66 That those men which so grossely ioyne the bodie of Christ with the signes, may the better declare themselues, they are woont to bring two similitudes. ³⁹¹ The first is, if thou haue a pot full of wine, and shalt pronounce, This is wine, thou lyest not at all, séeing thou shewest the wine it selfe contained in the Cup. In like maner shall it be if thou take a hotte burning Iron, and shewing the fire, saiest, This is fire, therein thou speakest neither falselie nor absurdly: so (say they) must be vnderstoode that saying of the Lord, This is my bodie: and they manifestly admit the figure Synecdoche. For séeing they shew a subiect compounded, it is no true proposition vnlesse it be as touching the one part of the thing shewed. Yet must it bée knowen that these similitudes are not taken by them, as though they thought that euery maner of waie they agrée with the matter proposed: because they contend that the bodie of Christ is present not locally, ³⁹² but onelie diffinitiuely, which then they vnderstand to bee when any thing is not circumscribed with the measure of place, but yet is said to be there, because his nature or essence is then appointed to that place, or worketh therein. But this agréeth not with wine being in a cup: for that hath his place there wherein it is limited. Further these men would not say that the bodie of Christ is so in bread as it shall take name of the qualities or accidents therof. For it cannot truelie be named white, round, baked or sodden: which neuerthelesse we perceiue to happen vnto fire mixed with burning Iron. For it so followeth the fashion of the Iron, the length, the bredth, and the depth thereof, as it maie be named by the shapes and formes of the same. Whereby it plainely appeareth, that this similitude in this opinion, is not vnderstoode by these men, as touching all the partes, but onelie that a true and reall coniunction of the sacrament and the thing may be shewed, which being graunted, it followeth, that aswell the wicked as the godly, doe receiue the bodie of Christ. First (forsooth) that this coniunction is reall, they thinke it is sufficiently prooued by the wordes of the Lord. ³⁹³ But the other, namely that the bodie of Christ is giuen euen vnto the wicked, they sée it doeth necessarily follow. But we haue alreadie shewed the contrarie, to wit, that these wordes of Christ driue vs not necessarilie vnto this sense, and by effectuall reasons it hath bin prooued that the wicked receiue onely the outward elements.

67 These men also are woont to argue, that if the wordes of the scripture be vnderstoode figuratiuelie, it maie then easilie bée that manie precepts should be ouerthrowen. For Abraham might haue saide of circumcision when it was commaunded: ³⁹⁴ It is a figuratiue spéeche, and I shall fulfill this commaundement, if I circumcise my heart, and cut off the lustes and infections of the flesh. Also when the choyse of meates was commanded, the Israelites might haue said, that the execution of that commandement might consist in the morall obseruation, if they did not commit those sinnes which were signified by those vncleane beastes: and by that meanes neither circumcision nor choyse of meates should haue taken place. Howbeit it may plainely be prooued that this is a weake argument, because it is perceiued by the letter it selfe and by the text that the same is no figuratiue spéeche. As touching Circumcision, it is appointed to be the viii. day after the childes birth, and it is added, y t the couenant of the Lord was to be borne in the fleshe it selfe. By which wordes it appeareth, that true Circumcision was commaunded. And in the choyse of meates the conditions of the liuing creatures cleane and vncleane are so expressedly described and a purifying appointed as touching the offenders, that no place of doubting is left. We haue also a rule of Augustine De Doctrina Christiana, ³⁹⁵ wherein he sheweth, that vnlesse an ill act be commaunded, or some good worke prohibited, the speech is to bée taken without a figure: the which rule if it be applyed to the choyse of meates and vnto circumcision, he sheweth, that the wordes of God must be absolutelie vnderstoode. They say moreouer, that in the Prophets and histories, figures are easily admitted, because in these the holy ghost dealeth after the manner of men, & applyeth himselfe to their familiar spéeches, that hée may the more and the more earnestlie expresse those things which are to bée spoken, but in doctrine and precepts wée must not so iudge: All things, (saie they) must be taken simply, ³⁹⁶ which opinion of theirs is not firme or vniuersall. For as touching precepts, the Lord saith: Beware of the Leuen of the Pharesies, where he manifestlie vseth a figure, & that such a figure, as the Apostles in that place vnderstoode him amisse. Moreouer in the 7. ³⁹⁷ of Matthew he commaunded that they should beware of false Prophets, for they will come vnto you (saith he) in sheepes clothing, but inwardly they be rauening woolues. In which commaundement who perceiueth not a figuratiue spéeche? And in teaching of doctrine there is no doubt, but figures & tropes are vsed. Paul saith in the new Testament: ³⁹⁸ The rocke was Christ: We be one bread. And of God it is writte~, that he is a co~suming fire.

68 Afterward they affirme that the bodie of Christ may be euerie where, ³⁹⁹ and that by the wordes of Christ to Nichodemus in the 3. Chapter of Iohn where it is saide: No man ascendeth into heaue~, but he that came down from heauen, euen the sonne of man which is in heauen. Beholde say they the sonne of man, that is Christ, spake vnto them as touching his humane nature, and was also in heauen, because the humane nature cannot be plucked away from the diuine: Therefore what he affirmeth of one, must also be spoken of the other. But it is aunswered that wée will not diuide these two natures one from an other: yet it followeth not therefore that that which appertaineth to the one should be giuen vnto the other. Indéede wée graunt that the diuinitie of Christ is euery where, but we will not attribute the same vnto his bodie and humanitie. And this did Augustine vnto Dardanus most manifestly teache. And that which is brought out of the third Chapter of Iohn, the same Augustine enterpreteth, that it must be vnderstoode, that the sonne of man was in heauen as touching his diuine nature. Neither did Chrysostome otherwise iudge, when he expoundeth this place. For he affirmeth, that to be in heauen was not attributed vnto the sonne of man but in respect of his diuine nature. But how féeble an argument this is: These two natures are ioyned together, therefore that which is graunted to the one, must be attributed also to the other. This may bée shewed by the like: The body of the sonne and the light thereof, haue betwéene them a naturall and excellent coniunction: yet the light extendeth not it selfe to euery place, whereunto the bodie doeth reallie attaine. In like manner the bodie, ⁴⁰⁰ our eyes and sight, are verie much ioyned one with an other, and yet doth our sight attaine to manie things vnto which the eye of the bodie extendeth not. Afterward they argue that vnto the bodie of Christ, manie things must be granted besides the common course and conditions of other bodies: and that for two causes: partly because it is glorified, and partlie because it hath the word ioyned with it. We confesse that many things are to be giuen, but, to bée euerie where, this cannot be fit for it, the nature of mans bodie preserued. And if wée shoulde graunt this vnto it, it were not to bring renowne but ruine thereunto, for then it should be extruded from his owne nature. Moreouer it doeth not much further this matter, because although we should graunt that the bodie of Christ hath this in it, that it can be in manie places, yet would it not therof follow that God would deale so in this sacrament.

⁴⁰¹ 69 Moreouer they indeuour to prooue this corporall presence, by the similitude of a teacher. Who séeing he can extend his wordes vnto many hearers, in them he communicateth vnto the hearers the concept of his mind, so as all they vnderstand him fullie alike: So saith he doth God deale in the words which bée vttered at the Sacrament. Hée fouldeth his bodie in them, that by them he may be shewed in all these signes, and may be communicated vnto all that be receiuers. Wherefore that which is graunted vnto a maister, and that an earthly maister, why shall it not bée graunted vnto Christ? But the comparison is farre wide, and as wée saide before, words doe not discouer things or the concept of the minde, vnlesse it bée by way of signification. And that is to no purpose which afterwarde they goe about to prooue that the body of Christ is euery where, out of the first chapter of the Epistle to the Ephesians (where it is saide: ⁴⁰² Christ is giuen to be the head of the bodie of the Church: which (as it is written in the gréeke) is the fulnesse of him that filleth all in all things ) For the Apostle meaneth not that the bodie of Christ filleth al things and is euery where as these men inferre. ⁴⁰³ But because the signification of that verbe or participle ⟨…⟩ fulfilling, is doubtfull, (for it may bée taken both actiuely and passiuelie, séeing it is a verbe of the meane voyce) if thou vnderstand it passiuely according to the gréeke expositions, the sense shalbe this: That Christ the head of the Church is filled as touching all things in all his members, not that he is accomplished in himselfe. For he is both sufficientlie perfect & happie. Howbeit, that must be vnderstoode in respect of the bodie & members. For as to be the head is giuen vnto him, so likewise the Church is vnderstoode to be the fulnes of Christ: namely for that it filleth and maketh perfect his mysticall body. But if the signification therof be actiue, then shal it be said that Christ is the head, because he himself perfecteth al the gifts and vertues in all his members. ⁴⁰⁴ Neither is the sense that he, as he is man, is euery where. And it is thought that this maie bée prooued by the Scriptures. ⁴⁰⁵ For Christ openlie confesseth that Lazarus was dead when hée was not there. But if he wil co~tend, that he had not a glorified body, it maketh not much to y e matter, because he had neuerthelesse the godhead ioyned with it. But to take away the doubt, the Angell now after the resurrection saide vnto the women: He is risen, he is not heere. ⁴⁰⁶ And againe: He shall goe before you into Galile. And againe, ⁴⁰⁷ He was taken away from their eyes as he ascended into heauen. Wherfore hée filleth not all things nor is euerie where.

