Ecumenical Christian Library

  • Loading…

64. The eleuenth Chapter. Whether it be lawfull in the Communion to

158351 min read

The eleuenth Chapter. Whether it be lawfull in the Communion to vse one onely kinde.

1 OVr aduersaries endeuour by many Arguments to defend y e most shamefull mayming of this sacrament which they haue brought in. 2 In déede they graunt that the Church while it was yet ignorat, vsed both y e kinds, but afterward when it vnderstoode that the one part might suffice, especially the laitie (to preuent the error of some, which might thinke that the bodie of Christ in the sacrament is giuen seuered from the bloud, and the bloud seuered from the bodie,) it decréed that onely the Priests shoulde vse both kindes in the Masse; and that to the people, onely the one kinde shoulde be distributed. 3 Further they saie, that it was authorized by the Councell of Constance. Moreouer they contriue the Commaundements of God into two principall points: Some of them they will haue to remaine perpetuallie firme and vnshaken, so as they may neuer be violated, among which sort they place the moralles. The others doubtlesse, they appoint to be those which concerne outward things: of which kind be the Ceremonies and sacraments. And these they will not haue to be so necessarie, but that according to the place and time they maie be changed. 4 They maintaine also y t it was no wrong to the Christia people, that one kinde is taken from them. For the bodie of Christ (say they) is not giuen in the forme of bread without bloud: euen as in the cuppe also the bloud is not had without the bodie. They likewise alleadge, 5 that the libertie of Christ his Church, is far greater, than was the libertie of the Synagogue: & that therefore it is lawfull for the Church to change more things in our Ceremonies, than was permitted to the fathers of the olde Lawe. For we are not vnder the law as seruants, but as frée me~ vnder grace. And they indeuour to shew that sometimes the Church in manie rites altered euen in verie matter. First of all they say, 6 that it dipped not them which be baptised, according as the Gréeke word ⟨…⟩ signifieth, but it onelie sprinkled, or after a strange manner washed. Neither is it to be doubted, but that those which so be washed must be holden as baptized, 7 séeing that Cyprian béeing demaunded whether they which were baptised in yéelding vp the ghost, should be iudged as baptized (for they lay in the bed and being oppressed with the force of sickenesse might neither be dipped, nor yet washed, but onelie sprinkled, wherefore they should seeme not to be baptized) that man of God aunswereth, that they had perfect baptisme.

8 2 They vaunt also that in baptisme the wordes haue sometime béene altered, séeing in the Actes of the Apostles the 8. 9 Chapter we reade: that baptisme was giuen in the name of our Lord Iesus Christ: when as notwithstanding in the Gospell, the Lorde commaunded his disciples that they should baptize in the name of the father, and of the Sonne, 10 and of the holie ghost. Yea and they alleage that at this day the order prescribed by Christ is peruerted. 11 For he commanded that they should first teach and then baptize. But wee deale otherwise, we first baptize infantes, afterward when they are growen, we teach the~. 12 And againe they say that that which Christ did is not obserued in our communion. For we receaue the sacraments fasting, whereas he distributed them when he and his Apostles had supped. 13 We also choose vnto our selues the morning, whereas hée made his supper in the euening. Neither doo we washe féete, whereas he first washed his disciples féete, and commaunded that one should wash an others féete. 14 In like maner they alleage the commaundement of the Apostle, 15 to wit, That a man should not pray or prophesie with his head couered, nor yet a woman with her head bare. Which at this day is not so carefully & preciselie obserued. Also a decrée of the first Councell, 16 which was held in time of the Apostles, namelie, that the Gentiles should abstaine from bloude and strangled, 17 is abolished. And these fellowes cauill that the case of the Apostles, with whom the Lord in his last supper communicated, is not like the case of the Christian people. For they were ordained by Christ to be Préests: wherefore they say that iustlie and vpon good cause there was ordained an other disposition of the communion for the lay people. 18 They faine likewise, that Christ otherwhile distributed the Eucharist vnder one kinde to his disciples, especiallie when he went with them vnto y e towne of Emaus, where they are said to haue knowen him in breaking of bread. 19 Whereupon they argue that we offende in séeking to establishe a doctrine & precept onely by one action of Christ. Further they crie out that the consent of the Catholike Church maketh for them, 20 and they alleage causes whereby they are led to minister onelie one kinde vnto the laitie. 21 The first they say is, least the wine should be spilt, which might easilie happen, if it should bée ministred to the whole multitude. 22 The other cause is, for that it were requisit that as well wine as bread shoulde bee reserued for the sicke, and ministered vnto them whensoeuer they should aske it, which might not conueniently be doone, because wine is so soone and easilie corrupted. 23 Besides this they obiect that there be many which drinke no wine, who being able to receiue onely one part, if both partes were of necessitie, they woulde thinke that neither they communicate rightly, neither that they haue the whole Sacrament. Lastly, 24 they alleage the honour of the ministerie: for they haue iudged it méete that more shoulde be attributed vnto their Massing Priests than vnto the general multitude. Neither would they that the communion of the laitie should be of equall dignitie or estimation with the Masse. I haue wel-néere recited their Arguments which be of most force.

