Answer unto a Crafy and Sophistical Cavillation, Debate · Confutation of book 3 · Section 7
Caunterbury.
BEcause this comparison (as you say) is like the other, therfore it is fully answered before in the other comparisons. And here yet agayn, it is to be noted, that in all these 4. comparisons you approue and allow for truth, the second parte of the comparison which we say.How long christ taryeth with the receyuour of the sacrament. And where you say that Christ vndoubtedly remayneth in the man that worthely receaueth the sacrament, so long as that man remaineth a member of Christ. How agreeth this with the common saying of all the Papistes, that Christ is conteyned vnderunder the formes of bread and wine, and remayneth there no longer then the formes of bread and wine remain? Wherefore in this point all the wholl route of the Papistes will condemne for vntruth, that which you so constantly affirme to be vndoubtedly true.
And when the Papistes teache that the body of Christ is really in the sacramēt vnderunder the forme of bread, they speak not this, geueng faith to Christ his words (as you say they doe) for Christ neuer spake any such words, and as for this saying of Christ, this is my body, it is a figuratiue speach, called Metonymia, Metonymia.when one thing is called by the name of another, which it signifieth, and it hath no such sence as you pretend, for these is a great diuersity betweene these two sayinges. This is my body, and, the body of Christ is really in the sacrament vnderunder the forme of bread. But the Papists hauehave set Christes wordes vponupon the tenters, and stretched them out so farre, that they make his wordes to signifie as pleaseth them, not as he meant.
The Fathers in the old law receiued the same things in their sacramēts that we do in ours.And this is a marueilous doctrine of you, to say that Christ was the body of all the shadowes, and figures of the law, and did exhibite, and geue in his Sacramentes of the new law, the thinges promised in the Sacramentes of the olde law. For he is the body of all the figures, as well of the new law, as of the olde, and did exhibite, and geue his promises in the Sacramentes of the olde law, as he doth now in the Sacraments of the new law. And we must vnderstand and the wordes spoaken in the institution of the Sacramentes in both the lawes: Figuratiuely, as concerning the Sacramentes, and without figure, as concerning the thinges by them promised, signified, and exhibited. As in circumcision was geeuen the same thing to them, that is geuen to vsus in baptisme, and the same by Manna, that we hauehave at the Lords table. Only this difference was betweene them and vsus, that our redemption by Christes death and passion was then onelyonly promised, and now it is perfourmed and past. And as their Sacramentes were figures of his death to come, so be our figures of the same now past and gon. And yet it was all but one Christ to them and vsus. Who gaue life, comfort, and strength, to them by his death to come, and geueth the same to vsus by his death passed.
And he was in their Sacramentes spiritually, and effectually present, and for so much truely and really present (that is to say in deede) before he was born, no lesse thē he is now in our Sacramēts present after his death and assention into heauen. But as for carnall presence, he was to them not yet come. And to vsus he is come, and gone agayne vntounto his Father, from whom he came.
Reseruation. Cyrill Hesichius.And as for the reseruation of the Sacrament, neither Cyrill, nor Hesychius, speake any worde what ought to be done with the Sacrament, when by negligence of the Minister it were reserued ouer long. But Hesychius sheweth plainly that nothing ought to be reserued, but to be burned what so euer remayned.
And as for the flying of Christ vp into heauen, so soone as the bread is chawed in the mouth, or changed in the stomack, I say not that the church teacheth so, but that Papistes say so, whith for as much as you say, that it liketh me to reporte this most vntruely, reade what the glose saith vpō the chapter,De consecrat. d. 2. Tribus gradibus Tribus gradibus, de Consecrat. dist, a: & there you shall finde these words. Certum est, quod species quam citó dentibus teruntur, tam citó in Coelum rapitur corpus Christi. And if this glose be false and erroneous, why was it published and set out by the authority of the Papistes? Why hath it been writtē and printed in so many countreis, and so many yeares without reprofe, of any fault found therein by any man?
But here may wise men learn to beware of your doctrine. For you reproue those Papistes which hauehave written of this matter, 4. or 5. hundreth yeares past, and doe inuent a new deuise of your own. And therefore wise men, when they see you teach one doctrine, and the Papistes that were before your time, teach another, they will beleeue none of you all.
And where you say, that in the beleefe of this mistery is great benefitte,The benefite & comfort in this sacrament. and consolation. What benefitte (I beseech you) is it to vsus, if Christ be really and corporally in the formes of bread and wine, a monethmonth or two, or a yeare or two? And if we receaue him really and corporally with the bread and wine into our mouthes or stomackes, and no further, and there he tarieth not in that sorte, but departeth away from vsus by and by agayn, what great benefit or comforte (I pray you) is such a corporall presence vntounto vsus? And yet this is the teaching of all the Papistes, although you seeme to vary from them in this last point, of Christes sodayne departure. But when the matter shall be throughly answered, I weene you will agree with the rest of the Papistes, that as concerning his carnall presence, Christ departeth from vsus, at the least wheu the formes of bread and wine be altered in the stomack. And then I pray you declare what comfort and benefitte we hauehave by this carnall presence which by and by is absent, and taryeth not with vsus? Such comfort hauehave weake and sick consciences at the Papistes handes, to tell them that Christ was with them, and now he is gone from them. Neuerthelesse in the beleef of this mistery (if it be vnderstāded according to Gods word) is great benefit and consolation, but to beleeue your addition, vntounto Gods word, is neither benefit nor wisedome.