70 They are woont also to cite a place in the 4. Chapter to the Ephesians: ⁴⁰⁸ He that descended is the verie same that ascended euen aboue all heauens, ⁴⁰⁹ that hee might fill all thinges. Which place notwithstanding prooueth nothing, and is expounded two manner of wayes. First that to fill all things is referred vnto that which is prophesied and written of Christ. Wherefore a little before he cited the scripture: ⁴¹⁰ He ascended on high, he led captiuitie captiue and gaue gifts vnto men. And if thou wilt referre it vnto places, thou must vnderstand this of the kindes of places, not of each one place particularlie, according to that sentence, ⁴¹¹ The Lord would haue all men to be saued. So shall we say that Christ sometime occupied the middle places, sometime the higher places, and otherwhile the lower places, as in the sepulchre. The Transubstantiators say, that this belonged not vnto them, because they say not that the bodie of Christ is euery where, but onelie where the Sacrament is: yea rather it is against them. For if (as they iudge) it be not repugnant to the bodie of Christ, ⁴¹² to be at one time and together in xx. or fiftie places, it will not be repugnant to be in an hundreth or in a thowsand, and finallie in all places: and so will they make the bodie of Christ to be infinite, neither is there any cause why thou shouldst accuse the forme of the Argument. For the selfesame did Ierom vse against Iohn Byshop of Ierusalem, where he would prooue that our bodies after resurrection, can remaine without meate. For Elias (saith he) and Moses by the power of God could remaine without meate for the space of 40 dayes, therefore might man for moe dayes also be sustained by the power of God. And if for longer time, it followeth that for euermore if it be the will of God. But to returne to those men, they, because they sée, that vppon so néere a coniunction it followeth, that the Sacrament may be adored (for if the Lord be corporally and really contained therein, who will not woorship him? ⁴¹³ ) they teach that it is frée for thée to doe it or not doe it. For they say: although he be there, yet is he not there to the end he should be woorshipped. If thou receaue him and eate him, it is enough: if also thou woorship him, thou errest not. But we rather iudge, that in woorshipping we should not conuert our minde vnto the signes. But if any man while the rite of the Sacrament is exercised, being well instructed in the mysterie shall turne his minde to the woorshipping of Christ reigning in heauen, he dooth rightlie, and his bounden duetie to woorship Christ, which declareth himselfe vnto him: neither is idolatrie committed therein. And this Paul taught in the first Epistle to the Corinthians, ⁴¹⁴ when he saith: If a man enter into your congregation, if he be vnlearned and a plaine man, and heare you all speake together in tongues, doubtlesse he wil say: They be mad, neither shall he be edified: but if he shall heare you prophesie, and shall perceiue that the secretes of his heart be opened, then will he fall downe vppon his face and woorship God. He will not woorship men in such wise prophesying, but séeing the Lord is there reuealed vnto him, he will turne himselfe to the woorshipping of God.

⁴¹⁵ 71 The reasons in bréefe, for the which their grosse iudgemet séemeth not to be true, are these, to wit, that this reall and corporal presence bringeth therewith no vtilitie, which we receiue not aswell by the spirituall presence. ⁴¹⁶ For in the 6. of Iohn, the Lord promised to them that eate him, eternall life: further that he would dwel in them and they in him: ouer and besides these thinges what is required? Moreouer it might not be grau ted that we and the fathers of the olde lawe had the selfesame Sacramentes: ⁴¹⁷ because it was not possible that the olde fathers could haue obtained this reall presence, for that the sonne of God had not as yet taken vpon him humane flesh. Further it would follow, that both the godlie and the wicked doe eate the bodie of Christ. Againe, besides that spirituall eating which we haue in the 6. of Iohn, they bring in an other carnall and corporall eating, which cannot be allowed, séeing this eating and that be all one, sauing that in the latter are added signes, for the more confirmation of the thing. Finally it followeth, that when they attribute so much vnto wordes, they are in the same difficultie wherein the Transubstantiators be when they say, This is my bodie. For they cannot expresse their meaning, that they may speake plainelie without contradiction, what they would declare, and how the wordes while they be vttered may be true, if they admit not a figure. They spread abroad the bodie of Christ, that it may be together in manie places, and euery where. Neither is it of force if they say, Not locallie, because although he be there, as Angels are said to be in a place, that is not fit for the creature as it is prooued before by Didimus, Basill, Augustine vnto Dardanus, and by Cyrill: which places, thou shalt finde at the end of the first disputation against Tresham: The wordes of the scripture driue vs not to so grosse and corporall a presence: and faith is of the word of God, wherefore faith ought not to imbrace the same.

72 Besides this, the fathers teache otherwise, for what maner of bodie is in the Eucharist, Cyprian in his Sermon of the Lordes supper sheweth, when he saith: Who vnto this day createth, sanctifieth & blesseth his most true and holie bodie, and diuideth it vnto the godlie receauers. The proper bodie of Christ is not created or sanctified of men, neither yet is it diuided. Chrysostome vpon Matthew the 5. Chapter in the 11. homilie in the vnfinished worke: If therefore it bée so dangerous to transferre vnto priuate vses these vessels sanctified wherein is not contained the true bodie of Christ, but a mysterie of his bodie, &c. And how we must ascend into heaue~ when we communicate, if we would inioy the bodie of Christ, the same father declareth vppon the first Epistle to the Corinthians the 10. Chapter, Homilie 24. He commaundeth vs that with great concord and charitie we come vnto him, and being made Eagles in this lyfe, we should fly vnto the very heauen or rather aboue heauen. For where (saith he) the dead carkas is, ⁴¹⁸ there also the Eagles be. The carkas is the bodie of the Lord by reason of his death. For vnlesse y t he had fallen, we had not risen againe. And he calleth vs Eagles, to shew that he which commeth vnto this bodie must mount on high, & must haue no communitie with the earth, and must not lay holde vppon, or be drawen vnto inferiour thinges, but alwaies fly aloft and looke into the sonne of righteousnesse, and haue a most readie eye of the minde: for this is a table of Eagles and not of Iayes. Againe the same father vppon Matthew the 26. Chapter, Homilie 83. They were about to iourney fro~ Egypt into Palestina, and therefore they did weare the habit of a traueler: thou from the earth must ascend into heauen. And in the 3. booke De Sacerdotio: Doost thou thinke to dwell among mortal men, and to stay and be in the earth? And doost thou not rather thinke that thou shalt foorthwith be translated into heauen? And in casting away all cogitation of y e flesh, doest thou not with a single heart and pure minde consider those things that be in heaue~?

73 Augustine vnto Boniface hath all these things after the same order and sense. The time of Easter being at hand, hee saith: As this or the next day saue one Christ dyed, and on the Sonday: This day Christ rose againe. Baptisme is faith: and the Sacrament of the bodie of Christ is the bodie of Christ. And wee sée that in all the sayings which we haue reckoned, ⁴¹⁹ that which is absent, is really pronounced of that which is present. The same Father vpon the 54. Psalme: The head was in heauen: and he saide, Why doest thou persecute mée? Wee are with him in heauen by hope, he is with vs in the earth by loue. And in the 119. Epistle to Ianuarius: Wherefore to that persecutor whom with his voyce he slue, and translating him into his bodie after a sort hath eaten, he sounded fro~ heauen: Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou mee? Vpon Iohn the 30. Treatise, and we haue it in the Title de Consecratione distinction the 2. yet the first in déede, The Lord is aboue, but here also is the truth of the Lord: For the Lords body wherin he rose againe, ought to be in one place: his trueth is euerywhere spread. Also vpon Iohn the 50. Treatise: For according to his Maiestie, according to his prouidence, according to this vnspeakeable & inuisible grace is fulfilled that which was spoke~ by him: Behold I wilbee with you vntill the ende of the world. ⁴²⁰ But according to the flesh which the word tooke vpon it, according to that which was borne of the Virgin, according to that which was taken holde of by the Iewes, which was fastened to the trée, which was taken downe from the crosse, which was wrapped in cloathes, which was buried in the sepulchre, which was made manifest in the resurrection, Ye shall not alwaies haue mee with you. ⁴²¹ Wherefore after he had béene conuersant as touching his bodilie presence fourtie daies with his Disciples, they leading him foorth, while they saw him, but not followed him, he ascended into heauen, and is not here: for there he sitteth at the right hand of his Father, and is héere: for he departed not with the presence of his Maiestie: we haue Christ alwaies. As touching the presence of the flesh, it was rightlie saide vnto the Disciples: ⁴²² Me ye shal not haue alwaies. For the Church had him but a fewe daies as touching the presence of the flesh. Nowe it houldeth him by faith, it séeth him not with the eyes. And y e same Father vpon the Epistle of Iohn at the end: Wherefore our Lord Iesus Christ did for this cause ascend into heauen on the fortie daie, hee in this respect commended his bodie, because it was to be left on the earth in his members, for that he sawe that many would honor him for that he ascended into heauen, and perceaued that their honoring is vnprofitable, if they tread downe his members vppon the earth. And that none might be deceaued, nor when he should woorship the head in heauen, should oppresse the séete vppon the earth, he tould them, where his members should be. For when he was about to ascend, he spake the last wordes, after these wordes he spake no more vppon the earth. The head being about to ascend into heauen, commended his members vppon the earth, and so departed. Thou shalt not now finde Christ to speake vppon the earth. Thou findest him to speake, howbeit in heauen, and out of heauen it selfe. Wherefore? because the members were ouertrodden vppon the earth. For vnto Paul the persecuter he said, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? ⁴²³ I ascended into heauen, but I lie still vpon the earth. Here I sit at the right hand of the father, there I still hunger, thyrst, and am a straunger. After what sort then commended he his bodie vpo~ the earth being about to ascend? ⁴²⁴ When his disciples had demaunded of him: Lord, if thou wilt at this time be presented, when wilt thou restore the kingdome of Israel? He aunswered vpon his departure, It is not for you to know the time, which the father hath layd vp in his owne power: but ye shal receaue the power of the holy spirit comming vppon you, ye shall be witnesses vnto me in Ierusalem. Behold in what respect he spreadeth out his bodie: behold, when he wil not be trodden vppon, ye shal be my witnesses in Ierusalem, and ouer all Iury and Samaria, and vnto the endes of the earth. Behold I lie which doe ascend: For I ascend because I am the head: my bodie yet still lyeth. In what sort dooth it lie? Ouer the whole earth.

74 Vnto Augustine, Cyrillus dooth consent, who saith vppon Iohn the 6. booke and 14. Chapter: Here must we note, that although he tooke from hence the presence of his bodie, euen as he promised that he would be away from his disciples, yet in the maiestie of his Godhead he is alwayes present. Behold I am with you alwayes euen vntill the end of the world. And the same father in the 9. booke vppon Iohn the 21. Chapter: And Christ said that he would be with his disciples a little while, not because he would vtterly depart from them, for he is with vs alwayes euen vntill the end of the world, but because he would not liue together with the~ as he did before. For the time was now at hand, that he should goe euen into heauen vnto the father: And the faithfull ought to beléeue, that although he be absent from vs, in bodie, yet that we and all thinges are gouerned by his power, and that he is alwaies present with all men which loue him. Therfore he said: ⁴²⁵ Verilie verilie I say vnto you, that wheresoeuer two or three be gathered in my name, there am I in the middest of them. For euen as when he was conuersant vppon the earth as man, he then also filled the heauens, and left not the fellowship of the Angels: after the same manner now he being in the heauens filleth not the earth with his flesh, and yet is with them that loue him. And it must be obserued that although hee should be absent onely according to the flesh (for he is alwayes present by the power of the Godhead, as we haue said) yet he said he would be a little while with his disciples, manifestlie naming him selfe, that none should be so hardie as diuide Christ into two sonnes. Among these comes Vigilius, ⁴²⁶ which in y e 1. booke against Eutiches writeth: The sonne of God as concerning his humanitie departed from vs: as concerning his Godhead he saith vnto vs: Behold I am with you vnto the end of the world. And straightway after: Because whome he left & from whom he departed with his humanitie, he neither left nor forsooke them with his diuinitie. For according to the forme of a seruant, which he tooke fro~ vs into heauen, he is absent from vs: according to the forme of God wherewith he departeth not from vs, he is present with vs vppon the earth: yet both present and absent he is one and the selfe same to vs. Also in the 4. booke: If of the word and the flesh the nature be all one, how is it, that séeing y e word is euery where, the flesh also is not found euery where? For when hée was in the earth, hée was not also in heauen, and now because hée is in heauen, verilie he is not vppon the earth. And it importeth not much, that we should expect Christ to come out of heauen as touching the flesh it selfe, whom we beléeue to be with vs vppon the earth as concerning the word. Therefore as you will haue it, either the word is contained in a place with his flesh, or the flesh with the word is euerywhere: because one nature dooth not receaue a thing contrarie or diuers in it selfe: But it is a thing diuers and farre vnlyke, To be limited in a place, and to be euery where. Forasmuch then as the word is euerywhere, but the flesh thereof is not euery where, it appeareth that one and the selfesame Christ is of both natures: That both he is euerywhere according to his diuine nature, and that according to the nature of his humanitie he is contained in a place: that he is created, and that he hath no beginning: that he is subiect vnto death, and that he cannot dye. And straightway he addeth: This is the Catholick faith and confession, which the Apostles haue taught, the Martyrs haue confirmed, and the faithfull doe to this day kéepe.

