Three Pillars and Arch-patriarchs of the Popish Synagogues, Treatise 1 · Book 3 · Part 5
The fift Chapter, teaching that Manna and the water of the stone be figures of the body and bloud of Christ, by Origen and Saint Ambrose.Hesk.
That the olde writers called Manna and the water, figures of the body and bloud of Christ,Fulk. it shal be no controuersie betweene vsus and M. Heskins: but whether they denied them to be sacraments of the body and bloud of Christe, or affirmed them to bee nothing but prefigurations of the sacrament, is nowe the question betwixt vsus. And therefore these long sentences out of Origen and Ambrose make nothing for him, but much against him. But let vsus viewe them: Origen is cited In Num. Hom. 7. Modo enim &c. Nowe when Moses came vntounto vsus, and is ioyned to our Aethiopesse, the lawe of God is not nowe knowne in figures and images as before, but in the very apparence of the truth. And those things, which were first set foorth in darke speaches, are nowe fulfilled in plaine shewe and trueth. And therefore he, which declared the plaine forme of figures and darke speaches, saith, we knowe that all our fathers were vnderunder the cloude, and all passed through the sea &c. Thou seest howe Paule assoyleth the darke riddles of the lawe, and teacheth the plaine shewe of those darke speaches. And a little after. Then in a darke manner Manna was the meate, but nowe in plaine shewe, the flesh of the sonne of God is the true meat, as he himselfe saith▪ my flesh is meat in deed, and my bloud is drink in deede. M. Heskins thinketh, this is as plaine as neede to be, for his onelyonly figure, and the bodily presence: and me thinke it is as plaine for the contrarie. For he affirmeth, that Manna was the same spirituall meate, that the flesh of the sonne of God is nowe, and layeth the difference in the obscure manner of deliuering the one, and the plaine manner of deliuering the other, which can not be vnderstoode of the outwarde signes, which are in both of like plainenesse or obscuritie, but of the doctrine or worde annexed to the signes, which to them was very darke, and to vsus is very cleere, that Christes fleshe and bloud are our meate and drinke. For it is well knowne, that Origen knewe neither the Popishe transubstantiation, nor the bodily presence. For writing vponupon the fifteenth of Saint Matthewe, after hee hath shewed that the materiall part of the sacrament goeth into the bellie, and is cast foorth, hee addeth: Nec materia panis sed super illum dictus sermo est, qui prodest non indignè comedenti illum. Et hae… quidem de typico symbolicóque corpore. Multa porro & de ipso verbo dici possent, quod factum est caro veríssque cibus, quem qui comederie omnino viuet in aeternum, quem nullus malus edere potest. Neyther that matter of the breade, but the woorde which is spoken of it, is that, which doth profite to him which eateth it not vnwoorthily. And these thinges are of the typicall or symbolicall bodye: Many thinges also might bee sayde of the Worde it selfe, which was made flesh and the true meate, which hee that shall eate, shall vndoubtedly liue for euer, which no euill man can eate. Doest thou not here see (Christian reader) what Origens minde was of transubstantiation, when hee speaketh of the matter of the breade whiche is eaten? And what his iudgement was of the bodily presence, when hee calleth it the typicall and symbolicall, or figuratiue bodye, distinguishing it from the woorde made fleshe, and the meate in deede? Finally, whether hee thought that any euill man could eate of the bodye of Christ, which is the spirituall part of the sacrament?
