¶ Certeyne notes about the vse and translation of holy scripture to be remembred of hym that shall reade this booke.

IN alleging the holy scriptures although I haue had al­waies dew regard vnto the tonges, wherein they were first writen, yet I haue specially kept that texte, which hath bene a­boue these thousand yeres generally receaued throughowt all the weast Churche, and therefore is expounded best, and best knowen to the Latyns. Concerninge the number of the Psal­mes, I haue followed the seuentie interpretours, whom vniuer­sally the whole Churche hath followed from the Apostles tyme, namely in the distinction of the Psalmes.

Concerning the englyshe bible, I haue almost neuer vsed the wordes thereof, partely because I am not bounde therevnto, but specially because it almost neuer translateth any text well, where­of any controuersie is in these our daies. And to omit for this present other falsified places to the number of a great many hun­dreds, these that followe, are found not to be well translated in the onely matter of the Sacrament of Christes body and blood.

Christ saieth: [...]. Opera­mini Ioan. 6. cibum permanentem. The true Englishe were: worke the meate which tarieth. The translation appointed to be read in the Churches turneth (Operamini) labour for. Whereby the Cert [...]in places not weltrans­lated. sense of the place is corrupted. We labour for that, which we seeke, and haue not, we worke that stuffe, which is present with vs, and must nedes be present, before we can worke it. I suppose there is a difference, whether a carpenter worke a piece of tymber, or labour for a piece of tymber. He that woorketh it, hath it pre­sent, he that laboureth for it, seeketh it absent. Christ bad the [...] Iewes not labour for a meate, which should be absent, when they came to work, but he bad them work the meate, which taryeth [Page 8] to life euerlastinge, which the sonne of man will geue them. The sonne of man (which is Christ) will make the meate present, and the Iewes are willed to worke the sayed meate being first made present, and geuen to them.

It is not therfore the commaundement of Christ, that they should labourfor it, as if it were to be sought out by their diligēce (for they should labour in vain, as neuer being able to find of them selues so preciouse a thing) But Christ meaneth that they shuld work, by faith and mouth, by soule and body, by soule in be­leuing, by body in eating, that meate, which the sonne of man doth promise to geue them. That is the trew meaning of the word, Operamini, work ye: as the wordes that follow to the end of the Chapiter do plainly declare.

But because the Sacramentaries do not beleue the meate that Why th [...] Sacrain [...] taries ha­ue corru­pted th [...] text. tarieth (which is afterward shewed to be the flesh of Christ eaten in dede, whereby he tarieth in vs and we in him for euer) to be made really present, so that we maye work it by faith and body: therfore they haue changed working into labouring for, as thow­gh in the supper of Christ we laboured for his body, and did dot rather work his body.

Againe, Christ saith: [...] 2. Ioan. 6. Qui manducat me & ipse viuet propter me. The trew English is, He that eateth me, he also shall liue for me, The Englishe Bible teadeth, He that eateth me, shall liue by the meanes of me. There is a similitude made in that place, that as Christ being sent of the Father liueth for the Father: so he that eateth Christ liueth for Christ. The Greek word is [...] in both places. It is construed with an accusatiue case in both places, it is latined by propter in both places. yet in the former place it is englished in the common Bible, for the Father: in the later, not (for me) as it owght, but by the meanes of me: Whereas Christ wold proue, that as him self [Page] doth liue for his Father (with whom he is one nature and God­head by eterna! generation) so we doe liue for him, with whom we are one flesh and manhod by eating him worthely. As therfor [...] the Godhead of the Father is really present in the whole substance thereof with Christ: so is Ch [...]ist really present with vs in his whole substance, when we eate him in the Sacrament, of which kind of eating he speaketh in that place by the waie of promise, as I haue proued vpon S. Ihon. What hon [...]sty can be here preten­ded in one sentence to turne one word di [...]ersly, euen when Christ [...]seth the self same word to shew therby the similitude of y ^• matter? Is propter Patrem, for the Father? and yet is propter me, not, for me, but, by the meanes of me? A man maie liue by his meanes that is abs [...]t, whom also he neuer saw. But he can not liue for him, who is not with him, yea so with him, that his whole life is mainteined through him. For here Christ meaneth, by liuing for me, such a kind of life as men haue by liuing for, and because of the meate which they [...]. As therfore noman is able to liue through that meate which is absent, and as when the meat causeth vs to liue, it is truly and really in vs: euen so when Christ saith, He that eateth me, shall liue for me, he meaneth him self, to be really eaten of him who liueth through that he eateth Christ. This helpe toward the Catholike faith the Sacramentaries thought to make nothing, by sa [...]ifying the holy scripture.

Thirdly Christ saith: [...]. [...]. Qui manducat hunc panem viuet in aeternum. The true English were. He that eateth this bread, shall liue for euer. The Bible doth English it, He that eateth of this bread. It is true to saie, he that earcth of this bread shall liue for euer, and it was saied before of Christ. But though it be true in his place, yet it is not the true sense of this place. For here Christ speaketh (by the waie of promise) of sacramental eating, and he is so eaten in the [Page 9] Sacrament, that we both eate him, and of him. We eate him, be­cause he is bodi [...]y pr [...]sent vnder the foorm of bread. We eate of him, because we take vertue and increase of li [...]e of him, & he yet tarieth whole. Of him we maie eate also, without the Sacrament, by be­leuing in him, and keping his commaund [...]ments. But himself we properly eate only vnder the foorm of bread, of which eating Christ now spake.

But because the Sacramentaries wold haue no difference be­twen eating Christ, & eating of Christ, (as who beleue Christ re­ally neuer to be eaten vnder the form of bread) therfore they haue corrup [...]ed the text, putting, of this bread, where they shuld haue left out, of, and haue said: He y ^• eateth this bread. this bread, I say, which before Christ called his own [...]lesh and his own self. He that eateth this bread shall liue for euer. Other smal faults in transla­ting S. John I will not now stand about. Lett vs passe vnto the supper of Christ.

S. [...]athew writeth: [...]. Cūaccepisset Iesus panē, et gratias egisset, fregit, et dedit discipulis, et ait. The true english is Iesus hauing taken bread, & geuē thanks (or blessed) bra [...]e, & gaue to the disciples and said. The common Bible readeth: Iesus tok [...] bread, and when [...]e had geuen thanks he brake it, & gaue it to the disc [...]ples. The holy scripture saith not that Je [...]us brake (it) neither that he gaue (it) but that he brake and gaue. For Iesus toke in dede wheaten bread. but hauing [...] a [...]d g [...]uen thanks, and saied the words of consecration, This is my body, he made f [...]om of the [...] of bread the subs [...]ance of his body, because he said, This is my body, [...]nd he is not wont to saie [...]. Thi [...] [...], which when Jes [...]s toke, was bread, is, after the words prono [...]ced, the body of Christ, and consequently that which was taken is made his body, whi [...]s it is changed by the power of God in to his body [Page] and therfore the substance of bread is no more present. For which cause the scripture saied not, fregit eum, & dedit eum, as the En­glish Bible hath, he brake it, and gaue it, but he brake, and gaue, withowt, it, for he brake the forme of bread which remained, and he gaue his body which by his word he made.

The words of S. Mathew do not all stand in order, as it shal­be shewed hereafter: in so much as Christ said the words of conse­cration, as it is more like, before he brake the Sacrament or gaue to his Disciples.

But the Sacramentaries who wold the word of Christ (when he said: This is my body) to be voide, to be figuratiue, to be a word of promising and not of performing, do saie falsely that it is not in dede the body of Christ, but bread stil as it was before, & to main­tein that heresie they corrupt the text, sayng: Jesus toke bread Matt. 26. Marc. 14 Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11 and brake (it) and gaue (it) Again, in S. Mark (say they) he brake (it) and in S. Luke, he brake (it) last of all in S. Paule, he brake (it) [...] tymes putting the particle (it) which is neither in the Breke nor in the Latin [...]ble.

S. Luke and S. Paule after the consecration of the body of Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11 Christ, witnesse that Christ sayd: [...]. Hoc facite. The trewest Englishe were, Make this thing▪ The sullest, do and make this thing. The common Bible readeth in S. Luke, This do. [...] S. Paule, This do ye. And that which is most abominable of all, in the second tome of yowr ho [...]lies, in the homilie of the Sacra­ment Fol. 213. of Christes body, it is translated, Do ye thus.

So that in two wordes thre faults be committed: the one, tha [...] facere is here Englished, to doe, whereas it standeth not for that only, but also to make, which is y ^• cheefer meaning of y ^• twaine as I proue hereafter. And therfore either both significatiōs of doing and making, or the more principal which is, of making, owght to [...]aue bē expressed. Moreouer, hoc, this thing, is turned (this) only [Page 10] without adding therunto the name of thing, and that to th [...]nd noman should think y ^• a substātial thing were wi [...] to be made, but only that a qualitie were d [...]d. For they wold haue the words of Christ, to meane: Doe as [...], [...] so, do this. Wher­as he meaneth, Make this thing, wh [...] I haue m [...]: This thing, I saye, wherof you heard me saye: This ys my body: as though he [...], make this my body.

But the Sacramentaries, without all [...], haue corrupted y ^• gespell, because noman should think of [...] any thing, least by asking what thing it were, he should [...] that the body of Christ is commanded to be made. In so much that in those homi­lies Tom. 2. Fol. 213. where they pretend to teache the word of [...]d, they report the command [...] of Christ, saying: Do ye thus. [...]a what [...] do ye thus. [...] bread and [...] it, and [...] it, and make no more a doe, but doe ye thus. O trusty go [...], O blasphemouse tongs. Did Christ say, [...] ye thue? He say [...]: Doe and make this thing: Hoc est corpus meum quod pro vobis datur, hoc sacite. This is my [...]ody, which is geuen [...]or you, do [...] and make this thing. [...]tt vs go forward.

It [...] in S. Luke, and in S. Paule, [...]. Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11 In meam comme morationem. The true English were, for the remembrance of me, or to th'end I may be remembred. The common Bible turneth In the remembrance of me. A thing may be done best in the remembrance of a man, when the man is first remembred, and afterward the thing is done in the remembrance of him. But Christ meaneth not so, he meaneth to haue this thing (to witt) his body made to this effect, that his death may be re­membred, and so his words do sound: Doe and m [...]e this thing for the remembrance of me, to bring men into the remembrance of me. For when my body is made by the Priest, and listed vp to be adored, and all the peple taught to bow doune to the body of [Page] Christ, and to come with pure consciences to receaue it, then Christ is remembred by reason of his body made, and so the scrip­ture is fulfilled which saith: Doe and make this thing for the re­membrance of me.

But the Sacramentaries wold haue nothing made in Chri­stes supper. But they wold haue bread eaten, and wine druncken, which is not able to make Christ to be remembred so effectually, and with such contrition, confession and satisfaction, as he requi­reth to be remēbred withall. For he seeketh not (as the Zuingliās imagine) a remembrance in words alone, but much more in dedes. The remembrance of him is the following of his Crosse and death by penance, by humility, by confessing our synnes to his ministers, and taking absolution of them: and all this kind of remembrance ariseth by the making of Christes body, whiles men are persuaded, they may not come to so preciouse a thing, without confoorming of them selues to the death of Christ.

In translating S. Paule there are other faults not of so greate 1. Cor. 10 weight, as these others, but yet which should haue bene more dili­gently translated: as where the Greek readeth, [...]. Cōmunicatio sanguinis Chri­sti, cōmunicatio corporis. There the common Bible turneth: The partaking of y ^• blood of Christ, the partaking of y ^• body. Whereas it shuld be translated, the cōmunicating of the blood of Christ, and the communicating of the body. Communicating is more then partaking, albeit the old Latin text in the later place doth reade, participatio, partaking. But that excuseth not the Sacramenta­ries, who pretend to correct it allwaies by the Greek. and now whereas the Greek readeth twise, [...], and the Latin once communicatio, the English agreing throughly with neither o [...] both, turneth twise, partaking.

The communicating of Christes body and blood is, when it [Page 11] self and all thing that is in it, is made common. Partaking is, when part therof is taken. But because after his resurrection Christ can be no more diuided, the partaking of his blood is the communicating of it, not by the force of the meane, but by the de­pendence of the thing. For as he that hath anie part of God, must nedes haue all God, because God is a nature whole euery where without any parts therof: so he that hath any peece of Christes body and blood, hath the whole body and blood, because it is un­mortal and can no more die. Yet if it might be diuided, it might also bye, so that although partaking must in this argument [...] stand for communicating, yet the Sacramētaries haue shew­ed their spite against S. Paule, in translating it after the worst maner they could.

[...] after S. Paul sa [...]th: we being many are one bread, be­cause we all partake, [...], it should be Englished, of the one bread. For such strength hath y ^• [...] article, [...]. & so [...] ­time the common Bible turneth the Greek article into, that. But here it was not for the purpose of the Sacramentaries, that it should be meaned so. S. Paul meaneth one certain bread of li [...]e wherof we partake, & to shew that, he said, [...], of the one Ioan. 6. bread (to witte) of the bread which hath no fellowes, of that bread who said: I am the bread of life, and the bread which I wil geue, is me flesh.

If so manie faults be found without curiouse serching (which I haue not vsed) in so sinal rome, iudge (good Reader) in what case their soules be, who take the word of God at these mens handes, iudge whose Gospell they haue deliuered to the simple people in English. Uerily their own, and not the Gospell of Jesus Christ.

¶ The state of the question betwen the Lutherans, Zuinglians, [...], and Catholikes, concer­ning the Sacr [...]ment of the altar.

TO th'inthent thou maiest good Reader the better vnder­stand, to what point and mark the whole disputation shalbe [...]: I will briefly declare how diuersly the do­ctrine of the blessed Sacrament of the altar hath be [...] set forth in our dayes.

From the beginning of y ^• Christian Churche vntill y ^• yere of our Lord 1517. all y ^• on the earth professed openly Christes Catholike All the Church [...] y ^• [...] pre­sence of Christes body. faith, did beleue, as well in the Breke as in the Latin Church, the reall presence of Chris [...]es body & blood vnder the formes of bread and wine, after consecration dewly made. This faith of theirs was preserued by the delyuery from hand to hand of that do­c [...]rine euen sithens the beginning of Christes Church, and was mainteined by the preaching and writing of the lerned Fathers, and protested by the godly honour, which all Christen people gaue to the said Sacrament at the time of masse or otherwise.

Well it might be that s [...]me one in his harte thought amisse of that hely myst [...], and that some [...] in corners also conspired Noman denied o­penly the [...] pre­sence of Christes body. against the truthe thereof, as [...] and some other like: as now [...]ull many maie be suspected to think that Christ is not the saui­our of mankind. [...] as [...]o Christian this daie teacheth openly and in expresse [...], that [...] is not y ^• [...] of the world: so did no man in open [...], with the autoritie or toleration of any [...], preache, write or professe, that the body of Christ was not present in the Sacrament of the altar, if the Priest had once [...] the solemne benediction, which our lord Jesus Luc. 22. commanded.

On the other syde, if in the first six hundred yeres, the Christians had beleued, as the Lutherans or Zuinglians now doe, he that [Page 12] had first begunne to haue taught y ^• real presence of Christes body The opi­ [...] of y ^e reall pre­sence [...] y ^e first six hundred yeres. and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine, must haue ben at y ^t tyme noted & reputed for an [...], he must haue ben conuin­ced by som generall or proninciall Councell kept either in the [...] Church, or in the west, the Preachers and Doctours of that age should haue writen against him.

It is not possible, that all the whole Church, which to that day had beleued the mysteries, that be consecrated vpon the altar, to be [...]more but holy bread and wine, to be only tokens of Christes body absent in substance, to be neither a sacrifice [...], nor the reall body and blood of Christ: should [...] through all nations change the Catholike and vniuersall belefe wit­hout [...] [...] that had [...] six hundred yeres, could not [...] sod [...]nly changed, without great tu­multe. any trouble or tumult at all, without any contradiction, or disputation, yea without any man at all knowen or euer heard of, that should first commend vnto them this new opinion of nine hundred yeres old.

Is it credible, that so many thousand millions of Christen men, as were in the Church at the end of the first six hundred yeres, be­leuing the one yere those halowed things vpon the altar to be still bread and wine, should the next yere after, alltogether in all countr [...]es and languages fall [...] prostrate or [...], or at the least bow to the very same things, as to the true body of their maker and sauiour, which before they had ben taught to haue ben vnreasonable and vnsensible creatures [...] And did they al this thing without any guide or preacher, who might will them so to doe? Or did all the Preachers in [...] at on [...] moment change No histo­ry maketh [...] of any chāge of y ^• faith after y ^• first six hūdred [...]. their mind, & [...] the [...] so? Or did som few go through the sower parts of the world, and without resistance of any man preache that new [...]? Were all the pennes of all the writers of histories so tyed, that [...] of them all was able once to write any one mans name, who after the six hundred yeres [...] taught [Page] first, second or third, or at any tyme that change of belefe through out Christendom? Was that hereti [...]ke alone so almighty, that no­man durst write his name, neither whiles he liued, nor when he was departed out of this life? If the man were vnknowen, at the No [...] can be pa­ [...], be­cause none [...]. least why hath the sect no speciall name? Was there not one lerned man in the whole Church of God either willing or able, to resist that fury of new doctrin in the matter of Christes supper?

If none were lerned enough to conquer it by preaching, or dis­puting, or writing, at the least wise wold none do bis best to sett [...] a bare historie of that tragedie? Or who euer hath writen that the whole Church chāged her saith in this matter? So many Councells haue ben kept in all ages and countries, so many he­ [...] names and opiniōs, who were but in priuie corners, haue Euthi­mius, In panoplia Libro. 2. Bernar­dus. Concil. Viēnen. ben of late [...] left writen to vs, as Bogomili, VValdenses, Pe­trobusiani, Pseudoapostoli, Begardi, Beguinae, with such like, and could this main heresie of Christes reall preseuce ouerrunne the whole Church so far, that fifty yeres past and vpwards no small chapell can be named in the wide world, where Christes supper was made without adoration of his body and blood as present vnder formes of bread and wine, and yet [...] noman vpon the earth be found, in the space of eight hundred and fiftie yeres, to leaue in monumēts of histories, when that heresy began, or by whom it was promulgated, or what name was geuen to it?

Did Satan in those eight hundred yeres so strongly oppresse Marc. 1. Matt. 16. Ioan. 16. Christ, that his gospell was cleane darkned and his kingdom lost? Did hel gates auaile against the whole Churche? Did the rock it self [...]? Did y ^• holy Ghost [...] to teache y ^• people of God all [...]? I think it wilbe sayed, that the Bishops of Rome did preache, commend, set foorth and mainteine that [...]. But they must shew which Bishop first began, and who writeth it of him, and by what meanes he was so [...] obeyed, that no resi­stance [Page 13] in the world is read to haue ben any where made against him. And yet surely he neuer lacked e [...]emies in the cast Church.

The truth is, that all the Bishops of Rome, yea all the Catho­like Bishops of the whole world, lerned of Christ, this to be his reall body, and this to be his blood. And this faith dured from the last supper of Christ in all faithfull men without any denying or direct [...] therof, vntill Berengarius began to teache otherwise. It was in dede [...] indirectly by Marcion Va­lentinus, Manichaeus, and all those, that thought Christ to haue had no true body of his own. Again by Arrius and Nestorius, who taught the body of Christ to be the body of a man. Arrius, because Christ was not equal in substance with his father but a creature only: Nestorius, because he had two persons, one of God, an Cyrillus in Ana­thematis mo. 11. other, man, therfore seing this was his humane body, Nestorius wold it not to be the body of y ^• sonne of God. But directly y ^• reall presence of Christ in this blessed Sacrament was not impugned, vntill Berengarius, about fiue hundred yeres past, began to sow in the field of the Churche the corrupt sede of false doctrine, concer­ning that question. But his owne [...], and the three Coun­cels gathered straight against him at Uercelles, Tours, and Ro­me, Thre coū cells kept against Berenga rius [...] his life tyme. do rather shew what, and how constant the Catholike [...] was of old time in that behalfe, then any thing help and [...] the opinion of those men, who now adayes endeuour to establish a new inuention of their owne.

The Church therefore, as I said, beleuing most [...], that Christ gaue his owne reall flesh and blood in the mysteries of his last supper, taught consequently, the meane of making present The mea­ [...] [...] Chri [...] presence. that blessed body, to be (not the comming downe of Christ from heauen) but the changing of the substance of bread and wine into the substance of his [...] and blood, by the almighty power of [...] word spoken by a Priest, with such minde and [...], [Page] as that solemne [...] required.

This [...]hange, wherein the wh [...]le subs [...]ance of br [...]ad and wine should by the [...] of Christ be so mightely conuerted into that [...] which [...] for vs, and into that holy bloud which Luc. 22. was shed for vs on the [...]rosse, must of [...] be a dreadfull and propitiatorie sacrifice, as well by reason of the body of Christ sacri­fi [...]ed once to death (which is now made [...]) as for the cause and finall end, why it is made present. For Christ sayd at his [...], This is my Lody, which is geuen for you, doe and make Luc. 22. this thing for the remembraunce of me. If it be at the tyme of The [...] of y ^• [...]. consecration geuen for vs [...] by the comma [...]dement of Christ, who can deny but it is a sacrifice, and that we take greate profit and aduantage by that gift?

Upon this ground, the Christen people were taught to esteme this holy sacri [...]ice, abou [...] all other externall [...]inds of worshipping God in this life. Thence came so goodly bi [...]ding of so many Churches, so riche decking of altars, so great foundations of [...]hanteries, in [...], so much estimation of Masse, that some came to the holy order of Priesthod not for [...], but for welth. And The faul­tes of the [...]. some other went into monasteries rather for case, then for [...] to serue God. All which became, th [...]ough ouer much ease, & lacke of the feare of God, negligent in their office, dissolute in their be­hauiour, ignorant in good lerning, and (which in that vocation is most filthy of all) [...], [...], cou [...]touse. And the moe that in such sorte vnworth [...]ly presumed to those holy prosessions, the greater anger of God the [...] synfull doing prouoked against them selues.

The people on th'other side seing the vnhonest li [...]e of certaine The [...] of the [...]. religiouse persons and Priestes, and how vnre [...]erently they handled the diuine seruice, sell in hatred not so much with their faultes, as with the office it selfe, imputing the vices of euill men [Page 14] to a most holy vocation and ministerie, against the commaunde­ment Matt. 23. of Christ. They withdrew vniustly their tithes and obla­tions, they enuied the riches of the clergy, and in euery alehouse d [...]couered the [...] of their spirituall fathers.

When these great enormities were comme to the highest, so that the cockle began to ouergrow and hide the good corne, and now tyme required that iudgement should beginne at the house of God, and those that in dede were good and faithfull should be 1. Pet. 4. disseuered from the euill, Martin Luther a Frier of S. Augu­stines order in Saxonic, was permitted like a proud [...]ing of Ba­bylon to comme out of the north, and to make spirituall bataile to Ierem. 1. the holy Citie of Hierusalem, because her Citezens did not wor­ship Christ in such puritie of good life, as they ought to haue done. Whereby it came to light, who were y ^e cha [...]e, which is with euery [...] of windecaried vp and doune, & who were the true wheat, which lieth [...] against all tentations, and perseuereth in the Church of God. For those that were light and euill disposed, Who were me [...]e to re ceaue [...] do­ctrine. when they vnderstode they might kepe their liuinges, though they did not dischardge the office belonging therevnto, seing they came to the office only to haue the liuing, those, I say, embraced with all their endeuour the new religion of Martin Luther. And that, whether they were Monkes and religious men, or secular Priestes only. Make them sure of good [...], & they will assure the Prince to geue vp their Abbeys and monasteries. And good reason why. For they neuer loued neither the cote nor the vow, but only the [...]ase and filling of their bellies.

Then God made it euident vnto the world, which were those who had standered in dede the holy order of Priesthod. Who they were that hauing [...] kept wemen, sayd afterward they were their wiues, and who they were that [...] their [...] more them their vowes made to God. I shall nede name no [Page] man. But I thinke there are few men aboue forty yeres old in all England, but they can of their owne knowledge reckon vp di­uers [...] and [...], who before the preaching of Lu­ther, shamed with their vnhouest behauiour the clergy of the realme. And the same men shewed themselues, when broching tyme came, not to haue ben of the Church, but of that religion whatsoeuer should be set foor [...] most carual.

This good then Luther hath do [...]e, that whereas the euill were The pro­fit which y ^• Church taketh of [...]. in profession mingled among the good, now it should be no more so. For two bodies are made, ou [...] of Catholikes, an other of the Protestantes. And the Churche of God remaineth [...] purged from that wicked generation of men. Not that Catho [...]kes lack their great [...], or can be iustified in the sighe of God as no synners. But it skilleth much whether a man doe syn with fear of [...] and with desyre of repentance, or els whether he desend his syn, & make a doctrine of his euildoing.

The [...] and Priest sayeth, he doth not synne in ma­rying, though he [...], not to marie. Yea to amend the matter, he sayeth, no man ought to vowe chastitie, condemning in that doctrine, besyde an infinite number of holy professed virgins, the blessed mother of God, who wōdered how she might haue a childe Luce. 1. [...] she knew not any man. Whereunto her own reason mig [...]t [...] haue replied, that hereafter she might know a man, except she had vowed her selfe not to know at all any man. Now Luther was permitted to discouer such synners, as were most desperate and of least purpose to repent.

This Luther hath shaken the walles of moe Chapels, Chur­ches, Monasteries, then euer any king of Syria did shake [...], Castels or houses in the land of the twelue tribes of Israel and [...]uda. He began with lesse matters, but as the Prince of the [...] throwing [...] and conquering such small fortes as [Page 14] lay in his way, alwayes made hast to besiege Hierusalem itselse the chiefe Citie of the land of Iury: so Luther hauing his eye vpon the highest mysterie of all our faith, (as him selse [...]) [...] In epist. ad argen to raten­ses. to ouerthrow the great reuerence which all good men gaue to the blessed Sacrament of the altar. He went about to be persuaded, In Sacramento praeter panem & vinum esse nihil, that nothing was in the Sacrament besides bread and wine. For these are his owne wordes. But sinding the scriptures to plaine (as himself also [...]) and the saith and consent of [...] do­ctours and people to strong, he [...] gaue ouer tha [...] [...], and contented himselfe with [...] the sacred [...]ower of [...]. He taught, that bread and wine were not in [...]. The [...] of [...] ther. their substance changed into the body of Christ, [...] with­all the [...] presence of our Sauiours flesh and blood. Whose [...] o [...]ce being spred in Germanie, a great multitude of [...] Rutters voluntarily folowed his [...].

But when the Catholikes had euidently shewed, that two di­uers natures al [...]ready exta [...]t in the world (as Christ and [...] bread or wine) could neuer without a maruelouse vnion be made one, and be incorporated together: the which vnion, betwen Christ and materiall bread and wine, neither is expre [...]y acknow­ledged by the holy Gospell, neither gathered thence by generall Councels or lerned Fathers ( [...]or who euer heard, De Christo im­panato, of Christ imbreaded) moreouer when the Catholikes de­clared their belefe of [...] to be conformable to the Scriptures, and expresly alowed by the holy spirit of God in ge­nerall Councels, and in the bookes of auncient Doctours: [...] In the great Con̄ s [...]l of [...]. etc. [...] his Capitain Luther neither to be able to withstand the reasons brought against him, neither yet willing to geue ouer the opinion which him selfe had chosen, he much misli­ked with Luther, and within foure yeres after began to publish [Page] at zurich in z [...]cherland, that the reall substance of Christes flesh 2. The opi­ [...]on o [...] zum­ [...]. Decolam­ [...]. and blood was not in the Sacrament of the altar, as Luther had said, but only was named and signified to be there. To whom Decolam [...]s a renegate out of S. Brigittes Cloister ioyned him selfe, stoutly defending that figuratine doctrine, both against the Catholikes and against Martin Luther.

The Catholikes out of hand shewed how much against the wordes and workes of Christ that opinion is, how absurd, vnse­mely and vncredible it were, that Christ, who is the truth it selfe, Ioan. 1. Luc. 24. and by whom truth is made, and who came to fulfill all figures, should leaue in his owne supper, contrary to the meaning of his owne sayinges, nothing but figures and shadowes.

Satan therefore vnderstanding this doctrine of zuinglius to be much better impugned by the Catholikes, then by Decolam­ [...]dins defended, fearing y ^• onerthrow of the whole armie, spe­dily 3. The opi­ [...] of Caluin. sent in a fresh band vnder y ^• conduct and gouernance of John Caluin. who restoring y ^• fight, protested y ^• he neither thought nor taught a bare figure to be geuē at y ^• supper of Christ, as zuinglius did seme to teach. In dede (quod he) a figure it is, but a strōg stout effectual figure, ioyned with words of promise, stirring vp the hart of him, that heareth the promise and worthely r [...]aueth the pledge therof, to mounte into heauen, and there by faith to fede in spirite vpon Christes owne body and blood, as he in earth corpo­rally feedeth vpon bread and wine. For Caluin teacheth bread and wine to be the figures and signes of Christes body, and those wordes, This is my body, to be wordes of preaching, or of pro­mising Christes body, to them that doe beleue.

O pitifull tossing and tearing of Gods holy mysteries. Are those words, which make and shew the body of Christ present, words of promise? But hereof, I will speak more hereafter. Now concerning that he willeth vs to goe into heauen by faith, know [Page 16] ye not that, because our nature was not able to [...] [...]y to the seat of God in heauen, therefore y ^• [...] o [...] God came [...] from heauen to earth, to leade and list vs vp to the [...]ition o [...] his Fa­ther? Know ye not, that because our body more quickly [...]weth Sapiē. 9. our soule dounward, then our spirit is able to draw our body vp­ward, therefore Christ [...] not only y ^• soule, but also the body of man, geuing vs in his last supper that body of his, to th'inthent our bodies taking hold in the Sacrament of the altar of his bo­dy, might be caried into heauen to haue the sight of God? And be­cause faith without th'incarnation of Christ cannot lift vp our bo­dies, therefore Christ fulfilled [...]aith with truth, and hauing taken of the virgin oure nature, gaue his body in dede to our bodies The flesh of Christ was sent down to lift [...] vp. and soules, y ^• we again might in body & soule be lifted vp with it.

As a man that is cast into a depe pit, calleth by the meane of his tonge for help, but when a cord is let doune to him for the aide and [...] of him, it is not then sufficient to vse his tong still, and to let his handes alone: euen so our faith called for Christ to come from heauen to help vs, to let doune the corde of his hu­manitie, & of his flesh and blood. And shall we now when it is let doune to be fastened in our bodies, and in the bottom of our har­tes, by eating it really, shall wee now refuse it, and saie, wee will goe into heauen by faith ourselues, and there take holde of Christ, whereby wee maie be saued and deliuered out of the depe vale of misery? As though the corde should haue neded to haue ben let doune, if wee could haue fastened our bodies to any thing in hea­uen, and yet our bodyes are they which weigh doune our soules Sapiē. 9. ch [...]ely.

But what meane I to reason in this place of that point, where­of in all the booke folowing, by Gods grace, I will fully intreat? For as it happeneth, they are the scholars of Calnin, with whom specially wee must haue to do at this time. Of whose lerning and [Page] pr [...]ncie▪ I most crue [...]y craue this fauour, that none of them all The Au­thor inten deth not to speak a­gainst the person of the Sacra mētaries. thin [...] me to speak against their persons, but only against their opinions, and so to speak against them, as I am instructed by the holy Scriptures, not graunting, that either they loue more intier­ly, or study more carefully, or reuerence more hartily the word of God, then my Fathers, brethren, and I my selfe doe in the Catho­like Church of Jesus Christ. Only about the meaning of it, I ra­ther would trust the common iudge [...]ent of auncient Doctours, and practise of the whole Church, theu mine owne priuate election and phantasie, or the deuise of a newly planted congregation.

A Catholike man must kepe the most auncient path, and most Ierem. 6. Matt. 24. commonly troden high waie. Priuie bypathes carie m [...]n a side to the [...] dennes of [...]. My purpose is to proue out of the The intēt of the w [...] ter. word of God, specially against zuinglius and Caluin, that Christ geueth in his last supper the true substance of his flesh and blood, not only to our soules by words of promise, but also to our bo­dies vnder the formes of bread and wine. And for as much as the present Church of England, in the Apologie thereof, hath set forth to the world an other doctrine contrarie to that wce re [...]ued of our fore Fathers: I will first disproue and confute the wordes and reasons o [...] the Apologie: and afterward will by the grace of God proue the Catholike faith, out of the holy Scriptures and auncient Fathers.

But first of all I must declare what we Catholiks, and what the Protestants and Sacramentaries beleue the supper of Christ to be. That seing I make the Title of my booke, Of the supper of our Lord, it maie straight appere whose [...] is more worthy to be instituted of Christ, that which we through his word be­leue, or that which they assigne him, against y ^• [...] truthe of his own words.

¶ what the supper of Christ is, according to the bel [...]e of the Catholikes.

BEcause my purpose is to intreat of the blessed supper of our Lord, I thought it best to declare before hand, what we take that supper to be, shewing withal how the Sacramentaries, vnder the pretense of refoorming the abuses thereof, haue taken away the whole supper of Christ, and geuen vs a bare drinking of their own [...]. And whence maie that be more truly and soundly proued, then chi [...]fly out of the word of God, & next out of the monuments of the a a [...]cient Fathers?

The word of God is a most faithfull witnesse o [...] the institution of Christ, the monuments and writings of auncient Fathers doe shew the right vnderstanding of the word of God. which thing I speake not, as though the Catholike Doctours of this later tyire had not the self same holy Ghost which the first had, but seing our aduersaries refuse Albereus magnus, Thomas of Aquine, Bona­uenture, Alexander of [...]ales, Diony [...]ns the Carthusian, Nico­laus de Lyra, Gabriel Biel, and such other men of excellēt vertue, wit, and lerning, (who not withstanding by a rule that S. Augu­ [...]stine Augusti­nus in si­ne libr. 2. cōtra Iu­lianū Pe­lagianū. geueth, ought to be of credit, in so much as all they liued be­fore this question rose be [...]wene the Sacramentaries and vs, and therfore can not beare nor shew more affection to the one syde then to the other) but seing our aduersaries refuse them for [...], and yet follow men of later [...], as Luther, zuinglius, [...]: we are content to put all the matter into the hands of the old Doctours.

And to beginne (as we promised) with the word of God, thus writeth S. Paul in his first [...] to the Corinthians: Conue­nientibus vobis in vnum, iam non est dominicam coenam man­ducare, 1. Cor. 11. vnusquis (que) enim suam coenam praesumit ad manducandū. when yow come together, now there is no eating of our Lords [Page] supper. For euery man taketh [...] his owne supper to eate. By the name of supper, in the old tyme, that one meale was meant, Oecume nius in. 1. Cor. 11 wich ordinarily was made after noon, and it serued for diner and supper. The Corinthians coming together to y ^• holy communion, taried not one for the other, but euery man as he was most riche so he made hast to take his owne meale, neglecting to call other poore men to it. S. Paule mislyking this custome in them, shew­eth, that Christ did other wise, who communicated his supper to all his Apostles equally. For as S. Cyprian saith: Aequa omni­bus Cypria­nus de caena Do mini. Hiero. li. 2. aduer­sus Ioui­nian. Theodo ritus in 1. Cor. 11 Matt 26. Marc. 14 [...]. 22. 1. Cor. 11 portio datur. An equal porcion is geuen to all men. And S. Hieroine sayeth: Christi corpus aequaliter accipimus. We take the body of Christ equally. And Theodorite sayeth: All men are indif­ferently partakers of our Lords supper.

At this time we chiefly consider that Christ hath a supper of his own, as y ^• Corinthians had one of theirs. And it is our question, what Christes supper was. If we shall beleue y ^e holy scriptures: [...] toke bread & wine, & when he had geuen thankes, he said: This is my body, which is geuen for you, and this chalice is the new te­stament in my blood. By which words we are informed, y ^e supper of Christ to be his owne body & blood, geuen vnder y ^• signes of y ^• bread & wine, wh [...]re vpō he gaue thākes, turning by his almighty power the substance of bread and wine, into the substance of his body and blood. The Sacramentaries take the wordes of Christ to be spoken figuratiuely, and therefore they put bread and wine to remaine in their olde substance, sayng, we are [...] by faith with the body and blood of Christ.

Leauing other argumentes for other places, we now only de­ [...], whether the name and nature of a supper be more agrea­ble to our belefe, or to their meaning? Whether is more like, that Christ made his [...] supper to his Apostles of the substance of common bread and wine, or of his owne reall body and blood?

[Page 18]When a man departeth from his frends taking his leaue with a banket, it is lyke that his banket shalbe, according to his habi­litie, full of deinty dishes and costly cates, specially if it be pu­blished before and long tyme loked for, as Christes banket was. The which Melchisedech had prefigured more then two thousand Gen. 14. Sapiē. 16. Psal. 22. Prou. 9. yeares before. [...] had foreshewed it shuld contein al that might be delectable to the taste. Dauid had called it a table proui­ded by God. Salomon a table set forth by the wisedome of God, whereunto poore men in spirit and the fooles of the world were 3. Reg. 17 called. Elias lying hidden at the Torrent of Laryth was sed by crowes that brought him bread and flesh euery euening.

Christ in a parable describing the great supper made at the Matt. 2 [...]. Luce. 14. mariage of the kinges sonne which him self was, telleth of oxen and other satlings kylled and made readie for that purpose. And now shal we suppose, that the sonne of the king of heauen making Galat. 2. a parting supper unto his best beloued and the pillours of all his Church, doth geue them ou [...]wardly at his farewel none other de [...]uties besides common bread and wine sanctified in vse only, and not [...] in substance?

A [...] before, he had [...] with the same Apostles the paschall lambe, and rising from that table (as being the table of Moyses Ioan. 13. Matt. 26. rather then of Christ) he [...] his Apostles feere to make them meete [...]or a greater mysterie. And sitting doune againe he toke bread and wine, not as the dishes of his banket, but as matter and stuff wherof he wold make his owne supper. For it is to be well weighed, that this banket is called our Lords supper, that 1. Cor. 11. is to say, made, and ministred, and [...]ornished by Christ himselfe. He now did not send S. Iohn & S. Peter to prepare his supper Luce. 22. (as he sent them to make ready the Paschall lambe) Christ in his owne supper is the prouider and maker of it. He taketh bread and wi [...]e into his holy handes, intēding lyke a most conning worke­man, [Page] of simple and litle stuff to make the greatest and finest feast that euer was hard of.

It is a great glorie in the profession of cookery, to be able to make of one kinde of stuff (as for example of egs alone) sixtene or twenty diuerse dishes. But to doe that feate, much labour, many spices and sauces, great compositions and mixtures are required. Christ in stede of all those shyfts vsed blessing, & working words Marc 14. of thankes geuing, which were so sure to worke their intent, that some men haue doubted, whether he gaue thanks first, because he forsaw the whole purpose out of hand should be obtained as him selfe wished, or else (which is more probable) whether the very What the blessing of Christ was. working of the feate were not the selfe thankes geuing for the worke. For his blessing and thankes geuing was the sayng ouer the bread, This is my body: and ouer the wine, This is my blood. By the vertue of which wordes his body and blood being made of the creatures of bread and wine, as well were a thankfull sa­cri [...]ice them selues to God euen vnder y ^e forme of bread and wine, as Christ also in his visible foorm hauing wrought this worke, did praise and thanke his Father for such an excellent effect. The which body and blood his Apos [...]les eating & drinking were made partakers of y ^e greatest bāket, that euer was made in earth.

For the better vnderstanding wherof it maye please the reader to repete in his minde, how God in the beginning adorned this world, first with angels and heauenly spirits. Secondly with the Gene. 1. heauens them selues. Thirdly with the elements of fyer, ayer, water and [...]arth. And as the angels occupie the highest place, so doe the heauens with the lights and starres in them occupie the second place, & the foure elements are beneth them. When [...] were come after this sorte from the highest order of [...] to the earth, which is the lowest element of all, then it pleased the wy [...]edome of God to make as it were a reuolt of all things, and [Page 19] to returne his creatures from the bottom of the earth vpward From the [...]owest grow vp­ward a­gain. againe towards him selfe. He therefore made the [...]arth to bring sorth grene grasse with all such kind of things as haue animam vegetatiuam, that is to saye, as liue and are quick by the strength which they haue in them selues to grow and encreace, of which kinde all herbes, springs and trees be. Aboue those in a higher de­gre were byrdes, fishes & beasts, which haue a life sensitiue, being able (those that be perfit) to moue from place to place.

Last of all God made man, who hath not only the vegetatiue Man is y ^• bri [...]f and somme of all creatu­res. power and sensitiue in his soule, but also reason and vnderstan­ding. In whose body are the vertues of the foure elements, with the [...] of the heau [...]ns, in whose soule is free will and power to gouern, agreable to the nature of angels and of heauenly spi­rits. For which cause this creature hath bene worthely called, euen of the Christ [...]n Philosophers, [...], a lytle world, for that he alone hath in him all the degrees of creatures both liuing and without life, both sensible and reasonable, and therefore he is Marc. 16. Exod. 8. called in holy scripture, Omnis creatura, [...]ll creatures.

Now when the sonne of God taking pitie, that this litle world the worke of his great power was by the deuyll seduced, came doune and toke flesh of the virgyn Mary, being true God and Luce. 1. true man in one person. At that tyme were all things briefly brought again to God, whence they first were created & brought forth. Christ aboue is all in one. In his Godhed, he is all that is Christ alone is all. Ierem. 23 Psal. 98. aboue the heauens, and that fylleth the world. In his manhod which is the [...] of God, he is all that is in, or vnder the heauens. In this manhod are all creatures most perfectly com­piled, without all blemmysh of nature, of mynd or of body. So that seing this body of Christ, (wherein also the fullnes of God­hed Coloss. 2. dwelleth) is geuen and eaten at a banket, there is no doubt but the same is such a banket, as can not be made with all the [Page] creatures of heauen and earth gathered together. In this one dysh is a composition most delicate of angels, heauens, ele­ments, of herbes, fysshes, byrds, beasts, of reasonable men, and of God hym selfe. No kind of salit, meate, sauce, sruyts, confe­ction, no kynde of wyne, aqua vite, aqua composita, liquors, sy­rops can be found in nature, made by arte, deuysed by wyt, but it is all set vppon this table, and that in a small rome, where it cloyeth not with the abundance, ue annoyeth with the vncleane handling, it sylleth without lothsomues, it prouoketh the appe­tite without daunger of surfcating. To be shorte, were it not a banket prouided by the sonne of God, no man wold think it pos­sible, to haue any such feast made in the desert of this wycked world.

Thus, good reader, doe the Latholyks teache of the supper of our Lord, and beleue it agreable to his word, and worthy his worship. This banket fedeth the whole man, there is a rea­sonable soule to fede our reason, a naturall substance of flesh to fede and nourysh our flesh, there is the spirite of God which quyckeneth both soule and flesh to lyfe euerlasting. This is the Sap. 16. true Manna, which conteyneth the taste of all swetenes, and hath in it selfe all maner of pleasant refection. This is the fode of lyfe, Ioan. 6. the which who so eateth worthely he shall lyue for euer. This is the feast whereof Salomō speaketh: Hoc ita (que) visum est mihi bonū Eccle. 3. 5. &. 7. vt comedat quis & bibat, & fruatur laetitia ex labore suo. This therefore semeth good to me, that a man should eate and drinke and enioye myrth of his traualic. Which words. S. Augustine al­legeth and expoundeth after this sorte. Vbi ait: Non est bonū ho­mini Augusti­nus. De ciuit. Libr. 17. Capi. 20. nisi quod manducabit & bibet, quid credibilius dicere intel­ligitur, quàm quod ad participationem mensae huius pertinet, quam Sacerdos ipse, mediator testamentinoui, perhibet secundum ordi­nem [Page 20] Melchisedech de corpore & sanguine sue? when Salomon sayeth, There is no good thing to a man, but that which he shall eate and drinke: what is he more credibly thought to meane, then the thing which belongeth to the partaking of this table, y ^• which table y ^• Priest him selfe, who is mediatour of the new testament, doth furnish according to y ^• order of Melchisedech with his owne body and blood?

If then the Prophet haue affirmed the greatest good that man hath in this life, to be eating and drinking, and that eating and drinking belong to the supper of Christ: we maye perceaue right well, that the matter and substance of Christes supper consisteth not in bread and wine (for then we might be better occupied then in eating and drinking it) but in the reall flesh and blood of Jesus Christ, wherein all goodnes spirituall and corporall is collected into one heape, and geuen to vs vnder the forme of bread and wine. For so God hath appoīted, Instaurare omnia in Christo quae Ephes. 1. in caelis, & quae in terra sunt, in ipso. Briefly to renew all things in Christ, which are in heauen, and which are in earth in him.

The Breek word, [...], importeth such a brief gathering to one certain head and somme, that not only heauen and earth, but all things that are in them are brought into Christ, and in him as it were begun again & renewed. The which cometh to passe by the taking of his flesh, and geuing it to death vpon the crosse sor man, in whom all things were both briefly collected, and pitiously corrupted. Now when Christ gaue to vs in his banket that flesh which he toke of his mother, and that blood which he did shed on the crosse, bidding vs make and eate that thing for the Luc. 22. remembrance of him, then was the head, the floure, the cheif com­position of all meats, drinks, and iunkets in the world geuen vs in his last fupper.

S. Cyprian consydering the great deinties of this feast, sayth: De caena Domin. [Page] Vident haec. Sacramenta pauperes spiritu, & hoc vno contenti fer­culo, omnes mundi huius delicias aspernantur, & possidentes Chri stum, aliquam huius mundi possidere supellectilem dedignantur. The poore in spirit see these Sacraments, and contenting them selues with this one dishe, they despise all the delicates of this world, and possessing Christ, they disdaine to possesse any stuff of this world. Contrariwise the wise men of this world, abhorring (as the same Cyprian saith) the commandement of this religion, euen to this day go backward (he alludeth to the Capharnaits, who through the doctrine this Sacrament forsoke Christ) & à secretis diuinis, omnium intra se mysteriorum continentibus sum­mam, diffugiunt & recedunt. And they flee and depart from the diuine secrets, which conteine within them the brief or somme of all mysteries. A great deale more is found in S. Cyprian after the same sense, in so much he calleth the supper of our Lord, Omni [...] consummationis sinem, the end of all perfection. All which praises only rise vpon this ground, because these mysteries truly & really contein within them the body and blood of Christ. when S. Cy­prian De coe­na Domi ni. sayth within them (intra se) he meaneth within the compasse or soormes of bread and wine. For those only are the things that we can point vnto within or without. Other meate or drink we see not.

S. Chrysostom hath so much in the praise of this feast, that it wold make a great volume to bring all he saith therof. I will con tent myself at this tyme with one place. Quando corpus Christi In 1. cor. Hom. 24 tibi propositum fuerit, dic tecum: Propter hoc corpus, & so foorth. When the body of Christ is set before thee, sai [...] with thyselfe: For this bodies sake, I am nomore earth and ashes. For this, I hope to receaue heauen and the good things which are in heauen, im­mortall life, the seat of Angels, the cumpanie of Christ. The verie [Page 21] table is the strength of our soule, the bond of trust, the foundation, our hope, saluation, life. If we goe hence pure with this sacrifice, with most great confidence we shall ascend to the holy porche, or entry, as it were compassed round about with golden garments. But what reherse I things to come? Dum in hac vita sumus, vt nobis terra caelum sit, facit hoc mysterium. Whiles we are in this life, this mysterie causeth, that the earth is heauen to vs.

By the iudgement of Chrysostom, the fame body of Christ which is our saluation and life, is set besore vs vpon the verie table, to th'intent whiles we liue, the earth should be heauen to vs, and when we departed heuce, carying that body with vs, we should be safe conueied vnto heauen it self. When he saith the earth is heauen to vs through this mysterie, he meaneth nolesse to be set vpon the table it self or altar, then is at the right hand of God the Father. And this is the supper of our Lord, which the Catholiks beleue, and not an emptie dish of faith, which although it be much worth when truthe is absent, yet as in heauen where clere vision is, no faith abydeth: euen so when earth is through 1. Cor. 13 this mysterie made heauen to vs, we receaue and eate the body of Christ, not only by faith from heauen, but also in truthe from the verie altar and table. For as there is a truthe lesse of our bo­dies, then of our soules, and as the soules of the faithfull neuer lacked God whom they might feede on by faith & spirit: so Christ therefore toke flesh, that our bodies also might haue a banket ma­de to them, and so the whole man might be no [...]rished to life euer­lasting. Oportuit enim certe (sayth Cyrillus) vt non solum anima In Ioan. Libro. 4. c. 14. per spiritum sanctum in beatam vitam alcenderet, verum etiam vt rude atque terrestre hoc corpus cognato sibi gustu, tactu & cibo, ad immortalitatem reduceretur. For it behoued truly, that not only y ^• soule should ascend by the holy Ghost into the blessed life, but also that this rude and earthly body should be brought to [Page] immortality by tasting, touching & eating the meate which were of alliance or kynred with it, that is to say, of the same nature and substance whereof our bodies are.

Thus in the C [...]tholik banket of Christes supper not only the soule but euen the body eateth, tasteth, and toucheth such meat as is of the same blood and kynred with it. That is to say: our flesh eateth Christes flesh, our body his body. It was flesh that made vs all borne in originall synne, it is flesh that maketh vs all rege­ [...]erate in Christ. Our soule was sp [...]tted, by the entrance into that flesh which was spotted. Thereiore our soule is made cleane by the wasshing of that our flesh, which was bor [...] in syn. The flesh, Tertulli. De resur rectione [...]. sayth T [...]rtullian, is washed that the soule maie be cleansed. The flesh is oynted, that the soule maie be consecrated. The [...]esh is si­gued, that the soule maie be defenced. ‘The flesh is shadowed with imposition of hand, that the soule also may be defenced. The flesh is fed with the body and blood of Christ, that the soule may also be made sat of God. Non possunt ergo separari in mercede quas opera coniung it. They cannot therefore be parted in reward, whom work ioy [...]eth.’Hitherto hath Tertullian commended to vs the great priuileges which God geueth to our flesh. The grea­test of all which, is the eating and drinking of the body and blood of Christ. As therefore we Catholiks beleue most vndoutedly, not only that our soules be [...] and redemed of Christ, but euen that our flesh is the creature of God, made with his own hands, redemed by Christ, and shall [...] again at the later daie really, and Gene. 1. 1. Cor. 15 liue for euer with the soule of the iuste man: euen so we beleue and professe, that not only our soules, but euen y ^• same flesh receaueth [...]to it the benefits of Chri [...]s pa [...]on, the Sacraments which he left to vs, eating & drai [...]ing really vnder the formes of bread and wine the true substance of Christes body and blood. This is the last supper of Christ, which we Catholiks beleue and prosesse.

¶ wh [...]t the supper of Christ is according to the doctrine of the Protestants and Sacramentaries, with a confu­tation thereof.

NOw let vs consyder on the other syde, what kinde of banket our new brethern teache. They saye: Christ ge­ueth to the body bread and wyne, but to the soule he ge­ [...]eth hym selfe by faith, spirit and vnderstanding. This opinion shall by Gods grace be straight waies proued faul [...]ye and er­roneous.

In dede before that Christ was made man, such a banket as Gen. 14. they speake of had bene much worth, and was kept of Melchise­dech and Abraham, of the children of Israell eating Manna, of Exo. 16. the priests eating the bread and cakes, which was offered accor­ding Leuit. [...]. to the lawe. For then with an earthly banket of bread, of flesh, and of wyne, the ioyning of a spirituall eating by fayth and vnderstanding was the highest banket that could be made. For as the spirit and fayth was vertuously occupied in lifting vp it self to God: So was the body occupied in making a figure and signe of the true banket of Christ, which was to come. But when Christ had taken flesh of the virgyn Marye, tunc [...] Ioan. 1. Christum facta est, then the truth was made by Christ. Truth perfoormed outwardly in fulfilling the corporall figures, doth adde much vnto fayth and spirit.

In the fayth of good men and in the spirit of God Christ was Christ [...] by faith [...]ly. euer man, but not euer man in truth of nature. Whil [...]s Christ was only a spirit and only God, so long y ^e feast or banket, which Christ ea­tē ty faith o [...]ly. was geuen for hym, had no better thing in it then the fayth and spirit of the eaters and drinckers, for that was the highest gyft th [...]t God as yet had geuen to man. But all those eatings and drinkings which were in nature and in y ^e law of Moyses though they had corporall meate with faith and spirit, are so farre behind [Page] the supper of Christ (after his manhod really ass [...]pted) as the Christ re­ally man. fayth of Christes incarnation is behind the incarnation it felf [...].

Mark the point (good reader) and thou shalt not be deceaued by false doctrine. As Christ by his incarnation did geue a reall truth to the fayth of the old fathers, and not a new spirite: so in his last supper, he geueth the same spirituall gyft to vs that he gaue to Abel, Noe, Abraham, Moyses, Dauid, Daniell, and such others: but he geueth vs an other kind of truth then euer he Christ re­ally eaten [...] his own supper. gaue them. The truthe made by Christ is the true flesh and blood which he tooke of his mother, and the geuing of that truth to be eaten, is the ge [...]ing of that flesh and blood vnder the formes of bread and wyne. Therefore they that now say: Christ geueth bread and wyne with spirituall gyfts, wherein our soule eateth and drinketh Christes flesh and blood, they graunt a good thing one way, but an other way they take away the greatest goodnes that euer was geuen to man.

Their spirituall eating is not euill, but it lacketh some truthe. A true ea tīg is to ea te [...] thīg bo [...]h with body and soule. How so? because the whole man is not fed. For faith feedeth bue the soule, and yet the name of feeding is proper to the body, and thence is transferred to the soule. that feeding therefore is not ful­ly true, which eateth not that in the mouth, which it eateth in the harte, whereas the true supper of Christ, is meat in dede, and drink in dede, and must be the eating of that in our body, which Ioan. 6. our mynde and soule doth eate. So sayd Leo the great of Christes supper: Hoc enim ore sumitur, quod fide creditur. For that is Ser. 6. de ieiunio. 7. men. taken in the mouth, which is beleued in fayth. The reall flesh of Christ is beleued in faith, therefore the same real flesh must be ea­ten with mouth. And what other cause can be deuysed, why all­ways from the beginning of the world to this day, eating by mouth hath be [...]e ioyned to the highest sacrifices and chefe kind of worshipping of God that euer was vsed: what meaneth the [Page 23] [...]ating of the Paschall la [...]be, of Man [...], of shew bread, wheate [...] Exo. 12. Exo. 16. Leuit. 2. & 24. meale, and all such offerings as were in the law? Could not God haue inueuted an other waye to haue occupied his people in ser­uing him, but only by eating and drinking?

Surely the meaning of all those diners, and suppers, and feasts, were to shew, that in tyme to come the same Messias, that they loked for, [...] in whom they beleued, should so truly come for our sakes into the earth, that he should come also into our bodies to dwell (by his flesh caten) in vs, that we might dwell in him. Nei­ther Ioan. 6. let this seme a laughing matter to thee (good Reader) For sith Christ was born to vs, and geuen to vs (as Esaie saith) he Esai. 9. sought not his owne commoditie but ours, and perceauing that in paradyse the whole nature of man was ouercome of the deuill, specially by cating with mouth of the fruit, which was forbiddē 1. The deuil Eua. him: As against the deuill persuading Eua to disobaye God, he sent the ar [...]hangell Babriell to persuade the blessed virgin Marie 2. Gabriel. Maria. to consent to his will: as against that appletree, he planted the crosse of our redemption: as for y ^• disobedience of Adam, him selfe 3. The ap­ [...]. The cros­se. came to be obedient euen to death: right so for the apple of the for­biddē tree [...] eaten, he gaue him selfe the fruit and apple of the crosse, which is the tree of grace, lawfully and medefully to 4. Ada [...]. Christ. be eaten, and his blood to be drunken. Bibimus (sayth S. Cyprian) 5. The ap­ple eaten. The fl [...]sh of Christ eaten. Cypria­nus de Coena Domini. de sanguine Christi, ipso iub ēte, vitae aeternae cum ipso & per ipsum participes, animalis vitae peccata quasi sanguinem impurum hor­rentes, & fatentes nos per peccati gustum â beatitudine priuatos & damnatos, nisi nos Christi clementia ad societatem vitae aeternae suo sanguine reduxisset. We drink of the blood of Christ, him self commanding, being partakers of euerlasting life with him, and by him, abhorring y ^e sinnes of bare natural life as vnpure blood, and graunting ourselues to haue ben depriued from blisse, and [Page] damned through the taste of sinne, except the clemencie of Christ had brought vs again to the fellowship of euerlasting life by his blood. S. Cyprian setteth the drinking of Christes blood against the taste of syn, which man fell into, by tasting vnlawfully the apple which was forbidden to be tasted of.

The like phrase also Prosper Aquitanicus hath vsed. who firs [...] declareth our fall by eating and drinking, and afterward our ari­sing again by eating the body, and drinking the blood of Christ. Concerning our fall thus he writeth: Liberum ergo arbitrium, id est, rei sibi placitae spontaneus appetitus vbi vsum bonorum quae Prosper Aquitan. contra Collato. acceperat fastidiuit, & vilescentibus sibi felicitatis suae praesidijs in­sanam cupiditatem ad experientiam praeuaricationis intendit, bi­bit omnium vitiorum venenum, & totam naturam hominis intem­perantiae suae ebrietate madefecit. Free will therefore, that is to saie y ^• volūtarie appetite of the thing which pleased it, being ones 10thsome of y ^e good things which it had takē, and without regard we were poysoned in Adam. or care had to the aydes of his own blessednes, hauing bent his impotēt gredines to the triall and experience of disobedience and preuarication, drank in the poyson of all vices, and drowned the whole nature of man with the drunkēnes of his intemperance.

Thus was poison drunk in. Let vs now cōsider whence helth maie be recouered. Inde, priusquam edendo carnem filij hominis, & bibendo sanguiuem eius, lethalem digerat cruditatem, labitur memoria, errat iuditio, nutat incessu, neque vllo modo idoneus est ad illud bonum eligendum▪ & concupiscendum quo se sponte pri­uauit. Thence it commeth, that man faileth in memorie, erreth in iudgement, wauereth in his going, neither is he by any meanes mete to choose and desier that good thing, whereof he depriued himself of his own accorde, before that by eating the flesh of the we digest our surfet [...] Christ. sonne of man & by drinking his blood, he digest the deadly sur [...]et which he toke.

[Page 24]As therefore y ^e apple that Adam did really eate against the com­mandement of God, doth make vs all, y ^• were in his body at that tyme, gilty of disobedience, and the children of wrath: so the reall eating of Christes flesh, according to the worthy eating thereof, which Christ commanded, doth make vs all free from the pain of euerlasting death, and the children of grace and glorie.

But as euery man did not eate the prohibited apple in his own person and by his own act, but by the act of our father and mo­ther, and as being in them, and of them: so it is not nedefull that euery man in his own person eate the flesh of Christ, which is It is not [...] eueri child eate really y ^• flesh of Christ. geuen vs in the Sacrament to be eaten, but it is absolutely nede­full that some or other eate it as really, as euer the apple was eaten, that all the rest, who by baptisme enter into the same body, maie be one perfitly with Christ, whiles they are one mystically with them, who really eate the substance of Christes flesh, being the substance of our true sacrifice, truly rosted vpon the crosse, and truly rising from death, to th'intent it might be truly eaten of vs without any corruption or perishing therof.

Thus we find, that the supper of Christ can not in any wise consist of eating the flesh of Christ, by faith and spirit alone. But we (that is to saie) some of the mystical body that are of lawfull age, must eate it to saluation, as y ^e apple was eaten to damnatiō. And because before Christ was incarnat, we had no apple to damnatiō, he toke flesh, and went of his own accord to death, that thence we The flesh of Christ is y ^• wood of life. might plucke y ^e apple of life and the fruit of the wood of life which preserueth vs to euerlasting ioyes. For as Gregorius Bishop of Nyssa brother to S. Basil doth teache, the medicine must be accor­ding to the poyson which we are infected withall. His discourse is to long to write it all in this place, so muche as apperteineth to my purpose, I will translate into English.

Quemadmodum qui per insidias venenum hauserunt, & caetera. [Page] As those that by [...] haue drunk in poyson, doe by an other [...] Orat. [...]. medicine put out the strength thereof, and like as the poyson so the medicine must goe into the bowels, that by meane of them help maie be spread throughout the whole body: euen so is it to be don of vs. That seing we haue tasted poyson wher with our Poyson tasted. nature is dissolued, we maie receaue a medicine whereby that na­ture of ours is gathered together, that the infection of the poy­son maie be expelled by the contrarie and holsome strength of the medicine. What medicine is this? None other beside that body, The [...] of Christ is the me­dicine. which is declared to be aboue death, and the cause of our saluatiō. For as a litle leauen (saith the Apostle) maketh the whole lump of dow like to it self: so that body, which is made immortal of God, entring into our body doth transferre and change the whole into it self. For as if a pestilent thing be mixed with a holsom thing it maketh it hurtfull: so the immortall body maketh all that, wherein The body of Christ entreth into oure body. The me­decyne must ne­des enter into our bodyes. it is receaued, of the like nature & immortal. But it can not enter into the body, except it be mingled with the bowels by meate and drink: Itaque necessarium est, vt natura nostra, quoad eius fieri po­test, vim salutarem intra corpus admittat. Therefore it is necessa­rie, that our nature (as much as lieth in it) do receaue y ^t healthfull strength within the body. And seing none other thing, beside that diuine body (of Christ) hath receaued such grace (to heale our sicknes) and seing it hath ben shewed, it can not be, our bodies should attein to immortality, vnlesse they be ioyned with the im­mortall body, and so obtein incorruption, it is to be consydered how it maie be brought to passe, whereas that one body conti­nually through the whole world is geuen to so many thousands of faithfull men, the whole maie become euery mans for his part, and [...] tarie whole in it felf.

Consequently Gregorius goeth forward to shew, how that [...] be: and he sheweth it to be brought to passe whiles bread and [Page 25] wine (wherwith Christ was nourished in this mortal life, and the How Christes▪ body to ge uen really to many and yet re mayneth whole. Transub­st āttation. which by the power of altering and [...] were daily tur­ned into his flesh and blood) be now also in his holy Sacraments turned by the consecration of his blessing and by his words, into his own body and blood. For by that meanes he proueth it possi­ble, that Christes whole body should both be geuen to euery man a part, and yet remain whole in it self. But hereof we shall speak an other tyme.

All that apperteined to my present purpose, was to declare Grego­rius an. D. 370. out of S. Bregorie of Nyssa, who liued about twelue hundred yeres past, that syth Christ hath made his body and blood, in the blessed Sacrament of the altar, a medicine against that poy­son, which Adā first, and in him all we tooke by tasting the apple against the commandement of God: it is not only profitable but [...], that as the poysoned apple entred in at Adams mouth, and was not only receaued by faith, spirit, and vnderstanding, but by hand, tong, iawes, and was digested into his bowells, and so poysoned all his flesh & blood, whereby the flesh that we tooke of Adam, was also [...] and poysoned, and our soules vnited Driginall syn. to that infected flesh were also infected: euen so y ^• medicine (which is the body and blood of Christ made of bread and wine) must not only be receaued by faith, spirit and vnderstanding, neither only the figure of it must be receaued in at our mouthes and so be [...] into our bowels, but the body of Christ it self must come to our bodyes, and it must be receaued as really into them by our mouthes, as euer the apple came into the mouth of Adam.

Who euer heard that when a mans body was really poysoned, The [...] re of a me [...] hea leth not. it should be sufficient to think vpon a certain true medicine, and to receaue withal the figure or signe therof into his body, not at all touching and receauing really y ^e medicine it self? And yet sure­ly they that teache the body of Christ, to be [...] into our [Page] bodies only by bread and wine the figures therof, and into our soules by faith and spirit, do [...] manifestly tell him that is bodily poysoned, that it is enough for him to think in his mind vpon mithrida [...]icum or some other medicine, and to receaue the token thereof into his body. Such is the physike and y ^• diuinitie of the Caluinists.

Before that Adam had tasted of the apple, he was g [...]tie of death in the sight of God concerning his own person and soule, in so much as in his hart he consented to taste thereof at his wyfes Gen. 3. request. For he did not taste it so hastely, but that he first intended so to doe: yea S. Augustine saith it is not to be thought, y ^• deuyll August. de Gen. ad lit. li. 11. cap. 5. should haue throwen doune Adam, except a certain pride had ben first in his mynde. But when he tooke the apple into his mouth (to the eating whereof his hart had allready yelded) then had he brought the inward disobedience into the outward acte, so that he was inexcusable not only before God, but in the sight of an­gels, of his wife, and of all creatures, his hands, his eyes, his mouth, his throte and stomack was now wytnes against hym. Thence came the dredfull necessitie of death to all the children of Adam, it was the tasting of his flesh which made all our flesh so farre gilty. That polluted body could not beget innocent chil­dren Iod. 14. with vncleane sede.

Well. Christ is the second Adam which taketh away this obli­gation 1. Cor. 15 and bond of death that lay on our neckes. and he taketh it away, n [...]t by force but by i [...]stice, changing and recompensing Ro▪ 5▪ all that was before done amysse. For the corrupt generatiō which we haue by the sede of Adam, he geueth vs a new byrth in the Sa crament of water and renuing of y ^e holy Ghost, in which baptism Tit. 3. our soule only is not cleansed, but our body also is washed. For the fruyt of death which Adam did [...]ate as well in mouth as hart, he hath geuen the apple of lyfe, as well to be eaten in our mou­thes [Page 22] as in ou [...] ha [...]tes, so that as the olde Adam caryed a wytnes of damnation for hym and his posteritie in all his membres, so doth the new Adam with his children cary the witnes of lyfe in all their membres. They haue God and man not in hart alone, 1. Cor. 10 but also in a Sacrament, yea in their [...]ands, in their mouthes, in their bodyes, and become one with the flesh of Christ which they eate, as the apple, which Adam did eate, became one with his flesh.

This was the supper that Christ came to make: not to g [...]ue bread and wyne, not to make figures and shadowes, not to geue vs a drinking in stede of a solemne feast. In comparyson of this banket all fayth is impe [...]t. For we eate the ende of our belefe. Spirit [...] gifts are not here reproued, but Chr­ [...]l is [...] ­fered be­fore them all. Ephes. 4 All vnderstanding fayleth, in so much as more is in our mouth then we are able to comprehend in our wyt or mynde. All spiri­tuall gyfts are in [...]erlour, because the flesh is present which trium­pheth ouer death, and ascending into heauen sytteth at the right hand of God, thence distributing gyfts vnto men. We haue the cause of all [...] present, and letting it go, shall we chiefly com­mend the feast for [...]ertayn spirituall effectes?

In respect of Christes reall substance, thy supper O Caluyn is but a mere sauour of swete meates. Geue me the flesh of Christ, and take thou the sauour of it. But alas the sauour hath alredy 2. Cor. 2. Caluin setteth foorth the king [...]om of y ^• deui [...], & abaseth y ^• kingd [...] gifts of God. k [...]lled thee▪ so much the lesse I wonder, if thou art wery of the flesh it selfe. In setting forth our damnation in old Adam thou lackest neither diligence nor eloquence, thou hast therin set foorth the lumpe of perdition, the seuere doctrine of induration, the im­potent weakenes of the wounded man, to helpe forward his owne destruction. But when thou commest to Christ the new Adam, he hath a s [...]ly pore vnknowen and vnsene cumpanie, fewe children, a cold supper, small offering of sufficient grace, his bap­tisme is (with thee) lyke a marke set vpon shepe that sheweth [Page] somewhat and worketh nothing, his Church hath no externa [...] sacrifice, no priesthod, no one chief shepherd in earth, no autho­ritie to make lawes, no communion of Sa [...]ts (by the way of praying to them or for y ^• soules departed) no reall ioyning & v [...]i­ting with Christes flesh and blood in the holy mysteries. What is this but to preferr euill before good, the deuill before God, sha­dowes before truth, vice before vertue, and the power of darknes before the kingdom of light? It is no eating now (as S. Paule 1. Cor. 11 sayeth) of our Lords supper, for euery heretyke taketh a supper of his owne before hand, making Christes supper to geue place to hym.

And that I maye speake nothing of so great change of commu­nions Luthers supper. as hath bene in England, Luther saith: that Christes words be proper, and that his supper is bread and flesh, wyne and blood, as though the immortall flesh of Christ must be eaten with materiall bread. How do mortal things agree with immor­tal in one banket?

Carolstadius supposeth that Christes words be proper, but Corolsta­dius sup­per. that he touching hym selfe on the brest, sayd: Take bread and wine, this is my body, which I touche as though it were a sup­per mete for Christes making, if he only shewed his body to his Apostles which euer was in their sight, not suffering them to eate thereof.

Zuinglius said, the bread and wine were only figures of Chri­stes Zuingli­us sup­per. body and blood, geuē to our bodies to represent to our harts t [...]e death of Christ. And that the words of Christes supper were figuratine only, by which reason the supper of the Paschall lam­be was better then the supper of Christ, because the dead flesh of an vnspotted lambe was more apt then bread and wine, to shew the death of Christes innocent flesh, wich is the lambe of God, Ioan. 1. that taketh away the sinnes of the world.

[Page 23]Cal [...]in added to Zuinglius bare figures, an efficacie of feeding Caluins supper. by faith, and taught the words of Christ, not so much to be figura­tiue, as words of promise, which being heard with faith, cause that the minde by faith eateth of Christ sitting in heauen. a mete supper for such a deuiser, who setting the men that should be fed vppon earth, kepeth the meate, wherof they should be filled, in heauen, promising them, who consist also of bodies mortal and corruptible, that they shall fede vpon immortall meat in their soules. such an eating were good for Angels, I denie not. but it is not the supper that Christ made to corporall men for his fare­well, when he said: Take and eate, this is my body, and, Drinke Matt. 26. ye all of this, for this is my blood. Taking with our bodies is more then beleuing in our soules, eating y ^• body of Christ is more then signifying the eating of his body. The meate is the body of Christ, the drinke is the blood of Christ. Beleue and thou hast it in harte, before thou commest to the table. But come to the blessed Sacrament of the altar, and thou hast it in thy mouth and body. Matth. 3. Bothe is better then one, Christ hath [...] and fullfilled all maner of iustice, he made both body and soule, redemeth both, fe­deth both, rayseth both, crowneth both. He doth not now diuide the hand from the harte, the mouth from the minde, the figure from the thing, the token from the truth. That he sayth, he doth, that thou beleuest in heauen, thou receyuest at his table in earth. yea earth is heauen to thee (saith Chrysostom) through this my­sterie, Chryso­stom. in 1. Cor. hom. 24. make his gift no lesse then he nameth it, leste for vnthank­fullnes thou be giltie of iudgement. He that beleueth his plaine wordes is on the surer syde.

The Corinthians fault concerning the supper of our Lord was The first fault of y ^• Corin­thians. partely for that they came to it after they had eaten their own supper, and vndoutebly so doe heretyks. They first deuise with them se [...]ues what supper they will allow to Christ, and then they [Page] come to his supper entending to conforme it to their forme [...] deuise. Partely the [...] were reproued of S. Paule for The'r se­eōd fault. eating and drinking alone, without making their meate common to the poore. Euen so the heretiks eate and drinke alone, teaching that euery man eateth Christ only by y ^e measure of his own faith, which hath diuerse degrees in euery man, and therefore it maketh Rom 12. Ephes. 4 euery man eate Christ after his own faith only. Whereas the sup­per of Christ is equall and common to all, as S. Cyprian, S. Hie­rome, and Theodorite witnessed before. wherein he geueth o [...]e [...], one blood, one person to all that come, without any respecte Hieroni mus li. 2. aduer­sus Ioui­nianum. concerning the meate and substance of the supper, although not without discerning the diuerse merites of the geastes. It is the honour of him that maketh the feast, to haue the meate most boū ­tifull and most reall, howsoeuer the weak stomaks of euill men are able to beare it.

Wilt thou yet see more plainly, how liberall Christ is in his sup­per? All that he hath he geueth, for he geueth his own selfe indiffe­rently to euery man that sitteth at his table, be the nian riche or poore, good or bad. The [...] of this feast at his table is the ma­ker of the feast him selfe. Who sayeth so? Uerily he that cānot lye. Who after that he said: My flesh is meate in dede, douted not to Ioan. 6. add moreouer, He that eateth me, shall liue for me, doing [...] to vnderstand, that by eating his flesh we eate himself.

The same thing teacheth S. Hierom, a man worthy to be credi ted as well for his own great learning, as for y ^t tyme wherein he liued, and the faith wherof in his writing he witnesseth. S. Hie­rome, I saie, expounding these wordes of [...] the Prophet, Hiero. in Ozeam. Capit. 11. Declinaui ad eum vt vesceretur, I bowed downe or turned in to him that he might eate, writeth thus, in Christes person: Declina­ui ad eos deserens regna coelorum, vt cum eis vescerer assumpta forma hominis: siue, dedi eis esum corporis mei, ipse & cibus & [Page 24] [...]. Forsaking the kingdome of heauen I bowed downe or turned in to them, that the shape of mā being taken, I might eate with them: or else, I gaue them the meate of my body, I my selfe Hieron. ad He­dib. 2. being both the meate and the banketer or feaster. And yet he spe­keth in an other place more plainly: Nec Moyses, &c. Neither Moyses hath geuen vs the true bread, but our lord Iesus him self the feaster and the feast, himself the eater and he that is eaten.

Behold Christes supper. it may worthely be called his [...], for neuer any man made any such before him, he biddeth geasts and fedeth them with his owne flesh. He is at the table, as he was at the altar of his crosse. For these two things are in most points agreable. For this table is the [...] and reall remembrance of that crosse. As therefore vpon the crosse Christ Augusti­nus. De Trinit. Libro. 4. Cap. 14. Esaie. 63 was the preist, who made the sacrifice, Christ the hoste that was killed, Christ the God to whom it was offred, Christ the head of that body of his Church for whom it was offered, & Christ alone played all partes, & non fuit de gentibus vir cum illo, and of all nations no man was with him: so likewise in the last supper, Christ [...] the geastes, telling them [...] yere before of his ban [...] at Capharnaum, and the hower being come, Christ geueth Ioan. 13. Cypria­nus De [...] Domini. water not only to their hands, but euen to their feete, Christ is the panter, Christ is the butler, as S. Cyprian also hath writen: Christ is the meate, Christ is the drinke, and what creature should haue parte with him in his supper? Are bread and wine mete ban ketting dishes for his table? They are in dede mete by their owt­ward shew to signifie the supper of Christ, but not mete to be a substancial part therof. He that is Lord of heauen and earth, will he borow the substance of his creatures to make vp his feast? As though he lacked bread of his owne, or as though his flesh which is the true [...] conteining al swetnesse in it, lacked the swet­nesse of wheaten bread or of materiall wine, as though Christ had [Page] not better bread and meate of his [...], and better drinke of his owne then the grape maketh? and who shall haue them if he be without them?

