The Anatomy of the Mass, Book 1 · Chapter 12
CHAP. XII. That our Adverſaries, to avoide a cleare and naturall figure, forge a multitude of harſh and unuſuaall ones, and ſpeake but in figurative tearmes. And of Berengarius his confeſsion.
OVr Adverſaries, who make a ſhew to be enemies to Figures, forge nevertheleſſe a great number of abſurd and violent figures, and turne all into figures.
When Chriſt ſaith This is my body, by This, they underſtand an individuum Vagum, or that which is under theſe ſpecies; without determining any thing. Others interprete the word IS, by ſhall be or ſhall become. For they ſay that the Tranſubſtantiation is not made or effected, till the words be pronounced.
When the Evangeliſts ſay that the Lord gave bread, by this word bread, they underſtand fleſh. And wee have heard them confeſſe that theſe word This cup is the New Teſtament in my bloe… are figurative.
By their doctrine, which puts … body into the cup, Chriſt giving … cup, might have ſaid This is my body and had ſpoken truely, if wee belee… them.
Chriſt called that which he dran… in the Euchariſt, the fruit of the Vi… But our Adverſaries by the fruit … the Vine, will have the blood to be underſtood.
By theſe words Doe this, they underſtand Sacrifice me; but the words following, Doe this in remembrance of … doe refute that interpretation. For it … impoſſible to Sacrifice Chriſt in remembrance of Chriſt.
Wee ſhall ſee anone that when i… the 6 of Saint John, Verſe 53. Chri… ſaith, Except yee drinke my blood, yee ha… no life in you: our adverſaries, leaſt th… ſhould be accuſed of taking the li… from the Lay people, in depriving the… of the cup, by the word drinking, they underſtand eating. And that whe… Chriſt ſaith, I leave the World, and am … more in the world, they add this taile to it, to wit, by my viſible preſence.
We have ſeene before, that the Apoſtle ſaith foure ſeveral times, that in the Lords Supper, we breake bread and eate bread. To ſhun the force of theſe words, they wreſt them into figures, ſaying that it is not bread that we eate: But that figuratively Chriſts body is called bread, becauſe it ſeemes to be ſo. Which thing they know to be falſe: for Chriſts body never ſeemed to be bread. Item they ſay that it is called bread, becauſe it was bread before the conſecration. Which alſo is falſe. For the Lords body was never bread. To ſuch figures, Rhethorick affords no name.
They bring indeed for example, Moſes Rod, which is ſtill called a rod after it was turned into a Serpent: and the water of the wedding of Cana, Iohn 2.which is ſtill called water after it was turned into wine. Which are examples making againſt them. For of that rod it is expresſly ſaid, that it was turned into a Serpent, Exod. 4.3. And of that water it is ſaid in expreſſe termes that it was turned into wine, John 2.9. But of the bread of the holy Supper, it is not ſaid that it was converted into fleſh. Of this Serpent one might have truly ſaid that it was once a rod: and of this wine, that it was once water, becauſe it was the ſame matter clothed with another forme. But of Chriſts body it cannot be ſayd truely that ever it was bread. The matter or ſubſtance of the body of Chriſt, is not the matter of the bread. For Chriſts body is not made of bread, and was never bread.
Others ſay, that the Apoſtle ſaith not, When ye eate bread, but when ye eate of this bread, underſtanding by the pronoune This, a ſpirituall and heavenly bread. But they conſider not that the Apoſtle in the firſt to the Corinthians, Chapter 10, ſaith not THIS BREAD: but the bread that we breake. And Saint Luke in the 20 of the Acts, 7 Verſe. The Diſciples came together to break bread. There, their Philoſophy fayles them. They muſt alſo learne that when the Scripture taketh this word Bread in a ſpirituall ſenſe, it is never oppoſed to the cup: becauſe that when the queſtion is of a ſpirituall foode, to eate and to drinke are but one and the ſame thing. But Saint Paul oppoſeth this bread to that cup, ſaying, Let every man eate of this bread, and drinke of this …up.
That if any one conſider exactly all the termes which our Adverſaries uſe in this matter, hee ſhall perceive that they be unintelligible figures. They ſay that the Prieſt breaketh the hoſte, and that this hoſte is the body of Chriſt, which nevertheleſſe cannot be broken. They ſay they lift up God, but God cannot be lifted up. They ſay the conſecrated hoſte is round: And that Chriſts body is in the conſecrated hoſte. Whence will follow in good Logick, that the body of Chriſt is round. Which, nevertheleſſe, they doe not beleeve. They grant both propoſitions, and deny the concluſion. Which is againſt common ſenſe.
And when they ſpeake of drinking the cup, by drinking, they underſtand a ſwallowing downe of fleſh and bones, and the Soule of Chriſt with his Divinity.This confeſſion of Berengarius is to be found in the 2 Diſtinction of the Conſecration at the Canō. Ego Berengarius.
The Roman Councell under Nieholas the ſecond, preſcribed to Berengarius a forme of abjuration of his doctrine, in the moſt exquiſite and formall tearmes that ever they could deviſe. Theſe tearmes are, that he proteſteth to ſtand and keepe himſelfe cloſe to the doctrine of the Pope and Church of Rome, to wit, that the bread and the wine which are upon the Altar, are not onelyonly the Sacrament but alſo the very body and blood of Chriſt. Words that muſt be taken in a quite contrary ſenſe: For the Church of Rome beleeveth not that the bread is the true body of Chriſt. Item they make him ſay that Chriſts body is ſenſiblie handled by the Prieſt, and is broken and cruſhed with the teeth of the faithfull. But the Doctors Gloſſe noteth in the margent theſe wordes. Except thou underſtandſt aright Berengarius his words, thou ſhalt fall into a greater heriſie than Berengarius did. It is the property of untruth, to intangle it ſelfe with figures, and not to underſtand it ſelfe.