Answer unto a Crafy and Sophistical Cavillation, Debate · Confutation of book 4 · Section 13 – Section 16
Caunterbury.
WHere as I hauehave shewed what idolatry was cōmitted by meanes of the Papisticall doctrine, concerning adoration of the sacrament, bicause that answere to my reasons you can not, and confesse the truth you will not, therfore you runne to your vsuall shift, passing it ouer with a toy and scoffe, saying, that you will not answere myne eloquence but the matter, and yet indede you answere neither of both, but vnderunder pretence of myne eloquēce, you shift of the matter also. And yet other eloquence I vsed not, but the accustomed speach of the homely people, as such a matter requireth.
And where you say, that it were not well to worship Christ in the Sacrament, if nothing be there, (as you say I teach) if you meane, that Christ can not be worshipped but where he is corporally present (as you must nedes meane, if your reason should be to purpose) then it followeth of your saying, that we may not worship Christ in Baptisme, in the fieldes in priuate houses, nor in no place els, where Christ is not corporally and naturally present. But the true teaching of the holy catholike churche is, that although Christ, as concerning his corporall presence, be continually resident in heauen, yet he is to be worshiped not onelyonly there, but here in earth also, of all faythfull people, at all tymes, in all places, and in all theyr workes. Heare now what followeth further in my Booke.
August. in psal. 98.But the Papistes (for theyr owne commodity to keepe the people still in idolatry) do often alleadge a certayne place of S. Augustine vponupon the Psalmes where he sayth, that no man doth eate the flesh of Christ, except he first worship it, and that we do not offend in worshipping therof, but we should, offend if we should not worship it.
That is true, which S. Augustine sayth in this place. For who is he that professeth Christ, and spiritually fedde and nourished with his flesh and bloud, but he will honor and worship him, sitting at the right hand of his father, and render vntounto him from the botome of his hart, all laud, prayse and thankes, for his mercifull redemption?
And as this is most true, which S. Augustine sayth, so is that most false, which the Papistes would perswade vponupon S. Augustines wordes, that the Sacramentall bread and wine, or any visible thing is to be worshipped in the Sacrament. For S. Augustines mynd was so farre from any such thought, that he forbiddeth vtterly to worship Christes owne flesh and bloud alone, but in consideration, and as they be annexed and ioyned to his diuinity. How much lesse then could he thinke or allow, that we should worship the Sacramentall bread and wine, or any outward or visible Sacrament, which be shadowes, figures, and representations of Christes flesh and bloud?
And S. Augustine was afrayd, least in worshiping Christes very body, we should offend, therfore he biddeth vsus, when we worship Christ, that we should not tarry and fixe our myndes vponupon his flesh (which of it self auayleth nothing) but that we should lift vp our myndes from the flesh to ye spirite, which geueth lyfe: and yet the Papistes be not afrayd by crafty meanes to induce vsus, to worship those thinges, which be signes and sacraments of Christes body.
But what will not the shamelesse Papistes alleadge for theyr purpose, when they be not ashamed to mayntayne the adoration of the Sacrament by these wordes of S. Augustine? Wherin he speaketh not one word of the adoration of the sacrament, but onelyonly of Christ him selfe?
And although he say, that Christ gaue his flesh to be eaten of vsus, yet he ment not, that his flesh is here corporally present, and corporally eaten, but onelyonly spiritually. As his word declare playnly, which follow in the same place, where S. Augustine as it were in the person of Christ, speaketh these wordes.
It is the spirite that giueth lyfe, but the flesh profiteth nothing. The wordes which I hauehave spoken vntounto you, be spirite and life. That which I hauehave spoken, vnderstand you spiritually. You shall not eate this body which you see, and drincke that bloud which they shall shed, that shall crucify me. I hauehave commended vntounto you a sacramēt, vnderstand it spiritually, and it shall geue you lyfe. And although it must be visibly ministred, yet it must be inuisibly vnderstand.
These wordes of S. Augustine with the other before recited, do expresse his mynd playnly, that Christ is not otherwise to be eaten, than spiritually, (which spirituall eating requireth no corporal presence) and that he entended not to teach here any adoration, eyther of the visible sacramentes, or of any thing that is corporally in them. For in dede there is nothing really and corporally in the bread to be worshipped, although the Papistes say that Christ is in eueryevery consecrated bread.
Winchester.
