Defense of the True Doctrine of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, Book 3 · Chapter 6 – Chapter 7
For one nature that is circumscribed,Chap. 6. compassed and measured,One bodye can not be in dyuers places at one tyme. can not be in dyuers places at one tyme. This is the fayth of the olde Catholike churche, as appeareth as well by the authors before rehersed, as by these that hereafter foloweth.
Sainct Augustyne speakyng,Ad Dardanum. that a body must nedes be in some place, saith: that if it be not within the compasse of a place, it is no where. And if it be no where, than is it not.
Cyrillus de Trin. lib. 2.And S. Cyril consideryng the proper nature of a very body, sayd: that if the nature of the Godhead were a body, it must needes bee in a place, and hauehave quantitee, greatnes, and circumscription.
If than the nature of the Godhead muste nedes bee circumscribed, if it were a body, muche more must the nature of Christes manhoode bee circumscribed and contayned within the compasse of a certayne place.
Didymus de spiritu sā cto. lib. 1 cap. 1.Didymus also in his booke De spiritu sancto, (whiche sainct Hierome did translate) proueth, that the holy ghost is very God, because he is in many places at one tyme, whiche no creature can be. For (sayth he) all creatures visible and inuisible be circumscribed and inuironed either within one place (as corporal and inuisible thynges be) or within the proprietee of their owne substance, (as Angels & inuisible creatures bee) so that no Angel (sayth he) can bee at one tym… in two places. And forasmuche as the holy ghost is in many men at one tyme, therefore (sayth he) the holy ghost must nedes be God.
Basilius de spiritu sancto. ca. 22.The same affirmeth also sainct Basyle, That the Angel whiche was with Cornelius, was not at the same tyme with Philippe, nor the Angell whiche spake to zachary in the altare, was not the same tyme in his proper place in heauē. But the holy ghost was at one tyme in Abacuk, and in Danyel in Babylon, and with Hieremy in prison, and with Ezechiell in Chober, wherby he proueth, that the holy ghost is God.
Wherfore the Papistes (whiche saie, that the body of Christe is in an infinite numbre of places at one tyme) doo make his body to bee God, and so confounde the two natures of Christ, attributyng to his humaine nature, that thynge whiche belongeth onelyonly to his diuinitee, whiche is a moste heynous and detestable heresy.
Agaynst whome writeth Fulgentius in this wyse, speakyng of the distinction and diuersitee of the two natures in CHRISTE.
One and the selfe same Christe (saythe he) of mankynd was made a man,Fulgentius ad Trasimū dum Regem lib. 2. compassed in a place, who of his father is God, without measure or place. One and the selfe same person, as concernyng his mans substaunce, was not in heauen, whan he was in yearth, and forsooke the yearthe, when he ascended into heauen: but as concernynge his godly substaunce (whiche is aboue all measure) he neither lefte heauen, when he cam from heauen, nor he left not the yearthe, whan he ascended into heauen, whiche may be knowen by the moste certayn worde of Christ hym self, who to shewe the placyng of his humanitee, sayd to his disciples: I ascende vp to my father and youre father, to my God and your God. Also when he had sayd of Lazarus, that he was dead, he added, saiyng: I am glad for your sakes, that you maye beleeue. For I was not there: but to shewe the vnmeasurable compasse of his diuinitee, he sayd to his disciples: Beholde, I am with you alwaies vntounto the worldes ende. Nowe how dyd he go vp into heauen, but because he is a verye man conteined within a place? Or howe is he present with faythfull people, but because he is very God, beynge without measure?
Of these wordes of Fulgentius it is declared most certainly, that Christe is not here with vsus in earth, but by his godhead, & that his humanitee is in heauen onelyonly, and absent from vsus.
Yet the same is more plainly shewed (yf more playnely can bee spoken) by Uigilius a byshop and an holy martyr.Vigilius Contra Eutychen libro. 1. He writeth thus agaynste the heretike Eutyches, whyche denyed the humanite of CHRISTE, holdynge opinion, that he was onelyonly God, and not manne. Whose erroure Uigilius confutynge, proueth that CHRISTE hadde in hym two natures ioyned togyther in one persone, the nature of his Godhead, and the nature of his manhode. Thus he writeth.
