Three Pillars and Arch-patriarchs of the Popish Synagogues, Treatise 1 · Book 2 · Part 12 – Part 13
Hesk.The twelfth Chapter aunswereth certaine obiections tha… … to imp…ge the Catholique doctrine of this matter.
Fulke.In the beginning of this Chapter▪ he saith, there was neuer heretiques but had some shew of argumentes to auouche his heresie, and bringeth in diuerse examples, only the proclaymer, made no argument in his … for yt he would hauehave the people receiue his bare proclamation. What arguments he vsed, let the world iudge & the Papistes if they can, study to answer him. But Oecolampadius (he saith,) hath heaped vp scriptures to proue the ascention of Christ, which the Papistes doe graunt, & yet acknowledge his presence on the earth in the sacrament: as though his departing out of the world, and presence in the world concerning his bodily presence, could stand together. Then he flyeth to his diuine power, by which he is able to be present in diuerse places, as well as do such and such miracles as he rehearseth, and wisheth that we should not be so streight and cruell to the body of Christ, as to giuegive it no greater prerogatiue, then vntounto any other body. Verily we do acknowledge as great prerogatiue thereof, as he himselfe hath giuen it, whereof we hauehave vnderstanding by his holy worde, and otherwise it were madnesse in vsus, to take vponupon vsus to be liberall to him which giueth all thinges. And if we found as good authoritie for the vbiquitie, or pluralitie of placing of his body, as we finde for the feeding vsus thereby into eternall life, we would as easily confesse the one, as we doe the other. But we finde not in deede (as M. Heskins saith) that he himselfe hath giuen or would giuegive his body that prerogatiue, to be eueryevery where, or in more places then one at once. As for the possibilitie, we extend it no further then his will. We know he can do what soeuer he will. And many thinges we know he cannot do, because he wil not. But M. Heskins to assure vsus of his will, hath nothing to bring, but yt which is al the controuersie, & which most impudently he affirmeth, that he hath proued both by scriptures and doctours, that Christ hath caused his bodie to be in diuers places at one time, which neither scripture nor any Doctour of antiquitie euer did affirme in proper manner of speaking, otherwise in figuratiue speech, we may truly say we eate in the sacrament the body of Christe, which is in heauen, when to speake properly, and wtout figure, we eate but the bread, which to the faithfull receiuer is a sacrament, and seale of our spirituall nourishment, whiche we receiue of his flesh and bloud, after a diuine and vnspeakable manner vntounto eternall life: saith rather lifting vsus vp into heauen, then bringing Christes body into the earth.
Maister Heskins saith, the scriptures that say Christ is in heauen, speake without exclusiues, or exceptiues, and therefore there is no denial imployed, but that he may be beleeued to be also on the earth in the sacrament:
When Peter in the Actes 3. affirmeth that Christ must be conteined in heauen, (which is meant of his humanitie) vntill the time of restoring of all thinges: is not this an exclusion of all other places or beeings of his humanitie? When Paule to the Colossians, Colo. 3. willeth them to seeke those thinges that are aboue, and where Christ is at the right hand of God, to set their mindes on thinges aboue, and not on things vponupon the earth: is not the re…son, because Christ concerning his humanitie, is aboue & not vponupon earth? Is not this an exclusiue and exception? When Christe sayeth not only, I goe to my father, but also I leaue the worlde Ioan. 16. Whiche saying the Apostles confessed to be plaine, and without all parable. Is not this a manifest exclusion of his bodily presence from the worlde? So that it is manifest, that this ascention and abiding in heauen, concerning his humane nature, in which he ascended, is an excluding and shutting out, and denying of all other places or presences of his bodie, then to be in heauen only. But now that he hath thus tombled vp the authorities of the scripture, he wil take in hand to answer the obiections brought out of the Doctours. And first shalbe the saying of Augustine Ad Dardanum ep. 57. Which place contrarie to his bragg in the beginning, he alledgeth truncatly, & by halfe, beginning at the middest thereof. But this place is in Augustine: Et sic venturus est, illa angelica voce testante, quemadmodum ire visus est in Coelum, id est, in eadem carnis forma atque substantia, cui profectò immortalitatem dedit, naturam non abstulis. Secundùm hanc formam non est putandus vbique diffusus. And he shall come euen so (as that voyce of the Angel doth testifie.) euen as he was seene to go into heauen, that is, in the same fourme and substance of his fleshe, to which truly, he hath giuen immortalitie, but he hath not taken the nature from it. According to this fourme, he is not thought, to be diffused in all places. All this hath Heskins left out, and beginneth thus: Cauendum est enim, no ita veritatem astru…mu… hominis, vt veritatem corporis auferamus. Non est enim consequens, vt quod no Deo est, ita sit vbique vt Deus. For we must beware that we doe not so affirme the Deitie of the man, that we take away the trueth of his body. For it is no consequent, that, that which is in God, should so be euerie where as God is. Note here, that Saint Augustine doeth not onelyonly flatly denie the vbiquitie of Christes body, but also affirmeth that it reteineth still the nature of a bodie, which is to be conteined in one onelyonly place. Againe he sayeth in the same Epistle Iesus vbique per id quod Deus est: in coelo autem per id quod homo est. Iesus by that he is God is euerie where: by that he is man, he is in heauen. Nowe let vsus heare, howe wisely Maister Heskins will auoide this authoritie. First he sayeth, that Augustine in this epistle, speaketh not of the sacrament, and therefore these sentences make not against that matter.
