Three Pillars and Arch-patriarchs of the Popish Synagogues, Treatise 1 · Book 2 · Part 14 – Part 16
The fourteenth Chapter expoundeth the same text by S. Augustine, and Cyrill.Hesk.
Out of Saint Augustine are alledged foure places, one In Ioan. Tra. 36. Quomodo quidem detur, &c. How it is giuen, Fulke.and what is the manner of the eating of this bread, ye knowe not. Neuerthelesse, except ye eate that flesh of the sonne of man, and drinke his bloud, ye shall hauehave no life in you. This did he speake not to dead carkases, but to liuing men. By this place sayeth Maister Heskins is proued, that the Iewes knewe not the manner of eating of Christes fleshe in the sacrament.
And no maruell, for his disciples did not yet knowe it, nor could, before the sacrament was instituted, and therefore Saint Augustine in the same place expoundeth what this meate and drinke was, saying: Hunc itaque e… bum & potum societatem vult intelligi corporis & membrorum suorum, quod est sancta Ecclesia in praedestinatis, & vocatis, & iustificatis, & glorificatis sanctis & fidelibus eius▪ He woulde hauehave this meate and drinke to be vnderstoode the fellowship of his bodie and his members, which is the holy Church in them that are praedestinated, and called, and glorified, euen his sayntes and faithfull ones. And afterwarde he sayeth: Huius rei sacramentum id est vnitatis corporis & sanguinis Christi, alicubi quotidie, alicubi certis interuallis dierū in Dominica mensa pręparatur. & de mensa Dominica sumitur: quibusdam ad vitam, quibusdam ad exitium. Res verò ipsa cuius sacramentum est omni homini ad vitam, nulli ad exitium quicunque eius particeps fuerit. The sacrament of this thing, that is, of the vnitie of the bodie and bloude of Christe in some places euerie daye, in some places at certeine dayes betweene, is prepared in the Lordes table, and from the Lordes table is receiued, vntounto some to life, to other some to destruction. But the thing it selfe whereof it is a sacrament, is to life vntounto eueryevery man, and to destruction of none that shalbe partaker of it.
These places declare, that the text in hande, is by Augustine expounded not of the sacrament, but of the societie of the members of Christe in his bodie, whereof the communion is a sacrament. So that Master Heskins alledgeth Augustine directly against his playne meaning.
The seconde place he citeth out of Augustine is in Psalm. 98. Nisi quis, &c. Except a man eate my flesh, he shall hauehave no life. They tooke it foolishly, carnally they thought, and they thought that our Lorde woulde cutt certeine peeces from his bodie and giuegive them. They vnderstood not (sayeth Maister Heskins) that he woulde giuegive them his fleshe to be eaten verily in the sacrament. But howe verily, let Saint Augustine tell his owne tale in the same place. Ille autem instruxit eos & ait eis: Spiritus est qui viuificat, caro autem nihil prodest. Verba que loquntus sum vobis, spiritus est & vita. Spiritualiter intelligite quod loquntus sum. Non hoc corpus quod videtis manducaturi estis▪ & bibituri illum sanguinem, quem fusuri sunt, qui me cru…ifigent. Sacramentum aliquod vobis commend…i spiritualiter intellectum viuificabit vot. Et sinecesse est illud visibiliter celebrari, oportet tamen inuisibiliter intelligi. But he instructed them, and sayeth vntounto them: It is the Spirite that quickeneth, the fleshe profiteth nothing. The wordes that I hauehave spoken to you, are spirite and life. Vnderstande ye spiritually, that whiche I speake: You shall not eate this bodie which you see, and drinke that bloude which they shall shead, that shall crucifie mee. I hauehave commended vntounto you a certeine sacrament, which being spiritually vnderstoode, shall quicken you. Although it be necessarie that the same should be celebrated visibly, yet it must be vnderstoode inuisibly. This saying of Augustine being so plaine, I shall not neede to gather any more of it, then eueryevery simple man at the first reading will conceiue.
