Three Pillars and Arch-patriarchs of the Popish Synagogues, Treatise 1 · Book 2 · Part 43
The three and fortieth Chapter beginneth to proue the vnderstanding of Christes foresaid wordes not to be figuratiue, by the authoritie of the Fathers. And first by Alexander and Iustinus.Hesk.
Iustine is alledged in this second Apologie in a corrupt Latine translation,Fulk. which he maketh worsse by falsifying the same in his English translation. The place hath bene already considered in the first booke Chap. 27. according to the originall Greeke copie. I will nowe rehearse the same after his Latine translation, and afterward shewe M. Heskins falsification. Cum autem &c. When he that is ouerseer hath giuen thankes, and all the people hauehave assented, they which are called Deacons with vsus, do distribute to eueryevery one that is present, that they may take part in the breade in which thankes is giuen, and of the wine and water, and carie it to those which are not present. And this foode which is called thankes giuing: Of which it is not lawfull for any other to take part, but he that beleeueth those things to be true which are taught by vsus, and which is washed in the lauer vntounto remission of sinnes and regeneration, and so liueth as Christ hath taught. Neither do we take these thinges as common bread and a common cup: but euen as by the word of God Iesus Christ our sauiour being incarnate, had both flesh and bloud: so we are taught that the foode through the prayer of his word being consecrated by thankesgiuing, of which our flesh & bloud by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh & bloud of Iesus Christ, which was incarnate. For the Apostles in their cōmentaries, which are called Gospels, hauehave taught that he did so cōmaund them, That when he had taken bread & giuen thanks, he said, Do this in remembrance of me, this is my body. And likewise when he had taken the cup and giuen thankes that he said: This is my bloud, and gaue first to them alone. M. Heskins hath falsified this author in his translation. First, where he turneth is qui pręest, the prieste, as though there were Masse priestes in that time. Secondly, quae docentur a nobis, that be taught of vsus, as though none should receiue the sacrament, but they which beleue the real presence, which he surmiseth to be taught to thē. But more notably, where he translateth these wordes: Sie verbi sui oratione, consecratum gratiarum actione alimentum, ex quo caro nostra, & sanguis per transmutationem aluntur, ipsius incarnati Iesu Christi & carnem & sanguinem esse educti sumus. Into this English, with foysting in a parenthesis, and chaunging his letter. EVEN SO WE BE TAVGHT THAT THE FOODE (wherewith our flesh and bloud be nourished by alteration) WHEN IT IS CONSECRATED BY THE PRAYER OF HIS WORD, TO BE THE FLESH AND BLOVD OF THE SAME IESVS INCARNATED. In this beastly racking & peruerting, he hath left out thank…giuing, not knowing wher to place it. The cause of this falsification is, for that he can not abide, that the food after it is consecrated, shuld nourish our bodies, which Iustinꝰ doth most expresly affirme. But before I proceede to his collections, I will gather my selfe out of this place, that which the Papistes wil not wel like of, and yet although they would burst for anger, thei can not auoyde, but that they be necessarie collections. First, that there was no priuate Masse in his dayes, for all that were present did communicate. Secondly, that the people, as well as the ministers, receiued in both kindes. Thirdly, that the things wherof they were partakers, were bread, wine, and water, which after they were consecrated, were the nourishment of their bodies. Now let vsus heare M. Hes. collection for the reall presence. First he saith not, these things were signes, figures, tokens: therefore they were none. A tried argument of the authoritie, of a man negatiuely. Secondly he saith, they were taught that by consecration, they were made by ye power of Gods worde, the flesh and bloud of Christ that was incarnated. We beleue the same likewise. Thirdly M. Hes saith, the real presence was as certaine to the primitiue Church, as the incarnation. So saith not Iustinus, neither that the sacrament was the same substance of naturall flesh and bloud of Iesus that was incarnat by that diuine & wonderful means, by which he was incarnate, and this do we most constantly beleeue. And therefore here is no plaine place for the proclamer to proue the reall presence, whereof Iustine speaketh none otherwise, then the proclamer did speak, & beleeue while he liued.
But M. Heskins, although there was neuer seene a more impudent falsifier of the Doctours sayings and meanings, and euen in this place as I hauehave plainely discouered, most lewdly corrupted the authours wordes by false translation: yet he shameth not to slaunder holy and learned Cranmer of the same crime. But what should an harlot do? but after she hath plaied the strumpet, call eueryevery honest woman shee meeteth whore first? Cranmer (saith he) reporteth, as though Iustine should say, the sacrament is but called the body of Christe. This is first an intollerable lye. For Cranmer saith, it is called the body of Christ, he saith not it is but called so, that is only called so. Secondly Cranmer saide out of Iustinus, that these creatures after they be consecrated do nourish the bodies, and are chaunged into them. And therein he saith most truely, and as the wordes of Iustine are, and as the Latine translation is, and Maister Heskins most falsely hath corrupted them, as I shewed before. Of which falsification being guiltie in his owne conscience, he fleeth from his former Latine translation which is true in this point, to the translation of Petrus Nannius a Papist, which yet helpeth him not, but by false pointing and displacing of the wordes, Ita quoque per preces verbi illius, cibum ex quo caro nostra & sanguis per immutationem aluntur cum benedictus fuerit, Iesu ipsius incarnati, carnem & sanguinem didicimus esse. But the Greeke Article is so placed, as it can abide no such patcherie: foreign.
Euen so we are taught that that foode after thankes are giuen for it by prayer of his word, of which our flesh and bloud by permutation are nourished, is the flesh and bloud of that Iesus which was incarnated. So are the very wordes of Iustine.
But to helpe out the matter, Ambrose is alledged. Lib. 4. de sacra. Cap. 5. Before it be consecrated it is bread, but when the wordes of Christ are come to it, it is the body of Christ. But the same Ambrose in the same booke and Chapter, saith of the sacrament in the prayer of the Church: Fac nobis, inquit, hanc oblationem ascriptam, rationabilem, acceptabilē: quod est figura corporis & sanguinis Domini nostri Iesu Christi. Make vntounto vsus (saith the priest) this oblation ascribed, reasonable, acceptable: which is the figure of the body and bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ. By these wordes it is manifest, how Ambrose and the Church in his time, tooke the breade to be the body of Christ. The like may be said of Augustine, whose wordes M. Heskins cyteth, De verbis Domini, ser. 8. Before the wordes of Christ that which is offered is called breade, when the words of Christ are spoken now it is not called breade, but is called his body. Who seeth not yt these words are vttered by comparison, it is not caled bread, but his body, that is, it is rather called his body then bread, as S. Paule saith, Christe sent me not to baptise, but to preach, that is, rather to preach then to baptise?
But nowe commeth in the authoritie of Alexander somtime Byshop of Rome, to which I will not vouchsafe to make any answere, bicause it is a meere forgerie and counterfet Epistle, as all ye pack of these decretall Epistles are, yt are feined in the name of those auncient holy Martyrs, sometimes Bishops of the citie of Rome, by some lewde Losel, that could not write true Latine, as is easie to see of all men that will take paines to read such beastly baggage. I will giuegive you a taste of this counterfet Alexander, speaking of holy water: If the ashes being sprinkled with the bloud of a heifer did sanctifie the people, much more shall water sprinkled with salt, and hallowed with godly prayers. See howe the brutish blasphemous Asse, transferreth the argument of the Apostle, Heb. 9. from the precious bloud of Christ to his beggerly holy water. I wil therfore leaue M. Heskins rooting with his groyne in this draffe sacke, and passe to the next Chapter.