But when Augustine speaketh generally of the bodie of Christ, that it reteineth the nature of a body, that it is not euerie where, &c. he doeth not except the sacrament. Although it is false, that Heskins saith, for in the latter end of that Epistle he hath these wordes: Huius corporis caput est Christus, huius corporis vnitas nostro sacrificio commendatur. The head of this bodie is Christ, the vnitie of this bodie is commended in our sacrifice.
By sacrifice (as Maister Heskins will confesse) he meaneth the celebration of the sacrament. Wherefore he forgate not the sacrament in that Epistle, but that he might hauehave made exception thereof, if he had thought good. The seconde aunswere of Maister Heskins is a balde distinction, that a thing may be at one time in many places two wayes, the one is by nature, the other by gifte. By nature he confesseth that the body of Christe can not be in two places, but by gifte it may be euerie where, or in as many places as hee will: and then bringeth many examples to shewe that CHRISTES body hath many properties by gifte, which it hath not by nature. And in this distinction he triumpheth out of measure.
But the lewde sophister will not see that Saint Augustine denieth to Christes body his imagined gift, and affirmeth his denied nature to remaine. Cui (saith he) profectò immortalitatem dedit, naturam non abstudit: to which fleshe he hath giuen immortalitie, but not taken away the nature of it. Doeth not Augustine here plainely deny the gift of vbiquitie, affirming the nature to remaine concerning the circum scription of place? You see this very place to ouerthrow his blinde distinction.
Nowe followeth another place out of this Epistle to Dardanus, in which he beeing such an impudent falsarie, as we hauehave so often discouered, yet blusheth not to accuse Oecolampadius for falsifying of Aug. by a subtile addition. Spacia locorum tolle corporibus, nusquaem erunt, & quia nusquam erunt, nec erunt. Tolle ipsa corpora qualitatibus corporum, non erit vbi fint, & ideo non alibi, quàm in caelo corpore fate…r Christum. Take the spaces of places from bodies and they shall be no where, and because they shalbe no where, they shal not be at al. Take the same bodies from the qualities of bodies, and there shal no place be found, where they may be, & therfore we confesse Christ in body to be no where else but in heauē. These last words: & therfore we confesse Christ in body to be no where but in heauen: as he saith truly they be not in Augustine, so he saith falsly, thei were added by Oecolampadius, otherwise then as a conclusion of his owne, gathered out of Augustines wordes. But he must hauehave some cauill, to shift of the matter. For his answere is so impudent, that I maruell the beast was not ashamed once to rehearse this obiection, which he could no more colourably auoide: He saith these wordes of Augustine are not spoken of the body of Christe, but of natural bodies vponupon the earth: whereas the only purpose of Augustine is, to shewe the naturall propertie of the bodie of Christ to be conteined in one place, according to the nature of al other bodies either in heauen or in earth.
But because this olde foole playeth the boy so kindely, let me pose him in his aunswere like a childe. Speaketh Augustine of all bodies or of some? If of all, then of the bodie of Christ: If of some, then of particulars followeth nothing. But speaketh he of all naturall bodies of the earth? Then aunswere me whether Christes body be vponupon the earth? Yes, or else it could not be in the sacrament. Well admitte it be vponupon the earth, is it a naturall bodie or no? Take heede what you aunswere. Yea, it is a naturall bodie: why then sir, if Christes body be a naturall body vponupon earth, and Augustine speaketh of naturall bodies vponupon earth, then Augustine speaketh of Christes bodie also. This childishe kinde of reasoning were good inough for such childish aunsweres as he maketh to so graue authorities.
