The mynde & exposiciō of the olde doctours upon the wordes of Christes maundye.
|More.| And where master More sayeth, that yf Chryste had not ment after the playne litterall sense, that both the hearers at that tyme, and the expositours sens, and all Christen people besyde thys xv.c. yeare wolde not haue taken onelye the litterall sens beynge so straunge and mervelous that yt myght seame impossyble, ād declyne from the letter for allegoryes in all suche other thynges, beynge (as he sayeth) and as in dede they be, so manye farre in nombre mo.
|Fryth.| ¶ As towchynge the hearers they were deceyued and vunderstoode hym not (I meane as manye as toke hys wordes fleslye as you do). And they had their answere of Christe (when they mourmured) that hys wordes were spyrite and lyfe: that is (as S. Austen sayeth) spirytually to be vnderstonde & not fleslye, as ys before declared. And as for the exposytours, I thynke he hath not one of the olde fathers for hym, but certen newe felowes: as Dominicus, S. Thomas, Occam, ād suche other which haue made the Pope a God. And as I haue shewed S. Austen maketh full for vs, and so do all the olde fathers. As Oecolompadius hath well declared in hys boke. Quid ueteres senserint de sacramento eucharistiæ. And some of their sayenges I shall alleage a none. And where you saye that all Christen people haue so beleued this .1500. yeares, that is very false. For there ys no doubte, but that the people thought as holye Saynt Austen and other faythful fathers taught thē. Which as I sayde, make with vs. Notwithstondynge in dede syth oure prelates haue bene made lordes and haue sette vp their lawes and decrees contrarye to the prerogatyue of all Prynces, and lyke moste subtle traytours, haue made all men beleue that they may make lawes & bynde mens cōscyences to obeye them: and that theyr lawes are Gods lawes, blyndynge the peoples eyes wyth two or thre textes wrongfully wrested, to avaunce their pryde, where they ought to obeye Kynges & Princes & be subiect to their lawes, as Christ & hys Apostles were euē vnto the death. Syth that tyme I say, they haue made mē beleue what they lyst, & make artycles of the faythe at their pleasure. One artycle must be that they be the church, ād cā not erre. And this ys the grounde of all their doctryne. But the truth of this artycle ys now suffycyently knowē. For yf quene Katheryne be Kynge Hēryes wyfe, thē they do erre, & yf she be not, they haue thē erred. It is nowe become an artycle of our fayth that the Pope of Rome must be the hede of the churche ād the vycar of Christe: & that by Gods lawe. It is an artycle of our fayth, that what soeuer he byndeth in earth, is boūde in heauē, in so moche that yf he curse wrōgfully, yet yt must be feared, ād infynite suche other which are not in our crede, but blessed be god that hath geuē some lyght in to oure Prynces harte. For he hath lately put forth a boke called the glasse of truth, which proueth many of these artycles very folysh fātasyes, ād that euē by theyr owne doctours, and so I truste you shall be proued in this poynt of the sacramēt. For though it be an artycle of our fayth, yt is none artycle of our Crede in the .xij. artycles, whiche are suffycyent for our saluacyon. And therfore we may thynke that you lye without all Ieoperdye of dampnacyon.
Neuerthelesse seynge hys mastershyp sayeth that all make for hym, & I say cleane contrarye, that allthe olde fathers make agaynste hym, it were necessarye that one of vs shulde proue hys purpose. But in dede in this poynte he wolde loke to haue the vātage of me. For he thynketh that mē wyll sooner beleue him which is a greate mā, thē me which am but a poore mā, ād that therfor I had more neade to proue my parte true, thē he to proue hys. Well, I am content, and therfor geue eare dere reader and iudge betwene vs.
|Tertullianus libro. 2. cōtra Marcionem. Tertullianus libro 4. cōtra Marcionem.| First I wyll begynne with Tertulyan, because he is of moste antiquyte. Tertullyan sayeth. Ipse (Christus) nec panem reprobauit quod ipsum corpus suum representat. That is to saye: Christ hym selfe ded not reproue or discōmēde breade which doth represent hys bodye. For the vnderstōdynge of thys place, you must know that there was an heretyke called Marcyō, which ded reproue creatures, & sayde that all maner of creatures were euell. This thynge doth Tertullyā improue by the sacramēt & sayeth. Christ ded not reproue or dyscōmende breade the which doth represēt his bodye: as though he shulde say, yf Christ had counted the breade euell, then wolde he not haue lefte yt for a sacrament to represent hys bodye, meanynge that it is a sacramente, sygne, token, and memoryall of hys bodye, and not the body ytselfe. And that this is hys mynde, doth playnly appeare in his fourth boke, where he sayeth. Christus acceptū panē et distributū discipulis, corpus suū illud fecit: hoc est corpus meū dicēdo, id est figura corporis mei. Figura autē non fuisset, nisi ueritatis e ēt corpus. Vacua res quod est phātasma, figuram capere non posset.
That ys to saye: Christe takynge breade and dystrybutynge vnto hys discyples made yt hys bodye, sayēge. This ys my body. But thys breade coulde not haue bene a figure of yt, excepte Christ had had a true bodye. For a vayne thynge or a fantasye can take no fygure. For the vnderstondynge of this place, you muste marke that this heretycke Marcyō agaynst whome thys auctoure wryteth, ded holde opynyon that Christ had no naturall bodye, but onelye a fantastycall bodye, ād this opynyon doth thys doctoure improue by the sacrament of the aulter sayenge. The sacrament ys a fygure of hys bodye: ergo Christ had a true bodye, ād not a fantastycall bodye: For a vayne thynge or fantasye can take no fygure. Loo, here doth this olde father which was longe before .S. Austen or .S. Hierome, expounde these wordes of Christe. This is my bodye: that is to saye, a fygure of my bodye. Therfor ye are to blame to call it new lernynge. Nowe because they shall not of temeraryous presumpcyon reiecte this olde father, I shall establyshe hys wordes by S. Austen, which commendeth Christes meruelous pacyence for sufferynge so lōge that traytour Iudas, as though he had bene a good man, and yet was not ignorāt of hys wycked thoughtes. |Augusti.| Adhibuit (inquit) ad cōuiuium in quo corporis & sanguinis sui figura discipulis commendauit ac tradidit. That is to saye: |in prefa. Psalm. 3.| he admytted hym sayeth S. Austē vnto the mandye wherin he dede be take and delyuer vnto the dyscyples the fygure of hys bodye and bloode. Here doth thys holye father .S. Austē call yt the fygure of hys body. And I am sure there is no mā so chyldyshe, but that he knoweth that the fygure of Christe ys not Christe hym selfe, the fygure of .S. Peter ys not saynt Peter hym selfe. And yet we do neuerthelesse commōly call those fygures by the name of the thynge that they do represente. As I maye saye when I see the fygure of .S. Peter, thys ys S. Peter to whome Christe delyuered the keyes of the kyngdome of heauē. And yet he were a foole that wolde thynke that fygure to be S. Peter hym selfe. For yt is onelye a representacyon of hym. Besydes that S. Austen sayeth. |Augusti in prefa. Psalm. 98.| Non hoc corpus quod uidetis estis manducaturi, nec bibituri illum sanguinem quem effusuri sunt qui me crucifigent. Sacramentum aliquod uobis commendaui, spiritualiter intellectum uiuificat nos, caro autem non prodest quicquam. That ys to saye: you shall not eate thys bodye that you see, nor drynke that bloode which they that crucyfye me shall shedde out. I haue geuen a certayne sacramente vnto you, yf yt be spirytually vnderstonde, yt quyckeneth you: but the fleshe profyteth nothynge. What thynges can be more playnely spoken?
Furdermore S. Austen sayeth. Sepe ita loquimur ut Pascha appropinquante crastinam uel perendinam Domini passionem dicamus: cum ille ante tam multos annes passus sit, nec omnino nisi semel illa passio facta sit. Nempe ipso die dominico dicimus bodie dominus resurrexit cum ex quo surrexit tot anni transierunt. Quare nemo tam ineptus est, ut nos ita loquentes arguat esse mentitos, quia istos dies secundum illorum quibus hæc gesta sunt similitudinem nuncupamus: ut dicatur ipse dies qui non sit ipse, sed reuolucio ne temporum similes eius: & dicatur illo die fieri propter sacramenti celebrationem, quod non illo die, sed iam olim factum est. Nonne semel immolatus est Christus in seipso? & tamen in sacramento non solum per amnuas Paschæ solennitates, sed omni die pro popuslis immola tur: nec utique mentitur qui interrogatus, responderit eum immolari. Si enim sacramenta quandam similitudinem earum rerum quarum sunt sacramenta non haberent, omnino sacramenta non essent. Ex hac autem similitudine plerumque etiam ipsarum rerum nomina accipiunt. Sicut ergo secundum quendam modum sacramētum corporis CHRISTI corpus CHRISTI est. Et sacramentum sanguinis CHRISTI sanguis CHRISTI est, ita sacramenta fidei fides est, Nihil est autem aliud ud credere, quam fidem habere, ac per hoc respondetur fidem habere propter fidei sacramenta. Et conuertere se ad Deum propter conuersionis sacramentum. Quia & ipsa responsio pertinet ad celebrationem sacramenti. Sicut de ipso baptismo Apostolus dicit. Consepulti (inquit) sumus Christo per baptismum in mortem, Non ait sepulturam significauimus, sed prorsus ait, consepulti sumus. Sacramentum ergo tantæ rei non nisi eiusdem rei uocabulo nuncupauit.