75 Moreouer Fulgentius vnto Trasimundus the King, y e 2. booke: One & the selfesame man, locall of a man, ⁴²⁷ which is God immensible of the father, one and the selfesame, according to humane substance, absent out of heauen when he was in earth, and forsaking the earth when he ascended into heauen: but as touching the diuine and immensible substance, neither leauing heauen when he descended out of heauen, neither forsaking the earth when he ascended into heauen. And this appeareth certainlie by the assured word of the Lord himselfe: who to shew that his humanitie was locall, said vnto his disciples, ⁴²⁸ I ascend vnto your father and my father, vnto my God and to your God. Of Lazarus also, when he had said: Lazarus is dead, ⁴²⁹ he added saying, I am glad because of you that ye may beleeue because I was not there. He shewed vndoubtedlie the infinite greatnesse of his diuinitie vnto his Apostles, saying: Beholde I am with you euen to the end of the world. How ascendeth he into heauen, but for that he is in a place as very man? Or how is he present with his faithfull, sauing because he is one immensible and very God? The same father in the 3. booke: The very same and inseparable Christ, as touching his flesh onelie, rose out of the sepulchre. The very same and inseparable Christ, according to the whole man which he receaued, forsaking the earth locallie, ascended into heauen, and sitteth at the right hand of God. According to the selfesame man, he shall come to iudge the quicke and the dead, and to crowne the faithful and godlie. Lastlie Bernard vppon the Canticles the 33. ⁴³⁰ Sermon: I also haue the word, but in the flesh, and before me is set the trueth, howbeit in a Sacrament. The Angell is fatned, but yet with the fatnesse of Corne, and is now filled with graine. In the meane time it behooueth me to be content, with the barke of the Sacrament, with the branne of the flesh, with the chaffe of the letter, with the couering of faith. And these thinges be such as being tasted bring death, if they haue not receaued some seasoning of the first fruites of the spirit. Death is altogether to me in the potte, vnlesse it should be swéetened by the little meale of the Prophet. ⁴³¹ But certainelie in how great abounda~ce soeuer these things doe waxe fatte, the booke of the Sacrament and the fatte of the wheate, faith and hope, memorie and presence, eternitie and time, the visage and a glasse, the Image of GOD and the forme of a seruant, are not receaued with like pleasantnesse. Verilie in all these thinges, faith vnto me is rich and the vnderstanding poore. And is the sauour of faith and vnderstanding all one, when as this tendeth vnto merit, and that vnto reward? Thou séest that there is asmuch difference betwéene the meats, as betwéene the places. And euen as the heauens are exalted from the earth, so are the inhabitantes therein. Here thou plainelie séest that Bernard maketh an Antithesis or contrarie comparison betwéene the remembrance and presence of a thing, and speaketh of many other thinges which serue much to that we haue in hand. But let vs returne vnto y e aduersaries: they haue fathers to oppose against vs. They haue Irenaeus who saith that the Eucharist consisteth of two thinges: the one earthlie, and the other heauenlie, the which also Gelasius supposeth. Howbeit these thinges conclude not vnlesse thou shalt vnderstand the whole Sacrament, ⁴³² so that thou make it one thing consisting of the signe and the thing signified, then we graunt that it standeth of two partes. But if afterward thou wouldest appoint so great a coniunction betwéene the bread & the bodie of Christ as is betwéene the diuine and humane natures in Christ, that should in no wise be graunted, because it were necessarie that of bread and of the bodie of Christ, should be made one substance, that is one subiect, so as they might neuer be sundred one from an other, the which is most absurd. Out of the other fathers they obiect in a manner the very same which the Transubstantiatours cited before.

⁴³³ 76 Now let vs sée, what they which imbrase the third opinion saie against these men. First they admit not that same scattering of y e body of Christ, so as it can be euery where, because it is against the propertie of mans nature. And Augustine vnto Dardanus doth most plainly write otherwise. Furthermore they contend that the eating set foorth in the 6. of Iohn and this last eating is altogether one, sauing that in this are added signes. And that they prooue by this Argument, that Iohn when he made mention of his eating at the ende of the Gospell, spake not of the institution of the Sacrament as doe the other Euangelistes: For that he had sufficiently taught before. And the Summe of doctrine which they omitted, Iohn in the 6. Chapter fulfilled. And there is not therefore any cause (say they) why any man should say, that the communion is therefore superfluous, because in often communicating we celebrate the memorie of the Lorde: and thankes giuing, and the minde is stirred vp with a likenesse of those things which be represented. Neither are they dumbe, but speaking signes which be there. ⁴³⁴ Further a certaine priuie token is there, wherby the Christians doe make themselues to be ioyned one with an other, and with Christ. Moreouer they professe their faith as touching the bodie of Christ nailed vpon the Crosse, and his blood shed for our saluation. For it is not ynough to beléeue with the heart, but confession also must be with the mouth: and not onelie with the mouth, but with outward actions. Neither doe they admit it (as these men saie) that the wicked also doe receiue the bodie of Christ. ⁴³⁵ For sense and reason attaine not vnto it. Wherefore it remaineth that he be receaued by faith, wherof they being destitute, can haue nothing but the signes. And Paule writeth: He that shall eate the bread vnworthilie, and saith not: He that eateth the bodie vnworthilie.

77 Furthermore they woonder at them which follow the contrarie opinion, ⁴³⁶ that vnto that corporall eating of Christ they attribute remission of sinnes: for so much as this is to admit Opus operatum, that is merite, in respect of the verie act of working. Neither is remission of sinnes had otherwise than by faith. Afterward they sticke vnto the saying of Paule, when the Lorde commaundeth this to be doone in the remembrance of him, and that his death shoulde bée shewed: which wordes séeme vnto them to declare the absence of the body of Christ. But I haue elsewhere shewed, that this argument is not verie firme, vnlesse they meane as touching the bodie of Christ reallie and corporally and naturallie to be present. Otherwise when it is receaued by faith, it is not vnderstoode to be altogether absent, although he remaine in heauen as touching his nature and substance. For he is spirituallie eaten, and is trulie ioyned with vs. Moreouer they cite the fathers, which doe plainelie pronounce, that the type, the signe and the figure héere is the bodie of Christ. And they bring in two similitudes. ⁴³⁷ One is of a friend, whose friend being absent bodilie, is saide to be present when he thinketh of him. The other they appoint to be of lookingglasses which be about one, and the selfesame man, whose face and countenance is multiplyed throughout all the glasses, although he be not moued out of his place. Symilitudes I graunt these be, but yet ouer could to agrée with this mysterie. For a friend being comprehended in the cogitation, and conuersant in the minde, changeth not him that thinketh vpon him: he nourisheth not his minde, neither yet doth he restore his flesh whereby it might be capable of the resurrection. And this similitude of the glasses, is a verie slender shadow, neither must it be compared to that coniunction which we haue with Christ. For the presence that wée confesse of the spirite of Christ hath the power of the holie ghost ioyned therewith, which most néerelie coupleth vs vnto him. But yet the foresaide similitudes are not vtterly to be refused séeing they maie after a sort leade vs to the trueth of the matter, so that they make not the things equall. For they shewe how this receauing maie be with faith and with the mind. But they haue made mention of two coniunctions with Christ: One is, that by faith wée apprehend his bodie was nailed to the crosse, and his bloud shed for our saluation. An other is, that the sonne of God himselfe tooke our verie nature vpon him. And so is there a naturall coniunction betwéene vs and Christ, whereof there is mention in the 2. Chapter to the Hebrues. ⁴³⁸ But there is a certaine third coniunction, which we enter into with Christ in eating of him spirituallie, whereof they doe not manie times speake, although they passe it not ouer altogether in silence. But as touching that, we will intreat a little after. Now if these men be demaunded, whether Christ be present at the supper of the Lord, they answere that he is present. Howbeit this they speake by the figure Synecdoche, ⁴³⁹ because the one part of Christ that is his Godhead, is trulie present. Otherwise in expounding the sentence of the Lord: This is my bodie, they vse the figure Metonymia, to wit, the name of the signe for the thing signified. And they graunt that Christ himselfe after that sort is present: as the Sonne which kéepeth it selfe within his owne circle, ⁴⁴⁰ and yet neuerthelesse is said to be present with the world, and to gouerne the same with his motion and light. ⁴⁴¹ But howe throughly faith maie make a thing to be present, ⁴⁴² they thinke that they declared out of the Epistle to the Galathians, where Paule saide that Christ was described before their eyes and crucified among them.