A great shame it is that either any thing should chalenge part in Christes supper besydes Christe himselfe, or that he should [...] the table with bare odours of spirituall grace, hauiug at Colos. 2. commandement the substance of flesh and blood, wherein the full­nes of Godhed dwelleth corporally. Think of Christes supper ac­cording to the worship of him that made it, leaue bread and wine for Lutrish tables, beleue thou that Christ gaue no lesse to his geasts then he had to geue. for verily all that he toke, he toke it to geue for vs and to vs: for vs, vppon the crosse, and to vs, in his [...]. 22. last supper. Both which he expressed manifestly, when he [...] saing: Take, eate, this is my body, which is geuen for you. that bo­dy was geuen bloodily for vs in the forme of man, because he died for man. the same is vnbloodily geuen to vs in the form of bread, because man liueth by bread. But earthly bread is to maintein life to earthly men. Heauēly men eate the bread which came doun from heauen, which is the sonne of God assumpting the flesh of man. For the bread which Christ promised to geue, is his flesh for Ioan. 6. the life of the world. His flesh is meate in dede, and his blood is brink in dede.

Therefore who so teacheth the body & blood of Christ to be now receaued by faith & spirit only, he denieth the supper of our Lord, where the body was geuen by the hands of Christ, receaued with Matt. 26. the hands of the Apostles, eaten with their corporal mouthes, and the blood drunken out of the chalice of blessing, the which Christ 1. Cor. 10 deliuered by their hands to their mouths and harts, by that mea­nes feeding the whole man with his whole substance.

¶ A speciall [...] of Caluin is con [...]ed, who taught this is my body, which is geuen for you, to be words of promise in the way of preaching at Christes supper, whereas they are words of per­foormance in the way of working.

THe special authoritie that Caluin hath gotten through his scholars in England, moueth me specially to coufute, I can not tell whether I shall name it, his more false or more foolish opinion. Who perceauing the Catholiks wholy to stick to the most proper and most effectual words of Christes supper, Matt. 26 and therevpon to build the belefe of the real presence of his body and blood: thought best to inuegle the strength of those words, as much as might [...], & to bring them from doing to saying, from making to speaking, from perfoorming to promising. and there­fore among manie other words of the same argument, thus he writeth. Atqui non panem alloquitur Christus, vt corpus suum fiat, sed discipulos iubet manducare, at (que) illis corporis & sangui­nis sui communicationem pollicetur, & caet. But Christ speaketh The words of [...] in his insti­tutions De coe­na Do. not to the bread, that it might be made his body, but he comman­deth his disciples to eate, and he promiseth them the communica­ting of his body and [...]. And afterward: Let vs vnderstand those words to be a liuely preaching, which may edifie the hea­rers, etc. which in the fulfilling of that it promiseth, may bring foorth his efficacie. Hytherto Caluin. whose worthy scholars haue consecrated that vnsensible deuise of his in the booke of their The wor­des of the [...] the leafe 213. pag. [...] English homilies. Where after an exhortation made that men should come them selues to communion, it is sayd: To this Christes commandement forceth vs, saying, do ye thus. to this, his promise enticeth vs, this is my body which is geuen for you, this is my blood which is shed for you.

This fault I find with my countriemen. There can not be a [Page] foolish saying in al Germanie or [...]uicherland which they must The [...] of the En­glish new preachers. not allow, follow, preache to their audience, and set foorth in print. And therefore if euery man might haue his will, so many schismatical Churches as they had se [...]e beyond the seas, so many orders of communion they wold haue embraced. Men that neuer brought foorth of them selues any thing worthy name, and yet neuer saw in other places so apish a toye, which they did not wonder at, and gredeily practise. Wherein they are both most like their master Caluin, for so much as they specially follow his peuish inuentions: and most vnlike him, because he followed none other man in his doctrine, but himself inuented a new reli­gion of his own making.

What say we then? This is my body which is geuen for you, are they words of promise, or no? I answere. Words of promise Words of promise are of two sorts. Gala. 4. may be taken for suche as make a promise, or els for suche as haue a promise made cōcerning them. Those who beleue in God (as Isaac did) are named in holy scripture the children of pro­mise, not of that promise which themselues make to God, but because through the grace of God which he promised before to Abraham in his blessed sede (Iesus Christ) they are made his chil Gen. 18. 20. 22. Galat. 3. dren. And in that sense This is my body which is geuen for you, may be called words of promise, in so much as they fulfil at Chri­stes supper the promise made before at Capharnaū, When Christ sayd: work the meate which the sonne of man will geue you, and Ioan. 6. the bread which I wil geue is my flesh.

Again these words which is geuen for you, at the tyme of Chri stes supper might stand to signifie, which shalbe geuen for you, and so the old Fathers did reade them, and the Latin copies of S. Paule haue so at this daye. But the [...] the promise was to be [...]. Cor. 11 consydered concerning the death of Christ, which was to come, and not concerning his supper which was present.

[Page 26]Caluin speaking of Christes supper as it is a supper, saith How Cal uin taketh the name of promise De Coe­na Dom. (this is my body which is geuen for you) be words of promise, and that, not because they are iustified concerning a former pro­mise made at Capharnaum, neither concerning the death which is now past: but because they make a promise of Christes body to be spiritually eaten at his supper. ‘For he saith, those words were not spoken to the bread & wine, but vnto the disciples, to whom Christ (pollicetur) promiseth the communicating of his body and blood. Also he saith, the promises are offered to the faithfull toge­ther with bread and wine. Moreouer, let vs vnderstand (saith he) these words to be a liuely preaching, which maie shew his effica­cie in the accomplishement of that it promiseth. First these words be a breif collation or sermon. Secondly they promise the cōmunicating of Christes [...]ody. Thirdly they being receaued of the faithfull, bring forth in them that effectual eating of Christ which they promise. Last of al he saith, Take, eate, is the commandement like vnto Inuoca me, call vpon me. This is my body, is the promise like vnto Exaudiam te, I will heare the.’ I am the longer in shewing his mind, because I feared it might be thought of wise men a great slaunder to faine so folish an opi­nion vpon a man taken for wise and lerned. For it semeth an ex­treme madnesse, to affirm that those words, which shew a thing really present, and bid vs take the same, are notwithstanding Matt. 17. words of promise. At the transfiguration of Christ, it was said, this is my derebeloued sonne, in whom I haue delighted, heare him. But who was euer so mad as to think, that Christ was promised in those words, and not rather shewed present? Like­wise Matth. 9. when Christ said to him that had the palsey, take a good hart sonne, thy sinnes are forgeuen thee, we beleue his sinnes were presently forgeuen him, and not only a promise made that hereafter they should be forgeuen. The diffe rence be­twene a promise & a perfoor­mance.

A promise lacketh many conditions, which the performance hath. A promise beginneth the bargain, the perfoormance endeth at the least some part of it. A promise consisteth in bare words, [Page] the perfoormance besyde words hath dedes also ioyned. A pr [...] mise belongeth to the time to come, the performance to the tyme present. A promise maie be differred to a certain daie, or suspended with conditions, the perfoormance must [...]edes be altogether without delay. And how can, these words, Take, eate, this is my body, which is geuen for you, be words of promise, which neither speake of the time to come, but of the present: neither begyn, but end the couenant: nor consist in bare talk, but also in reall dedes, nor haue any condition or delay annexed, but haue all things pre­sently said, signified, made and deliuered?

If, this is my body, make to y ^• hearers a promise of a spirituall communicating, then seing those words were spoken to Iudas Matt. 26. Luc. 22. one of the twelue, and are daily spoken to euil men without any condition or exception: it maie seme that a spirituall communica­ting is promised to them, which possibly can not be so. For how can light and darknesse agree? But if Caluin saie these words promise the body of Christ only to the faithfull, I aske whether those words be writen in the supper of Christ, or no? If they be not writen, how dareth Caluin supply them? It is not said, this is my body to you only that be faithfull (as Caluin vseth falsely Ioan. 6. 1. Cor. 11 Matt. 26. to interprete those words) But it is absolutely said, This is my body, whosoeuer take it, and eate it, whether he take it by faith, to his comfort and to euerlasting life, or in deadely sinne, to his iudgement and death. For as God the Father said, This is my Matth. 3. derebeloued sonne, and as thereof it foloweth, that the person then shewed and pointed vnto by y ^• voice, was y ^• sonne of God in dede, whether euill men had to doe with him (to whom he was y ^• 2. Cor. 2. sauour of death) or good men (to whom he was y ^e sauour of life) right so, this is my body was said of one certain thing then bles­sed, be y ^e man y ^• cometh to eate it, good or bad. And as this is my derebeloued [...]ne are no words of promise but of a diuine witnes [Page 27] [...]oward Christ: euen so this is my body, promise not, but witnesse and make presently the thing shewed to be in dede Christes body.

If this is my body, doe promise the body of Christ, & yet (this) must nedes shew where the thing is whereunto it pointeth: the This, [...] ­inteth to [...] thing. body of Christ which is promised, is also pointed vnto. and the sense is, I will geue you this thing to eate, which is my body: and by that meanes the eating is promised, and the body is poin­ted to, but the pointing can be directed to none other sensible thing, but vnto that which semeth bread. therfore that is affirmed to be Christes body, and is promised to be geuen vs as meat. bu [...] bread is not naturally the body of Christ, therfore it is made his body. And consequently Caluin who will haue these words to promise the [...]ing of Christes body by faith, must nedes confesse that they make the same body in dede, to th' [...]nd the promise of ea­ting y ^t body, which is so directly pointed vnto, maie be fulfilled. Howbeit Christ said not, I will geue you my body, but presently geuing, said, take, eate, this is my body.

But seing Caluin teacheth, this, that is pointed vnto, still to remain bread, I see not how those words which (as he saith) point vnto bread, can withall promise the body of Christ. For the proposition is simple, and affirmeth but one thing, and that thing doth concerne the substāce, as we beleue, of Christes body, as he saith, of bread, so that none other thing can [...] inferred vpon those words, then what thing this is (as we saie) or what thing this bread doth signifie, as the Sacramentaries teache.

Admit now it were expresly said, this bread is the signe of Christes body, (which sense is salsely ascribed to those words by the Zuinglians) yet it wold not follow therevpon, that the body of Christ is promised to our soules, but only that by this bread we are brought to remember Christ. Now as for eating it is commanded, and not promised,

[Page]Caluin had the cheif property of an heretike, which was to be singular. And therein he delighted so much, that albeit he was determined not to tarie in the faith wherein he was Christened, Caluin wold [...] ­des set vp a new re­ligion. yet he wold neither goe to Luther (who first withdrew himself from vs) nor to Zuinglius (whose sect he fauored rather) but he wold make a religion of his own. And therfore he deuised a new sense of Christes words. Affirming This is my body, not to be spoken to the bread (as both Catholiks, Lutherans and Zuingli­ans after diuers meanings doe confesse) but to be words of prea­ching, made vnto the people that stand about the Priest, and that these words promise the body of Christ to al that beleue his death and resurrection, as verily as that bread is really eaten into their bodies, and yet neither be the words concei [...]ed in the manner of promising, neither do they speake of faith, or death, or of the resur­rection of Christ, or of eating bread. Is not this a strang sense, to pick out of these words: This is my body? as if it were said: Ma­sters, beleue that Christ is dead and risen again, and then, as this bread is eaten of your bodies, so certainly shal you fede of his bo­dy in faith & spirit. Did [...]uer any man heare of such a [...]? Hoc, This, doth signifie and shew to Caluin the bread which must be eaten at the supper of Christ, and pointeth also to a spirituall food which is promised. Est, Is, doth stand both properly for the present time, in y ^• it is a signe of Christes body at y ^e tyme of spea­king, and also vnproperly for the tyme to come, in that it is a pro­mise of his body to be eaten spiritually. Corpus meum, My body doth signifie to him, the signe of my body taken by mouth, and the strēgth or vertue ther [...]of that shalbe taken by faith and spirit. Put together: This bread which you bodily eate, is the signe, & this thing which I promise that your soules shall eate, shallbe the strēgth or efficacie of my body (and yet he addeth farther of his owne) to them that beleue Christes death and resurrection.

[Page 28]This is the sermon which Caluin saith was made at Christes supper. Wherein euery word must signifie at once two or three things. and one verb in one tense must signifie two tymes. and the same word body, must signifie two proprieties, and yet nei­ther of them both properly. For whether body stand for signe of body (as he wold haue it taken in respect of bread) it standeth vn­properly, or whether i [...] stand for efficacie of body (as he wold haue it taken in respect of the communicants) it standeth vnpro­perly: whereas the proper signification thereof is to signifie the substance of Christes body. If we presse him out of S. Paul and 1. Cor. 11 out of the Fathers, that euil men eate the body of Christ, then he will answere they eate the signe of his body, without promise or efficacie. If we saie, that good men eate the body of Christ, he ex­poundeth it in such sense, that they first haue it promised them, & [...]ate both a certain pledge bodily, and in their soules a spirituall efficacie thereof. O crafty deuiser.

If thou canst thus deceaue a sort of miserable, and either vn­lerned or vngraciouse men, thinkest thou to deceaue God or to escape his terrible iudgement? Agree at the last, how euery word shalbe so taken, that thy interpretation maie be like it self. Let not the same word be now a signe, now a pledge, now a promise, now an efficacie, & now again no efficacie, no promise, no pledge but only a signe. We beleue that euery word standeth properly. And that both euill and good receaue one and the same substance The Ca­tholike interpreta tion o [...] Christes words. of Christes body. But as one medicine receaued of two diuerse complexions worketh not one effect: so the good men haue a good effect by eating worthely the body of Christ, the euill haue condemnation by eating it vnworthely. Thus we take the word body, for the reall substance of the body. the verb, est is, we take properly, because it is in dede Christes body, when the words are spoken. This, we saie, doth finally point to the substance of [Page] Christes body as then pr [...]ently made vnder the foorm of bread. In our interpretation there is no inconstancy, no impropriety, no changing of significations in the same words, no bare promising of a thing to come, b [...]t a present perfoormance. If any man aske by what scriptures I conuince Caluin, I wold first [...]now by what scriptures he proueth his lewed interpretation. Shall he speake a thing without scripture beside all truthe and reason, and shall not we be credited, vnlesse we conuince him by scripture? Howbeit let vs forgeue that iniurie, and confute his fond [...]piniō by the word of God.

Caluin saith, This ys my body, be words of promise, against which saing thus I reason. S. Paule intending to shew that God was not bound to the carnall Iewes, because they were the chil­dern of Abraham by flesh, but that rather he wold reward them who were the children of Abraham by faith and spirit, declareth Isaac to haue ben the child of promise, because the Angell said to Abraham, Secundum hoc tempus veniam, & erit Sarae filius: I will come according to this tyme, and a sonne shalbe vnto Sara. out of which words S. Paule proueth a promise. How so? Pro­missionis Rom. 9. enim hoc verbum est. For this word or saing, is a word of promise. which word is that? Veniam, I will com, & filius [...]rit, a sonne shalbe, as if S. Paule said, wil, &, shall, be words of pro­mise. For when a speache is conceiued for the tyme to come with [...] circumstance that it maie appere the speaker meant to war­rant the thing spoken, it maketh a promise. If, I will come, and [...] sonne shalbe, are words of promise: I am come and a sonne is, be words of perfoormance. and that is also con [...]irmed out os the word of God. Where it is writ [...]n, the Lord visited Sara, as he had [...]. 21. promised, and fulfilled the things which he spake. and she concei­ued, and brought foorth a sonne at y ^• tyme wherein god had fore­ [...]old [...], that which was before in S. Paul named a promise is [Page 29] [...]ow called also a foretelling or prediction. For albeit euery pre­diction A promi [...] is a predi­ction. be not a promise, yet euery promise is a prediction and a telling before hand. so that we haue in the word of God, that a promise telleth a thing before hand, yea that a promise is concei­ued for the time to come. For it could not be told before hand, if it were not to come in respect of him to whom it is told. But these words, This is my b [...]dy, do not tell a thing before hand. they doe not belong to the time to come, but vnto the time present. therefore they be not words of promise. they do not saie this shal­be my body, but this is my body.

Who knoweth not y ^t there are three differences of tyme, one pa [...], an other present, & the third to come? out of question a promise i [...] self is of a thīg to come. therfore y ^e words of promising must nedes be words that may belōg to y ^e time to come. For the nature of the time is applied to y ^e nature of the thig. except they be suche words as being inuented principally to signifie y ^• present bond of y ^t thing to come, do contein at once eche strength in them. as when we say polliceor, spondeo, ꝓmitto: I promise. & then it is all one to say▪ I promise to ge [...]e, or, I will geue. which thig is proued by y ^• custom of all nations which speak so, and by the autoritie of the auncient ciuilians who when they bound men most str [...]ightly to words and termes, yet they gaue them leaue to say, any of these follo­wing, as being all of equall power: Spondes? spondeo. Promit­tis? In [...], de verb. oblig. promitto. Fideiubes? [...]. Dabis? dabo. Facies? faciam. Where these words are put for words of like meaning a [...]d sense, doest thou promise, or wilt thou geue, or wilt thou doe? al which induce and make both a promise and an obligation of words. Whereby we lern y ^• words of promise either must be vttered by expressing the name of promise, as if Christ should saie: I p [...]omise him the eating of my body, who [...] eateth with saith this bread: or [...]ls must be [...] in the f [...]ure tense, as if it were said: Take, [Page] cate, this shalbe my body to you: but seing neither of both is don, it is a vain folly to saie that words of present affirmation, words o [...] working & consecrating, be words of promise or of preaching.

Yea but God speaketh not to the bread (saith Caluin) that it should be made his body. But he commandeth his Disciples to eate, and he promiseth them the communicating of his body and blood.

In dede God saith to his Disciples, take, and eate. But that is a commandement, and no promise. He saith farther, this is my body. and that is the making of the meate which must be eaten, and the shewing of it, but no promise. For Christ maketh his sup­per ready by dede alone, or by his word & dede together. by dede alone in taking bread: by his word and dede together in blessing and saying, this is my body. which words turn the substance of bread into his body. so that these words doe not promise any thing, but they perfoorm an old promise made before at Caphar­naum.

What saie we then to [...] words, who affirmeth, that Christ spake not to the bread, that it should be made his body, but that he spake to his Disciples? I answere, he spake y ^• words, eate and take, to his Disciples, but he spake these words (this is my body) to the bread, or (as the Catholiks rather vse to speake) ouer the dread, and vpon the bread. But yet we might saie very well and truly, that Christ spake to the bread, euen as he is rea­ [...] to haue commanded the windes, and they cessed, and to haue Matth. 8 Matt 21. Matt. 17. spoken to the figtree, when he said let sruite neuer spring more of the. And as he said, the Apostles hauing faith should speake to any certain hil, Transi hine illuc, & transibit, passe from this place to that, and it shall passe from hence. The speaking of God or of his ministers to any creature, whether it be a reasonable a sensi­ble or a diuine creature, is the signisying that his wil is don al­wayes [Page 30] vpon euery creature, according as it pleaseth him. neither [...]oth it skyll in what foorm of words he speaketh, seing that som­time he is readen to saie, Volo, I will, Mundare, [...]e thou cleanied. Matt. 8. Somtime he saith: Sicut credidisti [...]iat tibi, be it don to the as thou [...] beleued. Somtime he cureth by touching alone without Matt. 9. words. Somtime he saith in the present tense: Remittātur tibi pec [...] tua, thy sinnes are forgeuē thee. And thereūto these words of his supper are like. For when he toke bread and hauing ble [...]d, Matt. 26. said: This is my body: His word at that instant made his body of that bread which was taken, euen as these words, thy synnes are forgeuen thee, made a iust man of a synner.

The speaking therefore of God vnto creatures is the shewing Iob 38. of his will to be don vpon them. In so much that in Iob God confesseth himself only to dispose, order, and command all crea­tures. he se [...]deth lightings and they goe, and returning they saie to him, adsumus, here we are. which thing they could not say, ex­cept they heard his voice. Therefore it is not wel said of Caluin, to make it an absurd thing for bread to heare the words of Christ, seing they doe not only heare, but also answer in so much that an [...]. [...]. other Prophet saith, the starres were called, and they said: Adsu­mus, we are at haud. To be short, S. Paul saith, that God calleth Rom. 4. things that be not, as things that be. Meaning, that it is no lesse easy to God by his calling or naming to make a thing to be which was not at all, or els to be that which before it was not, then it is to call a thing by his old name. It is all one to God to saie to Ioan. 2. vs, this is water which before was water, and to saie of water, thi [...] is wine. for at his word it is made wine as who cannot possibly [...]. and seing experience teacheth vs, that all crea­ture [...] will go against their own particular nature, rather then the order which God hath appointed in y ^• whole world, shall in any [...]oint faile, seing when a quill is put into any liquour, & the ayer [Page] thereof drawen vp with his breath that sucketh it, y ^• heauy [...] of water will rather against his nature goe vpward, then any voide or emptie place should be. shall we yet wonder that Gods will is don euery where euen at y ^• speaking of his word shall not his visible [...] make faith of his inuisible & mysticall doings, Roma. 1. so th [...]t all which will not beleue, shalbe inexcusab [...]e?

Caluin saith, Christ spake not to the bread. I tell him, he spake to the bread, not as to a thing that should tarie bread, but as to that which should be chāged into his body: for he called the bread his body. will Caluin graunt me that, or no? If he will not, I bring foorth Tertullian, one that is nere ha [...]d fourtene hundred Tertull. aduersus Marcio­nem. Libr. 4. yeres old, who saith that Christ called the bread his body. Panem corpus suum appellat. He calleth the bread his body. But we can not call a thing, except we speake vnto it. Therefore when Christ called the bread his body, he spake vnto the bread, as if he had said to the bread, be thou my body. For as it is all one in Christ to saie, let thy synnes be forgeuen, and thy synnes are forgeuen: so it is Matth. 9. one to saye concerning a certain bread which was taken: Let this be my body, or this is my body. with whatsoeuer words the mind of Christ be vttered, out of question it is allwaies fullfilled. But among all kind of vtterāce, none is more plain to vs, then when a thing is clerely a [...]rmed to be this or that: for then it is made plain to vs, not only that God wold haue it so, or wisheth it to be so, but that really and in dede it is so. Christ calleth bread his bo­dy: Therfore Caluin saith fals [...], when he affirmeth that Christ speaketh not to the bread to th'end it might be made his body.

You will say, calling is not making. yeas for fout [...], in God, in Christ, in those whom Christ willeth to call one thing, and make thereof an other thing, in all them calling is making. Men call a thing by the name of the former nature, but God in calling any The cal­ [...] of Go [...]. thi [...]g, or in willing it to be called by a new name changeth the [Page 31] former nature, and maketh it to be as he called it. And there­fore when the Prophet [...] wold signifie that the gentils and panims should be turned to the faith, how doth he vtter Ozee. 2. that matter? Saith he not in the person of God: Dicam non populo meo, populus meus es tu? I will saye to that which is not my people, thou art my people? Dicam. I will saye it. And trow ye, his saying is not don? Yes it solloweth immediatly. Et ipse dicet: Deus meus es tu. And the people it self shall say, thou art my God. which thing the people could not saye, ex­cept in dede it were conuerted and made the people of God from the people of infidelity. And therfore S. Paul him self expoundeth this place of Osoe, by the word of calling, and Roma. 9. [...] Vocabo non plebem meam, plebem meam. I will call that, which is not my people, my people: & erit in loco vbi dictum Ozee. 1. Roma. 9. est eis, non plebs mea vos, ibi vocabuntur filij Dei. And it shall come to passe in the plate, where it hath ben said to them, ye are not my people, there they shalbe called the sonnes God. After which sort when Christ hauing taken bread and blessed, said: This is my body: That saying was the calling of that which was before, Non corpus Christi, not the body of Christ. Corpus Christi, the body of Christ.

In this sense S. Ambroise saith: Ante benedictionem ver­borum De ijs qui init. myster. Capit. 9. coeles [...]m alia species nominatur, post consecrationem corpus significatur. Ipse dicit sanguinem suum ante consecratio­nem aliud dicitur, post consecrationem sanguis nuncupatur. Et tu dicis, Amen, hoc est, verum est. quod os loquitur, mens interna fateatur. Quod sermo sonat, affectus sentiat. Before the blessing of the heauenly words it is named an other kind, after consecra­tion the body is signified. himself saith (or nameth) his blood. Before consecration it is named (or sayd) an other thing. [Page] a [...]ter consecration it is called blood. and thou [...], Amen, [...] is to saie, it is true. That which the mouth speaketh, let the in­ward mind cousesse, that which the speache soundeth, let the har [...] think.

Here we lern by S. Ambrose, that the naming, signisying, or calling bread and wine the body and blood of Christ, is both [...] [...]uident signe, that Christ spake to bread and wine (otherwis [...] then Caluin said) and also the making of them to be in dede so [...]s they are called and signified. also he sheweth y ^• custome of y ^• pri­matiue Church to haue ben, that immediatly before communio [...] when y ^• Priest said, the body of Christ, the people vsed, to answer: Amen, it is true: it is in dede his body. And as the word body soundeth, and as our confirmation thereof soundeth: so he requi­reth vs to beleue confesse and think. certainly there is none othe [...] thing sounding to our eares besyde the name of body. Likewise Tertullian hauing witnessed that Christ called the bread his bo­dy, Tertull. aduers. Marcio­ [...] lib. 4. witnesseth also that he made the bread which was taken and distributed to the Disciples, his body. Fecit panem corpus suum. He made the bread his body, in saying, This is my body, that is to saye, the figure of my body. But neither calling nor naming, no [...] saying, nor the being of a figure, stoppeth any thing y ^• reall truth [...] of Christes body. the Sacrament is the figure of Christes body, because it sheweth his death vntill he come, as S. Paul saith. But as Christ is the figure, or print and form of his Fathers sub­stance, 1. Cor. 11 and yet also his substance in dede: euen so the Sacrament Hebr. 1. is a figure of Christ, and Christ in dede. Christ, as an other person beside his Father, so is he the figure of his substance. But other­wise in truthe he is throughly the same substance. euen so, as the Sacrament is another maner of Christes presence, so it is a fi­gure either of his visible body, or of his death. But concerning the truth of substance, all is one. Thus without all controuersy [Page 32] the [...] of [...] [...]ords standeth vpright. And his naming, signifying, figuring, calling, is the making of a thing to be that which it is named bi him, signified, figured, or called. He hath said Psal. 14 [...] & the things are made. Ther can be none more grosse, more vile, more blasphemous opiniō, then to think y ^• Christ is a bare man▪ that his word is like our word, or his figures and Sacraments like our figures, or like the figures of the old law. Looke what oddes is betwen God and man, so much beleue thou to be also betwen his naming, or his figures of the new Testament, and all other figures. His figures contein the self same substance which they expresse in figure, signe, or name, whereof God wylling I will intreat more hereafter.

It is at this tyme to be cōsydered, y ^• seing the Sacramēt of Chri Lucae. 2 [...]. 1. Cor. [...] stes supper, is y ^e remēbrance of y ^t great sacri [...]ice made by his death vpō y ^• crosse: It self also must nedes partake that nature, whereof it is the remembrance, & consequētly it must be certeinly beleued to be a true sacrifice, as that of y ^e crosse was. In euery publike sa­ [...] ther is a thing offered & vowed vnto God, & the act which offereth & voweth it, apperteiueth as wel to the thing [...] (by the meane of doing sumwhat about it) as vnto God, to whom the oblation is theifly dedicated. As therefore when a lamb is sa­crificed, Leuiti▪ 1. Math. 21. hands are layed vpon the lambs head, the lamb is killed, burnt or eaten, and all that while God in the lamb is honoured, prayed vnto, blessed, thanked and praised: euen so when the bread is taken, the words (which are the instrument to make our sa­crifice) are spoken to the bread i [...] the way of vowing and dedica­ting it vnto Christ, into whose flesh it is turned by his almighty word in such sort, that God is withal the last end of the whole of­fering, to whom this th [...]nkful sacrifice is made. For S. Ireneus Ireneus. Libro. 5. aduersus haereses. hath witnessed, that when the mixed chalice and the bread broken percipit verbum Dei, taketh the word of God, the Eucharist of [Page] the blood and body of Christ is made. Ireneus saith, the [...] taketh the word of God. Caluin affirmeth that Christ speaketh not vnto the bread. As though the bread could take that word, which is not directed vnto it. Bread is the matter of the Eucha­rist, to witt, of the most thankful sacrifice of Christes supper. Words are the instrument which the word of God vseth in wor­king and consecrating the bread. When the words come vnto the bread, or (as S. Ireneus speaketh) when the bread taketh, and re ceaueth, or heareth y ^• word of God, y ^• Eucharist of Christes body and blood is made. Is a thing made of bread by words, and yet doth not Christ speake those words vnto y ^• bread? How cā words work or make any thing, but by speaking?

In an other place likewise S. Ireneus saith: panis percipiens Ireneus a [...]uersus haeres. li. 3 Cap. 34. vocationem Dei, bread receauing the calling of God is not now common bread, but the Eucharist, consisting of two things, one earthly, an other heauenly. The earthly thing is y ^• old soorm o [...] bread, y ^• heauenly is y ^• body of Christ newly made vnder y ^t [...] ▪ And yet doth not Christ speak vnto bread, to [...] it should be made his body?

Iustinus Martyr intreating of the self same sacrifice, writeth Iustinus Martyr▪ In apo­log. 2. thus: Cibum qui per verbum precationis, quod ab eo accepimus, consecratus est, Iesu Christi carnem & sanguinem esse accepimus. We haue learned y ^t sood which is consecrated by y ^• word of prayer (which we toke of him) to be y ^• flesh and blood of Iesus Christ.

Th [...]re is a kind of meate or food cōsecrated. by what meanes? by the word of prayer, which we toke of Christ. What word can y ^t be I pray you, but only, This is my body? Caluin thought they had bene words of preaching, but Iustinus scholar vnto y ^• Apo­stles, calleth them words of prayer, because he that speaketh them mindeth by y ^t speaking, to make a sacrifice vnto God, which is y ^• highest kind of prayer & of worshipping God y ^• [...] be. Of which [Page 33] kind Christ said: my howse shalbe called y ^t howse of prayer. Prea­ching Math. 21. is principally directed vnto y ^e people, prayer only to God. But among all prayers, y ^t which is most peculiar to publike sacri fice, is most proper vnto God. For he that offereth sacrifice to any other thing besyde to God alone, is most properly an idolatour.

Now seing Caluin is content y ^t y ^• word of prayer and sacrifice, which we receaued of Christ, shalbe so principally directed to the people, y ^• it shall not in y ^e like degree appertein to y ^e bread (which Caluin is shewed to be an ido­latour. is y ^t matter of our sacrifice,) I say he is content, y ^t ▪ sacrifice by na­ture dew to God alone, be offered vnto mortal men. & because in stede of God (to whom these words are chiefly directed) he hath placed y ^• ticklish eares of y ^• rude multitude, he hath cōmitted mayn idolatry. As chosing to speake these words (This is my body) altogether to the men standing about him, whereas they are dew finally to God aloue, and by y ^e way of sacrificing, appertein to y ^e bread, which is chāged into Christes body. As therefore if a man Acto. 14. should kil an ox or a Calf, referrig y ^e last end thereof vnto y ^t people which standeth by, he should vndoubtedly be an idolatour: euen so when he affirmeth y ^• those words (which by y ^• appointment of Christ, make y ^• Eucharist & sacri [...]ice of thanksgeuing vnto God) ought to be spoken to y ^e people, as for y ^e cheif vse where vnto they were created, he not only committeth, but also defendeth mayn idolatry. Which is [...] most grosse fault y ^t euer was don by so spiri­tual a worshipper of Christ, as Caluin wil seme to be. Ad Pres by terorū preces (saith S. Hierom) Christi corpus sanguis (que) consici­tur: Hierony mus ad [...] to. 2. The body and blood of Christ is made at the prayers of the Priests. Doutlesse at none other prayers, then wherein they say [...] y ^• mind of sacrificing, [...] bread, This is my body, & ouer wine this is my blood. [...] speaking of these words y ^• body & blood Augusti­nus in Psal. 39. of Christ be [...], [...] these words promise nothing. For as S. Augustine [...]. [...] abstulit verba promittētia, [Page] The [...] or the perfienesse of the th [...]igs promised, ha [...] taken away the promising words. And again. Tam diu quis (que) promissor est donec det, cum dederit, mutat verba, non dicit ad­huc dabo, quod se daturum dicebat, sed dicit, dedi, mutauit ver­bum. So long euery man is one that pro [...]iseth, vntil he geue. When he hath geuen, he changeth the words. He saith not stil: I wil geue, of y ^• which he said he wold geue: but he saith, I hau [...] geuen. He hath cha [...]ged the word. S. Augustine putteth a diffe­rence betwene a g [...]er and a promiser. Betwene words, & dedes, betwene sayings and doings. He accompteth dabo, I wil geu [...] for a word of promise, but dedi, I haue geuen for a word of per­ [...]ance. Seing therefore Christ in his supper did not say [...] he wold geue his body to the faithful, but said expresly take, eate, thi [...] is my body, and seing the Euangelist saith of that fact, dedit Di­scipulis, he hath geuen to his Disciples, out of question y ^• words which are ioyned with a reall gift, be not verba promissiua, sed completiua: as S. Augustine nameth them, they are not words which promise, but which accomplish and fulfil the former pro­mise. And now to return to the for [...]er talke of sacrif [...]ce, they are such words as fulfil the act of the sacrifice, and therefore they are called of Iustinus Martyr, [...]. Orationis aut voti verbū. Iustinus in apol. 2 Augusti­ [...]us. [...]pist 59 [...]. Tim. 2. the word of prayer or of vow. [...]or (as S. Augustine hath well no­ted in expounding the words of S. [...] to Timothe,) ea pro­prie intelligenda est oratio, quam facimus ad votum. That is pro­perly vnderstanded to be prayer which is made at vowing, that is to saye, which we make with a special [...]owing and re [...]ring vnto God of our selues, or of some [...] thing where by we pro [...] our faith.

So that the word of prayer in the Eucharist, is the word which voweth and dedicateth vnto God the substance of y ^• bread [Page 34] and wyne, which is taken to be consecrated. Vouentur autem The obla tion of the [...] to [...]. omnia que offeruntur Deo, maximè sancti altaris oblatio. Truly all things are vowed (saith S. Augustine) which are offered vnto God, specially the oblation of the holy altar. We bring bread and wyne to the altar to offer them. That offering is a vowing of them to God. When are they vowed? When the word of vowing or of prayer is spoken. When is that prayer made? S. Augustine sheweth in the same place: Orationes accipimus dictas, cum illud Epist. 59 (quod est in Domini mensa) benedicitur & sanctificatur, & ad di­stribuendum comminuitur. We take prayers to be sayd, when that which is on the table of our Lord, is blessed and sanctified, and broken to be distributed.

Mark whether S. Augustine speake like Caluin or no. that S. Augu [...] reth [...] words, this is [...]y body to [...] vpon y ^• ta­ble, & not vnto the audience. which is on the table is blessed, that is sanctified, that is broken, that is distributed, that blessing & sanctifying is made by prayer, that prayer is the vowing to God, of that which is brought to the table, which was bread and wine. The word of vowing is to saye ouer it, This is my body. For the sense of these words is, that Christ so [...]estly offereth, so throughly voweth the substance of bread and wine to the honour of God, that he maketh them by his almighty power the same flesh and blood of Christ, which is vnited to the sonne of God in one person. This only is the offe­ring and vowing of an outward thing, which came to that per­fection Gen. 14. Psal. 109. whereunto in the [...] of [...] it was destenied. Because the Priest (who offered it according to the order of [...]) is God as well as man. The instrument of this great sacrifice, the word of this prayer, y ^e execution of this vow, are the Marci. 14 words of Christ, who said in the waie of blessing, of thāksgeuing, o [...] praying, and of vowing or of offering to God, This is my bo­dy, which is geuen for you, doe and make this thing for the re­membrance Lucae. 22. of me.

[Page]Caluin wold neither haue prayer nor vow, nor any sacrifice made vnto God in these words, but hath with swete poysoned talk, made of them a promise & apreaching to the people, geuing to man the [...] of sacrifice dew [...] God only. But S. Ireneus Lib. 4. cap. 32. witnesseth, that Christ hauing taken bread, and geuen thanks, said, This is my body, and confe [...] the chalice to be his blood. Et noui testamenti nouam docuit oblationem, and he taught a new oblation of the new testament. Which also he proueth out o [...] Malac. 1. Malachie the Prophet.

Caluin wold the words to be spoken without working any thing vpon the brend: as who should say, the bread could be offe­red according to the state of any law or testament, and yet no change of substance be made therein. Caluin wold the working to be only in the minds of y ^• hearers, whereas y ^• gospell teache [...] that Christ hauing taken bread, said: This is my body. But Cal­uin imagineth, that he spake not to the bread, but sayd to the peo­ple, this bread is a witnesse that you shall ca [...]e my body, whereas the bread it self was by those words made Christes body, and so made, that it was his body, as sone as the word was spoken. So saith Bregorius Nyssenus, who writeth that the bread is chāged In Orat. [...]. into the body of Christ, statim vt dictum est [...] verbo: Hoc est cor­pus meum, straight as sone as it is sayd of the word (of God) thi [...] is my body. S. Chrysostom sheweth the words to be spoken by Chryso. hom. de prod [...]io ne Iud [...]. to. 3. Ambros. de Sacra. lib. 4 c. 5 the Priests mouth: who saith, This is my body. Hoc verbo prop [...] sita consecrantur. With this word the things set foorth are con­secrated. S. Ambrose saith: Vbi verba Christi operata fuerint, san­guis efficitur, qui plebem red [...]it. When y ^• words of Ch [...]ist haus wrought, the blood is made which hath [...] the people.

Is it n [...]t a great madnesse to resist the [...]e witnesses? Or can the th [...]ngs set foorth, which are [...] and wine be consecrate [...], be chan [...]d, [...]e made the body & [...] of Christ, & not be [...]

[Page 35]I might bring against Caluin whatsoeuer the Catholikes teache or saie of the reall presence of Christes body and blood, of [...], and of the sacrifice. For [...] word destroyeth this foolish inuention of promising and preaching. It shalbe now sufficient to shew, that the whole East and West Church by diuerse meanes yet conformably destroye that erroneouse opiniō of Caluin.

In the East Church the words of consecration, This is my bo­dy The cu­stom of y ^• East Churche at conse­cration. which is geuen for you: and likewise of the blood, are spoken with so lowd avoice, that the whole Church maie here the Priest pronouncing them. And immediatly after eche of the words the quere and people cried out Amen. Which doth signific, as S. Am­brose De iis qui init. cap. 9. hath expounded it, Verum est, it is true. Wherby all those Churches did signifie, that the body and blood of Christ was pre­sently made, when the people affirmed it to be true, and yet no­man had at that tyme receaued the communion. Therefore th [...]se words, This is my body, which is geuen for you, and, this is my blood, which is shed for you, Which Caluin calleth words of promise made to the receauers, are witnessed by y ^• whole Chur [...]h to be true presently, and so to be perfoormed, l [...]g before any man receaue cither kind.

On the other side in the West Churche the same words are spo­ken The cn­stom of the west [...]hurch in conse­crating. secretly o [...]er the bread and the wine, and immediatly after the pronouncing of eche words, the body and blood of Christ is adored of all the people, because it is really conteined [...]nder the foormes of bread and wine. Which auncient custome of secretly pronouncing these words, This is my body, shew they are neither words of promise nor of preaching. If they were words of pro­mise or of preaching, they should be spoken to the people out of the chaire, or pulpit, or some like place. But now they are spok [...]n at the al [...]ar of God, and not at all directed to the people, as the [Page] which [...] to y ^t office of [...] Priesthod, whereunto y ^• peo­ple is not called. For as the high Bishop among the Jewes went Hebr. 9. alone, and that but one day in the whole yere into y ^e Holy of Ho­lies in the temple of Salomon: right so when the Priest goeth to consecrate the Holy of all Holies (which is the body and blood of Christ) it is most conneniently ordeined, that he alone enter [...]. And this custom is in that West Church which S. Pe­ter and S. Paule planted with their preaching, and watered with their blood. This is the Church which S. Ambrose honou­red so [...], that albeit himself in manie points followed in his seruice the [...] rite and manner, yet he openly praised the good and laudable custom of the Romane Churche, saying: In omni­bus De Sa­cra. lib. 3. cap. 1. cupio sequi Ecclesiam Romanam. In all points I couet to follow the Romane Churche.

But now let vs bring a practise of y ^e whole primatiue Churche, as well in the East as in the West, which so euidently doth con­fute the [...] opinion of Caluin, that he is sain to condēne the Apostles them [...] to auoide that argument. For so had he rather doe, yea to deny all the whole Bible, then once to re­moue the breadth of a [...] from his derebeloued pha [...]tasy. such is the stubburnesse of heretiks.

The holy Bishop and Martyr S. [...] doth witnesse (as [...] allegeth him) that the Bishops of Rome before the [...]useb. li. 5. c. 24 tyme of Pope Uictor, to wit, Soter, Anicetus, Pius, Higinius, Telesphorus, Xistus, did all kepe Easterday alwayes vpon the sunday, and yet withal kept peace with ohter Churches, which did otherwise. For a demonstration of that peace, [...] alle­geth The Eu­charist was sent [...] in the pri­ [...] Churche. generally, that all the Priests which were before Uictor, (which were in number, from S. Peters time, twelue at the least) vsed solemnely to send Eucharistiam, the Eucharist (which is the Sacrament of Christes supper) to suche Priests who came out of [Page 36] those quarters, where Easter was kept otherwise, then it was at Rome. By that sending of the Sacramēt from the Pope to other Priests a [...]d Bishops, Jreneus concludeth all those to haue com­municated together.

To our purpose, I note, that there is a certain thing so [...] ­crated in Christes supper, that it hath in it the whole vertue of y ^• s [...]pper. And it is a torporall and real thing which may be [...] ­ued, caried, sent vp and down, and so at the last receaued. Mark wel the Historie. Al the Bisshops of Rome vsed to send to strāge Bishops comming to Rome the holy Eucharist, in token that they were al of one communion, of one Church, and one religion. This Eucharist was the Sacrament of Christes supper, this Sa crament was first made, and then kept for strāgers, and sent vnto them when they came. Which they receaued as the bond of peace & loue. The consecration of that Eucharist could consist in none other thing so essentially, as in the pronouncing ouer bread, these words, This is my body.

Now remember, I beseche you, what Caluin iudgeth of our Lords supper. He teacheth those words to be words of promise, and of preaching, Which being heard of the faithfull stirr vp their harts to receaue Christ by faith. But the custom of the primatiue Churche, euen of the first hundred yeres after Christes death, ma­nifestly reproueth his opinion. For the Eucharist was made then The cu­stom of y ^• [...] Church is against y ^• doctri [...]e of Caluin. and sent afterward to those who were not present at the making thereof. Who neither heard any preaching, nor toke hold of any promise, but came like strangers to Rome, and so had the blessed body of Christ deliuered them. wherefore his body was not only cōsecrated in the harts of men, but also in a corporall thing which might be sene, touched, caried, deliuered and r [...]ceaued. The con­secration was fulfilled in that external thing, which was called the Eucharist. And so it is proued without any escape, that when [Page] bread was taken and blessed, these words, This is my body, were said to the bread and ouer it, and changed it into the substance of Christes body. And by that meanes the body of Christ was con­teined vnder the foorm of bread, and so caried vnto the faithfull Prelats which came to Rome: The Eucharist it self was caried. The body of Christ was sent from one Bisshop to an other.

The words which Caluin dreameth to be words of promise, were not suche: but in dede were word [...] working the reall presen­ce of Christes body. And truly when Christ gaue his Apostles au­thori [...]ie Luc. 22. to make his last supper: He [...]ad them not make a promise of any thing. But he said: Hoc facite, Doe and make this thing. A certayn external thing was made and don by Christ, which he wil Christ [...]ad not his Apo­stles ma­ke a pro­mise of a thing but make the thing it self. led his Apostles to doe & make. He said not to them, preache th [...]s, nor say thus, nor doe thus (albeit the homilies corrupt the gos­pel after that sort) but he said: doe this thing, make this thing, to wit, make my body with the same words of blessing, which you heard me vse when I toke bread, and hauing g [...]uen thanks sayd thereof: This is my body, make this thing.

Which thing the Apostles and their successours haue alwayes made, not in pulpits, (as Caluin, who wold haue them words of promise, and of preaching, must nedes allow best) But they haue made the body and blood of Christ vpon the blessed altars & holy tables, where they o [...]ered vnblody sacrifice, and sanctified the holy mysteries with y ^t mind o [...] celebrating, of daing and making, but not with the mind of promising or preaching. Neither only was this the custom of Rome, to send the Eucharist already con­secrated vnto other Bisshops, but wise and learned men think y ^e like vse to haue bene in euery other Churche.

And certeinly Iusti [...]us Martyr, of sufficient antiquity to them that care for Apostolical doctri [...] or traditio [...], doth witnesse that the Eucharist was made in the assembles of the [...], and af­terward [Page 37] sent by the Deacons to those that were absent: by Dea­cons, The [...] charist was cari­ed by [...] to y ^• [...] per­ [...] with­out wor­des of pr [...] mising. Hieron. Euagri. to. 2. Iustinu [...] Marty [...] in apo­log. 2. I say, who could in no wise them selues either consecrate or iterate again the words of consecration already spokē. For as S. Hierom writeth, Priests differ from Deacons, because at the prayer of Priests the body and blood of Christ is made. Which thing the Deacons can not doe. They on'y can minister vnto the people the body and b [...]od already consecrated and made by the Priests.

And therefore Iustinus Martyr writeth thus of them, and of the whole making of the mysteries. Panis vinum (que) & aqua affe­runtur, tum (que) is qui primum locum tenet eodem modo preces gra tiarum (que) actionem pro virili mittit, populus (que) acclamat dicens, Amen. Et ijs, quae cum gratiarum actione consecrata sunt, vnus­quis (que) participat. Eadem (que) ad eos qui absunt, Diaconis dantur perferenda. Bread, wine, and water are brought. And then he which is chief prayeth and geueth thanks to the vttermost of his p [...]wer, after the same maner (which was described before) and y ^t people reioysingly crieth, Amen And euery man partaketh those things which are consecrated with thanksgeuing. And the same things are geuen to the Deacons to be caried to these which are absent.

What can be more plainly spoken? Bread, wine, and water are consecrated by the words of prayer which we toke of Christ. those words are, This is my body, and, this is my blood. After which consecration the people cried, Amen. And the consecrated things, to wit, the body and blood which are made by the consecration of bread, wine, and water, the body and blood, I say, are deliue­red by the [...] to them first which are present. And when they haue communicated, to others also which are absent.

Therefore the holynes rested in y ^• things that were consecrated and was not made by [...] in the eares and [...] of y ^• people [Page] but the consecrated mysteries were geuen and caryed: geuen to y ^• present, caryed to the absent. geuen by hands, not by words, ge­uen to their hands or mouthes, and not to their eares. they were caried to the absent, as hauing real vertue made in them by the words of Christ. what saith Caluin to these practises of the pri­matiue Churche? what spirit will he in this point shew to vs? whether will he shew the spirit of humility in wondering at, and in following those Fathers which lerned all their seruice and or­ders of the Apostles them selues? If Caluin had that spirit, he were farr from hearesy. But now see what spirit Caluin hath. Thus he writeth in this matter. Immediatly after the words which I rehersed in y ^e [...] of this chapiter, thus he writeth.

His rationibus constat, repositionem Sacramenti, &c. It is The words of Caluin. De Coen. Domini. euident (saith Caluin) by those reasons, the reseruation of the Sa­crament (which some men presse, to th end it maie be distributed extraordinarily to the sick,) to be vnprofitable. ‘For either the sick shall receaue it without rehersall of the institution of Christ, or the minister together with the signe will ioyne the true expli­cation of the mysterie. If the institution of Christ be not spoken of, it is an abuse, and a fault. If the promises be rehersed and the mysterie be declared, so that they who shall receaue, maie receaue with fruit, we n [...]de not dowt, this to be y ^e true consecration. To what purpose then is the other, whose strength reacheth not so farr as to come to the sick? But you will saye, they that doe so (to wit, that reserue the Sacrament) haue the example of the old Churche. Fateor. I graunt but in so weighty a matter, & wherein errour is not committed without great danger, nothing is more safe then to follow the truthe it self.’

Hytherto Caluin hath reasoned, who putteth the whole strēgth of the Sacrament of Christes supper in promising and preaching. therefore if any where preaching and promising be not vsed in the geuing of the Sacrament, he calleth it an abuse and fault.

And seing the primatiue Church, euen whiles y ^e Apostles were [...]liue, did by the witnesse of [...] reserue the Sacramēt so long [Page 38] after consecration, as to send it to such Bishops, which might come to strange dioceses out of an other prouince: and seing the deacous vsed to carie it in the tyme of Iustinus Martyr (who liued within a hundred yeres of Christes death) to those which were absent: Caluin, I saie, perceauing the vse of all Apostolicall Caluin re proueth y ^e [...] Church. Churchs to stand against him, will seme to con [...]ute them all with this fond reason. Either the sick and absent persons (for all is one concerning this matter) shall receaue that which was con­secrated in the Church without a new rehersall of these words, This is my body, And then, it is an abuse, saith Caluin, & a fault: (& he calleth it an abuse, which the scholars of the Apostles vsed) or [...]ls (saith he) the words shalbe ioyned with the signe, and it is a true consecration. And then, saith he, the first consecration made at the Church was in vain concerning the sick and absent men. But the second is good, which is made by preaching and rehear­sing the words of promise to the sick persons.

I haue most faithfully behersed the opinion of Caluin. But let vs now examine, why it is an abuse and fault to deliuer to the sick or to the absent persons the holy hoste which was consecra­ted in the Churches, without a new rehersall of Christes words. why is that an abuse? who told Caluin it was an abuse or a fault. Caluin bringeth no reason for his [...] re­ [...] of the Apo­ [...] [...] ­lers. For south his own mind gaue him so, his wisedom thought so, his grauitie said so, his blasphemonse penue wrote so. But other cause, reason, or scripture he bringeth none for it. [...]e first [...] that the consecration of Christes supper consisteth in saying to the people, This is my body which is geuen for you: And proneth it not at all. but graunt him once his dream, & consequently he in­ferreth that if such an hoste whereupon the words of consecration were once dewly pronoūced, be afterward geuē to him that hea [...]d not those words of promise, because he was sick or absent, if the [...]ost, I say, he geuen without a new rehersall of the words, it fo­loweth [Page] that it is an abuse. Yea but some Papist will saye, the old Churche did so. For now he calleth the primati [...]e Churche the old Churche. I graunt, saith Caluin. But it is better yet to follow the truthe it self. Why [...] doest thow only know, what the truth it self is? we allege the old Church, to pro [...]e, that the truthe [...] Christes gospell doth stand for vs: and to proue that consecra­tion is not made by preaching and by the hearing of the people, but by the vertue of Gods word, which spoken ouer the elements of bread and wine, saith by the one: This is my body, making it so. And by the other: This is my blood, making it so.

We saye these words make the body of Christ vnder the form of bread, and his blood vnder the form of wine. For our saying we bring the gospell, where [...]t is writen, this is, and, this is. When other [...] the gospell, we shew that the Apostles and Matt. 26. their successours practised this which we beleue. For they all vn­derstode, by these words directed to brcad and wine, that the bo­dy and blood of Christ was really made, vnder the formes of them. How proue we that? Because if once the words had ben spoken by a Priest vpon those elements, the things consecrated were afterward kept and caried as a most holy sacrifice to men ab [...]ent. as the which things cōteined really within them the body & blood of Christ. Why els should they be caried to others that were absent? A [...] maye say, that when they came to the absent persons, the words were again rehersed. First that appe­reth not in Iustinus, or in Ireneus, of whom the one sayth, the [...] was sent to stra [...]gers: the other saith, that the things consecrated, which were receaued of the present Christians, the same were caried to the absent. How is the Eucharist sent, if it be Nothing knowē to be cōsecra ted maye be [...] teo again. no Eucharist vntill it come to the stranger, and then be made a new? Or is it [...] to iterate the consecration of any Sacra­ment? Hath Caluin lerned so farr? Did the first consecration lack [Page 39] [...]ertue, so that an other must be made, or the first be repeted?

Last of al the Deacons caried the Eucharist, who possibly could not reherse the words of consecration, This is my body, and, this is my blood. And yet if they were words of promise & preaching, the Deacon, who may [...] and in preaching may [...] y ^• spiritual seeding of our soules, might also reherse those words. But from the Apostles tyme to this day it was neuer heard, that [...] Deacon might consecrate the body and blood of Christ. For no­man Hebr. 5. A Deacō cannot cō secrate the holy my­ [...]. is able to doe any more, then wherevnto he is lawfully cal­led. But no Deacon hath the power to cōsecrate geuen him. And that his name sheweth, which is to say, a [...], or a waiter on. For he waiteth vpon the Priest at Masse, and is not as yet pro­moted to the office of [...].

Seing then the Deacons caried the Eucharist, and they could not say the words of consecration, doub [...]lesse they that receaued it of their hands, receaued neither words of promise, nor of prea­ching, but they receaued that blessed body and blood of Christ which was cōsecrated before, vnder the foormes of bread & wine. This faith wil stand sound when Caluin and all his scholars be out of memorie. This practise did the Apostles leaue to their suc­cessours and scholars, as Iustinus the Martyr, Ireneus and Eu­sebi [...]s witnesse.

Now consyder what an intolerable spirit of arrogancy was The into­lerable pride of [...]. in Caluin, who dareth oppose him self against the first hundred yeres after Christ. He dareth affirm, that all the Priests and Bis­shops of Rome before [...] committed an abuse, in sending the Eucharist to strangers. That all Asia and Brece committed an abuse, in sending the Eucharist by Deacons to men that were ab­sent, who heard not the words of promise.

If thou looke to be saued (good Reader) beware of that arro­gant spirit. Learning thou shalt not find in Caluin, and much [Page] lesse honesty. Only he hath a sort of smothe words, which are poy soned with pride and ignorance. If any of his scholars wil take vpon him to defend his errour, I wil by Gods grace discouer more ignorance of that arrogant Master of theirs. In the meane tyme I wil content my self with these reasons, which I haue presently brought against him out of the word of God, and out of the sayings and doings of the whole primatiue Churche.

¶ The Catholikes require their cause to be vprightlye tried by the holy Scriptures, which they haue alwayes studied and reuerenced.

THe Apologie of the Church of England boasting it self, The first Chapiter. partly of the word of God, partly of the primatiue Church, requireth that we call the new gospellers no more by the name of heretykes, neither accompt our selues hereafter Catho­likes, except we co [...]ince them out of the holy Scriptures, as the old Catholike Fathers did vse to conuince the old stubburne he­retikes.

If we be heretikes (saith the Apologie) & they (as they would The wor des of the Apologie. Fol. 14. b vi. pag 1. gladly be called) be Catholikes, why do they not, as they see the Fathers, which were Catholike men, haue done alwayes? Why do they not conuince and maister vs by the di [...]e Scriptures? Why do they not call vs againe to be tried by them? Why do they not lay before vs, how we haue gone away from Christ? From the Prophets? From the Apostles? and from the holy Fathers? Why sticke they to do it? Why are they afrayed of it? It is Gods cause, why doubt they to commit it to the triall of Gods word?

To this proude bragge of the Apologie, thus I answere. To The an­swere. the holy scriptures, and to the holy Fathers ye haue appealed: By the holy Scriptures and Fathers your doctrine shalbe tried▪ The Catholikes neuer feared to be tried by the holy Scriptures, but they alwayes feared to abuse them. For we y ^• know in dede what holy Scripture is, are so carefull how to behaue ourselues reuerently and semely about the same, that we lightly vse not to allege any part thereof to proue any rare and harde matter, vnlesse we shew some auncient Fathers or Councell to haue ex­pounded that peece of Scripture before vs, in suche sorte & sense, as we, by the witnes thereof, desyre to persuade and confirme.

But otherwise, the Catholikes neuer refused the triall of the [...]oly Scriptures, as y ^• which they alwayes both studied & loued. [Page] Do not the writings of S. Beruard in manner wholy consist of S. Ber­nard. Petrus Lombar­bus. Tho. de Aquino. Lyranus Diony­sius. Bur gensis. Caieta­nus. continuall testimonies taken out of holy Scripture? Did not Pe­t [...] [...]ombardus lernedly comment the Psalmes, the Epis [...]s of S. Paule, and other parcels of Gods word▪ Did not S. Tho­mas of Aquin write so vpō Iob, Esaias, Ieremias, S. Mathew, S. Iohn, S. Paule, the Canonicall epistles, and the Apocalips, that he vseth to expound one hard place by an other, as nighe as th [...] thing will suffer? Did not Nicolaus de Lyra, Dionysius the Carthusian, Paulus Burgensis, Caietanus the Cardinall, with diuerse other expound the whole Bible, or make notes vpon it? wold they haue don so, except they had ben specially delighted with the word of God? More ouer when heresies arose in our dayes, Did not Contarenus, Sadoletus, Polus, [...]osius, [...], Gropper, Tapper, Eckius, Pighius, Petrus and Domi­nicus of Soto, Miranda, Uillegagnon, Ioannes a Louanio, with diuerse other co [...]ince those heresies by the holy Scriptu­res and Fathers? And yet as though we brought nothing at all for defence of the Catholike faith out of the word of God or pri­mitiue Churche, so dothe the penner of this Apologie, more to his discredite then to ours, falsely and vnhonestly reporte. But now to shew the better his falsehood and dishonestie, I thought good for my part to set soorth such holy Scriptures, and suche witnes­ses of the primitiue Churche, as plainly confirme the Catholike belefe concerning the chefe matter, which at this day is in con­trouer [...]e betwixt vs and them.

The chefe question is about the blessed Sacrament of the al­tar. The [...] question of our age. Our belefe is, that after consecration duely made, the body & blood of Christ is really present vnder the formes of bread and wine. The Apologie teacheth other wise, as now it shall appeare. But whereas there are many questions in this behalfe, as of the reall presence, of transubstantiation, of the sacrifice of the masse, of [Page 43] communion vnder one kind, of receauing alone, of r [...]tion of the Sacrament, and of suche other: I will beginne [...] with the matter of reall presence, which i [...] the grounde of all the rest, not despayring to haue (at other tymes) more leasure to handle also the other questions.

So much therefore as in the Apologie belongeth to the reall presence of Christes body and blood in the Sacrament of the al­tar, I will faithfully set foorth, and trie the truth of that doctrine by Gods word, and by the holy Fathers. Neither let any man be offended, yf I seme to kepe no good order, in so much as I make no new methode of myne owne, but follow the order of the Apo­logie, which sodenly and abruptly thus intreth in to y ^• question.

¶ It is proued by the word of God, that euill men receaue The secōd Chapiter. the body of Christ in his supper.

WE do expresly pronounce, that in the supper (vnto The Apo logie. Fol. 24. c. 8. pa. 1. The an­swere. suche as beleue) there is truly geuen the body and blood of the Lord.

This doctrine being called to y ^• word of God, & to y ^• iudgement of holy Fathers for his triall, will appere false & for­ged. Because the holy scripture teacheth the body and blood of Euill men [...] y ^• body of Christ. Tit. 1. Ioan. 6. Leo. de passione Domini Sermo. 1 The body of Christ was deli­uered to Iudas. Christ to be truly delyuered not only to such as do beleue, but euen to wicked men, who in their workes haue deuied their faith howsoeuer they kepe it, or geue it ouer in hart. Iudas one whole yere before the last supper, was called a de [...]ll, for so much as Christ knew that he wold betray and sell him vnto y ^• Iewes. Which it is not to be thought y ^t Iudas wold haue don, if he had bene of the true belefe, that Christ was the Sonne of God, & God him self. And yet the body and blood of Christ was truly deliue­red vnto him. Who although he had beleued the diuine power of Christ, yet he had not beleued as we now take beleuing, for [Page] the fulfilling and perfoorming of all that which belongeth to the Belief is takē [...] ­tune for y ^e [...]hole sta­te of the gospell. Ioan. 3. Galat. 5. state and lawe of the new Testament. According as it is written, Vt omnis qui credit in eum non pereat, sed habeat vitam aeternam. That euery man which beleueth in him, may not perish but haue euerlasting life. Such a belefe worki [...]g by charitie, Iudas had not. And yet he receaued the body and blood of Christ. For albeit some auncient Fathers thought, that Iudas went out before the supper of Christ, yet farre the greater part teache otherwise. And Hilarius in Matt. it is much more agreable to the word of God. How proue I that?

S. Mark writeth that Christ came with the twelue. S. Ma­thew Matt. 26. Marc. 14 sayeth, Christ sate down with the twelue, and whiles they were eating he gaue his body and blood. S. Luke agreeth vpon the very same number, and vpon the same gift. Among y ^e twelue Matt. 10. Marc. 3. Luc. 6. Ioan. 6. Matt. 26. Iudas is rekoned in S. Mathew, S. Mark, S. Luke, and S. Iohn. And whiles they were at supper (which they besyde the twelue?) Iesus tooke bread and blessed (and gaue thanks) and brake and gaue to them. To which them I pray you, but vnto the twelue that came with him, and sate with him? to y ^• twelue there­fore he gaue and said: Take, eate, this is my body. And taking the chalice, he gaue thanks, and gaue them saying: Drinke ye all of this, for this is my blood of the new Testament, Which is (or shalbe) shed, [...]or the remission of synnes. Et biberunt ex illo om­nes. Marc. 14 And all drank of it. Which all, if not the twelue?

Iudas therefore being one of the twelue, had the body & blood Iudas drank y ^• which the other A­postles did. Matt. 26. of Christ deliuered to him. For Christ said: Take, eate, and drinke ye all of this. And as they dranke all, so is there no doubt, but they all did take and eate: therefore Iudas tooke that, which Christ deliuered. But Christ witnessed himselfe to deliuer his owne body, saying, Take, and eate, this is my body: And drink ye all of this, for this is my blood: Therefore the body and blood of [Page 44] Christ was deliuered vnto Iudas. And sith Iudas did not be­leue: Iudas did not be leue well. the body and blood of Christ was truely delyuered to some such, as did not beleue.

We nowe call these defenders to be tried by the holy Scrip­tures. We make it appere y ^• they haue seuered them selues from Christ, from the Prophetes, from the Apostles, we stagger not, we flee not, it is Gods cause, we doubt not to commit it to Gods word. And that no man maie suspect we take the words of the Apologie to short, that we expound them to hardly, that we seeke aduantage vpon small occasion: I will bring foorth their owne words, which they haue more fully writen in an other place of the same Apologie concerning this matter.

We do affirme with the most auncient Fathers, that the body The [...] logie. Fol. 90. m. ij. pa­gin. 2. of Christ is eaten of none other, but of godly and of faithfull men, and such as are endued with the spirite of Christ. These felowes do teach, that the very body of Christ maie in very dede, and as they terme it really, and substantially, be eaten not only of wicked and vnfaithfull men, but also (it is horrible to speake it) of mise and dogges.

Whether mise and dogges maie in some sense eate the body of [...] an­sw [...]re. Victor persecu­tionis vand. li. 1. cap. 3. Optatus lib. 6. de schisma. Donat. Christ or no, it is not worth while to discusse, for so much as the Catholikes kepe the body of Christ so warely, that neither mouse nor dogge maie come nigh to it. But as y ^• Arrians threw downe the body and blood of Christ, and trod thereon with their filthie feete, and as the Donatists brake the chalices, which as Optatus saith, caried the blood of Christ: so the Sacramentaries of Eng­land haue taken out of the holy pixes, and troden vnder their prophane fecte the blessed body of Christ, they haue sold, broken and abused to filthy ministeries the chalices which haue holden Christes blood. If the wicked men be able to pollute, to tread on, and to defile, (as much as lieth in them) the body of Christ, [...] men are worse thē dogs, Heb. 10. The Fa­thers teach that Iudas did eate y ^e body of Christ. 1. Cypri. de coena Domini. 2. Hiero. Li. 2. ad uers. Io. 3. Theo­dorit. in 3. Cor. 11 4. Chry­sost. Ho. deprodit 5. Augu­stinus in Ioà. tra­ctat. 50. 6. Leo in Ser. 1. de passione. 7. Sedul. in Carm. Paschali. 8. Beda in Ioà. 6. 9. Theo­phil. in Matt. 26. 10. Euthi mius. 64 in Matt. A thinke that to be worse, then if mise and dogges did eate it. [Page] Not that the immortall body of Christ can take any harme at all. But yet a terrible damnation is reserued to them, who being able to do it no hurte, shewe not withstanding their vnsatiable malice against the highest mysterie of our redemption, tredding vnder foote the sonne of God, & counting the blood of the new testament prophane and vnholy.

Leauing therefore this question, we returne to the principall matter, cōfessing our selues to teache, y ^t y ^e w [...]ked men [...]ate in dede & really y ^e body of Christ in our Lords supper. Thus we teach, not only because the greater part of the Fathers haue deliuered so vnto vs, but also because thus we learned of Christ. Who after bread taken hauing blessed, gaue to Iudas one of the twelue bid­ding him take & eate, saying, This is my body. A worse man then Iudas, I think, is not lightly heard of. Which amōg other things causeth vs to beleue, that be the man neuer so euill, yet if he take and eate after consecration and benediction, he taketh and eateth really and in dede the body of Christ. Which vnworthy recea­uing of so precious a thing, although it mislike Christ (as all synne doth) yet as he permitteth synne for the goodnes which he worketh by the occasion thereof: so he thought it lesse euill that euil men should eate his body, then that his Sacraments by any our infidelity should be made void, or that the gift of his grace should be vncertaine.

For Christ in the institution of his Sacramēts dependeth not vpon our faith or vertue, but vpon his owne mercy and truth. Wherefore when so euer by a lawfull Priest intending to execute the ministerie commaunded by Christ, it is d [...]ely sayd ouer bread and wine, This is my body, and, This is my blood, Christ would it so to be as the wordes declare, and who so euer receaueth that kind of food, receaueth the body of Christ. whether well or [...]uill, that dependeth vpon his worthy or vnworthy eating.

[Page 45]If any man eate vnworthely, then will Christ complaine of him, as he cōplained of Iudas. For straight after the deliuery of the blood, he sayd (as S. Luke doth witnesse, and S. Augustine Lucae. 22. S. Augu­stin. de verb. do. serm. 22. so expoun­deth it. hath noted the same to pertaine to the Sacrament) Veruntamen ecce manus tradentis me, mecum est in mensa. But yet see, y ^• hand of him y ^• betrayeth me, is with me on the table. As if he had sayd: You see what loue I shewe to you by geuing mine owne body to be eaten, mine owne blood to be drunken in this my last supper, this only greueth me, that a very deuill doth eate & drinke these preciouse giftes together with me and you. Except our new bre­thren will say Iudas to haue bene a good faithfull man, I see not but they must cōfesse, that euill men may haue the body and blood of Christ deliuered to them.

Which thing S. Paul most euidently confirmeth of all euill 1. Cor. 1 [...] Christians, saying: Therefore who so euer shall eate this bread, or drinke the chalice of our Lord vnworthely, he shallbe gilty of the body and blood of our Lord. Doth not he that speaketh of vn Unwor­thy eating presuppo­seth [...] ea­ting. worthy eating, cōfesse a true eating? True, I say, in nature of the thing eaten, but vnworthy cōcerning y ^e effect of grace ensewing. And yet doe not euill men, who receaue the body of Christ vn­worthely, eate really the same body?

It is written in the booke of the Machabees, that King An­tiochus Machab. li. 2. ca. 5. hauing slaine foure score thousand, within three dayes, entred also into y ^e holy Temple. Et scelestis manibus sumens san­cta vasa, contrectabat indigne & contaminabat. And taking in his [...]andling [...] the [...] handling. wicked hands the holy vessels, he handled or touched them vn­worthely and defiled them. I aske whether it doth not folow: Antiochus touched vnworthely the holy vessels, therefore he tou ched the holy vessels? If that argument be good, it is like to say; an euil man doth eate the body of Christ vnworthely, therefore he doth eate y ^• body of Christ. Or did not Adam and [...] eate of the [Page] [...]uit of the tree, because they did eate the same against the com­maundement Gene. 3. of God? For these defenders seme to make an vn­worthy eating no eating. Whereas if it were no eating, it were An vn­worthy ea [...]ng is an [...]. not an vnworthy eating.

Perhaps they wil say, S. Paul writeth not y ^t synners & wicked men eate y ^e body of Christ vnworthely, but y ^t they eate this bread vnworthely. Uerily S. Paul speaketh not of bakers bread in y ^• place. But hauing shewed y ^t Christ taking bread after thanks ge­uen, 1. Cor. 11 sayd: This is my body, straight he inferreth that, as often as this bread is eaten, the death of Christ is shewed, & therefore who so eateth this bread vnworthely, he shalbe gilty of the body of our Lord. This bread is one certayn kinde of meate or foode (for so Bread is tak [...] in holy scrip­ture for all y ^• which is eaten. bread in the holy scripture doth signifie) which food before was declared to be the body of Christ.

And S. Paul doth so warely describe this kind of bread, that he putteth both an article and a pronoune to it, saying. [...]. As if it were said in English, who so eateth vnworthely The grek article & y ^• pronoun make plam the words of S. Paule Matt. 26. this certayn kinde of bread: For so the article [...] betokeneth [...] certayn bread spoken of before. But then foloweth besides [...] which most vehemently restraineth that certayn bread to this kind of bread & food which Christ gaue at his last supper, saying, take and eate, this is my body. So that S. Paul by (bread) mea­neth a thing eaten: By (the bread) a certayn knowen thing ea­ten: By (this bread) one certayn kind of thing eaten, which alitle before was declared to be the body of Christ. Who so euer eatet [...] this kind of bread vnworthely, he is gilty of the body of Christ. Why so? Because he eateth the body of Christ vnworthely. oth [...] ­wise by eating he can not be gilty of that body, which he doth not eate. But hereof we shall saye more vpon S. Paule.

Thus now I reason out of the holy gospel. That thing where [Page 46] of Christ sayd to the twelue; take and eate, and drinke, was taken This, can not be spo­ken of two things. & eatē & drunken of all y ^• twelue, y ^t was one thing only cōceruing y ^• eating, & one thing only concerning y ^• drinking, y ^t is to say, the body of Christ, & y ^• blood of Christ. For he sayd, This is my body. (This) truly is but one thing, which Peter, Iohn, Iames, & like­wise August. in loan. tracta. 50 Peter and Iudas to ke of one bread. Lucae. 22. Iudas did eate. If Iudas did not eate this, he did eate no­thing of Christes supper. But Christ cōplaineth at his owne last supper, that his betrayer had his hand on the table with him. He did therefore eate somewhat: And consequētly this one thing, which was only at Christes supper geuen to be eaten. But this (one thing) is my body (sayeth Christ) therefore Iudas did eate Christes body. This, can meane but one thing, which all the [...]po­stles did take a [...]ke

If that argument be not plaine ynough, take an other. Iudas and Iohn did eate one thing. Eche of them that foode, whereof Christ sayd, This is my body, But S. Iohn, by the confession of the Apologie did truly eate Christes body, because, I suppose, the Apologie doth take S. Iohn for a faithfull man: Therefore Iu­das did truly eate the same body. As truly, as really, did Iudas eate the body of Christ, as S. Iohn, but not so worthely. Or made Christ in his supper two giftes? Did he deliuer one thing Christ made but one gift of his [...]ody. to S. Iohn, an other to Iudas? What gospell teacheth that? sayd not Christ, This? Is not This the singular nomber? Is it not one certayn thing? (This) was deliuered to all twelue, and to euery of them. (This) was eaten of all twelue, and of euery of them. Therefore seing (this) was to S. Iohn the body of Christ, (as the Apologie confesseth it was, as also to all others y ^t do beleue) likewise (this) was to Iudas y ^• body of Christ, and to all others that receaue at Christes table. If Iu­das did not eate y ^e body, nei­ther any o ther co [...]ld eate it.

What Iuglers be these, y ^t of one certayn thing whereof Christ sayd, This is my body, doo make the true body to Iohn, and not the true body to Iudas? If they say, that (this) doth nor point to [Page] the body of Christ, but to Bakers bread: then how doth S. Iohn by eating this, eate the body of Christ? S. Iohn eateth that same thing which Christ deliuereth to Iudas. But you say Christ deli­uereth Bakers bread, and none other thing to Iudas: Therefore S. Iohn though he beleue neuer so well, yet by eating (this) he doth not eate any thing besyde Bakers bread, and so he doth not eate the body of Christ.

More then Christ deliuereth him, he can not eate at the supper of our Lord. But Christ geuing (this) deliuereth bread to Iu­das, and not his body, as you say. Then how can S. Ihon by ea­ting (this) eate the body of Christ? You will say: S. Ihon may eate it by faith. Yea Syr, but that is not the eating (this) where­of Christ spake. Here againe I presse you with y ^• word of God.

The eating whereof Christ spake in his supper, was an eating The ea­ting in Christes supper was bodi­ly. by body. It was such an eating as agreed with the geuing of Christ, and with the taking of y ^• Disciples. But Christ gaue with his hands, they toke with their hands, and they did eate by the meane of their tonges, teeth, and mouthes. Therefore the eating and drinking whereof Christ sayd: take and eate & drinke, was an eating and drinking by body, albeit y ^• end of that banket was to feed also y ^• soule by that bodily food. The end, I say, intended on Christes part. But you can not out of that outward precept of eating and drinking, deduce an eating and drinking of y ^• body and blood an other way, that is to wit, by faith and spirit only. If you can, it must nedes folow, that Iudas did eate and drinke the body and blood of Christ by faith and spirit also.

For as it is sayd: Bibite ex hoc omnes, drinke ye all of this: so Mat. 26▪ Mar. 14. it is sayd, Biberu [...]t ex illo omnes, they all dranke of that. If the precept be fulfilled: such as the precept is, such the fulfilling is. If Christ by saying, drink, did will them to drinke wine in their mouthes, and his blood in spirit only: Then they whom y ^• gospell [Page 47] [...]heweth to haue drunken, did also drinke wine in their mouthes and his blood in spirit. Or will you take in the historie of y ^• same drink [...] all of this and they all drank muste ne­des be said of one thing. supper Bibite otherwise, then biberunt? Is not drinke ye, sayd of the same thing, whereof it is sayd, They dranke? Now then either Ihon dranke not truly (according to the precept geuen in the supper) the blood of Christ, or Iudas dranke also the blood of Christ. For (this) whereof Christ sayd: drinke ye all of this, came as wel to Iudas, as to S. Ihon. Christ sayd to all: drinke ye of this, and they all dranke of that.

