Christian Questions and Answers Part 2, Catechism · Question 236 – Question 242
235. Queſtion.
Let vsus goe forewarde then to other arguments.
Anſweare.
I ſet downe therefore firſt of all that which is moſt true, that the bodie of Chriſt is truely an organicall and a naturall bodie, the which nature hee had neyther then put of, when he inſtituted the ſupper, neither afterwardes did his glorie take it away frō him. I ſet down alſo this, that Chriſt properly is ſaide, according to the fleſh, too bee aſcended, that is, gone out of the earth vpwardes, aboue the heauens, hauing chaunged the ſituation of his place.
I ſette downe alſo this thirde thing, too witte, that he ſhall not returne from thence whether hee aſcended, before that day wherein hee is looked for too come againe.
Theſe groundes beeing thus layde, ſo I gather: If that breade bee properlye that verye bodye, and that Wyne properly that verye blood, Yea further, if the Bodie and Bloode be properly in, vnderunder, or with the breade and wine, they are then in the ſame beeing and occupying of a roome, and in verye deede are alſo preſent togeather, and in the ſelfe ſame moment there is preſent in as many places that ſame body and that ſame blood, as that ſame bread and that ſame wyne are preſent.
But this thing and they holde not in any fourme of argument or reaſon. But they are moſt certayne. Both theſe opinions therefore, ſeeing they are agaynſt the analogy of Fayth, are falſe.
Notwithſtanding both are witneſſed in the holy ſcriptures, both therefore of neceſſitie muſt be true.
But two contradictoryes, if they be properly taken, can not bee true. Of theſe therefore of neceſſitie, one muſt bee taken properly, the other figuratiuely.
Queſtion.
But who will agree vntoo theſe groundes?
Anſweare.
Surely whoſoeuer is a Chriſtian. For he that denyeth that the body taken of the ſonne of God was a true, & therfore an organicall body, he is a Martionite, and not a Chriſtian. Hee that denyeth, that Chriſte came according to his fleſhe thither whether hee came, & went away whence hee went, and therefore was not truely abſent and preſent in certaine places, he is refelled by the hyſtory of the Goſpell. He that taketh away the proprietie of a naturall body, (that is to ſay, which is not in any other place then wherein it is limited) eyther from the tyme of that ſubſtantiall vnyon, or from the tyme of his aſcention, hee is an Eutichyan and not a Chriſtian. They alſo that interprete the aſcentiō of Chriſt after the mutation of qualitie and not of place, and interprete the heauens into which hee aſcended allegorically, they are refelled alſo by the hyſtorie it ſelfe, and by the analogie and proportion of Fayth, and that they may deny one vſuall type & figure, and altogether agreeable to the proportion of Fayth, they bring in innumerable figures diſagreeing from the proportion of Fayth. Finally, they that thinke that the proprietie of the woordes in the hyſtorie of the aſcention can ſtande with that reall preſence, eyther by conſubſtantiō, or by trā ſubſtātiatiō, they maintein two cōtradictiōs at once to wc contradictiō that there is no place, neither in nature nor in the myſteries of faith, we wil ſhewe in his place. This collection therfore ſtandeth ſure & is inuincible: Chriſt according to the fleſh properly, is gone frō vsus aboue the heauens, not to come againe from thence, before that he ſhal come to iudge both the quicke and the deade. Therefore neyther the breade which is in the earth, is properly the very fleſhe of Chriſt, neyther the fleſhe of Chriſt is properly in, or with, or vnderunder the breade.
Queſtion.
Yea but this ſame propoſition Bread; this is my bodie, is no other wiſe true, nowe, then when Chriſte ſpake it, yea, therefore nowe it is true, becauſe then it was true, to witte, by the vertue of the ſame inſtitution. But then was hee himſelfe preſent. Therfore now alſo the ſame preſence is required.
Anſweare.
Of this we ſhal ſee afterwards. Now I ſaye agayne, whether the bodie of Chriſt be determined to bee preſent or abſent, yet notwithſtanding that that cannot ſtand, that that breade ſhoulde be properly ſayd to be the very body of the Lord. Now I proceede to thoſe argumentes which are taken from the true properties of mannes fleſhe.
236. Queſtion.
Say on therefore.
Anſweare.
He that ouerthroweth the eſſentiall propertie of any thing, ouerthroweth the thing it ſelfe: becauſe the definition being ouerthrowen, the thing defined is ouerthrowen.