Ioh. 14Christ sayd to his disciples: If you loued me, you wold be glad, for I go vntounto my father. And agayn he sayde:Ioh. 16. It is expedient for you that I go, for yf I go not, the comforter shal not come to you. And yet surely the eternal word of God, the vertue of God, the wysedome of God, was euer with his father, and in his father, yea euen at the same tyme, whan he was with vsus, and in vsus: For whan he dyd mercyfully dwelle in this worlde, he left not his habitation in heauen, for he is eueryevery where whole with his father, equall in diuinitee, whome no place can conteyne, for the Sonne fylleth all thynges, and there is no place that lacketh the presence of his diuinitee. From whence than and whither dyd he say, that he wolde go? Or howe dyd he say, that he went to his father, from whome doubtelesse he neuer departed? But that to go to his father, and frome vsus, was to take from this worlde that nature, whiche he receaued of vsus. Thou seest therfore that it was the propretee of that nature to bee taken away and go from vsus, which in the ende of the worlde shall bee rendered agayne to vsus, as the angels wytnessed,Act. 1… saiyng: This Iesus which is taken from you, shal com agayn, lyke as you saw hym goyng vp into heauen. For looke vponupon the myracle, looke vponupon the mysterie of bothe the natures. The sonne of God, as concernyng his humanitee went from vsus, as concernynge his diuinitee, he sayde vntounto vsus:Mat. vl…. Behold I am with you all the dayes vntounto the worldes ende.
Thus farre hauehave I rehersed the woordes of Uigilius. and by and by he concludeth thus. He is with vsus, and not with vsus, For those whome he lefte, and went from them, as concernyng his humanitee, those he lefte not, nor forsoke them not, as touchyng his diuinitee. For as touchyng the form of a seruant (which he toke away from vsus into heuen) he is absent from vsus, but by the fourme of God, (whyche goeth not from vsus) he is present with vsus in earth: and neuerthelesse both present and absent, he is all one Christe.
Hytherto you hauehave herd Uigilius speke, that Christ as concernynge his bodily presence, and the nature of his manhode, is gone from vsus, taken from vsus, is gone vp into heuen, is not with vsus, hath left vsus, hath forsaken vsus. But as concernyng the other nature of his deitee, he is styl with vsus, so that he is bothe with vsus, and not with vsus: with vsus in the nature of his deitee, and not with vsus in the nature of his humanitee.
Contra Eu…ychē lib. 4And yet more clerely doth the same Uigilius declare the same thyng in an other place, sayenge:
If the worde and the fleshe were bothe of one nature, seyng that the word is eueryevery where, why is not the fleshe than eueryevery where? For whan yt was in earthe, than verily it was not in heauen: and nowe whan it is in heauen, it is not surely in yearth. And it is so sure, that it is not in earth, that as concernyng it, we looke for hym to come from heauen, whom as concernyng his eternall woorde, we beleue to bee with vsus in earthe: Therfore by your doctrine (saith Uigilius vntounto Eutyches, who defended, that the diuinitee and humanite in Christe was but one nature) either the word is conteyned in a place with his fleshe, or els the fleshe is eueryevery where with the worde. For one nature can not receaue in it selfe two diuers and contrary thinges. But these two thinges be dyuers and farre vnlyke, that is to say, to be conteyned in a place, and to be eueryevery where. Therfore in as muche as the word is eueryevery where, and the fleshe is not eueryevery where, it appeareth playnly, that one Christ hym self hath in hym two natures, & that by his diuine nature, he is eueryevery where, and by his humain nature, he is conteined in a place, that he is created, & hath no beginnyng, that he is subiect to death, & can not die. Wherof one he hath by the nature of his worde (wherby he is God) & the other he hath by y• nature of his fleshe, wher by the same God is man also. Therfore one son of God, the self same was made the sonne of mā, and he hath a begynnynge by the nature of his fleshe, and no begynnynge by the nature of his Godheade. He is created by the nature of his fleshe, and not created by the nature of his Godhead. He is comprehended in a place, by the nature of his fleshe, and not comprehended in a place by the nature of his Godhead. He is inferiour to angels in the nature of his fleshe, and is equall to his father in the nature of his Godhead. He dyed by the nature of his fleshe, and died not by the nature of his Godhead. This is the faithe and catholyke confession, whyche the Apostles taught, the martyrs dyd corroborate, and faithfull people kepe vntounto this daie.