78 Now remaineth that we shewe our iudgemet among these opinions, ⁴⁴³ what must bee auoyded, and what must be receaued. Not that I am minded to reprooue either Luther or Zuinglius being singular and verie excellent men. For as touching Zuinglius, I certainlie know, that in his bookes he affirmeth the signes in this sacrament, not to bée vaine or frustrate signes, as we before declared. And it hath also béene reported vnto me, ⁴⁴⁴ by all them which haue had conference with Luther, that he in verie déede, betwéene the bodie of Christ and the signes, put no other but a sacramental coniunction. But how the contention is growen & set on fire betwéene the, it is no time now to rehearse. Now then setting these men aside, which are neuer sufficientlie praised, we will intreate of the opinions, as they are set downe and vrged on both partes. Wherefore in the first opinion, ⁴⁴⁵ I allowe not that grosse knitting together of the bodie of Christ with bread, so as it should be naturallie, corporallie, and reallie comprehended therein. For the holy Scripture dryueth vs not thus to affirme. And to multiply & increase so many myracles without the testimonie therof, is not to deale like a diuine. And further such a presence is not necessarie, and is of no moment to our saluation. Againe that the wicked receiue the body of Christ I allow not. ⁴⁴⁶ For whatsoeuer the Lord instituted, that did he that it might be for our health. But a fleshlie and corporall eating helpeth not the saluation of the wicked. Therfore Christ appointed no such eating. And whatsoeuer the wicked do eate corporallie, it ought not to be said, that they eate the body of Christ, vnlesse vnto the signe and seale thou wilt attribute the name of the thing. Further we will not graunt that the bodie of Christ is euerie where, or that it is spread ouer all or manie places, because this is against the humane nature. Neyther must we in like maner iudge that there is a difference betwéene the spirituall eating which is in the 6. Chapter of Iohn, and that which the Lord instituted in the last supper, sauing vnto that doctrine & promise which he had first taught, he added a Seale. That also which they speake doubtfullie of adoration, must not be admitted. For we taught before and that plainly and manifestly what we must iudge of that matter. And thus much as concerning this opinion. From the which I thinke good, that those things be taken away which I haue now recited.

⁴⁴⁷ 79 And in the other it liketh me not, that they seldome make mention of a sacramentall chaunging of the breade and wine, which neuerthelesse is no light matter. And the Fathers, wheresoeuer they séeme to fauour transubstantiation, haue a respect vnto the same. And the holy Scriptures contemned it not. For Paul euen in the very handling of the Sacrament, nameth not simply, The Cup: ⁴⁴⁸ but The Cup of the Lord. Further we sée in the olde Testament that thinges which were offered, ⁴⁴⁹ are not onelie called holy, but holy of holy, that is in the Hebrewe phrase, most holy. Wherefore there is no cause why they shoulde say that this change is of light importaunce, séeing it is of great moment. But if they pretend that they doe this, because we should not cleaue ouer much to signes: we answere, that a remedie may easily be had for this euill through the doctrine whereby men are taught, ⁴⁵⁰ that Christ while we communicate, is ioyned vnto vs with an excellent coniunction, as he that dwelleth in vs and we in him: who also in the next degrée is ioyned with wordes, and that by signification: Thirdly also he is coupled by signes & also by signification: which coniunction notwithstanding is lesse than that which belongeth vnto wordes. Yea and of the former, to wit, the coniunction by the wordes, the signes doe take their sacramentall signification. If these things be rightly taught, there will be no daunger. I graunt that the writers of this opinion haue sometimes intreated of this sacramentall changing, yet but seldome.

⁴⁵¹ 80 Furthermore they haue not alwayes applied thereunto that efficacie which is due vnto it: for these are not made common signes, but such as may mightily and effectually stirre vp the minde. They will say, that this will bee to attribute ouermuch to the elements of this world. We answer that these things are not attributed vnto those elements for themselues sake, but because of the institution of the Lord, the power of the holy Ghost and plainnesse of the wordes. If they shall demaunde: ⁴⁵² howe may I knowe that the holy Ghost worketh here? It may be easily answered, because it is alreadie ordained that this is a spirituall eating. But howe shall we eate spiritually without the holy Ghost? As touching the institution of the Lord, there is no doubt: and of the efficacie of the word, the scriptures speake euery where. Paul sayeth, ⁴⁵³ That the Gospell is the power of God vnto saluation: namely that God will declare his power by this instrument: and what else is the Eucharist, than the Gospell or visible word? Also Paul saieth, That faith is by hearing, ⁴⁵⁴ and hearing by the word of God: not that the word maketh vs to beléeue, for it is the spirit by whom we beléeue: but he vseth the instrument of words and also of sacraments which be the sensible words of God. For who knoweth not that the creatures are sanctified by the worde of God as it is in the Epistle to Timothie? ⁴⁵⁵ Which also must be rightly vnderstoode. For it is the holy Ghost which in very déede doth sanctifie. Howbeit he doeth this by the instrument both of the word and sacraments. Wherefore this changing must not be taken from breade and wine, whereby they are made effectuall signes of the bodie and bloud of Christ: that is, by the which the spirit of the Lord worketh mightily and not meanely in vs, so that we be indued with faith and godlinesse. For we speake not here of an efficacie which may binde our saluation to the things of this worlde. Neither let any man here crie out that séeing this receiuing is had by faith, what shal the communicants gaine; because if they be faithfull, they haue Christ alreadie ioyned vnto them? It may be easily answered: In déede he is ioyned vnto them, but he is euerie day more néerely ioyned vnto vs, & while we communicate he is more and more vnited vnto vs. Moreouer this commeth to passe, that we should satisfie the commandement of the Lord, who commanded that we should eate and drinke this Sacrament. Otherwise thou wilt say the verie selfesame of Baptisme. For when as a man beléeueth he is straightwaie iustified, and hath remission of sinnes, and yet is he not in vaine baptized. But if so be thou wilt demaund whether this efficacie of the Eucharist is towards all men alike, I answer, No: ⁴⁵⁶ but according to the state and measure of the faith of the communicants. Euen as Origen saide vppon the 15. Chapter of Matthew: namely, that the matter of this Sacrament profiteth not but by the worde and by obsecration, it may helpe our mindes, according to the quantitie and proportion of faith.

81 Another thing there is besides that I woulde often put these men in remembrance of, that we, ⁴⁵⁷ by the Communion are incorporated vnto Christ. Which worde is not newe, but is in Paule to the Ephesians, who saieth that the Gentiles are made Coheires and of the same bodie, which in Gréeke is called ⟨…⟩. For although wée affirme that the apprehension or holding fast of the bodie of Christ is doone by faith, yet vpo~ this fast holding followeth an effect, euen a true coniunction with Christ, not a fained or imagined: the which first belongeth vnto the soule, secondly it redoundeth to the bodie. And the same in the holie scriptures is commended to vs by Paul vnder a metaphor of the head and bodie, when he calleth vs members of one and the selfesame bodie vnder Christ the head; & vnder the state of Mariage, wherein two are made one flesh. The which, that Cyrill might expresse, he brought in a similitude of molten waxe, which is mingled with other waxe, and so of two is made one: Thus woulde he haue vs to bée ioined with Christ. And to this purpose specially, ⁴⁵⁸ make the wordes vnto the Ephesians, wherein we are saide to be flesh of his flesh, and bone of his bones: which words if thou looke vpon at the first viewe wil appeare that it ought otherwise to be saide: ⁴⁵⁹ to wit that the sonne of God is of our flesh, and of our bones, because he assumed flesh of mankind. Howbeit Paul vnderstoode not, meere flesh, but flesh cleane from sinne, capable of resurrection and immortalitie. The which séeing the faithfull haue not of themselues, neither drew it fro~ Adam, they claime it vnto them by Christ, because they be incorporated vnto him by the sacraments and by faith. Wherefore there happeneth a certaine enterance of Christ, ⁴⁶⁰ into vs, and a spiritual touching: the which Paul weighed, when he said vnto the Galathians, ⁴⁶¹ But now it is not I that liue, but Christ liueth in mee. Neither is there any néede in these respectes to drawe Christ out of heauen or to disperse his body into infinite places, forsomuch as all this that we teach is spirituall: and yet notwithstanding no fained thing: for imagined sightes, Idols, or fained things doe not nourish the minde, as here we be certaine that it is doone. For we haue saide, and we confirme it, that these signes doe both signifie, and offer, and most truely exhibite the bodie of Christ, although spiritually, that is, to bee eaten with the minde, ⁴⁶² not with the mouth of the bodie. But if thou shalt demand, after what manner the Fathers of the olde Lawe in their Sacramentes could haue the same that wee haue: it is easie to bee aunswered, séeing wée haue affirmed that in this Sacrament the thing is vsed spiritually, not corporally. And in the Apocalyps we reade, That the Lambe was slaine from the beginning of the world. They waited for things to come, wee celebrate the memorie of them alreadie doone. Lastly we haue shewed that great héede must be taken least that which we speake of spirituall eating be vnderstoode as though it destroyed the truth of his presence. For Augustine saide vpon the 54. Psalme, that the bodie of the Lorde, is in a certaine place in heauen, but that the trueth of the Lordes bodie is euerie where. For wheresoeuer the faithfull be, they apprehend that Christ had a true bodie giuen for vs, and so they doe eate him by faith.

82 Wherefore I haue nowe spoken in this sacramentall matter that which in my iudgement ought to be affirmed, being according to the Scriptures, which I woulde the godly reader woulde well consider and take in good part. And God of his goodnesse graunt that at the length the Church of Christ may obtaine both trueth and quietnesse as touching this sacrament. Which two things I therefore wish because hitherto I sée that the Eucharist whereof we intreate hath bin so ouerwhelmed, buried and defaced with lies, craftie deuises and superstitions, as it might rather be iudged any other thing than that which the Lord instituted in the supper. The which least it should easilie be cleansed, the Diuell which is the most gréeuous enimie of al peace and truth, hath sowne so manie opinions, contentions, disagréements, heresies, and controuersies, (sauing that they bée without bloud) that scarcelie any consent woorthie of Christians can in mans reason be hoped for. But these things (alas) we suffer not without cause, who haue doone double iniurie vnto this Sacrament, partlie for that in stead of a notable and singular gift of Christ, we haue erected an execrable Idol, and partly because we haue without sinceritie of faith, with a conscience defiled with grieuous sinnes, & without sufficient triall of our selues abused these most holy mysteries. I beséech y e Lord to take pitie of so great a calamitie, and vouchsafe at length to restore vnto his Church a reformed Eucharist, and the right vse of the same: through our Lord Iesus Christ. Amen.

Looke the Exhortation to the Supper of the Lorde. Also looke his Confession and opinion touching this whole matter. Item the disputations with Tressham, &c At the end of these Common places.

A short abridgement of the disputation which D. P. Martyr made as concerning the Eucharist against Gardiner, Byshop of VVinchester.