Lo, that which S. Ihon dranke, also Iudas dranke, concer­ning, I say, the drinking of the supper. And the drinking of that thing, which is the substance of the Sacrament of the altar, Ihon truly dranke, as ye confesse: Iudas truly dranke, as the Gospell teacheth. Wherefore Iudas drank the same blood, that S. Ihon Iudas dranke y ^• samethig, but not to the same merite. 1. Cor. 10 did. Had Iudas then as greate merite by drinking, as S. Ihon? God forbid. But Iudas dranke the same thing, as all y ^e children of Israel did eate one, and the same Manna, but not to one and the same merite, as S. Paul hath declared. The merite riseth not of drinking, but of worthy drinking. As Manna tasted better to Sap. 16. the good Israelites, then to the bad: so S. Ihon dranke worthe­ly, Iudas vnworthely. S. Ihon had by drinking life euerlasting, Augusti. tractat. 50. in Io. Peter to­ke to life, Iudas to death. Iudas had by drinking damnation. S. Ihon dranke by body & by faith working by charitie. Iudas dranke by body alone, with a maliciouse intent to betraye Christ.

The good faith of S. Ihon was not the thing, whereby he dranke the blood according to the outward precept of Christ in his last supper, but it was the thing whereby and wherewith he Faith was nessa ry not to y ^• drinking but to the worthy drinking. worthely dranke the blood. Did not then Christ will and com­mand his Disciples to come worthely to his supper? Yeas for­soth, he not only willed them to come worthely, but for his part he offered them grace to come worthely. He not only for his part [Page] was redy to [...]euse their soules, but in token thereof washed also Ioan. 13. their bodies: Saying, they were all cleane except one, which was Iuda [...].

The preparing to haue a good faith, to haue a good charitie, to 1. Cor. 11 examine him selfe, goeth before the supper: eating by faith and Eating bi fayth is a [...] to worthy [...] of y ^• sacramt̄. spirit is a thing required to come worthely to the supper. But when we once come thither, we all eate one thing, one meate, one foode, one body, whether we come worthely or vnworthely, euen as all that are sprinkled with water in the name of the Trinitie, are baptized in one, and the same Sacrament of baptim, whether It is one bap [...]e to good & euill. they be good men as Cornelius was, or [...]uill men as Simon Magus was.

For Simon Magus was baptized of Philip y ^• deacon. But as it may appere by y ^t is tolde in the scriptures, and gathered by the Acto. 2. Simon Magus was bapti [...]ed as wel as Corne­lius, but not so me­ritoriously Ephes. 4. Breke and Latine Fathers, he came not worthely to that Sacra­ment, but faynedly, as one that hoped to make gain of his faith. And yet he had that baptisme, which (as S. Paul sayeth) is but one. But he had not the vertue of that one baptisme, which is the remission of synnes.

I trust by this tyme the defenders nede not boast of their do­ctrine, neither vpbraid vs of ours, because they teach, that only Tit. 3. Acto. 2▪ good men haue y ^• body of Christ deliuered to them. And we teach that euill men also eate really the true body of Christ. We haue, I suppose, declared the word of God to stand in our side. and seing their doctrine must be tried by the word of God, I tell them it is tried and sound to be false and forged, except they can proue Iu­das to haue bene an honest man. For surely that he receaued the body of Christ, it is the mind of S. Cyprian, S. Hierom, S. Chryso [...]om, S. Augustin, S. Leo, S. Bede, Theodoritus, Se­dulius, [...], Euthymius. yea it is so farre the common opinion of all men, that vpon that example this▪ conclusion is [Page 48] grounded, that we can not remoue [...] euill man from the commu C. Si Sa­cerd. de off. Iudi. ordinar. Chryso. hom. 83. in Mat. nion, excepthy order of law we may cōuince him, Quia nec Chri­stus Iudam a communione remouit: Because Christ did not re­moue Iudas from communion.

Howbeit we stand not in this doctrine vpon the person of Iu­das only, but also vpon the generall doctrine of S. Paule, who teacheth euery euill man to be gilty of the body of Christ, for ea­ting that bread vnworthely.

¶ The auncient Fathers teach, that euill men receaue The third chapiter. truly the body of Christ.

YEa but (say they) we do affirme with the most auncient The Apo logie. Fathers, that the body of Christ is eaten of none other, but of Godly and faithfull men.

Seing the holy scriptures are proued to stand on our The an­s [...]e. side, it were great marueile if the auncient Fathers did make for you. They are not wonte to be contrarie to the word of God. But what a miserie is this, what a seducing of the people? The word of God is pretended, the auncient Fathers be named, and not one syllable brought forth out of either both, concerning this question. But as before we brought holy scriptures, so let vs now allege the auncient Fathers.

Origen sayeth: Those who come to the Eucharist without exa­mining Origi­nes in Psal. 37. Hom. 2. & cleansing them selues, are lyke to men sicke of an ague, who presuming to eate sanorum cibos the meates of whole men, doe hurte them selues. Whereby we may perceaue, he iudgeth the meate of Christes supper, which is pro [...]ded only for whole men, yet to be truly, but not profitab [...]y, eaten of them, who are burde­ned with great synnes.

Basile asketh, what a man shall say of him, qui otiose et inutili­ter Basil. de Bapt. [...] ▪ [...] ca. vlt. edere audet corpus, et bibere sanguinem Domini nostri Iesu Christi? Who dareth in vayne and vnprofitably eate the body and [Page] drinke the blood of our Lord Iesus Christ? If a man eate in vaine and to his disprofit, yet he eateth in dede, and as S. Basile sayeth, he eateth the body of Christ. Chrysost. in Ioan. Ho. 45.

Chrysostom writeth thus: If those which spotte the Kinges purple be no lesse punished, then those that cutte it, what wonder is it, if those who take the body of Christ with an vncleane con­science, haue the same punishment which they haue, who pearced him with nailes? Behold as it is one purple still, whether it be spotted or cutt, so is it the same body still, whether it be pearced with nailes (as the Iewes haudled it) or taken with an vnclean conscience, as euill Christians order it.

S. Cyprian in manner of purpose answereth those obiections Cypria­nus de Coena Domini. which might moue any man to doubt, how euill men may & doo receaue so good a thing, as Christes owne body is. The Sacra­mentes (sayeth he) for their part can not be without their proper vertue. Neither doth Gods maiestie by any meanes absent it self from the mysteries. But albeit the Sacramentes permitte them Euill mē receaue y ^• Sacra­mēts but not the holines of them. selues to be taken or touched of vnworthy men, yet those men can not be partakers of the spirit, whose infidelitie or vnworthy­nes withstandeth such holines.

If, by the mynd of S. Ciprian, the Sacramentes can not lacke their owne proper vertue, come good men or euill to them, one substance is alwayes geuen. but the euill can not receaue y ^e spirit or grace thereof, because they are vnworthie of such a benefite.

S. Hierome: Opponis mihi Gomor Mannae vnam mensuram: Et nos Christi corpus aequaliter accipimus. Thou laiest vnto me the one measure of Manna called Gomor, and we take the body of Christ equally. One as well taketh it as an other, but as it there foloweth: Pro accipientiū meritis diuersum fit, quod vnum est. According to the merites of them that receaue, that which is one, is made diuerse. The Sacrament is one in it selfe, yet to one [Page 49] it is made y ^• cause of goodnes when he taketh it worthely, to an other the cause of euill, when he taketh it vnworthely. There also S. Hierome sayeth, that Iudas dranke of the same cuppe, where­of the other Apostles dranke, but yet that he was not of the same merit.

S. Augustine sayeth: Tolerat ipse Dominus Iudam, Diabolū, in Epist. 162. furem, & venditorem suum sinit accipere inter innocentes Disci­pulos, quod norunt fideles, precium nostrum. Our Lord him selfe beareth with Iudas, he su [...]th a deuill, a theefe, and the seller of him selfe to receaue among the innocent Disciples, our price, Iudas did eate our price, which is y ^• reall body of Christ. which the faithfull knowe. If any thing, besydes y ^t body of Christ, may be our price, then S. Augustine might meane that euill men receaue an other thing. But if our price be vndoubtedly that body of Christ which by death redemed vs, Iudas receauing our price receaued the very true body and substance of Christ.

In an other place he writeth: Eundem cibū sanctū alios mandu­care Contra Crescor. li. [...]. ca. 25 digne, alios indigne. Some eate worthely, some vnworthely the same holy meate. Beholde the meate is the same, Whether the euill receaue it or the good. And because the Apologie (though it name no Father at all) yet it maie haue some pretense of certain wordes which are in S Augustine, it is to be weighed diligētly, Christ hath both a natural, and a my­stical bo­dy. that Christ hath as well a mystical body, as a true naturall body. The mysticall body of Christ, are his members which are incor­porated by grace, & ioyned to him being their head. This incor­poration is wrought by the grace of baptisme in one degr [...], and finis [...]ed by the Sacrament of the altar in a higher degree, whereof we shall speake hereafter more at large. The naturall body of Christis that, which he tooke of the virgine and gaue to death for vs. Now Christ in his last supper gaue y ^• substāce of his natural body to be [...]aten of his disciples, to th' intent they should be made one mysticall body, euen by eating his flesh & blood.

[Page]Seing then the naturall body of Christ is geuen to th [...]end we maie be nerer knitte in the mysticall body, (according as S. Paul sayeth, The bread which we breake is the communicating of our 1. Cor, 10 Lords body, because we being many, are one bread, one body, all that partake of one bread: Seing I say, we communicate the na­tural body, to be made a mystical body in a greater vnitie then we had in baptisme, any man of discretion may perceaue, that in som Euil men receaue not y ^e vniō which is in y ^e mysti­cal body. August. [...] Ioan. tra ctat. 26. sense euill men receaue not the thing or the effect of the body of Christ, vnderstanding by the effect of body, the vnitie of the mysti call body, the obteining whereof is the end of the eating. Which vnitie S. Augustine somtime calleth Rem ipsam: The thing it selfe, that is to say, the last effect and benefite which ariseth to vs by worthy eating of the Sacrament of the altar.

After which sort S. Augustin saieth, euill men are not to be said August. de ciuita te Dei. li. 21. c. 25 to eate the body of Christ, adding therevnto this reason, Quoniā nec in membris computandi sunt Christi: Because they are not to be rekoned among the membres of Christ. So that euil men eate the substance of the naturall body, but not the thing for which y ^t substance was geuen, which is the vnite of the body mysticall, because they eate not worthely. Whereas worthy eating only maketh them to obteyne the vnitie of the mysticall body, which is to abide in Christ, and to haue Christ abiding in them. Therefore Ioan. 6. S. Augustine him selfe sayeth, Non quocun (que) modo quisquàm De verb. Domini. Serm. 22. manducauerit carnem Christi, & biberit sanguinem Christi, ma­net in Christo, & in illo Christus, sed certo quodam modo. Not how so euer a man eateth the flesh of Christ, and drinketh y ^e blood of Christ, he abideth in Christ, and Christ in him, but by a certain kind of way. As though S. Augustine sayd: Euery waye y ^e flesh and blood of Christ is receaued in the supper of our Lord, But not euery way it is so receaued, that we maye dwell in Christ, and Christ in vs.

[Page 50]S. Bregorse saith by euell men: Salutis fructū non percipiunt Grego. in prim. reg. li. 2. Cap. 1. in comestione salutaris hostiae. They receaue not y ^• fruit of salua­tion in y ^• eating of y ^• healthful sacrifice. They eate y ^• healthfull sa­crifice, which surely is nothing els but y ^e naturall body of Christ, but the fruit they receaue not, as many men take an healthfull medicine, but because their bodies be euil affected, it proueth not healthfull to them. Beda in Lucae. ca. 22.

S. Bede, cōpareth him to Iudas, who with his sinfull mem­bers presumeth to violate, Illud inestimabile & inuiolabile Do­mini corpus, That inestimable and inuiolable body of our Lord. And how could he violate it with his members, if with no part Arno­bius. 1. Cor. 11 of his body he touched it? I omit Arnobius vpon y ^t Psalm. 74. S. Ambrose, Theodorite, Decumenius, Haimo, Theophilact, Anselme vpon S. Paule, who agree with the rest of the Fathers Euery Sacra­mēt hath a substāce and an [...]f­fect. Euil men receaue y ^e substance of Christs body, but; [...] not y ^• ef­fect. What com parisons y ^• Fathers vse in shewing, y ^• good & euil [...] re ceaue one [...] in y ^e Sacra­ments. that there is in euery mysterie the substance of the Sacramēt and the effect thereof. As well the euill as the good receaue the sub­stance, which (in our Lords supper) is the body and blood of Christ. But only y ^e good receaue th'effect, Which is y ^e grace of spi­rituall nourishment to life euerlasting, and y ^e vnion with Christ.

Now as we haue shewed by the holy Scriptures, euen so haue we proued out of y ^e holy Fathers, that euell men rec [...]aue the body and blood of Christ as really, as the purple is one still whether it be spotted or cutt: as really, as one meate is eaten of some to their hurte, of others to their helth: as really, as good and euill Iewes had all one measure of Manna, but not all one swetenes in y ^e [...]ast thereof: as really as Iudas did kisse trayterously the same body of Christ which him self (as all euill men) trayterously receaued at Christes supper. If nowe the Apologie hath neither Scriptures nor Fathers, it maie leaue those boasting vpbraidinges, as though the Catholikes fled y ^e tria [...] of b [...]th Scriptures and Fathers. It is Gods cause, we haue committed it to Gods word. The Fathers [Page] when they agree in anie one article, are knowen to haue y ^• spirite of Christ, and they beare witnesse that we haue rightly expoūded the holy scriptures. He that listeth to see more of the same argu­ment, [...] read that which I haue writen vpon y ^t saying of S. Paule: He that eateth this bread vnworthely, shalbe gilty of the body and blood of our Lord.

¶ What is the true deliuerance of Christes body The fourth Chapiter. and blood.

IN the supper there is truly deliuered y ^e body and blood of the The Apo logie. Fol. 24. Lord, the flesh of the sōne of God quickening our soules, The food of immortalitie, grace, truth, life.

In these words no euil doctrine is conteined, but all sound The an­swere. and Catholike. In so much a man wold wōder, to what purpose these things are now brought, being extreme contrary to y ^• which the Caluinists defend, saing, they wold seme to speake as the ho­ly scriptures and primitiue Churche hath spoken. Seing there­fore these words conteine true doctrine, I wil reason briefly out of them, against their opinion that wrote them. You say, The bo­dy and blood of the Lord is truly deliuered in the su [...]per. If it be so, it is truly present. And seing none other thing can be war­rauted The Apo logie by his own confession defendeth the reall presence. to haue bene deliuered in the supper, besyde that which Christ gaue with his own hands, which semed bread, whereof he sayd: This is my body, and besyde that which semed wine, where of he sayd: This is my blood, by the doctrine of the Apologie it will folow, that Chris [...]es body was deliuered truly vnder that, which semed bread, and his blood was deliuered truly vnder that which semed wine.

Or tell me: Can [...] any man proue out of the word of God, that any other thing was deliuered in the supper of Christ, besyde two kinds, the one being bread, vntill Christ had sayd: [Page 51] This is my body, The other being the cup of wine, vntill Christ had sayd: This is my blood? Is there mention made of any other thing truly exhibited, offered, or deliuered to the Apostles? Or doth the supper of Christ consist of fower kinds? of bread & body, of wine and blood? In what gospell reade we of bread and wine deliuered? Bread and wine were takē, but body and blood were Matt. 26. only deliuered. For Christ sayd: Take, this is my body. Drinke, this is my blood. This, can be but one thing. Therefore Christ de­liuering that, whereof he sayd: This and this, deliuered at eche tyme but one thing, in all but two things. He deliuered his body & blood as him self sayd, and you cōfes [...]e he truly deliuered them, wherevpon I conclude, that he deliuered neither bread nor wine, and consequently that the bread taken was changed in to y ^e body of Christ, and the wine was changed into his blood.

For seing Christ toke both bread and wine, and deliuered truly his body and blood, & yet deliuered but one thing at eche tyme, and that also keping the forme of bread and wine, it must nedes be graunted, that the substance of bread and wine which was tru­ly taken, and not truly deliuered (because an other thing was truly deliuered) was in the meane tyme truly changed into that body and blood, which was truly deliuered. O masters, truth is strong, and by the aduersaries own weapon getteth the victorie.

Again, remember that the name of body and the name of blood A work belonging [...] y ^e [...] of Christ must haue a truth ac cording to the man­hod. The [...] heresic. are names belonging to the manhod of Christ, to which manhod when you adioyne any act or work which may truly be verisied thereof, it must be meant according to that truth, which properly belongeth to the nature of the manhod. When we say, Christ was truly scurged, nailed to the Crosse, bound, and buried, it is not here to be vnderstanded, that these things were don in figure, in spirit, in faith: But that his body suffered, according to the f [...]esh, all these things. And he that saith the contrarie is an [...] [Page] which heresie wold the manhod of Christ to be changed into his diuine nature.

If then the body and blood of Christ be truly d [...]red, you must not vuderstand a figure only to be d [...]red, neither a spi­ritual d [...] only. For if the body of Christ be deliuered tru­ly, and yet by spirit only: then the truth of his body is by these men brought vnto the truth of a spirit, and the flesh of Christ hath losi his true nature and prop [...].

Mark wel the reason: when the body of Christ is truly deli­uered, it is deliuered according to the truth of his own nature. The nature of a body is to be d [...]d after some bodily maner, verily by hands, or by some other corporail action. And they to The deli­ [...] of a corporall t [...]ing must haue some [...]t of the body. whom it is del [...]red, likewise receaue it by some part or sense of their body. For so requireth the true nature of flesh and blood, not immediatly to be geuen to the spirit and soule, but to come to it by meane of the body. Whereof it is inferred, that the body and blood of Christ, which are truly deliuered in the supper, are bodi­ly deliuered and bodily receaued. But from the body of Christ who made the d [...]ance vnto the bodies of the Apo [...]es, who receaued the things deliuered, none other thing can [...]syde that which semed bread and wine: therefore vnder that foormes the body and blood of Christ were truly cont [...]ined, and by y ^• meanes truly deliuered, and truly receaued.

Thirdly when you say, the [...]sh of God quickeneth our soules, you should haue sayd also, that it quickeneth our bodies, as in other places I haue proued out of the sixth of S. [...], an [...] out of S. Jreneus, [...]tullian, Cyrillus, and other auncient Fa­thers.

¶ what it is which nourisheth vs in the supper of The fifth Chapiter. Christ▪

[Page 52]ANd that the same supper is the co [...]ion of the body The [...]. Fol. 24. and blood of Christ, by the partaking whereof we are q [...]ned, we are [...] and sed [...].

That which [...] and [...]th can not be [...] from The [...] ­swere. them whom it nourisheth, and when it is cut of their reache, they can not haue it before it be geuen. If then we haue in [...] y ^• body [...] is by [...] r [...]y pre­ [...]. and blood of Christ, we receaued it by his gift at his supper. And surely it was the thing whereof he sayd: Eate, and whereof he sayd, Drinke. Other food was not deliuered in Christes supper, be [...] his body and blood: Nor possiblie can we haue the food of his supper at any other mans table, then at his.

Wel. If we be nourished by the meate which Christ gaue vs Christ gaue with [...] h [...]s y ^• which nour [...] ­sheth. when he sayd: Eate, and yet we be nourished by his body and blood: vndoubtedly he sayd: Eate, of that which he gaue with his hands, and which the Apostles toke into their mouthes, and that was bread to see vnto, therefore vnder that [...]orme of bread we take the nourishment whereby we are sed to immortalitie. Otherwise, what warrant haue we to come by this food, which is cleane out of our reache, vntil God geue it saying, Eate, this is my body: Drinke, this is my blood? By those words o [...] [...]ate & one liquour only is geuen, which also [...]deth vs to immortali­tie, as y ^• Apologie co [...]h. But none other food that man may receaue bodily, can feed vs to immortalitie, besyde the reall sub­stance of Christ. therefore that substance is receaued, & nourisheth vs when Christ sayd: Eate, this is my body: Drinke, this is my blood.

¶ The vnion, which is made by eating Christes The sixth [...]. reall flesh, must n [...]s be a naturall vnion, [...]ore it be a mysticall.

[Page]ANd by the which we are coupled, we are vnited, and graf­ted The Apo [...]. into the body of Christ, that we might [...]well in hin [...], and he in vs.

Christes [...]sh is deliuered to the end we should be nourished therewith. And the end of nourishing is to make one thing of y ^• The aun­ [...]. which is eaten, and of him that eateth it. The flesh deliuered to nourishe vs, is not any mysticall flesh, but only the natural flesh of Christ, neither can it be any other food. For none other thing that co [...]th in at the mouth of man, is able to seed him to im­mortalitie, besyde the substance of Christes flesh and blood.

If then it be the naturall flesh which feedeth, and the vnion doe come by seeding: the vnion must of neces [...]ty be made with the naturall flesh of Christ. And because that is such a flesh, as Ioan. 1. being vnited to God, hath power to geue life and [...]mortality: out of the naturall vnion which is made with it by eating, an other spiritual and mystical vnion floweth, which maketh all the members of Christ to be one mysticall body.

So that we haue now fi [...]e degrees. First, the slesh of Christ is The de­ [...]s o [...] re [...]ing Christ in [...] supper. deliuered to vs in his supper. Next, we eate the same flesh. Thirdly, we are fed by it, if we eate it worthely. Fourthly, of y ^• feeding conuneth a reall and naturall vnion and ioyning with Christes flesh, as S. Hilarie teacheth, and other auncient Fa­thers. Of that naturall vnion procedeth a spirituall vnion with Hilarius de trinit. li. 8. the whole body of the Church. Because being made one with Christes flesh, we are vnited thereby to his spirit and Godhead, liuing for him, as he [...]th for his Father: whereof I will speake Ioan. 6 more hereafter.

The Apologie acknowledgeth a ioyning with Christ by eating. But it surely meaneth the last spirituall ioyning, which ariseth of the other naturall vnion. Whereas that spiritual ioyning doth [Page 53] [...]ude the other natural, as euery effect presupposeth the neces­sarie cause thereof. We are coupled to Christ by eating that flesh of his, which he deliuereth to vs. But Christ deliuereth it not on­ly spiritually, but also with his hands, saying: Take, eate, this is Math 26 my body. As therefore y ^• deliuery is real and not only spirituall, so is the eating reall, and the coupling reall. I haue proued this thing in other places folowing. Here it is [...] to say this much against the bare words of the Apologie.

¶ That the Apologie speaking of the Lords supper, The seuē th chapter goeth cleane from the word of God.

VVE do acknowledge the Eucharist or the Lordes sup­per The Apo log [...]. to be a Sacrament, y ^• is to say, an [...] of the body and blood of Christ.

Besides the former va [...]t of the word of God already brought The aun­swere. foorth to the reproche of the Catholikes, also the Apologie a [...]tle before these words witnessed, that y ^• auctours & ab [...]tours thereof gaue thanks to God for the light of the Gospel raysed to them, The [...]or des of the Aplogie. which they might allwayes haue before theyr eyes, as a moste certayne rule, to which all doctrine of y ^• Church ought to be called for his triall. And within lesse than [...] lines after, the same Apologie cometh to denie our Lords supper, calling it a Sacra­ment, that is to say, an [...] token of the body and blood of Christ. The scrip [...] call not y ^• sup­per of [...] a [...]. Ioan. 6. The na­ [...] of [...]

What m [...]ers? Hau [...] you in the holy Scriptures, that the supper of our Lord is a Sacrament or a signe of y ^• body and blood of Christ? From the beginning of [...] to the later ende of tho [...]ocalips, you finde [...]t our Lordes supper so called. Christ in S. [...] calleth it y ^• m [...]e which [...] not, but [...] into l [...]e [...]. He saieth, y ^• bread which he will [...], [...] which he will [...] [...]or y ^• [...]se of y ^• world. He [...] it the [...] and [Page] the blood of the sonne of man, meate in dede, and drinke in dede, his flesh and his blood, the eating of him, the bread which who so eateth shall liue for euer. In S. Mathew, and in S. Marke, Matt 26. Marc. 14 Lucae. 22. 1. Cor, 10 his body and his blood of the new testament. In S. Luke, his body whiche is geuen for vs, and the chalice which is the newe testament in his blood, which is shed for vs. In S. Paul, y ^e bread which we breake is the communicating of our Lords body, the chalice of blessing which we blesse, which is the cōmunicating (or partaking) of Christes blood; the one bread, y ^• table of our Lord, and the chalice of our Lord, the body which is broken for vs, the chalice which is the new Testament of his blood, the eating of 1. Cor. 11 this bread, and drinking of this chalice.

So many names are geuen in so many places of holy scripture to this blessed Sacrament, and it being no where called a signe or token, yet the Apologie which thanketh God for y ^• holy scrip­tures, a [...]d will trie all doctrine by them, in the chief question of The Apo logie go­eth quite from the scriptures our age, goeth quite from all holy scriptures and sayeth, the Eu­charist or the Lordes supper is an euident token of the body and blood of Christ.

What is the matter that in wordes you make so much of holy scripture, and in dede so litle? What Apostle, what Euangelist, what Prophete, or Patriarke taught our Lordes supper to be a signe or token?

S. Paul threateneth damnation to him, who vnworthely ea­teth 1. Cor. 11. it, and he calleth vnworthy eating, not only the contempte thereof or lacke of faith, but euen the omitting to proue or exa­mine What vn­worthy ea ting to in S. Paule him selfe, before he eate our Lords body. And that because he maketh no difference betwixt it and common meates. And come you with a new doctrine, affirming y ^t we receaue not our Lords body into our bodies, but an euident signe and token thereof?

[Page 54]you [...] no authoritie, no rule, no triall of matters belonging to faith, but only the holy Scriptures. and immediatly ye breake The Apo logie brea­k [...]th [...] own rule. your owne rule, in so much as the holy scriptures call the supper of our Lord, his body and blood, and you teach it to be an euident token of his body and blood. If you kepe not your owne rule, whom can you binde to kepe the [...]aine?

Ye will aske me perhaps, whether the Lordes supper be not a Sacrament? if a Sacrament, then also a signe and token. I aun­swere, ye that prescribe rules of beleuing to the world, ye that wil haue all thinges iudged and proued by y ^t touchestone of Gods worde, ye that for pretense of folowing the gospell, haue stirred vp so greate strife through all Christendome, must not talke with vs with if, with and, with conditions and peraduentures. But ye must bring forth the word of God for that ye say.

Although the supper of our Lord were neuer so much a Sacra­ment, The s [...]p­per of our Lorde to [...] ­res is no [...]acramet. surely to you it were none, because ye cannot proue out of the word of God, where it is so named.

To vs it is both a Sacrament and a sacrifice. A Sacrament, be­cause we are so taught by tradiction from the Apostles: A sacrifice because Malachie the prophet in y ^e person of God expressely saieth In omni loco sacrificatur & offertur nomini meo oblatio munda▪ Malac. 1. quia magnum est nomen meum in gētibus. In euery place a cleane oblation is sacrificed and offered to mie name, because my name is The sup­per of Christ is a [...]acrifice. greate amonge the gentils. There is absolutely no pure and cleane oblation besides the sacrifice of Christes body and blood, whiche was offered to death not in euery place, but without the gate of Hierusalem alone, and the same is at this daie vnbloodily offered Heb. 13. in the masse in euerie place, where so euer among the gentils the name of God is [...] called vpon.

Thus both we and you maie proue the [...]upper of our Lord to be a sacrifice, but that it is a [...] ▪ we can proue, because [Page] our forefathers delyuered such a doctrine to vs: You can not It is a tradition vnwriten that our Lords su [...]per is a Sacra­ment. The Apo logie. Fol. 24. [...]a. 8. pa. 1 proue the same, seing you will not be bound to folow vnwritten traditions.

If you flee to the Church for naming it a Sacramēt, the church hathe seuen Sacramentes. But ye in this present Apologie ac­knowledge only two, properly to be rekoned vnder y ^• name. for so many (saie you) do we find deliuered and sanctified by Christ, and allowed of the olde fathers Ambrose and Augustine. Concer­ning the deliuery of Sacraments by Christ, ye might haue found in the word of God Confirmatiō. Actor. 8. Penance, Ioā. 20. Ex­treme vnction, Iacob. 5. Priesthod. Luk. 22. Matrimonie, Eph. 5. And not only Baptim and the Eucharist. But what kind of talk is this, to say, that S. Ambrose and S. Augustine allow y ^t workes of Christ? was not the deliuery and consecration of Christ of suf­fic [...]ent autoritie, except Ambrose and Augustine had approued it? I tho [...]ght Ambrose and Augustine should haue bene allowed by the scripture, and not the scripture by them.

I stand with you vpon the autoritie of the word of God. proue Nor bap­tim nor y ^• supper is called a sacrament in y ^• scrip­tures. me thence, that these two are Sacramentes alone, yea proue, that thei are so named at all. what gospell calleth baptisme a Sa­crament? What holy write nameth the supper of our Lord a Sa­crament? dare you geue these things a name, which is not in the word of God? What warrāt haue you for that dede? you will say, Ambrose and Augustine calle them so. I replie, Peter and Paul doe not call them so. At other times and with other men, I will stay vpon the authoritie of Ambrose and Augustine', whom as I ought to do, I reuerence for men of excellent vertue and lear­ning. But yet they were men (as you are wont to saie) they might erre, they might be deceaued.

At this time we haue appealed chiefly to y ^• holy scriptures, and out of them we must ground all our talke, and next vnto them, [Page 55] we will heare what the Fathers saye.

I saie, that neither the old testament, nor the new calleth the supper of our lord, a Sacrament. Therefore the Apologie that so calleth it, goeth from the assurance of the word of God, to the good and [...]audable inuentions and traditions of mē, which them seiues [...], when they lilte.

And yet the said Apologie so calleth it a Sacrament, that vpon The wor de Sa­cramēt is y ^• ground o [...] [...] y ^• [...]ro testars [...]o [...] in our Lor­des sup­per. that only word the auctors thereof grounde all their doctrine. Thence it hath to be a signe, to be a token, to be a badge, a seale, a paterne, a counterpa [...]e. Thence all the figuratiue doctrine ry­seth. Thence it commeth, that the reall body and blood of Christ is denied to be vnder the formes of bread and wine.

Shall now so much as Christ hath plainely spoken of his bo­dy and blood, so much as his Apostles and disciples haue prea­ched and writen in that behalfe, shall now all this be ouerthrow­en The Apo logie fle­eth from y ^• writen wor [...] to y ^e [...]. by an vnwritten veritie? Are these the men o [...] God who f [...]ee from S. Mathew, S. Marke, S. Luke, S. Iohn, S. Paul, to Augustine and Ambrose? Will the Apologie allowe that dede? If it will not, why hath it done so it selfe?

If none but prophetes and Apostles had written, where had they found two Sacramentes? where had they readen, that the supper of our Lord is a signe and token? They make much a doe about the word of God, till they haue gotten credit among the ignorant, and then they quite lead thē from all the word of God. To you I speake, good Christen readers, y ^t haue the true loue of the word of God [...] in your hartes, to you I speake. geue not ouer S. Ma [...]hew, S. Iohn, S. Paul, for Ambro [...]e and Augu­s [...]ine. [...] not ouer Christ, who is God and man, to haue the o­pinion of what s [...] euer [...]ottor and Father in causes of belefe. Some men in comparison of others be of greate authoritie. But in comparison o [...] God, all men be nothing at all.

[Page]God saieth, this is my body. Now what so euer man or angell No man is to be heard who saieth: This is not the body of Christ. Gal. 5. Ephe 5. from heauen tell you, this is not the body of Christ but only a fi­gure of it, beleue him not, but let him be [...]cursed to you. Shal we not be well occupied, if we leaue y ^• plain worde of God and come to see whether Ambrose and Augustine teach two Sa­cramentes, or mo then twaine? S. Paul teacheth Matrimonie to be a Sacrament. And yet shall we goe from him to Ambrose and Augustine, to see whether it be one or no?

Was euer such a vile practise heard of, as to brag of scriptures, to boast of holy write, to crie vpon vs for comyng to the worde of God, and nowe that we are come thither, to call vs from all Prophetes and Apostles, yea frō Christ him selfe, to Ambrose and The Apo logi [...] brin g [...]th v [...] from y ^• ho­ly Scrip­ture to the Fathers. Augustine? Is this the waie to the holy scriptures? Can this fault be excused? Can this hypocrisie be tolerated?

To winne to you the itching eares of the inconstant multitude, to get you y ^e applause of licencious libertines in y ^• pulpit, you call to y ^• word of God, and when you haue gotten them within your nettes, you teach them out of Ambrose and Augustine. Yea, would God ye did so at the least. And although it be alitle out of mie way, (if to detect falshod can euer be out of a mans way) yet what if now we proue that ye deceaue them also, by fathering that vpon Ambrose and Augustine, which they neuer wrote [...] thought?

¶ That S. Ambrose and S. Augustine taught moe The eigth chapiter. then two Sacraments.

DOe they teache but two Sacramentes only? What if they taught two especially, yet if they do not deny the other, your proof is none. But let vs see. Doe they ap­proue no more then twaine? What if besydes these twaine which you haue named, I bring within the compasse of one chapiter. [Page 56] two moe out of S. Augustin as plainly named of him, as possibly can be? Where then will this Apologie re [...]t?

Bonum igitur nuptiarum per omnes gentes at (que) omnes homi­nes Aug. d [...] bono cō iugal. ca. 24. in causa generandi est, & in fide castitatis. quòd autem ad po­pulum Dei pertinet, etiam in sancti tate Sacramenti, & caet. The good (sayeth S. Augustine) which riseth of mariage through all nations, and all men, consisteth in y ^• cause of begetting (children) and in the faith of chastitie. And in so much as appertaineth to y ^• Mariage among Christiās is a Sa­crament. people of God, it consisteth also in the holynes of the Sacramēt, through which it is vnlawfull (yea though diuorse come betwen) to marie an other, whiles her husband liueth, not so much as for the very cause of bringing foorth of children, which though alone it be the cause why mariages are made, yet the band of mariage is not loosed (vnlesse the husband die) albeit y ^• thing folow not, for which the mariage is made. Much like, as if to bring the peo­ple Priesth [...] is a Sa­crament. together, some of the clergie should be ordered (or consecra­ted with holy orders) for although the meeting of the people do not insewe, yet Sacramentum ordinationis, the Sacrament of ge­uing orders abideth, in them that be ordered. And if for any fault The sub­stance of y ^• Sacra­ment tari­eth in an e [...]ill priest remoued from his office. any man be remoued from the office, he shall not lacke the Sacra­ment of our Lord, which is once put vpon him, although it re­maine to his damnation.

In these words S. Augustine hath shewed, that amōg Christi­an men there are two other Sacramentes, of Priesthod & of Ma­trimonie, besides baptisme and the Eucharist. And eche of them so greate and so strong, that they can not be loosed and taken awaie but only by death of the partie, although the chief cause [...]asse why the Sacrament was geuen.

I could bring if nede were an other notable place out of S. Augu. eō tra Don. li. 5. c. 20 Ambros. lib. 1. de Paenit. cap. 7. Augustine, where he nameth together, the water of baptim, oile, the Eucharist, and the imposition of hands.

[Page]S. Ambrose like wise confesseth moe Sacraments then Bap­tim and the Eucharist: Cur baptizatis, si per hominem peccata di­mitti non licet? In baptismo vti (que) remissio peccatorum omniū est. Quid interest vtrum per paenitentiam, an per lauacrum hoc ius sibi datum sacerdotes vendicent? Vnum in vtro (que) mysterium est. Sed dices, quia in lauacro operatur mysteriorum gratia. Quid in paeni­tentia? Nonne Dei nomen operatur? Why art thou baptized if it be not lawfull synnes to be forgeuen by man? Truly in Baptim there is forgeuenesse of all synnes. What skilleth it whether Priests challenge this right (of forgeuing synnes) to be geuen them by penance, or by baptim? The mysterie or Sacrament is one in both. But thou wilt say: that in Baptim the grace o [...] y ^• my­steries worketh. What in Penance? doth not the name of God work? Here is the same vertue and name of a mysterie or Sacra ment geuen to Penance, which is geuē to Baptim. Whereby S. Ambrose taught as wel that there was a Sacramēt of Penance, as the Apologie graunteth one of Baptim.

But to stand about the proof of all the seuen Sacraments it Seuē Sa cram [...]ts were pro­ [...] [...] y ^• Greeks & Latins in y ^• Coūcell of F [...]orēce nedeth not, sith in that most notable generall Councell gathered both of Grekes and Latines at Florence, all the seuen Sacra­mentes were according to the word of God confessed, proued, de­clared and expounded, as in the ende thereof it may appere. But neither S. Ambrose, nor S. Augustine had the charge commit­ted to them, to rekon vp how many Sacraments there are.

I brought these few places out of S. Augustine, and S. Am­brose to shewe as it were to the eyes of all them that will not wilfully blind them selues, how these defenders crie out vpon the word of God, vntill they haue with swete words wonne [...]a­nour Heretikes e [...]eme nei ther scrip­tures nor Fathe [...]s. amōg the miserable nomber [...]f those vnstable me [...], that all­wayes harken for newes. But when they haue them fast, then is the word of God cleane forgotten, and in siede of it, Ambrose and [Page 57] Augusti [...]e are captiously and falsely alleged. For the truth is, they that set nought by the word of God, can not long es [...]me Ambrose and Augustine, who with all their hartes embraced the word of God, and expounded the same according to the auncient tradition of holy Church.

To what end then doth this Apologie runne? Truly to sette The Apo logie pre­tendeth scriptures til it may set vp an idol of his own. vp an Idoll of their owne making, in place of the word of God. To set vp, I say, a fantasticall religion of their owne deuising. But if they should crie to the people: Come, come, bowe down to the Idoll that we haue deuised for you: the people would not come, as being feared with y ^• infamouse name of an Idoll. There­fore they say, come to the word of God, come to the holy Scrip­tures, come to the true gospell of Iesus Christ. well Syr, you say herein exceding well, we are come. Teach vs the word of God, the Scriptures, the gospell. Say on a Gods name.

¶ That the supper of our Lord is the chief Sacra­ment The nyn­the cha­piter. of all, but not acknowledged of the Apologie, according to the word of God.

WE saye, that Eucharistia, the supper of the Lord, is a The Apo logie. Sacrament, that is to wit, an euident token of y ^e body and blood of Christ.

It is most true, that the supper of our Lord is a Sacrament, The aun­swere. The sup­per of our Lord is a sacrament Dion. de Ec. Hier. cap. 3. Maxim. in schol. Graecis. yea it is the chief Sacrament of all Sacraments. [...]. Est enim, se­cundū clarissimi praeceptoris nostri sententiam, Sacramentorū Sa­cramentum. The most holy Eucharist (which Dyonisius named so a litle before) according to the mind of our renowmed maister, is the Sacrament of Sacramentes.

Although Dionysius had S. Paul to his master, yet he mea­neth at this tyme (as vpon him Maximus hath noted, & by other [Page] places of his worke it may well appere to be true) Hierotheus an holy Father and Disciple of Christ, who in his talke whiche he was wonte to haue with Dyonisius, did vse to call the holy E [...] ­charist of all the Sacramentes the chief Sacrament. Surely i [...] there had bene but two Sacramentes, both Hierotheus & Dyo­nisius [...] ­sius ac­knowled­geth moe Sacra­mēts then twaine. had abused their words. For where two things only are of one degree, there one may be worthier then the other, but nei­ther of the twaiue may iustly be called the chief of the others.

If in all there be only two Sacramentes, baptisme & the Eu­charist, how is the Eucharist the Sacrament of Sacramentes? sith when one is taken away, there doth remaine but one moe, to which relation may be made. The opinion therefore of this Apo­logie standing, the Eucharist may be y ^• more chief Sacrament of t [...]e twaine, but not the Sacrament of moe Sacramentes.

But what nede we stand herevpon, seing Dionysius hath at Ca. 4. 5. 6. de Ec­clesiast. Hierar­ [...]hia. large prosecuted moe Sacramentes then baptisme and the Eu­charist, as it is easye to see in his workes?

Seing then the supper of our Lord is a Sacrament, and yet not found so to be named in holy Scripture, the Apologie is con­strained to beleue it selfe, and to teach others somewhat which is The Apo logie is cō strained to beleue many veri ties vn­writen. not readen in holy Scripture.

Againe that euery Sacrament is a signe and token, it is also true, but not readen in holy Scripture.

Thirdly the Sacrament of y ^e altar is an euident token of y ^• body and blood of Christ. But so much is not expressed in holy Scrip­ture.

Last of all, the supper of our Lord is the reall body & blood of Ioan. 6. Matt. 26. Mark. 14 Luk. 22. 1. Cor. 10. &. 11. Christ him selfe. And that truth is very plainly, very ofte, very earnestly sayd, taught, repeted in holy Scripture.

Foure thinges are now verified of the supper of our Lord. It is a Sacrament, it is consequently a holy signe. It is an euident [Page 58] token of the body and blood of Christ. It is the truth and sub­stance of the body and blood of Christ. Of the foure truthes, the last only is expressed in holy scriptures because it is the ground of all the other. The three first are taught by the Church not cōtrary to the scripture, but ouer and besides it. Now mark well whe­ther these defenders lead vs to the word of God or no.

In describing the supper of our Lord, they put the three first verities, of which neuer a one is named in the scripture. And the last veritie which is expresly named in all the foure Euange­listes and in S. Paul (as before I haue declared) that they vtter­ly The apo­logie skip­peth the writen ve­ [...]. [...] a [...]d leaue out: As if they shuld saie, we make much a­ [...] to pretend y ^• holy scriptures, but we will be sure to bring any thi [...]g soner then the holy scriptures.

Marke this Apologie who shal, he neuer lightly saw any book writen in so many matters of diuinitie, wherein so litle scripture The Apo logie is full o [...] glo­ses but not of scriptu­res. hath bene alleged. It is full of gloses, but the texte it hath very seldome. And why? They loue not in dede the scriptures, they know not the scriptures according to the mind of the holy Ghost, but only make a shew of them to entangle the sunple in their snares.

The supper of our Lord is a sacrament, a holy signe, an euident token of the body and blood of Christ. hitherto they teache with­out Math. 26 Heretikes loue not the gospel. scriptures. It is the body and blood it selfe of Iesus Christ. Hereof speake they at this time neuer a word, because it is in the Gospell which they loue not.

If this last truth can not stand with the first, what doubt is there, but the worde of God must ouercome, and the doctrine of men g [...]ue place? If therefore the supper of our Lord ma [...]e both be the signe of the body, and the body it selfe, it is well, we are throughly agreed, for all sc [...]iptures call it the body, and some doc­tours call it a signe, But if these thinges can not both be true to­gether, [Page] awase with signes, awaie with tokens, let the worde of Matt. 26. God be heard, which saieth: This is m [...] body, This is my blood.

Is it reason we obeie men, or God? If both stand in one degree, Actor. 5. men keping them selues vnder God, let both be obeyed. But if men draw from God, he is more worth alone, then all the men of the world.

What [...] we now? Will the sig [...]e of the body and the body it sel [...]e stand together or no? If not, let the signe of the body (which is not in scripture) geue place, let the body it selfe which is often times found there, tarie still.

If the signe and the truth can not stand together, the Sacra­mentaries must nedes be condemned, who denie the truth which is in the scripture, and preferre the signe before it, which is not in the scripture.

If the signe & truth doe both stand together, y ^• Sacramentaries Euery way the Sacramē [...] be [...]. (onlesse they repent) be condemned, because they denie the one part of y ^• twaine. For they denie the true presence of Christs body and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine.

In what case stand these defenders, which still be in state of damnation, whatsoeuer be concluded true.

We verely teach and beleue the figure and the truth to stand together: the supper of our Lord to be the signe of Christes body, and to be his owne body. The weaker part is the signe, the grea­ter The fi­g [...]re and y ^• truth [...]. is the truth. But both doe not only stand together in one Sa­crament, but farther more, the true nature of euerie Sacrament of Christ is to haue both: that is [...]aie, to haue oue certaine truth, & one certaine signe of the same truth.

The truth is hidden vnder the signe, the signe is witnes of the truth. Which thing once being declared, you shall see the vaine doctrine of this Apologie, & with what kind of worthy School­ [...] the English Church is nowe gouerned, to the greate [Page 59] [...] and destruction of Christian soules. Pardon me, good rea­der, if I stand somewhat long vpon the name of a Sacrament, for in that word lieth hidden all the poyson of the Sacramentarie doctrine.

¶ That the supper of our Lord is both the signe of The. x. Chapiter. Christes body, and also his true body, euen as it is a Sacrament.

GEue diligent care (good Reader) to the doctrine folow­ing. Because as it is most true and profitable, so is it somewhat hard. I will shew that suche a signe as belon­geth to Christes institution, must nedes haue the same truth pre­sent, whereof it is the Sacrament, or holy signe. Ioan. 1. Christ hath two natures in one persō. Galat. 3. 1. Tim. 2.

The naturall sonne of God tooke naturall flesh of the virgin Marie, to th'intent he being o [...]e persone and there in hauing his humane nature common with men, and his diuine common with God, might by that meanes reconcile man to God againe. His diuine personne staied in it the nature of man, his manhod part­ly couered the diuine nature, from the eyes of mortall men: part­ly by maruelous signes and workes shewed the same to the faith 1. Ioā. 5. &. 10. of [...] men.

Li [...]ewise man consisteth of two parts, of a soule inuisible, and Man con­sisteth of two parts of a visible body. The soule ruleth and gouerneth the body. And the body sheweth to others by outward tokens, what the soule thinketh and inwardly worketh.

Christ therefore intending to leaue certayn holy mysteries vn­to his Church, thereby to [...] to her the fruite of his passion and death: as well for regard of his owne selfe, in whose per­sonne The Sa­craments consist of [...] parts. two natures were vnited, as for regard of vs who cōsiste of body and soule, made the sayd holy Sacramentes to be of a dubble sort and nature, so that the one part thereof might appere [Page] to the senses, the other should lye priuie and only be seene by faith.

But as the outward workes and doctrine of Christ were vn­doubted testimonies of the inward Godhed really present, so y ^e outward signe, which is in the Sacraments, is a most euident witnesse of the inward grace which they worke really present in them. A [...]ter this sort Christ instituted y ^e Sacrament of Baptisme, Ioan. 3. that we might be newly borne and regenerated of water and of the holy Ghost, as him selfe sayd to [...]. For y ^e outward wasshing of the body in the na [...]e of the Trinitie, is an euident Mat. 28. signe that the holy Ghost at the same instant by the meane of the word and water, inwardly wassheth y ^• soule from synne. There­fore S. Paul sayeth: God hath saued vs by the wasshing of water, Tit. 3. and of the renewing of the holy Ghost. The which holy scrip­tures S. Augustine embracing, sayeth: Aqua exhibens forinsecus In ep. 23. ad Boni­facium. Sacramentum gratiae, & spiritus operans intrinsecus beneficium gratiae regenerat hominem in vno Christo, ex vno Adam genera­tum. Water geuing outwardly the Sacrament (or holy signe) of grace, and the holy Ghost working inwardly the benefite of grace, begetteth man againe in one Christ, which was begotten of one Adam.

Water is the outward signe. Grace is y ^• inward benefite. The outward water which wassheth the body, is the signe of the in­ward grace which is wrought vpon the sou [...]e. Here thou seest, good Reader, the signe of a thing, and the thing it selfe to agree so The signe and thing signified stand toge ther. well, that the one is alwayes depending of the other. Much lesse doth one of them hinder the other. Except any man will say, that Christ was not God in dede, because his works were tokens & signes of his Godhead, which were a detestable saying.

Likewise the supper of Christ is both a signe of his body, & also his true body, A signe outwardly & y ^e true body inwardly. A signe [Page 60] by y ^• sound of words when it is first made, & a truth by y ^e inward working of y ^e holy Ghost, by y ^e meanes of y ^e words of y ^e censecra­tion. For as when y ^e Priest sp [...]inkleth or dippeth y ^e child in water, Mat. 28. saying: [...] wass he the, in the name of the Father, and of the Sonne, and of the holy Ghost: At y ^e same moment y ^e holy Ghost wassheth the soule of the person baptized: Right so, when Christ, or any lawfull Priest in his name, taking bread, & bles [...]ing duely sayeth: Mat. 26▪ Marc 14. Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11 This is my body, making in those words an euident token of his body [...]eally present, at the same instant the holy Ghost worketh inwardly the true substance of Jesus Christ really present vnder the forme of bread. The outward pronouncing of the words o­uer bread and wine, is the Sacrament or holy signe that maketh and sheweth Christes body, and the inward [...] ning of the sub­stance of bread into Christes reall body, is the grace which is at the same tyme inuis [...]bly wrought.

Thus in holy Scripture the signe of body, and the true body stand so wel [...] together, that both are true, because one is true. The which doctrine S. Chrisostom confessing, writeth: Sacerdo­tis Homil. de Iudae proditio ne. oreverba proferuntur: Et Dei virtute proposita consecrantur & gratia. Hoc est (ait) corpus meum, hoc verbo proposita conse­crantur. The words are pronounced by the Priests mouth. And the things set foorth are consecrated by the vertue and grace of God. This (sayeth he) is my body. With this word the things which are set foorth are consecrated.

Who seeth not here the visible Sacrament, and the thing or in­ [...]isible grace of the Sacrament? The Sacrament is the due pro­nouncing of the words ouer bread o [...] wine. As for example, ta­king bread, I say, in Christes person, This is my body. The words naturally haue their knowen signification as other wor­des of other things haue. Which who so hea [...]eth spoken or per­ceaueth to be spoken, can tell what they meane and signifie. [Page] Neither can it be denied but they betoken the being or substance of Christes body. That natural betokening of theirs alone with­out the matter of bread and wine present, should not be a Sacra­ment, that is to say, an euident signe and token of a holy thing. But when those words are spoken ouer bread by a Priest (as Christ appointed them to be spoken) then by his institution they are a Sacrament, to wit, an euident token of a holy thing.

Now as God and Christ can not lye, so they do not institute Christ c [...] not insti­ [...] a false signe. a false signe and token. If the token be true, and it be the token of Christes body present, that thing which it betokeneth by the in­stitution of Christ, must nedes be not only true, but also present, if it be so betokened.

¶ What signe must chiefly be respected in the Sa­crament The. xi. chapiter. of Christes supper. And what a Sacrament is.

IAm not ignorant that in the Sacrament of the altar, diuerse Diuerse sign [...]s are in y ^• Eu­ [...]. kindes of signes & tokens are founde. 1. some be tokens of the making and consecrating the Eucharist: 2. others of it being now consecrated and made, vntill the outward signes be consu­med: 3. a signification also of the Church of Christ is gathered out [...] it now made and consecrated. 4. Yea the very eating is again a signe of a maruelous banket in the life to come.

1. The first signe of all is y ^e signe of consecrating our Lords sup per, and it is the words duely spoken by a Priest ouer bread and The Words of [...] ­tion ar [...] y ^• first signe. [...], which both betoken the making of Christes body & blood, and make it in dede.

2. The signe of the Eucharist now made, is the forme of bread and wine. But this later signe presupposeth the first signe and token. For except it had bene sayd ouer the bread and wine: This is my body, and this is my blood, the formes of bread and wine [Page 61] could not betoken the reall body and blood of Christ vnder them. For not wheresoeuer we see such formes, we doe there beleue the body and blood to be, except we thinke the words of consecration to haue bene spoken ouer them.

We now speake of that first signe and token, which both signi­fieth and maketh the Sacrament. Wherein Christ would that to be wrought inuisibly, whiche the words do signifie to our cares, and whic [...], the doing sheweth to our eyes.

A man is able to institute a token of the truth, but not always able to make present the truth of the token: As when he leaueth a ring in token of him himsel [...]e, not being able to leaue his owne sub­stance in the same ring, or vnder the forme of it.

But Christ as he is both God and man, so he leaneth both an Christes toke hath in it, the truth [...]. outward token according to his hu [...]ane nature, and worketh an inward truth of the same token, according to his diuine allnugh­tynes. The outward token is called the Sacrament, the truth thereof is called the thing of the Sacrament.

Christ intending to shewe to the people that his Father all­ways heareth him, sayeth: Father I thanke the because thou hast Ioan. 11. heard me. These words betoken a thanksull hart. Wheresore if in [...]ede the hart be thankfull, they are a Sacrament or holy signe because they betoken a most holy sacrifice of thankigeuing. But if in dede the hart geue no thanks, they are a false token, & there­fore 1. Ioā. 5. please not God, who is truth and loueth nothing but truth.

Upon this ground of holy scriptures and of lerned Fathers, What a Sa [...]ra­ment is. the definition of a Sacrament is agre [...]d [...]pon by all diuin [...]s, ta­ken specially ont of S. Augustine, as [...] doth [...], in these words. Sacramentum est [...] gratiae, visi [...]ilis forma. De cōse­cratione [...]. 2. cap▪ Sa­ [...]. A Sacrament is the visible forme of [...] grace. whereby [...] may perceaue a Sacrament to [...] o [...] two parts. the one is ap prehended by faith, whiles the other is outwardly shewed to the [Page] senses. If we see one baptized in the name of the Trinitie, we say, a Christen man was made to day. How proue we that? be­cause y ^• Sacrament, which we saw, telleth vs what was wrought inwardly.

Therefore seing Christ hath will [...]d vs to say at his holy table Luc. 22. ouer bread and [...] (This is my body and this is my blood) there is no doubt but the very naming of body and blood solēnly com­maunded, is the comma [...]udement to make a holy signe, which is asmuch to say, as to make a Sacrament. Whereof it foloweth, that the same thing is inuisibly wrought, which is outwardly si­gnified. Otherwise a Sacrament may be false, it may be of one part alone, it may lacke the operation of the holy Ghost. And to be short, it may be made voide and of none [...]. The token and signe sayeth, when bread is present: Hoc est corpus meum, This is my body. The pro [...]ne Hoc (This) and the verb (est, is) beto­ken a thing present. The thing spoken of, is the body of Christ. If the bo dy be not made the wordes make a fal se token. Psal. 58. If this (whereof I speake it) be not made my body here present­ly, I signifie and betoken a false thing. No false signification can be a Sacrament, because rather it is an execration or cursing, wherein au vntruth is betokened, from which God abhorreth.

The Apologie confe [...]eth the supper of our Lord to be a Sa­crament, and whereas euery Sacramēt [...] of words and things, of which twaine the words are the more plaine token of the holy thing which is made: seing the words of Christes sup­per are, This is my body, & This is my blood, of necessitie there must be a truth of that thing which these words doe signifie. And for asmuche as they signifie the presence of Christes body, his bo­dy must nedes be present, where they doe signifie it to be present.

I will exemplifie it in an other Sacrament also. Christ at his Facere is to doe and make. last supper hauing sayd, This is my body which is geuen for you, sayd to his Apostles, Hoc facite in meam commemorationem. [Page 62] Doe, and make this thing for the remembrance of me. In these words Christ betokened somewhat, surely that they sho [...]ld make and doe the thing he spake of. I aske now, whether he gaue in deed power to the Apostles to make and doe that thing for the remembrance of him, or no? If in deed he gaue them no power, the signification of his words was false, and the tokē which they make to our eares, vntrue.

On th' otherside if in deed by that precept Priests haue power to make that thing, whereof Christ spake, then the token was true, and the outward signification of the words agreeth with the in­ward effect and working of them. For which cause we say, that When the order of Priestho [...] was geuè to the Apostles. Christ in those words instituted a Sacrament of holy orders. For he gaue vnto his Apostles at that tyme by those words the order of Priesthod. The holy signe of this Sacrament is, the pronoun­cing of these words. Hoc facite in meam commemorationem. Make and doe this thing for the remembrance of me. The inuisi­ble grace wrought therein, is the power which the Apostles toke to make the body of Christ.

Euen so: As sone as these words This is my body, and this is my blood are duely spoken, straight the body and blood is made present. If indeed it be not present, here is no Sacrament at all. Note well what I say, here is no true signe at all, but an hipo­criticall and fonde Imagination of a thing, the truth whereof is not so as the word soundeth, and therefore the sig [...]e is false.

Neither will it helpe any thing at all, if one say that Christ spake figuratiuely. For a figuratiue speache can not be an euidēt token of any thing, except it be such a figure, as through the cu­stome of speache hath now obteined some easy and knowen [...] among all men that vse the same language as when by the name of a cuppe, we meane the drinke in it, or by the keyes of Lucae. 22. Matt. 16. the Kingdome of heauen we meane authoritie to bring men to [Page] Christ and God, or by opening the mouth we meane speaking, which kind of speache though it be called figuratiue for some re­spect, yet in dede it is all one with proper speach, because vse and custome maketh euery speach propre. Otherwise a very figura­tiue A figura­tiue speach doth not signifie till it be vn­derstāded. speach signifieth no certain thing, vntill it be plainly vnder­standed. And consequently no figuratiue speach can be a Sacra­ment or a holy signe of an other thing. For a signe is euer plaine euident and able to instruct, as being according to the iudgemēt of S. Augustine the thing which besides the shew it maketh to August. de doctr. Christ. li. 2. ca. 1. our senses, causeth an other thing to come to our knowledge. But a figure not made common by vse, is obscure, darke, vncer­taine, as all ridles be vntill they are opened.

So that if Christ saying, This is my body, had meant (this doth signifie my body, and in dede is not so,) truly no Sacra­ment had bene made (as I will shew hereafter) because no eui­dent token had bene geuen of any thing. It can not be called an euident token, when I may more truly veryfie the contradictorie then that which is spoken. For if the Sacramentaries teach wel, it is a truer token to say, This is not my body: then to say, This is my body. But this is my body, cā neuer signifie to me by any figure of [...]hetorike, this is not my body. For doubtlesse as long as I am not driuen to thinke this is not my body, or to thinke of an other thing as of trees, stones, water, bread, wine, or any like thing which is cleane diuerse in nature from Christes body (which to do after the name of body once heard out of Christes This is my body either doth signi fie nothing or it signi­fieth the body of Christ. mouth is allmost impossible) so long it may still be a signe to me that it is Christes body.

And seing it can neuer come to passe that I hearing Christ say, This is my body, can exclude the thought of his body from my vnderstanding, will I or nill I, (This) will be to me either a fals­hod, or it will be the Sacrament or signe of his body. If it be so, [Page 63] then seing the Sacrament and holy signe must nedes be true, the body must likewise be truly present, for so the token doth report. If when I heare Christ say This is my body, I must stand mu­sing and diuising, how (is) may be taken vnproperly, and signi­fie a certayn betokening without a true being, surely because all ignorant men, (studie they neuer so long) are able to conclude no Simple men can not vnder stand how the sig [...]e may [...]e called [...]y y ^• name o [...] the thin [...]. such thing, for that no such example cometh to their minde, and they are not exercised in scriptures as diuines be, thereby it will folow, that Christes words shall signifie one thing, to one man, and an other to an other.

To some learned men after some conference they may signifie by the waye of coniecture the betokening of his body. To others who coniecture that Christ pointed to his own person when he sayd so, they will sound otherwise. But to the simple and igno­rant who can not so put matters together, they will signifie all­ways The Apo stles were simple men. the reall presence of his body. Uerily the twelue Ap [...]tles were very simple, ignorant and (as the scriptures call them) [...] without lerning, neither was their mind opened to vn­derstand the scriptures at y ^• tyme. And yet I dare say they knew Actor. 4. what they did receaue: wherefore they toke the words of Christ literally as they sounded to them.

Now seing these words (This is my body) signified the body of Christ, it will insewe, that seing Christ maketh allways a true signe, to them it was the truth of Christes body. Marye to Ihon Caluine who is more deeply lerned, and who studieth ful sore to If Chri­stes words haue not their first meaning they must sound to diuer [...]e mē diuersly. make and proue Christ a lyer, it may well be they will sounde otherwise. O Lord to what case are these signes and Sacra­mentes brought, if according to some menne they shall sound one way, and to others an other way. And yet the truth of them stan­deth chiefly & wholy dependeth vpon the signe which they make. As though all other men being able to make their last willes [Page] with wordes plaine enough, thou Lord alone haddest neither vt­terance, nor witte, nor mind, nor remembrance to make a token of thy inuisible work.

And yet the Apologie sayth that the Eucharist is an euidēt to­ken of the body and blood. If the token be euident all men do The Apo logie is cō futed by his own saying [...]. quicklie vnderstand it, why then striue we vpon an euident mat­ter? Call wemen & children to ask of them what token y ^• words of Christ make: I warrant you, they will not say, that (is) doth stand to betoken, nor (body) for figure of body. That kind of to­kens is not very euident to them. But in deed the token of Chri­stes body is euident by his own words, and therefore the truth which he doth betoken to be present, is really present, for as his token is most euident, so is it most true.

Christ after his resurrection gaue power to his Apostles to forgeue and retaine synnes. This thing was the institution of the Sacrament of Peuance. Let vs there see the Sacrament or holy signe of this gi [...]t. whose synnes ye forgeue (sayeth he) they Ioan. 20. are foregeuen them. And whose ye retaine, they are reteyned. [...] in those words a signe of remission of synnes be instituted, su [...]ely when that signe is made by a Priest du [...]ly absoluing the penitēt, his synnes are in deed remitted. For loke how much the words words must be taken as they com­monly sound. doe signifie to men of common vnderstanding, so much is geuen by them. How proue I that▪ because so much is signified to be geuen.

And seing the gift of God which might haue bene secret, is now so made that the signe and token of it goeth together with the truth thereof, it could geue from it selfe no other token then it hath nature of his owne. The token of Christ sheweth power of forgeuing and reteyning synnes to be geuen to the Apostles. Therefore that power is in deed geuen.

I am not ignorant that the Apologie (as it denieth this Sa­crament [Page 64] of Penance) so it falsefieth the words of Christ, saying The Apo logie falsi­fieth the words of Christ. that the words whose synnes ye forgeue they are forgeuen, are meant, whose synnes ye declare to be forgeuen, but thereof we may by Gods grace, dispute an other tyme. Now it is enough to shew that the word (forgeuing) doth not importe euidently and at the first sight a declaration of forgeuenesse, but an actual for­geuenesse in deed, and a signe thereof. Euen as these words This is my body, doe importe both a signe, and work a true being of the body, and not a signe without a truth.

Briefly, it is one thing to consyder, what words any other where may signifie, and an other thing, to consyder what they may signifie in a Sacrament. For many words may signifie vn­properly The chief words of a Sacra­mēt must not be vn­proper. in other places, but the principall words of a Sacramēt can not be vnproper. For the nature of y ^• thing doth ly [...]itte the interpretation of the words.

When Christ maketh a Sacrament, he maketh a thing of a dubble nature, to wit, a holy thing, and the signe of a holy thing. But the whole is to vs knowen by the signe. For the thing we see not, neither in Baptisine nor in confirmation, nor in the Eu­charist, nor in Penaunce, nor in extreme vnction, nor in Priest­hod, nor in Matrimonie. The thing, the truth, the grace, the in­ward operation is hid from our eyes, from our eares, & feeling. The signe thereof is sensible and apperteineth to the eyes and ea­res. Now to say that a plaine signe is not made outwardly, it is as much to say, as a plaine grace or truth is not made inwardly.

Againe, if it be not a plaine signe, it is dark and obscure, it is doubtfull and in controuersie. Wherefore it will be inferred that An obscu­re saying is no sen­sible signe it rather confoundeth our vnderstanding, then teacheth it. Which being so, it is no visible signe of inuisible grace. For surely, be the inward grace what so euer it pleaseth God it shal be, yet one cer­tayn being, nature, substance, condition and state it hath, whereof [Page] no man is certainly warned, if y ^• words y ^• warne vs of it, be not plaine. And therefore we haue found a Sacrament according to y ^• It is a­gainst the nature of an holy signe or sa­crament not to sig­nific plain [...]y. Sacramentaries opiniō, without a holy signe, a truth without a figure, a certayn grace without a certayn foorme, a great mysterie without belefe or knowlege thereof. A notable institutiō of a sup­per i [...] mē knew, or might know what it were, a thing to be made daily, to be frequented oft, to be eaten and dronken, but what it is, no man is able to proue it plainely. To this point our new [...]es would bring vs.

That they couet to bring you into this blindnes cleane cōtra­ry to the word of God, I wonder not, they do their ministerie, they worke their masters inspiration, they practise the de [...]ils de­uises. Antichrist must denie all the mysteries & veryties of Christ, Antichrist could not take away the whole faith, if some part [...] not called in [...]oubt be­ [...]ore. how could that come to passe if no mā went before to bring them in doubt? Sodenly to preua [...]le that belongeth only to God, by peece meale, and by litle and litle, to creepe in, that is the worke of Satan. They are faithfull seruantes to their Lord. And as lōg as they serue him, I blame them not, but I exhort them to leaue his seruice, for he is but an euill paimaster in th▪end. Mary that other so diligently follow them, that they so carefully striue to maintaine the same doctrine, that they by so long experience do not vnderstand whence it commeth, and whereto it hasteneth that is the greater grief.

¶ which argument is more agreable to the word of God, it is a token of the body, made by Christ, and The. xij. Chapiter. therefore not the body, or els, therefore it is the true body of Christ.

THe common argument of all the Sacramentaries against the blessed Sacrament of the altar, is thus formed. The supper of our Lord is the Sacrament, the signe, the figure, The [...]rgu ment of he [...]es. the pledge, the token, the remembrance of Christes body, there­fore [Page 65] it is not his body in dede.

This argument is so good, or rather so bad, that if I should dispute for my life on the contrary side, I would bring the same, to proue the contrary truth. I wold say, the supper of our Lord is The sup­per of our Lord is his body▪ because it is a signe thereof in­stituted by him self. the Sacrament of Christes body, the signe, the figure, y ^• pledge, the token, the remembrance thereof, instituted by Christ, there­fore it is in dede the body of Christ. Now let vs goe to the word of God, to trie whiche argument is better.

First it is to be noted, that although before the incarnation of Christ, signes were in part emptie and voide of the truth which they si [...]nified, yet now the signes of the new Testament which Ioan. 1. August. Psal. 73. Christ himself hath instituted, conteyn the truth which they signi fie, because truthe is made by Jesus Christ. And S. Augustiue sayth, the Sacraments of the new Testament gene saluation.

Again not with standing y ^• Christ left to his Church only seuen Sacramentes, which it should vse according as the nature of eueryone, or the profite of men doth require, yet Christ him selfe made a greate number moe, not leauing ordinarie a [...]toritie to vs to do the same, but those which him self made in his own dispensa tiō of [...]esh, & which he left to his Church to be made, be all of one nature. His incarnation, fasting, baptis [...], miracles, transfigu­ration, passion, resurrection, ascension, were marue louse greate 1. Tim. 3. Sacraments. For besides the truth which was wrought in them, they also be tokened an other thing either fulfilled in the olde [...]i­gures and Prophecies, or to be followed of his members, which 1. Pet. 2. should conform them selues to the dedes of Christ their heade.

But because we now speake of such Sacraments as are made chie [...]ly by words (of which kind those are, which y ^• Church prac­tiseth.) I will shew only a fewe such places which doe witnes a [...]hing to haue bene done, whiles a word signifying so much, was spoken. And all my examples shall proue, that looke what is out [Page] wardly sayd, the same is inuisibly wrought at the same [...]. So that the word is an vndoubted token of the thing don and made thereby. The true conception [...] is [...] with the signe thereof. Lucae. 1.

For my part I say, the Angell Gabriel made the sig [...]e & token that Christ should be conceaued of the virgin Marye. Saying: Concipies in vtero. Thou shalt conceaue in thy wombe. And the holy virgin signified her consent therevnto saying, Fiat mihi se­cundum verbum tuum. Be it done to me according to thy word. Therefore Christ in deed was conceaued, and tooke flesh of the Matth. 8. Cleansing [...] in deed [...] the word is [...]. virgin Marie at the very same tyme.

Christ [...]ayd to the Leprouse man, Be thou made cleane, which words gaue a signe and token of cleansing, therefore in deed he was made cleane.

Christ gaue a signe and token that synnes were forgeuen to him that had the palsey, by these words. Remittuntur tibi pecca­ta Matth. 9. [...] be forgeuē [...] when so [...] s [...]d [...] Christ. Math. 11. Those mi racies were don in deed which were be­ [...]. Marci. 7. The ea­res were opened [...] deed when it was sayd, be y ^• opened. tua. Thie synnes are forgeuen the, therefore in deed they were forgeuen. Likewise Christ bad him take vp his bed, & goe home, for a token that the sonne of man had power in earth to forgeue synnes, therefore Christ in deed had power in earth to forgeue synnes: Because his token and signe is neuer false.

When Iohn Baptiste had sent two of his disciples to know whether he were the man that shuld come, or an other, were to be looked for: Christ gaue a token to the eyes and eares of the messengers, that the blind sawe, y ^• lame walked, y ^• leepers were cleansed: Therefore in deed it was so. And he bad them tell S. Ihon what they had heard and seen.

Christ sayd to the deafe and domme man, Adaperire. Be thou opened, and as it foloweth in the Gospell, straight ways his eares were opened, and the bond of his tonge loosed. Thus might I goe through euery example of the whole Gospell, and allways [Page 66] when at the doing of any thing an outward signe of an inward grace is rehersed, that which the signe soundeth the grace wor­keth.

Marke well good Reader, that this rule be not wreasted to y ^t mere doctrine of Christ, which he spake doing or making no­thing. Math. 13. Parables w [...] vsed in teachig but not in doing. For then I confesse many parables, many obscure sayings were vttered to prouoke his audience to be humble, to think of their owne ignorance, to depend wholy of Christ, & to aske him the vnderstanding of the darke sayings. But now I speake not of sole doctrine. I speake of a worke that Christ maketh and of words ioy [...]d with his worke. In this case I say, what so euer signe is outwardly made, the same is inwardly wrought. Ioan. 20.

Christ sayeth to his Disciples. Take ye the holy Ghost, and withal he [...] vpon them. Beholde the word and the doing. The outward word is a holy signe or Sacrament, so is the out­ward doing, which is breathing. The inward worke is the per­foorming of th [...] [...] signe which the worde and breath did betoken.

Seing then Christ at his last supper did somewhat, seing he Christ ra­ther did, thē taught in his supper. tooke bread, seing he blessed, seing he brake, seing he gaue, seing at the ty [...] of this outward doing and working, he sayd some­what, which saying was a signe, a Sacrament, a figure, a token, a pledge, a [...] of his body: we are assured by the word of God (which neuer shall perish) that Christ gaue at the same 1. Pet. 1. tyme his true body vnder the forme of that bread, which he tooke and which by blessing he turned into his body.

Hath not now the Apologie depely reasoned? Hath it not put a goodly foundation of the Sacramentarie doctrine? to saye the supper of our Lord is the euident token of the body and blood of Christ, thereby meaning th [...] his body is not in dede really pre­sent? wherein although it speake otherwise then y ^e holy scripture [Page] [...]oth in the same case: [...]et mangre the will of the makers there­of, it proueth the Catholike faith, because the signe that euery Sa crament of Christ maketh euidently to our senses, is inwardly wrought in that creature, whereof the signifying words are spo­ken. By this true declaration of the nature of a Sacrament, it is proued, that so many Fathers, as call the supper of Christ a signe or figure, geue witnesse that it is also the truth it self. And if the Apologie will disproue the reall presence of Christ vnder y ^• foorm of bread, it must shew that his supper is not so much as a signe of his body and blood. But as long as they graunt vs the sig [...]e, the word of God will conuince the truthe to be present, which is signified.

¶ The words of Christes supper are not figuratiue, The. xiii. Chapiter. nor his token a common kind of tokens.

WHen I graunt the supper of Christ to be a signe, a to­ken, a figure, yet I do not graunt the words where­with The wor­des of the Sacra­ment be not figu­ratiue. it is made, to be figuratiue. If I geue you a ring and say, were this token for the remembrance of me, I both geue a token of me, and name a signe or token, and yet my words are not figuratiue.

It is therefore to be noted, that how many Fathers so euer call the Sacrament a figure, yet none of them all teacheth these words: (This is my body, and, this is my blood) to be words fi­guratiue. The Fa­thers cal­ling y ^• sup­per of Christ a figure, meane not a figure of Rheto­ [...]. For when they call it a figure, they meane not a figure of Rhetorike, but a mysticall figure, and calling it a signe they meane not a naturall signe or token, but a mysticall signe, that is to say, a secret and miraculous kind of token, such as the state of the new Testament requireth, the nature whereof is to doe that which it sayeth▪ because Christ the speaker [...] all that by his diuine power and substance, which his word spoken by y ^e [Page 67] mouth of his manhod, in holy Sacraments doth vtter and signi­fie. Now he that wold the Sacrament of Christ so to be a signe, that he should not make that thing to be his body in deed where­of in word he sayeth, This is my body, he most wickedly denieth the Godhead of Christ.

Ebion was an heretike, who denying the diuine nature of Epipha­nius. li. 1. To. 2. Her. 30. Christ, sayd him to be Nudū hominem, a bare man. Epiphanius will proue against Ebion, that he is God. How so? Because he was geuen to the world for a signe. As the holy Ghost had pro­phecied before of him, when he sayd to Achaz, Pete tibi signum, Esaiae. 7. The sig­nes of Christ are miracu­louse. ask to the a signe. And for as much as he wold not ask, then sayd the Prophete, Ipse Dominus dabit vobis signum, our Lord him self will geue you a signe. Behold a virgin shall conceaue: Now sayth Epiphanius: Non potest is qui per omnia homo genitus est signi gratia mundo dari: He y ^• is alltogether begotten as a man, can not be geuen to the world for a signe. For that which is cu­stomably don, what signe of the Godhead could be therein?

Epiphanius therefore doth signifie that sith Christes birth was geuen to the world for a signe, it could not be such a byrth, as o­ther men haue, but it must be miraculous, and the miracle stode in this point, because he was truly born of a true virgin.

Muche more we may say, sith the blessed Sacrament of the al­tar hath bene left vnto vs as a signe of the body and blood of Christ: It could not be so if it were bare bread and wine, and not The Sa­craments of Christ are secret tokens. in deed his body and blood. what signe, what secret token, what miracle were in the eating and drinking of bare bread and wine, if none other thing were made thereof?

As the ordinarie birth of man is no mere signe for Christ, who is true God, so the ordinarie eating of bread & drinking of wine, is no mete signe for the remembrance of Christes death.

As the birth of Christ was a true birth but most miraculous [Page] withall: so is the Sacrament of the altar a true signe, and there­fore his true body and blood, by the great miracle of turning the substance of bread & wine in to them. This is y ^• signe that Christ made in his last supper.