To Origen he ioyneth Ambrose, or rather disioyneth him, for hee diuideth his saying into two partes, pretending to inueigh against Oecolampadius, for leauing out the former parte, but in deede, that hee might raise a dust with his stamping and staring, least the latter part might be seene to be, as it is, a cleare interpretation of the former, and an application of the writers minde concerning the corporall manner of presence,In Ps. 118. Serm. 18. I will rehearse them both together. Ille ego ante despectus &c. Euen I before despised (speaking in the person of the Gentiles conuerted) am nowe preferred, am nowe set before the chosen. Euen I before a despised people of sinners, hauehave nowe the reuerend companies of the heauenly sacramentes, nowe I am receiued to the honour of the heauenly table. The rayne is not powred downe on my meate, the spring of the earth laboureth not, nor the fruite of the trees. For my drinke no riuers are to be sought, nor welles. Christe is meate to me, Christe is drinke to me. The fleshe of GOD is meate to me, the bloud of GOD is my drinke. I doe not nowe looke for yearely increase to satisfie me: Christe is ministred to mee daily. I will not bee afrayde; least any distemperature of the ayre, or barrennesse of the countrie shoulde hang ouer mee, if the dilligence of godly tillage doe continue. I doe not nowe wishe the rayne of Quayles to come downe for me, which before I did maruell at. Not Manna which earst they preferred before all meates, bicause those Fathers which did eate Manna, hauehave hungered. My meate is that, which doeth not fatten the bodye, but confirmeth the heart of man. Before, that breade which came downe from heauen, was woonderfull to mee. For it is written, hee gaue them bread from heauen to eate, but that was not the true breade, but a shaddowe of that was to come. The father hath reserued for me that true breade from heauen.
That breade of GOD descended from heauen to mee, Here beginneth Oecolampadius.which giueth life to this worlde. It hath not descended to the Iewes, nor to the Synagogue, but to the Church, to the younger people. For howe did that breade which giueth life, descend to the Iewes, when all they, that did eate that breade, that is Manna, which the Iewes thought to bee the true breade, are deade in the wildernesse? Howe did it descend to the Synagogue: when all the Synagogue perished and fainted, beeing pyned with euerlasting hunger of fayth? Finally, if they had receiued the true breade, they had not sayde: Lorde giuegive vsus alwayes this breade. What doest thou require, O Iewe, that hee shoulde giuegive vntounto thee? The bread which he giueth to all, which he giueth daily, which hee giueth alwayes, it is in thy selfe, that thou maiest receiue this bread. Come vntounto this bread, and thou shalt receiue it. Of this bread it is said, all they that estrange them selues from thee shall perish. If thou estrange thy self frō him, thou shalt perish. If thou come neere vntounto him, thou shalt liue. He is the bread of life. He that eateth life can not die. For howe doth he die▪ whose meate is life? How shall he fayle, which hath that vitall substance? Come ye vntounto him, and be satisfied, for he is breade. Come ye vntounto him and drinke for he is a wel Come ye vntounto him and be lightened, for he is light. Come ye vntounto him, and be deliuered for where the spirite of the Lord is, there is libertie. Come ye vntounto him, and be absolued, for he is remission of sinnes. You aske who this may be? Heare ye him selfe saying I am the breade of life, he that commeth to me shall not hunger, and hee that beleeueth in me, shall neuer thirst. You hauehave heard him, and you hauehave seene him, and you hauehave not beleeued him, therefore you are dead.
The latter part of this long discourse sufficiently expoundeth the former. That Christe and the flesh and bloud of God (which M. Heskins noteth to be a plaine place for the proclamer) is so our true meate and drinke, as he is breade, as he is a well, as he is light, as he is libertie, as he is remission of sinnes: that is, after a spiritual maner. And where he saith, Manna was a figure or shaddowe, and not the trueth of that which was to come: he meaneth of Manna, as it was corporall meate, and eaten of the vnfaithfull that are dead, and not as it was spiritual meat, and eaten of the faithfull which are aliue, as S. Augustine saith. Moreouer, it is to be noted, that S. Ambrose saith, that he which eateth this bread which is life, can not dye. Therefore no wicked man eateth this bread, this meate, this flesh of God, which with S. Ambrose are all one. As for the difference of our sacramentes, what it is, we hauehave shewed before, and this place sheweth none. For Ambrose speaketh of Manna as a corporall meat, and not as it was a spirituall meate and sacrament.