Answer unto a Crafy and Sophistical Cavillation, Debate · Confutation of book 2 · Section 28
Winchester.
S. Chrisostomes wordes in deede,Chrisostomus. if this author had had them eyther truely translated vntounto him, or had taken the paynes to hauehave truly translated them himselfe, which as Peter Martyr sayth, be not in print but were found in Florence a copy wherof remayneth in the archdeacon or Archbishop of Caunterburies handes, or els if this author had reported the wordes as they be translated into English out of Peter Martyrs booke, wherin some poynt the translator in English, semeth to hauehave attayned by gesse the sense more perfectly than Peter Martyr vttereth it himselfe, if eyther of this had bene done, the matter should hauehave seemed for so much the more playne. But what is this to make foundation of an argument vponupon a secret copy of an epistle vttered at one tyme in diuers senses? I shall touch one speciall poynt, Peter Martyr sayth in Latin, whome the translator in English therin followeth, that the bread is reputed worthy the name of the Lordes body. This author Englishing the same place, termeth it (exalted to the name of the Lordes body) which wordes of exalting come nearer to the purpose of this author to hauehave the bread but a figure and therwith neuer the holier of it selfe. But a figure can neuer be accompted worthy ye name of our Lordes body, the very thing of ye Sacrament, onles there were the thing in deede, as there is by conuersion, as the church truely teacheth. Is not heare reader a meruaylous diuersity in report, and the same so set forth, as thou that canst but reade English mayst euidently see it? God ordring it so as such varieties and contradictions should so manifestly appeare, where the truth is impugned? Agayne this author maketh Chrisostome to speake strangely in the end of this authority, that the diuine nature resteth in the body of Christ, as though the nature of man were the stay to the diuine nature, where as in that vnion the rest is an ineffable mistery, the two natures in Christ to hauehave one substance called and termed an hipostasie, and therfore he that hath translated Peter Martyr into English doth translate it thus: The diuine constitution the nature of the body adioyned, these two both togither, make one sonne and one person.
Thou reader mayst compare the bookes that be abroad of Peter Martyr in Latine, of Peter Martyr in English and this authors booke, with that I write, and so deeme whither I say true or no. But to the purpose of S. Chrisostomes wordes (if they be his wordes) he directeth his argument to shew by the mistery, of the Sacrament, that as in it there is no confusion of natures, but each remayneth in his property, so likewise in Christ the nature of his godhead doth not confound the nature of his manhode. If the visible creatures were in the Sacrament by the presence of Christes body there truely present, inuisible also as that body is, impalpable also as that body is, incorruptible also as that is, then were the visible nature altred, and as it were confounded, which Chrisostome sayth is not so, for the nature of the bread remayneth, by which word of nature, is conueniently signified the property of nature. For proofe wherof, to shew remayning of the property without alteration, Chrisostome maketh onelyonly the resemblance, and before I hauehave shewed how nature signifieth the propriety of nature, and may signifie the outward part of nature, that is to say, the accidents being substance in his proper signification the inward nature of the thyng, of the conuersion wherof, is specially vnderstand transubstantiation.