That is to saye: We often vse to saye, when Easter draweth nyghe, that to morow or the nexte day is the Lordes passyō, ād yet yt is many yeares sens he suffered, and that passyon was neuer done but ones. And vpon that sondaye we saye, thys daye the Lorde ded ryse agayne, and yet yt ys many yeares sens he rose. Now ys there no man so folyshe to reproue vs as lyers for so sayenge, because we name these dayes after the symylytude of those in which these thynges were done, so that yt is called the same daye, which is not the verye same, but by the reuolucyon of tyme lyke it. And yt is named to be done the same daye through the celebracyon of the sacramēt (through kepynge the memoryall of the thynge ones done) which ys not done that daye, but was done lōge before. Was not Christe ones crucyfyed in hys owne parson? ād yet in a mysterye (which is the remembraunce of hys very passyon) he ys crucyfyed for the people not onely euery feaste of Easter, but euery daye. Neyther doth he lye which (whē he is asked) answereth that he is crucyfyed. For yf the sacramentes, had not certayne symylytudes of those thynges wherof they are sacramentes, then shulde they be no sacramentes at all. And for thys symylytude for the most parte they take the names of the very thynges, and therfore after a certayne maner the sacramente of Christes bodye ys Christes bodye, & the sacramēte of Christes bloode, is christes bloode, so the sacramēt of faythe, is fayth. For yt ys nō other thyng to beleue, thē to haue fayth, & therfore whē a mā āswereth that the infante beleueth which hath not the affecte of fayth, he answereth that yt hath faythe for the sacramēt of fayth: And that yt turneth yt selfe to GOD, for the sacrament of conuersyon. For the answere yt selfe perteyneth vnto the mynystrynge of the sacrament. As the Apostle wryteth of Baptyme: we are buryed (sayeth he) wyth Christ through Baptyme vnto death. He sayeth not, we sygnyfye buryenge, but vtterlye sayeth, we are buryed. He called therfore the sacrament of so greate a thynge euen wyth the propre name of the verye thynge it selfe. & ce. If a man wolde avoyde contencyon and loke soberly vpon those wordes of Saynte Austen, he shall soone perceyue the mysterye of thys matter. For euē as the nexte good frydaye shalbe called the daye of Christes passyon: and yet he shall not suffer death a gayne vpon that daye, for he dyed but ones and is nowe immortall, euē so is the Sacrament called Christes bodye. And as that daye is not the verye daye that he dyed vpon, but onelye a remembraunce therof: So the Sacrament is not hys very naturall bodye, but onelye a remembraunce of hys bodye breakynge and bloode sheadynge. And lykewyse, as the nexte Easter daye shall be called the daye of hys resurrectyon, not that it is the very same daye that Christe ded ryse in, but a remembraunce of the same: Euen so the Sacrament is called hys bodye: not that it is hys bodye in dede, but onely a remembraunce of the same. And furdermore, euē as the Preste doth offer hym, that is to saye, crucyfye hym at Masse, euē so is the sacramēt hys bodye. But the Masse doth but onely represent hys passyon. And so doth the Sacrament represent hys bodye. And yet though the Masse dothe but represent his crucyfyēge, we maye trulye saye he is crucyfyed, euen so though the Sacrament do but sygnyfye or represent hys bodye, yet may we trulye saye that it is hys bodye. Why so? verely (sayeth he) for the sacramentes haue a certayne symylytude of those thynges wherof they are sacramentes. And for thys symylytude for the moste parte, they take the names of the verye thynges. Blessed be God which hathe so clearelye dyscussed this matter by thys faythfull Father. Notwithstondynge he doth yet expresse it more playnelye sayēg: After a certayne maner the sacrament of Christes bodye is Christes bodye. Beholde deare bretherne he sayeth, after a certayne maner the sacramēt is Christes bodye. And by that you maye soone knowe that he neuer mēte that it shulde be hys verye naturall bodye in dede, but onelye a token and memoryall to keape in memorye the death of hys bodye, and so to nouryshe our fayth. Besydes that, hys symylytude which he after allegeth of Baptyme, doth througlye expoūde this matter, for (sayeth he) the Apostle sayeth not, we sygnyfye buryenge: but he sayeth, we are buryed, & yet in dede the Baptyme doth but sygnyfye it. And therevpon .S. Austen addeth, that he called the sacrament of so greate a thynge euen with the name of the verye thynge it selfe. And lykewyse it is in our sacrament. Fynallye to be shorte, I wyll passe ouer many places which I haue gathered out of this holye father, and wyll towche but this one more. Saynte Austē sayeth. |Augusti cōtr. adamantū.| Non enim Dominus dubitauit dicere, Hoc est corpus meum, cum daret signum corporis sui. Et in eoden capite exponit. Sic est enim sanguis anima, quomodo petra erat Christus, nec tamen petra (ait) significabat Christū, sed ait petra erat Christus. That is to saye: The lorde doubted not to saye, this is my bodye, whē he gaue a sygne of hys bodye. And after in the same chapyter he expoundeth it. For trulye so the bloode is the soule, as Christe was the stone. And yet the Apostle sayeth not, the stone ded sygnyfye Christ, but he sayeth the stone was Christ.
Here S. Austen sayeth playnelye, that Christe called the sygne of hys bodye, his bodye, and in this chapyter doth compare these thre textes of scrypture, this is my bodye, the bloode is the soule, and Christe was the stone: And declareth them to be one phrase, and to be expounded after one fashyō. Now is there no mā so madde, as to saye, that Christe was a naturall stone (excepte he be a naturall foole) whose Judgemēt we neade not greately to regarde. Therefore we may well cōclude that the sacrament is not his naturall bodye, but is called his bodye, for a symylytude that it hath, wherin it sygnyfyeth & representeth his bodye. And that the sacramēt of so greate a thynge is called euē with the name of the very thynge it selfe. As s. Austē sayde. Thys were prove ynough to conclude that all the olde Fathers ded holde the same opynyon, for who wolde ones surmyse (seynge we haue. S. Austen so playne for vs which is the cheafest amonge thē all) who wolde ones surmyse I say, that they dyssented in thys greate matter frō the other faythfull fathers, or they from hym? Neuerthelesse I dare not lett hym stōde post alone, leaste ye dyspyse hym. And therfore I wyll shewe you the mynde of certayne other also: and fyrste of hys master Saynt Ambrose.
|Ambrosi super illud mortē domini annuncia.| S. Ambrose wrytynge vpon the Epystle of Paule to the Corynthyans in the .xi. Chapter sayeth. Quia enim morte Domini liberati sumus, huius rei in edēdo & potādo, carnem & sanguinem qui pro nobis oblata sunt, significamus. That is to saye: because we be delyuered by the death of the Lorde, in eatynge and drynkynge of thys thynge, meanynge of the Sacrament, we sygnyfye the fleshe and bloode which were offered for vs. Here doth S. Ambrose saye ynough, yf men were not sophysters, but wolde be content with reason. For he sayeth that in eatynge and drynkynge the Sacramēt of Christes bodye, we sygnyfye or represent the fleshe and bloode of our sauyoure Iesus. Notwithstondynge be cause you are so slyppery, we shall bynde you a lytle better by thys mās wordes.
|Ambrosi de sacra.| S. Ambrose sayeth. Sed forte dices speciem sanguinis non uideo, sed habet similitudinem. Sicut enim mortis similitudinem sumpsisti, ita etiam similitudinem preciosi sanguinis bibis. That is to saye. But perauenture thou wylte saye, I see no apperaunce of bloode, but it hathe a symylytude. For euē as thou haste taken the symylytude of death, euen so thou drynkest the symylytude of the precyous bloode. Here maye ye see by the conferrynge of these two Sacramentes, what .S. Ambrose iudged of it. For he sayeth, euen as thou haste taken a symylytude of hys death in the sacramēt of baptyme, so doste thou drynke a symylytude of hys precyouse bloode in the Sacrament of the Aulter. And yet as S. Austen sayde before, the Apostle sayeth, not we sygnyfye buryenge, but sayeth, we are buryed. And lykewyse here Christe sayde, not this sygnyfyeth my bodye, but this is my bodye, callynge the Sacrament, a sygne, token, and memoryall of so greate a thynge, euen with the name of the verye thynge it selfe. Thus doth S. Ambrose choke our sophysters.