This is such a signe as is withall a secret miracle. For it is a miracle not shewed to [...] but only to the faithfull. For as The [...] of Chri­stes Chur che be ge­ [...] to the [...], & ther [...]ore are [...] ­ble. the birth of Christ is a [...] to the faithfull only, who beleue Christ being God and man, truly to haue bene borne of a virgin, withou [...] sede of man by the almighty power of the holy [...]host: Right so the supp [...] of Christ is a sig [...]e of his body [...] blood to the faithfull only, who beleue the [...] of bread and wine to be [...]urned into his body and blood without [...] or corrup­tion, by y ^• only [...] of the [...] o [...] Chris [...]. Who sayd after bread taken, and [...], This is my body, and this is my blood. Luc. 22. Doe and make this thing for the remembrance of me.

Behold: the making of Christes body [...]nd blood [...]or y ^• remem­brance of his death, that is the signe we speake of. This was the memorie or the remembrance whereof Dauid sayd: Memoriam Psal. 110. fecit mirabilium suorum misericors & miserator Dominus, esean [...] dedit timentibus se. Our mercifull & graciouse Lord hath made a remembrance of his maruelous works, he hath geuen meate to them that feare him. And think we that a remembrance of mar­uelous things is made of God without a miracle? Ciprian. de coena Domini. August. in ma­nuali. cap. 11. Chrysos. de sacer­dot. lib. 3. Damasc. de or­thod. fid. li. 4. c. 14.

S. Cyprian saith the bread to be made slesh Omnipotentia ver­bi. By the allmighty power of the word.

S. Augustine calleth it Mirabile sacrificium, A maruelous sa­crifice.

S. Chrysostom crieth out, o miracle, o the goodnesse of God he that sitteth aboue with the Father, in the self same moment of tyme is touched with the hands of all men.

If thou ask how it is made (saith Damascene) it is enough [Page 68] for the to heare, that it is made by the holy Ghost, euen as our Lord made for him self, and in him self a body out of the virgin, Mother of God. And we know no more but that the word of God is true, strenghtfull, allmighty. Euseb. li. 5. demō. cap. 3. Beda in hom. vi­dit Iesus &c. Basilius in Litur. Gregor. Nyssen. in orat. de pas­chate. Hieron. in Leui. Nicepho rus lib. 1. cap. 28.

Eusebius calleth it Admirabilem exitum oraculi, a maruelous euent of the oracle.

S. Bede nameth it a sanctification of the holy Ghost that can not be vttered by speache. The like words haue S. Ba [...]ile, S. Gregorins Nyssenus, S. [...]ieront, Nicephorus.

This much I thought good briefly to say concerning y ^• man­ner how the blessed Sacrament of the altar is a signe, token, fi­gure, mysterie, remembrance: Euery word whereof expounded according to the Gospell and to the state of the new Testament, doth proue the reall presence of Christes body and blood vnder y ^• foormes of bread and wine. It is a Sacrament which outwardly signi [...] that which is inwardly wrought. It is a figure cōtey­ning the truth figured. It is a signe mete for the institution of Christ, whose signes are miraculous, it is a secret token knowen only to them that beleue. It is a remembrance of Christes death, by the presence of the body which died. What shall I say more? It is the body and blood of Christ couered from our eyes, reueled to our faith, feeding presently our bodies and soules to life euer­lasting.

¶ That the supper of our Lord is no Sacrament at The. xiiij. Chapiter. all, if these words of Christ, (This is my body, and This is my blood) be figuratiue. The [...] ­rence bet­wen [...] ­res of [...] & [...].

THere is a great difference betwen a figure of Rhetorike, and a Sacramentall figure made by Christ. The Rhetori­call figures consist in words or sentences: the mysticall fi­gures of Christ consist in deeds, & secret workings. Those some­tymes [Page] sound one way, and meane an other way. These meane and sound always one thing, but they shew it one way, and doe it an other way. Those chiefly serue the eares of mortall men: These chiefly serue the harts of faithfull men. Those were found by men, these were instituted of God.

Christ sometime vsed figures of Rhetorike, because in taking the nature of man he addicted him selfe to vse the kind of speakīg which men obserued. But now Christians vse y ^• mystical sign [...]es of Christ, because he that toke their nature left vnto them the ver­tue of his almightie Godhead. Let noman ther [...]ore think when y ^• supper of our Lorde is called sometime a figure, that a Rhetori The fi­gures of Christ are mysticall. cal figure is meant, it is not so. A mystical figure, a secrete kno­wlege, a pri [...]ie watch word is vnderstanded by the name of a fi­gure, as if Christ should say to his Apostles & folowers. Let this be a token betwen you and me, & betwene one of you toward y ^• other that when a faithfull man is washed with water and in the Matt. 28. meane tyme it is said ouer him, I Baptize the in the name of the Father, and of the sonne, and of the holy gost, straight all synnes are forgeuen him. And he is of my flock and receaued into my fold.

Lett it be again an other couenant or signe betwene vs. When my Apostles or those which are made Priests by them, say ouer bread this is my body, and ouer wine this is my blood, hauing Matt. 26. the intent to blesse and geue thanks and to make a remembrance of my death, that my body and blood are really present vnder the formes of bread and wine accordingly as my words doe sound.

These are mystical signes, priuie tokens, and secret figures to be kept only among the faithfull, and not to be published to infi­dels. For as men by vse of speaking haue agreed to transferr cer­tain words from their most proper signification to an other figu­ratiue custom: euen so Christ hath transferred certain natural [Page 69] things to an other mystical vse, which is now called in some Fa­thers by y ^t name of holy signes, or figures, or tokens, or which is most common of all, by the name of sacraments or mysteries.

See good reader to what myserie we are growen. He that commeth late from his grammar, where he lerned certain figures of construction, or he y ^• beginneth his Rhetorik where he more [...]oyes iudge the figures of God to be figures of grammer. depely entreth into the treatise of tropes and shemes, when he readeth in a two pēny booke the place alleged, where it is said (in Tertullian) this is my body, that is to saie the figure of my body he iudgeth owt of hand that Tertullian meaneth a figure of Rhe­torik, and Decolampadius, Caluin, or Peter Martir is a mete Heretikes name what fi­gure of grammer it is. Scholemaster for him to expound what kind of Rhetorical figure it is, verely saithei, metonymia, or synecdoche.

Again, whe [...] thei heare S. Augustine affirm that Christ gaue a'signe of his body, thei think he meaneth such a signe as is set vp at an ale howse, or wine tauern. y ^t Doctors meane a peculiar signe and token, miraculously instituted by Christ, which conteyneth & geueth to the faithfull the truthe which it betokeneth.

This kind of signes and figures concerning the substance of [...] things. them, consist of two parts as I sayd before. Of things and of words: the things are diuers, as for example, water, bread, wine, Mysticall words. oile and suche other. The mystical words coming to suche things as Christ hath appointed, make vp the whole Sacrament. So that the things are like stone, tymber, iron, wher [...] withall a man will build or make somewhat, the words are like the order, and foorm which the Carpenter will set the stuff in. The things are confuse vntill the words determine them particularly to this or that vse.

Therefore S. Paule saith, that Christ sanctifieth his Church Mu [...]dans eam lauacro aquae in verbo vitae. Cleansing it with the Ephes. 5. was [...]ng of water, in the word of life. What is that word of [...]? [Page] [...]erily whereof Christ sayd, goe teache all nations Baptizing Math. 28. them in the nanse of the Father and of the Sonne, and of the ho­ly Ghost: This is the word which geueth life to him that is due­ly wasshed. Of this word Christ sayd: Iam vos mundi estis prop­ter Ioan. 15. sermonem quem locutus sum vobis. Now ye are clean for the words sake which I haue spoken to you.

S. Augustine demandeth, why Christ sayd not, ye are cleane In Ioan. tract. 80. for y ^e Baptim wherewith ye are wasshed, but rather ye are cleane for the word which I haue spoken to you, sauing that euen in wa ter it is the word that cleanseth? Detrahe verbū, & quid est aqua nisi aqua? Accedit verbum ad elementum & fit Sacramentum. Take away the word and what is water but water? The word cometh to the matter, and the Sacrament is made.

S. Angustine calleth the thing or stuff whereof the Sacram [...]t Elemen­tum. is made, Elementum: Which is to say a materiall thing that ser­ueth for a beginning whereof a farther mysterie may be made, when the word appointed by Christ cometh to it.

The Grecians vse to call those things, especially in the supper of Christ. [...] [...] The things put or set before [...] the Priest who must consecrate them with the word of God.

The element therefore whether it be water, oile, bread, wine, or any other thing that Christ appointeth, is the weaker and infer riour part. The word is the more chief and principal. Vnde ista tanta virtus aquae (saith S. Augustine) vt corpus tangat & cor August. in [...]oan. tract. 80. abluat, nisi faciente verbo? Non quia dicitur, sed quia creditur, Nam & in ipso verbo aliud est sonus transiens, aliud virtus ma­nens. Whence hath water this great vertue, that it should touche the body, and wasshe the hart, but that the word causeth it, not (only) because it is spoken, but because it is beleued, For in the [...]er e word the sou [...]d which passeth awaie is one thing, and the vertue which remaineth is an other thing.

[Page 70]Now haue we thre things consydered by S. Augustine in a [...]n. things in a Sa­crament. Sacrament, the lowest is the element which in baptun is water, the higher, is the word which again is cōsydered in two respects, in one as it is spoken, and so being ioyned with the element it maketh the substance of the Sacrament, and passeth awaie: in the other as it is beleued of him that receaueth the Sacrament, and so it worketh in him a grace, vertue, and effect of the Sacra­ment.

If now the word be it that both chefely maketh and effectuallie establisheth the Sacrament, it can not be douted, but that Christ gaue the greatest diligence of all, in assigning the solemn words of his blessed Sacraments.

For the words appointed by Christ to the making of his Sa­craments are so stronge, that althoughe the minister be neuer so August. cōt. Do­nat. li. 5. cap. 19. &. 20. éuil a man, yet as S. Augustine saith, God sanctifieth his Sacra­ments, Ad verba quae procedunt ex ore homicidae. At the words which come foorth of the mouth of a mankiller. And again he saith, Deus adest Sacramentis & verbis suis, per qualeslibet admi­nistrentur. God is present to his Sacraments and words by whatsoeuer maner of men they be ministred. In so much that if August. cōt. Ep. Parmen. li. 2. c. 12. at the tyme of celebrating, both the geuer and receauer haue don vula [...]fully (saith S. Augustine) Non tamen pro non dato habebi­tur. Yet the Sacrament shall not be accompted as not geuen.

For seing the word was once spoken and ioyned with the ele­ment, the substance of the Sacrament was made though it lacked his effect. Whereof it foloweth, that the Sacramētal words bring foorth a secret strength for their own part, albeit neither the mini­ster Chry­sost. in Epist. ad Roma. Hom. 16 nor the receauer be of such worthinesse as they owght to be of. In ipso aquarum lauacro (saith S. Chrysostom) verba Dei sunt quae nos generant. In the verie washing of the waters they be the words of God which begett vs.

[Page]Which thing sith it is so, the words of Christes Sacraments doe not depend vpon the vnderstanding either of the minister, or of him that receaueth the Sacrament, but they haue a sufficient vertue in them selues, whereby they may worke. It is enowgh that the minister doe as the Church vseth to doe in such cases. This intention being kept, the words will bring the rest to passe. Or if a maliciouse Priest baptize a child with the mind to make him a Lutheran or an Anabaptist, shall y ^t child by y ^t intention be made an heret [...]ke? No verily: For so much as the words of Christ wherewith he is baptized, make him a member of his mysticall body, not incorporating him to any other felowship. Qui fuerit superbus minister, cum diabolo computatur, sed non contamina­tur August. in Ioan. tracta. 5. donū Christi. The proude minister (saith S. Augustin) is ac­compted with the deuill, but the gift of Christ is not defiled.

To come somewhat nere our purpose, S. Ambrose doth by name witnes, what strength Christes words haue in making his Ambros. de Sacra. li. 4. c. 4. &. 5. supper. Sermo Christi hoc conficit Sacramentum, The words of Christ make this Sacrament. Antequàm consecretur, panis est, vbi verba Christi accesserint, corpus est Christi. Before it be consecra­ted, it is bread, when the words of Christ are come to it, it is the body of Christ.

Hoc (ait Sacerdos) est corpus meum. Hoc verbo proposita con­secratnr. Chryso. hom. de prodi [...]i. Iudae. S. Chrysostom writeth, that when the Priest saith: This is my body, the things set foorth are consecrated with this word or saying.

If now it be clere, that among many causes which concurre to make a Sacrament, one of the chefe is the words pronounced at the same tyme: and in the Sacrament of the Altar, seing they are: This is my body, and, This is my blood, Which are spoken ouer bre [...]d and wine, I say these words maie be in no wise figuratiue. [Page 71] For by that meanes they shall not only not consecrate the body and blood of Christ, but (which is more) they shall not [...] so much as a signe of Christes body and blood.

For yf words make any thing, they make it by signifiyng, as the which are not only signes of things, but by S. Augustines August, de d [...]ct. Christi. li. 2 ca. 3. August. de Ma­gistro. iudgement, they are the chefe among all signes. And as the same Doctour saith in an other place, Signum nisi aliquid significet, nō potest esse signum: A signe except it signifie sumwhat, can not be a signe. Now y ^t which doth not signifie a thing at all, can not by signifiyng make and work that thing, which it doth not signifie.

Take these fower words, This is my body: Neuer a one of them doth signifie washing. Therefore if a mā washing an other with the mind to make him a member of Christes body should saie, This is my body, out of doute that man washed with those words, should not be baptized. What is the cause? Washing was vsed, y ^e minister was present with intent to baptize, some words also lacked not. but yet because those words lacked, which might signifie washing in the name of y ^e Trinitie, he was not baptized.

If then the words of Sacraments must signifie that which shalbe made, these words, This is my body, spoken by any Priest, shall neuer make the signe of Christes body. Because they doe The wor­des of Christes supper doe not sig nifie a fi­gure of his body. not signifie any figure or signe thereof. Ou the other syde, If they be in dede figuratiue, (as the Zuinglians affirm them to be) they shall not make the body of Christ, because (they say) Christ meant not so, but only meant a figure to be made in bread and wine.

Behold to what case we are now brought. We haue striued so long about the words of Christ, whether they be proper or figu­ratiue, If Chri­stes wor­des be si­guratiue, they make nothing at all. that now they are proued to make nothing at all, if they be figuratiue. For they make not the body of Christ, because (if they be figuratiue) they meane not to make it. They make no figure of the body, because they name and signifie no figure. And that [Page] which they do not signifie, they by signifying can not make. Fo [...] their whole institution, vse, nature, and commoditie is to signifie, to shew foorth, to betoken & make plain the mind of the speaker.

That which words doe not signifie they do not work. That Words doe all [...] they doe by signi­fying. which they work not is neuer don by them. But these words, This is my body, and this is my blood signifie no figure no signe, no token (for so muche as they signifie an other thing) therefore they work no figure, they make no signe, they leaue no token. And then haue we no Sacrament at all made, because none is made without suche words as may signifie that which is made and wrought.

If any man saye Christ may meane a figure and signe, and by his meaning, these words, This is my body, may work a figure o [...] his body, I answer, if Christ wil work by his meaning, who can forbed him, seing he is almighty? And if he will work without any words, who cā gainsaye him? But then his words work not. And why then are they deliuered to vs, as the chief instrument to work withall? Why sayd he, Hoc facite, Doe, and make this Lucae. 22. thing? why are they rehersed in euery Masse and communion? Why doe the auncient Fathers teache the bread and wine to be consecrated by them? Why may not Baptism be made by other words then by those which Christ instituted?

Surely to say, that these words, This is my body, make a fi­gure Math. 28 of his body because Christ wil haue it so, is to say that Christ will not hane words necessarie to the making of his Sacramēts. Or it is to saie, that he will haue a thing wrought by words, to work the which they be vumete instruments: as if a man wold take a saw to plane timber withall, & a beetil to cutt down a tree. The word of God hath geuen ho­ [...]ur to words.

Christ being y ^e word of God hath geuen that honour to words of men (but yet to such as are appointed by him self) that they should principally among instrumentall causes work and make [Page 72] his Sacraments. Next vnto words he chose maruelous conue­nient things, wherewith they should concur. The things to be most agreable to th▪effect which they are sett to work, all men agree. It is conuenient for water to washe, for bread and wine to concur to the Sacrament of the Altar as meetest to nourish, for oile to serue in ointing at the vse of other Sacraments.

And now hath Christ erred in chosing his words? hath he [...] (body) to signifie the figure of his body? To whom doth it signi­fie after that sort? Surely not to all men, as it is e [...]ident. not to all Christians, as it maie appere, in that we hearing it said, that Christ had a mans body, or walked in a mans body, or that our Body doth sig [...]i sie y ^• sub­stance but not the si­gure of a body. bodies shall rise at the later daie, in all these phrases, we take not the name of body, for a signe and figure of a body: but we take it to meane the true substance of flesh and blood.

How then? shall the word body be taken only in the supper of our Lord for the signe and figure of body? Wher is that rul [...] readen? Wher is that secret reueled▪? For dowtlesse if it were true, it were of it self a mysterie, and an vnwont acception appointed by Christ, and it had neded to haue ben registred in the Scriptu­res or in the holy Fathers, or at the least to haue ben deliuered to vs by tradition.

But who teacheth, that body standeth to signifie the figure of body? many Fathers saie the words of Christ are plain, manifest, true, and effectuall, but no man telleth vs of such a strange taking of the words (body and blood,) noman witnesseth them to be ta­ken for the figures of body and blood, and no maruail. For no man knew that iuterpretation.

They knew that the true body of Christ geuen after such a sort How Christes body is a figure. vnder the foormes of bread and wine, was a figure of the self same body, either walking visibly vpon the earth, or suffering death vpon the crosse, or sitting now at the right hand of his [Page] Father, or intending to come to iudgement. They could tell, that a thing present in a secrete maner, is a token, a signe, and a watch word to all the faithfull, of an open maner, either past or to come in the same thing. By this meanes they confessed the Sacrament to be the figure of Christes body and blood, but they knew no such figure as the Sacramētaries haue deuised. they neuer could tell of Synecdoche, or of Meronymia. they knew Sacramentall, and not Rhetoricall figures, Mysticall, and not Poeticall, holy and not prophane. Let him therfore that will haue any thing at all made by Christes words, acknowlege them to be proper, to signifie sumwhat, and to make that they signifie, which is the true body and blood of Christ.

¶ The reall presence of Christes body is that, which The. xv. Chapiter. setteth his death and life before vs.

WE doe acknowlege the Eucharist to be a Sacrament, The Apo logie. wherein is sette after a manner before our eyes the death of Christ, and his resurrection, and what soeuer he did here in his humane body.

The eating of common bread and drinking of common wine The aun­swere. is but an homely maner of setting the death and resurrection and life of Christ before our eyes. Here is the Sacramentaries argu­ment: I eate bread and drinke wine in token of Christes death & resurrection, therefore he is dead and risen. I pray you Syr, how doth this argument hold? What affinitie hath bread and wine with the death and with the resurrection of Christ?

But if bread and wine be turned into the same body & blood of It is the body of Christ which set­teth his death be­fore vs, & not bread and wine. Christ, which died and rose againe, which wrought all the mira­cles done in this world: Then is the death and resurrection and conuersation of Christ in dede it selfe set before the eyes of our faith. Because (as Chrisostom teacheth) Hoc idem corpus cruen­tatum, & caet. This very same body bloudied, perced with y ^• speare [Page 73] gaue as it were out of a spring, fountaynes of blood, healthfull to the whole world. And the selfe body God a [...]anced vnto the high­est seate, the which body also he gaue to vs, both to th'intent we should haue it, and to the intent we should ea [...]e it.

But what speake I of S. Chrisostom? This (sayeth Christ) is Lucae. 22. 1. Cor. 11 my body, which is geuen for you. And againe, the bread which I will geue is my flesh, which I will geue for the life of the world. Ioan. 6. How ofte so euer (sayeth S. Paul) ye shall eate this bread and 1. Cor. 11 drinke the chalice of our Lord, ye shall shew his death vntill he comme.

So that the hauing of the death, and resurrection, and all y ^• mi­racles of Christ before our eyes at Masse tyme, riseth chiefly of y ^• thing which is the body of Christ. And secondarily of the things which are done about that his body. The consecrating, the offe­ring, the eating of the selfe same body, which wrought these mi­racles, which died and rose againe, those facts I say in that thing, shew his death and resurrection. All other wayes of setting the death and resurrection and conuersation of Christ before our eyes without the reall presence of Christ, is painting and shadowing in comparison of this liuely representation.

O how many (sayeth S. Chrisostom) say now adayes, I wold Hom. 83. in Ma [...]h. see the soorm & shape of Christ, I would see his very garmentes, and shoowes. Ipsum igitur vides, ipsum tāgis, ipsum comedis. Lo, thou seest him selfe, thou touchest him selfe, thou eatest him selfe. Non quòd corpus illud (sayeth Damascen) è coelo descendat, sed Damas­cenus de orthod. side. li. 4. cap. 14. quia panis & vinum in Christi corpus & sanguinem transmutatur Not as though the body of Christ came downe from heauen, but because the bread and wine is changed into the body and blood of Christ.

See now good Reader, whether the Apologie say more truly, [Page] that, the signe or token of Christes body and blood (the body it selfe not being made present vnder the so [...]nes of bread and wine as it teacheth) doe more effectuously set before our eyes y ^t death and resurrection and all the miracles of Christ, or els whether y ^e incarnation, life, death, and resurrection of him be not better and more according to the word of God set soorth by the Catholikes who teach that the substance of bread and wine is changed into y ^t body and blood of Christ to th'end the death and resurrection of the same body might be effectually remembred.

So teacheth S. Cyrillus in these words. Prebet Christus nobis Cyrillus in Ioan. lib. 12. cap. 28. carnem suam tangendam, &c. ‘Christ geueth vs his flesh to be tou ched, that we might beleue assuredly that he hath in deed reised his temple. For that the communion of mystical blessing is a cer­tayn confession of the resurrection of Christ, it is proued by his own words. For he distributed the bread after it was broken, saying, This is my body, which shalbe geuen for you, for the re­mission of synnes. Make and doe this thing for the remembrance of me. Therefore the participation of y ^t mysterie is a certain true confession and remembrance that for our sakes and for vs our Lord both hath died and is reuiued, and through that filleth vs with diuine blessing. Let vs therefore flee infidelity after the tou­ching of Christ, and let vs be found strong and stedfast being far from all doubtfulnesse.’

Thus far S. Cyrillus. Who alludeth in that place to S. Tho­mas the Apostle. And as S. Thomas touching the syde of Christ cried out My Lord and my God, euen so S. Cyrillus teacheth y ^t we touche the body of Christ when we come to the holy commu­nion. Ioan. 20. For as vnder the visible flesh of Christ, his Godhead lay priuie but yet was truly present, and had assumpted his flesh into one person, euen so vnder the visible foorm of bread the flesh of Christ is really present in the holy mysteries, and therefore we [Page 74] touch that flesh, when we touche the foorm of bread, as S. Tho­mas did touche the Godhead when he touched the flesh of Christ. For in eche place we touche not either the Godhead or the flesh visibly, but by the meane of that thing, wherein it is truly pre­sent. That thing I say receaued of vs, doth make his death and resurrection to be remembred.

Hath not he all that euer Christ did, presently before his eyes, who hath Christ him selfe present? But take Christ awaye, and afterward it is a foolish dreame to talke, how his deeds be set be­fore our eyes by bread and wine. The apparence of bread is the token, that Christes body is here to be eaten. And the similitude of wine doth shew, that his blood is here to be drunken. But the true shewing of his death, life, and resurrection, ariseth of that truth which is vnder those foormes.

When I eate the body that died, I shew the death of it, because 1. Cor. 11 no sacrificed flesh was euer eaten before the host was offered. But we eate really the body of Christ, therefore our fact crieth, that Christ is dead. We eate his body aliue hauing the blood and soule in it, therefore our fact crieth, he is risen again. Thus the Ca tholiks reason. Let him that hath cōmon sense iudge, who goeth nere the truth of the Gospell, the Sacramentarie, or the Ca­tholike.

¶ Our thanksgeuing and remembrance of Christes death is altogether by the reall presence of his body. The. xvi. Chapiter.

TO th'intent we should geue thanks for his death and our The Apo logie. deliuerance, and that by often resorting to the Sacramen­tes, we should continually renew the remembrance there­of.

These men presuppose we haue a signe or token left vnto vs The aun­swere. in bread and wine, to geue thanks withall. We haue in deed a to­ken, but this token though it were made of bread and wine, is [Page] not bread and wine. For Christ in his last supper, tooke bread, Lucae. 22. and when he had geuen thanks, he sayd, This is my body, which is geuen for you, doe and make this thing for the remembrance of me.

Behold the token, wherein Christ both him selfe gaue thanks, and would vs to geue thanks in the same. The making of his body for vs, is the thanksgeuing for his death, and for our deli­uerance.

Ipso genere sacrificij (sayeth S. Chrysostom) ad iugem nos pro Chry­sost. in Hom. 26 in Math. beneficijs suis inuitans gratiarum actionem: Stirring vs to geue thanks perpetually for his benefites, by the very kind of the sa­crifice. And shewing farther in an other place what kind of sacri­fice it is, God (sayth Chrysostom) did yerely by certain holydays set the remembrances of his benefites before the Iewes. Tibi ve­ro Chry­sostom. Hom. 51. in Math. quotidiè ipse, ne obliuiscaris, proponitur. But he is set before thee daily him selfe, lest thou shouldest bee vnmindfull.

See now by what meanes the death of Christ is renewed. Not by tokens wherein he is doubtfully called to minde, him selfe being absent, (for that were a feble token) but by these tokens, wherein him selfe is made present, lest we should forgett his death.

The body of Christ must be made, to th'intent we maye re­member Lucae. 22. his death. If you take from vs the making of his body which causeth the vehement remembrance of the death, it is af­terward a vaine thing to talke of the remembraunce of his death by eating bread and drinking wine. For the necessarie meane of necessarie remembrance of his death, consisteth in the reall pre­sence of him that died. For who can forget his death, whose body is daily made, worshipped and eaten, to the end the death may be remembred. But I may right well eate bread and drinke wine, not yet remembring thereby, that Christ is dead for me.

¶ The true resurrection of our bodies commeth by The. xvii. Chapiter. eating that body of Christ, which is both true and is true in vs.

TO th'intent we being fed with the body and blood of The Apo logie. Christ, may be brought into the hope of the resurrection, and of euerlasting life, and may most assuredly beleue that the body and blood of Christ doth in like manner feed our soules, as bread and wine doth feed our bodies.

I omit to say any thing vpon that ouersight, wherein the En­glish The aun­swere. translation of a body hath left out the word Vero, the true body, which the Latine edition hath. But here the Apologie pre­supposeth that Christes supper consisteth as wel of bread & wine, as of body and blood. The first two they will haue geuen to the bodies: The later twaine to the soules. The bread & wine they will haue present on the table, whence they be deliuered: The bo­dy and blood they will haue to be receaued from heauen, by faith and vnderstanding. Against this dreame thus I reason out of y ^e word of God.

Christ made his whole supper vpon a visible table, according­ly as it was prophecied by king Dauid, Parasti in conspectu meo Psal. 22. mensam. Thou hast prepared a table in my sight. And by Salo­mon, Prou. 9. Sapientia proposuit mensam suā & insipientibus locuta est: venite, comedite panem meum, & bibite vinum quod miscui vo­bis. Wisedome hath set foorth her table, and hath spoken to sim­ple men: come ye, eate my bread, and drinke y ^e wine which I haue mixed for you. S. Paul sayth, Non potestis mensae Domini parti­cipes 1. Cor. 10 esse, & mensae Daemoniorum. Ye can not be partakers of our Lords table, and of the table of deuils.

Put these three together, and the sense will be, the supper and table of our Lord was prepared and set foorth in the sight of the faithfull, that they might thence cate and drinke such as the wise­dome of God gaue them at his supper. Therefore no meate, no [Page] foode, no banket is to be looked for at his supper, but such as is prepared by Christ & set foorth vpon his table. Otherwise Christ Psal. 22. had prepared no supper, in the sight of y ^t faithfull (as Dauid fore­told) nor had not set foorth his table (as Salomon prophecied) Prou. 9. nor we had not bene partakers of our Lords table (as S. Paul 1. Cor. 10 writeth.

For bread and wine is not prepared of Christ: But was before Bread & wine was not y ^• ta­ble that Christ pre pared. hand made ready by the baker and vintner, or by the seruants y ^• brought them foorth. The preparing which Christ made, was by blessing and conse [...]ng, to make of earthly bread, the bread of life euerlasting. And hauing made it, he deliuered the same to the Apostles, and bad them both make and doe that thing.

If he deliuered not his owne body with his owne handes, Lucae. 22. doubtles they did not eate his body. For he, sayd in respect only of that which he deliuered, take and eate. Wherevpon S. Chry­sostom Hom. 82 in Math. sayeth to him that cometh to our Lords table: Cogita quid manu capias, & caet. Bethink thy selfe what thou takest in thy hand, and kepe it free from all couetousnes and violent robbery. Consider againe, that thou takest it not only in thy hande, but al­so The hand & tō ge re­ceaue [...]he same body y ^• the hart doth. puttest it to the mouth (and) after thy hand and tonge, the harte receaueth that dreadfull mysterie. Thus much S. Chryso­stom.

Let any reasonable man iudge, whether he sayeth not, that the hart receaueth the same which the hande doth, and the hande the same, which the hart doth. For if the hart receaue it after y ^t hand, the hand receaued it before the hart.

It is not therefore, as the Sacramentaries falsely teach, bread only in hand, and body only in harte: But body as well in hand, as in harte. And none other true body in the harte, then was first in the hand, and mouth.

For this cause euer sith we receaued the faith, we called this [Page 76] blessed supper, The Sacrament of the altar. As if we sayd, the Sa­cramēt Why the supper of Christ is called the Sacra­mēt of the altar. Malach. 1 which is made vpon the altar or vpon the table of Christ. for the table of Christ is an altar, as in Malachie it may appere, and in an other place, by the fauour of God, I will declare.

This name of the Sacramēt of the altar was deliuered to vs with our Christianitie, and it is found very ofte in the olde wri­ters, namely in S. Augustine. By which we are enformed that De ciuit. Dei. li. 10 cap. 6. the consecration and oblation thereof is made, not in the hartes of men by words of promising and preaching, but vpon the visi­ble altar, in the sight of Christian people, by y ^• visible Priest who as a publike minister ordeined by God, consecrateth the body of Christ by the same power, which Christ gaue when he sayd: Hoc Lucae. 22. facite, doe and make this thing.

This is [...] table prepared in the sight of Dauid, set foorth by Psal. 22. Prou. 9. 1. Cor. 10 August. li. 9. con­fes. ca. 13. the wisedome of God, whereof we are partakers, when we re­ceaue the blessed Sacrament of the altar. At this altar S. Augu­stines mother desired a memorie of her to be made, vnde sci­ret dispensari victimam sanctam, qua deletum est chirographum quod erat contrarium nobis. From which altar my mother knew (sayeth S. Augustine) the holy sacrifice to be distributed, where­by the handwriting that was contrarie to vs, is put out. Behold the sacrificed body of Christ was dispēsed and geuen from the al­tar, as both S. Augustine, and his mother, and all the faithfull then beleued. Thus thou seest the dreame of the Apologie by the word of God to be blowen away like chaf & dust dispersed with the wind.

The Apologie sayeth, our bodies are fed at Christes supper Math. 26 with bread and wine. that is not in the word of God, where it is sayd: Eate, This is my body.

The Apologie semeth to say, that our bodies be not no [...]rished with the body and blood of Christ, for it assigneth body and blood [Page] to our soules as our bodies are fed with bread and wine. But Christ gaue his body to no [...]rish our bodies also. And therefore Ioan. 6. sayd: Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood, ye shall not haue life in you. That is (as Cyrillus expoun­deth Cyrillus li. 10. c. 13 in Ioan. it) In corpore vestro, in your body. And therefore on the o­ther syde Christ sayd, he that eateth my flesh & drinketh my blood, hath life euerlasting, and I will reyse him again in the last day. Ego (sayeth Cyrillus) Id est, corpus meum quod comedetur. I will reyse him, that is to say, my body which shalbe eaten. Rey­sing belongeth to the body which falleth into putrefaction by death.

As therefore the body is reysed by Christes body: so the body li­ueth in the state of grace, by Christes body. and such life is by spi­ritual nutriment, which is receaued of the flesh of Christ really present in vs.

For which cause Tertullian confessed that not only our soule, Tertul. in lib. de resurrec. carnis. Ireneus aduersus haereses. li. 4. c. 34. but also our body seedeth vpon the body and blood of Christ, to th'intent our soule may be made fat of God. Likewise Ireneus writeth that our flesh is nourish [...]d of the body and blood of our Lord.

We may now see what errour they fall into, who assigne the body and blood of Christ to our soules, and bread & wine to our bodies, whereas there is no substance left of bread or wine, but euen our bodies feede vpon Christes body, as Ireneus, Cyrillus and Tertullian haue sayd.

¶ Nothing is wrought in the supper of Christ accor­ding The [...]. to the doctrine of the Sacramentaries.

AFter the Apologie had spoken of communion vnder both kinds, and of transubstautiation, of which points as yet I speake not, it returneth again in a confuse manner to the matter of the reall presence, and thus it sayeth.

[Page 77]And in speaking thus, we meane not to abase the Lords sup­per, The Apo logie. or to teache that it is but a cold ceremonie only, and nothing to be wrought therein, as many falsely slaunder vs, we teache.

If they that pluck down altars, and other ornaments of Chri­stes The aun­swere. supper, if they that call the blessed Sacrament of the altar by so vile names as you and your scholars haue done, be not of your By what meanes y ^• Lords sup per is aba sed now in Englā [...] number, if they be not your derelings, if they lerned not that cō ­tempt of holy things, and the denyall of the vnbloody sacrifice of you, if they first persuaded not the licenciouse youth and faithlesse companie of men and w [...]men in Englād rather by blasphemous names, geuen to the Eucharist, then by any word of God (which you stil pretend and neuer allege) then let it be thought, that you meane not to abase the Lords supper.

But if you did set all the players and minstrels in the realme a work with such scoffes, as your brotherhead inuented against the blessed body and blood of Christ, I feare me you be not slaun­dered, when you are sayd to teach it to be but a cold ceremonie, The Apo logie na­meth y ^• ho nouring of Christes body, the worship­ping of bread. sith you doubt not to call, euen in this Apologie, y ^• honour done to it the worshipping of bread, whereas it is in deed the worship­ping of the true body and blood of Christ.

Wel, you teach not, that nothing is wrought or made in the sup­per. Then by like you teach, that somewhat is wrought there. I wold fain see what it is which you teach to be wrought in the sup per. For where you say, that Christ geueth him self in his supper that we may eate him by faith: You teach a work of Christ, in ge­uing him self, & a work of ours in eating him, but not any thing wrought or made in the supper it self.

For the supper is that meate which is prouided to be eaten at the table of Christ. There you confesse bread and wine to be ta­ken. But seing you teache the same things (notwithstanding he speaketh otherwise of them) yet to tarie bread and wine stil, I can [Page] not perceaue, what substanciall thing you teach [...] to be wrought No sub­stanciall thing is wrought in Chri­stes sup­per by the Sacra­mentaries doctrine. in the supper concerning the matter of the supper, which is bread and wine. Now concerning the body and blood of Christ, which you graunt to be geuen by faith, I trow you teache not any thing to be wrought a new and made therein, sithens they be impassi­ble, and therefore can not haue any thing made in them. what is it then, which you teache to be made in the supper?

Either bread and wine is the supper, or the body and blood of Christ, or both together. For nothing els is there mentioned. Bread and wine, you say, remayne still as they were before con­cerning their substāce. Then I say, nothing is wrought in them. The body and blood of Christ can haue nothing wrought in their substance, because that wherein somewhat shalbe made, must suf­fer of that which worketh it. therefore glose the matter how ye will, you teache not any substanciall thing to be wrought in the supper of Christ, except you call the geastes them selues the sup­per. And then I we [...]e they must be eaten vp of some body, in so much as euery supper is prouided to be eaten.

We teache the substance of bread and wine to be made the sub­stance What the Catholi­kes beleue to be wrought. of Christes body and blood. And that is y ^• true work made in the supper of Christ, where the mutable creatures are turned into the immutable substance of Christ. which work sith you de­ny, bable what you wil, you teache nothing to be wrought in the supper of Christ.

¶ The reall presence of Christes flesh is proued by the The. xix. Chapiter. expresse naming of flesh, blood, and body, which are names of his humane nature.

FOr we affirme that Christ doth truly and presently geue his The Apo logie. owne self in his Sacraments. in Baptisme, that we may put him on, and in his supper, that we may eate him by faith and spirite, and may haue euerlasting life by his cr [...]sse and blood.

[Page 78]Heare ye not how they affirme that Christ presently geueth his The [...]. own self? wold not a mā thinke they meant honestly and truly? But sith they can make the words of Christ figuratiue when they lyst, wonder not if they require their own words to be taken fi­guratiuely.

They meane not that Christ doth geue him self presently to our bodies and soules, as is requisite to the presence of the flesh The Apo logie [...]pea­keth [...] & meaner [...] euill. and blood of man. why then vse they such words? Uerily because they see the Scriptures so playne, the Fathers and Councells so manifest, the [...]aith and practise of the Church so euident for y ^• reall presence of Christ, that in no wyse they may confesse any other thing then they doe. And yet on the other side being fully deter­mined to sticke to their desperate opinion, that we really neither eate nor drinke vnder forme of bread and wine the flesh & blood of Christ, they haue inuented such kind of speaking, as may both seme to agree with the Scriptures, and yet withall mayntein their false doctrine. The which thing that thou mayest the better vnderstand, this is to be consydered.

The Catholike faith is, that Christ in one person hath two na­tures: Two na­tures in one per [...]on of Christ. The nature of God, and the nature of man. which two natures are ioyned and vnited together into one person, after such sorte, that what so euer is said of the one nature, may be sayd of the other, if we speake by that worde which signifieth the per­son. For example, we may say that man was in heauen before the Ioan. 3. ascension of Christ, and that God died, not because the nature of God could be borne of a woman or dye, or y ^e nature of man could be in heauen before the ascension of Christ, but because that which was borne and dyed, was also God, and that which was in hea­uen was also man. albeit his byrth and death was by the nature of man, and his being in heauen by the nature of God. The na­tures then tary distinct, but y ^• p [...]rson of God & man is but one. [Page] Now shall you see the meane, whereby these new prechers go about to deceaue you.

They say Christ geueth him selfe in his Sacramēts. The word Christ, & him self be names of his person (Christ) doth signifie his person, wherein he is both God & man: Likewise the word (him self) is a word belonging to his person, wherein both natures of God & man are conteyned. Now when they say Christ geueth him self, they meane that he being God & man geueth by some spiritual way the vertue of his flesh & blood, which they call him self, for that he, as God, being euery where, may dwell in vs more excellently by charitie, as the Father and the holy Ghost doe.

But they meane not by geuing of him selfe, y ^e reall gifte of his person and of both natures which are ioyned therein, after such sort that our whole nature might receaue his nature. For then they should teache that, which we doe. But howsoeuer they ba­ble of our soules, they will graunt our bodies no touching nor tasting of him, no not so much as vnder y ^• [...]oormes of bread and wine. You haue heard what they say: Now heare what Christ sayeth.

Christ speaketh of him self in diuerse places diuersely. Due where he sayeth: I will not leaue you Orphans, I will come vnto Ioan. 14. you. There he speaketh of his person, and concerning the nature of Godhead, as it appereth afterward where it is written: If any man loue me, he will kepe my word, and my Father will loue him and we will come vnto him, and make a mansion or dwelling with him, or at his howse. Here he speaketh first in such sort of his own coming, that his Father (as it appered afterward) might come after the same sort. Then was it the coming of God, and not of man.

At his departure when he ascended from the world into hea­uen, he sayd: Behold I am with you all dayes euen vntill the con­summation [Page 79] of the world. These words may be meant as well by Math. 28 the nature of manhod, which we haue with his Godhead in the S. Ger­manus in rer. Ecc. Theoria. Sacrament of the altar (and so some holy Doctors haue taken them) as also by the only nature of the Godhead, which is euery where by maiestie, and in good men by grace.

In an other place he sayd: Poore men ye shall haue allwayes Math. 26 with you, me ye shall not haue allwayes. Where, by the word, me, he meaneth not his Godhead, which is allways euery where, but the nature of his manhod, and that not as it is in the Sacrament, but as it was when he spake, in a visible forme of a poore man, who had not any howse of his own, where he might reste his head.

Last of all let vs marke, after what sorte he sayd that he wold Math. 8. be in his blessed supper. Dyd he say: I will geue my self to be ea­ten and to be dr [...]nken? If he had sayd so, yet seing he had men­tioned eating and drinking, which according to the letter, rather belongeth to his manhod then to his Godhead, we should ra­ther haue thought, that the words must haue bene taken proper­ly, then improperly. To eate the substance of a man may be sayd properly, for in deed it may be eaten with mouth and teeth, but to Cyrillus in. 11. Anathe­matismū eate the substance of God it is sayd vnproperly: For it can not be eaten with teethe and mouth (as also S. Cyrillus hath noted) but only with vnderstanding and faith.

If then Christ had sayd before supper, I will geue my self to be eaten, and had sayd at his supper: I do geue my self to be eaten: These words with a circumstance of a supper, had made so strōg­ly for the bodily geuing of him selfe, that their part had bene more probable, who had vnderstanded it of his manhod. With whom if the tradition of the Apostles had stood, there were no doubt but he should haue bene a wicked heretik, who, when Christ had sayd I geue my self to be eaten, wold haue denyed that we had eaten [Page] the humane nature of Christ.

But now attend what words Christ vsed: He forcseing this hearesie made [...] agaynst it, and therefore he sayd not, I will geue or do geue my self to be eaten, as heretiks now delight Christ v­sed the names of his hu­mane na­ture in his supper. to speake, but I geue my flesh, my body, my blood. These are not wordes of personage, which may be applyed two wayes, but they are the words of nature, and only of mans nature. For God by y ^• nature of his Godhead hath neither flesh ne blood, ne soule, ne body, ne bone. Christ as man hath all these things.

Now do the heretiks and false preachers of our age maruclous­ly deceaue the people of God, who alwayes say that they dimi­nish not Christes benefite, nor do not abuse the Lords supper, [...] (say they) we teache that Christ geueth his owne self, and they re­pete agayne and agayn his owne self, his owne self. And thereby they meane no more then the comming of his grace and charitie into our soules, by fayth, spirit, and vnderstanding: Wholy rob­bing vs of that flesh which dyed for vs, and of that blood whiche was shed for vs.

For although God was able to haue saued man otherwyse, yet he swetely disposed our saluaciō, by sending his dere sōne to take It is real flesh and blood which sa­ueth vs. of the virgyn our flesh and blood. This flesh and this blood wor­keth our saluacion: Which he y ^• taketh away from the Sacrament of the altar, depriueth vs of the meane whereby to come to life euerlasting. For as by this flesh and blood we are redemed: So that redemption is applyed to all that be of lawful age by wor­thy Ioan. 6. eating and drinking thereof. Now when these preachers cry vnto you, of God, of fayth, of spirit, of vnderstanding, of vertue, they seme perhaps to say goodly things, but they craftily put you from that only meane of fleshe and blood, whereby God hath or­deyned our saluacion. Abraham was the sather of al beleuers, Rom. 4. because neuer any mans belefe was so throughly tryed, as hys. [Page 80] He lacked not grace, vertue and vnderstanding, but he lacked the flesh and blood of Christ: Which flesh when it came really into the world, when it was crucified and gusshed out streames of blood, then the soule of Christ deliuered the soule of Abraham and all the other Fathers out of prison.

Wel, to end this matter, Christ to shew that he wold be in his supper by y ^• nature of his manhed, for that cause he named not his person, but his flesh, his body, his blood. And S. Paule named Ephe. 5. his bones, as you shall see hereafter. Wherefore y ^• talke of his pre­sence by fayth is vnfaythfull, y ^• talke of his presence by spirite as Lucae. 24. thereby excluding his body & soule from our bodies and soules, is spritish and diuelish. A spirit hath no flesh and bones: Christ is with vs in the substance of his owne flesh, & of his owne bones.

And yet that we might vnderstand that Christ naming flesh & blood, meaneth not that either his flesh is vnder y ^• forme of bread without blood, or his blood vnder the forme of wine without flesh, but that vnder eche kinde both flesh and blood and soule and Godhead is: he saith, he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my Ioan. 6. blood, taryethin me, & I in hym. That is to say, when I promise flesh and blood, I name them only to declare plainly, that my be­ing in the Sacrament is a being according to y ^• truthe of my hu­mane nature, and not as though I were not there in mine owne person. for he that eateth my flesh and drynketh my blood, dwell­eth in me and I in him. But it I had sayd, that I geue my self & no more: [...] false preachers had expoūded my selfe by my God­head and by fayth vppon me, my simple faythfull people might haue bene deceaued.

I name flesh, body, and blood, to shew according to what nature I am [...]. But I am not diuided as though my flesh were vn­der one kynde, and mie blood vnder the other. And therefore I say last of all: He that catcth me, he also, shall lyue for me, so that [Page] I am altogether in mine owne person vnder eche kynde, after cō ­secration. Marke this agayne and agayne, and let not the doc­trine We ought to beleue as y ^• word of God speaketh. of Christ him self pretēded in suttil words, deceaue thee any longer. Beleue thou the presence of body, of blood, of flesh, and of bones, as the word of God speaketh.

¶ It is a cold supper which the Sacramentaries as­signe The. xx. Chapiter. to Christ, in comparison of his true supper.

ANd we say not this is done sleightly and coldly, but effec­tually The Apo logie. and truly.

The eating of Christ by faith and spirit is no sleight or The aun­swere. cold thing. But to say that no more is done in his supper, that is sleightly & coldly sayd. Partly because so much may be done with­out Why [...] Sacra­mentaries make the [...] of Christ a cold sup­per. Ioan. 6. the supper, namely when so euer a man with good faith and charitie doth meditate vpon his gloriouse victorie ouer death & synne: Partly because, it is a cold thing to [...] men, who consist of bodies, to a supper of Christes making, and to geue their bo­dies none other meate then corruptible bread and wine, as you teache, whereas Christ did forbid vs to work the perishing meate at his banket.

How can y ^• be worthely called y ^• supper of Christ, which a man may make at home, without coming to the table of Christ? As though it were not for his honour to haue a singular kind of sup­ [...] of his owne. Euery man may eate bread and drinke wine at his owne howse with his wife and children, and remember that Christ died for them, neither wil Christ leaue his good deuotion vnrewarded, wherein the supper, that you assigne to Christ, con­sisteth and is fulfilled. And is not that, which may be done at pri­uate mens tables, coldly and sleightly done in comparison of that great sacrifice of the true Melchisedech, who by his blessed word turneth the substance of the bread and wine into that body of his 1. Cor. 10 Hebr. 5. which died, and into that blood which was shed for vs?

¶ By eating we touche the body of Christ, as it may The. xxi. Chapiter be touched vnder the foorm of bread.

FOr although we do not touche the body of Christ with teeth The Apo logie. and mouth, yet we hold him fast and eate him by faith, by vnderstanding, and by the spirit.

These men haue lost their wits through malice. As who can The aun­swere. deuise an eating of meate in a supper, which eating shalbe with­out touching the meate that is eaten with teeth and mouth.

For in the supper of Christ it is a detestable heresie and an in­tolerable Math. 26 ignorance to say, that Christ saying: Take and eate, did not meane taking by hands or mouthes, and eating by teeth and mouth. Taking and eating is not without touching: Christ sayd Take and eate, this is my body, therefore he sayd in effect, touche my body with your teeth and with your mouth.

Neither doth it skil that his body is immortal and impassible. for though it be not perished by the eating, yet the eating and tou ching is not therefore false, but so much the truer, by how much the meate receaued is the more profitable cuē to our bodies. And as we are sayd truly to kisse the Kings knee, when we kisse his hose vnder which the knee is conteined: euen so in touching the accidents of bread and wine, we touche the body and blood of Christ which is cōteined vnder them. For which cause S. Chry­sostom Chry­sost. in 1. Cor. 10 Hom. 24 & in Math. 83 sayd, [...] we doe not only see, we doe not only touch, but we eate, and fasten our teeth in y ^• slesh of Christ, thereby noting and teaching the vndoubted presence thereof vnder the foorm of bread. Which foorm we see, we touche, we eate, we chaw, and by that meanes we doe these things to the body of Christ vnder that foorm, not perishing the body one whit. For the same cause S. Cyrillus speaking of the blessed Eucharist, sayeth of Christ: Prae­bet Cyrillus in loan. li. 12. c. [...] nobis carnem suam tangendā, vt firmiter credamus, quia tem­plum verè suum suscitauit. He geueth vs his flesh to be touched, [Page] that we might beleue assuredly, that he hath truly reised his tem­ple, that is to say, his own body. Christ geueth vs his flesh to be touched, and yet doe we not touche it? But how do we touche it? Uerily as S. Thomas touched the Godhead of Christ. For as in Ioan. 20. touching his flesh he confessed him to be God, because the God­head lay hid in that flesh: right so, when we touche with teeth & mouth the forme of bread in the holy mysteries, we confesse that we touche thereby the flesh which lieth hid vnder that forme, and yet the Apologie denieth vs to touche the body of Christ with teeth and mouth.

And whereas it sayeth we hold him fast by faith, that is true also, but it is not the whole truthe. for as S. Thomas the Apostle did beleue vpon the Godhead of Christ, and withall touche the flesh wherein it dwelt corporally: euen so we beleue the presence of his body, and touch it vnder the foorm of bread, not hindering Colos. 2. our touching by our belefe, but rather furthering our belefe by our touching, for so much as we touche that visibly, wherein we beleue the flesh of Christ to be inuisibly. The Apologie supposeth holding by faith, to be contrarie to touching with teeth. But we think them bothe to agree right well, and both to be true in their proper kind.

S. Ireneus writing against those heretiks who denied the re­surrection Ireneus aduersus [...]. li. 5. of our flesh, sayeth: that S. Paule naming spirituall men, doth call them so, because they partake of the spirit, Sed non secundum defraudationem & interceptionem carnis, but not as defrauding them, or as taking their flesh from them. Euen so it is true that we hold Christ by faith, spirit, and vnderstanding in the holy mysteries, but we thereby ought not to take away the truthe of his flesh which is in the same mysteries. It is an old custome of heretiks by y ^e assertiō of one truth to imbarr & stop an other truth, whereas y ^• Catholiks beleue as wel y ^• one as y ^• other.

¶ The [...]acramentaries haue neither vnderstanding, The. [...]. Chapiter. nor faith, nor spirit, nor deuotion to receaue Chri [...]t withall.

ANd this is no vaine faith which doth comprehend Christ, The [...] logie. and that is not receaued with cold deuotion, which is re­ceaued with vnderstanding, with faith, and with spirit.

The fai [...]h of receauing Christ in spirit (which you speake of) The aun­swere. is not vaine, when it denieth not some veritie of the Gospell. But seing you denie this to be the body of Christ which Christ visibly deliuered, now it is a vaine faith to beleue, that who so denieth Math. 26 parcell of his faith, doth notwithstanding comprehend and re­ceaue Christ by faith or spirit.

What vnderstanding haue you, that say: This is my body, doth not meane, This is my body?

What faith haue you, that beleue not the working and effectual words of Christ which were spoken with blessing?

What spirit haue you, when you know not y ^• words of Christ Marc. 14. to be spirit & life, as y ^• which make all that which they sound in y ^t Ioan. 6. consecration of his holy mysteries? It is a warme deuotion that hearing the body of Christ by him self affirmed to be present, can eate without adoring, and denye Godly honour to it. God kepe Psal. 21. me and all others from such faith, such vnderstanding, such spi­rit, and such de [...]otion.

¶ The reall presence of Christes body is proued by The. xxiii. Chapiter. the confession of the Apologie.

FOr Christ him self altogether is so offered and geuen vs in The Apo logie. these mysteries, that we may certeinly know, we be flesh of his flesh, and bone of his bones, and that Christ continueth in vs, and we in him.

If Christ be geuen vs in these mysteries, he is present in th [...]m. The aun­swere. For a gift is not made of a thing absent. But he is not any where [Page] to be shewed present, but only vnder the forms of bread and wine A gift is of a thing present. & yet Christ shewed his body & blood saying: This is my body & this is my blood. This and this be words that shew things which are spoken of. therefore the presence of Christ, which you confesse, and which him self sheweth, must nedes be meant of his presence vnder the formes of bread and wine.

Again if we may certainly know, we are flesh of Christes flesh, and bone of his bones, if we may know it (as your words import) by his presence in these mysteries: Seing our knowlege That is not know [...] [...]hich [...] not true must nedes rise of a certaine truth, (otherwise it were an errour and not a knowlege) it is certainly true, that in theis mysterics we are by the presence of Christ in them, flesh of his flesh, & bone of his bones. But y ^• can not be, except y ^• flesh & bones of Christ be really present, yea so really present as Christes mother was really present to hym, & he to her when he toke flesh of her flesh. For a coniunctiō betwixt y ^• flesh of Christ & y ^• flesh of men cā not de made by faith, spirit, & vnderstanding: For y ^• is a coniunctiō o [...] mind, but not of flesh & bones. Flesh and bones haue no faith or [...] with flesh can not be made by [...] only. spirit, whereby the cōiunction betwene them and Christ may be receaued. they haue a natural substance as wel in Christ as in vs.

And as the man and wife can not be one flesh by the consent of mariage, except in dede they come bodily together: Euen so cā not the flesh of Christ be made one with our flesh, except both his flesh he present in the Sacrament for vs, and we come to the selfe Sacrament to be ioyned to it. And this example of mariage is so good and true, that S. Paul him self vseth it in talking of this verie coniunction of flesh and bones betwixt vs and Christ. which now the Apologie semeth to allude vnto. But the flesh of Christ cometh not from his Fathers right hand corporally to be ioyned with our flesh: Therefore it remaineth that the bread is by consecration turned into Christes [...], to thintent it may [Page 83] [...]e receaued and made one with our flesh.

Other meanes how either Christ may be present in flesh, or his flesh ioyned to our flesh, the Gospel neuer taught, the Fathers neuer lerned, y ^• Catholike Church neuer knew. But by this mea­nes, S. Irenens, S. Hilarie, S. Cyril, S. Chrysostome, and other Fathers cōsesse our natural ioyning with Christes flesh, as it shall appere in diuerse places of this booke.

¶ The contrarietie of the Apologie is shewed, and The. [...]. Chapiter. that the lifting vp of our harrs to heauen is no good cause, why we should lift the body of Christ from the altar.

ANd therefore in celebrating these mysteries the people are The Apo logie. to good purpose exhorted, before they come to receaue the holy commun [...]on, to lift vp their harts, and to direct their minds to heauenward, because he is there, by whom we must be full fed and liue.

Who euer had to doe with so forgetfull men? A e [...]ueller name I The aun­swere. wil not vse. For Gods sake, good reader, suffer not thy self to be lead of them, as if thou haddest nor wit nor sense. Be a child in 1. Cor. 14 anoiding malice, but in vnderstanding shew thy self a man.

I assure thee he is not worthy to be called a man, who percea­uing their extreme foly (as now he may) yet wil addict him self to folow their doctrine. See I besech you how this geare han­geth together.

Christ (said the Apologie in the last sentence) geueth him self present in these mysteries, & we know we are flesh of his flesh & bone of his bones, and therfore we are byd lift vp our harts to heauen, becau [...]e he is there by whom we must be ful fed and liue.

Mark how this (therefore) cometh in. it agreeth together as if it were sayd in shorter words: Christ geueth him self present in The con­tr [...]tie of the Apo logie. these mysteries, and therefore he is not here but in heauē, seeding vs from thence.

[Page]You deceaued deceauers, how feare you not to dally thus with the dreadfull mysteries of God? Doth Christ offer and geue him self present in th [...]e mysteries, or no? You graunt he doth. be these mysteries in heauen, or in earth? I suppose they be in earth. Then (say I) your words import, th [...]t Christ geueth him self present in the earth. How then doe you straight way inferre (by a therefore) that we are bid lift vp our harts to h [...]nward, because he is there, by whom we must be [...] fed? If you meane he is both there and here, you say very wel, bu [...] th [...] you graunt his body to be at once in diuers places, at the least by y ^• way of Sacramētall being. Except you will say his body is not in these mysteries, and then he geueth not him self present. For his body is the chefe thing whereof this Sacrament is named.

Neither we are flesh of his flesh in those mysteries, where his flesh is not present to be ioyned with ours. You say, that Christ geueth him self present, yea so farr present, that we know certain­ly we are flesh of his flesh, and yet you bid vs goe to heauen, be­cause he is there of whom we must be ful fed. As though his my­steries were not in earth, in which you graunt he geueth him sel [...] present.

If any spark of grace remaine in you, consyder that God hath Rom. 1. geuen you ouer into a lewd vnderstanding, into a blind hart, in to palpable darknesse. Ye wold set God and the deuill together, ye wold reconcile your fond hearesie with the healthfull Gospell of Christ, you wold seme to conf [...]e with Christ, y ^• he geueth him self present in these mysteries, with S. Paul, that we are flesh o [...] Ioan. 6. Christes flesh, and yet withall you will ioyne your own repug­nant Ephes. 5. assertion, that the body of Christ is only in heauen, and con­sequently not in these mysteries which are in earth. The longer you stand in this repugnance, the more you shame your selues.

I haue not spoken this for any other cause but to stirr vp your [Page 84] minds by words of sharp warning (which S. Paul biddeth vs Tit. 3. vse to heretiks) thereby to prouoke some such, as haue regard to their soules, to repent in tyme, and to persuade them selues that they are not able to geue a new exposition of Christes supper, which may stand with the old Gospell of Christes Church. The body of Christ is the meat of his supper. For thereof he sayd: Take Math. 26 eate, this is my body. If then Christ geue him self present in these mysteries, he geneth his body present. If his body be present, how say ye, we must lift vp our harts to heauen, there to be ful fed? Is not Christ him self being present, able to feed vs full? How is it then, that we must goe vp to heauen to be ful fed? But let vs far­ther consyder your discrete discurse.

It is said in the preface of the Masse: Lift vp your harts. which words you interprete as though it were sayd, your meat is in heauen, and not vpon the holy table. This argument I maruail if any man be able to answere: The people are warned before cō ­secration, to li [...]t vp their myndes to heauen: Therefore the body of Christ is not really present on the alter aftar consecration. As much to say, as: Before the incarnation of Christ the Prophetes and Patriarchs called and cried to God them selues, and also ex­horted the people to praie for y ^e coming of Christ, therefore when he was come, he was not true God and true man in earth.

We crie: Lift vp your harts, before the body of Christ is made, as beseching God we may haue his body made for vs. & when it is made, we lift the body it self vp, to be adored, and worshipped of the faithfull people as hauing then obteined our desier, and y ^t because it is the true body of true God.

And yet euen after consecration and after the body is really Chry so. de Dei natura Hom. 4. present, it might wel be sayd, lift vp your harts to heauen. where by lyfting vp, we should meane nothing ells, but that the faithful men should not geue them selues to wordly thoughts of y ^e earth, [Page] of mony, of flesh, but list vp their minds to thinke of euerlasting ioyes.

Againe by naming heauen, we meane not to denye y ^• real pre­sence either of God in the whole earth, or of Christ on the altar, but only to shew that we should looke for another worlde and y ^• life thereof.

This argument might haue become a tinkar better then a di­uine, and least of all it could become a superintendent, who ought to haue knowen, that y ^• Church is y ^• kingdome of heauen, and therefore the kingdome of God is within vs: & that to con­syder, Lucae. 17. what Christ worketh in his Church and for her sake, is also after one sort to lift vp our hartes to heauen: & last of all he ought to consyder that S. Chrysostom writeth.

Diddest thou not promise y ^• Preist, when he cryed: lift vp your Chryso. Hom. de Eucha­ristia. minds and hartes, and saidest thou not: we lift them vp vnto our Lord? Will you see a wonderfull matter? The table is furnished with the mysteries, the Lamb of God is offred for thee, the Priest is hofull for thee, a spirituall fyre floweth from the table.

See what lifting vp of harts was to the old Fathers. It was, to acknowlege the mysteries vpon the table, to beleue the sacri­fice of the Masse, and not to deny the real presence of Christ. That is in deed a homely lifting vp of harts, to lift the body and blood of Christ, cleane from the altar and holy table. Such lifting away becometh theues.

Hitherto these men brought neither any euident authoritie of Scripture, thereby to fortifie their opinion, nor any sentence of auncient Father, cōcerning the question of the reall presence. And now I pray you see what worshipful geare they bring. We say in the Masse, lift vp your harts, before y ^• body is sanctified and made present: therefore it is not made present at all. We say grace before the meate is set vpon the table: therefore none at all is set there. [Page 85] This is the stuff of them that boast so much of the Gospell.

This is my body is forgotten: which is fower tymes repeted twise of two Apostles, and twise of two Euangelists. Yet is that forgotten, and, lifting vp of harts, which came of the good inuen­tion of Godly Fathers, but yet from men it came, that is called in for a witnesse, against the truth of the Gospell. And yet euery man thinkeththey bring nothing but the pure word of God for their false doctrine.

¶What be grosse imaginations concerning the sup­per The. xxv. Chapiter. of Christ.

ANd Cyrillus sayth, that in the receauing of the mysteries, The Apo logie. all grosse imaginations must be put away.

Here is the second authoritie alleged against the reall presence The aun­swere. of Christes body, and that, I warrant you, full strong.

Grosse imaginations must be put awaye in receauing the my­steries: The argu ment of y ^• Apologie. therefore Christ spake not properly nor truly, when he sayd, This is my body. Are we not now happy to haue such fine preachers, who can shew the beleuing of that, which Christ sayth and teacheth, to be a grosse imagination? O grosse imagination of these pitifull preachers. May there be a more grosse imagina­tion, then to imagine that Christ lyed? Cyrillus biddeth vs put Cyrillu [...] in Epist. ad Calo­syr. away grosse imaginations, and Cyrillus saith of y ^• reall presence, Ne dubites an hoc verum sit, eo manifestè dicente, hoc est corpus meum: Sed potius suscipe verba Saluatoris in fide. Cum enim sit veritas, non mentitur. Doubt thou not whether this be true, sith him self plainly saith: This is my body. But rather imbrace the words of our Sauiour in faith. For seing he is the truth, he lieth not.

Who so consydereth well these words, may vnderstand, that [Page] Cyrillus thought nothing more grosse, then to doubt whether y ^t body of Christ be present or no. What grosse imaginations then did Cyrillus bid vs put away? 1. For sooth aboue all, y ^t we should not imagin, Christ to lye. 2. Secondly that we should not imagin his words, concerning this Sacrament, to be dark or obscure, seing Christ (as he sayth) spake manifestly. 3. Again, that no man should thinke, any other body to be geuen, besydes the true body of Christ, who in one person is God and man.

In the tyme of Cyrillus, a great heretike named Nestorius, Nesto­rius his hearesie. scholar to one Diodorus, falsely taught that Christ had two per­sons, one of God, an other of man. Therefore they imagined, the the body of Christ (which all the world, euen the heretikes them selues, beleued to be present vpon the altar after consecration) to be the body of man, but not the proper body of God the word.

This was a very grosse imagination, and therefore ought to be put away from the mind of faithfull men, in receauing the mysteries. Hereof Cyrillus literally said, Num hominis comesti­onem In. 11. Anathe­matismo nostrum hoc Sucramentum pronuncias, & irreligiosè ad crassas cogitationes vrges eorum mentem qui crediderunt? Doest thou pronounce this our Sacrament, to be the eating of a man? And doest thou irreuerently inforce the mind of the faithfull, to grosse cogitations?

Behold, the grosse cogitation was to thinke, that we doe eate y ^t body of a mā, whereas in dede through y ^e vnitie of person it is y ^• [...]ody of God him self. And therefore Cyrillus sayth afterwar [...]: Proprium est corpus eius verbi, quod omnia viuificat. It is the body proper to that word, which quickeneth all thinges. Of this [...]oule and grosse e [...]oure, two epistles are extant of Cyrillus, as Ad Suc­cessum Episcop. Isauriae. also in all his workes he full oft confuteth it.

One thing I wil further note. this fine penner of the Apologie citeth not, where Cyrillus speaketh of these grosse imaginations, [Page 86] because the place is maruelous euident against him. And what foul play is this, to belie Cyrillus, as though he had spoken of that imagination, wherein we beleue y ^t reall presence of Christes body vnder the form of bread, whereas he spake, of that wherein Nestorius vnderstanded, that we did eate the flesh of Christ, with out the diuine nature vnited vnto it in one person.

Cyrillus sayth, because the word which is of God the Father, Cyrillus▪ in Ana­them. 11. ad Eno­ptium. is life by nature it hath declared his flesh to be the geuer of life, & hac ratione, facta est nobis benedictio viuificatrix and by this meanes, the blessing is made to vs, geuer of life.

Cyrillus calleth y ^• Sacrement of the altar, benedictio, blessing, because it is made by blessing. Now in naming blessing, he must The Eu­charist is called bles sing. nedes meane, that which is blessed, which is on the altar before vs, and not any thing co [...]ceaued in faith or spirit.

Therefore Cyrillus meaneth out of all cōtrouersie, that thing which is made by blessing, which we take in our hands, which Cyrillus natura di uinitatis minime comedi­tur. we put in our mouths, to be able to geue life euerlasting, which none other eatable thing can doe besydes the reall flesh of Christ. For the nature of Godhead (as Cyrillus there confesseth) is not eaten, by itself, or a part from the flesh.

If we put this together, I require no more, but that he be an honest man, who shall construe the place of Cyrillus. He shalbe forced to confesse such an eating in the Sacrament of the altar as is not proper to the Godhead: And yet eating by faith is proper to vs in respect of the Godhead, therefore Cyrillus speaketh of eating, that which quickeneth vs to life euerlasting with our bo­dy also, and not with faith alone.

An other grosse imagination was to thinke that we eating the * 4 The. [...] ­grosse [...] gination. body of Christ, should eat it dead, or mortall, and passible, as we vse to eate other meates: Whereas it is quicke, yea of power to quicken vs (as Cyrillus teacheth)

[Page]Quoniam Saluatoris caro, verbo Dei quod naturaliter vita est­coniuncta, viuifica effecta est, quando eam comedimus, tun [...] vitam habemus in nobis, illi coniuncti, quae vita effecta est. Because the flesh of our Sauiour, ioyned to the word of God which is life na turally, is made able to geue life: When we eate it, then we haue life in vs, being ioyned to that flesh which is made life.

5. The fifth grosse imagination is, to thinke that we should so eate Christes flesh, as if it were rawe and not by any meanes, made meate for mannes cating. Of this grosse imagination, the Capharnaits were. Ad immanes ferarum mores, vocari se a Chri Cyrillus in Ioan. li. 4. c. 22. sto arbitrabantur, incitari (que), vt vellent crudas hominis carnes manducare, & sanguinem bibere: quae vel auditu horribilia sunt. They thought them selues to be inuited of Christ, to the cruel cu­stom of wild beastes, and to be prouoked, to eate the raw flesh, & drinke the blood of man: which thinges are horrible to heare.

It was yet no lesse a grosse imaginatiō to suppose, they should [...] 6. cate the body of Christ peece meale, one taking the shoulder, an other the legg, the third the brest, and so foorth. Against which imagination S. Augustine hath writen.

Their imagination also, is very grosse, who think y ^t substance, August. in Psal. 98. of bread to remaine, after consecration, as though they wold eate that immortall and gloriouse flesh of Christ, with bakers bread. * 7. Which is the cursed banket, of the Lutherās, whereas Christ said, The bread which I will geue, is my flesh. geuing vs to vnderstand, Ioan. 6. y ^• he wold not haue in his heauenly supper, an earthly substance, of materiall bread.

And yet it is, a more grosse imagination, to confesse y ^t reallpre­sence * 8. of Christes body, and to denye adoration to it, sithens it is the body of God.

9. But how grosse is it to denye it to be a propitiatorie sacrifice, sith it is his body, who is the propitiation for the whole world. [...]. Ioan. 2.

[Page 87] 10▪ I omit at this tyme his grosse imagination who teacheth the words which are spoken of a gift presently made and deliuered, to be words of promise and of preaching.

* But the grossest imagination that euer was heard of, is of them, who affirm no body of Christ at all, to be made really pre­sent, vnder the form of bread when it is sayd ouer the bread, of Christ him self: This is my body. This grosse imagination, ma­keth Christ a lyer, as Cyrillus hath witnessed.

And now came our Apologists, and bring those wordes aga­inst the Catholikes, as though they had a grosse imagination, who thinke and teach, the wordes of Christ, to be true & to worke that they speake, when soeuer they belong to any Sacrament. And therefore the substance of bread and wine, to be turned into y ^t substance of the body and blood of Christ, the formes of the same bread and wine remaining, as veyles and cortaines to couer the Why the formes of bread and wine re­main. sayd flesh, as well because our faith should haue merit, as because our eyes be not able to see that gloriouse & mysticall kind of pre­sence.

The which consecrating of Christes body, is an vnblody sacrifice wherein God is put in mind, of the death, which redemed the world. Euery part of y ^t Sacrament hath in it whole Christ, eue­ry kind alone is sufficiēt to norish him to saluatiō, who worthely eateth it. And yet both kinds together must be cōsecrated, to shew the death of Christ. This belefe hath no grosse imagination in it, as shall appeare in all the worke folowing.

¶What the first Councel of Nice hath taught concer­ning The. xxvi. Chapiter. Christes supper.

ANd the Councell of Nice, as it is cited in Greek of some, The Apo logie. doth expresly forbid vs, that we should not basely occupy our minds about the bread and wine set before vs.

[Page]The words of the Nicen Councell, whereof the Apologie spea The aun­swere. keth, are these. Iterum etiam hic in diuina mensa, & caet. Again here also in the holy table, let vs not basely attend the bread and cup The wor­des of the first Ni­cene Con cell. set before vs, but lifting vp our mind, let vs vnderstand by faith, That Lamb of God, which taketh away the synnes of the world, [...], sitū esse, to be put, and laid on that holy table, incruente a sacerdotibus immolatum, to be vnbloodely sacrificed of the Priests, and that we [...], Verè, Truly and in deed, taking his own precious body and blood, doe beleue, these to be the mysti­call tokens, of our redemption. For this cause we take not much but litle, that we might know we take not, to fill vs, but for holy­nesse.

In these words many things are affirmed, of the blessed Sa­crament of the altar, euery of the which doth proue, or helpe to proue, the real presence of Christes body, vnder the forme of bread and wine.

1 First the Councell sayeth the bread and the cup to be set be­fore vs, vpon the holy table, bidding vs not basely attend or con­syder them.

What other thing, can these words meane, then to warne vs▪ that we should not looke to the natural appearing or shew, of the Some vertue ly­eth priuie vnder the formes of bread and wine. bread and of the cup, but to a greater vertue, which lieth priuie vnder their formes? Therefore begin we to collect, that the bread and the wine, which stand vpon y ^• holy table, kepe not any more their old nature & substance, but contein vnder their old formes, the new substance of Christ. For if they remained (as before con­secration they were) materiall bread and wine: then we nede no warning to put away base considerations of them, sith by that opinion, we are bound to beleue, earthly bread and wine, to be still bread and wine, and to be nothing bettered in substance.

2 Then as concerning the vse of them, so long as y ^• blessed word [Page 88] of God, which is the form of the Secrament, is ioyned with any How long a Sacra­ment may be so cal­led. element, (which remaineth still in his old nature), so long y ^• word and the element, make a mysterie: But when the word or form is ended, the Sacrament is ended, as the which only worketh, and hath grace annexed to it, whiles it is in the vse, whereunto Christ hath appointed it. So long as the Priest, whiles he washeth, is saying, I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Sonne, and of the holy Ghost, so long y ^• baptim is a doing and working: when the wordes be ended, the Sacrament is ended. For seing y ^• promesse of forgeuenesse of synnes, is geuen to the washing in y ^• Ioan. 3. Marc. 16. name of the Trinite, when that is done, the promesse is sinished for that course.

The councell of Nice, speaketh of the bread and of the cup af­ter consecration, after that it was sayd ouer thē, This is my body and this is my blood, which wordes are the form of that Sacra­ment. For the councell speaketh of the being, and standing, and of cōsyderig these things vpon the holy table, not only whiles y ^• wordes are spoken, but still afterward vntill they be receaued.

If then, both the wordes of the Sacrament be past, and yet y ^• councell say, we must not basely attend, the bread and the cup that are vpon the holy table. It geueth vs to vnderstand, that the wordes did not only come to the elements of bread and wine, to make them a Sacrament, after the commen sort of making, which The wor­des of the supper di [...] work so [...] permanē [...] thing. is in baptim, in confirmation, in holy orders, and in penance, but also, that the wordes did worke some reall thing, vnder y ^• formes of bread & wine, which remaineth still as long as y ^• sayd formes & signes remain.

For this cause the councell sayd, we ought not basely consyder the bread and cup, for that, more was vnder the shew and colour of them, then our eyes could tell vs. What must we then doe?

[...] We must resort to a higher master, then our eyes are: we must [Page] lift vp our mind, we must vnderstand, not by loking & seing, but by faith. Whether must we lift our mind? To heauen? That is not euill, but the councell sayth, an other thing: We lifting vp What lif­eing vp of the mind is. our mindes must vnderstand by faith. Then the lifting vp of our mind, is the renouncing of our senses, & the cleauing to our faith. We must beleue that which we can not see.

4. What must we beliue? That the Lamb of God is vpon the holy table. Which Lamb? He that taketh away the sinnes of the Ioan. 1. world. On which table? On the holy table, whereon that standeth, which semeth bread and wine.

5. How is y ^• Lamb there? He is put layed & situate there as a thing may be situate which is vnder the formes of an other thing. For of such a situation the councell speaketh & so we must beleue of it. Now put this geare together, and thus the councell sayth.

Consyder not basely that bread and cup which standeth before The mea­ning of the Nicen Councell. you. For although it seme that which nature made, yet we must lift vp our mind, and vnderstand by faith, that thing or substance, which is standing on the holy table, how so euer it appere bread and wine, to be the Lamb of God, that taketh away the synnes of the world.

Now we see, what is base, and what is high. Bread and wine is base: Body and blood is highe. That must not be consydered, because the substance thereof now hath ceased to be: This must be beleued, because it is made present in substance.

