Answer unto a Crafy and Sophistical Cavillation, Debate · Confutation of book 1 · Section 1 – Section 9
HERE before the beginning of your booke, you hauehave prefixed a goodly title, but it agreeth with the argument and matter therof, as water agreeth with the fire. For your booke is so farre from an explication and assertion of the true catholike fayth in the matter of the sacrament, that it is but a crafty cauillation and subtile sophisticatiō, to obscure the truth therof, and to hyde the same, that it should not appeare. And in your whole booke, the reader (if he marke it wel) shal easily perceiue, how little learning is shewed therin and how few authors you hauehave alleadged, other then such as I brought forth in my booke, and made aunswer vntounto: but there is shewed what may be done by fine wit, and new deuises, to deceiue the reader, and by false interpretations to auoyde the plain wordes of scripture and of the old authors.
Wherfore in as much as I purpose God willing, in this defēce of my former book, not only to aunswer you, but by ye way also to touch D. Smith two things I would wish in you both: The one is truth wt simplicitie: the other is, yt either of you both had so much learning as you think you hauehave, or els yt you thought of your selfe no more then you hauehave in dede: but to aū swer both your bokes in few words: yt one sheweth nothing els, but what rayling without reason or learning: the other what frowardnes armed with wit and eloquence, be able to do against the truth. And Smith because he would be vehement, and shew his heat in the maner of speach, where the matter is cold, hath framed in a maner all his sentēces through out his whole booke, by interrogations. But if the reader of both your bookes do no more, but diligently read ouer my booke once agayn, he shal fynde the same not so slenderly made, but that I hauehave foreseene all that duplicate page could be sayd to the contrary: and that I hauehave fully aunswered before hand all that you both hauehave sayd, or is able to say.
Winchester.
FOrasmuch as amonge other myne allegations for defence of my selfe in this matter, moued against me by occasion of my Sermon made before the kinges most excellent maiestie, touching partly the catholike fayth of the most precious sacrament of the aulter, which I see now impugned, by a booke set forth vnderunder the name of my lord of Canterburies grace: I hauehave thought expedient for the better opening of the matter, and considering I am by name touched in the sayd booke, the rather to vtter partly that I hauehave to say by confutation of that booke, wherin I thinke neuerthelesse not requisite to direct any speach by speciall name to the person of him that is entituled author,I would as much as may be do my due to the matter and him also. because it may possible he that his name is abused, wherwith to set forth the matter beyng himselfe of such dignitie and authoritie in the common wealth, as for that respect should be inuiolable. For which consideration, I shal in my speach of such reproofe as the vntruth of the matter necessarily requireth, omitting the speciall title of the author of the booke, speake onelyonly of the author in generall, beyng a thing to me greatly to be meruayled at, yt such matter should now be published out of my lord of Canterburies pen, but because he is a man, I will not wonder, and because he is such a man, I will reuerently vse him, and forbearing further to name him, talke only of the author by that general name.
Caunterbury.
THe first entrie of your booke sheweth to them that be wise, what they may looke for in the rest of the same, except the beginning vary from all that followeth.The craft of winchester in the beginnyng. Now the beginning is framed with such sleight & subtletie, that it may deceiue the reader notably in two thinges. The one, that he should thinke you were called into iudgement before the kinges maiesties commissioners at Lamhith for your catholike faith in the Sacrament: The other, that you made your booke for your defence therein, which be both vtterly vntrue For your booke was made or euer ye were called before the said commissioners, and after you were called, then you altered only two lines in the beginning of your booke, and made that beginning which it hath now. This am I able to proue, as well otherwise, as by a booke which I hauehave of your owne hand writing, wherin appeareth plainly the alteration of the beginning.
And as concerning the cause wherfore ye were called before the Commissioners, whereas by your owne importune sute and procurement, and as it were enforcing the matter, you were called to iustice for your manifest contempt and continuall disobedience from tyme to tyme, or rather rebellion against the kinges maiestie, and were iustly depriued of your estate for the same, you would turne it now to a matter of the sacrament, that the world should thinke your trouble rose for your fayth in the sacrament, which was no matter nor occasion therof, nor no such matter was obiected against you, wherfore you nede to make any such defence. And where you would make that matter the occasion of your worthy depriuation and punishment, (which was no cause therof) and cloke your wilfull obstinacie and disobedience (which was the onelyonly cause therof) all mē of iudgement may well perceiue, that you could meane no goodnes therby, neither to the kinges maiestie, nor to his realme.
