Three Pillars and Arch-patriarchs of the Popish Synagogues, Treatise 1 · Book 1 · Part 20
The twentieth Chapter, ioyneth Saint Gregorie, and Damascen to confirme the same matter.Heskins.
In the beginning of this Chapter, he doeth honestly confesse,Fulk. that Gregorie was the last of the higher house: & Damascen the first and chiefest of the lower house, he may make him Vantparlar if he will. But neither of thē hauehave any thing materiall for his purpose, that he alledgeth them, nor for the generall purpose of his bill. For Gregories wordes are altogether alegoricall, & therefore cannot be taken in the Grammaticall sense, Hom. 22. Pasch: All which thinges do bring forth to vsus great edifying if they be discussed by mystical, or alegoricall interpretation. For what the bloud of the lambe is you hauehave learned, not now by hearing, but by drinking, which bloud is put vponupon both the postes, when it is dronke, not only with the mouth of the body, but also with the mouth of the heart. For he that doeth so receiue the bloud of his redeemer, that he will not as yet followe his passion, hath put the bloud on a post. Heare what a great thing is there? But that he calleth the sacrament of the bloud, ye bloud of the redeemer, speaking alegorically, as he calleth it the bloud of the Lamb, meaning the olde Paschal, whiche doth signifie the bloud of Christ. Therfore if Maister Heskins will vrge the bloud of the redeemer dronke not only with the mouth of the body, but with ye mouth of the heart: he may likewise vrge the bloud of ye lamb: if this be a figuratiue speech, so is that. But Gregorie proceedeth. In the night (saith he) we eate the lambe, because we do now receiue the Lordes body in a sacrament, when as yet we do not see one anothers conscience. Note here yt Gregorie doth not say simply, we eate the Lords body, but we eate the Lordes body in a sacrament or mysterie: comparing the night of the Iewish eating, with the mysterie of the Lordes body. And in neither of both his sayinges affirmeth the lambe to be a figure of the supper, which is the purpose of the Chapter. As for Damascen, his chiefe words are these, (For it were too long to rehearse all, he being but a knight of the lower house.) If God the word by willing was made man, &c. can he not make bread his owne body, and wine with water his bloud? God saide in the beginning: let the earth bring forth greene hearbes: and vntounto this day, beeing holpen, & strengthened by Gods cōmandement, the rayne comming, it bringeth forth fruits. God said, this is my body, & this is my bloud, and do ye this in remēbrance of me: by his almightie cōmandement it is brought to passe vntill he come. In this testimonie, which M. Hesk. rehearseth more at large, sauing yt he nameth ye old Passeouer yt Christ did celebrate at his last supper, there is no mentiō of any figure yt it was of his supper. Secōdly, although the time, in which Damascen liued, was very corrupt, yet there is nothing in these wordes, whiche may not wel be referred to ye spiritual presence of Christs body, vntounto the faith of the worthie receiuer. M. Heskins maketh a needlesse digression of ye cōmandement of consecratiō, which shalbe granted to him, if he wil not frame a new signification of consecration, which none of his Calepines, Vocabularies, nor Dictionaries do acknowledge. For, to consecrate, is to halow, or to separat to an holy vse, so we grant ye bread and wine to be consecrated. But ye Papistes call consecrating, to change ye substances, or to transubstātiat. And so neither Chrysostom, nor any other learned man, did euer vse yt word. His wordes, as M. Heskins citeth thē Ho. de pro. Iud. be these: And now the same Christ is present, which did furnish that table, he also consecrateth this. For it is not man that maketh the thinges set foorth to be the body and bloud of Christ, by consecration of the Lordes table, but he that was crucified for vsus, euen Christ Wordes are spoken by the mouth of the priest, but they are consecrated by the power and grace of God. This is saith he, my body. By this worde the thinges set foorth are consecrated. And as that voyce that said, grow ye, & multiply ye, was but once spoken, but yet it feeleth alway effect, nature working with it vntounto generation: so that voyce was but once spoken, but through all the tables of the Church, vntounto this day, and vntill the comming, it giueth strength to the sacrifice. In these wordes (because M. Heskins bringeth them in for consecration) note yt Chrysostome affirmeth all consecration vntounto the worldes end to be wrought by the voice of Christ, once spoken by him selfe. This is my body, whereas the Papistes affirme consecration to be by the vertue of these words spoken by a Priest. So yt there is great diuersitie, betweene their iudgements of consecration.