The thirde place he citeth is, de Doct. Christ. lib. 3. Capitul. 16. which he citeth corruptly and truncately, although I see not what frawde lyeth in his corruption, saue onelyonly he declareth, that he hath not redd the place in Augustine him selfe, but taketh it out of some collectour or gatherer. The woordes of Augustine are these: Si praeceptiua locutio est aut flagitium aut facinus vetans, aut vtilitatem, aut beneficentiam iubens, non est figurata. Si autem flagitium aut facinus videtur iubere, aut vtilitatem aut beneficentiam vetare, figura est. Nisi manducaueritis (inquit) carn…m filij hominis & sanguinem biberitis, non habebitis vitam in vobis, facinur vel flagitium videtur iubere, figura est ergo, praecipiens passioni Domini esse communicandum & suauiter atque vtiliter recondendum in memoria, quod pro nobis caro eius crucifixa & vulnerata sit. If it be a speache of commaundement, forbidding any wickednesse or heynous offence, or commaunding any profite or well doing, it is no figuratiue speache. But if it seeme to commaunde a wicked deede, or an heynous offence, or to forbidd any profit or well doing, it is a figure.
Except you shall eat (sayth he) the flesh of the sonne of man, & drinke his bloud, you shall hauehave no life in you. He fe…eth to commaund a heynous offence, or a wicked deede: therefore it is a figure, commaunding vsus to communicate with the pas…ion of our Lorde, and swetely and profitably to keepe in a memorie, that his flesh was crucified and wounded for vsus. Although this place be directly against his purpose, and the purpose of al the Papistes, yet by a fonde glose of one Buitmundus, that wrote against Berengarius, he would seeme to make it serue his turne, and wring it out of our hands. And this forsooth is the shift. The sacrament is not a figure of the bodie of Christe, but of his death. But Augustine in this place calleth not the sacrament a figure, but sayeth that the text in hande, is a figuratiue speach, and sheweth howe it must be vnderstood.
The fourth place he rehearseth out of Augustine is Contra aduers. legis & Proph. Cap. 9. he omitteth to quote the booke, but it is in the second booke, and thus he citeth it. Quamuis horribilius videatur humanam carnem manducare, quàm perimere, & humanum sanguinē potare, quàm fundere: nos tamen mediatorem Dei & hominum Iesum Christum carnem suam nobis manducandam, bibendum que sanguinem dantem fideli corde & ore suscipimus. Although it may seeme to be more horrible, to eate the flesh of man, then to kill a man, and to drinke the bloud of man, then to shed it: yet wee for all that doe receiue the mediatour of God and man Iesus Christ, giuing vsus his flesh to be eaten, with a faithfull heart and mouth, and his bloude to be drunken. Thus Augustine. But rather, thus Heskins, the impudent falsifier, truncator, gelder, peruerter, and lewd interpreter of Augustine, and all other doctours that come in his hande.
But Augustine him selfe writeth thus: Sicut duos in carne vna Christum & ecclesiam istis nolentibus fine vlla obscoenitate cognoscimus: sicut mediatorem Dei & homimum, hominem Christum Iesum, carnem suam nobis manducandam bibendum que sanguinem dantem, fideli corde & ore suscipimus: quamuis horribilius videatur, humanam carnem manducare, quàm perimere, & humanum sanguinem potare qàum fundere. At que in omnibus sanctis scripturis, secundùm sanae fidei regulam figuratè dictum vel factum si quid exponitur de quibuslibet rebus & verbis, quae sacris paginis continentur, expositio illa ducatur non aspernanter, sed sapienter audiamur. Euen as we knowe, though against these mens will, two in one fleshe, Christe and his Church without any filthinesse: euen as with faithfull heart and mouth wee receiue the Mediatour of God and man Iesus Christe, giuing vsus his fleshe to bee eaten, and his bloud to be drunken: although it seemeth a more horrible thing to eate the fleshe of man, then to kill him: and to drinke the bloud of man, then to shed it.
And in all the holie scriptures, if any thing figuratiuely spoken or done, be expounded, according to the rule of sounde faith, of any things or wordes, which are conteyned in the holie scriptures, let not the exposition be taken contemptuously, but let vsus heare wisely.
Where is nowe that should pinche the proclaimer by the conscience of receiuing the bodie of Christ with the mouth? Where is that lewd insultation against Maister Horne, whome (he sayeth) he heard in Cambridge, abuse the figuratiue speach, and place it there, where it should not be placed, &c. When S. Augustine maketh this whole text a figuratiue speache.
