Answer unto a Crafy and Sophistical Cavillation, Debate · Confutation of book 3 · Section 33 – Section 38
Caunterbury.
EAting and drinking with the mouth being so playne a matter,The eating of Christes body is not with teeth. that yong babes learne it, and know it before they cā speake, yet the Cut till here with his blacke colours and darke speaches goeth about so to couer and hyde the matter, that neither yong nor olde, learned nor vnlearned, should vnderstand what he meaneth. But for all his masking who is so ignoraunt but he knoweth, that eating, in the propper and vsuall signification, is to bite and chaw in sunder with the teeth? And who knoweth not also, that Christ is not so eaten? Who can then be ignorant, that here you speake a manifest vntruth, when you say, that Christes body to be eaten, is of it selfe a propper speach and not figuratiue? Which is by and by confessed by your selfe, when you say that we do not eate that heauēnly meat, as we do other carnall meates, which is by chawing and deuiding with the mouth and teeth. And yet we receaue with the mouth that is ordeined to be receiued with the mouth, that is to say, the Sacramentall bread and wine, esteming them neuerthelesse vntounto vsus when we duly receiue them, according vntounto Christes wordes and ordinaunce.
But where you say, that of the substaunce of Christes body no good man iudgeth carnally, ne discusseth the vnfaythful question (how:) you charge your selfe very sore in so saying, and seeme to make demonstration vponupon your selfe, of whom may be sayd, Ex ore tuo te iudico. For you both iudge carnally in affirming a carnall presence, and a carnall eating,Luk. 19. and also you discusse this question (how) when you say that Christes body is in the sacrament really, substauncially, corporally, carnally, sensible, and naturally, as he was born of the virgin Mary, and suffered on the cros.
And as concerning these wordes of Christ:Iohn. 6. The wordes which I doe speake be Spirite and lyfe, I hauehave not wrested them with myne owne glose (as you misreport) but I hauehave cited for me the interpretation of the catholik doctors and holy fathers of the church, as I refer to the iudgement of the reader.
But you teach such a carnall & grosse eating, and drinking of Christes flesh & bloud, as is more meet to expresse how dogges deuoure paunches, then to sette forth the high mistery of Christes holy supper. For you say, that Christes body is present really, substauncially, corporally, and carnally, and so is eaten: and that we eate Christes body, as eating is taken in common speach: but in common speach it is taken for chawing, and gnawing as doges do paunches: wherfore of your saying it followeth, that we do so eate Christes body, as dogges eate paunches, which all christian eares abhore for to heare.
But why should I ioyne with you here an issue, in that mater which I neuer spake? For I neuer read nor hard no man that sayd (sauing you alone) that we do eate Christ grossely, or carnally, or as eating is taken in common speach without any figure, but all that euer I hauehave hard or read, say quite cleane contrary. But you, who affirme that we eate Christ carnally, and as eating is taken in common speach (which is carnally & grossely to chaw with the teeth) must nedes consequently graunt, that we eat him grossely and carnally, as dogges eate paunches. And this is a strange thing to heare, that where before you sayd, that Christ is present but after a spirituall maner, now you say, that he is eaten carnally.
And where you say, that in the holy Supper men vse their mouth and teeth, truth it is that they so do, but to chawe the Sacramēt, not ye body of Christ. And if they doo not teare that most precious body and bloud, why say you then that they eate the body of Christ, as eatyng is taken in cōmon speech? And wherefore doth that false Papisticall fayth of Pope Nicolas,Nycolas the second. (which you wrongfully call Catholike,) teach that Christs body is torne with the teeth of the faythfull? De consecr. dist. 2. Ego.De consecr, dist, 2. Ego.
Now folowe the particular authorities, which I hauehave alleaged for the interpretation of Christes wordes, which if you had well considered, you would not hauehave sayd (as you doe) that I wrasted Christes wordes with mine owne glose. For I beginne with Origene, saying:
Origen. in Leuit. Ho 7.And Origene declaring the sayd eating of Christes flesh, and drinking of his bloud, not to be vnderstand as the wordes doe sound, but figuratiuely, writeth thus vponupon these wordes of Christ: Except you eate my flesh and drinke my bloud, you shall not hauehave lyfe in you.Iohn. 6. Consider (sayth Origen) that these thinges written in Godes bookes, are figures, and therefore examine, and vnderstand them as spirituall, and not as carnall men. For if you vnderstand them as carnall men, they hurt you, and feede you not. For euen in the Gospels is there foūd letter that killeth. And not onelyonly in the old Testament, but also in the new is there found letter that slayeth hym, that dooth not spiritually vnderstand that which is spoken. For if thou follow the letter or wordes of this that Christ sayd: Except you eat my flesh, and drink my bloud this letter killeth.
