THE THIRD BOOK TEACHETH THE MANNER HOW CHRIST IS PRESENT IN HIS HOLY SUPPER.

Now this matter of Transubstantiation being, as chap. I trust, sufficiently resolved, (which is the first part before rehearsed, wherein the Papistical sencroT doctrine varieth from the Catholick truth,) order sacramenu^ requireth next to treat of the second part, which
is of the manner of the presence of the body and
blood of our Saviour Christ in the sacrament
thereof, wherein is no less contention than in
the first part. For a plain explication whereof,
it is not unknown to all true faithful Christian
people, that our Saviour Christ, being perfect
God, and in all things equal and co-eternal with
his Father, for our sakes became also a perfect
man, taking flesh and blood of his blessed mother and virgin Mary, and, saving sin, being in
all things like unto us ; adjoining unto his divinity a most perfect soul and a most perfect
body; his soul being endued with life, sense, will.
102 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
reason, wisdom, memory, and all other things
required to the perfect soul of man; and his
body being made of very flesh and bones, not
only having all members of a perfect man’s body
in due order and proportion, but also being subject to hunger, thirst, labour, sweat, weariness,
cold, heat, and all other like infirmities and passions of man, and unto death also, and that the
most vile and painful, upon the cross. And
after his death he rose again, with the self- same
visible and palpable body, and appeared therewith, and shewed the same unto his apostles,
and especially to Thomas, making him to put
his hands into his side and to feel his wounds.
Christ cor- And with the self-same body he forsook this
porally is “^ ascended world, aud asccndcd into heaven, (the apostles
into heaven. ‘ n i seeing and beholding his body when it ascended,) and now sitteth at the right hand of his Father, and there shall remain until the last day,
when he shall come to judge the quick and the
dead “. This is the true Catholick faith, which
the Scripture teacheth, and the universal church
of Christ hath ever believed from the beginning
until within these four or five hundred years
last past, that the bishop of Rome, with the as- sistance of his Papists, hath set up a new faith
and belief of their own devising, that the same
body really, corporally, naturally, and sensibly,
* Acts iii.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 105is in this world still, and that in an hundred
thousand places at one time, being enclosed in
every pix and bread consecrated.
And although we do affirm, (according to chap.
God’s word,) that Christ is “in all persons that II. truly believe in him, in such sort, that with his J,l!fe*be-^” flesh and blood he doth spiritually nourish them, tru^anirthe and feed them, and giveth them everlasting life, doctrine* 111 1 1 r- nil concerning and doth assure them thereoi, as well bv the the presence
of Christ’s promise of his word, as by the sacramental bread ^°^yand wine in his holy supper, which he did institute for the same purpose, yet we do not a little vary from the heinous errors of the Papists : for
they teach, that Christ is in the bread and wine
:
but we say, according to the truth, that he is in
them that worthily eat and drink the bread and
wine. They say, that when any man eateth the
bread and drinketh the cup, Christ goeth into
his mouth or stomach with the bread and wine,
and no further : but we say, that Christ is in the
whole man, both in the body and soul of him
that worthily eateth the bread and drinketh the
cup, and not in his mouth or stomach only.
They say, that Christ is received in the mouth,
and entereth in with the bread and wine : we
say, that he is received in the heart, and entereth
in by faith. They say, that Christ is really in
the sacramental bread, being reserved an whole
year, or so long as the form of bread remaineth
;
but after the receiving thereof, he flyeth up (say
104 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
they) from the receiver unto heaven, as soon as the bread is chewed in the mouth, or changed in
the stomach : but we say, that Christ remaineth
in the man that worthily receiveth it, so long as the man remaineth’a member of Christ.
They say, that in the sacrament, the corporal
members of Christ be not distant in place one from another, but that wheresoever the head is,
there be the feet, and wheresoever the arms be,
there be the legs ; so that in every part of the
bread and wine is altogether whole head, whole
feet, whole flesh, whole blood, whole heart,
whole lungs, whole breast, whole back, and al- together whole, confused, and mixt without distinction or diversity. O, what a foolish and an abominable invention is this, to make of the
most pure and perfect body of Christ such a confused and monstrous body ! And yet can the
Papists imagine nothing so foolish, but all Christian people must receive the same as an oracle
of God, and as a most certain article of their
faith, without whispering to the contrary.
Furthermore the Papists say, that a dog or a
cat eat the body of Christ, if they by chance do
eat the sacramental bread : we say, that no
earthly creature can eat the body of Christ, nor
drink his blood, but only man. They say, that
every man, good and evil, eateth the body of
Christ : we say, that both do eat the sacramental
bread and drink the wine, but none do eat the
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 105very body of Christ, and drink his blood, but
only they that be lively members of his body.
They say, that good men eat the body of
Christ, and drink his blood, only at that time
when they receive the sacrament : we say, that
they eat, drink, and feed of Christ continually, so long as they be members of his body.
They say, that the body of Christ that is in
the sacrament, hath his own proper form and
quantity : we say, that Christ is there sacra- mentally and spiritually, without form or quantity.
They say, that the fathers and prophets of the
Old Testament did not eat the body nor drink
the blood of Christ : we say, that they did eat
his body and drink his blood, although he was
not yet born nor incarnated.
They say, that the body of Christ is every day
many times made as often as there be masses
said, and that then and there he is made of bread
and wine : we say, that Christ’s body was never but once made, and then not of the nature and
substance of bread and wine, but of the substance of his blessed mother.
They say, that the mass is a sacrifice satisfactory for sin, by the devotion of the priest that
offereth, and not by the thing that is offered : but
we say, that their saying is a most heinous lie and detestable error against the glory of Christ.
For the satisfaction for our sins is not the devo-
106 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
tion nor offering of the priest ; but the only host
and satisfaction for all the sins of the world is the death of Christ, and the oblation of his body
upon the cross, that is to say, the oblation that
Christ himself offered once upon the cross, and
never but once, nor never none but he. Andtherefore that oblation, which the priests makedaily in their Papistical masses, cannot be a sa- tisfaction for other men’s sins by the priest’s devotion, but it is a mere elusion and subtle craft of
the devil, whereby Antichrist hath many years
blinded and deceived the world.
They say, that Christ is corporally in manyplaces at one time, affirming that his body is corporally and really present in as many places
as there be hosts consecrated : we say, that as the Son corporally is ever in heaven, and no where else ; and yet by his operation and virtue,
the Son is here on earth, by whose influence
and virtue all things in the world be corporally
regenerated, encreased, and grow to their perfect state ; so likewise our Saviour Christ bodily
and corporally is in heaven, sitting at the right
hand of his Father, although spiritually he hath
promised to be present with us upon earth unto
the world’s end. And whensoever two or three
be gathered together in his name, he is there in
the midst among them, by whose supernal grace
all godly men be first by him spiritually regenerated, and after increase and grow to their spiri-
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 107tual perfection in God, spiritually by faith eating
his flesh and drinking his blood, although the
same corporally be in heaven, far distant from
our sight.
Now to return to the principal matter, lest it c«ap. might be thought a new device of us, that Christ
III.
as concerning his body and his human nature is herei7by
in heaven, and not in earth : therefore by God’s sioninour grace, it shall be evidently proved, that this is creed. no new devised matter, but that it was ever the
old faith of the Catholick church, until the Papists invented a new faith, that Christ really,
corporally, naturally, and sensibly is here still with us in earth, shut up in a box, or within the
compass of bread and wine. This needeth no
better nor stronger proof, than that which the
old authors bring for the same, that is to say,
the general profession of all Christian people in
the common Creed, wherein, as concerning
Christ’s humanity, they be taught to believe
after this sort: that he was conceived by the
Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary ; that he
suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified,
dead, and buried ; that he descended into hell,
and rose again the third day ; that he ascended
into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of his
almighty Father, and from thence shall come to
judge the quick and the dead. This hath been
ever the Catholick faith of Christian people, that
Christ, as concerning his body and his manhood^
108 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
is in heaven, and shall there continue until he
come down at the last judgment. And forasmuch as the Creed maketh so express mention
of the article of his ascension, and departing
hence from us ; if it had been another article of our faith, that his body tarrieth also here with us
in earth, surely in this place of the Creed was so urgent an occasion given to make some mention
thereof, that doubtless it would not have been
passed over in our Creed with silence. For if Christ, as concerning his humanity, be both
here and gone hence, and both those two be articles of our faith, when mention was made of
the one in the Creed, it was necessary to makemention of the other, lest, by professing the one,
we should be dissuaded from believing the other,
being so contrary the one to the other.
CHAP. To this article of our Creed accordeth holy
‘.— Scripture, and all the old ancient doctors of
beieofby Christ’s cliurch. For Christ himself said, ” I
the Scripture, leave the world, and go to my Father^’.” Andalso he said, ‘* You shall ever have poor folks
with you, but you shall not ever have me with
you ^” And he gave warning of this error before hand, saying, ” That the time would come
when many deceivers should be in the world,
and say, Here is Christ, and there is Christ; but
believe them not, said Christ ^” And St. Mark
^ John xvi. <= Matt. xxvi. ^ Matt. xxiv.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 109writethin the last chapter of his Gospel, ** That
the Lord Jesus was taken up into heaven, and
sitteth at the right hand of his Father ‘.” And
St. Paul exhorteth all men *’ to seek for things
that be above in heaven, where Christ,” saith
he, ” sitteth at the right hand of God his Father ^” Also he saith, ” That we have such a
bishop, that sitteth in heaven at the right hand
of the throne of God’s majesty ^.” And ” that
he having offered one sacrifice for sins, sitteth
continually at the right hand of God, until his
enemies be put under his feet, as a footstool ”.” And hereunto consent all the old doctors of the
church.
First, Origen* upon Matthew reasoneth this <^”^pmatter, how Christ may be called a stranger
V.
that is departed into another country, seeing thS°by 11–1 t 1 in 1 ^”^ieit au- that he is with us alway unto the world s end, thors. and is among all them that be gathered together
in his name, and also in the midst of them that
know him not. And thus he reasoneth : *’ If he
be here among us still, how can he be gone
hence as a stranger departed into another country ? Whereunto he answereth, that Christ is both God and man, having in him two natures.
And as a man he is not with us unto the world’s
end, nor is present with all his faithful that be
• Mark vii. ^ Coloss. iii. « Heb. viii. *” Heb. x.
‘ Oiigen. ill Mat. Tract. A’i.
OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
gathered together m his name; but his divine
power and spirit is ever with us. Paul (saith
he) was absent from the Corinthians in his body,
when he was present with them in his spirit.
So is Christ (saith he) gone hence, and absent
in his humanity, which in his divine nature is every where. And in this saying (saith Origen)
we divide not his humanity ; for St. John writeth, that no spirit that divideth Jesus can be of
God ; but we reserve to both his natures their
own properties.” In these words Origen hath
plainly declared his mind, that Christ’s body is not both present here with us, and also gonehence and estranged from us. For that were to
make two natures of one body, and to divide the
body of Jesus ; forasmuch as one nature cannot
at one time be both with us and absent from us. And therefore, saith Origen, that the presence
must be understood of his divinity, and the ab- sence of his humanity.
And according hereunto, St. Augustine writeth thus, in an Epistle Ad Darda?m?n ^. ” Doubtnot but Jesus Christ, as concerning the nature
of his manhood, is now there, from whence heshall come ; and remember well and believe the
profession of a Christian man, that he rose fromdeath, ascended into heaven, sitteth at the right
hand of his Father, and from that place, and” August, ad Dardanum, Epist. 57.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. Ill
none other, shall he come to judge the quick
and the dead. And he shall come (as the angels
said) as he was seen go into heaven, that is to
say, in the same form and substance, unto the
which he gave immortality, but changed not nature. After this form, (saith he,) meaning his
man’s nature, we may not think that he is every
where. For we must beware, that we do not so
establish his divinity, that we take away the
verity of his body.” These be St. Augustine’s
plain words. And by and by, after, he addeth
these words : ” The Lord Jesus as God is every
where, and as man is in heaven.” And, finally,
he concludeth this matter in these few words
:
” Doubt not but our Lord Jesus Christ is every
where as God ; and as a dweller he is in man
that is the temple of God, and he is in a certain
place in heaven, because of the measure of a very body.” And again St. Augustine writeth
upon the Gospel of St. John’ : *’ The Lord Jesus,” saith he, ** is above, but yet the truth of
his word is here. His body wherein he arose is in one place, but the truth of his word is spread
every where.” And in another place of the
same book ™, St. Augustine, expounding these
words of Christ, ” You shall ever have poor men
with you, but me you shall not ever have,” saith,
** That Christ spake these words of the presence
‘ In Joan. Tract, 30. ” Tract. 50.
112 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
of his body. For (saith he) as concerning his
Divine Majesty, as concerning his providence,
as concerning his infallible and invisible grace,
these words be fulfilled which he spake, ‘ I amwith you unto the world’s end.’ But as con- cerning the flesh which he took in his incarnation, as concerning that which was born of the
Virgin, as concerning that which was apprehended by the Jews, and crucified upon a tree,
and taken down from the cross, lapped in linen
clothes, and buried, and rose again, and appeared
after his resurrection ; as concerning that flesh
he said, ‘ You shall not ever have me with you.’
Wherefore seeing, that as concerning his flesh,
he was conversant with his disciples forty days,
and they accompanying, -seeing, and following
him, he went up into heaven, both he is not
here, (for he sitteth at the right hand of his Father,) and yet he is here, for he departed not
hence, as concerning the presence of his Divine
Majesty. As concerning the presence of his
Majesty, we have Christ ever with us ; but as concerning the presence of his flesh, he said
truly to his disciples, ‘ Ye shall not ever have
me with you.’ For as concerning the presence
of his flesh, the church had Christ but a fewdays ; yet now it holdeth him fast by faith,
though it see him not with eyes.” All these be
St. Augustine’s words.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 113Also in another book “, entitled to St. Auoustine, is written thus : ‘* We must believe and
confess, that the Son of God, as concerning his
divinity, is invisible, without a body, immortal,
and incircumscriptible ; but, as concerning his
humanity, we ought to believe and confess, that
he is visible, hath a body, and is contained in a
certain place, and hath truly all the members of a man.” Of these words of St. Augustine, it is most clear, that the profession of the Catholick
faith is, that Christ, as concerning his bodily
substance and nature of man, is in heaven, and
not present here with us in earth. For the nature and property of a very body is to be in one
place, and to occupy one place, and not to be
every where, or in riiany places at one time.