3 Nowe on the contrarie part I will shewe our reasons, 25 whereby shall be shewed how grieuously they offend in this mangling of the Lordes Supper. First they depart from the institution of Christ, and preach an other Gospell than he himselfe and his Apostles haue preached: And this doth excéedingly iarre from godlinesse. This in diuinitie ought to bee a chiefe principle whereby all things must be resolued: The Lorde saide: It is the word of the Lord that indureth for euer. From the which, 26 if we shoulde be called backe to mens fancies, since they often change, we shall haue nothing firme in religion, but we shall be driuen from certeinties to vncerteinties; and the authoritie of men shall be equall to the authoritie of God. 27 Vnto the Galathians it is written: If wee or an Angell from heauen, shall preach otherwise, let him be accursed. But and if that Paul wil neither haue Angels nor Apostles to bee heard, which affirme any thing contrarie to the decrées of the Gospell, wee will nothing regard the boldnesse and impudencie of corrupt men, which teach otherwise of the Sacraments than Christ taught. Paule in the 11. of the 1. to the Corinthians, testifieth, 28 that he receiued of the Lorde that which he deliuered: And he out of doubt rehearsed both kindes. So as wee may thinke, that they which otherwise define, haue not receiued of the Lord, but rather of his aduersarie: wherfore they must not be heard. 29 And vnto the Galathians Paule hath, Vnto a Testament although it be mans, the same being co~firmed, nothing is added or ordained besides: howe much lesse should men be rash in adding any thing to the Testament of Christ? Men which be fraile and weake, do only bequeath earthly things by their Testaments. But Christ which is God and omnipotent, hath bequeathed to his Church sacraments which belong vnto eternall life. Wherefore none ought at any time to haue bin so hardie as to inuert his Testament. 30 In Deuteronomie the fourth Chapter, the Lord commandeth Israel That he should heare his Law, 31 & specially he mentioneth Chukim, which word signifieth Ceremonies, & he commaundeth that they should neither adde nor take any thing from them: which commaundement of God, is of great force to beate downe our pride. For so proud are we, that wee would alwayes haue our owne deuises, not onely to be in estimation, but also to be preferred aboue the wordes of the Lord: 32 And in the Booke of Numbers the 15. Chapter it is written, That the children of Israel should haue rybands of blew silke in the borders of their garments, that in seeing of them, they might call to remembrance the co~maundements of God, that they might not doe y t which was pleasing to their owne heart, or liking to their owne eyes. And vnto the Romans, 33 Paul grieuously reprooued it, that the Gentils were infatuated with their owne vaine disputations, & that they would not worship God simplie as they knewe him by his creatures; 34 whereupon he sayeth that they were giuen ouer vnto wicked lustes. And there is no doubt but that this mayming of the Supper of the Lorde, belongeth vnto this kinde of vice. 35 And moreouer to this institution of the Lorde concerning the administration of the Sacrament, the vniuersall Church, both in the most auncient and best times hath alwaies consented.

36 4 Also the fathers haue greatlie feared to leaue the Lords order in this Sacrament. There is extant a Canon of Gelasius, 37 which is in the Title De Consecratione, distinct. 2. in the Chapter Comperimus, wherein certaine men are blamed, because they hauing receiued the Lords bodie, abstained from the cuppe of the bloud. Which he saith is superstitious. And he commaundeth them that either they should receiue the whole Sacraments, or else be driuen from the whole. Also he saith it is sacriledge that they should in such sort bee diuided. This doe they indeuour to auoide, and to restraine it to massing Priestes while they consecrate. For them (saie they) it is necessarie to receaue both kindes. Howbeit this they haue not out of the wordes of the Bishop. Nay rather there is mention there of the participants, and of them which are to be driuen from the sacraments: the which agrée fitlie vnto them to whom they be distributed. Moreouer it is written in the decrée, that the iniurie is done not vnto the oblation or sacrifice, but vnto the Sacrament. For he saith that a diuision of one and the selfesame mysterie, cannot bee doone without great sacriledge. Therefore séeing they distribute the communion vnto the laitie vnder one kind, and make diuision of the Sacrament, they cannot denie but that they commit sacriledge. 38 Chrysostome in the 18. homilie vpon the 2. Epistle to the Corinthians saith, that there be some things wherin a Priest differeth not from a laye man. I say in receiuing of y e dreadful mysteries, it is not with vs as it was in the old law, where some parts of the sacrifices were giuen vnto the Priests, others went vnto them that offered: but vnto all vs is set forth one and the selfesame bodie of Christ, & the selfesame cup.

5 39 Cyprian in his seconde Booke, and 3. Epistle earnestly affirmeth that in this Sacrament of the Eucharist, wee must by no meanes varie from the institution of Christ. And there when hee intreateth at large of this matter, he setteth downe these speciall pointes, namelie: That Christ in this matter must be heard: further that we ought not to regard what others haue doone before vs, but what Christ did before all. Moreouer, he that doth not as he did, doth in vaine worship God with the commaundements and doctrines of men. And such precepts of the Sacrament he maketh not light, but saith they be great. And the same Martyr in an Epistle to Pompeius against Stephen Bishop of the Citie of Rome, writeth: Where any doubt is, we must alwais resort to the Tradition of the Lord, to the Gospell and the Apostles. The aduersaries say, that Cyprian speaketh not of this which we nowe intreate of. He disputed against the heretiks called Aquarij, 40 who vsed not wine vnto the cuppe of the Lord but water. This (say they) he reprooued, and not the taking away of a part of the Eucharist from the laitie. I graunt it, but I say, that these men sinne more gréeuously against the institutio~ of the Lord than did the Aquarij. Because they although they put water in the stead of wine, yet did they not vtterly remooue the other part of the sacrament. They vsed the selfsame wordes, which we speake in deliuering of the Cup: onely they did change the Element. But these men take awaie from the people both the whole Cup, and the wordes thereof. Further I graunt the disputation of Cyprian to be particular, whereby he confuteth the Aquarij, but the Argument and reason which he vseth is vniuersall: namely that in the Sacrament of the Eucharist wee must not flie from the institution of the Lord. For this cause also we argue, that we as it were by handes doe receaue the same from him to the intent we may shewe, that it was not lawfull to take away the cup from the Communion. They haue also other subtill shifts, and they say, that Cyprian wrote these things onelie of them that offer, and that therefore the place serueth nothing vnto Communion. But it is a wonder that these so wittie men perceiued not that they in times past and speciallie in the time of Cyprian, had no oblation that differed from the Co~munion. 41 There was no place among them for priuate masses. Those sproong vp manie yeares after, to the greate hurt of Religion. Moreouer if the Epistle be read from the beginning, thou shalt heare Cyprian say, that these men depart from the institution of Christ as wel by consecrating the cuppe, as by distributing of it vnto the people. Wherefore, the cauil is vtterlie confuted.

42 6 Now remaineth that we declare that the reasons which they thinke to make for them, be of none effect. They said that the Church in the first times vsed both kindes, while it was yet ignorant. I would to God that we were so instructed, as the Christians were taught in the first times. Afterward (say they) it sawe that the laie people may be content with one kinde. What I beséech you sawe our Popes, that the Apostles and prelates of the primitiue Church sawe not, who were most plentifullie indued with the holy Ghost? What is it else that we sée but méere darkenesse if it shall be compared to the most cleare knowledge of them? They adde: To the intent that the error of them should be auoyded, who perhappes would think that the bodie of Christ is giuen a part from the bloud, as though the bodie should sit in heauen at the right hand of the father without bloud. These be their monstrous opinions. None of the heretickes euer deuised this kinde of error. But admit there had bin sometime such an heresie: might it not otherwise be amended than by corrupting of the Sacrament of the Eucharist? Vndoutedlie many pernitious opinions may arise as touching the other part of the Eucharist which they haue made to remaine. And will they because of those thinges, take away this also?