As in the wrong report of S Augustine,Augustinus. who speaking of the adoration of Christes flesh, geuen to be eaten, doth so fashion his speach, as it can not with any violence be drawen to such an vnderstanding, as though S. Augustine should meane of the adoring of Christes flesh in heauen, as this author would hauehave it. S. Augustine speaketh of the giuing of Christes flesh to vsus to eate, and declareth after, that he meaneth in the visible Sacrament, which must be inuisibly vnderstanded & spiritually, not as the Capernaites did vnderstand Christes wordes, carnally to eate that body cut in peces: and therfore there may be no such imaginations to eat Christes body after the manner he walked here, nor drincke his bloud as it was shedde vponupon the Crosse: but it is a mystery and sacrament that is godly of godes worke supernaturall aboue mans vnderstanding, and therfore spiritually vnderstanded shall geue life, which life carnall vnderstanding must nedes exclude. And by these my wordes, I thincke I declare truely S. Augustines meaning of the truth of this sacrament, wherin Christ giueth truly his flesh to be eaten, the flesh he spake of before taken of the virgine. For the spirituall vnderstanding that S. Augustine speaketh of is not to exclude the truth of Gods worke in the sacrament, but to exclude carnall imagination from musing of the manner of the worke, which is in mistery such as a carnall man can not comprehend. In which matter if S. Augustine had had such a fayth of the visible sacrament, as the author sayth him selfe hath now of late, and calleth it catholicke, S. Augustine would hauehave vttered it, as an expositor playnly, in this place, and sayd, there is but a figure of Christes body: Christes body and flesh is in heauen and not in this visible sacrament, Christes speach that was estemed so hard, was but a figuratiue speach. And where Christ sayd, This is my body, he ment onelyonly of the figure of his body: which manner of saying S. Augustine vseth not in this place, and yet he could speake playnly, and so doth he, declaring vsus first the truth of the flesh that Christ geueth to be eaten, that is to say, the same flesh that he tooke of the virgine. And yet bicause Christ giueth it not in a visible manner, nor such a maner as the Capernaites thought on, nor such a maner as any carnall man can conceaue, being also the flesh in the sacrament, giuen not a common flesh but a liuely, godly and spirituall flesh. Therfore S. Augustine vseth wordes and speach wherby he denieth the gift of that body of Christ, which we did see, and of the bloud that was shed, so as by affirmation and deniall so nere together of the same to be geuen, and the same not to be giuen, the mistery should be thus farre opened, that for the truth of the thing giuen, it is the same, and touching the manner of the giuing, and the quality of the flesh giuen, it is not the same. And bicause it is the same, S. Augustine sayth before we must worship it, and yet bicause it is now an hidden godly mistery, we may not hauehave carnall imaginations of the same but godly, spiritually and inuisibly vnderstand it.
Caunterbury.
AS concerning the wordes of S. Augustine (which you say I do wrong report) let eueryevery indeferēt reader iudge, who maketh a wrong report of S. Augustine,August. in psal. 98. you or I. For I hauehave reported his wordes as they be, and so hauehave not you. For S. Augustine sayth not, that Christes body is eaten in the visible sacrament (as you report) but that Christ hath giuen vsus a sacrament of the eating of his body, which must be vnderstand inuisibly, and spiritually, as you say truly in that poynt. But to the spirituall eating, is not required any locall or corporall presence in the sacrament, nor S. Augustine sayth not so, as you in that poynt vniustly report him: And although the worke of God in his sacraments be effectuall and true, yet the working of God in the sacraments is not his working by grace in the water, bread, and wine, but in them that duely receaue the same, which worke is such as no carnall man can comprehend.
And where you say, that if S. Augustine had ment as I do, he would in this place hauehave declared a figure, and hauehave sayd, that here is but a figure, and we eate onelyonly a figure, but Christ himselfe is gone vp into heauen and is not here it is to much arrogancy of you, to appoynt S. Augustin his wordes, what he should say in this place, as you would lead an hound in a line where you list, or draw a beare to the stake. And here still you cease not vntruly to report me. For I say not that in the Lordes supper is but a figure, or that Christ is eaten only figuratiuely, but I say that there is a figure and figuratiue eating. And doth not S. Augustine sufficiently declare a figure in Christes wordes, when he sayth, that they must be vnderstād spiritually: And what man can deuise to expresse more playnly, both that in Christes speach is a figure, and that his body is not corporally present, and corporally eaten, then S. Augustine doth in a thousand places? but specially in his epistle ad Bonifacium, ad Dardanum, ad Ianuarium, De doctrina Christiana, De catechisandis rudibus, in quest super leuit, De ciuitate Dei, Contra Adamatium, contra aduersarium legis & prophetarum, In epistolam & Euangelium Iohannis, In sermone ad infantes, & De verbis apostoli. The flesh of Christ is a true flesh, and was borne of a woman, dyed, rose agayne, ascended into heauen, and sitteth at the right hand of his father, but yet is he eaten of vsus spiritually, and in the maner of the eating, there is the mistery and secret, and yet the true worke of God.