And it is so truly made, and the Lamb so truly prosen [...], that he * 6. The sa­crifice of y ^• Masse. is offered not in hart alone, but euen outwardly of the Priests, not by shedding of blood (as vpon the crosse) but vnblodely as it becommeth the cleane oblation of the new Testament, where­of Malachie did prophecie.

That sacrifice which Priests offer can not be but present, for Malach. 1 c [...]p. they offer with their hands, mo [...]thes, and other externall mem­bers [Page 89] of their body.

7. After that the sacrifice is made, the faithfull people, who stand by, doe partake with the altar, which could not be, except a perma ne [...]t substance were made by consecration.

The Lamb is vpon the table. He is offered there by y ^• Priests. It foloweth in the Councell.

8. We take truly the precious body and blood: We take it and truly take it. That is to say, in deed really and bodily. For the True bo­dy. truth of Christes body and blood, is not an imaginarie or fained truth, it is not a thing conceaued only (as a man might conceaue in his mind, men flying in the aier), it is not only beleued or ho­ped, but he in naturall existence, and among external things, hath as true a body and blood, as any creature hath a substance of his owne.

The true taking of the which precious body and blood, is the Trne ta­king. taking of it in suche a truth of subs [...]ce as it self hath. And because it is true in y ^• thing it selfe, the taking of it, is in the thing it self.

9. The taking of that which s [...]andeth before vs on the table, is by instrument of our bodyes, therefore it is deliuered according to the same external truth, by the corporall ministerie of y ^• Priests So that all is truly and externally done, by the iudgement of this auncient councell.

10. Wel, we truly taking them, beleue them to be the tokens of our The to­kens of our re­demption. redemption or as some bookes read, of our resurrection. For as our redemption was by the [...]ame body and the same blood really wrought vpon the crosse: so hauing them selues present vpon y ^• holy table, and truly taking them, we take the sure witnesses and euident tokens of our redemption. Bread & wine be not [...] of our re­demption.

But if the things which stand vpon the holy table were in sub­stance bread and wine, how could they be the tokens of our re­demption? Did bread and wine redeme vs? Or did they rise from [Page] death for vs? It is the body and blood of Christ which redemed vs and which arose from death, and the self same body and blood are now made present to vs, & offered vnbloodely for vs, to shew in fact and dede, our redemption already wrought by them, and to distribute the fruits of y ^• Crosse, by none other thing so much, as by the same body and blood that redemed vs.

For least we should assigne any part of our saluation, to any Why Chri stes body is the tokē of our re­demption. other creature besydes to the only body and blood of Christ, he made the selfsame body, both the price wherewith he redemed vs, and the token and dispensour of the redemption.

It was proued before, that if these things be the tokens of our redemption, instituted by the expresse words of Christ, then they are the things them selues, which they betoken, because they are mysticall tokens of the new Testament. But they are here not as redeming vs new, and therefore as tokens of y ^• old redemption, that no man should thinke Christ to die again, or should doubt (as S. Chrysostom hath noted) of his death already past, or of Chrysos. Hom. 83, in Math. any maner prices of our redemptiō to be payed then one, or that it hath any other token left thereof in the holy mysteries besydes it selfe.

For it was so worthy a truth and ra [...]som payed for vs vpon the Crosse, which was able to be painted worthely or set foorth, to the remembrances of the faithfull by none other image, then such, wherein y ^• truth might be set foorth after an other sort more mystical, concerning the manner: But no lesse true then the thing which died was, concerning the substance.

Who so is faithfull and humble, is now able to vnderstād, how The some of all that was sayd. the shew of bread and wine, standeth with the truth, of body and blood present on the holy table: How the vnbloody sacrifice, is made of the Priests, whiles by pronouncing the words of God they turne the substance of bread and wine in to the substance of [Page 90] Christes body and blood: how we both truly take the precious body and blood of Christ, cōcerning the substance of them, vnder the formes of bread and wine: And yet beleue them to be tokens instituted of Christ, of our redemptiō, betokening the price paid, by making present the body and blood which payed it.

Was not this a worthy place, for the Apologie to allege? But How much of this testi­monie the Apolog [...] left out. I warrant you, it alleged the weakest part therof, leauing out the situatiō of the Lamb of God, on the holy table: The vnbloody sacrifice made of Priests, the true taking and receauing of the pre cious body and blood. Only bread and wine, (which are named to shew the formes within the which the body and blood are) them they name, as a great matter, to further this new broched heresie.

But he is a faithfull trier and examiner of auncient Fathers, who faithfully citeth the whole place, neither adding nor dimi­nishing, which honest dealing we may not looke, for, at these de­fenders hands.

¶ That the Catholiks haue the table of Egles, and The. [...] Chapiter. the Sacramentaries haue the table of Iaies.

ANd as Chrisostome writeth wel, we say, that the body of The Apo logie. Christ is the carcas, and we must be the Egles, that we may know, that we ought, to flye highe, if we will come to the body of Christ. For this is the table of Egles, not of Iayes.

It is a weake stake that these mē wold not take hold of, being The aun­swere. now plunging for life, vnder the water.

S. Chrysostome so plainly expoundeth his owne meaning, immediatly where he speaketh, of the carcas and of the Egles, that I can not sufficiently wonder, at the impudēcie of him, who allegeth this place. For the alleger, wold haue the wordes taken, as though the body of Christ, were not vpon the altar: But we [Page] only shold by faith ascend into heauen, whereas S. Chrysostome speaketh, of going in to heauen, by good life also, and not by faith only. His words are these.

The body of our Lord is through death become the [...], Chryso. in. [...]. cor. Hom. 24 carcase. for vnlesse he had fallen, we had not risen. Christ vseth the name of Egles to declare, that it behoueth him, who shall approchevn­to his body, to seeke for high things, and not to medle with the earth, nor to be drawē down, or crepe vnto earthly matters, which are a low, but to flee allways vp to higher matters: And to behold the sonne of righteousnes, and to haue the eye and the mind quick of sight, for this is the table of Egles and not of Iaies. Hetherto S. Chrysostome.

1 The car­case. Who first sheweth why the body of Christ is called the carcase. Not because it is without life, but because it once hath died for vs

2 Like Egles. Secondly we must be like Egles in life and faith. In life by forsaking earthly affectiōs: In faith by quicknesse of mind, whiles we beleue, that not withstanding bread and wine appeare to vs, yet it is in deed an other [...]. The pro­pri [...]es of the Egle.

The Egle hath many proprietes, as to flee highe, to looke [...]ed­fastly vpon the sun, to see most clerely a farr of, and to take his pray most swiftly: To the flying high, our good life must answer: to y ^• quicknesse of sight, our faith: Not in suche sort to flee a highe as though the matter we seeke were not present, but to [...]spie the body and blood of Christ vnder the formes of bread and wine. This is y ^e table o [...] Egles.

For as S. Chrysostome saith: This is the table of Egles. He speaketh not now of heauen, which is a bo [...]e the sun, he speaketh of the table which standeth in the Church before vs, wherupon y ^e sonne of righteousnes is situated, from which we take the foode of life, the ioye of heauen, y ^• earcase y ^• hath died for vs. The table is it whereof he speaketh.

What impudencie is this, so to abuse the wordes of that blessed man, as if he spake of going into heauen by faith, whereas in dede [Page 91] he speaketh of them that liue like the saints of heauen, and of thē that haue a quick sight, to witt, a faithfull vnderstanding, y ^• they be able as it were to loke through the formes of bread and wine. there to see vnder those formes the reall body and blood of Christ. The quic [...]ight of Egles is [...].

For straight vpon the naming of a quick sight, he inferreth y ^• this is the table of Egles not of Iaies. As who sho [...]ld say here is a meate that none can see but those who haue a most pure eye of faith.

Aquila (sayth S. Augustine) sublimiter volās, de tanto intervallo August. in lib. de diumat. Daemonū sub fluctibus natantem piscem dicitur ꝑ [...]idere, & grauiter aquis illisa extertis pedibus at (que) vnguibus rapere. The Egle flying a high, is sayd most perfitly to see a great way of, a fishe swīming vnder the waues, and vehemētly beating her self against the wa­ter, by stretching out her feet and clawes, to snatch vp the fishe.

Behold an Egle seeth one thing vnder an other: And so must An Egle seeth one thing vn­der an o­ther. we repute y ^• table of Christ to haue in it one thing vnder an other. To haue vpon it the body of Christ vnder the form of bread. And therefore no [...]e but Egles can espie the said body.

As for the Sacramentaries & Zuinglians they are like Iaies, The here­t [...]s are Iayes. euer pratling of the body of Christ, but neuer espying it, or seing where it lieth, they flee low as y ^e Iaies doe, as thinking that good works bring smal aide to [...]ife euerlasting. They see weakely, and cōtent them selues with a base banket of bread and wine, requirīg to theyr bodies none other food of life.

And whereas the sonne of reghteousnesse hath couered him self as it were with the cloudes of bread and wine, to thint [...]nt our eye might be able to beare more easily the bright [...]esse of his shyning, The [...] sight of [...] ­tiks. yet they are of so dull and of so dimme eye sight, that th [...]y say ther is nothing but [...] vpon the table. So that our table is the table of E [...]les, where faithfull Egles may e [...]pie the sonne of [...] present vpon the altar and table, and theyr table is [Page] the table of Iaies, where nothing is [...] besydes that, which iufidell Iaies may find out by naturall eye sight, & bare naming without true being.

It foloweth in S. Chrysostm. If noman wil rashly handle an Chryso. Hom. 24 in. 1. cor. other mans garment, how dare we, to our great shame and re­proche, receaue this pure and immaculate body▪ which is Lord of al, which is partaker of the diuine nature, through which we haue our being and liuing, by which y ^• gates of hel are broken downe: and the gates of heauen set wide open?

Thus S. Chrysostome sheweth, vs to receaue this body of Christ, from y ^• holy table or altar, as truly, cōcerning the substance thereof, as we may truly touche, an other mans garment.

Heauen is vsed both in holy Scriptures and in the Fathers for Heauen. Lucae. 10. &. 12. &c the heauenly life. And so we must flee in to heauen, not, to receaue this body (so it is not said) but, when we approche vnto this body. The body is in earth with vs, cōcerning the nature and substāce thereof, vnder the formes of bread: But as it is a body glori [...]ied, and thereby made heauenly, euen so we must clense and purge our selues from synne, when we come to it, and so be made hea­uenly, Lucae. 10. 1. Tim. 3. or flee in to the state of them who liue in heauen: And that state we professe who are called the kingdome of heauē, & y ^• howse of God.

¶ The bread, that is the meate of the mind and not of the The. 28. Chapiter. belly, can be no wheaten bread, but only the bread of lyfe which is the body of Christ.

ANd Ciprian, this bread (sayith hee) is meate of the mynd, The Apo logie. not meate of the belly.

The truth is so strong, that y ^• more is brought agaynst it, the The aun­swere. better it is seene. The sayng of S. Ciprian maketh so clearly [Page 92] for the contrarie of that wich the Apologi teacheth, as it is pos­sible to deuise.

If this bread be meate of the mind not meate of the belly, out That the substance of bread r [...] mameth not in Christes supper. of questiō, it is not material bread, it is not the substāce of cōmon bread. for though such materiall bread, be neuer so much hallo­wed, by prayer and thanksgeuing, yet it still remayneth, in sub­stance, bread of the belly.

But seing y ^• substance of y ^• common bread, is changed into y ^• flesh of Christ, (as we catholikes beleue and teach) now, it can by no meanes be meate of the bellye. for albeit wee receiue it really, vnder the formes of bread, into our bodyes, and that also to feed Two kinds of feeding. them, as wel as our sowles, yet there ar two kinds of feedyng, one, wich is to liue in this world (and in that case meate is for the belly, and the belly for meate, and God shall destroye both 1. Cor. 6. the one & the other). But an other feeding is to life euerlasting, & Ioan. 6. y ^t is called by Christ, cibus permanens, meate which abideth & which perisheth not.

Such a meate, is the blessed body of Christ. It is a meat ī deed. The body of Christ is not the meate of y ^• belly. A meate wiche is truly eaten, but is not digested into our cor­ruptible flesh, and voided as common meates are, but a litle and a litle, it feedeth and nourisheth vs to life euerlasting.

These defenders thought, if it were [...]aten in deed, that it could The er­rour of y ^• Apologie. not be, but meate of the belly. As well they might blasphemously say, that because Christ was man in deed, he was born in synne. And in that opinion, they are like the Capharnaits, who could Ioan. 6. imagine none other kinde of meate, besides that which is diuided into peeces, and consumed by eating.

The true Christians haue learned, by the mercy of God, with Cyrillus lib. 4. in Ioā. c. 14. holy Cyrillus, how the flesh of Christ (because it is y ^• flesh of God) may be eaten, and yet quicken the eaters, and make them liue to God, and notbe wasted by eating, but rather how it may profite [Page] our soules being worthely receaued into our bodies.

For so Tertullian sayeth. The flesh is fedde with the body and Tertull. de resur. carnis. blood of Christ, to th'ende that the soule may be made fatte in God.

Perhaps the Apologists will say, that S. Cyprian doth call it bread: I answere he calleth it bread because it is meate for he The kind of bread whereof S. Cy­prian spea keth. sayeth, This bread is meate. But what kinde of meate? Panis iste quem Dominus Discipulis porrigebat, non effigie sed natura mu tatus omnipotentia verbi factus est caro. This bread which ou [...] Lord ga [...]e to the Disciples, being changed not in shape, but in Cypria. de coena Domini. nature, is made flesh by the almighty power of the word.

Behold the kind of bread, it is cōmon bread in sha pe, but made the flesh of Christ in substance.

In the olde tyme sayth S. Ciprian, the shew loues being cold Cypria. de coena Domini. and hard, were changed euery Sabothe daie, and hote loaues of the same nomber were wonte to be sette vpon y ^e table. I am nulla [...]itpanis panis mutatio, vnus est panis caloris continui. Now there is no change of bread made, there is one loase os cōt [...]al heate, which neuer is cold.

By this we vnderstand that somtyme S. Ciprian speaketh of common bread which Christ tooke into his handes, and that is changed, and is at euery tyme a new loafe. At other tymes he speaketh of y ^e bread whereunto y ^e change is made. And y ^• bread is y ^e flesh of Christ which is neuer changed. The first bread if it tar [...]ed in substance, it should sill the belly.

But because the substance thereof is changed, the flesh of Christ which is made by consecration is the meate of the mind, and not of the belly. For it feedeth vs to that state of immortalitie where the belly shall no more be filled with coruptible meates. So that it feedeth vs in such sorte that we leaue to cherishe o [...]r bellies so much the lesse, by how much the more we eate it [...].

¶ Sacramētall eating differreth from eating by faith The. [...]. [...]. alone whereof only S. Augustine speaketh in y ^• place al [...]aged by the Apologie.

ANd Augustine. how (sayth he) shall I hold him that is ab­sent? The Apo logie. How shall I reache forth my hand into h [...]auen that I might hold him there sitting? Reach out (sayth he) faith: & thou hast caught him.

To make vp and to con [...]lnde all these wrested places, which haue The [...] ­sivere. bene alleaged heretofore out of y ^e Fathers, a plaine text is brought forth out of S. Augustine, which speaketh neuer a wh [...]t of y ^• pre­sent August. tract. 50. in Ioan. controuersie, nor can not be at all applied to it.

The question betwixt vs is, whether Christes body bee present in y ^e Sacrament of the altar or [...]o? The Apologie reasoneth thus

A Iewe that yet beleued not, niay beginne to beleue, and so may The arg [...] ment of y ^e Apologie. streche forth his hand to heauen, and hold Christ fast by faith, al­though he be bodily absent, therefore Christes body after conse­cration dewly made, is not present vnder forme of bread.

Is not this a mighty argument, and worthy to be kept for the last place? A Iewe may hold Christ by faith if he wil beleue vpon August. tract. 50. in Ioan. him, therefore he is not to be eaten really of faithful Christians in the Sacrament? Nos indicemus modo Iudaeis, vbi sit Christus. Let vs now shew to the Iewes (sayeth S. Augustine) where Christ is. Occisus est a parentibus eorum, he is [...]aine of their Pa rents. Venturus est iudex, he shall come a i [...]dge. Audiant & te­neant, let them heare and hold. Respondet, quem tenebo? The I [...]we maketh answere, whom shall I hold? Absentem? Shall I hold him that is absent? Quomodo in coelum manum mittam vt ibi sedentem teneam? How shall I stretch my hand vnto heauen that I may hold him sitting there? Fidem mitte, & tenuisti, strech out faith, and thou hast caught him. Parentes tui tenuerunt car­ [...], tu tene corde. Thy Parents haue holden (him) in flesh, hold hold [...] (him) in harte. Quoniam Christus absens etiam presens est, [Page] because Christ being absent is also present. And againe, corpus suum intulit coelo, maiestatem n on abstulit mundo. Christ hath caried his body into heauen, he hath not taken away his maiestie from the world.

This dialogue S. Augustine made betwen him selfe & a Iew, not intending any whit, to spcake in that place of the Sacrament of the altar, wherof Iewes ought to know nothing. And yet commeth y ^• Apologie, and will proue that we touch not the body of Christ with our teeth, and iawes, but by faith, mind, and spirite, bycause, beside all the former argumentes (which be not woreth a strawe) S. Augustine telleth a Iewe, y ^t he may beleue vpon Christ absent in body, but present in maiestie of his Godhead.

You will say perhaps, If Christ be absent in body, that his bo­dy is not present vnder the form of bread, after consecration. Syr, S. Augustine speaketh not of Christs body, as it is in y ^• Sacramēt to be eaten, but as it is visible in heauen. Infidels were kept from Masse.

And to assure you therof, it was y ^• custome of y ^• primitiue Church, to let no infidel see, or be present, at y ^• tyme of Masse of y ^• Christiās. Therefore S. Augustine might not lawfully talke to a Iewe, of y ^• misticall presens of Christ in the Sa [...]ament, neither surely any word of his in that alleaged place, is to be referred to the Sacra­mentall eating.

They are two distinct things, to receaue Christ by faith alone, and to receaue by faith and Sacramēt together: that may be done Receauīg by faith. Act. 10. Sacramē tall recea­ning. Iustinus in Apol. 2. before baptisme (as it appeareth by Cornelius in the Actes of the Apostles) But a Sacramentall receauing in the supper of Christ, is graunted only to Christians after baptisme (as S. Justinus y ^• martyr and the experience it selfe doth witnesse)

For as he, that is not borne, can not eate, so he, y ^• is not regene­rated in Christ, may not be suffered to eate his body & drinke his blood in the Sacrament. And truly, except a man hath so addicted [Page 94] him selfe to Christ, that he wil be contented to bele [...]e what so euer Why infi­ [...] might not come to Masse. he shal say vnto him, he would neuer be persuaded, that vnder the forme of so small a peece of bread the reall body of Christ were conteyned.

But when he hath learned in the articles of his faith, y ^t Christ is God, and therefore almighty, after that belefe, he both can be­leue his word to be true, when he sayd ouer bread which was ta­ken: This is my body, and also may eate the same body of Christ Math. 26 to his profit, and to the encrease of life euerlasting. But what ignorance was this, to applie the eating of an infidell Iew to the mysticall eating, which only the faithfull make in Christes supper?

¶ The argument of the sixth Chapiter of S. Ihon is The first Chapiter. declared.

WHereas Christ may be receaued either by faith & spirit only, without the Sacrament of the altar, or els in the Christ may be re­ceaued thre ways Sacrament of the altar only, without liuely faith and grace, or in both together, which is the most fruitfull kinde of communicating: some haue thought, that in the sixth cha­piter of S. Iohn there is no talke of the second and third kinde of receauing (which is referred to the Sacrament of the altar) but only of the first, which is by faith and charitie.

Merily those men are not to be blamed for saying y ^• Christ spea­keth Christ speaketh not in S. Ihon of vnworthy eating. not there, of y ^• second kinde of eating which is by Sacramēt alone, without spirituall eating and drinking (for thereof in deed he speaketh not) but they are to be reprehended, if they denie y ^• he speaketh of such Sacramētall eating, as is vsed in our Lords supper, when it is (as it always ought to be) worthely receaued.

My purpose is at this tyme, to shew that albeit Christ in the former part of that Chapiter speaketh for the most part of spiritu­all Worthy Sacra­mētal ea­ting is spo ken of to ward the end of y ^• Chapiter. eating and drinking only, yet afterward he speaketh also of y ^t eating which is by receauing worthely the Sacrament of y ^t altar at y ^• Priests hands. for to that ende chiefly goeth all the talke of it, not as though spirituall receauing alone were not better then on­ly Sacramentall receauing, but because both together are better then one alone. Christ presseth his Disciples to such a receauing of him selfe as is most perfit of all. For proofe of which thing, I am constrained bri [...]fly to touche the tyme and order of Christes talke.

A litle more then one whole yere before his passion, Christ about the greate feast of Easter, went beyond the sea of Galilee, and wrought that notable miracle, wherein he fedde about fiue thou­sand Ioan. 6. men with fiue loa [...]es and two fishes. Wherby y ^• people were [Page 98] induced y ^• rather to seeke him y ^t next day at [...]. Whom The mi­racle of multiply­ing bread, was a pre paratorie to the talk of Chry­stes sup­per. he no [...] sawe, but he did put them in mind of yesterdays mi­racle, telling them that they followed him, not for the signessake which they had sene, but because they had eaten their bellies full of bread. as though he had sayd: my intent was y ^t you should ra­ther haue noted y ^e miracle, then haue respected your bellies▪ which [...] sith you haue not done of your selues, I warne you thereof willing you to worke, not the meate which perisheth (as yester­days bread & fish did) but that which tarieth vnto life euerlasting, which the Sonne of man will geue you.

In these words Christ doth manifestly declare (as also S. Chry­ [...]ostom Chryso. in ca. 6. Ioan. Ho mi. 45. Math. 14. hath noted) that the miracle of fiue loaues appertained in some part vnto his last supper, whereof he intended at that tyme to speake, taking an occasin of that bread which by blessing and thanksgeuing he had multiplied. For which cause he sayd, worke [...] other kind of mea [...]e then ye did yesterday, for y ^• meate is now perished, and ye are a hungred againe. Worke a meate that may tary longer with you, y ^• may tary vnto euerlasting life. Hitherto the words of Christ may be meant▪ by spirituall eating and drin­king only,

B [...]t the words that follow, do meane also a further kinde of ea­ting The gift of Christ which is to come is meant of his supper and drinking. For when he sayth: which the sonne of man wil geue you, he plainely meaneth y ^t gift of his last supper, as Theo­phylact doth witnesse, but yet vttereth his meaning after a secret sort, as S. Cyrillus doth write vpon the same place. And in dede y ^t [...] Christ doth ex­pound the spirituall eating be­fore the Sacra­metall [...]a­ting. is the gift which is namely reserued in this Chapiter to the sonne of man, as it shall appere afterward.

But because they could not come to y ^• worthy working of Chr­stes own gift, vntill y ^• worke of faith were by y ^• [...] wrought in them, he straight declareth by an occasion taken of the olde fi­gure manna, how they must haue faith from God, to beleue vpon [Page] him. for that he was the bread of life, who came downe from hea­uen to geue life eu [...]rlasting both in body and soule to all such as his Father brought vnto him. for who so euer should eate of that bread which him selfe was, should liue for euer.

After which preparation made, he retourneth to expound his owne gifte which he named the gifte of y ^e Sonne of man shewing most expressely that which he will geue in his last supper: And the Ioan. 6. bread which I will geue is my flesh for the life of the world. The Spiritual [...]ating was pre­sent. gift of spirituall eating by faith & charitie was not to come when Christ spake vnto his Disciples. For it was then present, & there­fore he sayd presently, I am the bread of life, meaning that he was presently so, cōcerning spiritual feeding, in so much as, if any man would haue beleued in him, euen at that instāt, he might through grace haue eaten of Christ.

But Christ sayth his own peculiar gift was to come: and there Sacra­mental ea­ting was to come. fore he continueth expounding his gift in many sentences, vntill at the last he sayth, he that eateth this bread (which him self had be­fore promised to geue to be eaten) shall liue for euer.

I will by Gods grace make y ^e proofe hereof so plaine hereafter, as any reasonable man shall desire. Only first protesting that I folowe not myne own braine herein, but y ^t iudgemēt of all y ^• [...] ­cient Fathers, who with one accorde haue taken this Chapiter to speake (by way of promise), of the Sacrament of the altar, which was iustituted by Christ in his last supper.

¶ It is proued by circumstances & by y ^e cōference of holy The secōd Chapiter. Scriptures y ^• Christ speaketh in S. Ihon of his last sup­per. 1. The tyme of Easter.

HE y ^• doth well consider y ^e only time when this talke was had, he that weygheth how Christ hauing made y ^t greate 1. The mi­racle made [...]n bread. miracle in blessing fiue loaues, doth the next daie about the time of Easter, one whole yere before the celebrating [Page 99] of his last supper, as it wer make both a prophecie and a promise 3. The Pro pheticall promise. what he would do y ^• Easter twelue moneth after, he that confer­reth as well what was done and sayd abonte the sea of Tiberias 4▪ The con­ference of things done and sayd. and at Capharnaū as what was done and said in the last supper which was kept the night wherein he was betrayed, he that no­teth the fathers gift to be accompted present, and that to be the working of belefe in y ^t hartes of the faithful (which is a spiritual 5. The pre­sent eating of Gods gift. eating of Christ) but y ^• sōnes gift to be rekoned as a thing to come hereafter, and to be called eating his flesh and drinking his blood (Wich if it shall differ any thing at all from the fathers gift, must nedes be more then a spirituall eating of Christes flesh) he shall 6. The ea­ting of Christes gift to come. Ioan. 6. Math. 26 Marc. 14. perceane [...] this chapiter both a spirituall eating presently offred, and a sacramentall eating promised hereafter [...] the naturall sub­stāce of flesh and blood. which in this place thus breefly touched shall at large be handled in the treatise folowing.

At this tyme he that conferreth what was done and sayd both at the last supper of Christ and the yere before about the sea of 1. Bread ta­ken. Tyberias: shall see concerning the doyngs, bread taken in bothe places, blessing and thanksgeuing in bothe, eating in bothe.

And as concerning words, let him deeply ponder, and consider 2. Blessing. that as in S. Iohn he began his talke of cōmon bread saying to y ^e 3. Thanks­geuing. Iewes: ye folow me because yehaue eaten of the loaues of bread, 4. Eating. but at the length he ended his talke with the eating of his fleshe, and drynking his blood: So in his last supper he tooke into his 5. From bread to flesh. Math 26 handes cōmon bread, but at the length he ended his banket in the eating his body and drinking his blood.

As in S. Iohn he speaketh distinctly of a meate which the sōne 6. The sōne of man is the geuer. of man will geue: So at his supper, y ^e soon of man did administer the whole gift of his heauenly meate in his owne person.

As in S. Iohn he saieth: the bread which I will geue, that is to 7. Meare is geuen▪ Mar. [...]4. Mat. 26. say, y ^e meate of my last supper: so in his last supper he tak [...]g bread [Page] after blessing & breakyng, d [...]th geue a blessed food saying, sumite, take. 8. That is [...] which Christ toke first. [...]. 6.

As in S. Iohn he sayd, the bread whiche I will geue, and not the bread whiche I will take: so in his supper he tooke one kind of bread, and gaue an other. For as in S. Iohn he saieth, the bread which I will geue is my flesh: so at his last supper after he had taken cōmon bread, and blessed, he sayed: Take, this is my body. 9. Flesh and body is geuen. Ioan. 6.

As in S. Ihon the bread to be geuen and the flesh of Christ is all o [...]e: so in his supper he geueth none other bread besides his owne body. For the substance of the cōmon bread was chaunged by blessing and speaking the wordes. 10. No com­mon bread is geuen. Ioan. 6.

As his bread and flesh was sayd to be in S. Iohn for the lyfe of y ^t world: so in his supper he sayd: This is my body which is geuen for you. 11. The flesh that died is geuen.

As in S. Iohn he saieth, my flessh is meate in deed: so in his supper he saieth: take, eate, this is my body. That whiche is eaten in deed, is meate in deed. 12. The gift is eaten in deed. Ioan. 6.

As in S. Ihon there is mention o [...] drinking the blood of Christ: so in his supper he sayth: drink ye al of this, for this is my blood.

As in S. Ihon there is no mention of wine to be geuen or drū ­ken: 13. The blood is drunkē. Ioan. 6. so Christ in his supper neither spake of wine at the tyme of drīking, nor gaue any wine at all to be drūken, because it was by his words changed into his blood. 14. No wine was [...]run ken. Ioan. 6.

As at Capharuaum certaine of his Disciples went away from him: so at his last supper he did reiect and separate them from his table. And as his twelue Apostles most faithfully taried with him at Capharnaum: so they alone were in the night of his betraying admitted to his holy table. 15. The. xij. only taried [...] both places.

As at Capharnaum when Christ had asked the twelue, whe­ther 16. The. xij. protested in bothe places not to [...]orsake Christ. Ioan. 6. they also wold goe away, S. Peter answered for them (Lord to whom shall we goe?) meaning they were not offended [...], nor [Page 100] wold nōt got from him: euen so after his last supper S. Peter & likewise all the rest sayd they wold not de [...]ie him, though all the world forsoke him, or toke offence against him.

As at Capharnaum Christ sayd, that one of the twelue was a deuill: so at his last supper y ^• Bospel doth tell that Satan entred 17. Iudas was re­proued in both pla­ces. Ioan. 13. into Iudas one of the twelue.

If the tyme, wordes, dedes, & persons throughly agree, it is vnsemely to make them diuerse kindes of eating and drinking, whereof one man at one tyme of the yere speaketh and practiseth to the same Disciples so conformable a doctrine and doing.

¶ It is proued out of the holy Fathers and generall The third Chapiter. Councels, that Christ in S. Ihon spake of his last supper.

THat I may here omit S. Ignatius, who defineth y ^e bread Ignatius [...] epist. ad Roman. of God, of heauen, and of life (which is named in the sixth of S. Ihon) to be the flesh of Christ and his cup or blood: That I may let passe Clemens Alexandrinus, who speaking of Clemens Alexād. De Paeda gogo. li. 1. ca. 6. Ioan. 6. Origen. Hom. 7. sup num. Ioan. 6. the nourishment which we, that are baptized in Christ, haue by him, calleth it not only Christ, the word, milk, bread and drink, but also the flesh and blood, and body of Christ, and the mysterie of bread, alleging diuerse places out of S. Ihon for that pur­pose: Last of all, that I may not stand vpon Origen, who com­paring the fulnes of Baptism to the red sea which was but a shadow, and likewise the Sacramēt of Christes supper to Mau­na, declareth out of S. Ihon that now the flesh of Christ is meate in deed, by that meanes witnessing, that he toke the words of the sixth of S. Ihon to belong to the mysterie o [...] Christes last ban­ket: Surely S. Cyprian doth not only by occasion of other talk, Cypria. in oratio nem Do mini. but euen of set purpose teache, that who so euer for some great fault is any long tyme kept from the body of Christ in the Sa­crament, [Page] he is in danger of euerlasting life. And y ^• because Christ sayd: except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drink his blood, ye shal not haue life in you. And yet he should wholy faile of his proofe, if that place which he bringeth out of S. Ihon, did not proue the necessitie of communicating Sacramentally.

S. Athanasius setting foorth a brief and compendiouse reher­sal Athana­sius in Synopsi. no. testa. lib. 4. Ioan. 6. of the whole diuine Scripture, witnesseth that Christ at his coming to Capharnaum, reasoneth with the multitude concer­ning the mysteries. Which saying of his can not be iustified accor­ding to the historicall sense which he professeth in that worke, if Christ in S. Ihon spake principally of y ^t spirituall eating which is besyde his holy mysteries.

S. Hilarie disputing of the naturall veritie of Christ which is Hilarius libr. 8. de Trinit. Ioan. 6. in vs by the Sacramēt of receauing his flesh, doth not only bring for that intent, these words, My flesh is meate in deed: But also concludeth that as well by the profession of our Lord, as by our own faith Christes flesh is truly in vs. And certainly he meaneth it so to be in vs as we receaue it in his last supper. But if y ^e place by him alleged proue not so muche, his reason lacketh a sufficient ground, for so much as he citeth none other authoritie for that ar­gument of his against the Arrians, but only the words which are in S. Ihon. By those words he affirmeth Christ to be in vs after such sort, that he is in vs naturally, and we naturally in him.

S. Basile intituling his booke of Baptism, and wholy bent to Basilius de bapt. li. 1. ca. 3. declare the Sacraments of Christes Church, sheweth that after our second birth nourishment is necessarie to vs, & straight way bringeth foorth Christes words in S. Ihon: ioyning them with the words of his last supper, which S. Basile sayeth to be writen Ioan. 6. in the end of the Gospels, thereby geuing vs to vnderstand that as the performance was made in the end, so the promise went be­fore. Is it not maruaile now that any thing should be pretended [Page 101] out of this blessed man for the contrarie opinion? But how iustly it is pretended, wee shall see afterward.

Gregorius of Nyssa brother to S. Basile teacheth the flesh of Grego­rius Nys senus in vita Moy sis. Ioan. 6. Christ to be a bodily thing because it is made meate for mans bo­dy. That it is meate he proueth out of S. Ihon. For there only are found the chief words by him alleged, which are, Panis enim qui de coelo descendit qui verus cibus est, non incorporea quaedam res est. For the bread which came down from heauen which is the true meate is not a thing without a body. Quo enim pacto (sayth he) res incorporea corpori cibus fiet? For by what meanes will a thing which lacketh a body be made meate vnto the body? Doubtlesse Christ is made meate vnto our bodies no where els but only in the Sacramēt of his supper. And therefore this great clerck thought him self to reason wel, in bringing such words as are in S. Ihon for that effect which belongeth to the holy cōmu­nion. Because he iudged both places of holy Scripture to be of one argument.

Cyrillus of Hierusalem intreating of the Sacrament of the al­tar, Cyrillus Catech. mysta­gogi. 4. so euidently citeth these words of S. Ihon, Excepte ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, & caet. that noman may doubt of his meaning. And because this part of my work wold be ouer long if I should staye so long vpon euery of the aunciēt Fathers, I besech the studiouse Reader to be content that hereafter I may in fewer words declare euery mans iudgemēt, shewing him the place of the author, where if it please him, he may at more leisure examine all the circumstances. Ambros. de Sacra men. li. 6 cap. 1. Euseb. Emissen. Hom. 5. [...] Pa [...]cha.

S. Ambrose disputing of the truth of Christes flesh in the Eu­charist, although it selfe be not sene, bringeth out of S. Ihon: My flesh is meate in dede, and except ye eate the flesh, &c.

Eusebius Emissenus hauing spoken of the bread and wine of Melchisedech, sheweth Christ to haue spoken of eating his own [Page] [...]esh, & of drinking his own blood in S. Ihon, as of two kindes whereby he is receaued, which is done no where but in Christes supper.

S. Chrysostom is so plaine herein, that of those wordes, the Chryso. Hom. 44 in Ioan. bread which I will geue is my flesh, he maketh none other literal meaning, but such as apperteineth to the Sacrament of Christes body. And yet he expoundeth the former partes of the Chapiter indifferently of spirituall eating and drinking.

S. Augustine albeit he may seme vpon S. Ihon to presse most August. in Ioan. cap. 6. tract. 26. earnestly vpon the w [...]itie, which we haue with Christ by eating his [...]esh and drinking his blood, and by tarying in him, & hauing him tarying in vs: yet he meaneth not to exclude out of those wordes al Sacramentall receauing, but only the vnworthy Sa­cramentall receauing. For he sayth expresly, he that tarieth not in Christ ea [...]eth not spiritually his flesh▪ albei [...] carnally and visibly he presse with his teath the Sacramēt of [...] body and blood of Christ. There is a dubble spiritual eating of Christ.

So that by S. Augustine there is a dubble spirituall eating of Christes flesh, one without the Sacrament, and an other with the Sacrament. Christ so spake of both, that he spake specially of the most per [...]it, which is obteined by worthy receauing of y ^e Sa­crament. August▪ in Ioan. cap. 6. As the greatest signe there of, so the highest [...] is in this Sa crament. August. de [...]uit. Dei li. 27 cap. 5. Ioan. 6. Out of this worthy receauing riseth that greate societie & vnitie with Christ & his mysticall body, whereof S. Augustine so much speaketh: This is the Sacramēt of Godlines, the signe of vnitie, the bonde of cha [...]itie. Without eating of this, one way or other, no life euerlastīg is to be loked for: & by eating y ^• same wor thely in y ^• best kinde of way (which is in the Sacrament of the al­tar) the highest degree of vnitie with Christ our head is ob [...]eined.

As the best signe of vnitie is in the forin of this Sacrament, so the best effect springeth o [...]t of the worthy receauing of y ^e substāce which is vnder that form. Therefore in other places S. Augustīe [...] words out o [...] S. Ihon (This bread w [...]cih I w [...]ll [Page 102] geue is my flesh for the life of the world) to shew the Priesthod of Melchisedech, which Priesthod him selfe declareth to be in the August. Epist. 95 Sacrament of the altar saying: Melchicedech prolato Sacramen­to mensae dominicae, nouit aeternum eius Sacerdotium figurare. Melchisedech by bringing forth the Sacrament of our Lords ta­ble, August. de conse. Euange. li. 3. ca. 1. de ciuit. li. 17. c 5. de verb. Apostol. Serm. 2. de pecca▪ mer. li. 1. ca. 20. & 24. in Psal. 33. &. 98. cō tra Cre­scō. Grā. li. 1. c. 25. de verb. Do. Ser. 11. &. 46. q. ī Leui. ca. 57. Hieron. in. 1. ca. Epist. ad Ephes. Ioan. 6. Cyrillus Alexan­drinus. li. 4. c. 14. &. 16. did know to shew the [...]igure of his euerlasting Priesthod.

Furthermore S. Augustine expounding these words of S. Ihon of the last supper in very many places of his works most expresly sayth, that S. Ihon spake nothing of the body and blood of our Lord in the thirtenth Chapiter (where he mentioned the last supper,) sed plane alibi multo vberius hinc Dominum locutū esse testatur. But verily in an other place S. Ihon witnesseth our Lord to haue spoken much more copiously thereof. Except S. Augustine thought y ^• sixth Chapiter of S. Ihon to appertein literally to the Sacrament of the altar, he wold neuer haue sayd that S. Ihon spake not of the supper in the due place, because he spake of it in an other place more copiously. But of S. Augustie I will speake again hereafter.

S. Hierome sayth, the flesh and blood of Christ is vnderstanded two ways or in two maners: Either that spirituall and diuine, whereof he sayd. My flesh is meate in dede and my blood is drinke in dede, &c▪ or els y ^• flesh which was crucified for vs, and y ^• blood which was shed with the speare of the Souldiour. And that one substance is in eche maner of flesh and blood (only the maner of geuing it being diuerse) it appereth also by the sentēce folowing, where he sayeth: one flesh of the Sai [...]res may see the saluatiō of God, an other flesh can not possesse heauen. Not that the substāce of natural flesh, but the worthines of the men is diuerse.

S. Cyrillus of Alexandria writing vpon S. Ihon of purpose and shewing the most literall sense thereof that he could deuise, or learn, interpreateth the whole sixth chapiter of S. Ihon of the [Page] Sacramēt of the altar, naming very many tymes the partaking of the holy mysteries and the mysticall blessing, and the commu­nicating of the holy chalice. Also vpon those words, I will reyse Cyrillus in [...]. li. 4. ca. 15. him vp again, he maketh this exposition: Ego, id est, corpus meū quod comedetur, resuscitabo eum. I will reise him, that is to say, my body that shalbe eaten, shall reise him. As if he sayd, I will reise him, because my body which shalbe eaten of him, shall reise him.

Sedulius proueth the chalice of blessing to be the communica­ti [...]g Sedulius in 1. Cor. 10. Leo in serm. 6. de Ieiun. mens. 7. Theodo ritus in D [...]alo▪ 1. of Christes blood according as Christ said: He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, &c.

Leo the great sayth, we ought so to communicate with our Lords table, that we doubt nothing of the veritie of his body and blood, seing he sayd: Except ye eat the flesh, &c.

Theodoritus speaking of the holy mysteries, ioyneth with the words of the supper these also: The bread which I wil geue is my flesh, which I will geue for the life of the world.

Isychius shewing that the penitent person may eate the bread Isychius in Leuit. li. 6. c. 22. whereof Christ sayd: The bread which I will geue is my flesh, ioy­neth there with all the words of S. Paul: Let a man proue him self and so eate: Declaring both sayings to belong to one mysterie.

Theophilact vpon these words: The bread which I will geue, witnesseth that Christ manifestly telleth vs in this place of the mysticall communion of his body. Damasce nus de Orthod. l. 4. c. 14.

Damascenus declaring that Christ sayd: This is my body, and not the figure of my body, bringeth for the same purpose: Except ye eate the flesh, &c.

Prosper Aquitanicus ioyneth these words, Except ye eate the Prosper de vocat. gent. lib. 1. cap. 18. flesh, &c. with these, except a man be born again of water, to shew that the Sacraments of Christ doe geue vs grace, and not o [...]r own works which goe before baptism. As therefore S. Cyprian [Page 103] and S. Augustin applie those two sayings to two seuerall Sa­craments of baptism, and of the Eucharist: so must we think that Procop. in com­mēt. in cap. 12. Prosper doth who most diligently folowed S. Augustine. Proco pius Gazeus writeth, y ^• these words: except ye eate my flesh, &c. Typum mysteriorum quae sub ipso latent, continent, conteine the foorm of the mysteries which lie priuie vnder it.

Eucherius teaching that Christ feedeth vs with the nourish­mēts Eucher. in 2. Reg. cap. 4. of the healthiull mysterie, saith that he distributeth to euery man a [...]ake of that bread, which came down [...]rom heauen and ge­ueth life to the world.

Cassiodorus saying that Christ did co [...]secrate his body & blood Cassiod. in psalm. 109. Ioan. 6. Primat. in 1. Cor. cap. 10. in geuing of bread and wine, proueth it because him self sayd: Ex­cept ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man, &c.

Primatius shewing how the chalice of blessing is the commu­nicating of the blood of Christ, bringeth our Sauiour his words in S. Ihon saying, he that eateth my flesh & drinketh my blood, tarieth in me and I in him. S. Bede folowed in all points S. Augustin, whose words he reciteth both vpon S. Ihon, & vpon Ioan. 6. Beda in Ioan. 6. 1. Cor. 10 & 11. Angelo­mus in 1. Reg. c. 2. Ha [...]o in 1. Cor. cap. 11. Bernar­dusin [...]. 90. vers. tertio. S. Paule. And therefore we nede not doubt but he is wholy of y ^• same mind.

Angelomus vpon the first booke of the kings reciteth S. Ihon in the same sense.

Haimo vpon S. Paule intreating of the Sacrament confer­reth S. Paules words with the sixth of S. Ihon.

S. B [...]rnard although he say the eating of the flesh of Christ to be the folowing of his painful conuersation in suffering voluntarie [...] for his sake, yet well knowing that Christ spake literally also of an other kinde of eating, he saieth, that Christ did speake of penance in a figure, that is to saie, couertly as rather inclu­ding penance vnder the wordes which he named, then expresse­ly naming it. Vnde & hoe designat illibatum illud altaris sacra­mentum, [Page] vbi dominicum corpus accipimus. wherefore that pure Sacrament of the altar where we take our Lords body betoke­neth so much.

Behold the true and literall meaning of Christes wordes is to haue his flesh eaten in the sacrament of the altar. But that ea­ting importeth a folowing of Christ in his painful conuersati­on. For as that forme of bread (saieth S. Bernard) is seene to enter into vs: so let vs knowe that Christ thorough that con­uersation which he had in earth, eutreth into vs, to dwell by faith in our hartes.

Whereby we maie perceaue that S. Bernard vnderstandeth the sixth chapter of S. Iohn so literally of the sacrament of the altar, that thereupon he buildeth a couert and a figuratiue prea­ching of penance.

Euthymius noteth that Christ did not say: I do geue my Euthy­mius in 6. Ioan. Ioan. 6. Nicolaus Methon. In tract. flesh, but I wil geue, because he minded to geue it in his last sup­per. Nicolaus Methonensis hauing first rehersed the wordes of the Gospell, this is my body, straight expoundeth all the chap­ter of S. Iohn thereof, shewing the profit which we take by this Sacrament.

Samonas after the wordes of the supper declared, as not be­tokening Samonas in tract. a figure or image, affirmeth Christ to haue said in other places the same thing, and straight reciteth the sixth chapiter of S. Iohn. I omitt here Petrus Cluniacensis, Guimundus, Al­gerus, Lanfrancus, S. Thomas de Aquino, Albertus Magnus, Dionysius the Carthusian, Nicolaus de Lyra, & a great number of late writers, which all agreed vpon the same vnderstanding of Gonciliū Triden­tinum. sessione. 13. ca. 2. the sixth of S. Iohu.

But what speake I of these Fathers one by one? not only the Councel of Trident hath taken witnesse for the Sacrament of the altar out of S. Iohn, but also the seuenth kept at Nice, and the [Page 104] first kept at Ephesus doth allege against Nestorius the here­tike Concili­um Nice num 2. Concili­um Ephe sinum in epist. ad Nestori­um. for the presence of Christes person in the Sacramēt, the wor­des of S. Iohn his gospell.

Yea the whole west church readeth the same gospell of S. Iohn, when it celebrateth the feast of corpus Christi daie. And surely whē the Church kepeth any feast, whereof there is mention in the gospell according to the letter, it alwaies chooseth to reade that part, where the feast is literally mentioned. It wold there­fore The prac tise of the churche. be very absurd, sith S. Mathew, S. Marke, and S. Luke, haue written so distinctly the historie of Christes supper, to leaue them all, and to reade the wordes of Christ in S. Iohn, if the same wordes had any other sense more literall then that, which belongeth to the supper of Christ.

So that I trust there is no possible cause of doubting to a sober man, but that the wordes of Christ in this chapiter maie literally and according to the first and chief meaning of them, be brought to declare, what we ought to thinke of his bodily presence in the Sacrament of his last supper. But if any man be not fully satis­fied therein, let him reade the processe folowing, and he shal haue lesse cause to doubt any more in this matter.

¶ Answer is made to their obiections, who teache out The iii [...]. Chapit. of the holy fathers, that the sixth chapiter of S. Iohn ought to be expounded only of spiritual eating.

FOr their opinion, who think the sixth chapiter of S. Iohn to speake only of the spiritual and not of the worthy sacra­mental eating of Christes body, the authoritie of certaine fa­thers The argu ments for the contra rie part. is alleged, who are thought somtimes to expound the wordes of this chapiter, partly of belefe in Christ, partly of the vnitie which riseth by the sacramentes of baptisme and of penance.

[Page]But it maie seme a sufficient answere to that obiection, if we The aun­swere. saie first, that so many fathers do not expound the wordes of 1. Christ in the sixth chapter of S. Iohn of any other one argu­ment, as doe conformably expound it of the supper of our lord. And when we speake of the authoritie of the fathers, their con­sent The con­sent of Fa thers is mo [...]t to be followed. Math. 18. and agreement in one point is the chiefe waie to know (ac­cording to the promise of Christ) in what case they are specially to be followed.

Secondly those fathers which are named some where to haue 2. expounded these wordes otherwise then of the supper of Christ, haue them selues in other places expounded the same wordes of the verie supper: As we maie perceaue by the places of S. Cy­prian, of S. Hierome, of S. Augustine, and of S. Bernard, be­fore alleged. Whereby their authoritie is as great for that which I say, as it is against it.

Thirdly no one of the auncient writers is brought forth, who 3. denieth these words in S. Iohn to appertaine to the supper. Li. Con­fess. 12. cap 28. 29. 20. And what skilleth it, if many senses of one place be found out, so long as they all stand together? Is it not S. Augustines rule that all such senses may be well kept and all admitted?

Fourthly many of those places which are brought for the con trary opinion, do manifestly, and as it semeth to me, inuincibly 4. proue the wordes in S. Iohn to be literally meant of the sup­per of Christ.

S. Cyprian (who is first alleged for the other side) putteth Cypria. ad Quiri num. li. 3. cap. 25. &. 26. Ioan. 3. Ioan 6. forth this truth, that a man without baptisme can not come t [...] the kingdome of heauen: because except a man be borne againe of water, and of the holy ghost, he can not enter into the kingdo­me of God. Likewise, except ye eate the flessh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood, ye shall not haue life in you.

Now they suppose that S. Ciprian bringeth these two sayin­ges [Page 105] for baptisme alone. Wherefore (say they) it was not sayd of the supper, except ye eate the flesh &c.

But herein they seme to be deceaued, because the custome of the primitiue church i many places was, to geue the sacramēt of y ^• al­tar Baptism & the Eu­ [...] [...]ere in some pla­ces geuen together. Dionys. de Eccle. Hierar. c. 1. i fine. Ambros. de ijs qui init. ca. 9. Cypria. de lapsis. Cypria. ad Quir. cap. 26. together with the sacrament of baptisme, not so much for ne­cessitie, as for sureties sake.

Hereof we haue mention i Dionysius Areopagita, and in S. Am brose. In so much that y ^e very infantes were in y ^e primitiue church in some countries made partakers of the sacrament of y ^e altar.

Seing then y ^e sacament of y ^e altar was vsed to be geuen straight after y ^• sacrament of baptism, therefore S. Cyprian ioyned toge­ther those two witnesses whiche did belong to those two Sacra­mentes, & that is vndoubtedly proued by his owne wordes, for after he had cited those wordes in S. Iohn, it followeth [...]mediatly Parum esse baptizari et eucharistiam accipere, nisi quis factis et opere perficiat. It is litle worth to be baptized and to receaue the eucharist, except a man by deedes and workes make all perfit.

Behold as he alleged two sayings of Christ, so he nameth the two sacramēts whereof they were spoken. Thus I think it most clere that S. Ciprian did not expound the eating of the flessh of Christ as spoken by baptism only.

And y ^e lyke may be said of Innocentius, Augustinus, Eusebius Tob. 2. August. Epist. 93. &. 106. Euseb. Hom. 5. in Pascha Iustinus Martyr in Apo­logia. 2. Ioan. 6. Emissenus, and of suche others, whiche bring these woords of Christ, except ye eate the fleshe of the sonne of man &c. against the Pelagians, to proue that infantes cannot haue lyfe in them selues, vnles they be first baptized. For seing they knew, that no man could come to the eucharist, except he were first baptized (as also Iustinus Martyr hath witnessed) & seing y ^• Eucharist was namely called the bread of life, whiche who so did eate, he should liue for euer: and who by any fault of his own did not eate it, he should not haue life in himself: moreouer, seing the person bapti­zed, [Page] had not only Christ in him spiritually through baptism, but had right vnto the very Sacrament of Christes supper, and also being of lawfull discretion customably receaued it straight after baptism: these things being so, it is most true, that who so is not at all baptized, he is not only excluded from y ^• kingdom of heauē (as y ^• Pelagians graunted) but likewise (whiche thing they de­nyed) Ioan. 3. from euerlasting life, because he is by all meanes excluded from the food of life, whiche except we eate by some meanes or other, we cannot haue life in vs. & we cannot eate it by any mea­nes at all, that is to say, not so muche as spiritually, except we be first baptized, either in deed or in perfit desire. And being once baptized we doo eate it in some effect at the very font, and really may, and commonly must eate it afterward in the Sacrament to a farther effect.

So that the reasons of those Fathers do not import, as though Christ meant in S. Ihon of spirituall eating only, but that he meant of that kind of eating at the least: and meant a farther kind Ioan. 3. of eating also in that case, when farther occasion should be mini­stred. For as when Christ saide: except a man be born againe of water and of the holye Ghost, he can not enter into the kingdom of heauen, he so meant in those wordes to include his saluation, that would be born & vowed him self to be born again (although by preuention of death he were not really so borne) that yet not withstanding, he meant muche more to haue most men really so born of water and of the holy ghost: Right so, when Christ sayd: The pre­ceptof bap tism, and of eating Christes flesh are like. except ye eate the [...]lesh of the sonne af man & drinke his blood, ye shall not haue life in you, he so meant to binde vs to eate his fleash, that he should haue life which was at the least spiritually fead there with in baptisme, and yet also that most men should be bound to feed really thereon, and that he should haue most perfit [Page 106] life, who was [...]d sacramentally with his fleshe and blood in the Sacrament of the Altar.

As therefore not withstandinge that the will of being baptised [...]seth to some, others must be sacramentally baptised by that Ioan. [...]. very precept of Christ in S. Ihon: euen so though it be sufficient for [...]tes to eate Christ in baptisme spiritually, yet other are boūd by y ^• same very precept to eate his flesh Sacramētally. Now to a [...]irme the one sense whiche was lesse meant, denying there­withall the chief sense which was principally meant, it is no smal iuiurie to Gods worde. Certeinly S. Innocentins, Gusebius, & S. Augu [...] in saying that infants can not haue life except they [...]t the least wise eate Christ in baptisme, did not meane to say that these wordes except ye eate the flesh, & cae. were only spoken of baptisme, or els more principally of baptisme, then of Christes supper, but rather they meant cleane contrarie, as it may appere by S. Augustines owne wordes. who disputing against the Pe­lagiās in this very question which we now speak of, saith expres­ly, Augu. de pec. mer. li. 1. c. 20. Dominum audiamus non quidem hoode. Sacramento lauacri dicentem, sed de sacramento sanctae mensae suae (quo nemo ritè nisi baptizatus accedit) nisi manducaueritis carnem meam, & caet. Let vs heare our Lorde, verily not saying this of the Sacramente of baptisme, but saying it of the Sacramēt of his holy table, (whither no man cometh well, vnlesse he be baptised) except ye eate my flesh, and soforth.

S. Augustine here declareth the precept of eatinge Christes flesh which is in the sixt of S. Ihon, so to appertein to the Sacra­mēt of his holy supper, that it apperteineth not in suche sorte vn­to baptisme. And yet if by eating his flesh he meant only beleuing in him, and the receauing of grace or the vnitie of Christes mysti­call body, then truely those wordes, except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man, should belong first to baptisme where we are vni­ted [Page] first, and incorporated vnto Christ [...] But S. Augustine [...] ­meth a difference betwene baptisme and the Eucharist by these wordes, in so [...]uche as he saith God spake of the one & not of the other. But yf he spake of spirituall vniting vs to Christ withou [...] the Sacrament of his owne supper, then he rather spake of bap­tisme then of his supper, whiche S. Augustine him selfe denieth. Therefore S. Augustine meant, that Christ in S. Ihon literally Lib: 1. ca. [...]. promysed the gift of his supper, but yet to them only that were baptised. And for y ^• cause he geueth a reason why this gift whiche is proper to Christes supper, is applied to the infants which are Augu. in Epi. 106. 10. 2. baptised, his reason is, quo n [...]mo ritè nisi baptizatus accedit, to the Sacrament of which holy table no man cometh duely, with­out he be baptised. y ^• which reason also he brinketh another where for the same purpose.

If the Sacrament of his holy table be taken for the thing and general effect of that Sacramēt (as some expound S. Augustine) then the reason alleged is false. for some man, yea all men that are worthely baptised, in the very baptisme come to the thing, to the grace, and to the geuerall effect of Christes holy table, because they come by baptisme to the vnitie of his mysticall body, whiche is a generall effect wrought in the Sacrament as wel of baptism as of Christes table, as S. Paule saith: we are one bread, one bo­dy, [...]. Cor. 10 all that receaue of the one bread.

But if we take the thing or effect of Christes table for the spe­ciall effect rysing thence (whiche is the nourishing and maintey­ [...] of life [...]ing) that effect being spoken of in S. Ihon doth inf [...] of [...], that the ordinarie ca [...]se of the same effect is also spoken of▪ which is the blessed Eucharist. For euery effect presuppose [...] necessary cause. But the cause without whiche we can not ordinarily maintein o [...]r spirituall life, is the Sacra­ment of Christes supper. He therefore sayinge except ye eate my [Page 107] flesh, ye shal not haue life in y [...]; meaneth exceptye co [...] [...]he­lye to the Sacrament of my supper, ye shall not kepe and preserue lyfe in you.

For, that the verbe, [...] habere, doth in holy scripture signifie Habere. not onlye the firste obteining of a thing, but also the keping and Hieron. adu. Iou. lib. 1. 1. Cor. 7. vse thereof. S. Hierom hath well noted against Iouinian, vppon those words of S. Paul: Vnusquisque habeat vxorē suam, let eue­ry ma [...]haue and hold his wife.

I make [...]o doubt but al men of iudgement will confesse, that The main tenance of life depen­deth vpo [...] the Eucha rist alone. when a Sacrament is instituted of Christ for a speciall purpose, that purpose dependeth ordinarily vpon that Sacrament alone. and although Christ be able otherwyse to saue [...]en [...], yet we can not warrant that he will saue him, who being of lawfull age doth abstein voluntarily from the Sacrament of his holy table.

Thus muche I haue said concerning S. Augustines mynde, [...] whose workes I neuer saw one syllable, why to think that he would the literall sense of the sixth of S. Ihon to [...]long only to spirituall eating. But I haue sene very muche and haue alleged, and shal hereafter allege many places out of him, wherein it ap­ [...] most clerely, that he meant otherwyse. Basilius in ep. 141

S. Basil is also brought foorth, who saith that Christ in those wordes: except ye eate my flesh, &c. calleth his whole mysticall coming fleshe and blood. But what of that? is not therefore that saying verisied also of the Sacrament of his last supper? whiche The Eu­charist is y ^• somme of al y ^• Christ dyd in his fleshe. who so receaueth worthely, he is partaker of all the mysteries of Christ, of his [...], of his preaching, of his passiō, [...] ­tion, ascension, and of al the rest his doings and saings. so that it is a very good sense to say: except ye beleue that the so [...]e of mā [...]ath done and taught in fleshe, & except your selu [...] by his grace [...] and kepe all his commaundements, ye shall not haue lyse in [...], but S Bastil knewe right wel that the chief Sacrament left [Page] by Christ was the institution of his last supper, and therfore that Sacramēt is a singular peece of that which Christ in these words commaundeth vs to beleue and to performe, and for that cause in the place where S. Basil purposely disputeth of the holy Sacra­ments, Basilius debaptis. li. 11. c. 3. he declareth all the later parte of the sixth of S. Ihon to appertein specially to Christes supper.

Their reasons are aunswered who denye Christ to speake properly of his last supper in S. Ihon.

THe first reason which is brought, to shew that Christ in S. 1. Ihon promysed not properly the Sacramente of his holy table, is grounded vpon this negatiue proposition, because there is no mention made of bread and wine, which are the matter and elements wherof his supper is made. As though he The aun­swer. might not promise the thing which sho [...]ld be made in his banket vnlesse he named that whereof it should be made. A man may be inuited to a pastie or tart or some lyke confection, although it be not tolde him of what stuf it shalbe made▪ it skilled nothing for y ^• multitude of men to know the order of [...]king his banket, which thing was committed to the Apostles alone. But it skilled much for them all to know what kynd of food they should receaue.

Againe the matter of any sacramēt is not more necessary, then the forme of wor [...] which is vsed therein. But when Christ sayd: except a man b [...] [...]orne againe of water and of the holy Ghost, he Ioan. 3. can not enter into the kingdome of heauen, He shewed not by what wordes the water whiche washeth, should be made a sacra­ment to our vse & profite. Therefore (if this kind of reasoning be good) he spake not at all of baptisme to Nicode [...]us, whiche is a false conclusion. In [...]ede it foloweth wel, Christ in S. Ihon spea­keth neither of bread, nor of wine, therfore he meaneth not to bind [Page] vs by his wordes in that Chapiter to receaue v [...]der both kinds▪ but onely bindeth vs to receaue that thing which is his flesh and blood, vnder whatsoeuer kind we receaue it. But to say that he speaketh notat all of his fleshe in respect of the sacra [...]nt of the altar, that is not true▪ as I haue proued before.

An other argumente of theirs, is, that Christe speaketh of 2. eatinge him by faith, and therefore saith: this is the worke of God, that ye should beleue in him whom he hath sent. He that beleueth in [...] shall not hunger, but there be some of you whiche beleue not, so that the eating is the beleuing, and the not beleuing is the not eating. Christ in dede speaketh of belefe which is very The aun­swere. Cyr. li. 4 [...]a. 17. in Ioan. necessarie and euen the foundation (as S. Cyrillus noteth) of his last supper, but he speaketh also of a farther act, whiche is to build vpon the foundation of faith the working of the euerlasting meat that he wil geue▪ and to work not onely by faith, but lykewise by eating and drinking, and therefore as he chalengeth belefe to his godhead, so doth he say that we muste eate his fleshe and drinke his blood according as he is the sonne of man.

Thus may we consyder in Christes wordes, a dubble kind of eating, the one is called māducare ex hoc pane, to eate of his bread The diffe rence be­twene e [...] ­tinge of Christ, & eatinge Christ. the which bread Christ is, the other is manducare hunc panem, to eate this bread. by faith we eate of Christ, by his last supper we eate Christ. By eating of him we partake some effect of grace frō him: By eating him we receaue his whole flesh, blood, soule and godhead into our bodies. As therfore Christ willeth vs not ouly to eate of him, but also to eate him self: so besyds the eating which is by faith, he geueth vs to vnderstand there is another eatinge proper to his last supper described in S. Ihon.

The third argument of theirs is, that Christ was the bread of [...]. life presently, when he spake to the Iewes. For he sayd I am the bread of life, or the liuely bread which am come downe from hea­uen [Page] & my father doth geu [...] you y ^• tru [...] bread from heauen. There­fore Christ was presently the bread of life, yea rather he was so when he was incarnate firste of the virgin. for euen then he came down from heauē. but how can this stand together, if his words be applied to his last supper, which was not yet instituted? The aun­swere.

Christ through his Godhead was the bread of life to vs all for euer, and straight vpon his incarnation he was the bread of life through his manhod, and so continued stil at the tyme when he spake to the Iewes, and after that visible and corporall sort he was to be eaten by faith & not corporally. But he sa [...]d also: worke the meate which the Sonne of man wil geue you, and the bread which I wil geue, is my flesh. This gift which Christ sayth he wil make, differeth in tyme and maner from the gift which his Father doth presently make, so that as he is the bread of life by faith, so he wilbe the bread of life by corporal participation. which second gift is fulfilled in his last supper which he him self now promiseth. For no reason can be shewed why Christ should say his gift was to come, except it had bene some other gift thē to eate him by faith alone. The which eating by faith sith it was lawful euen at the same instant wherein he spake, he wold not say: I wil goue, of any spiritual eating. therefore he spake of the Sacramental geuing which he intended to make at his last supper.

Against this last saying of mine, Caietane or some other of his The iii [...]. argu [...]t. opiniō wil pretend, that Christes gift whereof he speaketh in S. Ihon was in dede to come, but yet not meant of his last supper, because it was the gift of him self to death vpon the Crosse which This obie ction hath many things to be wei­ghed in it. he meant. And therefore he sayd, the bread which I wil geue is my [...] for the life of the world, signifying that the gift which he wil make shalbe such as shal redeme the world. Which gift was only performed vpon the Crosse, & was partaken always of the old Fathers, and may be dayly & howerly partaken of vs. Which [Page 109] points doe not agree with the gift of y ^e holy Eucharist in Christes [...]upper.

This argument although it were wittily deuised, yet it is in­sufficient, The [...] ­sw [...]. and for many causes.

First becaus [...] Christ spake of a meate which he wold geue euen vnto our bodies, and not only vnto our soules. And that may [...]ppeare to be so, as wel for that he ordeined the miracle of multi­plying fiue loaues to be an introduction to this talke (the which loaues were corporally eaten) as also for that he shewed him self to be the true bread, which would fulfill and excede [...]anna the fi­guratiue Cyril. in Ioan. lib. 4. ca. 16. breade of the Iewes. and therefore S. Cyrill saith, that Christ saying, my fleshe is meat in dede, maketh a distinction be­twene the mysticall benediction and manna▪ for manna dyd not geue life euerlasting, but by the blessing of the mysterie (saith S. Cyrill) we take the verie sonne of God. Nowe seing manna was eaten of the Iewes, both spiritually of the iust men, and also cor­por [...]llye of all the Israelites, Christ who sayd his father to geue presently the true bread, and promysed that him selfe would geue Christ pro miseth his flesh as he gaue 5. loa ues and manna to y ^• Iewes. hereafter his flesh to be eaten, which is [...]ate in dede, dyd shewe, the spirituall eating of manna to be presently fulfilled by his fa­thers gifte, whereby he toke fleshe, and that the corporall eating shuld likewise be hereafter fulfilled in his last supper.

Whiche being wel consydered, it is plain that Christ when he speaketh of a gift which he will make, doth speake of suche a kind of gifte as the miracle of fyue loaues, as the figure of manna, as the name of bread and nature of eating requireth. But his death vpon the crosse is not the fulfilling of manna, in that respect as manna was eaten either corporally or spiritually. It is in dede the cause of all our feeding both in spirit and body, the fontain of all our sacraments, the welspring of al grace. B [...]t we seek a simi­litude of things which are spoken together, an agreement of one [Page] matter with an other.

Manna was a sacramēt onely and not properly a sacrifice, and Manna wa [...] [...] Sa cr [...]te [...]ely. therefore it being eatē betokened the gift of Christ which he wold make in his supper, wherein the true manna shulde be sacramen­tally eaten. For which cause after Christ had said, the bread which I will geue is my flesh, he both commanded his flesh to be eaten & shewed the profit of eating it, and concluded in this wise, not as your fathers haue eaten māna & be dead, he that eateth this bread, Ioan. 6. shall line for euer. If now we must eate that which he wil geue, & we must eate it after the rate as manna was eaten (albeit y ^• thing eaten is far better) surely the gift promised must be of a thing that De cōse. di. 2. c. de hac. Marke this place of S. Hie­ro [...]. in cap. 1. ad Ephes. shalbe geuen to vs in a supper, and not y ^• shalbe made for vs vpō the Crosse. for noman (as it is alleged out of Origines) eateth properly the flesh of Christ as it was crucified. In so much that S. Hierom distincteth expresly the flesh of Christ, whereof Christ speaketh in S. Ihon, from the respect whiche the same flesh hath being crucified. For although it be one substāce, yet it is cru [...]fied as a sacrisice onely, but it is eaten as a sacrament wherin the sa­crifice is partaken.

Secondarily the Greeke text maketh mention of two gifts:

The one of that which Christ will make to vs, which also is y ^• same substance y ^• he wil geue for vs. The bread (sayth he) which I wil geue is my flesh, the which I wil geue for the life of the world. Chr [...]t ma keth two diuerser [...]o mises of geuing. It is not in vaine sayd twise I wil geue. For he wil geue one and the same flesh both as a Sacramētal food, & as a bloody sacrific [...]: the one gift he wil make in his supper, the other vpon the Crosse,

Neither doth it skill that the latin copies report but once I wil geue, for as they say that which is true, so the same truth is made the plainer by the greke text. God forbid we should so vnderstād the one, as to make y ^• other false or super [...]ons, seing both may stand right well together.

[Page 110]Thirdly it ought diligently to be marked y ^• Christ sayd before, worke the euerlasting meate which the Sonne of man wil geue you. He there said he would geue meate vnto them, but he determined not what kind of meate it was, but now expounding the kind of meate be sayth, and the bread (or meate) which I wil geue is my flesh.

As then the meate which y ^• Sonne of man sayd he would geue Christ pr [...] miseth to geue his flesh to vs was promised to be geuen to vs (for he sayd dabit vobis, he wil geue to you) euen so the kind of meate, to wit, the [...]esh of Christ which he wil geue, must be vnderstāded of that gift which he wil make, nobis to vs, and not only pro nobis, for vs. But his death is geuen more properly for vs, then to vs. His death, I say, was paied to God the Father, to whom we were detters, and it was Christes death was for vs ra­ther then to vs. paied for vs and in our behalf, but his death was not properly geuen to vs. For then a sacrifice should be made of Christ to vs, and consequently God the Father is robbed of his glory, and that glory is geuen to men. From which thought all good men doe abhorre.

All is one to say, the sonne of man will geue, and I will geue, to say, euerlasting meate, and the bread which is Christes flesh. But it was expresly sayd in the first proposition, Dabit vobis he will geue it to you, therefore in the second it is to be supplied, the bread which I will geue to you, is my flesh for the life of y ^• world, that is to say, it is the same flesh which I will offer to my Father to the end the iust men of the world may liue for euer. And so a reason is geuen by Christ why his flesh is that euerlasting meate vnto vs which he sayd before tarieth into life euerlasting. For y ^• which is offered meritoriously to God for the life of the whole world, must nedes euen by that sacrifice haue strength in it selfe to quicken all that eate it worthely, and to reconcile the parta­kers thereof to God.

[Page]Farthermore, when Christ sayd: The bread which I will geue is my flesh, he sayd in effect, The eatable thing which I wil geue is my flesh, as if it were in other termes sayd, I wil geue you my flesh to be eaten. For bread vnto the Hebrewes doth shew all y ^•, What bread is in this place. which is apt to be eaten of man. Christ [...]ad the Iewes work the euerlasting meate which he wold geue. They straight sayd, their Fathers had eaten Manna, thinking that Christ was not able to geue them a better kind of bread. Then Christ shewing that his Father had geuen them him self by his incarnation the true bread of God, last of all cometh to shew what bread he him self wold geue them. And the bread, sayth he, which I will geue, that is to wit, the Manna, the foode, the meate which I wil geue is my flesh, so that by the promise of bread he sheweth him self to speake properly of a banket which is to come.

The Iewes who knew the Hebrew phrase, albeit they did a­misse in that they taried not to see how y ^• promise should be per­foormed, yet they vnderstode right well that Christ sayd: I will geue you my flesh to eate. And therefore they in other words re­porting the same sense, ask, how this man is able to geue them To geue bread which is flesh, is to geu. flesh to [...] [...]aten his flesh to be eaten? As who should say, we vnderstand that he promiseth vs the eating of his flesh, but we see not that he is able to perfoorm it, in such sort as Manna was geuen to our fore [...]a­thers. Neither is any man able to deny, but the Iewes toke the words of Christ after this sense, [...]s knowing him to promise his flesh to be really eaten. The which sense surely is against their o­pinion who suppose that Christ meant only of the gift of his flesh vpon the Crosse.

Yea Christ alloweth the sense of the Iewes cōcerning the na­turall sound of his words, and (as S. Basile hath noted) with a Basil. de baptis. li. 1. cap. 3. vehement repetition signifieth, he wil so truly geue his flesh to be eaten, that except they do eate is, they shall not haue life in them [Page 111] selues. Neither is it to be doubted but if they had so obediently submitted them selues to Christ cōcerning the maner of perfoor­ming his gift, as they vnderstode what he promised, they had not offended at all. For they lacked rather belefe, then wit or vnder­standing.

What shall I say more? The circumstance of the whole talk, the Greektext, the like words going before, the propriety of the Hebrew tong, the vnderstanding of the Iewes, the othe and cō ­firmation of Christ geue a witnesse aboue al exception, that when he sayd, The bread which I will geue is my flesh, he meant, I that The mea­ning of Christes promise. am the true bread, which by incarnation came down from heauē, I that am presently sent and geuen to you to be beleued on of my Father, I will hereafter geue mine own flesh, euen the same flesh which is offered for the life of the world, to be meate vnto you y ^• wil tarie with me, which haue the words of eternall life. Which sense being thus proued, their sense who wold haue the gift of Christes death only to be meant, is not sufficient or full enough for the right interpretation of this place, but it must be also meant of the last supper, as all the Fathers both Greek and Latin haue bene shewed before to ha [...]e taken it, and as all these reasons doe euidently conuince.

Now whereas they (who dissent from me in this matter) say, that Christ speaketh here of that gift which was common to the whole world, euen to the Patriarchs and Prophets, and there­fore that it is a spirituall gift (for els Dauid and Abraham could The aun­swere. not haue partaken it) I answere, that Christ doth not promise in these words any one meate vnto the whole world, but he promi­seth his flesh to be eaten, the which flesh is geuen for the whole world. For as at his last supper he sayd: This is my body which is or shalbe geuen for you (thereby geuing vs in his supper a far Lucae. 22. 1. Cor. 11. better meale, then he gaue to Moyses or Elias) euen so in this [Page] place, when he promiseth to geue vs the bread which is his flesh for y ^• world, he meaneth not that we shall haue no more then Ia­cob had, but that our meate is such as also is the propitiation for 1. Ioan. 2. the synnes of the whole world. By which words it is shewed y ^• our meat is also an externall sacrifice, and not that it is only a spirituall food receaued by faith and charitie.

Concerning that daily we may eate y ^• bread which Christ pro­miseth, it is not against the Sacrament of his supper, which is left to be our daily and supersubstantial bread: Either because we Math. 6. may come daily to it, or els because being receaued at certaine tymes, it always tarieth with vs, by some spirituall effect, which the Sacramentall receauing worketh in vs. And as the absolutiō which we receaue of the Priest at certain tymes, causeth a conti­nual Penance in vs through all our life: so a Sacramental recea­uing of Christes body causeth a cōtinuall eating of him by spirit. Now Christ so meant to haue his flesh eaten spiritually, that the ordinarie cause of that feeding should consist in the Sacrament of his last supper. for that Sacrament mainteineth our spiritual life as S. Paule teacheth. The last reason of the contrarie part 1. Co. 10. is thus foormed.

Christ in S. Iohn speaketh of that eating, which maketh vs tary in him, and him to tary in vs. But that is not alwayes the effecte of the Sacramentall eating. for as S. Paul sayeth, a man 1. Co. 11. maye eate Christes body in the Sacrament of the altar vnwor­thely, and to his damnation. Therefore, say they, Christ speaketh not in S. Ihon of sacramentall eating, but only of that eating by faith and charitie whereby we maye liue for euer.

For answere to this argument thus I saye: Sacramentall The ann­swer. Sacramē tal eating is conside­red two wais. eating must be considered two waies, as all the other workes of God towardes men maye be considered. one waye is to consider it in that nature, vertue, and effect which God for his part put­teth [Page 112] in the Sacrament. An other is in that abuse, and imperfe­ction which man wickedly committeth about the holy workes of God.

Who can doubt but that Christ came into the world to saue Ioan. 3. men, vt saluetur mundus per ipsum, that the world maye be sayd by him? as for condemnation it was not brought in by Christ, Rom. 5. but by Adam and Eue our first parents, and by our owne wilful synnes ad misdoinges. And yet the holy scriptures witnes that 2. Cor. 2. Christ is the sauour of death to many, and the stone whereat they stomble, not through any fault of his, but because they vse their 1. Pet. 2. freewil to the worse part with whom he hath to do.