43 7 And that which they obiect as touching the Councell of Constance or Basil, we passe not of it. Neither the Gréeke Church, nor y e whole East part obayed them: & not without a cause. For they decréed against the word of God. And oftentimes Councels doe erre, as it is euident of the Councels of Ariminum, Chalcedon, Ephesus the second: and of the Councell of Africa that was vnder Cyprian, and many others. Yea and in the time of Christ, did not the Councell of the Priestes, and the Church of that time, shamefully erre, when it refused the doctrine of Christ, and condemned Christ himselfe and the Apostles? Elsewhere I haue warned, that Councels haue not alwayes decreed that which was true: The greater part there had the ouerha~d of the lesser, and oftentimes the woorser of the better. Here bragge they: Our Church hath the holy Ghost, and therefore it cannot erre. They vse a fallacie of the Accident: For they that haue the holy Ghost, 44 doe not all that they doe by him. Euen in lyke manner as a Maister builder in that he is a Maister builder, in building dooth not amisse: but because it happeneth sometime that he is occupied in other cogitations, and perhappes hath droonke ouermuch, therefore he otherwhile dooth amisse. 45 But the Church (say they) hath a promise of the holie Ghost, and that it shal not be forsaken at any time. I graunt: neither is this promise wanting, but is fulfilled: and there be verie manie alwayes in the Church which doe iudge rightlie. Euen as in the Iewish Church in most corrupt seasons, were Simeon, Zacharias, Elizabeth, Iohn Baptist, Mary the virgin, and Ioseph, Nathanael, and manie others which were partakers of this promise. Wherefore it followeth that trueth preuaileth and errors are discouered. Yet is it not gathered by y e power of this promise, that they alwayes define wel in Councels. Oftentimes they be troubled with affections, and oftentimes they grope in y e dark. How should this be knowen of vs? How shal we vnderstand whether they haue decréed well or amisse? All thinges must be tryed by the touchstone of the holy scriptures, there the trueth is found out. But let vs procéede to confute other their Argumentes.

8 They said that the preceptes of outward thinges and of ceremonies are not so firme, 46 as they cannot be changed by any meanes. Against this maketh Cyprian in the Epistle now alledged against the Aquarij: where he calleth the preceptes of this Sacrament, great preceptes. 47 And Christ also saith that he shall be called the least or none at all in the kingdome of heauen, which breaketh the least of his commaundementes. Moreouer the places out of Deuteronomie the 4. and 12. Chapters, and out of the 15 of Numbers the which we alledged before, doe plainlie shew that it was not lawfull to change any thing in ceremonies: yet doe we graunt that there is some difference in the preceptes of GOD. 48 For there be some of them from which we be neuer loosed, as be all those which prohibit. Also that same sume, whereof the whole lawe and the Prophets depend: To loue the Lorde GOD with all the heart, with all the strength, and with all the soule, and our neighbour as our selues. But there be other precepts which we are not alwayes bound to execute, except it be when time, place, and reason require that they should be doone. For the Hebrewes were not bound to doe their holie thinges euery where and at all times, but at certaine dayes, and in the place which the Lord had chosen. And vppon the Sabbaoth day they could not alwayes be voyd of outward woorkes. Sometimes it behooued them to fight, as we reade in the bookes of the Machabies: neither might circumcision be ministred before the 8. day. At this day also he that would desire Baptisme, 49 and might not haue the libertie thereof, his desire should be imputed in stead of the woorke. Wherefore in these thinges, when the commaundement of the Lord is to be doone, it is not lawfull to change or inuert anie thing. And although thou be not alwayes bound to doe that which is commaunded, yet when thou doest it, it is not méete thou should depart fro the order which GOD hath appointed. 50 Nadab and Abihu would alter some thing about the holy seruice, and they were consumed with fire. Oza dyed for his rashnesse. 51 And king Ozias when he would burne incense, which was not lawful, was stricken with leprosie. Why are they not mooued with the example of their pretie Sacrificers, who take very carefull héede in their Masse that they say not Masse without their Orarium, or as they terme them without their stole or maniple? And they iudge it to be a grieuous offence if they shal omit anie signe of the crosse or anie the least iot of this kinde: which neuerthelesse be the inuentions of men, méere toyes and trifles. Why should not we rather beware that we passe not ouer those thinges which Christ himselfe in his word commaunded? And among the Ethnickes there was very great care had in their sacred ceremonies, least the priest should trippe or misse in a word, which if it happened, it was iudged to be no light offence. And haue our aduersaries thought that Christes order in the Sacramentes may so easilie be vndoone?

52 9 They said that as touching the olde lawe, we are indued with a greater libertie than were the Hebrewes, and therefore we are permitted to change something in ceremonies which for them was not lawfull. But these men ought to know that Christian libertie herein consisteth not, that we should change the institutions of Christ: but in that, that Christ hath reduced manie ceremonies into fewe, and instead of laborsome, hath giuen easie and plaine, and in the stead of obscure ceremonies hath set downe those which are most euident. Adde that we by the power of the spirit, are made willing and voluntarie doers, for we are not constrained by the lawe, but we doe willinglie those thinges which religion perswadeth. Wherefore they proue not what they would, but are rather driuen to the contrarie. For séeing we be so frée as we haue but a few ceremonies, and those easie and gentle, it would be an intollerable thing, and woorthie to be condemned if we should not performe them without corruption.

