuerunt) & execrando admouent ori. Per hoc quod frequēter ait, corporis & sanguinis Domini, manifestat, quod non sit nudus homo, qui immolatur, sed ipse Dominus, & factor omnium, vt videlicet per hoc eos terreat That he saieth: he shall be giltie of the bodie and blood of our Lorde: he sheweth this, that, as Iudas betraied him, and the Iewes raiged against him, euen so doe they dishonour The bodie of our Lord maie be receaued with vn pure hands and execrable mouth. him, that with vnclean handes (as then the Iewes did holde him) doo receaue his most holie bodie, and put yt to their cursed or detestable mouthe. By that, that he often saieth: the bodie and blood of our Lorde: he manifestlie declareth, that yt ys not a pure or onelie man that ys offred, but euen our Lorde himself, the maker of al things, that therby he might make thē afraied.
What ys in the Sacrament, which ys deliuered into the handes and mouthes of men, by this authour ye maie perceaue. For yt ys (saieth he) the most holie bodie of our Lorde, which most holie bodie ys receaued both with vnclean handes, for that the consciences of soch receauers be vnclean, and with detestable mouthes, for that their mouthes speaking wicked thinges, are detestable S. Paule doth often call the bless. Sacr. the bodie and blood of our lord G before God. Yf yowe will see more of the trueth of this matter: note that he saieth, that S. Paule doeth often call the Sacrament, the bodie and bloode of our Lorde, but will ye knowe why he doeth so? Not to make vs beleue that yt ys not the bodie of Chryst (as this Proclamer wolde beare vs in hande) but that he wolde, as this authour testifieth, manifestlie teache vs, that yt ys a verie bodie, and not the onelie figure of a bodie: a bodie, which ys not the bodie onelie of a man, but the bodie of our Lord God, who ys the maker of all thinges. Yf the Proclamer desire to haue one that by expresse woordes, doeth teach the verie presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament. Let him beholde a nombre now brought to expownde S. Paule, which al not onelie of their own faith affirme soch presence, but also teach that sainct Paule affimed the same. And therfor if ther be anie treuth in the same Proclamer let him nowe forsake his wicked heresie, and according to his promesse, let him subscribe to the veritie. For that being nowe oftentimes doen, that he required but once to be doen, as iustlie I maie, so doe I clame the performance of his promesse. Well reader whatsoeuer he, witho [...]den either with shame or H with malice shall doe in this matter against the trueth, and most like also against his conscience: yet thow hauing regarde to thie duetie before God, and to the saluacion of thie soule, beholde thow with indifferent eies these [Page 378]so manie plain manifest, and expresse places: tarie and abide vpon them: vieue A them and consider them well, and yelding to trueth, thow shalt by gods grace, if thow humblie craue yt, come to yt, but yet thowe shalt see more of S. Paule.
THE THREE AND FIFTETH CHAP. BEGINneth the exposition of the next text of S. Paule, which ys, Let euery man examin himself, and so let him eate, &c.
INS. Paule yt foloweth. Probet seipsum homo, & sic de pane illo edat, & de calice hibat. Let therfore a man examine himself: And so let him eate of that bread, and drinke of that cuppe. The great peril and daunger that shall come to vnwoorthie receauers of that blessed bodie and blood being by S. Paule declared, he imediatelie ioineth therunto, as a salue to a deadlie sore, a godlie admonicion, that to auoide soche daunger as maie ensewe, or to remedie the hurt, if yt be allreadie takē euery mā that will receaue this blessed Sacramēt, shoulde first cō sider B what yt ys, and vpō consideracion therof examine him self, whether he be a woorthie person to receaue yt or no. But vnto this text we shall geue Toexamin our selues what yt ys and howe yt maie be doen. moche light, if we open what yt ys for man to examine himself, and when he hath so doen, howe he shall knowe when he ys woorthie or vnwoorthie. First, yt ys expedient, that the state of man, wherin he aught to be before God, be knowen, for the state knowen, yt shall be easier for man, to make examinacion of himself, wherher he be in the state nere to yt, or farre from yt. The state that man aught to be in before God in this fraill life cōsisteth in two partes in vpprightnesse of faithe and in puritie or clenesse of life. As Hebr. 11. touching faith the Apostle saieth: Sine fide impossibile est placere Deo. withoute fatth yt ys vnpossible to please God. For (as he saieth again) Accedentem ad Deum oportet credere. He that will come to God must beleue. Wherfor Chryst being as touching the birth of his manheade in his owne contrie did not Ibidem. Faith howe necessarie yt ys. ther manie miracles, for that the vnbeleif of the people, whiche shoulde haue comed to him by beleif, did let him, and staie. For (saieth the Euangelist Mathew) Nonfecit ibi virtutes multas, propter incredulitatem illorum C he did not manie miracles ther bicause of their vnbeleif. But wher faith Math. 13. was, ther Chryst wroght his miracles bowntifullie. Wherfor when the Centurio came vnto Chryst, as an humble and faithfull suiter for the health Math. 8. of his seruant that laie sicke of a palsie, and vpon the mercifull answere of Chryst, who saied that he wolde come and cure him: The Centurio strong in faith saied: Lorde I am not woorthie than thowe shouldest entre vnder my roofe, but Wherfaith ys there God woorketh. onelie saie the woorde, and my seruant shall be holle: Chryst was so delighted with his faith that he did not onely praise yt saing: I fownde not so great faith in Israell: But also for the health of the sicke man he saied to the Centurio: Go thy waies, as thowe hauest beleued, so be yt vnto thee, and his seruant was healed in the self same howre.
The woman also that had the bloodie flixe, was so strong in faith that she saied with in her self: yf I maie touche but the hemme of his vesture onelie Math. 9. I shall be wholl, whervpon immediatelie she bothe receaued the benefett of health at Chrystes hāde and also the praise of her faith, Chryst saing to her be of good comforte daughter: thy faith hath made the safe. Chryst also beholding Math. 15. the faith of the womā of Canaan, did not onelie praise the same sainge: D O woman great ys thie faithe. But also for the health of her daughter saied [Page]vnto her: Be yt vnto thee as thowe hauest desiered, and her daughter was healed, euen at the same time. What shall I stand in this large campe of faith, and E in the woorthinesse therof, of the which the wholle bible from Genesis, to Heb. 11. The force of faith. the last of the Apocalips doth continuallie make mencion? wherfor I wil with S. Paule conclude in fewe woordes, saing with him: The holie faithfull by faith haue subdewed kingdomes, wrought righteousnesse, obteined the promisses, stopped the mouthes of Lions, quenched the violence of fire, eschaped the edge of the swoorde, oute of weaknesse were made stronge, waxed valiaunt in fight, turned to sleight the armies of the alientes, the wemen receaued their dead raised to life again.
Thus maie we see howe necessarie faith ys, withoute the which man cannot come to God: Thus maie we see howe bowntifullie God woorketh wher faith ys: Thus maie we finallie see the great might, and power of faithe, which ys soche, that yt maketh all thinges possible to the Math. 17. beleuer. For to him that beleueth, nothing ys vnpossible, saith Chryst.
Nowe as faith woorketh these wonders: so the lacke of faithe hyndereth all these wonders. The Apostles attempted to deliuer a man, that was possessed Want of faith howe yt hindereth good effects. Marc. 9. of a Deuell, and coulde not, wherupon the Father of him, brought him to Chryst saing: Master, I brought my Sonne to thie Disciples, and they coulde F not cast the Deuell oute of him. When Chryste had cast the Deuell oute, the Disciples came secretlie to him, saing: Whie coulde not we cast him oute? Iesus saied vnto them, bicause of yowr vnbeleif. Vnbeleif then was the hinderance of this great worke that might haue ben doen by the Apostles. Faith made Peter walke vpon the sea: vnbeleif made him sinke, wherupon he heard at Chrystes mouthe. Modicae sidei, quare dubitasti? O thow of litle faith, wherfor didest thow doubte? Vnbeleis so moche displeaseth Chryste that after the resurrection he rebuked the two Disciples that went from Hierusalem to Emaus, and with sharpe woordes saied vnto them: O ye fooles, and slowe of heart to beleue al that the prophetes haue spoken. S. Marke also saieth that Chryst appearing to the eleuen as they satte at meate, cast their vnbeleif in their teeth, and rebuked Matth. 14 Mar. 16. the hardnesse of their heart, bicause they beleued not them, whiche had seen, that he was risen from the dead.
To thus moch, the Arrian, the Nouatian, the Pelagian, the Berengarian, the Wycleffest, the Lutheran, the Oecolampadian, the Caluiniste, and the Anabaptist, will agree, and euerie one of these will saie, that faithe must be had, and eche of G them will saie, that he hath that faith that pleaseth God, and yet being all voide of vpright faith, they varie in faithe, as did the Phariseies, and Sadduceis, that ys hauing some peice, but missing the wholl.
This faith therfor wolde be knowen, as also of whome yt shoulde be learned. The catholique faith described. Yf ye will knowe this faith, in fewe woordes yt ys the faith that we call Apostolique, and catholique, Apostolique descending by continuall succession from the Apostles, as yt were from to hand hand, euen vnto vs that now liue. Catholique as vniuersallie receiued, professed, and beleued throughoute the chrystian orbe, not reigning in one corner, or in one realm, by the priuate inuencion of one priuate brain, and mainteined by the priuate affection of one prince, but generallie and vniuersallie of all Chrystian princes, of all Chrystian Realmes, of all Chrystian men, and that not for twentie or fortie years, as the new faith in Germanie, and in Englond but in all times not nowe receaued, and now disproued, as the Lutherans doctrine, but euer without interruption continued. This faith maie not H be deuised, newly inuented or vpon affection appoincted, but yt must be learned. Fides ex auditu, faith cometh by hearing saieth Paule, beinge [Page 379]called to be the singular vesell of God, was yet sent by Chrystes commaundement A to Ananias, to learn of him what he shoulde doe. Hic dicet tibi, quid te oporteat facere. He shall tell thee what thow must doe. Cornelius a godlie man Act. 9. and fearing God, although he might haue ben taught of the Angell that appeared vnto him, yet he was not, but by the same Angell was willed to sende to Ioppe for S. Peter to come to him. And he (saieth the Angell) shall tell thee what thow oughtest to doe. Marke learned of S. Peter, Luke of S. Paule, of the which a longer discourse ys made in the first book. So that this faith I saie Cap. 7. must by Gods ordeinaunce be learned of the elders, not deuised by newe inuentours.
The faith, if yt maie be so tearmed, which Luther taught, wher learned he yt? was there anie elder at that daie in all the worlde, that taught him that Wher learned Luther and his rable their faith. phantasticall faith? did he not of his owne priuate head newlie skowre some of the heresies of Wicliff and Husse, and some deuised neuer hearde of before? Who in all the Christian orbe, when Luther had griffed (as he saied) a right, a true and a perfect faith, taught Carolstadius, Zuinglius, and Oecolampadius a contrarie B faith to Luther, as to teache that Chrystes bodie ys not in the Sacrament? Let Carolstadius bring furth one Chrystian realme that so taught him: or one Church, or one allowed Father or elder then liuing, that so taught. But forsomoch as he cā not, yt maie be cōcluded, that as well his faith, as the faith of Luther ys not learned of the Fathers by succession, but partelie borowed of some other heretique by priuate election, partlie deuised by a newe inuention, and so a faith not continued, but both inuented, and interrupted, and therfor neither Apostolique, neither catholique. The state of man then in the vpprightnesse of faith, must be in the faith Apostolique, and catholike, and not in hereticall faith, which ys no more a faith in dede, then a painted man ys a man. A man ys vpright in faith whē he discrediteth nothing that ys conteined in the holie faith Apostolique and catholique.
The other parte of the state of mans life before God ys puritie and cleannesse of life, which parte who so can (Faith, as ys saicd presupposed) atteign vnto, ys blessed, Chryst saing: Beatimundo corde, quoniam ipsi Deum videbunt. Blessed be the clean in hearte, for they shall see God. C
This cleannesse standeth in two poinctes: in the eschewing the filthinesse Puritie of life stādeth in two poincts. Psalm. 33. of sinne: and in adourning our selues with vertues, in declining from euel and doing of good, as the psalme saieth, Declina à malo, & fac bonum. Decline or forsake euell, and doe good. For yt ys not sufficient to a good life to flie sinne onelie, but also to doe good. And therfore the holie Goste hath with a copulacion coopled and linked them together allwaies.
Nowe thus moch of the state of mans life knowen, yt ys the easier to perceaue what S. Paule meeneth by the examinacion of themselues. To examine our selues ys to trie and prooue, to search to call our selues to accompte, first whether we stand sownde in faith, according to the counsell of S. Paule in an other place, Vos metipsos tentate si estis in fide, ipsi vos probate. Prooue yowrselues whether ye be in faith or not examine yowrselues. This triall ys made, when we examining our selues, whether we disagree or dissent from anie one article of the catholique faith, finde our selues neither varieng from, nor doubting of anie of them.
In the secōd part, we must thus examine our selues, first whether anie sinne D be by vs allreadie committed, or anie pourpose remaining in vs for anie to be committed. Yf anie be cōmitted, the same must by heartie cōtriciō, humble 2. Cop. 13. and plain confession, true and faithfull penaunce be wiped awaie. [Page]Yf anie pourpose be in vs to sinne, that must be cutt of and detested, and by E like means (as ys before saied) clean forsaken, knowing that euery sinne to the which consent of wil ys geuen, though yt be not doen in facte, ys reputed before God, and ys in dede a full sinne.
Thus moch not onely the catholique Church hath willed to be doen, as S. Cyprian and S. Augustine are plentifull wittnesses. But also the Lutherans Conuenticles. For in their confession of the cheif articles of their faith, thus they saie: Confessio in ecclesiis apud nos, non est abolita. Non enim solet porrigi corpus Domini nisi antea exploratis, & absolutis. Confession ys not with vs in our churches Confess. August. Art. de Confess. abolished. For the bodie of oure Lorde ys not wount to be geuen, but to soche as before be diligently searched and examined and absolued.
When we be thus farre goen we must examine our selues of our deuocion, regarde and reuerence to the thing that ys to be receaued. For ells we shall receaue to our owne condemnacion, for that, as S. Paule saieth, we make no difference of the bodie of our Lord, from other common meates. Thus moch being saied for our examinacion and preparacion before we come to the receipt of this high mysterie, we haue therin neither varied from the doctrine of Chryst neither from the doctrine of S. Paule, nor of the holie F Fathers of the Church. The doctrine of Chryst shall furth with be shewed. The doctrine of S. Paule and the Fathers shall be opened in all the processe folowinge,
Chryste setting furth this high mysterie of his bodie and blood, declared Joan. 6. Chryste in structed his Apostles in the faith of the bless. Sacrament before he institutedit that yt was necessarie to haue both faith and puritie of life. First, as touching faith, that his Apostles shoulde be therin prepared and made readie, he did not onelye instructe them fullie long before he ministred the thing to them that they shoulde knowe what yt was that they should receaue, but also induced them to the same faith by a miracle wrought also in bread, that as thei knewe by the power of his godhead the fiue loaues to be multiplied to the satisfieng of fiue thousand people, and to the leauing yet of twelue baskettes full of fragmentes of the same loaues, so they shoulde (this being doē in their seight) with the more ease be brought to beleue, that he by the same power coulde make of bread his bodie. Wherupon though manie of the Disciples not beleuing Chryst did forsake him and came no more at him (as manie haue doen in these daies) yet the Apostles by the miracle being prepared, and G by Chrystes owne doctrine instructed in the faith of this mysterie, abode with him and saied-Domine ad quem ibimus? Verba vitae aeternae babes. Lorde vnto whom shall we go? Thowe hauest the woordes of euerlasting life.
Thus being by Chrystes instruction made perfect in the faith of this my sterie, thei came (as Chrysostom saieth) quietlie to the receipt of yt, being nothing troobled with the woordes of Chryst when he saied: Take eate this ys my bodie. Take, and drinke this ys my blood, for that (saieth he) they had before hearde manie and great thinges of this mysterie. By this then yt ys manifest that to the receipt of this Sacrament, faithe ys necessarelie required..
Likewise are we by him admonished of the puritie of life. For when he Chryste gaue instruction of the puritie of life required in the receauers of the bless. Sacr. wolde geue furth this blessed Sacrament, he rose from the supper of the Paschall lambe, and laied aside his vpper garmentes, and being girded with a towel wasshed his Disciples feete signifieng therby, that all that come to receaue this Sacrament must before be clensed and purified from all sinfull H affections.
And here to saie by the waie, yf this Sacrament contein no more, thē did [Page 380]the Paschall lambe, but that both this and that be onely figures of Chryst: A and so the Lambe as good a Sacrament as this: why did Chryst leaue this solempn Ceremonie of wasshinge his Disciples feet vndoen before the eating of the Paschall lambe, and differred yt vnto the receipt of this Sacrament? Yt hath also consideracion why he wolde nowe washe his Disciples feete, who before cōtrarie to the maner of the Iewes, not onelie suffred, but also defended his Apostles for the eatinge of their meate with vnwasshed handes.
The other part of puritie of life, whiche consisteth in the adourning of our selues with vertuouse and godlie actes, was not left vntaught of Chryst, but when he saied: This doe ye in the remembrance of me: he bothe willed that godlie acte to be doen, and also that we shoulde be mindefull of his death and passion, and of his great loue towordes vs in suffring of the same, and therby to be moued, not onelie to render vnto him most humble and lowlie thankes, but for his sake for the proporcion of owre possibilitie, to practise the like charitie, and shewe the like loue to our bretheren. Nowe he that hath suche charitie what lacketh he to the sufficient furniture of his soule with all godlie vertues necessarie? B
But a merueilouse matter, as godlie, a thing as yt ys, for a man to examine himself, as plain as yt ys, bothe by Chrystes doinges, and S. Paules woordes, that yt shoulde so be: yet Sathan coulde gett a minister to teache that no other preparacion neadeth for the receipt of the Sacramēt, but onely faith. Ys ther moche hope of trueth to be reposed in him, that so teacheth? Libertie a baite of the Deuell, setfurth by his ministers luther and his likes. ys not the religion to be suspected, or raither detested, that ys settfurth by soche a patrone? yet this ys the doctrine of Luther, who ys the fownder of this newe religion, the inuentour of this faith, the setter vppe of the woorde, the restorer, as they saie, of trueth, and the bringer of light. But Sathan and his minister also knewe well howe to winne the people. They knew that libertie was a goodly bait to catche them withall. Wherfor to deliuer the people from the trooble of contricion, and heauinesse for sinnes, to make them free from the heauie yocke (as yt ys taken) of confession, to ease them of the laboure of praier, to disburden them of the care of godlie life, Sathan by his minister Luther teacheth, that to the receipt of the Sacrament ther C neadeth no other examinacion or preparacion, but onelie that they beleue that they shall receaue grace, and that ys sufficient.
But that I maie not be thought to misreport him, at my pleasure, I will Luth. in Assert Acti. 15. reherse his owne woordes, whiche be these: Magnus error est eorum, qui ad sacramentum Eucharistiae accedunt, hinc innixi quod sint confessi, quòd non sint sibi conscii ali cuius peccati mortalis, quòd praemiserint orationes suas, & praeparatoria: Omnes illi iudicium sibi manducant, & bibunt. Sed si credant, & confidant se gratiam ibi consecuturos, haec sola fides facit eos puros & dignos. Great ys the erroure of them that come to the Sacrament trusting to this, that they be confessed, that they knowe not them selues giltie of anie mortall sinne, that they haue saied their praiers before, that they haue prepared them selues: All they doe eate and drinke, their owne condemnacion. But if they beleue and trust that they shal there obtein grace, this faith alone maketh them pure and woorthie receauers.
Haue ye not hearde the same serpent nowe speaking to chrystian people, that in paradse spake to owre first parentes? Haue ye not heard him likewise encounteringe with his negatiue, the affirmatiue of Chryst and S. Paule, as he did the affirmitiue of God, who saied: In what day ye eate of this fruict, ye D shall die:: he contrariwise saing: Ye shall not die? Haue ye not heard that [Page]Chryst vsed that solemne preparacion of wasshing the feet of his Disciples, before he wolde minister vnto them the Sacrament of his blessed bodie and E blood? Saied not Chryst after that wasshing: I am vos mundi estis: Nowe ye Joan. 13. are clean? Did he not also then prepare them to humilitie and lowlinesse, whiche ys moche required in all that receaue the Sacrament? Yf I (saith Chryste) haue wasshed yowr feete being Lorde and Master, then ought yowe also to wassh one an others feete, I haue geuen yowe an example, that as I haue doen, euen so that ye doe. Ys not lowlinesse a necessarie vertue to a receauer of this Sacrament? yt ys not meet that a man knowe his owne filthinesse before he receaue and ther fore go to Chryste to be wasshed with the water of his grace? Ys yt not cō mendable that we saie with the Centurion: Lorde I am not woorthie that thowe entre Mith. 8. vnder my roofe? Ar we not so moued to doe by the olde Father Origen? Ouer and aboue all this also we are willed by. S. Paule to examine our selues, and yf we doe not, we shall eate and drinke our owne condemnacion: And yet this beast, this Serpent shameth not to saie clean cōtrarie, that yf ye confesse yowr sinnes, yf ye finde yowr self clere from all mortall sinne yf before F ye receaue, ye geue yowr self to praier, yf ye vse soche prepatiues, then ye eate and drinke yowr owne condempnacion, Who euer heard soche doctrine? What eares can abide yt? And yet this ys the doctrine of him that lightned the worlde with the knowledge of the trueth, as blinde men call yt.
But perchaunce some Lutheran in desence of his Patriarche will saie that S. Paule willing a man to examine himself spake onely as Luther doeth of What moued S. Paule to write of the Sacrament to the Corinth the examinacion of faithe. To trie this let vs haue recourse to the letter of S. Paules epistle and there see what moued him to write this. That moued him to write this, that moued him to write the wholl processe of the Sacramēt in the same eleuenth chapter. He wrote to the Corinthians in the matter of the Sacrament, for that they coming to the receipt therof admitted diuerse faultes and abuses in maners, but not in faith. For first of all (saieth S. Paule) when ye come together into the congregacion, I heare that ther ys dissention among yowe. Ther ys also an other faulte that euerie man beginneth a fore to eate his owne supper. And besides this in the eating of yowr Supper, ther G ys litle charitie. For one ys hungrie, and an other ys dronken, in the whiche their doinge they semed to despise the congregacion of God and shame the poor that of pouertie had nothing to eate. And for these cause when ye come together, the supper of our Lorde can not be eaten (saieth S. Paule) Of faithe here ys no one title. For S. Paule fownde no fault in the Corinthians as touching the matters of faith aboute the Sacrament, but aboute their maners in receauing of yt. And therfor as touching maners he saied: Let euery man examine him self, and so let him eate of that bread and drinke of that cuppe.
Ye see then that S. Paule moued by the euell maners of the Corinthians, and not by their euell faith was moued to entre the treactise of the Sacrament, S Paule corrected the maners of the Corinth and not their faith. wherfor therin he correcteth their maners, and not their faith. S. Paule then trauailing to remoue dissension, and to plant concorde, to remoue glottonie and to plant temperance: to remoue pride whiche the riche had in the shewe of their great suppers, and to plant humilitie: to remoue lacke of mercie whiche was in the riche, they being dronke, while their poor H were right hongrie, and to plant pitie: to remoue disdain and contempt, and to plant seemly regarde, saing also that these vices being in place, the supper of our Lorde coulde not well, and as yt ought, be eaten, did he not [Page 382]prepare the Corinthians and in them all chrystians to the woorthie receipt A of the Sacrament, did he not herein folowe the example of his master Chryste, goinge aboute to wassh awaie the filthinesse of their feet, that ys of their earthlie and carnall affections.
But what stand I so long in so open a matter? Finallie wher Luther saieth that if we haue faith, that we shall receaue grace ther, that grace alone maketh vs pure and woorthie receauers: First, I maie aske him by what rule he speaketh this? wher ys his scripture for yt? Might the Corinthians (trowe ye) being in the case that they were in, and hauing, as they had faith, might they I saie, receaue grace? Yf they might then, S. Paule was not true, that saied they shoulde receaue condemnacion.
But to looke somwhat nearer to this saing of Luther, yt wolde haue ben desined, and determined, seing ther be so manie faiths nowe a daies, by whiche faith a man shoulde receaue this grace. Yf he saie by the faith that he him self hath framed, the Carolstadins, Zwinglians, and Oecolampadius will denie that Yf Oecolāpadius will saie, by his faith that he hath deuised: the Swenck feldians, who denie all Sacramentes, denie that. Yf Caluine will chalenge yt to his faith that he hath inueuted, the Anabaptistes will not abide that. B Thus leauing vs in vncertenties, as manie others of his likes doe in other matters, he concludeth nothing.
In the ende, forasmoche as the Apostle speaketh of the vnwoorthie receauer signifieng therby, that ther ys a woorthie receauer yt apperteineh to owre Woorthie or vnworthie reteauers of the bless. Sacr. who be. pourpose to discusse, yf anie man maie be a woorthie receauer yt ys plain that a sinner ys no woorthie receauer. And S. Iohn saieth: Yf we saie that we haue no sinne we deceaue our selues, and ther ys no trueth in vs: yea so manie be our sinnes, that the Prophet Dauid saieth: Yf thowe Lorde will be extreame to marke what ys doen a misse, oh Lorde who maie abide yt? as who might saie, no man can abide yt. And therfor concluding all liuing men vnder sinne, saieth: In thie seight, o Lorde, shall no man liuinge be iustified. yf no man liuinge can 1. Joan. 1. be iustified, then no man liuing vs woorthie to receaue this blessed misterie. Psal. 130. What nowe then shall we faie to S. Paule, that appointeth woorthie receauers? Yt ys the minde of S. Paule to pronownce who ys an vnwoorthie receauer: but he describeth not the woorthie receauer. For in dede speaking of C woorthinesse in the propre significacion of yt, no man that liueth, be he neuer so iust, no though he were an Angell, yea if he were an Archanngell, yf he were of the highest of the Angells as of Cherubines and Seraphines can be accompted woorthie in that maner, to receaue this high and heauenlie misterie. Woorthinesse proprelie what yt ys. For proprelie that man ys woorthie of an other thing, when he him self or his desertes be equiualent, and doe fullie aunswere the goodnesse of the thinge, wherto yt ys referred, as in our cōmō speache we saie that foure pence be woorth a grote. And the woorkman ys woorthie his wages: in this kinde of woorthinesse no man ys or can be woorthie.
An other kinde of woourthinesse ys by reputacion, or acceptacion, when one ys accepted as woorthie, whē in very dede he ys not. As a queē to maririe a lowe subiect. A noble womā to marrie her seruāt betwē whō, whē cō parison ys made, ther ys neither birth, nor honour, nor liuing, nor dominiō nor richesse in the mā that can cownteruaill the womā, yet for somoch as yt liketh her so to accept him, by her acceptaciō he ys made nowe woorthie of her, who of himself before was not. Euē so our mercifull Lorde God, in power, wisdome ād goodnesse infinite, betwixt whō and vs sinfull creaturs ther D ys no cōparison, makinge through his great mercie of sinners, iust mē, and of [Page]vnwoorthie woorthie, when he seith vs in our weake maner endeuour ourselues to accomplish his holie will: when he beholdeth howe we prepare E and adonrne the tabernacle of owre hearte, being holden with moche desire ther in to receaue him, yt liketh him, though we maie still crie, Lorde I am not woorthie that thowe shouldest come vnder my roofe: yet he accepteth vs vpon soche preparacion as woorthie to his mercifull contentacion, and to our health and saluacion. Thus the text in part opened, and the detestable heresie of Luther somwhat touched, I shall for the farder exposition of the one, and the stronger confutacion of the other after my accustomed maner repair to the holie Fathers, and vnderstand also therin their mindes.
THE FOVRE AND FOVRTETH CHAP. BEGINneth the exposition of the Fathers vpon the same text with sainct Hierom and Chrysostome.
