Rejoinder to Bristows Reply, Part 2 · Book 3 · Chapter 17 – Chapter 19
CAP. XVII.
We are made one with Christ by naturall participation of his Sander.flesh, as he being one nature with his father, hath assumpted our nature into his owne person.
Sander alwaies reasoneth so, as he maketh eating by Fulk.faith and spirite, to exclude the fleshe of Christ and the vertue thereof, as in this chapter, he saith, Hee that eateth Christs fleshe, receiueth life of him, not by the meanes of faith & spirite onelyonly, but also by naturall participation of his flesh: as Christ liueth for the father, so he that eateth Christ shall liue for him: but Christ liueth not for his father in faith, nor by meane of spirite alone, as we take spirite for deuotion or spirituall giftes and qualities, but by his whole substance present in him. But whē wee say, that wee eate Christ by faith & spirit, we meane not by spirite, deuotion, or spirituall gifts, but the working of the holy spirite, as the principall efficient cause, and faith as the instrumentall cause, by which wee eate Christ present in whole substance. The controuersie is not, whether wee must bee ioyned to Christ by eating of his flesh and drinking of his bloud, for that wee beleue without al controuersie, that from the beginning of the world, to the end, none can be ioyned to Christ otherwise then by eating his flesh & drinking his bloud: but whether Christes flesh can be eaten and drunken without eating bodily the Sacrament, that is the question. And therfore Sander maketh a large & needlesse discourse, in this Chapter, to shew how Christ liueth for his father and how we must liue for him, that is by participation of his flesh and bloud, which is that naturall participation, whereof Hilary speaketh against the Arrians, which saied, we are ioyned to him onelyonly in vnity of will, which is not so: for he by his incarnation, is naturally ioyned to vsus, and we by participation of his flesh are naturally ioyned to him, so that wee are flesh of his flesh, and bone of his bone, of which coniunction the Sacrament is an heauenly pledge and assurance. But now commeth Sander, and saith, that in foure pointes the Sacramentaries be against S. Hilary: first b…couse they pr…suppose Christes flesh not to be eaten of vsus, and consequently not to be in vsus, in his owne nature and substance. This is a false supposell, for we affirme Christes flesh to be eaten of al the elect of God, and whole Christ to be in them. Secondly they are against the Godhead of Christ, if we doe not liue by eating of Christs flesh as he by the father. This is the 2. slanderous cauell, answered before. Thirdly they are against the life of our bodyes, because they say that in the Sacrament, we eate nothing into our bodies, but bread and wine, which are not able to giuegive life to our bodies, whereby they may liue for euer. This is a peeuish Sophistry, we eate into our bodies, and we eate in the Sacrament bodilye nothing, but bread and wine, therefore we eat not at all. Yes, we eat the flesh of Christ both in the Sacrament and without it, with our soules which is of force to giuegive life both to bodies and soules. Fourthly they are against the foode of our bodies, which is the flesh of Christ. No forsooth, wee acknowledge that flesh of Christ to be foode to feede the whole man, body and soule vntounto eternall life, but yet so to feede the body as it is not receiued corporally, nor feedeth corporally, but after a spirituall and diuine manner. And heere he maketh the Zwinglians to affirme, that the sanctified bread in the supper, is the foode of our bodies, vntounto eternall life, as water in baptisme is the instrument and meane as wel to bodies & soules of euerlasting life. Which is vtterly false, for they affirme, neither ye bread to be food, nor the water to be regeneration otherwise, then as holy signes, seales, pledges, assurances of spirituall feeding and regeneration. But Sander by scripture, will destroy this comparison, affirming that God in deede may vse what meanes he will, to saue vsus, but by his word, he hath testified his wil, yt baptisme hath his promise of saluatiō annexed to it, but no promise is made to material bread and wine, nor to him that eateth and drinketh them. I answere, neither is any promise made to the water in baptisme, but to him that receiueth it worthily, and to him that eateth and drinketh materiall bread and wine in the Sacrament, the like promise is made of remission of sinnes and of eternall life: not in respect of ye bread & wine, but in respect of him that feedeth our faith by that Sacrament, and by faith and working of his holye spirite feedeth vsus with his flesh and bloud, euen when that Sacrament is not receiued. But Cyril saith in Ioan, lib. 10, Cap. 13. Non poterat, &c. This corruptible nature of the body could not otherwise be brought to incorruption and life, vnlesse the body of the naturall life, were ioyned vntounto it. This is true: but the manner of the coniunction is all the matter we stand vpō, which we affirme must be such, as may ioyne eueryevery body of Gods elect that hath bene & shall be, to the body of the naturall life, which cannot be the Sacramētal coniunctiō or corporal receiuing of Christs naturall body into our bodies, which was denied to al ye fathers before Christes incarnation. And yet except eueryevery one of their bodies had bene ioyned to the body of Christ, which is the body of naturall life, they could not be partakers of incorruptiō & life, as Cyril saith. Therefore the manner of our coniunction, is not the receiuing of Christes body in at our mouthes, but an heauenlie & diuine manner wrought by the spirit of God, apprehended by faith in all that hauehave heard the word of God …d are partakers of it.
