The Novelty of Popery Opposed to the Antiquity of True Christianity, Book 7 · Controversy 11 · Chapter 12
CHAP. XII. That the Fathers not only ſpeak of a ſpiritual manducation which is not done with the mouth, but alſo underſtand Chriſts words, John 6. of a ſpiritual manducation.
THE Fathers are full of expreſſes which turn our thoughts from the carnal and oral manducation of Chriſts body, to the ſpiritual, which is done by faith, and warn us that Chriſts words muſt be underſtood in a ſpiritual ſenſe.
Tertullian in the thirty ſeventh chapter of the book of the Reſurrection of the fleſh, expounding theſe words, The fleſh profiteth nothing, (a)Tertul. de reſur. carn. c. 37. Ex materia dicta dirigendus eſt ſenſus. Nam quia durum et intolerabilem exiſtimaverunt ſermonem ejus quaſi vere carnem ſuam illis edendam determinaſſet, ut in ſpiritu diſponeret tamen ſalutis, praemiſit, Spiritus eſt qui vivificat atque ita ſubjunxit, Caro nihil prodeſt, ad vivificandum ſcilicet.We muſt (ſaith he) direct the ſenſe of theſe words according to the ſubject that he ſpeaks of. For becauſe they eſteemed his word hard and intolerable, as if he had determined to give them really his fleſh to eat: that he might make the ſtate of ſalvation ſpiritual, he ſaid before, It is the Spirit that quickneth: and then addeth, The fleſh profiteth nothing, that is, it profiteth not for quickning.
And in the ſame place,(b)Ibid. Quia et ſermo caro erat factus, pr… inde in cauſam vitae appetendus, et devorandus auditu, et ruminandus intellectu, et fide digerendus. Nam paulo ante carnem ſuam panem quoque coeleſtem pronuntiarat, urgens uſquequaque per allegoriam neceſſariorum pabulorum, memoriam Patrum qui panem et carnes Aegyptiorum praeverterant divinae vocationi. The word was made fleſh, and by conſequent that we may have life, it muſt be deſired and devoured by hearing, and ruminated with the underſtanding, and diſgeſted with faith.
And in the ſame place, For he had declared a little before, thae his fleſh was the heavenly bread, urging by all means by an allegory taken from neceſſary meats, the remembrance of their Fathers, who had preferred the bread and meat of the Aegyptitians to the heavenly calling.
(c)Clem. Alex. lib. 1. cap. 4. pag. 44. foreign.Clemens Alexandrinus is of the ſame mind; In another place (ſaith he) even in St. Johns Goſpel, the Lord declared it otherwiſe by ſigns, ſaying, Eat my fleſh, and drink my blood, propounding by Allegory the evidence of faith, and the drink of promiſe.
(d)Pag. 45. foreign.And a little after, He calls the Spirit fleſh by Allegory, for the fleſh is created by him, and the blood enigmatically ſignifieth the Word.
Again,(e)Pag. 46. foreign. He ſaid that the bread which I ſhall give you, is my fleſh. Now the fleſh is moiſtned with blood, and the wine ſignifieth the blood by Allegory.
Again,(f)Lib. 2. cap. 2. pag. 68. foreign. He bleſſed the wine, ſaying, Take, drink, This is the blood of the vine. The holy liquor of joy (meaning the conſecrated wine) ſignifieth by Allegory, the Word that was poured for many. Note that he expounds the blood of the cup, to be the blood of the vine, that is, wine.
In the end of Clemens the Summaries of Theodotus are added, where theſe words are found,(g)Pag. 536. foreign. The bread which I will give you is my fleſh, even that whereby our fleſh is fed in the Euchariſt. Then correcting himſelf, he addeth, Or rather this fleſh is his body, which is the Church, the heavenly bread, the bleſſed aſſembly. It is evident that the Fathers choſe rather to ſay any other thing, and to uſe the moſt remote and hard interpretations then to believe Tranſubſtantiation.