10 They say, 53 that the ceremonie is not for that cause polluted, neither the people defrauded, because somuch is had vnder one kinde as vnder both. For with the bodie of Christ his bloud is also giuen, and that vnder our kinde, 54 which they say is doone by Concomitancie, for so they speake. But these men should haue weighed, that the communion of the bodie and bloud of Christ, is not in this Sacrament by the woorke of nature. For whatsoeuer of these thinges is deliuered vnto vs, is receaued by faith and is offered vnto vs by the words of Christes promises. And in these outward thinges, God requireth chieflie an obedience. Signes and the outward actions of ceremonies, be fraile thinges: The word of God indureth for euer, therefore the nature of the Sacrament must be iudged by it. So much is giuen vnto vs, as God appointed to giue: of whose will we know nothing further than his sayings disclose vnto vs. But Christ appointed two partes of the Sacrament: by one of the which he sayd that his bodie is communicated, and by the other his bloud, and of these he hath left vnto vs expresse wordes: wherefore we must rather giue credit vnto him than vnto the subtill sayings of men. Thou tellest me of I know not what Concomitancie: and doubtlesse it is thine owne subtill poynt of reasoning: I know that it so fareth with the bodie of Christ which is in heauen, as it is not without bloud. I doubt not but that these thinges be ioyned together in him. But how wilt thou prooue that they be signified when they be ioyned together in the Sacrament? On the one part, the faith of the communicants comprehendeth there the bodie of Christ nailed vppon the crosse for our saluation, whereof we be spirituallie fedde. And the same faith on the other part layeth holde of his bloud shed for our saluation, and hereof wée bée spirituallie watred and haue droonke. About these mysteries of the death of Christ is the minde of the faithfull chiefelie occupied, while they communicate. Wherefore wee must not regard in what sort the bodie of Christ is now in heauen. We followe the woordes of GOD, and perceaue it is not of necessitie that those things which in their owne nature be ioyned together should be communicated one with another. 55 The humane and diuine natures are ioyned together in the subiect of Christ, neither are they plucked one from an other. Yet wilt thou not say that wheresoeuer the diuine nature is, there also is the humane, vnlesse thou wilt extend the bodie of Christ to an vnmeasurable greatnesse, the which is most strange from the nature of man. The sonne of God, in so much as he is God, is found euerie where, and filleth all places, the which his bodie doth not. Further in the holy Ghost all graces or giftes are ioyned together, yet for all that is not the gift of sundrie tongues giuen to him vppon whomsoeuer the power of prophesying is bestowed: or so likewise on the other part. Also seueritie and mercie, are most néerely ioyned together in God, and yet neuerthelesse, when as one is made an inheritor of eternall life, he hath a proofe of the mercie and not of the seueritie of God. And the same might I affirme of many thinges, which being ioyned together in themselues, yet are they communicated asunder. But herein standeth the effect of the answere, that this communication is no woorke of nature, and therefore is not giuen vnto vs by the constitution or disposition of the thing which it hath in his owne nature, but by the will and pleasure of the giuer, of whose will and counsell wée cannot decrée, further than is expressed by his owne words.

56 11 They sayde moreouer that in Baptisme there is much altered: First because Infants haue water powred vppon them, 57 and are not dipped in, as the Gréeke woord ⟨…⟩ signifieth. I know y t the Fathers, when it might be, in respect of age and health vsed dipping: the which was shadowed in the olde Testament when the Israelites passed through the sea: yet is it not of necessitie, neither is there a commaundement extant for the same. When it is vsed it hath an excellent signification: because when we are dipped in, we are signified to dy with Christ, and when we issue foorth, we are declared to haue risen with him vnto eternall life. Howbeit this signification as we say is not of necessitie. But that which concerneth the nature and naturall propertie of Baptisme is a cleansing from sinnes: Wherefore in the Epistle to y e Ephesians, 58 Christ is said To haue cleansed his Church by the washing away of water in the word: And we are pronounced to be baptised vnto the remission of sinnes. And this cleansing, whether we be dipped, or whether we be washed all about, or whether we be sprinckled, or after what manner soeuer we be washed with waters, it is very fitlie shewed in Baptisme. Neither dooth the Gréeke word ⟨…⟩ only signifie, to be dipped, but any manner of way to be sprinckled. Moreouer the reason is not a like: To change the manner of washing, and to take it all wholy away: Because in them which be sprinckled or haue water powred vppon them, the element of Baptisme, namelie water is kept and hath his signification. Neither doe we superstitiously contend after what sort we are to drinke of the cuppe, eyther little or somewhat largelie. Neither through little pipes as sometime it was doon, and as the Bishop of Rome dooth at this day, or with our lippes put to the cup, or by bread dipped and made wet in the wine, as it is in the historie of Eusebius Caesariensis. As touching these things, so the part of the Sacrament remaine whole it sufficeth. Howbeit I iudge that must be doone which commeth most néere to the institution of Christ.

12 And wheras they added, 59 that y e words which are vsed at Baptisme were inuerted, because we finde in the Actes of the Apostles, that some were Baptised in the name of Iesus Christ, there be many which graunt vnto it. Because (say they) in the name of Iesus Christ, the names of the thrée diuine persons are comprehended: Of the Father, (I say) of the Sonne, and of the holy Ghost. And that Irenaeus very plainelie testifieth in the 4. booke against the Valentinians. 60 Vnder the name (saith he) of Christ are the thrée persons vnderstood. Because that word signifieth annointed, wherein is shewed both the annointer, and he that is annointed, and also the oyntment. He that is annointed is the Sonne, the annointer is the Father, the annointment is the holy Ghost: whereby appeareth, that in the same alteration nothing was taken away, whereas these men tooke away almost the whole halfe of the Sacrament. Howbeit I stand not to this aunswere: because our aduersaries cauill that euen in the Communion of either kinde the whole is signified. Wherefore I say that by that place of the Actes of the Apostles In the name of Iesus Christ, is meant, by the guiding, 61 commaundement, will and institution of Christ. Wherefore by these wordes rather it is knowen that the Apostles did altogether kéepe the forme prescribed by Christ. Otherwise they would not haue baptised in the name of Christ, dooing otherwise than he had commaunded. Neither are we to thinke that the Apostles who spread abroad religion with so great godlynesse and indeuour, reiected the forme of Baptising deliuered by Christ. Neither must we passe it ouer that the Schoolemen (as we reade in Thomas, ) when they agrée that the forme of baptising was in a manner changed by the Apostles, write that this was doone for a time by the dispensation of the holy Ghost, to the inten⟨…⟩ the name of Christ might be made the more famous, and that therefore a perpetual lawe should not be drawen from thence. The which these men that haue taken away the cup of y e Communion from the layitie, haue not obserued, séeing they will haue their decrée to be perpetual, and not for a time. Besides this, the Apostles condemned not for heretickes those which baptised after the vsuall and appointed forme. But they haue not onely condemned for heretickes the layemen when they haue receaued both partes of y e sacrament, but they also deliuer them to y e fire. Neither is this doctrine to be suffered, y t it is put in mens authority to inuert either the matter or y e wordes of y e Sacraments as these men haue most impudentlie doone: who not onelie haue taken away the cup from the common people, but also the wordes spoken thereat, the which be very comfortable, and doe more largelie and significantlie expresse the mysteries of our saluation than doe the wordes which be vttered, as touching the bread, where it is onelie said: This is my bodie, 62 which shall be giuen for you: But at the cuppe it is said: 63 This cuppe is the newe Testament in my bloud which shall be shed for you and for many vnto the remission of sinnes. Weigh how manie expositors thou hast here of the promise which was set down in the other part.