But as touching the matter now in controuersie, I impugn not ye true catholike faith which was taught by Christ and his Apostles (as you say I do) but I impugne the false Papisticall faith, inuented, deuised, and imagined by Antichrist and his ministers.
And as for further forbearing of my name, and talking of the Author in generall (after that you hauehave named me once, and your whole booke is directed against my booke, openly set out in my name) all men may iudge that your doing herein, is not for reuerence to be vsed vntounto me, but that by suppressing of my name, you may the more vnreuerently and vnseemely vse your scoffing, taunting, rayling, and defaming of the author in generall, and yet shall eueryevery man vnderstand, that your speach is directed to me in especiall, as wel as if you had appointed me with your finger. And your reuerent vsing of your selfe, before the kings highnes commissioners of late, doth plainly declare, what reuerent respect you hauehave to them that be in dignitie and authoritie in the common wealth.
Winchester.
THis author denieth the reall presence of Christes most precious body and bloud in the Sacrament.
The summe of the booke.This author denieth Transubstantiation.
This author denieth euill men to eate and drinke the body and bloud of Christ in the Sacrament.
These thre denials only impugne and tend to destroy that faith which this author fermeth the Popish to erre in, calling now all popish that beleue either of these thre articles by him denied, the truth wherof shall hereafter be opened.
Now because faith affirmeth some certaintie:Because the author pretendeth a defence of the catholick faith, it were reason to know what it is. if we aske this author what is his saith which he calleth true and catholike, it is onelyonly this, as we may learne by his booke, that in our Lordes supper be consecrate bread and wyne, and deliuered as tokens only to signifie Christes body and bloud, he calleth them holy tokens, but yet noteth that the bread and wyne be neuer the holyer, he sayth neuerthelesse they be not bare tokens, and yet cō cludeth, Christ not to be spiritually present in them, but only as a thyng is present in that which signifieth it (which is the nature of a bare token) saying in an other place,The effect of that this author calleth his faith. Untrue report. there is nothing to be worshipped, for there is nothyng present, but in figure & in a signe: which who so euer saith, calleth the thyng in deede absent. And yet the author sayth: Christ is in the man that worthely receiueth, spiritually present, who eateth of Christes flesh and his bloud reigning in heauen, whether the good beleuing man ascendeth by his faith. And as our body is nourished with the bread and wyne receyued in the supper: so the true beleuyng man is fed with the body and bloud of Christ. And this is the summe of the doctrine of that faith, which this author calleth the true catholike fayth.
Caunterbury.
I Desire the Reader to iudge my faith not by this short, enuious, and vntrue collection and reporte, but by mine owne booke, as it is at length set out in the first part, from the 8. vntounto the 16. chapter.
And as concerning holynes of bread and wine (wherunto I may adde the water into baptisme) how can a dombe or an insensible and liuelesse creature receiue into it selfe any foode,Bread, wine, & water, be not holy, but holy tokens. and feede thereupon? No more is it possible that a spiritlesse creature should receiue any spirituall sanctification or holynes. And yet do I not vtterly depriue the outward sacramēts of the name of holy thinges, because of the holy vse wherunto they serue, & not because of any holynesse yt lyeth hid in the insensible creature. Which although they hauehave no holynes in them, yet they be signes and tokens of the meruailous workes and holy effects, which god worketh in vsus by his omnipotent power.
They be not bare tokens.And they be no vayne or bare tokens, as you would perswade (for a bare token is that which betokeneth only and geneth nothing, as a painted fire, which geueth neither light nor heate) but in the due ministration of the Sacramentes God is present, working with his worde and Sacramentes.
And although (to speake properly) in the bread and wine be nothing in dede to be worshipped, yet in them that duely receiue the sacramentes is Christ himself inhabiting, and is of all creatures to be worshipped.