Cyrillus or Origen upon Leviticus (for the Author is not certainly known) in the ſeventh book, expounding theſe words, How can this man give us his fleſh to eat? ſpeaks thus, Acknowledge that theſe things written in the divine volumes are figures. See that thou underſtand them as spiritual, not as carnal. For if you receive them as carnal, they hurt you inſtead of nouriſhing you.
(h)Orig. in Levit. cap. 10. Hom 7. Eſt in Novo Teſtamento littera quae …ccidit eum qui non ſpiritualiter ea quae dicuntur adverterit. Si enim ſecundum litteram ſequeris hoc ipſum quod dictum eſt, Niſi mandicaveritis carnem meam & biberitis ſanguinem meum, occidit haec littera.For there is in the New Teſtament a letter that kills him that obſerveth not the things which are ſpiritually ſpoken. For if thou followeſt according to the letter, that very thing which is ſaid, Ʋnleſs you eat my fleſh, and drink my blood, that letter killeth.
The ſame Author upon the Numbers, in the fourteenth chapter, Hom. 16.(i)Bibere dicimur ſanguinem Chriſti non ſolum Sacramentorum ritu ſed & cum ſermones ejus recipimus in quibus vita conſiſtit; ſicut & ipſe dixit, Verba quae locutus ſum ſpiritus & vita ſunt. We are ſaid to drink the blood of Chriſt, not only in the celebration of the Sacraments, but alſo when we receive his words in which life conſiſteth, as himſelf ſaith, The words which I ſpake unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
Baſil in his Epiſtle to the Ceſareans, which is the one hundred and fourty firſt,(k)foreign.. We eat his fleſh, and drink his blood, being by the incarnation made partakers of the ſenſible life of the word, and of the wiſdom. For the Lord hath called his myſtical converſation, fleſh and blood. The hardneſs of ſuch interpretations ſheweth how far the Fathers were from believing Tranſubſtantiation, ſince that rather then to believe that bread and wine are tranſubſtantiated into fleſh, they choſe by the fleſh of the Lord, which we eat, to underſtand either his word, or his Church, or his converſation among men. Any other expoſition ſeems to them more convenient, and leſs hard then the doctrine of Tranſubſtantiation.
The ſame Father upon Pſal. 33.(l)foreign. There is an intelligible mouth of the inward man, at which he is fed, being partaker of the word of life which is the bread that came down from heaven.
Hierom upon the third chapter of Eccleſiaſtes, ſaith that the fleſh of Chriſt is eaten when Scripture is read.(m)Hoc ſolum habemus in praeſenti ſaeculo bonum, ſi veſcamur carne ejus cruoreque potemur, non ſolum in myſterio, ſed etiam in Scripturarum lectione. We eat his fleſh (ſaith he) and drink his blood, not only in the myſterie, but alſo in the reading of Scripture. For the true meat and the true drink which is received from the word of God, is the knowledge of Scripture.
And in the Comment, upon the Pſalms which is attributed to him, upon Pſalm 44.(n)Ego corpus Chriſti Evangelium puto, &c. Quando dicit qui non comederit carnem meam & biberit ſanguinem meum, licet & in myſterio poſſit intelligi, tamen verius corpus Chriſti & ſanguis ejus ſermo Scripturarum eſt. I think that the body of Chriſt is the Goſpel, and that Scripture is his doctrine, when he ſaith, he that eats not my fleſh, and drinks not my blood, &c. although this may be underſtood in myſterie, yet to ſpeak more truly, the body and blood of Chriſt is the word of the Scriptures, and the divine doctrine. And a little after, Caro Chriſti & ſanguis ejus in auribus noſtris funditur; The fleſh of Chriſt and his blood is poured into our ears. That indeed is far from eating Chriſt with the mouth of the body. How far was Hierom from the belief of our Adverſaries, ſince by theſe words, This is my body, he will have us to underſtand, this is my Goſpel?
In the ſame place,(o)Si quando audimus ſermonem Dei, & ſermo Dei, & caro Chriſti, & ſanguis ejus in auribus noſtris funditur, & nos aliud cogitamus, in quantum periculum procurrimus? If when we hear the word of God, and that the word of God, and the fleſh of Chriſt, and his blood is poured into our ears, we think of ſomething elſe, what danger do we run into?
