Answer unto a Crafy and Sophistical Cavillation, Debate · Confutation of book 3 · Section 63
Caunterbury.
WHether I make an exposition of Cyprian by myne own deuise, I leaue to the iudgement of the indifferent reader. And if I so doe, why do not you proue the same substancially agaynst me? For your own bare words without any proofe I trust the indifferent reader will not allow, hauing such experience of you as he hath. And if Cyprian of all other had writ most plainly agaynst me (as you say without profe) who thinketh that you would hauehave omitted here Cyprians wordes, and hauehave fled to Melancthon,Melancthon. Epinus. and Epinus for succor?
And why do you alleage their authority for you, which in no wise you admit when they be brought agaynst you? But it semeth that you be faint harted in this mater, and beginne to shrinke, and like one that refuseth the combat, and findeth the shift to put an other in his place, euen so it semeth you would draw backe your selfe from the daunger, and set me to fight wt other men, that in the meane tyme you might be an idle looker on. And if you as graund capitayne, take them but as meane souldiours to fyght in your quarell, you shall hauehave little ayd at their hands: for their writings declare opēly that they be agaynst you more then me, although in this place you bring them for your part, and report them to say more, and otherwise then they say indeed.
And as for Cyprian and S. Augustine, here by you alleaged, they serue nothing for your purpose, nor speake nothing against me, by Epinus own iudgement. For Epinus sayth, that Eucharistia is called a sacrifice, because it is a remembrance of the true sacrifice, which was offred vponupon the cros and that in it is dispensed the very body and bloud, yea the very death of Christ, (as he alleadgeth of S. Augustine in that place) the holy sacrifice wherby he blotted out and canceled the obligation of death, which was against vsus, nayling it vponupon the crosse, and in his owne person wanne the victory, and tryumphed agaynst the princes & powers of darknesse. This passion, death, and victory of Christ is dispēsed and distributed in ye Lords holy supper, and dayly among Christs holy people. And yet all this requireth no corporal presence of Christ in the sacrament nor the words of Cypriā ad Quirinum neither. For if they did, then was Christes flesh corporally present in the sacrifice of the old testament 1500. yeares before he was borne: for of those sacrifices speaketh that text alleaged by Cyprian ad Quirinum, Cyprian ad quirinum. cap. 94.whereof Epinus and you gather these wordes, that the body of our Lord is our sacrifice in flesh. And how so euer you wrast Melancthon or Epinus they condemne clearely your doctrine, that Christes body is corporally contayned vnderunder the formes or accidents of bread and wine.
Next in my book of Hilarius.
But Hylarius (thinke they) is playnest for them in this matter, whose words they translate thus.
If the word were made very flesh, and we verely receaue the word beyng flesh,The answere to Hylarius. S. de trinitare. in our lords meat, how shal not Christ be thought to dwel naturally in vsus? Who beyng borne man, hath taken vntounto him the nature of our flesh, that can not be seuered, & hath put together ye nature of his flesh to the nature of his eternity vnderunder the sacrament of the communion of his flesh vntounto vsus. For so we be all one because the father is in Christ and Christ in vsus. Wherfore whosoeuer will deny the father to be naturally in Christ, he must deny fyrst eyther himselfe to be naturally in Christ, or Christ to be naturally in him. For the beyng of the father in Christ and the being of Christ in vsus, maketh vsus to be one in them. And therfore if Christ hauehave taken verily the flesh of our body, and the man that was verily born of the virgin Mary is Christ, and also we receaue vnderunder thè true mistery the flesh of his body, by meanes wherof we shalbe one (for the father is in Christ, and Christ in vsus) how shall that be called the vnity of will, when the naturall property, brought to passe by the Sacrament, is the sacrament of vnity?
Thus doth the Papists (the aduersaries of Gods word & of his truth) alleage the authority of Hilarius (eyther peruersely and purposely, as it semeth, vntruely reciting hym and wrasting his words to their purpose) or els not truely vnderstanding him.
For although he sayth that Christ is naturally in vsus, yet he sayth also that we be naturally in him. And neuerthelesse in so saying, he ment not of the natural and corporall presence of the substaunce of Christes body and of ours (for as our bodyes be not after that sort within his body, so is not his body after that sort within our bodies:) but he ment that Christ in his incarnation receyued of vsus a mortal nature and vnited the same vntounto his diuinity, and so be we naturally in him.
And the sacraments of Baptisme & of his holy supper (if we rightly vse the same) do most assuredly certify vsus, that we be partakers of his godly nature, hauing geuen vntounto vsus by him, immortality and life euerlasting, and so is Christ naturally in vsus. And so be we one with Christ, and Christ with vsus, not onelyonly in will and mind, but also in very naturall properties.
And so concludeth Hylarius agaynst Arrius, that Christ is one with his father, not in purpose and will onelyonly, but also in very nature.
And as the vnion betwene Christ and vsus in baptisme is spirituall, and requireth no real and corporall presence: so likewise our vnion with Christ in his holy supper is spirituall, and therfore requireth no reall and coporall presence.
And therfore Hilarius speaking therof, both the sacraments, maketh no difference betwene our vnion with Christ in baptisme, and our vnion with him in his holy supper. And sayth further, that as Christ is in vsus, so be we in him, which the Papistes cannot vnderstand corporally and really, except they will say, that all our bodyes be corporally within Christes body. Thus is Hylarius answered vntounto, both playnly and shortly.