64 13 They affirme moreouer that we haue inuerted the order in Baptisme, because we baptise infants before we teach the~. Whereas Christ deliuered them first to be taught, and afterward to be baptised. I maruell that these men descend hither as though they would hold with the Anabaptistes, to the intent they may be against vs, and doe not consider that the saying of Christ is generallie to be vnderstood, as touching the Gentils, and not particularlie. Verilie it is true that in the propagation of Christianity they were first to beginne with doctrine. For when as a Citie, a Prouince, or a kingdome should be woonne vnto Christ, it behooueth to vse preaching before we come to Baptisme: which when they haue beléeued, those of ripe age not onelie are baptised themselues, but they also offer their young children to be baptised. Wherefore that which was so commaunded by Christ in general, they will drawe vnto y e particular Baptisme of young children. In Gréeke it is said ⟨…⟩, y t is, to make disciples and to gather them vnto Christ: which in them of ripe yeares is doone both by doctrine and baptisme, but in young children by Baptisme, séeing they are not yet capable of doctrine. The very which order is séene in Circumcision. As touching Abraha~ being of perfect age, Doctrine went for most, afterward followed the sacrament: in his sonne Isaac it came otherwise to passe. And absolutelie it is true that in the Church Doctrine dooth goe before the Sacramentes, as euerie man may perceiue. Neither (as we taught before,) doe they rightlie gather, when as by an order of the wordes, they wil gather an order of the thinges: For we haue it in Marke as concerning Iohn, 65 That he baptised and preached the baptisme of repentance: when as yet there is no doubt but that he preached before he baptised.

14 And as touching the time of the Lords Supper, 66 we confesse that the Church might order the same as it thought good, séeing there is no commaundement had thereof. There be commaundements as touching this Sacrament: Take and eate ye, 67 Take and drinke ye all of it: Doe this in remembrance of mee: Let a man examine himselfe, and other such sayings. No mentio~ is there of time, of place, of garment, or other such like circumstances. Christ first ate the Passouer, because hee would institute the newe things after the olde. Neither is it commaunded vs either to kill or eate the Passouer before the Communion. 68 And the causes why the Eucharist is distributed in the morning, are gathered out of Cyprian. The first is, because it is more easie at that houre to haue the holy assembly. For in the day time there happen many affaires whereby m⟨…⟩n be ledde away from the seruice of God. Further at that time, men be well aduised, and wee haue a minde more fit and attentiue to receiue excellent things. Thirdly he addeth, that the same morning tyde is a monument of the resurrection of Christ, which doeth not a little further the institution of this Sacrament. Neuerthelesse wee must note that the ancient fathers in the time of fasting, (because they did not eate meate till night) had the Communion at euening tyde: for all the whole fasting day they spent their time in Sermons, Hymnes, and other godly exercises. Towards night the Supper of the Lord was ministred, the Sacrament was receyued. Afterward they returned home to the refreshing of their bodies. Albeit in the time of Augustine in many Churches, 69 as he himselfe reporteth, that vpon the Thursday before Easter, to the intent the Act of Christ might be represented the better, the Eucharist was giuen to the faithfull at night and after Supper. But I finde this custome to bee abolished by the 6. Synode, which at Constantinople was held in Trullo. Whose Canons are extant in Gréeke, wherein there is plaine mention made of this custome to be among the Churches of Aphrica. But to returne whence we haue digressed. So the integritie of Sacramentes be retained, as touching the time & other such like circumstances, we shoulde not be verie carefull séeing of those things there is nothing co~manded. Christ when he was baptized was thirtie yéeres of age. Would it not be a great follie at this day, if we would baptize only such as be 30. yéeres olde?

70 15 Of the washing of féete which is now omitted, we say, that therein is a double signification to be considered: One as touching remission of sinnes, and cleansing the filth of the minde, the which is giuen vnto vs by Christ. Thereof the Lorde said vnto Peter: If I shall not washe thee, 71 thou shalt haue no part with mee. And he that is washed hath no neede but that his feete be washed. And about this signification S. Bernard dealeth verie much. Furthermore that washing was a signe of charitie and submission of the minde, which we ought to vse though we bée noble & of great honour. Wherefore Christ said thereof: 72 Ye call mee Maister and Lord, and yee say well, for so I am: but if that I a Lord and Maister, haue washed your feete, ye also must one wash an others feete. By which commaundement he meant, that no ma~ for any honors sake of this world should cease from doing his duetie vnto his neighbour, euen as touching those things which séeme to be but vile, because Christ himselfe would doe them. The washing of féete was common and vsuall among the Iewes. For in the hotte regions as Iewrie is, when men iourney by foote, their bodies are verie much wearied with heate. Wherefore vnto men wearied and full of dust, the washing of féete bringeth no small refreshing: especially séeing in those Regions, men goe not so well shod as they doe with vs. Otherwise howe could Christ haue bin washed of the woman that was a sinner, 73 and be wyped with her haire, and be annointed when he should sitte downe at the Table, vnlesse he had his féete eyther bare or else so as they might easily be vncouered? And that the washing of féete in the Scriptures doeth represent the meanest seruices towardes our neighbours, Abigail testified, who, when Dauid meant to take her for his wife, answered: 74 Thy ha~dmaiden wil be readie, who shall wash the feete of my Lord: as if she had said: I doe not thinke my selfe worthy of so great an honour: I will rather be ready to do the meanest seruices vnto thy seruants. And Paul in the first Epistle vnto Timothy, 75 whe~ he speaketh of a widowe to be chosen of y e Church, requireth such a one as shal aboud in good works, & hath washed the féete of the Saints. Where there is no doubt but by the washing of féete, Paule requireth that she haue exercised her selfe in doing of seruices and commodities to the men of God. And Christ while he saieth in the Gospell: When ye fast, 76 I would not haue you to be sad as the Hypocrites, but commaundeth the contrarie: Thou when thou dost fast, annoint thy head, &c. By which place it is not to be gathered that in fastings we shoulde anoynt heads, but because in Siria or Arabia surnamed the happie, the vse of Oyntments was common, when men would shew themselues to be mery, (yea they were in a maner daily annointed, except they had bin in some sadnes) therfore Christ meant, that when we are in hand with priuate fastings, we must not intermit the custome of outward worshipping, as though by fastings we woulde winne the fauour of the people. But we among whom is not that vse of oyntmentes are not bound in fastings to doe that which Christ saide. The verie which thing thou maiest vnderstand about the washing of féet, which our aduersaries obiected. That can not be called a Sacrament, (although by the element, it may signifie no common thing, and it hath a commandement ioyned therewith,) because there be giuen no particular words, which should come to the element to make it a sacrament, and by which the promise of some singular gift or grace to be obtained is declared vnto vs. Furthermore, neither Christ nor yet the Apostles decréed, that they which were to Comunicate should washe one anothers féete. 77 And Augustine in the 119. Epistle vnto Ianuarius writeth, that some Churches remooued this Ceremonie, least it shoulde be estéemed for a part of the Sacrament, or else for Baptisme: the verie which notwithstanding some Churches retained.