But the moſt pregnant of all the Fathers upon this point is Auſtin, who ſeems to have made it his task to diſſwade us from believing the manducation of Chriſt with the mouth and teeth. Already we have underſtood how in the ſixth chapter of the third book of Chriſtian doctrine; he was not content to have ſaid that theſe words of Chriſt, Except you eat my fleſh, &c. are a typical expreſſion, but he declared very expreſly how that figure muſt be underſtood, namely that eating the fleſh of Chriſt is meditating his death, and printing it with fruit and pleaſure in our memory.
We have ſeen alſo how in the 21. book of the City of God, 25. ch. he ſpeaks of two manducations of the fleſh of Chriſt; the one done in the Sacrament or ſacred ſign, the other ſpiritual, which he calls the only true manducation.(p)Oſtendit quid ſit non Sacramento tenus, ſed re vera corpus Chriſti manducare. The Lord ſheweth (ſaith he) what it is to eat the body of Chriſt, not in Sacrament only, but alſo in truth.
(q)Non ſolo Sacramento ſed re ipſa manducaverūt corpus Chriſti.In the ſame place, They have eaten the body of Chriſt not only in Sacrament, but in truth alſo.
The ſame upon the 98. Pſ. upon that Chriſt had promiſed to give his fleſh to eat, he perſonates the Lord ſpeaking thus to his Diſciples,(r)Spiritualiter intelligite quod lecutus ſum, non hoc corpus quod videtis manducaturi eſtis, & bibituri ſanguinem quem fuſuri ſunt qui me crucifigent. Sacramentum quod vobis commendavi ſpiritualiter intellectum vivificabit vos. Ʋnderſtand ſpiritually what I ſaid unto you; You ſhall not eat this body which you ſee, and ſhall not drink the blood which they that ſhall crucifie me ſhall ſhed. I have recommended unto you a ſacred ſign, which being ſpiritually underſtood ſhall quicken you.
And in the ſecond Sermon, de verbis Apoſtoli, If that which is taken viſibly in a ſacred ſign, is eaten ſpiritually in the truth it ſelf, &c.
But he inſiſteth moſt upon that point in the 25, and 26. Treatiſe upon St. Johns Goſpel, where he makes a long Comment upon the 6. ch. of St. John. In the 25. Treatiſe expounding the Lords words,(ſ)Hoc eſt ergo manducare cibum, non qui perit, ſed qui permanet in vitā aeternam. Ut quid paras dentes & ventrem? Crede & manducaſti. This is the work of God, that you believe on him whom he hath ſent, he ſaith. This then (that is believing) is eating the meat which periſheth not, but is permanent unto everlaſting life. Why prepareſt thou thy teeth and thy belly? Believe and thou haſt eaten.
And in the 26. Treatiſe,(t)Daturus Dominus Spiritum Sanctum dixit ſe panem qui de coelo deſcendit, hortans ut credamus in cum. Credere in eum, hoc eſt manducare panem vivū. Qui credit in eum, manducat, inviſibiliter ſaginatur, quia & inviſibiliter renaſcitur. When the Lord would give the Holy Ghoſt, he ſaid that he was the bread come down from heaven, exhorting us to believe on him. For believing on him is eating the living bread. He that believeth on him, eats him; He is inviſibly fattened, becauſe he is inviſibly born again.
There alſo ſpeaking of Moſes, Aaron, and Phineas, who ate the Manna in another manner then the incredulous do.(u)Viſibilem cibum ſpiritualiter intellexerunt, ſpiritualiter eſurierunt ut ſpiritualiter ſatiarentur. Nam & nos hodie accipimus viſibilem cibum, ſed aliud eſt Sacramentum, aliud eſt virtus Sacramenti. They ſpiritually underſtood the viſible meat, they were ſpiritually hungry, they taſted ſpiritually that they might be ſatiated ſpiritually. For we alſo take this day a viſible food; but the Sacrament is one thing, and the truth of the Sacrament is another thing. He ſaith two things; for he ſpeaks of a ſpiritual manducation proper to the believers, and calls that which we eat in the Sacrament a viſible food. Now what is that viſible food? Is it the Lords body? But our adverſaries ſay that it is inviſible in the Maſſe. Is it the accidents? But they are no food, unleſs they will give us lines, and colours, and figures for meat.