But let vsus see another obiection, whiche is out of Augustine also. In Ioan. tract. 30. Sursum est Domimus, sed etiam hîc, & veritas Dominus. Corpus enim Domini, in quo resurrexit, vno loco esse potest. Veritas eius vbique diffusa est. Our Lorde is aboue, hi… also he is here, and our Lord is the trueth. For the bodie of our Lorde, in which he rose againe, can be but in one place, his truth is diffused euerie where. This place is corruptly cited by Maister Heskins, for he setteth it downe thus: Sed etiam hîc est veritas Domini. His translation I wil not deale with, because it is the matter in controuersie. He aunswereth that Augustine saith no more, but that he may be in one onelyonly place at one time, if it please him. A goodly saying, as though euer any man would thinke otherwise, then that it were possible for his bodie to be in one place at one time. But that one place in these wordes, is an exclusiue of all other places: if the opposition of one place and all other places will not serue, at least wise, let the Canon law it selfe beare some sway with Papistes, to expound it, for in the decrees De contract. Dist. 2. prima quidem. Thi… place of Augustine is thus cited. Corpus enim in quo resurrexit, in vno loco esse oportet, veritas autem eius vbique disfusa est. For his body in which he rose againe must needes be in one place, but his trueth is diffused in all places By this it is euident, that Augustines worde, Potest esse vno loco assigneth his body to one onelyonly place. Nowe as though there were no more obiections out of Augustine, or any other writer against the vbiquitie of Christes bodie, he endeth with this: concluding after his maner, that faith must ouer rule reason, which is true, where Gods worde hath promised any thing, but we denie that Christ hath promised the presence of his bodie in moe places then one, therefore there is no place for faith where the word hath not gone before. But left the reader should thinke, M. Heskins hath answered all obiections out of Augustine, I thinke good to set downe one or two more, first In Ioan. Tract. 31. Christus, homo secundum corpus in loco est, & de loco migrat, & … ad alium locum venerit, in eo loco, vnde venit, non est. Deus autem implet omnia, & vbique totu… est, non secundùm spacia tenetur locis, &c. Christe, the man according to his bodie is in a place, & goeth from a place, and when he is come vntounto another place, he is not in that place from whence he came, but God filleth all thinges, and is whole in euerie place, he is not helde in places according to spaces or distances.
And Tr. 50. Respondent quem tenebo? absentem? Quomodo in coelum maman mittam vt ibi sedentem teneam? Fidem mitte, & tenuisti. Parentes tuitenuerunt carne, no tene corde, quoniam Christus absens etiam presens est. Nisi praesens esset a nobis ipsit toneri non posset, sed quoniam verum est quod ait: Ecce ego vobiscum sum vsque ad consumnationem saeculi: & abijs & his est, & redijt & nos non deseruit. Corpus enim su…n intulit caelo, maiestatem non abstulis mundo. They answere (meaning the vnbeleeuing Iewes) whom shall I holde? Him that is absent? How shall I send vp my hand into heauen, that I may holde him which sitteth there? Send vp faith, and thou hast held him. Thy parentes held him in flesh, holde thou him in heart. For Christ being absent is also present. For except he were present, he could not be held of ourselues, but because it is true which he saith: Beholde I am with you to the end of the worlde, he is both gone away and is here, & is come againe and hath not forsaken vsus. For he hath carried his bodie into heauen, he hath not taken away his Maiestie from the worlde. And in the same treatise, speaking of his presence in the sacrament: Si bonus es & ad corpus Christi pertines, quod significat Petrus, habes Christum in praesenti & in futuro. In presenti per fidem, in praesenti per signum, in praesenti per baptismatis sacramentum, in praesenti per altaris cibum & potum. If thou be a good man, and perteynest to the bodie of Christe, thou hast that which Peter doeth signifie, that is, Christ in present, and in that which is to come. In present by faith, in present by signe, in present by the sacrament of baptisme, in present by ye meate and drinke of the altar. And againe: Loquebatur de praesentia corporis sui. Nam secundùm Maiestatem suam, secundùm prouidentiam, secundùm ineffabilem & inuisibilem gratiam impletur, quod ab eo dictum est: Ecce ego vobiscum sum omnibus diebus vsque ad consūmationem saeculi. Secundùm carnem verò, quam verbum sumpsit, secundùm id quod de virgine natus est, secundùm id quod a Iudae is pręhensus est, quod ligno crucifixus, quod de cruce depositus, quod linteis inuolutus, quod