IN the allegacion of the Fathers that nowe shall be produced, F to geue vs the vnderstanding of this text, bicause manie be alleaged vpon the last scripture, and this dependeth vpon that, and so the one fullie expownded, the other ys the easier to be perceaued, I shall be the shorter, both in the nombre and also in the abiding vpon them. The first coople that commeth to my hande ys S. Hierom and Chrysostom. S. Hierom expownding the epistles of S. Paule, for the exposition of this text hath thus moche: Si [...]jn lintheum vel vas sordidum non illud mitterè audet, quanto magis in corde polluto? quam immundiciam Deus super Hieron. in. 11. 1. Cor. omnia execratur, & quae sola iniuria est eius corpori. Nam & Iosephille iustus propterea sindone munda inuolutum in sepulchro nouo corpus Domini sepeliuit, praefigurans corpus Domini accepturos tam mundam mentem babere, quàm nouam. Yf a man dare not putte that bodie into a filthie vessell or cloath, howe moche more in a defiled S. Hierō expowndeth S. Paule to speake of the bodie of our Lord. heart? which vncleannesse God aboue all thinges detesteth, as which ys the onelie wronge that nowe can be doen vnto his bodie. For therfor did Iosph also the righteouse, wrappe the bodie of our Lorde in a clean sheet, and so buried yt in a newe Tumbe, prefiguring that they that shoulde receaue G the bodie of our Lorde, shoulde haue bothe a newe and a clean minde. Thus moch S. Hierom.
In whome first we haue to obserue, that expowndinge S. Paule, who in this place calleth the Sacrament breade, and not absolutelie bread, but with an article (that bread) expowndeth yt to be the bodie of our Lorde, whiche also he doeth in an other place, by so expresse woordes that yt can not be denied. In his apologie against Iouinian he thus vttereth S. Paule saing: Probet se vnusquisque, & sic ad corpus Christi accedat. Let euerie man examine him self, and so let him come to the bodie of Chryste (saieth S. Hierom) yt were not an exposition but a confusion of the trueth, yf he shoulde call that the bodie of Chryst, that ys but breade. But yt ys more then euident in all Hieron. Apolo pr. lib. aduers Jouinianū. that place of S, Hierom, as the circunstance also inuinciblie prooueth, that he vnderstandeth S. Paule ther to haue spoken of the bodie of Chryst, and of no earthlie breade.
In the ende of this exposition, he doeth not onelie cōfirme this trueth of H Chrystes verie presence, but also he infirmeth and against saieth the wicked assertion of Luther. He saieth that Ioseph burieng the bodie Chryst in a clean [Page 382]sheet, and a newe Tumbe, prefigured that they that shoulde receaue the A bodie of Chryst, shoulde haue both a clean and a newe minde. For the presence, marke that he saieth by plain woordes, that we receaue the bodie of Let the proclamer see here howe plainlie S. Hierom vttereth S. Paules meninge. Chryst. Against Luther, who wolde haue no other preparacion in vs in the receipt of the bodie of Chryst but onelie faithe, he faieth that they that will receaue the bodie of Chryst, must haue bothe a clean and a newe minde. wherbie what ells ys ment, but that we must clense owre consciences from dead workes, whiche putrifie and stinke in our sowles, and so leauinge the olde man, we must be renewed in spiritte of our minde, and be cloathed with the newe man, whiche after God ys shapen in righteousnesse and true holinesse.
But let S. Hierome open him self, who expownding this text of S. Paule Whosoeuer eateth this bread, and drinketh the cuppe of oure lord vnwoorthilie, shall be giltie of the bodie and bloode of our lorde: saieth thus: Sicut scriptum est, Omnis mundus manducabit. Et iterum: Anima quae manducauerit immunda, exterminabitur de populo suo Hier. in 11 1. Cor. Et ipse Dominus ait: Si ante altarè recordatus fueris, quia habet frater tuus aliquid aduersum B te relinque munus tuum antè altare, & vade reconciliari fratri tuo. Prius ergo perscrutanda est conscientia, si in nullo nos reprehendit, & sic aut offerre, aut commnnicare debemus. Quidam sane dicunt, quia non indignum, sed indigne accipientem reuocet à sancto. Siergo dignus indignè accedens retrahitur: Quanto magis indignus, qui non potest accipere dignè? Vnde oportet ociosum cessare a vitiis vt sanctum Domini corpus, sanctè accipiat. As yt ys written Euery clean man shall eate, and again: That soule that shall eate being vnclean, shall be putt from amonge his people. And our Lorde him self saieth: Yf thowe remembre being before the aultar, that thie brother hath anie thing against thee, leaue thy gift before the aultar, and go to be reconciled to thy brother. Therfore the conscience ys first to be searched, yf yt doe in nothing reprehende vs, and so we aught Howe men aught to prepare them selues to receaue the bless. Sacr. either to offre or communicate. Ther besome that saie, that he doeth not hereforbidde the vnworthie man from the holie thinge, but him that receaueth vnwoorthilie. Yf the woorthie cominge vnwoorthilie be for bidden, howe moche more the vnwoorthilie that can not receaue woorthilie? Wherfore the euell doer must ceasse from vices, that he maie holilie receaue the holie bodie of our Lord. hitherto S. Hierom. Who in euery parte improoueth C the pestilent doctrine of Luther, First, by the olde Testament, whose extern cleanesse or vncleannesse being commaunded or forbidden in the eating of the holie thinges of the same lawe, be figures of spirituall cleannesse or vncleannsse of our consciences, required or prohibited in the receipt of the holie misteries in the newe lawe, So that, as ther was required an outwarde cleannesse in the bodie. So here ys required an inwarde cleannesse of conscience.
Besides this he beateth him downe with the plain and mightie authoritie Mè aught to prepare thēselues be for the receipt of the bless. Sacr. euen by Chryst rule of Chryst him self, who hathe geuen vs this order, that being at the aultar, and remembring that our brother hath anie matter against vs, we must first be reconciled to our brother, or that we can dooe anie thinge at the aultar, or offre sacrifice or receaue the holie Sacrament. Ys not this a notable preparacion commaunded by our M. Chryste? what can Luther and all his Disciples saie to this? Ys ther here nothinge required but faithe? ys not here full and perfect reconciliacion commaunded? Ys not here a discussion and examinacion of our consciences in calling to minde and remembrance yf D anie grief be betwixt vs and our brother? Yt ys so certenly. Wherfor S. Hierom concludeth sainge: Therfor first ys the conscience to be searched, yf yt dooe not reprehende vs, then maie we either offre or receaue. Yf the conscience be to be searched [Page]for soche matters of offence before we receaue, wher ys Luthers onelie faith that will make vs woorthie receauers? Luther saieth we maie not searche, E whether we finde our self giltie of anie offence or not: S. Hierom not onely saieth that our consciences are to be searched, but he also saieth that the euell dooer must ceasse from vices that he maie receaue the holie bodie of our Lorde holilie, in which woordes, note (geatle Reader) bothe thy preparacion before thowe receaue, and also what thowe doest receaue. Thy preparacion ys to ceasse from vices wherunto manie things appertein: the thinge that thowe receauest ys the holie bodie of our Lorde.
But S. Hierome hath saied sufficientlie both for the trueth of the presence and also against Luthers licenciouse doctrine. Wherfore we will nowe heare Chrysostome dooe the like. He also expowndeth this text of S. Paule and saieth thus: Probet seipsum homo, quod & in secunda inquit: Vosinet tentate si estis in fide: ipsi vos probatè non quemadmodum nunc facimus, temporis gratia accedentes, magis quàm animi studio, neque vt praeparati ad vitia nostra expurganda, compuctionis pleni accedimus: Chrysost in 11. 1. Cor. sed vt in solemnitatibus simus quando omnes adsunt, consideramus. Sed non ita F Paulus praecipit. Sed vnum tempus nouit quo accideremus, communicationis & conscientiae puritatem. Let a man examin himself. Whiche thinge also he saieth in the seconde epistle: Proue yower selues yf ye be in saith. doe ye yowr selues examine yowr selues. Not as we dooe nowe, comminge raither for the times sake, then for anie earnest affectiō or desire of the minde. Neither doe we come as full of compunction prepared to pourge oute our vices, but our consideracion ys, vpon that that all the people be assembled to gether, that we also maie be in the solemnities. But Paule doeth not so commaunde, but he knewe one time in the whiche we shoulde come, that ys, the puritie or cleannesse of communicacion and conscience.
That we shoulde not come to the receipt of the holie Sacrament, but when we be prepared, and haue pourged oute oure vices by compunction and repentaunce he declareth by an apt similitude, sainge: Nam si sensibili nunquam communicamus mensa, si febre laboramus, & malis humoribus abundamus, neperderemur: longè magis hanc tangere nephas est, absurdis cupiditatibus impediti, quae febribus grauiores sunt. Cùm autem absurdas dico cupiditates, etiam corporum dico, & pecuniarum, G & irae, & succensionis, & omnes simpliciter absurdas. Quae omnia accedentem exhaurire oportet, & it a purum illud attingerè sacrificium non pigrè disponi, & miserè cogi propter solemmtatē acccedere, neque rursum compunctum, & praeparatum impediri, eo quòd non sit solemnitas. Solemnitas enim operum est demonstratio, animae puritas, vitae certitudo, quae si habueris, semper celebrarè poteris solemnitatem, & semper accedere. Propterea (inquit) probet autem scipsum homo, & sic edat. For if we be sicke of a feuer, and doe abunde with humours, we wolde neuer be partakers of the cōmondiett This wholl sentence impugneth luthers wicked assertiō lest we sholde be cast awaie moche more yt ys wicked to touche, this table, beinge entangled with odiouse lustes, whiche be sorer then the feuers When I speake of naughtie and odiouse lustes or desires, I speake also of the lustes and desires of owre bodies, and of moneie, and of wraithe, and of anger, and plainlie of all lustes that be naught. All whiche he that cometh to receaue, must ridde awaie, and so receaue that pure sacrifice not to be flouthfullie disposed, nor miserablie to be compelled to come for the solemnitie. Neither again beinge penitent and prepared, to be letted, bicause ther ys no solemnitie. Solemnitie ys an euident declaracion of good woorkes, the H puritie of soule, the assurednesse of life. Whiche thinges if thowe hauest, tho we maist allwaies celebrate a Solemnitie, and allwaies come to the recept of the Sacrament therfor he saieth, let a man examine himself and so lett him eate. Thus farre Chrysostome.
[Page 383]In these woordes the saing of Luther ys also (as by S. Hierom) detected to A be deuelish and wicked. Luther will haue no preparacion of a man to come to receaue the Sacrament. But iudge thow, reader, whether we be not earnestlie admonished by Chrysostome to be prepared: whether we be not willed to cast awaie all the lustes of the bodie, of couetousnesse, and soch other: whether we shoulde not be penitent. For (saieth he) all that will receaue must as a man labouring of a feuer, and full of humours not receaue, vntill he hath pourged himself. But when he hath pourged himself then he maie eate of the meat that before he might not. Manie goodlie occasions trulie be geuen for exhortacion to godlie receauing, farre otherwise then Luther hath geuen, which to auoide prolixitie, I leaue to the consideracion of the reader wishing him yet to vnderstand, what yt ys that Chrysostome moueth vs to receaue. Yt ys (saieth he) purum illud sacrificium, that pure sacrifice. What ys, or can be, that pure sacrifice but the bodie of Chryste? Wherfor by Chrysostome yt ys the bodie of Chryst, that we receaue. Chrys Ho. oportet haeresies, &c.
But thow shalt heare himself speake yt in plain woords, in an homely wher B he saieth, thus moch of this matter. Deinde vbi multum disputauit de his, qui indigné communicant mysteriis, eosue repraehendisset grauiter & demonstrasset quòd idem supplicium passuri essent, quod ij qui Christum occiderant, si sanguinē eius & corpus absque probacione & temerè accipiant, rursum ad propositam materiā sermonē conuertit. Then when Daunger of the vnwoorthie receauing of the bless. Sacr. he hath disputed moch of those which vnwoorthilie receaue the mysteries and had greuouslie rebuked thē, and had declared that they should suffre the same punishment, that they did, which had slain Chryst, if thei receaue the bodie and blood of Chryst rashlie withoute anie examinaciō, he turneth again his communicacion to the matter in hand.
Note this then well, that by expresse and plain woordes, Chrysostome saieth, that we shall suffre the same pain, that they which crucified Chryst, if we rashlie without examinacion of our selues receaue the bodie and blood of Chryst. Wherby he teacheth that we receaue the bodie of Chryst in the Sacramēt, ād that which ys more, ād ys the great proof of the reall ād substācial presence of Chrystes bodie ād blood in the blessed Sacr. that euell men receaue yt, which argueth that presence ther to be by the assured power of C God, at the due pronunciaciō of his woord, according to the catholike faith, grownded vpon Gods holie woorde. And not to depende vpon the vncertē Sacramentaries doctrine ys without all grownd or authoritie of scripturs vnadsured, and sleight faith of the receauer, according to the phantasticall doctrine of the Sacramentaries, grownded and fownded vpon no one title of Gods woord, but onelie vpon their own pleasures and phansies. Let this Proclamer if he cā, if he cā not, let him praie aide of his likes, and bring furth one scripture, that teacheth this doctrine that faith onelie maketh Chryst present vnto vs in the Sacr. and that he ys not verilie and reallie present in the Sacr. as ys saied, and he shall haue the victorie. Yf he cā not let him for shame, let him yelde, let the trueth haue the victorie. Better yt ys for him a litle here to be confownded, then to suffre euerlasting confusion, in the worlde to come.
But to return to our matter, I wolde here ende, but that I thinke yt moche pitie to kepe from the knowledge of the godlie reader, so godlie a lesson as Chrysostome hath in this matter, conteining both faithfull instruction, and godlie exhortacion. Thus he writeth: Considera nunc quanta illi veteris sacrificii participes vitae frugalitate vtehantur. Quid enim ii non faciebant, omni tempore purisicabantur. Hom. 3. in Epist. ad Eph. D Et tu ad salutarē hanc hostiam accessurus, quam angeli ipsi cum tremore suscipiut, rē tantam circūscribis tēporū ambitu? Qua frōte teipsum sistes ad Christi tribunal praesentē, qui impuris manibus ac labiis, sic impudenter ipsius corpus ausus sis attingere. Regem vtique non eligas [Page] exosculari, siquidem os tuum olet grauiter: & regem coelorum impudens exoscularis, anima tua tam vitits olente? atrox sanè contumelia est res huiusmodi, dic tu mihi: Num eligas illotis E manibus ad tam venerabilem victimam accedere? Non puto, quin, vt coniicio, malis prorsus tibi temperare ab aditu, quam sordidis accedere manibus. At interim in paruo tam religiosus cum sis, animam autem habens coeno vitiorum squalentem accedis, & audes impudens contingere? Etiamsi ob manuum sordes ad tempus quis contineat, sed ad animam omni elunic vitiorum repurgandam, totus interim redeat. Consider nowe what great godlinesse of life the receauers of the olde sacrifice did vse, what did they not? Sacrifice of the aultar honourable to Angels. They were alwaies purified, and doest thow coming to this healthsome sacrifice, which the angells thēselues doe with trembling honour, doest thowe measure so great a thing with the compasse of time? with what countenaūce wilt thow stand before the iudgement seat of Chryste, who hauest ben so bolde, with impure and vnclean hands and lippes so impudentlie to touche his bodie? Thowe woldest not, if thowe haddest a stinking mouthe, take vpō thee to kisse the kinge: And doest thowe, thow impudent man, kisse the king of heauens, thy soule so sore stinking with vices and sinnes? This maner of F thing ys a cruell reproache. Tell me woldest thow take vpon thee to come to this honorable sacrifice with vnwashed hands? I thinke not. But as a gesse thow haddest leuer altogether forbeare to go to yt, then to come to yt, with filthie handes. And whilest thowe arte so religiouse in a small thing darest thow (thowe impudent man) touche this, hauing a soule defiled with the filthinesse of sinnes? Although a man for the vncleannesse of his handes doe witholde himself for a time, but yet to clense his soule frō the pestilent stinking sinke of vices, let him whollie geue himself. Thus he.
Thow hauest heard, reader, a notable godlie saing of Chrysostome. Thow maist therin, as I haue saied, finde faithfull instruction, and godlie exhortaciō. 1 Three poincts of instruction in Chrysost. woordes. As concerning instruction, thow art instructed here in three poinctes? First, that Chrystes verie bodie ys in the Sacrament. Which thow art taught by expresse woordes, when he saieth to the finful man: darest thow with vncleā hands and lippes impudently touche his bodie? wherin he teacheth that the bodie of Chryst ys so present in the Sacrament, that yt ys touched both with hands and lippes whē yt ys receaued, which maner of receauing argueth the G corporall substance of Chryst to be present, which maie be touched according to Chrystes owne sainge: Palpate, & videte quia spiritus carnem & ossa non habet, sicut me vid [...]tis habere. Feel and see, that a Spiritt hath not flesh and bones as yt see me to haue. Again wher he saieth to the like man: Thowe woldest not take vpon thee, with a stinking mouthe to kisse the kinge. And darest thowe kisse the kinge of heauens, thy soule so stinking with vices? Marke yt well, So certenlie ys the bodie of Chryst presentlie touched, that he calleth the same the King of heauens. What wise, godlie, or learned man making sermons to the people, wolde euer call the Sacramen (if therin were nothing but a peice of bread) the bodie of Chryst, and the king of heauens, and so leaue yt to them to beleue, if yt were not as he calleth yt? Yt were not to teach but to deceaue: not to edifie, 2 The bodie of Chryste maie be touched and receaued of him that hath a silthie soule. but to destroye. Wherfore vnderstand that by the doctrine and instruction of Chrysostome, the verie bodie of Chryst, the verie kinge of heauens, ys in the Sacrament receaued into our handes and lippes.
The seconde poinct of instruction confirmeth the first, whiche poinct ys that men defiled in soule maie yet receaue with their handes and mouthes H the bodie of Chryst, the king of heauens. Which poinct although he doeth open and declare throwoute the wholl processe: yet speciallie when he saieth: darest thowe not kisse the King if thow hauest a stinking mouthe. And darest thowe kisse [Page 384] the king of heauens thy soule stinking with filthie and stinking vices? By which woordes A he fullie teacheth that men defiled, and corrupted in soule, maie yet (though to their condemnacion) receaue the bodie and blood of Chryst. But vpon this bicause moch ys allreadie saied, and this ys so plainlie testified by Chrysostome, I will not tarie. 3 Sacrifice auouched.
The thirde poinct of his instruction, that also confirmeth the presence ys: that he saieth that the Sacrament ys a sacrifice, which he doeth in the beginning of his saing, wher alluding to the preparacion of the receauers of the sacrifices of the olde lawe, he saieth, they clensed purified, and ordred thēselus. And wilt thow (saieth he) come to this holsome sacrifice, which Angels with trēbling doe honoure, by the measure of time? Meaning that the people should not cōme to receaue vpō this onelie pourpose, that yt ys a solemne feast, but vpō this that they be pure and clean in conscience, frō all filthiness of sinne. Wher ye see that Chrysostome doeth not onelie call yt a sacrifice, but also saieth yt to be soch a sacrifice as Angels with trembling doe honoure, which Sacrifice ys not our sacrifice of thankesgeuing (as the Sacramentaries doe feign) for that ys no soch thing, as wherunto the Angels should doe honoure, or in the presence of which thei should trēble: No, this sacrifice ys soch, as vnto the which Chrysost. exhorteth to preparacion contrarie to Luthers doctrine. B being in yt self honourable: yet we maie come to yt with vnwashed hands, saieth Chrysostome, wherfor yt ys of an other sorte, which ys in dede the Sacrifice of Chrystes bodie and blood, which ys alwaies to the Angels honourable. He geueth also godlie exhortaciō, which whollie consisteth in the preparaciō of our selues, to pourge and clense our selues from all filthinesse of euell liuing, or viciouse affectiō. To this he persuadeth bi the exāple of them, that were partakers of the sacrifices of the olde lawe, which purified and clē sed themselues, and kept thēselues clean in that time. By the exāple also of a man, that will not presume, for bicause he hath a stinking mouth, to kisse the King, that we moch more hauing stinking soules should not presume to receaue Chryst our King. And thirdly by example of extern reuerence doē to the Sacrament in the time of Chrysostome, at which time the people receauing the Sacramentes into their handes, vsed not so to receaue, but they had wasshed their hāds before. By all which exāples he moueth the receauers of this blessed, holie, and diuine Sacrament, to pourge thēselues, to clense their consciences, C to purifie their soules frō the stinking sinke of vices, and so with all cleannesse of bodie and soule to come to the receipt of the mysteries. In all which proceasse, howe moch he varieth and dissenteth frō the wicked doctrine of Luther, yt ys more manifest then I nede to open yt. For Luther reiecteth all cōfession of sinnes which ys our clensing and pourging: regardeth not our examinaciō as touching life despiceth and contēnethour praiers ād preparacion, onelie a certain faith he wold haue which he saieth sufficeth.
But this holie Chrysostome, as a right Chrystiā mā ought to doe speakinge and writing to Chrystiā mē, presupposeth faith. Wherfor speaking no woord of yt, whollie laboureth to haue Chrystian receauers to be diligent in preparacion of themselues, to be chaste in bodie, pure in soule, clean in conscience vncorrupted in heart, in pourpose diuerted frō vice, whollie cōuerted to vertue. The subtle craft of the Deuell aboute Luther and so in other like. This is the doctrin of exhortaciō geuē bi holie fathers of Christs church. Wherfor embrace yt, reader, for yt ys fowded vpō a sure stone. As for the doctrine of Luther a father of Sathās Synagog, yt ys a doctrin meit to be breathed oute of Sathan. For wilt thow see the subtilitie of Sathan? Whē he had corrupted the faith of Luther in no small nombre of articles, by whiche corruption D he was nowe before God, as hauing no faith, feeringe leest by the doinge [Page]of good woorkes, doen with godlie zeale and deuocion, God might be procured E to haue mercie vpon him, and reduce him from his heresie, as diuerse haue ben, thought yt good, as he spoiled him of his faith: so to spoill him of his good woorkes also, and to bringe that to passe, he breathed into him, that onely faith sufficeth, wherby good woorkes neclected, and his painted faith being nothing he and his Disciples shoulde be clean destituted and naked both from faith and workes, so that nothing should remain in them for God to woorke vpon, but that Sathan shoulde be assured of them, and haue the wholl possession of them. Wherfore, reader, slie the snares of the deuell, and hauinge faith, studie to be fruictfull in good woorkes also, that thy master and Sauiour maie vouchesafe to come with his Father and the holie Spiritt to dwell and abide in thee.
THE FIVE AND FIFTETH CHAP. PROCEAdeth vpon the same text by I sicbius and sainct Augustine.
HAuing in consideracion the detestablenesse of Luthers sainge, ād to what licenciousnes, yt maketh a redie open waie, how lightlie F yt entrappeth the sensuall person, how directly also yt standeth against S. Paules owne woordes, that we haue now in hande, how yt swarueth from the doctrine of all holie Fathers, and writers, I can not contein, but I must somwhat more saie in yt, that where yt ys sufficientlie confuted by two noble Fathers of the Church yt maie be perceaued by a more nombre, more fullie doen. I haue therfor intended to produce an other coople of Chrystes house, which be Isichius and S. Augustin by whose testimonie, I doubte yt not, the matter shall be made verie clere. I sichius writeth thus: Probet autem seipsum homo, & sic de pancillo edat, & de calice Jsich in 26 Leuitic. bibat. Qualem probationem dicit? id est, vt in corde mundo atque conscientia, & poenitentiam corum, quae deliquit intendenti, participetur sanctis ad ablutionem peccatorum suorum. Let a man examine himself, and so let him eate of that bread, and drinke of that cuppe. What maner of examinacion doeth he speake of? yt ys this, that in a clean heart and conscience, and to him that mindeth to doe penaunce for those sinnes, that he hath offended in, thee Sacrament shoulde be geuen to holie persons, to the washing awaie of their sinnes. G
In this breif saing of Isichius, note I praie yowe, that asking vpon the woordes of S. Paule, what examinacion he wolde we shoulde make, He aunswereth that we shoulde be of clean heart, and conscience, and of minde to doe penaunce for our sinnes, before we receaue, but of Luthers faith he speaketh no one woorde so that teaching soch examinacion to be made, he confowndeth Penaunce, clean heart and consciē ce necessarie to the receauers of the bless. Sacr. clean Luthers doctrine. Luther saieth we must make no preparaciō by confession, which ys a parte of penaunce, this authour saieth that we must doe penaunce for those offences that we haue committed. Luther saieth that we maie not search whether we finde ourselues giltie or no: this authour saieth that we must be clean in heart and conscience, which can not be knowē but by soch search. What shall I saie more, but that Luthers wicked doctrine ys in euery parte contrarie to the wholsome doctrine of the Fathers, euen as a mā wolde of a sette pourpose take a vieue of their sainges, and maliciouslie saie the contrarie of all that he findeth them to haue saied: Which thinge ye shal more manifestlie perceaue, when ye shall heare the saing of S. Augustine also produced for the vnderstanding of S Paule. From whom bicause I wil not long detein yowe, his saing shall be furthwith ascribed.
[Page 385]Thus he writeth: Ab iis, pietas Domini nostri Iesu Christi nos liberet, & seipsum A edendum tribuat, qui dixit: Ego sum panis viuus, qui de coelo descendi. Qui manducat meam carnem, & bibit meum sanguinem habet vitam aeternam in seipso. Sed vnusquisque antequam August. ad Julian. Epist. 111. corpus & sanguinem Domini nostri Iesu Christi accipiat, seipsum probet, & secundùm Apostoli praeceptum, sic de pane illo edat, & de calice bibat. Quia, qui indignè mandu cat corpus & sanguinem Domini, iudicium sibi manducat, & bibit, non diiudicans corpus Domini. Quando enim accipere debemus, anteà ad confessionem, & poenitentiam recurrere debemus, & omnes actus nostros curiosius discutere, & peccata obnoxia si in nobis senseriserimus, cito festinemus per confessionem, & veram poenitentiam abluere, ne cum Iuda proditore Diabolium intra nos celautes pereamus, protrahentes & celantes peccatum nostrum de die in diem. Etsi quid mali aut nequam cogitauimus, de eo poenitentiam agamus, & velociter illud de corde nostro eradere festinemus. The greate mercie of our Lorde Iesus Chryst, deliuer vs from these things, and geue himself to be eaten, who saied: The receauer of the bless. Sacrmust prepare himself, by cōfessiō. I am the bread of life, which came dowen from heauen. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath euerlasting life in himself. But let euery man before he receaue the bodie and blood of our Lord Iesus Chryst, examine himself, and so B according to the commaundement of the Apostle, let him eate of that bread, and drinke of that cuppe. For he that vnwoorthilie eateth the bodie and blood of our Lorde, eateth and drinketh his own condēnaciō making no differēce of the bodie of our lord. Therfor when we shall receaue, we aught before to haue recourse to confession and penaunce, and most diligentlie search all our actes and doings. And if we finde anie sinnes in vs woorthie of punishment, let vs spedelie hast by confession and true penaunce to washe them awaie, leest we with Iudas hidinge the deuell within vs, doe perish by that we doe protracte and hide our sinne from daie to doe, ād if we haue thought anie euell or vnhappinesse, let vs doe penance for yt, and make hast quicklie to wipe yt clean from our heartes. Thus moch S. Augustine.