CAP. XVIII.
The eating of Christes flesh was so true, that it was …ght Sander.with the losse of many disciples.
If Christ had not meant to giuegive his flesh in deed (saith Fulke.Sander) he would not hauehave cast a stumbling blocke in his disciples way, nor hindered their faith by wordes more hard then needed. I answere, he ment to giuegive them his flesh in deede, to be eaten, not only in his supper, but euen then presently, if they had bene faithfull to hauehave receiued it. And therefore he saith to them, he that eateth me, shall liue for me or by me, my flesh is meate in deede, and my bloud is drinke in deede. Sander must remember, what he hath taught vsus before, that Christes fleshe cannot bee meate in deede, except it bee eaten, but Christ saith it is meat in deede, before it was to be eaten in the Sacrament, therefore it was presently eaten by faith and spirite, and he speaketh not there of Sacramentall eating onelyonly. Neither doth Cyrill say, that only in the Sacrament, Christes flesh is eaten, although he shew that Christ instructed his Apostles, when he gaue them fragmenta panis, pecces of bread, how his flesh might be eaten, in Ioan lib. 4. Cap. 14. namely spiritually and not corporally.
CAP. XIX.
The right vnderstanding of these wordes: It is the spirite that Sander.quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing.
Basil, Chrysostome, and Augustine, (saith Sander) Fulke.expounde the name flesh for carnall and fleshlye vnderstanding of the Iewes: which Caluine of Luciferian pride reprocueth: And yet Augustine and Cy…l doe chiefely followe another vnderstanding, which also Cal…e followeth, that Christes flesh, should not profit any thing, but that by the spirite of his Godhead, it is made able to giuegive euerlasting life. See the ran…or of Sander, which condemneth Caluine of diuellish pride, for refusing one interpretation of some fathers, & taking the exposition of others, and that, which one of the same fathers doth cheefely followe, as Sander doth confesse. But now (saith he) what neede more adoe? If this saying apperteine not to the last supper, it maketh nothing against our beleefe. If it doe apperteine, they are wordes propheticall, fulfilled in the supper. I hauehave often shewed how all this doctrine of eating the flesh of Christ, perteineth to the supper, and howe it perteineth not. And this I prooue out of this saying against your Popish opinion, wherein you holde that wicked men eate Christes flesh. Our sauiour Christe shewing whence his fleshe hath power to giuegive life, namely not of it selfe, but of the spirite, doth also shewe the necessary effect of his spirit, which is neuer separated from his flesh. The spirit (saith he) quickneth or giueth life: seeing therefore that no man can receiue the fleshe of Christe separated from his spirite, no man can receiue his flesh, but he that receiueth it quickning or giuing life. But where Sander saith, that when Christ gaue his body, he gaue it after a spirituall sorte, and no… after a fleshly manner. It might seeme that he fully agreed with vsus in minde, as he doth in wordes: but when he cō meth to expounde spiritually and fleshly, he declareth, that he meaneth not to exclude, all fleshly manners, but only one maner of eating his body by pieces, as though the eating of it whole according to their imagination into their bodies were not also a fleshly manner: but when he cōmeth to spirituall sort, he expoundeth it only by inuisible sort: as though he which giueth a piece of golde closed in a paper, so that it could not be seene, did giuegive it after a spirituall manner. As for the conuersion of bread and wine into his body and bloud, his presence at the table and in their mouthes, and in heauen, &c. shew not a spirituall manner of giuing his body, but a monstrous alteration of bodily thinges, which are affirmed to be so really and corporally, and yet contrary to the nature of all thinges and bodies spoken of. I omitt his ridiculous interpretations of Ieremies saying. Let vsus put wood into his bread, which he applyeth to the crucifying of Christs flesh, where yet wodde was not put into his flesh, but his flesh put vponupon wodde. But the Prophet rehearseth the saying of his aduersaries, which threatened to giuegive him wood in steede of bread, that is to famish him in the stockes. Likewise of Abacuks saying: Hornes are in his hands, which he meanein of the almightie power of God, often called figuratiue hornes, Sander referreth it to the corners of the crosse, which yet were not in the hands of Christ, but his hands stretched out toward them.