Who can more playnely expresse in any wordes, that the eating & drinking of Christes flesh and bloud, are not to be taken in common signification, as the wordes pretend and sound, then Origene dooth in this place?
Winchester.
Now I will touch shortly what may be sayd to the particular authorities brought in by this author.Origenes. Origen is noted (among other writers of the church) to draw the text to all egories, who doth not therby meane to destroy the truth of the letter, and therefore whē he speaketh of a figure, sayth not there is onelyonly a figure, which exclusiue (only) being away, (as it is not found by any author Catholick taught that the spéech of Christ of ye eating of his flesh to be onelyonly a figure) this author had nothing aduanced his purpose. As for spiritual vnderstanding meaneth not any destruction of the letter wher the same may stand with the rules of our faith. All Christes words be life and spirit, contayning in the letter many tymes that is aboue our capacity, as specially in this place of the eating of his flesh, to discusse the particularities of (how) & yet we must beleue to be true that Christ sayth (although we can not tell how:) For when we go about to discusse of Gods mistery (how,) then we fall from fayth, and waxe carnall men, and would hauehave Gods wayes like ours.
Caunterbury.
HEre may eueryevery man that readeth the words of Origen plainly see, yt you seek in this waighty matter nothing by shifts and cauillatiōs. For you hauehave nothing aunswered directly to Origen although he directly writeth agaynst your doctrine. For you say that the eating of Chrstes flesh is taken in the proper signification without a fygure. Origen sayth there is a figure. And Origen sayth further, that it is onelyonly a figuratiue spech, although not adding this word (onelyonly) yet adding other words of the same effect. For he sayth, that we may not vnderstand the words as the letter soundeth. And sayth further, that if we vnderstand the words of Christ in this place, as the letter soundeth, the letter killeth. Now who knoweth not, that to say these words (not as the letter soundeth, and yt letter killeth) be as much to say, as onelyonly spiritually, and only otherwise then the letter soundeth? Wherfore you must spit vponupon your hands, aud take better hold, or els you can not be able to plucke Origen so shortly from me. And I maruayle that you be not ashamed, thus to trifle with the auncient authors in so serious a matter, and such places, where the reader onelyonly looking vponupon the authors wordes, may see your dealing.
The next is Chrysostome, whom I cite thus.
And Saynct Iohn Chrisostome affirmeth the same,Chrisostome in Iohānem Hom. 46. saying, that if any man vnderstand the words of Christ carnally he shall surely profit nothing therby. For what meane these words, the flesh auayleth nothing? He ment not of flesh (God forbid) but he ment of them that fleshly and carnally vnderstood those things that Christ spake But what is carnall vnderstanding? To vnderstand the words simply as they be spoken, and nothing els. For we ought not so to vnderstād the things which we see, but all misteries must be considered with inward eyes, and that is spiritually to vnderstand them.
In these words S. Iohn Chrisostō sheweth plainly that the words of Christ concerning the eating of his flesh and drinking of his bloud, are not to be vnderstand simply, as they be spoken, but spiritually and figuratiuely.
Winchester.
Sainct Chrisostom declareth himself,Chrisostome. how misteries must be considered with inward eyes, which is a spirituall vnderstanding, wherby the truth of the mistery is not, (as it were by a figuratiue spech empayred) but wt an humility of vnderstanding in a certayn fayth of the truth maruayled at. And here the author of this book vseth a sleight to ioyne figuratiuely to spiritually, as though they were alwayes all one, which is not so.
Caunterbury.
AS you hauehave handled Origen before, euen so do you hādle Chrisostō. Wherfore I only refer the reader to looke vponupon the words of Chrysostome recited in my book, who sayth, that to vnderstand the words of eating of Christes flesh, symply as they be spoken, is a carnall vnderstanding. And then can it be no proper speech (as you say it is) bicause it can not be vnderstand as the wordes be spoken, but must hauehave an other v…derstanding spiritually. Then followeth next Sainct Augustine, of whom I write thus.
And yet most planely of all other,Augustine S. Augustine dooth declare this matter in his booke De doctrina christiana, de doctrina Christ. li. 3.in which book he instructeth christian people, how they should vnderstand those places of Scripture, which seem hard and obscure.
