Three Pillars and Arch-patriarchs of the Popish Synagogues, Treatise 1 · Book 3 · Part 48
The eight and fortieth Chapter abideth in the exposition of the same text, by Chrysostome and S. Augustine.Hesk.
Chrysostome is cited Hom. 45. in Ioan. Fulk.Qui enim manducat &c. For he that eateth and drinketh the bloud of our Lord vnworthily, eateth and drinketh iudgement to him selfe. For if they which defile the kings purple are none otherwise punished, then they which rent it: what maruell if they which receiue the body of Christ in an vncleane conscience, suffer the same punishment that they did which fastened him with nailes to the crosse Two things M. Hes. noteth out of these words, one that the body of Christ is receiued in the sacrament, the other, that euill men receiue the sacrament. Concerning the first, there is no doubt, but that the bodie of Christ is receiued in the sacrament after a spirituall manner of faith, and touching the latter, this place proueth not, that wicked men receiue the body of Christ with their mouthes wherin is the controuersie: for neither doth Chrysost. here speake of reprobates, but of the faithfull that were sinners, which receiued Christes bodie in an vncleane conscience, & not carnally with their mouthes. But admitte he did speake of reprobates and wicked persons, yet he speaketh of the sacramentes, that are called the bodie and bloud of Christ, and not of the natural bodie and bloud of Christ, and therefore he vseth the similitude of the Kinges purple, whereunto he compareth the sacrament. For euen as he that abuseth by rending or defyling the Kings purple robe, though he touch not his person, yet is he punished as a traitour: so he that abuseth the sacrament, either as an open contemner, or as a prophane receiuer, is guiltie of the bodie and bloud of Christ. And to put the matter out of question he faith, not three lines before, speaking of the bloud of Christ: Qui huius sanguinis sunt participes, cum Angelis, & Archangelis, & supernis virtutibus commorantur, ipsam regiam Christi stolam induti spiritualibus armis muniti (sed nihil dixi) immo ipsum induti sunt regem. They that are partakers of this bloud, do dwell with Angels, & Archangels, and the high powers, hauing put on the very royall robe of Christ, being armed with spiritual armour (but I hauehave said nothing) yea they hauehave put on the King himselfe. By these words it is plaine, that euerie one that is partaker of the sacrament, is not partaker of the bloud of Christ.
But Maister Heskins will bring forth other places of Chrysostome wherein he doeth plainely affirme, that Iudas the traitour did receiue the bodie of Christ with the other Apostles. But suspend thy iudgement gentle Reader, vntill thou hauehave read his places. The first is Hom. …0. de proditione Iuda. Cum manducarent & biberent, &c. When they did eate and drinke, Iesus tooke bread and brake it and saide: This is my bodie. They that be consecrated to the diuine mysteries, knowe what I speake. And againe he tooke the cup and saide, This is my bloud, and Iudas was present when Christ spake these wordes: This is my bloud. Say Iudas, whom hast thou solde for thirty pence? Is this the bloud for which thou hast made a bargaine before with the Pharisees: O the merciemercy of Christ! O the madnesse of Iudas! He bargained that he might sell him for thirtie pence, and Christ offered him the bloud which he hath solde, that he might hauehave forgiuenesse of sinnes, if he would not hauehave bene vngodly. For Iudas was present, and was partaker of that sacrifice. Here we see plainely that Christ offered his bloud to Iudas, that he might hauehave remission of sinnes, but no worde that Iudas receiued the bloud of Christ. It is saide, that Iudas was partaker of yt sacrifice, that is of the outwarde sacrament (for so Chrysostome often calleth it) but not of the bodie and bloud of Christ. And whereas Maister Heskins noteth, that because Christ offred the same bloud that Iudas solde, therfore the sacrament is the naturall bloud of Christ, it is a most friuolous reason. For euerie childe vnderstandeth, ye selling of Christes bloud is a figure of betraying Christ, euen as the bloud whiche he offered is a figure of that, which was betrayed, and so the reason maketh altogether against him. But Chrysostome hath other wordes in the same sermon.
