Answer unto a Crafy and Sophistical Cavillation, Debate · Confutation of book 3 · Section 65
Canterbury.
HEre you confesse that you cited Hilary vntruely, but you impute the fault to your copy. What copy you had I know not, but aswell the citation of Melancthon, as all the printed bookes that euer I saw, hauehave otherwise then you hauehave written, and therfore it seemeth that you neuer red any printed booke of Hylarius. Marry it might be that you had from Smyth a false copy written,Smyth. who informed me, that you had of him all the authorityes that be in your booke. And hauing al the authorities that he had with great trauell gathered, by and by you made your booke, and stale from him all his thanck and glory, like vntounto Esops choughe, which plumed himselfe with other birds fethers. But whersoeuer you had your copy all the books setforth by publike fayth hauehave otherwise, then you hauehave cited. And although the false allegatiō of Hylary toucheth you somewhat yet chiefly it toucheth Smyth, who hath erred much worse in his translation then you hauehave done, albeit nether of you both handle the matter sincerely and faithfully, nor agree the one with the other.
But I trow it be your chaunce to light vponupon false bookes. For wheras in this sentence (Quisquis ergo naturaliter patrem in Christo negabit, negit prius naturaliter vel se in Christo, vel Christum sibi inesse) one false print for (naturaliter) hath (non naturaliter) it seemeth that you chaunced vpō that false print.Non naturaliter For if you hauehave found Hilary truely corrected (as you say you hauehave) your fault is the more, that out of a true copy would pick out an vntrue translation. And if you hauehave so done, then by putting in a little prety (not) where none ought to be, with that little prity trip you hauehave cleane ouerthrowne your selfe. For if it be an errour to deny that Christ is not naturally in vsus, (as it his rehersed for an errour) then must it be an errour to affirme that Christ is naturally in vsus. For it is all one thing, that he is not, and to affirme that he is naturally in vsus. And so by your owne translation you ouerthrow your selfe quite and cleane, in that you say in many places of your book, that Christ is naturally in vsus, and ground your saying vponupon Hylarie. Whereas now by your owne translation, Hylary reiecteth that clearely as an haynous error.
Truely.And as concerning this word (truely) it fetteth not liuely forth a real and substanciall presence (as you say it doth) for Christ is truely in all his faithfull people, and there truely eate his flesh and drinke his bloud, and yet not by a reall and corporall, but by a spirituall and effectuall presence.
Perfecta.And as concerning the word (perfecta or peafectae) in the print, which I hauehave of your book, is neyther of both, but be left quite out. Neuerthelesse that fault I impute to no vntruth in you, but rather to the negligence either of your pen or of the printer.
But for the perfectnes of the vnity between Christ and vsus, you declare here to be the perfect vnity to be that, which is but the one halfe of it. For the perfect vnity of vsus with Christ, is not onelyonly to hauehave Christ corporally and naturally dwelling in vsus, but likewise we to dwell corporally and naturally in him. And Hylary declareth the second part to pertain to our vnity with Christ, aswell as the first, which of sleight & pollicy you leaue out purposely, because it declareth the meaning of the first part, which is not that Christ is in them that receaue the sacrament, and when they receaue the sacrament only, but that he naturally tarrieth and dwelleth in all them that partayn to him, whether they receaue the sacrament or no. And as he dwelleth naturally in them so do they in him.
Mine issue.And although you hauehave excused your peruersity by your false copy, yet here I will ioyne an issue with you, that you did neither aleage Hylaries wordes before truely, nor yet now do truely declare them. As for the fyrst part you hauehave confessed your selfe, that you were deceiued by a false copy. And therfore in this part, I plead that you be gilty by your own cōfessiō. And as concerniug the second part, Hylary speaketh not of the vnitye of Christ with the sacrament, nor of the vnity of Christ with vsus onelyonly when we receaue the sacrament, nor of the vnity of vsus with Christ onelyonly, but also with his father, by which vnity we dwell in Christ, and Christ in vsus, & also we dwell in the Father and the father in vsus.Iohn. 14. Iohn. 5. Iohn. 6. For as Christ beyng in his father, & his father in him, hath lyfe of his father so he beyng in vsus, & we in him, geueth vntounto vsus the nature of his eternity, which he receiued of his father, that is to say, immortality and life euerlasting, which is the nature of his Godhead. And so hauehave we the Father and ye Sonne dwelling in vsus naturally,Naturally. and we in them, forasmuch as he geueth to vsus the nature of his eternitie, which he had of his father, and honoureth vsus with yt honoureth vsus with that houour which he had of his father. But Christ giueth not this nature of eternity to the Sacrament, except you will say that the sacrament shall hauehave euerlasting lyfe, as you must needes say, if Christ dwell naturally in it, after Hylaries maner of reasoning. For by the saying of Hylary, where Christ dwelleth, there dwelleth his father, & giueth eternall lyfe by his sonne.