Neuerthelesse I wyll alleage one place more out of Ambrose, where he sayeth. |Ambrosi lib .3. de sacramē.| Dicit sacerdos fac nobis hanc oblationē scriptam rationabilem, quod est figura corporis Domini nostri Iesu Christi. That is: the Preste sayeth, make vs this oblacyon acceptable. & ce. For it is a fygure of the bodye of our Lorde Iesus Chryst. Here he calleth it playnelye a fygure of Christes bodye, which thynge you can not avoyde. Therfore geue prayse vnto God and lette hys trouth sprede, which is so playnelye testyfyed, by these holye Fathers. Now lette vs see what S. Hierome sayeth.
|Hieronimus super eccle.| Saynte Hierome wrytynge vpon Ecclesiastes sayeth on this maner. Caro Domini uerus cibus est, & sanguis eius uerus potus est, hoc solum habemus in presenti sæculo bonum, si uescamur carne eius cruoreque potemur, nō solum in misterio, sed etiam in scripturarum lectione, uerus enim cibus est & potus, qui ex uerbo Dei sumitur scientia scripturarum. That is to saye: the fleshe of the lorde is verye meate, and his bloode verye drynke. This is onelye the pleasure or profytte that we haue in this worlde, that we maye eate hys fleshe and drynke his bloode, not onely in a mysterye, but also in the readynge of scryptures. For it is very meate and drynke, which is taken out of Godes worde, by the knowelege of scryptures. Here maye ye see S. Hieroms mynde in fewe wordes. For fyrste he sayeth that we eate hys fleshe and drynke hys bloode in a mysterye, whiche is the sacrament of hys remembraunce, and memoryall of his passyon. And after he addeth, that we eate his fleshe ād drynke hys bloode in the readynge ād knowelege of scriptures, ād calleth that very meate ād very drynke. And yet I am sure ye are not so grosse, as to thynke that the letters whiche you reade are tourned in to naturall fleshe ād blode. And lykewyse it is not necessarye that the breade shulde be tourned in to hys bodye, no more than the letters in scrypture are tourned in to his fleshe. And neuerthelesse through faythe we may as well eate hys bodye in receyuynge of the sacrament, as eate hys fleshe in readynge of the letters of the scrypture. Besydes that S. Hierome calleth the vnsterstōdynge of the scripture verye meate and very drynke: whiche you muste neades vnderstonde in a mysterye and spyrituall sense. For it is no materyall meate nor drynke that is receyued with the mouth and teth, but it is spyrytuall meate and drynke, and is so called for a symylytude and propertye: because that as meate and drynke counforte the bodye and outwarde man, so doth the readynge and knowelege of scrypture conforte the soule and inwarde man. And lykewyse it is of Christes bodye, whiche is called verye meate and verye drynke, whiche you muste neades vnderstonde in a mysterye or spyrytuall sense (as Saynte Hierome called it) for hys bodye is no materyall meate nor drynke that is receyued with the mouth or teth: But it is spyrytuall meate and drynke, and so called for a symilytude and propertye, because that as meate and drynke conforte the bodye, so doth the fayth in hys bodye breakynge & bloode sheadynge refreshe the soule vnto lyfe euerlastynge. We vse it customablye in our daylye speache to saye, when a chylde setteth all hys mynde and delyght vpō sporte and playe: It is meate and drynke to thys chylde to playe. And also we saye by a man that loueth well hawkynge and huntynge: It is meate and drynke to thys man to hawke and hunte. Where no man doubteth, but it is a fyguratyue speache. And therfore I wonder that they are so blynde in thys one poynte of Christes bodye. And can not also take the wordes fyguratyuelye, as these olde doctours ded. |Hieronimus super Matheum.| Agayne S. Hierome sayeth. Postquam mysticum pascha fuerat impletum & agni carnes cum apostolis comederat, assumit panem qui confortat cor hominis, & ad uerū paschæ transgreditur sacramentum, quomodo in prefiguratione eius Melchisedech uinum & panem proferens fecerat, ipse quoq; ueritatem corporis repræsentaret. That is to saye: after the mystycall Easter lābe fullfylled, and that Christe had eaten the lambes fleshe with the Apostles, he toke breade which conforteth the harte of man, and passeth to the true sacramēt of the Easter lambe: that as Melchisedech brought forthe breade and wyne fygurynge hym, so myght he lykewyse represent the truth of hys bodye. Here doth S. Hierome speake after the maner that Tertullyā ded before: that Christe with breade and wyne ded represent the truth of hys bodye. For excepte he had had a true bodye, he coulde not leaue a fygure of it nor represent it vnto vs. For a vayne thynge or fantasye can haue no fygure, nor can not be represented. As by example. How shulde a mā make a fygure of hys dreame or represent it vnto our memorye? But Christ hath lefte vs a fygure and representacyon of hys bodye in breade and wyne: therfore it foloweth that he had a true bodye. And that this was .S. Hieroms mynde doth manefestly appeare by the wordes of Bede, which doth more copyouslye sette out this sayenge of Hierome. |Beda super Luc.| For he wryteth on this maner. Finitis paschæ ueteris solennijs que in commemorationē antiquæ de ægypto liberationis agebantur, transit ad nouū quod in suæ redemptionis memoriā ecclesia frequētare desiderat, ut uidelicet pro carne agni uel sanguine suo, carnis sanguinisq; sacramentum in panis ac uini figura substituens, ipsum se esse monstraret cui iurauit Dominus. Tu es sacerdos in æternum secundum ordinem Melchisedech. Frangit autem ipse panem quem porrigit, ut ostendat corporis sui fractionem non sine sua sponte futuram. Similiter & calicem postquam cœna uit dedit eis. Quia ergo panis carnē cōfirmat, uinum uero sanguinē operatur in carne, hic ad corpus Christi mystice, illud refertur ad sanguinem. That is to saye. After the solempnyte of the olde Easter lambe was fynyshed, which was obserued in the remēbraunce of the olde delyueraūce out of Egypte, he goth vnto the newe which the churche gladlye obserueth in the remēbraunce of hys redempcyon, that he in the steade of the fleshe and bloode of the lambe, myght instytute and ordeyne the sacramēt of hys fleshe and bloode in the fygure of breade and wyne, and so declare hym selfe to be the same vnto whome the Lorde sware, thou arte a perpetuall Preste after the order of Melchisedech. And he hym selfe brake the breade which he gaue, to shewe that the breakynge of hys bodye shulde not be done without hys owne wyll. And lykewyse he gaue them the cuppe after he had supped. And because breade doth confyrme or strengthen the fleshe, and wyne worketh bloode in the fleshe, therfore is the breade mystycallye referred vnto the bodye of Christe, and the wyne referred vnto hys bloode.
Here maye you note, fyrste that as the lambe was a remembraunce of theyr delyueraunce out of Egipte (and yet the lābe delyuered them not) so is the sacrament a remembraunce of our redemptyon, and yet the sacrament redeamed vs not. Besydes that he sayeth, that Christ in the steade of the fleshe and bloode of the lambe, ded instytute the sacrament of hys fleshe and bloode in fygure of breade and wyne.
Marke well, he sayeth not that in the steade of lambes fleshe and bloode he ded instytute hys owne fleshe and bloode, but sayeth that he ded instytute the sacrament of hys fleshe and bloode. What thynge is a sacrament? Verelye it is the sygne of an holye thynge, and there is no dyference betwene a sygne and a sacrament, but that the sygne is referred vnto a worldlye thynge, and a Sacrament vnto a spyrytuall or holye thynge.
|Ad Marcellum.| As Saynte Austen sayeth. Signa cum ad res diuinas pertinent, sacramenta appellantur. That is to saye: sygnes when they partayne vnto godlye thynges are called sacramentes.
Therfore when Bede sayeth, that they ded instytute the Sacrament of hys fleshe and bloode in the fygure of breade and wyne, it is as moche to saye (by Saynte Austens dyffynycyon) as that he ded instytute the fygure of hys holye fleshe and bloode in the fygure of breade and wyne, that is to saye: that breade and wyne shulde be the fygure and sygne representynge hys most blessed holye fleshe and bloode vnto vs, for a perpetuall remēbraunce. And afterwarde he declared the propertye for whiche the breade is called the bodye ād the wyne the bloode: savynge he speaketh not so darkelye as I now do, but playnelye sayeth that the breade is mystycallye referred vnto the bodye of Christe: because that as breade doth strēgthē the fleshe, so Christes bodye which is fygured by the breade, doth strēgthen the soule through fayth in hys death. And so doth he clearlye proue my purpose.