78 16 There was also opposed vnto vs a decrée of the Apostles, wherein they ordained, that the Gentils which were conuerted vnto Christ, should abstaine from bloud and from that which is Strangled. Which séeing it is abolished, they say it is lawfull sometimes to decline somewhat from the Scriptures. Howbeit we must marke in this place, what is the end and meaning of that decrée. It was pronounced, because of the dissension risen in the Church. For they which were conuerted from Iudaisme, thought that the Gentiles for obtayning of saluation, should be compelled to retaine Moses lawes, and should kéepe the old Ceremonies. But Paule and Barnabas taught otherwise, according to whose minde the Apostles decréede. Yet did they not by their constitution prohibite, but that men conuerted from the Gentiles vnto Christ, might kéepe somewhat of the Ceremonies of Moses, so that they should not thinke those to be necessarie vnto saluation. Howbeit to the intent they might not be gréeuous or troublesome vnto them which were conuerted out of Iudaisme, who liued then very friendly with them, they gaue that commaundement: and it séemed to helpe somewhat to the quietnesse of the beléeuers. So that the Apostles for no other cause did decrée that the Gentiles should abstaine from these things: séeing they would not, that the Iewes which were conuerted shoulde bée straight way offended, of whom the Church in that first time did chéefelie consist. Wherefore they commaunded not these things, in that they belonged vnto the lawe, or vnto Moses, but according as they perceiued them to further the peace and tranquillitie of the Church, that the faithfull might growe vp together among themselues in a greater agréement. Wherupon séeing afterward this cause was taken away (for so much as Hierusalem béeing destroyed, and the rites of Moses vtterlie subuerted, this difference was not betwéene the Iewes and the Gentiles) therefore that decrée might be taken away. Howbeit it was kept a long while, euen vnto the times of Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen: and Caesariensis maketh mention thereof, in the historie of Attalus and Blandin. These Ceremonies might after a sort bee retained at the beginning, vntill the preaching of the Gospel did take better roote, and that all men might plainelie vnderstand that the rites of Moses were abolished. 79 Augustine against Faustus the 2. booke and 13. Chapter, maketh plaine me~tion of this matter, and saith, that vntill both the walles of the Church & Synagogue were wel growen together, so as the difference should no more appeare, somewhat ought to be yéelded to the infirmitie of the Iewes. And it séemeth that speciallie y t was to bee done in those things, which belonged not to sacrifices, but vnto daylie foode. For y e Iewes could not straightway be well content with the dyet of the Ethnickes. 80 Afterwarde they obiected the Apostolicall tradition, whereby a man is commaunded to prophesie and praie bareheaded, & the woman with her head couered: which preceptes they say, 81 are not throughlie kept. Héere we answere, that it is not our part to bee inquisitiue what is kept, or what is not kept. This commaundement we know is extant: and they that kéepe it not, let themselues sée to it. I haue not séene anie minister praying openlie, but that his heade hath béene vncouered. In the verie which habite, I sée them to be at Sermons, especiallie while they recite the wordes of the holie Scripture.

17 Our Aduersaries also argued that Christ gaue the sacramet to his Apostles, 82 the consideration of whom was not alike, séeing they were made priestes: therefore they affirmed that this example of Christ was not to be extended vnto the people. But certainlie as touching the Préesthood of the Apostles we know nothing, neither is there any one syllable extant in the holie Scriptures that the Apostles were Priestes. The Scripture vseth not these wordes. But goe too: Let them vnderstand, By Priests, the Ministers of the Church: Let them tel vs why they giue not to their Massing Priests, if they Masse not when they come to Communicate, but one part of the Sacrament as vnto the laity, séeing Christ gaue both vnto the Apostles, and no lesse distributed vnto them, than hée receiued for himselfe. Further if Christ (as they will) gaue the Eucharist onely vnto the priests, how dare they be so hardy as to giue a part of the Eucharist vnto the laytie and common sort, séeing Christ (as they say) did not communicate with them? Adde that in the supper with Christ were no women present, vnlesse they will, that they were Priestes. Why then doe they distribute the Sacrament vnto them, seeing Christ gaue it onely vnto men? But they which speake so subtillie of the supper which Christ himselfe had with his Apostles, what answere (I beséech you) will they make vnto Paule, 83 who writing to the whole Church of Corinth, and not to the Ministers of the Church onelie, commaundeth that both kindes shoulde bée giuen. And yet they say, that in the Canons, decrées, and Ecclesiasticall histories, there is mention made of the Communion of the laitie. 84 I denie not but it is so: howbeit they are farre deceiued which thinke that the Communion of the laytie doth onely signifie a participation of one part onelie, for euen then both the kindes was giuen. But it was called the communion of the laytie, because the Ministers of the Church, béeing once put fro their function by reason of some offence, did no more communicate in the cleargie or among the Ministers, but were mingled with the companie of the laye men.