And though the body of Christ, after his resur- rection and ascension, was made immortal, yet
the nature thereof was not changed ; for then,
as St. Augustine saith, it were no very body.
And further, St. Augustine sheweth both the
manner and form, how Christ is here present
with us in earth, and how he is absent, saying,
that he is present by his divine nature and majesty, by his providence, and by his grace ; but
by his human nature and very body, he is absent from this world, and present in heaven,
” De Essentia Divinitatis.
I
114 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
Cyrillus” likewise, upon the Gospel of St.
John, agreeth fully with St. Augustine, saying,
** Although Christ took away from hence the
presence of his body, yet in the majesty of his
Godhead he is ever here, as he promised to his
disciples at his departing, saying, * I am with
you ever unto the world’s end.’ ” And in another place P of the same book, St. Cyril saith
thus : *’ Christian people must believe, that al- though Christ be absent from us, as concerning
his body, yet by his power he governeth us and
all things, and is present with all them that love
him. Therefore he said, * Truly, truly I say
unto you, wheresoever there be two or three gathered together in my name, there am I in the
midst of them.’ For like as when he was conversant here in earth as a man, yet then he filled heaven, and did not leave the company of angels : even so being now in heaven with his flesh,
yet he filleth the earth, and is in them that love
him. And it is to be marked, that although
Christ should go away only as concerning his
flesh, (for he is ever present in the power of his
divinity,) yet for a little time he said he would
be with his disciples.” These be the words of
St. Cyril.
St. Ambrose also saith \ ” That we must not
• Cyrillus in Joan. lib. 6. cap. 14. “^ Libro 6. cap. 21.
‘^ Ambrosius in Lucam. lib. 10. cap. 24.
JN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 115
seek Christ upon earth, nor in earth, but in heaven, where he sitteth at the right hand of his
Father.”
And likewise St. Gregory ” writeth thus:
** Christ,” saith he, ” is not here by the pre- sence of his flesh, and yet he is absent no where
by the presence of his majesty.” What subtlety
thinkest thou, good reader, can the Papists now
imagine, to defend their pernicious error, that
Christ in his human nature is bodily here in
earth, in the consecrated bread and wine ; see- ing that all the old church of Christ believed the
contrary, and all the old authors wrote the contrary ? For they all affirmed and believed, that
Christ, being one person, hath nevertheless in
him two natures or substances, that is to say,
the nature of his Godhead, and the nature of his
manhood. They say furthermore, that Christ is both gone hence from us unto heaven, and is also here with us in earth, but not in his human
nature, as the Papists would have us to believe
;
but the old authors say, that he is in heaven, as concerning his manhood, and nevertheless both
here and there, and every where, as concerning
his Godhead. For although his divinity be such
that it is infinite, without measure, compass, or place ; so that, as concerning that nature, he is circumscribed with no place, but is every where,
‘ GregOiius in Horn, ruschat,
1 2
116 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
and filleth all the world : yet as concerning his
human nature, he hath measure, compass, andplace ; so that when he was here upon earth, hewas not at the same time in heaven ; and nowthat he is ascended into heaven, as concerning
that nature, he hath now forsaken the earth, andis only in heaven,
CHAP. For one nature, that is circumscribed, compassed, and measured, cannot be in divers places VI. cZottm at one time. This is the faith of the old Cathopilces at lick church, as appeareth as well by the authors
before rehearsed, as by these that hereafter
follow.
St. Augustine speaking, that a body mustneeds be in some place, saith, ‘* That if it be not
within the compass of a place, it is no where.
And if it be no where, then it is not ‘.” And St. Cyril, considering the proper nature
of a very body, said, ‘* That if the nature of the
Godhead were a body, it must needs be in a
place, and have quantity, greatness, and circumscription *.” If then the nature of the Godhead must needs
be circumscribed, if it were a body, much moremust the nature of Christ’s manhood be circumscribed and contained within the compass of a
certain place.
Didymus also “, in his book De Spiritu Saticto,
• Ad Dardanum. » Cyrillus de Trin. lib. 2.
” Didymus de Spiritu Sancto, lib. 1. cap. 1.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 117(which St. Jerome did translate,) proveth, that the
Holy Ghost is very God; because he is in many
places at one time, which no creature can be.
*’For,” saith he, ” all creatures, visible and invisible, be circumscribed and environed either within one place, (as corporeal and visible things be,) or within the propriety of their own substance,
(as angels and invisible creatures be,) so that no
angel,” saith he, ‘* can be at one time in two places.
And forasmuch as the Holy Ghost is in many
men at one time, therefore,” saith he, “the Holy
Ghost must needs be God.” The same affirmeth St. Basil also “, ” That the angel, which was
with Cornelius, was not at the same time with
Philip; nor the angel, which spake to Zachary
in the altar, was not the same time in his proper
place in heaven. But the Holy Ghost was at one time in Habakkuk, and in Daniel in Babylon, and with Jeremy in prison, and with Ezekiel in Chober; whereby he proveth, that the
Holy Ghost is God.” Wherefore the Papists,
which say that the body of Christ is in an infi- nite number of places at one time, do make his
body to be God, and so confound the two natures of Christ, attributing to his human nature
that tiling which belongeth only to his divinity,
which is a most heinous and detestable heresy.
Against whom writeth Fulgentius ^ in this wise,
‘ Basilius (le Spiritu Sancto, cap. 22.
^ Fulgentius ad Trasimundum Regem, lib. 2,
lis OF THE PKESENCE OF CHllIST
speaking of the distinction and diversity of the
two natures in Christ : ” One and the self-same
Christ,” saith he, ” of mankind was made a man,
compassed in a place, who of his Father is God,
without measure or place. One and the self- same person, as concerning his man’s substance,
was not in heaven, when he was in earth, andforsook the earth when he ascended into heaven:
but as concerning his godly substance, which is above all measure, he neither left heaven, whenhe canie from heaven, nor he left not the earth
when he ascended into heaven, w^hich may beknown by the most certain word of Christ himself, who, to shew the placing of his humanity,
said to his disciples, * I ascend up to my Father
and your Father, to my God and your God.’
Also when he had said of Lazarus, that he wasdead, he added, saying, * I am glad for yoursakes, that you may believe ; for I was not there.’
But to shew the unmeasurable compass of his
divinity, he said to his disciples, ‘ Behold, I amwith you always unto the world’s end.’ Nowhow did he go up into heaven, but because he is a very man, contained within a place ? Or howis he present with faithful people, but becausehe is very God, being without measure ?” Ofthese words of Fulgentius it is declared mostcertainly, that Christ is not here with us in earth,
but by his Godhead, and that his humanity is in
heaven only, and absent from us.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 119Yet the same is more plainly shewed, (if more
plainly can be spoken,) by Vigilius’, a bishop and
an holy martyr. He writeth thus against the heretick Eutyches, which denied the humanity of
Christ, holding opinion that he was only God, and
not man. Whose error Vigilius confuting, proveth
that Christ had in him two natures joined together in one person, the nature of his Godhead
and the nature of his manhood. Thus he writeth: ‘* Christ said to his disciples, * If you loved
me, you would be glad, for I go unto my Father.’
And again he said, ‘ It is expedient for you that
I go, for if I go not, the Comforter shall not
come to you.’ And yet surely the eternal word
of God, the virtue of God, the wisdom of God,
was ever with his Father, and in his Father, yea
even at the same time when he was with us and
in us. For when he did mercifully dwell in this
world, he left not his habitation in heaven, for
he is every where whole with his Father equal
in divinity, whom no place can contain, for the
Son filleth all things, and there is no place that
lacketh the presence of his divinity. From
whence then and whither did he say that he
would go ? Or how did he say that he went to his Father, from whom doubtless he never departed ? But that to go to his Father, and from
us, was to take from this world that nature which
* Vigilius contra Eutychen, lib. 1.
120 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
he received of us. Thou seest, therefore, that it was the property of that nature to be taken
away and go from us, which in the end of the
world shall be rendered again to us, as the angels witnessed, saying, * This Jesus, which is taken from you, shall come again, like as you saw
him going up into heaven.’ For look upon the
miracle, look upon the mystery, of both the natures. The Son of God, as concerning his humanity, went from us ; as concerning his divinity, he said unto us, * Behold 1 am with you
all the days unto the world’s end.’

Thus far have I rehearsed the words of Vigilius, and by and bye he concludeth thus : ” Heis with us, and not with us. For those whomhe left and went from them, as concerning his
humanity, those he left not, nor forsook them
not, as touching his divinity. For as touching
the form of a servant, (which he took away from
us into heaven,) he is absent from us ; but bythe form of God, (which goeth not from us,) he
is present with us in earth : aud nevertheless,
both present and absent, he is all one Christ.”
Hitherto you have heard Vigilius speak, that
Christ as concerning his bodily presence, and
the nature of his manhood is gone from us, taken
from us, is gone up into heaven, is not with us, hath left us, hath forsaken us. But as concerning the other nature of his Deity, he is still with
us; so that he is both with us, and not with us :
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 121
with US in the nature of his Deity, and not with
us in the nature of his humanity. And yet more
clearly doth the same Vigilius declare the same
thing in another place % saying, ” If the word
and the flesh were both of one nature, seeing
that the word is every where, why is not the
flesh then every where ? For when it was in
earth, then verily it was not in heaven ; and now
when it is in heaven, it is not surely in earth.
And it is so sure that it is not in earth, that as concerning it, we look for him to come from
heaven, whom, as concerning his eternal word, ‘ we believe to be with us in earth. Therefore by
your doctrine, (saith Vigilius unto Eutyches,
who defended that the divinity and humanity in
Christ was but one nature,) either the word is contained in a place with his flesh, or else the
flesh is every where with the word. For one
nature cannot receive in itself two divers and
contrary things. But these two things be divers
and far unlike, that is to say, to be contained in a place, and to be every where. Therefore inasmuch as the word is every where, and the flesh
is not every where, it appeareth plainly, that one Christ himself hath in him two natures ; and that by his divine nature he is every where,
and by his human nature he is contained in a
place ; that he is created, and hath no beginningj,
* Contra Eutychen, lib. 4.
122 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
that he is subject to death, and cannot die.
Whereof one he hath by the nature of his word,
– whereby he is God, and the other he hath bythe nature of his flesh, whereby the same Godis man also. Therefore one Son of God, the
self-same was made the son of man, and he hath
a beginning by the nature of his flesh, and nobeginning by the nature of his Godhead. He is created by the nature of his flesh, and not cre- ated by the nature of his Godhead. He is comprehended in a place by the nature of his flesh,
and not comprehended in a place by the nature
of his Godhead. He is inferior to angels in the
nature of his flesh, and is equal to his Father in
the nature of his Godhead. He died by the nature of his flesh, and died not by the nature of
his Godhead. This is the faith and Catholick
confession which the apostles taught, the martyrs did corroborate, and faithful people keepunto this day.” All these be the sayings of Vigilius, who, according to all the other authors
before rehearsed, and to the faith and Catholick
confession of the apostles, martyrs, and all faithful people unto his time, saith, that as concerning Christ’s humanity, when he was here onearth, he was not in heaven ; and now when heis in heaven, he is not in earth. For one nature
‘ cannot be both contained in a place in heaven,
and be also herein earth at one time. And forasmuch as Christ is here with us in earth, and
IN HIS HOLT SUPPER. 123
also is contained in a place in heaven, he proveth
thereby, that Christ hath two natures in him,
the nature of a man, whereby he is gone from
us, and ascended into heaven ; and the nature of
his Godhead, whereby he is here with us in
earths So that it is not one nature that is here
with us, and that is gone from us, that is as- cended into heaven, and there contained, and
that is permanent here with us in earth. Wherefore the Papists, which now of late years have
made a new faith, that Christ’s natural body is teally and naturally present both with us here
in earth, and sitteth at the right hand of his Father in heaven, do err in two very horrible heresies. The one, that they confound his two natures, his Godhead and his manhood, attributing
unto his humanity that thing which appertaineth
only to his divinity, that is to say, to be in hea- ven and earth and in many places at one time.
The other is, that they divide and separate his
human nature, or his body, making of one body
of Christ two bodies and two natures; one which
is in heaven, visible and palpable, having all members and proportions of a most perfect natural man ; and another, which they say is in
earth here with us, in every bread and wine that
is consecrated, having no distinction, form, nor
proportion of members : Which contrarieties and
diversities (as this holy martyr Vigilius saith)
cannot be together in one nature.
124 01’ THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
CHAP. But now seeing that it is so evident a matter,
VII. both by the express words of Scripture, and also
An answer
to the Pa- by all the old authors of the same, that our Sapists, alleg- ing for Uiem viour Christ (as concernino- his bodily presence)these words, ^ ^ j i /
bod'”‘”‘*”^ is ascended into heaven, and is not here in earth
;
and seeing that this hath been the true confession of the Catholick faith ever since Christ’s
ascension ; it is now to be considered what movedthe Papists to make a new and contrary faith,
and what Scriptures they have for their purpose.
What moved them I know not, but their owniniquity, or the nature and condition of the see
of Rome, which is of all other most contrary to
Christ, and therefore most worthy to be called
the see of Antichrist. And as for Scripture,
nienioftiie they allcgc none but only one, and that not truly
Papists. Ill 1 • understood; but, to serve their purpose, wrestedout of tune, whereby they make it to jar andsound contrary to all other Scriptures pertaining
to that matter.
Jr’Tta’tiorof Christ took bread, (say they,) blessed andII’tlj^u mj ^’^^^^ it, and gave it to his disciples, saying,
boaj.” i( rpj^-g
jg j^y ]3Q(jy ” These words they ever
still repeat and beat upon, that Christ said,
** This is my body.” And this saying they maketheir sheet-anchor, to prove thereby as well the
real and natural presence of Christ’s body in the
sacrament, as their imagined Transubstantiation.
For these words of Christ (say they) be most
plain and most true. Then forasmuch as he said^
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 125
** This is my body,” it must needs be true, that
that thing which the priest holdeth in his hands
is Christ’s body. And if it be Christ’s body,
then can it not be bread, whereof they gather
by their reasoning, that there is Christ’s body
really present, and no bread. Now forasmuch
as all their proof hangeth only upon these words,
** This is my body,” the true sense and meaning
of these words must be examined. But (say
they) what need they any examination ? What
words can be more plain than to say, ** This is my body ?” Truth it is indeed, that the words be as plain The answer, as may be spoken ; but that the sense is not so
plain, it is manifest to every man that weigheth
substantially the circumstances of the place.