|Crisost. super Matth.| Now lette vs see what Chrisostome sayeth, whiche shall descrybe vs the fayth of the olde Grecyans, who had not loste the true fayth, howsoeuer the wordle go now adayes. Chrisostome sayeth in thys maner. Si enim mortuus Iesus nō est cuius signum & simbolū hoc sacrificū est? uides quantum ei studium fuerit ut semper memoria teneamus pro nobis ipsum mortuum fuisse. That is to saye: Yf Iesus haue not dyed, whose memoryall and sygne is this sacryfyce? Thou seest what dylygence he gaue that we shulde cōtynuallye keape in memorye that he dyed for vs. Here you maye see that Chrisostome calleth the sacramet symbolum et signum: That is to saye, a memoryall and sygne of Christ, and that it was instytute to keape hys death in perpetuall remembraunce. But of one thynge thou muste be ware or els thou arte deceyued, he calleth it also a sacryfyce, and there thou muste wyselye vnderstonde hym. |Sacryfyce.| For yf it were the sacryfyce of Christes bodye, then muste Christes bodye be slayne agayne, which thynge God forbyd. And therfore thou muste vnderstōde hym whē he calleth it a sacryfyce, that he meaneth it to be a remēbraunce of that holye sacryfyce, where Christes bodye was offered on the crosse ones for all. For he can be sacryfyced no more, seynge he is immortall. Notwithstondynge our Prelates wyll here note me of presumptiō, that I dare be so bolde to expounde hys mynde on this fashyon. For in dede they take hym otherwyse, and thynke that it is a verye sacryfyce. And therfore I wyll brynge one other texte, where Chrisostome shall expounde hym selfe. Chrisostome sayeth: |Crisost. ad Hebre. hom. 17.| Nonne per singulos dies offerrimus? offerrimus qdem, sed ad recordationem mortis eius facientes. Hoc autem sacrificium (sicut pontifex) sed id ipsum semper facimus: imo recordationē sacrificij. That is to saye: do we not daylye offer or do sacryfyce: yes suerlye. But we do it for the remembraunce of hys death, for this sacryfyce is as an example of that we offer, not an other sacryfyce (as the Byshopp in the olde lawe ded) but euer the same: yea rather a remembraunce of the sacryfyce. Fyrste he sayeth that they daylye do sacryfyce, but it is in remembraunce of Christes death. Then he sayeth that the sacryfyce is an example of that. Thyrdlye he sayeth, that they offer not an other sacryfyce (that is to saye an oxe or a gotte) as the Byshoppes of the olde lawe, but euer the same.
Marke thys poynte: For though it seame at the fyrste syght to make wyth them, yet doth yt make so derectelye agaynste them, that they shall neuer be able to avoyde it. Chrisostome sayeth, they do not offer an other sacryfyce as the Bysshoppes ded, but euer the same. They offer other breade and wyne thys daye, then they ded yesterdaye: they shall saye an other Masse to morowe, then they ded this daye.
Now yf thys breade and wyne or the Masse be a sacryfyce, then do they offer an other sacryfyce, as well as the Byshoppes of the olde Lawe. For thys sacryfyce ded sygnyfye that Christe shulde come and shedde hys bloode, as well as the breade, wyne, and Masse, do represent that he hath done it in dede. And therfore yf it be a sacryfyce, then do they offer an other sacryfyce, representynge hys passyon, as well as the Byshoppe of the olde Lawe. But that doth Chrisostome denye, and sayeth that they offer euerye daye the same. What same? Verelye euen the same that was done and sacryfyced when Christe shedde hys bloode. In thys sacryfyce is Christe euerye daye bounde and buffetted, and ledde from Anna to Cayphas: he is brought to Pylate and condempned; he is scourged ād crowned with thorne, and nayled on the crosse, and hys harte opened with a spere, and so sheadeth hys bloode for our redempcyon. Why Chrisostome, and do you the selfe same sacryfyce euerye daye? Yea verelye. Then why doth Saynte Paule saye to the Romaynes |Rom. 6.| in the syxte Chapter: that Christe is rysen from death, and dyeth no more? Yf he dye no more, how do you daylye crucyfye hym? For sothe Paule sayeth trouthe.
For we do it not actuallye in dede, but onelye in a mysterye. And yet we saye, that we do sacryfyce hym, and that thys is hys sacryfyce, for the celebracyon of the Sacrament and memorye of the passyon whiche we keape: and for thys cause it hath the name of the thynge that it doth represente and sygnyfye. And therfore, as Saynte Austen declareth a fore ad Bonifacium, |Augustinus ad Bonifacium.| I expounde my mynde by a rethorycall correctyon and saye, Imo recordationem sacrificij. That is to saye: Yea rather the remembraunce, and fygure of the sacryfyce.
Graunde mercyes good Chrisostome, now do I perceyue the pyth of thys matter: euen as the Masse is the verye death and passyon of Christe, so is it a sacryfyce. Now it doth but onelye represente the verye death and passyon of Christe, therfore it doth folowe that the Masse in verye dede doth but onely represente a sacryfyce. And yet not withstandynge manye tymes it is called a sacryfyce of holye doctours, and hathe the name of the verye same thynge that it doth represent ād sygnyfye. And euen so we maye saye of this sacrament, that as the Masse is the verye sacryfyce and passyon of Christ, so is the sacrament hys verye bodye and sacryfyce that is offered. Nowe the Masse doth but onely represent and sygnyfye the passyon: so the sacrament doth but onelye represent and sygnyfye the bodye and very sacryfyce ones offred for euer. Notwithstondynge manye tymes the Masse is called the bodye and a sacryfyce. And hath the name of the verye same thynge that it doth represent and sygnyfye.
|Crisostome.| Furthermore Chrisostome sayeth. Ipse quos; bibitex eo, ne auditis uerbis illis dicerēt. Quid igitur sanguinem bibimus & carnem commedimus? ac ideo perturbarentur, nam & quando prius de his uerba fecit, etiam uerbis ipsius offendabantur. Ne igitur tunc id quoque accideret, primus ipse hoc fecit, ut ad communionem misteriorum induceret intrepidam. That ys to saye: he also dranke of yt, leaste when they harde hys wordes, they shulde saye: why do we than drynke bloode and eate fleshe? and so shulde be troubled. For when he spake before of those thynges, they were offended wyth hys wordes. And because that shulde not now also chaunce, he hym selfe dranke fyrst of yt, that he myght cause thē to come without feare to the partakynge of those mysteryes. Here Chrisostome noteth that Christe dranke of yt, to drawe them from the grosse vnderstōdynge of hys wordes, and by hys drynkynge to testyfye vnto them, that yt was not hys naturall fleshe in dede, but onely memoryalles and representacyons of hys bodye and bloode. And therfore he calleth them mysteryes: that is to saye sacramentes. For in thys place a sacramente ād a mysterye ys all one thynge. Notwithstondynge some tyme thys worde mysterye ys more common ād large in signyfyenge then this worde sacrament. And I haue shewed you before, that a sacrament ys the sygne of an holy thynge, and not the thynge it selfe that yt representeth: albeit somtyme yt beare the name of the verye thynge yt selfe. As the Image of .S. Peter ys not saynt Peter hym selfe, and yet yt beareth hys name.
Chrisostome sayeth. Caro non prodest quicquam: hoc est, secundum spiritum uerba mea audienda sunt. Qui secundum carnem audit, nihil lucratur, nihil utilitatis accipit. Quid est autem carnaliter intelligere: simpliciter ut res dicuntur, neque aliud quippiam excogitare. Misteria omnia interioribus oculis consideranda, hoc est spiritualiter. That is to saye. The fleshe profyteth nothynge, that is: my wordes muste be vnderstonde after the spiryte, he that vnderstondeth them after the fleshe wynneth nothynge, nor taketh no profytte. What meaneth this, to vnderstonde after the fleshe or carnallye? Verelye to take the thynges symplye as they are spoken, and to thynke none other thynge. All mysteryes or sacramentes muste be consydered with the inwarde eyes, that is to saye: spyrytuallye.
And after he expoundeth hym selfe on this maner. Interiores autem oculi ut panem uiderint, creaturas transuolant, & non de illo pane a pistore cocto cogitant: sed de eo qui dixit se panem uitæ, qui per mysticum panem significatur. That is to saye. The inwarde eyes as soone as they see the breade, they passe ouer the creatures, ād thynke not of that breade which is baken of the baker, but of hym that called hym selfe the breade of lyfe, which is sygnyfyed by the mystycall or sacramētall breade. Wolde you haue hym saye any more? he telleth you playne, that Christe which ys the very breade of lyfe, ys sygnyfyed by this sacramentall breade. And that is the thynge which our Byshoppes so fleshlye denye now adayes, which thynge yet you maye see, the olde Fathers cōclude with one assente. Notwythstōdynge yet I wyll alleage mo olde doctours, so that from hence forthe they maye be a shamed to call yt newe learnynge. Fulgentius sayeth. |Fulgentius 2. libro de fide.| In illis enim carnalibus (tèpore legis) uictunis, significacio suit carnis Christi quam pro pctis nostris & ipse sine pctō fuerat oblaturus, & sanguinis quem erat effusurus in remissionè peccarorum nostrorum. In isto autè sacrificio gratiarum actio atq; cōmemoracio est carnis Christi quam pro nobis obtulit, & sanguinis quē pro nobis idē Deus effudit. That is to saye. In these carnall sacrifyces in the tyme of the lawe, was a sygnyficacyon of the fleshe of Christe, which he without synne, shuld offer for our synnes, ād of the bloode which he shulde shedde out in remyssyon of our synnes. But this sacryfyce is a thankes geuynge ād remembraūce of the fleshe of Christe which he offered for vs, and of the bloode which the same God shedde for vs. Fyrste note that he calleth yt a sacryfyce, which notwithstōdyng is but a remēbraūce of that sacryfyce offered on the crosse ones for all: Thā he playnely calleth yt a thankes geuynge, and remembraunce of Christes very fleshe and bloode: and so concludeth with vs. Neuerthelesse because sophysters wolde soone thynke to avoyde thys place, I wyll alleage one other sayenge of the same autoure which they shall neuer be able to avoyde.