Christ is presēt in his sacramentes.And therfore you gather of my sayings vniustly, that Christ is in deede absent, for I say (according to Gods worde and the doctrine of the olde writers) that Christ is present in his sacramentes, as they teach also that he is present in his worde, when he worketh mightely by the same, in the hartes of the hearers. By which maner of speach it is not ment that Christ is corporally present in the voyce or sound of the speaker (which sound perisheth as soone as the wordes be spoken) but this speach meaneth that he worketh with his word, vsing the voyce of the speaker, as his instrument to worke by, as he vseth also his sacramentes wherby he worketh, & therfore is said to be present in them.
Winchester.
A catholike fayth.Now a catholike faith, is an vniuersall faith taught and preached through all, and so receiued and beleued, agreable and consonant to the scriptures, testified by such as by all ages hauehave in their writinges geuen knowledge therof;Thus authors fayth hath no point of a catholike fayth. which be the tokens and markes of a true catholike faith, whereof no one can be found in the faith this author calleth catholike.
Untrue report. Scripture in letter fauoureth not thus autors fayth.First there is no scripture that in letter maynteineth ye doctrine of this authors booke. for Christ sayth not that the bread doth o…ly signifie his body absent, nor S Paul saith not so in any place, ne any other Canonicall Scripture declareth Christes wordes so. As for the sence and vnderstanding of Christes wordes, there hath not bene in any age any one approued and knowen learned man, that hath so declared and expounded Christes wordes in his supper, that the bread did onelyonly signifie Christes body, and the wyne his bloud as thinges absent.
Caunterbury.
THe first part of your description of a catholike faith, is crafty and full of subtletie,My doctrine is catholike by your owne description. for what you meane by (all) you do not expresse. The secōd part is very true, and agreeth fully with my doctrine in eueryevery thing, as wel in the matter of transubstantiation, of the presence of Christ in the sacrament, and of the eating and drinking of him, as in the sacrifice propitiatory. For as I hauehave taught in these 4. matters of controuersie, so learned I the same of the holy scripture, so is it testified by all olde writers & learned men of all ages, so was it vniuersally taught and preached, receiued & beleued, vntill the sea of Rome, the chiefe aduersary vntounto Christ, corrupted all together, and by hypocrisie and simulation, in the stede of Christ, erected Autichrist, who being the sonne of perdition, hath extolled and aduanced himselfe, and sitteth in the temple of God, as he were God himselfe, losing and bynding at his pleasure, in heauen, hell, and earth: condemning, absoluing, canonising & damning, as to his iudgement he thinketh good.
But as concerning your doctrine of Transubstantiation, of the reall, corporall and naturall presence of Christes body in the bread, and bloud in the wyne: that ill men do eate his flesh and drinke his bloud: that Christ is many tymes offred, there is no scripture that in letter mainteyneth any of them (as you require in a catholike faith) but the scripture in ye letter doth mainteine this my doctrine plainly, that the bread remaineth, Panis quem frangimus, 1. Cor. 10.nonne communicatio corporis Christi est? Is not ye bread which we breake, the communion of Christes body? And that euill men do not eate Christe his fleshe, nor drinke his bloud, for the scripture saith expressely: He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud,Ioh. 6. dwelleth in me and I in him, which is not true of ill men. And for the corporall absence of Christ, what can be more plainly said in the letter, then he sayd of himself, that he forsoke the world?Ioh. 16. besides other scriptures which I hauehave alleaged in my 3. booke, the 4. chapter. And the scripture speaketh plainly in the Epistle to the Hebrues,Heb. 7.9. & 10. that Christ was neuer more offred then once.
But here you take such a large scope that you flee from the foure proper matters that be in controuersie,Christ is spiritually present. vntounto a new scope deuised by you, that I should absolutely deny the presence of Christ, and say: That the bread doth only signifie Christes body absent, which thing I neuer said nor thought. And as Christ sayth not so, nor Paule sayth not so, euen so like wise I say not so, and my booke in diuers places saith cleane contrary, that Christ is with vsus spiritually present, is eaten & dronken of vsus, and dwelleth within vsus, although corporally he be departed out of this world, and is ascended vp into heauen.
Winchester.