But to be limited and conteyned in a place is the eſſētial property of a body.
Therefore he that taketh away the limitation of place from the bodie of Chriſte; hee aboliſheth the very body it ſelfe. The propoſition needeth no proofe. The aſſumption is playne by the definition of the bodie, becauſe it is ſayd to be a diuiſible quantitie, according to a threefold meaſure, length, bredth and thicknes, and whoſe partes are bounded with one common bounde, that is to ſay, the ſuperficies. Alſo from the diffinition of a place. For a place is that, through which a touch is made both of that which conceineth, & of that which is conteined.
237. Queſtion.
But I did thinke that a place was not the eſſence or ſubſtance of the bodie.
Anſweare.
So the Sophiſters trifle. Neyther doe we ſay, that a place is the matter of the bodie, but placing as I may ſay neceſſarily and in it ſelfe is proper too bodies: Neither doe we then conſider the body as the matter, but as the quantitie. Therefore Auguſtine ſpeaking very wel of the glorified bodie of Chriſt it ſelfe, If it be a bodie (ſayth he,) then is it in a place. And take away ſpaces from the bodyes, and they ſhall bee no bodies.
But let vsus proceede.
Hee taketh away the limitation of place, which contendeth that one and the ſelfe ſame body can be euerie where and in manie places at once properly.
This euerie one doeth, which teacheth eyther that this bread is proper by the bodie of our Lorde, or in verie deed wil hauehave it to be preſent, in, with, or vnderunder the breade, and to be giuen too the outwarde ſenſes in as many places as the Supper of the Lorde is celebrated.
Therefore. &c.
I knowe that manie flee vntounto the diſtinction of a bodie ſupernaturall, certaine alſo vntounto that common ſtartinghole of the omnipotencie of God. But to what endeſerues this? For the natural, generall, and eſſentiall fourme, by which euerie bodie is a bodie, being taken away it ſhall follow, that that body ceaſeth to be a body, from which that ſame eſſentiall fourme of a body is taken away, & they play the Sophiſters: which reaſon from the accidentall properties to the eſſential, of which matter wee will ſpeake in his place.
238. Queſtion.
Haſt thou any other argument that thou canſt alleadge?
Anſweare.
Yea that I hauehave, and that of great waight. For the proper, perpetual and neceſſary effect being taken away, the antecedent alſo of the cauſe is taken away. I ſay therfore out of Saint Iohns verſe. 51. Who ſo euer is a partaker of Chriſt, hee is a partaker of euerlaſtyng lyfe. But it is playne, that many doe receyue the Elements of the Lords Supper to iudgement. Therefore none of theſe are partakers of Chriſt him ſelfe. But if properly and in very deede, the bread were the body of Chriſt, and that wyne the blood of Chriſte, eyther by tranſubſtantiation, or by reall conſubſtantiation, who ſo euer ſhould receyue the Element, ſhoulde receyue alſo properly and in very deede the thing it ſelf. Therefore &c.
Queſtion.
Thou art not ignorant what is anſweared vntounto the propoſition of this argument: to wit, that that ſaying of Iohn and ſuch other like, is to be vnderſtoode of thoſe that come vntounto it rightly and worthily.
Anſweare.
I knowe it, and I truſt I ſhall eaſily confute this, as alſo that ſame threefolde or rather fourefold eating.
Queſtion.
What therefore doeſt thou conclude of all theſe?
Anſweare.
Surely that thoſe propoſitions, this is my body which is giuen for you, and this is my blood which is ſhed for many for the remiſſion of ſinnes, are neceſſarily to be interpreted figuratiuely, to wit, by a ſacramentall metonimy, and yet neyther for al that, is any thing withdrawen from the trueth of the Sacrament, or from the true participation of Chriſt himſelfe.
239. Queſtion.
I would gladly alſo that that were declared vntounto me, at what time thou thinkeſt the ſupper of the Lord ought to be celebrated. For wee heare that the Chriſtians are laughed to ſkorne of the Iewes, who ſuppe ſo earely, yea, and that againſt the manner of the moſt old and Apoſtolicall church of Chriſt it ſelfe.
Anſweare.