|Fulgen.| ¶ Fulgentius sayeth, as Haymo testyfyeth. Hic calix nouum testamentum est, id est, hic calix quem uobis trado, nouum testamentum significat. That is to saye. Thys cuppe or chalyce is the newe testament: That is: thys cuppe or chalyce which I delyuer you doth sygnyfye the newe testament. In this place he doth playnelye shewe hys mynde, which cā not be avoyded. For euen as the cuppe is the newe testament, so ys the breade the bodye. Nowe the cuppe dothe but sygnyfy the new testament. And therfore I may conclude, that the breade doth but sygnyfye the bodye.
|Eusebius.| Eusebius sayeth. Quia corpus assumptum ablaturus erat ex oculis nostris & syderibus allaturus, necessarium erat ut uobis in hac die sacramentum corporis & sanguinis consecraret, ut coleretur iugiter per mysterium quod semel offerebatur in precium. That is to saye: Because he wolde take awaye out of our eyes the bodye that he toke, and carye yt in to heauen, it was necessarye that in thys tyme he shulde consecrate to vs the sacramēte of hys bodye ād bloode: that that which was ones offered for the pryce of our redemptyon, myght contynuallye be honoured through the mysterye.
|Consecrate.| To consecrate a thynge, is to applye it vnto an holye vse. Here you maye see that he calleth yt the sacrament of hys bodye and bloode, which bodye is caryed vp into heauen. And also he calleth it a mysterye, which is ynough for them that wyll see.
|Druthmarius.| Also Druthmarius expoundeth these wordes, thys is my bodye on this maner: Hoc est corpus meum in mysterio. That is to saye: thys is my bodye in a mysterye. I thynke you knowe what a mysterye meaneth. Christe is crucyfyed euery daye in a mysterye: that is to saye: euery daye hys death ys represented by the sacramentes of remembraunce. The Masse is Christes passyon in a mysterye: that is to saye: the Masse doth represente hys passyon and keapeth yt in our memorye. The breade ys Christes bodye in a mysterye: that is to saye: it representeth hys body that was broken for vs, and keapeth yt in our remēbraunce.
You haue harde already the mynde of the doctours, how the sacrament ys Christes bodye. And now I shall shewe you how the sacrament ys our bodye, which doth not a lytle healpe to the vnderstōdynge of these wordes whych are in controversye. The sacramēt of the Aulter ys our bodye as well as it is Christes bodye. And euē as it is our bodye, so yt is Christes. But there is no man that cā saye that it is our naturall bodye in dede, but onely a fygure, sygne, memoryall, or represētacyon of our bodye: Wherfore yt must also folowe, that it is but onely a fygure, sygne, memoryall or represētaciō of Christes bodye. The fyrste parte of this argument maye thus be proued. |Augustino in sermone ad infantes.| S. Austen wrytynge in a sermon sayeth on this maner. Corpus ergo Christi si uultis intelligere, apostolum audite dicentem. Vos estis corpus christi & mēbra .1. Cor. 12. Si ergo estis corpus christi & membra, mysteriū uestrumque in mensa Domini positū est, mysteriū Domini accipitis, ad id quod estis. Amē respōdetis et respōdēdo subscribitis. That is to saye: Yf you wyll vnderstōde the bodye of Christe, here the Apostle which sayeth. We are the bodye of Christe and mēbres .1. Cor. 12. Therfore yf ye be the bodye of Christe and membres, your mysterye is put vpon the Lordes table, ye receyue the mysterye of the Lorde, vnto that you are you answer Amē. And in answerynge subscrybe vnto yt. Here you maye see that the sacramēt ys also our body, ād yet is not our naturall body, but onely our body in a mysterye, that is to saye: a fygure sygne, memoryall, or represētacyō of our body. For as the breade ys made of many graynes or cornes, so we (though we be manye) are one breade ād one bodye. And for this propertye and symylitude it is called our bodye, and beareth the name of the verye thynge which yt doth represēt & sygnyfy. Agayne s. Austē sayth. |Augusti in ser. de sacra feria Pasche.| Quia Christus passy est pro nobis, cŏmēdauit nobis in isto sacramēto corpus & sanguinem suum, quod etiam fecit & nos ipsos. Nam & nos ipsius corpus facti sumus, & per misericordiā ipsius quod accipimus nos sumus. Et postea dicit. Iam in nomine Christi tanquam ad calicem Domini uenistis, ibi nos estis in mensa & ibi uos estis in calice. That is, because Christ hath suffered for vs, he hath betakē vnto vs in thys sacramēt hys bodye and bloode, which he hath also made euen our selfes. For we also are made hys bodye, and by his mercye we are euē the same thynge that we receyue. And after he sayeth. Now in the name of Christe ye are come, as a man wolde saye, to the chalyce of the Lorde: there are ye vpon the table, and there are ye in the chalyce. Here you maye see, that the sacrament is our bodye. And yet yt is not our naturall bodye, but onelye in a mysterye, as it is before sayde.
|Augusti de sacra feria pasche.| Furthermore S. Austen sayeth. Hunc itaq; cibŭ & potū societatē uult intelligi corporis & mēbrorū suorū quod est sācta ecclesia in predestinatis & uocatis & iustificatis & glorificatis sanctis & fidelibus eius. Huius rei sacramentum alicubi quotidie, alicubi certis interuallis dierum in dominico preparatur, & de mensa Domini sumitur, quibusdà ad uitam, quibusdam ad exitium. Res uero ipsa cuius est sacramentum, est omni homini ad uitam, nulli ad exitium, quicumque eius particeps fuerit. That is to saye: he wyll that this meate and drynke shulde be vnderstōde to be the felowshyp of hys bodye and membres, which ys the holy churche in hys predestynate and called and iustyfyed and gloryfyed sayntes and faythfull. The sacrament of thys thynge ys prepared in some place daylye, and in some place at certayne appoynted dayes, as vpon the sondaye. And yt is receyued at the table of the Lorde, of some vnto lyfe, and of some vnto destruccyō. But the thynge yt selfe whose sacrament thys ys, is receyued of all men vnto lyfe, and of no mā vnto destruccyon, whosoeuer is partaker of yt. Here doth S. Austen fyrste saye, that this sacrament ys the felowshyppe of his bodye and membres which are we. And yet is not our naturall bodye, as ys before sayde. And then he sayeth, that the sacrament of thys thynge ys receyued of some vnto lyfe and saluacyon, and of some vnto death and dampnacyon. For both faythfull and vnfaythfull maye receyue the sacramēt. And after he sayeth, that the thynge yt selfe whose sacrament yt ys, is receyued of all men vnto lyfe, and of no man vnto destruccyon, who so euer ys partaker of yt. And of thys sayenge yt muste neades folowe, that onely the faythfull eate Christes bodye, and the vnfaythfull eate hym not. For he is receyued of no mā vnto destruccyon. And of thys yt muste also folowe that the sacrament ys not Christes bodye in dede, but onelye in a mysterye. For yf the sacrament were hys naturall bodye, then shulde yt folowe, that the vnfaythfull shulde receyue hys bodye. Which is contrarye to the mynde of saynt Austen, and agaynst all truth. Thus haue we suffycyentlye proued the fyrste parte of our argumēte, that the sacrament is our bodye, as well as yt is Christes. And nowe wyll I proue the secōde parte more playnely (although yt be ynough declared already, to them that haue eares) that euen as yt is our bodye so it is Christes.