Euen so cometh it to passe in the blessed Sacrament of the altar. Christ geueth it only to this end, that we by eating there­of maye tarie in him and he in vs. For as Isychius hath well Isychius in Leuit. c. 22. l. 6. noted, Sanctificationis causa, non autem contaminationis propo­suit suum mysterium. Christ hath set foorth his mysterie to san­ctifie, and not to spott vs. As he geueth faith to th'end it should Gal. 5. Iacob. 2. worke by charitie, and not to th'end it should lye dead and vn­fruitfull.

And in dede so should all men tary for euer in Christ, if they did eate this Sacrament as they ought to do. If nowe they will pro­fanely come vnto it without contrition, and confession of their Ioan. 20. synnes, and absolution of the priest, that is not the sault of the Sacrament, which is geuen to make vs dwel for euer in Christ, but it is their fault, who abuse the gift of God to their owne hurte and losse.

This thing wel weighed I answere, that alwaies the effect of The Sa­cramental eating, on Christes behalfe is euer profi table. Sacramentall eating on Christes behalfe is the tarying of vs in Christ, and of Christ in vs. And S. Paul saying, that some re­ceyue it vnworthely and to their damnation, speaketh not of any effect rising of the Sacrament it self, but only of a negligence and [Page] impietie which standeth on their part, who come to the rea [...] 1. Co. 11. flesh and blood of Christ in the Sacrament, as if it were common bread and wine, only halowed by the deuout praiers of man, whereas in dede it is changed in substance by the mightie power of the word of God.

Let it therefore stand for a truth (as it is a most vndoubted truth) that Christ in the sixth chapiter of S. Ihon doth prophecie of his last supper, promising to geue in it his own flesh to be ea­ten, as the which is meate in dede, and for his part he promiseth that it shall haue a perfit effect, albeit we sometymes through ma lice withstand his goodnes. This meaning is not only true in it self, but it is confirmed also by S. Augustine, who declaring that Augusti. contra Cr [...]scon gramm. li. 1. c. 25. Rom. 3. a thing good in it self may be vnpro [...]itable to him y ^• vseth it euill, after he had shewed that to be so in light which hurteth sick eyes and delighteth the whole eyes, and in the law, in which although the Iewes were, yet they abused the same: at the length he co­meth to our very purpose saying, Quid de ipso corpore & san­guine Domini vnico sacrificio pro salute nostra, quamuis ipse Do­minus dicat: nisi manducaueritis, & caet. What say we concerning the very body and blood of our Lord the only sacrifice for our sal­uation? Not withstanding that our Lord him self sayth, Except Ioan. 6. a man eate my flesh and drink my blood, he shall not haue life in him self, doth not yet the same Apostle teache euen this thing to be made hurtfull to them y ^• vse it euill? For he sayth: Whosoeuer eat eth the bread and drinketh the chalice of our Lord vnworthe­ly, he shalbe gilty of the body and blood of our Lord. What cā be 1. Co. 11. plainer then these words of S. Augustine? Who thought that ar­gument, which I haue answered, to be nothing worth at all, af­firming the Apostle S. Paule, and Christ in S. Ihon to speake of one and the same body or flesh of Christ, as it is geuen in the Sa­crament of his last supper.

[Page 113]And truly they doe no small iniury to S. Augustine, who by any meanes wold father vpon him this opinion, as though he S. Aug [...] stine all­wais ex­poundeth the sixth of Ihon as being the promise of Christes supper. taught Christ in S. Ihon to speake only of a spirituall eating by faith and charitie, whereas he neuer gaue any sufficient token of that meaning, but expresly teacheth the contrarie as all the other Fathers doe. The reason which moued some men to think, that S. Augustine meant so, was for that he speaketh much of spiri­tual eating and of the vnitie of Christes Church. But that eating is also made, and best of all made in the mysteries of Christes sup­per when they are worthely receaued, as Christ wold allways haue them to be receaued. If any other argument remain, by this which is already said it may be easily sene, what answere ought to be made therevnto.

Thus I haue proued by the proprietie of y ^• words in S. Ihon, By how manye wais it is proued, y ^• Christ i S. Ihon speaketh of his sup­per. by the circumstance of the tyme and place, by the cōference of holy Scriptures, by the vniform consent of the auncient Fathers, by the authoritie of generall Councels, by the yerely practise of the west Church, by the confutation of the reasons which are made to the contrarie, that Christ in his disputation at Capharnaum spake in some part of y ^• sixth Chapiter (by the way of promise) of y ^• Sacrament of his last supper. All which things if they proue not Ioan. 6. my intent, I desier the learned Reader to shew me, wherein they faile from the truth. But vntill that be shewed, I must say all the authoritie, that is an y ^• earth, semeth to concurre to that my posi­tion. And therefore God willing, I intend to build vpon this so sure a ground the rest of my disputation against the heretiks of our tyme, who teach false doctrine in the matter of Christes sup­per, The entrā ce to the [...]e cond part of this booke. affirming that Christ promiseth in S. Ihon to geue his flesh in spirit only and not vnder the forme of bread. Against whom I wil from hence foorth dispute, if yet I first shew somwhat more particularly, that the euerlasting meate (which Christ promiseth [Page] in S. Ihon) doth appertein to that part of Christes talk whic [...] is before proued to appertein to his last supper.

¶ The meate tarying to euerlasting life, which Christ The [...]. Chap. promiseth to geue, is meant of his reall flesh and blood to be geuen at his last supper.

CHrist going about to drawe the people from filling of their bellies to a more spiritual feeding, said: worke not the meate which perisheth, but that which tarieth to life Ioan. 6. euerlasting, which the sonne of man wil geue you.

This proposition is diligently to be consydered, as being the chief keye of the whole disp [...]ation folowing. And therefore I wil declare how euery part of it doth agree with the processe of The con­ference of Scriptu­res. the talke, which towardes the end of the chapter is made concer­ning Christes owne gift.

First where he saith: the sonne of man will geue meate, he afterwarde vttereth the kinde of meate or foode more plainly saying: The Bread which I wil geue, is my flesh. Ioan. 6.

And whereas he [...]ad them worke the sayd meate, he afterward sheweth that by working, he meaneth first beleuing in him with a true and working faith, and afterward also eating and drin­king What it is to worke the meate which Christwil g [...]ue. worthely his owne flesh and blood. And therfore sayth: this is the worke of God, that you beleue in him whom he hath sent, and again: Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood, ye shal not haue life in you. he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath life euerlasting. And yet farther expounding his former wordes he sayth, for my flesh [...] meate in dede. the word ( verè in dede) declareth what kinde of verè. worke belongeth to this meate, not only a metaphoricall worke, but a true worke of the body and soule, of the soule in beleuing, of the body in eating.

[Page 114]So that if we marke well, the meate that must be wro [...]ght, the bread that he wil geue, and his ow [...]e flesh which must be eaten, is al one thing. The working of this meate req [...]reth the helpe as well of the minde as of the body, accordingly as Ter­tullian Tertul. de resur. carnis. sayth: Caro corpore & sanguine Christi vescitur, vt & ani­ma de Deo saginetur. non possunt ergo separari in mercede quas opera coniungit. The flesh eateth the body and blood of Christ, to thintent the soule also m [...]e be made fat of God. They can not therefore be seperated in reward whom the worke ioyneth.

The body worketh with the soule in eating y ^• flesh of Christ, y ^e The bo [...]y worketh in eating Christes fleshe. work ioyneth them, because they both work and eate one thing, and therefore they must be rewarded both together in the daye of Iugdement. But if we did eate the body of Christ by faith only (as the Sacramentaries teache) our bodies should not worke the meate which perisheth not, but only should eate bread and drinke wine, which must nedes [...]erish.

But Christ goeth forward to shewe his owne flesh to be meat in dede, & to be that true meate, which he sayd before should not 3. Ioan. 6. perish, but tary and abide still, saying: for he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, tarieth in me and I in him; which thing [...]hy Christes flesh be [...]ng eaten [...]a­rieth vncō su [...]ed. cometh so t [...] passe, because Christes flesh being eaten is not di­gested into our earthly flesh, and so consumed of vs as other meates are, b [...]t rather as being incomparably stronger then o [...]r stomaks, it consumeth all our carnall and fleshly humours. If then it cause vs not to perish, how much more is it selfe a meate not perishing, but tarying for euer?

And to shew, that the sayd worker of the meate and flesh which Christ will geue, ta [...]ieth in Christ [...]ot only for a time, but to life euerlasting, (as the not perishing meate was before sayd to doe) againe it foloweth, He that eateth this br [...]ad shall liue for euer. By which [...] of Christes words it is euident [Page] when he sayeth: worke not the meate whiche perisheth, but which tarieth to life euerlasting, which the sonne of man wil geue you, that then he meaneth they shuld eate his flesh & drinke his blood, in such [...]orte as the sonne of man wil geue it.

I [...] thee, good Reader, once againe to conferre these say­inges. Is it not all one to say, the sonne of man will geue, and 1. I wil geue. Likewyse the sonne of man wil geue you meate, and 2. the bread which I will geue is my flesh. only this difference there is that in the later wordes he nameth the kinde of meate, which in the former he did not name. The sonne of man will geue the meate which perisheth not. and what is that [...] say, but that he 3. will geue his flesh as meate, which flesh he will geue for the life of the world. And how can that fleshe be thought able to perish, which maketh all other men that beleue in it to liue for euer? The meate which the sonne of man wil geue must be wrought: and the bread which Christ sayeth to be his flesh which he wil geue, must also be eaten. for except ye [...]ate the flesh of the sonne of [...] 4. and drinke his blood, ye shal not haue life in you. The meate of the sonne of man tarieth, and he that eateth the flesh of Christ and 5. drinketh his blood, tarieth in Christ, and Christ in him. The meate of the sonne of man dureth to life euerlasting. And he that 6. eateth the flesh of Christ hath life euerlasting.

If these things answere throughly, if Christ be the sonne of man, if the bread he wil geue (which is his flesh for the life of the world) be the meat which perisheth not, if the working of this meate be both beleuing and eating, if the meat make the eater [...]arie for euer: then [...]ith so many thinges agree, let these wordes be cōfessed no lesse to perteine to the promise of Christes supper, then those doe towardes thende of the chapter when he sayth, the Theoph. [...] cap. Ioan. 6. bread which I wil ge [...]e is my flesh.

So doth Theophilact expo [...]d this place; Cibum manentem [Page 115] mysticam dicit sumptionem carnis domini, quam nobis ipse dat filius hominis factus. He calleth the meate which tarieth, the my­call receauing of our Lords [...]esh, which him selfe being made the Sonne of man geueth vs.

What name I Theophilact? All the Fathers, yea all Christians August. in Psal. [...] agree that Christe in his supper is the meate whereof it is sayd, it perisheth not. Now Christ perisheth not whether he be geuen to vs by faith as his Father is sayd to geue him, or in the Sacra­ment of his supper, as y ^• Sonne of man is afterward sayd to be of the will to geue his flesh which is meate in dede.

As therefore we can not denie Christ when he is geuen by faith Christ in his supp [...] is the not perishinge meate. to be the not perishing meate: so it were wo [...]derfull impiety to say the substance of Christes flesh geuen at his supper, not to be the same not perishing meate. or seing it is also a not perishing meate at his supper, why should not these words be vnderstāded of the same supper?

And seing Christ would it to be wrought not only as his Fa­ther geueth it presently, but also as the Sonne of man wil geue it hereafter, to wit, vnder y ^e form of bread at his last supper: it must nedes be gra [...]ted y ^• Christ speaking of working the gift of y ^e Sōne of man, meant no lesse of working his own gift which he nameth afterward eating, then the working of his Fathers gift which is straghtways called beleuing. How beit concerning equalitie of substance in Godhead, all is common betwixt them.

In fine, the not perishing meate which the Sonne of man wil geue to y ^• Iewes, is his flesh, which he wil geue to be eatē. Which flesh [...] not perish, as well because it is wholly [...] in by the na ture & substance of almightie God, as also because it is not chāged Collos. 2 into our flesh when it is [...]aten, as other meats are, but spiritually changeth vs into it.

Now that fleshe not perishing but tarying in our soules & bo­dies [Page] maketh them also kepe and preserue [...] life, whereby we The [...]eat whereof [...] spe keth [...]elon [...] to our bo­dies. Cyril. in Ioan. li. 3 cap. 28. come to the ioy [...]s of heauen. For, that Christ meant of suche a not perishīg meat, as might be receaued not only into our soules but into our bodies. Also, S. Cyrillus hath witnessed vpō this place.

Operemur igitur (vt saluator ait) non eum [...]ibum, & caet. Let vs work therefore ( [...]s our sauiour saith) not that meat which [...]iding into the belly and geuing vs a short pleasure, at the leugth go [...]th forth in excrements and perisheth, but let vs work the spirit [...]all meat, which strengtheneth the hartes, & leadeth to life [...]uerlasting, the which meate he promiseth that he wil geue saying: the Sonne of man will geue you this meate. Thus he hath ioyned the things Humana o [...] man to the things of God, and touched the whole mysterie of the incarnation. For he sheweth sum what priuily the spirituall Occult. meate whereby we liue in Christe, being sanctified both in soule and body. But he wil say this thing more openly anon, where­fore Apertius we also wil write there more at large, an interpretation that shall agree to this place.

[...] dured the words of S. Cyrillus, who as he was a most excellent man of wit and lerning, so hath he most exactly de­clared the meaning of these wordes which I now expound.

Christ meāt to persuade the Iewes his diuine nature, and that Christes [...]. he was himself according to his flesh the true ma [...]a which came down from heauen, and that he would geue the self same flesh as truely to be [...]aten into the bodies of the faithfull for a spirituall nourishement of them, as euer the Iewes dyd corporally feede vpon manna. To persuade this he wrought a miracle in bread, he trai [...]ed them to talk of bread, and of manna, withal exhorting thē to sede vpon the [...]corruptible meate which he would geue. This meate was his owne fleshe. but he as yet would not vtter so muche, vntill their myndes were somwhat prepared therunto by true faith. For this cause S. Cyrillus wryteth, that Christ as yet [Page 116] describeth the spirituall meate occultius somwhat secr [...]tly. Bu [...] that afterward h [...] will shew it apertius more openly.

Agame S. Cyrillus saith: Christ hath ioyned humana diuinis, the things of man to the things of God. The things of man are y ^t, flesh assumpted by Christ, and the sanctifying of our bodies by re­ceauing his fleshe into them through the gift of Christ, whiche he gaue as man. The thinges of God are, the feeding of our soules by right belefe vpon God.

Thirdly by the iudgement of S. Cyrillus, this place appertei­neth to that which foloweth concerning the sanctification as wel of our bodies as of our soules. but that whiche foloweth is most properly meant of the sanctification, which our bodies receaue by the food of Christes supper, of which supper S. Cyrillus exponn­deth those words: except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man. &c.

What nede more words? this place is like to y ^e oth [...]r following in the end of the same chapiter: The bread which I wil geue is my flesh, whiche wordes al the auncient fathers without any contra­diction, teache to belong to the supper. Therefore doubtlesse they are of the same mynd concerning this place also, but because this place is not so plaine as the other, no man nede to maruaile why they rather allege the other, then this.

And yet euen to this place of S. Iohn, the holy martyr Igna­tius alluded, when he sayd in that epistle, which both Eusebius & Hier. in Catalo. Ignatius ad Rom [...] nos. S. Hierom acknowledged to be his: Non mihi placet cibus corru­ptionis, nequè voluptates vitae huius. panem Dei volo, panem coe­lestem, panem vitae, quod est caro Christi filij Dei, & poculum vo­lo, sanguinē eius, quod est charitas incorruptibilis & perennis vita.

The perishing mea [...]e and pleasures of this life pl [...]ase me not. I long for Gods bread, the heanēly bread, the bread of li [...], whiche thing is the flesh of Christ the sonne of God, and for the cup, his blood, which thing is [...]haritie not perishing and life euerlasting.

[Page]Thus as wel the cōference of holy scriptures, as the witnesses of S. Ignatius, of S. Cyrillus, of Theophilact, of S. Augustine, and of Tertullian do shew this place to belong to the Sacramēt of the Altar. therefore therein we muste eate, not bread and wine which perishe, but only the permanent fleshe of Christ, and so we must eate it by mouth, as we beleue on it in hart. For eating and beleuing is referred in this Chapiter to the selfe same fleshe of Christe. therefore as really it must be eaten by mouth, as it is be­leued in hart to be most r [...]all in it selfe.

¶The equalitie of substance with his father (which Christ allegeth for his gift) proueth the reall presence of his bo­dy The vii. Cha [...]tt. and blood in the Sacramēt of the altar, euen as God the Father gaue hun reall fleshe and blood at his incar­nation.

CHrist for the meate whiche he promysed to gene in his last supper, alleaged his diuinity, as who shoulde plainly say: wonder not that I promise you suche a thing of so greate difficulty and miracle, for I am God. His wordes are these: worke (saith he to the multitude of the Iewes) not the meate which doth perish, but that which tarieth to life euerlasting, which the sonne of man wil geue you, for him God hath signed, that is, God the father hath printed his diuine substance vppon him by 1. The fa­ther and y ^• sonne be equall. Psal. 44. eternal generation, or hath oynted him with the oile of gladnes aboue al others, because his humane nature is vnited to the god­hed, whereby he is able to do as much as his father.

It is not to be thought, that Christ would haue alleged his equall auctoritie with his Father, for a gift which were not of 2. Their gift [...]s be equall. equall truth and of equall power with that, which his Father is sayd to gene. But his Father gaue him not only the vertue and [...] of flesh, but reall and natural flesh and blood at his in­carnation, [Page 117] there [...]ore God the S [...]nn [...] to geue vs the same [...] [...]ral f [...]sh in his last supper. For which cause he doth im­mediatly declare both God his Fathers gift, and his own. [...] Ioan. 6. his Fathers gift he say [...] My Father geueth you the true bread 3. The Fa­thers gift. from heauen, for it is the bread of God, whiche cometh downe from heauen, and geueth life to the worlde. But what breade is this? I (saith Christ) am the bread of life, I am the liuely bread which came downe from heauen. [...]ow we haue lerned, that God the Father gaue Christ his Sonne from heauen; when he sent him to take the flesh of man: which flesh assumpted o [...] the word is also by vnion to the word made the bread of life.

Christ therefore hauing shewed his Fathers gift, and that him 4. Thesōn [...] gift. self is the bread of li [...]e, cometh to shew his own bread, which he wil geue saying: And the bread which I wil geue, is my flesh for the life of the world.

The brief discourse of y ^• whole doctrine is this: work the meate which tarieth for euer, which the Sonne of man wil geue you. for 5. the whole discours [...]. this So [...]ne of man is equall with God his Father, whose na­turall image he hath printed in him. God the Father hath geuen his Sonne to the world and made him true man, the true bread of life. Therefore God y ^• Sonne being equall with his Father, wil geue vs the same true flesh of the Sonne of man as meate y ^• shall tarie with vs to life euerlasting. But his Father gaue him [...]o the world not only in faith & spirite, but in real and substancial flesh. Therefore God the Sonne by the drift of all his talk doth signi­fie, that he wil geue in his supper (whereof he speaketh) not in spi rite and faith only, but in truth of nature and substance, the [...] same real and substanciall flesh.

First he sayth, he wil geue that meate, which shal tarye to life 1. euerlasting. Secondly that he is able to doe so, as one signed of 2. God his Father. Thirdly he sheweth what bread and meate his [...]. [Page] Father hath geuen him, that is to say, the true flesh, wherein [...]e 4. spake to that presēt multitude of men. Fourthly, he sayth y ^• breade 5. that he wil geue is his fleshe. Last of all who so cateth it, hath life euerlasting. 1. Christ toke real flesh.

Doth not all this goe to proue, that as he bad them work the meate which tarieth for euer, and shewed him sefe (concerning 2. He is able to geue vs the same. his [...]) to be made that meate, sent from God his Father: so he is able to geue them that meate which his Father gaue him, and sayth he wil geue it them, to the end they eating it, may liue 3. He saith he wil ge­ue it. for euer, he tarying in them, and they in him?

And yet is not that his reall and substanciall flesh, which he promiseth? Or did he not perform in his supper, that, which he pro 4. Healwais perfor­meth his promise. mised? If he can not be false of his word, we haue in our Lords supper (where he perfomed this promise) the reall and substancial body of Iesus Christ, as truly as euer his Father gaue him reall 5. In his supper he gaue it. and substancial flesh in this world. And consequently we haue it not only by faith and spirite, but in truth and substance.

This plainly is the disco [...]rse of Christ him selfe, who by his 6. He gaue it really & not by faith alone Hilarius lib. 8. de Trinit. Godhead assureth vs of the gift of that incorruptible meat, which is his flesh. Whereupon S. Hilarie sayth, that no man douteth of y ^• veritie of Christes flesh in vs, except he deny Christ to be true God.

¶ Seing Christ is the bread of life to vs by the gift of his flesh, the eating of that flesh by our faith & spirit The [...] ▪ [...]. only suffiseth not, but it self also must be really ea­ten.

GOd sent his Sonne, who is by nature the bread of life (as [...]. 6. hym self hath witnessed) to take flesh for vs, that in his flesh he might geue vs the same di [...]ine nature, which is y ^e [...] bread of life. Therefore when Christ had sayd: The Sonne of [Page 118] man will geue you the meate, which tarieth to life euerlasting, straightways he sheweth in one word three causes of y ^• his pro­mise. For God the Father (sayeth he) hath signed this Sōne of mā, that is to say, he hath geuen him hys owne substance concerning the diuine nature of Christ, and concerning his humane nature he hath shewed his will by hym, as by a seale of his owne hand. Farthermore he hath assigned hym to bring vs this meate, which Signare. tarieth to life euerlasting. The verb Signauit, he hath signed, may 1. Cy [...]illus Libr. 3. cap. 29. signifye the printing of the same forme and ymage, which the ori­ginall seale hath, as S. Cyrillus hath noted in this place. also it may stand to shew or confirme a thing by witnes of seale, as 2. Theophi lact. ī ca. 6. Ioan. Theophilact expoundeth it. Orels to assigne or appoint a thing to some certain effect and purpose, as S. Chrysostome, and E [...] ­thymius take it. 3.

God the Father signed Christ after the first sort by geuing him 1. his own nature: And after y ^• secōd sort by shewing him (through 2. miracles wrought in his flesh) to be his own Sonne. And last of 3. all in appointing to haue his will done most perfitly and execu­ted Ioan. 4. by him, as Christ him self said: It is my meate to doe the wil of him that sent me.

According to this last sense, it was the wil of God, that Christ should geue vs the euerlasting [...]eate, which naturally is his Godhead, and by the mysterie of the incarnation, it is his flesh. And to signifie so much, Christ sayd: I will geue you the euerla­sting meate, because my Father hath signed me to this purpose. The whiche sense S. Chrysostome followeth in the first place of Chryso. ibidem. his interpretation writing thus: Signauit, hoc est misit, qui hunc vobis cibum ferret. God the Father hath signed, that is to say, hath sent the Sonne of man, to bring you this meate. And E [...] ­thymius agreeth with S. Chrysostome therein.

Christ therefore being sent of his Father to geue vs the euer­lasting [Page] meate of life, first fayeth: I am the bread of life. And then sheweth how he will geue the same bread, saying: And the bread which I will geue, is my flesh. S. Cyrillus vppon those words: Cyrillus in I [...]an. li. 3. c. 36. I am the bread of life, writeth thus: His verbis subostendit san­ctissimi sui corporis vitam, & gratiam, qua in nobis vnigeniti pro­prietas, id est, vita & ingreditur, & permanet. In these words he sheweth priuily the life and grace of his most holy body, where­by the proprietie, that is to say, the life of the only begotten both entreth into vs and tarieth.

Likewise S. Hilarie hath these words: Si verè verbū caro fa­ctum Hilarins lib. 8 de [...]rinit. est, & nos verè verbum carnem cibo Dominico sumimus, quomodo non naturaliter manere in nobis existimandus est? If the word be truly made flesh, and in our Lords meate we truly re ceaue the word (made) flesh, how can it be, but he must be iud­ged to dwell naturally in vs? Christ being for euer God in the fulnesse of tyme toke flesh, and when the hower of death was at hād, he gaue vs that flesh to be eaten, by the which eating we re­ [...]eaue the word it self, that is to say the naturall Sonne of God into our bodies, and so Christ dwelleth in vs not only by faith, spirit, or vnderstanding, but naturally. Wherefore S. Hilarie sayth, we take and receaue the word truly. Verè verbū sumimus. We receaue truly and in dede the word which was with God in the beginning, and which was God. But how can we receaue Ioan. 1. Ioan. 4. God truly or naturally? God is a spirit, and our nature, consi­sting of a body, can not fede truly and naturally vpon a spirit, but only by faith and charitie. How [...]hen receaue we God truly? For south because [...] toke flesh truly, and we receaue truly the word made flesh. Noman doubted but we can truly receaue flesh, seing then the word is made flesh, we thereby can receaue the word it self, not only by vnderstanding, but also whiles his own pro­prietie, that is to say, whiles y ^e life & Godhead, which corporally [Page 119] dwelleth in Christes flesh, entreth into vs with his flesh & tari [...]th in vs, if we receaue worthely his most holy body. Thus it appea­reth that Christ in his flesh geueth vs the bread of life which he was sent to geue, and he geueth it because that flesh is vnited to the word of God, which is life by his own nature.

But if this flesh of his be geuen to vs by faith alone, and vn­derstanding, or spirit alone, and not in very dede: We haue not y ^• bread of life in dede geuen to vs, but only geuen to vs by faith & spirite or vnderstanding. And so it was geuen to vs before y ^• in­carnatiō of Christ. For God was euer beleued on of the iust men Hebr. 11. Ioan. 14. [...]oth to be, and to be the rewarder of them who seeke him, as S. Paule sayth. And faith by nature is due to God, as Christ sayth: [...] beleue in God, beleue also in me. Therefore although Christ hath taken flesh, yet if his flesh he geuen to vs only by [...]aith and spirit, the bread of life and nature of God, which dwelleth cor­porally Colos. 2. in that flesh, is not geuen vs after the coming of Christ by any other meanes then by faith. And so by the incarnation of Christ we haue not the bread of life geuē to vs by any other way then we had it before. Which is expresly against the word of God, where the euerlasting meat, and the bread of life is now first pro­mised by the gift of Christ, as who came into the world to bring vs this euerlasting meate. And the bread which he will geue is his flesh.

Therefore to saue the truth of y ^• Gospell (which neuer cā faile) we must beleue, that by the incarnation of Christ and by his gif [...] at the last supper we haue his reall flesh, and in it the bread of life geuen to vs, more then by faith, or vnderstanding, or spirit. & that more, is the gift of the true substance of flesh and of blood, where­in the Godhead corporally dwelleth. And by it the Godhead is receaued of vs, not only by an effecte of grace, & by a certain ver­ [...]ue, Colos. 2▪ but in such truth of nature, as it is corporally dwelling in [Page] the person of Christ, who is one in substance with his Father. Ierem 23 Iustinus Martyr in libr. de Trinitat.

For although God be euery where by nature, and fill both hea­uen and earth, yet as Iustinus Martyr witnesseth, he is in the Sonne of man by so excellent a meane of v [...]g man to God, y ^t he is no where els after that sort. And by that singular meane he was promised vnto vs, as who is only the euerlasting meate, which alone satisfieth the hunger of man: whose harte as S. August. li. cōfess. 1. cap. 1. Augustine confesseth, is without rest, vntil it rest in God, because it was made to come to God: And nothing is at quiet, vntill it h [...]ue obteyned the end wherevnto it was first made.

Seing then God is by nature y ^• only euerlasting meate which perisheth not, and seing he must be geuen to vs in his own na­ture, and we are not able to receaue him as he is a spirit, he hath done for vs as good mothers and Nourses doe for their babes. The mother eateth bread, & by her eating, turneth it into milk, and that milk she geueth to the infante, and by that meanes the August. in cōc. 1. in Psal. 33 Ioan. 1. infante eateth bread made milk. This similitude S. Augustine bringeth for the same purpose whereof I now speake.

In the beginning was the worde and the worde was w ^t God, and the word was God. Ecce cibus sempiternus: Behold, sayeth S. Augustine, the euerlasting meate, Sed manducant Angeli: But the Angels eate it. Quis homo posset ad illum cibum? What man were able (to attayne) to y ^t meate? Oportebat ergo vt illa mensa lactesceret, & ad paruulos perueniret. It behoued therefore that foode should be turned into milk, and so come to litle ones. Vn­de cibus in lac conuertitur, nisi per carnem traijciatur? By what meanes is meate turned into milk, except it be conueyed through flesh? Quomodo ergo de ipso pane pauit nos sapientia Dei? How then hath the wisedome of God fed vs with y ^• bread it selfe? Quia verbum caro factum est, & habitauit in nobis. Because the worde is made flesh and hath dwelte in vs. And so S. Augustine cōclu­deth [Page 120] y ^• man hath eatē Angels food, and that, as he sheweth there, in the new sacrifice of Christes supper. For of that sacrifice & Sa­crament he intreateth.

Thus we see that God him self must be eaten of vs, not only by faith (for then he neded not to haue bene made man) but he must be eaten also, as infants eate milk, by mouth and body. And because that could not be, vnlesse God were made man, he vni­ted to his diuine person the nature of man, thereby making the bread of life and the food of Angels apt to be eaten of men. And at his supper he gaue that flesh, wherein the Godhead corporally dwelt, by which only meanes y ^• word of God is fulfilled, where he sayeth: Worke the euerlasting meate which the Sonne of man wil geue you. For God the Father hath signed hym to this intent, that he should bring and geue you this meate. The way of brin­ging was for the word to become man: The way of geuing was for the Sonne of man to geue the flesh of his, which is vnited to the Godhead, to be eaten. It is geuen at Christes supper vnder the forme of bread.

No other meane of geuinge will serue. for eating by faithe No gift cā recōpense the gift of Christes reall flesh. alone, be it neuer so liuely a faith, lacketh the Godhead, in suche sorte and truth, as it hath assumpted the fleshe of man to fede vs therewithall. No spirit, no vnderstanding, no faith, no grace, no other gifte in heauen or in earth (besyde the naturall substance of Christ) can supplie the gifte of Gods nature dwelling corporally in Christ. What thing can be equall to the gift of y ^• euerlasting meate, and to the gifte of y ^• bread of life? There is but one meanes in all the world for vs to obtein y ^• substance, which meanes is the fleshe of Christ, where it only dwelleth for vs. and God assum­pted that flesh to geue it vnto vs.

And now what crueltie is it, to spoile vs of y ^t flesh, & thereby to spoyle vs of God, of life, and of the spirite? That spirite is it [Page] which we muste eate. The flesh profiteth nothing, it is the spi­rit Ioan. 6. that quickneth, it is the Godhead that feedeth, God is a spi­rite: And because man consisting of a body could not eate Ioan. 4. God, therefore the spirit assumpted flesh, and quickned that flesh singularli [...] for our sakes. That flesh is geuen vs, and is profita­ble, not in respect as it is flesh, but because the spirite of the God­head and the life it self dwelleth in it, and that not by faith or vn­derstanding alone, but corporallie. That Godhead the Sacra­ [...]entaries depriue vs of, that spirite they plucke from vs, and it is no where els to be so eaten of man.

Heauen and earth, Angels and archangels, yea all y ^t creatures can not geue vs God corporallie dwelling in them▪ and so to be eaten in anie kynde of meate besydès the flesh of Christ. But in that flesh we eate the substance it self of God him self. So teacheth Ambros. de Sacra mentis li. 6. c. 1. blessed S. Ambrose, saying: Tu qui accepisti eius carnem, diuinae eius substantiae in illo participaris alimento. Thou that hast taken his flesh, art made partaker of his diuine substance in that fode.

It is not possible to vnderstand this saying of anie spirituall vertue, or of anie other thing, then of the real flesh of Christ. Therein only is the substance of God made mete to be eaten of man. No signe suffiseth to conuey to vs that heauenlie br [...]ad. It is an haynous impietie and an horrible blasphemie to say that a peece of bread can make vs partakers of the substance of God, as it hath assumpted flesh in one persone: Or to say that my faith is able to deriue the substance of God as meate into my [...]phes. 2. sowle and body. faith is a great gifte of God, but yet a creature only wherein the fulnes of Godhead dwelleth not. and there­fore it is not able to a [...]iue to the vnion of Gods nature, and much lesse able to geue it me.

But Christ although he be true man, yet is he God also in one persone, equal with his Father, and y ^t fulnesse of Godhead dwel­leth [Page 121] in his flesh. that flesh he geueth & in it the fulnes of the God­head. So may we eat the meat which perisheth not: So we re­ceaue the bread of life. But other way in the whole world none can be deuised, how we may eate God, or carie hym in our bo­dies properly and corporally.

¶ By the three diuerse geuings which are named, in S. The. ix. Chapiter. Ihon, it is shewed that Christ geueth his reall flesh vnder the figure of an other thing.

IN that wonderfull disputation which our sauiour had at Ca­pharnaum, and which is described by S. Iohn, dyuers perso­ues at three seuerall tymes are shewed to haue had somwhat to do about the geuing of bread or food: God by the mynisterie of Moyses, God the Father him self, and Iesus Christ God and man.

God by Moyses, is sayd to haue geuen in tyme past: He hath 1. Ioan. 6. geuen them bread from heauen to eate. God the Father him self 2. is sayd presently to geue: my Father geueth you from heauen the 3. true bread. Iesus Christ sayth that hereafter he wil geue: Work the euerlasting meate which the sonne of man wil geue you: the bread whiche I wil geue is my flesh. God by Moyses gaue bread The breadgeu [...] by [...]v­ses was figur [...]ue which was figuratiue, coming from the vppermost part of the ayer, not able to geue life of it self, and therefore not the true bread.

The bread of God the Father was from heauen it self, able to The b [...]d of God is true. geue life of it self, and therefore the true bread.

Christes bread is such according to the forme thereof, as both God by Moyses had figured (which was māna) and such in sub­stance Thebread of Christ [...] true vnder a figure. as God the Father gaue, which is the flesh of his sonne incarnate, and therfore it is called the bread, which is the flesh of Christ.

[Page]Christes bread, concerning the substance thereof, is the same flesh which geueth life euerlasting, which is made the proper flesh of the worde, and it is vnder the sorme of bread, in token The gift of Christ sheweth both his Godhead & manhod that he fulfilleth the figure of manna. For Christ being true God with his Father, and true man with Moyses, doth both geue vs by his Godhead the same true fle [...]h, which his Father gaue to him, and also he geueth it by his manhood, vnder such a figure and forme of bread, as in the ministerie of the law was vsed, and eaten with the paschal lambe a litell before the making of his ow [...] supper.

He geueth not the substance of common bread, as Moyses did, (for then the outward substance of his gyste had bene no better, The form of bread. then God by Moyses gaue) neither geueth he the shape of flesh. as his Father gaue (for then he had kept no agreement with the Kepeth y ^• agreemēt with the law of Moyses. figuratiue law of Moyses) but he geueth as true flesh, as his Father gaue him, because he is one with his Father: and coue­reth y ^• same flesh w ^t y ^• forme of bread, because he is not only God with his Father, but man also with Moyses, and with all vs.

By whiche manhood he is lesse then his Father. and therefore as vnder the forme of man he couereth his true Godhead, (wherein he is equal with his Father) so vnder y ^• forme of bread, he couereth the gifte of his flesh, wherein he geueth as much as his Father gaue him.

Only this difference there is, that it was expedient for vs the flesh assumpted of Christe to tary flesh still. & in dede seing God Why the substāce of bread takē is chāged, and y ^• sub­stance of flesh takē, [...]. Math. 26 is by all meanes immutable, neither could the word be changed into flesh, neither flesh into the word. but sith the substance of common bread doth not helpe vs to life enerlasting, and may be chaunged into the flesh of Christ, it is by the power of Christ chaunged into his flesh, when he taking bread and blessing saith, this is my body.

[Page 122]Hereby we may see how the name of br [...]ad and the figure of Manna is ioyned with the flesh of Christ, as the processe of this chapiter teacheth. Hereby we may vnderstand how the blessed Gen. 14. seed of Abraham, which is the body of Christ, is ioyned with the apparent shewe, that Melchisedech made of bread and wine: Exo. 12. how the vnleauened bread eaten with the old lambe is the couer of the trew paschall lambe Iesus Christ, and to be short how the substance of the old figure, is gone into the substance of Christes flesh, and how the outwarde forme of the figure remayneth vntill we come to heauen, where we shall see face to face without 1. Co. [...]. any vayle or shadow put betwene vs and the gloriouse flesh of Christ.

Hence it cometh that (as S. Ireneus doth witnes) the Eucha­rist Ireneus l. 4. c. 34. consisteth of two things, of one earthly which is the forme of bread and of wine: of the other heauenly, which is the substance of Christes body and blood.

But if Christes gift consisted of the substance of bread being The ab­surdities which rise of the Sa cramenta­ries opi­nion. only sanctified in quality and made a signe of Christes body (as y ^• Sacramentaries teache) it should neither be that true bread, which his Father gaue him, nor be in substance better then man­na, but rather worse (for that Manna was miraculously wrought by angels, whereas at Christes supper common bread is taken) nor it should not be dis [...]ncted from the gift made in the law: for Psal. 77. as much as there also while Manna was eaten, the iust men had grace frome God geuen them, because it was a Sacrament of the law. It is not therefore grace and commō bread which Christ geueth, but the substance of his flesh made vnder the forme of common bread by his almighty word.

¶ By the shadow of the law past, and by the [...] truthe to come in heauē, it is perceaued, that y ^• midle The x. Chapiter. state of the new Testament requireth the reall pre­sence of Christes body vnder the forme of brea [...].

THe occasion of the thre tymes, the past, the present, and the future, and of the gifts made in them which are named in S. Iohn, doth prouoke me to ētre into a farther discourse, whereby it may appeare to those that delight in conferring the holy scriptures, what wonderfull witnesse euery part of them doth beare to that truthe, which our forefathers beleued, and we that are not bastarde children doe kepe and mayntaine.

The law (saieth S. Paule) hath the shadow of good things to Heb. 10. Shadow. Image of things. Things them [...]. a. Cor. 5. come, not the very image of things. whereby he meaneth, that as the lawe had but a shadow: so the ghospell hath the thing it self. but yet not clere and playne. for (as the same Apostle sayeth) we in this world walke by fayth, and not by vision and clere sight.

If Christ gaue not vnto vs his reall and substanciall flesh vnder the forme of bread, how gaue he vs the thing it self? How Christ is the thing it self. were he by that gyfte proued greater then Moyses, and equall with his Father? If on the other side he gaue vs his flesh naked, how were our state an image of the things them selues?

Christ is our mediatoure. A mediatour is in the myddle to Galat. 3. 1. Tim. 2. ioyne two partes that otherwise do not agree. then if he will make man agree with God, he must haue [...]oth the nature of God and of man ioyned in one person. likewise if he wil make the state of the ghospell present, agree with the law past, and with the state of glorye to come, he must take the similitude of the law and the nature of the glorye of heauen, and ioyne these two into one mystery, and so he hath done.

For as he is in one person very God, and very man: so he hath perfectly expressed the old state of the lawe and the state of heauen in o [...] Sacrament.

[Page 123]The nature of the law of Moyses was to shew Christ, and to The state of the law. Galat. 3. be a guyde vnto the schole of Christ, which thing it did by diuerse figures.

The nature of glory is to see face to face, to haue all truth with 1. Co. 13. The state of glory. The mid­dle state. [...] any figure.

Now the state of the new Testament, being the middle state betwixt the law and the glory of heauē, must haue the very truth that is in heauen (which is the true flesh of Christ whereon An­gelles desyer to looke) and the true Godhead, which is the full blessednes of all sainctes, and this thing it must haue vnder a fi­gure. Therefore the the [...]e Sacrament thát Christ left vnto his Church (which also he called the new Testament in his Luc. 22. blood) must by the same reason haue y ^• true flesh of Christ, where­in Colos. 2. the Godhead dwelleth corporally, and y ^• vnder a very figure, which is the forme of bread.

A [...]d truly this forme of bread and of wyne is only a true fi­gure, because there is in it none other substance but the bare fi­gure. Other figures of the olde lawe were set to signify, being them selues [...] other substance in nature, as the arke, the taber­nacle, The form of bread is only a true figure. the vayle, the [...]hewebread and all the sacrifices. but the bare figure of bread without the substance of bread set to signifie the bread of life really present vnder it, that is the only true figure as the whiche hathe none other truthe in his own substance, but only the truth of a figure, because the substance thereof is turned Hebr. 5. Psa. 109. into that flesh of Christ, who vnder the figure of y ^• ordre of Mel­chisedech (whereof he is priest) fullfilleth all figures, that euer haue bene of him, in his real and substanciall flesh.

which real flesh yf we had not in our Sacramēt of the altar, Christ gaue no more in his outward mysteries then was geuen by Moyses, he were not equal with his Father by his gyfte, he were not y ^• corner stone ioyning the state of Moyses law which Ephes. [...]. [Page] was only [...] a [...]d the veritie of glory together. But if these are great [...]rrours, let vs stedfastly beleue that Christ left vs his very crue rcall flesh in the blessed Sactament of the altar, vnder the forme of bread and wyne. Math. 5.

For as in other precepts we may vnderstand the old law not Galat. 5. to be taken away concer [...]ing the spirit which laie hid in it, but only to be fulfilled and made more perfect: so notwithstanding the old figures be dead and changed, yet the state of fulfilling them is suche, that the new Testament is not it self without all figures, but rather conteineth the truth couered with a conue­nient figure. Uerily Christ sayd so much in effect, when he taught that he came not to putt away the law, but to fulfill it▪ for the ful­filling Math. 5. of the law without the putting away thereof, is no lesse to say, then to putt the fulnesse of new grace vnder a shadow, which shadow may seme to kepe a resemblance with the old law: so that of two distincte states there must now be made one new middle state of the which the outward parte resembleth the law, and the inward is one with the state of grace.

Let vs put an example in the precepts of nature to make this thing more plaine. The law saith: Non occides: Thou shalt not Exo. 20. kyl. This precept was not put away by Christe, but the true ground of it (which is, not to be angry) was ioyned therevnto as it appeareth by y ^• serm [...]n of Christe in S. Mathew: It was said Math. 5. to them of the oldelaw, Thou shalt not kyl, but I say vnto yow that euery one that is angry with his brother shalbe gylty in iudgement.

Here we see two things, the one of kylliug, the other of being angrie. That of kylling is outward: That of angre, is in­warde. Anger is the groūd of not kil­ [...]ng. they both make but one precept of the new Testament. the not kylling dependeth vppon the not being angrie, and then is kylling throughly taken away, when anger is throughly cu­red, [Page 124] and as it fareth with this precept: so staudeth it with the the blessed Sacrament, whereof we reason.

For it keepeth y ^• forme of bread and wyne which vnder y ^• law was emptie, and y ^e truth which was be tokened by the olde man­na, is put by the almyghtic power of God vnder the formes of bread and wyne. and so remayneth the law not altogether put away (for a kynd of figure taryeth stil, and it was euer a sigura­tiue law) but fulfilled, because the body of Christ, which is the fulfilling of the law, is made present vnder a figure.

The signe of circuncision (saith S. Leo) the sanctification of Leo de passione Domini serm. 13. gifts, the consecracion of priests, the purity of sacrisice, the veritie of washing, the honour of the tēple is with vs. there is no legal instruction, no prophetical figure, quod non totum in Christi sa­cramēta transierit. which is not wholy transferred into the Sa­craments Leo de passione Domini serm. 8. of Christ: and again, one oblation of thy body and blood fulfilleth the diuersity of the old sacrifices. Hitherto S. Leo the great.

To y ^• same effect serue y ^• words of blessed Dionysius a Coun­seller of the Senate of Athens scholar to S. Paule, who hauing In lib. de coele. Hi erarchia. declared the holy kinde of gouernāce, which is in heauen among the ordres of Angelles, and hauing shewed, that by them the in­feriour degrees of men are brought vnto God according to their capacitie, he first sheweth that God gaue vnto the world the go­ueruement of the law, which he gaue as to children in signes and tokens, and as to weak eyes in figures, clowdes, or sha­dowes. But afterward came our holy gouernaunce, which is the end and fulfilling of the former law. Now saith this holy Dionys. Areopa­gita [...] ec­cles. Hie rar. ca. 5. writer.

Nostra hierarchia & coelestis est & legalis, quae communiter me­dietate extremorum comprehenditur, cum illa communes ha­bens spiritales contemplationes, cum hac autem signa quo sensum [Page] mouent, quorum varietate distinguitur & per ea piè ad deum ad­ducitur. Our holy gouernance (saieth Dionysius) is both hea­uenly and legal, that is to say, hauing somewhat like to the law conteyned in cōmon betwene those two extremyties, partaking with that of heauen spirituall contemplations, and with this of the law sensible signes, whereby it is diuersly distincted, and by them it is brought after an holy mauer vnto God.

We haue heard how the scholar of S. Paule ioyneth in our Our state is mingled of law and glory. state the heauenly contemplaciōs of Angelles (who looke vpon God him selfe) with the outward signes of the law. For by hea­uenly contemplacions S. Dionysius meaneth that truth, which face to face is sene in heauen. But let vs returne again to the words of S. Paule, who did yet expresse this matter more plain­ly, keping the same diuision, but geuing euery thing his playne name.

The law had the bare shadow of things to come: The truth, Heb. 10. is the body of Christ it self, which he calleth also Rem ipsam, the thing it self, wherein also dwelleth the nature of God. Now the Colos. 2. ioyning of a figure with the truthe is called Ipsa imago rerū, the very shape or image of the things. Vmbram enim habens lex fu­turorum Heb. 10. bonorum non ipsam imaginem rerum: For y ^• law (sayth S. Paule) hath the shadow of good things to come, not the very image of the things. The good things to come are the vision of The good things. Christ in glory, and y ^• clere sight of God, who corporally dwel­leth in the body of Christ. The shadow hereof was y ^• law, where­of The sha­dow. The ima­ge of the things. Moyses being steward, obtayned bread from the ayer for the children of Israel: But the image it self of the things, that is to say, wherein the body of Christ is conteyned and in that body God dwelleth, y ^• image is the substance of God & man couered vnder the formes of our blessed Sacrament of the altar. The pecu liar gift of Christ.

And therefore that Sacrament is properly the gift of Christ cō [Page 125] teyning both it whiche we shall see in heauen, and suche a figure as we haue sene vnder the lawe, couering presently the truth to come, with the shadow past, to come I say without a shadowe, & Maxim. in scho­lijs in Di ony [...] Pachim. Oecume nius in 10. ad Hebr. The di­stinctiō of the gifts is not in vaine. past I say, without y ^• real truthe, but now hauing the truthe vn­der a shadow. Maximus and Pachimera do vpon S. Dionysius allege S. Paule for the profe of that which Dionysius said. Oecu menius likewise expoundeth the things them selues, to be the life to come, the shadow to be the old testamēt, the image of things to be the state of the Gospel.

This I take to be the true meaning of the holy Ghost, who doth not in vaine cause the gifte of God by Moyses to be named diuersly from the gift of God the father, and the gift of Christ to differ from them both. Moyses is sayd to haue geuen, God the fa ther presently to geue, Christ promiseth that he will geue. God by Moyses hath geuen bread, God the father at the tyme of spea­king, gaue his sonne in visible fleshe, Christ promyseth to geue y ^• bread which is the flesh of the sonne of man, which flesh vnder the forme of bread bringeth together in the Sacrament of the al­tar the good things of heauen, & such figures as were in the law. The Sa­cramen­taries make voyde these di­uerse gifts

All which distinctions of geuing, and truth of gifts, the Sacra mentaries by their figuratiue doctrine make voyd, as they doe the reste of the holy Scriptures. For they will that Christes out­warde gift should in it conteyne no inuisible truth of fleshe and blood, but euen the bare substance of common bread and wyne, feeding vs with needy and impotent creatures, as though we Gal. 4. remayned yet babes, as though Christ in fulfylling all figures had destroyed them, and not left them full and perfect.

That which the water and the cloude did signifie, is now real­ly 1. Co. 10. performed in baptisme, where we are saued by the washing of regeneration and of the renewing of the holy ghoste. Likewyse Tit. 3. that which Manna dyd then shadow hauing the swetenesse of all [Page] deyntie and pleasant tastes, as now really geuen, because y ^• flesh Sap. 16. of Christ is meate in dede.

We differ not in substance of our manna from the Angels of We are nere to the Angels then to y ^• Iewes. heauen, but only they are out of all feare, we lyuc in good hope, they see and eate we eate, & see not, but be [...]ue. They are in theyr and oure countrey, we are in the way to them. Whyles we are goyng, the truth of heauen is couered to vs, but sith Christ came downe to be our guyde, he hath left the kingdome of heauen in the blood of the newe testament among vs, as really as him self [...] really for that purpose tooke fleshe, and dyed in the same flesh, to Ioan. 12. thintent he being exalted vpon the crosse, should draw al things vnto him selfe.

¶ The bread that Christ promiseth to geue which is his flesh, must nedes be meant of the substance of The. xi. Chapiter. his flesh.

HAuing already touched the three seuerall tymes of geuing▪ which are spoken of in S. Ihon, order wold y ^• I should shew the three seuerall kinds of working those three gifts. But for as much as the last gift of the three is the gift of Christ, whereof we doe principally intreat, I thought good to say some­what of it alone.

Christ hauing sayd before: work the euerlasting meat which the Sonne of man will geue you, cometh now to namè what kind of meat it is, and the bread (sayth he) which I will geue is my flesh.

I haue proued already that these two sentences belong to one maner of gift, which also is promised to be geuen to vs, and not only to be geuen for vs, as some doe a [...]. To be geuen to vs I say, in the Sacrament of Christes supper, and not only for vs vpon y ^• Crosse, the which thing because I haue by diuerse reasōs [Page 126] proued in two places of this present booke. it shalbe now su [...] In [...]he [...] ▪ Chap. in y ^• aunswere to the iiij. obiectiō, & in the vi. Chapiter. Cyp de orat. Do min. Chrys. hon. i. 46 in Ioan. Cyril. li. 11. in Ioā. cap. 22. Aug. de ciuit. lib. 17 c. 5. de pec. mer. & remis. li 1 c 24. &c. Theodo. dial. 1. to warn the reader that S. Cypr [...] writing vpō our Lords pray­ier, hath alleged these words: The bread which I will geue is my [...]esh, as spoken of the Eucharist. The like hath S. Chrysostom done in his comments vpon the same place, affirming that Christ spake of the mysteries: beside that which he speaketh hereof vpon the sixt of S. Ihon, doth also allege it again for the Sacrament of Christes supper, naming benedictionem mystica [...], the mysti­call blessing.

S. Augustine often tymes allegeth this text for the gift made in Christes supper, as I haue declared before also. Theodoritus was of the same mind: and as for Theophilact and Euthymius be so clere in this matter, that they neuer doubted thereof.

Which sith it is so: let it stād for a truth most vniuersally recea­ued, y ^• Christ saying, The bread which I wil geue is my flesh, meant, the bread which I wil geue you at my last supper is my flesh.

Moreouer, the word bread must be noted, which standeth not presently for wheaten breade, but only for food and meat. For as Christ sayd before, work the meat which the sonne of man wil geue you: so now he sayth, and the bread which I wil geue is my flesh, declaring y ^• bread in this place is all one with meat. The which Cyril. in Ioan. lib. 11. ca. 22. truthe is also expressed of S. Cyrillus where he sayth: Saluator cū ad Iudaeos multa de carne sua dissereret, ac viuisicum verè panem [...]am appellaret, panis enim, inquit, quem ego dabo, caro mea est. When our Sauiour disputed manie things among the Iewes, of his flesh, and ca [...]ed it the bread truly geuing life, he sayd: for the bread which I will geue is my flesh.

Thus it is clere, that Christ in effect sayth, I will geue you a kind of meat or food in my last supper, y ^• which is my flesh, euen the same flesh which I wil geue for the life of the world.

This promise Christ made at Caph [...] to al the [...]tude, [Page] but [...] submitted thē selues to receaue that doctrine beside the twelue Apostles, among whom Iudas being one, had this pro­mise made to him also. For although Christ knew him to be a de­uil and traitour, as him self sayd euen at Caph [...]um: yet seing Ioan. 6. he taried with the twelue euen at the last supper, and other men knewe not so muche of his maliciouse intent, Christ dissembled it, and as he promysed his fleshe to all, so he gaue it to the twelue in the night wherein he was betrayd. The whiche thing I speake to thend the reader might perceane, what Christ pro­mised presently. Suche a gift it was the whiche was performed [...]o lesse to Iudas, then to the other Apostles. It was not therefore a spiritual gift only which was promised (for such a one Iudas neither did nor could take) but it was a reall ▪and externall gift, which was deliuered with the hands of Christ, and receaued into the mouthes of the Apostles. After which sort Iudas tooke it. Which could not be so, except the fleshe of Christ were vnder the forme of bread, which Christ gaue.

Again Christ spake not now of geuing his flesh by faith only, for that gift his Father presently gaue, as he sayd: Pater meus dat vobis panem de coelo verum, my Father doth geue you the true bread from heauen. That gift Christ him self was being geuen in flesh, to thend we should beleue in him, and [...] vpon him by spi­rituall deuotion. But Christes gift both hath an other person, & an other tyme. The person is Christ, the tyme is to come. Where­vpon Chrys. homi. 46 in Ioan. S. Chrysostom here noteth: Se, non patrem dare dicit: He saith him self to geue, and not his Father. It is therefore a reall gift to be made externally whereof Christ speaketh.

Wherupō it foloweth, that Christes flesh was promised vnder the form of bread which suin his [...]pper was taken, blessed, and deliuered. Under that form Christes flesh is promised not in faith only, but in truth of nature, and in the same substance which was [Page 127] geuen [...] the life of the world.

The Sacramentaries must nowe say, that flesh here standeth The [...] ­ction. for the signe and figure of Christes flesh, and so by that meanes (they will say) both Iudas had the figure of Christes flesh geuen▪ and the other Apostles had the flesh it self by faith and spirit.

It hath b [...]e [...]wed before, that the bread, whereof Christ now The [...] ­swere. speaketh, and which he affirmeth to be his flesh, is Christ him self, as he is true God and man. Therefore to say, the bread which Christ will geue, is the signe of his flesh, is to say that Christ him self through his own gift is the signe of his own flesh, for of any other bread Christ spake not in this place, then of such bread as him self is. And of that he spake, not in that only respecte as he is God, but as he is man. And so either the man [...]hood of Christ is y ^• Either no signe is ge uen by Christ, or his flesh is the signe y ^• is geuē. signe of his flesh, or nothing els is here called the signe thereof. If the māhood be the signe, surely the māhood is now promised and is deliuered euen to Iudas at his last supper: which being so, I graunt it to be a most true [...]se, y ^• Iudas did eate such a signe of Christes flesh, as his owne substance is. But if the Sacramen­taries will needes haue materiall bread meant by these words ( The bread which I will geue) besydes that they take that word otherwyse, then it is taken in all the talke which apperteineth to y ^• true bread which came down [...]rom heauen, I wil confute that grosse error an other way also.

Christ ioyneth together two diuerse tenses, the future, and the present, Dabo, I will geue, and est, it is, a [...]ing that the geuig of his bread is to come, but the substance or being o [...] the same bread which he wil geue, is pres [...]nt. for he sayd not, y ^• bread which Flesh here can not meane the [...]igure of flesh. I will geue shalbe my flesh, but is my flesh. And yet if the word bread did stand for materiall bread, and the word flesh for y ^• signe and figure of fleshe (as some doubt not falsely to teache) or it the [...] ( is) o [...]d stand [...]or the verbe ( signi [...]icat) which m [...]aneth to be­token [Page] or to signifie, thē Christ euen by our aduersaryes interpre­tation should haue sayd, the bread which I will geue shalbe my flesh, and not (as he now said) is my flesh.

For seing that Christ spake these words one whole yere before his supper (as by the ghospell it maie appere) if the bread whiche he said he would geue, should only betoken his flesh, and not be his fleshe in dede, then were it falsely spoken that the same bread now presently is his flesh. for if the bread it self he not yet made, yea perhappes not so much as the corne thereof in the grounde, and certainly not yet blessed of Christ, how is it possible that the bread which now is not, can be now a signe or token of Christes flesh? That which is not it self, can much lesse be a [...]oken of an other thing. but that which Christ sayd he wold geue, was extāt in substance at that tyme when he spake, and at that present in­stant when he spake. For he sayd the bread which I will geue, is my flesh as I say, is now, is at this moment, wherein I speake. But the materiall bread that I will take into my hands, & turne into my fl [...]sh, is not as yet extant any where. Or if it be, it is not a token vntill I blesse. But the bread that I will geue is euen now my flesh: As much as if Christ sayd, that which I will geu [...] at my last supper, howe so euer it seme cōmon breade, and ap­peare in the forme of bread, which forme and figure is to come: (and therefore I say that I will geue it hereafter) yet the sub­stance that shalbe conteyned within that forme of bread, that sub stance which is the being and essence of my gift, whereof now I speake, that substance is now present in your eyes. What substāce is that? Forsoth the substance of my flesh. For as the forme of br [...]ad is to come, and the substance of my flesh is here present in me: so by the forme of bread I say, I wil geue it. but concerning the substance thereof, I say it is my flesh. I say not it shalbe, lest you should thinke I meante to make such a gi [...]t of my flesh, the [Page 128] substance whereof were to come rather then present. But I say, it is my flesh. For within the forme of that bread none other sub stance shalbe, then that which you see here, which is my flesh. so that these words (the bread which I wil geue is my flesh) are as much to say, as I will geue you the substance of my flesh to eat: And that the word flesh doth here signifie the substance of Chri­stes flesh, Tertullian hath witnessed almoste fourtene hundred Tertull. de carne Christi. yeres past. Who disputing against those heretiks, that confoun­ded the flesh and the soule of Christ, taketh vpon him to declare that they are two distincted natures. Of y ^• soule of Christ it was sayd: Anxia est anima mea vs (que) ad mortem, my soule is sorowfull to death. of his flesh, Panis, quem ego dedero pro salute mundi, caro mea est. The bread which I shall geue for the life of y ^• world is my flesh. Quod si vna caro, & vna anima, illa tristis vs (que) ad mor­tem: & illa panis pro mundi salute saluus est numerus duarū sub­stantiarum [...] genere distantium, excludens carneae animae vnicam speciem. If the flesh be one and the soule an other, y ^• soule sorow [...]ui to death, & the flesh bread for the saluation of the world, the number of two substances differring in their kinde is safe, excluding the one kind of a fleshly soule. If in this disputati [...]n we might expound flesh for the signe of flesh, and being for the signe of being, Tertullian by this place had not proued a reall substance of flesh, sith a signe of flesh, is not the substance of flesh. but now, as in this saying, my soule sorowfull, the word, soule standeth for the substance of the soule: so in this, the bread which I will gene is my flesh, the word flesh standeth for the true sub­stance of Christes flesh. Seing then Christ promiseth to geue the substance of his flesh, & it must nedes be that he fulfilled his pro­myse, vndonbtedly he hath geuen vs in dede the true substance of his flesh in his last supper, when he sayd: Take and eate, this is my body, that is to say, as now I haue pros [...]d, the substance of [Page] my body. Thus it is pro [...]: first, that these words belong to the Sacrament of Christes supper: Next that the word bread [...] [...]eth Christ him self the bread of life: Thirdly that if it were ex­ [...] for common bread, yet euery way the sense should serue to proue of [...] the true gift of Christes substance in his last supper.

¶ A farther declaration of the reall presence of Christes bo The [...]. Chapiter. dy & blood taken out of the discourse of his [...]wn words concerning the different eating of him by f [...]ith, and the re [...]auing of his fleshe and bl [...] in the S [...]amente of the [...]ltar.

MAruaile not, good Reader, that I stand long about a lit­tle. The strength of the word of God is so greate, that a fewe syllables of his can not be sufficiētly expounded by a great many bookes of any mortall mās making. for God spake Psal. 61. but one, and yet Dauid heard two things, to wit, the power and mercy of God. Whereby are vnderstanded the two hole bookes of the old and newe Testament.

Now I wil goe forward to shew you the plaine differerence, that Christ him selfe hath set forth in this Chapiter betwene ea­ting of him by faith, and eating of his flesh and blood in the Sa­crament of the altar. For these two are not one, as our new prea­chers goe about (against the worde of God) to make you beleue: neither doe they differ onely, because in the supper a bodily signe of that thing is eaten, where vpon we feed by faith: but because that thing is receaued into our bodies, where vppon we feed by faith. In so much that of purpose Christ impugneth & destroyeth the Sacramētary doctrine by these his wordes in this Chapiter. wherein as I haue heretofore no [...]ed diuerse kindes and tymes of Thre [...]. ge [...]ng, because God by Moyses gaue naked figures in the tyme [Page 129] past, the father him self geueth presently the true naturall flesh of his naturall sonne to our eyes and hartes. and Christ will geue hereafter the same true fleshe vnder the forme of breade to our mouthes and mindes: so now must I note diuerse workings of the sayd gifts.

One worke aunswered to Gods gift by Moyses, another to Three workings. the fathers gist, and the third to Christes gift.

By Moyses his minister God gaue Manna. This bread was 1. Manna was wrought corporally only corporall, and the people wrought the substāce thereof only with their teeth & bellies: other thing was there not in it whiche myght be wrought. for although it were ordeined to be a figure o [...] a greater thing to come in Christ, yet that was no parte of the Manna it self, but consisted and had his whole ground in the ap­pointemēt of God, and in the vnderstanding of y ^• people of God. to whom (if they were well instructed and so toke it) Māna was a figure: and whether they toke it so or no, it was ordeined to be a figure, but not to them profitable who toke it onely for bodily food. Again those which vnderstode wel what Manna signified, had not any good by the meat it self, but looked for it of the truth which Manna shadowed. for whiche cause Christ saith, your fa­thers haue eaten Manna in the desert and are dead: as who should say, Manna by his owne vertue could saue none of them all, but that true breade Iesus Christ only saueth, whiche Manna dyd signifie.

The second gift is the present gift of the Father, whereof Christ 2. Ioan 6. Christ wrought on by faith Augu. in Ioan. c. 6 sayeth: My [...] doth geue you the true bread frō heauen. This gift of the father muste be wrought not by teeth and bellies (as Manna was) but by fayth and spirite. And therefore S. Augu­s [...]ine saith vpon this place: Vt quid paras dentem & ventrem? Cre de & máducasti. What doest thou prouide tooth and belly? beleue, and thou [...].

[Page]The third gift is that where Christ promiseth to geue his flesh: Christ re­ceaued cor porally. and the working of it, is to eate worthely the same fleshe vnder y ^e forme of bread.

God the father is sayd to gene the true bread, whiche is Christ Christ geuen. him selfe in such sorte as he is God and man in one person: and the same one God doth worke faith in all that heare his voyce, by Faith geuen. the which faith they may worke vpon Christ and eate of him by spirit. Of this worke it is sayde: This is the worke of God that ye Ioan. 6. beleue vpon him whom he hath sent. of this kind of working it is sayd: He that commeth to me shall not hunger, and he that bele­ueth The re­ward of faith. in me, shall not thirst for euer. To be short, of this worke doth Christ speake specially, and in maner wholy from that place where he sayd, that the Father geueth the true bread, for twenty sentences together, vntyll he conclude that kind of working by these words: If any man eate of this bread, he shall lyue for euer▪ Take the payne to reade ouer once or twise the Chapitre of S. Jhon from that place, where it is sayd, operamini, worke, not y ^t The diui­sion of the Chapiter. meat which perisheth, and so forth to the end, and conferte there­with that which I now write, and you shal see as clevely as can be, that Christ distincteth as thre giftes, so thre workings of thē.

As God by Moyses gaue the delicate bread called Manna, so they wrought vppon it by eating the same bread with their teth. As God the father geueth y ^• true bread Iesus Christ, so the faith­full must worke it by beleuing, and their reward shalbe life euer­lasting. But as thou doest tender thy soule health, so goe forward with me to the third gi [...]t, and the third working or eating: which in dede yf it be done profitably conteineth both a bodily and a spi rituall working, a bodily with manna, a spirituall with the gifte The third gift is catē with bo­dy [...] soule. of God the father. a bodily to [...] the manhod of Christ, a spiri­tuall to eate it fruitfully. the eating is spirituall because it requi­reth faith in Christ, and loue towards God and our neighbours, [Page 130] the same eating is bodily, becau [...]e it in dede eateth vnder y ^t forms of bread and wine that fleshe of Christ, whiche it beleueth in saith and harte.

First Christ sheweth his gift, saying: And the bread which I wil geue is my flesh for the life of the world. That this gifte doth dif­fer Christes gift [...]isse­reth from manna. from the gifte of Moyses (who gaue bare breade) it is easily sene. For the sonnes gift tarieth for euer, but Māna perished and they that dyd eate it, concerning any vertue that Manna had in his own substāce to saue them from death. The working of this gift is also named eating and drinking, but yet after another sort then the eating of Manna was vnder Moyses. for here the truth is eaten that was figured in Manna. But how it differeth from the fathers gifte, and the worke whiche belongeth to the fathers gifte, there standeth a great part of this question.

Here I must warne the Reader, that he cōfound not him self. for in ofte repeating what the Father, and what the sonne, why the Father, and why the sonne geueth this, or that: it is to be sea­red least the mynd gor [...]et the chief distinction, and so take one part in stead of the other.

The Father, and the sonne, yea the holy ghost also be all one God, and giue al one thing. But the holy scripture, for the in­struction The who le trinitie worketh. of vs, and by reason of Christes flesh assumpted, doth attribute sometyme one thing to the Father, an other to y ^• son­ne, an other to the holy ghoste: meaninge most commonly by the name of the Father, God, and the whole Trinitie, according to the whiche appropriation of workes and giftes, we now in­tend to speake.

The Father is sayd to geue many waies in this chapiter, he geueth faith into our hartes, he geueth Christ to the world in How ma­nie ways y ^• Father geueth. flesh, he geueth Christ to vs, and geueth vs to Christ. Therefore the gift of the Father may be respected speciallie two wayes. [Page] either in Christ him self, or in vs toward Christ. The Fathers gift in Christ him [...]elf is reall and externall, because he sendeth and geueth his only begotten Sonne in the true flesh of man to be seen, heard, and felt. The Fathers gift, in respect of y ^• we re­ceaue of him, is reall, but internal, spiritual, and without wor­king outwardly y ^t same sensible gift which is wrought inward­ly. For after the Father had once geuen flesh to his Sonne, all sensible and externall working was worthely committed to that heauenly instrument of Christes flesh. So that sometyme we say the Fathers gift is reall and externall, but then we meane the visible flesh of Christ in his owne person: Somtyme we say the Fathers gift is only spiritual, and then we vnderstand the faith, charitie, and grace, which the Father worketh in vs, whom he bringeth to Christ by faith and spirit. This distinction well re­membred, I trust to make the matter playne enough.

The state of our nature is suche, that sith we consist of body and soule, our soule being the chief part of vs, and our body the inseriour parte, God the Father in his gift intendeth to feed our The Fa­ther fee­deth the soule. Sap. 9. soules: which being fed, our body shalbe fed, by reason it depen­deth vppon the soule. But Christ considering that our heauy bo­dies most commonly weigh down our soules to the pit of hell, wold also inuent a way, that our very bodies might not only not hindre, but rather helpe our soules, and not only through our soules, but also through a meate that them selues should re­ceaue, be made lyght and meet to rise vpward, and to obey the spirit gladly.

So that the meate, which God the Father geueth to the soule, Christ [...] y ^• spirituall food euen to the bo­dy. Christ bringeth to the body. And because the body hath no faith to apprehend the flesh of Christ withall, neither vnderstanding, nor spirite, whereby to folowe the flesh of Christ into heauen: it hath pleased his infinite mercy to leaue his flesh in so mar­uelouse [Page 131] a manner vnder the forme of bread, that it might be ge­uen into our handes, mouthes, and breastes, by which meanes we are able to receaue it corporally and naturally. The Sonne The Fa­ [...] and [...] geu [...] one thing not one way. therefore and the Father geue one thing on Christes behalfe, but not one way on our behalfe. For the Father geueth Christ vnto the world in dede, but to vs in faith and spirit. The sonne geueth him self to vs in faith and spirit with the Father, and moreouer he is here sayd to geue him self in truth of body and blood to oursoules and bodies.

Because therefore the thing it self is one which the Father and the Soune geue, one effect doth folowe in vs of both gifts. For as it is sayd of the Fathers gifte, He that beleueth in me, hath euerlasting life: So it is sayd of the Sounes gifte, He that There­ward is one of both gifts The di­uerse wayes of geuing. The [...]irst difference. eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath euerlasting life. But for so much as the Father and the Sonne geue not theire gifts after one sorte: Therefore their two giftes are in this cha­piter of S Ihon diuersly described.

First as I sayd before, of the Fathers gift it is sayd, He doth geue the true bread, in the present tense: Of y ^t Sonne, I wil geue, in the future tense.

The Father geueth Christ in the forme of man, and therefore The [...] difference. it is sayd: This is the will of my Father which sent me, that euery one, who seeth the Sonne and beleueth on him, may haue euerla­sting life, and again, ye haue sene me and haue not beleued. Be­hold, by the manner of the Fathers gift, the faithful may see that Sonne of man, vppon whom they beleue. But of the Sonnes gifte it is only sayd. The bread which I will geue, is my flesh. where it is not sayd that his flesh shalbe seen, but rather insinua­ted y ^t it shalbe vnder a couering of an other kinde of food, which the naming of bread signifieth. And in the supper (where this prophecie was fulfilled) it is most clere.

[Page]The Fathers gift is called Verus panis de coelo, the true bread The [...]. difference. or meate from heauen: The Sonnes gift is called not only true bread, but also truly bread, and meate in dede, Caro mea verè est cibus, my flesh is truly meate. some true meate may chaunce not to be truly meate, because it is not eaten: but nothing is meat in dede, and truly meate, except it be in dede eaten. There is diffe­rence betwene being the true vyne, and a vyne truly. Christ sayd him self was the true vyne, but he sayd not, that he was truly any certeyn vyne.

The Iewes and Disciples went not away from Christ for The iiij. difference. any thing that was spoken about the Fathers gyfte. For al­beit they beleued not Christ to be y ^• sonne of God, yet they well perceaued, that suche a gifte of eating by faith myght stand with the custome of Gods people. but when the sonnes gifte came to be declared, they could abyde no longer. Seing then it is playne that they lacked faith, but yet lacked not vnderstanding, we may be sure they sawe more apparāt absurditie in the sonnes gifte (as they toke it) then in the Fathers. because it semeth straunger for mans flesh to be eaten, as the sonne semed to saye, then God to be made man, which is the Fathers gift, who sent his sonne to take our flesh.

The gifte of the Father is called by suche names only, as be­long The v. difference. to the persone of Christ, or to his dyuine nature, to say: the bread of life, the liuely bread, the true bread, (for God only is absolutely the true bread of life) or by the pronown [...] ego, which is to say, I. but y ^• gifte of Christ, is called also by y ^• names of his humane nature, to wit, the flesh and blood o [...] the sonne of man.

An other difference may be, to cōsider, that Christ endeth his The vi. difference. talke of eche gifte with repeating the old figure Manna, betoke­ning y ^• as wel by the giste of the Father as of the sonne the sha­dow of manna was fulfilled. But (as it shall hereafter appeare) [Page 132] Manna was more perfectly fulfilled in outward doynges Manna was fulfil led in both gifts. by the sonnes gift. As therefore when he had longe reasoned of the belefe which they ought to haue in him, whom God the Fa­ther had sent, he last of al concludeth: I am the bread of lyfe. To eate o [...] this bread Your Fathers did eate manna in the desert and be dead, yf any man eate of this bread he shall lyue for euer: ryght so, hauing at To eate this bread large reasoned of eating his owne flesh, and of y ^• effect which ry­seth thereof, he at the last endeth: This is the bread which came downe from heauen: not as your Fathers haue eaten manna, and be dead, he that eateth this bread shall lyue for euer. The like peroration vsed in both places with wordes somwhat vnlike, doth declare that one substance is gyuen of the Father to be eatē of vs by faith, and of the sonne to be really eaten. so that the ma­ner differeth, because we eate only ex Christo, that is to say of Christ by faith, but we eate and receaue Christum Christ him self, in the Sacrament of the altar.

For it pleased the whole Trinitie, y ^• the fulnesse of our salua­tion should be in the manhood of Christ, whose food it is, to end Ioan. 4. his Fathers worke. The Fathers gift is to beleue in Christ: the sōnes gifte is, to eate and drink in very dede his flesh and blood.

In working the Fathers gifte, a working faith is sufficient. in working the sonnes gifte, [...]aith is required with taking and eating that, wherein we beleue.

The Fathers gifte is to worke Christ in vs, as Christ is God and man: but more as he is God, then as he is man. for oure [...]aith and belefe is due to the Godhead first of all, a [...]d vnto the manhood because it is ioyned vnto the Godhead: and therefore Ioan. 14. Christ sayd, ye beleue in God, beleue also in me. But drinking and eating is first apperteyning to the manhood, and afterward reacheth vnto the Godhead, because y ^• Godhead is in that mea [...]e and drinke, which we take, therefore Christ sayd: he that [...] [Page] my flesh, dwelleth in me, and I in him. 4.

The Fathers gift is belonging first to our spirite, and then to oure flesh, because it is the flesh of such a spirit, which beleueth in God, and loueth him. the sonnes gifte is first in our body and flesh, concernyng the Sacramentall receauing of him, and then in our spirite, because it is a spirite belonging to such a flesh, which receaueth the flesh of God thorough Christ.

In the Fathers gift we are not sayd to receaue y ^• true bread it 5. self, which the Father gaue into the world, but to receaue, as it were an effect wrought by y ^• strēgth thereof. for after Christ had at large described his Fathers gifte, he said: this is the bread com­ming We eate of Christ by the Fa­thers gift. downe from heauen, to the entent that if any man shal eate, ex ipso, of it, he may not dye. he saith not ipsum, if any man eate it, but of it. Again: Ego sum panis qui de coelo descēdi, si quis man­ducauerit ex hoc páne, viuet in aeternum. I am the bread which came downe from heauen, if any man eate of this bread he shall liue for euer. to eat of this bread, is, to receaue some grace and ef­fect comming from it. And this much cōcerning y ^• Fathers gift.

But concerning the sonnes gifte, Christ saith: except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of mā. He saith not of the flesh, but y ^• wholè flesh it self. Again, My flesh is truely mea [...] he that eateth my flesh We eate Christ by y ^• Sonnes gift. tarieth in me. and afterward, he that eateth me [...] he saith not now of me, but me. Last of all: qui māducat hunc panem, viuet in aeter­num, he that eateth this bread shal liue for euer. he saith not now, he that eateth (of this bread) as he sayd before speaking of spirituall eating, but he that eateth this bread.