THe matter of the Eucharist according as the Lorde deliuered the same vnto vs, is both plaine and easie to be knowen: which, if it were handled according to the iudgement and sense of the holy scriptures, and that there were a consideration had of the humane nature of Christ, and of the receaued definition of the Sacrament, there should be no great paynes taken either in the vnderstanding or handling of the fame. Howbeit by reason of the contention and importunitie of the aduersaries, it is become more intricate than any blinde labyrinth, and it is come in a manner to passe, that through contention wee haue welneere forgone the trueth: for they, rather tha~ they would giue place to y e right and best opinion: yea that they may by all maner of meanes defend their monstrous deuises rather than the truth, they haue vsed all kinde of counterfeiting cauillations and deceiueable wayes. Whereupon when I of late daies was diligent to encounter with the huge armie of their cauils and sophisticall Arguments, and should answere y e same with as much diligence as I could, y e volume grew in a manner to an exceeding greatnesse. Fearing therefore least godly men when they come to take my book in hand, being ouermuch tyred with long reading, should returne as vncertaine as before (for seeing the reasons on both sides, and those sometimes but latelie and newlie deuised, it is not possible but those which be the later should obscure the memorie of those that went before, or in a manner make them to be quite forgotten) I minded straightway to set y e matter before mens eyes in a certaine abridgement or resolution, which the Gretians call ⟨…⟩, that those which shall reade my writings, or be minded to reade them, or haue alreadie read them, may haue present and at their hand certaine speciall notes no lesse plaine than briefe, whereunto they may easilie referre aswel the Argumentes as the aunsweres of the disputation. And this (if I be not deceiued) will in such disputations be no lesse helpe vnto the readers than an assured sight of the loade starre is vnto the Mariners when they be tossed too and from the deepe Sea. Which therefore being doone of me with a good and faithfull minde, I would haue all good and godlie men to take in good part, and most diligentlie cosider the methode so deuised by me, and then courteouslie to giue their iudgemet according to the word of God. But I will make no longer preface, since an abridgement requires asmuch shortnesse as is possible.

That the vvordes of the Supper are to be vnderstood figuratiuelie.

First vndoubtedlie in the Sacramet of the Eucharist we affirme that the bread and the wine (which the holy scriptures, the fathers, and the sense it selfe doe testifie to be there present) be signes of the bodie and bloud of the Lord: verilie not prophane or vulgar signes, but such as were woot to be assigned in other mysteries.

Contrariwise our aduersaries affirme those signes to be properlie and truly y e body & bloud of Christ. We demaund how they know them so to be. Because (saie they) Christ said, This is my bodie. But we interpret the saying of our sauiour by that forme of speach or kinde of figure, whereby chieflie in Sacramentes, signes are woont to be called by the names of the thinges signified.

This opinion of ours doe they withstand, and say that the wordes of Christ are not figuratiue, but altogether proper and simple.

I.

It is obiected by vs, that there is no certaine Argument to be gathered out of the historie of the Gospell, to prooue that those wordes must be absolutelie vnderstood. For the supper of the Lord is plainelie set downe by Matthew, Marke, Luke, and Paul. In which places are perceaued many figures. The cup is called the new Testament: and yet is not the cup it selfe nor the liquor contained therein the verie new Testament in deed.

II.

Those which receaue vnwoorthily are affirmed to eate and drink iudgement vnto themselues: and yet cannot iudgement bee properlie either eaten or drunken.

III.

Farre is it from the bodie of the Lord to be truelie eaten, for it is altogether a wicked thing that he should be broken, ground with the teeth, and dissolued.

IIII.

Our Sauiour said when he sate downe at the same board, that he earnestlie desired to eate the Passeouer with his disciples: but euerie man knoweth that Pesach it selfe, that is to say, the Passouer of the Lord, was not woont to be eaten in that solemnitie, but the Lambe.

V.

So often (saith Paul ) in the 1. to the Corint. the 11. as ye shal drinke of this cuppe. Doe we drinke the cuppe or not rather that which is poured into the cuppe? Wherefore Paul spake in the most vsuall kinde of figure. Seeing then in declaring the Supper of the Lord, the Penmen of the holy spirit, haue vsed many figuratiue speaches: what dooth now let but that the saying This is my bodie, which we intreat of, was spoken of them figuratiuely?

VI.

I omit many other sentences of the holy scriptures, which euidentlie appeare to be expounded by figures of all such as iudge godlie: for if I would recken them vp, I should now make no abridgement, but a large booke: Therefore when we thus interprete this sentence of ours, we bring in no new thing or that which is repugna~t to the Scriptures.

VII.

That the wordes which are written in Paul and Luke as concerning the cuppe are spoken figuratiuely, as we haue alreadie taught, what atte~tiue reader seeth not that it cannot be iustlie denyed? Wherefore those thinges that Matthew & Marke wrote of that matter, must be vnderstood figuratiuely, vnlesse any will deny that the former sayinges must be expounded by the later: but that Paul and Luke wrote after Matthew and Marke, no man doubteth.

VIII.

Howbeit neither can that which Matthew and Marke teach as concerning the bloud, be vnderstood simply as it is spoken. Thus doe they write ⟨…⟩. And now what else can this pronoune ⟨…⟩ signifie but the cup? For it is specified that Christ both tooke the same in his handes, and deliuered it to his Apostles. Neither doe Luke and Paul affirme any other thing whe~ they write that Christ said: This cuppe is the new Testament: But who dare teach y t the cup is properlie the bloud? Wherefore let the wordes of Matthew & Marke be rightly weighed on the one part, and the words of Luke and Paul on the other, and then let the~ deny if they can that there is a figure.

IX.

The aduersaries themselues, although they be very desirous rather to follow their owne opinion tha~ the trueth, canot interpret the words of the Lorde without the helpe of a figure. And I shew that in the Sacrament of the Eucharist it is not lawfull for them to pronounce of it, This is my bodie. Let them be ashamed therefore to blame vs for the which they themselues may iustly & of due desert be accused. Moreouer the very definitio of a sacrament, that it is the signe of an holy thing, & a visible forme of inuisible grace dooth most of all defend our opinion. For by that commo~ receaued definition it is brought to passe that those thinges which be seene in the Eucharist be signes of the bodie and bloud of the Lord, vnlesse we will blot the Eucharist it selfe out of the number of the Sacraments.

X.

Neither can the formes of speaking which the holy scripture vseth, be otherwise expounded, sith by the visible part of the sacrament he pronounceth the thing it selfe which is signifyed. For how should Circumcision be called, The couenant of the Lord, vnlesse wee will say that the same is a signe thereof? ⁴⁶³ Of this opinion is Paul the Author, who calleth Circumcision ⟨…⟩, that is a signe or seale of the righteousnes obtained by faith. ⁴⁶⁴ Baptisme is also called The washing of the new byrth: and in the olde Testament, The Lambe is called the Passouer, as we haue alreadie declared.

XI.

Herewithall agree the Fathers, who in expresse words teach y t Christ gaue a signe of his bodie, That he gaue a figure, That hee represented his owne bodie, That the things which are seene be figures and paterns of the bodie & bloud of the Lorde. Cyprian, Cyrill, Augustine, Gelasius, and Theodoretus, doe most manifestly teach, that these signes are called by the names of the thinges which they signifie. Since therefore in the deliuerie of this sacrament the holy Scriptures doe admit figures, and the verie nature of a Sacrament requires the same, and that the Fathers doe most manifestly receyue them, shall we be blamed for vsing a figuratiue interpretation in expounding the wordes of the Lorde? These reasons alleaged, haue preuailed so greatly with some of our aduersaries, (such force hath the trueth) as they graunt that those things which be offered to the senses, namely the breade and wine, be signes of the bodie and bloud of Christ, but yet in such sort, as they haue present in them the things that be signifyed: but this is shewed by many reasons to bee most farre from the trueth.

That the figuratiue speeche of Christs vvords require no reall or substantiall presence of his body and bloud.

I.

First the Scriptures of God doe teach, that Christ as touching his humane nature is gone from hence, they declare his ascension into heauen, as it is set foorth in the Articles of the faith. They assure vs that Christ said: that we shall not alwayes haue him with vs, but that heaue~ shall containe him vntill the latter day: and that he shal from thence come at the length to iudge the quicke and the dead.

II.

Againe it is not agreeable for a humane body to bee in many places at one time. Neither yet can it be graunted that it is present in the worlde without place: for these things are altogether repugnant with the definition of an humane body, vnlesse wee wil take away a very true body from Christ. We must beware that we affirme not the same to bee scattered or present in many places at once.

III.

Neither hath the essence (as I may say) of the Angels which are without bodies, such a propertie as it can be in many places at one time.

IIII.

Yea and to say the trueth, it might not be eschued, but that euen the very nature of GOD, if it were bodily, should admit both diuision and limitation. Since therefore that these things be on this wise, euen as the fathers doe most fully testifie, it is altogether proued, that the body of Christ is subiect to these properties and qualities.

V.

Neither doeth the very nature of sacraments require that they shoulde haue the things signifyed eyther to be ioined vnto themselues or to containe them in themselues. But was the couenaunt of God included in the Circumcision? Truely the couenant was past, and it was alreadie made with the Fathers, before that Circumcision was commaunded to Abraham: and, if any of that couenant remained, that was wholy kept in the minde of God, and of faithfull men: but in the fleshe was borne not the couenant it selfe but the signe thereof commanded by God. Againe y e pascall Lambe did not verilie include in it selfe y e passouer of the Lord. Also what man in his right minde would say that the fleshe and bloud of the Lorde were included either in the water of the desert or in the Manna: and that in the water of y e Baptisme the spirit and grace are inuisiblie hidden? But and if in other Sacraments it be not giuen, & that of their owne nature, that they should haue the things present either to be cleauing to them or to be included in them: neither are we otherwise to determine as concerning the Eucharist, if y e nature or propertie therof ought to appeare vnto vs to be y e selfe same with other sacraments, especiallie since the word of God hath spoken nothing at all of the matter which we haue now in hande.

VI.

⁴⁶⁵ Moreouer since that Paule in the first to the Corinthians writeth that the olde fathers did eate the same spirituall meate with vs, and dranke the same spirituall drinke: and yet had they not present with them the flesh and bloud of Christ, since as yet they were not extant: and since these men affirme these things to bee present in the Eucharist, vndoubtedly it followeth that against the saying of Paul, the olde Fathers and we had not all the selfesame Sacramentes. In signes they doe not agree: for they had Manna and water, but we breade & wine. In the things signifyed they bee also diuers: for they by faith receiued the thinges signifyed being absent, as those which were afterward to come: but these men say that they receiue the thinges present together with the signes. Verily there can be imagined no greater difference in these Sacraments, than is to disagree aswell in the signes, as in the things signifyed. And therefore let vs rather say with Paul that the sacraments of the olde Fathers, in the things signifyed are the selfesame that ours bee, although that their signes be diuers, and that they are receiued both of vs and them all after one manner, namely by faith. For they by faith receiued the fleshe and bloud of Christ which were to be giuen for our saluation, and wee by faith and the spirit doe imbrace them as alreadie giuen.