Ye haue now heard howe we should examine our selues S. Hieron. Chrysostome, and Isichius, gaue vs like instruction in generall woordes, but S. Augustine hath touched the matter with speciall woordes. For he expownding howe we shall examine or selues according to S. Paules precept, saieth: that if we minde to receaue the holie Sacrament we ought before to haue recourse C to confession and penaunce, and so most diligentlie sifte and search al our doinges. The doctrine of S. Augustine and other fathers ys now heard as touching our examinaciō: the doctrine of Luther ys also knowen. Iudge nowe I Luther ys herin direotliecōtrarie to the fathers to S. Paule and to Chryste. beseche thee (gētle reader) how he agreeth with thē. Ys he not in euery title plainlie repugnaunt to them? He wolde haue no preparacion before we, receaue. All they, as with one mouthe, exhorte vs to great and diligent preparaciō. He wold haueno cōfessiō: S. Augustine by expresse woords requireth cō fession and penance. Luther saieth, yf we prepare our selues by confession, penance, and other good workes, we receaue our condemnacion: S. Paule ād the holy fathers saie, if we doe not examine our selues and prepare our selues we reccaue or owne condemnacion.
Hauest thow not heard the serpēt againg or raither the deuel in the Serpēt contrarieng Gods owne woords, ād his holie saincts? Wherin they saie, yea, he therin saieth naie: and wherin they, saie naie, therin he saieth yea. I wolde to God that all they that haue geuen their eares to the hissing of this Serpēt and haue ben therby allured to fall from the auncient faith and godlie religion D of Chrystes Church, wolde but weigh the doctrine of him in this parte (although he hath manie other poinctes as wicked, and as loathsome ād ab hominable as this) that thei might perceaue what stone their faith, ys builded [Page]on, what a fownder, ād patrone they haue of their new religiō. Yf ther were no more but this, yt wold make me afraied to folowe soch a Schoolemaster. E
As Luther ys here touched by S. Augustine, so ys the Proclamer also. For as Luther will no confession to be made before receipt of the Sacrament, no more will he and his complices, as the practise in the Church of Englōd dothe well declare? wher, by their meanes confession of sinnes ys so abandoned, that allmost ther ys no woorde of yt. Not onelie in this ys the Proclamer touched, but in one other poinct also wherin Luther ys not touched, and that ys in the presence of Chryst in the blessed Sacrament, wherin the Proclamer ys woorse then Luther. S. Augustin expownding S. Paules woords speake the by clain woordes: Let euerie man before he receaue the bodie and blood of our Lorde Iesus Chryst, examine himself, according to the precept of S. Paule. Perceaue then that by S. Augustine yt ys the precept of S. Paule to examine our selues Note here howe S. Augustine vttereth S. Paules woordes before we receaue the bodie and blood of Chryst, and not before we receaue a peice of bread, and drinke a cuppe of wine. So that here again as in diuerse other before, we see that S. Angustine expownding S. Paule calleth yt the bodie and blood of Chryst, that S. Paule calleth the bread and cuppe of oure Lord, teaching that by that same bread and cuppe, S. Paule ment none F other thing, but our heauenlie bread and cuppe, the bodie and bloode of ower Lord Iesus Chryst, I trust he can not saie, but S. Augustine hath here spoken plain enough, yf he hath not, I wolde he had taught him to speake plainer.
But to returne to our pourpose: yt ys well to be perceaued that S. Augustine teacheth here two thinges, which the Proclamer refuseth, that ys, the presence, and confession, of which both robbinge the people, he hath with all robbed them of godlie deuocion and feare, and opened the gate to them, to let them runne headling to all licenciousnesse, and abhominable liuinge. Among manie euells which they committe in putting awaie confession, two Two great euells committed by putting awaie of cō fession. in my iudgement be notable. The one ys that they wolde make the ordeinaunce of God voide, and his authoritie vain: The other that the simple passe and ende their liues withoute repentance.
As touching the first certen yt ys that God hath in his Church made thys ordeinaunce, and therto hath geuen his power that sinnes shoulde be remitted. This ordeinaunce he did with a Solemnitie. For he first breathed vpon G his Apostles, and when he had so doen, he saied: Accipite Spiritum sanctum, Quorum remiseritis peccata, remittūtur eis, & quorum retinueritis retēta sunt. Receaue yowe the holie Gost, whose sinnes ye remitte, they are remitted, and whose sinnes yowe retein, they are reteined. Beholde in the doing of this ordeinaunce Joan. 20. the holie Gost ys first geuen to the Apostles, and after the gift of the holie Gost the authoritie to remitte sinne ys solemnelie geuen. Now if confession be taken awaie, and sinnes by the mynisters be not forgeuen in the people, then ys the ordeinaunce voide, then ys the authoritie vain. For wher, when, or howe doe they exercise this powre of Chryste in the remission of sinnes, yf they doe yt not vpon penitētes? how shal they know penitentes but by cō fession? Confession then taken awaie, yt must nedes folow that the ordeinasice of God ys voide, and that his authoritie ys vainlie geuen to his Churche.
S. Augustine saieth that for our fragilitie, God ordeined penaunce. These be his woordes: Ordinauit nobis poenitentiam propter fragilitatem nostram. Ideo debemus nostras cōfessiones veraciter confiteri, et fructus dignos facere, id est, praeterita ne iteremus, secundùm H August. ad Julian. comit epla. 111. iussionem Denm timentis sacerdotis. Qui sacerdos vt sapiens, & medicus, primùm sciat curare peccata sua, et postea aliena vulnera detergere, et sanare, & non publicare. [Page 387] Nos sequamur perquiramus, & cum talibus consilium salutis nostrae ineamus, vt non perdamus A haereditatem coelestem, quam nobis Dominus ab initio mundi praeparauit, si seruiamus ei in iusticia, & sanctitate, & puritate cordis, & charitate non ficta. God in consideracion Confession aught to be madetrulie of our fragilitie hath ordeined for vs penaunce. Therfore we aught to confesse our confessions trulie and doe the worthie fruictes of penaunce, that ys, accordinge to the commaundement of the preist fearing God, that we committe not again our sinnes past. Whiche preist let him first knowe, as a wise man and good phisitian to cure his owne sinnes, and after to wipe clean, and to heale other mens woondes, and them not to publishe. Let vs folowe, let vs searche, and with soche let vs entre some holsome talke of our healthe, that we leese, not our heauenlie inheritance, whiche God hath prepared for vs from the beginninge of the worlde, yf we serue him in holinesse, and rightwisonesse, and puritie of heart and charitie not feigned, hitherto S. Augustine.
Se ye not that pennaunce ys gods ordeinaunce mercifullie appoincted for our fragilitie? Se ye not what S. Augustine inferreth to be doen on our behalf vpon that ordeinaunce? Therfor (saieth he) must we trulie confesse our confessions. And that the hissing serpent shoulde not deceaue thee, sainge: B that he speaketh of confession onelie to be doen to God, he by expresse woordes saieth yt must be doen to the preist, by whoise cōmaundemēt we must doe the woorthie fruicts of penaūce. Wher again note that he saieth that the preist hath or aught to haue these three poinctes: to make clean the Three things perteining to a gostlie father. woondes of our Sinnes (vnderstand by godlie counsell and whosome doctrine, and iniunction of penaunce) to heale them (vnderstand by the authoritie of absolucion) Thirdlie, not to publishe them, but to kepe most secrete all thinges in confession disclosed. I maie conclude then that to take awaie confession ys to make gods ordeinaunce voide, and his authoritie geuen for the remission of sinnes, to be geuen in vain.
The other notable euell ys that the simple people passe their liues, yea, and manie ende the same withoute penance. Confession beside manie other commodities, had these two: Yt was occasion that fewer sinnes amō ge Two great cōmodities of cōfessiō. younge people were committed: And yt was an occasion also to call thē selues to an accompte for soche as they had comitted. And vpon the remembrance C of them, and vpon farder and speciall exhortacion, admonicion and Counsell geuen vpon particular offences, and seuerallie applied in the same confessions, by the discreet hearers of the same, to make them to vnderstand the grauitie of their offences, and ther with and by, to make them earnestlie penitent, and so to cause them with sythes and humble prostracions, and other exercises of penitent persons, to receaue the great mercie of God, whiche mercie so receaued vndoubtedlie they obteined.
But nowe confession beinge abandoned, youthe withoute feare or shame fal to all kinde of vices, wherby vice nowe excessiuelie abundeth. Contrition for soche vices before God ther ys none. The gauitie of sinnes, other wise then worldlie shame leadeth ys not discerned. The accōpte that soche people call themselues to before God either yt ys merueilouse slender, or Penance banished oute Englond. none at all. Penaunce ys not seen, Sackcloath and herecloath, be not in vse Fastinge ys derided and skorned. Praier ys shortned, and almost banished. Charitie ys all most dead for cold. The teares of Peter and Mary Magdalene are dried vppe, they washe not ourfaces. Alas what speake we of these bitter woorkes of penaunce, when we heare not in these daies from a penitent he D art, as moche as this poour voice of the publicame. O God be mercifull to me a [Page] sinner? Or this one voice of Kinge Dauid, Peccaui, I haue sinned. But the younge man and the maidē, the Mā ād the wief, yea, the auncient father, ād the matrone E passe oute the moueth and the yeare, yea, and yeare, after yeares, the first in wanton and licenciose life, the next in stoutenesse of Manhode, in quarelinge, in sighting, in robbinge, in slainge, in deceauinge, and wrong doinge: The thirde in auarice, and greadie gettinge and kepinge, wherin euery state pleasinge them selues, they go furth, amendment of life not nitended, neither mercie desiered.
Nowe for somoche as Chryst saieth: Nisi poenitentiam egeritis, omnes similiter peribitis. Except ye doe penaunce, ye shall all perishe: what maie we more Luc. 13. fear to ensewe vpon the greatest nombre but perdicion, losse and damnacion? But God who ys riche in mercie, and who (as S. Paule saieth) for his great loue, wherwith he loued vs, when we were Ehp. 2. dead by sinnes, quickned vs together in Chryst, and raised vs vppe together with him, and made vs to sitte to gether with him among them in heauen, in Chryst Iesu: he nowe quicken vs and raise vs vppe again from the deathe F of hereticall and sinfull life, and make vs by true faith, ād true penaunce to sitte to getheher with him in the vnitie of his Churche amonge them that be settled in faithe and charitie in his catholique Church, which ys (though yt be yet vpon the earth) the kingdome of heauen, as Chryst in the gospell doeth testifie. Math. 25.
But that I seeme not (as yt ys in the proverbe) to daunce oute of the daunce, or forgetting my limittes to walke oute of my compasse, and so leauing my principall matter, to wander in digressions (although this matter be apperteinent necessarelie, vnto the principall matter in dede) I shall ende this matter of cōfession with these fewe woordes, trustinge that God will geue me grace and time to speake more of yt in an other place. But yet reader forgett not thowe, that yt ys the mean of thy preparacion, as S. Augustine hath taught thee, yf thowe wilt come to receaue the bodie and bloode of thy Lorde Iesus Chryst. Whiche bodie and bloode thowe hauest also hearde the same S. Augustine auouchinge to be receaued in the holie Sacrament. G
THE SIXE AND FIFTETH CHAP. ENDETH the exposition of this text, By Theodoret, and Anselm.
WEll perceauing that manie, and those of the cheifest and most famouse men of Chrystes Parliament house, haue ben nowe produced to testifie vnto vs the enacted trueth of the right vnderstandinge of S. Paule, I haue thought yt good, not to troble the reader, with the allegacion of manie mo vpon this text but haue staied my self with one coople onelie, although the Proclamer him self knoweth that mo might be produced. In the producinge of which, I can not cōmitte but one of them (as cōmlie here to fore I haue doen) be of the later daies (whiche I tearme the lower house) that the doctrine of the later daies maie be cōferred with the doctrine of the auncient daies whiche being perceaued to be all one the malice of the Proclamer and his likes maie be the more perceaued, H and their confusion more euidentlie daclared. This coople thē shall be Theodorete and Anselme.
Theodorete one of the higher house, whose testimonie ye haue hearde [Page 387]vpon the last text before this in the last chapter of the expositiō of the same A text, most manifestlie testifienge the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament, so manifestlie that he saith, that yt ys receaued with handes and mouthes. Whiche inuinciblie argueth the verie reall and substanciall presence of Chrystes bodie. For their offices serue not to the receipt of the spirituall bodie. This Teodorete then knowinge what a great gift of God yt ys for a sinfull mortall man to receaue the bodie of his Lord, vpon this text of S. Paules sainge: Let euery man examin himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drinke of that cuppè saieth thus: Sic tui ipsius Iudex vitam tuam exactè iudica: conscientiam scrutare, Theodoret in. [...]1. 1 Cor & examina & tunc dominum suscipe: So thowe beinge thine owne iudge, exactlie iudge thine owne life, searche and examine thine owne conscience, and then receaue the gift. Thus Theodorete.
As who might saie, forasmoche as euerie act of man, beinge Good or euell shall be iudged either by man himself, or ells by God, yf man preuent not the iudgement of God, and in God ther ys a mercifull bowntifullnesse in geuinge, as in man ther aught to be a semelie duetie in receauinge, therfore seinge God geueth vs so great a gifte as the bodie of his owne dere Sonne, and our parte ys to be fownde pure, clean, vndefiled, and withoute offence B at the same receipt, let euerie one of vs before we receaue that gifte of God, preuent the iudgement of God, and enter into iugement with owre selues, and be our owne iudges. Let vs looke strictlie vpon our life: let vs examine our consciences, and see whether we be meete to receaue the gift or no. To be shorte our life and conuersacion must be iudged our consciences must be examined and searched, before we can receaue this blessed gift of God, the bodie of his Sonne Iesus Chryst. Yt maie verie well be called his gifte. For in dede yt ys a thinge that ys his, and not owres, but as geuen to vs yt cometh from him, and not from vs: yt ys instituted by him, and not by vs: the wholl title and interest, the full right and propretie ys in him, and not in vs. Seing then the gifte ys his, and the gifte so woorthie and so great, meete yt ys that we receaue yt seemelie.
But yt will be, that the aduersarie will thinke, that I presume to farre vpō this authour, that wher he calleth the Sacrament but the gifte of God, I call yt the bodie of Chryste. Let the aduersarie vnderstande that I neither swarue C from the trueth nor from the minde of the authour. For besides that he saieth here vpon S. Paule, he in an other place expowndeth him self what he meneth by the gifte, and saieth thus talkinge in a dialoge, and asking a question: Quid appellas donum, quod offertur post sanctificationem? Orth. corpus Christi, & The dorit Dialog. 2. sanguinem Christi. Era. Et credis te fieri participem Christi corporis & sanguinis? Orth. Ita credo. What after sanctificacion doest thowe call the gift that ys offred? The aunswere: I call them the bodie of Chryst and the bloode of Chryste. A plain place for the proclamer both for real presence, and sacrifice. The question. And doest thowe beleue thy sels to be made partaker of the bodie and bloode of Chryste? The aunswere. So I beleue. Thus Theodorete. Ye maie perceaue then that I callinge the gift, the bodie of Chryst, doe folowe the minde of the authour, who both did so call yt, and so beleue yt to be, as after in the same dialoge yt ys easie to see. In this authour then, as in other before alleadged we finde plain and sufficient matter bothe against Luther, and against the Proclamer. Against Luther. For the authour saieth we must exactlie iudge our life and searche and examine our conscience whiche (as ye haue hearde ofter then once) Luther saieth yt aught not to be doen, onelie faith ys to be had. Against the Proclamer he teacheth that the bodie D and blood of Chryst be in the Sacracrament, and more against him he saieth [Page]that they so beleued, and adored as beinge those thinges that they beleued.
Thus hauinge but, as yt were glaūced by the notes of the sainges of this E authour, and a litle touched the aduersarie by conference of the doctrine of eche side: I passe to Anselme, as to one of the lower house, of whome we shal learn what doctrine was professed in that house and whether yt was dissonaunt to the doctrine of the fathers in the vnderstanding of S. Paule. Thus writeth he vpon this text of S. Paule: Nemo praesumat accedere indignus. Sed homo, id est rationabiliter agens, probet, id est, discutiat, & examinet prius seipsum, qut etiam ex eo Anselm. in 11. [...] Cor. quod homo est, sinè peccato non est. Probet autem seipsum, id est, vitam suam inspiciat & cōsideret, an dignè possit accedere vel non. Rarò enim inueniri potest quisquā ita magnus & iustus, vt in eo per dt scussionem, non inueniatur aliquid quod debeat eum à corporè & sanguine Domini tardare, nisi confessus fuerit illud & per paenitentiam deleuerit. Probet se, & sic, id est, postquam se probauerit, edat de pane illo, & bibat de calice, quia tunc ei proderit. Let no man beinge vnwoorthie presume to come, but let the man, that ys to saie, the reasonable dooer, examine, that ys searche and trie first himself who also for that that he ys a man, he ys not withoute sinne. But let him examine himself, that ys, let him beholde his owne life, and considre yt, whether he maie come woorthilie or no. For seldon maie anie man be fownde F so great and iust, that in him cā nothinge be fownde, that maie staie him frō the bodie and bloode of owre Lorde. Except he confesse yt and by penawnce wipe yt awaie. Let him examine himself and so, that ys, after that he hathe examined him selfe, let him eate of that bread and drinke of that cuppe. for then yt shall doe him good. Thus farre Anselmus.
This ys a plain exposition, but as godlie, and true, as ys ys plain. What can the Aduersarie reprehend in this expositiō? wherin dissenteth he from the auncient Fathers, in expownding S. Paule? They all saie that the examinacion of our selues that S. Paule speaketh of here, ys a triall or a searche, anentringe, into iudgement with owre owne liues and conuersations vpon the testimonie of our owne consciences, whether we be clean from sinne or no, and so saieth he. S. Augustine saieth that if anie thing be amisse in vs, we must by confession and penaunce put yt awaie, the like saieth this authour. All the rest vnderstand S. Paule to haue spoken here of the bodie and bloode of Chryst: and so doeth he. Wherin then ys the quarrel of the Aduersarie? bicause he and his companie speake to plain. They can not be wrested. G For to saie that they dissent in the doctrine of faithe from the auncient fathers, yt ys to impudent an vntrueth.
To conclude ye haue nowe hearde these three last cooples expownding S. Paule, and they all determe that ther must be an examinacion in life and maners and a semelie preparaciō of our selues before we receaue the blessed Sacrament. Wherin they ouerthrowe the Satanicall doctrine of Luther, who The preparacion that we are commaunded to make for the receipt of the B. Sacr. and the daunger of vnworthie receauing argueth the real presēce wolde haue no examinacion, no consession no preparaciō. Again they all vnderstand S. Paule to haue spoken of the bodie and bloode of Chryste in this processe. Wherfore the heresie of the Proclamer and of the rest of the Sacramentaries, whiche they wolde fain grif here vpon S. Paules woordes, ys plucked vppe by the rootes for soche wicked plantes maie not growe vpon soche godlie stockes.
And as touching this matter of the presence of Chrystes bodie, if rher were not so plain testimony for yt in S. Paule and the holie writers as ther ys: yet the holie and great preparacion, that they exhort vs to, and the heauie sentence H of euerlastinge drmnacion thretened vnto vs for lacke of the same preparaciō, if we wolde not shutte vppe the eies of our vnderstandinge, wolde [Page 384]cause vs easelie to perceaue a moche greater matter to be in the Sacrmēt thē A a poour peice of bread ād a poour bare cuppe of wine. Who euer hearde or redd soch spirituall and heauenlie preparaciō, for the recept of a simple earthlie, and as they themselues tearm yt, vnholie peice of bread? Whoeuer readd soche preparaciō commaunded for the eatinge of a bare sign or figure? Whoeuer readde damnacion appointed for lacke of preparacion to the receipt of anie figure? Let all the volumme of the olde testamēt, wher all thinges were doen in figures be searched, and ye shall neuer finde either soche preparacion, or soche pain inflicted for vnsemelie receauing of anie soche figure. Vieue the three principall figures, as Manna, the Paschall lambe, and the Exod. 16. shewe bread, and see what preparacion ys ther commaunded, what pain to the euell receauers ys ther inflicted. As for Manna the seconde booke of Moyses declareth that although yt were so miraculouse a figure and that in manie respectes as before ys declared, yet ther was no other preparacion required of the people but onelie that they shoulde gett Baskettes, and gather yt. The pain also inflicted for the abuse of yt, as the thinge yt self was temporall, B so was yt. They were commaunded that they shoulde not kepe yt vntill the next daie, except yt were the Sabboth daie, yet some of them kept yt, and therfore they were punished. For yt putrified, and waxed full of woormes. Exod. 12. The Paschall lambe although yt were so liuelie a figure of Chryste, yt had no other preparacion But this. Of this maner saieth God shall ye eate yt with yowr loines girded, and yowr shooes on yowr feet, and yowr staues in yowr handes. And ye shall eate yt in haste. This preparacion was but ciuill and worldlie here ys no spirituall preparacion commaunded: here ys no clensinge of the conscience required. The Shewe bread also had none other preparacion, but that the preistes might when newe were putt vpon the aultar take the olde and eate them. Pain for the abuse of them we read none.
Perchaunce ye will saie, that in the offringes of sacrifices and in soche as did take parte of the Sacrifices, ther was required a preparacion. Trueth yt ys, what doeth that helpe the cause of the Sacramentaries, who denie the Sacrament to be a sacrifice? well yet for that the catholique faith teacheth C yt to be the chrystian Sacrifice, we will accept the facrifices of the olde lawe as beinge figures of the sacrifice of the newe lawe, and the preparacions ther as figures of preparacions in this lawe. In the olde lawe in dede we finde preparacion commaunded both for the preistes that did offre soche sacrifice, and for them also whiche were partakers of those sacrifices. For the preistes Exod. 30. we read this commaundement geuen to Moyses: Facies labium aeneum cum basi sua ad lauandum, ponesue illud inter Tabernaculum testimonii & altarè missa aqua lauabunt in ea Aaron & filii eius manus suas, & pedes, quando ingressuri sunt tabernaculum testimonii, & quando accessuri sunt ad altare, vt offerant in eo thymiama, Domino, ne forte moriantur. Thowe shalt make a lauer of brasse, and his foote also of brasse, to wash with all, and shalt putt yt betwen the tabernacle of wittnesse and the aultar, and putte water ther in. For Aaron and his sonnes shall washe their handes and ther feet ther in, euen when they go into the tabernacle of wittnesse, or when they go vnto the aultar to ministre, and to burne the Lordes offringe they shall washe them selues with water leest they die.
And again we finde thus ordeined of God: Omnis homo qui accesserit de stripè Leuit. 22. D vestra ad ea, quae consecrata sunt, & quae obtulerunt filii Israël Domino, in quo est immunditia, peribit coram Domino. Whosoeuer he be of all yower seed that goeth to the holie thinges, whiche the children of Israell halowe vnto the Lorde hauinge [Page]his vncleannesse vpon him, he shall perish. Here we sinde a preparacion and a pain also inflicted to them that omitted so to prepare them selues. But E what were all these preparacions? They were (as S. Paule termeth) worldlie holinesse, wasshinges and iustifienges of the flesh whiche clensed not the cō science. In the time of the lawe (saieth S. Paule) were offred giftes and sacrifices, that Hebr. 9. coulde not make the ministre perfect, as perteining to the conscience, with onelie meates and drinkes, and diuerse wasshinges and iustifienges of the flessh, whiche were ordeined vntill the time of reformacion. For as ther sacrifices that were then offred did not take awaie sinnes and sanctifie the conscience, For yt ys vupossible (saieth S. Paule) with the bloode of goates and calues sinnes to be taken awaie, but onelie sanctified men and purified men, as touching the purifienge of the flessh, as he again saieth, no more did those preparacions touche the conscience, but onelie were doē for an outwarde cleannesse. For reason will geue that that thing, that the preparaciō ys doen for, should be of more force, value and vertue, then the preparacion in yt self yf then the sacrifices them selues purified not the consciences of men, moche lesse the preparacion. The pain also that was inflicted F to soche as omitted this preparacion, what was yt? yt was but deathe tē porall, whiche hath no comparison with death eternall.
Nowe the preparacion required before the offring of the sacrifice of our Lorde, and before the partaking of the same in the newe Testament, ys an exacte and a pure pourging and cleansinge of our consciences. And our pain for our presumption to receaue this sacrifice without due preparacion, ys not as yowe hearde, deathe temporall, but euen soche (as Chrysostome, and Theodorete saie) as they suffre, whiche crucified Chryste, whiche ys death euerlastinge. Nowe as our preparacion, whiche consisteth in pourging and clensing of our consciences, farre surmounteth the wasshing of the flessh: And as our pain neclectinge this preparacion ys the losse of euerlasting life, whiche aboue all measure passeth the losse of this tansitorie life: Euen so must yt nedes be, that the thinge that we prepare for, must aboue all measure passe and exceade in woorthinesse the figures and sacrifices, that they in the olde lawe made preparacion for.
But they will saie, that we by faithe make Chryst, who substanciallie sitteth G Obiectiō of spirituall presence by faith. at the right hand of his Father, as verilie present at the receipt of the Sacramentall breade and wine, and so we receaue Chrystes bodie and blood verilie, but yet spirituallie.
In dede they saie yt, but they prooue yt not. But how soeuer they saie yt, and howe soeuer they painct and coolour their euell sainges, with goodlie glosinge woordes: certen yt ys that this they saie, that the fathers of the Theanswer. olde Testament receaued Chryste as well as we, and that there ys no more in our Sacramentes, then was in theirs, but that their Sacramentes were figures of Chryste to come, and owers be figures of Chryste as nowe comed. But to them I saie, yf we haue no more in our Sacramentes then they had, why are we required to make anie other preparacion then they did? Whie preparare we so diligently our consciences, wher they were required but to purifie their flesh? Again as touching the punishmēt they make God vniust. For if the thinge receaued of the fathers and vs hath no difference in value, whie hathe yt a difference in pain? yt standeth not with the iustice of God, the offence beinge all one to punishe to offenders, one with euerlasting deathe: H the other but with temporall death. And yet so must yt nedes be, yf the sainges of the Sacramentaries were true. But thowe maist see Reader, into what inconueniences their, dreames, and phantasies bring them. Wherfore [Page 389]I shall wisshe the reader, to consider that thys our preparacion being so A farre aboue the preparacion of the olde lawe, teacheth vs that we receaue a thing, farre aboue that, that they receaued in that lawe. And forasmoche as the punishment of our presumption ys euerlasting deathe, that yt argueth that we presume to abuse the euerlasting Maiestie of our Lord God, and Sauiour Iesus Chryst, bicause (as sainct Paule saieth) we make no difference of our Lords bodie. In dede if we examine not our selues before we receaue, but go to yt with filthie cōsciences, thē go we to yt as to other meates, and so make we no difference betwixt our Lordes bodie and other meates. And for this our irreuerencie we woorthilie suffre the pain testified by sainct Paule, that ys, we eate and drinke our owne damnacion, yea so great ys the offence of vnwoorthie receauing, that God doeth not onelie punish yt eternallie, but also by diuerse means temporallie, as thow shalt see yt plainly testified in the text that foloweth.
THE SEVEN AND FIFTETH CHAP. EXPOVNdeth B this text: For this cause manie are weake and sicke, &c. By Origen and sainct Ambrose.
YT foloweth in the text of S. Paule: Ideo inter vos multi imbecilles, & infirmi, & dormiunt multi. For this cause manie are weak and sick among yowe, and manie do die. S. Paule rebuking the vncharitable, the vngodlie, and vndeuoute maner of the Corinthians in cominge to the receipt of the holie Sacrament, of the which somwhat ys before saied, did plainlie teache them and assure them that soch vnwoorthie receauers should be eternallie cōdemned, as they that vilanouslie and cruellie putte Chryst to death. For as they did with all spite spitte vpō him, pietifullie araie him, mocke him, skorn him, ād as they thought, with all shame and reproache diswoorshippe ād dishonour him, ād repute him but as a vile, abiect, and a castawaie amōg the childrē of mē: Euen so they that come to receaue his blessed bodie ād blood, as thei wold come to receaue a peice of the carkasse of an oxe, lābe, calf, orshepe hauing no regarde to the cleannesse and puritie of their cōsciences, they doe C as moch, and as wickedlie abuse, diswoorshippe and dishonour that his blessed bodie, as the Iewes of whome we spake of before. For what more contumelie, what more inurie, can be doen to the bodie of Chryst, then to be cast into a sinfull stinking bodie more filthie or lothsome in his seight, then anie donghill or sinke. The grauitie than of the offence, with the greuouse pain of condemnacion due to the same declared, to make thē better creditt the same, he indueeth them by present examples of the punishment of soche persons in this present life, sainge: For this cause many amonge yowe are weake, and seke, and manie doe die. As who might saie: think not that I dallie with yowe, behold and see euen amonge yowr selues, howe God sheweth a preamble or image of his fearfull iudgement which I haue spoken of. For euen for this vnwoorthie receauing of the bodie and blood of hys Sonne our Lorde Iesus Chryste, he hath stricken manie with weaknesse, manie with sekenesse, and manie with death.