And yet to make the matter more playne such an eating is as­signed 6. We eate Christ in his supper as Mana was eatē. to the gifte of Christ (which is made in his supper) as be­fore was named of Māna. for it was sayd thereof: Our Fathers did eate Manna. they sayd not of Manna, but Manna in his owne substance. which words are three tymes conformably re­hearsed, [Page 133] and euery where they did eate Manna, not only of Man na (as though they had only taken a certeyn vertue out of it) but they did eate Manna, as we eate common bread.

Seing then we may eate of a thing, or els the thing it self, the eating of it is a spiritual eating by faith and vnderstanding. But the eating it is a reall eating, in the nature and substance of the thing it self.

When I say, that by the Fathers gifte we eate of Christ, and by the Sonnes gifte we eate Christ, I meane not to deny but that also by the Sonnes gifte we eate of Christ. For as he that hath syxe, hath fower: so he y ^t eateth worthely Christes flesh, ea­teth He that eateth Christ, may eate also of Christ. both Christ, and of Christ, but not only of Christ, for he ea­teth Christ in his humane nature, wherein the diuine nature dwelleth, and is geuen thereby to be eaten of.

He eateth of Christ, I say, concerning that effect & grace, which by Sacramentall eating the Godhead worketh in his body and soule. For the Godhead it self is the bread whereof we must par­take. But the meane to partake it most abundantly is to receaue worthely y ^• manhood, wherein the Godhead corporally dwelleth. Therefore Christ geuing all the spirituall gifts that his Father Colos. 2. doth, as meane to make vs partakers of y ^• Godhead, geueth also besydes all them, the truth of his flesh and blood in the Sacra­ment of the altar, as y ^• meane far y ^• highest to ioyne vs most nigh to y ^• spirit of God. And although his Father geue vs by his ap­pointment the same flesh and blood which Christ doth geue, yet Christ calleth it for a great reason his own gift, because the sub­stance of it procedeth from his own person, where vnto he assum­pted flesh and blood. For in this Chapiter (as in many other places) by the Fathers gift, the gift of God and of the whole Trinitie is meant. And by y ^• Sonnes gift that chiefly is meant, which peculiarly procedeth by meane of y ^• incarnatiō & strength [Page] of Christes flesh ioyned always with y ^• dyuine nature, the which flesh we receaue in the Sacrament of Christes own institution, Mat. 26. wherein he sayd in his own person: Take and eate, this is my bo­dy, drink ye all of this, for this is my blood.

Who seeth not nowe the difference betwene the gift that God geueth vs by charitie (which he spreadeth in our hartes) and the gif [...] wherein he gaue his owne Sonne, whē he toke flesh and be­came man with vs, and the gift which the Sonne being made man geueth in his supper. No gifte of God could saue vs (the Theword made [...]. prophecies standing as they did) but only the geuing of his sōne into the world, when he tooke reall flesh for vs. And yet was not Christ ma [...]e our sacrifice. that enough, except the Sonne again had geuen him self to death for vs. Then the flesh of Christ is the meane for vs to be saued, that is, a ladder let down from heauen, whereon we may steppe and so clyme vp. God him self we could not eate, thereby to be Christ made our food. chaūged into him, and made membres of him. But God became man, that we eating mā might receaue God, as he dwelt in that flesh which we re [...]aued.

The conclusion is, that if the Fathers gifte, which is the in­ [...]arnation of Christ and his manhood, be to be taken in spirite and faith, concerning the feeding of our soules (as you haue seen it plainly proued) the sonnes gifte (which is an other different maner of geuing, and hath an other kynde of working, appoin ted to it) must be receaued not in faith, spirit, and vertue only, but also in the substance of flesh and blood.

Our new preachers expound the whole matter, as though The Sa­cramen­taries ex­ [...]. Christ gaue his flesh in his last supper no [...]e otherwise (excepting materiall bread and wine) then his Father geueth it vnto vs by faith. And therefore they teache, that we receaue in the supper of our Lord with common bread and wine, Christ him self by faith and spirit. But by that meanes Christ geueth a great deale lesse, [Page 134] then his father gaue. For bread and wine is lesse then the gift of faith, & when Christ geueth faith, he doth it as God, therein being one with his father. Is then his owne gift only bread and wine? Came he into the world to geue a lesse tokē, then God had geuen before vnder Moyses? For who can doubt, but manna dyd in his owne substāce farre passe bakers bread and wine of the grape? Is this the end of this long disputation, of so many differences put betwene Moyses, God the Father, and Christ, betwene manna, Christes incarnatiō, & his supper? betwene eating by body alone, by faith alone, by bodie & faith together? Is this al, to haue by y ^• gift of Christ, only a token of him selfe in bread and wine? how is then the bread, which is eaten, able to make vs liue for euer? if the eating it by faith only at Christes supper, make vs lyue for euer, and yet we had it by faith before of the fathers geuing: then Christe geneth him selfe by none other meane (sauing bread and wine) then his father had done. and doth he in vain (trow ye) di­stinct his own gift from his fathers so many waies? is it then all one to eate of Christ alone, and to eate Christ and of Christ? Ue­rily if concerning our taking of it, the thing were throughly one (sauing bread and wine) he wold not make so many differences.

But if Christes gift (concerning our partaking) differ front his fathers gift in tyme, in maner, in degree, why should it be so, but that Christ geueth for a greater ioyning of vs to him▪ y ^• same in truth of nature, whiche his father in faith and spirite gaue be­fore, as the necessarie preparation to the sonnes gifte? His father is only spirite and truth, and therefore geueth Christe really to the worlde to be fed of, spiritually by vs. But the sonne is fleshe Ioan. 1. (for the worde is made flesh) and so geueth really to vs the gifte of that flesh whiche he toke, not for his own sake, but for ours to thende we might really eate the spirite of God which is in it.

Neither let it be strange to you, y ^• Christ semeth to geue more [Page] to vs then his father. for he geueth more both for vs vppon the Cros [...], and to vs in his supper, then his father doth outwardly ge [...]. but yet all his gifts come srom his father, because his father gaue his only begotten sonne to vs in the truth of our fleshe, to thend he should geue the same fl [...]she in his owne person both for vs & to vs: that by such an excellen [...] meane we might [...] the nerer ioyned to God him self.

Although the conference of the words of the Ghospel do proue sufficiently that which I haue sayd, yet I wil shew also that S. Chrisostom toke this chapiter in the same sense that I haue done.

First he noteth the diuersitie of persons, in that Christ sayd: se, In Ioan. hom. 45. non pat [...]em dare: him selfe to geue, and not his Father.

Secondly, the distinct places of the chapiter where Christ spea­keth, in the one, of eating his Godhead by faith: in the other, of In Ioan. hom. 44. eating his body. Primum de diuinitate &c. de corpore circa finē inquit. Panis quem ego dabo &c. Christ speaketh fir [...]t o [...] his God­head: & of his body he sayth toward the end: the bread, which I will geue, is my flesh.

Thirdly S. Chrysostom noteth, that the word panis bread, sig­nifieth either the doctrine of Christ, and saluatiō, and faith in him: In Ioan. h [...]m. 45. or els his body. By which words who seeth not, y ^• he distincteth eating by faith alone, from eating y ^• body it self? The body there­fore is it self eaten otherwyse then by fa th.

Fourthly he sayth (vpon these words, my flesh is verily meat) that Christ sayd so, to thend they should not thinke him to speake In Ioan hom. 47. In Ioan. hom. 45. in parables. And yet by flesh to meaue the signe of his flesh, or by eating to meane be [...]uing, is to speake in parables.

Last of all he sayth, it is brought to passe by the meat which he hath geuen vs, that we should not only by loue, but also in dede In Math. hom. 83. it selfe be turned into y ^• flesh of his. And again: Christ mingleth him sel [...]e with vs not by faith only, but he maketh vs his booy in [Page 135] it self. But if we [...] Christ by faith only & loue, surely we should be reformed to him by none other meane thē by faith & loue. But now we are turned from our corruptible nature, and are made able to liue for euer, not only by the gift of faith and charitie, but euen by that we receaue Christes flesh in dede it sel [...]e in his owne substance, truthe and nature. All these things did S. Chrysostom gather out of Christes words.

I nede not to shew in many lines that Theophilact and Eu­thymius folow y ^t same order in expounding S. Ihon, which S. Chrysostom before had vsed. For I think no man, who knoweth their trade of wryting, doubteth of it. The former saith vpō these Theophi lact. in 6. Ioan. words: The bread whiche I wil geue is my flesh, that Christ ma­nifestly in that place speaketh of the Sacramentall communion of his body, and that y ^• bread which is eaten of vs in y ^• mysteries is not only a certein resembling of our Lords flesh, sed ipsa caro Domini, but the flesh of our Lod it selfe.

Euthymius likewyse agreeth, that Christ is bread two ways, Euth. in c. 6. [...]oā. according to his diuine and humane nature.

Non autem dixit, quem do, sed quem dabo. He sayd not, which I doe geue, but which I will geue. For he minded to geue it in his last supper.

Now as Christ is bread two ways: so is he eaten two ways. As God, he is eaten by faith alone: as man geuing his flesh to vs at hi [...] last supper, he is eaten not only by faith but in very dede. The later way of eating the Sacramentaries take away.

¶ The like precept made to men o [...]lawful age for The xi [...]ij. [...]. caring Chris [...]es flesh, as was made generally for [...], sheweth his [...] to be as really present i [...] his [...], as [...] is in [...].

[Page]WHen Christ had promised to geue his flesh to be eaten, and the Iewes had asked how he was able to doe it, Christ answered: Except y [...] eate the flesh of the Sonne Ioan. 6. of man and drinke his blood, ye shall not haue life in you: he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath life euerlasting, and I will reise him in the last day.

These words first were spoken to men of lawfull age as it ap­pereth by the circumstance, who are bound to receaue the blessed Sacrament of Christes supper, if no lawfull impediment stop them, to thend they may nourish and maitein the life which they toke in baptism, and increase it to a higher degree of vnitie with Christ him selfe.

But baptism, by our aduersaries confession, may and ought to be geuen to infants, and yet it could not doe them any good, if it conteined not in it self y ^e strength to regenerate them in Christ, seing they are not able for their parts to beleue actually. Mary if baptism really make them a new creature, & saue them (as S. Paule speaketh): the nourishment which we receaue in y ^• Sacra­mēt 2. Cor. 5. Tit 3. Greg. in orat. ca­theche [...] ca, apud Euthy. in Pano­plia. li 2. Hor. 21. of [...] altar (being now of perfect vnderstāding) must nedes be also reall. For as [...]regorius of Nyssa reasoneth, our nature is not at any certain state, but continueth in his substance by per­petuall motion, drawing to it that which it lacketh, and expelling superfluo [...]se things.

As therefore our baptim is made by real washing with water, & real renewing of y ^• holy Ghost: so nowe in the supper of Christ it behoueth we be really fed with the fruit of the [...] of life, which is [...]one other thing besyde the flesh of Christ. That flesh th [...]n [...] be really eaten of vs, and not only eaten by spirit, ( [...] is conuenient for Angels, but satisfieth not the necessi­tie [...] [...] nature) but eaten by mouth and body. For of [...], [...] Christ at this tyme, neither is it worth [Page 136] while to say, that the body shall eate bread while the soul feedeth vpon the flesh of Christ. For the bread and wine haue no promise made in this place of them. For albeit bread and wine be necessa­rie to the consecrating of the Sacrament, yet the substance of thē is not necessarie at y ^• tyme of receauing the Sacrament. it is only the flesh which died for vs, that Christ promiseth to geue to be ea­ten, it is the flesh of the sonne of man, which if we eate not, we shall not haue life in vs. It is Christes flesh, which if we eate, he will reise vs vp at the last day. That flesh of his must be eaten & his only blood must be drunken.

This threatning which is made, if we receaue not worthely the flesh of Christ, must be vnderstanded in his kind, like the other threatning precept made before, concerninge baptism: where it was sayd, except a man be borne again of water and of the holy ghost, he can not enter into the kingdom of heauen. bothe are Sacraments, both necessarie to faithful men and both profitable to life euerlasting. that whiche water doth in wasshing vs, the fleshe of Christ must do in feeding vs. for this cause the ancient Fathers haue alwais both ioyned these two Sacraments toge­ther, Cyp. ad Quiri. li. 3. cap. 26. & 26. Basil. de baptis. li. 1. c. 2. & 3. Ambr de sacramē. & de [...] qui initiā Aug de [...]. mer. & remis. cap 20. and haue alleged these two places for them: the one out of the third, the other out of the sixth of S. Iohn. and they haue na­med the one baptism, of wasshing: and the other is called Chri­stes body and blood, of that substance whiche is geuen in it. What should I name here S. Cyprian, S. Basil, S. Ambrose, S. Augustine, & all the rest, who reckon euery where the same truth of flesh to be in the [...], which is concerning water in bap­tisme.

Therefore as the water which washeth vs, is present really: so must the fleshe of Christ which feedeth vs, be made really present. As baptisme can not be truely kept without naturall water, so [Page] can not the supper of Christ be truely kept without his naturall flesh. As if an euil mā come to baptism, he is truly washed though not profitably to him self: so if an euill man come to the supper of Christ, he truly (though not worthely) receaueth his flesh. As it is not enough for the Sracrament of baptism to haue water pre­sent in faith only and in spirite or vnderstanding: so the presence of Christes flesh by faith, spirite, or vnderstanding only suffiseth not, to make the Sacrament of his supper.

I pray you what vnderstanding had children, wherewith they might receaue the body and blood of Christe? and yet seing it is [...]. in ser. de la­psis. Innocēt. epist. 92. to. 2. a­pud Aug. & Aug. epi. 106. [...] by the witnesse of S. Cyprian, of S. [...]unocentius, and of S. Augustin, that children (although without euident [...]) receaued the [...] in many places of christendō, euen while the Churche was yet in his cheife floure, it can not be denied but in that age all those Bishops, Doctors, and preachers which vsed to do so, dyd well vnderstand, that the receauing of the Eu­charist consisted not in receauing Christ by actuall faith, and me­ditation of his death and resurrection, but in the vertue of those visible giftes, which were sanctified by the Priestes vpon the ho­ly altar of God, and thence distributed to the faithfull people.

T [...]at custome of so auncient time vsed more for a securitie thē The com­ [...] [...] of in­fants doth [...] the [...] taries. for necessitie, yet was approued of God thus farre, that we there­by might haue an [...] witnesse of the learned farthers auc­thority, against them, who doubt not to affirme all the writers and preachers of the first six hundred yeres after Christ, to haue beleued of our Lords supper, as the new preachers do now pro­ [...] in England.

But the new preachers make the substance of Christes supper to [...] in faith, in spirite, and in vnderstanding. And that not in [...] saith, whiche another man [...] for me (as it is d [...]ne for [...]. antes at the [...]) b [...]t teache t [...]e [...]upper [...]o con [...]ist in [...] [Page 137] faith, as euery man for him self bringeth and [...]. So that if a man thinke not of Christes death, and lifting vp his hart doe not swetely feede vppon Christ sitting at the right hand of his Fa ther, they say he doth not receaue our Lords body. And they teach that he eateth nothing but breade and wine, and toucheth nor the body and blood of Christ at all.

Of whō I aske, what S. [...], what all the other Bishops Cypr. in [...]. de [...]. of A [...]rica thought. If they had thought so as these men doe, they would not haue geuē the Eucharist to children and infants, who could not [...]uminate Christes passion, nor thinke vpon him sitting in heauen.

They doutlesse beleued farre otherwise of the Sacrament, then so. They beleued the body and blood of Christ to be really contei­ned vnder the formes of bread and wine, and therefore that chil­dren might haue profite by receauing it into their verie bodies & soules, albeit they could not lift vp their mindes actually to hea­uen. The matter in those da [...]es dyd not stand vppon the faith of men, but vpon the word of God, who said: this is my body. This, I say, which I bid you take, this, whiche I geue, this, whiche I bid you eate. What a toy is it nowe for our Sacramentaries to imagin an eating aboue the sky, whereas the body is geuen to the Apostles hands & mouthes by Christ himself, and to the hāds or mouthes of other faithfull men by his ministers in earth? The xiii. Chap [...]ter▪

¶That S. Augustine did not teach these words, except ye eate the flesh &c. to betoken the eating o [...] Christ on [...]y by faith and spirit, nor yet the eating o [...] materiall bread with [...] remembrance of him, but the eating of his flesh, to the [...]d we may be the better wyned to the spirit of God.

[Page]IF any speache (sayth S. Augustin) seme to command a disho­norable Aug. de doctrina Christ. li. 3. c. 16. acte or vncharitable deed, or to forbyd a profitable or benesiciall thing, that speache conteineth some figure. Fxcept ye eate (sayth our Lord) the slesh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood, ye shall not haue life in you. He semeth to command a dishonorable act, or an euyll deed. It is therefore a figure cōman­ding that we should communicate with the passion of our Lord, and y ^• we should swetely and profitably remember, that his flesh was crucified and wounded for vs.

This place of S. Augustine may be alleged against me, first by The obie­ctiō of the [...]utherās the Lutherans, who wold proue thereby that Christ in S. Thou spake figuratiuely, whe [...] he named the eating of his flesh and the drinking of his blood. For there (wil they say) he toke eating and drinking for perfect beleuing and remembring Christes death, which is no sacramentall eating.

To whom I answere, that S. Augustin by calling this speach The aun­swere. a figure, meaneth not to deny that it apperteineth to the last sup­per, but only that it is a figure of speache in respect of the maner of eating his flesh and of drinking his blood: because it semeth to commaund the visible and external eating of a mans flesh, which is a heynouse thing. but in dede Christ meant, that they should ca [...]e his fleshe and drinke his blood swetely and profitably in a Sacrament, in a mysterie, in a remembraunce of his death who purchased our life: which was done at Christes last supper, when taking bread he said after blessing, this is my body which is geuē Luc. 22. for you, take & eate. which body who so eateth worthely, he must nedes communicate with the passion of Christ, in so much as he eateth that body, which suffered so bitter a passion for him. Now by the fact of eating to communicate also with the spirite & god­head of Christ, that is the figure whereof S. Augustin speaketh: but otherwise it is out all question, that S. Augustine meant not [Page 138] by the swete remembraunce of Christes death to exclude the ne­cessitie of receauing that Sacrament, the which if we ca [...]e not when we shold cate it, we shal not haue life, and the whiche is [...]. Co. 11. commanded to be made for Christes remembrance. Or is any man able to make a more swete remembrance of his own deuo­tion, then Christ hath iustituted for vs at his last supper? there­fore S. Augustin [...]oth meane that whiles we eate the Sacra­mēt, we should communicate with Christes passion, by doing y ^• in soule, which our body doth.

Farthermore S. Augustin expoundeth these present wordes of Christes last supper in diuers other places of his workes. in Aug. de pec. me. li. 1. c. 20. so much that he disputing against the Pelagians expresly affir­meth them to be sayd, De sanctae mensae Sacramento, of the Sa­crament of the holy table. and vppon the booke of Leuiticus, he asketh why the Iewes were forbidden to drink blood, sith Christ & in Le­uit. 9. q. 57. & in ep. 106. &c. & in Ps. 68. con­tra Cre­scon li. 1. cap. 25. exhorteth all men that wil haue life, to receaue the blood of his sacrifice, in alimentum, to nourish them. which thing is knowē to be done in the Sacrament of the altar, and the exhortation therevnto is made in S. Iohn. This much is sufficiēt to answer the Lutherans concerning that they leane to S. Augustins au­thoritie, in whom he that listeth to see more, may reade the pla­ces noted in the marge [...]t.

Secondarilie the Zwinglians graunting this place to be vn­derstanded of Christes last supper, and building vntruly there­vppon The obie­ [...] of the [...]. the necessitie of both kindes, make an argument, that in his last supper we haue not the body of Christ present vnder the forme of bread after consecration, but only that by eating ma­teriall bread the figure thereof, we must remember it absent, and swetely repete in our minde what paines Christ suffered [...]or vs, and with how great loue he redemed vs. and this their saying they wold father vppon this present place of S. Augu­stine, [Page] because he calleth Christes speache figuratiue.

For the better vnderstanding of this present controuersie, it The ann­swer. is to be noted, that S. Augustine, writing rules or precepts of christian doctrine, taketh and defineth a figuratiue speache after a certain peculiar maner, which he him self describeth in this sort: Aug. de doctrina Christ. l. 3. cap. 10. Quicquid in sermone diuino nequè ad morum honestatem, ne (que) ad fidei veritatom propriè referri potest, figuratum esse cognoscas. Whatsoeuer in the word of God can not be properly referred neither to the honestie of maners, nor to the truthe of faith, be thou sure it is figuratiue.

Whereby we may perceaue, that he measureth a figuratiue What a fi guratiue speache is to S. Au­gustine. speache, by true faith and good maners. to either of which all that cannot be properly attributed, he doubteth not to call figura tiue, in such sort as he now vseth that word for a thing that mea­neth a farther truthe, then the word naturally soundeth. The figure, that S. Augustine findeth in Christes words, is because if we rest in their natural sense, they can not be referred to the ho­nesty of maners. for it semeth a dishonorable dede and against charitie to eate a mans flesh. for it is both against that charitie which a man oweth to him self (and therefore is called flagitium, [...]agitiū. dishonour) and also against y ^• which we owe to our neighbour, and therefore is named facinus an vncharitable or hurtsull act. facinus. For as S. Augustine him self sheweth how he taketh a figura­tiue speathe, so doth he tell how he taketh flagitium and facinus. L. 3. c. 10.

It is surely a wilfull abusing of good lerning, if a man know­ing how a master and teacher taketh his termes, will notwith­standing dispute with him, vsing them in other seuse. which thing sith it is not landable, we knowing what S. Augustine calleth figuratiue, and what he calleth dishonour and vnchari­table, must so talk of those things, as he hath done.

Why then is it a figuratiue speache, when Christ [...]ad the Iewes [Page 139] [...]ate his flesh? S. Augustine him self geueth the cause, saying: Facinus vel flagitium videtur iubere. he semeth to command a thing dis honorable and hurtfull. dishonorable to y ^• cater, hurt­full to him, whose flesh is eaten. for it is a thing muche against the honestie of nature to fede vpon our brothers flesh, and it can not be naturally and properly done, without the losse of his life whose flesh we eate. for these two causes, or els for any one of them, we ought to think this precept to be a figure, that is to say, that it must be more profitablie vnderstanded, then y ^• words doe properly sound. what sound they properly?

See, good reader, whether I deale syncerely with thee, or no. It is a weighty matter to hādle diuine mysteries, and therefore I endeuour to vse therin such warinesse, as becometh me. I will bring none other mans words, but S. Augustines own, to shew, what the precept of eating Christes flesh at Capharnaum did seme to sound properly. S. Augustine speaketh in this wise August. tract. 26. in [...]oan. of the Iewes: Carnē sic intellexerunt quomodo in cadauere dila­niatur, & caet. The Iewes vnderstode flesh after such sort, as it is torne in peeces in a carcase, or as it is sold in the shambles, and not as it is quickened with the spirit. And in an other place S. Augustine writeth also of the very same matter: Durum illis Aug. in Psal. 98. visum est quod ait, nisi quis manducauerit &c. it semed a hard saying to the Iewes: except a man eate my flesh, he shal not haue life euerlasting. They toke it foolishly, thei thought of it carnally and supposed, that our lord minded to cut of certain smal peeces of his body, and to geue it them. This is a hard talk sayd they. they were hard, and not the talk. for if they were not hard, but gentle, they wold say to them selues: He speaketh not this thing rashly, but because there lieth priuie some Sacrament. [...]eing gen tle & not hard, they wold [...]arie with him, and should learn of him that thing which, after their departure, those lerned who ta­ried. [Page] for when y ^• twelue had taried with him (the other being de­parted) they (as who were sorie of y ^• others departing,) warned Christ, that they were offended with his word & so were depar­ted. but Christ instructed them and sayd: It is the spirit which quickeneth, the flesh profiteth not, the words which I haue spo­ken to you are spirit and life. vnderstand that, which I haue spo­ken, spiritually. Ye shall not eate this body which ye see, ne shall not drink that blood which they shal shed who wil [...] me. I haue commended to you a certain Sacrament, which, being spi­ritually vnderstanded, shal make you liue. and although that Sacrament mustenedes be visibly celebrated, yet it must be in­uisibly vnderstanded. thus much S. Augustine.

First I note in these words against the Lutherans, that S. 1. Augustine vnderstandeth the precept of eating Christes flesh of the Sacrament of his last supper. for there only a Sacrament of his death is visibly folemnized, and inuisibly vnderstanded.

Secondly I note against the Zuingla [...]s, that the figuratiue 2. speache which S. Augustine acknowlegeth in Christes words, is to be measured and meant according to the natural and custo­mable speaking and vnderstanding of carnall men, who yet be not fully faithfull. for they thought they should haue eaten Chri­stes flesh torne into peeces, & to f [...]l their bellies there withal. for in dede y ^e eating of flesh naturally imploieth cutting or tearing, before it come to our month, and afterward chawing with the teeth, and so the filling of the bellye. but in respect of all suche meanings, the words of Christ be figuratiue.

For seing it is against the honestie of maners to order mans flesh after such a cruel fashion, the Iewes should haue deui­sed how to make an honest meaning of his words, whom Ioan. 6. they confessed to be a great Prophete, or at the least they should haue asked of Christ the true meaning of his own words. For [Page 140] seing Christ had multiplied siue loaues miraculously to feed them, and did so many other miracles and so much good in al the countrie, that all men who were voide of malice confessed him Ioan. 9. to be of God, reason geueth, they should harken obediently to his words, as the which they might perceaue to be spoken by no meane or common man, and that therefore they should not measure them by their own phantasie & experience. Now then to say, that except ye eate my flesh, is a siguratiue speache, is no more to say, but you must not take the eating of Christes flesh so as at the first sight it cometh to your mind, neither concerning the vsuall maner, nor concerning the customable end of y ^• eating, for that is vnhonest. Tarie therefore vntill you find a better sense. Whiche sense is found when it is knowen that Christ vn­der the forme of bread geueth the substance of his flesh whole, Colos. 2. sound, and quick, with the Godhead corporally dwelling in it, to the end we should liue spiritually for euer, by worthy recea­uing it into our bodies and soules.

Thirdly I note much the kind of speaking, which S. Augu­stine vseth. For he calleth that thing a Sacrament vpon y ^• words of the Psalm now alleged, which in his bookes of Christian Psal. 98. doctrine, he called a figure: Shewing him self to take the name of a figure for all that, when a farther and higher thing is to be lib. 3. ca. 10. vnderstanded then was outwardly expressed, in which case the thing expressed is a Sacrament, to wit, a figure or a holy signe of that higher truth which is to be vnderstanded. but he meant not by the name of a figure either to exclude the truth of eating Christes flesh, or the truthe of drinking his blood, but only the grosse maner of eating and drinking it to a carnal end, which the Iewes thought vpon. for as the killing and eating of the Pas­chall lamb was not only natural, but also gaue y ^• faithful to vn­derstand that Christ [...]ould be both killed on the crosse, and eaten [Page] in a Sacrament: and as the figure which was in that Lamb did not diminish the real killing and eating thereof, but only did refer it to a higher truthe: so the figure, which is in eating Christes flesh, doth not diminish the true eating there­of, but only declareth that eating to be a figure, because it is referred again to a higher truthe, both in Christ, whose flesh that once died is now eaten, and in vs, who eate it not so much for to eate it corporally, as to fede spiritually of God him self, who maketh that flesh profitable. and that S. Augustine thought so, it is euident by his own words vpon S. Iohn: ye know not what is y ^t maner of eating this flesh, but except ye eate it &c. Lo the maner of eating was secret, but the thing that should be eaten was naturall flesh. August. in Ioan. tractat. 26. &. 27

Again: Carnem sic intellexerunt, quomodo in cadauere dila­niatur, aut in macello venditur, non quomodo spiritu vegetatur. They so vnderstode flesh, as it is torne in a carcase, or solde in the shambles: And not as it is quickened with the spirit or God­head. Here it is reported, wherein the Iewes did erre. They toke the word, flesh, amisse, not concerning the substance of it, (which must be really eaten) but concerning the maner of ea­ting Modus. it. Is not modus Latin for the maner? Is not quomodo as much to say, as by what maner? The Iewes vnderstode y ^• name of flesh, Quomodo dilaniatur, non quomodo vegetatur: After such maner as it is torn into pecces, and not after such maner as it is quickened with the spirit of God. Do not these words import, that the Iewes erred in the manner of eating Christes flesh? Doth not he that findeth fault only with the maner of ea­ting flesh, sufficiently allow the eating of the flesh it self, if it be done after a good maner?

Yea farther, doth not he that sheweth the maner how it may be well eaten, approue that kind of eating it? As we must not [Page 141] [...]ate Christes flesh after such a grosse maner, as is vsed in eating such flesh which is commonly cut into peeces: Right so we must eate Christes flesh after such maner, as it is quickened with the Godhead. So doe S. Angustines words import.

I beseche thee, good Reader, see the oddes betwene the argu­ment of a Catholike and of a Sacramētarie. He reasoneth thus: The Sa­cramen­tarie. we must not eate Christes flesh carnally and butcharly, there­fore we must not eate really y ^• substance thereof. We reason thus: We must eate Christes flesh as it is quickened with the God­head, The Ca­tholike. Why the Sacra­mentaries argument faileth. therefore we must eate really the substance thereof. The ar­gument of the Sacramentarie is naught, because a certain vse or maner of a thing forbidden doth not infer, that the substance of the thing it self is forbidden.

Yea contrariewise, the forbidding of one maner semeth to li­cence the same thing in an other maner. As if the law say, let no­man were a sword in the city, it semeth to graunt that men may were a sword in the highe way. And yet because S. Augustine sayth, we ought to take Christes words figuratiuely in respect of such a foule maner of eating his flesh, as the Iewes imagined, the Sacramentarie will conclude, that Christes flesh it self must not be eaten really and substancially at all.

See on the other syde, why the Catholikes argument is good Why the Catho­liks argu ment is good. and laudable. Euery maner and qualitie which is graunted, cō ­cerning the vse of any substance, doth infer of necessitie the ha­uing of that substance. But we may externally in a Sacrament by our fact and dede, as wel as by faith, eate Christes flesh, Quo­modo spiritu vegetatur, after such maner as it is quickened with the spirit, therefore we must haue it substancially and really pre­sent, to the end we may so eate it in the sayd Sacrament. The not eating it after a grosse maner, doth not take away the eating of it in substance. but the eating of it in a Sacrament, whereof we [Page] now speake, as it is dw [...]t in of the [...] (which is a mo [...] pure maner of eating it) doth include the eating of it in substāce, where dwelleth the Godhead but in the substance of Christes flesh? Or how can I eate it as the spirit doth quicken it, if I eat not the substance of it, which only is quickened and vnited to the Godhead? which thing sith it is so, S. Augustine meaneth no [...], by calling Christes words figuratiue, to exclude the eating [...] his flesh substancially, but to exclude the eating of it by peece meale, or els for the filling of the belly. And therefore vppon. [...] thus he writeth: Quomodo illi intellexerunt carnem, non tract. 27. sic ego do ad manducandum carnem meam. After such maner as they vnderstode flesh, I do not so geue my flesh to eate. What is this to say, but I g [...]ue my flesh to be eaten after an other sort, but not in an other substance then the Iewes thought of? The Iewes erred in the maner of eating, as thinking they should eate it in that visible quantitie wherein Christ spake: and so they erred in the maner, but not in the substance of Christes flesh. But the Sacramentaries erre in the substance it [...]. The Iewes thought Christes slesh should haue bene eaten properly and na­turally, as other meates are eaten which are diuided and pe­rished in the eating. The Sacramentaries think, that Christes flesh must not be eaten substancially or in truth of his own na­ture, but [...] and by faith alone. The truth receaued in the whole Catholike Church is, that Christes flesh is eaten both substancially and figuratiu [...], in such sort, that the [...] eating is referred to an eating by faith.

we eate Christes flesh substancially, because his true sub­stance Gen. 14. Exo. [...]. & 16. Pro. 9. was both shadowed in the law of nature and of Moyses to be eaten: and prophecied of before as meate and drink: and promised by Christ vnder those names: And deliuered by his own hands with these words, This is my body, and this is my [Page 142] blood, take and eate. and beleued in the whole church, and adored Hila. li. 8 de Trin. Augu. in Psal. 98. vnder the formes of bread and wine through all Christendome: we beleue y ^t same substance of Christes flesh to be also eaten figu­ratiuely, because it is not remoued thereby from his place in hea­uen: but is made present by wordes, which signifie & worke the presence of his flesh and blood. It is not sene in his own shape, not felt nor tasted in his own proprieties, not cut into peeces al­though diuerse take it together: it is not perished by eating, it [...] ­deth not the belly, or y ^• sensible, but the reasonable & spiritual life, it is not eaten only to be eatē, but to make vs remēbre effectual­ly, and to conforme our selues to the death and life of him, whose flesh it is. And thereby to make vs to loue him, & to beleue him to be the bread of life to all the faithsull, and no lesse to gather di­uerse men into one mysticall body of his church, then diuerse bo­dies of wheat and of grapes are made into one artificiall body of bread and wine. the which mysticall body he will no lesse change from mortalitie, then he hath changed the substance of bread and wine into the substance of his flesh and blood.

Seing the flesh of Christ may signifie so many things vnto vs through the maner of the presence, it were more then madnesse to say it is not a figure, or is not eaten figuratiuely. But because it signifieth so many things, therefore to deny it to be present, is to take away no lesse the figures whiche come by the presence of it, then the thing it felfe.

Christ is the figure of his fathers substance, the image of God Hebr. 1. Coloss. 1. Phil. 2. who can not be sene, he is [...] in shape as a man. But what? is he not therefore the same substance with his father, [...] God with him, and true man in dede: who reason thus but [...]; who Tert. cō. Mar. l. 5. [...]. ep. 46. but Arriās, but Marcionits, but [...]? did S. [...] gustine euer meane suche a figure of Christes [...], whiche was voide of the truth sigured? taught he not that we must adore [Page] the body and blood of [...] we [...] it▪ but of [...] Aug. in Psal. 98. [...] I [...] to [...]. [...] not [...], [...] a [...] may [...] a [...] of it [...] doth not the [...] a [...] or twain [...], [...] that bread is there to be [...] lose is both bread, [...] a [...] of [...], [...] bread in [...], and a [...] in [...] of [...]: so is the [...] of Chri. a [...] and [...] that [...] vs. It is the flesh it self and the [...] [...], but it is [...] in [...] owne substance without any [...] or lacke, and the [...] in [...] of death whiche the same [...], hauing [...] once, [...] not now suffer, but would by his own [...] make it [...] to vs in suche sort, that we should [...] the death of [...], and partake the fruites of the death as oft as we came to receaue that [...] worthely. what nede more wordes?

To geue a brief resolution of S. [...] mynd, it is to be noted, that both by his iudgemēt, and by the [...] of the Sa cramentaries, these words, except ye eate the flesh &c. belong to the mysterie of Christes supper: therefore, if they be figuratiue, they must shewe some figure in one parte or other of the supper. The supper cōsisteth of bread & wine as of material parts, [...] ­of it must be made, and of pronouncing vpō or ouer them (as S. Iustin. in Apol. 2. Iustinus the martyr speaketh) the wordes instituted by Christ, this is my body and this is my blood, the which words whē they come to the elements of bread and wine, the Sacramēt is made: what is that Sacramente? we say, it is the making present (in a miraculouse sorte) the true body and blood of Christ. Our ad­uersaries say, it is the appointing of bread and wine to be a fi­gure of Christes body and blood through the remembrance of his death. For our belefe, I bring S. Augustines authoritie, who saith, except ye eate my flesh, are words figuratiue, and out of it, thus I reason.

[Page 143]The [...]ating of Christes fleshe, and the [...] of his blood, being reall [...] which must be performed in Christes supper, & yet being called [...] good [...] siguratiue [...], must nedes [...] the sigures of somwhat, & the [...] dedes & words being re­ferred to the supper os Christ, [...] nedes betoken somewhat as they are there [...]. But the eating of flesh in Christes sup­per can betoken nothing at all, [...] his flesh be there eaten, the eating whereof may be the [...] of this betokening. Therefore these wordes import of [...], that in Christes supper the [...] of Christ is really eaten, and his blood is really drunken.

It is not sayd of Christ: except ye eate bread & drinke wine. Of Bread & [...] are not [...] ­ned at Ca [...] those elemēts he in the promyse of his supper made at Caphar­ [...], speakethnot one syllable. for which cause we must not aske at this time what they figure & signisy in Christes supper, because nowe there is no mentiō of thē, except any man be so frontike as to say, that y ^• flesh of Christ is here made y ^• figure of bakers bread, & his blood y ^• figure of wine. whereupon it would folow that y ^• [...] & blood, as being [...] of these dead [...], were worse and baser then the elements thē selues. for euery figure is some way or other behind the truth, which it figureth.

If then we must leaue of the consyderation of bread and wine, if likewise no respect must now be had of the words of consecra­tion, which are not yet spoken os: what other thing can these [...] ratiue words, except ye eate my flesh, signifie in Christes supper, but this: except ye eate my flesh in that mysticall and wonderfull maner, which I will geue it in, and to that [...] end, for the which I (being true God) wil geue it you? that is to say, except ye do both take it in the Sacrament, and spiritually remember my death [...] me thanks for it, and conforming your selues to it, ye shall not haue [...] in you. By whiche interpretation Christes [...] are figuratiue, in so much as they meane neither that ma­ner [Page] of [...]ating p [...]ces of fleshe, whiche the Iewes vnderstode, no [...] that end of eating it, which they thought vpon, mynding altoge Cyr. li. 3. ca. 35. in Ioan. Chrys in Ioan. ho. 44. ther (as S. Cyrillus and S. Chrysostom note) the feding of their bellies.

But if Christes flesh be not present at all, whereof is it a figure when it is eaten? can that, which is not, signifie or figure anie thing? cā the flesh which is only figured at the tyme of our eating bread (as the Sacramentaries teache) be made a signe and figure by eating it? if the eating of Christes fleshe be not the figure, the wordes: Except ye eate my flesh, be not figuratiue. For if eating [...]e throughly taken for beleuing and for no eating at all, thē these wordes do not apperteine to the Sacramētall eating of Christes supper. But seing the Sacramentaries teache them to speake of the supper (as in truth they doe) the eating must so be figuratiue one way, that yet it be true another way. For if there be no true eating, there lacketh a groūd which may be the figure of another eating, that is to say, of spirituall communicating with Christes passion.

If some reall eating must be had to warn vs of that spirituall eating, surely that real eating can not in S. Iohn be meante of bread and wine, sith Christ neuer named them. therefore it is im­ployed that Christ meaneth, except ye eate my flesh so, as it is a figure both of my death, and may be a cause of your spiritual life, ye shal not liue euerlastīgly. Thus doubtelesse did Christ meane, thus dyd S. Augustine expound his wordes.

The Sacramentaries doc erre in making Christes words to be figurati [...] only passiuely, whereas they are also figuratiue Wherein y ^• Sacramē taries [...]re in [...] ding th [...]e wor [...]es. actiuely. That is to say, the Sacramentaries so take this matter as if it were only said, the fleshe and blood of Christ be figured & signi [...]ed in his supper as to be spiri [...]ually fed on. But it is not so said only, but also the actuall eating of Christes flesh is taught [Page 144] to be a figure it selfe of another spirituall eating. Therefore we eate really flesh one way, to signifie another way the [...]ating and Ambr. in 1. cor. ca. 11. beleuing in flesh spiritually. And that is proued out S. Ambrose most mani [...]estly, where he saith: In edendo & potando [...], & sanguinem, (for there is the point, albeit the Sacramentaries go about to corrupt his wordes by euil distincting of them) quae pro nobis oblata sunt, significamus. In eating and drinking the [...] and blood, we signifie those things, whiche were offered [...]or vs. Behold, the [...]ating [...] doth signi [...]ie and make a figure of the self same flesh, as it was offered for vs. And so doth both Christ & S. Augustine [...]ane at this tyme. our Lord cōmaunding vs to eat [...] his flesh, doth command vs to cōmunicate with his passion (saith Li. 3. [...] 1 [...] de doct. Christ. S. Augustine) and profitably to remember his death, that is to wit, he comma [...]deth both to eate the body which died, & to eate it worthely, to eate it in hart as wel as in mouth: to eate it in re­membraunce of his loue toward vs, as wel as in the Sacramēt: to eate it as the Godhead doth quicken it, and as it figureth the entring and tarying in his mysticall body the Church.

This eating of Christes [...]eshe is swete, is profitable, is not hard, not carnall, not without a figure, or mysterie. For to eate without any mystical meaning is only to fill the belly, whereof Christ spake not. he commanded a figuratiue eating of his fleshe, [...] that figu­reth ano­ther thing must be [...]. the which figuratiue [...]ating should not take away the real eating of his flesh. for that eating whiche is not reall, can not be actiuely figuratiue, sith euerie figure is made vpon a true ground of one thing done really, & of another thing meant mystically. But the figurati [...]e eating importeth a farther thing, then to rest in the eating it selfe.

It is therefore insensibly said of the Sacramētaries, that those wordes which naming a certain actuall and real dede (as the ea­ting of mans flesh is) be [...]iguratiue, because the flesh is not really [Page] [...]ten. But they be in dede figuratiue because the fleshe of that [...] is [...] also and vnderstanded to be more then [...]ally ea­ten: for it [...] spirit [...]lly eaten also.

The Sacrame [...]taries com [...]ted an ot [...]er foule error in these [...] secōd [...] y ^• [...]. wordes. [...] whiles they wil draw this place of S. Iohn to their purpose, they are constrained to expound the wordes of Christ i [...] this [...]: [...] ye eate t [...]e [...] of the sonne of man, that is to say, the sigure of his flesh. That is the [...] speach which they find [...]n the text, and yet that might be wel born withal, if thei rested there. For in dede it is meant in some sense of Christ, ex­cept [...] is a [...] of it self. ye eate the figure of my fl [...]sh, to wit, except ye eate that inui­sible s [...]stance of my fleshe, which is a figure of my visible & pas­sible [...], ye shall not haue life in you. But now they can not so [...]ke it. For they will not graunt that Christ mea [...]t of his owne substance to be really eaten. For which cause they must goe for­ward and expo [...]d again the figure of Christes flesh saying: [...]x­cept ye eate the [...]gure of my fl [...]sh, the which [...]igure bread & wine Breade [...] [...] are not the [...] which S. [...]. Aug. de doctr. Christ. li. 3. c. 16. shall make, ye shall not haue life in you. Did S. Augustin referre the [...]gure he [...] of, to bread and wine? Did he once touche or mention those materiall elements, in declaring the figuratiue speach th [...]t Chr [...]st by his iudgement vsed? where named S. [...] bread and wine? He sayth our Lord commanded vs to communicat with his passiō, to remember swetely the flesh which was crucified for vs. In that communicating and remembrance he putteth the figuratiue speache. So that, if we marke wel, the reall eating of Christes fl [...]sh is not [...], but left stil as the [...] the [...]gure must be built. The figure must be in the end of the worke, and not in the beginning ther [...]of. [...] [...]gure looketh higher to a truth aboue it, and not lower to [...] elements which [...]re [...] it.

[...]rily neither Christ, nor S. Augustine did speake or meane [Page 145] of bread and [...], and [...] bread and [...] the [...] the [...] which [...].

Christ sayth: except ye eate my [...]. [...]hey s [...]y, [...] ye [...], which shall [...] the [...] [...] and blood. [...] a [...] [...]s this, to [...] and blood to [...] bread and wine, and there [...] to make [...] & wine to [...] and blood? What ignorance, what abusing of Gods word, what a blasphemy is this, to make y ^• higher [...] first to si [...]nifie the lower, that the lower may afterward [...] y ^• higher? It is as mu [...]h to say, as Chr [...] [...] a doore, & then a doore is s [...]ōdarily the token of Christ. Where is honesty? where is shame [...]nes? where is cōmon [...]? I aske of them whether these words, except ye eate, belong to y ^• supper. They say, they doe belong to the supper so truly, that they build vppon them falsely the [...] of both [...].

Then say I, [...]ating is meant not only of eating by hart and faith, but also by mouth, as S. Basil, S. Chryso [...]ome, S. Cyrillus, S. Augustine, with all the rest of the fathers besore alleged, doe co [...]fesse, and the Sacramentaries graunt the same most willingly. Then we are agreed that eating standeth in some part properly, concerning that some one thing eaten shall enter into our mouth.

I aske thē, wherein the figure cheefely standeth? They say in y ^• word flesh principally, & secondarily in eating, y ^• is, in remēbring (by that thing which is eaten) an other thing, and I con [...]e it also.

What is now meant by that word, flesh? They say, the figure of flesh. and that doe I graunt, although it were more properly sayd, that flesh meaneth, and is the figure of the passion. But let flesh stand for the figure of flesh. Here beginneth the issue.

[Page]What meane you by the figure of flesh? Bread, say they. That, Flesh can not signi­fie bread. say I, is starke false, and vnpossible. For how commeth flesh to be latine for breade? By what grammaticall, by what Rhethori­call, by what Mosaical or mysticall figure is that interpretation brought about? All the world seeth, that in proper speach he that wil haue bread, vseth not to cal for flesh. Or if he doe so, I think the butcher wil soner serue him, then the baker. Moreouer no fi­gure wil serue to make one thing meane another, except there be some affinitie or dependance betwene them. but fleshe and bread are cleane seuerall kindes of natures.

Thirdly, Christ neuer in any couenant or truse instituted flesh to signifie material bread. we haue no such Sacramēt neither in the old, nor in the new Testament. and surely sith flesh is neither a naturall nor a diuine token of breade, nor so vsed in common speache, it can not by any ordinarie meane betoken bread. In so muche that the lawiers, who of all men best know the proprietie of wordes, and are most prone to expound them fauorably in the testamentes of men departed, yet haue cōcluded, that if any man erre in naming the kinde of thing, as if intending to bequeath his garmentes doe say: I bequeath my siluer, or contrarie wise: the legacie can not hold. For saith Ulpian: Rerum vocabula immu Vlpia. de leg. 3. l. 4. tabilia sunt, hominum mutabilia. Proper names geuen by men may be changed, and therefore an errour in them is tolerable. but the appellatiue names of things can not be changed. and yet our new brethern can fynd the meanes how fleshe may stand for bakers bread, & blood for wine of the grape. The cōtrarie might stand right wel, because bread and wine were instituded by God in the law of nature and of Moyses (as the fact of Melchisedech Gen. 14. Leu. 2. 1. Cor 10 Ioan. 6. & the figures of the lawe do shewe) to figure & shadow Christes flesh & blood. So was the rock instituted to signifie Christ, manna to be a signe of his last supper. But that flesh, yea y ^e flesh of Christ [Page 146] (who is the end of the law) that it should serue to signifie whea­ten Rom. 10. bread, that diuinitie was born and sprang first in our dayes, being vnknowen to S. Augustine, and to all other Fathers and Councels. yet it is so good diuinitie iu England, that a mā may soner haue a bishopprick for it, then for saying God is one in thre persons. I haue stode sumwhat long vpon this place, because it is one of them, where vpon the Sacramentaries vse fondly to boast & bragg, as thowgh they had gained sumwhat by y ^e name of a figuratiue speache, which S. Augustine saith is in Christes words. but y ^• figure serueth to shew a higher & a more profitable mysterie, thē y ^e word nameth, but not as they vulearnedly wold haue it, to shew y ^e base creature of wheaten bread & wyne. It is y ^e passion of Christ, & y ^e spirituall maner of eating, in respect where of Christes speache is called of S. Augustine figuratiue. for if Christes flesh were eatē only to fill y ^e bellie, without farther ac­compt of spiritual grace and life, then were the eating of that flesh natural, sensible, accustomable and without all figure, and should be eaten by cutting, tearing, and wasting it: but in that case flesh profiteth nothing. the flesh we speake of, must be How fles [...] must be eaten in a figure. be eaten as a figure, as a mysterie, as a Sacrameut, as a holy signe of a higher truthe wrought in the soule, then that bodilie eating doth work. So likewise in baptism we are washed in a fi gure, because the washing hath a farther and higher end, then only to cleanse the body. That speache therefore wherein Christ commādeth his flesh to be eatē, is figuratiue, not that we should denye the true eating of his flesh, but because that eating is re­ferred to a greater purpose, then to the feeding of the body. for Christes flesh is meate in dede, that is to say, is eaten in dede as I shal proue vpon that place. but it is not eaten only y ^t it should be corporal [...]y receaued, but to thend we should partake of the spirit and godhead which is in it, and so by the merit of that [Page] flesh really present in vs, obteyn life euerlasting with it. now from what a worthy meaning wold these figuratiue Gospellers bring the words of our sauiour? whose hard harts I beseche God to mollify, that when they heare the truthe, their stomake do not kendle to maynteine their old fashon, be [...]ore they haue well loked about them. rather choosing to confesse a fault and to amend it, then to make a new synne by myssexcusing the for­mer fault.

¶ Christes slesh being meate in dede, must nedes be really receaued into our bodyes.

HE that wil know exactly why the flesh of Christ is called meate in dede, must put before his eies three thinges. The first is, that the Iewes hearing Christ say he wold geue 1. them his flesh, asked, how he could geue it, to be eaten? The se­cond is, that although Christ answered not directly to their cap­tious, 2. how and vnsaythful question, yet he sayd, the eating of his flesh to be necessary for them (as without the whiche they could not haue life) and profitable (as whereby they shold haue euerlasting life, & that not in their soules only, but also in their bodies, for so much as he wold reise them vp in the last day. after whiche two things well pondered, the third is to marke, that 3. Christ confirmeth all these former sayings of his, by suche wor­des, These words cō firm the former talk. as geue a reason of them. for my flesh (saith he) is meate in dede, and my blood is drinke in dede. as if he had sayd, wonder not y ^• my flesh geueth you life euerlasting, & reiseth vp your bo­dies, for it is meate in dede. that is to say, it hath truly & in dede those proprieties, which any man wold wish for in true meate.

Two thinges may be considered in meate: the one, that it is trulie receaued into the body of that liuing creature for whose Two pro­prieties in [...]. vse it is appointed: the other, that it is receaued as a medicine [Page 147] whiche may preserue vs against death. for meate is neither pro­perly attributed vnto the feeding of the sowle (but only by a metaphor and an vnproper speache) neither is it worthy to be called true meat, if it gene not a true remedie against death. there fore when Christ saith: My flesh is meate in dede, he meaneth thus, my flesh bothe shalbe receaued into the verie bodies of my people, and shall geue life euerlasting as well to their bodi [...]s, as to their soules▪ the whiche interpretation S. Chrysostom ma­keth writing thus: Quid significat &c. what meane these words, Chryso. in Ioan. Hom. 46 my flesh is meate in deede, and my blood is truly drinke? either it meaneth that flesh to be y ^e true meate whiche saueth the soule, or els, he speaketh it to confirm them in the former wordes, N [...] obscurè locutum in parabolis arbitrarentur, sed scirent omnino necessariū esse vt corpus comederent: that they should not thinke him to haue spokē in parables darkely, but that they should know Note that Christ [...]pake not now in parables. it to be by all meanes necessary to eate his body. thus far S. Chrysostom.

By whiche interpretation Christ geueth a reason both of his first wordes, wherein he sayd, the bread which I wil geue, is my flesh, and of the second, when he sayd, he that eateth my flesh hath life euerlasting. for my flesh is meate in deede, both in that re­spect that it shal be geuen to you as true meate is wont to be de­liuered to them, who truly take and truly eate it, and also in that respect that it nourisheth truly, as true and e [...]erlasting meate ought to nourishe. he that denieth any one sense of the twaine, deuieth one veritie of y ^e ghospell. he that graunteth both senses, must needes graunt, that the true eating of the flesh stan­deth It were a parable if flesh stode for bread and [...] for [...]. not for eating truly the signe of flesh, because he spake not obscurely nor in parables as S. Chrysostom affirmeth. and yet it is an obs [...]nre saying to put flesh for materiall bread, or eating for beleuing. it is a parabolicall speache, if when flesh, blood, [Page] eating, and drinking is named, yet we shal [...]derstand that ba­kers bread must be eaten and wyne drunken, and Christ must be loued & beleued vppon? these parables neither Christ thought of, nor the Fathers knew.

If Adam had not synned, the opinion of ancient doctors is, that notwithstanding his body consisted of contrarie elements, by whose continual fight and battail it should naturally haue drawen to corruption and dissolution, yet through the marue­louse grace of God (saith S. Augustine) his body sho [...]lo haue Aug. de [...]iuit. dei lib. 13. c. 20. Gen. 2. bene far from disseases, from old age, from death, & from all cor­ruption, by tasting of the wood of life whiche was in y ^• middest of paradise. Tanquam caetera essent alimento, illud Sacramento. vt sic fuisse accipiatur lignum vitae in paradyso corporali, sicut in spiritali, hoc est, intelligibili paradyso sapientia Dei, de qua scri­ptum est: Lignum vitae est omnibus amplectentibus eam. So that Prou. 3. other meates (in paradise) were to nourish Adam corporally, the word of life was also in stede of a mysterie or Sacrament, to th'end the word of life should be vnderstanded to be after such sort in the corporal paradise, as the wisedom of God is in the spiritual paradise, which is atteined to by only vnderstanding. the which wisedom of God, as it is writen thereof, is the wood of life to all that embrace it.

As now the wood of life which should haue preserued man frō Corporall [...]asting is [...]ecessarie to make y ^• [...]eat true [...]eate. incorruption, was to be bodily tasted of, and yet to wor [...]e a Sa­cramentall and spirituall effect in preseruing mans body aboue al course of a corrutible nature: so is it meant that Christes flesh, which is in dede the wood of life, should be a Sacramēt vnto vs by the corporall eating and spiritual working thereof, & for bothe these canses together it is called meate in dede.

Take a way y ^• corporall tasting of Christes body: and charitie, [...]aith, hope, or any like vertue is proportionably & in his degree [Page 148] meat in dede, or drinke in dede, as the Sacramēt of Christes sup­per Iacob. 1. is. For all those vertues coming from God feed vs in dede to life euerlasting, & therefore haue y ^t second proprietie of trut meat, which is to nourish for euer. But they haue not y ^• first proprietie, which is to be receaued after an external maner into our bodies. To this externall maner Christ had also respect, when he [...]ayd: My flesh is meat in dede, or verily meat. For he sayd not only my verè▪ Truly. flesh is true meat, but it is truly meat. It hath not only y ^• true na­ture of meat, but also y ^• true maner of it. for as verus cibus is true meat: so is verè cibus truly meat. As true meat is sayd in respect of the essentiall proprietie and effect of meat, which is to nourish: so is the flesh of Christ truly meat in respect of the maner of it, because it is receaued in at the mouth, & goeth into the body, af­ter such sort as other meates doc, although it nourish spiritually.

I haue sayd often tymes, that Christ in this chapiter speaketh both of spirituall eating alone, and besydes that of Sacramental eating together with spirituall. He speaketh of spirtuall alone about the middest of the chapiter [...]raight after those words: work The theme of y ^• [...]. of S. Ihon. the euerlasting meat which the sonne of man will geue you. Which words are the generall theme to the whole Sermon folowing. But of Sacramental eating, as being the s [...]cond part of his Ser­mon, Christ speaketh specially and expresly, from these words forward, and the bread which I will geue, is my flesh.

Whiles Christ was yet about the first part of his Sermon, which belōgeth to spiritual eating alone, he sayd: Patermeus da [...] vobis panem de coelo verum. My Father geueth you the true Verus panis. bread from heauen. Qui credit in me, non sitiet vnquam. He that beleueth in me shall not thir [...]t at any tyme. As Christ is only be­leued on and only receaued by faith, so he is panis verus, the true bread, or meate.

But when he was come to the second part of his Sermon, [Page] where he spake of Sacramentall eating as well as of spirituall, there he sayd, for Pater meus dat, ego dabo: For verus, verè. In How the Sonnes gift is dif­ferēt from the Fa­thers gift. stede of, my Father, he sayth, I: in stede of, doth geue, he sayth, I will geue. In stede of, him self to be true food, he sayth, His flesh is truly food. There is in the second parte none other sub­stance then was in the first, to th'end we should vnderstand that Christ geueth in his Sacrament the same reall flesh, which his Father gaue him when he came down from heauen by taking flesh. But there is an other tyme of Christes gift at his last sup­per, and an other sorte or maner of his geuing. For that which God the Father gaue vnto the soules of the faithfull, God the Sonne geueth to their bodies also. And by that meanes he is not only true meate, but also truly meate. And that without all dark speaches or parables.

S. Hilarie well vnderstanding the strength of the same word Verè, truly or verily, or in dede presseth the old Arrians and new Sacramentaries therewith in this maner.

De naturali in nobis Christi veritate quae dicimus nisi ab eo di­scimus, Hilarius lib. 8. de Trinitat. stultè atque impiè dicimus. ipse enim ait, caro mea vere est esca, & caet. Thus they are in English. That we say concerning the naturall truth of Christ being in vs, except we learue it of him, we say it foolishly and vngodly. For him self sayth, My flesh is meate in dede, and my blood is drink in dede: he that ea­teth my flesh and drinketh my blood, tarieth in me and I in him. There is no place of doubting left concerning the truth of flesh and blood. for now both by the profession of our Lord, and by our own faith it is truly flesh, and truly blood. And these things taken and swallowed are the cause, that we tary in Christ and Christ in vs. Is not this thing the truth? It may well chaunce not to be true to them, who denye Iesus Christ not to be true God.

[Page 149]S. Hilarie disputing in those words against the Arrians, who wolde Christ to be one with his Father in will only, doth proue that we also are one with Christ naturally by some [...]anes, that is to say, by naturall partaking of Christes flesh in his last sup­per. And to proue that thinge, albeit he might hauc brought ma­ny places out of the Ghospell, or out of S. Paule, yet [...] to bring this place out of S. Ihon, as the which he thought no lesse plaine, then any other was. And twise he repeteth that the flesh of Christ is truly meate: D [...]ce as being spoken of God, an other tyme as being also beleued of vs. and farther he affirmeth vppon this place, that the flesh and blood of Christ being taken Accepta. and swallowed, bringe to passe that we are in Christ, and Christ in vs.

The taking of Christ by faith doth not proue S. Hilaries purpose. for he must shew that we take Christ in body and na­ture, euen as he defendeth Christ to be one nature and substance with his Father. The being of Christes flesh in our bodies, and the reall ioyning of the one to the other is that, which S. Hilarie forceth vppon. And therefore he sayth afterward, that Christ na­turaliter in nobis permanet, tarieth naturally in vs.

By that word naturally S. Hilarie expoundeth how he taketh Natural­ly. Truly. the word Verè, truly. For he taketh it, as if it were writen, my flesh is to be naturally receaued of my Disciples, as meate. The which thing he had twise expressed before, saying: nos verè, ver­bum Lib. 8. de Trinitat. carnem, cibo Dominico sumimus. We take y ^• word (made) flesh truly in our Lords meate. And again: Verè sub mysterio [...]arnem corporis sui sumimus. We take the flesh of his body truly vnder a mysterie. Lo, by thies meanes the naturall veritie of Christ is in vs, according as we learned of him, saying: My flesh is meate in dede. All men knowe what we receaue into oure mouthes and bodies in Christes supper. That very thing is af­firmed [Page] of Christ to be his flesh. And by that receauing of ours, his flesh is truly meate.

S. Gregorie of Nyssa, brother to S. Basile the greate, war­neth Gregor. Nyssen. in vita Moysit. vs, puro defaecatoque animo coelestem cibū sumere: To take the heauenly meat▪ with a pure▪ and cleane mind. The which meat (sayth he) no sowing brought forth vnto vs by the arte of tilling the ground. But it is bread prouided for vs without seed, without sowing, without any other worke of man. It flowing from aboue is found in the earth. for the bread which came downe from hea­uen, which is the true meate, which is obscurely meant by this historie of Manna, is nor a thing without a body. For by what meanes cā a thing without a body be made meate vnto the body? The thing which is not without a body, is by all meanes a body.

This blessed man alludeth euidently to the wordes of Christ in S. Iohn, where he saith: my flesh is meate in dede. for y ^e bread whiche came downe from heauen whiche is the trew meate, is none other thing then the flesh of Christ. this kind of thing is not a spiritual thing that lacketh a body, but it is a trew body. how doth S. Gregorie proue it to be a trew body? because it is Nyssenus proueth y ^e truth of Christes body by y ^e truth of the eating it. made meate vnto the body. for how (saith he) can a 'thing whiche lacketh a body, be made meat vnto the body? as who should say, there is no doubt but the flesh of Christ is made meate vnto one body, because Christ sayd: my flesh is meate in dede. and meate is ordinarilie promised to nourish the body, although it, being the meate of God, helpeth the soule also.

If the bread that came downe from heauen whiche is the flesh of Christ, be true meate, it is a bodily thing. for els how could a thinge that hath no body, be made meate for the body? if that can not be so, truly the flesh geuen at the supper of Christ, whiche is meate in dede and drinke in dede, can not be only receaued in [Page 150] spirit, but it must be so reall, that it may fede our bodies also, to thintēt they may be reised in the later day. therefore that whiche our body receaueth when Christ saith: take and eate, is the same flesh of Christ which is meate in dede. and seing it is proued to be a body, because it is made meate vnto y ^e body, it must be meate in dede vnto vs, and must be really taken into our bodies by our mouthes, or els Nyssenus [...]ayleth in his whole discourse. for he proueth it a body, because it is meate vnto the body. then cer­tainlie it is not meate only to the soule, nor it is not only recea­ued by faith, but trulie and in dede. And seing al wise men reason The faith of the pri­matiue churche. vpon a sure ground, we may not doubt but all the Catholike Church twelue hundred yeres past and so vpward toke it for an euident truthe, that Christes body was meate vnto our bodies.

¶ By the maner of our tarying in Christ it is proued, The xvi. chapit. that we receaue his reall flesh into our bodies.

WHereas hitherto the necessitie, the profite and the truth of eating Chrisies flesh hath bene shewed and confirmed: Now the proper effect of that banket is The effect of Chri­stes sup­per. also declared, because he that eateth Christes flesh, and drinketh his blood, tarieth in Christ and Christ in him. In respect whereof the same thing was before named, Cibus permanens, the meate which tarieth. Whereby we may perceaue, that in the Sacramēt of Christes supper we doe not beginue to liue (as in baptism) but we maintein, kepe, nourish, & increase the sede of life, which we toke in our spirituall birth.

Neither only doe we preserue life during the tyme of our fee­ding, but also when the banket is ended, some effect remaineth in vs, through the which we are sayd to tary in Christ, and he in vs. Let vs then trye out what effect that is. for by the maner & kind of the effect, we may gather somewhat of the cause.

[Page]What meaueth it, that Christ tarieth in vs and we in him? S. Chry [...]ostom answereth: In me manet, dicit, vt cum ipso se admi­sceri ostendat. Christ sayth: He tarieth in me, to shew that him Chryso. hom 46. in Math. self is mingled with him. S. Chrysostom meaneth, that whiles we receaue worthely the substance of Christes flesh into our bodies, we are so intierly ioyned to him, that we may be sayd to be min­gled with him. And how that is done, S. Cyrillus declareth by Cyril. in Ioan lib. 4. ca. 16. this similitude. As if a man poure wax vppon melted wax, he wholy must nedes mingle the one with y ^e other, so it must nedes be, if any man receaue the flesh and blood of our Lord, that he be so ioyned with him, that Christ may be found in him, and he in Christ. And again: Sicut parum fermenti, & caet. As a litle leauen tempereth the whole lump of dow: so a litle benedictiō (where­by he meaneth a peece of the consecrated host, be it neuer so smal) draweth the whole man vnto it, and filleth him with his grace, and by this meanes Christ tarieth in vs, and we in him.

S. Cyrillus calleth the things which are consecrated at Chri­stes Cyril. li. 4. in Ioā. cap. 17. supper, Benedictio, a blessing, because they are consecrated by the words of blessing, the which Christ left vnto vs. Now a litle of that blessed food being receaued worthely of vs, is not so properly sayd to tary in vs, as we to tary in it, for that, though it be small in forme, yet in vertue it is great. And therefore it draweth vs vnto it, as leauen turneth the dow to his nature.

It can not be auoided by these interpretations, but that the heauenly food which we receaue into our mouthes, is the reall substance of Christes flesh. For it is here called Benedictio, the Benedi­ctio. blessing. & that word is not meant of an inward vertue coming srom heauen, but of that which semeth bread, and is visibly re­ceaued at our Lords table. For euen in the same Chapiter S. Cyrillus exhorteth men ad recipiendam benedictionem, to re­ceaue the Sacrament of Christes supper. The which Sacramēt [Page 151] if it were wheaten bread, how could it be true, that a litle there­of should draw the whole man vnto it? Doth wheaten bread make vs like it? are we then made vnreasonable, vnsensible, and a corruptible creature, as wheatē bread is? Christ sayth, his meat tarieth to life euerlasting, so doth not wheatē bread. Christ sayth by eating his flesh we tary in him. But we tary in him, whiles the gift, which at his supper he deliuereth, is mingled with vs, and conuerteth vs vnto it, as S. Chrysostom and S. [...]yrillus teache: And yet we be not conuerted or drawen to the nature of materiall bread or wine. therefore it appeareth the gift which Christ deliuered, not to haue bene bread and wine, but his own body and blood vnder those formes.

S. Hilarie bringeth the very same word of tarying to proue, Hilar. 8. de trinit. that as Christ is in his Father by the nature of Godhead, & we in him by his corporall birth: so he is in vs by the mysterie of the Sacraments, and tarieth in vs naturally.

The like witnesse Theophilact geueth, saying: Contempera­tio Theophi lact. in Ioan. 6. fit noua & super rationem, ita vt sit Deus in nobis & nos in ipso. There is made (by eating Christes flesh) a new mingling toge­ther, so that God is in vs and we in him. Briefly thus Christ meaneth: He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood recea­ueth me, as meate into his body and soule. But because I come not to nourish carnall life but spiritual in him, he doth not digest and turn my body into his, (as it happeneth in other meates) but he is turned to be like me. For the real ioyning and knitting of my flesh to his maketh a maruelouse mixture, as if melted wax were poured to other wax, so that a great grace and vertue is left of me in him, whereby he may tary still in me and increase y ^e fountain of life, which is in him.

This kind of our tarying in Christ, and of his with vs, could not be true, if we [...]ed spiritually only vpō Christ absent in body. [Page] For how can the body, which is only in heauen, be so tēpered t [...] our bodies & soules in earth, as one melted wax being powred to an other wax doth make one thing of twain, which is the simili­tude made here by S. Tyrillus? What like ioyning to that other similitude of the leauen can be, if no leauē, that is to say, no bene­diction or no flesh of Christ be receaued into vs, which may draw vs to it? What mingling together is made of things that be so far distant as heauen and earth?

If you say, faith and spirit doth ioyne, mingle, & knitte Christ to vs, and vs to Christ, and make vs to tarie in him, and him to tarie in vs, either you geue a cause of y ^• ioyning which may stand with the cause alleged by Christ, or els you correct his cause and put a better.

If the faith & spirit, whereof you speake, shal stand with Chri­stes cause, it must be such faith as doth concurre with the eating of his flesh. For he now sayd not, he that beleueth in me tarieth in me, but he y ^• eateth my flesh tarieth in me. Therefore though [...] tary [...]ng in Christ is assigned to eating and not only to [...] ye beleue neuer so wel, yet your present tarying in Christ is not assigned to faith, but vnto eating. Faith is necessarie to worthy eating, and cōsequently to our tarying in Christ. But not euery ground, which is necessarie to a thing, is by and by y ^• cause th [...]re­of. Or though it be one cause, it is not the only cause. In the for­mer part of this chapiter saith had his due commendation. But now Christ speaketh of eating his flesh, and saith it maketh vs tary, that is to say, to be ioyned to him wholy, and to be mingled with him as well in body, as in soule, which thing can not be otherwise then through that we eate his flesh substantially. He that leauing that eating of Christes flesh, staieth vpon feeding by faith alone, correcteth the cause assigned by Christ, and also de­priueth vs of that naturall tarying in him, whereof he now in­treateth.

¶ We are made one with Christ by natural participa­tion The xvi [...]. Chapiter. of his flesh, as he, being one nature with his Father, hath assumpted our nature into his own person.

HE that eateth Christes flesh tarieth in Christ, and recea­ueth life of him, not by the meanes of faith & spirit only, but also by natural participation of his flesh. which thing Christ declareth by this example: As the liuing Father hath sent me, and I liue for the Father: also he that eateth me, shal him self Christ [...] ­ueth not for his Fa ther in faith. liue for me. But Christ liueth not for his Father by faith at all, (because he seeth his glorie face to face) nor yet by the meane of spirit alone, as we take spirit for deuotion, or els for spiritual gifts and qualities. but he liueth for his Father, hauing his Fa­thers whole substance really present in him self: therefore we y ^t eating Christ liue in like maner for him, must haue his whole substance really present in vs, and so must we receaue life, not by faith or spirit alone, but by taking the flesh of life it self into our bodies and soules.

Thus veri [...]ic Christ doth meane. That we may reache to the true ground of this comparison, it behoueth we lerne first, how Christ liueth for his Father: and then we may vnderstand, how we receauing his flesh worthelie, shall liue also for him. Christ hauing two natures in one person may be sayd to liue for his Father, according to either of bothe natures. As God: he liueth for his Father, for that he is eternally begotten of him, to whom the Father ge [...]eth his whole nature, substance, life, glorie, so that How Christ li­ueth for his Fa­ther as God. uo di [...]ference is betwene the Father and the sonne, but that the sonne is begotten of the Father and the Father is altogether vnbegotten and without any relation to a farther beginning. This order wherein the sonne (otherwise equall God [...] his Fa­ther) [Page] doth yet alwaies refer his generation and life to an euerla­sting Hilar. li. 8 de tri­nitate. beginning, is the cause why Christ as God, liueth for his Father. the which interpretation S. Hilarie, S. Basile, S. Chry sostom, and S. Augustine doe confesse may well agree to this place.

Christ as man li [...]eth for his Father, because his Father sent How he liueth as man▪ him to take flesh, whose flesh (being of it self neither able to geue life euerlasting, nor to haue it in his own nature) yet for the word wherevnto it is vnited in one person, both hath life and geueth life. now the word is naturally one God and one life with the Father. this second sense doth better please S. Basile, S. Augu­stine, and S. Cyril, although they allow the former also: but this second sense doth more agree with those words sicut misit me pater, as my Father sent me. For the sending of Christ was the taking of flesh at his incarnation. bothe senses agree herein, Wherein both sen­ses agree. that both life is really and corporally dwelling in Christes flesh through the Godhead, and the Godhead is naturally with Christ, through that he is the sonne of God the Father.

Two things are to be noted in this comparison. the one is the real presence of life: the other is the hauing of it by gift, and by relation to a farther cause or beginning. For as Christes flesh li­ueth for the word of God, to whom it is really vnited, and the word of God liueth for the Father, whose whole substāce it hath Wherein be simili­tude stan­deth. really receaued by generation without beginning of tyme: so he that eateth Christ, liueth for Christ, hauing the substance of his flesh really present with him, and thereby partaketh life euer­lasting.

This verie sense Christes words haue, both by the conference of the text it self, and also by the interpretation of S. Hilarie. Arrians. who by this scripture confuteth the Arrians that sayd, Christ to be inferiour to his Father, & not to be equall God with him. To [Page 153] mainteine the which heresie, they brought foorth a similitude of Ioan. 17. vnitie which is made in holy scripture betwene God the Father, Christ, and vs: affirming Christ to be one with his Father as we are one with him, but (sayd they) we are one with Christ only by will and consent, therefore Christ is one with his Father only after the same sort. to which argument S. Hilarie answe­ring, Hilar. li. 8. de Tri nitate. turneth it vpon their own heads in this wise: Viuit ergo per patrem, & quomodo per patrem viuit, eodem modo nos per carnem eius viuemus. omnis enim comparatio, &c. Christ then liueth by his Father. and as he liueth by his Father, after the same maner we shal liue by his flesh. for euery comparison is presumed to be made according to the forme and concept of our vnderstanding, to thintent the matter whereof we intreat may be so perceaued, as the example geueth, which is proponed.

This truly is the cause of our life, in so much as we haue Christ Christ in vs by flesh. abyding by flesh in vs, who consist of flesh: and he shall liue through him by such condition, as he liueth through his Fa­ther. Yf we then liue through him naturally according to flesh, that is to wit, hauing obteined the nature of his flesh, how can he but haue naturally the Father in him self according to the spi­rit (or Godhead) sith he liueth through the Father?

S. Hilarie sheweth first in these words, y ^• there is a similitude of liuing betwene vs and Christ, and betwene God the Father and Christ. we liue for Christ, by eating his flesh, as he liueth for his Father who sent him: but we (saith S. Hilarie) liue for Christ by eating his flesh in such sort, that we haue the nature of his flesh in vs. Therefore Christ liuing for his Father, hath his Fathers nature in him self. Thus haue the Arrians gained no­thing, by saying that the Father was one with Christ, as Christ is one with vs. For Christ is found to be one w ^t vs naturally. and thereunto it suffiseth not that Christ toke our naturall flesh [Page] in his mothers womb. for Christ spake not of that vnitie: other­wise The [...] nation ma keth not Christ to be in vs naturally. the gentils, Iewes, heretiks, and heinouse synners should be naturally one with Christ, which thing is not so. for, to be one with Christ, it behoueth that as he toke our nature into his own person, we take his nature into our bodies & soules. Two reasonable parties, which haue both free will & consist of bodies, be not properly made one in nature, if they bothe do not as well consent thereunto in mind, as also approche in bodies.

Lett vs put an example betwene Dina and Sichem. for al­though Gen. 34. One in bo dy wit­hout mine Sichem had by force oppressed Dina corporally: yet she not consenting in hart thereunto, was not throughly and in her whole nature made one with him, for that the cheif part of her dissented. Again, lett vs put the ca [...]e, that two other persons be together in hart wisshing to be man and wise: but yet that they can not come together, because bothe, or one of them is in­closed One in mind with out body. in prison. these also are not one naturally, as long as their bodies be asonder. euen so albeit Christ haue the same na­ture which all men haue (excepting synne) yet he is not natural­lie, that is to say, in the whole truth of nature one with vs there­by, except we both in hart and body approche vnto him. If we come to him in body alone, we come vnworthely: if in hart alone, it is a spiritual coniunction, which will serue if either necessitie or infamie kepe vs from natural coniunction. but if we come to lawful age & haue opportunitie, we must approche both in body One in bo dy and mind. and soule to the Sacrament of Christes supper, to be made one with him naturally, that is to say, to take his body really into ours, to th'end the spirit and Godhead which dwelleth corporal­ly in that body of his, may fede our spirit and soule (which be­leueth in him) to life euerlasting. Of this kind of liuing Christ spake when he sayd: he that eateth me, lineth for me, as I liue for my Father.