Nullus igitur fictus accedat &c. Therefore let no feigned person come: Let none be so bolde with a counterfet mind to come neere so great mysteries least he be condemned, deserue sentence, and suffer that which Iudas suffered. For after the partaking of the table, the diuell entred into him, not because he despised the Lordes bodie, but because the impudencie of Iudas and the maliciousnesse of his minde, caused that the aduersarie dwelled in him. By these words M.H. would proue, yt ye Lords body had entred into Iudas, before the diuel, but ye contrarie may more probably be gathered: for Chrysost. answereth a secret obiection, that might be made vponupon the appellation of ye sacrament, to be ye bodie of Christ. It might seeme ye diuel contemned the body of Christ, yt he entred immediatly after ye bodie of Christ receiued, but he saith, he contemned not ye body of Christ (for Iudas was so full of wickednes, that ye bodie of Christ entred not into him) but ye diuel before had possessed him. And yt this is more agreable to ye mind of Chryso. his wordes in the Hom. 45. In Ioan. doe declare: Daemones cum Dominicum sanguinem in nobis vident, in fugam vertuntur. When the diuels doe see the bloud of our Lorde in vsus, they are put to flight. This proueth, that Iudas receiued not the bloud of Christ, seeing immediately after the receipt of the sacrament (as he sayeth) the Diuel entred into him. Therefore the other place, which Maister Heskins alledgeth out of Chrysost. Ho. 83. In Mat. is likewise answered: Caenantibus, &c. When they were a… Supper: Iesus tooke bread, & blessed it, and brake it, and gaue it to his disciples: O the blindnesse of that traitor, which when he had bene partaker of the vnspeakable mysteries, he remained the same man, and being admitted to Gods table, would not be changed into better, which Luke signified saying: that after this, Satan entred into him, not because he despised the Lordes bodie, but because he laughed to scorne the folly of the traytor. These vnspeakeable mysteries M. Hesk. saith can not be a bare piece of bread, and a cup of wine, but must needes be the bodie and bloud of Christ. But sauing his authoritie, is not the baptisme, wherewith wicked men are baptised, an vnspekable mysterie? and yet no wicked man in baptisme, receiueth the spirite of regeneration. But Chrysostome proceedeth in the sentence before alledged: Maius enim peccatum vtra que ratione fiebat: quia tali animo mysterijs susceptis, nec timore, nec beneficio, nec honore melior factus est. For his offence was made greater both wayes: because, that hauing receiued the mysteries with such a minde, neither with feare, nor with the benefite, nor with the honour, he was made better. Chrysostome saith, he receiued the mysteries, he doth not say he receiued the bodie of Christ. Now iudge whether Chrysostome doth plainely affirme, that Iudas receiued the bodie of Christ, with the other Apostles, or whether M. Heskins doth lye, that so affirmeth of Chrysostome and can no better proue it then you hauehave heard. Now followeth S. Aug. In Ep. contra Donatist. post Collat. Quisquis autem, &c. Who so euer shall liue wel in this church, other mens sinnes do nothing hinder him: for in it euerie one shall beare his owne burthen, as the Apostle saith: and whosoeuer shall eate the bodie of Christ vnworthily, eateth and drinketh iudgement to himselfe: for the Apostle him selfe hath written this. In these wordes Augustine calleth the sacrament of the bodie of Christe, the bodie of Christ, as it followeth immediately after: Cum autem dicit, iudicium sibi manducat, satis oftendit, quia non alteri iudicium manducat sed sibi. Hoc nos egimus & ostendimus & obtinuimus, quia communio malorum non maculat aliquem participatione sacramentorum, sed consensione factorum. And when he saith, he eateth iudgement to himselfe, he sheweth sufficiently that he eateth not iudgement to another but to himselfe. This hauehave we treated, & shewed and proued, that the fellowship of euill men doth not defile any man by participation of the sacramentes with them, but by consent of their deedes. Likewise he tearmeth the sacrament by ye name of the bodie of Christ. Cont. Donat. Lib. 5. Cap. 8. Sicut enim &c. As Iudas to whom our Lord gaue the morsel, gaue place himselfe to the diuell, not by receiuing an euill thing, but by receiuing is amisse: so any man receiuing vnworthily the Lordes sacrament, causeth not, because he himselfe is euill, that it should be euil, or because he receiueth it not to saluation, that he receiueth nothing. For it was neuerthelesse the bodie and bloud of our Lord, euen to them whom the Apostle saide: He that eateth & drinketh vnworthily, eateth & drinketh iudgement to himselfe. In these wordes, he reasoneth against the Donatistes, that saide, that baptisme ministred by heretikes, was no sacrament, which he confuteth by example of the other sacrament of Christes bodie & bloud, which Iudas and other wicked men receiued. So that in these wordes the bodie and bloud of the Lorde, are to be taken for the sacrament of the bodie & bloud of Christ. Which sacrament as Augu. saith, Tract. 