The literall exposition being thus breiflie touched as wherby yt maie be perceaued, howe this text doeth depende of the other, ād ys ioined with the D same we wil (as heretofore ys doē) heare the Fathers of Chrystes Parliamēt house, therby also to trie, whether the catholike Church that now ys, cōsent with thē, or dissent frō thē, or the Proclā. ād his cōpanie agree or disagree. [Page]Of these Fathers the first coople shall be Origen and sainct Ambrose. Origen saieth thus: Iudicium Dei paruipendis? & commonentem te Ecclesiam despicis? Communicare E non times corpus Christi, accedens ad Eucharistiam quasi mundus, & purus, quasi in te Origen. in Psalm. 37. nihil sit indignum, & in us omnibus putas quod effugies iudicium Dei. Non recordaris illud quod scriptum est, quòd propterea in vobis infirmi, & aegri, & dormiunt multi. Quare multi infirmi? Quoniam non seipsos di [...]udicant, neque seipsos examinant, neque intelligunt, quid communicare Ecclesiae, vel quid est accedere ad tanta, & tam eximia Sacramenta. Patiuntur hoc quod febricitantes pati solent, quum sanorum cibos praesumunt, sibimetipsis inferentes exitium. Settest thow litle by the iudgement of God? And despicest thow the Church admonishing thee? Thow arte not a feard to communicate the bodie Origen in plain words calleth the bless. Sacr. the bodie of Chryst. of Chryste, coming to the Eucharist, as a clean and a pure man, as though ther were no vnwoorthie thing in thee: and in all these, thow thinkest that thow shalt eschape the iudgement of God. Thowe doest not remembre, that which ys written: that for these thinges, ther be manie among yowe weake, and sicke, and manie doe die. Whie be ther manie sicke? Bicause they iudge not themselues, neither examin themselues, neither doe they vnderstande F what yt ys to communicate with the Church, or what yt ys to come to so great, and so excellent mysteries. They suffre that that men whiche be sick of agues, are wont to suffre, when they eate the meates of wholl men and so kill themselues.
Origen rebuking here the euell doings of some men, Who not fearing the iudgement of God, nor the admonicion of the Church presumed as though they had ben in clean state of life to come to receaue the bodie of Chryst: putteth them in feare with this saing of sainct Paule that for this cause ther be amonge you manie weake, and sick, and manie doe die. Wherin note that Origen saieth, that the cause of these plagues ys the vnwoorthie receauinge of the bodie of Chryst by expresse woordes. He neither calleth yt Sacramentall bread, nor figure nor signe, but euē as yt ys, the bodie of Chryst. And for that yt ys ther vnspeakeablie, and yet most assuredlie, he afterwarde calleth yt, so great, and so excellent mysteries.
A mysterie ys wher somthing lieth hidden, that ys not by open meanes, A mysterie what yt ys, and howe the blessed Sacr. ys a mysterie. or common knowledge perceaued. Forasmoch then as Chryst verilie being G in the Sacrament ys not perceaued by the common knowledg of the senseis, nor of naturall reason, but by the speciall knowledge of faith yt ys verie well of Origen called mysteries. And forasmoch as Chryst therin being, ys so great and so excellent, therfor verie well doeth he call them mysteries great and excellent. And ther this ys to be noted, that he calleth yt not a mysterie as being but one, but he calleth yt mysteries as being two. For although yt ys somtime called singularlie, a Sacrament or a mysterie as one thing, of the vnitie of the thing fignified and conteined, which ys the bodie of Christ: yet as touching the thinges that doe signifie, and conteine, which be the formes of bread and wine, vnder which both, Chryst ys verilie and whollie, they are right well called mysteries plurallie, bicause they be two kindes, and vnder eche kinde Chryst fullie, and therfore eche of them well called a Sacrament and a mysterie.
In all this sainge, this also maie be noted, that euell men receaue the bodie of Chryste, but speciallie, when he saieth: that euell men doe as men Euell mē receaue the bodie of Chryst in the B. Sac. sicke of agues, who will presume to eate holl mens meat, wherby he H plainlle teacheth, that euell men eate the same meate in the Sacrament, that good men doe, But good men receaue the bodie of Chryst: [Page 390]wherfor so doe euell men also, but to contrarie effectes. For as the holl man A eating his meate continueth his life, and the sicke man eating the same procureth or causeth his owne death: Euē so the worthie receauer receauinge the bodie of Chryst getteth life, wher the vnwoorthie receauing the same getteth him euerlasting death. Thus maie we of this auncient father of Chrystes Parliament house learn the trueth, that Chrystes bodie ys in the Sacrament. Thus maie we learn, that forbicause euell men do abuse yt vnreuerent lie receauing yt, that the plagues of God, as sicknesse, weaknesse, and deathe, come vpon them. Thys being true, God plant in the heart of euery man, that hath professed the name of Chryst, to professe also hys holie faith, and reuerentlie and thankfullie to accept this great and confortable benefitte of Chrystes presence with vs in the Sacrament, and yt honourablie to vse.
O Lorde, what mishappe haue we, that after so long continuance of the faith of Chryst we shoulde nowe in the later daies, fall from that reuerent and honourable vsage of this blessed Sacrament, that was vsed in the primitiue Churche, when the faith was not so dilated, so spred, so established, as nowe for the long continaunce of yt, yt aught to be: And yet then was yt had in great reuerence, and honourablie B vsed.
But amonge manie testimonies that maie be produced, bicause we are nowe hearing the doctrine of Origen, we will also but heare hys testimonie in this matter. He exhorting the people, that hearinge the woorde of God they should vse great diligence, that, that they had once learned, shoulde not by necligence fall from their memorie: vseth the example of their regarde of the holie Sacrament, and saieth: Volo vos admonere religionis vestrae exemplis. Orig. homil 13. in Exod Nostis, qui diuinis mysteriis interesse consuestis, quomodò cùm suscipitis corpus Domini cum omni cautela & veneratione seruatis, ne ex eo parum quid decidat, ne consecrati muneris aliquid dilabatur. Reos enim vos creditis, & rectè creditis, si quid inde per neccligentiam decidat. Quodsi circa corpus eius conseruandum, tanta vtimini cautela, & meritò vtimini, See what warenesse was vsed in the primitiue Church in receauing the bodie of our Lorde. quomodò putatis minoris esse piaculi verbum Dei neclexisse, quàm corpus eius? I will admonishe yowe withe the examples of your owne religion, ye, that haue ben wount to be at the mynistracion of the diuine mysteries, knowe, howe, when ye receaue the bodie of our Lorde, ye geue heed with all warenesse and C honoure that no litle porcion of yt should fall down, that no parte of the consecrate thing should slippe awaie, ye beleue yowr selues to be giltie, and ye beleue well, yf anie of yt should fall from yow through necligēce. Yf than ye vse so great warenesse and diligence aboute the conseruing of his bodie, and yowr vse therin ys good: howe thinke yowe yt a matter of lesse offence, to haue neglected the woorde of God, then his bodie? Thus moche Origen?
In this testimonie ys no mention made of the Aduersaries figure, sign or Sacramentall bread, but here ys plain declaracion of the catholique faithe, A plain saing for the Procla. Origen saing and declaring to the Chrystian people of his time by expresse woordes that they receaued the bodie of Chryst. But note withal which ys most cheiflie to our pourpose here, that not onelie the people did vse the same E bodie of Chryst reuerentlie and honorablie, but also Origen doeth both well alowe ther so doing, and commendeth and praiseth thē for the same also. And here note farder that the people had the blessed Sacr. in so great reuerēce, that they beleued thē selues to haue cōmitted a great offence (ād Origē saieth they beleued yt wel) yf by their necligēce anie part of the Sacr. had fallen from them to the grownde by which their reuerend vsage, as we maie [Page]clerelie perceaue and see, that they beleued ther to be the verie bodie of E Chryste, to the whiche they gaue this reuerence and honour: So by the same ys the vnreuerend vsage of our Sacramentaries moch reprehended. Remembre See the vse of the Communion bread in the newe Church. their doings, ād consider their vsages, and cōpare them with the doings and vsageis of the auncient Chrystian people, in the time of Origen. Owre Sacramentaries caused that the bread which was left at their comuniō should not be honourablie but prophanelie vsed. For in some places the mynister had that that was left: in some places the parish clerke: in some places a peice of yt was deliuered to him that shoulde the next sondaie prouide the bread for the communiō. And euerie of these put this bread into his bosom or purse, as beggers doe their lumpes and fragmentes into their bagges and wallettes without all reuerence or regarde, and carieng yt home with like irreuerencie vsed yt in no otherwise then other common bread, geuing yt to their wieues and children, the crustes to their dogges and cattes, the crommes to their pullen. O Lord howe farre ys this vsage from the vsage of the primitiue Church? The good people that thē were (as thow hauest heard) thought F yt a great offence, yf yt did but fall from them to the grownde.
And Pius the ninth Bishoppe of Rome after S. Peter, and liued aboute the yeare of our Lord cxlvii vpon consideracion of the great excellencie of the De consec. Dist. 2. Sacrament as wherin ys verilie the bodie of our Sauiour Chryste, and vpon the regarde of soche due reuerence as apperteineth to vs to yeald to the same, appoincted sondrie penaūces, ād fastings to soch as by whom anie parte of the blood of Chryst should happen to distil or to be shedde: But these people Difference of the primitiue and schismatical church in vse of the Sacr. ād in faith. of our daies neither regarde falling to the grownde nor shedding, no, as, yt ys saied, they spare not to geue yt to their dogges. By which sundrie maners yt ys easie to be perceaued that the faithes of these people be sundrie. The people of the primitiue church (as by their regard, reuerence, and honoure to the B. Sacrament, yt maie be perceaued) beleued the presence of Chrystes bodie and blood to be ther, wher they bestowed soche reuerence and duetie: The companie of Sacramentaries, as their irrenerent vsage well declareth, beleue no reall presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament. For to yt they denie all honoure and reuerence. Yf the primitiue Church had beleued as the Sacramentaries doe, whie gaue they that honour to yt, that these doe not? or raither whie doe not the Sacramentrries honour the Sacramēt G as they of the primitiue Church did? Yf ye wil know the cause, yt ys (though they bragge moch of the primitiue Church) bicause they varie and dissent from yt, bothe in faith and maners. Howe can they trulie saie, that they folowe the primitiue Church when yt ys here so manifest, as yt can not be against saied, that they not onelie dissent from yt by their doctrine, but also doe thinges euen clean contrarie to that, that was doen in the primitiue Clemens Epist. 2. Church? They with all irreuerencie contemning the leauings of the Sacrament wher the primitiue Church vsed honourablie to repose them and reserue them in the holie placea (as S. Clement gaue cōmaundement) and also had great regarde, and reuerence to yt, wher these men (as ye haue hearde) fede their families with yt, as with prophane bread. Wherfore to conclude this matter with sainct Paule, I maie saie, that they be giltie of the bodie and bloode of owre Lorde, bicause they make no difference betwixit yt and common or prophane meates, but indifferently eate the one and the other. H Ambr. in 11. 1. Cor.
But I tarie to long vpon Origen, yt ys time that S. Ambrose also were heard [Page 391]Vpon this text thus he saieth: Vt verum probaret, quia examen futurum est accipientium A corpus Domini, iam hic imaginem iudicii ostendit, in eos qui inconsideratè corpus Domini acceperant, dum febribus, & infirmitatibus corripiebantur, & multi moriebantur, vt iis caeteri discerent, & paucorum exemplo territi emendarentur non inultum scientes corpus Domini negligenter accipere, & eum quem hic poena distulerit, grauius tractari, fore, quia S. Ambr. vnderstandeth S. Panle io speak of the bodie of our Lord. contempsit exemplum. To proue that ther ys a iudgemēt to come of them, that receaue the bodie of our Lord, he doeth now shewe a certain image of the same iudgement vpon them, which without due consideraciō had receaued the bodie of our Lord forasmoch as they were punished with feuers, and sicknesses, and manie died: that by these men other might learn, and they feared with the example of a few might be amended: knowing that to receaue the bodie of our Lorde necligentlie ys not left vnpunished, but yf his punish ment be differred that he shal be more greuouslie handled hereafter, bicause he hath contemned the example.
As Origen hath doen before: so S. Ambrose here agreablie declareth that feuers, sicknesses, and death also haue by gods punishment fallen vpon B them, that vnwoorthilie haue receaued the bodie of our Lorde. In which his declaracion of sainct Paules minde this ys also euident to be seen, that he bothe confesseth the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament: and also that the same bodie of Chryst hath ben receaued of euell men. Nowe soche presence as the Aduersarie teacheth can be but of good men receaued, wherfor sainct Ambrose here and Origen, and diuerse other before alleaged for the exposition of sainct Paule, teaching vs that euell men receaue the bodie of Chryste, yt must nedes necessarilie folowe that ther ys besides the spirituall maner (which onelie the Aduersarie teacheth) an other maner of reall and substanciall presence, by which the euell man receaueth the verie substance of the bodie of Chryst verilie and in dede. Which being (as yt ys in dede) a most certen trueth testified by manie holie doctours, and graue Fathers, of the Church, the contrarie assertion of the Aduersarie, must neds be iudged an hereticall vntrueth. Wherfor Chrystian Reader, be not deceaued with vain gloses of light Sacramentaries, but staie thie self vpon the sure and agreable expositiōs of the holie Fathers, ād beleue no lesse but thow C cominge wher the Sacrament ys duelie ministred, according to Chrystes institucion, and receauing the same, that thow receauest the verie reall and substanciall Ambr. in 11. 1. Cor. Reuerence is due to him whose bodie wereceaue. bodie of Chryst. But now yt standeth thee in hande, to see howe thowe receauest yt, with what faith, with that deuocion, and with what reuerence. For this holie father sainct Ambrose (as other before) teacheth vs after the minde of sainct Paule, that we must come to this most holie Sacrament with deuocion, feare and reuerence. For shewing sainct Paules minde, who willeth vs to examin our selues, he saieth vpon the same thus: Deuoto animo, & cum timore accedendum ad communionem docet, vt sciat meus reuerentiam se debere ei, ad cuius corpus sumendum accedit. He teacheth vs to come to the communion with a deuoute minde, and with feare, that the minde maie knowe yt self to owe reuerence vnto him, whose bodie yt cometh to receaue. Thus moche he.
What soeuer Luther hath saied against our preparacion for our seemelie coming to the receipt of the bless. Sacrament: what soeuer the Aduersaries S. Ambr. and Origen vse plaintearmes for the Procla. the Sacramentaries and the Proclamer saie against the holie and blessed bodie D of Chryst in the Sacrament sekinge by termes, as by Sacramentall bread, by figure, by an holie signe, and soche like, to deface yt, and yet with soch holie tearmes to cloake their vnholie heresie, and loathing by expresse words to [Page]call yt the bodie of Chryst: yet this holie Father and Bishoppe. S. Ambrose in bothe these places alleadged, and Origen in his sainges, in this chapter produced E calleth the Sacrament sixe or seuen times by plain woords, the bodie of our Lorde, the doubtful tearmes of the Aduersarie left, as by which they could not so liuelie expresse and shewe furth the trueth.
To ende with these two Fathers of Chrystes Parliament house we maie perfectlie by them vnderstand, that God punisheth vnwoorthie receauers of the bodie of Chryst, some temporallie, by feuers sicknesses, ād death: some eternally by perpetuall damnacion. Wherbie as by the greuousnesse of the punishmētes we maie learn the greuousnesse of the offence: So by the great nesse of the offence, we maie learn the greatnesse of the blessed Sacrament, in the receipt of which no soch offence coulde be committed, if he were not ther present, whose maiestie being great, maketh the offence great.
THE EIGHT AND FIFTETH CHAP. ENDETH the exposition of the same text by Theophilact. F and Anselm.
FOrasmuche as the matter treacted of by S. Paule in this text ys apperteinent, and dependeth of the matter spoken of before, in the which we haue proceaded at the lenght, therfor I haue determined to content my self with the two Fathers, in the last chapter produced, by whome we maie learn the enacted trueth of the vnderstanding of this text in the higher house, and with two other Fathers of the lower house who shall open vnto vs also the vnderstanding of the same in the lower house, which two shall be Theophilact, and Anselme.
Theophilact writeth thus: Accipite demonstrationē ex iis, quae apud vos contingunt. Hinc enim sunt immaturae mortes, diuturnaeue aegritudines, & morbi, eò quòd multi in dignè assumant. Quid igitur? Qui non aegrotant, & ad extremam vsque senectam seruantur Theophilact in 11. 1 Cor. incolumes, nonne peccant? Peccant sanè. Sed non huius temporis paenae solae indignè accedentibus destinatae sunt, sed in futuro quoque seculo. Take ye a demonstracion of those thinges which happen among yowe. For bicause manie do receaue vnwoorthilie, G therfor ther be hastie deathes, and long disseases and sicknesses. What then? They that are not sick but to their extearm age are kept in health, doe they not sinne? They sinne trulie, but not the onelie paines of this time are apointed to vnwoorthie receauers, but ther be also in the world to cōme more harde, and more greuouse punishmentes reposed.
As the Iudgementes of God be merueilouse, and incomprehensible, so deepe also that no man can reache vnto the profunditie therof: so are they also God punisheth some tempor. illie but not eternallie some eternallie not temporallie some [...] temparallie and eternallie. vpright, iust and full of equitie, geuing to euery man according to hys workes. By whiche he punisheth some in this life, but not eternallie, some eternallie, but not in this life temporallie: some both temporallie, and eternallie. So likewise of them that by vnwoorthie receipt contemne and foulie abuse the blessed Sacrament some by sicknesses, and diseases are punished who humblie receauing the same, and repenting their former doings, and amending their liues, God temperinge hys iustice with mercie punisheth them but in this life. Other some ther be that abusing the holie Sacrament by vnwoorthie receipt, and continuing the same doe yet some H good workes, though not in the right ordre of good workes, soche God of hys mercie punisheth not temporallie, but differring the punishment, punisheth thē eternallie. Some being of most beastlie and detestable life, [Page 392]and continuinge in the same without repentance as men euen solde ouer to A sinne, and touched with sicknesse will not hūblie receaue the same as Gods mercifull punishment to the amendmēt of life, but raither heapinge euells vpō euells doe murmure ād grudge, yea ād with all violēt impaciēcie blaspheme his holie name, ād reprooue his correctiō with manie vnsemelie woords, manie soche are punished both temporallie ād eternallie. Thus by Theopilacle then we maie learn, that to vnwoorthie receauers of the bless. Sacrament soche punishmentes haue ben inflicted of God, wherby (as ys saied) maie be perceaued, that as the offence ys great, so yt ys doen against him, who ys great, euen Chryst our Sauioure and redemer, whose blessed bodie being present in the Sacrament ys by wicked receauers moche abused. I stand not to declare the faith of Theophllact as touchinge the presence. For yt ys more then manifest, that he that denieth the Aduersaries figure in the Sacrument confesseth the presence, whiche this authour doeth in diuerse places expowndinge the scripturs, as in this worke also yt maie be seen,
Wherfor leauinge him we will heare Anselmus, who vpon this text folowinge B S. Ambrose and vsinge his woordes, writeth thus, as speakinge to the Anselm. in. 11. 1. Cor. Corinthians in the person of S. Paule: Quia indignè manducatis hoc corpus, & sanguinem bibitis, ideo sunt inter vos multi infirmi, qui graui morbo languent: & imbecilles qui diuturua inualitudine torpent & dormiunt etiam multi, id est somno mortis sunt occupati, vt verum probaret, quia examen futurum est accipientium corpus Domini. Iam hic imaginem iudicii ostendit in nonnullis qui corpus illud inconsiderate acceperant, dum aegrotationibus, & longis inualitudinibus tenerentur, & multi morerentur, vt in eis caeteri discerēt se non impunè corpus Domini necligenter accipere, & paucorū exēplo caeteri territi emenda rentur, scientes quia grauiores paenas in futuro seculo propter hanc culpā ipsi forent passuri, sinon corrigerentur. Bicause ye doe eate ād drink his bodie and blood vnwoorthilie, therfor ther be amōg yow manie sick of greuous sicknesse, ād weak which faint with lōg disease, ād manie also sleape, that ys, they are preuēted with The Corinthians did eate and drinke the bodie and blood of our Lord vnworthilie. death. To prooue that a iudgemēt or condēnaciō shall come of thē that receaue the bodie of our Lord, he doeth now shew the ymage of the iudgemēt in manie, whiche had incōsideratelie reaeaued that bodie, forasmochas they were holden with sicknesses, and long weaknesse and manie died, that by C them other shoulde learn, that they shoulde not receaue the bodie of our Lorde necligentlie withoute punishment, and other feared with the example of a fewe, shoulde be amended, knowinge that theie shall suffre more greuouse paines in the worlde to come for this offence, except they were amended. Thus he.
We learn here of Anselmus, that the sicknesses, diseases and deathes that happened amonge the Corinthians, were bicause thei receaued not onelie the Sacrament, or (as the Sacramentaries tearme yt) the Sacramentall bread vnworthily, but bicause they did inconsideratelie receaue the bodie of our Lorde. In whiche maner of faithe, and speache this authour foloweth not his owne devise, but the graue doctrine and iudgement, of S. Ambrose whose sainge he doeth here alleage. And so by them bothe yt ys manifest that the bodie of Chryst ys receaued in the Sacrament, that euell men also receaue yt ther, whiche prooueth the reall and substanciall presence of Chrystes bodie, and that soche euell receauers for that they doe moche iniurie to that pure and vndefiled bodie of Chryst castinge yt into their bodie defiled with D moche filth of sinne, doe oftētimes suffre the pains in this life and also in the liue to come.
Of the displeasure of God against euell receauers, as S. Paule maketh [Page]proofe by demonstracion, and experience of the same in his time: so doeth also S. Cyprian for the like in his time, who bringeth three or foure exāples E of Gods wrath against them that beinge defiled with sinne did presume to Cap. ser. 5. de. lapsis. approache to, or receaue the holie bodie of Chryst. The sirst example is of a childe, whiche beinge put to a Nource did tast of a soppe of bread, whiche was offred vnto Idolls. And when the mother hauinge this childe in her armes came to the Churche amonge christian people, and the Sacrament amonge other, was also offred to the childe, the child (who I saie, had tasted of Idolls meat) turned awaie her face from the Sacrament, she stopped her She might haue receaued the newe Communion with out anie soche troble. mouthe and helde her lippes harde together, she refused by anie mean to touche the cuppe of the bloode of Chryste. Yet though she did thus striue, the deacon gaue her of the Sacrament. Whiche when she had once receaued, furth with she fell to boking and vomiting for (as Cyprian saieth) in corpore, atque ore violato Eucharistia permanere non potuit. Sāctificatus in Domini sanguine potus, de pollutis visceribus erupit. Tanta est potestas Domini, tanta maiestas. In a defiled mouthe and bodie the Sacrament coulde not abide. The sanctified drinke F in our Lordes bloode brast oute of the defiled bowells. So great ys the power of owre Lorde, so great ys his maiestie.
By this example maie we learn, howe moche yt offendeth God, that the bodie of Chryst should be receaued vnwoorthilie of one that hathe knowledge and reason. Immediatelie after this, S. Cyprian maketh reporte of a woman that was of age, knowledge, and reason, sainge that soche one when he was offringe the sacrisice priueilie stole in among other, and receauing A woman receauing the B. Sa. vnworthilie stricken with death the Sacrament, not as meat to comforte her, for that she was vnwoorthie, but as a sworde to destroie her, and takinge as yt were deadly poison in to her mouthe and breast, she begā to be merueilouselie vexed, and disquieted, and so suffringe the heauie punishment of her offence, pantinge and tremblinge she fell downe dead. So (saieth he) was not her euell offence left long vnpunished. But she that thought by her cloaking and dissemblinge of her offence to haue deceaued man, felt God to whome all thinges be knowen, the reuenger and punisher of the same.
An other woman ther was also, who receauing the Sacrament into her G handes kept the same, and carienge yt home, putte yt into her coafer. But to vse the woordes of S. Cyprian, Cum arcam suam in qua Domini sanctum fuit manibus indignis tentasset aperire, igne inde surgente deterrita est, ne auderet attingere. When she wolde with vnwoorthie hands open the coafer, wherin was the holie thinge of our Lorde, ther sprang oute a fire, wherby she was cast in soch feare that she durst not touche yt. Vpon this example this maie we note, that if God wolde not suffre the woman, forasmoche as she was vnwoorthie, not as moche as to open the coafer, wher the holie thinge of our lorde was laied, howe moche lesse will he beare yt that a licenciouse filthie liuinge man shoulde touche the thing ytself, eate yt, and cast yt into his sinfull bodie?
An other merueilouse thinge doeth S. Cyprian report of the blessed Sacrament, A mā vnwoorthilie receauing the bless. Sa in his hand whē he opened his hād ther was nothing but asshes Ther was (saieth he) a certain defiled or sinfull man, who beinge present when the Sacrament was celebrated by the preist (so doeth S. Cyprian tearme the holie ministracion) he presumed priuielie with other to receaue, but he coulde not eate the holie thinge of God nor handle yt. For when he H had opened his hande to see what he had receaued, he fownde nothinge but asshes. This in dede ys a meruertouse thinge, wherby ys declared that God ys not willing, that his holie Sacrament shoulde be receaued of a filthie [Page 383]sinner, forasmoche as sodenlie yt pleaseth him to chaunge yt into asshes A he him self departing from yt.
But let vs heare what S. Cyprian him self noteth vpō this miracle of God Serm. s de lapsis. Documento vnius ostensum est, Dominum recedere cum negatur, nec immerentibus prodesse ad salutem quod sumitur, cum gratia salutaris in cinerem sanctitate fugiente mutetur. By the example of one yt ys declared, that our Lorde departeth when he ys denied, nether doeth yt, that ys receaued profitte the vnwoorthie to saluacion or healthe, when the holsome grace, holinesse departinge awaie, ys chaunged into asshes.
This note of S. Cyprian ys notable in dede and for that yt ys so, I wishe yt so to be noted of the reader, that yt neuer fall from his memorie. First, let the euell man note that at the receipt of the Sacrament bicause in life and conuersation God ys denied that he departeth and goeth awaie. But let the faithfull herby learn, that owre Lorde ys present with his Sacramēt, who as he departeth from the wicked so he abideth to be receaued of the vertuouse ād godlie. This also ys not to be ouerpassed, that the holie Martir saieth, that yt, that ys receaued, profiteth not the vnwoorthie to saluacion. For by that he saieth, yt profiteth not the vnwoorthie, he argueth that yt B profiteth the woorthie, or ells we must saie that the state bothe of the woorthie, and vnwoorthie ys equall, whiche if yt so were, S. Ciprian did but vainlie saie, that yt did not profitte the vnwoorthie,
Yf then one thinge be receaued in the Sacrament that profiteth the good and auaileth not the euel, we must first graunt, that the good and the euell receaue one thinge, profiting the one, and hurting the other. Nowe wolde yt be learned of the Sacramentarie, what one thing that ys in the Sacrament that ys receaued, that profiteth and hurteth. The Sacramentarie leaueth no more in the Sacrament by his doctrine, but Sacramentall bread, and Sacramentall wine, whiche both (saieth he) remain in their substance and nature, so that ther ys no other thinge (taking thing for substance) but the substance of bread and wine: Certen yt ys, that as God suffereth the Sunne to shine vpon good and euell, and raineth vpon the iust and vniust: So do the he suffre the substance of bread and wine to feede and nourish both good and euell, as well to profitte the wicked as the rightwise, no more (measure C beinge obserued) to hurt the one then the other. Yf than the substance of bread so indifferent, that yt profiteth as well the wicked as the good the substance of bread ys not the thinge, that holie Cyprian saith to be in the Sacrament, which onelie prositeth the good, and hurteth the euell, yf yt be receaued. Wherfor yt doeth necessarelie folowe, that ther ys an other thing in the Sacrament, than the substance of bread, whiche ys the bodie of Chryst, as the holie fathers before alleaged haue confessed, and the holie Churche catholique professeth and beleueth.