VII.

Also if our aduersaries opinion should be admitted, it might not be auoided, but that aswell the wicked as the godly shoulde eate and drinke the flesh and bloud of the Lord. But this doeth Christ the Author of the sacraments manifestly refute in the 6. of Iohn, where he saieth that his flesh and bloud is eaten and drunken by faith. See then (I pray you) that when y e wicked are destitute of faith, and be straungers from Christ, what communion haue they with the flesh and bloud of Christ? Doubtlesse they haue onely the signes to be receiued, and that to their owne condemnation: for neither is Christ in them, neyther doe they abide in Christ.

VIII.

They are to bee demaunded also which affirme that the bloud of the Lord is present in this sacrament, for what cause or vnder what colour they dare name that their sacrifice an vnbloudie sacrifice as they terme it. Surely if they will haue the bloud of the Lorde flowing from the Lordes side to be receiued in their Cuppe as Chrysostome said, by an excessiue kind of speech, let them indeuour the same as much as they will, as they knowe and as they can: yet shall they neuer bring to passe but that they must needes drinke bloudie drinke.

IX.

Truely such is the nature of things repugnant as they can neuer be affirmed both at once, that is, at the selfe same time of one and the selfe same sacrament. Wherefore the bodie of Christ cannot be together and at one time both aboue and beneath, visible and inuisible, one and many, mortall and immortall, broken and whole. This reason haue not we feined to our selues, but we haue taken it from Christ, from the Angels, from the Apostles, from the fathers, and from nature it selfe. For all these doe testifie that this cannot be all at once. Moreouer it were too long to rehearse in how many places and writinges of the fathers they haue affirmed this absence of the Lord according to the flesh.

X.

As though forsooth this presence of the flesh and bloud of the Lord, boasted of and defended by these men in the Eucharist, can, while the same is performed, bring any other profit tha~ we haue by a spirituall receauing, which (as we haue sayd) is performed by faith and by the minde.

XI.

This finally we demaund of our aduersaries, whether they iudge that there is the bodie of the Lord in the bread without bloud, and whether there is bloud in the wine without the bodie? If they say, there is, they diuide the humane nature by the two partes of y e mysterie, which cannot be committed without impietie, since the bloud & bodie and humane nature of Christ are vnited by a perpetuall coniunction. But if they will say y t these thinges bee together, and will feigne those stra~ge Concomitancies of theirs, this at the leastwise they cannot escape but that they shal double y e bodie of Christ, to wit, wholy vnder the wine, and wholy vnder the bread, appointing the same (as they will haue it) vnder their Accidentes.

XII.

Lastly there happeneth vnto the wordes of Christ lesse than is pronounced by them in the partes of the Sacrament, since they affirme the bread to be the bodie alone, and the wine to be the bloud alone.

These be the principall and chiefe poyntes which are contained in my booke of confession against Gardiner, as farre as concerne the Arguments and confirmations of our part. And now this remaineth, that I lay before the courteous reader some sayinges, as it were certaine sentences, out of the which not onelie all our Argumentes in a manner are drawen, but whereby also the reasons of our aduersaries may easilie be confuted. And so all this disputation will become both plaine and easie.

Sayinges or sentences out of vvhich &c.

I.

Christ in the holy supper called the very bread, his bodie, and the very wine his bloud: whereupon it commeth that they cannot vndersta~d his wordes This is my bodie simply and without a figure, since neither the bread nor the wine can properly and truelie be the bodie & bloud of Christ.

II.

These wordes This is my bodie, and This is my bloud be figuratiue formes of speeche, whereby God pronounced of the outwarde signes the things which are signified.

III.

To eate the flesh or the bodie of the Lorde, and to drinke his bloud, is to beleeue that these things were giuen for vs as a price of our redemption, and that vnto these are ioyned those thinges which for our sakes were taken away vppon the crosse.

IIII.

The humane nature of Christ from his ascension into heauen vntill his last comming when he shall iudge the world, is no where else but in heauen.

V.

In the faithfull receauing of the Eucharist, we are not onely in soule or minde through faith ioyned to the bodie and bloud of Christ, but we become partakers, of the spirit, grace, and vertue of the Lord, not in deed by the power of the woorke, but through his goodnesse and faithfull promise.

VI.

Wicked men doe not eate the very flesh and bloud of Christ, except so far foorth as they vse y e outward signes, the bread I meane and the wine, which in their kinde of manner be, & are called, the bodie & bloud of Christ.

VII.

We are no lesse ioyned to Christ in baptisme, tha~ we be in the Eucharist: Wherefore the presence of him and the receauing of him, which is spirituall, is to be affirmed alike in both.

VIII.

The fathers in the olde Testament did eate the bodie and bloud of Christ as touching the matter it selfe no otherwise than we doe.

IX.

Onely the faithfull doe truely and spirituallie receaue the bodie & bloud of the Lord, and that by faith, inasmuch as it is the onely instrument of ioyning vs vnto Christ.

X.

Our bodies after a certaine manner are nourished and restored to eternall lyfe by the bodie and bloud of Christ.

XI.

We our selues by a faithfull participation of the Lordes supper, are fed vp, and in a manner transelementated by a certaine kinde of spirituall change into the bodie of Christ.

XII.

By the incarnation of the sonne of God, we communicate with him in flesh and bloud, forsomuch as we beleeue he tooke our flesh vppon him: and on the otherside while in communicating we imbrace through faith his bodie and bloud which were giue~ for vs vnto death, we are spiritually made partakers of them.

XIII.

The word of the holy scriptures, or the hearing, or sense [of them] in asmuch as it is receaued by faith, is the bodie of Christ, and the bread whereby our mindes are nourished.

XIIII.

The congregation of beleeuers is the bodie of Christ, whereof he himselfe is the head, and we also both are and are called his members.

XV.

The poore & those which be oppressed for the name of Christ be his bodie: Thereupon came that voyce vnto Paul: Why doest thou persecute me?

XVI.

Miracles that haue otherwhile bin shewed about the signes of the Eucharist, doe neither proue a change of the substance of the Elementes thereof, neither yet a reall and substantiall presence of the bodie.

XVII.

A spirituall presence of the bodie vnto them which doe communicate without doubt signifieth not, to be inuisiblie, but yet properlie present as the Papistes say: but that it be present to our faith and spirite no otherwise than his death which we truelie beleeue, and then the good thinges of the life to come which we expect with a most assured hope, y e presence whereof can onely be referred to our faith and spirite.

XVIII,

Truelie our aduersaries speake many thinges of the consecration of the bread and wine, but whether it be performed by praiers or by words, that they cannot determine.

XIX.

In the Eucharist we admit no other sacrifice than y e sacrifice of thanksgiuing, of prayers, and of offering vp of our owne selues: and these sacrifices must not onely be offered vp of the Minister, but also of the people that communicate.

XX.

Also we graunt that a sacrifice is there, in respect that there is a commemoration of the true sacrifice: and the sacraments, that is the outwarde signes which are proposed, are signes of the same true sacrifice, and by the institution of the Lorde, doe set foorth the same vnto the Communicants.

The sentences which I haue now rehearsed, the prudent and gentle reader of my Booke shall finde not onely to be handled therein, but also to bee confirmed by many testimonies aswell of the Scripture as of the Fathers. Wherefore, if it shall like him to haue all this whole co~trouersie plainlie and euidently described as it were in a certaine table, let him with an attentiue minde and often repetition make himselfe well acquainted, fyrst with these sentences, and then with the reasons which I haue brought in this Abridgement: for in so doing, I hope he shall both reape profit, and it shal neuer repent him of the labour he hath bestowed. 1561.

---

← 62. The ninth Chapter. Of the dedication of · Contents · 64. The eleuenth Chapter. Whether it be →

Footnotes

1. Out of the Preface to Cranmer Byshop of Canterburie. ↩

2. Iohn. 6. 57. ↩

3. Luk. 22. 19. ↩

4. 1. Co. 11. 26
   ↩

5. Luk. 22. 20. 1. Co. 11. 25 ↩

6. Rom. 12. 4. ↩

7. Gen. 2. 23. Mark. 10. 8. ↩

8. Mar. 14. 22. Luk. 22. 19. ↩

9. Of y e whole sacramental thing, and namelie of the Supper of the Lord looke in 10. & 11 of the first to the Corinths. The estate of the question touching the Eucharist. ↩

10. This treatise diuided into foure principall poynts. ↩

11. The opinion which hath affirmed transubstantiation. ↩

12. Arguments for transubstantiation. ↩

13. Iohn. 6. 51. ↩

14. Ib. ver. 53. ↩

15. Ib. ver. 51. ↩

16. 1. Co. 11. 27
    ↩

17. Ibid. 29. ↩

18. Ib. ver. 24. ↩

19. They ⟨…⟩ for themselues the Fathers. Irenaeus. ↩

20. Tertullian ↩

21. Origen. ↩

22. Cyprian. ↩

23. Ambrose. ↩

24. Chrysost. ↩

25. Augustine ↩

26. Hilarie. ↩

27. Leo. ↩

28. Theophilact. ↩

29. The Councell of Ephesus. ↩

30. The Councell of Vercellensis. ↩

31. The Romane Cou~ cell called Laterane~sis ↩

32. The Councel of Constance. ↩

33. Scotus. ↩

34. 1. Co. 15. 45
    ↩
35. 1. Co. 11. 24
    ↩

36. Mat. 24. 2⟨…⟩ ↩

37. Luk. 22. 3⟨…⟩. ↩

38. Ambrose. ↩

39. Arguments against transubstantiation. ↩

40. 1. Co. 11. 23
    ↩

41. Paul named bread 5. times. 1. Co. 10. 16 ↩

42. Ib. ver. 17. ↩

43. 1. Co. 11. 25
    ↩

44. Ib. ver. 27. ↩

45. Verse. 28. ↩

46. Acts. 2. 46. To breake bread an Hebrewe phrase of spéeche. ↩

47. Esa. 58. 7. ↩

48. Verse. 4. ↩

49. An obiectio~. ↩

50. Exod. 7. 12. ↩

51. Gen. 3. 19. Iob. 4. 19. ↩

52. Gen. 2. 23. ↩

53. An answer. ↩

54. Iohn. 2. 9. An obiectio~. ↩

55. An answer⟨…⟩ ↩

56. An other obiection. ↩

57. Verse. 51. ↩

58. An answer. ↩

59. 1. Cor. 10. 6
    ↩

60. Exo. 12. 46. ↩

61. Iohn. 6. 51. ↩

62. That the materiall bread of the Eucharist is not the bread spoken of in the 6. of Iohn. Mat. 26. 29 A confirmation. ↩