Chriſt did celebrate theſe myſteries at night for twoo cauſes: For hee woulde compare this newe Sacrament which he inſtituted with the figure anſwering vntounto it. Now the paſſeouer was ſlaine betwixt twoo euenings. And furthemore it is playne that this was the manner of the ancient, yt they ſhould ſit downe once, that is too ſay, in the eueninges. For foreign and foreign which the Latines (I thinke) called Prandium, that is, a dinner, as if a man ſhoulde ſay, the leauings of the former meales, becauſe that that very ſame day nothing in a manner was ſodden, but ſomewhat was taken of the remnantes of the former dayes meale in a maner they not ſitting down neither was it of all, nor of full prouiſion and iunquettes. It is no meruayle therfore, foraſmuche as Chriſt differred theſe ſame myſteries, as it were the ſealing vp of his Teſtament into his laſt banquet, that hee rather inſtituted this ryte in the Euening then in the Morning. Nowe it ought not too ſeeme any wonder, that the olde Churche, whiles that thoſe louelove feaſtes by little and little were taken away, that they did end their banquetes with the celebration of this Supper: the which thing notwithſtanding, that it was not eueryevery where kept, it appeareth not onelyonly by the laſt Apology of Iuſtine, but alſo by other teſtimonies of the ancient fathers. But it cannot be geathered of any cir, cumſtance of time out of the wordes of the inſtitution, that Chriſt commaunded any thing concerning the circumſtance of time. Therefore cuſtome hath very wel preuayled, that the Supper of the Lorde ſhoulde be celebrated rather in the morning meeting, & of thoſe that are faſting, then of thoſe that hauehave dyned, that they may come to the hearing of Gods word and to this ſame heauenly myſtery which is to be executed with great attention and highe reuerence, with the redier and better prepared myndes.
240. Queſtion.
But hath the Lord appoynted nothing concerning the place?
Anſweare.
He appoynted the place, to wit, of the publike congregation of the Churche, whenas he ordained it amongeſt his diſciples: neyther ſaide be, Doe this eueryevery one, but doe yee this. And Paule ſayeth plainely, When ye come together, the wc thing alſo the very name foreign & al the old Liturgies or formes of adminiſtring the Sacramentes doe ſhew: & alſo the very ſcope of theſe myſteries, in whith our natural felowſhip & conſotiation in Chriſt is ratified, doth require. Nowe to appoint ſome certayne place with a kinde of religion (as it was not lawfull in times paſt too celebrate the Paſſeouer other where then in that place the Lorde had choſen) it were a Iewiſh ſuperſtition.
241. Queſtion.
What therefore doeſt thou thinke of the ſupper of the Lord adminiſtred in priuate houſes?
Anſweare.
I paſſe nothing at all of priuate houſes, if the church, that is to ſay, the congregation doe meete in them, as it was neceſſary in thoſe ſame auncient times vnderunder the tyranny of the Romaine Emperours, and is yet alſo neceſſary in our times in too many places.
Queſtion.
And yet notwithſtanding there are, which hauehave once condempned theſe priuate meetinges in the night.
Anſweare.
I doe confeſſe, that thoſe ſame night meetinges are not raſhely too bee tollerated, nor otherwiſe then by great neceſſitie: wherevppon alſo in tymes paſt occaſion was taken of caſting the Chriſtians falſely in the teeth of nighte whoringes. Alſo in our times no leſſe impudētly obiected to the French Churches. But if they think them therfore to be cōdemned, who whiles moſt cruell perfecution is hot, came togeather in our times by night, or yet come together, ſurely they muſt condēne all ye true Apoſtolical Churches. But it was an eaſie matter for thē, whoſe congregations by the autority and fauour of their princes, beyng neuer dryuen into theſe narrowe ſtreightes of the French men and other nations driuen therto, that either muſt want al Eccleſiaſtical adminiſtration of the worde and Sacramentes, or elſe muſt take whatſoeuer occaſions of meeting together and comforting one another, it was an eaſie matter I ſay for them too finde fault with other: from whom it was agayne lawfull for them to appeale to the whole auncient and moſt pure Church, to the teſtimony of their conſcience, to the fruites of the confeſſion of Martyrs, and finally to the tribunall ſeate of Chriſte it ſelfe. And theſe forſooth accuſers of the brethren, neuer ſhewed themſelues ſuche, in that their warre ſcarce induring for a yeere as it is playne both theſe were and are who nowe hauehave borne the waight of moſt horrible perſecution theſe 50. yeeres, neither yet by the grace of God do faint, vnderunder this burden.