And where you vnderstand the inuisible mistery (which S. Augustin speaketh of) to be in the diuersity of the body of Christ seene or not seene, you be farre deceaued. For S. Augustine speaketh of the mistery that is in the eating of the body, and not in the diuersity of the body: which in substaūce is euer one without diuersity. The meaning therfore of S. Augustine was this, that when Christ sayd (Except you eate the flesh of the sonne of man,Iohn. 6. you shall not hauehave life in you,) he ment of spirituall and not carnall eating of his body. For if he had entended to hauehave described the diuersity of the maner of Christes body visible and inuisible, he would not hauehave sayd (this body which you see) but this body in such maner as you see it, or in such like termes, you shall not eate. But to eate Christes flesh (sayth S. Augustine) is fructifully to remember that the same flesh was crucified for vsus.August. de doctri. christiana. li. 3. cap. 4. And this is spiritually to eate his flesh and drincke his bloud.
Winchester.
And bicause S. Hierome who was of S. Augustines tyme, writeth in his commentaries vponupon S. Paule, ad Ephesios that may serue for the better opening hereof, I will write it in here.Hieroni. ad Ephesios. The wordes, be these. The bloud and flesh of Christ is two wayes vnderstanded, either the spirituall and godly, of which him selfe sayd: My flesh is verely meate, and my bloud is verely drincke. And vnles ye eate my flesh & drincke my bloud, ye shall not hauehave euerlasting lyfe. Or the flesh which was crucified and the bloud which was shed with the spere. According to this diuision, the diuersity of flesh and bloud is taken in Christes sayntes, that there is one flesh that shall see the saluation of God, an other flesh and bloud that cannot possese the kingdome of heauen. There be S. Hieromes wordes. In which, thou reader seest a deniall of that flesh of Christ to be geuen, to be eaten, that was crucified, but the flesh geuen to be eaten to be a godly and spirituall flesh, and a distinction made betwen them, as is in our flesh, of which it may be sayd, that the flesh we walke in here, shall not see God, that is to say, as it is corruptible according to the text of S. Paule, flesh and bloud shall not possesse heauen,1. Cor. 16. and yet we must beleue and hope with Iobe truly: that the same our flesh shall see God in heauen after which diuision likewise we receaue not in the sacrament Christes flesh that was crucified, being so a visible and mortall flesh, But Christes flesh glorified, incorruptible and impassible, a Godly and spirituall flesh. And so that is but one in substance, and alwayes so that same one is neuerthelesse for the alteration in the maner of the being of it deuided and so called not the same, wherin S. Hierom and S. Augustine vsed both one maner of speaking: and S. Hierom resembling the diuision that he reherseth of Christes flesh, to the diuision of our flesh in the resurrection, doth more playnly open how the same may be called not the same, bicause we beleue certaynly the resurrection of the same flesh we walke in, and yet it shall be by the garmēt of incorruptibility not the same in quality, and so be verefied the scriptures that flesh shall not possesse heauen: and, I shal see God in my flesh: and here I will note to the reader by the way S. Hierome writeth this distinction of Christes flesh as a matter agreed on, and then in catholique doctrine receaued not of his inuention, but in the catholique fayth as a principle established, which declareth the belyfe to hauehave bene of that very godly and spiritual flesh geuen really in the sacrament, for els to eate onelyonly in fayth, is specially to remember Christes flesh, as it was visibly crucified, wherin was accomplished the oblation for our sinne: and S. Paule willeth vsus in the supper to shew forth and professe the death of Christ, for so Christ would hauehave his death continually expressed till his coming, and if S. Hierome with other should hauehave ment of the eating of Christ as he sitteth in heauen reigning, this destinction of Christes flesh were an idle matter and out of purpose to compare the distinction in it to be like distinction of oure flesh to enter into heauen, and not to enter into heauen, the same and not the same. And thus I say that this place of S. Hierome sheweth so euedently both his and S. Augustines fayth, that wrot at the same tyme as there cannot be desired a more euident matter.