[Page 154]And it is to be consydered, that Christe brought the similitude of his own liuing for his father, to shew thereby how we doe line for him, when we eate him. But S. Hilarie was so sure of this later part of the similitude, to wit, that we liue for Christ by na­turall coniunction of his body and spirite to our bodies and soules, when we eate him: that thereby he proued Christ to be one with his father in nature and substance.

And now come our new Sacramentaries teaching the argu­ment 1. The Sa­cramenta ries be aga [...]st S. Hilarie. of S. Hilarie to be nothing worth, because they presuppose Christes fleshe not to be eaten of vs, and consequently not to be in vs in his own nature and substance. whereby they also affirm that the father is not proued to be in Christe naturally by these wordes of our sauiour. as the liuing father sent me, and I liue for the father, also he that eateth me, shall liue him selfe for me. For if here the comparison be only in this point, that as Christ refer­reth his life to another beginning, which is his father: so we liue by Christ who is the cause of all the grace we haue: if I say no­thing els be respected in both partes, but that a thing whiche is 2. Against [...] Godhead of Christ. lesse receaueth a benefite by the greater: these words rather seme to proue against the Godhead of Christ then for it. Yea the mā ­hood is not by thē shewed to be really vnited to the worde. And so that which the Catholike fathers bring for the truth, which is beleued in Christ, the Sacramentaries make altogether voyd.

Let vs adde to the former consyderations, y ^t we, eating Christ, liue for Christ. we then so liue for him, as we eate him. For seing the eating is the cause of the life, such is the life as the eating is. But the Sacramentaries auouche that we eate bodily nothing els at Christes supper beside bread and wine, therefore by theyr 3. Against [...] life of our bodies. iudgement we shall liue bodily none other way, then to that end whereunto bread & wine cā fede vs. They can not feed vs to life euerlasting, therefore it foloweth of the Sacramentarie docrine [Page] that our bodies haue no meate whereby they may liue for euer.

What say ye masters? Haue we not bodies as wel as soules▪ Doe not our bodies eate in theyr kind, as wel as our soules? Do 4. Against y ^t food our bread. not our bodies line by theyr proper meat, as our soules doe liue by the meat which is conuenient for them?

If Christ be meat vnto vs, is he not meat to vs as well in re­spect Ioan. 7. Our bo­dies bo fed to liue for euer. of our bodies, as of our soules? Doth he not heale the whole man, regenerate the whole, feed the whole, and saue the whole▪ Then by like he feedeth our bodies to life euerlasting. What food it that? Where is it geuen? how cometh it vnto vs?

The Catholiks answere: It is the flesh of Christ which is ge­uen to vs vnder the form of bread. But ye Zuinglians (who deny that real presence of Christ) shew what meat our bodies receaue, which is able to make them liue for euer. Either say, they shal not liue, or shew the meane of life. You say our bodies eate sanctified bread at Christes supper. Be it so. But is that sanctified bread stil bread, or is it made the flesh of Christ which is the bread of life? If it be made Christes fleshe, ye agree with me. our bodies haue Bread is no food of life. the true food of life. But if it tarie bread stil, it can not geue our flesh life euerlasting.

Ye will say, Christ is able to vse wheaten bread tarying bread The obiec tion. for his instrument or tokē, to geue vs by that maane euerlastiug life: As common water tarying water, is in baptism y ^• instrumēt & meane, as wel to our bodies, as to our soules of life euerlastig. In which reason ye vaunt your selues ouer much, and think ye haue found a goodly defence. But beware least ye triūph before y ^e The aun­swere. victorie.

As hitherto I haue resorted to the word of God to confute your vain doctrine: so now I wil repair to the same vndouted fountain of true wisdome.

It is most certain that God were able to saue vs by what mea [Page 155] nes he would. But his will is now committed to writing, that heretiks might not fame vpō him what should please them, but should be controlled by his word. For as vniuersal tradition suf­fiseth Scrip­tures wer prouided against he retikes. to Catholiks who beleue it, so the heretik, who estemeth no tradition, must haue his ouerthrow by the holy Scriptures.

In them we read, that who so beleueth and is baptized, shalbe saued: Whereby is most clere, that baptism hath his promse of sal­uation Marc. 16 annexed to it. But when we come to our Lords supper, no promise at al is made to him, that eateth material bread, or dri­keth wine. Therefore no man may be so bold to say, that by eatig No pro­mise is made to bread.. bakers bread we shalbe saued. Eating verily hath his promyse of saluatiō annexed thereunto. but it is the flesh of Christ whiche must be eaten, it is the blood of the sonne of man, which must be drunken, it is the food of life Christ him felf, whiche must be Sa­cramentallie receaued.

In all S. Iohn there is promyse of life made to none other Ioan. 6. thing. At the last supper it is said: this is my body, take eate: and this is my blood, drinke ye all of this. Where no mention of ea­ting Matt. 26. bread, or of drink [...]g wine is made, much lesse anie promise of life is thereunto annexed. S. Paul speaketh of none other breade 1. Cor. 10 & 11. then of that, which is the communicating of his flesh, and which being one, is receaued and partaken of al faithful: and yet neither in him, nor in the actes of the Apostles, nor in anieplace place els is any promise made by Christ, that who so eateth material bread in his remembrance (though he eate it neuer so deuoutly) shall by that eating liue foreuer.

Nowe whereas Caluin pretendeth y ^• words of Christes sup­per In the. 1. booke. to be words of promise, it is already confuted. and albeit they were words of promise, yet they neither promise bread to be eatē, nor life to them that deuoutly eate bread. In cōsideration where­of we may conclude, that water is the instrument to giue life, be­cause [Page] baptism is expresly named, andd hath the promyse of salua­tion in Gods word. But seing bread hath not suche promise, they speake beside all scriptures, who think it sufficient for our bodies to eate bread, and to drinke wine at Christes supper.

And lest any man should think, that I may be deceaued in the word of God, and that some promise there made to bread & wine may escape me: I answer, that euen here Christ sheweth vs not only to liue for him, but also to line for him by eating him: so that we haue the word of God, that Christ him self is our food not on­ly by faith, but by eating. We haue then two aduātages, one that no promise of life is made to bread and wine: The other, that ex­presse promise of life is made to him, who eateth Christ. whereup­on thus I reason: Either this promise of life, which is made to him that eateth Christ, su [...]iseth in the kind of eating or no.

If this suffise not, the word of God is reproued, which sayth: He that eateth me, shall liue for me. And by eating Christ he vn­derstandeth It suffi­seth [...]ocate Christ. (as I haue often tymes declared) beleuing vpō him, doing his wil, and besydes al that the receauing of him corporal­ly in the Sacrament of his supper.

If now his promise of life be alone sufficient, what place is left for the Sacramentaries, to chalenge life to their bodies by the ea­ting of wheaten bread and by drinking wine. Their bodies veri­ly can not liue without the food of life, for as Christ said before, except ye eate my flesh, ye shall not haue life in you. and I am sure he spake to men that had bodies. But material bread is not Chri­stes fleshe, neither hath it any promise to geue life to our bodies, therefore either our bodies die for euer, or els they liue through y ^• Our bo­dies re­ceaue Christ. Cyril. in Ioan. lib. 10. ca. 13. that they receaue Christ into them corporally, the which saying of myne is confirmed by this place of S. Cyrillus.

Non poterat aliter corruptibilis haec natura corporis ad incor­ruptibilitatem & vitam traduci, nisi naturalis vitae corpus ei con­iungeretur. [Page 156] This corruptible [...] of the body could not other­wise be brought to incorruption and life, [...] the body of the naturall life were ioyned vnto it, which, if it be true, [...] not they, who take the body of Christe (who is the naturall life) from [...] corruptible bodies, depriue vs of all hope of life in our bodies: How thē do we lyue for Christ & through him, as he liued for his father? Doth not he liue for his father as well in body as in soule, because his manhood is vnited to y ^e word which word is y ^e sonne of y ^• father? Therefore as we liue for him by eating him, & as he li­ueth for his father who sent him: so must we be naturally ioyned to his flesh in the Sacramēt of his supper, & by receauing y ^• same worthely into our bodies, liue in body and soule for euer.

¶ The eating of Christes flesh was so true, that it The [...]. Chapiter. was taught with the losse of many disciples.

IT is not to be thought that Christ, who forbiddeth all occa­siōs Matt. 18. Christ gaue no offence. of geuing offence to other men, wold him self cast a stum­bling block in his disciples way, by pressing them to eate his fleshe and to drinke his blood, if in dede they were not really to be eaten and drunken. But if Christ spake that, which was true in dede, and spake it as it was true, then was it their fault (who had sene him the day before working so great a miracle) not to Ioan. 6. beleue such a Prophet, as their own experiēce and expresse words witnessed him to be.

If then they were bound to beleue him, and y ^• they could do no The disci ples shuld haue bele­ued. otherwise, then if they beleued that he would geue them his flesh to eate in dede, their fault was in that they did not beleue that he was both able, and in dede would by a conu [...]nient meane geue them his true flesh in the way o [...] meate, and his true blood in the way of drinke. If that were their fault, then is it their [...]ault like­wise, who in our daies thinke & teach, that Christ hath not geuen vs in his last supper his [...] flesh to be really eaten, & true blood [Page] to be really drunken. [...] the maner of eating flesh and drinking blood [...] should in time conuenient haue learned that also.

Al men do know, that when a thing is to be done, the first que­stion is to demand, whether it may be done or no. wherein it is The natu rall order of que­stions. also conteined, how easily a thing may be done. The second is, whether it be worthy y ^• taking in hand. The third, how it may be brought to passe. As lōg as the thig is thought either vnpossible, or very hard or vnpro [...]itable: so long it is in vaine to talke of the maner of the doing it.

Christ did talke with the Iewes of the two first points, shew­ing that he was able to do it: Quia h [...]nc pater signauit Deus, because God the father hath signed him, whereby he declared him self to be almyghty God. He said also that it was profytable, because he that dyd eate his flesh and drinke his blood, should be raised againe to life euerlasting. If they had beleued him in these The Ie­wes bele­uing not the [...]. first points ler ned not y ^• third. Matt. 26. pointes, they might haue asked, yea without asking they had knowen (at, or not long after his last supper) the maner how it should haue bene cōueniently done, as those Apostles did know, who continued in their belefe. And the way of knowledge was at his last supper, where taking breade with speaking of these wordes (this is my body) he changed the substance of the breade into his body: and wylled his disciples to take and eate his body. This much those could not fre, because thei would not beleue. but to say that Christ hyndred their belefe by words more hard then neded, that is more cruelly sayd, thê it neded. Oportebat, &c. they ought (saith S. Cyril) first of al to cast the rootes of faith in their mind, and then to aske the thinges that were to be asked, but the Cyril. li. 4. c. 14. in. Ioan. Iewes asked importunely before they beleued. for this cause our Lord shewed them not, how it might be brought to passe. & a [...]ter­ward S. Cyrill declareth, how Christ in his last supper shewed y ^• [Page 157] maner also to thē, who dyd beleue, although they asked not for it.

¶ The right vnderstanding of those words: It is the spi­rite The xix. Chapiter. that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing.

I May be the shorter in this point, because none of those who are meanely conuersant in the bookes of auncient writers (though otherwyse they beleue not well) haue applied these words against the reall presence of Christes body in his last sup­per. for how can it be, that Christes fleshe, which is geuen for the 1. de bap. li. 1. ca. 2. 2. in Ioā. hom. 46. 3. in Ioā. tract. 27. life of the world, should profite nothing? Therefore S. Basil, S. Chrysostom, and S. Augustin do expound the name of flesh (after one sort) for the fleshly and carnall vnderstanding of the Iewes, who thought they should haue eaten Christ, as men eat mutton and beefe, whereas Christ meant to geue his flesh in a secret ma­ner, as the faithful know. which notwithstāding, the Luciferian spirit of Caluin reproueth this first vnderstanding in his com­ments The pride of Caluin. vppon this place. But it is sufficient, to say, that he dif­sented from those three notable pillers of Gods Church before named.

The second vnderstanding is on Christes behalf, whose flesh should not profit any thing, if the spirit, y ^t is to say, the Godhead did not make it able to geue vs euerlasting life. The which sense is chiefly followed by S. Augustin also, and by S. Cyrillus. Aug. in Psal. 98. & in Ioā. Cyril. in Ioan. li. 4 c. 23. & 24 Now seing the flesh of Christ is geuen so to vs vnder the foorm of bread, that the Godhead is present with it, we are sure to haue much profit by it. What nede moe words?

If this saying appertem not to the last supper, it maketh no­thing against our belefe: If it doe appertein to it, the words are Propheticall, because they speake before hand of a thing, which most certeinly shall come to passe in the last supper, and then the fulfilling of them will make them plaine. For as Procopius [Page] saith: A prophecie at the first sight is not clere, but when it is come Procop. in praefa­tionem genesim. to the euent, which was forespoken, and is cōferred with the thing it self, then draweth it to a perfit clerenes. If now the sayd words were fulsilled at the supper, and take a clere vnderstāding there­of, How̄e Christes flesh was geuen spi­ritually. what meaning can they haue but that when Christ gaue his body, he gaue it after a spiritual sort & not after a fleshely maner? He gaue not a shoulder to one Apostle, and a legg to an other, a brest to the third, and a ribbe to the fourth, but the whole body to euery [...]: not visible in the forme of flesh, but inuisible in the forme of bread: so making plaine, why he had so often called him selfe bread, and said that the bread which he would geue, is his flesh. He gaue not his body without his soule and Godhead, nei­ther his blood without his bones and flesh: but the spirite quic­kened al things, eche kinde had whole Christ. He lost not his vi­sible body by geuing of it, but by his words, which are spirit and life, turned bread and wine into his body and blood, shewing y ^• as he was at the table in his whole body, notwithstanding they did eate the same body, so he might be in heauen although the sub stance of his true body and blood were geuen in his Sacrament in earth. What shall I say more? If the vnderstanding of these words depend vpon the last supper, they must not geue vs a rule how to vnderstand the last supper, but they must take their vn­derstanding of it. Who dare say that bread was crucified for vs, because Ieremie sayd: Mittamus lignum in panem eius, let vs put Hie. c. 11. wood into his bread? Do we not rather say, that because we are sure that the true flesh of Christ was crucified, therefore in Iere­mie bread is taken for flesh? Who dare say that Christ had hornes in his hands, because Habacuk said: Cornua in manibus eius? Do Habac. 3. we not rather say that by hornes he meante the corners of the crosse, because we are sure that Christ had vpon the crosse no ma­teriall hornes in his hands? If then these words, the spirit quic­keneth, [Page 158] be referred to the supper, and there we finde bread & wine taken, and after blessing, body and blood geuen, we may be well assured that one truth doth not take away the other. Spirit doth not take away flesh, but spirit must be taken for the Godhead, which maketh the flesh both to be present and profitable, to all such as receaue it worthely.

¶ The words of Christ being spirit and life shew, that The xx. Chapiter. his reall flesh is made present in his last supper a­boue all course of nature and reason.

VErba quae ego locutus sum vobis, spiritus & vita sunt. The words which I haue spoken, or (as the greke text readeth) which I doe speake to you, are spirit and life.

The Capharnaits hearing Christ say, he wold geue his flesh to be eaten, partly thought it not possible for him to geue, partly not semely for them selues to take. They imagined a diuisiō of y ^• flesh The er­rour of the Caphar­naits. which should be deliuered, and consequently the person, whose flesh were cut in such peeces, must die. but how could a dead man geue his own flesh to be eaten? Again though he could doe it, what a cruel thing were it for them to eate mans flesh?

Christ knowing this theyr grosse concept, sayth, that the sonne of man wil ascend into heauen where he was before. Thereby de­claring first his almighty power and Godhead: Next, that the gift of his flesh doth not import the lacke of life either in y ^• geuer, or in y ^e thing geuē. For thē in dede the gift should be litle worth, because it is the spirit & life which quickeneth, dead flesh profiteth nothing to euerlasting life.

My words (sayth Christ) be spirit and life, that is to say, they be The spi­rit of Christ is his God­head. words of him that is by nature euerlasting life, who meaneth to geue his flesh aliue, and that not only so aliue as our flesh liueth whiles the soule is in it, but so liuing as that flesh liueth, which is [...] and ioyned in one person to the Godhe [...]d.

[Page]Think no more (you grosse Capharnaits) of dead flesh geuē by peece meale, which is not auayable to br [...]g you to heauē, but think of such a flesh as God hath assūpted, to geue life by it to y ^e world, of such a flesh as will ascend by his own vertue into heauen, of such a flesh as being conceaued not by the sede of man, but by the holy ghost, hath power to become spirituall without losse of his true nature and substance. My words be spirit and life.

Spiritus est Deus, God is a spirit. In ipso vita erat, life was in Ioan. 4. Ioan. 1. the word, & verbum caro factum est, and y ^• word was made flesh. Of that flesh Christ words must be vnderstanded. That is y ^e flesh which he will geue, & which we must eate. that flesh liueth w ^t God and in God, and geueth them life who receaue it worthely.

This doutlesse is the literall meaning of Christes words, and therefore S. Cyrillus douted not to write: Spiritum hic &c. Cyril in Ioan. lib. 4. ca. 24. Christ hath called here the very flesh, [...]pirit, not because it hath lost the nature of flesh, and is changed into the spirit, but because the flesh, being very nigh ioyned with the spirit or Godhead, hath receaued the whole power of quikning, or of making thīgs to liue. The words then, which I haue spoken to you, are spirit, that is to Spiritus. say, spirituall. Et de spiritu & vita, id est, de viuisica & naturali vita sunt. And they are of the spirit and life. That is to say, of the natu­rall life, and of that which maketh other things to liue. De spiri­tu.

This phrase: Verba mea de spiritu sunt, my words are of the spirit, doth meane, that the words of Christ haue in them some of his spirit and of his diuine power.

Which meaning sith it is most true, these words of Christ doe Note. not shew, that the naming of flesh and blood which went before was figuratiue, and that now Christ declareth only a spirituall vnderstanding of them (as the Sacramentaries teach) but all is cleane, cōtrary. For Christ now geueth a reason, why his former [Page 159] words be possible, easy, true, and proper. The reason is, for that he is God that spake them, and he spake them of that flesh, which is vnited to the sonne of God.

Spiritus viuificans est caro Domini &c. The flesh of our Lord Damasc. de Orth. sid. li. 4. cap. 14. Ioan. 3. (sayth Damascen) is a spirit which quickeneth, because it was cō ­ceiued of a quicken [...]g spirit. sor that which is borne of the spirit is spirit. Which thing I say not, taking away the nature of the bo­dy, but intending to shew the Godhead thereof, and the power which it hath to make things liue.

As therefore the flesh of Christ was not thereby no flesh, be­cause it was ioyned to his diuine substance, but rather had by that vnion the power to make vs liue for euer: euen so y ^• words which before did shew the flesh of Christ to be meate in dede, and his blood to be drink in dede, are not now declared to be figura­tiue or vnproper words, but rather they are declared to be most proper and true, because they are witnessed to be spirit and life. For as the Godhead is in his own nature most infinite, almigh­ty, simple, and vncompounded, and the truth it self: So those How the words be spirit [...]al. words, which partake of the Godhead, are declared to be of most strength to work that they sound, to be most simple, and to haue least figures & parables in them, as the which conteine the ver­tue to make that truth which they signifi [...].

So that the name of spirit doth not stand to depri [...]e vs of Chri­stes reall flesh, but only to make it profitable to vs, and to shew that Christ by his word is able to geue vs his flesh, wherein the Godhead corporally dwelleth. Corpus Dei (sayeth S. Ambrose) Ambros. de ijs qui init. my­ster. c. 9. Corpus est spiritale: corpus Christi, corpus est diuini spiritus, quia Spiritus est Christus. The body of God is a spirituall body, the body of Christ is the body of the diuine spirit, because Christ is the spirit, that is to say, God. Non ergo corporalis esca, sed spiri­talis est. It is therefore no bodily, but a spirituall food.

[Page]The food is spirituall as the body of Christ, which he toke of Spiritual food. the virgin, is spiritual. But the body is not spiritual, as though it lacked the substance of true flesh, but because it was wrought and made by the holy Ghost in the virgens womb. Therefore the heauenly bread, which we receaue from the altar, is a spiri­tuall food, no [...] that it lacketh the true substance of Christes flesh, but because it is wrought and made present vnder the foorm of bread by the spirit of God and by the holy Ghost aboue all course of nature.

It is clere (saith S. Ambrose) that the virgen did beare (Christ) Ambros. ibidem. otherwise, then the course of nature was. and this body which we make, is of the virgen. What sekest thou here the course of nature in the body of Christ, seing our Lord Iesus him self is brought foorth of the virgen besyde the course of nature? As who should say, the reall flesh of Christ is made present vnder the foorm of bread by the holy Ghost, euen as Christ was incarnate in the vir­gens womb by the holy Ghost. It is the Godhead, the spirit, the life that worketh all things in y ^• holy mysteries. The flesh with­out y ^• Godhead profiteth nothing. From y ^• Godhead the words came which Christ spake. That Godhead is it which maketh Christes flesh profitable. Per carnem spiritus (sayth S. Augu­stine) August. in Ioan. tract. 27. aliquid prosalute nostra egit: caro vas fuit. quod habebat, at­tende, non quod erat. By the flesh the spirit (or Godhead) did somewhat for our saluation. The flesh was the vessel (or instru­ment) mark what the flesh had or held, and not what it was by his own nature. And again: The charitie of God is spread in our Roma. 5. harts by the holy Ghost which is geuen to vs. Ergo, it is the holy Ghost which quickeneth. The words which I haue spoken to you are spirit and life. What is it to say, they are spirit and life? They are to be vnderstanded spiritually. If thou hast vnderstanded them [Page 160] spiritually, they are spirit and life, if thou hast vnderstanded them carnally, they are spirit and life, but not to thee. Thus farre S. Augustine.

The word spirit may stand to signifie God, Angels, the soule what spi­rit may si­gnifie. of man, the life, the gift of God made to any reasonable crea­ture, & the wind, or breath, or ayer, or briefly any thing that mo­ueth. But among all significations the chief is to signifie God, who is by nature the only spirit which quickeneth and moueth all other spirits: In whom we liue, are moued, and haue our Acto. 17. being. Therefore the words, which are called spirit and life, are called in effect diuine and almighty.

Spirit sometyme standeth to signific the words of God, as when S. Paule sayth, the letter killeth the spirit quickeneth, the letter in that place doth signi [...]ie the law, and the spirit doth signi­fie Basil. de baptis. l. [...] cap. 2. the words of our Lord, as S. Basile doth expound it. For Christ our Lord geueth grace to his words, that they should not only signifie things (as the words of the law did) but also make and work the things which they signified.

The words that be spirit must be vnderstanded spiritually, Spiri­tually. that is to say, diuinely, and as it becometh the words of him who is God him self, whose words haue power in them selues to worke that which they betoken.

To vnderstand the words of Christ spiritually, it behoueth we beleue them first as they sound to humble & reasonable men. Esaiae. 7. for if we beleue not, we shal not vnderstand: but if we do beleue, then we may be assured (as S. Chryso [...]tom vppon this place Chryso. hom. 47. in loan. hath writen) that they conteine no naturall course, but are free from al earthly necessity and from the lawes of this life.

Which being so, when Christ taking bread, and blessing saith, this is my body, we may not say with our selues, how can this be so? what other body can here be, then a peece of bread which [Page] mine eye seeth, and my tong tasteth. If we speake after this sort, The Sa­cramen­taries make Christes words no spirit. we call the words of Christ from the spirit of God to the course of nature and of reason. and we do not beleue them to be spiri­tuall, that is to say, diuine, and aboue the course of nature. but we vnderstād thē carnally, loking for no miracle to be wrought by them. and yet they are spirit and life, able to quicken what soeuer they list. they can make bread to be Christes body, & wine to be his blood. they haue power to change natures, and to worke inuisibly. The wor­des of pa­rables.

In a parable it is not nedefull that all things be in dede, as the words doe sound. but when Christes words are sayd to be spirit and life, then it is declared to vs, that they partake the na­ture of his Godhead, that they worke a thing aboue our capa­citie, and make all that, which they say. A spiri­tual body.

Yea but (say you) shew me the body which they haue wrought. I answer, they are spirit and haue wrought a spiritual body, not such as lacketh the truthe of flesh, but such as through the vnion which it hath with the Godhead, hath disposed the substance of flesh vnder the form of bread in such sorte, as our soules are dis­posed within our bodies, which are vndoubtedlie there, but they can not be touched or felt by any sense. euen so we beleue the real presence of Christes flesh vnder the form of bread and wine, be­cause the words of Christ are spirit & life, albeit no scuse or rea­son can attein to that highe mysterie.

Seing then these words of promise (the bread which I wil geue is my flesh) be spirit and life, these words of performance, which after bread taken, say presently: this is my body, must nedes be much more spirit and life, y ^• is to say, of diuine power to worke that which they sound.

Let now al heretikes ceasse to mock vs of so many miracles, as we teache to be in the sacramēt of the altar, for so much as Christ [Page 161] hath witnessed it should be a miraculouse sacramēt, and aboue al This Sa crament is miracu­louse. course of nature, as being made by words which are spirit and life. Let them likewise no more abuse the name of spirit, to make men beleue that Christ spake not properly, sith Christ calleth his words, spirit, because they be so proper, that they come nere to y ^• nature of the Godhead (as being his words who is naturally God) then the words of men are able to doe. and as the Godhead is most immurable, and not at al subiect to any change: euen so those words, which partake most of the Godhead, are most vn­changeable, and least figuratiue. for al figuratiue speaches are Tropi. changed and abused, hauing the name of tropes among the Gre­cians, [...], ab eo quod vocabula mutantur a propria significatione in alienam. figuratiue speaches are called in greake tropes, that is to say, chāges, because y ^• words are changed Malach. from their proper significatiō to an vnproper meaning. but God is not changed, nor those words be not changed frō their proper signification, which God hath called spirit & life. but as they par­take y ^• Godhead, so doc they partake the proprietie of not being changed from their most accustomed meaning, & proper nature.

It is a world to see what difference there is betwene y ^• words of Christes Ghospell, & the interpretation of the false Ghospel­lers: The er­rour of y ^• Sacramē taires. betwene the old Fathers, and the new brethern: betwene Catholikes & Protestants. Mark I pray thee, good Reader, the differences diligently.

Christ by his incarnation was made to vs the bread of life, to the end we might eate his Godhead otherwise then the Fathers had done before. the new brethern after the incarnation and sup­per of Christ, wherein we should haue the Godhead geuen vs, bid vs beleue vpon Christ in heauen, and so to fede vpon him by faith alone, as No [...] & Abraham did. Their counc [...]l is not [...] in bidding vs sede by saith, but where is y ^• Godhead [...] by this [Page] meanes? is that also receaued by faith? why, so it might haue bene receaued and so it was receaued before Christ was man? Where is the food of Angels made the food of man? where is the Psal. 77. word of God so geuen to me after his incarnation, as it could not be geuen before? Where is any euerlasting meate for my body? Where is the supper, which may fede the whole man? faith fedeth my vnderstāding, but my wil & affectiō hath as much nede to be fed. my flesh is rebelliouse to my spirit, & it hath nede to be fed. my body was the meane to poyson my soule, therefore my soule must haue a medicine, which shalbe receaued into my body, and so be communicated vnto my soule.

S. Ireneus reproued those heretiks, who because men were Ireneus. aduersus Her. li. 5. called in scripture spirituall, denied the true resurrection of their flesh, as though their spirit only should tary for euer. and yet our new brethern, where so euer mention is made of spirit or of a spirituall body and flesh, so wrast it, as though the reall sub­stance of flesh in the Sacrament were by that word denied or di­minisshed: whereas it is rather increased, for so much as that flesh which is spirituall is not thereby the lesse true flesh, but it parta­keth the more of the spirit. And because a spirit once created is by the natural gift of God immortal, a spiritual flesh is likewise like to the spirit in that case. S. Augustine writeth, that after re­surrection August. lib. 1. re­tractat. cap. 13. & de ci­uit. Dei. lib. 13. cap. 22. the body shall no more haue nede of corporal nourish­ments, because the only spirit shall suffise to nourish it. qua causa etiam spiritale erit, for which cause also the body shalbe spiritual. now as after resurrection the spiritual being, which our bodies shal haue, doth not diminish the truthe of their nature, but decla­reth a wonderful abettering of them, in y ^t they be made in maner equal to spiritual substances: euen so the body of Christ in his supper is spiritual, not for any lack of his true substance vnder y ^• formes of bread and wine, but because it is wholy possessed and [Page 162] replenished with the Godhead, and is present after the maner of a spirit, as being neither sene, nor felt, nor tasted, but only bele­ued. And therefore this blessed Sacrament is worthely called of the Churche at the consecration of the blood, yea (as I think) it is 12. The my­sterie of faith. 1. Tim. 3. called of S. Paule also, mysterium fidei. the mys [...]erie of faith, because it secretly cōteineth vnder the formes of bread ond wine, the flesh, the blood, the soule and the spirit, or Godhead of Iesus Christ. The which mysterie of faith the Deacons vsed to deliuer to the faithful after consecration, as Iustinus the martyr doth witnesse, and therefore S. Paule willed the Deacons to vse that mysterie of faith with a pure and cleane conscience.

To be short: The Sacramentaries abuse y ^• word of God mi­serablie, when they talk of the spirit and of the flesh of Christ in such sort as they do. For Christ sayd, the flesh profiteth nothing, meaning only the corruptible flesh of a bare man, who is no God.

The Sacramentaries expound it, as if it were sayd, it is no­thing worth to eate Christes own flesh really, but only it is pro­fitable to fede on it by faith.

Christ sayd, it is the spirit that quickeneth, meaning the God­head, to make his flesh profitable vnto vs. They take it so, as though the spirit alone did q [...]icken vs at his last supper, with­out eating his fleshe really. Christ by naming the spirit reuoketh [...]ot the real gift of his flesh, the eating whereof he auouched to be necessarie for vs. They vse it contrarily to proue his flesh to be geuen vs really in his last supper, as though he had corre­cted his former words: Christ meant to adde more dignitie and worthinesse to the eating of his flesh, then is in other mens flesh, because the spirit made it alone quick, aliue, and profitable.

They endeuour by the precense of the word spirit, to say, he wold not geue his flesh to be eaten in dede, and so abuse y ^t name [Page] to the diminishing of his inestimable gift. Christ sayd: my words are spirit, that is to say of diuine power, & proceding from God.

They imagin he sayd: my words be vnproper and cropicall or parabolicall, as being only true by an allegory. Christ meant his words to procede from his own spirit and maiesty, and there [...]ore to be true aboue the course of nature. They expo [...]nd thē as if he had sayd, you must care my flesh in your spirit only, & not in very dede. Thus they wreast that to the spirit of mā, which Christ said of the spirit of God, and vnder this ambiguitie of words they co­uer theyr poisoued doctrine.

Christ would vs to vnderstand spiritually the reall [...]ating of his reall flesh, because he would geue it vs without losse of his own body, without lothsomnes of our stomacks, and without remouing from his own place in heauen. They apply the spiri­tuall vnderstanding of eating his flesh, to take away the real [...]a­ting of it, as though he that vnderstandeth a thing spiritually, should not therefore eate that really, which he vnderstandeth to be mysticall. The substance of Christes flesh eaten is the ground of that mystery, figure, Sacrament, or spiritual vnderstanding, which Christ spake of. Because he would them to eate his flesh, not to fil theyr bellies, but to signifie and partake y ^• merits other­wise done in that flesh.

They taking away the ground of the figure (which is Christes fleshe) adde of theyr own i [...]ention, bread & wine to be the groūd of this figure and of the spirituall vnderstanding.

They making Christes spiritual words tropicall and grama­tically [...]iguratiue, abase thē beneth y ^• condition of cōmon words. For a proper word i [...] of more dignitie then an improper, and mē for the most part speake properly. Christ sayd, my words are life, meaning thē to be so proper, that they performe whatsoeuer they promise or speake, as hauing the propriety of the Godhead which [Page 163] is most far from all figures, shadowes, and changes.

They make them dead words. For seing the mind of the spea­ker vttered in plain words is y ^• life of the words, the same words vttering the speakers mind obscurely are as dead and without life, vntil they be expoūded. What shal I say more? they take these words to be figuratiue in such sort, that they make thē inferiour to the common words of mortall men, who neuer ligthtly vse y ^• words flesh and blood for the signes of flesh and blood, but for the substances of them, and muche lesse doe they vse, flesh and blood so to signifie bread and wine, that the same bread and wine must again signifie Christes fleshe and blood, as I haue noted before that the Sacramentaries are constrained to say, if they will defend theyr false and [...] doctrine, the which I praie God they may haue grace to see and to amend.

¶ That no reason ought to be heard, why y ^e words of The first Chap [...]ter. Christes supper should now be expound [...]d vnpro­perly or figuratuely. and that the Sacramentaries can neuer be sure thereof.

CHrist in his last supper was b [...]th like a testatour, who disposeth before his death what shalbe com [...] of his goods afterward, and like a maker of lawes, who prescribeth an The gift or legacy of Christ. order to be kept in his commō weale. The legacie bequeath ed, or rather the gift made by his life tyme in consyderation of death cer [...]einly approching, was y ^e deliuery of those inestimable t [...]wels, which he called his own body and blood, willing his heyrs and fruids to take & to care h [...]s bod [...], which should be geuen for thē: and to drink his blood of the new Testament, which should be shed for the remission of synn [...]s.

The law which he made, was, that the Apostles and their suc­cessones The law of Christ. (in the like degree of Priesthood) should make that Sa­crament, which he had then instituted, for the remembrance of his death, vntill he came again to iudge the world.

His Testament and the gift made therein was confirmed by y ^t famouse death, which he siffered the next day vpon the Crosse. His law was receaued and practised from the coming doune of the holy Ghost euen to this day through al the catholike Church.

A few yeres after Christes death his Testamēt and law which The wri­ting of both. he made by mouth, was by witnesses of sufficient credit, put in writing, published, and acknowleged of al faithful men. If there­fore any question arise cōcerning such words, as were either in y ^• last wil or in y ^e law, or the narration of them who wrote the Gos­pell: We ought to weigh, whether that question be moued of a thing not already determined, or els vpō that which many yeres before was accustomed and receaued. For as reason would a new Ne [...]e doubts▪ doubt to be newly dissolued: so no reason, no law, no conscience [Page] can suffer, that a matter once fully decided and perfitly ended, should be again called into iudgement.

The question is, whether the words of Christ be figuratiue, or proper. I say, that question was decided aboue fiftene hundred yeres past. For when y ^t wil & law of Christ was first published, The que­stion deci­ded of old. al men toke those words, This is my body, and this is my blood, to be proper: And so we receaued of our forefathers from hand to hand, in so much y ^t the Church neuer heard before these daies any other doctrine preached by publike auctoritie. it neuer saw other practise, then to adore with Godly honoure those things ouer which the Priest, as Christes mynister, had sayd the words before rehearsed.

The vniuersal preaching and vsage of Christes Church is a sufficient witnesse, that it hath always taken those words to be proper & not figuratiue. Whiche thing sith it is so, minimè sunt Paulus ff. de leg. mutanda (sayth the lawier) quae interpretationem certam semper habuerunt. Those things are least of all to be changed, whiche haue always had a knowen vnderstanding. And yet if we should come to geue accompt of these vniuersall customs, how reasona­bly might it be applied to our purpose, which y ^• same lawier saith. Si de interpretatione legis quaeratur, inprimis inspiciendum est, quo iure ciuitas retro in huiusmodi casibus vsa fuisset. Optima e­nim est legū interpres [...]. If a question be moued cōcer­ning the interpretation of a law, it is principally to be attended, what order and law the common weale hath vsed before in those Custom. cases, for custome is the best interpreter of lawes.

We are sure that before the birth of [...]uther, yea also of Beren­garius, The vse of Gods church. al the Church vsed to worship the body & blood of Christ vnder the forms ofbread and wine: and yet it could not haue done so, if it had taken the word, body, for material bread only signi­fying y ^e body, & y ^t name of, blood, for wine which was appointed [Page 166] only to signifie Christes blood. For the Church of God wold ne­uer haue worshipped with Godly honour bakers bread & wine of the grape, though they were tokens of neuer so goodly things.

But if the Sacramentaries answer, that once the Church did other wise, and y ^t the auncient fathers neither adored the body & blood of Christ vnder y ^t formes of bread and wine, nor preached the words of Christes supper to be proper, besyde that such an­swer of theyrs is stark false, as by y ^t plain words of S. Ambrose, The ado­ration of Christes body. of S. [...], of S. Augustine and of Theodoretus it shal here­after euidērly appere: yet surely though so much could not be pre­sently declared, yet it were a great folly vpon the allegation of a thing so far beyond memorie of mā (as the primitiue Church is) to leaue the manifest vse and custom of the present Church, the which Christ no lesse redemed, no lesse gouerneth and loueth, thē he did the faithfull of the first six hundred yeres.

Furthermore if all that is presently beleued shalbe vndone, as oft as it is pretend [...]d that the primatiue Church thought other­wise, what quietnes can there be in the Church after this order? what end shall we haue of controuersies? When shall we hope to see that agreement of minds, that consent of wils, that vnifor­mitie of life and belefe, which our grandfathers and great grand­fathers had?

The Trinitaries of Polonia vnder their Capitain [...] A new heresie in Poolelād. (who is a false preacher in [...] y ^t chief citie of y ^• Kingdom) said that the name of the blessed Trinitie is a monsterouse thing, not because they openly deny the father, y ^• sonne, & y ^• holy ghost, or the equality of them, nor because they defend any more then one God: But they affirm, y ^• albeit there are three vnius naturae, of one nature & of one Godhead, yet there are not three, say they, y ^• are vna natura, vel Deitas, one nature or Godhead. And for proufe hereof they appeale to the new Testament and old, and to the [Page] Churche which they call priuatiue, which was of y ^e first two hun­dred yeres, or thereabout, bidding vs, looke whether we find, Trinum & vnum deū, or Trinitatem in vnitate, or vnum deum in tribus personis, in any scripture, or in any Father of that age.

As for S. Athanasius, S. Hilarie, S. Basil, S. Augustin & so forth, they esteme no more, then our new brethren esteme S. Bede, or S. Thomas of Aquine. The booke intituled of the Tri­nitie, which is in S. Iustinus works, they affirm not to be his, vsing presently the same shamles shifts against the blessed name and nature of y ^t Trinitie, which the Sacramentaries vse against the nature & name of the Masse.

Not long after these Trinitaries, an other cumpany began to Circum­ [...] of them sel [...]s think circumcision so necessarie, that in Lituania many [...] them selues, who to defend that heresy must nedes deny S. Pan les epistles, as Luther hath denied S. Iames his epistle, for that it is against his iustification of only faith.

And what forbiddeth an other sect to doe the like in an other Tertull. de prae scriptiō. aduersus haeretic. matter? Thus alwaies are we seeking (as Tertullian sayth) but we neuer find any thing, if once we goe from that which we all beleued.

If then a stay be to be made at any tyme in questions of belefe, if we may be sure of any article of all our faith, it behoueth we vndoe not that, which our forfathers haue so long before conclu­ded to be true. No reason of inducīg a new faith can be so weigh­ty, as the peace and preseruation of vnitie in Christes Churche ought to be singularly weighed of euery man.

There was but one vniuersall chang to be loked for in religiō One chāge on­ly could be in religiō. from the beginning of Christes Church to the last end thereof. And that was at y ^e coming of Christ into the world. The which chang that it might not be sodein, it was prophecied of before in all ages both by y ^• dedes and words of Patriarchs, of Prophets, [Page 167] and of Priests. And when the fulnesse of tyme was come, it was proued to become by miracles of so great vertue and name, that the very stones, that is to say, the infidels were turned by them: so great a matter it was with God, to haue the order of his reli­giō altered. And now shal we after Christes faith preached & be­leued fiften hūdred yeres together, shall we now take a new faith of Luther, of Zumglius, and of Caluin? If they be Christ, I grāt we must admit theyr doctrine: but if they be not so, it is not possible they should come of God, though they came with neuer so many miracles, but they must be the forerunners of [...].

To come again nere [...] own matter, if we shall geue any eare to them who affirm the words of Christes supper to be figura­tiue, Iacob. 1. that must be with some dout of our former faith. and in dou­ting thereof we are become men that lacke faith. which if it be not sure, it is not good, for so much as it hath not the foundation of Heb. 11. the things, which the Apostle sayd were to be hoped for.

Or tell me, he that first gaue eare to Berēgarius or Zuinglius against the bessed Sacrament of y ^• altar, may the same man geue care now to another that should wickedly say, the Apostles had A teacher of new do­ctrine is not to be heard. no authoritie geuen them to write holy scriptures? If he may, thē he may dout of the sayd [...]utoritie. and yet surely it were very hard to proue to a wrangler, that such autoritie of writing Gos­pels or epistles could be iustified out of the expresse words of the holy Bible.

But if it be vnlawfull to heare any such seditiouse man, how could it be lawful when eare was first geuen to Berengarius or Berenga rius prea­ched a new do­ctrine. Zuinglius? for then it was no lesse generally receaued through all Christendom, and much more expresly to be proued by the ho­ly scripture, that the things set foorth and consecrated vpon the holy table and altar were the reall body and blood of Christ, then it is sayd, that whatsoeuer the Apostles did write, should be con­firmed [Page] and established, as the words of the holy goo [...].

Where yet I will enter farther into the [...] of the cause▪ And before we heare what reasōs he can bring, who wil reproue the faith of the church in the blessed Eucharist, I say, he is not The Sa­cramen­taries can haue no ground of their do­ctrine. to be heard, because it is not possible that his reason can haue any sufficient ground, why we should geue ouer our old faith: and that whether we respect the writen word of God, or y ^• faith of all Christians, or the glorie of God, or the loue of Christ toward vs, or the profite of his churche.

For [...]either can he shew, where it is writen, or when it was 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. beleued, This is not my body: nor can proue that it is more ho­norable to God, or more agreable to Christes coming, or more profitable to vs, that we should lack his body present vnder the forme of bread, rather then haue it. For if the death of Christ did procede from excessiue charitie of him toward vs, and of God and our profite, that his Sonne should take flesh and dye for vs: I can not deuise how the most honorable remembrance of the The ho­nour of God. same death should not be most according to th'intent of Christ, and to our soules health. And doubtles it is a more honorable and a more louing remembrāce, where the true substāce of Christ is made really present for the keping of his death in memorie, & we take more benefite by such a commemoration of his bloody The pro­fite of the faithfull. sacrifice: then if in stede of Christes reall body, a peece of bread and wine be left vnto vs with neuer so great a feding by faith. For imagine ye the faith to be neuer so great, I am sure it will not be the lesse because Christ is taken into our hands, mouthes, and brests. The touching of his garment neuer hindred any Lucae. 6. good hart, much lesse can the taking of his whole body hurt our faith or deuotion. And yet if corporal touching did not also help, the faithfull womā troubled so long with a bloody fluxe, had not Lucae 8. bene so miraculously cured by touching the hemme of Christes [Page 168] garment. Her faith touched his Godhead, and her soule was healed. Her body also touched his manhod, and her body was likewise cured.

Seing then it is writen: This is my body, and all men beleued it once as well as the other articles of our faith: Seing that be­ [...]eif is so honorable vnto God, so mete for Christes coming and loue toward vs, and so profitable vnto vs, that the contrarie as­sertion shall lack the like holy Scriptures, and the like belefe of the Church, the like honour of God, the like loue of Christ, and the like profite of our soules: There can be no reason alleged hereafter, why we should o [...]ce geue audiēce to him, that preten­deth to proue the body of Christ not to be really present vnder the formes of bread and wine. For what thing possibly can ex­cede these causes before alleged?

Moreouer, all [...]igures were inuented partly for lack of proper Two cau ses of spea king figu­rati [...]ly. words, partly for the pleasantnes of speaking. Christ surely lac­ked not words to shew, y ^t he gaue bread for a signe of his body, if in dede he had done so. For sith Zuinglius and Caluin had words to signifie their opinion in this matter, it could not be but that Christ was able to haue spoken that which they speake. If then he spake not figuratiuely for necessity, our new brethern must proue, that he spake figuratiuely for his only pleasure. but how can they know that? Aug. de doctrina Christ. l. 3. cap, 10.

S. Augustine biddeth vs nolesse beware, that we take not a propre speache for a figuratiue, then that we take not a figura­tiue speache for a proper. The rule to know y ^e one from the other is this: Vt quicquid in sermone diuino &c. that what soeuer in the woord of God can be properly referred neither to the ho­nestie of manners, nor to y ^• truthe of faith, thou maist know to be figuratiue. Yf nowe these wordes of Christ, this is my body and this is my blood, may be referred to the truthe of faith (in [Page] so muche as all men haue beleued the body of Christ to be geuen The pro­per sense of [...] is no­ther aga­ [...] the [...], nor good ma­ners. in the Sacrament of the altar, not diminishing thereby their faith in any other article) by S. Augustins iugdement these wordes be not siguratiue. For certeinlie they be not only nothing against the honestie of maners (as good men vnderstand Christes pre­sence vnder the form of bread) but rather the strong belefe of them maketh al men more honest in life, whiles they come with great feare to so dreadfull mysteries. therefore it followeth y ^• they be not of necessitie figuratiue: of necessitie, I say, because there is no repugnance in saith or good maners, why they may not be proper. whiche notwithstanding a man for his pleasure might vse his wordes in a figuratiue sorte, when he neded not▪ but who so affirmeth so muche, beside that he breaketh S. Augustins rule, he casteth himselfe in greate daunger of prouing y ^• whiche hangeth of an other mans pleasure.

What argument haue our new brethern to proue, that it plea­sed We can neuer be sure that Christ spake figu ratiuely. Christ at this tyme to speake vnproperlie? what ground in the word of God can their opinion haue? how can they be sure, that they erre not in their indgement? when we reade that God is angry or sory, or that Iohn Baptist is Elias, or that the rocke is Christ, we say they are siguratiue speaches, because they can not be proper. Anger falleth not in God, nor sorrow. the rocke for that reason is not Christ in person and nature, because it is a rocke. for by nature they are seueral thinges, and suche as do not stand together. the like might haue bene thought in this Sacrament, if Christ had sayd: this bread is my body, and this wine is my blood. but he foresaw greate cause, why he wold not say so. For he wold by his worde so make his body and blood of bread and wine, that when the substance of his body and blood should be present, the substances of bread and wine should not remain, of this we are sure, because besyde the faith [Page 169] of the whole Churche, the proper signification of the words in­forceth so much, as now it shalbe declared.

¶ That as all other, so the words of Christes supper The ii. Chapiter. ought to be taken properly, vutill the contrarie doth euidently appeare.

WHat meaning words ought to haue, we iudge most directly by the proper signification and common vse of them. For if the contrary do not appeare, al words Wordes are to be taken as they do properly signifie. must be taken in y ^t meaning a [...]d sense, which the vsual custom of speaking and writing hath geuen them. Otherwise all things are confounded, and the profite, which cometh of words, is lost. Neither any man shall know what an other meaneth, neither how to make his own bargaine, or last will and Testament.

Certè peruersissimum est (sayth Tertullian) vt carnem nomi­nantes, Tertull. de carne Christi. animam intelligamus, & animam significantes, carnem in­terpretemur. Omnia periclitabuntur aliter accipi quàmsunt, & amittere quod sunt, dum aliter accipiuntur, si aliter quàm sunt, cognoninantur. Fides nominum, salus est proprietatum. Truly it is a most ouerthwart thing, that naming the [...]esh we should vnderstand the soule, and signifying the soule, we should Things must be beleued a [...] they are named. expound it the flesh. all things shall be in danger to be otherwise taken then they are, and whiles they are otherwise takē, to loose that they are, if they be named otherwise then they are. The faithfull naming of things preserueth their proprieties.

By these words of this auncient Doctour we may iudge, how foule a thing it is, that hearing the body of Christ named, we should without any reasonable cause expound it the figure of his body: And hearing the blood of Christ named, we should ex­pound it the signe of his blood. As well when he is named the [Page] Sonne of God, we may expound it, the image of the Sonne of God. And so we open a gate to all heresie, we take away all cer­teintie of speache, and make the holy Scriptures subiect to euery mans filthy lust & pleasure. We must therefore kepe euery word in his own nature and in his knowen signification, except it be manifest vnto vs that the speaker meante otherwise. Doth not naturall reason teach vs so much?

Sayth not Marcellus the same, being taught only by cōmon Li. 67. de leg. 3. wisedom and iudgement? Non aliter a significatione verborum recedi oportet, quàm cum manifestū est aliud sensisse testatorem. We must not otherwise depart from y ^e significatiō of the words, but when it is manifest y ^• the testatour thought an other thing. In which rule if we rest, all the world well knoweth that when The names v­sed at Christes supper are to be kept. Christ said (This is my body) and (This is my blood) the words both by theire propre signisication, and by the present vse of all speakers and writers, do importe the reall presence of Christes true body and blood.

For neither the pronoun (This) pointeth to a thing absent, This is body. neither the verb (is) can be said of that, which presently hath no true being, neither the noun (body) vseth to be verisied of a sha­dow, figure or token of a body, neither when Christ sayeth: This is my body, any faithfull man doubteth, but that both Christ had my. a true naturall body which he might geue, and is able to make his word true, & vseth to vtter no falshood. And whereas Christ sayd after bread taken, This is my body, it is geuen vs to vnder­stand, that by his word he maketh that particular substaunce of bread, which was taken into his hands, to be his own body. what cause can now be brought why we should forsake these knowen significations, and seeke out other more strange? The law of nature wold vs to rest in the names which we find. Ira­dition also maketh for the same interpretation. And surely these [Page 170] are y ^t chief rules to know y ^t meanig which any words may haue.

Epiphanius in this matter hath a notable rule, saying: Om­nia Epiphā. lib. 2. to. 1. haer. 61. diuina verba non habent opus allegoria, sed prout se habent, accipienda sunt. Speculatione autem indigent & sensu, ad cogno­scendam vniuscuiusque argumēti vim & facultatem. Oportet au­tem & traditione vti, non enim omnia a diuina Scriptura accipi possunt. All the words of God nede not an allegorie (or a figu­ratiue Traditiō is to be re spected in exposiding holy scri­ptures. meaning) but they are to be taken as they be. They re­quire in dede a diligent obseruation and vnderstanding, that the strength and power of euery matter proponed may be knowen. (wherein it behooueth to vse tradition.) For all things cā not be gathered out of the diuine writing. Here is the first place ge­uen by Epiphanius to the naturall takīg of words, for al things be not figuratiue, though many be.

To know which is figuratiue, and which is not, diligent con­syderation, and auncient tradition helpeth much. Well, of other helpes hereafter. Now let this be graunted, that the first rule of all maketh for the Catholikes. Which is, that euery word and speache, as long as the contrary is not manifestly proued, is to be taken, as it commonly doth signifie. According to the which rule these words of Christ (This is my body) and (This is my blood) affirme the reall presence of Christes body and blood, as now it shalbe shewed.

¶ The proper signification of these words This is my body, and This is my blood, is, that the substance The ii [...]. Chapiter. of Christes body and blood is couteyned vnder the visible formes of bread and wine.

WHen the Paschall Lamb was eaten, and the Disciples Ioan. 13. feete washed, Christ by taking bread into his hands declared him self to be disposed, to vse it for some one purpose or other: by blessing, and thanksgeuing ouer it, we are [Page] informed he wold make some diuine mysterie of that bread. And when he began to make the mysterie, saying (this is) and ended it, adding thereto (my body) we lern by the two first words (this This, can be said but of one sub­stance. is) that his mysterie consisteth not of bread and of his body, but of one substance only, which was declared to be so really inten­ded as well in his mind, as at his tongs end, that hauing once named what it was, to wit (my body) no mā aliue might doubt, but either he both in word and dede made a false signification, (which is with all true Catholikes a thing without al possibili­tie) or els that it was in dede so, as his words of blessing, and of saying, This is my body, witnessed.

And for asmuch as his word affirmed this to be his body, and his dede of taking bread, and of blessing shewed his words to be Christes words di­rected to the bread. directed vnto y ^• which was in his hand, or lay before him (which was bread before) it must nedes be, that the pronoun (this) so shewed to his Apostles y ^e thing already subiect vnto their eyes, that much more it serued to teache their vnderstanding verily, this, which appeared to them bread, to be in substance, at the en­ding of the words, his own body.

Therefore we teache the pronoun (this) to serue both to the The strēgth of the pro­noun this. eyes and to the vnderstanding of the Apostles. to their eyes, in pointing to the foorm of bread which they saw: to their vnder­standing, in teaching that substance which was present vnder that they saw, to be his own body streight when it was so na­med. And in so much as the same forme of bread tarieth after cō ­secration which was there before, the pronoun (this) doth all­wayes direct their eyes to one and the same forme of wheaten bread, which was there when Christ tooke it first. and also it in­sinuateth to their vnderstanding, that they must looke (by the nonn that foloweth the verb) to know what proprietie or sub­stance that visible thing hath. And seing the noun which cometh [Page 171] after, is not the name of a q [...]alitie or proprietie, but the name of a substance, and of such a substance as before was not present: Without all question, these words (This is my body) haue accor­ding The pr [...] ­per sense of Chri­stes wor­des. to the proper custom of speache, this meaning: The sub­stance which is conteyned vnder this forme of bread, and vnder the accidents the which I shew you, is the substance of my body. Whereof it foloweth, that the same thing is no longer the sub­stance of bread, and consequently therevnto, that the substance of the bread is, by the word of Christ, changed into the substance Transub­stantiatiō. of his body. And likewise when Christ sayd: This is my blood, the sense is: The substance which is conteined vnter the forme of wine (which you sensibly perceaue to be in this cuppe) is my blood, or is the substance of my blood.

Which interpretation is so true, that Christ hath forced vs to 1. Co. 11. Luc. 22. seeke it out, in causing S. Luke, and S. Paule to write: This chalice is the new Testament in my blood. For of necessitie we must interpret these words, This chalice, that is to say, the thing conteined inthis chalice, is my blood. As therefore (This) in na ming the chalice doth serue to shew the place & compasse, with­in which I must looke for that substance, which afterward is de­fined to be the blood of Christ: euen so (this) being spoken of the bread which was taken into Christes hands, doth first point vnto the eye, within what circuit or quantitie the mind shal seke for that substance or proprietie, which afterward the mouth of Christ wil declare. and when the name is once heard, it sheweth it to be y ^t substance of Christes body. Out of which discourse we may gather two conclusions: The one, that (this) beginneth most naturally with the sense of man: The other, that it with the rest of y ^t speache informeth y ^e vnderstanding of more then the eye saw. To y ^e sense it sheweth y ^• outward formes, to y ^e vnderstā ­dīg it sheweth pr [...]cipally y ^e inward substāce vnder those formes.

[Page]Now looke by how many degrees the inward substance doth hoc, this, [...] the noune (body.) passe the outward formes, and the end of the talk doth passe the beginning thereof: by so many the pronoun (this) rather ap­perteyneth to the substantiue (body) wherein it endeth, then to the formes, within the which it goeth about to shew an invisible substance. Which being so, Hoc, (this) is in Latin of the neuter gender, because the noune substantiue (corpus) body, wherevn­to it hasteneth) is of the neuter gender. And in the consecration of the blood Hic, (this) of certeintie is the masculine gender, be­cause sanguis blood, whereto it belongeth, is of the masculine gender.

Thus the literall sense of Christes words is declared, which ought to be taken for true, vntill the contrarie be proued. But this propriety of words standing (as it ought to stand) marke that whensoeuer any Catholike sayth, The substance of Christes body and blood to be vnder the formes of bread and wine, he speaketh not any other thing, then the natural and proper signi­fication of Christes words doth geue. For as he that pointing to that kind of beast (which an other cometh to learne) sayeth: This is an Oelephant, in effect sayth: The substance of an Oele­phant is contemed vnder this visible forme: So Christ hauing taken bread, and saying, This is my body, sayeth in effect: the substance of my body is conteined vnder the forme of this bread.

Only this oddes is betwene Christes naming and ours, that Christes naming to making. we either must name the thing by his former substance or pro­prietie, or els we make a lye: But Christ by [...] one thing y ^e name of an other, geueth it also the substance thereof whensoe­uer Rom. 4. he speaketh, not in parables, but in the way of doing some good turn. for he being God, as easily calleth things which are not, as those which are. and by his calling he maketh them to be as he nameth them, and not as them selues were.

¶ That the pronoun (this) in Christes wordes can The [...]. Chapiter. point neither to bread nor to wine.

SEing Christ in his last supper assigneth none other substāce to (this, and this) besyde the substance of body and blood, and yet the Sacramentaries will not graunt so muche: I ask them (for as muche as although it were so, that his words did mean an accidentall token of his body and blood, that token must be grounded in some substance or other) I ask them what substance is pointed vnto (as wherein the figure of Christes body and blood may by their iudgement consist) when Christ saith, this is my body and this is my blood? is any substance in­cluded in those words, or none at all? yf none, (this) may not be sayd to be any particular nature at all. for yf it be any certain thing consisting by it self, it is a substance: if it be in any other thing, it may be an accident and qualitie. but Christ saith not, this is in my body, but this is my body.

Admit now that he meant, this doth signifie my body. yet this that doth so signifie, must be sumwhat or other. I aske what this The opt­mō of the prote­stants. thing is, which you say doth signifie or shadow Christes body? you must nedes say, it is bread and wine, and therefore you must expound it, this bread signifieth my body, & this wine signifieth my blood. This interpretation of yours can not be true.

For (this) wil not agree with bread or wine neither in greeke, nor in latin. For hoc in latin and [...] in greek is of the neuter gender, but panis in latin and [...] in greeke is of the masculine gender. therefore hoc, (this) doth neither in greeke nor in latin agree with bread. likewise (hic) in latin is of the masculine gen­der, vinum, wine is of the newter. and contrarie wise in greke [...] is of the newter gender, and, [...] wine, is of the mascu­line gender, therefore (this) nother in greeke nor in latine can be referred to wine.

[Page]Now to say, hoc, this thing, (vnderstanding, which is bread) is to correct the words of Christ, as though he had sayd: hoc quod est panis, est corpus meum, this which is bread is my body. & yet if it had bene so sayd, the sense must haue bene thus: the substance of bread doth signifie the body of Christ. for that thing which is bread, is to say, the substance of bread. which if it The sub­stance of bread is not pom­ted vnto. were so, euery substance of bread should be the signe of Christes body, because that which the substance of one loafe is, y ^e substance of an other loaf is also in the same kind. & consequently when­soeuer any man eateth any substāce of bread without examining 1. Co. 11. himself, he is giltie of the body of Christ.

Again when it were sayd, hic est sanguis meus: hic, being of the masculine gender, could not be expounded by, hoc quod est vinū, (this thing which is wine) for it standeth not neutrally to signi­fie this thing, but only agreeth with the noune blood, which fo­loweth after, when it is sayd: this is my blood.

The pronoun is put in the same case, gender, and number whereof the substance is, wherevnto it pointeth. as when Christ Mat. 21. sayd: hic est haeres, this is the heire, hic, this, is of the masculine gender, aswell as the noune substātiue, h [...]res, an heire. h [...]c est ho­ra Luc. 22. vestra, this is your hower. As hower is of the femine gender, so is the pronoun haec, this. hoc est opus Dei, this is the worke of Ioan. 6. God. as opus worke is of the neuter gender, so is the pronoune, hoc, that. But when Christ tooke bread & blessed, he pointed not This, and bread be not of one gender. to bread by the pronoune (this) as to the substance which should remaine at the end of his whole talke. for bread is of the mascu­line gender, both in greke and latine.

Again let vs consyder, that it is all one to say, hoc est corpus Cypriā. de coena Domini not farre from the beginning meum, and haec est caro mea. in so much that S. Cyprian re­hearseth the words of Christes supper by these words, haec est caro mea, where haec being the feminine gender doth only agree [Page 173] with caro flesh, and not with, panis bread, which is neither of the neuter gender, that hoc may agree with, nor of the feminine tha [...] haec may be referred to it, but only of y ^• masculine gender. There­fore if Christ had pointed finally to bread, he must hane sayd, neither hoc est corpus, nor haec est caro, but hic est corpus meum, vnderstanding to hic, the substantiue (panis) and in Greke it This, in English is of all genders. should haue bene [...], and not [...]. In English (this) is of all gēders, and therefore it can not be exemplified in our barbarous tong, which thereby appereth not so mete to haue the word of God handled literally in it, as the lerned tongs are, although it is able enoughe to receaue an interpretation of Gods word. But it is much like as if one pointing to a man, called Lau­rence, should say, she is Laurence, or her is Laurence, which is as good english among the Brytons, as hoc panis, and hic vinū, is good latine among the Sacramentaries. Thus make they the wisedome of God to speake at this time, who say that the pro noune (this) determineth and pointeth to bread, as to a thing that still remaineth in his old substance, whereas bread is of the masculine gender, and the pronowne hoc, (this) of the newter gender. and God prouided of purpose y ^t the article (this) should neither agree with bread nor with wine, but only with body and blood, or with the chalice wherein the blood is conteined.

¶ That the pronoun (this) can not point to any certain acte, which is a doing about the bread and wine. The v. Chapiter.

LEast any man should thinke that in these wordes (this is (This) doth not stand to signifie many things. my body) the prononu [...] (this) doth stand to signifie neither bread nor body, but only this thing which is a doing, where­by a certaine taking, and breaking, and eating of bread in the remembrance of Christ should be meante: he must vnderstand that euery thing which is so distinctly shewed, is a particular [Page] thing, and it is but one thing. otherwise it should haue bene sayd in the plurall number, these things are the tokens of my body & of my blood.

But now sith it is sayd in the singular number (this) it must nedes be only one singular thing which is spoken of. Therefore if you will haue (hoc) this thing, to appointe to a doing, name which doing it is. For Christ did many thinges in his supper. He took bread, he blessed, he brake, he gaue. To which doth (hoc, this thing) pointe? To all it can not, sor they all be not only this All the doings be not poin­ted vnto. one thing in the singular number, but many thinges. If any one be named, I aske which of them? If breaking (which is one of the most like of all owtward actions to signifie the death of Christ) I aske how you are able to proue, that breaking is poin­ted vnto? surely S. Paule saith, the bread which we break is the 1. Co. 10. communicating of our lords body. which could not be so, if the words of Christ, which make it the signe of his body, had not bene first spoken ouer the bread.

For (as Iustinus Martyr, Gregorius Nyssenus, S. Am­brose, 1. in Apo. 2. 2. in Or. cathech. 3. li. 4. de Sacram. 4. depro dit. lud. 5. contr. Faust. li. 20. ca. 13. & epi. 59. Breaking is not poin ted vnto. S. Chrysostom, S. Augustine, and briefly all the Fathers teache) the bread is consecrated by these words of Christ, This is my body. And surely before it be consecrated there vnto, bread can not signifie Christes body, nor it can not be to vs the com­municating of Christes body. Therefore seing the bread which we breake is the communicating of our Lords body (as S. Paule sayeth) the words which were spoken ouer y ^• bread be­fore the breaking of it, can not presently point to that which is not yet done. And consequently (this) doth not point vnto the acte of breaking, nor vnto the act either of geuing or of eating, which folowed after the breaking.

If any man say, that Christ whiles he spake these wordes, dyd breake the bread, or eate it him felf, or make his Apostles eate it: [Page 174] the vuiuersall custome of the Churche in all ages doth shewe the contrarie. Whiche all, euen from the Apo [...]les tyme haue vsed to consecrate aud to say these wordes: this is my body, aud this is my blood: ouer bread and wine at the holy altar and table, a good tyme before the breaking or eating and drinking of them, Of S. Iames. Of S. [...]. Of S. Chrysost. Of S. Chrysost. as the auncient Liturgies manifestly declare.

Besydes, if the act of breaking, whiles it is adding, dyd only betoken to vs his body: when that act were past, the signe of his body were ended. and so we should not eate the signe of Christes body. Moreouer, seing neither the chalice nor the wine is broken, therein should be no signe of Christes blood at all.

On the other syde, if eating or drinking only were the signe Eating or drinkig is not alone pointed vnto. 1. Cor. 10 pointed vnto, it should be no signe before the eating, and there­vpon it would follow, that the bread which we breake is not the cōmunicating of Christes body, sith no signe at all is made there­in, if the whole signe depend vpō the eating alone. For if the signe depended of both together, it could not be said, this, i [...] the sin­gular number as I sayd before, but it must haue bene sayd: these actes and these doings about these creatures do signifie the bo­dy of Christ.

But seing it is sayd, this is my body, whiche (this) can point but to one thing, and seing that one thing can be neither breade (wherewith it agreeth not in gender) nor any one acte or doing (which alone doth not signify the body of Christ) doubtlesse (this) The body or blood is only poin­ted vnto. can by no meanes be referred to any other word or deede, then to the true substance of Christes body vnder the forme of bread, and vnto the true substance of his blood vnder the forme of wine.

The whiche thing once graunted, after that Christ hath taken bread and blessed, and sayd, this is my body, whatsoeuer is done either in breaking or in eating, or in geuing, and taking, doth si­guifie the body of Christe, because it is done to that thing and [Page] about it, which is the true substance of his body. the breaking The brea king. of the forme of bread, vnder whiche the body is, doth signifie the body of Christe once to haue ben broken with scourging The ta­king. and nailing to the Crosse, and now also to be impassible. The ta­king and touching signifieth the visible and palpable body, which walked vpon the earth preaching visibly to his disciples. The eating signifieth it to be the true bread of life, whiche who so ea­teth The ea­ting. Luc. 22. The ge­uing. worthely, he shall liue for euer, and shal eate it in heauen af­ter a new maner. The geuing of it doth signifie, how Christ gaue it [...]or vs to death. To be short whatsoeuer is done about y ^• which is the body o [...] Christ, doth signify somwhat either past or to come in that same body, & it doth signifie it so muche the more, because the presence of Christes glorious substance is such, that nothing done to it can hurt it, or bring any detriment thereunto. For the breaking, taking, geuing, and eating is done in a figure and my­sterie, the which figure is grounded in the reall presence of Chri­stes body. which if it were not vnder the formes of bread & wine, the things sayd & done about the Sacramēt should not be so my­sticall and miraculouse, as they are.

¶That the pronoune (this) pointeth finally to the bo­dy The vi. Chapiter. and blood, and particularly sig [...]fieth in Christes supper one certein kinde of fo [...]e.

SEing it is declared, that y ^• pronoun (this) pointeth neither to bread & wine, nor to any act done about them, it remaineth y ^• it pointeth only to the body and blood of Christ, and so long as the words of Christ are a speaking (which in so few words is not long) the pronoune s [...]pendeth his last determination. And Theop. [...] Math. 26 when al the words are ended, his pointing is also ended. There­sore [...] expounding what hoc, this, doth finally meane, writeth [...]us: Dicens hoc est corpus meum, ostendit quod ipsum [Page 175] corpus domini est panis qui sanctificatur in altario, & non respon­dens figura. Christ saying, this is my body, sheweth that the bread which is consecrated on the altar, is the self body of Christ, & not a figure which answereth thereunto. And again in an other place he saith: hoc est corpus meum, hoc inquam, quod sumitur. This is In Marc. 14. my body, this I say, whiche you take. So that by his [...] (this) pointeth not finally to that wheaten bread whiche Christe tooke, neither to any doing of his, but to y ^• body of Christ whiche he made by his words at the holy altar and table, and which the Apostles tooke afterward at the handes of Christ.

Howbeit if any man be so hastie, that he wil not tary the spea­king of fower words, to know what particular & finall substance the pronoun, hoc (this) doth point vnto, but will nedes knowe what it meaneth as sone as it came out of Christes mouth, vntill the last word be pronounced: I answere, that by the circūstances which are about and concerne the dedes and words of Christ, it may be wel sayd, that the pronoun (this) beside his generall sig­nisication This, doth mean particular ly this ea­table thi [...] (whiche is declared before) doth here also particularly betoken, euen from the beginning of Christes words to the end, this thing which is to be eaten or drunken, and so doth it declare as well the beginning of the words (which belong to wheaten bread whose cheefe vse is to be eaten) as the progresse which ten­deth to a supper, the substance whereof is eating, & the end, which is the bod [...] of Christ made present to be eatē. So (this) doth tru­ly always signifie this food or eateable substance, of which parti­cular pointing and signification I shall haue occasion to speake more at large hereafter, when I come to confer y ^• holy scriptures together which belong to the supper of Christ.

¶The naming of the chalice proueth not the rest of The vii. Chapiter. Christes words to be figuratiue.

[Page]HEreof the Sacramentaries make no small boast, that Christ sayd: this chalice is the new Testament in my blood. 1. Cor. 11 It can not be denyed (say they) but the name of chalice is figuratiuely put for that, whiche is in the chalice. Why may not The obie­cion. therefore other words in the supper be also figuratiuely taken?

Masters, it foloweth not, because one word is euidently sigu­ratiue, The aun­swere. that therefore another word must be also figuratiue, except one reason be in both words. Which in our case is cleane contra­ry, and that for diuerse causes. for all men, that is to say, as well Catholiks as Protestants and Sacramentaries confesse the word 1. (chalice) to be figuratiue, and thei are compelled so to doe, because if we take the name of (chalice) properly, we must confesse, sith Christ sayth this chalice is the new Testament in my blood, that a material cup of wood, glasse, or siluer is the new Testament, or y ^• cause of our synnes to be forgeuen, which no reasonable man will so much as dream of. Seing then we are constrained by force The Cha lice. of reason to say the (chalice) to stand for that, which is in the cha­lice, and no like reason presseth vs to think the like of the verbe (est, is) or of the noun (corpus, body) or of y ^e noun (sanguis, blood) the example which moueth vs to graunt a figure in y ^e one word, kepeth vs from suspecting any figure in the other words, which are nothing like.

Secondly, whereas S. Luke and S. Paul named the chalice, 2. The cha­lice expoū ded in ho­ly scrip­ture. S. Mathew and S. Marke speake not of it, geuing vs to vnder­stand, that the meaning of Christ was only to make and shew the blood of the new Testament, which was in the chalice. As there­fore the holy Ghost prouided for a sufficient declaration of tha [...] word which was in dede figuratiue: so leauing the verbe (est, is) and the nounes (body and blood) still in they proper significatiō, without mention of signe or figure, it hath sufficiently witnessed that they were to be takē as they did naturally sound to the com­mon [Page] [...]ares of men.

Thirdly although the word (calix) a cup or chalice were at the 3. beginning appointed to signifie chefely that vessel, which holdeth liquour me [...]e to be drunk: yet by common vse of speaking (which The cha­lice by vse of speakig signifieth the drinke in it. is farre the chefe gouernour in the vnderstanding of wordes) we being at the table meane by the cup that, which is in the cup. in so much y ^• if a mā sitting at the table, bid y ^• cup be geuen to another, no seruāt is lightly so rude, as to geue a stranger the cup without drink in it. now when words are as commonly vsed in theyr si­guratiue sense as in theyr natural, then eche way the sense is pro­per enough, in so much as the vse of speaking is equal to the first propriety of the word.

Fourthly, seing Christ sitting at the table, & in the sight of his 4. Apostles, taking the cup of wine mingled with water, blessed, & This cha lice where in liquor is knowē to be can not make the speach obscure. gaue thāks, saying not only the chalice or a chalice, but this cha­lice or this cup is the new Testament in my blood, it could not be that any dout could rise to his Apostles through naming that chalice which the Apostles them selues knew to contein a certen liquour, but that notwithstanding maruelouse great dout wold haue risen to them and to al Christians, if he should haue vsed (est for significat) and body & blood, for the signe of body & blood, for so much as they could not coniecture any other meaning of these words, then they did outwardly sound. For it is no common vse of speaking, but only both seldom vsed and not vnderstāded, but by great doctors and interpreters, who know and discern tokēs of things to be called sometyme by the names of the things them selues.

Fifthly, when with a figuratiue worde an other is immediat­ly 5. ioyned, which doth expound the figure, the whole speach is ra ther to be accompted proper, then figuratiue: for so much as the weaker part yeldeth always to the stronger, euen as in [...] [Page] when one noune adiectiue serueth two substantiues of diuerse genders, we make it agree with the masculin as with the more worthy gender. When Christ sayd to S. Peter, I will geue thee Matt. 16. the keies, he spake figuratiuely (cōcerning the name of keies) but if we marke that he ioyned thereunto, the keies of the kingdom of heauen, and yet again, what soeuer thou bindest or loosest in earth, and so foorth: by these words the former speache is made plain, as if it were not figuratiue at all: right so when he sayth, The word io [...]ned w ^t the name of [...], maketh a [...] pla [...]. this chalice is the new testament in my blood, y ^• nāing of the blood is so plain a declaration how the name of chalice is taken, that al is one as if it had bene said, this is my blood of y ^• new testament, which is in the chalice.

See then for Gods sake, how farre the figuratiue naming of y ^• 6. chalice is frō any figuratiue naming of the body or blood. As to y ^• chalice such words were ioyned which did shew the name to b [...] figuratiue: so to the body and blood such were ioyned, as forbid vs to think the like of them, not only because Christe sayd: This is my body & my blood (which surely were enough to proue that I say, because the body and blood of Christe wa [...] not figu­ratiue but true and naturall) but also because to the naming of Christes body it is ioined in S. Luke: The which is geuē for you, Luc. 22. And to the name of the cup, the which is shed for you.

Last of all the naming of the cup or chalice was prouided of 7. God for a maruelouse declaration and setting foorth of the reall blood of Christ made within it. For whereas the new preachers bid vs list our mindes to heauen to receaue y ^• blood of Christ by faith, spirit, and vnderstanding (as though it were not present at Christes own table) the holy Ghost knowing that afterward such false reachers should arise, prouided that the words of Christ should not only be reported (This is my blood of the new testamēt 26. as S. Mathew & S. Mark write) but also (as S. Luke & S. Paul 14. [Page 177] haue penned thē) this chalice is the new testament in my blood, this cahlice, that is to say the thing c [...]nteyned in this chalice, to [...] the [...] is [...]amed. the intent we should be sure, that the said blood was euen within the compasse of this chalice, and not only apprehended by saith and spirit. so that euen the word (chalice) although by exact ac­compt of grammer it stand figuratiuely, yet by common vse it signifieth the liquour in it, and that liquour is expresly named the blood of Christ, and that blood is declared to be present in the very chalice.