26. in Ioan. is receyued of some to destruction: Res verò ipsa, cuius sacramentum est, omni homini ad vitam, nulli ad exitium quicun que eius particeps fuerit. But the thing it selfe whereof it is sacrament, is vntounto life to euerie man & to destruction to no man, whosoeuer shall be partaker therof. But M. Heskins flyeth to his distinction of receiuing spiritually and corporally, as though Augustine euer saide, that the bodie of Christe was receiued corporally of any man. But let vsus heare his owne wordes, whiche M. Heskins hath cited in the same treatise. Quantum pertinet ad illam mortem &c. As touching that death, of which the Lorde saide that their fathers be dead: Moses also did eate Manna, & Aaron did eate Manna, & Phinees did eate Manna, & many did eate, which pleased the Lord, & died not. Wherfore? Because they vnderstoode the visible meate spiritually, they hūgred spiritually, they tasted spiritually, that they might be filled spiritually. For we also at this day hauehave receiued a visible meate. But the sacrament is one thing, the vertue of the sacrament another thing, which many do receiue of the altar & doe die, & in receiuing doe die. Wherefore the Apostle saith, he eateth & drinketh his owne iudgement. In these words Augustine teacheth, that the visible (meate which is the sacrament) may be eaten to condēnation, which is ye thing we affirme, & as for eating the body of Christe, otherwise then spiritually, he speaketh not one worde. But M. Heskins would learne of ye aduersarie, what Augustine meaneth by this word Vertue, which many do dye in receiuing it: and therefore it cannot be the vertue of his passion, so it must needs be his very bodie. So that by this conclusion, Christs bodie may be receiued wtout the vertue of his passion. But if it please him to learne what Aug. meaneth by this word Vertue in yt place, I answere he meaneth force or efficacie, which is either to life or to death, as the receiuer is affected that taketh the sacrament, for immediatly after, he saith: Nam bucella Dominica venenum suit Iudae, & tamen accepit. For the Lords morsel was poyson to Iudas, & yet he receiued it. You see therefore a double vertue in the sacramēt, one to saluation, another to condemnation, & no bodily presence necessarie for either of them. Another place he citeth In Ioan. Tr. 6. Recordamini vnde sit scriptū. Remember frō whence it is written, Whoso euer shal eat the bread and drinke the cup of our Lord vnworthily, shalbe guiltie of the bodie and bloud of our Lorde. For when the Apostle saide this, he spake it of them which receiued the bodie of our Lord vndiscreetly and negligently, as they wold do any other meat. Whersoeuer he borowed these words they are not to be found in yt treatise of Aug. which he citeth. But if they be August, in any place, they hauehave none other sense then before is expressed, yt such men are said to eate the bodie of Christ, which eate the sacrament therof, whiche in some manner of speache is called the body of Christ. The words that I find in Augustine sounding any thing like, are these: Et sancta possunt obesse: in bonis enim sancta ad salutem insunt, in malis ad iudicium: Certè enim fratres nouimus quid accipiamus, & vtique sanctum est quod accipimus, & nemo dicit non esse sanctum. Et quid ait Apostolus? Qui autem manducat & bibit indignè, iudicium sibi manducat & bibit, Non ait quia illa res mala est, sed quod ille malus, malè accipiendo, ad iudicium accipit bonum, quod accipit. Non enim mala buccella erat quae tradita est Iudae à Domino. Absit: medicus non daret venenum: Salutem medicus dedit, sed indignè accipiendo ad perniciem accepit. Euen holy things may hurte. For in good men holy things are vntounto saluation, in euill men vntounto condemnation. For surely brethren, we know what we receiue, and no man sayeth that it is not holy. And what sayeth the Apostle? He that eateth and drinketh vnworthily, eateth and drinketh his owne condemnation. He sayeth it not because that thing is euill, but because that euill man by euill receiuing receiueth vntounto condemnation that good thing, which he receiueth. For the morsell was not euill which was deliuered by our Lorde to Iudas. God forbidde: the Phisition woulde not giuegive poyson: the Phisition gaue health, but hee by receiuing vnwoorthily, receiued to his destruction. To this iudgement of Augustine wee doe subscribe, that wicked men receiue a holye thing, namely the sacrament, for prophaning whereof, they heape vp damnation to them selues, besides their other sinnes. But that the naturall bodie of Christe voyde of his quickening spirite, entreth into the mouth of any man, wee doe vtterly denye: and of the same iudgement is Augustine, as we hauehave shewed in this Chapter, & in many other places.