63. Certaine other obiections and answeres. ↩

64. 1. Cor. 10. 4
    ↩

65. That the sacraments of the forefathers and ours be all one. Look before cap. 7. art. 7. Look Dial. Of both natures in Christ. ↩

66. Matt. 13. 7. ↩

67. 1. Cor. 15. 3
    ↩

68. Gal. 3. 27. ↩

69. An obiection. ↩

70. An answere ↩

71. Howe Christ is giuen in Baptisme, and in the Eucharist. ↩

72. The error of the Marcionites. ↩

73. Christ is no iugler. ↩

74. Luk. 24. 39. ↩

75. Ib. ver. 40. ↩

76. An obiection. ↩

77. Mat. 14. 25. Acts. 1. 9. Luk. 4. 30. ↩

78. An answere ↩

79. The nature of a sacrament. ↩

80. What analogie there is of the signes to the things in this sacrament. ↩

81. 1. Co. 10. 17
    ↩

82. Tit. 3. 5. ↩

83. The analogie of signes to y e things in baptisme ↩

84. Mat. 26. 26 ↩

85. That one and y e same bodie is in many places as once. ↩

86. An obiectio~. ↩

87. A myracle of Ambrose ↩

88. An answere ↩

89. An other obiection. ↩

90. An answere ↩

91. Luk. 24. 39. ↩

92. Absurdities which follow transubstantiation. ↩

93. What Scotus and others affirme to be shewed in the proposition, This is my body. ↩

94. What is broken in y e sacrament. ↩

95. Iere. 11.⟨…⟩9. ↩

96. The Transubstantiators take away the figure of the old Testament. ↩

97. Gen. 14. 18 ↩

98. The change of vs in Baptisme. ↩

99. Iohn. 3. 5. ↩

100. Verse. 13. ↩

101. How Paul knitteth together the two Sacraments. ↩

102. Gal. 3. 27. ↩

103. Whether the words in the 5. of Iohn belong to the Eucharist. ↩

104. The error of the Caperna⟨…⟩s. ↩

105. Ioh. 6. ver. 36. ↩

106. Verse. 62. ↩

107. An obiection. ↩

108. An answere ↩

109. Iohn. 14. and after. Christ at his death saide he would leaue the world. ↩

110. Ioh. 16. 29. ↩

111. The holie Ghost is Christs Vicar. ↩

112. Luke. 1. 34. ↩

113. If Transubstantiation were true, there would be some admiration therof in the scriptures, as was of the mysterie of the incarnation Verse. 52. ↩

114. Ioh. 12. 26. Ioh. 14. 2. ↩

115. Apoc. 14. 4 ↩

116. Concomitantia. ↩

117. Ioh. 14. 16 ↩

118. Howe Christe with his bodie could beare his owne bodie. ↩

119. Manifest absurdities ↩

120. An obiectio~. ↩

121. An answere ↩

122. True exercises of our fayth. ↩

123. Obiections ↩

124. Answeres. ↩

125. Their fayned deuise of concomitancie. ↩

126. Against the concomitancie of Transubstantiation. ↩

127. That there is no sacrament but where there is an actio~. ↩

128. An obiectio~. ↩

129. An answere ↩

130. The chiefest end of the Eucharist is let by Transubstantiation. ↩

131. By the same is hindered the frequenting of the Co~munion ↩

132. An obiectio~ ↩

133. An answere ↩

134. A thing not bes⟨…⟩ming for the glorified bodie of Christ. ↩

135. An obiectio~ ↩

136. An answere ↩

137. Sanctification beginneth at the soule, not at the bodie. ↩

138. An obiectio~ ↩

139. An vnbloudy sacrifice. ↩

140. An answere ↩

141. An obiectio~ ↩

142. An answere ↩

143. It is méete that in Sacraments all things should be receiued sacrame~tally. ↩

144. Whether Christ gaue his passible bodie or whether his glorified bodie. ↩

145. Mat. 26. 26 ↩

146. An Emperour and a Pope poysoned by taking of the Eucharist. ↩

147. That the matter of y e sacrament cannot be cast away. What the matter and forme of the Sacrament are. ↩

148. 1. Co. 12. 27 1. Co. 10. 17
     ↩

149. The bread is not transubstantiated into the bodie mysticall, no more therefore is it into the bodie of Christ. ↩

150. The vngodlie doe not receiue the verie bodie of Christ. ↩

151. How they craue in vaine the help of myracles. ↩

152. Ireneus. ↩

153. Tertullian ↩

154. Origen. ↩

155. Cyprian. ↩

156. Athanasius. ↩

157. Basil. ↩

158. Dionysius. ↩

159. Ambrose. 1. Co. 11. 25 ↩

160. Chrysost. ↩

161. Emisenus. ↩

162. Augustine. ↩

163. Deu. 12. 23. ↩

164. Verse. 35. ↩

165. A definition of the sacrament. ↩

166. Leo. ↩

167. Cyril. ↩

168. Theodoritus. ↩

169. Ioh. 12. 23. ↩

170. Iohn. 15. 1. ↩

171. Iohn. 6. 51. ↩

172. Note that the signes do not cast away their old nature. ↩

173. Chrysost. ↩

174. An example of that Epistle is extant with the Byshop of Canterburie. ↩

175. Hesychius ↩

176. Gelasius. ↩

177. Gregorie. ↩

178. Bertram. ↩

179. Bernard. ↩

180. A confutation of the arguments for transubstantiation. ↩

181. Verse. 51. ↩

182. The meaning of the proposition, This is my bodie. ↩

183. ⟨…⟩ugustine. ↩

184. Gen. 1. 6. ↩

185. The Heretikes called Anthropomorphitae. ↩

186. Ioh. 4. 24. Luk. 24. 39. ↩

187. The Arria~s ↩

188. Ioh. 14. 28. ↩

189. Iohn. 1. 1. Rom. 9. 5. 1. Ioh. 5. 20. Luk. 22. 36. ↩

190. In interpreting of one place, we must haue respect vnto other places ↩

191. 1. Thess. 5. 17.
     ↩

192. The Heretikes called ⟨…⟩. ↩

193. 1. Tim. 5. 8.
     ↩
194. 1. Co. 14. 40 2. Thess. 3. 10.
     ↩

195. The Millenarii. Apo. 20. 7. ↩

196. The Sabellians. ↩

197. Ioh. 10. 30. Iohn. 14. 9. ↩

198. Ioh. 10. 38. ↩

199. The Ebionites. ↩

200. Mat. 27. 46 ↩

201. Verse. 54. ↩

202. The C⟨…⟩ ticles of Salomon. ↩

203. Matt. 13. 9. ↩

204. Matt. 16. 6. ↩

205. Ioh. 11. 11. ↩

206. Iohn. 2. 19. ↩

207. Iohn. 3. 4. &c. Iohn. 4. 11. ↩

208. Iohn. 8. 5 6. ↩

209. 1. Cor. 10. 4 Iohn. 1. 29. 1. Co. 10. 27 1. Co. 10. 7
     ↩

210. A first declaration of the proposition: This is my body. ↩

211. Rom. 8. 31. ↩

212. Mat. 26. 26 Iohn. 6. 35. He compareth the proposition This is my bodie, with that in the 6. of Iohn: I am the bread of life ↩

213. Verse. 5⟨…⟩. ↩

214. What figure is admitted in this proposition, This is my bodie ↩

215. Vnlesse we vse figures, we cannot ouerthrowe heretikes. ↩

216. Such figuratiue speeches as this, are most familiar in the scriptures. Luke. 8. 11. ↩

217. 1. Cor. 10. 4
     ↩

218. Iohn. 6. 70. ↩

219. Ioh. 17. 13. ↩

220. Verse. 20. ↩

221. Exo. 17. 15. ↩

222. Ier. 23. 6. ↩

223. Iohn. 5. 35. ↩

224. Mat. 17. 12 ↩

225. Iohn. 15. 1. ↩

226. Iohn. 10. 7. 1. Pet. 2. 6. ↩

227. Deu. 12. 23. ↩

228. Gen. 37. 37 ↩

229. 1. Co. 10. 17
     ↩

230. Ioh. 20. 22. ↩

231. Gen. 6. 3. ↩

232. Iohn. 1. 14. ↩

233. Ioh. 19. 26. ↩

234. Ephe. 2. 14. ↩

235. Iohn. 6. 62. ↩

236. Iohn. 1. 29. ↩

237. Psal. 19. 10. Psal. 105. 5. & 118. v. 13 ↩

238. Apoc. 1.⟨…⟩. ↩

239. Rom. 1. 16 ↩

240. 1. Cor. 1. 21.
     ↩

241. Ibid. 24. ↩

242. Deu. 30. 15 ↩

243. Gen. 41. 26 ↩

244. 1. Kings. 11. 31.
     ↩

245. Ver. 10. ↩

246. 2. Cor. 5. 21
     ↩

247. Leuit. 7. v. 2. 7. & 37. Osee. 4. 8. ↩

248. Eze. 36. 25 ↩

249. Iohn. 4. 14. ↩

250. Exo. 12. 27. ↩

251. Mat. 26. 17 ↩

252. 1. Cor. 5. 7.
     ↩

253. Where a signe should be, there the ⟨…⟩rsaries admit none, and where it should not be, there they will ⟨…⟩ one. ↩

254. 1. Co. 11. 27
     ↩
255. 1. Cor. 11. 4
     ↩

256. The con⟨…⟩ melie of the Sacrament redoundeth to the bodie of Christ, which is the thing of the Sacrament. ↩

257. Ibid. v. 27. ↩

258. The reaso~s that prooue a figure to be in these words, This is my body. ↩

259. Mat. 26 29. ↩

260. Iohn. 6. 63. ↩

261. 1. Cor. 10. & 11.
     ↩
262. 1. Cor. 10. 1
     ↩

263. Ibidem. ↩

264. 1. Co. 10. 16
     ↩
265. 1. Co. 11. 25
     ↩

266. Howe things distinct or va⟨…⟩ l⟨…⟩e, may be of stre~gth to make a proposition. ↩

267. Luke. 8. 11. ↩

268. Iohn. 15. 1. ↩

269. 1. Co. 10. 18.
     ↩

270. Ib. ver. 17. 1. Co. 11. 25 ↩

271. Mat. 25. 28 Mat. 14. 24. ↩

272. Testimonies of the Fathers, by which they call the sacraments signes and figures. ↩

273. Augustine ↩

274. The same Augustine ↩

275. Ierom. ↩

276. Tertullian ↩

277. Cyprian. ↩

278. Chrysost. ↩

279. Basiliu⟨…⟩. ↩

280. Augustine. ↩

281. That by affirming bread to remaine after consecratio~, there is no Idolatrie committed. ↩

282. The aduersaries are compelled to put two quantities and two bodies together. ↩

283. Cyprian. What is a sacrifice in the Suppe⟨…⟩ of y e Lord. ↩

284. Certaine rules for vnderstanding of the Fathers, when they speake of this Sacrament. ↩

285. Of these rules, looke in the Treatise against Gardiner, the first part ↩

286. The Fathers alwaies testifie the foode to be spirituall. ↩

287. What the Fathers meane, if happilie they say that wee communicate with Christ carnallie. ↩

288. Verse. 14. ↩

289. How the fathers vnderstand this word To Consecrate. ↩

290. The difference betwéene vs and the Capernaits. ↩

291. What the Fathers meane, whe~ they say that the bread or wine remaine no⟨…⟩ in &c. ↩

292. Ephe. 6. 12. ↩

293. Gal. 5. 17. ↩

294. Gal. 3. 28. ↩

295. 1. Cor. 4. 20
     ↩

296. As touching our owne faith and cogitation, the natures of bread and wine remaine not. Faith maketh things present. Gal. 3. 1. ↩

