Answer unto a Crafy and Sophistical Cavillation, Debate · Confutation of book 3 · Section 8
Winchester.
This is a maruaylous Rhetorique, and such as the author hath ouerséene himselfe in the vtterance of it, and confesseth himself pretely abused, to the latter end of his yeares to hauehave beleued that, he now calleth so foolish. But to the purpose. In the book of common prayer (now at this time) set foorth in this Realme: It is ordered to teach the people, that in ech part of the bread consecrate, brokē, is the whole body of our Sauiour Christ, which is agreable to the Catholicke doctrine: Upon occasion hereof, it liketh this author to multiply language by enumeration of partes, and because reason without fayth, directeth the bodily eye, to so little a visible quantity in the host, this Author beareth in hand the Catholicke Church to say and teach, all that fond reason deuiseth, where as the Church in y• doctrine of this mistery, denieth all that reasō without fayth diuiseth, and therefore, when we acknowledge by fayth, Christs body present, although we say, it is present truly, Really, Substantially, yet we say, our senses be not priuy to that presence, …e the maner of it, but by instruction of fayth, and therefore we say, Christes body to be not locally present, not by manner of quantity, but inuisible, and in no sensible manner, but maruailously in a Sacrament and mistery truely, and in such a spirituall maner, as we can not define and determyne, and yet by fayth we knowe his bodye present, the partes of which be in them selfe distinct, one from an other, in their owne substaunce, but not by circumscription of seuerall places, to be comprehended of our capacitie, which partes, we can by no demonstration, place, nor by imagination displace, diminish, alter, or confound, as this author for his pleasure reporteth, who writeth monstrously in so high a mistery, and impudently beareth in hand the Catholicke Church to teach that he listeth to beare in hand, may by wanton reason be deduced of the teaching,Pugnat cum alijs Papistis. where as al true Christian men beleue symply Christes wordes, and trouble not their heades with such consequences, as séeme to striue with reason. This is in the Author no whisperyng, but playnely rayling, wherein if he had remembred himselfe well, he would not hauehave spoken of all Christian men in the receypt of that he entendeth to disproue. And if he would say he spake it by an Irony or skorne, yet it implyeth that all had receyued that he thus mocketh, which after the sort he writeth, was neuer deuised by Papist, or other to be so taught, otherwyse then as this Author might read it, as an ydle argument, to shew absurditie in reason. For in Gods workes, as the sacramentes hée, we must think all semelynesse in déed without deformity, euen as we beleue al Gods iudgements iust and true, although reason conclude in them euident iniquitie. Mans reason when it séemeth most gallant,What is receued of all christen mē hath therein a manifest token in truth. is full of spottes and folly. Gods workes be all séemelynesse, without confusion, monsier, or any such absurditée, as this Author supposeth. Although I can not in the Sacrament with the eye of my reason, locally distinct Christs head from his foote, his legs from his arme. And where in the booke of common prayer, it is truely said, in ech part of the bread consecrate broken to be Christes whole body, if one of curiositee would question with me, and I of folly would aunswere him,It is a folly to answere a corious demaunder. first where is Christes head? I should say, here (poynting with my finger) he would thinke it first a little head. Then he would aske, where is his foote, and I should say there, and poynt in the same place againe, for there is none other left. If he replyed that I poynted before the same for the head, might not the third a catholicke man, that stood by, (trow you) wisely call vsus both madde, to go about to discusse that wée must grant we se not, & whē by faith we know only the being preset of Christs most precious body, then by blynd reason, to discusse the manner of being in the situation of such partes, as we do not see? Now if there came among vsus a fourth man as a mediatour, and would do as king Alexander dyd,Quintus Curtius maketh mention of this faith of Alexander. when he could not open the knot of Gordius, he did cut it with his sworde, if this man should say, I will reléeue this matter. You beleue Christes body is presēt in déed really, and substātially. Leaue out really and subtātially, and say his body is present in signification, and then it may be easily conceaued by reason, that Christs body being neuer so great,Fath of God & his work can not by mans deuise hauehave any qualification. may be as well signified by a little péece of bread, as by a great péece of bread: euen as a man may write a great mans name, as wel in smal letters short as in great letters at length. And to commend further his deuise vntounto vsus, would percase tell how many absurdities as he thinketh and inconueniences might be auoyded by it. This fourth man I speak of, making himselfe a mediatour, but in déede vnmete therfore because he hath no participation with sayth: yet if our religion and fayth were mans inuention, as that of Numa Pompilius was, he should not vtter this his conceit all ydelly. For he speaketh of a ioly easy way without any mistery or maruaile at all. But our faith is of hearing, as hath bene preached continually from the beginning, grounded vponupon the most sure trueth of the word of God, and therefore can not be attempered as man would deuise it, to exclude trauayle in carnall reason. For then the Sabellians were to be harkned vntounto,Sabellians. who by their heresy toke away all the hard and difficile questions in the mistery of the Trinitie.
Arrians.The Arrians also releued much mans reason in consideration of Christs death, denying him to be of the same substance with his father, which …as a pestilent heresy. Now in the Sacramēt to say Christs body is present onelyonly by signification, as it releueth in some mens iudgementes the absurdities in reason, which ought not to be releued, so it condemneth all the true publike faith, testified in the Church from the beginning hetherto, and sheweth the learned holy men, to hauehave wondred in their writynges at that which hath no wonder at all, to ordeyn one thing to be the signification of an other, which is practised daily among men. But from the beginning the mistery of the Sacrament hath béen with wonder marueyled at, how Christ made bread his body, and wyne his bloud, and vnderunder the figure of those visible creatures, gaue inuisibly his precious body any bloud presently there. And as he gaue (sayth S. Barnarde) his life for vsus, so he gaue his flesh to vsus in that mistery to redéeme vsus,Bernard super Cant. ser. 31. in this to féede vsus. Which doings of Christ we must vnderstand to hauehave béene perfited, not in an imagination in a figure and signification, but really in very déede, truely, and vnfaynedly, not because we beléeue it so, but because he wrought it so, whose works we must beleue to be most perfitly true, according to the truth of the letter where no absurditie in scripture driueth vsus from it, howsoeuer it seme repugnant to our reason, be we neuer so wise, and wittie, which mans reason now a dayes enflamed with fury of language is the only aduersary against the most blessed Sacrament, as it may appeare by these comparysons of differences throughly considered.