And if Maister Horne (as he sayeth) did not place the figuratiue speach as Augustine doeth: why did not such a doubtie doctour as Maister Heskins is, either in another sermon openly confute him, or in priuate conference admonishe him of it. But such hedgecreapers as he is, that dare not ioyne with a much weaker aduersarie, then that reuerend father is, in any conference or open disputation, can shoote out their slaunderous boltes against them, when they are a farre of, and prate of placing and displacing of Augustine, when he himselfe (as I hauehave shewed) most impudently peruerted and displaced the wordes and sense of Augustine, euen in this verie sentence, whereuppon he thus taketh occasion to iangle.
Out of Cyrill are alledged two places neither of both any thing to his purpose, but directly against him, the former In 1…. Ioan. Non poterat, &c. This corruptible nature of the bodie could not otherwise be brought to vncorruptiblenesse and life, except the bodie of naturall life were ioyned to it. Doest thou not beleeue mee saying these thinges? I pray thee beleeue Christ saying: Verily, verily, I saye vntounto you, except you shall ea…e the flesh of the sonne of man, and drinke his bloud, you shall hauehave no life in you. Thou hearest him openly saying, that wee shall not hauehave life, except wee drinke his bloude, and eate his fleshe. He sayeth, in your selues, that is, in your bodie. The same fleshe of life, by right, may be vnderstanded, life.
What is there here for the sacrament? or that eueryevery Christian man of our side will not graunt? But belike the second place maketh all playne. Non negamus &c. Wee do not denye, that with right faith and syncere louelove, wee are spiritually ioyned to Christe: but that wee hauehave no manner of coniunction with him after the fleshe, that truely wee do vtterly denye, and that wee saye to be altogether contrarie to the holye Scriptures. For who hath doubted, that Christe is euen so the vine, and wee the braunches, that wee receiue life from thence into vsus. Heare Saynt Paule saying, that we all are one bodye in Christ: For although wee be many, yet we are one in him, for wee all take parte of one breade. Or peraduenture doth hee thinke that the power of the mysticall blessing is vnknowen to vsus, which when it is done in vsus, doeth it not make Christe to dwell in vsus corporally, by the participation of the fleshe of Christe? For why are the members of the faithfull, the members of Christ? Knowe ye not (sayeth he) that the members of the faithfull, are the members of Christe? Shall I then make the members of Christ the members of an harlott? In this place Cyrill sayeth, that Christe doth dwell corporally in vsus, but howe? by participation of the fleshe of Christe, which as he tooke of our nature, so hath he againe giuen the same vntounto vsus, to bee in deede our nourishment vntounto eternall life, which thing is testified vntounto vsus by the sacrament, euen as the vnitie wee hauehave one with another, and all of vsus with Christe, is testified in that we all take part of one breade. Otherwise I see nothing in this place that may help Maister Heskins. For such as our vnitie is, such is our participation of his flesh, and as we are members of his body, so doe we eate his body. This M. Heskins must graunt, if he will allowe Cyrills authoritie, but our vnitie, participation, and coniunction of members, though it be in his body, of his flesh, and vntounto him as our head, yet is not after a carnall manner, no more is the eating of his flesh nor the corporall dwelling of him in vsus after a carnall or corporall manner, but after a diuine and spirituall manner. The place of Chrysostome hee cyteth, hath bene once or twice considered already.
The fifteenth Chapter continueth the exposition of the same text by Leo and Euthymius.Hesk.
The place of Leo is cyted out of Serm. 6. de Ieiu. sep. mens. Hanc confessionem &c. This confession most welbeloued, Fulke.vttering foorth with all your heart, forsake ye the vngodly deuises of heretiques, that your fastings and almes may be defiled with the infection of no errour. For then the offering of sacrifice is cleane, and the giuing of almes is holy, when they which performe these things vnderstand what they worke. For as our Lord saith, except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man, and drinke his bloud, you shall hauehave no life in you: you ought so to be partakers of the holy table, that you doubt nothing of the trueth of the body of Christe, and of his bloud. For that is taken with the mouth, which is beleeued by faith, and in vaine doe they answere Amen, which dispute against that which is receiued. Leo in these words, as Maister Heskins is enforced to confesse, speaketh against the Eutychian heresie, which denyed the trueth of Christes body after the adunation therof to the Diuinitie (as the papistes do indeed, though not in words, by their vbiquitie & trā substātiatiō) & saith, thei cannot be partakers rightly of ye sacramēt of his body & bloud, which do not acknowlege yt he had a very body & bloud. Therfore it is intollerable impudencie in M. Hes. to note a place for M. Iewel, whē he him selfe after, confesseth, that he spake not of the trueth of his body in the sacrament. And whereas he saith, the mouth receiueth that which is by faith beleeued, it helpeth him nothing, for he meaneth nothing else, but that those men cannot receiue with their mouth the sacrament of his flesh and bloud, which deny him to hauehave true flesh & bloud, for the sacrament is a seale and confirmation of faith. Nowe how far Leo was from transubstantiation or vbiquitie, we hauehave shewed before in the 11. Chapter of this booke, where his saying may be read.