Noweye haue heard the presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode taught by S. Paule in the epistle to the Corinthians: ye haue heard yt testified, yea and auouched by a nombre of auncient holie Fathers: ye haue hearde yt prooued that by the testimonie ās well of S. Paule, as the Fathers yt ys plain E and euident, that the euell and vnwoorthie receaue the same bodie of Chryst in the bless. Sacrament that the good and woorthie doth: Ye haue heard paines both temporall and eternall appoincted to soche vnwoorthie receauers: Ye haue seen greate difference of the pains of the vnclean receauers of the figures of the olde lawe, and of the vnwoorthie receauers of the Sacrament of the newe lawe, wherby also ys inuinciblie prooued a great [Page]difference of thinges receaued in both lawes. For in the olde lawe Chryst E was receaued figuratiuely: In the newe lawe he ys receaued verilie. In the olde lawe onelie spirituallie: In the newe lawe of good people bothe spirituallie and substanciallie. Thus moche beinge doen if grace be at hande with the reader ther ys enough doen to expell the Sacramentaries heresie, and to moue to receaue the catholique veritie. Wherfore although ther be other scriptures in S. Paule, I will not stand and abide vpon them, as hitherto I haue doen vpon other, but I will touche them and so ende.
THE NINE AND FIFTETH CHAP. TREACteth of these woordes of S. Paule. We are membres of his bodie, of his slesh, and of his bones, by Irenaeus and Hylarius.
IN the epistle to the Ephesians, S. Paule exhorting men to loue F their wieues, willeth them so to loue them, and nourish them, as Chryst doeth his Churche. And for proof that they shoulde so doe, he saieth that no man at anie time hath hated his owne slesh, but nourisheth and cheriseth yt as Chryst doeth his Churche. For we are saieth he mēbres of his bodie, of his flesh and of his bones. Whiche sainge forasmoche as the great auncient. Father Irenaeus doeth vnderstande of the flesh, bodie and bloode of Chryst in the Sacrament, I haue thought good to lett the reader perceaue the same▪
Thus he writeth: Quomodò carnem negant esse capacem donationis Dei, quae est vita aeterna quae sanguine & corpore Christi nutritur, & membrum eius fit, quemadmodum & Apostolus ait, in ea, quae est ad Ephesios epistola: Quoniam membra sumus corporis Iraen. li. 5. eius, de carne eius, & de ossibus eius, non de spirituali aliquo, & inuisibili homine dicens haec (spiritus enim neque ossa, neque carnes habet) sed de ea dispositione, quae est secundùm hommem, quae ex carnibus & neruis & ossibus consistit, quae de calice, qui est sanguis eius nutritur, & de pane, qui est corpus eius augetun? Howe denie they the flesh to be hable to receaue the gift of God, whiche ys euerlasting life, whiche ys nourished with the bodie and blood of Chryste, and ys made a membre of him, as the Aplain saing of Iren. agunst the Proclamer Apostle also saieth in the epistle to the Ephesians: For we are membres of his bodie, G of his flesh and of his bones: not speaking these woordes of any spirituall or inuisible man, but of that disposition, whiche ys after the nature of man whiche ys of flesh, Sinnewes and bones, whiche ys nourished of the cuppe, whiche ys his blood, and ys encreased by the bread whiche ys his bodie. hitherto Iren.
For the better vnderstanding of this sainge, the occasion whie he wrote this ys to be declared, although this Irenaeus were so auncient and so neare to the time of the Apostles, that he was the disciple of Policarpus, whiche Policarpus was the disciple of sainct Iohn the Euangelist: yet before and in his time were risen manie heretiques as Symon Samarites, who The flesh of mā shall haue euerlaing life bicause yt ys nourished with the flesh of Chryst. other wise ys called Symon Magus: Menander, Carportes, Basilides, Cerinthus Ebion, and Marcion: whiche fowlie and diuerslie erringe aboute the person of Chryst, some of them also denienge the resurrection, sainge that owre earthlie and grosse flesh coulde not be partaker of saluacion. Against whiche heresies Irenaeus wrote fiue bookes, and in the fiste booke H amonge other thinges impugning that heresie that saied that owre flesh coulde not enioie euerlastinge life, prooueth that yt maie and shall And [Page 394]by that yt ys nourished with the fleshe and bloode of Chryste. And A therfora sketh a question sainge: howe denie they our flesh to be partaker of the gifte of God, whiche ys euerlastinge, whiche flesh ys nourished with the bodie and blood of Chryst, and ys made a membre of him? That our flesh ys nourished by the bodie and blood of Chryst, and therby also made a membre of him: he prooueth yt by this Scripture of S. Paule, that we be membres of his bodie, of his flesh and of his bones. Both bodie and soule haue benefite by the bodie of Christe.
And here note howe goodlie he confirmeth the catholique faith, and howe mightilie he ouerthrowe the heresie of the Sacramentarie. The Catholique saieth that the wholl man bothe bodie and sowle taketh benefitte, and ys nourished by the bodie and bloode of Chryste: The Sacramentarie saieth, that onelie the inwarde man, the spirituall man ys spirituallie nourished by faith. But this false glose ys here by expresse woordes reproued and conuinced. S. Paule (saieth Irenaeus) speaketh not this of anie spirituall or inuisible man, but of the verie naturall man, which ys made of flesh sinnewes, and bones whiche naturall man ys nourished, and augmented by B the cuppe, whiche ys the bloode of our Lorde, and the breade whiche ys the bodie of our Lorde. Yt ys manifest then against the Sacramentarie, yt ys manifest against the Proclamer, that the naturall man doeth eate and drinke the naturall bodie and bloode of Chryst wherby also yt ys manifest, that the naturall bodie and bloode of Chryste be in the Sacrament, For if they were not, howe coulde they so be receaued?
Again yt ys manifest, that not onelie the inwarde man, the inuinsible or The outward naturall man receaueth the bodie and blood of Chryste. spirituall man receaueth the bodie and bloode of Chryst, but also the outwarde, the visible and naturall man. And for the full and perfect vnderstanding of this, note well the cheife grownde of this auncient holie Father Irenaeus. His pourpose ys to prooue, that our flesh although yt be a mortall thinge, shall receaue immortallitie: although yt be earthilie, yt shall receaue an heauenly and euerlastinge life: howe proueth he that? By that that our mortall flesh receaueth the immortall flesh and bloode of Chryst, and therby nourished shall in his time atteign to immortalitie ād life euerlastinge. The Sacramentaries denieng the receipt of Chrystsnaturall bodie into our, denie withall the argument of Jren. ād of consequent the immortallitie of our bodie after resurrect. Consider then that the argument of this holie father against this heresie, C to prooue that our bodies shall rise, and that they at the same resurrection, shall atteign to immortallie, ys, that we receaue the bodie ād blood of Christ by the whiche (yt beinge immortall, and also able to geue immortalitie) we shall be made immortall, and receauers of euerlastinge life. The Sacramentarie then denienge that we receaue the bodie of Chryst into our bodies, denieth the argument of this holie Father, and tectlie also denieth owre resurrection and immortalitie (which to manie of them haue allreadie apertlie doen) and robbeth vs of one great article of our faith, and of our cheif and high comforte, that we hope to haue in our resurrection. For (as S. Paule saieth) Si in hac vita tātùm, in Christo sperātes sumus omnibus hominibus, &c. Yf in this life onelie, we beleue on Chryst, then are we of all men most miserablie. Yf then they will robbe vs of the mean to atteign to this resurrection and immortallitie, whiche mean ys the very receipt of the bodie and blood of Chryst, they shall also robbe vs of the effect. For the cause being taken awaie the effect also must be taken awaie: as the cause beinge admitted, the effect must necessarilie folowe. For the cause of the immortalitie of our flesh ys D the coniunction of the immortall flesh of Chryst with owre, whiche ys doen 1. Cor. 15. by the receipt of the same in the Sacrament.
Of these two Chryst ys a full wittnesse, for the first he saieth. Nisi manducaueritis [Page] carnem filii hominis, & biberitis eius sanguinem non habebitis vitam in vobis Except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood, ye shall E haue no life in yowe, wherby ys testified that the receipt of the bodie and blood taken awaie from vs, immortalitie and euerlastinge life ys also taken awaie.
For the other, Chryst also testifieth: Qui manducat meā carnem & bibit meum ibid. sangumem, habet vitam aeternam. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath euerlastinge life. Wherby ys taught that the receipt of the bodie and bloode of Chryst, ys the cause and mean of and to euerlasting life.
But that the Aduersarie shall not cauill and saie, that I speake moche in this matter at mine owne libertie, and ther vnto expownde the scripturs by mine owne authoritie: he shall heare the holie Father Cyrill affirme as moche as I haue saied, and expownde the scripturs to the same sense. Thus he Cirill in 15 ca Joan. writeth: Non poterat aliter corruptibilis haec natura ad incorruptibilitatem, & vitam traduci, nisi naturalis vitae corpus ei coniungeretur. Non credis mihi haec dicenti? Christo, te F obsecro, fidem praebe dicenti: Amen, amen (inquit) dico vobis: Nisi manducaueritis carnem filu hominis, & biberitis eius sanguinem, non habebitis vitam in vobis. Qui manducat meam carnem, & bibit meum sanguinem habet vitam aeternam. Audis apertè clamātem non habituros nos vitam, nisi sanguinem cius biberimus, & carnem manducauerimus. In vobis autem ipsis, dicit, id est, in corpore vestro. Vita autem, iure ipsa vitae caro intelligi potest. Haec enim nos in nouissimo die suscitat, & quomodò, dicere non grauabor. Caro vitae facta Vnigeniti caro, ad virtutem vitae traducta est. Non potest igitur morte superari. Propterea in nobis facta, interitum à nobis expellit. Non enim abest ab ea vnigenitus Deisilius. Vnde quia vnus est cum carne sua, Ego (inquit) suscitabo cum. This corruptible nature of owre bodie could not other wise be brought to incorruptibilitie Oure, corruptible nature could not atteign to incorruptibilitie but by the receipt of the incorruptible flesh of Chryste. and life, except the bodie of naturall life shoulde be ioined to yt. Beleuest thowe not me sainge these woordes? I praie thee then beleue Chryst sainge Verilie verilie (saieth he) I saie vnto yowe, except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his bloode, ye shall haue no life in yowe. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my bloode hath euerlastinge life. Thowe hearest him openlie saing that we shall haue no life, except we drinke his bloode, and eate his flesh. He saieth: in G yower selues: that ys, in yower bodie. By life, maie of right be vnderstanded, that flesh of life. For this flesh shall raise vs vppe in the last daie. And howe, yt shall not greiue me to tell. The flesh of life being made the flesh of the onelie begotten Sonne of God ys brought to haue the power of life. Yt can not therfor be ouercomed of deathe. Wherfor that flesh beinge in vs, expelleth deathe from vs. For the onelie begotten Sonne of God ys not absent from that flesh. Wherfore bicause he ys one withe his flesh, he saied I will rayse him vppe.
Se ye not here plainlie affirmed by sainct Cyrill, and that by those places of the vi. of sainct Iohn, that this corruptible nature of owre bodie, can not atteign to immortalitie and life, except the bodie of Chryst, whiche he calleth the bodie of life, be conioined to yt. To returne then, the argument of Irenaeus ys of great force. For in dede, that The flesh can not be subiect to mortalitie that duelie receaueth the flesh of immortalitie. flesh can not be subiecte to mortalitie, that receaueth the flesh of Chryst, whiche geueth immortalitie. But once to ende with Irenaeus, I wishe the Reader to be aduertised of two thinges: The one that wher Irenaeus and S. H Cyrill saie, that by the receipt of the bodie of Chryst we receaue immortalitie, he maie not thinke them to speake against the scripture whiche saieth, Quis est homo, qui viuit, & non videbit mortem? What man ys he, that liueth, [Page 395]and shall not die? And again the penall sentence of God ys: Puluis es, & in puluerem A reuerteris. Thowe arte dust, and into dust shalt thowe returne. For they speake not of this worldlie life, but of the heauenlie life, that shall be geuen Howe and when this immortalitie shall be geuen. to man after the resurrection. At the whiche, forasmoche as man shall be raised, this temporall deathe ys properlie in the scriptures called a sleape. Whiche immortalitie ys not promised to all that receaue the bodie of Chryst, no more then saluacion ys to all them, that beleue and be Baptised, although Chryst saie: Qui crediderit, & baptisatus fuerit saluus erit. Who that shall beleue, and be baptised, shall be saued: But to soche as woorthilie receaue, and so perseuer to the ende. For Qui perseuerauerit in finem, hic saluus erit. He that perseuereth to the ende this man shall be saued.
The other ys, that wher Irenaeus saied, that owre flesh ys nourished by the flesh of Chryst, yt ys not to be vnderstanded, that that blessed flesh ys turned or chaunged after the maner of other earthlie meates into the The flesh of Chryste ys not turned into our substance, but raither turneth vs into yt. substance of our flesh and bloode, but raither that yt turneth vs into yt, as yt was saied to Sainct Augustine. Nec tu me mutabis in te, sicut B cibum carnis tuae: sed tu mutaberis in me. Neither shallt thowe chaunge or turne me into thee, as the meate of thie flesh, but thowe shallt be turned or chaunged into me. Yt doeth also nourish vs, in that yt geueth vs soche sustentacion of life as yt hath. Earthlie meates whie are they receaued, but that they shoulde geue sustentacion of this earthlie life? So this hauenlie meate ys receaued to geue vs sustentacion of the heauenlie immortall life. As by the one then we are nourished to liue this mortall life: So by the other are we nourished to liue the immortall life.
Again by the receipt of this holie flesh are we made the membres of Chryst incorporated to him, and made one with him, whiche thinge the great and learned Father Hilarie teacheth. Wherby this text of sainct Paul ys moche opened and declared. Which thing (although he doeth not speake of the verie woordes of S. Paule) moued me to ioin him with Irenaeus in this place, his woordes be these: Eos, qui inter Patrem & Filium voluntatis ingerunt vnitatem, C interrogo vtrum ne per naturae veritatem hodie Christus in nobis sit, an per concordiam voluntatis? Si enim verè Verbum caro factum est, & nos Verbum carnem factum cibo dominico sumimus, quomodò non naturaliter manere in nobis existimandus est, qui et naturam carnis nostrae iam inseparabilem sibi homo natus assumpsit, et naturam carnis suae ad naturam aeternitatis sub sacramento nobis communicandae carnis admiscuit? Ita enim omnes vnum sumus, quia in Christo Paterest, et Christus in nobis est. Quisquis ergo naturaliter, Patrem in Christo negabit, neget prius non naturaliter, vel se in Christo vel sibi Christum inesse, quia in Christo Pater, et Christus in nobis, vnum in iis esse nos faciunt. Si verè igitur carnem corporis nostri Christus assump sit, et verè homo ille, qui ex Maria natus fuit, Christus est, nosue verè sub mysterio carnem corporis We verilie receaue the woord made flesh in our Lordes meat. sumimus, et per hoc vnum erimus, quia Pater in eo est, et ille in nobis. I aske them, that bringe in the vnitie of will betwixt the Father and the Sonne, whether Chryst be in vs now by the agreement of will or by the veritie of nature. For if the woorde was verilie made flesh, and we verilie receaue the woorde made flesh in our Lordes meat, howe ys he to be thought not to abide in vs naturallie, who being born man, did both take our nature nowe inseparable vpon him, and also vnder the Sacrament D of the communicating of hys flesh, vnto vs, hath admixed the nature of his flesh to the, nature of eternitie? And so we be all one. For the Father ys in Chryste, and Chryste ys in vs. [Page]Whoseuer then shall denie the Father to be naturallie in Chryste let him E first denie either himself to be naturallie in Chryst, or Chryst to be in him. For the Father being in Chryste, and Chryste in vs maketh vs in these to be We verilie receaue the flesh of Chryste in the Sacr. one. Yf than Chryst hath verilie taken vpon him the flesh of our bodie: and that man that was borne of Marie, be verilie Chryste: And we also in the Sacrament doe verilie receaue the flesh of his bodie, we shall by this also be one. For the Father ys in him, and he in vs. Thus moch S. Hilarie.
For better vnderstandinge of whome, yt ys to be noted that he wrote against the pestiferouse heresie of the Arrians, who taught that the Sonne of God the second person in deitie was a creature, and was not all one with the Father in nature, in deitie, eternitie and equalitie, but was lesse then the Father, and onelie one with him in the vnitie of agreement or Arrius his heresie consent of will. Against this pestilent doctrine did sainct Hilarie write, prouing the Sonne of God to be naturallie in the Father, and the Father naturallie in the Sonne And for that this wicked sect to prooue their wicked doctrine made a false argument vpon our vnitie with God, sainge that F Christe tooke oure flesh in the mysterie of his incarnacion and geueth vs the same in the mysterie of his Sa. and so ys naturalie in vs, ād we in him. Chryst was one with God as we be, but our vnitie with him ys but by submission ād consent of will: therfor (saie) thei soch and none other ys this also. To improoue and dissolue this false and lieng argument, he prooueth that our vnitie with God ys not by consent of will onelie, but also by nature which vnitie ys made and wrought by the receipt of Chrystes naturall flesh and blood in the Sacrament, Wherfore sainct Hilarie thus reasoneth: Si verè verbum, &c. Yf the woorde was verilie made flesh, and we verilie receaue the woorde made flesh in our Lordes meate, howe ys he not to be thought naturallie to abide in vs, who hath bothe taken vpon him, beinge made man, the nature of our flesh nowe inseparable, and also vnder the Sacrament of communicating his flesh vnto vs hath admixed the nature of his flesh?
By whiche argument he doeth not onelie go aboute to prooue that the Father ys naturallie in Chryst, but most plainlie teacheth also that we receaue Chrystes verie naturall flesh in the Sacrament, and that, by that receipt, Chryst ys naturallie in vs. By which two poinctes he conuinceth directlie the wicked assertion of the Sacramentaries, who against all trueth that maie be learned in scriptures, and the most auncient G Fathers, teache, that neither Chrystes verie naturall flesh ys receaued in the Sacrament, neither that Chryst ys naturallie in vs, but onely spirituallie. The contrarie wherof ys not onely by this Authour in plain woordes taught, but also by Chrysostome and sainct Cyrill, as before ys shewed. That sainct Hilarie intended by his disputacion to confute the Arrians denieng Chryst to be naturallie in vs, and also the holie Gost (as yt maie be thought) left the same to confute the Sacramentaris, yt doeth verie well appeare by a conclusion that he maketh vpon the same disputacion thus sainge: Haec idcireo à nobis commemorata sunt, quia voluntatis tantùm inter Patrem & Filium, vnitatem haeretici mentientes, vnitatis nostrae ad Deum vtebantur exemplo, tanquam nobis ad Filium, & per filium ad Patrem obsequio tantùm ac voluntate religionis vnitis, nulla per Sacramentum & sanguinis naturalis communionis proprietas indulgeretur, cùm & per honorem nobis datum Dei filii, & per manentem in nobis carnaliter Dei filium, & in eo nobis corporaliter, & inseparabiliter vnitis, mysterium verae ac naturalis vnitatis sit H praedicandum. These thinges are for this cause spoken of vs, that [Page 396]heretiques vntruely saing the vnitie betwixt the Father and the Sonne A to be onelie the vnitie of will vsed the example of our vnitie with God, as though we being by obedience and will in religion onelie vnited to the Sonne, and by the Sonne to the Father, no proprietie of naturall communion shoulde be geuen by the Sacrament of the flesh and bloode, sithen that both by the honour of the Sonne of God geuen to vs, and by the Sonne of God carnallie abidng in vs, and we being corporallie, and inseparablie vnited in him, the mysterie of the true and naturall vnitie ys to be declared. Thus moch he.
By these woordes as S. Hilarie improoueth the Arrians saing that Chryst The Sacramentaries ioin with the Arrians in denieng natural vnion be twè Chryst and vs by the bless. Sa ys not naturallie in vs, so doeth he the Sacramentaries teaching the same. And thus maie we see the sinceritie of them, who doe maintein the pestilent doctrine of the Arrians. And that that was confuted and reprooued as heresie twelue hondreth yeares agon, ys nowe with a litle false skouring and colouring, solde to the people for trueth.
The Proclamer hath promised that he wolde subscribe yf we B coulde bringe furth but one, that by plain woordes coulde teache the trueth of soche articles, as he Proclamed. Here nowe be two both right auncient and famouse: The first saieth, that ower flesh ys nourished withe the cuppe. He saieth not as the Sacramentarie doeth, with the cuppe of the Lorde, but he speaketh as the catholique Churche doeth, sainge: With the cuppe, whiche ys the bloode of oure Lorde. Neither vseth he the hereticall phrase, sainge that our flesh ys nourished with the Sacramentall bread. but the phrase of Chrystes Churche, sainge that our flesh ys nourished A plain saing for the Procla. with the breade, whiche ys the bodie of our Lorde, calling them by expresse woordes, the bodie, and bloode of Chryste. Ys not this a plain speache? The other saieth, that as trulie as the Father ys naturallie in the Sonne: So trulie ys Chryst naturallie in vs by the receipt of his naturall flesh in the Sacrament. Whiche speach ys also so plain, that except men will not As God the Father ys naturallie in the Sōne so ys the Sō ne by his naturall flesh receaued in the bless. Sacr. naturalie in vs. see, or will not heare, or hearinge will not vnderstand, they can not choose but see, heare, and vnderstand a merueillouse plain trueth. Whiche trueth was so euident plain, famouse and notoriouse in the time of these Fathers, C that they might vpon the same, grownde and frame strong argumentes against great and famouse heresies, as nowe ye perceaue these Fathers to haue doen.
To conclude then seinge the one of these Fathers, saieth that we be nourished with the flesh of Chryst, by the receipt of the same in the blessed Sacrament: And the other, that by the same receipt Chryst ys naturallie in vs, and we naturallie one with him, we maie verie well saie with sainct Paule, that we are membres of his bodie, of his flesh and of his bones.
THE SIXTETH CHAP. TREACTETH VPON E this text of sainct Paule to Hebrues: He haue an Aultar, &c.
IN the xiii. chapter of S. Paules epistle to the Hebrues, we finde this sainge: We haue an Aultar, of the which yt ys not laufull for them to eate that serue in the tabernacle. Whiche saing I finde so expownded that by the Aultar ys vnderstanded the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament. So that the sense of those woordes maie be these: We haue the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament of the whiche yt ys not laufull for anie Iewe, resting and abidinge in the lawe of Moyses to eate. Isich. in leuit. li. 1. c. 4. That thus yt ys to be vnderstanded I haue wittnesses, but I will not trooble the reader with manie, but onelie produce a coople, which bothe be grecians. F And they be Isichius, and Theophilact, the one of the higher house and the other of the lower. Isichius saieth thus expownding a text of Leuitic. Omnem sanguinem reliquum Vituli, fundi circa basim altaris holocausti, quod est in tabernaculo testimonii, praecepit. Altare holocaustomatis rursus Christi corpus intelligamus. Sicut enim ipse Sacerdos, & sacrificium est, sic altare est. Quia autem intelligibile altare corpus Domini, & beatus Paulus intelligit, ipso dicente, cognosce. Ait enim: habemus Altare, de quo edere non habent potestatem, qui tabernaculo deseruiunt: corpus videlicet Christi, dicens, De illo enim comedere Iudaeis fas non est. He comaunded all the rest The aultar of the which the Jewes maie not eatc ys the bodie of Chryst. of the blood of the calfe to be powred oute aboute the foote of the Aultar of the burnt sacrifice, which ys in the Tabernacle of wittnesse. Let vs again vnderstande the Aultar of the burnt Sacrifice to be the bodie of Chryste. For as he ys the preist and the Sacrifice: so ys he the Aultar also. That sainct Paule also doeth vnderstand the intelligle Aultar, the bodie of Chryst, know by his owne saing. For he saieth, We haue an Aultar of the which yt ys not lauful for them to eate, that doe serue in the Tabernacle, that ys to saie, the bodie of Chryst, sainge that of yt, yt ys not laufull for the Iewes to eate. Thus moche G Isichius.
I nede not here moch to saie to open the place, for yt ys open enough of yt self, and can not well be wrested, but that in the literall sense yt must be Hoopers glose edere. 1. credere. vnderstanded of the bodie of Chryst, in that maner that the Iewe obseruing yet the Lawe, maie not eate him. Whiche maner ys onelie by his reall presence in the Sacrament, except we shall euell fauourablie (as Hooper did) expownde edere for credere, to eate, that ys, to beleue. And then the sense must be: that we haue an Aultar, which ys Chrystes bodie, on the whiche the Iewes that doe obserue the lawe of Moyses maie not beleue. Whiche sense as yt ys verie false, so yt ys verie cruell. God forbidde but that the Iewes shoulde beleue on Chryst, as manie a thousand of them haue doen, as the Actes of the Apostles, and diuerse other hystories doe testifie. The like sense shall this scripture haue, yf we vnderstand yt with the Sacramentarie of the spirituall presence of Chryst and the spirituall eating of him. So that a diligent reader maie in this place perceaue into what strictes, and what inconueniences Theophil. in 13. ca. epist ad Hebrues. soche wrestinge expositours doe bringe themselues, who leauing H the true, sownd, and perfect expositions of the Fathers, cleaue to their owne inuencions, which be soche, as although they like well the inuentours: yet they neither like nor well agree, with the scripturs, nor withe the true and catholique [Page 397]expositours of the same. But let vs heare Theophilact also vpon the A same text, Thus he saieth: Quoniam dixerat non obseruandos: esse cibos, ne videantur nostra despicatui habenda, quod obseruatione careant, Nos (inquit) obseruationem, habemus, verùm haud eam, quae sit in huiusmodi cibis, sed super altare, siue incruenta hostia viuifici corporis, liuius enim vt sint participes, ne pontisicibus quidem legalibus permittitur, tantisper dum tabernaculo deseruiunt, boc est, legalibus vmbris, & siguris, quae transeunt, ac dissoluuntur. Forasmoche as he had saied, that regarde of meates Note well these tearms the aultar, the vnbloodie sacrisice, the liuing bodie, &c. should not be had, least our thinges might seeme to be despiced, bicause they had no regarde or reueronce. We (saieth he) haue reuerend regarde, but not that that was vpon these maner of meates, but vpon the Aultar or the vnbloodie sacrisice of the liuinge bodie. For of this Sacrifice to be partakers, yt ys not permitted, no not to high preistes of the lawe as long as thei serue in the tabernacle, that ys, as long as they serue the shadowes and figures of the lawe, which passe a waie, and are dissolued.