297. Iohn. 8. 56. ↩

298. Iohn. 3. 13. ↩

299. After what maner the humane nature may be saide to be present in y e sacrament. ↩

300. Why the fathers vsed excessiue spéeches as touching these matters. ↩

301. To Tertullian. ↩

302. To Origen. ↩

303. To Cypria~. ↩

304. What manner of change of the bread is graunted. ↩

305. Diuers significations of nature. ↩

306. To Ambrose. ↩

307. Certaine bookes ascribed to Ambrose concerning sacraments ↩

308. Certaine spéeches of Ambrose. ↩

309. An exposition of Chrysostome. ↩

310. The excessiue spéeches of Chrysostome. ↩

311. We are not onely in faith but in verie déede mixed with the bodie of Christ. ↩

312. Chrysostom declareth his owne excessiue spéeches. ↩

313. A negatiue is somtime vnderstoode by a comparison. ↩

314. That which belongeth vnto the signes is attributed to y e things. ↩

315. Against those which stand by & co~municat⟨…⟩ not. ↩

316. The similitude of waxe vsed by Chrysostome and Cyril. ↩

317. To Augustine. ↩

318. Howe Christ bare himselfe in his owne hands. ↩

319. There is néede of the holie Ghost to make these Elements to be sacraments ↩

320. Psal. 99. 5. ↩

321. Esay. 66. 1. ↩

322. To the signes is some honor giuen, but without adoration. ↩

323. After what maner we should worship y e flesh of Christ. ↩

324. In what things adoration consisteth. ↩

325. God and Christ must be worshipped wheresoeuer they declare themselues vnto vs. Looke the Dialogue of both natures in Christ and in the treatise against Gardiner. ↩

326. Whether in receiuing y e Eucharist, it be lawful to vse adoration by y e outward signes. ↩

327. Whether pictures & Images are to bée worshipped ↩

328. Of the remnants of the Eucharist after the vse of the Sacraments. ↩

329. Of the Eucharist sent from house to house. ↩

330. T Hilarie ↩

331. Verse. 21. ↩

332. To Leo. ↩

333. To Emisenus. ↩

334. Why we so often make mencion of the cha~ging of our selues in receiuing of the Sacramentes. ↩

335. The communicants are more ioyned vnto Christ, than are y e signes ↩

336. Vnto Theophilact. ↩

337. That the kindes of bread and wine are changed into y e vertue of the bodie and bloud. ↩

338. To Anselmus and Hugo. ↩

339. To Iohn Damascen. ↩

340. In what age he liued ↩

341. The iudgement of Damascen in matters of Diut⟨…⟩i⟨…⟩ ↩

342. Gen. 9. 4. ↩

343. Exo. 21. 28. ↩

344. Gen. 1. 28. ↩

345. The same man wresteth Basil. ↩

346. Damascen after some sort defended. ↩

347. How the two parts of the sacrament are called Sacraments. ↩

348. Origen. Whether y e Sacrament be cast into the draught. ↩

349. Mat. 15. 11. ↩

350. 1. Co. 11. 30
     ↩

351. The wicked doe not eate the bodie of Christ. ↩

352. To the Councel of Ephesus. ↩

353. To the Romans Councell. Of Berengarius. ↩

354. The recantation of Berengarius. ↩

355. The Glosset of the decrées. ↩

356. The Master of the Sentences would defend the reca~tation by a figure. ↩

357. To the Synode of Constance. ↩

358. The Councell of Constance trecherous and cruell. ↩

359. Transubstantiation a news opinion. ↩

360. The general Councel of Florence ↩

361. To the arguments of the diuine power. ↩

362. Marke the similitude of Nichodemus Iohn. 3. 3. Looke the dialogue of both natures in Christ. ↩

363. Why the Fathers in speaking of the Sacraments extol the power of God. ↩

364. Gal. 3. 27. ↩

365. Whether sacrament is more woorthier, Baptisme or the Eucharist. ↩

366. The fathers made no mention of the myracle of Transubstantiation. ↩

367. For howe many causes myracles might be doone about the Eucharist. Look in the Treatise against Gardiner. 1. Co. 11. 30 ↩

368. Deut. 13. 1. ↩

369. 1. Thes. 2.⟨…⟩.
     ↩

370. Gen. 7. 11. ↩

371. T. Liuius. ↩

372. Quintus Curtius. ↩

373. The life Gregorie Byshop of Rome. ↩

374. An argument from the glorified bodie. ↩

375. 2. Co. 15. 44
     ↩

376. The efficacie of the gréek article ↩

377. Luk. 8. 11. ↩

378. Mat. 28. 30. ↩

379. After what manner Christ is prese~t with vs till the end of the world. ↩

380. The difference betweene our sacraments and theirs in old time. ↩

381. 1. Cor. 10. 1
     ↩

382. In what respect our sacraments be plaine⟨…⟩ than theirs in old time. ↩

383. Whether the Church were long time cast in an error by God. ↩

384. Luke. 18. 8. ↩

385. Matt. 24. verse. 24. ↩

386. We must attribute to the words of the Lord, but not attribute to them as to some enchantment. ↩

387. Algerius the Monk⟨…⟩ a man of no great iudgement. ↩

388. Thus farre of the first opinion, & why it hath béene somewhat largely entreated of. ↩

389. Of the contention betwéene Luther and Zuinglius. ↩

390. That their contention was rather of words, than of the thing. ↩

391. Two similitudes. ↩

392. To be present locally and definitiuely, what it is. ↩

393. As these men wil, the wicked receiue the bodie of Christ. ↩

394. Gen. 17. 10 Whether figuratiue spéeches bée a hurt to y e co~maundements of God. Leuit. 11. 2. ↩

395. A precept of Augustine. ↩

396. Whether in the doctrine & precepts of God there be figures. Mat. 16. 16 ↩

397. Matt. 7. 11. ↩

398. 1. Cor. 10. 4 Ib. ver. 18. Heb. 12. 29
     ↩

399. Whether the bodie of Christ be euerywhere. Look in the dialogue seuerally set out by P. Martyr, concerning this maner Iohn. 3. 13. ↩

400. A similitude. ↩

401. A similitude. ↩

402. Ephe. 5. 22. ↩

403. An exposition of a place to the Ephesians. ↩

404. Christ as he is man, is not euery where. ↩

405. Ioh. 11. ver. 14. & 15. ↩

406. Matt. 28. ver. 6. & 7. ↩

407. Acts. 1. 9. ↩

408. Verse. 10. ↩

409. An other place to the Ephesians expounded. ↩

410. Verse. 8. ↩

411. 1. Tim. 2. 4.
     ↩

412. If the bodie of Christ may be together in many places, it may also be euerie where, which thing also Scotus sawe. ↩

413. The aduersaries teach it to be frée to adore or not to adore the Sacrament. ↩

414. 1. Co. 14. 23
     ↩

415. Reasons against the second opinion. ↩

416. Verse. 51. ↩

417. 1. Cor. 10. ver. 2. 3. &c
     ↩

418. Mat. 24. 28. ↩

419. The thing absent, is really spoken of the thing present. Acts. 9. 4. ↩

420. Mat. 28. 20 ↩

421. Mat. 26. 11. ↩

422. Mat. 26. 11 ↩

423. Acts. 9. 4. ↩

424. Acts. 1. 6. ↩

425. Mat. 18. 20 ↩

426. Vigilius. ↩

427. Fulgentius ↩

428. Iohn. 2. 17. ↩

429. Ioh. 11. 14. ↩

430. Bernard. ↩

431. 1. Kings.
     ↩

432. After what maner the sacrament may be said to consist of two things. ↩

433. The third opinion de ⟨…⟩red. ↩

434. The co⟨…⟩ modities comming by the Co~ ⟨…⟩ ↩

435. That the wicked receiue not the bodie of Christ. ↩

436. Remission of sinnes is had by faith not for the woorke wrought of him that eateth. Besides is the eating faith is stirred vp not by the power of the works but by the working of the holie Ghost. 1. Cor. 11. ver. 24. 25. & 26. ↩

437. Two similitudes. ↩

438. Verse. 14. ↩

439. Christ by his godhead is trulie present in y e supper. ↩

440. A similitude. ↩

441. How present faith maketh a thing. ↩

442. Gal. 3. 1. ↩

443. What in those opinions is to be receiued or refused. ↩

444. That betwéene the bodie of Christ and the signes, Luther put no other but a sacramentall coniunction ↩

445. What in the first opinion must not be allowed. ↩

446. That the wicked eate not the flesh of Christ. ↩

447. What is not to be allowed in the other opinion. ↩

448. 1. Co. 11. 27
     ↩

449. The sacramentall change is not of smal importance but is affirmed by the scriptures. ↩

450. Christ in the Eucharist is ioyned vnto vs by thrée degrées. ↩

451. Of the efficacie of the sacrament. ↩

452. The action of the holie Ghost commeth while the Communion is in hand. ↩

453. Rom. 1. 16. ↩

454. Ro. 10. 17. ↩

455. 1. Tim. 4. 7.
     ↩

456. Whether the office of the Eucharist be towards all alike. ↩

457. By the Communion we are incorporated vnto Christ ↩

458. Ephe. 3. 6. ↩

459. Whether Christ be of our flesh, or we of his. ↩

460. A falling in of Christ into vs. ↩

461. Gal. 2. 20. ↩

462. How the forefathers had y e same thing in their Sacraments that we haue in ours. ↩

463. Rom. 4. 11 ↩

464. Titus. 3. 5. ↩

465. 1. Cor. 10. 3
     ↩