Fyrste you shall vnderstonde that in the wyne, which ys called Christes bloode, is admyxed water, which doth sygnyfye the people that are redeamed with hys bloode: so that the heade which is Christe, ys not without hys bodye which is the faythfull people, nor the bodye without hys heade. Now yf the wyne when it is consecrated, be tourned bodelye in to Christes bloode, then is it also necessarye that the water which is admyxed be bodelye tourned in to the bloode of the faythfull people. For where as is one cōsecracion muste folowe one operacyō. And where as is lyke reason, there muste folowe lyke mysterye. But what so euer is sygnyfyed by the water as cōcernynge the faythfull people, is taken spirytually. Therfore whatsoever is spokē of the bloode in the wyne, muste also neades be taken spyrytuallye. This reason is not myne, but it is made by one Bartrame |Bartrame.| vpō a .700. yeares sens, when this matter was fyrste in dysputacyon. Whervpō at the instaunce of greate Charles the Emperoure, he made a boke professynge euen the same thynge that I do, and proueth by the olde doctours & faythfull fathers, that the sacrament is Christes bodye in a mysterye, that is to saye: a sygne, figure, or memoryall of hys bodye, whiche was broken for vs, and not hys naturall bodye. And therfore that doctryne is newe which otherwyse teacheth, and not myne, which is not myne, but the doctryne of Christe and of the olde fathers of Christes churche, tyll Antichriste began to sytte and reigne in the temple of God.
|Cyprianus ad Cecilium.| Besydes that Cypriane sayeth, that the people is ānexed in the sacramēt through the myxture of water. Therfor I mervell moche that they are so cōtēcyous ād wyll not see, that as the water is the people, so the wyne ys Christes bloode, that is to saye: in a mysterye, because yt represēteth Christes bloode, as the water doth the people. Furthermore Eusebius sayth. |Eusebius.| Dū in sacramētis uino aqua miscetur, Christo fidelis populus incorporatur & iūgitur & quadā ei copula perfecta charitatis unitur. That is to saye: whyles in the sacrament water is admyxte with the wyne, the faythfull people is incorporate ād Ioyned with Christ, ād is made one with him, with a certayne knotte of perfecte charyte. Now where he sayeth, that we are Ioyned ād incorporated with Christe, what fondnes were it to cōtēde, syth we are there onelye in a mysterye, ād not naturallye. To cōtēde I say with suche pertynacyte that his naturall bodye must be there: ād not rather that he is Ioyned with vs, as we are Ioyned with hym, ād both in a mysterye, by the knotte of perfecte charyte. |More.| ❧ The yōge man perceyueth well ynough that an allegory vsed in some place is not a cause suffycyēt to leaue the proper sygnyfycacyōs of Godes worde in euery other place ād seke an allegorye, ād forsake the playne cōmō sence. For he cōfesseth that he wold not so do saue for necessyte: because (as he sayeth) that the cōmon lytterall sence is impossyble. For the thynge he sayeth that is mente therbye can not be true. That is to saye: that the verye bodye of Christe can be in the sacrament, because the sacrament ys in many dyuerse places at ones, and was at the maundye: that is to wete, in the handes of Christe ād in everye of hys Apostles mouthes. And at that tyme yt was not gloryfyed. And thē he sayeth that Christes bodye not beynge gloryfyed, could no more be in two places at ones than hys owne cā. And yet he goth after furder, ād sayeth, no more yt can whan yt is gloryfyed also. And that he proueth by the sayenge of S. Austen whose wordes be, that the body with the which Christ arose muste be in one place. &c.
|Fryth.| ¶ Hetherto hath master More reasoned reasonablye: but now he begynneth to declyne from the dygnyte of dyuynyte into the dyrty dregges of vayne sophystry. For where I saye that I muste of necessyte seake an allegorye, because the lytterall sence is impossyble and can not be true, meanynge that it can not stonde with the processe of holy scrypture, but that other textes do of necessyte constrayne me to cōstrue yt spyrytuallye. There catcheth he thys worde, can, and thys worde impossyble, and wolde make men beleue that I mente, yt coulde not be true because reason can not reache yt, but thynketh it impossyble. And there he triūpheth before the vyctorye, and wolde knowe what artycle of our fayth I coulde assygne, in which reason shall not dryue awaye the strengthe of my proue, and make me leaue the lytterall sence wherin my profe shulde stonde, and sende me to seake an allegorye that myght stonde wyth reason, and dryue awaye the fayth. But now deare bretherne, seynge I speake not of the impossybylyte of reason, but of the impossybylyte to stōde with other textes of scripture, ye maye see that this royall reasō is not worth a ryshe. Then wolde he fayne knowe the place where S. Austen so sayeth, which thyng although, yt were harde for me to tell, syth I haue not hys bokes to loke for it, yet I thanke God my memorye is not so bad, but I can shewe hym where he shall fynde yt. And because I thynke that he is more accustomed to the Popes lawes then to S. Austens workes, syth he is become the prelates proctoure and patrone: I saye he shall not fayle but fynde it in his lawes de consecracione. And where as he wolde wreste the wordes of S. Austē, which sayeth that the bodye in which Christ arose muste neades be in one place: sayēge, that he myght meane not that hys body myght not be in dyuerse places at ones, but that yt muste be in one place, that is to saye: in some one place or other. He speaketh (sayth master More) nothynge of the sacrament, nor sayeth not that his bodye with which he rose muste nedes be in one place, & that it cā by no possybylyte be in any mo. Thys seameth to some a goodly glose, ād yet yt shall proue but a vayne evasyon. For yf a mā wolde saye that the Kynges graces body muste be in one place, and then a nother wolde expounde that (notwithstondynge hys wordes) hys graces bodye myght be in two places at ones, I thynke men myght soone Iudge that he delyted to delaye, ād myght saye, what neade he to determyne, that he muste be in one place excepte he thought in dede, that he myght be in no mo but onely one; And though mē myght so argue vpō other mens wordes, yet of saynte Austēs wordes thys must neades folowe, for he bryngeth them in (as God wolde) by a contrarye antithesis sayenge. |Ad Hieronimū.| Corpus in quo resurrexit in uno loco esse oportet, ueritas autem eius ubique diffusa est. That is to saye: hys bodye wherin he rose must be in one place, but hys truth ys dyspersed in all places. Where he playnelye concludeth by the contrarye antithesis, that as hys truth ys dyspersed in all places, so muste hys bodye neades be in one place onelye. As by example, yf a mā shulde saye. The Kynges graces bodye muste neades be in one place, but hys power is through out hys Realme. Where no man doubteth, but that in sayenge one place, he meaneth one place onelye: And therfore though in some place that worde, muste, doth not sygnyfye suche a necessyte as excludeth all possybylyte, yet in this place yt doth so sygnyfye, as the contrarye antithesis doth evydently expresse.
And where ye saye, that he speaketh no thynge of the sacrament, I wolde ye shulde stycke styll to that sayenge. For this is playne, that he speaketh of hys naturall bodye. And therfore yf he speake not of the sacrament, then haue you cōcluded that the sacramēte is not hys naturall bodye: the contrarye wherof you wolde haue men beleue. Thus haue I shewed evydence, bothe where he shall fynde the wordes of S. Austen and also that I haue ryght alleaged them.
Notwytstondynge syth he maketh so moche of hys paynted sheth, I shall alleage hym more auctorytes that Christes naturall bodye is in one place onely. Which thynge proued doth vtterly conclude that the sacrament ys not hys naturall bodye, but onelye a memoryall representynge the same. And fyrste let vs see S. Austēs mynde.
|August. ad Dardanium.| S. Austen wrytynge vnto Dardanius doth playnly proue that the naturall body of Christe muste neades be in one place onelye, and also that hys soule can be but in one place at ones. The occasyon of hys Epystle is this: Dardanius ded wryte vnto S. Austen for the exposycyon of those wordes that Christe spake vnto the thefe sayenge: This daye shalt thou be with me in paradyse: & wyste not how he shulde vnderstonde yt, whether Christe mēte that the thefe shulde be in paradyse with Christes soule, or with hys bodye, or with hys Godhed. Thervpon S. Austen wryteth that as towchynge Christes bodye, that daye it was in the sepulchre. And sayeth that it was not paradyse, although it were in a gardē that he was buryed. For Christe (he sayeth) mēt of a place of Ioye. And that was not (sayeth S. Austen) in hys sepulchre. And as for Christes soule, yt was that daye in hell. And no mā wyll saye, that paradyse was there. Wherfore (sayeth Austen) the texte muste neades be vnderstonde, that Christ spake yt of hys godhed. Now marke thys argumēt of S. Austen, and ye shall see my purpose playnelye proued. For seynge he expoundeth thys texte vpō Christes Godhed, because hys māhod as towchynge the body was in the graue, and as towchynge hys soule was in hell: you may soone perceyue that Austē thought, that whyls hys body was in the graue, yt was not in paradyse also: & because hys soule was in hell, yt coulde not be in paradyse also. And therfor he verefyeth the texte vpon hys dyuynyte. For yf he had thought that Christes bodye or soule myght haue bene in dyuerse places at ones, he wolde not haue sayde, that the texte must neades be vnderstōde of his dyuynyte, but it myght full well, yea and moche better haue bene vnderstōde of hys manhode. Marke well thys texte whiche doth determyne the doubt of this matter. Notwithstondynge the faythfull Father leaueth not the matter on thys fashyō, but also taketh a waye soche fonde ymagynacyons as wolde cause mē to surmyse, that Christes bodye shulde be in mo places at ones then one. For he sayeth. Cauendum est ne ita diuinitatem astruamus hominis ut ueritatem auferamus corporis. Non est autem consequens ut quod in deo est, ita sit ubiq;. Nam & de nobis ueracißime scriptura dicit, quod in illo uiuimus, mouemur & sumus. Nec tamē sicut ille, ubiq; sumus, sed aliter homo ille in Deo, quam & aliter deus in illo homine, proprio quodam & singulari modo. Vna enim persona deus & homo est, et utrumq; est unus Christus Iesus, ubiq; per id quod deus est, in celo aūt per id quod homo. That is to saye: we muste beware that we do not so affyrme the dyuynyte of the man, that we take awaye the truth of hys bodye. For it foloweth not that the thynge whiche is in God, shulde be in euery place as God is. For the scrypture doth trulye testyfye vnto vs, that we lyue, moue, and be in hym. And yet are we not in everye place as he is. Howbeit, that man is otherwyse in God, and God otherwyse in that man by a certayne peculyer and synguler waye. For God and man is one parson, and bothe of them one Christe Iesu, whiche is in euery place in that he is God, and in heauen, in that he is man. Here Austen doth saye, that yf we shulde graunte Christe to be in all places as towchynge hys manhode, we shulde take a waye the truth of hys bodye. For though hys manhode be in God and God in hys manhode, yet it foloweth not, that it shulde be in everye place, as God is. And after he concludeth, that as towchynge hys Godhed he is in euery place, and as towchynge hys manhode, he is in heauē. What neade he to make these wordes and antithesis, but because he thought verelye that though hys Godhed were in euery place, yet his māhode was in heauen onelye.