Here again by Theophilact as before by Isichius, ye see this text vnderstanded of the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament. He calleth yt the vnbloodie Sacrifice as the holie Nicen Councell did. And that those woordes also of the vnbloodie Sacrifice shoulde not be drawen by the Sacramentaries, the B enemies and distroyers of this Sacrifice, to the sacrifice of lawdes, and thankesgeuinge, as Cranmer doeth in his booke of Sacrifice, he addeth, and fullie calleth yt the vnblood die sacrifice of the liuing bodie, or more proprielie, of the bodie that geueth life, or maketh to liue, which ys not, nor can be anie other but the bodie of Chryst, which (as in the last chapter ys saied) beinge ioined to the Godhead, and made the bodie of God (which ys life yt self) ys able to geue life, and to make other to liue. And therfor ys here of Theophilact verie well called: Viuificum corpus: the bodie that ys able to make to liue. But note that we speake not here of this transitorie, and passing life, but of the permanent and euerlasting life.
In the woordes of S. Paule, this also ys to be noted, that allthough in hys The sacrisice of the Churche of fred in a thousand places ys but oneand the same sacrisice. Hier lib. 3. in Oseam. cap. 8. time the faith was largelie spred, as in Rome, in Corinthus, in Galatia, in Ephesus, in Thessalonia, in Collossis, in Laodicea, yea (as he himself to the Romans doeth testifie) from Hierusalem rownde aboute all the coastes vnto Illiricum, he filled all the contries with the Gospel: yet nowe writing to the Hebrues C he saieth notplurallie we haue manie Aultars, but singularlie we haue an Aultar. For the Church of Chryst hath but one Chryst, and one vnblood die Sacrifice, as Chrysostome saieth, Vna est haec hostia, & non multae: This sacrifice ys one, and not manie. For we doe not offre one lambe to daie, and an other to morowe, but allwaies the same one sacrifice. Proinde (saieth he) Vnum est hoc sacrificium, Therfore this sacrifice ys one, yt hath also but one Aultar, as S. Hierom doeth testifie saing: Vnum esse altare in ecclesia, & vnam fidem, & vnum baptisma Apostolus docet. Quod haeretici deferentes, multa sibi altaria sabricati sunt, non ad placandum Deum, sed in delictorum multitudinem, propterea leges Dei accipere non merentur, cùm eas quaes acceperant, antè contempserint. Etsi quid dixerint de scripturis, nequaquam diuinis verbis, sed Ethnicorum sensibus comparandum est. Isti multas immolant hostias, & comedunt carnes earum, vnam Christi hostiam deserentes, nec comedentes eius carnem, cuius caro cibus credentium est, quicquid fecerint, sacrificiorum ordinem ritumue simulantes, siue dederint eleemosinam, siue pudicitiā repromittant, siue humilitatem simulēt, fictisue blāditiis simplices quosque decipiāt, nihil de huiusmodi sacrificiis Dominus suscipiet. The Apostle teacheth, to be in the Church one Aultar, one faith and one baptisme, which the heretikes forsakinge, haue framed to thēselus manie Aultars D [Page]not to appease God, but to the heaping vppe of multitude of sinnes. E Wherfore they are not woorthie to receaue the lawes of God, forasmoch as the lawes which they had receaued, they had before contemned. And yf they saie any thinge of the scriptures, yt ys not to be compared to the woordes of God, but raither to the senseis of Ethnickes. These men offre manie sacrifices, and doe eate the flesh of them, forsakinge the one sacrifice of Chryst, and doe not eate his flesh, whose flesh ys the meat of the beleuers. Whatsoeuer they doe dissemblinge the order and rite of sacrifices, whether they geue almose, whether they vowe chaistitie, whether they dissemble humilitie, or whether with feined flatteries thei deceaue the simple, God taketh nothing of soch maner of sacrifices. Hitherto S. Hierom.
Whom yf we marke well we maie learn that he by this woorde (aultar) vnderstandeth Chryst, as sainct Paule doeth in this scripture produced oute of the epistle to the Hebrues. For where sainct Paule to the Ephesians saieth Vnus Dominus, vna fides, vnum baptisma, &c. One Lord, one faith, one Baptisme: S. Hierom saieth, that S. Paule teacheth that we haue but one aultar, takinge F the one aultar for our one Lorde Chryst.
But note with all howe liuelie he describeth the heretiques of our time, Heretiques of oure time wel described by S. Hieron. by the painting of the heretiques of and before his time. For heretiques in all ages be heretiques, and heretiques be like heretiques. He saieth that the heretiques did forsake the one aultar of the Church, and framed to themselues manie aultars. So in this our time they haue forsaken the one aultar of Chrystes Church, and framed to themselues manie aultars. For first Luther forsaking the aultar of Chrystes Church, framed himself an other aultar. But Carolstadius, Zuinglius, and Oecolampadius, not likinge either the aultar of the Church or of Luther, framed to thēselues after their phātasie an other aultar. The Anabaptistes framed themselues an other aultar after their deuise. The Swenck feldians misliking all that was doen before them framed after their conceit a newe aultar altogether spirituall. The Caluinistes thinking to passe them all, haue inuented an other maner of aultar, euen altogether after the maner of the Arrians aultar, or not moch vnlike, as Richerus Caluines preacher hath in Frasice plainly declared. Al whiche aultars (as ours also in Englond with like diuersitie) haue not ben to appease God, but raither to heape vppe the multitude of iniquities to the great prouocacion of hys yre, wrath, G and indignacion against vs. Wherbie they being puffed vppe, with the vanitie of their mindes, and contemning the lawes of God, whiche before they had receaued, are nowe reiected, and not thought woorthie of the lawes of God, and therfor as men corrupted in iudgement, like mē in furiouse feuers, who mislike in taste and appetite all thinges that be holsome, and profitable and vehementlie desierouse of thinges vnholsome, and noisome, reiect all the holsome lawes, the holie religion, the catholique faith, the orders, rites, and Ceremonies, vnder whiche they were born, in the whiche thei were baptised, in the which they liued, whiche they receaued, and professed, whiche with moche peace, moche concorde, were manie nombres of years established, holden, obeied, and reuerenced, and haue desire to haue no other faith, religion constitucions, ordeinannces or lawes, but soche as they can presentlie Soch be the phansies of men of this time. inuent and deuise. So great ys their desire, to alter, chaunge and make newe thinges, that they wolde leaue nothinge that they fownde H in vse, But why God fuffreth them to doe this, sainct Hyerom declareth, bicause he thinketh them vnwoorthie to receaue his lawes, [Page 398]forasmoche as they haue contemned the lawes, whiche before they A had receaued.
As touchinge their allegacions of the scriptures, S. Hierom saieth, that their vnderstanding of them ys no better, than to be compared to the sainges of Ethnickes. For hauinge the letters or woordes of the scriptures, and Force of the scripturs falselie alleaged by heretiket. not the true sense, howe moche soeuer they bragge of the woorde, of the Lorde, they haue not the woorde of God, as yt doeth well appeare in their handlinge of the vi of S. Iohn, the xxvi of S. Mathew, the x and xi chapt. of the first epistle of S. Paule to the Corinthians, the fift to the Ephe. the thirtenth to the Hebrues and other, whiche in this booke we haue taken from their violent wrestinge, and tirannouse captiuitie, and haue restored them to the libertie of the concorde and true vnderstandinge of Chrystes Churche, as yt hath ben taught to vnderstande the same by the magisterie of the holie Gost, the right and appoincted Schoolemaster of the same Churche, by our Lorde and God Iesus Chryste.
To proceade in the sainge of S. Hierome, he saieth that they doe not eate the flesh of Chryst, whiche sainge howe true yt ys, with the greif of my heart This ys a chaunge for the wouse. I saie yt, yt ys to well knowen. For what thinge doe they more detest and abhorre B then to beleue and confesse Chrystes bodie and verie naturall flesh to be in the Sacrament, and there to be receaued? And therfor to the intent, that they wolde not eate his flesh, they haue altered Chrystes institucion, they haue altered his faith, they haue abandoned his holie feast of his blessed bodie and bloode, and haue in place of yt inuented a poour bare receauing of a drie peice of bread, and a sippe of wine. And beinge as they be, yt ys well. For the flesh of Chryst ys not meate for them, but yt ys the meate (as S. Hierō saieth) of beleuers. Finallie what soeuer this kinde of people doeth Fasting for meritte ys punishable by statute. whether they fast (as they doe not) for fastinge by them ys exiled, or praie, whiche by them ys almost to nothing shortened, or vowe chastitie, whiche they runne so fast vnto, that they hate all that doe not marrie, as the greater nombre of them ys married, and soche of them as doe not marrie, doe yt for the like holinesse that was in Iouinian, not for perfection of life, but for quiettnesse and ease, and to auoide then combrances that maie happē by a shrewed weif. For thorowoute they condemne the vowe of chastitie, though S. Hierom, C S. Ambrose, S. Augustine, Chrysostome, and all holie writers highlie esteem and commende the same. But to ende, what good dedes soeuer they flatter them selues to doe, as by their dissembled humilitie to shewe them selues lowlie, or by sweet and flatteringe woordes to deceaue the simple, God (S. Hyerome saieth) receaueth no part of soche their sacrifices.
Seinge then their doinges are accepted of God in no better part, I wish all men to leaue their vanitie, and walke in the veritie, to leaue heresie, and to walke in faith: to leaue their inuented toies, and to walke in gods established, and long continued lawes: to leaue their manie aultars framed vpon dissent, and diuision, and to cleaue to the one aultar of Chrystes catholique Churche, whiche ys our helpe and protectiō: to leaue their houngrie cheer of bare bread, and wine, and to enioie the roiall feast of Chrystes bodie and E bloode: to leaue their colde maner of fastinge, and praier, and to acquainte them selues with sharpe fasting and feruent deuocion: to leaue their pretensed matrimonie, and to delight in pure chaistitie, to leaue their licenciouse maner of life, and come to the trade of a penitent life. For in the ende Veritas liberabit, trueth will deliuer. And then, when conscience shall be sett before the iudgement seat of God, in the daie, when he shall iudge the secrettes of men, thē [Page] vnto them that be rebells, and that doe not obeie the trueth but folowe vnrightwisnes, shall E come indignacion and wrathe, tribulacion, and angnishe vpon the soule of euery man, that doeth euell (as saith S. Paule) and as he saieth to the Iewe first, and also to the Rom. 2. gentile: so saie I, to the chrystian first, and also to the infidell: but to euery man that doeth good shall come praise, honour, and peace. God therfore that hath once called vs to his holie faith, confirme and establish soche as haue not yet swarned from yt, and reduce, and bringe home again soche as haue wādred like lost sheape, that we be maie all be of the nombre of them, that shall receaue praise, honoure, and peace, whiche God of his mercie graunt Amen.
THE ONE AND SIXTETH CHAPITER maketh a recapitulacion of that, that ys doen in this worke.
NOwe gentle Reader, haue I goen thorowe all those scriptures, F that treact of the holie Sacrament, speciallie soche as be commonlie alleadged either by the catholiques to proue the same, or by the Aduersaries to improoue yt. In the hādling of which scriptures, so litle haue I geuen to mine owne iudgement, that yt beinge suppressed, I haue (as meit yt ys and as I wolde wish all that liue in this time of controuersies to doe) geuē place to the iudgementes of the learned fathers of Chrystes Churche in all ages. In the setting furth of which Fathers, I haue in sundrie places and matters cōferred the doctrine of the elder, and the younger together, that the concorde that ys betwixte thē might fullie be perceaued. This being trulie and faithfullie doen, the iudgement wher of I referre to the catholique Churche, and submitte both myself, and this ys my worke to the correction of the same, yt maie and doeth easilie appeare and maie clerelie be seen, howe vain the bragge of the Proclamer ys, who wolde haue but one scripture, one doctour, or one Councell produced for the testimonie of the trueth of the catholique faith, And nowe ther be, so manie scriptures, doctours, and Councells brought furth that ther ys not one left to bolstar vppe his heresie The scriptures which he and his complices pretend to haue in their possession are by the iudgement G of the Fathers of Chrystes Parliament house prooued neuer to be theirs, but are and haue ben allwaies in the possession of the catholique Churche.
Considre, Reader, howe manie fathers of the greke churche be here produced, as Dionise, Iustyne, Irenaeus, Origen, Gregorie Nazianzen, Basill, Chrisostom Cyrill, with other of the elder sort, which although they were of one Churche: yet they were of diuerse times, some of them with in one hundreth yeare after Chryst, some two hundreth, some three, and yet all these agree in one trueth of the presence of Chrystes bodie in the bless. Sacrament,
In the latine Churche were Alexander, Tertullian, Cyprian, Hilarie, Optatus, Hierom, Ambrose Augustine, and other, whiche although they were farre distaunte, manie hundreth of miles from the fathers of the greke Churche: yet in consent and agreement together in this matter they ioin and go together.
Of the greke churche again be produced other, that were manie yeares after the other Fathers before rehersed, as Theodorete. Euthimius, Damascen, Theophilact, Oecumenius, and Bessario with other, whiche although they liued in great H diuersitie of ages, hauinge manie hundreth yeares passing betwixt them: yet they liued in the vnitie of faith and religion.
[Page 399]Again also in the latine Churche answerablie to these were produced, A Gregorie, Beda, Haymo, Anselme, Paschasius, Thomas de Aquino, Lyra, and Dionise, with other, whiche also liuinge with moche difference of times, and diuersitie of places, were yet with the eldest, and the midlest, and with the latest all of one minde.
And here note that these authours, as they doe, according to the rule of Vincentius Lirinen. alltogether teache Chrystes presence in the Sacrament, so doe they yt manifestlie, commonlie, and continuallie For Origen, Basill. Chrysostome, Cyrill, Theodoret, Euthymius, and Theophilact, whiche be the greater writers of the grecians, are not produced once onely, neither speaking obscurelie: but they are often and manie times, and that with speache most plain and manifest, and that commonlie, in euerie weightie matter of the booke. Likwise be the Fathers of the latine churche, whiche in euery place beare agreable testimonie to the Fathers of the greke churche. And for asmoche as these fathers haue expownded the scriptures to vs, that doe treact of the Sacrament and doe therin agree, yt ys meete for vs to accept that sense and B vnderstanding, that by the handes of so manie Fathers ys so consonantlie deriued to vs. All they vnderstande them of the presence of Chryst in the bless. Sacrament: wherfor yt ys meete that we also vnderstand them so, and not onelie yt ys meete but we aught and are bownde to doe so.
Nowe therfor let the Proclamer turne his Historie of Mitridates vnto his owne heade and his likes, who lainge wicked seige to the citie of Gods Church, wolde beare the citizens in hand, that the armie of the holie learned Fathers and doctours of Chrystes Churche were on their side. But God be praised, the contrarie nowe appeareth. For this holie armie ys comed down, and haue ioined with Gods citizens, and haue vanquished Mitridates, and his companie, and deliuered the citie from their cruel tirannie of he resie, and haue declared them selues to all the worlde, that they be frendes of Gods citie, and defenders of the same, and aduersaries to Mitrydates the Proclamer and vanquishers of the same. For we haue not by bragge, onelie saied that the scriptures, doctours, and Councells be on our side (as this Mitrydates, this proclamer did) But we haue euidentlie, and inuinciblie prooued C yt in dede. Giezi the lieng and leprouse seruante of Heliseus coulde not, when his master was compased aboute with the theues of Syria, see anie that were on his masters side, but against his Master he sawe manie, yet in verie dede, there were mo on the Prophets side, then on the Syrians part. as after yt was well declared: So this Giezi, this Proclamer, the lieng leprouse seruant seeth not what a noble companie ys on Christs side, but on the Syrians side the enemies of Chryste he seeth multitudes.
For hitherto beinge blinded with ambition, and (as Giezi did) lieng for some gain, or promotion, he hath since fallen into the deapth of the spirituall leprey, which S. Austen calleth heresie. Leprosi (saieth he) non absurdè in telliguntur, qui scientiā verae fidei non habentes, varias doctrinas profitentur erroris. Nulla porrofalsa doctrina est, quae non aliqua vera intermiseat. Vera ergo falsis inordinaté permixta in vna narratione, vel disputatione hominis, tanquam in vnius corporis colore significant lepram, tanquam veris falsisue colorum fucis humana corpora variantem atque maculantem. The lepres are verie well to be vnderstanded those, whiche not hauinge the knowledge of the true faith, doe professe diuerse doctrines of errour. D For their ys no salse doctrine, whiche hathe not some true thinges medled with yt. True thinges therfore inordinatelie permixed with false thinges in one narracion or disputacion of a man, as yt were appearing in [Page]the coloure of one bodie, doeth signifie the leprey altering and defiling the bodies of men as yt were with true and false shewe of coloures. E
By these means then this man was so blinded that he could not see one scripture, one doctour nor one Councell, on Chrystes side, or on his trueths side. But on the enemies side, on heresies side, he could see an wholl armie. But I compare this armie vnto the people that were with in the walls of Hierusalem, at the time of the destruction of the same, whiche, as Iosephus declareth, were not onelie plagued by pestilence, and famine at the hande of God, and with swoorde and fire at the handes of their enemies without the walls, but also they being with in the walls plagued them selues with great debates, discordes, insurrections, and mortall warres. So that the slaughter was as great within, as yt was withoute. Euen so this armie hath ben moche plagued at Gods hande, yt hath raised moche sedicion and tumulte bothe in Germanie, Frannce, and Englonde, euen within their owne walls, yt hath bē from time to time persecuted with swoorde and fire, and the heade capitaines haue not agreed among thē selues, as in these our daies yt ys more then manifest that they doe not. F
This armie therfor, though yt be fuffred: yet as touching the cause, they are not to be feared, For we standing with our Prophete, our cause can not faill, and when yt shall please owre Prophete, the armie, that was with Helizeus, shall ioin with vs, and deliuer vs, whiche armie haue among them no diuision, no discorde, ther be amongest them no inwarde warres, no insurrections, no tumultes (as be amongest the other) but of them all ther ys one heart and one mouth. What one saieth all saie, what one denieth all denie.
On the other side, looke howe manie citties, howe manie contries, so manie doctrines, somanie faiths, so manie religions: yea almost howe manie heades, so manie opinnions. Howe doeth Luther agree with Oecolampadius? howe doeth Melancthon with Bullinger? yea howe doeth Luther agree with him self or Melancthon with himself As for their disagreinge with the holie fathers, yt ys to manifest. The holie fathers teache the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament, they denie yt. They teache that the sacrifice of Chrystes G bodie ys to be offred for the quicke and the dead: these denie yt. They teache almose and praiers to be auailable to the dead: these denie yt. To this yf yowe adde the gates, that they open to all licenciouse libertie, as the taking awaie of Confession, the contempt of penāce, the mocking of fasting, the common maner of diuorcing and marieng again, the voluptuouse taking of women to preists without all discrecion, be she maide or widowe, yf no worse, the indempnitie of vsurie, yt were enough and to moche to offend an honest heart, but to heare soche things.
Yt were to long a repeticion to reherse all the licenciouse doctrines, that be settfurth against godlie and vertuouse liuing. But yf ther were no more but these two euells last rehersed, in them, namelie their dissenting from the fathers and their geuing of libertie to viciouse liuing, yt wer enough to geue anie man iust occasion to suspect, yea and vtterlie to forsake their doctrine.
In the other side, forasmoche as the Catholiques embrace the doctrine of the Fathers, and teache vertueouse liuing, as penaunce, contricion, confession, H and satisfactiō, charitable lending, chaist matrimonie in maried people, pure chaistitie in preistes and religiouse persons, fasting and soche other iust occasion ys geuen to credite them, and to folowe them.
[Page 400]God nowe of his mercie open the eies of all his people, that hauing a breif shewe of the teachers of trueth and vntrueth, of verteuouse liuinge, and of licēciouse liuinge, maie by his grace take the one, and leaue the other, folowe the good, and leaue the euell, and so framing their lifes, to liue in the true faith, and good life, maie by his mercie atteign to the euerlasting life with him, to whome, be all honoure and glorie worlde withoute ende Amen.
Volumen hoc ab eximio viro M. n. Thoma Heskins, De praesentia corporis & sanguinis domini, Anglico idiomate conscriptum, perlectum est a viris illius idiomatis & sacrae Theologiae peritissimis, quibus sicutipsi authori meritò id tribuendum esse iudico, vt ad vtilitatem gentis anglicae euulgetur:
THE CHEIF AND MOSTE MATters conteined in this booke. wher nomber of booke ys omitted, ye be referred to the next before.
- AArons garment wotn for a Bishoprick. lib. 3. cap. 33.
- Abstinence from sinne honoureth God. lib. 2. ca. 44.
- Adoracion of the B. Sacrament taught by S. Paule. lib. 2. cap. 44. by Alexander. cap. 43. by S. Augustin. cap. 45. by S. Dionyse. ca. 47. by Eusebius Emis. ib. by S. Bernarde. ibid.
- Adoracion practised by Angells. lib. 2. ca. 45. by preist deacon, and people in the Greke Church: by S. Ambrose in the latin Churche: by S. Austens mother. ca. 45 by Erasmus, and al chrysten people. ca. 46. by Gorgonia cap. 27.
- Adoracion impugned, and denied, by I uther. lib. 2. cap. 48. by the Proclamer. cap. 46. by wicked doctrine. ibid. Adoracion proued by the same doctours, that the Proclamer alleaged against yt. li. 2. cap. 45.
- Adoracion aught to be doen before we receaue. ibid.
- Adoracion vsed in and before the time of S. Austen. ibid.
- Adoracion in the primitiue Church infamed by infidells for idolatrie. ibid.
- Adoracion ys to be alowed wher the presence ys admitted. li. 2. cap. 46.
- Adoracion neuer by catholique writer denied. cap. 47.
- Adoracion first denied about xl. yeares past. cap. 48.
- Adoracion not to haue ben vsed before the time of Honorius ys vntrue. ibid.
- Aerius denieng the sacrifice of the Masse to auaill the dead condemned for an heretique aboue a thousand years agon. lib. 3. ca. 39.
- Ale geuen in stead of wine in a Communion lib. 1. cap. 26.
- Alexanders authoritie approued. li. 2. ca. 32.
- Alfonsus nombreth xiij. heresies against the B. Sacrament. in Prolog.
- Algasia moued doubtes of scripture to S. Hierom. lib. 1. cap. 4.
- Aliud in the neuter gendre signifieth difference insubstance. ca. 29.
- Almaricus a Sacramētarie condēned. in Pro. S. Ambrose vnderstandeth S. Paule to speake of the verie bodie of Chryste. li. 3. ca. 57
- Ambrose corrupted by Oecolāpadius. ib. ca. 5
- Ambrose his doctrine compared with the Sacramentaries. lib. 2. ca. 52.
- Ambrose commended the faith of his Brother Satyrus in the B. Sacramēt. li. 1. ca. 24.
- Ambr. geueth three instruct. li. 3. ca. 14.
- Ambr. offred sacrifice in the Masse. cap. 37. he praied as the Church doth. ibid.
- S. Andrewe offred the dailie sacrifice. ca. 34.
- Angells attend vpon the preist in the time of sacrifice. li. 2. ca. 45.
- Angells appoincted to euerie man, and offre our praiers to God. li. 3. ca. 38.
- Antichryste shall cause the dailie sacrifice to ceasse. lib. 1. cap. 32.
- Appologie, and proclamaciō both like bolts. lib. 3. cap. 33.
- Apostles vnderstood not Chrystes owne woordes. li. 1. ca. 1.
- Apostles learned of Chryste. cap. 7.
- Apostles decreed that the dead should be praied for at Masse. lib. 3. cap. 39.
- Argument of Chrysts ascension in the vi. of S. Iohn proueth the reall presence in the Sacrament. li. 2. ca. 35.
- Argument of Theophil. to proue the bread made flesh. lib. 3. cap. 20.
- Arrogancie mother of errour. lib. 1. cap. 4.
- Ascension of Chryste improueth not the presence in the Sacrament. li. 2. ca. 12.
- Asseurance of mercie promised to man before full sentence pronownced against him. li. 1. cap. 9.
- Auncient and godlie customes are not to be left for the bare saing of a protestāt. ca. 25.
- Aultars holie. li. 3. cap. 31. testified by Optatus, and S. Austen, and abuse of them punished. ibid.
- Aultars in vse in time of S. Cyprian. ib. ca. 39
- Aultars from the Apostles time. cap. 31.
- Aultar wherfor yt serueth. ibid.
- Aultar and sacrifice correlatiues ibid.
- S. Austen to Dardan. opened li. 2. cap. 12.
- Austens cheifintent vpon the vi. of S. Iohn. lib. 2. cap. 16.
- [Page]Austen teacheth three things in one sentence against the Secramentaries. ca. 19.
- Austen anknowlegeth both spirituall and corporall receauing. ca. 16
- Austen produced by the Sacramentaries in wrong sense. ca. 24.
- Austen against Oecolamp. and Cranmer. ca. 54.
- Austens assertions conferred with the iudge ment of the Aduersa. li. 3. ca. 15
- Austen calleth the bread and cuppe of our Lorde a sacrifice. ca. 18.
- Austen trulie understanded. li. 2. ca. 54
- Austen vttereth S. Paules wootdes expreslie of the bodie and blood of Chryste. li. 3 ca. 55.
- S. Austen corrupted by the Proclamer. li. 3. ca. 31.
- Authoririe of late writers proued good by good reason. li. 2. ca. 3.
- Authoritie ys to be obied wher corruption of life ys. li. 1. ca. 6.
- Baptisme receaued of all indifferentlie. li. 3. cap. 2.
- Baptisme and the read sea compared. ibid.
- Baptisme of chryste and Iohn moch differēt. ibid.
- Baptisme instituted by chryste and commended by the wholl Trinitie li. 3. ca. 14
- Basill and Greg. Nazian. how they atteigned the knowlege of the scripturs. lib. 1. ca. 7.
- Basill howe he taught the simple to beleue of the Sacram. li. 2. ca. 52
- Basill and Chrysostom not fownders of the Masse, but setters furth of soche order as they fownd receaued by tradicion. lib. 3. cap. 35.
- Basill beleued the bread and wine to be made the bodie and blood of Chryste. ca. 36.
- Basill offred the bodie and blood of chryste in sacrifice ca. 37.
- Basill in his Masse praied for the dead and to saincts. ca. 39
- Benediction, what power yt hath. li 2. ca. 51. & ca. 62.
- Benefitts and plagues of the Iewes, figurs of our benefitcs and plagues. li. 3. ca. 1
- Berengarius the first open impugner of the B. Sacrament condemned in foure Councells prolog.
- Berengarius recanted and abiured ibid
- Berengarius neither excellēt in learning nor commendable in life. ibid.
- Berengarius foolishlie obiected S. Austen as the Sacramentaries do nowe. li. 2. cap. 14.
- Bertramus wrote obscurelie and suspiciouslie of the Sacr. prolog.
- Blasphemie to saie the B. Sacr. to be onely a figure. li. 2. ca. 64
- Blessing of Chryste, what force yt hath cap. 58.
- Blessing of more power then nature. cap. 62.
- Blood of Chryste on the crosse and in the Sacr. all one. li. 2. ca 5. & li. 3. ca. 20.
- Blood in the chalice the same that was shedd on the crosse. li. 2. cap. 60
- Blood of Chryste in the Sacr. howe to be estomed. li. 3. ca. 16
- Blood of the Paschall lambe a figure of chrystes blood in the B. Sacr. ibid.
- Bodie of chryste ioined to vs by corporall receipt, not by spirituall onelie. li. 2. cap. 14.
- Bodie of chryst consecrated of manie preists, all one bodie. ca. 28.
- Bodie of chryste inuisible in the Sacrament, a figure of the same bodie visible. ca. 49.
- Bodie of chryste demonstrated ād deliuered not in figure but in veritie. ca. 63.
- Bodie of chryst howe yt ys called a spirituall meat. li. 3. ca. 8
- Bodie of the lambe chryst fedeth vs. ca. 11
- Bodie of chryst vnder forme of bread. ca. 26.
- Bodie of chryste consecrated to two endes. cap. 41.
- Bookes of scripture sealed to manie. li. 1. ca. 5
- Bread of the newe communion differeth not from common bread. li. 1. ca. 17. howe the same ys nowe vsed. li. 3. ca. 47.
- Bread broken in the Sacrament the medicin of immottalitie. li. 1. ca. 17.