For when Christ gave bread to his disciples, and
said, ** This is my body,” there is no man of any
discretion, that understandeth the English
tongue, but he may well know by the order of
the speech, that Christ Ispake those words of the
bread, calling it his body, as all the old authors
also do affirm, although many of the Papists
deny the same. Wherefore this sentence can- not mean as the words seem and purport, but
there must needs be some figure or mystery in
this speech, more than appeareth in the plain
words. For by this manner of speech, plainly
understood without any figure as the words lie, can be gathered none other sense but that bread •
126 dF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
is Christ’s body, and that Christ’s body is bread,
which all Christian ears do abhor to hear.
Wherefore in these words must needs be soughtout another sense and meaning than the wordsof themselves do bear.
CHAP. And although the true sense and understanding of these words be sufficiently declared beVIII.
edbreadVs forc, whcu I spakc of Transubstautiatiou; yet to
wbe hL” make the matter so plain that no scruple or doubtshall remain, here is occasion given more fully
to treat thereof. In which process shall beshewed, that these sentences of Christ, *’ This is my body,” ” This is my blood,” be figurative
speeches. And although it be manifest enoughby the plain words of the Gospel, and provedbefore in the process of Transubstantiation, that
Christ spake of bread when he said, ” This is my body;” likewise that it was very wine whichhe called his blood ; yet lest the Papists shouldsay that we suck this out of our own fingers,
the same shall be proved, by testimony of all the
old authors, to be the true and old faith of the
Catholick church. Whereas the school authors
and Papists shall not be able to shew so muchas one word of any ancient author to the contrary.
First, Irenaeus, writing against the Valentinians, in his fourth book^ saith, ** That Christ
** Irenaeus contra Valen. li)). 4. cap. 32.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 127
confessed bread, which is a creature, to be his
body, and the cup to be his blood.” And in the
same book% he writeth thus also : ** The bread,
wherein the thanks be given, is the body of the
Lord.” And yet again, in the same book ^ he
saith, ** That Christ taking bread of the same
sort that our bread is of, confessed that it was
his body. And that that thing which was tempered in the chalice, was his blood.” And in
the fifth book % he writeth further, ” That of the
chalice, which is his blood, a man is nourished,
and doth grow by the bread, which is his body.”
These words of Irenseus be most plain, that
Christ taking very material bread, a creature of
God, and of such sort as other bread is, which
we do use, called that his body, when he said,
** This is my body.” And the wine also, which
doth feed and nourish us, he called his blood.
Tertullian likewise, in his book written against
the Jews^, saith, *’ That Christ called bread his
body.” And in his book against Marcion, he
oftentimes repeateth the self-same words. And
St. Cyprian, in the first book of his Epistles ^, saith the same thing, ” That Christ called such
bread, as is made of many corns joined together,
his body : and such wine he named his blood, as
is pressed out of many grapes, and made into
‘ Irenseus contra Valen. cap. 34. ” Cap. 57. * Lib. 5.
‘ Tertullianus adversus Jiidaeos.
^ Cyprianus ad Magnum, lib. 1. epist. 6.
128 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRISt
wine.” And in his second book”, he saith these
words, “Water is not the blood of Christ, butwine.” And again, in the same Epistle, he saith, ” That it was wine which Christ called his
blood ; and that if wine be not in the chalice,
then we drink not of the fruit of the vine.” Andin the same Epistle he saith, ” That meal alone, or water alone, is not the body of Christ, exceptthey be both joined together to make thereofbread.” Epiphanius also saith ‘, ** That Christ,
speaking of a loaf which is round in fashion, andcannot see, hear, nor feel, said of it, * This is my body.’ ” And St. Jerome, writing Ad Hedihiam, saith these words”, *’ Let us mark, thatthe bread which the Lord brake and gave to his
disciples, was the body of our Saviour Christ, ashe said unto them, * Take and eat, this is mybody.’ ” And St. Augustine also saith \ ” Thatalthough we may set forth Christ by mouth, bywriting, and by the sacrament of his body andblood, yet we call neither our tongue, nor words,nor ink, letters, nor paper, the body and bloodof Christ ; but that we call the body and bloodof Christ, which is taken of the fruit of the earth,
and consecrated by mystical prayer.” And also
he saith””, *’ Jesus called meat his body, anddrink, his blood.”
” Cyprianus ad Magnum, lib. 2. epist. 5.
‘ Epiphan. in Ancorato. ^ Hieron. a<l Hedibiam«
‘ August, de Ti’init. lib. 3. cap. 4. ” De verbis Apostoli, serm. 2.
TN HIS HOLY SU1>P£R. 129Moreover Cyril, upon Si. John, saith”, ** That
Christ gave to his disciples pieces of bread, saying, * Take, eat, this is my body.’

Likew^ise Theodoretus saith”, ” When Christ
gave the holy mysteries, he called bread his
body ; and the cup mixt with wine and water^
he called his blood.”
By all these foresaid authors and places, with
many more, it is plainly proved, that when our
Saviour Christ gave bread unto his disciples,
saying, ** Take and eat, this is my body ;” and
likewise when he gave them the cup, saying,
‘* Divide this among you, and drink you all of
this, for this is my blood ;” he called then the
very material bread his body, and the very wine
his blood.
That bread (I say) that is one of the creatures
here in earth among us, and that groweth out of
the earth, and is made of many grains of corn,
beaten into flour, and mixt with water, and so baken and made into bread, of such sort as other our bread is, that hath neither sense nor reason,
and finally that feedeth and nourisheth our bodies. Such bread Christ called his body, when
he said, ”This is my body.” And such wine as
is made of grapes pressed together, and thereof
is made drink which nourisheth the body, such
” Cyrillus in .Toanem. lib. 4. cap. 14.
” Theodoretus in Dialocro. 1.
130 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
wine he called his blood. This is the true doctrine, confirmed as well by holy Scripture, as by
all ancient authors of Christ’s church, both
Greeks and Latins, that is to say, that when our
Saviour Christ gave bread and wine to his disciples, and spake these words, ” This is my body,”
‘* This is my blood,” it was very bread and wine
which he called his body and blood.
Now let the Papists shew some authority for
their opinion, either of Scripture or of some ancient author. And let them not constrain all men to follow their fond devices, only because
they say it is so, without any other ground or
authority, but their own bare words. For in
such wise credit is to be given to God’s word
only, and not to the word of any man. As manyof them as I have read (the bishop of Winchester
only excepted) do say, that Christ called not
the bread his body, nor wine his blood, when he
said, ” This is my body, this is my blood.”
And yet in expounding these words, they vary
among themselves : which is a token that they
be uncertain of their own doctrine. For some
of them say, that by this pronoun demonstrative, ” this,” Christ understood not the bread
nor wine, but his body and blood. And other
some say, that by the pronoun ” this,” he meant
neither the bread nor wine, nor his body nor
blood, but that he meant a particular thing uncertain, which they call iMdividuum vagum, or
TNT HIS HOLY SUPPER. 131
individuum i?i gencre, I trow some mathematical
quiddity, they camiot tell what. But let all these
Papists together shew any one authority, either
of Scripture, or of ancient author, either Greek
or Latin, that saith as they say, that Christ
called not bread and wine his body and blood,
but individuum vagwn ; and for my part I shall
give them place, and confess that they say true. And if they can shew nothing for them of antiquity, but only their own bare words, then it is reason that they give place to the truth con- firmed by so many authorities, both of Scripture
and of ancient writers, which is, that Christ called
very material bread his body, and very wine
made of grapes his blood.
Now this being fully proved, it must needs chap.
follow consequently, that this manner of speak- If: ing is a figurative speech : for in plain and pro- ^od^’f wi™^ per speech it is not true to say that bread is be figura°uv, Christ’s body, or wine his blood. For Christ’.s”^””‘”‘ body hath a soul, life, sense, and reason : but
bread hath neither soul nor life, sense nor reason. Likewise, in plain speech, it is not true
that we eat Christ’s body, and drink his blood.
For eating and drinking, in their proper and
usual signification, is with the tongue, teeth, and
lips, to swallow, divide, and chew in pieces : which thing to do to the flesh and blood of
Christ, is horrible to be heard of any Christian.
K 2
l”^2 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
CHAP.
X. To eat
So that these speeches, to eat Christ’s body^
and drink his blood, to call bread his body, or
ciirist’s wnro his blood, be speeches not taken in the
llesli, and _ _
*•
blood ^lie P^*^P^^’ signification of every word, but by trans-
/iguiative lation of these words, ” eatinsf and drinkinof,” speeches. ‘ ~ ~’ from the signification of a corporeal thing* to signify a spiritual thing; and by calling a thing that
signifieth by the name of the thing which is signified thereby : which is no rare nor strange
thing, but an usual manner and phrase in common
speech. And yet lest this fault should be imputed unto us, that we do feign things of our own
heads without authority, (as the Papists be ac- customed to do,) here shall be cited sufficient
authority, as well of Scripture, as of old ancient
authors, to approve the same.
First, when our Saviour Christ, in the sixth of
John, said, ” That he was the bread of life, the
which whosoever did eat, should not die, but live
for ever; and that the bread which he would
give us^ was his flesh; and, therefore, whosoever
should eat his flesh, and drink his blood, should
have everlasting life ; and they that should not
cat his flesh and drink his blood, should not
have everlasting life p.” When Christ liad
spoken these words, with many more of the eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood, both
^ the Jews, and many also of his disciples, were
•’ Jolm vi.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 133offended with his words, and said, ” This is an
hard saying : for how can he give us his flesli to \ be eaten ?” Christ perceiving their murmuring
hearts, (because they knew none other eating of
his flesh, but by chewing and swallowing,) to declare that they should not eat his body after
that sort, nor that he meant of any such carnal
eating, he said thus unto them, ” What if you
see the Son of man ascend up where he was before ? It is the spirit that giveth life, the flesh
availeth nothing. The words, which I spake
unto you, be spirit and life.” These words our
Saviour Christ spake, to lift up their minds from
earth to heaven, and from carnal to spiritual
eating, that they should not fancy that they
should with their teeth eat him presently here in
earth, for his flesh so eaten (saith he) should nothing profit them. And yet so they should not
eat him, for he would take his body away from
them, and ascend with it into heaven : and
there by faith, and not with teeth, they should
spiritually eat him, sitting at the right hand of
his Father. ” And therefore,” saith he, ” the
words which I do speak, be spirit and life:”
that is to say, are not to be understood that we
shall eat Christ with our teeth grossly and carnally, but that we shall spiritually and ghostly
with our faith eat him, being carnally absent x from us in heaven, in such wise as Abraham and
other holy fathers did eat him, many years be.-
134 OF THE PRESENCE OE CHRIST
fore he was incarnated and born. As St. Paul
saith, ” That they did eat the same spiritual
meat that we do, and drank the same spiritual
drink, that is to say, Christ ”.” For they spiritually by their faith were fed and nourished with
Christ’s body and blood, and had eternal life by
him, before he was born, as we have now, that
come after his ascension. Thus have you heard,
by the declaration of Christ himself, and of St.
Paul, that the eating and drinking of Christ’s
flesh and blood is not taken in the common signification, with mouth and teeth to eat and chew
a thing being present, but by a lively faith in
heart and mind to chew and digest a thing being
absent, either ascended hence into heaven, or
else not yet born upon earth.
And Origen ” declaring the said eating of
Christ’s flesh and drinking of his blood, not to
be understood as the words do sound, but figuratively, writeth thus upon these words of
Christ : ” Except you eat my flesh and drink
my blood, you shall not have life in you.”
‘* Consider,” saith Origen, ‘* that these things,
written in God’s books, are figures ; and therefore examine and understand them as spiritual
and not as carnal men. For if you understand
them as carnal men, they hurt you and feed you
not. For even in the Gospels is there found let-
‘s 1 Cor. X. ‘ Ormen, in Levit. Horn. 7.
llSr HIS HOLY SUPPER. 135ter that killeth ; and not only in the Old Testament, but also in the New, is there found letter
that slayeth him that doth not spiritually understand that which is spoken. For if thou follow
the letter or words of this that Christ said, * Except you eat my flesh and drink my blood,’ this
letter killeth.” Who can more plainly express
in any words, that the eating and drinking of
Christ’s flesh and blood are not to be taken in
common signification, as the words pretend and
sound, than Origen doth in this place? And St.
John Chrysostome affirmeth the same % saying, ” That if any man understand the words of
Christ carnally, he shall surely profit nothing
thereby. For what mean these words, ‘ The
flesh availeth nothing ?’ He meant not of his
flesh, (God forbid,) but he meant of them that
fleshly and carnally understood those things
that Christ spake. But what is carnal understanding ? To understand the words simply as they be spoken, and nothing else. For we ought
not so to understand the things which we see, but all mysteries must be considered with inward eyes, and that is, spiritually to understand
them.” In these words St. John Chrysostome
sheweth plainly, that the words of Christ, con- cerning the eating of his flesh and drinking of
his blood, are not to be understood simply, as
* Chrysost, in Joamiem. Horn. 26.
136 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
they be spoken, but spiritually and figuratively.
And yet most plainly of all other, St. Augustine
doth declare this matter in his book De Doctrina
Christiana *, in which book he instructeth Christian people, how they should understand those
places of Scripture, which seem hard and obscure. ” Seldom,” saith he, *’ is any difficulty
in proper words, but either the circumstance of
the place, or the conferring of divers translations, or else the original tongue wherein it was
written, will make the sense plain. But in words
that be altered from their proper signification,
there is great diligence and heed to be taken.
And specially we must beware, that we take not
literally any thing that is spoken figuratively.
Nor, contrariwise, we must not take for a figure
any thing that is spoken properly. Therefore
must be declared,” saith St. Augustine, ** the
manner how to discern a proper speech from a
figurative ; wherein,” saith he, *’ must be observed this rule, that if the thing which is spoken
be to the furtherance of charity, then it is a proper speech, and no figure. So that if it be a commandment that forbiddeth any evil or wicked act, or commandeth any good or beneficial
thing, then it is no figure. But if it command
any ill or wicked thing, or forbid any thing that
iis good and beneficial, then it is a figurative
‘ Augustinus De Doctrina Christ, lib. 3.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPEK. 137
speech. Now this saying of Christ, ‘ Except
you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink
his blood, you shall have no life in you,’ seemeth
to command an heinous and a wicked thing
;
therefore it is a figure, commanding us to be
partakers of Christ’s passion, keeping in our minds, to our great comfort and profit, that his
flesh was crucified and wounded for us.” This
is briefly the sentence of St. Augustine, in his
book De Doctrina Christiana. And the like he
writeth in his book De Catechisandis Rndibus “, and in his book Contra Adversarium Legis et Pi^ophetarmn % and in divers other places, which
for tediousness I pass over. For if I should re- hearse all the authorities of St. Augustine and
others which make mention of this matter, it would weary the reader too much. Wherefore
to all them that by any reasonable means will
be satisfied, these things before rehearsed are
sufficient to prove that the eating of Christ’s flesh
and drinking of his blood, is not to be understood simply and plainly, (as the words do properly signify,) that we do eat and drink him
with our mouths ; but it is a figurative speech
spiritually to be understood, that we must deeply
print and fruitfully believe in our hearts, that his
flesh was crucified, and his blood shed, for our
redemption. And this our belief in him, is to
” De Catech. rudib. cnp. 2G.