And so be you a goodly sauiour, that can bring to euerlasting life both bread, and drinke, which neuer had life. But as this nature of eternity is not geuen to the sacrament: so is it not geuen to them that vnworthely receiue the sacrament, which eat and drink their owne damnation. Nor it is not geuen to the liuely members of Christ, onelyonly when they receaue the sacrament, but so long as they spiritually feede vponupon Christ, eating his flesh and drinking his bloud, either in this life, or in the life to come. For so long hauehave they Christ naturally dwelling in them, & they in him. And as the Father naturally dwelleth in Christ, so by Christ doth he naturally dwell in vsus.
And this is Hylaries mind, to tell how Christ and his father dwel naturally in his faythfull members, and what vnity we hauehave with them (yt is to say, an vnity of nature, and not of wil onelyonly) and not to tel how christ dwelleth in the sacrament, or in them that vnworthely receaue it, that he dwelleth in them at that time onelyonly, when they receiue the sacrament. And yet he sayth, that this vnity of faythfull people vntounto God, is by fayth taught by the sacrament of Baptisme, & of the Lords table, but wrought by Christ by the sacrament and mistery of his incarnation and redemption, whereby he humbled himself vntounto the lowlines of our feeble nature that he might exalt vsus to the dignity of his godly nature, and ioyne vsus vntounto his father in the nature of his eternity.
Thus is playnly declared Hylaries mind, who ment nothing lesse thē (as you say) to entreat how many diuers wayes we be one in Christ, but onelyonly to entreat and proue that we be naturally in Christ, and Christ in vsus. And this one thing he proueth by our fayth, and by the Sacrament of Baptisme, and of the Lords supper, and still he sayth aswell that we be naturally and corporally in him, as that he is naturally in vsus.
And where you speak of the vnity in baptisme, and say that Hylarius handleth that matter aboue some capacities howsoeuer Hilary handleth the matter, you handle it in such sort, as I thinke passeth all mens capacities, vnles your selfe make a large commentary therto. For what these your wordes meane (because there is but one Baptisme, and all that be baptised be so regenerate in one dispensation, and do the same thing, and be one in one, they that be one by the same thing, be as he sayeth, in nature one) and what that one thing is which they do that be baptised, I think no man can tell, except you read the riddle your self.
And now to your issue. If you can shew of the words of Hylary in this place, that Christ is naturally in the Sacraments of bread and wine, or in wicked persons, or in godly persōs onelyonly when they receiue ye sacramēt then will I confesse the issue to passe vponupon your syde, that you hauehave declared this Author truely, & that he maketh most clearely for you against me. And if you can not shew this by Hylaries words, then must you hold vp your hand and say, Giltie.
And yet furthermore when Hylary sayth yt we be naturally in Christ, he meaneth not that our bodyes be contayned within the compasse of his body, but that we receaue his naturall eternitie. And so likewise when he sayth that Christ dwelleth naturally and carnally in vsus, he meaneth not that his body is contained corporally within the compase of our mouthes or bodyes, (which you must proue by his playne wordes, if you will iustifie your yssue, that he speaketh most clearly for you) but he meaneth that Christ communicateth and geueth vntounto vsus the nature of his eternitie or euerlasting lyfe. And he dwelleth in vsus by his incarnation, as S. Iohn sayth:Iohn. 1. Verbum caro factum est, & habit auit in nobis, the word was made flesh and dwelled in vsus. And as he may be sayde to dwell in vsus by receauing of our mortall nature, so may we be sayd to dwell in him by receauing the nature of his immortalitie. And neuer man found faulte (as you truely say) at this notable place of Hillary: nor agayne neuer learned man hitherto expounded him as you do.
And when I sayd that Christ is in vsus naturally by his godhead, I forgatte not what I sayd (as you say of me) for I playnly expounded what I ment by naturally, that is to say, not by naturall substaunce to make vsus godes, but by naturall condition geuing vntounto vsus immortality and euerlasting life, which he had of his father, and so making vsus pertakers of his godly nature, and vniting vsus to his father. And if we atayne to the vnitie of his father, why not vntounto the vnitie of the godhead not by naturall substaunce, but by naturall proprietie? As Cirill sayth that we be made the children of God and heauenly men by participatiō of the deuine nature, as S. Peter also teacheth.2. Pet. 1. And so be we one in the father, in the sonne, and in the holy ghost.
And where you say, that we receaue Christ in the sacrament of his flesh and bloud, if we receaue him worthily: here you hauehave giuen good euidence agaynst your selfe, that we receaue him not, and that he dwelleth not in vsus naturally, except we receaue him worthely. And therfore where you say, that there is none that writeth agaynst the truth in the sacrament, but he hath in his writinges somewhat discrepant from truth that might be a certayn marke to iudge his spirite, this is so true, that your selfe differ not onelyonly from the truth in a nomber of places, but also from your owne sayinges.