And I pray you shew in what place the Scripture saith, that vnderunder the formes of bread and wine, is the body of Christ really, corporally, and naturally, or els acknowledge them to be your own additiō, beside Gods word, and your stout assertion herein to be but presumptuous boldnesse, and wicked temeritie, affirming so arrogantly that thing, for the which you hauehave no authority of Gods word.
And where you seeme to be offended with the discussion of this matter, what hurte, I pray you, can gold catch in the fire, or truth with discussing? Lyes onelyonly feare discussing. The Deuill hateth the light, because he hath been a lyar from the beginning, and is loth that his lies should come to light and triall. And all Hipocrites and Papistes be of a like sorte afraide, that their doctrine should come to discussing, whereby it may euidently appeare, that they be indued with the spirite of error and lying. If the Papists had not feared, that their doctrines should hauehave bene espied, and their opions hauehave come to discussing, the scriptures of God had bene in the vulgare and English tounge many yeares ago. But (God be praysed) at the length your doctrine is come to discussing, so that you can not so craftely walke in a cloude, but the light of Gods word will alwaies shew where you be. Our Sauiour Christ in the fifth of Iohn,Iohn. 5. willeth vsus to search the scriptures, and to trie out the trueth by them. And shall not we then with humble reuerence search the trueth in Christes Sacramentes?
And if we can not tel how Christ is present,The maner of presence. why do you then say, that he is substantially present, corporally present, naturally and carnally present?
And how sure be you that Christ is in substaunce present, because he is truely present: Are you assured that this your doctrine agreeth with Gods word? Doth not Gods word teach a true presence of Christ in spirit, where he is not present in his corporall substance? As when he saith:Math. 18. Where two or three be gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. And also when he sayth: I shall be with you till the end of the world.Math. 6. Was it not a true presence that Christ in these places promised? And yet can you not of this true presence gather such a corporall presence of the substance of Christs manhod, as you vnlearnedly, contrary to the scriptures… go about to proue in the Sacramēt. For when Christ said, This is my body, it was bread which is called his body in a figuratiue speach, as all olde authors teach, and as I hauehave proued in my third booke the 8 and 11 chap. And the manner how Christ caried himfelfe in his own handes, sainct Augustine declareth it to be figuratiuely.
And because you can finde no repugnaunce betweene the two partes of this comparison, to make them more plaine, I shall fill them vp with more wordes, as I did the other comparisons before. This therefore shall be the comparison.
The comparisōThey say, that Christ is really, and corporally in the sacramentall bread beyng reserued, so long as the forme of bread remayneth, although it be an whole years and more: but after the receiuing thereof, he flyeth vp from the receauer into heauen, as sone as the bread is chawed in the mouth or digested in the stomacke. But we say, that after what manner Christ is receaued of vsus, in the same wise he remaineth in vsus, so long as we remaine the members of Christ.
And where in the end you admonish the reader, that what so euer you affirme or precisely deny, you meane within the compasse of your knowledge, and of publicke doctrine, and of doctrine by consent receaued: what do you here else, but deuise certayne sleightes and prepare for your selfe priuy holes to start out at, when so euer you should be taken with a manifestly? So that you should not be cōpelled to abide by any word that you say. For by these crafty sleightes and shifts, of the compasse of your knowledge, and of publick doctrine, and of doctrine by common consent receaued, you meane to say euer what you list. And though neuer so manyfest a lye or vntruth be layd to your charge, yet shall no manne neuer be able to proue it so manifestly against you, but you shall hauehave one of these thre shiftes to flee out at for your defence.
Now foloweth in my booke the fift comparison.
The 5. comparison.They say, that in the Sacrament the corporall members of Christ be not distant in place one frō an other, but that where so euer the head is, there be the feete: and where so euer the armes be, there be the legges: so that in eueryevery part of the bread and wine, is altogether, whole head, whole feet, whole flesh, whole bloud, whole hart, whole lunges, whole breast, whole backe, and altogyther whole confused and mixt without distinction or diuersity. O what a foolish and an abhominable inuention is this, to make of the most pure and perfect bodye of Christ, such a confuse and monstrous body? And yet can the Papistes imagine nothing so foolish, but all Christian people must receiue the same, as an oracle of God, and as a most certayne article of their fayth, without whisperyng to the contrary.