* Contra advers. Legis ct Prophet, cap. 9.
138 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
eat his flesh and to drink his blood, althoughthey be not present here with us, but be as-cended into heaven. As our forefathers, beforeChrist’s time, did likewise eat his flesh and drinkhis blood, which was so far from them, that hewas not yet then born;
CHAP. The same authors do say also, that when Christcalled the bread his body, and the wine hisXI,
ijo^’Vhis’is ^1^0^) i^ “^^s no proper speech that he then^’/figyrauve “^^^ » ^”^ ^^ ^^^ sacramcuts be figures of otherspeeches, ^jjingg^ ^nd yct have the very names ofthe thingswhich they do signify : so Christ, instituting thesacrament of his most precious body and blood,did use figurative speeches, calling the bread byJe’jTrJ’s^nfeth ^^^^ namc of his body, because it signifieth hisdy’andtht body; and the wine he called his blood, becauseblood.” it represented his blood.
TertuUian \ herein writing against Marcion,saith these words : ” Christ did not reprovebread, whereby he did represent his very body,”And in the same book he saith, ** That Jesustaking bread, and distributing it amongst hisdisciples, made it his body, saying, ‘This is mybody;’ that is to say, (saith Tertullian,) a figureof my body. And therefore, (saith Tertullian,)that Christ called bread his body, and wine hisblood, because that, in the Old Testament, breadand wine were figures of his body and blood.”
‘ TertuUianus contra Marcionem, lib. 1.
IX HIS HOLY SUPPEK. 139
And St. Cyprian, the holy martyr’, saith of
this matter, ** That Christ’s blood is shewed in
the wine, and the people in the water, that is mixt with the wine : so that the mixture of the
water to the wine, signifieth the spiritual commixtion and joining of us unto Christ.” By
which similitude Cyprian meant not that the
blood of Christ is wine, or the people water
;
but as the water doth signify and represent the
people, so doth the wine signify and represent
Christ’s blood : and the uniting of the water and
wine together, signifieth the uniting of Christian
people unto Christ himself. And the same St.
Cyprian, in another place “”, writing hereof, saith, ” That Christ, in his last supper, gave to his
apostles with his own hands bread and wine,
which he called his flesh and blood ; but in the
cross he gave his very body to be wounded w^ith
the hands of the soldiers, that the apostles might
declare to the world how and in what manner
bread and wine may be the flesh of Christ. And
the manner he straightways declareth thus : that
things which do signify, and those things which
be signified by them, may be both called by one name.” Here it is certain by St. Cyprian’s
mind, wherefore and in what wise bread is called
Christ’s flesh, and wine his blood ; that is to say,
because that every thing that reprcscnteth and
‘ Cyprianus, lib, 2. epist. 3, * De unctione Chrismatis.
140 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
signifieth another thing, may be called by nameof the thing which it signifieth.
And therefore St. John Chrysostome saitll^” That Christ ordained the table of his holy supper for this purpose, that in that sacrament heshould daily shew unto us bread and wine for asimilitude of his body and blood.”
St. Jerome likewise saith % upon the Gospelof Matthew, ” That Christ took bread, whichcomforteth man’s heart, that he might representthereby his very body and blood.”
Also St. Ambrose “^ (if the book be his that isentitled De hiis qui misteriis initkmtur,) saith,** That before the consecration another kind isnamed ; but after the consecration the body ofChrist is signified. Christ said his blood; beforethe consecration, it is called another thing; but,after the consecration, is signified the blood ofChrist. And in his book De Sacramentis”, (ifthat be also his,) he writeth thus : ” Thou dostreceive the sacrament for a similitude of the fleshand blood of Christ ; but thou dost obtain thegrace and virtue of his true nature ; and, receiving the bread in that food, thou art partaker ofhis godly substance.” And in the same book\he saith, ” As thou hast in baptism received thesimilitude of death, so likewise dost thou in this” Chrysost. in Psal. xxii. “^ Hieronym. in Matt. xxvi.* Ambros. de hiis qui mysteriis initiantur. cap. ult.
^ De sacramentis, lib. b*. cap. 10. ^ Lib. 4. cap. 4.
l^’^ Hi.=> noLr supper. 141
sacrament drink the similitude of Christ’s precious blood.” And again he saith, in the said
book% ” The priest saith, make unto us this
oblation to be acceptable, which is the figure of
the body and blood of our Lord Jesu Christ.”
And upon the Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians ^ he saith, ” That in eating and drinking
the bread and wine, we do signify the flesh and
blood, which were offered for us. And the Old
Testament,” saith he, ‘* was instituted in blood,
because that blood was a witness of God’s benefit; in signification and figure whereof, we take
the mystical cup of his blood, to the tuition of our body and soul.” Of these places of SU
Chrysostome, St. Jerome, and St. Ambrose, it is clear, that in the sacramental bread and wine,
is not really and corporally the very natural substance of the flesh and blood of Christ, but that
the bread and wine be similitudes, mysteries,
and representations, significations, sacraments, siirns and figures and signs of his body and blood; and the name’s of ni 11 1 r 1 • *”^ tilings therefore be called and have the name of his which they
signify. very flesh and blood.
And yet St. Augustine sheweth this matter
more clearly and fully than any of the rest, specially in an Epistle which he wrote Ad Botiifaciiim \ where he saith, “That a day or two before
E Dc sacramcntis, lib. 4. cap. 5. ” 1 Cor. xi.
‘ August, ad Bonifaciuni, Epist. 2’6.
142 OF THE PKESENCE OF CHRIST
Good Friday, we used in common speech to saythus : to-morrow, or this day two days, Christsuffered his passion, where in very deed he neversuffered his passion but once, and that was manyyears passed. Likewise upon Easter-day wesay, this day Christ rose from death, where in very deed it is many hundred years since he rosefrom death. Why then do not men reprove usas liars, when we speak in this sort ? But be-cause we call these days so, by a similitude ofthese days, wherein these things were done indeed. And so it is called that day, which is notthat day in deed, but by the course of the yearis a like day, and such things be said to be donethat day for the solemn celebration of the sacra-ment, which things in deed were not done thatday, but long before. Was Ch’rist offered anymore but once ? And he offered himself, and yetin a sacrament or representation, not only everysolemn feast of Easter, but every day he is offer
ed to the people ; so that he doth not lie thatsaith, he is every day offered. For if sacramentshad not some similitude or likeness of thosethings, whereof they be sacraments, they couldin no wise be sacraments. And for their similitude and likeness, commonly they have the nameof the things, whereof they be sacraments.Therefore, as after a certain manner of speech,the sacrament of Christ’s body, is Christ’s body;the sacrament of Christ’s blood, is Christ’s blood
:
IN niS HOLY SUPPER. 143
SO likewise the sacrament of faith, is faith. And
to believe, is nothing else but to have faith : and
therefore, when we answer for young children in
their baptism, that they believe, which have not
yet the mind to believe, we answer that they
have faith, because they have the sacrament of
faith. And we say also, that they turn unto
God, because of the sacrament of the conversion
unto God ; for that answer pertaineth to the ce- lebration of the sacrament. And likewise speaketh the apostle of baptism, saying, ‘ That by
baptism we be buried with him into death :’ he
saith not, that we signify burial ; but he saith
plainly, that we be buried.’ So that the sacra- ment of so great a thing is not called but by the
name of the thing itself.” Hitherto I haVe rehearsed the answer of St. Augustine unto Boniface, a learned bishop, who
asked of him, how the parents and friends could answer for a young babe in baptism, and say in
his person, that he believeth and converteth unto
God, when the child can neither do nor think
any such thing. Whereunto the answer of St. Augustine is this : that forasmuch as baptism is the sacrament of the profession of our faith, and
of our conversion unto God, it becometh us so to answer for young children coming thereunto, as
to that sacrament appertaineth, although the
children indeed have no knowledge of such
things. And yet in our said answers we ought •
144 OF THE PRESENCE OF CIItllST
not to be reprehended as vain men or liars ; forasmuch as in common speech we use daily to call
sacraments and figures by the names of thethings that be signified by them, although theybe not the same thing indeed. As every GoodFriday, (as often as it returneth from year toyear,) we call it the day of Christ’s passion; andevery Easter-day we call the day of his resur-rection ; and every day in the year we say thatChrist is offered, and the sacrament of his body,we call it his body, and the sacrament of his
blood, we call it his blood ; and our baptism St.
Paul calleth our burial with Christ. And yet in
very deed Christ never suffered but once, neverarose but once, never was offered but once; norin very deed in baptism we be not buried, northe sacrament of Christ’s body fs not his body,nor the sacrament of his blood is not his blood
.
But so they be called, because they be figures,
sacraments, and representations of the thingsthemselves which they signify, and whereof theybear the name. Thus doth St. Augustine mostplainly open this matter in his Epistle to Bonifacius. Of this manner of speech, (wherein asign is called by the name of the thing which it signifieth,) speaketh St. Augustine also right
largely in his questions Super Leviticum et contra
Adamantimn ^ declaring how blood in Scripture” Super Lev. quest. 57.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. . 145is called the soul. ” A thing which signifieth,”
saith he, ” is wont to be called by the name of
the thing which it signifieth, as it is written in
the Scripture. The seven ears be seven years
;
the Scripture saith not signifieth seven years
;
and seven kine be seven years, and many other
like. And so said Paul, that ‘ the stone was
Christ,’ and not that it signified Christ ; but even as it had been he in deed, which nevertheless was not Christ by substance, but by signification. Even so,” saith St. Augustine, ”because
the blood signifieth and representeth the soul,
therefore in a sacrament or signification it is called the soul,” And Contra Adamantmm \ he
“writeth much like, saying, *’ In such wise is blood the soul, as the stone was Christ ; and yet
the apostle saith not, that the stone signified
Christ, but saith it was Christ. And this sentence, ‘ blood is the soul,’ may be understood to
be spoken in a sign or figure. For Christ did
not stick to say, * This is my body,’ when he
gave the sign of his body.” Here St. Augustine
rehearsing divers sentences which were spoken
figuratively, that is to say, when one thing was
called by the name of another, and yet was not
the other in substance, but in signification ; as that blood is the soul, seven kine be seven years, seven ears be seven years, the stone was Christ •
‘ Contra Adaniaiitiiini, cap. 12. L
146 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
among such manner of speeches, he rehearsed
those words which Christ spake at his last supper, **This is my body,” which declareth plainly
St. Augustine’s mind that Christ spake those
words figuratively, not meaning that the bread
was his body by substance, but by signification.
And therefore St. Augustine saith. Contra Majciminum “”, ” That in sacraments we must not consider what they be, but what they signify. Forthey be signs of things, being one thing, and signifying another.” Which he doth shew specially
of this sacramenty saying, “The heavenly bread,
which is Christ’s flesh, by some manner ofspeech
is called Christ’s body, when in very deed it is the sacrament of his body. And that ofi’ering
of the flesh, which is done by the priest’s hands,
is called Christ’s passion, death, and crucifying,
not in very deed, but in a mystical signification”.”
And to this purpose it is both pleasant, comfortable, and profitable, to read Theodoretus, in
his Dialogues”, where he disputeth and sheweth
at length, how the names of things be changed
in Scripture, and yet the things remain still. And for example, he proveth, that the flesh of
Christ is in the Scripture sometimes called a veil
of covering, sometimes a cloth, sometimes a
” Contra Maximinum, lib. 3. cap. 22.
” In lib. sententiarum Prosperi de consecr. diss. 9. Hoc est,
” Tk«odo?et, i>i dia^logis.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 147vestment, and sometimes a stole : and the blood
of the grape is called Christ’s blood, and the
names of bread and wine, and of his flesh and
blood, Christ doth so change, that sometimes he
calleth his body, corn or bread ; and sometimes
contrary, he calleth bread, his body. And likewise his blood sometime he calleth wine, and
sometimes, contrary, he calleth wine his blood.
For the more plain understanding whereof, it shall not be amiss to recite his own sayings in
his foresaid Dialogues, touching this matter of
the holy sacrament of Christ’s flesh and blood.
The speakers in these Dialogues be Orthodoxus
the right believer, and Eranistes his companion,
but not understanding the right faith. Orthodoxus saith to his companion, ** Dosfn^’i^’i”*
‘ Dialog lie 1 thou not know that God calleth bread his flesh?
Eranistes. ” I know that.
Orthodoxus. *’ And in another place he calleth
his body corn ? Eran. ” I know that also ; for I have heard
him say, *The hour is come that the Son of man
shall be glorified P;’ and except the grain-corn
that falleth in the ground, die, it remaineth sole;
but if it die, then it bringeth forth much fruit. Orth. ” When he gave the mysteries or sacra- ments, he called bread his body ; and that which
was mixt in the cup, he called blood.
•* John xii. L 2
148 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
Eran. ” So he called them.
Orth. ” But that also which was his natural
body, may well be called his body ; and his very
blood also, may be called his blood.
Eran. ” It is plain.
Orth. ”But our Saviour without doubt changed the names, and gave to the body the name of
the sign or token, and to the token he gave the
name of the body. And so when he called himself a vine, he called blood that, which was the
token of blood.
Eran. ” Surely thou hast spoken the truth ; but I would know the cause wherefore the nameswere changed.
Orth. ” The cause is manifest to them that be
expert in true religion. For he would that they
which be partakers of the godly sacraments,
should not set their minds upon the nature of the
things which they see, but, by the changing of
the names, should believe the things which be
wrought in them by grace. For he that called
that which is his natural body, corn and bread,
and also called himself a vine, he did honour the
visible tokens and signs with the names of his
body and blood, not changing the nature, but
adding grace to nature.
Eran. ” Sacraments be spoken of sacramentally, and also by them be manifestly declared
things which all men know not.