- Bread by the omnipotencie of the woord ys made flesh ibid. & li. 3. ca. 9. 20
- Bread and wine chaunged into the bodie and blood of chryste, not in figure but in veritie. li. 1. . ca. 21. li. 2. ca. 59. 60. 51. 53.
- Bread and wine offred by Melchisedecfigurs of that which chryst offre in his supper. li. 1. ca. 29
- Bread turned into an holier thing. cap. 31. 37.
- Bread taken three waies in the vi. of Iohn. li. 2. ca. 2.
- Bread howe yt ys turned into flesh, and why flesh ys not seen in the Bless. Sacrament. li. 2. cap. 7. 8. 19. 57 & li. 3. cap. 20.
- [Page]Bread that descended from heauen ys the bodie of our Lord. li 2. ca. 31
- Bread whiche Chryste deliuered no bare figure but flesh. ca 51. 53
- Bread and wine so sanctified in consecracion, as yt passeth mans witte. cap. 54.
- Bread geuen to the two Disciples in Emaus was the bodie of Chryste. cap. 65. 66.
- Bread whiche we breake ys the bodie of Chryste lib. 3. ca. 19. 27.
- Bread semeth to be in the Sacrament but yt ys flesh li. 3, ca. 20
- Bread diuided to manie ys the bodie of our Lorde li. 3. ca. 21.
- Bread, and cuppe in Sainct Paule the bodie, and bloode of Chryste. lib. 3. cap. 27. 50.
- Brentius impugneth the forme of Baptisme lib. 2. cap. 28.
- Canon of the Apostles corrupted by the Proclamer, li. 3. ca. 40
- Canon forbiddetb not the preist to receaue aloue ibi.
- Capharnaites vnderstood Chryste carnallie lib. 2. cap. 34. had twoo vain thoughts▪ ibid.
- Carnall vnderstanding ys by reason and senses onelie cap. 37
- Carnall men vnderstanding nothing aboue their senses, leape backe from the vnderstanding of the mysterie of the Sacrament cap-33
- Cassiodorus howe he vttereth Sainct Pauleswoordes li. 3. ca. 51
- Catholique preists folowing the Schisme be in miserable case. lib. 3. cap. 36.
- Catholique faith described cap. 53.
- Chastitie required in preists. lib. 1. cap. 22.
- Chryste turneth the malice of heretiques to the profitte of his Churche. prolog.
- Chryste dwelleth in vs corporallie not onelie spirituallie in Prolog. item lib. 1. cap. 14. lib. 3. cap. 23. & 26
- Chrystes reall presence in the Sacrament a receaued doctrine in all the chrystian Churche. prolog.
- Chrystes Parliament house the catholique Church ibid.
- Chrystes interpreting of the scripture proueth the difficultie. li. 1. cap. 7.
- Chryste not Salomon the seed promised to Dauid cap. 9
- Chryste and Sampson compared ca. 10
- Chrystes passion conferred to the prophecies therof. lib. 1. cap. 11. item his resurrection and ascension ca. 12.
- Chrystes bodie and bloode an euerlasting sacrifice. cap. 13. item 31. lib. 3. cap. 36. a dailie sacrifice. ibi.
- Chryste ys offered of his Church, and his Church of him. lib. 1. cap. 18. item lib. 3. cap. 36
- Chryste and Melchisedech compared lib. 1. cap. 13.
- Chryste offred bread, and wine that ys his bodie and blood. ca. 29
- Chrystes oblacion after the order of Melchisedech ouerthroweth the heresie of Eutyches cap. 30
- Chryste offred sacrifice in his supper, and commaunded yt to be contiuued. li. 1. ca. 32. 34. item lib. 3. cap. 33
- Chryste commaunded himself to be offred lib. 3. cap. 16
- Chryste offred euerie wher ys but one bodie and sacrifice lib. 2. cap. 10
- Chryste gaue his owne bodie to his Apostles. cap. 50. 64. he geueth himself to be eaten in the Sacrament, lib. 1. cap. 14.
- Chrystes woordes: This ys my bodie, be not figuratiue. lib. 2. cap. 42. 43. 44. & sequent.
- Chryste verīe bodie in the blessed Sacrament not the figure onelie. lib. 1. cap. 21. item lib. 2. cap. 7. item lib. 3. cap. 7. & 59.
- Chryste geueth vs the same flesh by whiche he was ioined to vs, or tooke of our nature. lib. 1. cap. 14. item lib. 2. cap. 5
- Chryste ys ioined to vs corporallie. lib. 1. cap. 14.
- Chryste and the Paschall lambe compared. lib. 1. cap. 15.
- Chryst in our passouer verilie perfectlie. lib. 1. cap. 16. 19. in the Iewes passouer vnper fectlie cap. 17
- Chryste yf he be receaued but spirituallie then ys our passouer all one with the Iewes passouer cap. 19
- Chryste first eate, and dranke his bodie, and blood, and then gaue to his Apostles. and whie. lib. 1. cap. 16. item lib. 2. cap. 55.
- Chryste gaue inconsumptible meat, tho Sacramentaries consumptible meat. li. 1. cap. 17.
- Chryste consecrated his owne bodie. lib. 3. cap. 51. and commaundeth the same to be consecrated. li. 1. ca. 20. the preist consecrateth
- [Page]Chryste and not the pope made the Sacra-Chrysts bodie. ibid. ca. 18
- Chryste did three notable things in the institution of the blessed Sacrament. lib. 3 cap. 16.
- Chryste commended to vs his bodie, and blood 24
- Chryste in the lawe presented in figure represented in the Gospell in veritie. lib. 1. cap. 18
- Chryste ys nowe receaued in veritie li. 3. ca. 5. & 59.
- Chrystes verie bodie set before vs in earth. lib, 1. ca. 18.
- Chryste the onelie begotten Sonne of God receaued in the blessed Sacrament ibid. & lib. 3. ca. 25
- Chryste verilie vpon the aultar lib. 1. cap. 18.
- Chryste geueth his owne blood in the cuppe lib. 2. cap. 61
- Chryste turned the bread into his bodie and the wine into his blood lib. 1. cap. 20. he made the bread his bodie. lib. 2. cap. 49.
- Chryste saing, this ys my bodie, with the woorde made the thing cap. 55
- Chryste not man doth consecrate lib. cap. 20. 31
- Chrystes woordes (this do ye) be referred to the substance not to the maner. lib. 1. cap. 27
- Chrystes maner in ministring hath no cōmaundement. ca. 26. neuer synce vsed. ibid.
- Chryste left the maner of ministracion to be ordered of his Apostles cap. 26. & lib. 3. cap. 34.
- Chryste in his supper bare himself in his hands lib. 2. cap. 10. 54
- Chryste geueth his flesh in substance verilie not in maner grosselie. ca. 36
- Chryste in his supper the geuer and the gifte. ca. 47. 53
- Chryste the meat that we all feed on. lib. 3 cap. 6.
- Chryste ys the substance of the blessed Sacrament. cap. 10
- Chrystes bodie as verilie receaued in the Sacrament as yt ys beleued to haue hanged on the crosse. ibid.
- Chrystes blood in the Sacrament shed vpon the soldiours garments lib. 1. cap. 24
- Chrystes bodie receaued with mouth both of bodie and soule. li. 1. cap. 20. li. 2. ca. 14. 25.
- Chrystes flesh ys not disgested as other meates. lib. 1. cap. 14. yt turneth vs into yt. li. 2. ca. 5. lib. 3. ca. 59.
- Chryst ys not there receaued spirituallie, where he ys not beleued that he maie be receaued reallie li. 1. cap. 31.
- Chryste doth sanctifie, and transmute the bread and wine. ibid. See bread.
- Chrystes bodie vpon the crosse called bread li. 2. ca. 6
- Chryste doth blesse sanctifie, and diuide his holie bodie to the receauers. lib. 2. cap 8.
- Chrysts flesh in the Sacrament geueth life to the woorthie receauers li. 2. cap. 6. li. 3. cap. 7.
- Chryste in all receauers naturallie: in good receauers both naturallie and spirituallie lib. 2. cap. 20. 24. 25. lib. 3. cap. 6.
- Chryste as verilie in the blessed Sacrament as he was verilie incarnated lib. 2. cap. 24.
- Chryste by his incarnacion ioined to vs: we by the Sacrament ioined to him, lib. 2. cap. 14. 28. item lib. 3. cap. 27. 59.
- Chrystes bodie shall raise our bodies lib. 2. cap. 26.
- Chryste feadeth vs with a bread, whiche ys his flesh. ca. 32
- Chryste moued the Iewes to beleue in his godhead, and to eate the flesh of his manhead. li. 2. ca. 2
- Chryste by the Sacrament maketh vs one with his bodie, and among our selues. li. 3. cap. 26.
- Chryste instructed his Apostles in the faith of the blessed Sacrament before he in stituted yt cap. 56
- Chryste spake plentifullie of his bodie and bloode in the sixt of Sainct Iohn. lib. 2. cap. 55.
- Chrystes institucion ys to receaue his bodie and bloode in the remembrance of his death. li. 3. cap. 36.
- Chrysts bodie ys not in the Sacramentall bread of the communion. cap. 42
- Chryste whie he instituted the Sacrament vnder two kindes lib. 2. ca. 67
- Chryste being whollie vnder eche kinde, the people be not defrauded receauing but thone ibid.
- Chryste saied Masse. li. 3. cap. 33
- Chryste taught the newe sacrifice of the newe Testament lib. 1. cap. 34. 37. item lib. 2. ca. 56. 58.
- Chryst [Page]ment a sacrifice li 1. ca. 31
- Chryste must of necessitie be graunted to haue offred sacrifice in his supper. ibid.
- Chryste ceasseth not to excute his perpetuall preisthead and sacrifice. cap. 37
- Chryste offred euery wher ys but one bodie, and one sacrifice li. 2. cap. 10
- Chryste both in heauen and earth in veritie ibid.
- Chrystes being in the Sacrament ys miraculouse contrarie to the rules of philosophie. ibid.
- Chryste bodie vpon the crosse, in heauen, and on the aultar all one. lib. 2. cap. 15. & 22.
- Chryste the Sonue of man, howe he was in heauen, when he spake in earth. lib. 2. cap. 34.
- Chrysts godhead and manhead distincted as two breades ca. 3. & 15.
- Chryst sitteth in heauen, and yet ys dailie sacrificed by the preist ca. 46
- Chrystes bodie on the aultar that was in the maunger ca. 45.
- Chryste why he made mencion of his ascension in the vi. of Sainct Iohn. cap. 34. 35.
- Chrystes flesh besides nature ascended into heauen, and besides nature geueth life in the blessed Sacrament. ca. 34.
- Chrystes woordes wrested to xvi. diuerse senses by protestants. ca. 41
- Chryste was the spirituall rocke, not the materiall and therfor ys ther no figure in Sainct Paules speache. lib. 3. cap. 3
- Chryste before the consecracion of his bodie, lift vppe his eies, and gaue thankes to his Father. li. 3. ca. 34
- Chryste tooke the cuppe of wine mixed with water into his handes, and blessed, and sanctified them. cap. 35
- Chrysts blood not onelie in heauen but also in the chalice ca. 25
- Chryste entred in to his Apostles the doores being shett. li. 2. ca. 11
- Chryste shall come to iudgement with the sign of the crosse and prints of his woundes. li. 3. ca 45.
- Chryste howe he ys, hath ben, and shall be a figure of himself. ibid.
- Chryst what he deliuered in his supper. ca. 44.
- Chrystians eate the flesh of Chryste, as the Iewes did Manna. li. 3. ca, 6
- Chrystians vsing, no external sacrifice, are lesse thankfull then the Iewes. lib. 1. ca. 32.
- Chrystians receauing but a figure as the Iewes, wher ys then the veritie. lib. 3. cap. 6
- Chrystians come to a greater thing in the Sacrament, then the Iewes did in Manna li. 2. ca. 39
- Chrysostome calleth that blood, whiche Sainct Paule calleth the cuppe lib. 2. cap. 27. he beleued the bread and wine, by sanctificacion to be made the bodie and bloode of Chryste. lib. 3. ca. 36.
- Chrysostome offred sacrifice in Masse, cap. 37. desiered intercession of Saincts, and praied for the dead. ca. 39
- Chrysostom impugneth Luther denieng preparacion to be nedefull before the receipt of the blessed Sacrament. ca. 54
- Churche offring sacrifice in the Masse foloweth Chryste his Apostles and the primitiue Churche. ca. 37
- Church must both offre and receaue. lib. 1. cap. 37
- Churche vseth ministracion for reseruacion, as Sainct Clement ordeined. cap. 24.
- Church falselie charged with erroure by M. Iuell ibid.
- Church reseruing the blessed Sacrament for the sicke offendeth not cap. 27
- Churches vniuersall obseruacion to be obeied and be kept. ibid.
- Churche teaching the scripturs to be scripturs teacheth the vnderstanding of them also. cap. 20
- Churche of Afrik vnderstood the vi. of S. Iohn of the Sacrament. lib. 2. cap. 15
- Sainct Clements saing opened lib. 1. cap. 24.
- Clement offred Chrysts bodie and bloode in sacrifice. lib. 3. cap. 37. he beleued the bread and wine by the holie Gost to be made the bodie and bloode of Chryste cap. 36
- Cloude a figure of the holie Goste cap. 2
- Communion with Chryste two waies ca. 23 see vnitie.
- Communion spirituall by Baptisme corporall by the Sacrament cap. 23. 26
- Communion vnder one kinde lib. 2. cap. 67.
- Communion with heretikes maie not be. lib. 3. cap. 25
- Communion in praier ca. 40
- Communion bread of the newe Church ho we yt ys vsed. 47. the bodie of Chryste ys not there *2
- Communicacion ys a nearer coniunction them participacion. cap. 17. 20.
- Communicacion what yt ys ibid. item ca. 22
- [Page]Comon praier of the Churche ys for the wholl Church. ca. 40.
- Comfort small wher consciēce ys confownded. prol.
- Conference of Chrystes woordes, and the serpents. li. 2. ca. 42.
- Confession hath three commodities. li. 3. cap. 55. yt ys to be made truly ibid.
- Consecracion what yt ys lib. 3. cap. 9. how yt ys done. li. 1. ca. 20. 31. li. 2. ca. 8. what ys the force. li. 3. ca. 14.
- Consecracion the woorde vsed by S. Ambrose. lib. 2. cap. 52. by Tertullian. lib. 3. cap. 33.
- Consecracion vsed by the Apost. and that ys vsed nowe in the Church, all one. ca. 34 35.
- Consecracion and sacrifice auouched by S. Cyprian. li. 1. ca. 29.
- Consecracion and sacrifice abolished in the Church that the ministers maie more frelie kepe wemen. ca. 22.
- Councells of more force then Parliaments cap. 25.
- Cranmers gloseth without warrant vpon Chrysost. lib. 1. ca. 18.
- Cranmers sensuall sentence of faith. cap. 16.
- Cranmer gloriouse woordes to cloake euel mening. cap. 21.
- Cranmer falsifieth the scripture. li. 2. ca. 11. he falsifieth Iustine. ca. 44.
- Cranmer vseth two false sleights in alleaging of Iustine. ibid.
- Cranmers heresie improued. li. 2. ca. 62.
- Cranmers generall rule refuted. lib. 3. cap. 30.
- Creature earthlie can not be chaunged in to a spirituall vertue. cap. 20.
- Cuppe of blessing what yt ys, ād why yt ys called. ca. 19.
- Cyprian and Origen teache that euell men receaue the bodie of Chryste. cap. 46.
- Cyril denieth that we receaue Chrysts bodie onelie spiritually. lib. 2. cap. 16. 26.
- Damasus pope disdenied not to learn of S. Hierom. li. 1. ca. 8.
- Damascen vnderstanded S. Paule to speake of the verie bodie of Chryst. Cor. 11. li. 3. cap. 51.
- Dailie sacrifice of Chrystes bodie and bloode to be offred. li. 2. ca. 57.
- Dailie sacrifice shall ceasse by Antichryst. li. 1. cap. 32.
- Daunger of vnwoorthie receauers. lib. 3. cap. 54.
- Death to him that will not heate the preist. lib. 1. cap. 6.
- Decaie of deuociō cause of shortning of the Masse. li. 3. cap. 34
- Dcrees made against preists Mariages. lib. 2. cap. 28
- Desire of the eating of the flesh of Iob applied to the eating of Chrysts flesh lib. 1. cap. 14.
- Difference betwen the bodie of Chryste and shewe bread. ca. 22
- Difference of being of the holie Gost with vs, and of Chryst. lib. 2. ca. 63.
- Difference betwen the primitiue Church, and the catholique Church nowe in the vse of the B. Sacrament. lib. 3. cap. 57.
- Diuerse histories of scripture prouoke to sinne being not godlie vnderstanded and vsed. li. 1. ca. 2.
- Diuine things are with reuerence and diligence to be handled. li. 3. ca. 1.
- Doctrine of the primitiue Churche conferred with the Churche nowe. lib. 2. cap. 43.
- Doctrine of the Sacramentaries conferred with the Fathers. lib. 1. cap. 21. contrarie to the Fathers. li. 2. ca. 59.
- Doctrine of the reall presence howe yt ys called newe. lib. 2. cap. 50. and that yt ys not inuencion of the papists.
- Doctrine flieng the common receaued vnderstanding of the scripture ys to be suspected. ca. 40
- Dogges cruellie vourowed their Masters, that vnreuerentlie had cast the B. Sacrament vnto them. li. 3. ca. 43
- Doubtes in the lawe of God, wher to be dissolued. lib. 1. cap. 6. item lib. 3. cap. 1.
- Disciples in Emaus knewe not Chryst before the eating of the bread. lib. 2. cap. 65.
- Drinke whiche we drinke in the B. Sacrament flowed oute of the syde of Chryste. lib. 3. cap. 7.
- Effecte of chrysts blessing of the bread, and of the woordes of consecracion. lib. 1. cap. 26. li. 2. cap. 61. & 62.
- Effect of the B. Sacrament euerlast. life. lib. 2 cap. 6. 30. & lib. 3. cap. 7.
- Effects of the bl. Sacrament prouing the excellencie therof, and meanes to atteing the same. lib. 3. cap. 6. & 14. li. 2. cap. 5.
- Effectual causes two. cap. 15
- Epistle to the Romaines full of obscure places, [Page]li. 1. ca. 4
- Ephesine Councell vnderstood the vi. of S, Iohn of the Sacrament. lib. 2. cap. 15.
- Erasmus calleth the errour of Berengarius impudent. prolog. errour of the Proclamer therfor arrogant. ibid.
- Erasmus his iudgement of the blessed Sacrament. ibid.
- Errour of Origen. li. 2. ca. 55
- Errour in the Sacrament bringeth manie other errours. li. 2. ca. 1
- Eucharist called the holie bodie of our Lorde by S. Cyprian. ca. 13
- Eutiches his heresie. ca. 68.
- Euthymius denieth that, which the Sacramen taries affirme ād affirmeth that they denie li. 2. ca. 15.
- Euery chrystian maie not dispute of God. li. 1. cap. 7.
- Euell men eate and drinke the bodie and bloode of Chryste. li. 2. cap. 16. 24. lib. 3. cap. 46. 49. 52. 54. 57.
- Euell receauers three sorts. cap. 52
- Euells two committed by purting awaie of confess. cap. 55.
- Examinacion of our selues what yt ys, and howe to be doen. ca. 53.
- Excellencie of Sacramēts standeth in three points cap. 12
- Excellencie of the blessed Sacrament aboue Manna. cap. 14. item 25. excellent titles therof. cap. 30
- Exhortacion to preparacion by Chrysost. ca. 54
- Fabianus made a lawe that the people shoulde communicate thrice in the year lib. 3 cap. 40.
- Faith howe yt ys requisit to the receauing of the blessed Sacrament. lib. 2. cap. 20. lib. 3 cap. 53
- Faith that beleueth the flesh of Chryste to be in the blessed Sacrament a spirituall faith li. 2. cap. 37.
- Faith aboue senses and reason and teacheth manie things contrary to them. lib. 1. cap. 16. & lib. 2. cap. 39. 62. 10.
- Faith [...] in the mysterie of the [...]. lib. 2. cap. 37.
- Faith iudgeth possible that reason iudgeth impossible. cap. 10. 30
- Faith and Baptisme inseparable means of saluacion. ca. 48
- Faith without woorks sufficieth not in persons of discrecion li. 3. ca. 1
- Faith nourished by the bodie and bloode of Chryste. lib. 2. ca. 49
- Faith catholique described. li. 3. ca. 53
- False Chrystians more woorthie reproche then Iewes. lib. 1. cap. 19. item lib. 2, cap. 9.
- False doctrine hath some trueth admixed. cap. 12
- Fame of the chrystian rites among infidells, proueth the presence. ca. 42
- Fasting for merit punishable by statute. lib. 3. ca. 60
- Fathers learned of their elders lib. 1. cap. 7
- Fathers in the primitiue Churche spake of the mysteries often couertlie. lib. 2. cap. 3
- Figurs of Chrystes incarnacion. li. 1. ca. 10
- Figurs be not in all points comparable ibi.
- Figures of the blessed Sacrament foure cap. 15.
- Figurs in good things not so good as the things figured: in euell things not so euell ibid.
- Figuratiue passouer, and the true passouer both on one table ca. 18
- Figurs of the olde lawe, and veritie of the newe lawe, be as shadowes, and the thing shadowed li. 2. ca. 22
- Figurs of things be not merueillouse but the Sacrament ys merueillouse ca. 47
- Figure taken two waies cap. 49.
- Figurs contein what reason conceaue, the Sacrament, what faith beleueth. cap. 51.
- Figure of the Sacramentaries excluded from Chrysts woordes lib. 2. cap. 51. 52. wiped awaie by Chrysost. cap. 55. denied cap. 58. 59. 60. 62.
- Figure what yt must be li. 3. ca. 2
- Figure geueth not life, but the blessed Sacrament geueth life, ergo &c. cap. 8
- Figurs and things figured compared. cap. 10.
- Figure maie forshewe life, but yt can not be life. ca. 14
- Flesh of Chryste in the Sacrament hath an vnspeakeable power. lib. 2. ca. 1
- Flesh of Chryste called life, as being the flesh of God, who ys life. ca. 14
- Flesh and blood of Chryste both vnder one kinde in the catholique maner of ministracion: neither of both vnder two kindes in the hereticall Communion. cap. 16.
- Foode of Chrystes flesh cause of our immortalitie lib. 2, cap. 17. 26. item lib. 3 cap. 24. 58. 59.
- Flesh of Chryste meate in plain maner lib. 2. cap. 18. lib. 3. cap. 5
- [Page]Flesh of Chryste geueth life and yet remaineth still naturall flesh. cap. 27.
- Flesh profiteth nothing Iohn vi. ys not spoken of the flesh of Chryste, for that profiteth moche. cap. 36.
- Flesh of Chryste both naturall and spirituall cap. 36. lib. 3. cap. 10.
- Flesh of the Sonne of God and the consecrated bread one bodie. cap. 52.
- Flesh of Chryste appeareth not in the B. Sacrament for our infirmities sake. lib. 2. ca. 7. 8. 19. 57. lib. 3. ca. 20.
- Flesh vnited to the Sonne of God by assumtion, the same vnited to vs by participacion. li. 3. cap. 27.
- Flesh of Chryste called spirit. li. 3. ca. 10.
- Flesh of Chryste receaued in the B. Sacramēt seed of euerlasting life. li. 2. ca. 57.
- Forme, essence, nature, substance, all one. lib. 2. cap. 7.
- Formes of breade and wine a speache knowē to S. August. ca. 22. and forme of bread remain. cap. 60.
- Foure thinges called the bodie of Chryste. ca. 58.
- Foure benefitts of the Iews nōbred. li. 3. ca. 1.
- Gelasius his meaning opened. li. 2. ca. 68.
- Gelasius truncatelie alleaged by the Proclamer, auoncheth two thinges whiche he concealed. ibid.
- Genesis not red of the Iewes before thirtie yeares of age. li. 1. ca. 2.
- Germanes acknowlege the reall presence. prolog.
- Good religion professed withoute good life not auailable. li. 3. ca. 1.
- God appointed no vain figure. li. 1. cap. 24.
- God and his spirit in his creaturs two waies. li. 3. ca. 49.
- God good by nature, man by participacion. li. 1. cap 33. li. 2. cap. 12.
- God plagueth vs in these daies for the abuse of the bl. Sacrament. lib. 2. ca. 5.
- God punisheth some tēporallie, some eternallie, some both waies. li. 3. ca. 58.
- Gods woorde contrarie to senses must be beleued. li. 2. ca. 55.
- Gods order in his Church for doctrine. lib. 1. cap. 6.
- Gods order inuerted. ibid.
- Godhead of Chryste hath not possibilitie but to be euery where: his manhead hath possibilitie to be somwhere. li. 2. ca. 12.
- Godhead of the Sonne filleth his boddie sanctified by the preist. lib. 2. cap. 28. lib. 3. cap. 25.
- Gospell hath two commodities. li. 2. cap. 1.
- Gospell hath not the figurs, but the verie things, ca. 18.
- Gospell commaunded the eating of blood: the lawe did forbidde yt. ca. 50.
- Gospell and lawe compared. li. 3. cap. 15.
- Grekes affirme the real presence. prol.
- Heresie maketh man enemie to God. prol.
- Hetesie by arrogancie moche preuaileth. lib. 1. cap. 5.
- Heresie the farder yt goeth the worse yt fretteth. cap. 31.
- Heretiques haue moued warre against the church. prolog.
- Heretiques agree in conspiring against the Church. li. 1. cap. 8.
- Heretiques why they are, not to be folowed. ibid.
- Heretiques barke against the trueth, as dooges against the Moon. cap. 16.
- Heretiques build there faith vpon reason and senses. ibid.
- Heretiques howe they alleage the fathers. lib. 1. ca. 21. li. 2. ca. 3.
- Heretiques haue no faith but opinions. li. 1. cap. 21.
- Heretiques refuges in reasoning of the Sacrament. ibid.
- Hereticall Councells allwaies repressed. ca. 25.
- Hereticall expositions of the prophecie of Malch. cap. 33.
- Heretiques call their phansies Gods woorde li. 2. ca. 33.
- Heretiques must be shunned. li. 3. ca. 25.
- Heretikes of oure time wel described. ca. 60
- Heretiques like men in feuers. ibid.
- Heretiques saings cōpared to the saings of Ethnikes. ibid.
- Hierom of praga condemned. prolog.
- S. Hierom howe he learned the scripturs. li. 1. ca. 7. et. 8. he expowndeth the scripturs contrarie to the Sacramentaries. ca. 39.
- S. Hieroms saing opened li. 2. ca. 57. he expowndeth S. Paule of the bodie of Chryste. li. 3. ca. 44.
- S. Hilarie vnderstandeth the vi. of S. Iohn of the Sacram. li. 2. ca. 24.
- Holie Gost consecrateth the B. Sacr. by the hande and tung of the preist li. 2. ca. 63.
- Holie Gost woorketh the consecracion aboue our vnderstāding. li. 1. ca. 20. li. 2. ca. 63.
- Holie bread vsed in the primitiue church. li. 2. ca. 51. li. 3. ca. 23.
- Honour due to God wherin yt consisteth. li. 1. ca. 18.
- Honour or dishonour doen by the receauer ys referred to the Sacr. li. 2. ca. 44.
- [Page]Honorable titles, and great effects of the Sa. li. 2. ca. 5.
- Hoopers glose. li. 3. ca. 60.
- Hornes figuracion. li. 2. ca. 14.
- How, the question of the faithlesse answered li. 1. ca. 20. li. 2. ca. 13.
- Iames and Iohns epistles of few vnderdāded li. 1. ca. 5.
- S. Iames in his Masse did three notable thinges. li. 3. ca. 37. he offred sacrifice ibid. he praied for the quicke and dead. ca. 39. he maketh intercession to Saincts. ibid.
