Answer unto a Crafy and Sophistical Cavillation, Debate · Confutation of book 3 · Section 81 – Section 83
Caunterbury.
ALl that you hauehave these many yeres gathered togither for your purpose, or that can be gathered, may be well trussed vp in a very small fardell, and very easely borne and caried away. For any weight that is therin. For your doinges bee like to him, that would fayne seme to hauehave some thing, and hauing nothing els, filleth a great male full of strawe, that men should thynke he caried some thing, where indeed a litle bouget had ben sufficient for so much in value.
And as for your owne doctrine, it is so straunge, that neither it agreeth with the scripture, nor with the old catholike churche, nor yet with the later church or congregation of the Papistes: but you stand poste alone, after the fall of the Papisticall doctrine, as sometime an old poste standeth when the building is ouerthrowen.
And where you say, that since Christes tyme there is no mo but syxe, that hauehave affirmed the doctrine that I hauehave taught, all that hauehave been learned, and hauehave redde the olde authors of ye catholike church, may euidently see the contrary, That sithens Christes tyme the doctrine of my booke was euer the catholike and publike receaued fayth of the church, vntill Nicholas the secondes tyme, who cōpelled Berengarius to make such a deuilish recantation,Nicholas the second. Berengarius. that the papistes thē selues be now ashamed of it. And since that tyme, hauehave many thousandes been cruelly persecuted onelyonly for the profession of the true fayth. For no maune myght speake one worde agaynst the byshope of Romes determination herein, but he was taken for an heretike, and so condemned, as Wiclieffe, Husse, and an infinite numbre mo.
And as for Bertram,Bertram. he was neuer before this tyme detected of any errour that euer I redde, but onelyonly now by you. For all other that hauehave written of him, hauehave spoken much to his commendation and prayse. But I know what the matter is, he hath written against your mynde, which is a fault and errour great inough.
As for Doctour Peter Martyr, he is of age to aunswer for him selfe, but concerning him, that told you that he was not learned, I would wish you to leaue this olde rooted fault in you, to be light of credite. For I suppose, that if his lernyng that tolde you that lye, and yours also, wer set both togither, you should be farre behind Master Peter Martyr. Marye in wordes, I think that you alone would ouerlay two Peter Martyrs,Peter Martyr. he is so sobre a man, and delighteth not in wasting of wordes in vayne. And none do say that he is not lerned, but such as know hym not, or be not lerned themselues, or els be so malicious or enuious, yt they wittingly speake agaynst theyr owne consciēce. And no doubt, that man bringeth hym selfe out of the estimation of a learned man, which, hath heard him reason and reade, and sayth that he is not learned. And whosoeuer misreporteth hym, and hath neuer heard him, may not be called so well Momus as Sicophanta, whose property is to mysreporte thē, whome thy neither see nor knowe. Now resteth onelyonly Damascene, of whome I write thus.
The aunswer to Damascenus de fide orth. lib. 4. cap 14.But here Iohn Damascen may in no wise be passed ouer, whome for is anctoritie, the aduersaries of Christes trew naturall body, do recken as a stout champion, sufficient to defende all the whole matter alone. But neither is the authorite of Damascene so greate, that they may oppresse vsus therby, nor, his wordes so playne for them, as they boast and vntruly pretende. For he is but a yong new author in the respecte of those which we hauehave brought in for our partie. And in diuers poyntes he varieth from the most auncient authors (if he meane as they expound him) as when he sayeth, that the bread and wine be not figures, which all the olde authors call figures: and that the bread and wyne consume not, nor be auoyded downward, which Origen and S. Augustine affirme: or that they be not called the examples of Christes body after the consecration, which shall manefestly appeare false by the Lyturgy ascribed vntounto S. Basyll.
And moreouer the sayd Damascene was one of the Byshop of Romes chief proctours agaynst the Emperours, and as it were his right hand, to set abroad all idolatrye by his owne hand writing. And therfore if he lost his hande (as they say he didde) he lost it by Goddes most righteous iudgemente, whatsoeuer they fayne and fable of the myraculous restitution of the same. And yet whatsoeuer the sayd Damescen writeth in other matters, surely in this place which the aduersaries do alleadge, he writeth spiritually and godly, although the Papists eyther of ignoraunce mistake him, or els willingly wrast him, and writh him to theyr purpose, cleane contrary to his meaning.
The sum of Damascene his doctrine in this matter is this. That as Christ being both God and man hath in him two natures, so hath he two natiuities, one eternall, and the other temporall. And so likewise we (being as it were double men, or hauing eueryevery one of vsus two men in vsus, the new man and the old man, the spirituall man and the carnall man) hauehave a double natiuitie: One of our first carnall father Adam (by whome as by auncient inheritaūce, cometh vntounto vsus maledictiō and euerlasting damnation) and the other of our heauenly Adam, that is to say, of Christ, by whome we be made heires of celestiall benediction, and euerlasting glory and imortalitie.