Orth. ” Seeing then that it is certain that the
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 149patriarch called the Lord’s body ‘ a vestment
and apparel %’ and that now we be entered to speak of godly sacraments, tell me truly of what
thing thinkest thou this holy meat to be a token
and figure ? Of Christ’s divinity, or of his body
and blood ? Eran. ” It is clear that it is the figure of those
things, whereof it beareth the name.
Orth. ”Meanest thou of his body and blood?
Eran. ‘* Even so I mean.
Orth. ” Thou hast spoken as one that loveth
the truth ; for the Lord, when he took the token
or sign, he said not, ‘ This is my divinity,’ but
* This is my body,’ and * This is my blood.’
And in another place, ‘ The bread which I will
give, is my flesh, which I will give for the life of
the world’.’
Eran. ” The things be true, for they be God’s
words.”
All this writeth Theodoretus in his first Dialogue.
And in the second he writeth the same in Diaiogue>2. effect, (and yet in some things more plainly,)
against such hereticks as aflirmed, that after
Christ’s resurrection and ascension his humanity
was changed from the very nature of a man, and
turned into his divinity. Against whom thus he
writeth.
‘ Gen. xlix. ‘ John vi.
150 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHIllST
Orth. ” Corruption, health, sickness, anddeath, be accidents ; for they go and come. Eran. ” It is meet they be so called.
Orth. ” Men’s bodies after their resurrection
be delivered from corruption, death, and mortality, and yet they lose not their proper nature.
Eran. ” Truth it is. Orth. ” The body of Christ therefore did rise
quite clean from all corruption and death, and is impassible, immortal, glorified with the glory ofCod, and is honoured of the powers of heaven;and yet it is a body, and hath the same bignessthat it had before.
Eran. ” Thy sayings seem true, and accordingto reason; but after he was ascended up into
heaven, I think thou wilt not say, that his bodywas not turned into the nature of the Godhead.Orth. ” I would not so say for the persuasionof man’s reason ; nor am I so arrogant and presumptuous to affirm any thing which Scripturepasseth over in silence ; but I have heard St. Paul cry, ‘ That God hath ordained a day, whenhe will judge all the world in justice by thatman which, he appointed before, performing hispromise to all men, and raising him from death*.’I have learned also of the holy angels, * That hewill come after that fashion, as his disciples sawhim go to heaven*.’ But they saw a nature of a* Acts xvii. * Acts i.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 151certain bigness, not a nature which had no bigness. I heard furthermore the Lord say, * You
shall see the Son of man come in the clouds of
heaven”.’ And I know that every thing that
men see, hath a certain bigness. For that nature that hath no bigness, cannot be seen. Moreover to set in the throne of glory, and to set
the lambs upon his right hand, and the goats
upon his left hand, signifieth a thing that hath
quantity and bigness.”
Hitherto I have rehearsed Theodoretus’s
words, and shortly after Eranistes saith
:
Ermi. ** We must turn every stone, (as the
proverb saith,) to seek out the truth, but specially when godly matters be propounded.
Orth. ** Tell me then the sacramental signs,
which be offered to God by his priests, whereof
be they signs which be oifered to God by his
priest ; whereof be they signs, sayest thou ? Eran. ** Of the Lord’s body and blood.
Orth. *’ Of a very body, or not of a very body?
Ei^an. ” Of a very body.
Orth. ” Very well, for an image must be made
after a true pattern ; for painters follow nature,
and paint the images of such things as we see with our eyes.
Eran. ” Truth it is. Orth. ” If therefore the godly sacraments re-
” Matt xxiv.
152 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
present a true body, then is the Lord’s body yetstill a body, not converted into the nature of his
Godhead, but replenished with God’s glory.
Eran. “^ It cometli in good time that thoumakest mention of God’s sacraments ; for by thesame I shall prove, that Christ’s body is turnedinto another nature. Answer, therefore, untomy questions.
Orth. ” I shall answer.
Eraii. *’ What callest thou that which is offer- ed before the invocation of the priest ? Orth. *’ We must not speak plainly, for it is like that some be present, which have not professed Christ.
Eran. ” Answer covertly.
Orth. *’ It is a nourishment made of seedsthat be like. Eran. *’ Then how call we the other sign?
Orth. ” It is also a common name, that signilieth a kind of drink.
Eran. ” But how dost thou call them after
the sanctification ? Orth. ” The body of Christ, and the blood ofChrist.
Eran. ” And dost thou believe that thou art
made partaker of Christ’s body and blood ? Orth. ” I believe so. Eran. ” Therefore as the tokens of God’s bodyand blood be other things before the priest’s invocation, but after the invocation they be chang-
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER.
ed, and be other things: so also the body of
Christ, after his assumption, is changed into his
divine substance.
Orth. ” Thou art taken with thine own net. For the sacramental signs go not from their own
nature after the sanctification, but continue in
their former substance, form, and figure, and
may be seen and touched as well as before; yet
in our minds we do consider what they be
made, and do repute and esteem them, and have
them in reverence, according to the same things
that they be taken for. Therefore compare the
images to the pattern, and thou shalt see them
like. For a figure must be like to the thing itself. For Christ’s body hath his former fashion,
figure, and bigness ; and, to speak at one word,
the same substance of his body. But after his
resurrection, it was made immortal, and of such
power, that no corruption nor death could come
unto it ; and it was exalted to that dignity, that
it was set at the right hand of the Father, and
honoured of all creatures, as the body of him
that is the Lord of nature.
Er^an. ** But the sacramental token changeth
his former name ; for it is no more called as it was
before, but is called Christ’s body. Therefore
must his body, after his ascension, be called
God, and not a body.
Orth. ” Thou seemest to me ignorant ; for it
is not called his body only, but also the bread of
153
154 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
life, as the Lord called it. So the body of Christwe call a godly body, a body that giveth life,
God’s body, the Lord’s body, our Master’s body,meaning that it is not a common body, as othermen’s bodies be, but that it is the body of ourLord Jesu Christ, both God and man.”
This have I rehearsed of the great clerk andholy bishop Theodoretus, whom some of the Papists perceiving to make so plainly against themhave defamed, saying that he was infected withthe error of Nestorius. Here the Papists shewtheir old accustomed nature and condition, whichis, (even in a manifest manner,) rather to liewithout shame, than to give place unto the truth,and confess their own error. And although hisadversaries falsely bruited such a fame againsthim when he was yet alive, nevertheless he waspurged thereof by the holy council of Calcedon,about eleven hundred years ago. And furthermore, in his book which he wrote against heresies, he specially condemneth Nestorius by name.And also all his three books of his Dialogues,before rehearsed, he wrote chiefly against Nestorius, and was never herein noted of error thisthousand year, but hath ever been reputed andtaken for an holy bishop, a great learned man,and a grave author, until now at this presenttime, when the Papists have nothing to answerunto him, they begin in excusing of themselves,to defame him.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 155
Thus much have I spoken for Theodoretus,
which I pray thee be not weary to read, good reader, but often and with delectation, deliberation,
and good advertisement to read. For it containeth plainly and briefly the true instruction of a Christian man, concerning the matter which in
this book we treat upon.
First, that our Saviour Christ in his last sup- Five princi- * pal things to per, when he gave bread and wine to his apos- ^^ “”J^d ia ties, saying, *’ This is my body, this is my blood,” ^””’•
it was bread which he called his body, and wine
mixed in the cup, which he called his blood : so
that he changed the names of the bread and wine,
which were the mysteries, sacraments, signs,
figures, and tokens of Christ’s flesh and blood,
and called them by the names of the things
which they did represent and signify, that is to
say, the bread he called by the name of his very
flesh, and the wine by the name of his blood.
Second, that although the names of bread and
wine were changed after sanctification, yet nevertheless the things themselves remained the
self-same that they were before the sanctification, that is to say, the same bread and wine in
nature, substance, form, and fashion.
The third, seeing that the substance of the bread
and wine be not changed, whybe then their names
changed, and the bread called Christ’s flesh, and
the wine his blood ? Theodoretus sheweth, that
thecause thereof was this, that we should not have
156 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
SO much respect to the bread and wine, whichwe see with our eyes and taste with our mouths,as we should have to Christ himself, in whomwebelieve with our hearts, and feel and taste himby our faith, and with whose flesh and blood, byhis grace, we believe that we be spiritually fedand nourished. These things we ought to re-member and revolve in our minds, and to lift upour hearts from the bread and wine unto Christthat sitteth above. And because we should sodo, therefore after the consecration, they be nomore called bread and wine, but the body andblood of Christ.
The fourth. It is in these sacraments of breadand wine, as it is in the very body of Christ.For as the body of Christ before his resurrection,and after, is all one in nature, substance, bigness,form, and fashion, and yet it is not called asanother common body, but with addition, forthe dignity of his exaltation, it is called a heavenly, a godly, an immortal, and the Lord’sbody : so likewise the bread and wine, beforethe consecration and after, is all one in nature,substance, bigness, form, and fashion, and yetitis not called as other common bread, but for thedignity whereunto it is taken, it is called withaddition, heavenly bread, the bread of life, andthe bread of thanksgiving.
The fifth, that no man ought to be so arrogantand presumptuous to affirm for a certain truth in
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 157
religion, any thing which is not spoken of in
holy Scripture. And this is spoken to the great
and utter condemnation of the Papists, which
make and unmake new articles of our faith from
time to time, at their pleasure, without any
Scripture at all, yea quite and clean contrary to
Scripture. And yet will they have all men bound
to believe whatsoever they invent, upon peril of
damnation and everlasting fire. And they would
constrain with fire and faggot all men to consent,
contrary to the manifest words of God, to these
their errors in this matter of the holy sacrament
of Christ’s body and blood. First, that there
remaineth no bread nor wine after the consecration, but that Christ’s flesh and blood is made of
them. Second, that Christ’s body is really, corporally, substantially, sensibly, and naturally in
the bread and wine. Thirdly, that wicked per- sons do eat and drink Christ’s very body and
blood. Fourthly, that priests offer Christ every
day, and make of him a new sacrifice propitiatory for sin. Thus, for shortness of time, do I make an end
of Theodoretus, with other old ancient writers,
which do most clearly affirm, that to eat Christ’s
body, and to drink his blood, be figurative
speeches. And so be these sentences likewise,
which Christ spake at his supper, ” This is my
body, this is my blood.”
158 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
CHAP. And marvel not, good reader, that Christ atxn. . . _ that time spake in figures, when he did instituteFigumtive ,
‘
. , . . speeches be that sacrament, seenig that it is the nature of all
not strange. sacraments to be figures. And although theScripture be full of schemes, tropes, and figures,yet specially it useth them when it speaketh ofsacraments. ” When the ark,” (which rq^resented God’smajesty,) ** was come into the army of the Israelites, the Philistines said that God was comeinto the army \” And God himself said, by hisprophet Nathan, ” That from the time that hehad brought the children of Israel out of Egypt,he dwelled not in houses, but that he was carriedabout in tents and tabernacles ^” And yet wasnot God himself so carried about, or went intents or tabernacles, but because the ark, whichwas a figure of God, was so removed from placeto place, he spake of himself that thing, whichwas to be understood of the ark.
S used'”” ^^^ Christ himself oftentimes spake in simifpeeches! li^udcs, parablcs, and figures, as when he said,** The field is the world, the enemy is the devil,the seed is the word of God \”—” John is Elias,I am a vine, and you be the branches\”—” I ambread of life \”_-‘* My father is an husbandman,and he hath his fan in his hand, and will make” 1 Sam. iv. y 2 Sam. a ii. » Matt. xiii.
* Matt, xi, and xvii. » JoH!i xvi.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 159
clean his floor, and gather the wheat into his
barn ; but the chafF he will cast into everlasting
fire’.”—” I have a meat to eat, which you know
nof*.”

‘* Work not meat that perisheth, but that
endureth unto everlasting life*.”—” I am a good
shepherd ^”—”The Son of man will set the sheep
at his right hand, and the goats at his left hand V
•—” I am a door**.”—One of you is the devil’.”
‘* Whosoever doeth my Father’s will, he is my
brother, sister, and mother \” And when he
said to his mother and to John, ** This is thy son,
this is thy mother ‘.” These, with an infinite number of like sen- tences, Christ spake in parables, metaphors,
tropes, and figures. But chiefly when he spake
of the sacraments, he used figurative speeches.
As when of baptism he said, ** That we must be
baptized with the Holy Ghost *” :” meaning of
spiritual baptism. And like speech used St.
John the Baptist, saying of Christ, *’ That he
should baptize with the Holy Ghost and fire°.”
And Christ said, ” That we must be born again, or else we cannot see the kingdom of God “.” And said also, ‘* Whosoever shall drink of that
water which I shall give him, he shall never be
dry again. But the water which I shall give
* John vi. ^ John xv. Matt. iii. ‘ John iv.
‘ John vi. ” John x. ” Matt. xxv. ‘ John x.
» John vi. ‘ Matt. xii. “‘ Acts i. ” Matt, iii, * John iii.
160 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
him, shall be made withm him a well, whichshall spring into everlasting life ”.” And St. Paul saith, *’ That in baptism we clothe us withChrist, and be buried with him ‘.” This baptism, washing, and new birth by thefire and the Holy Ghost, and this water thatspringeth in a man, and floweth into everlastinglife, cannot be understood of any material water,material washing, and material birth, but bytranslation of things visible into things invisible,
they must be understood spiritually and figuratively.
After the same sort the mystery of our re- demption, and the passion of our Saviour Christupon the cross, as well in the New as the OldTestament, is expressed and declared by manyfigures and figurative speeches. As the pureThe paschal pasclial Lamb without spot, signified Christ.The effusion of the Lamb’s blood, signified theeffusion of Christ’s blood. And the salvation ofthe children of Israel from temporal death by theLamb’s blood, signified our salvation from eternal death by Christ’s blood. And as AlmightyGod, passing through Egypt, killed all theEgyptians’ heirs in every house, and left not onealive ; and nevertheless he passed by the children of Israel’s houses, where he saw the Lamb’sblood upon the doors, and hurted none of them,i John iv. ^ JRom. vi. Galat. iii.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 5Gi
but saved them all by the means of the Lamb’s
blood : so likewise at the last judgment of the
whole world, none shall be passed over and
saved, but that shall be found marked with the
blood of the most pure and immaculate Lamb
Jesus Christ. And forasmuch as the shedding
of that Lamb’s blood, was a token and figure of The Lords the shedding of Christ’s blood then to come;
and forasmuch also as all the sacraments and
figures of the Old Testament ceased and had an end in Christ : lest by our great unkindness we
should peradventure be forgetful of the great
benefit of Christ, therefore at his last supper,
(when he took his leave of his apostles to depart
out of the v/orld,) he did make a new will and
testament, wherein he bequeathed unto us clean
remission of all our sins, and the everlasting inheritance of heaven. And the same he con- firmed the next day with his own blood and death.
