Three Pillars and Arch-patriarchs of the Popish Synagogues, Treatise 1 · Book 2 · Part 46
The sixe and fortieth Chapter proueth by other Doctors that the sacrament is to be adored.Hesk.
First he taketh this principle,Fulke. that if Christe verie God and man, be there, he is to be honored: but that is the matter in question, although it doeth not followe, if he were there, that the sacramēt is to be worshipped. The doue was an vndoubted sacrament of the presence of the holie Ghost, so was the fiery tongs, yet none of them worshipped. For God wil not be worshipped in outward shapes, as he hath often testified in the lawe, otherwise then he hath appointed, therefore would he not appeare in any visible fourme vntounto the people, least they should be deceiued to worship God therein. But to his Doctours. The first is Erasmus who pleaseth him wel, in affirming that he would still worship Christe in the Eucharistie. Then he presseth his principle of the reall presence, and that he will proue by Algerus, that was more then 400. yeres before him, & then by Paschasius that was more then 200. yeres before Algerus, and last of all by Leo that was more then 400. yeares before Paschasius. As for Algerus and Paschasius as being farre without the compasse of the challenge I wil passe ouer and come to Leo: sauing that I wil note, that though Paschasius alledgeth Hilarie, Ambrose, Augustine, Cyrill, and the counsell of Ephesus, he doeth but wrest their sayings, as the Papists do now to vphold ye errour yt was not so olde in his time. The wordes of Leo are Ep 22. ad Constant. Separentur & huiusmodi, &c. Let such men be separated from the holy member of the bodie of Christ, neither let the Catholique libertie suffer the yoke of the vnfaithfull to be laide vponupon it. For they are to be accounted without the house of Gods grace, and without the sacrament of mans health, which denying the nature of our flesh in Christ, doe both speake against the Gospell, and striue against the Symbole. Neither doe they perceiue through their blindenesse, that they are brought into such a steepe place, that they stand neither in the truth of the Lords passion, nor of his resurrection for both is made voide in our sauiour, if flesh of our kinde be not beleeued to be in him. In what darkenesse of ignorance, in what sluggishnes of sloth hauehave they … hitherto, that they would neither learne by hearing, nor acknowledge by reading that, which in the Church of God, in the mouth of all men, is so agreeably spoken? That not as much as of the tongues of infantes, the veritie of the bodie and bloud of Christ is vnspoken of among the sacraments of the common faith: for in that mystical distribution of that spirituall foode, this thing is giuen foorth, this thing is receiued, that receiuing the vertue of that heauenly meate, we may goe into his fleshe, which was made our fleshe.
First M. Heskins as his fashion is, to make the matter more cleare on his side, falsely translateth, Hoc impertitur, hoc sumitur, this bodie is giuen forth, this bodie is receiued. Where as Hoc is either taken absolutely for this thing, or else at the least, must hauehave relation to Sacramentum, which is the next substantiue of the neuter gender in any reasonable construction.
Secondly, it is manifest that Leo speaking against the heretiques Eutyche… and Dioscorus, setteth forth the truth of Christs bodie & bloud, as one of the common knowen sacraments or mysteries of Christian faith: & saith neuer a word of his carnall presence in the mysterie of his supper, but contrariwise teacheth that it is a mystical distributiō, a spiritual food, an heauēly meat, which words import not a carnal maner, but a spiritual maner of presēce & eating. Thus real presence (as he termeth it) being not yet proued, ye adoration cannot follow, as he pretendeth.