|Augustinus ibidē.| But yet thys holye doctoure goth furder (so that they maye be ashamed of their parte) and sayeth. Secundū hominē namq; in terra erat, non in cœlo (ubi nunc est) quādo dicebat, nemo ascendet in cœlum nisi qui descendit de cœlo, filius hominis qui est in cœlo. That is to saye; as towchynge hys manhod he was in the earth and not in heauen (where he now is) when he sayde, no man ascendeth into heauē but he that descended from heauen, the sone of man whiche is in heaven. Now I truste ye wyll be content and let the truth spreade. For I am sure it is not possyble for you to avoyde it, for he sayeth, that as towchynge hys manhod he was in the earth and not in heauē, whē he spake those wordes: and so proueth that he was not in mo places at ones then onelye one place. For els yf S. Austen had thought that he coulde haue bene in mo places at ones then one wyth hys bodye, then myght he not haue sayde, that he was in earth and not in heauen. For then a mā myght soone haue deinded hym and haue sayde. Austen you can not tell, for he maye be in euery place. But they that so thynke after Austens mynde, do take awaye the truthe of hys naturall bodye, and make it a very fantastycall bodye: from the which heresye God delyuer hys faythfull. Besydes thys S. Austen doth saye. Christum Dominum nostrum unigenitum DEI suium equalem patri, eundemq; hominis filium quo maior est pater, & ubiq; totum presentem esse non dubites tanquam DEVM, & in eodem templo DEI esse uerum DEVM, & in aliena parte cœli propter corporis modum. That is to saye: Doubt not but that Christe our Lorde the onlye begottē sonne of God equall to the Father, and the same beynge the sonne of mā wherin the father is greater, is whole present in all places as to towchynge hys Godhed, and dwelleth in the same temple of God as God, ād in some place of heauen, for the condycyon of hys very bodye. Here is it euydent by .S. Austēs wordes, that as towchynge hys Godhed he is in all places. And as towchynge hys manhod, he is onelye in heauen: yea and not that onelye, but that he beynge in heauen as towchynge the measure, nature, condycyon, and qualyte of hys naturall bodye, is onelye in one certayne place in heauen, and not in many places at ones. Thus moche is proued out of Saynte Austen.
This truth is not onelye proued by S Austens auctoryte, but also by the noble clarke Fulgentius, which wryteth on this maner. Vnus idemq; homo localis ex homine, qui est Deus immensus ex patre, unus idemq; secundum humanam substantiam absens cœlo cum esset in terra, et derelinquens terram cū ascendisset in cœlum. Secundum diuinam uero immensamq; substantiam, nec cœlum dimittens cum de cœlo descendit, nec terram deserens, cum ad cœlum ascendit. Quod ipsius Domini certisisimo sermone potest cognosci, qui ut localem ostenderet suam humanitatem, dicit discipulis suis: Ascendo ad patrem meum & patrem uestrum, Deum meun & Deum uestrum. De Lazaro quoq; cum dixisset, Lazarus mortuus est, adiunxit dicens, & gaudeo propter uos (ut credatis) quoniam non eram ibi immensitatem uero suæ diuinitatis ostendens discipulis dicit: Ecce ego uobiscum sum usq; ad consummationen sæculi. Quomodo autem ascendit in cœlum nisi quia localis & uerus est homo, aut quomode adest fidelibus suis, nisi quia idem inmensus & uerus Deus est. That is to saye. The same one man is locall (that is to saye: conteyned in one place) as towchynge hys manhod, whiche is also God vnmesurable from the Father. The same one man as towchynge the substaunce of hys manhod, was absent frō heauen, whē he was in earth, and forsakynge the earth, when he ascended in to heauē, but as towchynge hys Godly ād vnmeasurable substaunce he neyther forsoke heauen whē he descēded frō heauen, nor forsoke the earth, whē he ascēded vnto heauē, which may be knowē by the moste sure worde of the Lorde, whiche to shewe hys humanyte to be locall (that is to saye: contayned in one place onelye) ded saye vnto hys dyscyples. I ascēde vnto my Father and your Father, my God and your God. Of Lazarus also when he sayde, Lazarus is ded, he sayde further. I am gladde for your sake (that you may beleue) for that I was not there. And agayne, shewynge the vnmeasurablenes of hys Godhed, he sayde vnto hys discyples. Beholde, I am with you vnto the worldes ende, how ded he ascende in to heauen, but because he is locall and a verye mā? Or howe is he present vnto hys faythfull, but because he is vnmeasurable and verye God? Here maye you conclude by the auctoryte of thys doctoure also, that Christes bodye is onelye in one place at ones. For he sayeth, that Christ as towchynge hys manhod is locall: that is to saye: contayned in one place onelye. And that he proueth by the scrypture euen of Christes owne wordes. Now yf thys be true (as my conscyence doth testyfye, how so euer other men shall Iudge) then muste it neades folowe that this naturall bodye can not be in the sacrament. And the auctorite, I am sure no man can avoyde, yt is so playne.
|More.| ❧ Now as for hys naturall reasons be not worthye the reasonynge. For fyrste that the bodye of Christe vngloryfyed coulde no more be in two places at ones then hys owne can, because he is a naturall bodye, as he is. I wyll not examyne no comparyson betwene their two bodyes: but yf Christe wolde tell me that he wolde eche of both their bodyes to be in fyftene places at ones, I wolde beleue hym, and wolde neuer aske hym whether he wolde fyrste gloryfye them or not. But I am sure gloryfyed or vngloryfyed, yf he sayde it, he is able to do it. For the matter is not impossyble to God.
|Fryth.| ¶ Truthe it is that yf Christe so sayde and in so sayenge so mente, there is no doubte, but he were able so to do. But that he in dede so grosselye mēt, ye shall neuer proue. And in dede yf he had so mēte that hys owne naturall bodye shulde haue contynued in the sacrament which is the meate of the soule through faythe, and not of the bodye by eatynge it, and maye as well be eaten through fayth, although it remayne in heauen, as yf it were here present to our mouthes: yf (I saye) he had so mente, then wolde he neuer haue geuen vs suche scriptures as he ded. For I saye that thys grosse ymagynacyon may not stonde with the processe of the scrypture which is receyued, as it shall appeare by certayne textes.
Fyrste where our sauyoure sayeth: the fleshe profyteth nothynge. The wayght of those wordes doth compell vs to vnderstonde our matter spyrytuallye. For by thys shorte sentence we are no lesse plucked from the carnall eatynge, then was Nichodemus that he shulde not ones dreame of the carnall regeneracyon, whē Christe sayde vnto hym: that whatsoeuer thynge was of the fleshe was fleshe. For this is a playne conclusyon, that whē Christe sayde the fleshe profyteth nothynge, he ment it euē of hys owne fleshe, that it coulde not profyte (as they vnderstode hym) to be eaten with the teth. Albeyt it doth moche profyte to be slayne for our redemptyon, & eaten through fayth. Which thyng we may do although hys naturall fleshe be not in the sacrament. For I maye as well beleue in hym though he be in heauen, as yf he were in earth and in the sacrament, and before myne eyes. And that Christe spake these wordes of hys owne bodye, it is playne by S. Austens wordes wrytynge vpon the same place. |Augustitract. su. 6. Joan.| And therfore he sayeth, that they muste be vnderstonde spyrytuallye, and addeth: yf thou vnderstonde them spyrytuallye, they are spyryte and lyfe. And though thou vnderstonde them carnallye, yet neuerthelesse they are spyryte and lyfe: But vnto thē, they are not spyryte and lyfe, which vnderstondest not spyrytuallye those thynges that I haue spoken.