85 18 They saide that they haue the consent of the Church, wherein they impudentlie challenge to themselues that which is ours: séeing the Churches of Gréece, the whole East part, and the vniuersall antiquitie holde with vs. For the foule mangling of the Sacrament of the Eucharist is but latelie sprung vp. Among the latter men Thomas Aquinas saith, 86 that euen now in his time the same began to be practised in some Churches, which he writeth in the 3. part, Quaest. 80. Artic. 12. Doubtlesse the importunitie of the Aduersaries is woonderfull. When wée flie vnto the Scriptures, they crie out that they bee darke, and they appeale to the fathers, whom they say are on their side: they flie vnto the antiquitie of times, whereby they would shift off all the testimonies of the Scriptures. But how vncertaine they bée in their opinions, we easilie see in this disputation, séeing the Scripture is plaine: all the fathers make with vs, and the whole antiquity agréeth with the Scriptures. Wherfore the indeuour that they haue to bee contrarie ariseth onelie héereof, that they bée sworne & wholie addicted to the lawes of the Pope: in comparison whereof they weigh not a haire neither of the truth of the fathers, nor yet of antiquitie.

87 19 And wheras they alleaged, that Christ sometime administred onely the one part of the Sacrament, 88 because they reade in Luke, that the Disciples knew him by breaking of bread, it is trifling. For howe it may appeare for a certaintie, that the breaking of bread there signifieth the holie communion, they haue not béene able to shewe, séeth that worde also is often in the holy Scriptures applyed to common meate. And that those Disciples in taking of common meate, could know Christ, it is no maruell: For séeing he had peculiar thanks giuings, and particular prayers as we beléeue he had, he might easilie be perceiued. Further admit it were so, that Christ offered them onelie one part of the Sacrament, is it therefore lawefull for vs to doe the same? He did not by that fact abrogate his generall co~mandement, which he gaue in the Supper, and that is confirmed by the writings of the Euangelists and of Paul. 89 God once commaunded Abraham that he should sacrifice his sonne, yet did he not thereby plucke away any thing from his generall precept, Thou shalt not kill. 90 Hee also commaunded the Israelites, 91 that they should carie away the stuffe of the Egyptians: and yet neuerthelesse he would that commandement, Thou shalt not steale, to be inuiolate. 92 Lastly where it is named: The breaking of bread, we may by the figure Synecdoche vnderstand the whole Supper, euen as it was first declared. And they are to be laughed at when they accuse vs to doe absurdly, which of one action of Christ, which he had with his Apostles, would gather a generall precept: séeing that action of Christ was not ordinarie, but it had a precept ioyned therewith, the which was afterwarde confirmed by Paul. Moreouer we deale as wée shoulde, when we haue recourse to the head and to the verie institution of the Sacrament.

20 Now let vs speake of the causes, 93 by which they pretend that the Church was led to make a decrée for the mutilation of this Sacrament. The first was, least the cuppe should be spilt. Here we maruell excéedinglie at Irenaeus, Basil, Ambrose, Nazianzene, and Augustine, béeing verie prudent Fathers, who sawe not these daungers in the Eucharist: or if they sawe them, as likelie it is, thou must acknowledge that they made no such account of them, as they in respect of them violated the Sacraments, the which neuerthelesse, they administred very often: For of priuate Masses there was then no vse. They euermore communicated in the mysteries with others, and the people ranne together to the Sacraments much more often than at this day they do. They were not so greatly troubled if any part of the holy drinke had fallen vpon the ground. A young mayd in Cyprians time did vomit vp the same. Their chiefe care was that it might be distributed vnto them that were worthie: But our men now are not carefull to driue away dogges and swine, by which assuredly is doone a greater iniurie vnto the bloud of Christ, than if the same should be spilt vpon the ground, Wherefore we counsell that the godly ministers should take verie diligent heede that they shed not the holie cup. But if it shall happen by chaunce, they may be sorie for it, yet the matter must not be so exaggerated as it were an horrible and detestable crime. 94 Augustine, as it is in the first question in the Chapter Interrogo vos, 95 calleth into doubt, whether the bodie of Christ be more worthie than his worde. To some of the ruder sort it might seeme to be a blasphemous question, yet is it disputed of by Augustine, and he attributed as much to the word and saying of Christ as he did vnto the sacrament: and he plainly saieth, that the word of Christ is no lesse than the bodie of Christ. Whereupon he concludeth: that as we are carefull that a part of the sacrament should not fall vpon the ground, euen so no lesse heede must be taken, as well by the ministers of the word, as by the hearers thereof, that nothing be pronounced in vaine out of the words of God. And neuerthelesse, because it is a perillous thing, that any of the wordes of God should by negligence slip away from him that pronounceth or from them that be hearers, therefore the godly Sermons are not remooued from the people.

96 21 And as to that, which they speake of corruption which might easilie happen, if wine consecrated vnto the sicke should be kept, we saie that no man driueth them into these extremities, vnlesse it be their own superstitions. Who constraineth them to kéepe the Sacrament of the Eucharist? Who commaunded them this thing? It behooueth say they to giue vnto the sicke. 97 I graunt: but the mysteries should also be celebrated before the sicke persons. They cauill that the sick cannot alwayes stay and abide the long rites of ceremonies. But let them consider that this verie thing ariseth of their own superstition, and not from the commaundement of Christ. That which Christ commaunded may be drawen into foure wordes. 98 Gregorie testifieth in his Epistle that the Apostles vsed onelie the prayer of the Lord. But our men earnestlie affirme that the Sacrament of the Eucharist should be wrought onelie in their Masse and not otherwise. So as they themselues are the cause of these impedimentes, and therefore they must not be ascribed to the institution of Christ.