All these be the saiynges of Uigilius, who (accordyng to al the other authors before rehersed, and to the faith and catholike confession of the apostles, martyrs, and all faithfull people vntounto his tyme) saith, that as concernyng Christes humanitee, whan he was here on erthe, he was not in heauen: and nowe whan he is in heauen, he he is not in earthe. For one nature can not bee both conteyned in a place in heauen, and be also here in earthe at one tyme. And for asmuche as Christe is here with vsus in earth, and also is conteined in a place in heauen, he proueth thereby, that Christ hath two natures in hym, the nature of a man (wherby he is gon from vsus, and ascended into heauen) and the nature of his godhed, wherby he is here with vsus in erth. So that it is not one nature yt is here with vsus, & that is gone from vsus: that is ascended into heauen, and ther cōteined, & that is permanēt here with vsus in erth
Wherfore the Papistes (whiche nowe of late yeares hauehave made a newe faythe) that Christes naturall bodye is really and naturally present bothe with vsus here in earthe, and sytteth at the ryght hande of his father in heauen, do erre in two very horrible heresies.
The one, that thei confound his two natures, his godhead, & his manhod, attributynge vntounto his humanitee, that thyng, which appertaineth only to his diuinitee, that is to say, to be in heuen and erth, and in many places at one tyme.
The other is, that they deuide and separate his humain nature, or his body, makyng of one body of Christ. ii. bodyes, and ii. natures, one whiche is in heauen, visible and palpable, hauing al membres and proportions of a most perfect natural man, & an other which they say is in erth here with vsus, in eueryevery bread and wyne that is consecrated, hauing no distinction, forme nor proporcion of membres. whiche contrarieties & diuersities (as this holy martyr Uigilius saith) can not be together in one nature.
But now seyng that it is so euident a matter,Chap. 7. bothe by the expresse wordes of scripture, & also by all tholde authors of the same,An answer to the Papistes, alledgynge for theym the…e wordes, This is my bodye. that our sauior Christ (as cōcernyng his bodely presence) is ascended into heauē, and is not here in yerth. And seyng that this hath been the true confession of the catholike fayth euer sithens Christes ascencion, it is nowe to be cōsidered, what moued the Papistes to make a newe and contrary fayth, & what scriptures they hauehave for their purpose. What moued them I knowe not, but their own iniquitie, or the nature and condicion of the sea of Rome, whiche is of all other most contrary to Christ, and therfore most worthy to be called the sea of Antichrist. And as for scripture thei allege none but only one, & that not truly vnderstāded, but to serue their purpose wrested out of tune,The argumente of the Papistes. wherby they make it to gerre & sound cōtrary to al other scriptures partainyng to that matter.
Christ toke bread (say they) blessed, and brake it, and gaue it to his disciples, saiyng: This is my body. These woordes they euer styll repeate and beate vponupon, that Christe sayd, This is my body. And this saiyng they make their shote anker, to proue therby, aswell the real and nataral presence of Christes body in the sacrament, as their imagined Transubstantiation. For these woordes of Christ (say they) be most playne and most true. Than forasmuch as he sayd, This is my body. it must nedes be true, that that thyng whiche the priest holdeth in his hādes, is Christes body. And if it be Christes body, than can it not be bread, whereof they gather by their reasonyng, that there is Christes body really present, and no bread.
The aunswere.Nowe forasmuche as all their profe hangeth onelyonly vponupon these wordes, This is my body. the true sence and meanyng of these wordes must be examined. But (say they) what nede thei any examinacion? What wordes can bee more playne than to say, This is my body?
Truth it is in deede, that the woordes bee as playne as may be spoken:The interpretation of these woordes, This is my body. but that the sence is not so plaine, it is manyfest to eueryevery man, that wayeth substantially the circumstances of the place. For whan Christ gaue bread to his disciples, and sayd: This is my body. there is no man of any discrecion, that vnderstandeth the Englishe tongue, but he may well knowe by the order of the speeche, that Christ spake those wordes of the bread, callyng it his body, as all the olde authors also do affirme, although many of the Papistes deny the same. Wherfore this sentence can not meane as the woordes seme and purport, but there must nedes be some figure or mystery in this speeche, more than appeareth in the plaine wordes. For by this maner of speeche plainly vnderstande without any figure as the wordes lye, can bee gathered none other sence, but that bread is Christes body, and that Christes body is bread. whiche all christian eares do abhorre to heare. Wherfore in these words must nedes be sought out an other sense and menyng, then the wordes of them selues do beare.