And lest we should forget the samC;, he ordained
not a yearly memory, (as the paschal Lamb was
eaten but once every year,) but a daily remembrance he ordained thereof in bread and wine,
sanctified and dedicated to that purpose, saying,
*’ This is my body; this cup is my blood, which *
is shed for the remission of sins. Do this in the
remembrance of me.” Admonishing us by these
words, spoken at the making of his last will and
testament, and at his departing out of the world,
(because they should be the better remember-‘
M
162 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
ed,) that whensoever we do eat the bread in his
holy supper, and drink of that cup, we should
remember how much Christ hath done for us, and how he died for our sakes. Therefore, saith
St. Paul, ” As often as ye shall eat of this bread
and drink the cup, you shall shew forth the
Lord’s death until he come.” And forasmuch as
this holy bread broken, and the wine divided, do
represent unto us the death of Christ now passed, as the killing of the paschal Lamb did represent the same yet to come : therefore our Saviour
Christ used the same manner of speech of the
bread and wine, as God before used of the paschal Lamb. For as in the Old Testament Godsaid, ” This is the Lord’s pass-by, or passover :” even so saith Christ in the New Testament,
** This is my body, this is my blood.” But in
the old mystery and sacrament, the Lamb was
not the Lord’s very passover or passing-by, but
it was a figure which represented his passing by.
So likewise in the New Testament, the bread
and wine be not Christ’s very body and blood,
but they be figures, which by Christ’s institution be, unto the godly receivers thereof, sacra- ments, tokens, significations, and representations
of his very flesh and blood : instructing their
faith, that as the bread and wine feed them corporally, and continue this temporal life ; so the
very flesh and blood of Christ feedeth them spiritually, and giveth them everlasting life.
IX HIS HOLV SUPPER. 1G3And why should any man think it strange to ^^j^^^^’ ”^”” admit a figure in these speeches, ” This is my ‘;^’^^’;fj|”^ ^t body, this is my blood?” seeing that the com- ^upj’,e,f
‘**** munication the same night (by the Papists’ own
confessions) was so full of figurative speeches ? For the apostles spake figuratively when they
asked Christ where he would eat his passover or pass-by. And Christ himself used the same
figure when he said, ” I have much desired to
eat this passover with you.” Also to eat Christ’s
body and to drink his blood, I am sure they will
not say that it is taken properly, to eat and drink
as we do eat other meats and drinks. And when
Christ said, ‘* This cup is a new testament in
my blood;” here, in one sentence, be two
figures, one in this word ” cup,” which is not
taken for the cup itself, but for the thing contained in the cup : another is in this word ” tes- tament ;” for neither the cup, nor the wine contained in the cup, is Christ’s testament, but is a
token, sign, and figure, whereby is represented
unto us his testament, confirmed by his blood.
And if the Papists will say, (as they say indeed,)
that by this cup is neither meant the cup nor
the wine contained in the cup, but that thereby
is meant Christ’s blood contained in the cup : yet must they needs grant that there is a figure.
For Christ’s blood is not in proper speech the
new testament, but it is the thing that confirmed
tke new testament. And yet by this strange inM 2
CHAP.
XIII.
164 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
terpretation the Papists make a very strange
speech, more strange than any figurative speech
is. For this they make the sentence : this blood
is a new testament in my blood. Which saying
is so fond, and so far from all reason, that the
foolishness thereof is evident to every man. Now forasmuch as it is plainly declared and
^^^~ manifestly proved, that Christ called bread his
tks and°a”- ^ody, and wine his blood, and that these sentheTapls’ts. tences be figurative speeches; and that Christ,
as concerning his humanity and bodily presence,
is ascended into heaven with his whole flesh and
blood, and is not here upon earth ; and that the
substance of bread and wine do remain still, and
be received in the sacrament ; and that although
they remain, yet they have changed their names,
so that the bread is called Christ’s body, and the
wine his blood ; and that the cause why their
names be changed, is this, that we should lift up our hearts and minds from the things which
we see unto the things which we believe, and be
above in heaven, whereof the bread and wine
have the names, although they be not the very
same things in deed. These things well considered and weighed, all the authorities and arguments, which the Papists feign to serve for their
purpose, be clean wiped away.
CHAP. For whether the authors (which they allege)
say that we do eat Christ’s flesh, and drink his
XIV. One brief answectoaii. blood, Or that the bread and wine is converted
IN” HIS HOLY SUPPER. 165into the substance of his flesh and blood, or that
we be turned into his flesh, or that in the Lord’s
Supper we do receive his very flesh and blood
;
or that in the bread and wine is received that
which did hang upon the cross, or that Christ
hath left his flesh with us, or that Christ is in us, and we in him ; or that he is whole here and
whole in heaven ; or that the same thing is in the
chalice which flowed out of his side, or that the
same thing is received with our mouth which is believed with our faith; or that the bread and
wine, after the consecration, be the body and
blood of Christ ; or that we be nourished with
the body and blood of Christ; or that Christ is both gone hence and is still here; or that Christ
at his last supper bare himself in his own hands:
•—These and all other like sentences may not be
understood of Christ’s humanity literally and
carnally, as the words in common speech do properly signify: for so doth no man eat Christ’s
flesh, nor drink his blood ; nor so is not the bread
and wine turned into his flesh and blood, nor we
into him ; nor so is the bread and wine after the
consecration his flesh and blood ; nor so is not his
flesh and blood whole here in earth, eaten with
our mouths ; nor so did not Christ take himself
in his own hands : But these and all other like
sentences, which declare Christ to be here in
earth, and to be eaten and drunken of Christian
people, are to be understood either of his divinef
16G OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
nature, whereby he is every where, or else they
must be understood figuratively or spiritually.
For figuratively he is in the bread and wine, and
spiritually he is in them that worthily eat and
drink the bread and wine; but really, carnally,
and corporally, he is only in heaven, from whence
lie shall come to judge the quick and dead.
This brief answer will suffice for all that the
Papists can bring for their purpose, if it be aptly
applied. And for the more evidence hereof, I shall apply the same to some such places as the
Papists think do make most for them : that, by
the answer to those places, the rest may be the
more easily answered unto.
CHAP. They allege St. Clement, whose words be
these, as they report. “The sacraments of God’s XV.
tt^cfemlns, sccrcts arc committed to three degrees, to a
p’s’o a 2. pj.-gg^^ ^ deacon, and a minister ; which with fear
and trembling ought to keep the leavings of the
broken pieces of the Lord’s body, that no cor- ruption be found in the holy place, lest by negligence great injury be done to the portion of the
Lord’s body.” And by and by followeth : ** So
many hosts must be offered in the altar, as will
suffice for the people : and if any remain, they
must not be kept until the morning, but be
spent and consumed of the clerks with fear and
trembling. And they that consume the residue
of the Lord’s body, may not by and by take
other common meats, lest they should mix that
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 167holy portion with the meat which is digested by
the belly, and voided by the fundament. Therefore if the Lord’s portion be eaten in the morning, the ministers that consume it must fast unto
six of the clock ; and if they do take it at three
or four of the clock, the minister must fast until
the evening.” Thus much writeth Clement of
this matter, if the epistle which they allege were
Clement’s, as indeed it is not. But they have
feigned many things in other men’s names,
thereby to establish their feigned purposes. But
whose soever the epistle was, if it be thoroughly
considered, it maketh much more against the
Papists, than for their purpose. For by the same
epistle appeareth evidently three special things
against the errors of the Papists.
The first is, that the bread in the sacrament is called the Lord’s body, and the pieces of the
broken bread be called the pieces and fragments
of the Lord’s body, which cannot be understood
but figuratively. The second is, that the bread
ought not to be reserved and hanged up, as the
Papists every where do use. The third is, that
the priests ought not to receive the sacrament
alone, (as the Papists commonly do, making a
sale thereof unto the people,) but they ought to
communicate with the people. And here it is diligently to be noted, that we ought not unreverently and unadvisedly to approach unto the
meat of the Lcird’s table, as we do to other com.-
168 OF THE PRESLNCi. OF CHRIST
mon meats and drinks, but with great fear and
dread ; lest we should come to that holy table
unworthily, wherein is not only represented,
but also spiritually given unto us, very Christ
himself. And therefore ^we ought to come to that board of the Lord with all reverence, faith,
love and charity, fear and dread, according to
the same. Here I pass over Ignatius ‘ and Irenaeus *, which make nothing for the Papists’ opinions,
but stand in the commendation of the holy communion, and in exhortation of all men to the
often and godly receiving thereof. And yet neither they, nor no man else, can extol and commend the same sufficiently, according to the
dignity thereof, if it be godly used, as it ought
to be.
tcIoion^Ss Dionysius also, whom they allege to praise
Hie?cip.”3. ^^^ extol this sacrament, (as indeed it is most
worthy, being a sacrament of most high dignity
and perfection, representing unto us our most
perfect spiritual conjunction unto Christ, and
our continual nourishing, feeding, comfort, and
spiritual life in him,) yet he never said that the
flesh and blood of Christ was in the bread and
wine really, corporally, sensibly, and naturally,
(as the Papists would bear us in hand 😉 but he
‘ Ignatius in Epist. ad Ephesianos.
* Ireneeus, lib. 5, contra Valentin.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 1 G9
calleth ever the bread and wine signs, pledges,
and tokens, declaring unto the faithful receivers
of the same, that they receive Christ spiritually,
and that they spiritually eat his flesh and drink
his blood. And although the bread and wine
be the figures, signs, and tokens of Christ’s flesh
and blood, (as St. Dionysius calleth them both
before the consecration as after,) yet the Greek
annotations upon the same Dionysius do say,
that the very things themselves be above in heaven. And as the same Dionysius maketh nothing for the Papists’ opinions in this point of
Christ’s real and corporal presence ; so in divers
other things he maketh quite and clean against
them, and that specially in three points ; in
Transubstantiation, in reservation of the sacra- ment, and in the receiving of the same by the
priest alone.
Furthermore they do allege TertuUian, that The answer
•^ P to Tertallia- he constantly affirmeth, that in the sacrament ofnusderesur-
” rectioiie car- the altar we do eat the body and drink thesis- blood of our Saviour Christ. To whom we grant
that our flesh eateth and drinketh the bread and
wine, which be called the body and blood of
Christ, because (as TertuUian saith) they do re- present his body and blood, although they be
not really the same in very deed. And we grant
also, that our souls by faith do eat his very
body and drink his blood ; but that is, spiritually, sucking out of the same everlasting life. .
170 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
But we deny that unto this spiritual feeding is required any real and corporal presence. Andtherefore this Tertullian, speaketh nothing
against the truth of our Catholick doctrine, buthe speaketh many things most plainly for us, and against the Papists, and specially in three
points. First in that he saith, that Christ called
bread his body. The second, that Christ called
it so, because it representeth his body. Thethird, in that he saith, that by these words ofChrist, ” This is my body,” is meant, this is afigure of my body.
The answer Moreovcr they allege for them Origen, beto origenes 111 1 in^jumer. causc they would seem to have many ancient
authors favourers of their erroneous doctrine;
which Origen is most clearly against them. ” For although he do say (as they allege) that
those things which before we signified by obscure figures, be now truly in deed, and in their
very nature and kind, accomplished and fulfill- ed ; and for the declaration thereof, he bringeth
forth three examples ; one of the stone that floweth water, another of the sea and cloud, and the
third of manna, which in the Old Testament did
signify Christ to come, who is now come indeed,
and is manifested and exhibited unto us, as it were^ face to face, and sensibly, in his word, in
the sacrament of regeneration, and in the sacra- ments of bread and wine ;”—yet Origen meantnot, that Christ is corporally either in his word.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 171
or in the water of baptism, or in the bread and
wine, nor that we carnally and corporally be re- generated and born again, or eat Christ’s flesh,
and blood. For our regeneration in Christ is spiritual, and our eating and drinking is a spiritual feeding, which kind of regeneration and
feeding requireth no real and corporal presence
of Christ, but only his presence in spirit, grace,
and effectual operation. And that Origen thus
meant, that Christ’s flesh is a spiritual meat, and
his blood a spiritual drink ; and that the eating
and drinking of his flesh and blood may not be
understood literally, but spiritually ; it is manifested by Origen’s own words, in his seventh
homily upon the book called Leviticus, where he
sheweth, ” That those words must be understood
figuratively, and whosoever understandeth them
otherwise, they be deceived, and take harm by
their own gross understanding “.” And likewise meant Cyprian, in those places The answer which the adversaries of the truth allege for him, nus, Hb-‘a. concerning the true eating of Christ’s very flesh
and drinking of his blood.
For Cyprian spake of no gross and carnal eating with the mouth, but of an inward, spiritual,
and pure eating with heart and mind, which is to believe in our hearts, that his flesh was rent
and torn for us upon the cross, and his blood
” In Levit. Horn. 7.
172 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
shed for our redemption, and that the same flesh
and blood now sitteth at the right hand of the
Father, making continual intercession for us
;
and to imprint and digest this in our minds, putting our whole affiance and trust in him, as touching our salvation, and offering ourselves
clearly unto him, to love and serve him all the
days of our life : This is truly, sincerely, andspiritually to eat his flesh and to drink his
blood.
And this sacrifice of Christ upon the cross, was that oblation which, Cyprian saith, wasfigured and signified, before it was done, by the
wine which Noah drank, and by the bread andwine which Melchisedec gave to Abraham, andby many other figures which Cyprian there re- hearseth.
And now when Christ is come, and hath ac- complished that sacrifice, the same is figured,
signified, and represented unto us by that breadand wine, which faithful people receive daily in
the holy communion: wherein like as with their
mouths carnally they eat the bread and drink
the wine ; so by their faith spiritually they eat
Christ’s very flesh, and drink his very blood.
And hereby it appeareth that St. Cyprian clearly
affirmeth the most true doctrine, and is wholly
upon our side. And against the Papists he
teacheth most plainly, that the communionought to be received of ^11 men under both the
IX HIS HOLY SUPPER. 173
kinds, and that Christ called bread his body and
wine his blood, and that there is no transubstantiation, but that bread remaineth there as a
figure to represent Christ’s body, and wine to
represent his blood ; and that those which be
not the lively members of Christ, do eat the
bread and drink the wine, and be nourished by
them, but the very flesh and blood of Christ
they neither eat nor drink.