And to the entent eueryevery notable disagréement from the truth may the more euidently appeare.An issue. I will here in this place (as I will hereafter likewyse when the case occurreth) ioyne as it were an issue with this author, that is to say, to make a stay with him in this point triable (as they say) by euidence and soone tried. For in this point the scriptures bee already by the author brought forth, the letter wherof proueth not his fayth. And albeit he trauaileth & bringeth forth the saying of many approued writers, yet is there no one of them that writeth in expresse wordes the doctrine of that faith, which this author calleth the faith catholike. And to make the issue playne, and to ioyne it directly, thus I say.
No author known and approued,No writer approued, testifieth this authors faith. that is to say, Ignatius, Polycarpe, Iustine, Irene, Tertullian, Cyprian, Chrysostome, Hilary, Gregory Nazianzene, Basill, Emissen, Ambrose, Cyrill, Hierome, Augustine, Damascene, Theophilast, none of these hath this doctrine in playne termes,The summe of the issue. that the bread onelyonly signifieth Christes body absent, nor this sentence, that the bread and wyne be neuer the holyer after consecration, nor that Christes body is none otherwyse present in the Sacrament, but in a signification: nor this sentēce, that the Sacrament is not to be worshipped, because there is nothyng present but in a signe. And herein what the truth is, may soone appeare, as it shall by their workes neuer appeare to hauehave ben taught and preached, receiued and beleued vniuersally, and therfore can be called no catholike faith (that is to say) allowed in the whole, through and in outward teaching,Outward teaching. preached and beleued.
Caunterbury.
IN your issues you make me to say what you list, and take your issue where you list, and then if xii. false varlets passe with you, what wonder is it?Your doctrine is not catholike by your owne description. But I will ioyne with you this issue, that neither scripture nor aūcient author writeth in expresse wordes the doctrine of your faith. And to make the issue plaine, & to ioyne directly with you therin, thus I say: That no auncient and catholike authour hath your doctrine in playne termes. And because I will not take my issue in bye matters (as you do) I will make if in the foure principall pointes, wherin we vary, & wherupon my booke resteth.
My issue.This therfore shalbe mine issue: That as no scripture, so no auncient author known and approued, hath in plaine termes your Transubstantiation: nor that the body and bloud of Christ be really, corporally, naturally, and carnally wider the formes of bread and wine: nor that euil men do eate the very body and drinke the very bloud of Christ: nor that Christ is offered eueryevery day by the priest a sacrifice propiciatorie for sinne. Wherfore by your owne description and rule of a catholike faith, your doctrine and teaching in these 4. articles cannot be good and catholike except you can finde it in plaine termes, in the scripture and old catholike doctors, which when you do, I will hold vp my hand at the barre, and say, giltie: And if you cannot, then it is reason that you do the lyke, per legem Talionis.
Winchester.
If this author setting apart the worde (Catholike) would of his owne wil go about to proue. howsoeuer scripture hath bene vnderstanded hitherto, yet it should be vnderstanded in dede as he now teacheth, he hath herein diuers disaduantages and hindrances worthy consideration, which I will particularly note.
I notable matter, a man to be condemned by his owne former writinges, Bertram confessed to be of this opinion.First, the preiudice and sentence, geuen as it were by his own mouth against himself, now in the booke called the Catechisme in his name set forth.
Secondly, that about vij. C. yere ago, one Bertram (if the booke set forth in hys name be his) enterprised secretly the lyke, as appereth by the said booke, & yet preuayled not.
Thirdly, Berengarius beyng in dede but an Archdeacō, about v. C. yeres past, after he had openly attempted to set forth such like doctrine, recanted, & so fayled in his purpose.
Fourthly, Wickliffe not much aboue an C. yeares past, enterprised the same, whose teaching, God prospered not.
Fiftly, how Luther in his workes, handled them that would hauehave in our tyme raised vp the same doctrine in Germany, it is manifest by his & their writings, wherby appeareth the enterprise that hath had so many ouerthrowes, so many rebuts, so oftē reproofes, to be desperate,This authors doctrine often reiected as false. and such as God hath not prospered and sauoured to be receyued at any tyme openly, as his true teaching.
Herein whether I say true or no, let the stories try me, and it is matter worthy to bée noted,Actes. v. because Gamaliels obseruation written in the Actes of the Apostles in allowed to marke, how they prosper and go forward in their doctrine, that be authors of any news teaching.