A little after he ſhews of whom Chriſt ſpeaks when he ſaith, He that eateth this bread, ſhall not die for ever. (x)Qui manducat intus non foris, qui manducat in corde, non qui premit dente.It is he (ſaith he) that eats inwardly, not outwardly; he that eats in his heart, not he that preſſeth with his tooth.
We have ſhewed before how in the ſame place by the bread of life which we muſt eat, he underſtands the Church or the ſociety of the believers. Then he addeth,(y)Hoc eſt ergo manducare illam eſcam & illum bibere potum, in Chriſto manere & illum manentem in ſe habere. Ac per hoc qui non manet in Chriſto & in quo non manet Chriſtus, proculdubio nec manducat ſpiritualitor carnem ejus, nec bibit ejus ſanguinem, licet carnaliter & viſibiliter premat dentibus Sacramentum corporis & ſanguinis Chriſti. This is then eating this meat, and drinking this cup, even to abide in Chriſt, and to have him abiding within us. By that reaſon, he that abideth not in Chriſt, and in whom Chriſt abideth not, without doubt eats not his fleſh spiritually, and drinks not his blood, though he preſs with his teeth carnally and viſibly the Sacrament of the body and blood of Chriſt. Who ſeeth not that this good Doctor was ſet on by God to urge this ſo often and in ſuch preſſing words, to prevent the errour which Satan was contriving, and which he put forth ſome ages after?
In the 27. Treatiſe after he hath ſaid that it was needful that Chriſt ſhould ſpeak ſo that he might not be underſtood by all, he makes this concluſion of his diſcourſe,(z)Illi putabant eum erogaturum corpus ſuum, ille autem dixit ſe aſcenſurum in coelum, utique integrum. Cum videritis filiū hominis aſcendentem, ubi erat prius; certe vel tunc videbitis quia non eo modo quo putatis erogat corpus ſuum. Certe vel tunc intelligetis quod gratia ejus non conſumitur morſibus. The Jews thought that he would give them his body, but he tells them that he was to aſcend into heaven; in his whole perſon no doubt. When you ſhall ſee the Son of man aſcending where he was before, then at leaſt ſhall you ſee that he gives not his body in the ſame manner as you think; then at leaſt ſhall ye ſee that his grace is not conſumed with biting.
Theſe things are ſo clear and ſo expreſs, that Pope Innocent the third, under whom that word of tranſubſtantiation was authorized by the Article of a Council, being overcome with the force of truth, acknowledged, that when Chriſt ſpake of giving his fleſh to eat, he meant the ſpiritual manducation, which is done by Faith, not of that which is done by the mouth.(*)Innoc. 3. lib. 4. de Myſteriis Miſſae, cap. 4. De ſpirituali comeſtione Dominus ait, Niſi manducaveritis carnem, &c. Hoc modo corpus Chriſti ſoli boni comedunt. The Lord (ſaith he) speaks of ſpiritual manducation, ſaying, Except you eat the fleſh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you have no life in you. In this manner the good only eat the body of Chriſt. Wherefore alſo he ſaith, He that eateth my fleſh and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. For he that abideth in charity, dwelleth in God, and God in him. Why prepareſt thou thy tooth and thy belly? believe and thou haſt eaten.
In effect, if by theſe words, Except you eat my fleſh and drink my blood, you have no life in you, Chriſt binds not the Chriſtian to drink his blood with the mouth of his body, I ſee not how the Roman Church can be excuſed for taking from the people the cup of the Sacrament. For it is depriving the people of life, ſeeing that taking the blood in the hoſt is not drinking. Now Chriſt ſaith expreſly, Except you drink. If in this point they believed the Antients and their Pope Innocent, they might know that for the ſpiritual participation (which Chriſt recommendeth in this Chapter) eating and drinking are the ſame thing; and that Chriſt uſeth both the Metaphors to ſignifie that our ſouls finde in him a perfect and moſt compleat food.