Thus have you heard declared the mind of
Cyprian.
But Hilarius (think they) is plainest for them The answer
toHiIarius8 m this matter, whose words they translate thus: aeTrinitate.
** If the word was made verily flesh, and we verily receive the word being flesh in our Lord’s
meat, how shall not Christ be thought to dwell
naturally in us ? who, being born man, hath
taken unto him the nature of our flesh, that can- not be severed, and hath put together the nature
of his flesh to the nature of his eternity, under
the sacrament of the communion of his flesh unto
us. For so we be all one, because the Father
is in Christ, and Christ in us. Wherefore whosoever will deny the Father to be naturally in
Christ, he must deny first either himself to be
naturally in Christ, or Christ to be naturally in
him. For the being of the Father in Christ, and
the being of Christ in us, maketh us to be one
in them. And therefore if Christ have taken
verily the flesh of our body, and the man that .
174 OF THE -PRESENCE OF CHRIST
was verily born of the Virgin Mary is Christ,
and also we receive under the true mystery theflesh of his body, by means whereof we shall beone, (for the Father is in Christ, and Christ in
us,) how shall that be called the unity of will,
when the natural property, brought to pass bythe sacrament, is the sacrament of unity ?”
Thus do the Papists (the adversaries of God’sword and of his truth) allege the authority of Hilarius, either perversely and purposely, as it seemeth, untruly citing him, and wresting his wordsto their purpose, or else not truly understandinghim. For although he saith that Christ is naturally in us, yet he saith also that we be naturallyin him. And nevertheless in so saying, he meantnot of the natural and corporal presence of thesubstance of Christ’s body and of ours ; for asour bodies be not after that sort within his body,so it is not his body after that sort within ourbodies ; but he meant that Christ in his incarnation received of us a mortal nature, and unitedthe same unto his divinity, and so be we naturally in him. And the sacraments of baptismand of his holy supper, (if we rightly use thesame,) do most assuredly certify us, that we bepartakers of his godly nature, having given untous by him immortality and life everlasting, andso is Christ naturally in us. And so be we onewith Christ, and Christ with us, not only in will
and mind, but also in very natural properties.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 175
And so concludeth Hilariiis against Arius, that
Christ is one with his Father, not in purpose and
will only, but also in very nature. And as the
union between Christ and us in baptism is spiritual, and requireth no real and corporal pre- sence ; so likewise our union with Christ in his
holy supper is spiritual, and therefore requireth no real and corporal presence. And therefore
Hilarius, speaking there of both the sacraments,
maketh no difference between our union with
Christ in baptism, and our union with him in his
holy supper; and saith further, that as Christ
is in us, so be we in him; which the Papists
cannot understand corporally and really, except
they will say, that all our bodies be corporally
within Christ’s body. Thus is Hilarius answered
unto both plainly and shortly.
And this answer to Hilarius will serve also The answer unto Cyril, whom they allege to speak after the
same sort that Hilarius doth, that Christ is naturally in us. The words which they recite be
these : *’ We deny not,” saith Cyril against the
heretick, ” but we be spiritually joined to Christ
by faith and sincere charity ; but that we should
have no manner of conjunction in our flesh with
Christ, that we utterly deny, and think it utterly
discrepant from God’s holy Scriptures. For who
doubteth, that Christ is so the vine tree, and we
so the branches, as we get thence our life. Hear
what St. Paul saith, ‘ We be all one body with .
17G OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
Christ ; for though we be many, we be one in
him.’ All we participate in one food. Thinkeththis heretick that we know not the strength andvirtue of the mystical benediction ? which, whenit is made in us, doth it not make Christ, bycommunication of his flesh, to dwell corporallyin us ? Why be the members of faithful men’sbodies called the members of Christ ?
* Knowyou not, (saith St. Paul,) that your members bethe members of Christ ? And shall I make the
members of Christ parts of the whore’s body ? God forbid.’ And our Saviour also saith, * Hethat eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood,
dwelleth in me, and I in him.'”
Although in these words Cyril doth say, that
Christ doth dwell corporally in us, when we re- ceive the mystical benediction ; yet he neither
saith that Christ dwelleth corporally in the bread, nor that he dwelleth in us corporally only at such times as we receive the sacrament, nor that
he dwelleth in us, and not we in him ; but hesaith as well, that we dwell in him, as that hedwelleth in us. Which dwelling is neither cor- poral nor local, but an heavenly, spiritual, andsupernatural dwelling, whereby, so long as wedwell in him, and he in us, we have by him everlasting life. And therefore Cyril saith, in the
same place, that Christ is the vine, and we the
branches, because that by him we have life. For as the branches receive life and nourishment
I>J HIS HOLY SUPPER. 177of the body of the vme, so receive we by him the
natural property of his body, which is life and
immortality ; and by that means we, being his
members, do live, and are spiritually nourished.
And this meant Cyril by this word corporally,
when he saith, that Christ dwelleth corporally in
us. And the same meant also St. Hilarius by
this word naturally, when he said that Christ
dwelleth naturally in us. And as St. Paul, when
he said that in Christ dwelleth the fulJ divinity
corporally, by this word corporally, he meant not
that the divinity is a body, and so by that body
dwelleth bodily in Christ. But by this word
corporally, he meant that the divinity is not in
Christ accidentally, lightly, and slenderly, but
substantially and perfectly, with all his might
and power: so that Christ was not only a mortal
man, to suffer for us ; but also he was immortal
God, able to redeem us. So St. Cyril, when he
said that Christ is in us corporally, he meant
that we have him in us, not lightly and to small
effect and purpose, but that we have him in us
substantially, pithily, and effectually, in such
wise that we have by him redemption and everlastinof life. And this I suck not out of mine
own fingers, but have it of Cyril’s own express
words, where he saith, ‘* A little benediction
draweth the whole man to God, and filleth him
with his grace ; and after this manner Christ
N
178 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
dwelleth in us, and we in Christ \” But as for
corporal eating and drinking with our mouths,
and digesting with our bodies, Cyril never meant
that Christ doth so dwell in us, as he plainly
declareth.
** Our sacrament,” saith he^ ” doth not affirm
the eating of a man, drawing wickedly Christian
people to hgtve gross imaginations and carnal
fantasies of such things as be fine and pure, and
received only with a sincere faith. But as two
waxes that be molten and put together, they
close so in one, that every part of the one is joined to every part of the other : even so, (saith
Cyril %) he that receiveth the flesh and blood of
the Lord, must needs be so joined with Christ,
that Christ must be in him, and he in Christ.”
By these words of Cyril appeareth his mindplainly, that we may not grossly and rudely
think of the eating of Christ with our mouths,
but with our faith, by which eating, although he
be absent hence bodily, and be in the eternal
life and glory with his Father, yet we be madepartakers of his nature, to be immortal and have
eternal life and glory with him. And thus is declared the mind as well of Cyril as of Hilarius. And here may be well enough passed over
Basiiius, Basilius, Greoorius Nvssenus, and Gres^orius
Nyssemis, , J ‘ O
arid Nazian- Nazianzcnus, partly because thev speak little of
^ In Johan. lib. 4. cap. 17. ” Ai>athematismo. 11,
* In Johan. lib. 4. cap. 1 7.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 179this matter, and because they may be easily an- swered unto, by that which is before declared
and often repeated, which is, that a figure hath
the name of the thing whereof it is the figure,
and therefore of the figure may be spoken the
same thing that may be spoken of the thing it- self. And as concerning the eating of Christ’s
flesh and drinking of his blood, they spake of
the spiritual eating and drinking thereof by faith,
and not of corporal eating and drinking with the
mouth and teeth.
Likewise Eusebius Emissenus is shortly an- The answer
to Einisse- swered unto ; for he speaketh not of any real and n«s- corporal conversion of bread and wine into
Christ’s body and blood, nor of any corporal
and real eating and drinking of the same, but he
speaketh of a sacramental conversion of bread
and wine, and of a spiritual eating and drinking
of the body and blood. After which sort,
Christ is as well present in baptism (as the same
Eusebius plainly there declareth) as he is in the
Lord’s table : which is not carnally and corporally, but by faith, and spiritually. But of this
author is spoken before more at large in the
matter of Transubstantiation.
And now I will come to the saying of St. Am- The answer
” ‘-‘ to Ainbio- brose, which is always in their mouths. Before s’«s’ie;.i- the consecration, saith he, (as they allege,) it is ‘*”•»• ti’p.4. bread ; but after the words of consecration it is N 2
tiun.
180 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
the body of Christ. For answer hereunto, it must be first known what consecration is.
Consecra- Cousccration is the separation of any thing
from a profane and worldly use unto a spiritual
and godly use. And therefore when usual and common water
is taken from other uses, and put to the use of
baptism in the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghost, then it may rightly
be called consecrated water, that is to say, water put to an holy use. Even so when commonbread and wine be taken and severed from other
bread and wine, to the use of the holy communion, that portion of bread and wine, although it be of the same substance that the other is from
the which it is severed, yet it is now called consecrated or holy bread and holy wine. Not that
the bread and wine have or can have any holi- ness in them, but that they be used to an holy
work, and represent holy and godly things.
And therefore St. Dionyse^ calieth the bread
holy bread, and the cup an holy cup, as soon as they be set upon the altar to the use of the holy
communion.
But specially they may be called holy andconsecrated, when they be separated to that holy
use by Christ’s own words, which he spake for
that purpose, saying of the bread, ” This is my* De Ecci. Hierar. cap. 3.
IN Ills HOLY SUPPER. 181body*’;” and of the wine, ” This is my blood”/’
So that commonly the authors, before those
words be spoken, do take the bread and wine
but as other common bread and wine ; but after
those words be pronounced over them, then they
take them for consecrated and holy bread and
wine. Not that the bread and wine can be partakers of any holiness or godliness, or can be the
body and blood of Christ ; but that they represent the very body and blood of Christ, and the
holy food and nourishment which we have by
him. And so they be called by the names of
the body and blood of Christ, as the sign, token,
and figure is called by the name of the very
thing which it sheweth and signifieth. And
therefore as St. Ambrose, in the words before
cited by the adversaries, saith, that before the
consecration it is bread, and after the consecration it is Christ’s body : so in other places he
doth more plainly set forth his meaning, saying
these words : ” Before the benediction of the
heavenly words, it is called another kind of
thing; but, after the consecration, is signified
the body of Christ. Likewise before the consecration, it is called another thing; but, after the
consecration, it is named the blood of Christ ”.” And again he saith : ” When 1 treated of the
“” Matt. xxvi. Matt. xiv. ” Luke xxii.
“• De his qui mysteriis initiantuv cap. ult.
182 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
sacraments, I told you, that that thing which is offered before the words of Christ, is called
bread ; but when the words of Christ be pronounced, then it is not called bread, but it is called by the name of Christ’s body\”
By which words of St. Ambrose, it appeareth
plainly, that the bread is called by the name of
Christ’s body after the consecration; and al- though it be still bread, yet after consecration it is dignified by the name of the thing which it representeth, as at length is declared before in
‘ the process of Transubstantiation, and specially
in the words of Theodoretus.
And as the bread is a corporal meat, and cor- porally eaten, so, saith St. Ambrose ^ is the bodyof Christ a spiritual meat, and spiritually eaten,
and that requireth no corporal presence.
The answer Now Ict US cxamiuc St. John Chrysostome,lo Chrysosi
• ^
lomas. who, m sound of words, maketh most for the adversaries of the truth : but they that be familiar
and acquainted with Chrysostome’s manner ofspeaking, how in all his writings he is full of al- lusions, schemes, tropes, and figures, shall soonperceive, that he helpeth nothing their purposes,
as it shall well appear by the discussing of those
places, which the Papists do allege of him ; whichbe specially two : One is Li Sermont de Eucharistia in Encceniis ; and the other is, De Proditione
• De sacramentis, lib. 5. cap. 4. ‘ Ibid. lib. 6. cap. 1.
IN IHS HOLY SUPPER. 183JudcE. And as touching the first, no man can
speak more plainly against them than St. John
Chrysostome speaketh in that sermon. Wherefore it is to be wondered why they should allege
him for their party, unless they be so blind in
their opinion that they can see nothing, nor dis- cern what maketh for them, nor what against
them. For there he hath these words : ” When
you come to these mysteries, (speaking of the
Lord’s board and holy communion,) do not think
that you receive by a man the body of God,”
meaning of Christ ^ These be St. John Chrysostome’s own words in that place.
Then if we receive not the body of Christ at
the hands of a man. Ergo, the body of Christ is not really, corporally, and naturally in the sacra- ment, and so given to us by the priest. And
then it followeth that all the Papists be liars, be- cause they feign and teach the contrary.
But this place of Chrysostome is touched before more at length in answering to the Papists’
Transubstantiation.
Wherefore now shall be answered the other
place”, which they allege of Chrysostome in
these words : ** Here he is present in the sacra- ment and doth consecrate, which garnished the
table at the maundy or last supper. For it is
^ In sermone de Eiicharistia in Encaeniis.
^ De proditione Judae.
184 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
not man, which maketh of the bread and wine,
being set forth to be consecrated, the body and
blood of Christ ; but it is Christ himself (which
for us is crucified) that maketh himself to be
there present. The words are uttered and pronounced by the mouth of the priest, but the consecration is by the virtue, might, and grace of
God himself : and as this saying of God, ‘ Increase, be multiplied, and fill the earth V once spoken by God, took always effect towards generation : even so the saying of Christ, ‘ This
is my body ^’ being but once spoken, doth
throughout all churches to this present, and shall
to his last coming, give force and strength to
this sacrifice o” Thus far they rehearse of Chrysostome’s words.