And where you bidde me trust him no more that told me, that Hilary maketh no difference betwene our vnion in Christ in baptisme, and in his holy supper, it was very Hilary himselfe. of whom I lerned it, who sayth, that in both the sacramentes,Mine Issue. the vnion is naturall, and not in will onelyonly. And if you will say the contrary, I must tell you the french aunswer that you would tell me. And herein I will not refuse your issue.
Now come we to Ciril, of whome I write as followeth.
The aunswere to Cyrillus. lib. 10. cap. 13.And this answer to Hilarius will serue also vntounto Ciril, whom they alleadge to speake after the same sort that Hilarius doth, that Christ is naturally in vsus. The wordes which the recite, be these. We deny not (sayth Cyril, agaynst the heretike) but we be spiritually ioyned to Christ by fayth and sincere charitie: but that we should hauehave no maner of coniunction in our flesh with Christ, that we vtterly deny, and think it vtterly discrepant from Godes holy scriptures. For who doubteth, but Christ is so the vine tree, and we so the branches, as we get thence our life. Heare what S. Paule sayth. We be all one body with Christ, for though we be many, we be in one in him. All we participate in one foode. Thinketh this heretike that we know not the strength and vertue of the misticall benediction? which when it is made in vsus, doth it not make Christ by communication of his flesh to dwell corporally in vsus? Why be the members of faythfull mennes bodyes called the members of Christ? Know you not (sayth S. Paule) that your members be the members of Christ?1. Cor. 6. And shall I make the members of Christ, partes of the whores body? God forbid. And our sauiour also sayth: He that eateth my flesh and drincketh my bloud, dwelleth in me:Iohn. 6. and I in him.
Although in these wordes Cyrill doth say that Christ doth dwel corporally in vsus, when we receaue the misticall benediction, yet he neyther sayth that Christ dwelleth corporally in the bread, nor that he dwelleth in vsus corporally only at such tymes as we receaue the sacrament, nor that he dwelleth in vsus, and not we in him, but he sayth as well, that we dwell in him, as that he dwelleth in vsus. Which dwelling is neyther corporall nor locall, but an heauenly, spirituall and supernaturall dwelling, wherby so long as we dwell in him and he in vsus, we hauehave by him euerlasting life.Iohn. 15. And therfore Cyril sayth in the same place, that Christ is the vine, and we the branches, bicause that by him we hauehave lyfe. For as the branches receaue lyfe and nourishment of the body of the vine, so receaue we by him the naturall property of his body, which is life and immortality, and by that meanes we being his members, do liue and are spiritually nourished.
And this ment Cirill by this word Corporally, when he sayth, that Christ dwelleth corporally in vsus. And the same ment also S. Hilarius by this worde Naturally, Colo. 2.when he sayd, that Christ dwelleth naturally in vsus. And as S. Paule, when he sayd that in Christ dwelleth the full diuinity Corporally, by this word Corporally, he ment not that the diuinity is a body, and so by that body dwelleth bodily in Christ. But by this word Corporally, he ment, that the diuinity is not in Christ, accidentally, lightly and slenderly, but substancially and perfectly with all his might and power: so that Christ was not onelyonly a mortall man to suffer for vsus, but also he was immortall God able to redeeme vsus.
So S. Ciril, when he sayd that Christ is in vsus Corporally, he ment that we hauehave him in vsus, not lightly and to small effect and purpose, but that we hauehave him in vsus substancially, pithely and effectually, in such wise that we hauehave by him redemption and euerlasting life.
And this I sucke not out of mine owne singers,In Ihon lib. 4. cap. 17. but hauehave it of Cirils owne expresse wordes, where he sayth: A litle benediction draweth the whole man to God, and filleth him with his grace, and after this manner Christ dwelleth in vsus, and we in Christ.
But as for corporall eating and drinking with our mouthes, and digesting with our bodyes, Cirill neuer ment that Christ doth so dwell in vsus, as he playnly declareth.
Our sacrament (sayth he) doth not affirme the eating of a man, drawing wickedly christen people to hauehave grosse imaginations and carnall fantasies of such thinges as be fine and pure,Anathematismo 11. and receaued onelyonly with a sincere fayth.In Iho. li. 4. c. 17. But as two waxes, that be molten and put togither, they close so in one, that eueryevery part of the one, is ioyned to eueryevery part of the other, euen so (sayth Cirill) he that receaueth the flesh and bloud of the Lord, must needes be so ioyned with Christ, that Christ must be in him, and he in Christ.
By these wordes of Cirill appeareth his mynd playnly, that we may not grossely and rudely think of the eating of Christ with our mouthes, but with our fayth, by which eating (although he be absent hence bodely, and be in the eternall life and glory with his father) yet we be made partakers of his nature, to be immortall, and hauehave eternall lyfe and glory with him.
And thus is declared the mind as well of Cirill as of Hilarius.