|Athanasius. 3. li. qui dix. verb.| Also Athanasius sayeth. Spiritus est qui uiuificat, caro non prodest quicquà: uerba que ego locutus sum, spiritus sunt & uita. Nam & hoc loco utrumque de seipso dicit carnem & spiritum, & spiritum ab eo quod est secundum carnem distinxit, ut non solum uisibile, sed etiam inuisibile quod in ipso erat credentes discant, quod & ea que dicit non sunt carnalia sed spiritualia. Quod enim comedentibus suffecisset corpus, ut totius mundi alimonia fiat? Sed ea propter meminit ascensus filii hominis in cœlum ut illos a corporali cogitacione auelleret, & post hac discant carnem dictā cibum cœlestem superne uenientem & spiritualem alimoniam quam ipse det, nā quæ locutus sum (inquit) uobis spiritus sunt & uita. That is to saye: it is the spyryte that quyckeneth, the fleshe profyteth nothynge. The wordes which I speake vnto you, are spiryte and lyfe. For in this place also he meaneth both of hys owne fleshe and his owne spyryte, and he deuyded the spiryte from the fleshe: that they myght knowe through faythe not onelye the vysyble parte, but also the invysyble parte that was in hym, and also that the wordes which he spake were not carnall, but spirytuall. For what bodye shulde haue suffysed to haue bene the meate of all the worlde? And euen therfore ded he make mencyon of the ascensyon of the sonne of man in to heauen, that he myght wythdrawe them from the bodelye ymagynacyon, that they myght hereafter learne, that the fleshe was called heauēly meate which cōmeth frō a boue, & spirytuall meate which he wolde geue. For (sayeth Christe) the wordes that I haue spokē vnto you, are spiryte & lyfe. Here you maye see that Christe spake yt of his owne fleshe, & playnely that yt ded nothynge profyte as infideles ded vnderstonde hym: For els yt geueth lyfe, as yt is receyued of the faythfull in a mystery. |Bartrame.| For as Bartrame sayeth, in this mysterye of the bodye and bloode, is a spirytuall operacyon which geueth lyfe. Without the which operacyon those mysteryes do no thynge profytte, for surelye (sayth he) they may feade the bodye, but the soule they can not feade.
Besydes that the scrypture sayeth, that that entreth in by the mouth doth not defyle a man, for as Christe sayeth, it is caste forthe in to the drawght. And by the same reason it foloweth that it doth not sāctyfye or make a man holye. But the sacrament entreth in by the mouth: therfore yt doth folowe that (of it selfe) it doth not sāctyfye or make holye any mā. And of this texte shulde folowe two incōueniences, yf the sacramēte were the naturall bodye of Christ. Fyrste it shulde folowe that the body of Christ shulde not sāctyfye the faythfull because it ētreth in by the mouth. And agayne yt shulde folowe, that the bodye of Christe shulde be caste out in to the drawght, whych thynge is abhominable. Wherfore yt muste neades folowe, that the sacramēt cā not be his naturall bodye.
Furthermore Christ wolde not suffer that devoute womā which of loue sought hym at hys sepulchre, to touche his naturall bodye, because she lacked a poynte of faythe, & ded not counte hym to be equall with hys father. And moche more yt shall folowe that the wycked which haue no faythe nor loue towardes hym, shall not be suffered to eate hys fleshe with their teth, & swallowe yt in to their vncleane bodyes: for that were moche more then to touche hym. And yet notwithstandynge they receyue and eate the sacrament. Whervpon yt shulde folowe yf the sacrament were hys naturall bodye, that they shulde in dede eate hys bodye. Which thynge may be recoūted a blasphemye agaynste God. Moreouer Christe sayeth, he that eateth my fleshe ād drynketh my blood dwelleth in me & I in hym: Now we knowe ryght well that the wycked do eate the sacrament, ād yet neyther dwell in Christe, nor Christ in thē. Wherfore yt muste folowe that the sacramēt is not the very fleshe of Christe. And surelye I can not excuse thē of blasphemye which so dyrectlye do cōtrary Christes wordes. Howe can you avoyde these textes which Christ speaketh vnto hys dyscyples sayēge. Yet a lytel whyle am I with you. And then I departe to hym that sente me. |Ioan. 6.| And agayne it is expedyent for you that I departe. For excepte that I departe, that counforter shall not come vnto you. |Ioan. 6.| And agayne he sayeth. I forsake the worlde |Ioan. 6.| and go to my Father. And to be shorte, he sayeth, |Mat. 25.| poore mē ye shall euer haue with you, |Mar. 14.| but me shall you not euer haue. Now we knowe ryght well that hys Godhed is in all places, |Ioan. 12.| and that as towchynge hys Godhed he forsoke not the worlde, when he ascended vnto hys Father. Wherfore it muste neades folowe that he fors oke yt as towchynge hys fleshe and manhode. And therto agreeth the exposycyons of Saynte Austen, and Fulgentius before alleaged, yea and all other olde faythfull Fathers. Now yf he haue forsaken the worlde as towchynge the presence of hys naturall fleshe and māhode (as all doctours defyne) then mente he not that hys naturall fleshe shulde be presente in the sacrament, to be eaten with our tethe. And therfore though Christe so tell you, yet muste you take hym as he meaneth, or els you be begyled. For yf ye thynke that GOD both maye and wyll fulfyll and veryfye all thynges accordynge to the letter as he speaketh them, I maye call you an obedyent man, as Saynte BARNARD doth hys Monke Adam. And maye saye (as he doth) that yf that be the ryght waye, so symplye to receyue all thynge, we maye put out the texte of scrypture which warneth vs to be wyse as serpētes. For the texte folowynge is suffycyent, which byddeth vs to be symple as doves.
Why doth your mastershyppe graunte a necessarye allegorye, whē Paule sayeth, CHRISTE is a stone, or when Christ sayeth, that he is a dore? The scrypture sayeth he is both twayne. And syth God so sayth, he is able so to make it. And therfore by your reason we shall neade none allegorye in all scrypture, & thē he that is moste symple ād folyshe, may be counted moste faythfull. And so shall we neade no faythfull Fathers to expounde the texte, but it shalbe moste meryte, to beleue the letter. This I denye not, but that God coulde haue done yt, yf he had so entēded, when he spake the wordes: But nowe the scrypture stondynge as it doth, I thynke he can not do it. As by exāple. I thynke that God by the bloode of hys sone Christe myght haue saued all men, both faythfull and vnfaythfull, yf he had so intēded, ād that yt had so pleased hym. But nowe the scrypture stōdynge as it doth, I saye he can not do yt, and that it is impossyble for hym. For then he myght make hys sone a lyer which sayeth, |Ioan. 3.| he that beleueth not is dampned. And agayne, he that beleueth not shall not see lyfe, but the wrathe of God abydeth vpon hym. And euen as it is impossyble to stonde with the processe of scriptures (wherin God hath declared hys wyll) that the vnfaythfull shulde be saued, although God myght haue done it at the fyrst yf he had so wolde. Lykewyse it is impossyble the scryptures stondynge as they do, that the naturall bodye of Christ shulde be presente to our teth in the sacrament. And as for our faythe, yt neadeth not to haue hym presente in the breade. For I maye as well eate hym ād drynke hym through faythe, that is to saye: beleue in hym, as though he were as presente in the sacramēte, as he was hangynge vpon the crosse.
And because you saye, that my naturall reasons be not worth the reasonynge, I wyll alleage you some mo, to see what you can saye to them. Fyrste euery sacrament is the sygne of an holye thynge: but the sacramente of the aulter is a sacramēt (as all faythfull men confesse) ergo it muste folowe that the sacrament of the aulter is the sygne of an holye thynge. Nowe yf it be the sygne of an holye thynge, then it is not the holye thynge yt selfe which yt doth sygnyfye & represent. Why shulde we then feare, to call that breade a fygure, that is to saye: a sacrament of that holye bodye of our Lorde and Sauyoure.
Besydes that I wolde knowe of what necessyte or profyte hys fleshe muste be present in the sacrament. For the presence of hys fleshe can no more profyte vs, thē doth the remembraunce of hys bodye, but this remembraunce maye as well be done by the sacrament, as though hys bodye were present. And therfore syth God and nature make nought in vayne, it foloweth consequentlye, that his naturall fleshe is not there, but onelye a memoryall therof.
Furthermore, the ende and fynall cause of a thynge is euer better then those thynges which are prouyded for the ende (as the house is better than the lyme, stone, & tymber, which are prouyded for the howse) but the ende and fynall cause of the sacramente is the remembraunce of Christes bodye: and thervpō yt muste folowe that yf the sacramente be hys naturall bodye, that the remembraunce of Christes bodye shulde be better then hys bodye it selfe. Whiche thynge is to be abhorred of all faythfull men.
It were fondnes to fayne that the soule ded otherwyse eate then do the Angelles in heauē, and their meate is onelye the Ioye and delectacyon that they haue of God and of hys glorye; And euen so doth the soule which is here vpon the earth eate through faythe the bodye of Christe which is in heauen. For it delyteth & reioyseth whyles yt vnderstōdeth through faythe, that Christ hath takē our synnes vpō hym and pacyfyed the Fathers wrath. Neyther yt is necessarye, that for that or for thys cause, that his fleshe shulde be present. For a man maye as well loue ād reioyse in the thynge which is from hym and not present, as though yt were presēt by hym of that maner.