The testimonie of Euthymius is cyted In 6. Ioan. Nisi comederitis. Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man, and drink his bloud you shall hauehave no life in you. They thought this impossible, but he shewed that it was altogether possible, and not that only, but also necessarie, which also he did vntounto Nicodemus. He addeth also of his bloud signifying the cup, which as is saide already, he would giuegive to his disciples in the last supper. Here Euthymius a late writer, and out of the compasse of the challenge, vnderstandeth this text of the sacrament, yet speaketh hee nothing of the carnall manner of eating. As for the other place he braggeth of in Matth. 26. which he cyteth in the 58. Chapter of this booke, how little it maketh for him, I wish the reader before he go any further, to turne to the Chapter and consider.
Hesk.The sixteenth Chapter endeth the exposition of this text in hand by the Ephesine Counsell.
The woordes of the Epistle of the Ephesine Counsell vntounto Nestorius,Fulke. be these: Necessario & hoc &c. This also we do adde necessarily, for shewing foorth the death of the onelyonly begotten sonne of God after the flesh, that is, of Iesus Christe, and confessing together his resurrection and ascention into heauen, we celebrate it in our Churches, the vnbloudie seruice of his sacrifice, so also doe we come to the mysticall blessings, and are sanctified, being made partakers of the holy body and precious bloud of Christ, the redeemer of vsus all: Not taking it as common flesh, (which God forbid) nor at the flesh of a sanctified man, and ioyned to the word, according to the vnitie of dignitie, or as possessing a diuine habitation, but truely quickening and made proper vntounto the word it selfe. For he being naturally life as God, bicause he was vnited to his owne flesh, professed the sonne to hauehave power to giuegive life. And therefore although he say vntounto vsus: Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man, and drinke his bloud, you shall hauehave no life in you, yet we ought not to esteeme it as of a man, that is, one of vsus. For howe can the flesh of a man after his owne nature, be a quickening flesh? But as verily made his owne flesh, which for vsus was both made and called the sonne of man. The Fathers of this Counsell do not (as M. Heskins saith) expound this text of the sacrament, or declare what they receiue in the sacrament, but rather shew what they iudged of that flesh, whereof they receiued the sacrament, namely, that it was not the flesh of a pure man as Nestorius affirmed, but the flesh of the son of God, & therfore had power to giuegive life being eatē by faith, either in the participation of the sacrament or without it. And whereas he noteth a plaine place for M. Iewel, when they say, They were made partakers of the body and bloud of Christ, there is no more plainenesse then M. Iewell will confesse. But where he addeth, Receiuing it, not as cōmon flesh, but as the flesh truely giuing life: he corrupteth the sense of the Counsel, referring that to the receiuing of the sacrament, which they vnderstand of their iudgement of the flesh, whereof they receiued the sacrament. Finally, where he would helpe the matter with the opinion of Cyril, of our corporall coniunction with Christ, howe little it auayleth we shewed before in aunswere to yt place Cap. 14. But least he shuld lacke sufficient proofe of this matter, he confirmeth his exposition by the erronious practise of the Church of Aphrica, from Saint Cyprians time vntounto Saint Augustines time at the least, which imagined such a necessitie of tha… sacrament by this place: Except ye eate &c, that they ministred the Communion to infants, he might hauehave added that some did minister it to dead folkes. But this absurditie, which followeth of the exposition, will rather driue al wisemen from that exposition, then moue them to receiue it. And although the Bohemians vsed this text, to proue the communion in both kindes, yet doth it not followe, that it is properly to be expounded of the sacrament.