And bicause this Adam is spirituall, therfore our generation by him must be spirituall, and our feeding must be likewise spirituall. And our spirituall generation by him is playnly set forth in baptisme, and our spirituall meat and food is set forth in the holy communion and supper of the Lord. And because our sightes be so feeble that we cannot see the spirituall water wherwith we be washed in baptisme, nor the spirituall meat wherwith we be fed at the Lordes table. Therfore to help our infermities, and to make vsus the better to see the same with a pure fayth, our sauiour Christ hath set forth the same, as it were before our eyes, by sensible signes and tokens, which we be dayly vsed and accustomed vntounto.
And bycause the common custome of men, is to wash in water, therfore our spirituall regeneration in Christ, or spirituall washing in his bloud, is declared vntounto vsus in baptisme by water. Likewise our spirituall norishmēt & feeding in Christ, is set before our eyes by bread & wine, bicause they be meates and drinkes which chiefly & vsually we be fedde withal… that as they feede the body, so doth Christ with his flesh & bloud spiritually feed the soule.
And therfore the bread and wine be called examples of Christes flesh and bloud, and also they be called his very flesh and bloud, to signifie vntounto vsus, that as they feed vsus carnally, so doe they admonish vsus, that Christ with his flesh and bloud doth feed vsus spiritually, and most truely vntounto euerlasting lyfe.
And as almighty God by his most mighty word and his holy spirite and infinite power, brought forth all creatures in the beginning, and euer sithens hath preserued them: euen so by the same word and power he worketh in vsus, from tyme to tyme, this meruailous spirituall generation and wonderfull spirituall nourishment and feeding, which is wrought onelyonly by God, and is comprehended and receaued of vsus by fayth.
And as bread and drincke by naturall nourishment, be chaunged into a mannes body, and yet the body is not chaunged, but is the same that it was before: so although the bread and wine be sacramētally changed into Christes body, yet his body is the same, and in the same place that it was before, that is to say, in heauen, without any alteration of the same.
And the bread and wine be not so changed into the flesh and bloud of Christ, that they be made one nature, but they remayne still distinct in nature so that the bread in it selfe is not his flesh, and the wine his bloud, but vntounto them that worthely eare and drincke the bread and wine, to them the bread and wine be his flesh and bloud, that is to say, by things naturall, and which they be accustomed vntounto, they be exaulted vntounto things aboue nature. For the sacramentall bread and wine be not bare and naked figures, but so pithy and effectuous, that who soeuer worthely eateth them, eateth spiritually Christes flesh and bloud, and hath by them euerlasting life.
Wherfore, whosoeuer commeth to the Lordes table, must come with all humilitie, feare, reuerence, and puritie of lyfe, as to receaue not onelyonly bread and wine, but also our sauiour Christ, both God and man, withall his benefites, to the reliefe and sustentation both of theyr bodyes and soules.
This is briefly the summe and true meaning of Damascene, concerning this matter.
Wherfore they that gather of him; eyther the naturall presence of Christes body in the Sacraments of bread and wine, or the adoration of the outward and visible sacrament: or that after the consecration there remayneth no bread, nor wine, nor other substaunce, but onelyonly the substaunce of the body and bloud of Christ eyther they vnderstand not Damascene, or els of wilfull frowardnes they will not vnderstād him: which rather seemeth to be true, by such colections as they hauehave vniustly gathered and noted out of him.
For although he say, that Christ is the spirituall meat, yet as in baptisme the holy ghost is not in the water, but in him that is vnfaynedly baptised: so Damascene ment not, that Christ is in the bread, but in him that worthely eateth the bread.
And though he say that the bread is Christes body and the wine his bloud, yet he ment not that the bread considered in it selfe, or the wine in it selfe, being not receaued, is his flesh and bloud: but to such as by vnfayned fayth worthely receaue the bread and wine, to such the bread and wine, are called by Damascene the body and bloud of Christ, bicause that such persons, through the working of the holy ghost, be so knitte and vnited spiritually to Christes flesh and bloud, and to his diuinite also, that they be fedde with them vntounto euerlasting life.
Furthermore, Damascene sayth not that the sacrament should bee worshiped and adored, as the Papists terme it (which is playne idolatrye) but that we must worship Christ God and man. And yet we may not worship him in bread and wine, but sittyng in heauen with his father, and being spiritually within our selues.
Nor he sayth not; that there remayneth no bread nor wine, nor none other substaunce, but only the substaunce of the body and bloud of Christ: but he sayth playnly, that as a burning coale is not wodde only, but fier and wodde ioyned together, so the bread of the Communion is not bread only, but bread ioyned to the diuinite. But those that say, that there is none other substaunce but the substaunce of the body and bloud of Christ, do not onelyonly deny that there is bread and wine, but by force they must deny also, that there is either Christes diuinitie or his soule. For if the flesh and bloud, the soule and diuininitie of Christ be foure substances, and in the sacrament be but two of them, that is to say, his flesh and bloud, than where is his soule and diuinitie? And thus these men diuide Iesus, seperating his diuinitie from his humanitie. Of whome S. Iohn sayth:1. Iohn. 4. Whosoeuer deuideth Iesus, is not of God, but he is Antichrist.