in sepulchro conditus, quod in resurrectione manifestatus, non semper habebitis vobiscum. Quare? quoniam conuersatus est secundùm corporis praesentiam quadraginta diebus cum discipulis suis, & eis deducentibus, videndo, non sequendo, ascendit in coelum, & non est hîc. Ibi est enim sedet ad dextram patris: & hic est, non enim recessit pręsentia maiestatis. Aliter secundùm praesentiam maiestatis, semper habemus Christum: secundùm pręsentiam carnis rectè est discipulis, Me autem non semper habebitis. Habuit enim illum ecclesia secundùm praesentiam carnis, paucis diebus modò fide tenet, oculis non videt, &c. That is. He spake of the presence of his bodie. For according to his Maiestie, according to his prouidence, according to his vnspeakable and inuisible grace, it is fulfilled that was saide of him: Beholde I am with you all the dayes vntounto the end of the worlde. But according to the fleshe which the worde tooke vponupon him, according to that he was born of the virgin, according to that he was taken of the Iewes, that he was crucified on the tree, that he was taken down from the crosse, that he was wrapped in linnen clothes, that he was laied in the sepulchre, that he was openly shewed in his resurrection, you shall not always hauehave me with you. Why so? because he was conuersant with his disciples, according to the presence of his body, by the space of 40. dayes, and they bringing him on his way, by seeing, not by following, he ascended into heauen, and is not here. For there he is where he sitteth at the right hand of his father. And he is here also. For he is not departed concerning the presence of his Maiestie, otherwise according to the presence of his maiestie, we hauehave Christ alwayes. But according to the presence of his flesh, it was well saide to his disciples: but me shall ye not alwayes hauehave. For according to the presence of his flesh, the Church had him a few dayes, now she holdeth him by faith, she seeth him not with eyes.
These places and such like, of which a number might be brought out of diuers authours, I wish the Readers to consider for the presence of his body in the worlde, or in many places at one time, and to see how they will stande with Popish transubstantiation.
Hesk.The thirteenth Chapter beginneth the exposition of an other text in the sixt of Saint Ioan.
The text he meaneth is this: Except ye eate the fleshe of the sonne of man,Fulk. and drinke his bloud, you hauehave no life in you. That this should be spoken of, in the sacrament of the Lordes supper, he wil proue by this reason: as a man must hauehave birth and nourishment, so there be two sacraments, baptisme & the supper, by which we are born, and nourished vntounto eternal life, and both necessarie: for as Christ speaketh here of the one, so to Nicodemus he speaketh of the other, except a man be borne of water, and of the spirite, &c. But seeing he himselfe denieth, the necessitie of the one and of the other, but in them that are of type age, &c. it is manifest, that neither the one place is of baptisme, nor the of the other supper, but as these sacramentes are seales, to testifie the grace of regeneration, & preseruation. But if his reason faile, the doctours interpretation shall helpe, namely Cyprian, and Theophylacte. The place of Cyprian, hath bene already rehearsed, and …onsidered in the fourth Chapter of this booke,Sermo, de oration. Dom. whether I referre the Reader for breuitie sake. The other place cited by Maister Heskins, to proue that Cyprian by this word Eucharistia meaneth the bodie of Christ, is Lib. 3. Ep. 15. Illi contra legem Euangelij, &c. They contrarie to the lawe of the Gospell, and also your honourable petition, before penance done, and before confession made of their most greeuous and extreeme offence, before hand was laide on them by the Bishop, and the Cleargie for repentance, dare be bolde to offer for them, and giuegive them the Eucharistie or sacrament of thankesgiuing, that is to prophane the holy bodie of our Lorde. Thus much Heskins rehearseth: but Cyprian proceedeth: Cum scriptum sit, &c. Seeing it is writen: he that eateth this bread, and drinketh this cuppe of the Lorde vnworthily, shalbe guiltie of the body and bloud of the Lorde. By these wordes which Maister Heskins concealeth, it is apparent, how they did prophane the bodie of Christ, that gaue the sacrament to vnpenitent offenders, namely in that sense, which S. Paule saith they are guiltie of the death of Christ. That Theophylacte vnderstandeth this text of the receiuing of the Diuine mysteries, and requireth faith in the receiuers: although it, make litle for his purpose, yet because he is a late writer I will not spende time about his authoritie.