- S. Iames in consecracion directed his speche to God the Father. ca. 34.
- S. Iames Masse full of knowledge, as the proclamer graunteth ca. 39.
- Ignorance as bold as blind. li. 1. ca. 5.
- Ignorance of the B. Sa. what yt ys, and howe to be remoued li. 2. ca. 54.
- Immortalitie when and howe yt shal be geuē li. 3. ca. 59.
- Intencion of the Apostles and fathers in the ministracion, of the catholiques now, and of the newe ministers. ca. 36.
- Iohn Wicleff, and Iohn Husse condemned. prolog.
- Ioseph and Chryste compared. li. 1. ca. 10
- Isaac a figure of Chryste. ibid.
- Isichius acknowlegeth the presence of Christes bodie and blood in the B. Sa. ca. 29.
- Iewes did eate Manna: we oure lordes bodie. They dranke water of the rocke: we the blood of Chryste. li. 3. ca 9.
- A Iewe by a miracle in the S. Sacrament induced to be a christian. li. 2. ca. 42.
- Issue ioined with the Proclamer, for the presence li. 1. ca. 21. li. 2. ca. . 54. for reseruacion. li. 1. ca. 25. . 26. for sacrifice. li. 1. ca. 37. for adoracion. li. 2. ca. 47. for priuate Masse li. 3. ca. 40. for praier for the dead. ca. 39.
- Iudas receaued the bodie of Chryste which ys oure price. cap. 49.
- Iuell falsifieth. li. 3. ca. 46.
- Latine church hath, and doeth confesse the reall presence prolog.
- Laie men for praier commaunded to abstein from their wieues. li. 1. ca. 21.
- Lawe of Moyses had two offices. li. 2. ca. 1.
- Lent fast commaunded. ca. 48.
- Libertie a bait of the deuell. li. 3. ca. 53.
- Luther condemned. prolog.
- Luther contrarie to him self. li. 1. ca. 7. his prowd bragges and lies. ibid.
- Luther his straunge doctrin. ca. 8. and his pride. ibid.
- Luthers fond opinion of the presence. ca. 25.
- Luther condemned Sainct Iames epistle. li. 2. ca. 16.
- Lutherans doctrine hauing no apparance of scripture ys ouerthrowē euen by their owne argument. ca. 53.
- Luthers prowde contempt of the holie learned fathers. ca. 59.
- Luther wher he learned his faith. li. 3. ca. 53.
- Luther ys contrarie to S. Paule, to Chrysostō and the fathers. ca. 54.
- Mahomets patched religion and the Sacramentaries moche like. li. 2. ca. 10.
- Manna why yt was called a spirituall meat. li. 3. ca. 3. 8.
- Manna a figure of Chryste ca. 4. 5. applied to the Sacr. ca. 11. 12.
- Manna three kindes, ca. 4.
- Manna had xii wonders. ca. 12.
- Manna what yt ys by interpretacion. ca. 11.
- Manna and the Sacr. compared. li. 2. ca. 30. li 3. ca. 10. 11. 12.
- Manna moche inferiour to the B. Sacr. ca. 5. 14. but more excellent then the sacramentall bread. ca. 12.
- Manna was from the aier, Chryste from heauen ca. 4. a creature: but Chryste the creatour. ca. 14.
- Manna the figure gaue but temporall life: Manna the thing geueth eternall life. ibi.
- Manna gathered more then was commaunded corrupted. ca. 12.
- Man eatheth the bodie of Chryste. li. 1. ca. 16
- Marie Chrysts mother by nature, and aboue nature. li. 1. ca. 13.
- Masse taken two waies li. 3. cap. 33. and what yt ys proprelie. ibid. & cap 34.
- Masses in the primitiue Church varied in maner from Chrysts doing. cap. 27.
- Masse of S. Iames alowed by the Proclam. cap. 34.
- Masse of the Apostles, fathers, and of the Churche nowe all one in substance. ibid.
- Masse called a sacrifice in the Councell of Constantinop. ca. 35.
- Masse setteth furth the death of Chryste more liuelie then the newe communion. cap. 39.
- Masse the woorde howe yt cometh. cap. 32. and in yse within CCCC. hundreth years after Chryste euen by the Proclamers confession. ibid
- Masses mo then one maie be saied in one Church and one daie. ibid. three saied on [Page]Chryst masse daie fourtene hūdreth years agon. ibid.
- Masters and teachers of the scripture must be had and consulted li. 1. ca. 7.
- Matters of doubt are to be referred to the preists. ca. 6.
- Matthew and Luke seme to varie in the genealogie of Chryste. ca. 3.
- Meate of Chrystes supper differeth from cō mon meates. ca. 17.
- Melancthon his mutabilitie. li. 2. ca. 41.
- Melchisedech and his sacrifice treacted of and compared to Chryste and his sacrifice. li. 1. ca. 30. 31.
- Membres onelie of Chrystes bodie knowe Chryste. li. 2. ca 65.
- Memories and monumēts of holie and worthie men defaced. li. 1. ca. 21.
- Ministers of the newe church can not consecrate. li. 3. ca. 34.
- Ministers of two sortes. ca. 36.
- Ministerie of Agells aboute men. ca. 38.
- Miracles wrought in the blessed Sa. li. 1. ca. 24. li. 3. ca. 42.
- Misunderstanding mother of heresie. li. 1. ca. 7.
- Misunderstanding of Chrystes woordes causeth all the heresies of the Sacramentaries li. 2. ca. 64.
- Mocks and skoffs the onelie arguments of the Proclamer against the Masse. li. 3. ca. 38.
- Mother of Chryste, and of Sampson compared. li. 1. ca. 10.
- Mouth receaueth that faith beleueth. li. 2. ca. 15.
- Misteries of religion not common to all mē. li. 1. ca. 7.
- Mysteries of the church wonderfull. li. 2. ca. 5.
- Mysterie what yt ys, and howe the B. Sacr. ys called a mysterie. li. 3. ca. 57.
- My flesh ys verilie meate Iohn vi. no figuratiue speache li. 2. ca. 20. 21.
- Naturall order had no place in manie of Chrysts doings. li. 2. ca. 10. & 12.
- Naturall vnitie of Chryste to vs. li. 2. ca. 24. see vnitie.
- Naturs two in Chryste, not two persons. li. 3 ca. 51.
- Nature corrupted could not be brought to incorruption but by the incorruptible bodie of Chryste. li. 3. ca. 59.
- Nestorius and Eutiches heresies. li. 2. ca. 15.
- Newe lawe requireth a new presthead. li. 1. ca 13.
- Newe mynisters maner in their comunion. li. 3. ca. 34.
- Newe church chargeth Chryste with an vntreuth. ca. 39.
- Nothing so true but heresie maie impugn yt li. 2. ca. 12.
- Obedience to be shewed euen wher corruption of lifeys li. 1. ca. 6
- Obedience of the newe church how yt standeth. ca. 25.
- Obiection oute of Tertullian. li. 1. ca. 16. oute of S. Austen ca. 19. item ca. 23. oute of S. Clement ca. 24. oute of Chrysostome li. 2. ca. 5. oute of S. Aug. ca. 14 oute of Euseb. Emis. ca. 19 oute S Gregorie. ca. 25 oute of S. Aug. ca. 34 oute of. Tertull. ca: 49. oute of Leo. ca. 56. oute of Rupert. li. 3 ca. 10.
- Obiction of the Aduersarie solued. li. 1. ca. 18.
- Obiection oute of S. Hierom solued. ca. 22.
- Obiection vpon Melchisedec answered. ca. 28
- Obiection of Chrysts being in diuersse places. li 2. ca. 12.
- Obiection of the spirituall eating of Chryst. ca. 37.
- Obiections of the Proclamer against adoracion. cap. 44.
- Obiection vpon S. Basill. solued by damascen. li. 3. ca. 18.
- Obiection vpon the woord bread in S. Paul. cap. 29. item other obiections oute of S. Paule. ca. 44.
- Obiection of the Proclamer against sole receauing. ca. 40
- Obiection of Oecolamp. ca. 45.
- Ocolampadius denieth that Chryste affirmeth. li. 3. ca. 13. his wicked glose cofuted ca. 15.
- Oecolamp. condemned. prolog.
- Oecolamp. contradictions. li. 1. ca. 23
- Oecolamp. falsifieth Theophila. li. 2. ca. 12. and S. Aug. ibid. his wresting and abusing of S August. ca. 54.
- Oecolamp. abuseth S. Paules woords: The rock was Chryst. li. 3. ca. 3
- Oecolamp. wresteth the scripture ibid. he mutilateth S. Amb. ca. 4.
- Office of preist to expownd the scripture. li. 1. ca. 6
- Office of consecracion instituted by Chryste as Luther confesseth. ca. 20.
- Offring of bread ād wine, not bringing furth of yt perteineth to the preisthead of Melch. sedech. cap. 18
- Olde lawe had but figurs, new lawe hath the verie things. li. 1. ca. 15. 21
- [Page]Olde Paschall lambe the shadowe, our Paschall lambe the thing. ca. 18
- One thing in manie places two waies. lib. 2. ca. 12.
- One aultar, one faith one bapt. in the church li. 3. ca. 60
- One bread that manie are made one by, ys the bodie of Chryst. li. 3. ca. 28.
- Opinion of the Iewes of the coming of Elias lib. 3. ca. 3
- Order of God inuerted. li. 1. ca. 6
- Order of preisthead in two poincts. ca. 28
- Ordeinances of elders to be holden for lawes, wher scripture prescribeth not. ca. 27.
- Origen opened. li. 3. ca. 30.
- Origen in plain woordes calleth the Sacr. the bodie of Chryste. li. 3. ca. 5.
- Pagans haue daie Gods and howre Gods. li. 1. ca. 32.
- Partakers of Chrystes blood dwell with Angels. li. 2. ca. 5.
- Parts of the Sacr. ca. 56.
- Passion of Chryst settfurth with the prophecies of yt. li. 1. ca. 11
- Paschal lambe had two notable things. ca. 15
- Passouer of the chrystians more excellent thē the Passouer of the Iewes ibid.
- Paule by bread ad cuppe ment the bodie and blood of Chryste by the vnderstanding of Chrysost. li. 1. ca. 27. li. 3. ca. 16. & 24. of S Aug. ca. 15. of Oecumenius and Isidor. ca. 19. of Theophilact. ca. 20. of Anselme ca. 21 of Euthymius. ca. 37. of S. Hierō. ca. 44. of S. Basil. ca. 45. of Origen. ca. 46.
- S. Paule why he spake not of the sacrifice of Melchisedec in the epist. to the Hebrues. cap. 18.
- Paules woordes: the rocke was Chryste, cannot be expownded by a trope. li. 3. c. 3
- Paules woordes abused by Cranmer. ca. 16
- Paule in all his processe of the Sacr. maketh no litle mencion of anie figure. ca. 22.
- Paule saieth that our Lorde imparteth to vs his owne bodie. ca. 29
- Paule ād the vi. of S. Iohn speak of one thing. ca. 50.
- Paule doth often call the Sacr. the bodie of our Lord. ca. 52
- Penance and clean conscience necessarie for the receauers of the Sacr. ca. 55.
- Peter saied Masse at Antioche. ca. 36.
- Peter de Bruis his heresie. prolog.
- Peter Martyr howe he wresteth Theophilact. and his glose ouerthrowen. li. 3. ca. 20.
- Philippe sent by the holie Goste to expownd the scripturs to the Eunuch, which argugueth the difficultie therof. li. 1. ca. 1.
- Plagues for breaking of Gods order in relig. cap. 6.
- Polycarpus put oute of the calēder. li. 2. ca. 3
- Practises of the primitiue church prouing aswell reseruacion, as sole receauing. li. 2. ca. 68. li. 3. ca. 40.
- Practise of prophanacion lamentable to be seen in Englonde. li. 3. ca. 49.
- Praier necessarielie required to vnderstand the scripture. li. 1. ca. 7.
- Praier of the canō in the Masse agreeth with the fathers. The newe communion disagreeth. li. 3. ca. 35. 36. 38,
- Praier for the dead and almose profitable ād vsed in the primitiue church, ca. 39
- Preists office none maie doo but he that ys called li 1. ca. 7
- Preists ought to be reuerenced for their office. li. 1. ca. 18
- Preists must consecrate offre, and receaue. ca. 22.
- Preist must allwaies haue the B. Sacr. reserued for the sicke. ca. 35.
- Preisthead of chryste shall neuer be chaunged. cap. 31
- Preist maketh God, the cauil of the deuel. li. 2. ca. 8.
- Preistes doing the solemne action of the memoriall of chryst in the Masse aught to receaue vnder both kinds: Preists not doing the same and other receaue vnder one kinde. ca. 67
- Preparacion for the worthie receipt of the B. Sacr. commaunded: and the daunger of vnworthie receipt declared, argueth the reall presence. li. 3. ca. 56
- Prefence of chrysts bodie in the B. Sacr. li. 1. cap. 17. 18. & passim per totos tres libros.
- Presence of chryst in the Sacr. no more impossible then other of his workes and doings. li. 2. ca. 22.
- Presence of the holie Goste vnder the forme of the doue and chrystes presence in the Sacr. compared. li. 3. ca. 3.
- Presuptuouse teachers. li. 1. ca. 7.
- Priuate persons maie receaue vnder one kinde. li. 2. ca. 67.
- Priuate communion proprelie what and where yt ys. li. 3. ca. 41.
- Priuate Masse vsed in the time of chrysost. ib.
- Proclamacion of a newe Goliath. prolog.
- Proclamer to be pitied ibid. he denieth all, and proueth nothing. li. 1. ca. 20
- Proclamer impugneth reseruacion withoute reason or autoritie. li. 1. ca. 27.
- Proclamer settfurth that nowe for trueth, which S. Cyrill aboue a thousand years agon reputed an heresie. li. 3. ca. 26. he truncateth [Page]S. Hierom. li. 2. ca. 53. he falsifieth S. August. li. 3. ca. 37. he abuseth Anacletus ca. 4.
- Proclamer skorneth the Masse. ca. 33. & sequ. he findeth three faults in the Canon therof ca. 38.
- Proclamer braggeth of the primitiue Churche in woordes, but refusith yt in dedes. ca. 32.
- Proclamer indgeth maliciouslie of all the chrystian worlde. ca. 38.
- Proclamers sleight in alleaging S. Hierom. ca. 41.
- Prositts cōming to vs by receauing of Chrysts flesh. ca. 39.
- Prophanacion of holie things what yt ys. ca. 46.
- Promesse of gladd tidings to Abraham. li. 1. ca. 9.
- Prophecie not geuen to all. ca. 1.
- Prophecie of the stocke of Chryste and incarnation. ca. 11
- Protestants of euerie sect chalenge to them the woord of God, and the name of the church. ca. 25.
- Protestants tormented with the prophecie of Malach. ca. 33.
- Protestants compared to the dogge in the fable. li. 3. ca. 7.
- Puritie of life in two points. ca. 53.
- Rash readers, and arrogant teachers. li. 1. ca. 7.
- Reall bodie partaken: mysticall bodie partakers. li. 3. ca. 28.
- Reall presence li. 1. ca. 14. 16. 29. &c. li. 2. ca 15. 20. 43. 46. 49. & sequent. li. 3. ca. 5. 8. & alijs.
- Reall presence and sacrifice proued by S. Paule. li. 3. ca 16. 17. 22. 30. proued by Chrysost. ca. 36. by Theodoret. ca. 56.
- Receipt of Chrysts bodie both spirituall and corporall. li. 1. ca. 14. li. 3. ca. 23. 26.
- Receipt of Chrysts merits not propre to one Sacrament, but cōmon to all li. 2. ca. 5
- Receipt of Christs bodie maketh our bodies immortal. li. 2. ca. 14. see bodie and flesh.
- Receauing by ignorance what yt ys. ca. 54.
- Receauers of the B. Sa. must prepare thē selses, and howe. li. 3. ca. 55. must abstein frō the act of matrimo. ca. 41.
- Read Sea a figure of Bapt. ca. 2.
- Represent what yt signifieth li. 1. ca. 18.
- Reseruacion of the Sa. in the Apostles tyme li. 1. ca. 24 and after in the primitiue church ibid. &. ca. 25 26. 27. li. 2. ca. 68.
- Reseruacion not against the institucion of Chryst. li. 1 ca. 26. agnised by the nicē Coū cell. ca. 25. deniers ther of accursed ibid.
- Reseruacion in priuate houses li. 1. ca. 24. in the shippe ibid.
- Riche and poor eate all one bloode. li. 3. ca. 6.
- Richerus a Caluinist forbiddeth to praie to Chryste. li. 2. ca. 48.
- Right waie to vnderstand a caholique authour. ca. 49.
- Roffensis neuer yet answered prolog. his saings alleaged li. 3. ca. 12. & 32.
- Sacrament hath honourable titles. li. 1. ca. 17. yt conteineth the thing woorthie of most honour. ca. 18.
- Sacrament reserued. ca. 24. 25. &c. sent to a sicke man ibid. caried home to soche as were absent. ca. 27.
- Sacrament a figure not of the bodie of Chryste, but of his death. li. 2. ca. 14. &c. li. 3. ca. 44.
- Sacrament a figure in diuerse respects, but not onelie a figure. li. 2. ca. 14. li. 3. ca. 8.
- Sacrament conteineth three things li. 2. ca. 19. li. 3. ca. 42.
- Sacrament a mysterie howe and what a misterie ys. ca. 23.
- Sacrament hath two parts, and whiche thei be. ca. 57. and two offices. ca. 15.
- Sacrament maie be consecrated by no other woordes, then these Hoc est corp. ca. 64.
- Sacrament a sanctified thing and sanctificacion. ca. 66.
- Sacrament deliuered by Chryste in his supper vnder both kindes: in Emaus vnder one kinde proueth both to be laufull. ca. 67.
- Sacrament mynistred vnder one kinde by S. Cypr. ca. 68. receaued so of a woman ibid. and vpon good fridaie. ibid.
- Sacrament and the thing of the Sacrament. li. 3. ca. 8.
- Sacrament if yt haue not the presence of Chrysts bodie ys inferiour to Māna. ca. 12
- Sacraments diuerslie nombred by the protostans. ca. 13.
- Sacrament geuing life farre excelleth Manna ca. 14. yt ys inconsumptible meat. ibid.
- Sacraments of the new law better, &c. ca. 15 sacrament defined. ibid.
- Sacraments of the newe lawe geue grace. ib. and saluacion. ibid. compared to the olde lawe by S. August. ibid.
- Sacram. proued by our lord to be his bodie. li. 3. ca. 53.
- Sacrament caried home and receaued as deuocion serued, and lick wise reserued of holie men in wildernesse ca. 41.
- [Page]Sacramēt deliuered to a Iewe appeared flesh and likewise to an other. ca. 42.
- Sacramentaries condemned by eight Councells prolog. their glose vpon S. Cyprian ouerthrowen li 1. ca. 17.
- Sacramentaries make two maner of presence ca. 21. they take awaie the fatte and swete of the bless. Sacr. ca. 26. they stomble at a strawe and leape ouer a blocke. ibid. their cheif grownds be naturall reasons. li. 2. ca. 19.
- Sacramentaries denie that the fathers affirme, and affirme that they denie. ca. 59. they teache contrarie to their own rules. ca. 60. they denie the excellencie of the Sacraments of Chryste. li. 3. ca. 4.
- Sacramentaries maintein the heresie of Eutyches li. 1. ca. 30. and of the Aarrians. li. 3. ca 59. and denieng the receipt of Chrystes naturall flesh seme to denie the immortalitie of our flesh after resurrection. ibid.
- Sacrifice after the order of Melchisedec nowe diffused throughout the worlde. li. 1. ca. 31.
- Sacrifice auouched. ibid. propiciatorie li. ca. 43. li. 3. ca. 14.
- Sacrifice of lawde or gratulatorie separated from extern sacrifice. li. 1. ca. 33. li. 3. ca. 30.
- Sacrifice of the crosse, and of the aultar all one in substance, but diuerse in maner. li. 1 ca. 33.
- Sacrifice of the chrystians, a peculiar and speciall sacrifice ca. 35. a full and most holie sacrifice. ibid. full of horrour honorable to Angells li. 3. ca. 54. immaculate. ca. 37. the bodie and blood of Chryste. li. 1. ca. 36. instituted by Chryste. ca. 31. 32. & li. 2. ca. 49. 56. li. 3. ca. 33. & alibi.
- Sacrifice of the Masse of what preist soeuer offred, ys one with that Chryste offred. li. 2. ca. 8. offred in manie places ys all one sacrifice. ca. 10. item li. 3. ca. 33. & 60.
- Sacrifice of the church consisteth of the visible formes of bread and wine and of the inuisible flesh. &c. li 2. ca. 19. li. 3. ca. 6.
- Sacrrifice of the church proued by S. Paule. li. 3. 16. after the vnderstanding of S. Aug. ca. 18. 29.
- Sacrifice of Chryste in his supper and Melchisedec compared. li. 1. ca. 13. 30. 31. li. 3. ca. 17.
- Sacrifice and Masse caused the Proclamer to falsifie Leo. ca. 40.
- Sampsons conception and Chrystes compared. li. 1. ca. 10.
- Sāctificacion, and a sanctified thing be diuerse li. 1. ca. 66.
- Sathās finall marke he slooteth at. li. 3. ca. 32
- Sathā appeared to Luther and dispured with him of the Masse. ca. 42.
- Sathans power abated by vertue of the Masse. ibid.
- Satirus saued from drowning by power of the Sa. and his faith commended by S. Ambrose therin li. 1. ca. 24.
- Sectes of religion principal in the world foure. li. 1. ca. 32.
- Sects of Sacramentaries sixteen. li. 2. ca. 41.
- Sedulius saieth that S. Paule spake of the bodie of Chryste. li. 3. ca. 49.
- Serapion being being sicke called for the Sa. and receaued alone. li. 3. ca. 41.
- Shewe bread a figure of the Sa. and applied to the Sa. li. 1. ca. 22. 23. 24. appointed for three things ibid. continuallie vpon the aultar. ca. 23.
- Schoole arguments made for the opening of the trueth produced by a Protestant to confirme a falshead li 2. ca. 22
- Scripturs to be hard proued by vii argumēts li. 1. ca. 1.
- Scripturs must be studied with moche labour. ca. 5.
- Scripturs must be learned of the fathers. ca. 7. they be full of doubtes, and maie be drawen to dinerse senses. ca. 6. & 7. 8.
- Scripture the storehouse of God, and why God wolde the same shoulde be heard. ib.
- Scripturs alleaged by Oecolamp. against the presence. li. 2. ca. 12.
- Scripturs must be alleaged in the literall sense ibid ca. 50.
- Sonne of God made flesh ys receaued in our lords meat li. 3. ca. 59.
- Sonne of God troaden vnder foote whē his bodie and blood are not beleued to be in the Bl. Sa. li. 2. ca. 67.
- Spirit howe yt quickneth, and flesh howe yt Profiteth or not. ca. 36.
- Spirit taken two maner of waies. ca. 37.
- Spirit of vnitie among catholiques: spirit of diuision among Protest. li. 3. ca. 9.
- Spirituall receauing not figured by the Paschall lambe. li. 1. ca. 19.
- Spirituall vnderstanding what yt ys. li. 2. ca. 37. & 39. 63.
- Spirituall and reall receipt together wonder full. ca. 55.
- Spirituall knowlege aswell teacheth the substance of Chryst bodie and blood to be vnder the formes of bread and wine, as naturall knowlege the substance of naturall things to be vnder their formes. ca. 63.
- Stercoranits of our time li. 1. ca. 14.
- Storehouse of God not common to all. ca. 7.
- [Page]Straunge doctrines not to be folowed. li. 1. ca. 8.
- Substance of Sacraments must be obserued the maner maie be altered. ca. 26.
- Substance of a thing saied to be seen, when onelie the outwarde forme ys seen. li. 2. ca. 63.
- Synners receaue the bodie of Chryste reallie but not spirituallie. ca. 55.
- Sixtene sects of Sacramentaries and other like. ca. 41.
- Swearing to moche vsed now a daies. li. 3. ca. 30.
- Table of Chryste pourgeth li. 1. ca. 23.
- Table signifieth sacrifice in S. Paule. ca. 31. item li. 3. ca. 16.
- Table of Chryste terrible of the olde Passouer not so. li. 2. ca. 55
- Table of our lord, the bodie of our lorde. li. 3. ca. 30.
- Teachers meet or not meet to be folowed. li. 1. ca. 8.
- Temtacions of oure first Parents and men in these daies compared. li. 2. ca. 41.
- Tertullian in one saing ouer throweth three assertions of the Sacramentaries li. 2. ca. 42. the same opened and deliuered from their sleights. ca. 49.
- Tertullians wief receaued the Sa. secretly, and alone. li. 3. ca. 41.
- Theophilact auoucheth three things against the Sacramentaries. li. 2. ca. 60.
- Three maner of doings touching scripture. li. 1. ca. 26.
- Tradicion to be folowed li. 3. ca. 1.
- Transubstanciacion auouched li. 1. ca. 31. li. 2. ca. 7. 51. beleued of the fathers. ibid. what it ys. ca. 53. li. 3. ca. 14. proued bi Isich li. 2. ca. 54. & 57. item treacted of li. 2. ca. 59. 60. 62.
- Trueth must haue an excellencie aboue the figure. li. 3. ca.
- Water of the Rocke whie yt was called spirituall. li. 3. ca. 3.
- Waldo, and waldenses. prolog.
- Wanton lusts of Byshops and preists reproued. li. 1. ca. 22.
- Washing of the Apostles feet what yt signifieth. li. 2. ca. 47.
- Verè the Aduerbe, what force yt hath. li. 2. ca. 18.
- Verie flesh of Chryste vnder forme of bread ca. 22. the same called spirit ca. 39.
- Veritie of Chrysts flesh setfurth before vs in the Sa. ca. 60.
- Victor excōmunicated the Churches of Asia li. 1 ca. 24.
- Willfull reason no sufficient warrant allwaies in the court of faith. li. 2. ca. 42.
- Wyne mixed with water in Chrysts cuppe. li 1. ca. 20. 26. li. 2. 43. li. 3. ca. 34. 35. yt ys a diuine tradicion so to be vsed, and why yt ys. ibid.
- Wyse men, by hearing maie be wiser. li. 1. ca. 8.
- Woman stricken to death for vnwoorthie receauing of the Bl. Sacr. li. 3. ca. 58.
- Wonderfull what ys proprelie. li. 2. ca. 55.
- Worke of the Sa. miraculouse. ca. 60.
- Woorthie receauers and vnwoorthie what they receaue. li. 3. ca. 51. 52. 53. woorthinesse proprelie what yt ys ibid.
- Worldlie cares kepe men from God. li. 3. ca. 40.
- Vntrueths vttered by the Procla. three in one place. ca. 39.
- Vnbloodie sacrifice, the liuelie bodie of christe, the aultar whiche the Iewes maie not eate. ca. 60.
- Vnitie with Chryste two waies li. 1. ca. 14. li. 2 ca. 10. 14. 24. li. 3. ca. 23.
Faultes in printing.
In this long worke (gentle Reader) there can not a fewe faultes be committed in the or thographie, both bicause the printers were vnskilfull of oure language, and for that the ouerseer coulde not be allwaies readie at the presse to make corrections. In consideracion wherof, and that I haue not tyme my self to gather all, I praie thee of gentlenesse to beare ther with, and for thy skill to correct after these fewe examples. God be euer withe thee.
In the prolog the first line: read, haue moued: in the xv. lyne: for primatiue, primitiue and so in other places.
In the booke first amende the nombres of the leaues, as, for vii. viii. xi. xvi. lx. &c. ii. iii. iiii. viii. xl &c. then of the chapters, for thirtene, fourtene, &c. read thirtenth, fortenth &c. and for nine and thirteth. read nine and twenteth.
And let the binder looke to the order of the Ternions, for the signatorie letters be some wanting: some mysplaced.