99 22 As touching the abstainers from wine, and them which in respect of sicknesse cannot receaue wine, 100 we may readilie aunswere thrée wayes. For there be some which say: When there is this necessitie, against which no law is of force, let onely one part of the Sacrament be giuen vnto men: but thereby is not prooued, that as touching others which are able, the Sacrament should be diminished by the decrée or doctrine of men: because it is a rash part, of a particular thing, to bring in a generall rule. It séemeth to be God which bringeth that man into necessitie, neither dooth that man willinglie pollute the Sacrament of the Lord. It may otherwise be aunswered, 101 that such drinke must be giuen vnto these men as they can away withall, the perfection of the Sacrament and the reciting of the Lordes wordes being preserued. But if one wil say, that Christ did not so institute, they that thus iudge, doe aunswere, that Christ vsed that drinke which might be abidden, and which was méete for the receauers, from whose institution they say that they depart not, when they deliuer euery one to drinke, that which he is able to abide. For this séemeth rather to yéelde to the infirmitie of a brother, than to violate the Sacrament. But whatsoeuer may be thought of these answeres the which I will not vtterlie condemne, to the third I willinglie agrée, because it séemes to me to be sure and perfect enough: to wit, that if a man cannot receaue the Sacrament, as it was instituted by Christ, let him abstaine, for if he desire it and beléeue, no commoditie or benefit shall in that respect be wanting vnto him: euen as vnto him that desireth Baptisme, if he haue not y e libertie thereunto, it is imputed, as if he had receaued the same. Neither ought we by reason of these verie seldome chances to dismember the sacrament of Christ. Lastlie they are boulde to affirme that by this meanes an honour is doone to the Ministerie. 102 Vnto whom we answere, that héerein consisteth not the honour of the Ecclesiasticall Ministery, that he which distributeth the sacrament should haue a double portion or the greater péece of bread, when as the people onelie receiueth one kinde and vseth a lesse péece of bread. Paule very sufficiently in the first epistle to Timothie, and also vnto Titus hath described excellent properties of Ministers, 103 by which they should commend their honor. And againe vnto Timothie he wrote, that the elders are worthie of double honor when they gouerne well, 104 and do labour in the word of God. And of this matter I thinke there is sufficientlie spoken at this time.

← 63. A Treatise of the Sacrament of the · Contents · 65. The twelfth Chapter. Of the Masse, Also →

Footnotes

  1. In 1. Cor. 10. ↩

  2. The first reason of the aduersaries. ↩

  3. The 2. reason. The 3. reason. ↩

  4. The 4. reason. ↩

  5. The 5. reason. ↩

  6. The 6. reason. ↩

  7. Cyprian. ↩

  8. The 7. reaso~ ↩

  9. Acts. 8. 16. & 10. 48. ↩

  10. The 8. reaso~ ↩

  11. Matt. 28. ve. 19. & 20 ↩

  12. The 9. reaso~ ↩

  13. The 10. reason. ↩

  14. The 11. reason. ↩

    1. Cor. 11. 4
    ↩

  16. The 12. reason. Acts. 15. 29 ↩

  17. The 13. reason. ↩

  18. The 14. reason. ↩

  19. Luk. 24. 35. ↩

  20. The 15. reason. ↩

  21. The 16. reason. ↩

  22. The 17. reason. ↩

  23. The 18. reason. ↩

  24. The 19. reason. ↩

  25. Against the mangling of the Eucharist. ↩

    1. Pet. 1. 25.
    ↩

  27. The 2. reaso~ Gal. 1. 8. ↩

  28. Verse. 23. ↩

  29. The 3. reason. Gal. 3. 15. ↩

  30. Verse. 1. ↩

  31. The 4. reason. ↩

  32. Verse. 3 8. The 5. reaso~ ↩

  33. Rom. 1. 21. ↩

  34. The 6 reaso~ ↩

  35. The 7. reaso~ ↩

  36. The 8. reaso~ ↩

  37. Gelasius. ↩

  38. Chrysost. ↩

  39. Cyprian. ↩

  40. The Aquarij. ↩

  41. Priuate Masses. ↩

  42. An answere to the reasons of the aduersaries To the first. ↩

  43. To y e second ↩

  44. A false argument of the accident ↩

  45. Ioh. 14. 15. 16. Mat. 28. 20 ↩

  46. To y e third. ↩

  47. Matt. 5. 19. ↩

  48. A distinction of the precepts. ↩

  49. Baptisme imputed, where it cannot be had. ↩

  50. Deut. 10. 1. ↩

    1. Sam. 6. 6. 2. Paral. 26 ver. 16.
    ↩

  52. To the 4. ↩

  53. To the 5. ↩

  54. Of Concomitancie, a Papisticall deuice, which may be englished Ioint companying. ↩

  55. Things in their owne nature ioyned, may seuerally be communicated. ↩

  56. To y e sixth. ↩

  57. The cite of dipping in Baptisme. ↩

  58. Ephe. 6. 26 ↩

  59. To the 7. A change in the forme of baptisme Acts. 8. 16. & 10. 48. ↩

  60. Irenaeus. ↩

  61. A place in the Acts of baptizing in y e name of Christ expounded. ↩

  62. Mat. 26. 26 ↩

  63. Ibid. 27. ↩

  64. To the 8. Baptisme of Infants. Mat. 28. 19 ↩

  65. Marke. 1. 4 ↩

  66. To the ⟨…⟩. ↩

  67. Mat 26. 26 Ibid. 27. 1. Cor. 11. 24. Ib. ver. 28. ↩

  68. Why the Supper is celebrated in the morning. Cyprian. ↩

  69. The Eucharist celebrated vpon Mandie Thursday at night in Augustines time. ↩

  70. To the 10. The washing of féet ↩

  71. Ioh. 13. 8. ↩

  72. Ib. ver. 13. ↩

  73. Iohn. 12. 3. ↩

    1. Sa. 25. 41
    ↩
    1. Tim. 5. 10.
    ↩

  76. Matt. 6. 16. ↩

  77. Augustine. ↩

  78. Act. 15. 29. To the 11. ↩

  79. Augustine ↩

    1. Cor. 11. 4 To the 12.
    ↩

  81. Men commaunded to prophesie bare headed ↩

  82. To the 13. ↩

    1. Cor. 10. 11.
    ↩

  84. Communion of the Laitie. ↩

  85. To the 14. ↩

  86. Thomas Aquinas. ↩

  87. To the 15. ↩

  88. Luk. 24. 35. ↩

  89. Gen. 22. 1. ↩

  90. Exo. 20. 13. ↩

  91. Exod. 11. 2 ↩

  92. Exo. 20. 15 ↩

  93. To the 16. ↩

  94. Augustine ↩

  95. A question whether the bodie of Christ or this world ⟨…⟩ the more woorthie. ↩

  96. To the 17. ↩

  97. That the Eucharist must be giuen to the sicke. ↩

  98. Gregorie. ↩

  99. To the 18. ↩

  100. Touching the absteiners. ↩

  101. That any kinde of drinke may be vsed in y e Eucharist. ↩

  102. To the 19. ↩

    1. Tim. 3. 2. Titus. 1. 2.
    ↩
    1. Tim. 5. 17.
    ↩

Backlinks