And moreouer these men do so separate Christes body from his members in the sacramēt,In libro de duabus in Christo voluntatibus. that they leaue him no mans body at all. For as Damascene sayth that the distinctiō of members pertayne so much to the nature of mans body, that where there is no such distinctiō, there is no perfect mans body.
But by these papists doctrine, there is no such distinction of members in the sacrament: for either there is no head, feete, handes, armes, legges mouth, eyes, and nose at all, or els all his head, all feete, all handes, all armes, all legges, all mouth, all eyes, and all nose. And so they make of Christes body, no mans body at all.
Thus being confuted the Papists erroures, aswell concerning Transubstanciation, as the real, corporal, and naturall presence of Christ in the sacrament (which were two principall poyntes purposed in the beginning of this worke) Now it is tyme some thing to speake of the third errour of the papistes, which is concerning the eating of Christes very body, and drinking of his bloud.
Winchester.
Damascene.Last of all, the author bussieth himselfe with Damascene, and goeth about to aunswer hym by making of a summe, which summe is so wrong accompted, that eueryevery man that readeth Damascene, may be auditour to controule it. And this will I say, Damascene, writeth so euidently in the matter, that Peter Martyr, for a shift is fayne to finde fault in his iudgement and age, and yet he is .viii. C. yeares olde at the least and I say at the least, because he is relieued of summe halfe as old agayne. And what so euer his iudgement were, he writeth as Melancton sayth, his testimony of the fayth of the Sacrament, as it was in his time. I would write in here Damasceus wordes, to compare them with the summe collected by this author, wherby to disproue his particulars playnly, but the wordes of Damascene be to be redde, translated already abrode.
As for the foure substances, which this author by accompte numbreth of Christ, myght hauehave bene left vnreckened by tale, because amonge them that be faythfull, and vnderstand truely wher soeuer the substaunce of Christes very body is, there is also vnderstanded by concomitaunce to be present the substaunce of his soule as very man, and also of the Godhead as very God.Concomitance. And in the mater of the sacrament therfore, contending with hym that woulde hauehave the substaunce of bread there, it may be sayd there is in the Sacrament the onelyonly substaunce of Christes bodye, because the worde onelyonly thus placed, excludeth other straunge substaunces, and not the substances which without contention be knowen and confessed vnite with Christes body. And so a man may be sayd to be alone in his house, when he hath no straungers, although he hath a number of his owne men. And Erasmus noteth how the euangilest writeth Christ to hauehave prayed alone, and yet certayne of his disciples were there. And if in a contention raysed, whether the father and sonne were both killed in such a field or no, I defended the father to hauehave bene onelyonly killed there, and therupon a wager layd, should I lose, if by profe it appeared, that not onelyonly the father, but also three or fower of the fathers seruauntes were slayne, but the sonne escaped? And as in this speache the worde (onelyonly) serued to exclude that was in contention, and not to reduce the number to one, no more is it in the speach that this author would reproue, and therfore neded not to hauehave occupyed him selfe in the matter, wherin I heard him once say in a good audiēce, hym selfe was satisfied. In which mynde I would he had continued, and hauing so sclender stuffe as this is, and the truth so euident agaynst him, not to hauehave resuscitate this so often reproued vntruth, wherin neuer hitherto any one could preuayle.
Caunterbury.
AS for Damascene needeth no further aunswer, then I hauehave made in my former booke. But I pray the reader, that he will diligently examine ye place, and so to be an indifferent auditour betwixt vsus two.
Now when you be called to accompt for the number of substaunces in the Sacramēt, I perceaue by your wrangling, that you be somewhat moued with this audite, for bycause you be called to accompt. And I can not blame you, though it somewhat greeue you, for it toucheth the very quicke. And although I my selfe can right well vnderstand your numbers, that when you name but one, you meane fower, yet you should hauehave considered before hand, to whome your booke was written. You wrote to playne simple people in the english tongue, which vnderstande no further but one to be one, and fower to be fower. And therfore when you say there is but one, and meane fower, you attemper not your speach to the capacities of them to whome you write.
Now hauehave I aunswered to all your friuilous cauilations agaynst my thyrd booke, and fortified it so strongly, that you hauehave spent all your shotte and powder in vayne. And I trust I hauehave eyther broken your peeces, or pegged them, that you shall be able to shoote no more. Or if you shoote, the shotte shall be so faynte, that it shall not be able to perce through a paper leafe. And the life. I trust to doe, to all the munition and ordinaunce layde agaynst my fourth booke.