Seldome (sayth he) is any difficulty in proper words, but either the circumstance of the place, or the conferring of diuers translations, or els the originall toung wherin it was written, will make the sence playn. But in words that be altered from their proper signification, there is great diligence and hede to be taken. And specially we must beware, that we take not litterally any thing that is spoken figuratiuely. Nor contrary wise we must not take for a figure any thing, that is spoken properly. Therfore must be declared (sayth S. Augustine) the maner how to discerne a proper spech from a figuratiue. Wherin (sayth he) must be obserned this rule, that if the thing which is spoken, be to the furtherance of charity, then it is a proper spech and no figure. So that if it be a commaundement, that forbiddeth any euill or wicked act, or commaundeth any good or beneficiall thing, then it is no figure. But if it commaund any ill or wicked thing, or forbiddeth any thing that is good and beneficiall, then it is a figuratiue spech. Now this saying of Christ: (Except ye eat the flesh of the sonne of man, and drinke his bloud, you shall hauehave no life in you) seemeth to commaund an haynons and wicked thing, therfore it is a figure, commaunding vsus to be partakers of Christes passion, keeping in our mindes to our great comfort and profite, that his flesh was crucified and woū ded for vsus. This is briefly the sentence of S. Augustine in his booke De doctrina Christiana.
And the like he writeth in his book De catechisandis rudibus:De catech. rudi. ca. 26. Contra aduersar. legis & Prophe. li. 2. ca. 9. and in his book Contra aeduersarium legis & prophet arum, and in diuers other places, which forte diowsnes I passe ouer.
For if I should reherse all the authorityes of S. Augustine and other which make mention of this matter, it would weary the reader to much.
Wherfore to all them that by any reasonable meanes will be satisfied, these things before rehearsed are sufficient to proue that the eating of Christs flesh and drinking of his bloud, is not to be vnderstanded simply and playnly (as the words do properly signify) that we do eat and drinke him with our mouthes: but it is a figuratiue spech spiritually to be vnderstanded, that we must deeply print and fruitfully beleue in our harts, that his flesh was crucified, and his bloud shed for our redemption. And this our beliefe in him, is to eat his flesh and drink his bloud, although they be not present here with vsus, but be ascēded into heauen. As our forefathers before Christs tyme, did likewise eat his flesh and drinke his bloud, which was so farre from them, that he was not yet then borne.
Winchester.
Augustinus.Sainct Augustine according to his rules of a figuratiue and proper spéech, taketh this spéech, Except ye eat &c. for a figuratiue spéech, because it semeth to commaund in the letter carnally vnderstanded, an hainous and wicked thing to eat the flesh of a man, as mans carnal imagination conceiueth it: as appered by the Capharnaites, who murmured at it. And therfore because onelyonly faythful men can by fayth vnderstand this mistery of the eatyng of Christes flesh in the Sacrament, in which we eat not the carnall flesh of a common man as the letter soundeth, but the very spiritual flesh of Christ, God & mā as fayth teacheth: It is in that respect well noted for a figuratiue spéech, for that it hath such a sence in the letter as is hidden from the vnfaythfull. So as the same letter being to faythfull men spirite and life (who in humility of fayth vnderstandeth the same) is to the faythfull a figure, as contayning such a mistery as by the outward barke of the letter they vnderstand not: vponupon which consideration it semeth probable that the other fathers also signifiyng a great secrecie in this mistery of the Sacrament, wherein is a worke of God ineffable, such, as the Ethnike eares could not abide, they termed it a figure, not therby to deminish the truth of the mistery, as the proper and special name of a figure doth: but by the name of a figure, reuerently to couer so great a secrecy, apt only to be vnderstanded of men beleuing: and therefore the sayd fathers in some part of theyr works, in playn words expresse and declare the truth of the mistery & the plain doctrine therof according to the Catholick fayth, and in the other part passe it ouer with the name of a figure, which consideration in S. Augustines writings may be euidently gathered: for in some place no man more playnly openeth the substance of the Sacrament then he doth, speaking expressely of the very body and bloud of Christ contayned in it: & yet therwith in other places noteth in those words a figure, not thereby to contrary his other playne sayings and doctrine, but meaning by the word figure, to signify a secret déep mistery hidden from carnall vnderstanding. For auoyding and expelling of which carnallity, he geueth this doctrine here of this text: Except ye eat &c. which (as I sayd before) in the bare litterall sence implyeth to carnal iudgement other carnall circumstā ces to attayne the same flesh to be eaten, which in that carnall sence can not be but by wickednes. But what is this to the obeying of Christes commaundement in the institution of his supper, when he himself deliuereth his body and bloud in these misteryes, & biddeth, Eat and drink? there can be no offence to do as Christ biddeth, and therefore S. Augustins rule pertaineth not to Christs supper, wherin when Christ willeth vsus to vse our mouth, we ought to dare do as he biddeth for that is spirituall vnderstandyng,Contrary. to do as is commaunded without carnall thought or murmuring in our sensuall deuise how it can be so. And S. Augustin in the fame place speaking De communicando passionibus Christi, declareth playnely he meaneth of the Sacrament.