Which words, although they sound much for
their purpose, yet if they be thoroughly considered, and conferred with other places of the
same author, it shall well appear, that he meant
nothing less than that Christ’s body should be
corporally and naturally present in the bread
and wine ; but that in such sort he is in heaven
only, and in our minds by faith we ascend up
into heaven, to eat him there, although sacra- mentally as in a sign and figure, he be in the
bread and wine, and so is he also in the water of
baptism ; and in them that rightly receive the
‘ Gen. i. *” Matt. xxvi. Matt, xiv, Luke xxii.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 185
bread and wine, he is in a much more perfection
than corporally, which should avail them nothing ; but in them he is spiritually with his
divine power, giving them eternal life. And as in the first creation of the world all living creatures had their first life by God’s only
word ; for God only spake his word, and all things were created by and by accordingly;
and after their creation he spake these words,
” Increase and multiply ‘ ;” and, by the virtue of
those words, all things have gendered and increased ever since that time : even so after that
Christ said, ” Eat, this is my body, and drink,
this is my blood, do this hereafter in remembrance of me”‘ ;” by virtue of these words, and
not by virtue of any man, the bread and wine be
so consecrated, that whosoever with a lively faith
doth eat that bread and drink that wine, doth
spiritually eat, drink, and feed upon Christ, sit- ting in heaven with his Father. And this is the
whole meaning of St. Chrysostome.
And therefore doth he so often say, that we
receive Christ in baptism ; and when he hath
spoken of the receiving of him in the holy Communion, by and by he speaketh of the receiving
of him in baptism, without declaring any diversity of his presence in the one, from his presence
in the other.
‘ Gen. i. ” Matt. xxvi. Mark xiv. Luke xxii.
186 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
He saith also in many places “,
** That we as-cend into heaven, and do eat Christ sitting thereabove.”
And wh^re St. Chrysostome and other authorsdo speak of the wonderful operation of God inhis sacraments, passing all man’s wit, senses,and reason, he meaneth not of the working ofGod in the water, bread, and wine, but of themarvellous working of God in the hearts of themthat receive the sacraments, secretly, inwardly,and spiritually transforming them ; renewing,feeding, comforting, and nourishing them withhis flesh and blood, through his most Holy Spirit, the same flesh and blood still remaining inheaven.
Thus is this place of Chrysostome sufficientlyanswered unto ; and if any man require anymore, then let him look what is recited of thesame author before, in the matter of Transubstantiation*
Si’oX Yet furthermore they bring for them TheophiMar’kx’iv. lus Alcxaudriuus, who (as they allege) saiththus : ‘* Christ giving thanks did break, (whichalso we do,) adding thereto prayer: And hegave unto them, saying, ‘ Take, this is mybody ;’ this that I do now give, and that whichye now do take. For the bread is not a figureonly of Christ’s body, but it is changed into the” Ad populum Antiochetium, horn. 61. et in Joan. horn. 45.
IN HIS HOLT SUPPER. 187
very body of Christ ; for Christ saith, * The
bread which I will give you, is my flesh °.’ Nevertheless the flesh of Christ is not seen for our weakness, but bread and wine are familiar unto
us. And surely if we should visibly see flesh
and blood, we could not abide it. And therefore our Lord, bearing with our weakness, doth
retain and keep the form and appearance of
bread and wine ; but he doth turn the very
bread and wine into the very flesh and blood of
Christ.”
These be the words which the Papists do cite
out of Theophilus upon the Gospel of St. Mark.
But by this one place it appeareth evidently,
either how negligent the Papists be in searching
out and examining the sayings of the authors,
which they allege for their purpose ; or else how
false and deceitful they be, which willingly and
wittingly have made in this one place, and, as it were with one breath, two loud and shameful
lies.The first is, that because they would give the
more authority to the words by them alleged,
they (like false apothecaries that sell quid pro quo)
falsify the author’s name, fathering such sayings
upon Theophilus Alexandrinus, an old and ancient author, which were indeed none of his
words, but were the words of Theophylactus,
John
188 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
who was many years after Theophilus Alexandrinus. But such hath ever been the Papistical
subtleties, to set forth their own inventions,
dreams, and lies, under the name of antiquity andancient authors.
The second lie or falsehood is, that they falsify
the author’s words and meaning, subverting the
truth of his doctrine. For where Theopliylactus(according to the Catholick doctr’ine of ancient
authors) saith, that Almighty God, condescending to our infirmity, reserveth the kind of breadand wine^ and yet turneth them into the virtue ofChrist’s flesh and blood, they say that he re- serveth the forms and appearances of bread andwine, and turneth them into the verity of his
flesh and blood, so turning and altering kindsinto forms and appearances, and virtue into verity, that of the virtue of the flesh and blood theymake the verity of his flesh and blood. Andthus have they falsified as well the name as the
words of TheophylactuSj turning verity into plain
and flat falsity.
But to set forth plainly the meaning of Theopliylactus in this matter : As hot and burning iron
is iron still, and yet hath the force of fire ; andas the flesh of Christ, still remaining flesh, giveth life, as the flesh of him that is God : so the
sacramental bread and wine remain still in their
proper kinds; and yet to them that worthily eat
and drink them, they be turned not into the cor-
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 189
poral presence, but into the virtue of Christ’s
flesh and blood.
And although Theophylactus spake of the eat- ing of the very body of Christ, and the drinking
of his very bloody, (and not only of the figures of
them,) and of the conversion of the bread and
wine into the body and blood of Christ, yet he
meaneth not of a gross, carnal, corporal, and
sensible conversion of the bread and wine, nor
of a like eating and drinking of his flesh and
blood ; for so not only our stomachs would yearn
and our hearts abhor to eat his flesh and to drink
his blood ; but also such eating and drinking
could nothing profit and avail us : but he spake
of the celestial and spiritual eating of Christ,
and of a sacramental conversion of the bread,
calling the bread not only a figure, but also the
body of Christ, giving us by those words to understand, that in the sacrament we not only eat
corporally the bread, which is a sacrament and
figure of Christ’s body ; but spiritually we eat
also his very body, and drink his very blood.
And this doctrine of Theophylactus is both true,
godly, and comfortable.
Besides this our adversaries do allege St. Je- Tiie answer
*^ to Hieronyrome, upon the Epistle Ad Titiim, that there is ^’j;?^*;’^7 as great diflTerence between the loaves called’^'”””- panes ‘propositionis, and the body of Christ, as there is between a shadow of a body, and the
body itself, and as there is between an image •
190 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
and the thing itself, and between an example ofthings to come and the things that be prefiguredby them.”
These words of St. Jerome, truly understood,serve nothing for the intent of the Papists. Forhe meant that the shew-bread of the law wasbut a dark shadow of Christ to come ; but thesacrament of Christ’s body is a clear testimonythat Christ is already come, and that he hathperformed that which was promised, and dothpresently comfort and feed us spiritually withhis precious body and blood, notwithstandingthat corporally he is ascended into heaven.
Augustinus, And the same is to be answered unto all thatSerlulius, Leo Ful- tjjg adversaries brinof of St. Auorustine, Sedulius,gentius.Cas- ” o ‘ ?
Gregorius ^^^* Fulgcutius, Cassiodorus, Gregorius, andothers, concerning the eating of Christ in thesacrament.
Which thing cannot be understood plainly asthe words sound, but figuratively and spiritually, as before is sufficiently proved, and hereaftershall be more fully declared in the fourth partof this book.
But here John Damascene ^ may in no wisebe passed over, whom for his authority the adversaries of Christ’s true natural body do reckonas a stout champion sufficient to defend all thewhole matter alone. But neither is the autho-” Damascenus de fide orth. lib. 4. cap. 14.
IN HIS HOLT SUPPER. 191
rity of Damascene so great, that they may oppress us thereby, nor his words so plain for
them, as they boast and untruly pretend. For
he is but a young new author in the respect of
those which we have brought in for our party.
And in divers points he varieth from the most
ancient authors, (if he mean as they expound
him,) as when he saith, that the bread and wine
be not figures, which all the old authors call
figures, and that the bread and wine consume
not, nor be voided downward, which Origen and
St. Augustine affirm, or that they be not called
the examples of Christ’s body after the consecration, which shall manifestly appear false by the
Liturgy ascribed unto St. Basil.
And moreover the said Damascene was one
of the bishop of Rome’s chief proctors against
the emperors, and as it were his right hand, to
set abroad all idolatry by his own hand-writing.
And therefore if he lost his hand (as they say he
did) he lost it by God’s most righteous judgment, whatsoever they feign and fable of the
miraculous restitution of the same. And yet
whatsoever the said Damascene writeth in other
matters, surely in this place which the adversaries do allege, he writeth spiritually and godly,
although the Papists either of ignorance mistake
him, or else willingly wrest him and writhe him
to their purpose, clean contrary to his meaning.
The sum of Damascene’s doctrine in this mat- •
192 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
ter is this : that as Christ, being both God andman, hath in him two natures ; so hath he twonativities, one eternal and the other temporal.And so likewise we, being as it were double men,or having every one of us two men in us, the newman and the old man, the spiritual man and thecarnal man, have a double nativity : one of ourfirst carnal father, Adam, by whom as by ancientinheritance cometh unto us malediction andeverlasting damnation; and the other of our heavenly Adam, that is to say, of Christ, by whomwe be made heirs of celestial benediction andeverlasting glory and immortality.
And because this Adam is spiritual, thereforeour generation by him must be spiritual, and ourfeeding must be likewise spiritual. And our spiritual generation by him is plainly set forth inbaptism, and our spiritual meat and food is setforth in the holy communion and supper of theLord. And because our sights be so feeble thatwe cannot see the spiritual water wherewith webe washed in baptism, nor the spiritual meatwherewith we be fed at the Lord’s table ; therefore to help our infirmities, and to make us thebetter to see the same with a pure faith, our Saviour Christ hath set forth the same as it werebefore our eyes by sensible signs and tokens,which we be daily used and accustomed unto.
And because the common custom of men is towash in water, therefore our spiritual regenera-
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 103tion in Christ, or spiritual washing in his blood,
is declared unto us in baptism by water. Likewise our spiritual nourishment and feeding in
Christ, is set before our eyes by bread and wine,
because they be meats and drinks which chiefly
and usually we be fed withal ; that as they feed
the body, so doth Christ with his flesh and blood
spiritually feed the soul.
And therefore the bread and wine be called
examples of Christ’s flesh and blood, and also
they be called his very flesh and blood, to signify unto us that as they feed us carnally, so do
they admonish us that Christ with his flesh and , blood doth feed us spiritually and most truly
unto everlasting life. And as Almighty God by
his most mighty word and his Holy Spirit and
infinite power brought forth all creatures in the
beginning, and ever since hath preserved them
;
even so by the same word and power he worketh in us from time to time this marvellous spiritual generation and wonderful spiritual nourishment and feeding, which is wrought only by
God, and is comprehended and received of us by faith. And as bread and drink by natural nourishment be changed into a man’s body, and yet the
body is not changed, but the same that it was
before ; so although the bread and wine be sa- cramentally changed into Christ’s body, yet his
body is the same and in the same place that it’ o
194 ” OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
was before, that is to say, in heaven, without
any alteration of the same. And the bread and wine be not so changed
into the flesh and blood of Christ, that they be
made one nature, but they remain still distinct
in nature, so that the bread in itself is not his
flesh, and the wine his blood, but unto them
that worthily eat and drink the bread and wine,
to them the bread and wine be his flesh and
blood, that is to say, by things natural and which
they be accustomed unto, they be exalted unto
things above nature. For the sacramental bread
and wine be not bare and naked figures, but so pithy and efficacious, that whosoever worthily
eateth them, eateth spiritually Christ’s flesh and
blood, and hath by them everlasting life. Wherefore whosoever cometh to the Lord’s
table, must come with all humility, fear, reverence, and purity of life, as to receive not only
bread and wine, but also our Saviour Christ both
God and man, with all his benefits, to the relief
and sustentation both of their bodies and souls.
This is briefly the sum and true meaning of
Damascene, concerning this matter.
Wherefore they that gather of him either the
natural presence of Christ’s body in the sacra- ments of bread and wine, or the adoration of the
outward and visible sacrament, or that after the
consecration there remaineth no bread nor wine
nor other substance^ but only the substance of
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 195the body and blood of Christ; either they understand not Damascene, or else of wilful frowardness they will not understand him; which rather
seemeth to be true, by such collections as they
have unjustly gathered and noted out of him.
For although he say, that Christ is the spiritual meat, yet as in baptism the Holy Ghost is not in the water, but in him that is unfeignedly
baptized; so Damascene meant not that Christ
is in the bread, but in him that worthily eateth
the bread.
And though he say, that the bread is Christ’s
body, and the wine his blood, yet he meant not
that the bread considered in itself, or the wine
in itself being not received, is his flesh and
blood ; but to such as by unfeigned faith worthily receive the bread and wine, to such the
bread and wine are called by Damascene the
body and blood of Christ, because that such
persons through the working of the Holy Ghost
be so knit and united spiritually to Christ’s flesh
and blood, and to his divinity also, that they be
fed with them unto everlasting life. Furthermore Damascene saith not that the sa- crament should be worshipped and adored, as the Papists term it, which is plain idolatry, but
that we must worship Christ, God and man. And yet we may not worship him in bread and
wine, but sitting in heaven with his Father, and
being spiritually within ourselves. o 2
]J>6 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
Nor he saith not, that there remaineth no bread
nor wine, nor none other substance, but only the
substance of the body and blood of Christ ; but
he saith plainly, that as a burning coal is not
wood only, but fire and wood joined together ; so the bread of the communion is not bread
only, but bread joined to the divinity. But
those that say, that there is none other substance
but the substance of the body and blood of
Christ, do not only deny that thepe is bread and
wine, but by force they must deny also that
thexe is either Christ’s divinity or his soul. For
if the flesh and blood, the soul and divinity of
Christ be four substances, and in the sacrament
be but two of them, that is to say, his flesh and
blood, then where be his soul and divinity? Andthus these men divide Jesus, separating his divinity from his humanity: of whom St. John saith,
*’ Whosoever divideth Jesus, is not of God, but
he is Antichrist ”.” And moreover these men do so separate
Christ’s body from his members in the sacra- ment, that they leave him no man’s body at all. For as Damascene saith, ” That the distinction
of members pertain so much to the nature of a man’s body, that where there is no such distinction, there is no perfect man’s body ‘.” But bythese Papists’ doctrine, there is no such distinc-
‘ 1 John iv. In libio de duabus in Christo voluntatibus.
IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 197tion of members in the sacrament ; for either
there is no head, feet, hands, arms, legs, mouth,
eyes, and nose at all ; or else all is head, all feet,
all hands, all arms, all legs, all mouth, all eyes,
and all nose. And so they make of Christ’s
body no man’s body at all. Thus being confuted the Papists’ errors as well concerning Transubstantiation, as the real,
corporal, and natural presence of Christ in the
sacrament,! which were two principal points purposed in the beginning of this work ; now it is time something to speak of the third error of
the Papists, which is concerning the eating of
Christ’s very body and drinking of his blood.
THUS ENDETH TH-E THIRD BOOK.